Identity Assimilation and Church Separat PDF

Religious freedom and constraint
– theological-historical landmarks –
Published with the blessing of

† GURIE,
Bishop of Deva and Hunedoara
Descrierea CIP a Bibliotecii Naţionale a României
Religious freedom and constraint – theological-historical landmarks :
international symposium, Deva 17-18.10.2013 / pref.: Bishop Gurie
Georgiu of Deva and Hunedoara; coord.: priest. Florin Dobrei. -
Stockholm : Felicitas ; Deva : Editura Episcopiei Devei şi Hunedoarei, 2013
ISBN 978-91-980750-1-4
ISBN 978-606-93518-6-4
II. Dobrei. Florin (coord.)
2(063)
Cover and graphics: Pr. Mircea Mihuleț

Proofreading: Cătălin Ungureanu
All the rights on this volume are reserved to the Publishing House of Deva and
Hunedoara Diocese.
The responsibility for the content of the material published belongs solely to the
authors.
Deva and Hunedoara Diocese
Religious freedom and constraint

– theological-historical landmarks –
– international symposium –
Deva, 17-18 October 2013
Coordinator:
Pr. Florin Dobrei
Felicitas Editura
Rumänska Ortodoxa Stiftet Episcopiei Devei
för Norra Europa și Hunedoarei
Stockholm Deva
2013
Word of blessing
Since the enthronement of His Beatitude Patriarch Daniel of

Romania, the Holy Synod of the Romanian Orthodox Church decided
that each calendar year the theological ministration of the clergy and
laymen must be directed towards homaging a particular dimansion of the
endless treasure of Eastern Christian Orthodoxy.
This year, 2013, the emphasis fell on the rediscovery and affirmation
of the place and providential role that Saints Constantine and Helen have
had in the life and history of the Christian Church. This was the purpose
of the international symposium held in Deva on 17-18 October 2013
entitled suggestively Religious Freedom and constraint – historical-
theological constraints.
Structured in two sections, one of Ecclesiastical History and
the other of Theology and Christian spirituality, the papers presented
have embraced a wide range of issues relating to man’s freedom of
conscience, the relations between the Church and the State, namely
the relationship between Orthodoxy and the other Christian or non-
Christian denominations and faiths from the paleochristian period to
contemporaneity. Thus, in the first section were discussed and detailed,
step by step, the Donatist movement and the religious policy of Holy
Emperor Constantine the Great, the Western Crusades, a document
appointing a protopresbyter of Hunedoara, the image of the Orthodox
Christians of Transylvania in a travel journal of the seventeenth century,
immigration to the New World (with emphasis on the issue of founding
the Protestant American colonies of the seventeenth century), the
claiming program momentum of the social-religious movement of St.
Sophronius of Cioara, the movement of the old church books between
Transylvania and Oltenia in the context of prohibitive measures of the
eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the confessional primary education
of Haţeg vicariate between secularization and autonomy, respectively
the religious freedom of the Romanians in Banat in the context of
6 Religious freedom and constraint
hierarchical separation in mid nineteenth century, achievements and
bottlenecks in the life of the Orthodox Church of Old Romania (1866-
1918), identity, assimilation and separation of church in the Serbian
Banat in the second half of the nineteenth century and early twentieth
century, Hunedoara Church and Austro-Hungarian dualism, the clergy
of Caransebeş Diocese persecuted during World War I, and the memoirs
of this great conflagration, the testimony of Constantin Potârcă on the
struggle of the Romanian nation to forge the Great Union, the unified
action of the Romanian Orthodox Church and Greek Catholic Church
against the Hungarian inter-war revisionism, the religious freedom and
repression in Czechoslovakia reflected in the life of hieromonk Ignatie
Ciochina (1899-1976), the priests of former Muscel county who were
imprisoned in communist prisons, etc.
In the second section, certain religious aspects of the era of Holy
Emperor Constantine the Great have been analysed, the Calvary, the
cleansing of sins and the victory over demons of the Holy Fathers of
the 4th - 6th centuries, the spiritual, physical and social role of the Church
in the world, Christian freedom and love in the Church and human
life, interpersonal relations analysed in comparative religious context,
a missionary analysis of truth and freedom in democracy, economic
freedom and Christian morality, the triadological doctrine in the symbols
of faith and in the baptismal practices of the period prior to the ecumenical
council of Nicaea, the idea of martyrdom
in monotheistic religions, etc.
All the papers presented, which appeared signed by more than 30
participants, hierarchs and teachers in the country and abroad, specialists
in the field of church and secular history, respectively theology, are found
in the pages of this volume, an anthology of studies which aims bring a
plus of knowledge in the realm of the research branches mentioned above.
Consequently, we bless and recommend all the priests and church-
goers of our diocese and elsewhere, for knowledge and spiritual help.
† GURIE,
Bishop of Deva and Hunedoara
I. Studies of Ecclesiastical History
Bishop Gurie GEORGIU
The conversion of Saint Constantine – genuine

conversion or political reason?
Abstract
“Few historical issues have been so widely debated as the one of
Constantine’s “conversion”, accompanied by visions, in the oncoming
of the decisive battle with Maxentius. It is still a topic of discussion
today”1, says historian Nicolae Bănescu, in his synthesis on the history
of Byzantium. The opinions of historians of can be grouped, according to
Nicholas Bănescu into three categories.
Keywords:
Saint Constantine the Great, Byzantium, conversion, political
reason.
The first accredits the opinion that emperor Constantine did not
have a Christian religious conviction, and that his benevolence to those
who believed in Christ was a simple and brilliant political intuition, the
Basileus regarding Christianity as a potential opportunity to achieve
and maintain the unity of the Empire. Historians and theologians such
as Jacob Burckhardt, Ed. Schwartz, Adolf Harnack, Hugo Koch, Leon
Homo, Nicolae Iorga subscribe to this view.
A second category of historians, a more moderate one, namely
A. A. Vasiliev, consider the Emperor’s sincere disposition towards
Christianity, but combined with well-pondered political reasons, proving
a lucid grasp of the religious reality of the time. It is common knowledge
that Emperor Constantine was baptised only on his deathbed. This
1
Nicolae Bănescu, Istoria Imperiului Bizantin, vol. 1, Bucharest, 2000, p. 45.
gesture of the Emperor was not, according to this group of historians,
a rejection of Christianity, but rather an attitude imposed by an Empire
that gathered a conglomerate of religions under one dome of power. The
Emperor proved, however, by legislative decisions and personal piety,
to have been a Christian through his life and deeds, even before being
officially christened. His heart had been fully won by Christ the Lord
early in the takeover, and the postponement of Baptism was due to
limitations imposed by state political reasons. Constantine the Great was
on top of a state pyramid built on a pagan religious mosaic kept united
by the Emperor’s status of pontifex maximus.
From this point of view, the official Christianization of the Emperor
would have triggered a conflict with the entire administrative structure
of the Empire, and thus the internal destabilization of the state. Such a
gesture, that of baptism, would have been perceived, par excellence, as
political in the atmosphere of the time, and would not have been tolerated
by the strong virulent paganism of the state administration; on the other
hand, it would not have been helpful to Christianity in any case. An open
confrontation, as state policy in the social field, between the followers
of Christ and the ancient pagan world, would have continued an internal
crisis already secular concerning the persecution of Christians, which
would have been disastrous not only for the peace and social balance
within the Empire, but also for the Christian Church itself. Do not forget
that the imperial administration was heavily (overwhelmingly) dominated
by pagans. The Christians were a minority not only in number, but also in
their position in the hierarchy of state power, and the legislature was, par
excellence, dominated by the spirituality of pagan religions. We are only
in the first half of the fourth century, i.e. at the beginning of the social
freedom of Christianity, and the beginning of the first reforms on which
the Christian spirit leaves its mark! If after almost a century of reforms
and legislation in which the Christian spirituality had become more and
more visible the inertia of the pagan world could not be defeated, then
the more we understand that the atmosphere of the early fourth century
demanded that Emperor Constantine should maintain the insignia and
appearances of pontifex maximus in public practice and his reluctance to
I. Studies of Ecclesiastical History 11
be officially Christianized!
Here is how historian Teodor M. Popescu describes the pagan
social climate of the Empire and Imperial Court more than 50 years after
the reign of Emperor Constantine:
“A number of the Empire officials, Emperor collaborators

and subordinates were pagan. Prefects Tatianus, Themistius,
Optatus, rhetorician Libanius and others in the East, the two
Flavianus, the three Symmachus and others in the West,
were pagans. In the aristocracy of many cities, starting with
Rome, the pagans prevailed. The Senate, the upper classes,
all the officials belonged mostly to pagans. Magical practices
were being performed with interest and passion. Barbarians
were swarming at the borders and robbing the provinces of
the empire, gangs of Isaurians were plundering without fear
of the central power, the pagans were waiting for the fall of
Christianity, arrogant and cunning heretics were squirming
despite councils and laws, the people were living nervously
fidgeting with troubles and wishes, Arcadius (the emperor)
was powerless, Eudoxia was drunk with power, the entourage
were corrupt and venal, the overall level was low, the mood
was depressing”2.
Consequently, the Emperor’s gesture to refrain from official

Christianization through baptism must be understood on the line of
political reasons meant to ensure the Empire’s domestic tranquillity on
the one hand, and on the other hand meant to protect the fragile enough
social body of the Christian Church from confrontation with the pagan
power.
A third category of researchers regard the conversion of Emperor
Constantine as an honest act, even stripped of the state political reasons
and interests, act towards which he was heading naturally, due to the
education received from his mother, Saint Helena, to which was decisively
2
Teodor M. Popescu, „Epoca Sfântului Ioan Gură de Aur”, in Ortodoxia, no. 4/1957, pp.
536, 537, 553.
added the supernatural vision of the Cross in the sky. I subscribe to this
thesis, based on the information provided by the Emperor’s biographers
starting with Eusebius of Caesarea, a number of modern historians among
which may be listed Gaston Boissier, Ferdinand Lot, D. C. Hesseling
and, in general, the historiography of the Eastern Church.
The opinions of historian Henri Gregoire render a special touch. He
argues that Eusebius of Caesarea confiscated all the glory for Constantine,
to which Licinius should have been partaker, as the number of Christians
in the Empire was higher in the eastern part where Liciunius ruled than
in the Western Empire attributed for government to Constantine in the
beginning. Moreover, Henri Gregoire continues his rationale, Licinius
had been behind the Edict of freedom for Christians, edict promulgated
by Galerius on his deathbed, and he (Licinius) would have implemented
it, too. On the other hand, Maxentius, Constantine’s rival to power was
not a tyrant and a persecutor, but in fact a benefactor of Christianity,
and Constantine’s battle with him would have been deprived of religious
connotations, and led only for power. Then, Constantine’s vision
described by Eusebius in Vita Constantini (to which Henri Gregoire
denies its Eusebian paternity) would be a later insertion of an epigone3.
The Edict would be improperly called “The Edict of Mediolanum”
because, according to Lactantius, it was ruled in Nicomedia by Licinius,
“and no historian, be it religious or secular, reports that any edict of
tolerance occurred in the conferences of Milan. This name is a modern
conjuncture”4. In conclusion , Henri Gregoire thinks, Licinius has been
deprived by Eusebius of Caesarea of the merit of the imperial policy
orientation towards promoting Christianity, transferring it almost
exclusively to Constantine.
To understand these views proposed experts by more appropriately,
one needs a short journey into the writings and information historical
eras make available. We are going to present only the conversion of the
Emperor through the vision of the Cross, assisted by the data provided
by Lactantius, Eusebius of Caesarea, Theodoret of Cyrus, Socrates,
Sozomen and Cassiodorus.
3
See also Introduction of P.S.B. 14, pp. 26-27.
4
Nicolae Bănescu, op. cit., p. 57.
Lactantius, Latin writer during 240/250-325, author of several
writings among which De ira Dei, De Mortibus persecutorum and Divinae
Institutionis, because his fame was brought by Diocletian to his court in
Nicomedia. There, he had the opportunity to know young Constantine
closely, who was in Nicomedia until about 306, and whose preceptor he
probably was (mission he will later carry on with Crispus, Consantine’s
eldest son). Lactantius participated as an eyewitness to the events related to
the great persecution of Christians triggered by Diocletian in 303, thus his
work “De mortibus persecutorum”, written between 313-3165, offers first-
hand information both about the persecutions and the edicts of tolerance
(especially the edict of tolerance known in history as the Edict of Milan).
“De mortibus persecutorum” begins by outlining the tranquillity that the
Church regained after the cruel persecution begun in the apostolic age.
This could be possible through God’s mercy “for He ascended princes
who shattered the vile and bloody commandments of tyrants”6.
This beginning coincides with the end of the book, the last events
related being the rise to power of the two Augusti: Constantine in the West
and Licinius in the East. Thus, according to the narration of Lactantius, peace
for the Church was fully established only after the defeat of Maximinus
Daia in 313 and the display in Nicomedia, by Licinius, of a circular letter
on peace and the restoration of Church7. Lactantius states that not only
Constantine was victorious with God’s help, but also Licinius, as they both
had divine appearances before the decisive battles with Maxentius and
Maximinus Daia. Before the battle with Maxentius, Constantine
“during sleep, was advised [in a dream] to mark the

shields with God’s heavenly sign, and only in this fashion to
soar into battle. He proceeds as commanded and writes on the
shields Christ’s name with an X crossed by the letter I vaulted
to the end. Armed with this symbol, the army grab their iron
swords”8.
5
Lactanţiu, De Mortibus Persecutorum, Editura Amacord, Timişoara, 2000, p. 37.
6
Ibidem, p. 76.
7
Ibidem, p. 223.
8
Ibidem, p. 209.
Without making any other references to Christians or to the attitude

of Constantine to Christianity, Lactantius moves on to recounting the
conflict between Licinius and Maximinus. Thus Licinius has a similar
vision to that of Constantine, the author (Lactantius) insisting on it in
detail. The night before the battle
“one of God’s angels appeared at Licinius’ head, who

was sleeping, and warned him to wake up quickly, and to ask
God Almighty with all his army: if he does exactly as instructed,
he will obtain victory. After these words, it appeared [in the
dream] as if he would be up and the angel itself stood by him
teaching him in what way and with what words to pray. Once
awakened from sleep, he ordered that a secretary should be
brought and dictated – as he had heard – the words that follow:
“Supreme Lord, we pray Thee. Holy God, we pray Thee. All
righteousness we entrust to Thee. Our salvation we entrust to
Thee. Our Empire we entrust to Thee. Through Thee we live,
through Thee we consider ourselves winners and blessed. Holy
God, Supreme Lord, hear our prayers: to Thee we stretch our
arms, hear us, Holy God, Supreme Lord”9.
This prayer, multiplied, was sent to the soldiers who, before the
battle, “put down the shields, take off their helmets, lift their arms to
heaven following the example of their officers and say their prayer after
the emperor”10. Thus Licinius, with a handful of fighters, triumphed.
Regarding the cessation of persecution, Lactantius renders two acts
in extenso. The first was given by Galerius, who appeased by suffering,
came to confess God, and the second came from Licinius, being a
sort of understanding between him and Constantine, as a result of the
discussions held in Milan. The Edict of Galerius, displayed in Nicomedia
on 30th April 311, granted indulgence to Christians, thus being able to
“rebuild their places of meeting provided that they accomplish nothing
9
Ibidem, p. 217.
10
Ibidem, p. 218.
against constituted discipline”11. At the same time, a number of Christian
faith confessors were also released from prisons. This calm period lasted
until his death, persecution being resumed with greater cruelty by his
successor, Maximinus Daia. The second edict was a circular letter which
at the end made a reference to “the Edict hereby”, displayed by the order
of Licinius, in Nicomedia, which began like this:
“I, Constantine Augustus and I, Licinius Augustus, when

we happily got together in Milan and discussed all the aspects of
welfare and public safety, thought it appropriate that we should
regulate in the first place - among other provisions destined to
ensure the future of the majority of citizens - those that relate to
the respect for God, so that we should offer Christians, and all
other people, the freedom to worship in the faith they choose,
so that any divine nature existing in the heavenly abodes could
be persuaded to manifest favourably towards us and towards
all those under our protection”12.
The document allowed anyone to adopt the Christian religion

“freely and openly away from fear and disorder”. The same freedom
was guaranteed to the other citizens who would have chosen a different
religion than the Christian one. The Christian communities were given
back their confiscated goods and the places of worship where needed.
If Lactantius was biased with Licinius and Constantine was put
in the background in his writings, Eusebius of Caesarea (260/264-340),
considered to be the Father of Church History, has done the opposite. All
the credit for Christianity belonged to Constantine, while Licinius played
a more than secondary role. Eusebius met Constantine when the latter
was young, at the court of Diocletian, as his companion13. Being arrested
during the persecution of Diocletian, the future bishop of Caesarea won
Constantine’s favour, who will later entrust him with the reorganization
of Christian life in Palestine. Eusebius became, after the First Ecumenical
11
Ibidem, p. 183.
12
Ibidem, p. 227.
13
Eusebiu de Cezareea, Viaţa lui Constantin cel Mare, in PSB, 14, Bucharest, 1991, p. 6.
Council, one of the closest collaborators and friends of Constantine’s,
although he was pro-Aryan14. He had a crucial role on the vision of
religious policy of Emperor Constantine after the First Ecumenical
Council. He gave us The Ecclesiastical History, Vita Constantini, The 30-
year Reign Festive Speech and The speech delivered at the consecration
of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. In The Ecclesiastical History – work
that has seen four editions (312/313, 315, 317, 324), each time with various
amendments – Eusebius related the events of Christian history between
the time of the appearance of the Church and 324. the description of the
events related to the persecution of Diocletian and Galerius is very close
to that given by Lactantius in De Mortibus Persecutorum. In the eighth
book, the author presents the text of the Edict as it was related by Galerius,
where “Constantine the Pious” is also mentioned, while Licinius’ name is
deleted. The text appears to be a Greek translation of the Edict, the original
version being given by Lactantius15. The edict was published in Asia and
the neighbouring lands, but in the provinces under Maximinus’ dominion
it was held hidden16. Speaking about the fall of persecutor tyrants, the
History of Eusebius says that God sent two pious emperors who had not
trodden on the dangerous path of “his madness”, Constantine in the West
and Licinius in the East, to wage war against them17.
Constantine’s piety is strongly emphasized during the battle with
Maxentius. Thus, “after praying for help to the Heavenly God and to
His Word Itself, the Saviour of all”18, Constantine won the battle, and
as gratitude he commanded that a statue should be erected in the most
intensely circulated market in Rome, statue that has in the right hand
“the saving sign of the Calvary” and the inscription “by this saving
sign, through this genuine proof of bravery, we have saved your city,
liberating it from the yoke of the tyrant, and we have restored the senate
14
Ibidem, pp. 9-10.
15
Eusebiu de Cezareea, Istoria Bisericească, in PSB, 13, Bucharest, 1987, p. 337, n. 86.
16
Ibidem, p. 340.
17
Ibidem, pp. 350-351. In the Romanian translation Licinius does not appear as he appears
in P.G. 20 and in the English translation The nicene and post-nicene fathers, second series,
vol. I, editor Philip Schaff,.
18
Ibidem p. 351.
and the Roman people to their former glory and fame, after we have
freed them”19.
Eusebius also adds that Emperor Constantine, together with
Licinius, enforced a law favourable to Christians. In the last chapter of
the ninth book, the events taking place in the eastern part of the Empire
are presented, the struggle between Licinius and Maximinus, the end
of the latter and of his followers. Eusebius also presents a text-edict in
favour of the Christians, which is supposed to have been enforced by
Maximinus, who was considered to be the most cruel persecutor, after
the first time he was defeated by Licinius. The text says:
“Because from now so as to remove any suspicion or

doubt, as well as any fear, we have decided to publish this
Edict so as to be clear to everyone that it is allowed for those
who want to embrace any religion or any sect, by virtue of
this commitment, to do as they wish and like, according to the
religion they chose to practise on a regular basis. Likewise,
they will be allowed to build their own churches”20. At
the end of the book the author mentions the role of the two
Basileis in promoting Christianity: “When the wicked were
crushed, the parts of the empire which had belonged to them
were led strongly and without opposition by the two Basileis:
Constantine and Licinius. They first cleansed the world of
hatred towards God, then they proved their love of good and
God, as well as their devotion and gratitude to God through the
Law they enforced for the benefit of Christians”21.
Vita Constantini is a panegyric work written in honour of Emperor

Constantine and is placed in time sometime after the death of the Emperor.
It brings rich explanations and details regarding this topic. We emphasize
that this vision has imposed in the ecclesiastical historiography. Here it
is shown that before the battle with Maxentius, Constantine resorted to
19
Ibidem p. 353.
20
Ibidem, p. 357.
21
Ibidem, p. 360.
God’s help. Thus, contemplating which God to obey and believing that
all the other emperors who had placed their trust in gods and oracles
had ended badly, he reckoned that the best invocation would be to his
father’s God. He asked Him by earnest prayer to reveal Himself to him.
In response, Vita Constantini states, God showed the emperor a sign, a
vision that he himself told Eusebius later.
“So at about noon, when the day began to tide away,

Constantine said he had seen with his own eyes in the sky,
keeping watch over the sun, the sign of victory as a cross made
of light, and with it he could make out some writing saying:
“You will conquer in witness hereof!”; after which, at the sight
of such sight, both him and the whole army were astonished”22;
later “while sleeping, the Christ of God appeared to him with
the sign seen in the sky beforehand, ordering him to imagine,
in turn, the sign which had appeared to him in heaven above, so
as to be put under its protection during the battles that he would
fight against his enemy”23.
After these victories, the emperor ordered the sign he had seen to be
made of gold and gems, symbol seen and further described by the author.
It was made of a cross that was topped by a crown with the Christian
monogram in its midst. Defeating Maxentius when entering Rome,
Constantine revealed the “the saving sign” to everyone, and commanded
that a statue displaying the redeeming sign in one hand should be erected
(the episode is a transcript from The Ecclesiastical History). After the
liberation of Rome and the seizure of power by Constantine “an imperial
rescript was published everywhere giving those who had been deprived
of it, the right to enjoy their property, and those arbitrarily exiled were
asked to return to their homes; making the chains fall and redeeming
from danger and fear every man who had suffered such cruelty due to
the tyrant”24. As far as the edicts in favour of Christians are concerned,
22
Idem, Vita Constantini, in PSB, vol. 14, p. 76.
23
Ibidem, p. 77.
24
Ibidem, p. 82.
Vita Constantini, though rich in rendering documents, gives such act in
extenso only in the second book25. Eusebius also refers to an Edict given
by “the ruler of evildoers” whose name is not mentioned, but whose
disease resembles Galerius’ 26.
Theodoret of Cyrus is the next historian who gives us information
on the events related to the reign of Emperor Constantine and the
Christian favouring laws enacted by him. Theodoret continues Eusebius’
History from the beginning of the heresy of Arius, namely around 324.
Although in the first part of this work he presents several events in the
reign of Constantine, he does not relate anything from the beginning of
his reign, saying only the following:
“Constantine, the emperor worthy of all praise, who

received this call, neither from man nor through man, but from
heaven, like the divine Apostle, exerted it for the Church. Thus,
he wrote laws forbidding sacrifices to idols and also commanded
that churches should be erected. Then he appointed rulers over
his subjects, people of faith; he commanded that the clergy
should be honoured and threatened to kill those who would try
to mock them”27.
He does not mention anything about Licinius, implying that the

only pious emperor is Constantine.
The Ecclesiastical History initiated by Eusebius and Theodoret
was continued by another historian of the epoch, respectively Socrates
Scholasticus. Socrates mentions in the introduction to this paper the
writings of Eusebius, whom he takes as the standard as far as Constantine
is concerned. Thus, in the third chapter of the first book, Socrates briefly
resumes the vision of the Holy Cross the emperor was worthy of. He
follows the line of Vita Constantini. Consequently, shortly before the
fight with Maxentius, Constantine was wondering what deity he should
invoke in order to win the battle. Then, when the sun was at meridian
25
Ibidem, p. 103.
26
Ibidem, p. 89.
27
Teodoret de Cir, Istoria Bisericească, in PSB, 44, Bucharest, 1995, p. 20.
height, he saw a sign of light in the sky in the form of the cross, on which
the words in hoc signo vinces were inscribed. The following night Christ
appears to him, urging him to create a sign like the one he had seen and
to use it against enemies. Listening to this piece of advice, Constantine
made a sign, which, as Socrates confesses, “has been kept at the palace
until present time”. Constantine having conquered, in exchange for the
blessings received, brings thanks to God, restoring freedom to prisoners,
returning their seized properties, and erecting churches for Christians28.
Thus, Socrates Scholasticus attributes to Constantine the full merit of the
Christians’ freedom in the social space.
Sozomen is the next historian of the era we are referring to,
who recorded in writing the events related to the vision of Emperor
Constantine. He states that the emperor would have seen the sign of the
cross shining in the sky and the holy angels standing nearby, exclaiming,
“Oh, Constantine! In this sign you will conquer”, telling him that Christ
Himself will appear to him, showing him the sign of the cross and urging
him to make one, too. These details (the presence of the angels) have been
noticed by us at Lactantius, who attributed them to the vision of Licinius.
It seems that the whole historiography does not mention Licinius as athe
recipient of a vision converting to Christianity, everything being attached
to the person of Constantine, who, through the later Christian legislation
that he will enact, fully entitled the paternity of the vision for himself.
Sozomen succeeded Eusebius of Caesarea, whom he even quoted,
citing the emergence of a new vision for the next night, in which Christ
Himself appeared to Constantine, urging him to make a copy of the sign
seen. Waking up from his sleep, the emperor summoned the priests and
asked them about the Christian doctrine29, then made the shown sign
and prevailed. Linked to the Labarum representing the sign of the cross,
Sozomen added other stories about the soldiers who carried it into battle,
namely that those who carried it escaped unharmed, while those who
28
Socrates, Ecclesiastical history, chapter 3, in The nicene and post-nicene Fathers, second
series, vol. II, editor Philip Schaff.
29
Sozomen, Ecclesiastical history, chapter 3, in The nicene and post-nicene Fathers, second
series, vol. II, editor Philip Schaff.
discarded it in fear were killed on the spot30.
An interesting episode related by Sozomen, regarded by him as
a slander which would be brought to Christians, is the one referring
to the death of Crispus and others, to which Constantine would have
partaken. The latter, Constantine, seeking to cleanse his wrongs, would
have asked advice first from a philosopher named Sopater, follower of
Plotinus, who gave him no hope, while some Christian bishops brought
to his awareness the fact that repentance and Christian baptism can give
forgiveness and correction. In this way, the emperor would have come
to love the Christian doctrine, becoming a Christian himself31. It seems
that the pagans of the time used this episode to justify the conversion of
Emperor Constantine, and later Julian the Apostate used it, too.
Cassiodorus, the last historian of the old age, in the fifth century
which we are referring to, conveyed in his Historiae Ecclesiasticae
Tripartitae32, in a few chapters, the events related to the life of Constantine
the Great, but as it was a compilation of previous authors, he did not
add anything new, resuming to just copying whole pieces from the two
previous historians, Socrates and Sozomen.
At the end of these brief sketches of the most important testimonies
of the era when Christianity emerged from the catacombs, we conclude
that Emperor Constantine remains, beyond the ambiguity caused by
some historians regarding his conversion, the personality who pondered
the course of the world from paganism to Christianity, from gods to One
Unique God, revealed through the Incarnation of the Logos. Although
the Church historians are tributary to the subjectivity of Eusebius of
Caesarea in the praise they give to Saint Constantine the Great, the
public gestures and pro-Christian legislation that the emperor imposed
on a world with pagan structures and attitudes obliges the researcher’s
objectivity to subscribe to the fact that St. Constantine the Great was “one
with the Apostles” even before his baptism. Here are a few of the many
aspects that could be invoked to shape a spiritual profile of Emperor
Constantine the Great.
30
Ibidem, cap. 4.
31
Ibidem, cap. 5.
32
See Casiodor, Istoria Bisericească Tripartită, in PSB, 75, Bucharest, 1998.
First of all, Saint Constantine is presented by his biographers as
a man eager to enrich his knowledge of God.
“The emperor, writes Eusebius of Caesarea, enriched

his mind with the words of the divine Scripture, spending
his nights keeping vigil, and in moments of leisure writing
speeches. Whenever he was offered the opportunity to express
his views on theological subjects, the emperor used to refuse
people’s praise, urging them to look to the sky and address
their laudation only to the Emperor of Everything”, then in his
speech he used to criticise the follies of the belief in gods, saying
that “the demonic heathen cults were but deceit and cover for
unbelief”; Constantine advised his listeners “to acknowledge
the Christian God as the supreme Emperor”, then he advised
them on “His vulgo providence and providence to each of
them”. Eventually, he would get to the plan of salvation, and
finally he talked about God’s judgement, calling for a moral
life”33.
If the position and chlamis of pontifex maximus were accepted

for reasons of state, it was not the same with the Christian God. Christ
the Lord won the heart and conscience of Emperor Constantine. “At
certain hours of the day, Eusebius of Caesarea writes, Constantine would
lock himself in the most secret cellars of the palace, alone with his God,
The One, to Whom, kneeling, he would ask in fervent prayer what he
badly needed, as a true adept of secret work. To celebrate the saving
holiday (Easter) he used to extend his retreat, celebrating it in sacred
rites with all the powers of the soul and body assembled, fully devoted
to a life of grace, and thereby surpassing all the partakers in the feast.
The holy night vigil was extended till day; certain people sent by him lit
long wax candles all over the city, which were supplemented by torches
lit everywhere – which made the mysterious night of vigil brighter than
midday. And at dawn – after the example of redeeming overflows of
gifts of the Resurrection – the emperor would lie his generous arm over
33
Eusebiu de Cezareea, Viața lui Constantin cel Mare, IV, 29, 1-3, in PSB, 14, pp. 170-171.
all the provinces and nations and peoples of the empire, giving them all
rich gifts”34. In the palace, the Emperor “had assembled a kind of God’s
Church” where he “would spend his time with the Holy Scriptures in his
hands” and where together with the members of the palace “he would
say the prayers meant to be said”35. The fact that the prayer had won a
fundamental place in the life of Constantine the Great is also confirmed
by the fact that the Emperor chose that his effigies and portraits in various
cities of the empire, as well as the gold coin minted in his time, would
show him in prayer position with his eyes and arms raised to God36.
Emperor Constantine realized that prayer is not only the cornerstone
of the spiritual edifice of the person but also the bond that can ensure
social unity and stability. For this reason, he promoted the holidays
as landmarks intended to order and stimulate the structure of society.
He decreed Sunday as a day of rest and prayer for the whole Empire.
Eusebius of Caesarea notes, “the Emperor was thinking of making the
day dedicated to prayer, the most important – and the first – day (of the
week), as it had already been, a day dedicated to the Lord and bringing
salvation. The deacons and other servants of God were made by him to
watch over his whole house. His faithful guards and the soldiers of the
guards, who looked as if they were girded with self-sacrifice, saw him
as their teacher of religiousness, and honoured no less the salvation and
the feast day of Sunday, and said the prayers which were so dear to the
Emperor. Moreover, St. Constantine was concerned that everyone could
do it, because he had the plan to gradually make every man a worshipper
of God. His entire army was taught by him to honour this day of the
Saviour zealously, which is also named “the day of light” or of “the sun”.
The soldiers who shared the faith in God were now permitted to linger
around in the church of God, so as to be able to pray freely. But even
those who did not embrace the divine doctrine were commanded to go
to an open field in the vicinity of the city on Sunday, where, on cue, they
would all say together an already learnt prayer to God”37.
34
Ibidem, IV, 21, pp. 167-168.
35
Ibidem, IV, 16, p. 166.
36
Ibidem, IV, 16, p. 166.
37
Ibidem IV, 18-19, pp. 166-167.
Historian Theodoret of Cyrus records several letters of Emperor
Constantine the Great of which we retain, so as to complete his spiritual
profile, the care that he had for the copy of the Holy Scripture and for
erecting and providing for the places of worship. He demanded that the
calligrapher craftsmen would copy 50 volumes on parchment with the
text of the divine Scripture, which had to be easily read and to within the
reach of the worshipping assemblies38. Bishop Macarius of Jerusalem
writes to him advising him to use all his wisdom to build the Church of
the Holy Sepulchre so that it is “greater than churches elsewhere” and
to endow it with buildings that exceed the architectural beauty of all
buildings in the holy city39.
The conclusion of the two biographers of St. Constantine is
that the emperor accomplished, by way of government and legislative
decisions, a truly priestly work. “In this way, Eusebius writes, Constantine
pastorated to his God; which allowed him to say once, upon receipt of
bishops, that he himself was a kind of bishop. You are, he said, bishops
inside the church, but God placed me as a bishop of those outside it”40.
In conclusion, we believe that we can say that the life and deeds of
Emperor Constantine the Great are undoubtedly the cornerstone on which
the Christian history and the world have been built during the 1700 years
since the Edict of Milan. It is impossible to quantify and account for
the contribution of St. Constantine to the history of the world. Anyone
concerned with the history of philosophy and theology can notice that
behind the decisive facts and events that marked the becoming of our
world are the founding gestures of Emperor Constantine, whose decisions
guided the world to Christ.
The Constantine legacy has become somehow anonymous because
it is a common treasure of the Church,which flows throughout the
ecclesial body, pervading the spirit of every age.
38
Teodoret de Cir, Istoria Bisericească, 16, 2-3, in PSB 44, Bucharest, 1995, pp. 59-60.
39
Ibidem, 17, 6-7, p. 61.
40
Eusebiu de Cezareea, op. cit., IV, 24, p. 168.
Nicolae CHIFĂR
The Donatist Movement and Constantine’s

Religious Policy
Abstract
Persecutions against Christians generalized by Emperor Decius
(249-251) generated a long-lasting spiritual crisis within the Church,
with serious repercussions. The fact that some Christians, apparently
or not, succumbed to the persecutors’ cruel tortures and denied Christ
the Saviour sparked great controversy in the Church. It had to decide
how to relate to these traditori (lapsi), what measures to take to make
them return to their Christian community and how intense and severe
the penance applied to them should be. The different approach of local
Churches gave rise to heated and lengthy arguments, which even conciliar
decisions were not able to solve. Thus, schisms appeared among several
Christian communities which impacted seriously upon the credibility of
the apostolic testimony before the Gentiles. Sometimes these disputes
were so severe that it was necessary to resort to the secular authorities,
which could affect, to a certain extent the authonomy of the Church.
Keywords:
Donatist Movement, The Emperor Constantine the Great, religious
policy, Rome.
One of the major problems that troubled the life of the Church
for more than a century was the Donatist movement1. Besides the
1
For the Donatist controversy, see J.L. Maier, Le dossier du Donatisme, 2 Bd. (= Texte und
Untersuchungen, 134), Berlin, 1987-1989; W.H.C. Frend, The Donatist Church, Oxford,
1971; E.L. Grasmück, Coercitio. Staat und Kirche im Donatistenstreit (= Bonner Hist.
Forsch. 22), Bonn, 1964; E. Tengström, Donatisten und Katholiken. Soziale, wirtschaftliche
Novatians and the Meletians, Donatism emerged as a result of religious
rigorism manifested in north-African Christian communities2. The name,
standardized over time, is linked to the name of Donatus, bishop of Casa
Nigrae and then Carthage (†355), who was one of the leaders of this
dissident group.
The baptismal controversy3, in which St. Cyprian of Carthage
was also involved, was not yet completely over when the north-African
Christianity was confronted with the Donatist dispute. Over a whole
century, it degenerated from theological confrontations to true “street
fighting”. The spread of Christianity over a very large geographical
area, upon a very varied religious substrate and the deficient inter-
und politische Aspekte einer nordafrikanischen Kirchenspaltung (= Studia Graeca et Latina
Gothoburgensis, 18), Göteborg, 1964;
2
A. Angenendt, Das Frühmittelalter. Die abendländische Christenheit von 400 bis 900,
Kohlhammer, Stuttgart, 1995, p. 73.
3
The baptismal dispute concerning the recognition of the validity of heretics’ baptism attracted
important figures such as the bishops Stephen of Rome (254-257) and Cyprian of Carthage
(† 258). The former was upholding the Roman tradition to be encountered also in Egypt
and Palestine, of receiving the heretics within the church community only by the laying of
the hands, without rebaptising them. He was arguing that the Sacrament of Baptism works
independently of the will and dignity of the celebrant. When they did come back into the
Church the confession of faith and the baptism received in the name of the Holy Trinity
were required, and through the bishop’s act of laying his hands upon them they were to
receive again the gift of the Holy Spirit. The latter stood by the African tradition to be found
also in Asia Minor, demanding rebaptism of heretics and even of the fallen ones, the first
ones not having a valid baptism because they were outside of the Church, while the others
for having lost the grace of the Holy Spirit received when they were baptised because they
have rejected Christ. The concept of St. Cyprian of Carthage approved by the Carthaginian
councils of 255 and 256 and supported by the Bishops Firmilianus of Cappadocian Caearea,
Eleonas of Tarsus and others had determined Stephen of Rome to cease the fraternal ties
with the Asian and African episcopates. However, ecclesial communion between bishops
Cyprian and Stephen was not interrupted, both dying as martyrs during the persecution
of Emperor Valerian. The baptismal question was definitively answered at the Councils
of Arles (314) and Nicaea (325) which decided to recognize the validity of any baptism
that was performed in the name of the Holy Trinity. For details,see I. Todoran “Botezul
ereticilor”, in Mitropolia Ardealului, no. 4-6/1961, pp. 242-268, D. Popescu, “Doctrina
despre Taina Botezului în primele secole creştine” in Ortodoxia, no. 3/1961, pp. 393-404;
I.G. Coman, “Personalitatea Sfântului Ciprian” in Studii Teologice, no. 5-6/1959, pp. 267-
296; M.T. Finn, Early Christian baptism and the catechumenate: Italy, North Africa and
Egypt, Collegeville, 1992, C. Voicu, Botezul în Tradiţia Patristică, Sibiu, Agnos Publishing
House, 2011, pp. 80-86 and 159-166.
Christian communication gave rise to many misunderstandings within
the community. The most important cause that had led to the emergence
of various disputes between Christians was the persecution which lasted
almost three centuries (64-313). Donatism was one of the consequences
of the persecutions. In Africa, it manifested on the Christian rigorist
background promoted by Tertullian and St. Cyprian of Carthage on the
validity of the Holy Sacraments performed by a fallen clergyman4.
The dispute emerged within the context of the election held for the
bishop’s see in Carthage, following the death of Mensurius (311). The
appointed one was deacon Caecilian, one of the supporters of the critical
opinion expressed by his predecessor in connection with the exaggerated
enthusiasm of some Christians wanting to become martyrs at all costs5.
4
There were several Christians’ attitudes related to persecutions: some received the given
situation of a certain context and professed faith in Christ, even if it meant accepting to pay
the ultimate sacrifice; others, fearing torture and death or considering that they were able to
keep their faith in secret, formally declared that they were not Christians, having obtained
through connections or money a certificate; others, not wanting an open confrontation with
the persecutors, preferred to hide until the danger of being arrested passed; others, in a
rigorist spirit, have sought out, at all costs, martyrdom, believing that it would certainly
ensure their salvation. When the question arose regarding the reinstatement of the fallen
ones, these diverse attitudes created great problems for the Church in judging each category
and gave rise to heated controversies, which sometimes have degenerated into states of
schism. See D.N. Vălean, Erezii, controverse şi schisme în creştinismul secolelor I-XI, Cluj
Napoca, Limes Publishing House, 2009, pp. 53-56 and 72-78.
5
Writing to Bishop Secundus of Tigisis around the years 304/305, during the cruel persecution
of Diocletian, Mensurius was testifying that he had handed over to the searching party
heretical books instead of his holy books which he had hidden in his residence. Being
denounced, the Roman proconsul did not follow the charges. Instead, some of those who
sought martyrdom at all costs and whom may have been among the rigorist accusers
(i.e.) were holding holy books in their hands, saying that they would not hand them over
under any circumstances, even though nobody had previously asked them to do so. In
Mensurius’ opinion, these Christians did not deserve to be revered as martyrs, even though
by exposing themselves in this way were eventually arrested and killed by persecutors. In
turn, Secundus told him about the persecution in Numidia and how even himself was lured
with money to hand over his sacred books, which he refused to do because he did not want
to be counted with the traditori and especially because he did not want to set a bad example
by not respecting the evangelical prescriptions. See the extract from the minutes of the
dispute with the Donatists in Carthage, in 411, in St. Augustine, Breviculus collationis cum
Donatistis, 3, 13, 25 in: Kirchen-und Theologiegeschichte in Quellen, Bd I, Alte Kirche,
German translation and commentary by M.A. Ritter, 9th ed., Neukirchen-Vluyn, 2007, p.
Therefore, the rigorists targeted by Mensurius’ criticism, were
suspecting the appointed one of too much tolerance regarding the
traditori, considering him as being one of them6, and were watching
the events regarding his ordination as bishop. These facts showed
his opponents’ reasons of dissatisfaction: at his ordination as bishop
officiated Felix of Aptunga, Novelus of Cyzicus and Faust of Thuburbo
Maius, who were suspected of treason. The primate bishop of Numidia
had not been invited to this ceremony. In addition, two of the pretenders
of the Carthaginian Episcopal see (Botrus and Caelestius) joined the
discontented party. He had to take action against the curators (the elderly)
of the Celestin diocese because they became guilty of embezzlement of
church property, as he had been warned by bishop Mensurius7 before
leaving for Rome. Caecilian was not in matron Lucilla’s favours, who
was supporting financially the African Church, because he had stopped
worshiping some bones that she honoured as relics of martyrs8.
Under these conditions, Caecilian’s opponents, led by bishop
Donatus of Casae Nigrae in Numidia, sought to remove him from his
see. Although the appointment was hailed by all the people (suffragio
131. Optatus of Mileva in his work Contra Parmenianum Donatistam, ed. by Carl Ziwsa,
Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum (CSEL), vol. 26, Vienna, 1893, adding in
appendix some documents related to the way in which the searches were conducted during
the persecution. Relevant in this sense is also Gesta apud Zenophilum. See examples in M.
Ţepelea, Diocleţian şi persecuţiile împotriva creştinilor, Oradea, 2008, pp. 111-118.
6
During Diocletian’s persecution, among imprisoned Christians two groups have emerged
splitting up the unity among themselves. Those who consider themselves as being the “true
confessors” were considering some of their ailing colleagues as traditori and therefore being
excluded from the martyrs’ group. Due to the fact that the group of the Abyssinian prisoners
had starved to death, made the rigorists to charge bishop Mensurius and deacon Caecilian
with the accusation of having stopped their required food supply. It is known that Mensurius
condemned at all costs the exposure to martyrdom, and to resort himself to such a measure was
excluded. Starvation was one way of constraining the Christians to commit apostasy and in these
conditions persecutors watched that the relatives of the imprisoned ones would not bring them
food. Optatus of Mileva, Contra Parmenianum Donatistam, 3, 14, 26 (= AM Ritter), p. 132.
7
Denounced to the authorities that he did not hand in the sacred books in order to be burned, but
some heretical ones instead, he had to flee for a while to Rome, see D.N. Vălean, op. cit., p. 74.
8
It is about some Christians who deliberately exposed themselves to persecutions, attitude
dismissed by bishop Mensurius, hence they were not considered martyrs. A Schindler,
Afrika I. Das christliche Nordafrika (2. Bis 7. Jh.) In Theologische Realenzyklopädie, Bd I,
Berlin / New York, 1977, p. 655.
totius populi) and recognized by most of Western episcopates including
Miltiades of Rome (311-314), the Numidian bishops chaired by
Secundus of Tigisis met in council at Carthage between 311 and 312.
The approximately 70 bishops, probably motivated by the gifts received
from matron Lucilla, decided to reject the election and consecration of
Caecilian as non-canonical. They claimed that it had been ordained by
bishops suspected of treason and that he himself would have forbidden
the food supplements for the Christians imprisoned by persecutors9.
The council confirmed the election of lecturer Maiorin, from
Lucilla’s entourage, as bishop of Carthage. His supporters gathered in
a separate Church “of the pure ones” pretending to be the successors of
the African Church and rightful owners of its property10. Therefore the
African Church split itself, the two bishops accusing each other of non-
canonicity. Maiorin died in 313 but the schism was not settled. Donatus
succeeded him in office and his name was to be linked to the Donatist
movement for several decades11.
The measures that Emperor Constantine the Great had taken in favour
of the Church, in accordance with the application of the tolerance edict
issued by Galerius in 311 and the agreement with Licinius at Mediolanum
in 313, which were proving that the emperor was on Caecilian’s side12,
determined the Donatists to appeal to him, as supreme court in judging
their case, citing various charges against the bishop they contested13. They
9
According to Optatus of Mileva, Contra Parmenianum Donatistam, I, 19.20, and St.
Augustine, Breviculus collationis cum Donatistis, 3, 14, 26, (= AM Ritter), p. 132.
10
G. Haendler, Die abendländische Kirche im Zeitalter der Völkerwanderung (= Kirchengeschichte
in Einzeldarstellungen, I/5), Berlin, 1980, p. 45; C. Andresen/ A.M. Ritter, Geschichte des
Christentums, I/1. Altertum, Kohlhammer, Stuttgart, 1993, p. 69
11
K. Baus, Von der Urgemeinde zur frühchristlichen Großkirche, in H. Jedin (editor),
Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte, Bd. I, Freiburg-Basel-Wien, 1985, p. 465.
12
For Emperor Constantine the Great, Caecilian is the Primate of the universal Church of
the African Diocese whose capital was Carthage, according to the imperial letter addressed
to proconsul Anulinus, in Eusebius of Caesarea, Istoria bisericească, X, VII, 2, in the
collection Părinţi şi scriitori bisericeşti (=PSB), vol. 13, Bucharest, 1987, p. 385. Also,
the letter was even asking him to denounce those donatists who were refusing to obey the
imperial legal authority represented by the proconsul Anulinus and vice-prefect Patricius,
according to The letter to Caecilian, ibid, X, VI 0.4 to 5, p. 385.
13
According to the Letter to Miltiades of Rome, ibid, X, V, 18, p. 382.
were thus creating a precedent involving the imperial power in solving a
problem related to the church. The five signatories were suggesting that the
emperor should entrust this case to the judgment of the Gaelic bishops14.
The proposal was favoured by the sovereign for he trusted the
Gallic episcopate which was loyal to him (his imperial residence was in
Treveri, in Gaul) and because it remained neutral in the baptismal dispute
between Rome and Carthage. Consequently, Emperor Constantine, who
had acquired, after his victory at Pons Milvius, supremacy over the
western part of the empire, commissioned bishop Miltiades of Rome
to solve the case. Caecilian had to come to Rome accompanied by ten
bishops favourable to him. Ten other bishops from the opposing side had
to give reasons for the schism. The arbitration was provided by Miltiades
together with Reticius of Autu, Maternus of Cologne, and Marinus of
Arles. To facilitate a better understanding of the realities concerning the
controversies within the African Church, the emperor was sending to the
pope the incriminating letters received through proconsul Anulinus. At
the same time, he was confessing his desire to restore peace within the
Church from which the Donatists had parted15.
After a heated debate on doctrinal matters, the council of Rome
announced on of October 2, 313 the final decision: it recognized the
canonical election and consecration of Caecilian and rejected the
appointment of Maiorin; it had condemned the Donatist practice of
re-administering the Holy Sacraments to those who had received them
from fallen clergy. Thus, the council did not bring into question the
issue of Caecilian’s ordination by traditori, but the recognising of the
validity of those ordinations16.
Dissatisfied with these decisions, the Donatists continued with
their polemic oriented against the Church, arguing that the few bishops
14
The request, accompanied by a personal letter, was sent by Anuliaus on 15th of April 313.
Document no. 11 is found in the collection of documents edited by H.v. Soden, Urkunden
zur Entstehungsgeschichte des Donatismus, 1913, reed. The H.v. Campenhausen in: Kleine
Texte für Vorlesungen und Űbungen (= KIT) 122, Berlin, 1950 (the number of the document
and its editor shall be indicated below).
15
See the imperial letter in Eusebius of Caesarea, Istoria bisericească, X, V 0.18 to 20, pp.
382-383.
16
A. Schindler, Afrika I, p. 657.
present in Rome had not examined thoroughly the issue in question
thus they had taken a hasty decision. Wanting to end these disputes
once and for all, Emperor Constantine the Great decided to summon a
council at Arles, which brought together forty bishops from the West.
Meanwhile, an investigation was being conducted in Africa in order to
clarify the position of Bishop Felix of Aptunga, accused of treason. The
results of the investigation refuted the charges on February 15, 31417.
This thing was reflecting itself positively also upon Caecilian who had
been ordained by Felix, and the council of Arles could pronounce itself
against the Donatists. The emperor was watching with interest the events
because “this quarrel which has lasted in a miserable manner so long due
to some shameful rivalries” and the bishops who should have shown “full
and brotherly understanding, were divided in an ungodly way” giving
opportunity to the foreign pagans to scorn the most holy teaching18.
Through a series of canons, the council of Arles was seeking to
settle once and for all the disagreements within the Church. Canon
8 forbids the repetition of baptism if it was done in the name of the
Holy Trinity, canon 13 recognizes the validity of ordinations performed
even by traditori, and canon 14 provides for the excommunication
of the accusers that cannot support their accusations with authentic
documents19.
Defeated once again, the Donatists appealed to the emperor.
Intrigued by the fact that they did not respect the decisions of the
Council of Arles, the emperor called the complainants to his court
in Mediolanum20. After a new theological confrontation with the
supporters of Caecilian and Felix and based upon the reports drafted
by bishops Economius and Olympius a decree was issued condemning
17
According to Acta purgationis Felicis, Document 19 (Hv Soden).
18
From the imperial letter addressed to Bishop Chrestus of Syracuse, in Eusebius of Caesarea,
Istoria bisericească, XV, 22 and 24, pp. 383-384.
19
J. M. O’Donnell, The canons of the First Council of Arles, Washington, 1961. Although
there was a fierce controversy between African and Roman baptismal tradition during
the times of St. Cyprian and Pope Stephen, see infra, note 3, at the Council of Arles the
Carthaginians rallied themselves to the Roman and the Egyptian-Palestinian baptismal
tradition.
20
Document 28 (H.v. Soden).
the Donatists, which was sent to vicar Eumalius of Africa on November
10, 31621. Through this, the emperor was revealing his vision regarding
the relation of the state with respect to the Church, fact demonstrated by
other provisions that followed.
Thus, shortly after (316/317) it was ordered that Donatist churches
be confiscated in favour of Carthaginian communities, the decree being
implemented on March 12, 317 by duke Leontius and commissioner
Ursacius. Although they had appealed to imperial arbitration, the
Donatists put up a fiercely resistance, refusing in many cases to leave
their churches. Force and military strength was used, bloodshed occurred
under the horrified eyes of the assisting onlookers at the unleashing of this
inter-Christian war, arrests were made and exiles were ordered, e.g. that
of Bishop Silvan of Cirta22. As a result of these measures, the Donatists
declared all the Church as being fallen, forming a separate Church “of
the pure ones” the only one that allegedly had valid sacraments. This
principle defined the Donatist movement throughout its entire existence.
Clashes reached in some cases levels not recorded not even during
persecution times, if we take into account that it was a battle fought out
among Christians and not against pagans. From the evolution of this
conflict, even Emperor Constantine the Great himself understood that
the desired peace within the Church could not be achieved by force, but
by consensual acceptance on both sides that they can live in communion
within the same Church. Thus he reverted the decisions taken against
the Donatists, allowing the return of the exiled ones, through the decree
issued on May 5, 321, and giving them broad tolerance through another
law enacted the same year23.
These measures corroborated with the existence of a Donatist
majority in many of the North-African communities, led to the increase
of their influence up to acquiring the privileges bestowed upon the clergy
of the universal Church. An eloquent example is that that in 330 they
managed to impose the building of a church in Cirta (Constantia) at the
21
The imperial letter to which it was attached the decree condemning the Donatists, Document
25 (Hv Soden).
22
23
Document 30-31 (H.v. Soden).
expense of the state, after Donatists had taken over the church founded
by the emperor himself24. It is therefore evident that after the decree of
tolerance of 321 and until the death of Emperor Constantine there were
officially two Churches in Northern Africa, of which the most numerous
was the Donatist one. Due to the leadership exercised by personalities
like Donatus the Great25, Parmenian26 and Primian, most of the African
episcopate adhered to this heresy. The council held in Carthage, in 336,
chaired by Donatus, was attended by no less than 270 Donatist bishops27.
On this occasion, the need of rebaptising those who embraced Donatism
was reiterated. However the tolerance provided by the imperial power
created the premises of relatively peaceful cohabitation of the two faiths.
The Donatists even intensified their mission, becoming dominant in
North Africa, thanks to the tolerance that they enjoyed under Emperor
Constans (337-350), who was ruling over Africa, too.
Wanting to capitalize upon this favourable situation for Donatists,
Bishop Donatus initiated the union with the Church, asking the emperor
to recognize him as primate of all Carthaginian Christendom. Through
this move he was seeking to officialise Donatism as the only true faith.
At the same time, however, the tolerated Donatists in Africa were not
in communion with any other local Church. Thus they were excluded
from the universal Church. Their recognition would have been possible
only by coming back into communion with the Church in Carthage
and showing obedience to its head, which was in communion with the
universal Church.
This thing was understood also by Emperor Constans and did not
let himself caught in the entangling nets cast by Donatists. Unlike his
brother, Emperor Constantius II (337-361), who by supporting semi-
Arianism maintained the Eastern episcopate divided28. In the provinces
24
25
See P. Monceaux, Histoire littéraire de l’Afrique chrétienne, Bd V, Paris, 1920, p. 105.
26
Ibidem, p. 221.
27
K.S. Frank, Lehrbuch der Geschichte der Alten Kirche, Paderborn, 1997, p. 269.
28
Details regarding Arian disputes after the First Ecumenical Council of Nicaea, in I.
Rămureanu, „Lupta Ortodoxiei contra arianismului de la Sinodul I ecumenic până la
moartea lui Arie”, in Studii Teologice, nr. 1-2/1961, p. 13-31; Idem, „Sinodul de la Sardica
din anul 343. Importanţa lui pentru istoria pătrunderii creştinismului la geto-daco-romani”,
governed by Constans the Nicaene orthodox were predominant and they
were able to maintain the unity and communion among themselves. Thus,
he was hoping to achieve the reconciliation of bishops in Africa but not
in the Donatist version rejected by the Church. That is why he delegated
Paul and Macarius to go to Carthage and, under the pretext that they
were supervising grants distribution, tax collection and their sending to
the imperial capital, to discover the intentions of the Donatists. Donatus
reacted harshly, criticizing the emperor’s intervention in ecclesiastical
matters. “What has the emperor to do with the Church?” was the slogan
under which he mobilized his supporters against the sovereign29.
Thus, the emperor decided to end the Donatist heresy. He renewed,
in 347, the edict issued by his father in 316, demanding the Donatists
to recognize the authority of Bishop Gratus of Carthage, the second
successor of Caecilian. The places of worship and their church property
were reverted back to the Church. The hierarchs who were refusing
to obey the Bishop of Carthage were sent into exile and rebaptism
was forbidden. Violent clashes followed between Donatists and
representatives of imperial authority, as was the case in Numidia, where
the troops commanded by Macarius clashed with the Donatist opponents
grouped around bishop Donatus of Bagai, barricaded in a church. Even
Donatus of Carthage himself was sent into exile, where he died in 355,
his successor becoming bishop Parmenian. Outraged by this decision,
Donatists sent a delegation headed by Bishop Marculus, which brought
serious offenses against Commissioner Macarius. He had them flogged,
and the bishop imprisoned and eventually executed, making him a new
in Studii Teologice, nr. 3-4/1962, p. 146-182; Idem, „Sinoadele de la Sirmium dintre anii
348 şi 358. Condamnarea lui Fotin de Sirmium”, in Studii Teologice, nr. 5-6/1963, p.
266-316; C. Voicu, „Problema homoousius la Sfântul Atanasie cel Mare”, in Mitropolia
Olteniei, nr. 1-2/1963, p. 3-20; I. Oritz de Urbina, Nicee et Constantinople, Paris, 1963; H.
G. Opitz, Urkunden zur Geschichte des arianischen Streites, 2 vol. Berlin-Leipzig, 1934-
1935; H. Vogel, Das Nicaenische Glaubensbekenntis, Eine Doxologie, Berlin-Stuttgart,
1963; N. Chifăr, „Ortodoxia în confruntare cu arianismul. Episcopatul apusean în apărarea
crezului niceean”, in: Analele ştiinţifice ale Universităţii Al. I. Cuza-Iaşi, Teologie, tom
IV, 1997-1998, p. 187-202; N. Dumitraşcu, Hristologia Sfântului Atanasie cel Mare în
contextul controverselor ariene şi post-ariene, Cluj-Napoca, 1999, 2003; Idem, Cele şapte
personalităţi de la Niceea (325), Cluj-Napoca, 2003.
29
Optatus of Mileve, op. cit., III, 3.
martyr for the Donatists30.
Under the chairmanship of Gratus, Bishop of Carthage, an
African council was held in 348, which again forbade the practice
of re-administering the Sacrament of Baptism to the ones previously
baptised by heretics and the worship of false martyrs31.
This situation was preserved until the enthronement of the last
descendant of Constantine, Julian the Apostate (361-363), who allowing
all the exiled to return to their communities facilitated the reactivation
of Donatism in Africa. Becoming an apostate from the Christian faith,
Emperor Julian sought to destroy the Church through the confrontation
from within it. As in the case of the disputes between Nicaeans and Arians,
he allowed the Donatists to reactivate their communities and Episcopal
sees. He ordered the restoration of possession and goods that they had
held before the edict of 347. The return of Donatists in Africa meant the
starting of a cruel revenge: cities were plundered, Orthodox churches
destroyed, many bishops and priests abused. In this process even some
state representatives were involved, who used the Donatists’ anger and
the influence of their bishops in order to plot and to undermine imperial
authority, attitude maintained until the time of Emperor Honorius (395-
423), who on January 30, 412 decreed the realisation of their union and
their incorporation into the universal Church32.
The political and religious measures taken against the Donatists
during the Constantinian dynasty define, on the one hand, the way in
which the emperor understood his affiliation to Christianity and the
obligations assumed in order to defend the Church’s interests, preserving
the unity of faith as a prerequisite for achieving unity of the empire,
and on the other, the caution that the Church manifested towards the
implication of the secular power within its matters and its tenacity of
30
Details of these confrontations in Passio Marculi, Migne, P.L. VIII, 760-766, and Passio
Maximian et Isaac, ibid., 767-774. See also K. Baus / E. Ewig, Die Reichskirche nach dem
Konstantin Großen. Die Kirche von Nikaia bis Chakedon, in Jedin H. (ed.), Handbuch der
Kirchengeschichte, II/1, Freiburg, Basel, Vienna, 1985, p. 146.
31
It refers to those Christians who have sought martyrdom at all costs, practice rejected by
the Church during the persecutions. Ibidem, pp. 147-148. See infra, note 5.
32
See Codex Theodosianum, XVI, 5.52, T. Mommsen and P. Meyer (eds.), 2 vols, 2ed.,
Berlin, 1954.
fighting in order to maintain its autonomy from the state.
After the victory at Pons Milvius and strengthening the grip over the
West, Constantine the Grate gave a considerable attention to Christianity.
This comes out very clearly from the instructions given after the meeting
with Licinius at Mediolanum, in the spring of 313, when the church
acquired total freedom. Constantine was aware of the tolerance shown
to the Christians in the western part of the empire even from the reign
of his father, Constantius Chlorus (Caesar 293-305, Augustus 305-306),
which differed drastically from the situation in the East. The persecution
triggered off by emperor Diocletianus (284-305), which reached under
Galerius (Caesar 293-305, Augustus 305-311) unprecedented levels of
cruelty, did not manifest itself with the same virulence in the West (some
churches were destroyed, religious books and archives burned, and the
catacombs of Rome filled with sand in order to prevent the gatherings of
Christians), even less in the provinces governed by Constantius Chlorus,
and the Edict of toleration issued by Galerius in 311, which did not get
to be applied in the East, was legalizing the actual state of affairs already
existing in the West33.
Out of his personal revelation experience received from the Supreme
Divinity34 and following the discussions he had in Rome with Miltiades
and Hosius of Cordoba, who had become Imperial advisors especially
on religious matters, Emperor Constantine understood that the Christian
religion was not one of the many religions practiced and tolerated within
the empire, but the only one true faith in God the Almighty, to Whom
he owed the consolidation of his power, and that to it and its servants
he must give all his attention and support. This becomes clear also from
the personal dispositions communicated through letters to provincial
governors regarding the full restitution of the properties confiscated
during the persecutions and the subsidies provided by the state in order to
33
Although not confirmed by documents, Maxentius’ belonging to Christianity can be assumed.
It seems that it was one of the main reasons that mattered for excluding him from the leadership
of the empire at the conference of Carnuntum, in 308. See R. Donciu, Împăratul Maxenţiu şi
victoria creştinismului, Antet Publishing House, Filipestii de Târg, 2007.
34
See the story of the event in Eusebius of Caesarea, Viaţa lui Constantin cel Mare, I, 28-30,
PSB, vol. 14, Bucharest, 1991, pp. 76-77, and Lactanţiu, Despre moartea persecutorilor,
44, 5-6, bilingual edition, Iaşi, Polirom Publishing House, 2011, pp. 141-142.
support the clergy35. Relevant in this regard is the following passage: “As
it is obvious from many circumstances that when this religion, in which
there is the deepest respect for the most holy divine power, is despised,
great danger befall upon public life, but when it is legally adopted and
respected that provides the most significant prosperity to the Roman
name and remarkable success for all human endeavours through divine
benevolence, I considered it to be a good deed as the people who serve
with the due devotion and in full respect of the law for the glory of divine
faith to be rewarded for their effort”36.
The instauration of the Donatist schism which was splitting the
African Christianity and could have extended itself over a broader area
reactivating the baptismal dispute between St. Cyprian of Carthage and
Stephen of Rome, which managed to get even the Church of Cappadocia
involved in the dispute, made Constantine act promptly. He asked Bishop
Miltiades to arbitrate the conflict, but he ordered him to judge the case
with three Galician bishops.
In the emperor’s view, everything had to be in line with the civil
legal proceedings, the bishops appointed by him constituting themselves
into a panel of judges. The decisions of this body had to be obeyed in full.
Sensing the danger of setting a precedent with undesirable
implications in the Church-State relation, and the African schism being
strictly an ecclesiastical matter even if the Donatists had appealed to
imperial intervention, Miltiades invited to Rome another 15 bishops
from Italy, transforming the judging court envisioned by the emperor in
an authentic local council and offering the sovereign, indirectly, a lecture
35
Is relevant the letter addressed to Caecilian of Carthage regarding the distribution of the
money destined for the “the payment of the bills belonging to the rulers of the legitimate
and Holy Christian religion” preserved in copy form in Eusebius of Caesarea, Istoria
bisericească, X, VI, pp. 384-385, and the one addressed to the proconsul Anulinus of Africa
regarding the clergy’s exemptions from any public charge, ibidem, X, VII, pp. 385-386. It
seems that Donatists became even more impatient with Caecilian because they, who were
considering themselves the rightful successors of the true Christians in the North of Africa,
were excluded from these privileges, which were enjoyed by the traditori. C. Andresen /
A.M. Ritter, op. cit., p. 69.
36
In conformity with C. M. Odahl, Constantin şi imperiul creştin, trad. de M. Pop, Ed. Bic
All, Bucureşti, 2006, p. 112.
regarding the Church’s rule of law.37 The emperor, however, endorsed
the decisions of this council which were answering, in fact, to his desire
to absolve Caecilian of the accusation of non-canonicity, thinking that in
this way the Donatist schism would eventually end.
Being once again called by the Donatists dissatisfied with that
verdict, Emperor Constantin summoned, this time, a general council in
Arles, in august 314, to which he invited the bishops of all provinces
of the Western Empire. He had understood that a religious controversy
could only be solved by an ecclesiastical court, but it had to gather itself
under the auspices of the Imperial court and not under those of the bishop
of Rome38. Although under the jurisdiction of Rome, Bishop Chrestus of
Syracuse received his invitation directly from the sovereign, who through
the governor Latronianus provided him with the imperial post (cursus
publicus). Also the emperor associated the bishops, whom he called
beloved brothers (carissimi fratres), civilian officials, recommending
them to go to the council accompanied by a delegation39.
However, the participant bishops did not feel compelled to take
into account the emperor’s requirements who suggested that the charges
brought against Caecilian by the Donatist opponents be examined, but
they judged the charges from a theological perspective, not as a particular
case, but as a general one, valid for the entire Church. In their view,
Caecilian’s ordination was valid because the validity of a sacrament is
not given by the worthiness of the celebrant but by the mysterious work
of the Divine Grace. Therefore, in the case of the heretics’ baptism the
second baptism was not allowed, unless it was not done in the name of
the Holy Trinity (Can. 8). For the fact that the council did not consider
the Donatists’ request in light of a particular case, as the sovereign
wanted, hoping thereby to settle the conflict once and for all, but from
37
E. Caspar, Geschichte des Papsttums von den Anfängen bis zur Höhe der Weltherrschaft,
vol. I, Tübingen, 1930, p. 112.
38
Probably for this reason Pope Sylvester did not participate personally in the council, but
he only sent delegates, according to E. Dassmann, Kirchengeschichte II/1. Konstantinische
Wende und spätantike Reichskirche, Kohlhammer, Stuttgart, 1996, p. 32.
39
“...take another two second-class delegates, which you reckon them most suitable, as well
as three serving people, who will help you along the way” in Eusebius of Caesarea, Istoria
bisericescă, X, V, 23, p. 384.
the theological perspective of the Church’s faith that all Christians must
follow, the bishops defended their independence against the secular
power. They issued a dogmatic ruling regarding the validity of the Holy
Sacraments which included also the reply to Donatists. The emperor had
to accept yet again the fact of respecting the autonomy of the Church,
accepting the council’s decisions40.
Their application could have involve the imperial authority to the
extent that would not harm religious principles. Understanding that the
unity of the Church was not ensured by issuing some imperial edicts or
police like measures, even if they ultimately dealt with ecclesial matters,
but it was postulated only by compliance with faith norms, the emperor
granted, in the end, motivated also by the escalation of the conflict in
Numidia, religious tolerance for the Donatists who enjoyed it also under
his descendants until the year 347, when restrictive measures were
imposed.
From the above it follows that the Donatist dispute that involved
both ecclesiastical authority manifested through conciliar decisions,
as evidenced by the political and imperial decrees, opened the way for
a Church-state relation which experienced moments of cooperation
beneficial to both parts, but also tensions because of the sovereign’s
attempt (as bishop ektos tone) to overlap the bishop’s authority in internal
problems of the Church. When its autonomy was affected, the Church
reacted, making the sovereign understand that he is in the Church, not
above it and received the recognition of “bishop outside the Church
affairs” as long as he protected it, he defend it and confessed the faith and
supports it. When Church bishops appealed to the emperor as supreme
authority in ecclesiastical matters, balance was destroyed and the
autonomy of the Church was compromised, as demonstrated repeatedly
in the subsequent attempts to solve the great theological controversies.
The Donatist dispute is thus a relevant example.
40
Details regarding Emperor Constantine the Great’s attitude towards the synodal
authority in M. Girardet, Kaisergericht und Bischofsgericht. Studien zu den Anfängen
des Donatistenstreites (313-315) und zum Prozeß des Athanasius von Alexandrien (328-
346), Bonn, 1975, Idem, Konstantin der Grosse und das Reichskonzil von Arles (314),
Oecumenica et Patristics, Festschrift W. Schneemelcher Metropol der Schweiz, 1989.
Simion MOLNAR
The Crusades – between Religious Liberty and

Constraint
Abstract
The problem of early occidental crusades has always represented
an extremely interesting and fascinating topic, considering that between
the XI and the XIII centuries, the 8 crusades have featured the encounter
between two great civilizations – christians vs. muslims – with really
different canons and principles. Concurrently, we can not lose sight of
the christian civilization, which, divided after the Great Schism in 1054,
was inevitable confronted with the dissimilarities between the occidental
catholic christianity and the greek-byzantine one, coming to the point
where even military conflicts were demanded. That led to the conquest
of the Constantinopol during the forth crusade and the creation of the
easterly Latin Empire.
Keywords:
crusade, religious liberty and constraint, Great Schism, Catholic
Church.
As a token of the historiographic interest, we can highlight some

works that seem more important to us: Florentina Boilers (Crusades),
Renee Gruosset (The Secret History of the Crusades), Vladimir Roşulescu
(Crusades), Amin Maalouf (The Crusades seen by Arabs), Jean-Paul
Roux (History of the war between Islam and Christendom 622-2007).
Also, the interest for early crusades was eviced by and our great scientist
and historian Nicolae Iorga, through a series of research, materialized
by several publications: Breve histoire des croisades, Rhodes sous les
Hospitaliers, France de Cypre, La France de Terre Sainte, Quelques
observations sur les rapports entre le monde Oriental et les croises,
Elements of unity of the medieval, modern and contemporary world, vol.
I - Popes and emperors.
A crusade meant not only a record of dates and facts, finding some
trace of political, economic and cultural rights. It revealed the whole
mechanism of the European mentation, the way medieval people used
to think, their private universe, that was not yet acquainted with the laic
forms of perception, dominated by religious wiews soaked with ancestral
beliefs1.
Upon a fair balance of what has been already told, we have to point
out that the way that medieval Christianity was developing meant a way
to live and think that was really different from our nowadays modern
perception, as well as medieval Mohammedanism, which is different
from that of today. These elements cand be found in the words of the XII
century bookman, Foucher de Chartres:
“Keep in your minds how God turned West into East

today, we who were occidentals have become orientals, that
who was a roman or a frank, turned into a galilean or a resident
of palestine, that who lived in Reims or in Chartres, became
inhabitant of Tyre or Antioch. We have forgotten our places
and origins, they are unknown to many of us and I do not
hear anyone talking about them. Some of us have houses and
servants, we master them just like we have inherited everything,
some have taken a foreigner woman as their wife, a syrian or
an armenian, maybe even a saracen who received our baptism.
Others have a son- or daughter-in-law, stepfather or stepson
“of other origin” and are surrounded by grandchildren and
brothers. Different dialects are now common and trust gather
the nations togheder. One who was a stranger, now is just like
a home-born”2.
1
Florentina Căzan, Crusades, Bucharest, Academiei Române Publishing House, 1998.
2
Ibidem, p. 15.
The causes of crusades were a complex mixture of social, political,
economic and religious matters. In the XI century, we find ourselves in
a period of significant economic development. Easten Europe managed
to outrun the impact of recent migrations and invasions – the norman
and hungarian ones – and to concretize its early medieval states, just as
the blooming cities – states of Italy and Germany. Gradually, there was
achieved an economical improvement, a demographical development
and an increased trade politic, whos center was the Baltic Sea, dominated
by Germany.
Along with the consolidation of the Catholic Church, the practice
of piligrimage started developing. Originally, pilgrimage places were
in West Europe, but they gradually moved towards holy places like
Jerusalem and the Holy Tomb. If pilgrimages did not aroused hostility of
the first conquerors of the holy places – the Arabs –, their overrun by the
turks was the fact that got the things complicated.
So the world was morally prepared for the beat to the crusade. To
make everything happen, only a purpose and organization were needed.
These were given by Pope Urban II. According to J. Brundage, the
crusade means “a symbiosis between holy war and pilgrimage”3. The
crusaders seem to have a double role, being not just pilgrims but fighters
for the release of the holy places, of the Holy Tomb from the control of
the turks. Unfortunately, they used to behave like conquerors many times,
being intolenant and violent and breaking the principles of christianity.
In the same period, the Eastern Roman Empire (also known as
the Byzantine), the other pole of Christianity, was displaying a great
economic, social and political stability. Despite that, it had to confront
attacks of the arabs and turks. The repose was proved to be fortunate on
several ocasions, especially under the rule of Emperor John Tzimisckes.
But that did not last for long.
Also, there were attempts of restoring the unity of the Byzantine
Roman Empire under rule of Emperor Justinian. His army, led by generals
Belisarius and Narses, managed to reconquer a great part of the former
Western Roman Empire, but this unity of the empire did not last due to
3
Ibidem, p. 38.
barbarian invasions. Regarding this happenings, the call of Pope Urban
II came to crusade. The idea was embraced in large number by nobles
of France, Italy, the Netherlands, which led to their division into four
armies, as well as the initiation of large masses.
This phenomenon did not meet the views of Urban II, whose whole
activity revealed a long deliberated plan, his political genius and, besides
his perspicatious thinking, the native sense of organization; “but you can
not raise Europe to fight, not disrupt the world order without causing
problems...”4.
This is how the first crusade started, event that showed the world
the quarrel between the two christian worlds: the catholic and the
byzantine. That was when the latin, oriental and the Jerusalim kingdoms
were created, after initiating a bloody siege, abusing of violence, mass
murdering and even plundering the Holy Tomb. To highlight this matters,
a closer look to the the fourth crusade should be taken. That was the
apogee of disagreements between the two christian worlds. The crusade
has also been defined as “the crusade of shame”5.
The english king Richard Lionheart, signed a peace treaty with
Saladin, which provided free christian pilgrimage to the holy places.
After the death of Saladin, the conflict began once again: on one hand
the 17 followers began a strong fight for inheritance, on the other hand,
the rebirth of the crusade idea. The signal was given by the german
king Henry VI, successor of Frederick I Barbarossa. Basically it was
not really a crusade, because it was the germans’ initiative and not the
pope’s. Apart from releasing the holy places, the idea of Henry VI was to
conquer Constantinople, regarding the fact that the Byzantine emperors
were suspected to deal with enemy.
German troops lent in Palestina and attacked the town of Acra,
defeated by Malik-Al-Adil, Saladin’s inheritor. The death of Henry VI
caused the disorganization of the german army, making the german
nobles draw back with no other option. That was the moment when pope
Innocent III started prepairing the fourth crusade.
Innocent III was a important political figure and he believed in the
4
Rene Gruosset, Istoria secretă a cruciadelor, Bucureşti, 2007.
5
Vladimir Roşulescu, Cruciadele, Craiova, Scorilo Publishing House, 1999.
posibility of the union between the Easten and the Western Church, all
under his authority. He wanted to imply as many European princes as he
could, all under the rule of the church. That is why, to obtain financial
support, he adressed to the church, saying:
“You, the one who preach to laymen the necessity of

their sacrifice for the Holy Tomb, what do you sacrifice for it?
Just words. Where are your actions? The people accuse you
of blowing away Christ’s gifts to you. You spend more money
maintaining your hunting dogs and your falcons. I order you,
in the name of God almighty, in the virtue of Holy Spirit and
by threatening with your eternal damnation on the Judgement
Day, pay the taxes along with your people”6.
At the same time, the pope promised to the people, forgivness for
all their sins in return of their contribution to the crusade. This became
riskful because of the entlistment of many people that had problems
with religion or law. Thibault of Champagne was appointed leader of
the crusade and negociations with Venice started, for the naval support.
A delegation met in Venice with the doge Enrico Dandolo, fixing an sum
of money for the soldiers, horses, weapons and supplies on board. After
that, they reached the conclusion that they didn’t find enough crusaders,
which was why the amount was renegociated.
After that, there was a moment when the whole crusade got
endangered. Dandolo decided to take back the port of Zara, which was
occupied by the king of Hungary. Stopping the crusade displeased the
pope who had to choose between excounicating the crusaders or bringing
them back to their initial purpose.
Meanwhile, in Verona arrives pince Alexis Anghelos, the son of
Isac II, emperor of Byzantium, who was deposed, imprisoned and blinded
by his brother. Prince Alexis Anghelos asks for help, signing a lot of
treatys regarding financial and religious matters, including his obedience
to the pope. Finally, the crusaders start their mission once again, with
their new leader, Boniface of Montferrat, who was appointed after the
6
Fl. Căzan, op. cit., p. 95.
death of Thibaut de Champagne. As they arrived in Constantinople,
the siege began. Alexis III was defeated and Isac II gained his throne
back. He did not want to accept the treatys his son signed, fact that
angered the crusaders and led them to the decision that made them siege
Constantinople once again. The crusaders criticized his former attitude,
when the emperor ordered the murder of many crusaders who happened
to be in Constantinople. The citadel could not resist the siege, beeing
weakened by the force of the crusaders and losing a huge number of men.
This slaughter determined the reaction of pope Innocent III, who
adressed a letter to Boniface of Montferat:
“Having no right or power over Greece, you have

departed from your plan in an careless and reckless maner,
heading Constantinople instead of Jerusalim (...). But your guilt
is consolidated by the fact that you did not spare anything or
anyone. Your behaviour made the greek church turn away from
our rightful guidance, seeing the latins behaving like criminals,
which gives them the right to treat them with disgust, just like
dogs”7.
The damage that the fourth crusade has done to Europe, under the
authority of the pope, proved to be cathastrophic, guiding to the fall of
the most bright civilization, who made the transition from the Antiquity
to the Middle Ages8.
After this crusade, there will be four more. Among them the crusade
of children, whose purpose was not concretized in the end. The goal of
freeing Jerusalim. During these crusades, the military and religius orders
occured. The Hospitallers and the Templars, originally derived from
religious orders, were meant to take care of the piligrims. In time, the
orders gained fortunes and military power. In france, the Templars will
have to fight back king Phillip the Handsome, who wanted their riches.
The crusades meant conquering and colonization. Therefore, no
procedure was excluded. Among them, the most intriguing were violence
7
Ibidem, p.102.
8
Vl. Roşulescu, op. cit., p. 265.
and slaughter, on both sides. The defeated conquerors were blinded by
hatred and vengeance. The destruction of assets, the masacre that had
the Holy Cross as their banner can not be eluded. But it will be a huge
mistake, after analyzing the crusades to point out only the disruption. Far
from being a „collective madness”, the crusades had a precisely chosen
political purpose, determined by a expansion of European economy,
fact that damed the rush for robbery and opression that are related to
war. Some of the consequences proved themselves to be good from the
beginning9.
The two civilizations, the christians and the muslims, beyond
their conflict, promoted trade and cultural exchanges, and have often
displayed and religious tolerance. Another aspect was that the crusades
have delayed the expansion of the ottoman turks, who will soon replace the
seljuk ones more than two centuries, in their direction to Constantinople
and Europe.
Unfortunately, in 1453, Constantinople will find himself alone
once more, in front of ottoman danger, with only few christians as allies,
and he will fall into the hands of Mehmet II the Conqueror, who will
turn it in the capital of the Ottoman Empire. The fall of Constantinople
will allow the ottomans to continue their mission. In 1529 they will stop
under the walls of Vienna, where the turks will be defeated, even though
the empire reached its maximum expansion.
Turks will try again in 1683, the conquest of Vienna, and this
time, after their second defeat the fall of the Ottoman Empire will begin,
turning them into the “sick man of Europe” and whose end will last until
the end of World War I.
9
Ibidem, p. 136.
Vasile IONAȘ
A document on appointing a protopope in

Hunedoara
Abstract:
The document from the 24th of April 1506 is the first appointment
of an ortodox protopope in Hunedoara, made by Beatrice de Frangepan
as the mistress of the Hunedoara citadel and domain.
Keywords:
Hunedoara, protopope, orthodox religion, Beatrice de Frangepan,
Socet.

The hierarchy of the Romanian Orthodox Church and the status

of its servants, have represented topics of great interest to the modern
Romanian Historiography. Starting with Petru Maior, continuing with
Timotei Cipariu, then with A. D. Xenopol, Nicolae Iorga and Ion Bogdan,
it has been tried to clarify the role that the church had within the social
and political life of the Romanians, the organization of the institution, its
relationships with other churches in Transylvania. A major contribution
to the knowledge of the church hierarchy was made by Augustin Bunea in
two of his works Vechile episcopii ale Vadului, Geoagiului, Silvașului și
Bălgradului (Blaj, 1902) and Ierarhia Românilor din Ardeal și Ungaria
(Blaj, 1904). The latter was a polemical response to the work of Teodor
V. Păcățian Istoriografi vechi, istoriografi vechi. Studiu critic în chestia
vechii mitropolii ortodoxe române. If research and ancient polemics
focused primarily on the existence of an Orthodox Metropolitan Church
of Transylvania before Mihai Viteazul [Michael the Brave], on the
situation of the Romanian bishops against the hierarchy of religious
confessions which had official recognition, less attention has been paid
to the Romanian protopopes .
The more recent Romanian historiography resumed the topic of
the Romanian Orthodox Church hierarchy with important details and
nuances on the topic. We mention here the work of Priest Prof. Dr.
Mircea Păcurariu1 and Ana Dumitran2 on the church institutions of the
Transylvanian Romanians in general and with particular reference to
the deanery. The document signed on the 24th of April 1506, by which
Priest Petru from Socet3 was appointed protopope of the Romanians
from Hunedoara, is mentioned several times without having been fully
published neither by Cipariu nor by other researchers who have examined
the documents in the archive of Sf. Nicolae [St. Nicholas] in Hunedoara.
The document is issued by Beatrice de Frangepan, John Corvinus’
widow, as the inheritor of Hunedoara domain. The place of issue is
Rokolnok Castle that Vladislav II, King of Hungary, was to strengthen
for Beatrice and her daughter Elizabeth along with most of the domains
of her former husband, after the death of Christopher, the only the male
descendant of John Corvinus. The document is dated April 24, 1506,
in festo Beati Georgii Martiris, anno Domini millesimo quingentesimo
sexton.
The mistress of the domain shows that taking account of priest
Petru’s honour, his literacy “according to the Serbian tradition” (studium
morem Rascianorum litteralis scientie sufficienti peritia), and of other
proven merits, he is the appropriate person to fill the vacant position
within the Romanian church protopope district of Hunedoara and
to benefit from housing, income and the benefits of the deanery. The
appointment for life (vitaque sua durante), was resulting from the right to
own the domain (auctoritate nostris juspatronatus) and was addressing
1
Istoria Bisericii Ortodoxe Române, vol. I-II, București, 1981; Istoria vieții bisericești a
românilor hunedoreni, în vol. Episcopia Aradului. Istorie. Viață culturală. Monumente de
artă, Arad, 1987.
2
„Instituția protopopiatului în Biserica românească din Transilvania în secolul al XVII-lea”, in
Apulum, 32, 1995, pp. 315-325; Religie ortodoxă – religie reformată. Ipostaze ale identității
confesionale a românilor din Transilvania în secolele XVI-XVII, Cluj-Napoca, 2004.
3
The original document is available at the National Archives Service of the Hunedoara
County, fund Romanian Orthodox Parish “St. Nicholas” Hunedoara, doc. 3/1506.
all the priests from the Hunedoara Castle precints, living at that time or
in the future.
1506 April 24, Rokolnok

Nos Beatrix de Frangepanibus, Illustrissimi condam domini
Johannis Corvini Lyptovie ducis ac regnorum Dalmacie, Croacie et
Sclavonie bani etc. relictam memorie commendamus tenore presencium
significantes quibus expedit universis quod nos attentis et consideratis
vivis virtute, morum honestate ac studium morem Rascianorum, litteralis
scientie sufficienti peritia, aliisque probitatum meritis discreti Petri
presbiteri Walahorum de Zochet quibus ipse apud nos nonnullorum
fidelium nostrorum fidedigno testimonio meruit commendari eundem
veluti personam idoneam et benemeritam ad officium prothopopatus
ecclesie Walahorum in oppido nostro Hwnyad vocato fundate ad presens
de jure et de facto vacante simulcum domo et cunctis utilitatibus,
proventibus et obvencionibus eiusdem prothopopatus auctoritate nostris
juspatronatus duximus nominandis, eligendis et confirmandis, immo
nominamus, eligimus vitaque sua durante confirmamus presencium
tenorem. Quocirca vobis universis et singulis presbiteris Walachorum
ubique in pertinenciis castri nostri Hunyad ad praesens constitutis et
in futurum constitueritis harum serie firmiter percipientis mandamus
[…]. Petro presbitero prothopopo […] consveto integraliter respondere
debeatis et teneamini proventibus nichilominus nobis et predicto
castro nostro Hwnyad vestris e medio provenientibus semper salvis
remanentibus. Secus in premissis non facturis. Presentibus perlectis
exhibenti restitutis. Datum in castello nostro Rokolnok in festo Beati
Georgii Martiris, anno Domini millesimo quingentesimo sexto.
Gabriel-Viorel GÂRDAN
The Migration to the New World as a Form

of Religious Freedom. The Foundation of the
Protestant Colonies in North America during
the Seventeenth Century1
Abstract
Many of the British North American colonies that eventually
formed the United States of America were settled in the seventeenth
century by men and women, who, in the face of European persecution,
refused to compromise passionately held religious convictions and fled
Europe. The New England colonies, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and
Maryland were conceived and established “as plantations of religion”.
Some settlers who arrived in these areas came for secular motives, but
the great majority left Europe to worship God the way they believed it
to be correct. They enthusiastically supported the efforts of their leaders
to create “a city on a hill” or a “holy experiment” in order to prove
that God’s plan for his churches could be successfully realized in the
American wilderness.
Keywords:
colonies, migration, religious freedom, puritan, congregationalism
The most well known British colonies of North America, later

known as The United States of America, were founded during the
seventeenth century, by men and women faced with the European
1
The present text is a revised and restructured version of a previous study: Gabriel-Viorel
Gârdan, „America, un refugiu religios in secolul al XVII-lea”, in Analele Ştiinţifice ale
Facultăţii de Teologie Ortodoxă Cluj-Napoca, IX (2005-2006), pp. 57-72.
religious persecution2, and who refused to compromise the faith
manifested with great passion. They left Europe to be able to freely
manifest their convictions. The colonies of New England, New Jersey,
Pennsylvania or Maryland, were conceived and founded as “religious
plantations”. In spite of the fact that some colonists from that geographic
area were driven by secular reasons, most often economic reasons,
the great majority of the ones that brought these colonies to life, left
Europe animated by the wish to serve God the way they believed was
right. They were determined to enthusiastically support the efforts of
their leaders to create “a city on the hill”, to create a “holy experiment”.
Its success was to demonstrate that God’s plans regarding His Church
could be successfully accomplished in the American wilderness as well.
Even in the colonies of Virginia, established for commercial reasons, the
colonists believed themselves to be “militant Protestants”, and therefore
made strenuous efforts to contribute to the prosperity of the Church.
2
These attitudes were generated by the overwhelming majority of the Reformation and
Counter Reformation movements. In what follows we will mention only a few concrete
examples in order to be aware of the amplitude of the repressive phenomenon, justified
religiously, and which affected Europe during this time: namely the persecution of the
German Anabaptists, the persecution of the Huguenots by the Catholics, the persecution
of the Catholics by the Huguenots, The massacre of the Protestants by the Irish Catholics,
the persecution of the Jesuits in England and unfortunately, many others. Of course, each
of these persecutions generated victims which, after all, did nothing else but vex more the
belligerent parts. A great part of the cruelties committed during this epoch can be followed
in the work of John Foxe, Book of Martyrs, a History of the Lives, Sufferings and Deaths of
the Early Christian and Protestant Martyrs, edited by William Byron Forbush, Zonderman
Publishing House, 1967. This book was edited in Latin by John Foxe in the year 1559
and published in English in the year 1563 with the title The Acts and Monuments of these
latter and perilous Days, touching matters of the Church, wherein are comprehended and
described the great Persecution and horrible Troubles that have been wrought and practiced
by the Romishe Prelates, Especially in this Realm of England and Scotland, from the year
of our Lord a thousand to the time now present. Gathered and collected according to tile
true Copies and Writings certificatory as well of the Parties themselves that Suffered, as
also out of die Bishop’s Registers, which were the Doers thereof, by John Foxe, commonly
known as the Book of Martyrs, and it had several editions during the centuries. Interesting
images regarding the religious incidents in Europe during the seventeenth century can be
seen on the site www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion (accessed on September 15th 2013).
The imposed religious uniformity and the religious
persecutions in Europe during the seventeenth century
The religious persecutions that sent Europeans to the British
colonies of North America, sprung from the conviction, equally shared
by Protestants and Catholics, that in any given society there must be
religious uniformity. This irrational belief, if we are to express it in
psychological terms, is determined by the conviction that there is only
one true religion, and under these circumstances, it is the duty of the civil
and ecclesial authorities to impose that religion, by force if necessary, and
save the souls of all citizens. The nonconformists and the dissidents were
shown no mercy and could even be executed, as it actually happened
on several occasions, for they were considered heretics. The dominant
concept during this period, later denounced by Roger Williams3, was that
of “imposed religious uniformity”, which meant that the religious group
of the majority had the political control of a region and could impose
the faith to all the inhabitants of that region. Given these conditions,
there is no wonder that in some regions the Catholics would persecute
the Protestants, in other regions the Protestants would persecute the
Catholics, and in other places the Catholics together with the Protestants
would persecute their stubborn coreligionists. This approach found a
concise formula in the motto cuius regio eius religio and created victims
in spite of the decision made in England in the year 1689, a decision
according to which no religious constraints were allowed on its territory,
and an act of religious tolerance was issued as well4.
The colonies that formed New England5 were the direct result of
3
Roger Williams (1603-1683), English theologian, one of the founders of the first Baptist
communities in North America. O. Edwin S. Gaustad, Liberty of Conscience: Roger
Williams in America, Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, 1991; Ola Elizabeth
Winslow, Master Roger Williams. A Biography, The Macmillan Company, New York, 1957.
4
Details regarding the act issued by the co-sovereigns William and Maria can be followed in
the work of Edwin Gaustad & Leigh Schmith, The Religious History of America, revised
edition, Harper Collins Publishers, San Francisco, 2002, p. 44.
5
The problems regarding the American religious life during the colonial period were
presented in other papers as well. See: Ioan-Vasile Leb, Gabriel-Viorel Gârdan, Chipuri şi
the new religious conflict in England. Some of the most ardent Protestants
were not content with the moderate Anglican reform that gave birth to
the Anglican Church. Therefore, the Puritans, for this was their name,
starting with the year 15606, strived to purify the Anglican Church of
what they called inacceptable residues of Roman-Catholicism, militating
for a simplification of the cult and for the removal of the archbishopric7.
In essence, the Puritan doctrine8 proclaimed God’s absolute sovereignty
and the dependence of man upon the divine grace, hence this conception
continued to determine the Puritans to make sustained efforts to live their
lives strictly according to the will of God9.
The perspicacity of Queen Elisabeth I hindered the development
of the Puritan spirit and avoided the emergence of open conflicts during
her reign10. When it comes to her successors, the monarchs of the Stuart
Dynasty, James I (1603-1625) and Charles I (1625-1649), the conflict
became inevitable. James I addressed the Puritans without any consideration
stating that they had two choices: to conform to the practices and teachings
of the Anglican Church, or to be banned from the country.
scene din istoria creştinismului american, Presa Universitară Clujeană Publishing House,
Cluj-Napoca, 2008; Gabriel-Viorel Gârdan, „Începuturile creştinismului pe continentul
nord american”, in Analele Ştiinţifice ale Facultăţii de Teologie Ortodoxă Cluj-Napoca, VI
(2000-2002), pp. 93-112.
6
Charles L. Cohen, „Puritanism”, in Encyclopaedia of the North American Colonies, editor
Jacob Ernest Cooke, Charles Scribner’s Sons, N. Y., 1993, p. 577.
7
A Synopsis of American History, fifth edition, vol. I, editors Charles Sellers, Henry May,
Neil R. McMillen, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1981, p. 7.
8
The historical evolution of the puritan thinking is accurately grasped in the work of Perry
Miller, The New England Mind from Colony to Province, The Belknap Press of Harvard
University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England, 1981. See also Theodore
Wight Bozeman, To Live Ancient Lives: The Primitive Dimension in Puritanism, Chapel
Hill, N.C., 1991; Stephen Foster, The long Argument: English Puritanism and the Shaping
of New England Culture, 1550-1700, Chapel Hill, N.C., 1991; Idem, Their Solitary Way.
The Puritan Social Ethic in the First Century of Settlement in New England, New Haven
and London, Yale University Press, 1971; Charles H. George & Katherine George, The
Protestant Mind of the English Reformation, 1570-1640, Princeton, N. J., 1961.
9
A synopsis of American History, p. 7.
10
A detailed presentation of the evolution of Puritanism during the reign of Queen Elisabeth
I (1558-1603) can be followed in the work of Patrick Collinson, The Elizabethan Puritan
Movement, Berkeley, California, 1967. Also see, and Idem, The Religion of Protestants:
The Church in English Society, 1559-1625, Oxford, 1982.
In this context, not to respect the will of the sovereign, at the
beginning of the seventeenth century, was an illegal, and, at the same
time, dangerous attitude. Being identified as a nonconformist could
mean, according to the general perception of the time, not obeying the
requirements and the postulations of the national Church and showing
no respect towards the liturgical rules imposed by The Book of Common
Prayer, which was the equivalent of falling into public disgrace and
possibly being arrested by the nearest sheriff11.
Migration as a form of religious freedom

Directly influenced by this state of affairs, a small separatist group
would secretly meet in Nottingham12, north of London, during the first years
of the seventeenth century, seeking to hide from the eyes of the public opinion
and avoid the law, and try to discover what is righteous to God. If they had
stayed in London, they would have had to compromise with regards to their
consciousness, or they would have had to lose their rights, citizenship and
even their life. If they had left England, where would they have gone?
The Netherlands represented the most convenient option, for the
country was only a few kilometres away, over the English Channel.
Moreover, the Netherlands adopted for a few measures at the beginning
of 1600s, offering religious freedom as nowhere else on the European
continent. In 1607, when the London Company obtained the privilege
to colonize the North American continent, the Anglican clergy and the
faithful made efforts to establish the Anglican Church in Virginia, the
Puritans tried to transform the Protestant institutions, trying to make
them alike, in terms of the the precepts that were at the foundation of the
institutions created in Geneva by the reformist Jean Calvin (1509-1564).
After several weekly meetings held in the house of William Brewster
(c. 1566-1644)13, the Puritans decided to migrate, as a Church, and
11
Gaustad & Schmith, op. cit., p. 50.
12
Mark A. Noll, A History of Christianity in the United States and Canada, William B.
Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1993, p. 38.
13
For details regarding his life see K. P. Minkema, „William Brewster (c. 1566-1644)”, in
Daniel G. Reid (ed.), Dictionary of Christianity in America, InterVarsity Press, Illinois,
1990, pp. 186-187.
to create their desiderata somewhere else, in a country they knew only
from the stories they heard, a country where they had to learn another
language, where they didn’t know how they’d live. For more freedom in
serving God, they took this chance, paid the price, left behind their farms
and houses and started the pilgrimage towards freedom14.
Amsterdam, one of the most important commercial harbours
of Europe at the beginning of the seventeenth century, was their first
destination, and it was there they established their first residence.
Because the city proved to be full of temptations for this small ascetic
congregation, the group, under the leadership of John Robinson, migrated
to Leyden, a beautiful and honest city, well known for its university.
This voluntary exile was considered a temporary one. The separatist
Puritans believed they would remain in the Netherlands only until the
English sovereigns reconsidered their position. In the case of England,
as it happened in the Netherlands, hopefully new measures would be
taken into account to ensure a larger religious tolerance to all dissidents.
In spite of the expectations of the pilgrims the hope of change seemed
to fade away. Moreover, the exigencies of their own congregation in the
Netherlands were questioned, for it was not easy to lead a decent life
in a cosmopolitan environment as was the one of the Dutch harbours.
The fathers would see their children grow in a setting different from the
traditional English one, and environment that would hide several dangers
and negative models, that could estrange the children, not only from the
family but from the Puritan ideals as well. The unity and the purity of
their way of serving God were threatened, and if they wanted to maintain
the ideals that determined them to leave England behind, it was time they
moved again.
But where were they supposed to go? Their home was out of
the question, because as separatists, they would be penalized, beaten,
imprisoned or forced to give up their convictions. Staying in the
Netherlands was no longer an option, since they were bound to lose their
religious and cultural identity. None of the alternatives was preferable,
therefore the dilemma was evident. What if they returned to English
14
territories without returning to England, where the sheriffs were so close
and the archbishops so powerful?15 The pilgrims decided to focus on
America, and another set of questions arouse in their mind. Was it possible
for them to migrate to America? How expensive would such an attempt
be? What chances would they have in getting the regal permission to
cross the Ocean and keep their religious ideals? Would this migration
bring the long waited for religious freedom?
Several years will pass by before answers will be found to these
questions. Complex negotiations had to take place in order to get the
support of the London Company or of Virginia Company, the only
one that had the ability at that time to colonize the New World, and, of
course, the consent of the king. The latter proved to be the hardest to get,
For James I did not agree with the religious freedom concept, and also
found it unacceptable at several miles away from home. In this context,
the separatist Puritans had to prove to the king that they are loyal and
fearful servants of God, that they are neither radical nor hostile, when
it comes to national interests, and that they would not undermine the
colonial activities and efforts16.
The end of the turmoil was marked when the pilgrims finally
managed to prove their loyalty towards the king, who gave them the
permission to migrate, and obtain from some merchants of London17,
who were close to their cause, the financial support necessary for the
costs of their trip, and this is how they finalized their negotiations with
Virginia Company.
In July 1620, a significant part of the Puritan community of Leyden
went back to England. The two ships were prepared for them at the
beginning of the month of August 1620, as they were ready to cross the
Atlantic. The two ships left the Southampton harbour at the beginning of
the month of August 1620, and proved incapable to face the hardships
of the voyage on the agitated waves of the Atlantic and had to accost in
Plymouth. The ship, Mayflower, with 103 passengers on board18, and
15
Ibidem, p.51.
16
Ibidem.
17
18
At the board of the ship there were initially 102 passengers, among which three pregnant
several other provisions, started again on its way to the north of Virginia
on September 6, 162019. The 98 pilgrims on the ship, that have survived
the 66 day trip, saw land close to Cape Cod, but way to far up north from
the region they’ve chosen. Exhausted from the trip the pilgrims refused
to sail and considered that if it was God’s will for them to arrive to this
place, this place was to become their home, where they will build their
farms and will serve God. They founded another Plymouth, in the New
World20. Before landing, the men on the ship signed a pact in which the
main reasons of their adventure were presented: We’ve made this voyage
in order to establish the first colony in the northern parts of Virginia,
to praise God, to prosper into the Christian faith and to honour the
king and our country21. The same agreement stipulated that the pilgrims
formed a political civil corps meant to ensure the survival and facilitate
the accomplishment of the objectives of their voyage22.
Pilgrims and Puritans in the British colonies of North America

William Bradford (1590-1657)23, governor of the first Puritan
colony of America, for over 30 years, left a few eloquent notes regarding
the conditions the pilgrims faced right after their arrival24. Among others,
he confesses that they found there no friend to welcome them, no houses
to rest their bodies in after an exhausting voyage. Their survival in the
women. During the voyage one of them gave birth and the number of passengers reached
103. The name, the origin and the age of the 103 passengers is accessible, in electronic
format on the site http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~mosmd/mayfpas.htm (accessed last
on September 15 2013).
19
Justo L. González, The Story of Christianity, vol. 2, Harper Collins Publisher, San
Francisco, 1985, p. 221.
20
21
Mark A. Noll, op. cit., p. 38.
22
Ibidem, p. 39. The first recordings of the experience the pilgrims had on the way to and in the
New World were published by John Bellamine, A Relation or Journal of the Beginning and
Proceedings of the English Plantation Settled at Plymouth in New England, London, 1622.
23
Details regarding his life can be found in the work of H. S. Stout, „William Bradford (1590-
1657)”, in Daniel G. Reid (ed.), Dictionary of Christianity in America, InterVarsity Press,
Illinois, 1990, p. 180.
24
The text was edited by Caleb Johnson: William Bradford, Of Plymouth Plantation, Xlibris,
2006, p. 622.
wilderness in the winter of 1621 was a miracle attributed by Bradford to
the Holy Ghost and Its Grace. The Plymouth colonists started to plant,
fish and hunt and harvest, but, as it happened in the case of the Jamestown
colonists, the first year was an extremely difficult one, and many of the
colonists did not survive. Out of 26 married men, only 12 survived the
winter; out of 18 married women, only three survived the harshness of
the cold season. Therefore only a small and exhausted group managed to
survive and thank God for the first harvest in the year 162125.
The hardships and the wilderness of the region affected this first
colony in New England, which registered a very slow increase in the
number of people. Ten years later it registered 300 souls, and by 1660 the
population reached the insignificant level of 2000 inhabitants.
The Plymouth pilgrim colony was surpassed by the development of
the neighbouring colonies of the Massachusetts Golf, colonies established
after in 1629. The Massachusetts Bay Company obtained from King
Charles I26 the authorization to colonize. A year later, in Massachusetts,
there were already 2000 colonists, mainly in the Boston harbour area.
The northern colonies became very powerful in the next decade, as
Arminianism27 found more and more followers among Anglicans, and the
part of the Anglican Church that favoured Roman-Catholicism gained more
and more ground in England. Until the year 1660, approximately 20.000
colonists arrived, including 65 priests, and this determined, in a natural
way, an increase of establishments in the new region. On the colonial map
of New England new colonies were included such as: Connecticut, Rhode
Island, New Hampshire, Maine, and others. The religious justification of
the new colonies was expressed through the missionary initiatives that
had as a target the indigenous communities. The key character was Pastor
John Elliot28, who by 1650 translated the catechism and a part of the Holy
25
26
27
Arminianism is a protestant doctrine, founded by the Dutch bishop Jacobus Arminius,
which stated that Jesus died for all the people not just for the chosen ones, and it was against
the predestination and the rigor of Calvinism, which animated the Puritans, as we’ve seen.
28
The missionary activity carried among natives is synthetically presented by G.W. Harper,
“John Elliot (1604-1690)”, in Daniel G. Reid (ed.), Dictionary of Christianity in America,
Intervarsity Press, Illinois, 1990, p. 387
Scripture in the languages of the natives29. His missionary activity involved
the creation of the Christian communities, “cities that pray”, following
the model started by the Catholic missionaries. Until 1670 thousands of
natives were converted to Christianity30, but many more were killed during
bloody, armed confrontations.
The Puritans that colonized Massachusetts Bay considered
themselves as belonging to the Anglican Church and wanted to
demonstrate that in New England the true rigour of the Anglican Church
can still be implemented, and in order to succeed with this desiderate they
believed that there was a need for reorientation towards a more Calvinist
and less Catholic direction. But, as in the case of the Pilgrims, their
bishops were too powerful, the inertia too strong, and the punishments
imposed by the law too harsh to attain the change they aimed for. Unlike
the Pilgrims, they did not make the decisive step towards the isolation
from the official Church, and this fact led to a perception similar to the
Anglican perception regarding the value and the necessity to maintain an
official Church31.
The first Puritans that arrived to America were blessed – according
to others cursed – with dominant personalities, from the leaders of
the first colonists, as it was the case of the governor John Winthrop
(1588-1649)32 and of the priest John Cotton (1584-1652)33 until the last
defenders of “The New England Way”, as it was the case of the priest
Cotton Mather (1663-1728)34 and of another priest Richard Mather35,
29
An exemplar of Elliot’s Bible in the language of the Algonquin, is dated back to the year
1663, and can be admired on-line at the address www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion (accessed
on September 15, 2013).
30
Philip Jenkins, O istorie a Statelor Unite, Artemis, Bucharest, 2002, p. 32.
31
32
Francis J. Bremer, John Winthrop, American’s Forgotten Founding Father, Oxford
University Press, Oxford, New York, 2003.
33
John Cotton was also a prolific author. The most well know work is: The Way of the Churches of
Christ in New England (1645), an excellent source of information about early congregationalism.
More details can be found in the work of Sargent Bush JR. (ed.), The Correspondence of John
Cotton, University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, 2001, p. 548 p.
34
See Kenneth Silverman, The Life and Times of Cotton Mather, Harper & Row, New York,
1984, p. 479 p.
35
His name is connected to the publishing of the first book in North America. The book is The
and the Puritans enjoyed vigorous speech bearers that were involved in
very important events in the life of the community36. For example, John
Winthrop, who was the governor of the Massachusetts Bay37 Colony for
a long time, used to underline several times the motifs and the vision
behind the establishment of this colony. He used to remind the colonists
of the oath they made to serve God, to go by His will and to love one
another. In other words, Winthrop often asked of them to lead a life that
would allow them to be similar to a city on a hill, with all eyes looking
at them38. Indeed, the Puritans had built their city on the hill and tried
their best to fulfil their duties both towards the Anglican Church they
belonged to and to the government.
Congregationalism, the effect of religious freedom

In spite of the fact that the Puritans that arrived to America,
excepting the first Pilgrims, were considered as being a constructive
part of the Anglican Church, they developed until they became a distinct
part, as in opposed to the body it once belonged to, and in the end it
got its own life and a new name: Congregationalism39. John Cotton, an
appreciated member of the clergy in Boston, was the one that expressed
the main complaints against the national Church and in these complaints
some saw the beginning of Congregationalism or of what later history
called The New England Way40. In the national (Anglican) Church, as
Bay Psalm Book and was printed in 1640. Richard Mather and two other clergy versified
the psalms so that they can be chanted at the cult congregations. One of the 11 copies of
this book that survived the passing of time can be seen on line at the address www.loc.gov/
exhibits/religion (accessed on September 15 2013).
36
Mark A. Noll, op. cit., p. 40
37
For details regarding his activity see G.F. Moran, “John Winthrop (1595-1655)”, Daniel G. Reid
(ed.), Dictionary of Christianity in America, InterVarsity Press, Illinois, 1990, pp. 1264-1265.
38
39
To get a more complex image on the evolution of congregationalism see: Gaius Glen Atkins
& Frederick L. Fagley, History of American Congregationalism, The Pilgrim Press, Boston,
Chicago, 1942; John Von Rohr, The Shaping of American Congregationalism: 1620-1957,
The Pilgrim Press, Cleveland, Ohio, 1992. See also L. E. Wilshire, „Congregationalism”,
in Daniel G. Reid (ed.), Dictionary of Christianity in America, InterVarsity Press, Illinois,
1990, pp. 309-311.
40
A detailed presentation of the life and of the role played by Cotton in the formation of
stated by Cotton, the authority exerted by the bishops and the rigidity
imposed by the law became burdens too heavy to carry. Moreover, the
excessive use and praise of the so called Book of Common Prayer was
in contradiction with the second commandment, which states that the
man shall not pray to things made by the man. Also, Cotton declared
that the authority in the Church had to be congregational and not left in
the hands of the bishops; the human authority was the highest and it was
not represented in the king, in the bishops, priests or pastors, but in the
members of the congregation itself. If so much power was allotted to the
members of the congregation, they in turn had to prove that they were
dignified for such power, and this could be done by making evident in
life the personal conversion, that gave them the possibility not only to
be chosen by God, but also to enjoy eternal life by His side. The Church
was no longer a building for devotion, but the congregation of faithful
that oblige themselves in the presence of God to follow His path, as He
wished to reveal Himself to us in the blessed words of the truth41. All
these ideas were systemized during several gatherings between the years
1646 and 1648 in Cambridge, and the resulting decisions created the
foundation of what was to later become The Westminster Confession
of Faith42.
In the colonies of Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Hampshire,
“The New England Way” became more powerful, and succeeded in
imposing a lifestyle and a way of thinking that will survive beyond the
colonial period. The migrants themselves created Congregationalism in
the factory of their own life. If the Virginia Company was hoping to
Congregationalism see the work of J.F. Cooper, „John Cotton (1584-1652)”, Daniel G. Reid
(ed.), Dictionary of Christianity in America, InterVarsity Press, Illinois, 1990, pp. 320-321.
See also the bibliography presented here.
41
42
The Westminster Confession of Faith agreed upon by the assembly of divines at
Westminster, with the assistance of commissioners from the Church of Scotland, as a part
of the covenanted uniformity in religion betwixt the churches of Christ in the Kingdoms of
Scotland, England, and Ireland. Approved by the General Assembly 1647, and ratified and
established by acts of Parliament 1649 and 1690, as the public and avowed Confession
of the Church of Scotland, with the proofs from the Scripture. Foe details see J. H. Hall,
„Westmister Confession of Faith”, in Daniel G. Reid (ed.), Dictionary of Christianity in
America, InterVarsity Press, Illinois, 1990, pp. 1245-1246.
obtain profit in Plymouth, and the Massachusetts Company had the same
objectives in Boston, “the holy” of the Bible Commonwealth (the Bible
nation)43 came to the colonies out of faith and not guided by commercial
interests. They wished to respect the Sabbath and the Mysteries, they
wanted the local Church to be better organized, the moral disciplines
strengthened, the Calvinist doctrine propagated. The Puritans came here
because they wanted to have the liberty to practice their own religion. It
is important to understand that they never intended to establish a colony
that was open to other people with other religious beliefs. The Puritans
came because they wanted to create a Pure Church and develop a holy
experiment, without facing any opposition, perturbation or error. They
weren’t hypocrites that would claim their religious freedom by negating
it for others, and that is because for them religious freedom was not a
plan of action in the new World. They crossed the Ocean to prove that
one can create a faithful society, a pure Church, so that old England could
be transformed through the confession of the life in the colonies44.
Congregationalism became the official religion in New England,
not only a denomination among many other. The alliance between the
civil authorities and the ecclesiastic ones was intimate and extremely
powerful45. The Puritan nation was theocratic in the sense mentioned
before, for God’s will was sovereign. From this perspective the clergy
benefited from direct political power. Their power resulted from the
authority they had as interpreters of the divine will. Responsible for the
abidance of the civil laws were the magistrates who often called for the
authority of the priests in order to maintain the order. Either way, almost
every inhabitant of the Puritan colony felt obliged to strictly obey the
moral rules, to support the church, to participate at the religious services,
in other words to do everything that they can to increase the chances of
43
It was called this way because the puritan Christians from the New England colonies
started to use the Bible to organize all the aspects of their religious and social life according
to the precepts comprised in it. The Bible was cited as an absolute authority in the penal
code as well.
44
45
A detailed presentation of these reports can be seen in the work of Mark A. Noll, „Church
and State: The British Colonies”, in Jacob Ernest Cooke (ed.), Encyclopaedia of the North
American Colonies, Charles Scribner’s Sons, N. Y., 1993, pp. 503-515.
salvation for each member of the community46.
If we analyze the way the Puritan colonists organized their life
we will see that it reflects to the tiniest details the purposes of this holy
nation. The individuals were not allowed to buy land wherever they
wanted; they were forced to go to compact regions, in cities. When
the population had a sufficient enough growth, The General Court
authorized a group of people to found another city, in a zone adjacent to
the already existent cities. The families were given land at the periphery
of the cities, and they worked the land day by day. In the centre of each
town or village there was a meeting house47, and in the year 1740 the
New England congregationalism became the colonial religion with the
most churches, over 400, the majority concentrated in Massachusetts,
Connecticut and New Hampshire. Approximately during the same period,
the Episcopalians had less than half of the number of meeting houses the
Puritans had, and they were spread over a large territorial area48.
The doctrinarian fundamentals and the forms of manifestation

of religiosity in the Puritan communities
As presented above, Puritans identified themselves with Calvinism
at the doctrinarian level, the latter affirming Gods absolute sovereignty.
As for salvation, they shared the faith according to which this is only the
exclusive prerogative of the divine power. People do not choose God,
God chooses them. Salvation is given by God, it is not obtained by the
man, and this makes it secure and ensured for eternity. God forgives all
the sins of the ones He chooses, brightening their soul like a piece of
clothing, while the men chosen by God praise Him in their prayers and
anchor God in their soul, and hence none of the troubled waters can drive
Him away49.
The Puritan movement was not only a theological movement, but a
liturgical one as well, deeply preoccupied with making the ceremonial and
liturgical life of the Anglican Church more intense. What was occurring
46
47
Ibidem.
48
49
Ibidem, p. 56.
in the Anglican churches was considered by Puritans as too Catholic. The
faithful did not have to kneel when they received the holy mysteries at
God’s Supper, for this was similar to a kind of idolatry, an acceptance of
the Catholic teaching according to which the bread and the wine really
transform into the body and the blood of Christ. The ones that share
must stay together as a community at a great celebration. The liturgical
canonicals should not be worn, for they imply a spiritual separation
of the clergy from the faithful, as if they belonged to a separate caste.
The academic robes could be used instead, for they indicate a special
grounding of the one that wears them, and not a superior spiritual status.
The Puritans stated that if someone carefully read the New Testament,
would find no supporting evidence for the position held by a bishop with
the special prerogatives and with the special ordaining ritual. Therefore,
according to the Puritan conception, many of the rituals of the Catholic
and Anglican cult were biblically unjustified50 and consequently, had to
be changed.
For Puritans, and for the majority of the Protestants, the list of
mysteries was reduced to two: the Baptism and the Communion. The
Baptism was regarded as an initiation into the Christian community, and
children could be baptized as well, on condition that the parents nurture
the faith into the souls of these children, so that by the time they mature,
they can assume a fruitful participation to the Christian life. God’s
Supper (The Eucharist) supports the Christian community; the same way
food supports life. Bread is the main food that supports life, and the
bread offered by God at God’s Supper is fundamental to the support of
Christian life, while the wine symbolizes Christ’s activity51, therefore, the
Communion is perceived as a key moment in the life of the community.
The clerics were considered intermediaries between the faithful and
God, and the holy fathers and Virgin Mary did not play an intermediary
role between people and God. The priest and the bishop were not needed
to intermediate the relationship between the faithful and God. No altar
was needed for suggesting the repetition of Christ’s sacrifice. No sacred
image, statue or stained glass was needed to tempt the faithful into
50
Ibidem, p. 59.
51
Ibidem, p. 60.
praising, for any praise had to be given straight to God. The service had
to spring from the soul, and the prayers that make these feelings possible
were not set only in one prayer book, therefore prayer books were not
allowed, with the exception of the Bible. Sunday was a holy day and had
to be honoured. On this day, the faithful had to be in church, where they
would pray to God, intone the psalms, and listen to the way the word of
God was read and explained52.
The meeting houses were the centre of the religious and social
life in the Puritan colonies. These were the meeting places regardless
whether the Puritans were called cult matters or for matters of public
interest. Every Monday morning, the citizens met at these meeting
houses to decide what road needed to be fixed, what bridge needed to be
built, whose pigs needed a more careful checking and which pieces of
land could be bought. The meeting house belonged to the town and to its
inhabitants, whether they were Puritans or not, and all had to contribute
to its maintenance53.
Education, a major priority in the Puritan colonies of North

America
In the Puritan zones of influence education was always a priority
of maximal importance. This attitude was the result of the fact that they
believed that intelligence had to be cultivated in order to get to know
God’s will, a will followed by every Puritan54. The first pastors that came
with the migration wave in the year 1630, were people with exceptional
university degrees, people that studied at the prestigious university in
Cambridge, London55. This generated positive consequences for a
special opening towards education. Each father had to make sure that his
children and his employees knew how to read, write and count, and at the
same time, he had to make available to the boys the fundamental notions
52
The doctrinarian elements and the cultic rules existent in the Puritan colonies can be
followed in the detailed analyses offered in the works on Puritanism mentioned above.
Among these we notice the concision and accuracy of Charles L. Cohen’s study.
53
54
55
regarding the commerce and economy. They were equally responsible for
the moral education and the behaviour in their families. In Massachusetts,
the problem of education in a Puritan spirit was solved in the year 1647,
when it was decided that each town that had 50 houses would financially
support an elementary school, and the bigger ones, with over 100 houses
would have to have secondary schools as well56. Shortly after, similar
measurements were imposed in the other Puritan colonies, and in the
year 1671, there was already a public educational system viable in all
colonies. This state of affairs resulted out of the Puritan perception
according to which education had to mediate knowledge and a more
profound understanding of the will of God, a conception synthesized in
a well known saying during that time: God is with us in schools. That is
why schools must fully blossom57.
The Puritan theory of education presupposed not only an elementary
system of education, but also a superior one in which the judges and the
clerics could get superior education, asked by the fundamental role they
played in society. During the first years, after the initial colonization,
more than 100 graduates of the prestigious British universities, Oxford
and Cambridge, clergy and magistrates, travelled to New England to offer
their knowledge for religious and colonial prosperity. In the year 1636
the General Court of the colony of Massachusetts decided to establish in
Cambridge a new university college that carried the name John Harvard,
a young English cleric who donated to the college his library and half of
his fortune58. From the very beginning Harvard was conceived as a high
level school in which the students had to know Latin and Greek not in
order to be able to graduate but in order to be accepted. Of course, the
religiosity that characterized the life of the Puritan colonies was reflected
in the educational program of the university. Starting with the year 1647
new precise rules were imposed, rules that bound the students to consider
as the main objective of their lives and study, the knowledge of God and
of Jesus Christ, which is the eternal life59. Harvard College was not the
56
57
58
59
only one founded by Congregationalists. It was going to be followed by
the college of Yale in Connecticut in the year 170160. These institutions
will play an important role in the development of economic, social and
religious life of the Puritan colonies.
This would be the brief presentation of the historical evolution
of Puritanism, from the pilgrims that abandoned their farms and houses
in search of a favourable place where to live by their own religious
conviction, to the Congregationalists who developed from inside the
Puritan community, once faithful to Anglicanism, in the North American
territory, a place that became an extremely favourable religious refuge.
Persecuted in an environment that claimed religious uniformity, Pilgrims
in search of the freedom to manifest their faith, when arrived in the
colonies, the Puritans themselves become intransigent towards the ones
that did not share the same points of view, when it came to matters of
faith and religious life61.
60
A detailed presentation of all the measurements taken for the propagation of university
education can be followed in the work of George Brown Tindall & David E. Shi, America,
o istorie narativă, București, Enciclopedică Publishing House, 1996, vol. I, pp. 72-78.
61
See the case of Roger Williams and the foundation of the Rhode Island colony. Edwin
Gaustad, Liberty of Conscience. Roger Williams in America, Grand Rapids, Mi., 1991.
Ioan-Vasile LEB
Die Orthodoxen in Siebenbürgen im Lichte von

Reisebeschreibung des Pastors Conrad Jacob
Hiltebrandt (1629-1679)
Abstract:
Paper entitled `Orthodox in Transylvania travel light Journal of
Pastor Conrad Jacob Hiltebrandt (1629-1679)` brings some of the very
interesting observations of this author Lutheran in Sweden. Having
the opportunity to be part of the delegation sent to Constantinople or
in Ukraine, its roads passed through Transylvania, Moldova and the
Romanian Country, which has often been amazed by common speech,
common religion or similar habits of Romanians. Corroborating
information taken from the works of Tröster, Frölich, Bonfini others
with what he saw himself on the spot, Hiltebrand fails to provide a
meaningful picture of the Romanians in sec. XVII and their history.
Keywords:
Die Orthodoxen, Pastors Conrad Jacob Hiltebrandt, Siebenbürgen.
Wie im allgemeinen schon bekannt, sind die Reisebeschreibungen

immer wieder wichtig für die Geschichtsforschung durch die
Informationen die sonnst nicht zu finden sind. Deswegen sind diese
Quelle, trotz ihrer Unstimmigkeiten und Subjektivität, willkommen
und nutzbar. In der rumänischen Geschichtsschreibung sind sie schon
geforscht bewertet und veröffentlicht. Wir erwähnen hier nur drei
Momente in dieser Forschung, nämlich: die Werke von Nicolae Iorga1,
die sehr wichtige Kollektion: Călători străini despre Ţările Române2,
1
Nicolae Iorga, Istoria românilor prin călători, Bucureşti, 1981.
2
Maria Holban & alii, Călători străini despre Ţările Române, Știinţifică şi Enciclopedică
in mehrere Bände, und die Forschung von Mihaela Grancea von Sibiu-
Hermannstadt, die eine wichtige Doktorarbeit auf diesem Feld geleistet
hat3.
Für unseren Beitrag werden wir uns auf die Informationen eines
schwedischen Berichterstatters grenzen, der unsere Fürstentümer
besucht und beobachtet hat. Es ist der schwedische Pastor Conrad
Jacob Hiltebrandt (1629-1679), der uns ganz wichtige Hinweise aufs
Leben und Sitten der Rumänen aus Siebenbürgen, der Moldau unde der
Wallachey aus der Mitte des XVII. Jahrhundert vermittelt. Wer ist diese
Person gewesen?
Conrad Jacob Hiltebrand wurde am 19. November 1629 in Stettin
in der Familie des Ambrosius Hiltebrandt (1590-1664) und seiner Gattin
Anna Christine geboren. Als Kind einer wohlhabenden Familie und
geachteter Eltern war ihm eine glückliche Jugend beschieden. Er wuchs
mit zwei Brüdern und zwei Schwestern auf und es ist bemerkenswert, daß
als Ambrosius († 1664 als Pastor in Naugard) die theologische Laufbahn
einschlug, die beiden anderen, nämlich Conrad Jacob und Gustav
Adolf (zuerst Pastor primarius und Rector des Gymnasiums zu Speyer,
dann Inspektor zu St. Goar) in seine Fußtapfen traten und daß fortab
das Theologiestudium in diesem Zweig der Familie Hiltebrandt sich
zäh vererbte. Conrad Jacob wurde also zusammen mit seinen Brüdern
in Stargard erzogen, dann 1636 in Stettiner Ratsschule geschickt. Im
gleichen Jahr verlor er den Vater und die Verwandten nahmen sich des
Jungen an. Am 25. April 1649 erscheint er als Schüler des Fürstlichen
Paedagogiums zu Stettin. Dort beteiligte er sich an den Übungen des
Collegium Ethicum bei Magister Christoph Praetorius, unter dessen
Vorsitz er sich am 10. Dezember 1650 De bonis naturae quam Jehova
sospitante öffentlich ausließ. Er studierte auch an der Universität
Frankfurt an der Oder (1645). Sein eigentliches Hochschulstudium
Publishing House, vol. I-VIII, Bucureşti, 1968-1983.
3
Das Thema war: Spaţiul românesc în viziunea călătorilor străini (1683-1789). Sie hat auch
andere Studien veröffentlicht, z.B.: Western Travellers on the Romanian Religiosity (1683-
1789), in „Church and Society in Central and Eastern Europe”, ed. By Maria Crăciun &
Ovidiu Ghitta, European Studies Foundation Publishing House, 1998, S. 400-412; Călători
străini prin principatele Dunărene, Transilvania şi Banat (1683-1789). Identitate şi
alteritate. Ed. Univ. „Lucian Blaga”, Sibiu, ISBN 973-651-446-3, 340 S.u.a.
begann er jedoch erst im Sommer 1652 in Leipzig. Nach dem Ende
seins Studiums kehrte Conrad Jacob nach Hause zurück und sollte er als
Erzieher der Kindern des Gerichtsassessors Coelestinus von Sternbach
in Wismar arbeiten. Als im Frühjahrs 1656 sein Brotgeber nach dem
Südosten Europas aufbrach, um im Auftrag des schwedischen Königs
Karl Gustav X. eine Gesandtschaft nach Siebenbürgen auszuführen, war
der junge Conrad eingelaen, an dieser Fahrt in ihm unbekannte Länder
teilzunehmen. Da sich der junge Gesandtschaftsprediger später den
beiden Unternehmungen Gotthard Wellings nach der Ukraine und nach
Stambul anschließen durfte, blieb er volle zwei Jahre, von Ostern 1656
(5. April) bis Ende Mai 1658 der pommerschen Heimat fest.
Nach seiner Rückehr scheint er seine theologischen Studien zum
Abschluß gebracht zu haben, denn am 7. März 1661 war er von der
pommerschen Regierung zum Pastor und Praepositus nach Bahn im
Kreise Greifenhagen berufen, am 20 Juni in Greifswald ordiniert und am
8. September in sein Amt eingeführt. Am 17. September 1661 heiratete er
Konkordia, Tochter des Kurfürstlich Brandenburgischen Zolleinnehmers
und Bürgermeisters zu Falkenburg Thomas Bötticher und sie hatten vier
Kinder. Er starb 1679 als er fünfzig Jahre alt war.
Während seiner zweijähriger Reise (1656-1658) konnte
Hiltebrandt vieles von den rumänischen Verhältnissen kennenlernen. Für
uns ist es sehr wichtig, daß er in dieser Zeit ein Journal schrieb, das er
später in der Ruhe mit neuer Informationen aus den jüngsten Bücher
berreicherte. Dafür benützte er für Siebenbürgen die Werke von David
Frölich, Medulla geographicae practicae, Bartfeld 1639, Johann Tröster,
Das Alt - und Neu-Teutsche Dacia, Nürnberg 1666, Johann Bethlen, Das
bedrängte Dacia, Nürnberg 1666 und andere. Aus diesem Grund ist das
Werk Hiltebrandts ein Puzzle, ohne aber, daß seine Beobachtungen zu
fehlen. Und diese direkte Informationen sind sehr wichtig. Da er ein
Pastor war, vermitelt er wichtige Hinweise auf die Religion der Völkern
die er begegnet war. Selbstverständlich, daß er als protestant auf die
Protestanen und Katholiken aufmerksamer war, aber Informationen
über die Orthodoxen fehlen es auch nicht. Zum Beispiel ist das Werk
Hiltebrandts reicher in solcher Informationen als Tröster, obwohl er viel
aus dem Werk desjenigen schöpfte. Hoch interessant sind aber sein eigene
Beobachtungen, die eine lebendigere Darstelung als die verschiedene
Zitate realisieren. Sein Reisebericht heißt: Dreyfache Königl. Schwed.
Legations-Raiß-Beschreibung in Siebenbürgen, die Ukrain und Türkey
nacher Constantinopel. Als Ihr Königl. Maytt. zu Schweden Carolus
Gustavus, glorwürdigsten Andenckens, dero Legaten Ao 1656 & 1657 an
solche Örter abgesand, zum stetswehrendem Gedächtnis auffgezeichnet
von Conrado Jacobo Hiltebrandto, Bahnensium Pastore et Synodi
Praeposito. Sein Werk wurde aber erst 1937 von Franz Babinger
veröffentlicht, mit einer gründlichen Einführung verseht und an Neculae
Iorga gewidmet. Diese Ausgabe benützten wir für unsere Darstellung4.
Darin erweist sich Hiltebrandt als ein guter Kenner der
Siebenbürgischen Verhältnissen. So berichtet er – nach Tröster – woher
die drei Kreisch-Flüße entspringen5. Hier seine Worte: Tröster6 saget aus
der Galater Alpen7 entspringen die zween Kreischäste, der Schwartze
Kreisch und Seb Körös oder Strenge Kreisch; Körösch auf Ungrisch ein
Steinrausch wegen seines strengen Lauffes und anstoßend an die Steine,
daVor man ein eigen Wort nicht hören kan. Der dritte arm dieses Grentz
Flußes wird weiß Kreisch genandt aus dem Abrugbanyer Gebirge; ist der
Paß Von Waradein in Siebenbürgen8. Und weiter zitiert er ein Gedicht
von Martin Opitz, wo er sagt:
Itzt folgt der Berge Krantz, so Deinen Schoß umbschloßen
O Siebenbürgen hält. Zum ersten kömpt gefloßen
Der Keresch welcher sich in so Viel Adern theilt,
Und durch den Schwartzen Wald mit Vollem rauschen eilt9.
4
Franz Babinger, Conrad Jacob Hiltebrandt’s Dreifache Schwedische Gesandtschaftsreise
nach Siebenbürgen, der Ukraine und Constantinopel (1656-1658) ..., herausgegeben
und erläutert von..., Leiden, E.J.Brill 1937. Davon haben wir auch die biographischen
Informationnen entnommen.
5
Am 5. August 1566 kamen die Gesandten auf Feketeto, ein Dorff 4 meilen, hier kamen wir
an der Fluß Körösch, der 1 meile Von Huniad im Dorffe Kerez oder Keressö entspringen.
Hiltebrandt, pp. 26-27.
6
Johs. Tröster, Das Alt- und Neu-Teutsche Dacia, Nürnberg 1666, p. 447.
7
Munţii Apuseni.
8
Hiltebrandt, p. 27.
9
M. Opitz, sein Gedicht: Auf Ihr Fürstl. Durchlaucht..., bei Hiltebrandt, p. 27.
Seine eigene Bemerkungen sind aber lebendiger, da er hier seine
eigene Erfahrung darstellt. So berichtet Hiltebrandt: Von Groß Waradein
biß Clausenburgk sein Wir woll über etliche 30mahl mit unsern Pferden
überschwummen und muste der Pagage Wagen also folgen. Wen Wir
Einen kleinen Weg gereiset hatten, praesentirte sich bald wieder eine
Ader Von diesem KreischFluß, es wurde Uns aber Von dehnen bey Unß
habenden Ungarn allemahl bequeme Durchfahrten gezeiget, da man
mit dem Pferd füglich absetzen und sich in dieses Körösch Waßer zum
überschwimmen einlegen konte; bisweilen ging es nicht sonder Gefahr
ab10.
Hiltebrandt weißt auch was das Wort Transilvania11 heißt, von
wo die Worte Siebenbürgen und Septem Castra abstammen und sagt,
ganz ehrlich, daß er seine Informationen aus den Werken von Turöczi
und Tröster schöpfte. Tröster vertrete die Auffassung, dass dieser Name
schon vor der Ankunft der Magyaren in diesem Gegend existierte.
Hiltebrandt berichtet folgendes darüber: Siebenbürgen haben anfänglich
die Hochlöblichen Könige in Ungarn beseßen, ist aber Von König
Johanne12 dem Türcken zinsbar gemachet worden. Derselbige hat mit
dem Türckischen Kaiser Solimanno13 einen Bund und dergestalt sich
undt daß Land Siebenbürgen Ao. 1527:- dem Türcken zinsbar gemacht.
Es hat zu des Fürsten Betlen Gabors Zeiten Jährlich zehntausendt
Ducaten Tribut, bey der Regierung Rakoci II. Fünfzehn Tausend Ducaten
gegeben, endlich aber Achtzig Tausend ReichsDahler /:wie itzo:/ erlegen
müßen. Siebenbürgen hat Vor diesem Dacia geheißen. Auf Lateinisch
heißet es Transylvania, quia trans Carpathicum nemus (haemus ? nn)
acta jacet, weil es über dem Carpathischen Fruchtgebirg lieget. Tröster
in Seinem Alt-und Neu-teutschen Dacia14. Dieser Carpathus, nunc
Crapak, theilet sich in zween Arm und schließet Transylvaniam als mit
Ringmauern zusammen. Auf Ungrisch heißet es Erdely, ein Waldichtes
Land, Vom worth Erdö, das ist ein Wald, welches bey den Scribenten
10
Hiltebrandt, p. 27.
11
Ibidem.
12
Johannes Zápolya.
13
Soliman I. Der Bund wurde anfangs 1528, nicht in 1527 beschloßen.
14
Vgl. Johs. Tröster, Das Alt- und Neu-Teutsche Dacia, Nürnberg 1666, p. 27
gestümmelt Herdeelen gelesen wird15. Zu teutsch heißt es Siebenbürgen
oder Septem Castra. Nach dem Tod Attilae, schreibet Spilner hieVon
in seinem Ungrischen Chronico16 zogen die Hunnen oder Ungarn zum
Andermahl in Pannoniam. Sie zogen über ein hohes Gebirge bey 3
Monath lang und kamen zu letzt an die Grentzen des Ungerlandes. Da sie
das edle erdreich erlangeten, theileten sie die gantze Macht ihres Heeres
in Sieben theil und setzten einem jeden theil einen besondern Haubtman,
machten auch Centuriones, Rotten und Rottenmeister. Es hatte aber ein
jedes Heer 38077 streitbahre Männer. Diesen Sieben Hauptleuten und
ihren Heeren Verordneten Sie zu unterhandlung [von] Weib und Kind 7
Läger oder Landschaften und bauten in einer jeden ein Schloß oder Burg,
in welchen sie hernacheine lange Zeit Verblieben undt wohneten. Diese
Sieben Landschaften werden auch heutiges tages Siebenbürgen genennet.
Die Uhrsach dieser Benennung will Herr Tröster17 nicht paßieren laßen,
der schier dergleichen aus dem Turozio18 anführet, und berichtet dabey,
das dieser Relation Bonfinius19 aus diesem fast alle Scribenten auf dem
Spur nachfolgen; deßen angeführte Uhrsachen Ich in Seinem Werthe
beruhen laße, wen Er nur nicht aus lieb zu Seinem Vaterland und die
Saxen Vor die Ungarn zu erheben etwas Verdächtig schreibet; schleußt
dahin, daß Siebenbürgen Von den Sieben Teutschen Bürgen heut zu tage
Sieben Städte und Vor der Ungarn ankunfft gewesen seyn, den Namen
bekommen habe. In Transylnania Septem sunt Saxonum Civitates,
quas Septem Castra appellant. Bonfinius, Dec: 1 lb: 1: Dem stimmet zu
Fröilichius20: Germani vocant Siebenbürgen a Septem primarijs urbibus
15
Ibidem, p. 73.
16
Babinger, S. 191, N. 3 ist der Meinung, daß es eigentlich darunter Kaspar Maurer,
Ungarische Chronica / oder Kurtze Historische Beschreibung von allen Ungarischen
Christlichen Königen...usw. Erste Ausgabe bei Michael Endter, Nürnberg 1662; Neudruck
Nürnberg 1664 mit einer 221 Ss. Füllende Fortsetzung dieser Hungarischen Chronik.
gemeint wäre. Die hier angezogene Stelle findet sich auf. S. 7 beider ausgaben. Da in der
Handschrift jeweils deutlich Spilner zu lesen ist, besteht die Möglichkeit, daß Hiltebrandt
den Namen in dieser falschen Schreibung übernahm oder daß der Abschreiber der Vorlage
aus Maurer den Namen Spilner verlas. Vgl. S. XV.
17
Vgl. Tröster, p. 15.
18
Johannes Toróczi, Verfasser der Chronica Hungarorum, 1488.
19
Antonio Bonfinius (Bonfini), Rerum Hungaricarum decades, Basel 1543.
20
David Frölich, Medulla geographiae practicae, Bartfeld 1639, 367 f.
suis munitis sive Castris, Burg enim Germanis idem, quod Castrum
vel munimentum significat. Die Teutschen nennen Siebenbürgen Von
den Sieben Vornehmsten Vesten Städten oder Bürgen, den Burg heißt
auf teutsch so Viel als ein Schloß und Vestung. Dieses Siebenbürgen
ist mit Wäldern, denen Carpathischen und Wallachischen Gebirgen als
einer Cron ümbgeben und hat acht Eingänge oder Päße, so durch das
Gebirge ins Land führen21. Und weiter beschreibt er diese Päße die er
durchgefahren hat aber auch unter Benützung vieler Informationen von
Frölich und Tröster. Interessant ist eine seiner Bemerkungen in Bezug auf
den Paß von Transilvanien nach Moldau über Tartlau – Trotuş. Da schrieb
Hiltebrandt: Alß Ich nun seind der Zeit, wie leichtlich die Muselmänner
in dieses so fäste und von Bergen umbgebene Landt ohne sonderliche
Gegenwehr hineingedrungen, gehöret, hab Ich mich an meinem Orth zu
höchsten darüber Verwundert, gestalt einer Mühe genung hat mit Wagen
und Pferden durch solche Päße zu reisen, dem thor und thür geöfnet
werden, und halb ofters gesaget: Es wäre unmöglich Menschlicher Weise
daVon zu reden, wen die päße nur mit wenigen, redlichen, tapfferen
Soldaten, die den Krieg und Vestungen Verstünden, besetzt wären, das
Ein fremder Feind so leicht hinein dringen könte22. Das besagt viel über
die Grenzaufsicht jener Zeit in beiden Ländern.
Hiltebrandt beschreibt weiter fast alle große Städte Siebenbürgens.
Er weißt woher Cluj-Klausenburg ihren Namen herleitet23, was Braşov-
Kronstadt24 oder Turda-Thorda25 bedeutet, wie Alba-Iulia-Weißenburg26,
die er besuchte, aussah, und wie sie im Jahre 1658 von den Tartaren
geplündert wurde.
Immer wieder nach Tröster27, beschreibt Hiltebrandt die schwierigen
sozialen Verhältnisse des Landes. Er stellt nämlich fest: „Und zwar so
wohnen in Siebenbürgen Viererley Arth Leute, 1). Teutsche, 2). Ungarn,
21
Hiltebrandt, p. 28.
22
Ibidem, pp. 29-30.
23
Ibidem, p. 35.
24
Ibidem, p. 73.
25
Ibidem, p. 41.
26
Ibidem, p. 48ff.
27
Tröster, p. 87.
3). Zeklyer und 4). Wallachen. Der Ungarn seind die meisten, die den
Teutschen gantz disaffectionirt und sehr abgönstig seyn. Diese seindt
mehrentheils Vom Adel, gestalt derselbige Adel alda sehr gemein, wie
dan auch Handwercker alß Kürschner, Gläser, Schuster und dergleichen
Vom Adel seyn. Wer Einem solchen eine Maulschelle giebet, fält, wie
Sie Uns berichteten, in 100 f. Straff, alß unser Feldscher einstmahls
einem solchen importunen Menschen seine schlanke Frantzösische
Hand an seinen Kahlgeschorenen Kopff applicirte. Dieselben wohnen
in Siebenbürgen in gewiße Gerichts-Krayse, welche Sie Comitatus
heißen, abgetheilt, seind mehrentheils Crudele Leute, die nicht allein
mit Frembden, besondern auch mit Ihren Jobagyen und Leibeigenen
grausam und auf Türckisch umbgehen und gar mit Weib und Kind
Verkauffen, Wie Ich dan in Siebenbürgen schier mehr in eisen gehen
sehen alß bey den Türcken”28. Und weiter schrieb er: Die Einwohner im
Lande haben Ihre Statuta Nationalia, welche Stephanus Bathori A. C.
1583, confirmiret; nach denselben richten Sie alle Streitigkeiten, ohne
viel weiter aufschub und einwendung Römischer Rechten. Unter andern
sind diese Saxen Siebenbürger wegen Ihrer liberalität und Gastfreyheit
billig zu loben, wie sie sonst denen reisenden Ungarn Futter und Mahl
auf Fürstl. Befehl darreichen müßen, daVor sie wenig dank bekommen,
sondern es ist zum öftern wol des wachsamen H. Hahns Lohn, Vor sein
fleißiges Krähen und auftragen ein streich etliche Von einer scharffen
Tartarischen Corbatsche, damit der abziehende pochende Cattenak Ihm
den Kopff und Rücken schmieret. So erzeigen Sie sich sonst in diesem
Stück doch freundlich gegen die Reisenden, nemen Vor herberge und
bette, auch wol eßen und Trinken keine bezahlung, haltens Ihnen Vor
eine Ehre, daß ein Frembder bey Ihnen eingekehret ist. Wir haben solche
Gütigkeit im Durchzuge auch genoßen, denn da hatten Wir Fürstlichen
paß und Verordnung wegen der Verpflegung, die Uns willig und reichlich
an Futter und Mahl, auch Vorspannung, dargereicht ward. Und wen Wir
Uns beym Abzuge freundlich Vor gute bewirtung bedankten, freuten Sie
sich darüber und gratulirten Ihnen, daß Sie solche fromme, dankbahre
Gäste gehabt hätten. In Clausenburg hielten Sie eigene Pferde zum
28
Hiltebrandt, p. 30.
Dienst derer also auf Fürstlichen Paß reisenden, damit Sie weiter nach
Verzehrtem Mahl weggeführet und fortgeschaffet werden könten. Solches
Freyreisen auf sonderbare Fürstliche Gnad hat man zwar durch das
gantze Land Siebenbürgen, es betrifft aber die Saxen am meisten, denn
die Ungarn sich wol auszuwickeln wißen; so tractiret auch kein Ungar
den andern so unhöfflich mit der Peitsche. Frölichius gedencket dieses
Tractaments auch folgender gestaldt29: Es pflegen die Frembden und
andere Vom LandesFürsten einen Salvum Conductum, sicheres Geleit,
und Freyhe Zehrung durch gantz Siebenbürgen auff recommandation
eines Vornehmen höfflings leichtlich erhalten, daß Sie Von einer Stadt
zur andern geführet und in den Herbergen auf der Gemeine Kosten
zwey oder drey tage durch befoderung des Hahns mit eßen und trinken
rühmlich Versehen und hernacher wieder fortgeschaffet werden. Solche
des Landes Fürsten Gütigkeit gegen die Frembden und Seine Bedienten
machet des Landes Einwohnern schier täglich Unruh und molestien un
bringet Sie ümb ein groß Stück Geldes. Tröster schreibet hievon also p.
87: Die Ungrische Edelleute plagen das LandVolck durchauß sehr, denn
ein jeder, so Er nur des Landes Fürsten :/ weis nicht offt, was für einen
:/ paß aufzuweisen hat, mit Weib und Kindern, Pferden und allen seinen
Dienern durch das gantze Landt, ohne Verspendirung einziges thalers
reisen kan. Den da müßen die Dorffrichter, so man daselbst mit einem
altteutschen Wort Hahnen heißet, solche Edelleute oder Ihre Diener und
Posten mit eßen und trinken, haber und heuw, und Voraus mit guten Wein
aufs beste Versehen, für welches alles sie keinen heller, sondern lose
wort und oft grobe Stöß zu gewarten haben: Und welches das ärgste ist,
so mus man Ihnen Pferde an die Wägen oder unter den Sattel geben, die
Sie oft krum und lahm, oft gar wegreiten. Dieser überlast, so schwerlich
in gantz Europa erduldet wird, Verursachet dem LandVolk unsägliche
Unkosten und großen Schaden30.
Aber die schwierigste soziale Lage in Siebenbürgen hatten die
Rumänen zu ertragen. Nachdem er dann die Sitten und die Religion der
ersten drei Nationen darstellte, schrieb Hiltebrandt folgendes über die
letzten, die Rumänen: „Dieß ist die dritte Nation, so Ich in Siebenbürgen
29
Vgl. D. Frölich, 371 und Tröster, 87 ff.
30
Hiltebrandt, pp. 67-68
wohnend angetroffen habe. Inßgemein werden Sie die Wallachen, in
Siebenbürgen aber Blooch geheißen. In Ihrer Sprache heißen Sie sich
Romunos oder Römer. Einige wollen, daß die Wallachen Ihren Nahmen
haben sollen Vom Flacco. Wallachi nomen habent â Flacco, hinc
Flacci, mit der Zeit Valachi, zu teutsch Wallachen“31. Und dafür zitiert
er aus Ovid:
Praefuit his, Graecine, locis modo Flaccus, et illo
Ripa ferox Istri sub duce tuta fuit
Hic tenuit Mysas Gentis in pace fideli,
Hic arcu fisos terruit ense Getas32.
Weiter, beweint Hiltebrandt die Lage der Rumänen und sagt:
„Dieses Volck ist heutiges Tages so gar gering im Lande geachtet, das
es unter die Landstände nicht gerechnet wird, keine Stadt, Schloß oder
eintzige eigene Wohnung hat, sondern entweder hin und her in des
Landes Ringgebirge oder unter den Teutschen und Ungrischen Städte und
Märkten gebiet als Unterthanen seine hütten aus Vergunst besitzet. Aber
Ihrem herkommen nach sind Sie der Edlen Römer damahlß sehr berühmte
gräntz Soldaten, so nach den Teutschen33 die ältesten bewohner des
Landes wären, als welche Kayser Trajanus Ao Christi 100. zu erst dahin
geführet, alß Er den Teutschen Dietschwald geschlage, seine Königliche
Stadt Sarmis Gethusa/: so nu ein geringes Dörflein ist, Inwendig des
Eisern Thorß:/ eingenommen, mit Römischen Colonien besetzet und
Ulpia Trajana hatte nennen laßen34. Diese Römische Nachkömlinge
wohnen heute zu tage in Siebenbürgen, Moldau und Wallachey. Die
Moldau und Wallachey haben Sie in Ihren besitz und eigener Macht35,
31
Ibidem, p. 70.
32
Ovidius, Pontica, 1,4
33
Die sächsischen Historiker im XVI. Jhdt. vertraten die falsche Theorie, daß die Goten
dasselbe gewesen wären wie die Geten. Siehe bei Tröster, passim.
34
Wie Barbinger richtig beurteilte, schöpft Hiltebrandt seine Informationen aus Joh. Tröster,
Das Alt-und Neu-Teutsche Dacia, Nürnberg 1666, S. 322 ff. Sarmisegethusa, das heutige
Grădiştea (ung. Várhely), wohl die Königsburg des Decebalus. Reliefs auf der Trajanussäule
in Rom stellen die Kämpfe um diese Burg dar, die von den Römern 101 und 106 erobert
wurde. Unter den Römern blieb sie Hauptstadt der Provinz Dacia. Siehe: Hiltebrandt, S. 71
und 208, N. 1. Siehe auch: St. Fischer-Galaţi, Dinu C. Giurescu, Ioan-Aurel Pop, O Istorie
a Românilor, Cluj-Napoca, 1998, S. 29-33.
35
Sie sind kein privilegierter Stand wie die Deutschen, die Ungarn und die Szekler gewesen.
darinnen Sie Von Ihren eigenen Fürsten oder Woywoden beherschet
werden. In Siebenbürgen aber haben Sie keine Standes Freyheit, sondern
sind allzusammen Hirten und Tagelöhner. In Ihrer Sprache heißen Sie
sich Romunos oder Römer. In alten Mörösch in Siebenbürgen haben Sie
so Viel ein, daß Sie beyde, Ungarn und Teutschen fast mit der Menge
Ihrer Menschen übertreffen solten. Wie Sie nun unter den Siebenbürgern
wohnen, also lernen dieselbe auch der Wallachen Sprache, damit Sie
mit denenselben als Ihren Tagelöhnern und Knechten reden und Ihnen
die Arbeit befehlen können. Diese Gemeine Knechtische Wallachen
seind dibisch und Räuberisch36, dahero Sie auch in Siebenbürgen hart
abgestraffet und gemeiniglich in die Spieße gezogen werden, wie man
den schier Vor allen Städten, Flecken und Dörffern im Lande dergleichen
grausamen Spectaclus ansichtig wirdt. Gegen den Spieß oder Pfal,
wen Sie damit gezüchtiget werden, gehen Sie mit Freuden zum Galgen,
sagende, Christus Ihr Heyland wäre auch gehangen worden“37.
Hiltebrand wurde tief erstaunt von zwei Wallachen die zum Pfall
verurteil wurden. Er berichtet darüber: Einsmahl sahe Ich 2 Wallachen,
welche den Pfall, daran Sie gespießet werden solten, selber auf den
Schultern trugen, allein, ohne Begleitung eines Pastoris, Zum Gericht
gehen und wurde über der HH. Abgesandten Taffel daVon discouriret,
wie die Hern Reformirte keinen armen Sünder communicirten und daß
Abendmahl Verreicheten oder mit Ihm zum Gericht hinein gingen38.
Hiltebrandt vergißt auch nicht, den Tracht und die Ausstattung dieser
Menschen zu beschreiben. Er sagt folgendes darüber: „In Siebenbürgen
tragen Sich diese Esclav-Wallachen unterschiedlich, inßgemein wie die
so genandten Wallachen in Mähren, daVon Ich droben39 bey Swetin etwas
gemeldet. Etliche haben eine rauhe, lange, zottige haube aufm Kopffe,
36
Es ist hier eine kynische Justifizierung der grausamen Massnahmen die gegen die Rumänen
durchgeführt waren.
37
Hiltebrandt, p. 71.
38
Der protestantische Pastor konnte nicht verstehen wie kein orthodoxer Priester dabei
war um den Verurteilten die Eucharistie zu spenden und versuchte das protestantische
Eucharistieverständnis im Kurzen darzustellen. Denn die Eucharistie wird bei den
Orthodoxen erst nach der Beichte gereicht die, vielleicht, im Kerker oder gar nicht
gespendet wurde. Ibidem, pp. 54-55.
39
Ibidem, p. 12.
andere eine runde mit lang herabhangenden Locken, welche Von fern läßet
als eine perug oder blaue holländische runde Schipffer Mütz, Andere haben
etwas Spitze, schier wie die Derbisch Mönche in Pera aufm Haupt. Wen
Sie trauren, laßen Sie das Haar wachsen, gehen ohn Hut herein ein gantzes
Jahr, nach abgelegter Trauer laßen Sie daß Haupt wieder kahl scheren
und setzen wieder einen Hut auff. Im Sommer gehen Sie gemeinliglich in
Hembden, haben eine Schnur umb den Leib, an welcher ein Stück gewand
hänget in der lincken seiten, welches Sie beym Regen Wetter über dem
Kopff ziehen... Die Hembden der Männer hängen über die Hosen, sind
kurtz und gehen kaum über die Lenden. Die Hosen und Strümpffe sitzen
aneinander, die Schuh seind ein Stück Leder, welches Sie über den Fuß
mit langen Riemen zusammen schnüren, welche Sie Pintsch40 heißen. Sie
tragen einen langen Jäger-Spieß; mit solchem Spieß kehreten Sie unsern
Thomas einmal aus dem Weinberge, etc. Im Gürtel eine hacken oder kleine
Axt, mit welcher Sie gewiß werffen können. Sie haben auch gemeiniglich
Große Prügel und Keulen in den Händen, Welche Sie Toagul heißen41. Von
deren Gebrauch habe ich droben bey Clausenburg geredet”42.
Was berichtete Hiltebrandt darüber? Hier seine Worte: „Die
Wallachen tragen gemeiniglich größe Prügell. Den usum derselben
Keulen ward Ich in diesem Clausenburg gewar. Ein solcher Romunus
oder Wallach wolte etwas anpacken, da warn im Augenblick woll 10
Prügel auf seinem Rücken, deren Schläge Er mit seinem langen Prügel
artig aufzufangen wußte, also, daß Er ohne sonderliche Wehetage daVon
kam“43.
Interessant ist auch die Beschreibung der Rumänen aus dem
Mähren, die er sehen konnte als er in Swetin geweilt hatte. Er schrieb
nämlich: “Die Wallachen haben ein schwartz Majürcken44 auf dem
Kopff, gehen bey Sommertagen gemeiniglich ohne Rock undt Wambst,
40
Rumänisch: opincă –opinci.
41
Ibidem, 71-72. Es handel sich hier um das rumänische Wort Toiagul, Stab des Wanderers,
Greises, Würdenträgers. Verkleinerung toiegel.
42
Ibidem, p. 72.
43
Ibidem, p. 41.
44
Majürcken oder Majürchen (S. 33) ist kleinrussisch mahyrka, russ. Magerka, poln.
Magierka, d. i. ungarische Mütze.
in Hembden. Hosen und Strümpff seindt an einander, hatten Einen
breiten, ledernen Gürtell umb den Leib, daran ein Messingscher Ring
war. Darein hatten Sie ein Wurffbeil mit einem langen stiel stecken, an
der Seiten eine große Pulverflasche, daran das Maaß, was in das Rohr
ging abgepaßet war; ümb die Schultern trugen Sie an Einem Riemen Ein
(etliche Zwey) Gereifftes Teschinsches Rohr. Ihre Schuh waren ein Stück
ungegerbtes Leders, das hatten Sie mit einem langen Riemen oben auf
dem Fuß zusammen geschnüret, schier bis an die Waden; tragen Sich
fast wie die gemeinen Wallachen in Siebenbürgen. Sie waren gewaltige
Buschklöpper und Mauß-Köpffe“45.
Hiltebrandt wunderte aber auch die rumänischen Frauen von
Siebenbürgen wegen ihrem Fleiß. Er sagte nämlich: „Die Wallachischen
Weiber spinnen im gehen, haben den Spinrocken mit dem Werck im Gürtel
stecken und spinnen mit der Spindel, gehen Schwatzen mit einander oder
setzen Sich in den Schatten dahin, etc.46“. Und weiter, berichtet er: Das
Wallachische Weibs Volk träget Von eigen gewirkten Kleider. Ihre haar
schmieren Sie mit butter. Den Kopff tragen die Jungfern bloß, aber Vorn
ümb die Stirn und bey den Ohren herunter hangen Sie allerhand kleine,
auf schnüren gezogene Müntze, wie die Bulgarische Weiber, also das ich
unter diesen und jenen keinen sonderlichen unterscheid spüren konte, wie
Ich solchen Bulgarischen Frauen habit in meiner Türckischen Reise auch
angefüret habe47. Ihre hembder seind auch so närrisch bund außgenehet.
Die Ehfrauen haben einen Großen, Von baumwollen klaren tuch
geflochtenen Bund auff, welchen Sie so gantz nach belieben abnehmen
künnen. Sie eßen Viele brey, backen in der Aschen Kollatschen, Hirse
heerdkuchen48. Beeindruckt war aber Hiltebrandt auch von dem Tanz der
Rumänen. Er sagt darüber: Ihre Tantz ( davon Sie sehr viel halten ) ist
artig anzusehen und hat Her Opitz denselben in seinem Zlatna49 fein
beschrieben:
Es steckt manch edles Blut in Kleinen bauren hütten,
45
Hiltebrandt, p. 12.
46
Ibidem, p. 72.
47
Auf S. pp. 159-160.
48
Hiltebrandt, p. 72.
49
Hiltebrandt denkt hier vermutlich an die sog. Căluşarii, die in ganz Rumänien getanzt wird.
Das noch den alten brauch und art der alten Sitten
Nicht gäntzlich abgelegt. Wie den Ihr Tantz anzeigt,
In dem so wunderbahr gebückt wird und geneigt,
Gesprungen in die höhe auf Art der Capriolen,
Die meine Teutschen sonst aus Franckreich müßen holen,
Bald wird ein Kreyß gemacht, bald wiederumb zertrant,
Bald gehn die Menscher /:Jungfern:/ recht, bald auf der linken hand,
Die Menscher, die noch itzt fast Römisch Muster tragen
Zwar schlecht, doch witzig sind, Viel dencken, wenig sagen,
Und was Ich weiter nicht mag bringen auf die bahn,
Dadurch Ich sonsten wol in Argwohn kommen kan!
Sie pflegen auch woll gantze Comoedien50 in Ihren täntzen zu
praesentiren, wie Ich dergleichen zur Pfinstlichen Zeit auf der Reise
nach Constantinopel im Durchzug gesehen habe51.
Um seine Darstelung über die Rumänen zu runden, berichtet
Hiltebrandt auch über ihre Sprache und dafür benützt er Informationen
sowohl von Martin Opitz, als auch von Tröster: Ihre Sprache ist Alt
Römisch:
Der Römer Sprache bleibt noch hier auf diesen tag,
Darob sich den ein Mensch gar billig wundern mag, etc.Opitz52.
\Weiter gibt Hiltebrandt einige Exempla die aus dem Werk von
Tröster geschöpft wurden. Das heißt aber gar nicht, daß er sie nur zitiert
denn er hat schon mehrmals mit den Rumänen gesprochen. So diese
Exempli gratia:
Wallachisch: Lateinisch:
Cum ai dormit Quomodo dormivisti
Manunke Manduca
Be Bibe
Lasse me em patsch Laß mich zufrieden, etc53.
50
Es ist vielmehr eine mis en scene , nicht eine Komödie.
51
52
M. Opitz, Aus seinem Gedicht Zlatna.
53
Tröster, pp. 355-356.
Und weiter sagt Hiltebrandt: Was noch von dieser Nation weiter
anzuführen Von nöhten seyn möchte, solches soll bey der Wallachey oder
Moldau, wenn Ich dahin komme, erzehlet werden54.
Was erzählt er dann darüber? Zunächst, daß alle Wallachen, trotz
ihrer Verschiedenheit, römische Nachkommlinge sind. Als er über die
Moldau berichtet, schreibt Hiltebrandt folgendes: Die Einwohner dieses
Landes sind Wallachen und könnte Ich diese gegen die, so unter den
Siebenbürgern, Ungarn und Saxen als Tagelöhner zerstreuet leben,
woll die freye Wallachen nennen, gestaltsam Sie die gantze Moldau und
Wallachey allein besitzen, darinnen Sie Von Ihren eigenen Fürsten oder
Woyewoden beherrscht werden. Beyde Wallachische Fürstenthümer
werden Von den Romunis oder Wallachen bewohnet, aber dem gemeinen
Nahmen nach werden Sie unterschieden. Daß Fürstenthumb, so an dem
Üffer lieget, wird Wallachey genanndt und das andere, so an die Buzacker
Tartern gegen der Maeotischen Pfütze sich erstrecket, heißet Moldau,
doch kammen Mir die Wallachen höfflicher und verständiger Vor alß
die Moldauer55. Hiltebrandt entwickelt dann eine lange Theorie über
den Name der Moldau, aber seine Angaben stammen größtenteils aus
Trösters Werk.56 Er hat aber auch andere Informationen die, so zeugen Sie
doch Von der Wallachen Römischen Herkunft. Er wird doch präzisieren:
Diese Römische Wallachen seindt nicht der Joten ( Goten nn) und Dacier
Nachkommlinge, kommen auch nicht Von den Sarmatis oder Tartarn her,
sondern sind überbliebene Von Trajanischen Zug Völckern57.
Hiltebrandt weißt auch, daß alle Rumäne, sowohl in Siebenbürgen
als auch in der Moldau und in der Wallachey Orthodoxe sind und
deswegen wollte er in seiner Berichterstattung sich nicht wiederholen.
Es ist der Grund warum er nur einmal über die Religion der Wallachen
schreibt, als er seine Reise durch die Moldau darstellt. Er sagt folgendes:
Die Wallachen wollen des Gregors Calender nicht annehmen /: Confer
Backium, p. 204:20558 :/. Es sind auch diese Moldauer und Wallachen
54
Hiltebrandt, p. 73.
55
Ibidem, p. 78.
56
Tröster, p. 335.
57
Hiltebrandt, p. 79.
58
Backius: Weder unter dem Namen Bach, Back, noch Bake, Backius läßt sich, falls nicht
getauffte Christen Griechischer Religion. Weil es eben heyliger
Weynachts Abend war, nach dem alten Calender, welchen Sie behalten,
und den Neuen Gregorianischen, wiewoll ihn gantz Siebenbürgen
annehmen müßen59, nie angenommen noch wollen, muß Ich Von Ihren
Ceremonien, welche Ich dazumahl in Unserm Qvartier des Abends sahe,
etwas communiciren. Es kam Ihrer Poppen einer mit Seinem Diener60
und einigen andern begleitet, die sungen; der Wirth und daß gantze
Hauß Gesinde mußte in die Stuben kommen; darauf hielt Er Ihnen den
Salvator oder Bildnüß des Herren Christi Vor, daVor eine grüne Gardine
hing; die zog Er zurück und küßeten darauf alle die, so im Hause waren,
das Gemahlte /: geschnitzte Bilder leiden Sie nicht /: Brustbild des
Salvatoris, welches Er hernach Verwarte. Der Poppe ward zu Tische
genötiget, wollte aber nicht eßen, und sich lange auffhalten, eilete forth,
der Diener aber füllete Seinen Sack mit allerhand Victualien und gingen
die so fort. Mit diesem Poppen wolte Ich Latein reden, Er Verstand
Es aber nicht, gestatt Sie außer Ihrer Muttersprach, die Sie lesen und
Schreiben lernen, nichts studiren. Man berichtete Mir in Siebenbürgen,
daß der Siebenbürgische Fürst Rakoci II, als Er wieder die Moldauer
und Wallachen gestritten, da Er den Fürsten in der Moldau Basilium Ao
1652 Vom Stuhl herunter geschlagen und deßen Cantzler Stephanum an
Seine Statt gesetzet; und dem Fürsten in der Wallachey Constantino61
sein Regiment wieder seine eigene Czemenier62 befästigte; eben ümb
solcher ignoranz Willen, daß die Poppen das Vater Unser nicht recht
beten konten, viel derselben niedergesäbelt; sonst lesen Sie alles aus
geschriebenen Büchern, predigen außwendig selten oder gar nicht63.
etwa Ascanius Bake gemeint sein sollte, eine entsprechende Schrift nachweisen, wie bei
Spilner, meint Babinger, 211, N.1.
59
Mit Außnahme die Rumänen, die orthodox waren. Heute noch feiern alle Rumänen Ostern
nach dem alten Kelender, Weihnachten aber nach dem neuen.
60
Diakon oder Kantor?
61
Es geht um Vasile Lupu von der Moldau und Constantin Şerban von der Wallachey.
62
Seimeni. Darüber siehe: N. Iorga, Răscoala seimenilor împotriva lui Mateiu Basarab,
in den Analele Academiei Române, seria II, tomul XXXII, Memoriile secţiunii istorice,
Bucureşti, 1911, pp. 187-210.
63
Über die Kultur der orthodoxen Priestern dieser Zeit siehe auch: Antonie Plămădeală,
Romanitate, Continuitate, Unitate, Sibiu 1988, pp. 186-203.
Die Poppen haben lange Haar, dahero diese Leute die Teutschen mit
solchen langen haren Poppen nennen, wie Sie also des Fürsten Rakoci
II: in Siebenbürgen Teutschen wieder marschierende Soldatesca tiuliret
und Sich Vor diesen Poppen sehr gefürchtet haben. Ihre Poppen müßen
nothwendig zur Ehe schreiten und zwar müßen Sie eine Jüngfraw und
keine Witwe heyrahten. Stirbet dem Priester seine Fraw ab, kan Er am
Altar nicht mehr dienen, sondern kan nur allein in der Kirchen das lesen
und singen Verrichten64, so darff Er auch nicht zum andern mahl ein
Weib nehmen, wo Er seines priesterlichen Ampts nicht gar quiet gehen
und aus dem Geistlichen Orden außtreten will. Den deß Apostels Pauli
Spruch 1: Tim: 3: 2: Episcopus sit unius uxoris Vir, eß soll Ein Bischoff
eines Weibes Mann seyn, erklären Sie also, alß mußte Ein Priester
nothwendig eine Fraue haben und könne Derselbe nur eines Weibes
Mann seyn und müßte also nach absterben der ersten Frawen ein Leben
im Witwerstandzubringen65.
Hiltebrandt gibt auch Hinweise über die Bekleidung der Priester.
Er berichtet nämlich: Sie tragen Sich unterschiedlich nach Ihren Orden.
Die Münche haben eine Mütze aufm Kopff, bey den Ohren, welche sie
bedecket66, außgewinckelt, den diese heilige Leute sollen gleichsam die
Ohren zustopffen und nichts böses in die Ohren, Viel weniger ins Hertz
hinein laßen, darüber Sie einen langen Schwartzen flor biß auf den
Rücken herabhängend decken67. In der Moldau und Wallachey haben
Sie auch Monastire oder Klöster68, bißweilen brauchen Sie höltzerne
Bretter´-Glocken: Sacerdotes Graeci ligneo instrumento ad Graecos
in Ecclesiam convocandos utuntur, id est: Lignum binarum decem-
64
Das wurde von Tröster, 352 (106) entnommen. Es geht hier um die zweite Ehe. Siehe
Kanon 3 des V,-VI. Synode bei: Ioan N. Floca, Canoanele Bisericii Ortodoxe. Note şi
comentarii, Sibiu, 2005, pp. 112-114.
65
66
Camilafca.
67
Culion.
68
Das heißt nicht, daß es in Siebenbürgen keine gab; sie sind aber nicht so prächtig gestaltet
gewesen wie die fürstliche Gründungen aus der Moldau und der Wallachei. Siehe z.B.
N. Stoicescu, Matei Basarab, Academia RSR, Bucureşti, 1988, S. 81-125; V. Nicolae,
Ctitoriile lui Matei Basarab, Sport-Turism, Bucureşti, 1982; Marius Porumb, Dicţionar de
pictură veche românească din Transilvania sec. XIII-XVIII, Academia Română, Bucureşti,
1998. Über die Metropolitankirche von Mihai Viteazul siehe S. 14-16.
pedarum longitudine, duorum digitorum crassitudine, latitudine
quatuor, qvam optime dedolatum, non fissum aut rimosum, qvod
manu sinistra ita lignum diverberat, ut ictum nunc plenum, nunc
gravem, nunc auctum, nunc crebrum, nunc extensum edens, perfecta
Musices scientia qvam suavissime moduletur etc. Leo Allatius, ex illo
Thelavius in epistola dedicatoria, fol. 1569. Solche instrumenta hab Ich
– so berichtet Hiltebrandt weiter – in deren Griechen Städten, dadurch
Ich gereiset, nicht gesehen. In Adrianopel halten Sie eine Holtzklapper,
damit einer durch die Gaßen gehend ein zeichen zur Kirchen zu kommen
gab, in der Moldau und Wallachey aber seind Sie heuffig zu finden. In der
Ukraina hatten Sie schöne Glocken. Wen Sie nu also zur Kirchen leuten,
haben Sie höltzerne Bretter Glocken, dergleichen Ich in der Monoster
Gaßen Vor Clausenburgk70 in Siebenbürgen zu erst schlagen hören und
darauf besehen, denn Wir pflagen öfters nach gegebenen Zeichen uns
zu den Poppen, welcher Vorn im Vestibulo der Kirchen seine Wohnung
hatte, Verfügen und Ihren Gottesdienst zuzuschauen. Dieses eichene
wolgehubelte Bret, etwa 4 ellen lang, ein halbe breit und 3 oder 2 finger
dick, hing in der Mitten an einer Ketten an der Seiten des Tempels. Darauf
schlug der Priester mit einem höltzernen Hammer künstlich anfangs
einen Schlag drey hart, welchen Er repetirte, hernach heufte Er die harte
Schläge und schlug endlich so geschwinde, daß der Schal immer dünner
und dünner ward, biß man es endlich gahr nicht mehr hören kondte71.
Diese Brett Music war den Ohren nicht unangenehm. Dergleichen
hab Ich in der Moldau hernach hin und wieder gehöret, insonderheit
zu Jasch und Sitschava oder Soczava. Die Poppen haben lange Bärter,
sehen ernsthafftig und andächtig aus, und halten Ihren Gottesdienst des
Morgens früh und Abends spät mit größerer devotion als die Catholicen.
Den Römischen Bapst erkennen Sie nicht Vor als Haubt der Kirche,
glauben kein Beutel purgirendes purgatorium, haben in Ihren Kirchen,
welche, wie die Türcken Meskyten oben rund, aber doch nur mehren
theils auß holtz gebauet seyen, Viele Gemahlte, aber keine geschnitzte
69
Leo Allatius, De Ecclesia occidentalis atque orientalis perpetua consensione, Colonia
1648.
70
Es geht um die orthodoxe Kirche dort die von Mihai Viteazul errichtet wurde !
71
Es ist das sog. Klopfbret, rumänisch toacă, griechisch symandron.
Bilder. Wann Sie in die Kirche kommen, fallen Sie bald Vor die Jungfraw
Maria oder den heil. Georgium nieder, segnen und Creutzigen sich mit
tiefen bücken zur Erden, also das Sie anfangs mit der Rechten hand
an die Stirne, hernach auf die Brust, weiter auf den Rechten theil der
Brust, endlich auf den lincken, in eines + form, rühren oder stippen. Wer
sich anders Creutzgiget, den halten Sie Vor keinen Glaubensgenoßen,
sondern Vor einen fremdling. In Ihren Kirchen machet der Priester einen
lieblichen Geruch Von allerlhand Rauchwerck, welches Er in einen
Silbernen oder Messingen Rauchfaß hat; die Zuhörer erkauffen Von
dem Priester kleine Wax kertzlein, welche Sie an ein groß lang sehr dick
Waxlicht rund umbher kleiben, und den Heiligen zu Ehren außbrennen
laßen72. Den heiligen Georgium und Nikolaum ehren Sie insonderheit,
Bey der heil. Tauffe haben Sie immersionem, das sacrament des Altars
reichen Sie unter beyderley gestalt, auf Griechische und Reußische
art, daß Sie daß gesäuerte Brodt in den Wein legen und daßelbsige mit
Löffeln empfangen73. Sollte Ich hie bey dieser Wallachen Religion in der
Relation etwas übergehen, werde Ich solches, wenn Ich in die Ukraine
komme, Vollends anzuführen Gelegenheit haben74.
Viele Gemeinsamkeiten mit den Griechen findet Hiltebrandt
auch als er die die Moldauer Einwonner beschreibt. So berichtet er: Die
Einwoner der Moldau sind mehrentheilß Erbar, breit-bärtige Männer,
haben den Kopff beschoren, darauf ein klein roth mützlein und dan
darüber eine andere größere mütze, allerdings wie die Griechen in
Constantinopel, tragen lange Wandröcke Von allerhand Couleuren,
daß Frauenzimmer krieget man selten zu sehen. Die tragen Stieffeln mit
untengeschlagenen hohen Eisen und ein weißes tuch ümbs Haupt biß auf
den Rücken, doch daß das Angesicht offen75.
Wie bei der Rumäninen aus Siebenbürgen, bewundert Hiltebrandt
die Sauberkeit der moldauischen Häuser. Er sagt nämlich: Sie (die Frauen)
72
Auch für die Lebenden und für die Gestorbenen, wie es bis heute geschieht.
73
Die Euchariste wird von den Ktholiken und von den Reformierten ganz anders empfangen.
74
Hiltebrandt, p. 81.
75
Es ist die sog. Marama, die auch bei den siebenbürgischen Rumäninen schon dargestellt
wurde. Vgl. Hiltebrandt, p. 72.
lieben sehr Reuligkeit76. Obschon Ihr(e) Häuser schlecht erbauet, so ist
es doch noch sauber drein. Wenn sich Rost Vor dem Cammin angesetzet
hat, übertünchen Sie es alsbald, wie sie dann zu dem Ende den tünchtopff
allezeit bey der Hand haben. Bänke und tisch waschen Sie fein rein, Ihr
Bett ist eine Stromatte undt decke, damit Sie sich insgemein behelfen,
in den Stuben ist eine büne gemachet, darauf liegen Sie und schlaffen.
Zur Österlichen Zeit schockelen Sie sich auf großen Rädern, wie dann
dergleichen in Jaß sehr viel auf den Gaßen zu dem ende stehen77.
Das Verhalten der Kindern den Alten gegenüber hat den Schweden
auch beeindruckt, der schreibt: Wenn so wol die Kinder als die Alten
einen höhren Ehren wollen, so erwischen Sie seine Rechte Hand, küßen
dieselbe also, daß Sie mit dem dritten Kuß die hand an Ihre Stirne
drücken, wie es auch die Gemeine zu Constantinopel dem Patriarchen
im Außgang auß der Kirchen festo Visitationis Mariae also machete78.
Hiltebrandt hatte auch die Gelegenheit einen besonderen
orthodoxen Gottesdienst, Panihida genannt, zu sehen, aber er hat
nicht viel davon verstanden. Deswegen ist sein Bericht darüber sehr
sumarisch: Von Tartros (Trotuş n.n. ) kam der H. Abgesandte weiter
den 25. December nach Backu (Bacău n.n.), 5 meilen, über lauter hohe
berg und Wald, ein Städtlein am Fluß Besterz (Bistriţa), und funden
hier die Einwohner bey einander, da der Tisch, auf welchem unter dem
Tuch hew lag, gedecket war, und Viel liebe brodts auf dem Tisch lag; es
waren große runde pretzen und rundte brodt; die leute, so dabey saßen,
danckten Gott Vor ein guht Jahr und bahten ferner umb fruchtbare Zeit.
Der Herr Abgesandte stand in einem besondern Qvartier und wurden
die Leute gegenüber einlogiret, da man die thüre nicht eröfnen wolte,
biß dergleichen brodt Vom Tische weggeräumet und unter daß Beth
Verstecket ward79.
Wir haben hier nur einige Elemente die die Rumänen im
76
Da hier über die Sauberkeit des Hauses geredet wird, ist es triftiger Reinigkeit als
Reichlichkeit, wie es Babinger, S. 81, N.1 ließt. Vgl. Călători străini, 595, N. 297.
77
Hiltebrandt, p. 81.
78
Festum visitationis Mariae, d.i. Mariae Heimsuchung, fällt auf den 2, juli im Abendland;
bei den Orthodoxen ist Bunavestire und fällt auf 25 März.
79
Verständnis von Hiltebrandt charakterisieren. Es sind sowohl negative als
auch positive Aspekte die er dargestellt hat, die mit anderen Dokumenten
konfrontiert werden müßen, um die volle Wahrheit herausgestellt zu
werden. Der Mangel an Informationen oder die Einseitigkeit mancher
Beschreibungen sollen in dem historischen Kontext beurteilt werden.
Zum Beispiel die Darstelung der Wallachen als Diebe, Spitzbuben oder
als unfleißige Leute wird von anderen Berichten anders betrachtet,
indem man die Ursachen deren unglücklichen Zustandes in Betracht
ziehen und auch die positive Seite dieses Volkes darstellt. So wird der
Verfasser einer Vollständigen Handschrift über Siebenbürgen über den
Zustand der Rumänen um 1765 folgendes berichten: Ueberhaupt ist der
siebenbürgische Unterthan oder Iobbagy in Betracht seiner Situation
der unglücklichte Landmann welchen man nur irgendwo finden kann…
Ein wahrer Sklave seiner Grundherrn80. Er weiß, daß die Untertänigkeit
und Knechtschaft81 die Ursache dieses schlechten Rufes ist. Dennoch,
sieht man auch die positive Seite dieses Volkes. Hier die Worte des
Berichterstatters: Viel natürliche Geschicklichkeit und gegen den Todt
eine ganz besondere und bey anderen Nationen nicht leicht in so voller
Maas vorfindende Gleichgültigkeit, meistens sein jene welche in den
Soldatenstand begeben, so wie die Wallachen überhaupt, alle brav und
herzhaft82. Und man ist davon Überzeugt, daß, wenn man in der Zukunft
gute Maßnahmen treffen wird, werden diese Wallachen ein sehr braves,
geschicktes und vortreffliches Volk83 sein. Unde er hatte recht.
Eine interessante Beschreibung ist auch diejenige des Johannes
Lehmanns: Reise von Pressburg nach Hermannstadt in Siebenbürgen,
1785. Dieser Mann war fünf mal in Siebenbürgen. Er kannte die
Menschen dort sehr gut und so konnte er über die Vorurteile die über die
Rumänen kannte, folgendes berichten: Es gibt keine unmenschlichere,
leichtsinnigere Behauptung als diese von einer ganzen Nation84. Und,
80
Apud N. Iorga, Călători străini, p. 419.
81
Ibidem, 420. Er zitiert die Handschrift. Geogr.24 aus dem National Museum von Budapest,
die ich nicht gesehen habe.
82
Ibidem, p. 420.
83
Ibidem, p. 421.
84
Ibidem, p. 426.
wie Hiltebrandt damals, hatte auch Lehmann für die Rumäninen
alle Consideration. Er sagte nämlich: So sehr die Männerwallachen
verlieren im Vergleich mit andern Männern, so sehr gewinnen die
Weiber im Vergleich mit andern ihresgleichen aus andern Gegenden. Die
Wallachenweiber sind durchaus demütig, freundlich, gefällig und sehr
fleissig85.
Glücklicherweise hat die Geschichte denen Recht gegeben, die
auch die positive Seite des rumänischen Volkes gesehen haben. Vorurteile
bleiben aber immer noch und deswegen bleiben auch diese Reiseberichte
ein wahrer Memento für uns und für die Zukunft.
85
Ibidem.
Alin ALBU
Confessional freedom. Social and national

emancipation. The dynamics of the vindication
programme of Sophrony’s movement
(1759-1761)
Abstract
Considered the most important popular movement up to those
times, Sophrony’s riot has always aroused the interest of researchers,
even though in time the confessional or ideological emphasis laid upon
it has altered the complexity of the phenomenon to a greater or lesser
degree. As a religious rebellion and a rehearsal for a future national
battle, confessional attitude and social reflex, “the movement against the
Union (with the Church of Rome) and of the peasants’ serfdom” has been
interpreted differently both regarding its prevailing character and in
reference to the share of each one of its characteristics. It is clear that the
riot had a threefold character: religious, social and national. The main
reason was a confessional one, but the religious claims also hid social
dissatisfactions and national aspirations, which were yet undefined.
Keywords:
Sophrony’s riot, Transylvania, Orthodoxy, social and national
emancipation
Considered the most important popular movement up to those

times, Sophrony’s riot has always aroused the interest of researchers,
even though in time the confessional or ideological stress laid upon it has
altered the complexity of the phenomenon to a greater or lesser degree.
For example, in the works published during the communist period it
was mentioned that Sophrony’s riot had been anti-feudal, anti-Habsburg
and anti-Catholic. Even if many of the postulates in the historiography
of the epoch concerning this topic proved to be clichés, this definition
remains right, only that the order of the terms has to be reversed. Nicolae
Iorga makes this classification, too: “social discontent not expressed
yet, national aspirations undefined yet hid behind these confessional
claims”1.
1. The religious dimension

There are several directions in the interpretation of the religious
character of the movement, starting from its exclusively confessional
dimension up to the complete denial of any coordinates of this type.
One can identify at least four such orientations: two extremist
ones and two middle ones. The exponent of the first one is Silviu
Dragomir, who limits the goals of the movement to strictly confessional
ones: religious emancipation. The second one, at the other extreme, is
represented by Augustin Bunea, who denies this dimension, attributing
to the movement exclusively political goals2. These contradictory
interpretations are to a certain extent subjective and non-scientific. An
important part of the historiography in the communist period followed
the second pattern of interpretation, exacerbating the social function of
the movement, ignoring any confessional aspect3, or at best, reducing it
to the state of an impulse, a “spark”4.
The other two directions are more realistic, integrating the
religious dimension, too, at the same time without neglecting the obvious
1
Nicolae Iorga, Istoria românilor, vol. VII (Reformatorii), Bucureşti, 1938, p. 249.
2
Augustin Bunea, Din istoria românilor. Episcopul Ioan Inocenţiu Klein (1728-1751), Blaj,
1900, p. 179.
3
Gh. Georgescu-Buzău, Răscoala de la 1784 a iobagilor din Transilvania de sub conducerea
lui Horea, Cloşca şi Crişan, Bucureşti, Politică Publishing House, 1962, p. 129.
4
George Ivaşcu, “Prefaţă”, in Lucian Blaga, Gândirea românească în Transilvania în secolul al
XVIII-lea, edition prepared by George Ivaşcu, Bucureşti, Ştiinţifică Publishing House, 1966,
pp. 6-7; Gh. Georgescu-Buzău, Constantin Şerban, Răscoala de la 1784 din Transilvania de
sub conducerea lui Horea, Cloşca şi Crişan, Bucureşti, Politică Publishing House, 1974, p.
108; Ştefan Pascu, “Lupta antifeudală şi antihabsburgică”, in vol. Din istoria Transilvaniei
(several authors), 2ed., Bucureşti, Academia Română, 1961, pp. 241, 243, 245.
social and even national features of the events. As for the complexity
of these features, opinions vary. The first direction is again a product of
the historiography in the communist period, which, despite mentioning
the confessional character of the movement, considers that the social
dimension prevails over the confessional one, placing the latter in
the background (“anti-feudal, anti-Habsburg and anti-Catholic”5).
Finally, the last perspective considers the religious character as being
the dominant one, without neglecting, however, the other aspects of the
issue. For example, N. Iorga6, I. Lupaş7 and D. Prodan8 identify a double
function of the struggle against the Union with Rome – a religious and a
social one. Present-day researchers Mircea Păcurariu, and Dan Berindei
use the same terms, calling the movement “religious riot”9, respectively
“Orthodox riot”10, thus postulating its religious character, without
denying its social dimension11. A. Răduţiu12, Ş. Turcuş13 and S. Şipoş14
share the same opinion. Therefore, it is obvious – just as it is proved by
the testimonies of the epoch concerning the intransigency of the rioters
towards the compromise for “law” (faith), these being willing rather to
accept self-sacrifice than the Union – that the turmoil at the middle of the
5
Al. Neamţu, “Din antecedentele răscoalei lui Horea”, in Anuarul Institutului de Istorie din
Cluj, IX (1966), p. 260.
6
Nicolae Iorga, op. cit., p. 249.
7
Ioan Lupaş, Istoria bisericească a românilor ardeleni, 2nd ed., introduction, notes and
commentaries by Doru Radosav, Cluj-Napoca, Dacia, 1995, p. 149.
8
D. Prodan, Răscoala lui Horea, vol. I, Bucureşti, Ştiinţifică şi Enciclopedică, 1979, p. 62.
9
Mircea Păcurariu, Uniaţia în Transilvania în trecut şi astăzi, Sibiu, Mitropolia Ardealului,
1994, p. 26.
10
Dan Berindei, Românii şi Europa în perioadele premodernă şi modernă, Bucureşti,
Enciclopedică, 1997, p. 12.
11
“Riot against Uniatism and serfdom”, Mircea Păcurariu, Istoria Bisericii Ortodoxe Române,
vol. 2, 2ed., Bucureşti, Publishing House of the Mission and Bible Institute of the Romanian
Orthodox Church, 1994, p. 385; Dan Berindei, op. cit., p. 71.
12
A. Răduţiu, “Populaţie şi societate în Transilvania şi Banat”, in Paul Cernovodeanu, Nicolae
Edroiu, Istoria românilor, vol. VI (Românii între Europa clasică şi Europa Luminilor
(1711-1821)), Bucureşti, Enciclopedică, 2002, p. 81.
13
Şerban Turcuş, “Biserica”, in Paul Cernovodeanu, Nicolae Edroiu, Istoria românilor,
vol. VI, p. 413.
14
Sorin Şipoş, “Silviu Dragomir – istoric al unirii religioase (II)”, in Revista Teologică, Year
XV (87), no. 1, January-March, 2005, p. 69.
eighteenth century cannot be explained simply through social or national
causes, but through religious factors, which played a dominant role. On
the other hand, the detachment of the national and social reasons from
the religious ones leads to an incomplete understanding of a phenomenon
by no means lacking substance.
2. The social dimension

So far we have presented a few directions of interpretation of the
religious character of the movement, some rather subjective, others rather
objective. One could observe that some of them are direct derivatives
of some conceptions concerning the social nature of the event, which
anticipated the following classification. Thus, one can distinguish two types
of interpretation: one which attributes predominance or even exclusivity to
the social factor, to the detriment of the religious one, and the other one,
which, despite asserting the supremacy of the confessional character, does
not reject the social one, but considering it a secondary one.
The first perspective is shared by the exponents of the communist
historiography, which, “guided by the conception of the historical
materialism”15, exacerbates the social role of the anti-union movements16.
In this respect, a sample consists in the explanation concerning the
convulsions following the tolerance decree in 1759: the revolt broke out
again after this date because the edict did not answer the social claims of
the crowd, being a measure restricted to the religious issue17. Thus, the
impulse had an exclusively social character. At best (except for David
Prodan, who admitted the religious causes as being determinative), the
confessional component is attributed an auxiliary role18. Actually, this
predominantly social perspective is not a product of the historiography
of the twentieth century, but is to be found in Vienna’s attitude in the
epoch. Thus, in the punctual answers of the imperial committee given to
the memoir of April 1761, one can notice the stress placed on respecting
15
Gh. Georgescu-Buzău, op. cit., pp. 18-19.
16
Ibidem, p. 129.
17
Ibidem.
18
Ştefan Pascu, op. cit., pp. 241, 243, 245; George Ivaşcu, “Prefaţă”, in Lucian Blaga, op. cit.,
pp. 6-7; Gh. Georgescu-Buzău, Constantin Şerban, op. cit., p. 108; Al. Neamţu, art. cit., p. 260.
the country’s laws, as a condition for solving the requests of Sophrony
and his followers, as if the riot had trespassed these laws until then and
had had social coordinates, not religious ones19, although the petitioners
explicitly affirmed that “the griefs... from the leaders of the country are
given to us for faith”20.
The second perspective admits both dimensions of the movement,
identifying in the anti-Union actions some latent or more evolved social
reflexes, but less powerful than the religious ones. Thus, according to
N. Iorga, behind the confessional claims were hidden “social discontent
still not expressed, national aspirations yet undefined”21. Having the
same opinion, David Prodan mentions that the religious character of
the movement “cannot hide the calamities of the social background”22,
especially after Sophrony’s departure: “Sophrony’s convulsions... appear
more and more to be social facets, aiming also against serfdom, leading
to Horea’s riot”23.
Today the social character of the movement is admitted, but in
relation to the religious one: Mircea Păcurariu mentions “a riot against
Uniatism and serfdom”24, and A. Răduţiu “a strong religious motivation,
for Orthodoxy, but also with social, anti-feudal accents”25. Ș. Turcuş26, S.
Şipoş27 and Dan Berindei agree with this, identifying in the peasantry’s
slogans “confessional objectives related to social ones”28.
The existence of social implications is thus undeniable, so that we no
longer consider it a subject of debate. However, it is interesting to see how
these evolved, what were the beginnings and the accents they acquired.
19
D. Prodan, Supplex Libellus Valachorum, Bucureşti, Ştiinţifică, 1967, p. 204.
20
Aurel Răduţiu, “Câteva acte în limba română referitoare la mişcarea lui Sofronie”, in
Nicolae Edroiu, Aurel Răduţiu, Pompiliu Teodor, Stat, societate, naţiune – interpretări
istorice, Cluj-Napoca, Dacia, 1982, p. 227.
21
Nicolae Iorga, op. cit., p. 249.
22
D. Prodan, Răscoala lui Horea, vol. I, p. 62.
23
Idem, Supplex Libellus Valachorum, p. 216.
24
Mircea Păcurariu, op. cit., p. 385.
25
A. Răduţiu, “Populaţie şi societate în Transilvania şi Banat”, in Paul Cernovodeanu,
Nicolae Edroiu, Istoria românilor, vol. VI, p. 81.
26
Şerban Turcuş, art. cit., p. 413.
27
Sorin Şipoş, art. cit., p. 69.
28
Dan Berindei, op. cit., p. 71.
A possible dramatic evolution of the movement, which was to
degenerate into a massive social riot, was a preoccupation of the Imperial
court in Vienna, fearing that “this spark, lit for religious reasons, might
turn into a great blaze”29. There was a ground for this, as during the
riot the claims acquired numerous social accents. The most expressive
appears to be the declaration of the peasants in the Apuseni Mountains:
“the lords’ power is over and now we are masters”30 and the appeal in
“a Sophronian letter”31: “now stay united and prepare for war, so that
we send away the Union and serfdom out of our country”, one of the
most explicit definitions of the riot’s programme, religious and social at
the same time. Besides the declarations, certain gestures and attitudes
denote themselves a social direction of the course of events: the centre
of the movement moved to the Apuseni mountains, not only due to
the natural advantage of the relief (resistance being easier to organise
here)32, but also on account of the social discontent of the people there,
generated by the oppressing taxes and the restrictions concerning the use
of forests33; they asked for the Hungarian clerks in Zlatna, Abrud and
Câmpeni to be eliminated, because they had charged the people with too
many burdens34, a claim having a social rather than national character,
as the financial policy here dramatically degraded the relations between
masters and serfs35.
Despite all these, there also appeared other commitments of the
rioters concerning social order. For example, in a memoir in May 1760,
presented by a delegation of peasants to the Congregation of noblemen
in Hunedoara County, it is stated: “if you want to take anything from
us, as contribution or any other need of the principality, we are ready
29
Apud Gh. Georgescu-Buzău, op. cit., p. 131.
30
Apud Ştefan Pascu, ”Lupta antifeudală şi antihabsburgică”, in C. Daicoviciu, Şt. Pascu,
V. Cheresteşiu, T. Morariu, Din Istoria Transilvaniei, Bucureşti, 1960, p. 166.
31
N. Iorga, Sate şi preoţi din Ardeal, Bucureşti, 1902, pp. 275-277.
32
Mircea Păcurariu, Sfinţi daco-romani şi români, Iaşi, Mitropolia Moldovei şi Bucovinei,
1994, p. 116.
33
Ştefan Pascu, art. cit., p. 166.
34
I. Toth Zoltán, Mişcările ţărăneşti din Munţii Apuseni până la 1848, Bucureşti, Academia
Republicii Populare Române, 1955, p. 150.
35
Ibidem, p. 151.
for everything, but we will not leave our religion as long as we live”36.
One can notice here the absence of any social claims, guaranteeing, on
the contrary, the maintenance of public order and the fulfilment of civic
duties, the protest aiming strictly at the religious issue.
There are contradictory signals, which on the one hand ensure
social order, and on the other hand menace “the country’s peace”, to
which is added Sophrony’s irenic attitude during the riot, but with
growing social accents after his refuge beyond the Carpathians. These
impose a series of interrogations. Are there antinomic popular reactions,
or is there an evolution of the movement’s social plan? Did Sophrony
consider the vindicatory actions only from a confessional point of view
or also from a social one? Was the perception of the masses different
from that of the leader, or was it Sophrony’s tenacity, a strategy applied
according to the circumstances? These are questions that aim at defining
better, through possible answers, the social profile of the movement.
As it results from numerous documents, Sophrony’s perspective
of the riot was a confessional one, a proof being the effort of keeping
it within these boundaries, by appealing to peace and observance of the
laws. Thus, in a letter written in Zlatna in March 12th 1761, addressed to
the judge of the court in Hunedoara and to the purveyor there, Sophrony
affirmed: “we would rather leave our country and our lands than the law
and the Church... people... will toil for what they have to. But the law and
the church... will be kept”37.
In the mandate in February 5th 1761, given to the priest Gheorghe
and to the nobleman Andrei Ranta for the Romanians in the north of
Transylvania, the monk expresses his irenic perspective: “we want peace
in the country... we want to refrain the troublemakers, so one shouldn’t
say that we, Romanians, are the cause of troubles”38. Even at the synod in
Alba Iulia this component is to be found: “and ours should be good and
36
Silviu Dragomir, Istoria desrobirei religioase a românilor din Ardeal în secolul XVIII, vol.
II, Sibiu, 1930, p. 157.
37
Aurel Răduţiu, “Câteva acte în limba română referitoare la mişcarea lui Sofronie”, in
Nicolae Edroiu, Aurel Răduţiu, Pompiliu Teodor, Stat, societate, naţiune – interpretări
istorice, pp. 219, 224.
38
Apud Ştefan Meteş, Mănăstirile româneşti din Transilvania şi Ungaria, Sibiu, 1936, pp.
LIV-LV.
wise, they should not imprecate anybody, not hurt anybody... they should
pay the taxes to the Emperor and the other obligatory services, they
should not oppose, but obey, as they have done so far”39. If Sophrony had
had a primary social purpose, the imperial offer in 1761 would not have
certainly been satisfactory for him and the fight would have continued.
The abundance of the directives referring to social order, which
had to be observed, proves not only Sophrony’s attitude towards the
riot, but also that of the peasantry, which, as one can notice, manifested
growing tendencies of social and national emancipation, although at the
same time it showed civic obedience. The gestures seem contradictory:
although aware of the confessional nature of the riot, as it is proved by
the numerous acts of loyalty towards Orthodoxy, the masses appear to
orientate in a social direction as well, which the leader could hardly
avoid. Might it be an internal evolution of the movement, which the
masses spontaneously inferred, or a distance from the programme of
Sophrony? The latter hypothesis found supporters in historians such as
Toth Zoltán, N. Iorga and Şt. Pascu.
Hence, according to Toth Zoltán, it is unjust to consider the
movement’s character only according to the peasants’ ideology, just as
it is wrong to identify in the whole movement the attitude of the leader
to one of the adepts40. Although the commentary which accompanies
the postulate suffers from subjectivism, the enounced principle imposes
itself as a likely hypothesis in analysing this phenomenon: although
Sophrony’s confessional perspective was in general shared by his
supporters – a testimony in this sense is represented by the numerous
manifestations of Orthodox loyalty –, one cannot deny the isolated social
accents belonging to the masses, but not to the leader. These elements
made Iorga conclude that there was a different perception of the goals of
the riot, in which Sophrony had a religious purpose, and the peasantry
a social one41, the latter being outstanding by itself42. Şt. Pascu is even
more direct, offering a perspective somehow guilty for Sophrony: the
39
Apud I. Toth Zoltán, op. cit., p. 151 (see also note 3); Lucian Blaga, op. cit., p. 59.
40
I. Toth Zoltán, op. cit., pp. 151-152.
41
Nicolae Iorga, Istoria românilor, vol. VII, p. 251.
42
Ibidem, p. 221.
monk did not know how to act as leader of the masses and, being afraid
of the spread of the riot, backed away, trying to distract from the social
problems towards the confessional ones43.
According to this perspective, there was a schism in the programme
of Sophrony’s movement, the masses having a social goal, in opposition
with the leader, who professed a confessional orientation. Lucian Blaga
opposes an interesting perspective: it is possible for Sophrony to have
followed a strategy imposed by the circumstances: keeping the fight
within confessional boundaries with the aim of maintaining it within
the limits of “legality”44; thus the propaganda had to be in the spirit of
religious tolerance and observance of the law. Prodan adds to Blaga’s
affirmations that this concern to refrain the crowds from excesses
imposed itself so as not to endanger the victory45.
Yet, another question appears: may Sophrony himself have aimed,
in subsidiary, at a social programme, which he could apply only after
the refuge in Wallachia? Because “the Sophronian letters” written after
1761 (whose author was not himself in all cases), besides confessional
hostilities, threatened increasingly serfdom itself46. Blaga offers a possible
answer: as long as he was the leader of the movement, Sophrony always
appealed to obeying the civic duties of the supporters, because his main
objective was of a confessional nature, and extending the claims towards
the social segment might have compromised the final result; only after
crossing the Carpathians, the monk who was now safe dared to give way
to social claims47.
Blaga’s analysis, we believe, can offer realistic explanations as to
the social character of the movement and to Sophrony’s attitude and that
of the masses towards this aspect. Although aware of the confessional
nature of the claims and firmly engaged for Orthodoxy – as it is shown
43
Ştefan Pascu, art. cit., p. 166.
44
Lucian Blaga, op. cit., p. 59.
45
D. Prodan, Supplex Libellus Valachorum, p. 211.
46
Idem, Răscoala lui Horea, vol. I, p. 63; a significant social perspective of the movement is
offered by the famous letter addressed to the people in Şard, in which the rioters were urged
to stay united and prepared for war, in order to send away the Union and serfdom from the
country, in N. Iorga, Sate şi preoţi din Ardeal, pp. 275-277.
47
Lucian Blaga, op. cit., pp. 60-61.
among others in the memoir in 1760, presented to the Congregation of
the noblemen in Hunedoara County48 –, Sophrony’s followers started
to manifest growing tendencies of social emancipation. The internal
evolution of the movement, which integrated the social component in
the confessional programme, was instinctively perceived by the masses.
One can even admit an almost inevitable character of the phenomenon,
in which social claims imposed themselves automatically49.
Any divergence in the perception of objectives, whereby Sofrony’s
intentions may not have been fully coincident with those of his adepts,
can only be discussed at the level of very fine distinctions, since even
the peasants themselves didn’t stake from the outset any social claims.
The subsequent detachment of the two planes of action, confessional
and social, is to be construed not as a breach in the programme of the
uprising, but as an inevitable evolution and reflex in the mid-18th century
atmosphere. The scenario proposed by Blaga and Prodan is, we believe,
the most probable: Sofrony intended to maintain the fight within a
confessional framework, in order to keep it within the limits of “legality”
and not to jeopardise its final results. On the other hand, his attitude after
1761 disproves his alleged dissociation from social objectives, for which
he has been rebuked, testifying that Sofrony was no stranger to these
intentions, which however he didn’t take the risk of materialising to the
detriment of the confessional ones.
The social vision, predominant after 1761, shall for a long time
foster the aspirations of the Romanians in Transylvania, who shall not
relinquish the idea of Sofrony’s return –peradventure with the help of
the Tartars who had been pillaging in Moldova –, whereby not only
religious but also social injustice would be abolished50. Thus, Horea’s
great uprising was being prefigured on the horizon.
48
In Silviu Dragomir, op. cit., p. 157.
49
50
Ibidem, p. 251; the one suspected of having given the news of Sophrony’s imminent return
with the Tartars was the Archpriest Simion (Stoica) of Bălgrad, an old comrade of the monk,
Idem, Istoria Bisericii româneşti şi a vieţii religioase a românilor, 2ed., vol. II, Bucureşti,
Ministerul Cultelor şi Instrucţiunii Publice, 1932, p. 133. See also Alin Albu, ”Protopopul
Simion Stoica de Alba Iulia - colaborator al lui Sofronie de la Cioara şi apărător al Ortodoxiei”,
în Studia Universitatis Babeş-Bolyai. Theologia Orthodoxa, Year LIII, no. 2/2008, p. 73-83.
2.1. Sophrony and Horea
It has been stated that the two uprisings, Sofrony’s and Horea’s,
had certain correspondences51, the former being a prelude to the latter. I.
Lupaş supposes that “many of Horea’s comrades would have participated
in their youthful years in Sofrony’s movement, from which less than a
quarter century had elapsed, nor would they have forgotten, in their old
age, its main goals, namely the chasing away of the ‘Union’ [with Rome]
and serfdom in the Land of Ardeal [Transylvania], in order to restore
Orthodoxy unthwarted in its old rights and customs”52. Moreover, N.
Iorga even states that Horea and Crişan themselves participated in the
peasants’ movement in Sofrony’s time53. Lupaş’ supposition is in fact
confirmed in the epoch by the notification submitted by the purveyor
Gh. Dévai in 1778, in respect to the riots of the villagers in Bucium and
Abrud-Sat during that year, reminding that the inhabitants of that area
had also been, among others, promoters of the Sophronian uprisings54.
Numerous such associations of context and profile between the
two movements can be found in the epoch: in an official report of January
the 30th, 1779, the authorities were expressing their concern about the
existence of a possibility, unless safety measures were taken in respect
to the riots on the Zlatna domain, of a return to “the times of Sophrony”
(ad tempora Sophronii)55, while in a report of October 5th, 1782, the
administrator of the Zlatna domain expresses his fear that, if Horea were
to reach Vienna again, “might not the mountains’ riffraff start in spring
a riot bigger than that of Sophrony had been”56. Also in 1782, the earl of
the high domain, Alexe Incze, was distressfully evoking the Sophronian
51
Aurel Răduţiu, art. cit., p. 219; Al. Neamţu, art. cit., pp. 260-261; Antonie Plămădeală,
Calendar de inimă românească, Sibiu, 1988, p. 147.
52
I. Lupaş, Răscoala ţăranilor din Transilvania la 1784, Cluj, Astra, 1934, p. 55 apud Gh.
Georgescu-Buzău, op. cit., p. 12.
53
See Pompiliu Teodor, ”Nicolae Iorga şi răscoala lui Horea”, in Familia, 1984, no. 10, p. 40
apud Antonie Plămădeală, op. cit., p. 147, note 15.
54
D. Prodan, op. cit., p. 183.
55
Al. Neamţu, art. cit., p. 262.
56
Ibidem, p. 264.
movement, when so many of the high officials had to run away57, and in
1783, the purveyor Dévai was expressing his fears regarding the riots
in the high domain, recalling that Sophrony’s uprising had also started
there, spreading then throughout the entire Principality58. On August the
19th, 1784, in a report submitted to the Government, a reference was made
to the riots raised by Sophrony two and a half decades before59. Even the
Hungarian tenant farmers in Zlatna mention Sophrony’s uprising in one
of their complaints60.
Apart from connections of context and profile between the two
movements, there is also another association of Sophrony with Horea as
types, such as that made by Ştefan Halmaghi during the 1784 uprising:
“might we not fear that some monk [an allusion to Sophrony, our note]
or some Horea… were capable of raising all people of Greek Law
[Orthodox, our note] in the entire Transylvania…?”61.
It is obvious that, both for the authorities, and particularly for the
Transylvanians, Sophrony’s movement was remaining alive in their
memory62 even two decades after, on the eve of Horea’s uprising63,
providing reference and strength to those who were fighting for
emancipation once more.
3. The national dimension

Speaking about the gradual substitution of that “invincible
instinct” (ethnical conscience) with the national conscience64, N. Iorga
identifies the beginnings of the latter in the battles of the Orthodox
against the Union65. Showing that “yet unspoken social discontent, yet
57
D. Prodan, op. cit., p. 184.
58
Ibidem, p. 185.
59
Ibidem, p. 251.
60
Ibidem, vol. II, pp. 277-278.
61
In I. Lupaş, Răscoala ţăranilor din Transilvania în 1784, p. 178 apud I. Dumitriu-Snagov,
Românii în arhivele Romei (secolul XVIII), Bucureşti, Cartea românească, 1973, p. 36, note 85.
62
I. Toth Zoltán, op. cit., p. 143.
63
D. Prodan, op. cit., vol. I, p. 63.
64
65
Ibidem.
undefined national aspirations were hidden behind these confessional
vindications”66, the historian perceives in Sophrony’s movement an
early, indefinite expression of the national fight. In much the same
vein, Alexandru Duţu identifies among the consequences of Sophrony’s
uprising a strong return to tradition, an “incipient national conscience”67.
However, Aug. Bunea posits these beginnings still earlier, in the activity
of the United bishop Inochentie Micu, while Toth Zoltan – even earlier,
in the implementation of the religious Union68. L. Blaga, however, is of
the opinion that this topic must be dealt with in a more nuanced manner:
we need to recognise that the United (Greek-Catholic) Church shows in
the 18th century a more intense intellectual activity of crystallisation of
the national conscience, but its genesis cannot be punctually identified
in a particular moment or another. The Transylvanians display a
national conscience even before the Union with Rome, since after the
Reformation (16th-17th centuries) Orthodoxy becomes a distinctive note
of the Romanians versus the other ethnical groups in Transylvania,
therefore an ethnical characteristic feature, a buttress to national
consciousness. This consciousness gradually acquires richer meanings,
preparing certain aspects of the national consciousness to be rounded
up later. Thus, we may speak not of a precise moment of the genesis of
a national conscience, but of its progressive outlining in stages69, one of
which being also Sophrony’s movement.
The same position is also expressed by D. Prodan, for whom “the
Orthodox movement is… the empirical, traditional side of the national
fight”70, because the masses, unable to be directly engaged in the political
fight, were involved in a popular one, with indirect national implications.
That was because the empirical national conscience, identifiable in
the anti-Unionist movements71, was also influenced by the Romanian
66
Ibidem, p. 249.
67
Alexandru Duţu, “Conştiinţă naţională şi mentalitate ţărănească”, in Nicolae Edroiu, Aurel
Răduţiu, Pompiliu Teodor, Stat, societate, naţiune – interpretări istorice, Cluj-Napoca,
Dacia, 1982, p. 274.
68
Apud Lucian Blaga, op. cit., pp. 88-89.
69
Ibidem, pp. 88-91, 101, 106-108.
70
D. Prodan, Supplex Libellus Valachorum, p. 217.
71
Idem, Răscoala lui Horea, vol. I, pp. 58-59.
intellectual political actions72. In its turn, that conscience, although having
rather an ethnical dimension, also played a role in the development of the
modern national one.
That contagion of the empirical conscience by political reflexes can
be observed in the process of acquiring a certain historical conscience73, a
stage which goes beyond the previous phase of the exclusive consolidation
of national conscience with religious conscience, as expressed by the
concept of a “Romanian Law” (Law = Faith). Thus the idea of Dacism
now surfaces, as expressed, for instance, in a memo of 1761, in which,
referring to the Hungarian nobility, the Romanians in the Hunedoara
County were stating: “we are, and have always been, more numerous
than you, and, which is even more important, we are older than you are
in this land, since we are the heirs of the ancient Dacians (our emphasis
added)”74. If the idea of the Roman origin appeared in the 17th century in
the Moldovan and Wallachian chronicles, subsequently invoked by the
Transylvanians in support of their political claims, the Dacian sentiment
is the product of the 18th century.
As an extreme form of the thesis regarding the Romanians’ ethnical
genesis, postulating the purely Dacian extraction of the Romanian
people75 – due to the repulsion of the Orthodox to the “Latin Law” of
the Greek-Catholic Church76 –, the idea of Dacianism shall balance the
other theory of ethnical genesis, decentred by the other exclusivist form,
of the purely Roman (Latin) extraction, invoked by the Greek-Catholic
Church. These theses, erroneous taken separately, shall prove correct
only in complementarity. However, beyond this service brought to
historiography, the idea of Dacism represents an “echo of the historical
arguments laid at the foundation of the political fight of the nation”77,
such manifestations being the proof of a “descent of intellectual concepts
72
Idem, Supplex Libellus Valachorum, p. 219.
73
74
Ştefan Pascu, “Dominaţia regimului habsburgic în Transilvania”, in vol. Din istoria
Transilvaniei, 2ed., Bucureşti, Academia Română, 1961, p. 251.
75
Lucian Boia, Două secole de mitologie naţională, Bucureşti, Humanitas, 1999, p. 39.
76
77
D. Prodan, Răscoala lui Horea, vol. I, p. 62.
down the ladder, fructifying an existing popular national conscience with
political reflexes”78.
But let us also observe other contents of this consciousness!
Thus, both forms of the consciousness of unity are identifiable,
both that of the unity of Transylvanians among themselves, and that
of their unity with their brothers across the Carpathian Mountains.
The first characteristic feature is found in several memos: in 1755 a
petition to the Government was addressed on behalf of the “Romanian
folk in Ardeal”79, likewise some letters sent to the commanding general
in Sibiu, the Government, and even the Empress, were addressed
in the name of the “entire Romanian people in Ardeal”80. The second
form of unity, that between Transylvanians and Romanians across the
mountains, is found both explicitly, in a manifest way, and in the form of
numerous gestures and attitudes specific to Transylvanians during these
anti-Unionist movements. Thus, the crossing over the Carpathians by
those who refused the Union, the ordaining of priests in the Romanian
Principality (Wallachia), the support provided to the Transylvanians by
those beyond the mountains, all are also expressions of a consciousness
of national, not just confessional unity. In fact, this assertion is proven by
the deliberate antinational character of the banning, by the Habsburgs, of
any hierarchic relations of Romanians in Transylvania with the Church
in the Principalities81. This is explicitly stated by a contemporary witness
of the events, the author of The Lament of the Holy Monastery of Silvaş,
Abbott Ephrem of Prislop, who considers that the Union with Rome
78
Idem, Supplex Libellus Valachorum, pp. 220-221.
79
Aurel David, “Reacţia Ortodoxiei româneşti din Ardeal faţă de unirea cu Biserica Romei
(între anii 1759-1761). Răscoala condusă de Sofronie de la Cioara”, in Biserica Ortodoxă
Română, Year CXI, no. 1-3, January-March, 1993, p. 86.
80
Silviu Dragomir, op. cit., vol. II, p. 180; Ştefan Meteş, op. cit., pp. XLIX-L; the word
addressed to the government is that “of our Romanian nation in Transylvania” (verbum
nationis nostrae valachicae ex Transylvania), Silviu Dragomir, op. cit., vol. I, Sibiu, 1920,
p. 202, while that addressed to the Empress, dated August 9th, 1760, ends with the signature:
“universa gens valachica Transilvanensis”, Ibidem, p. 206; likewise, the memo on April
7th, 1761, addressed to General Bukow, was collectively signed by “us, the priests of the
Romanian folk”, Aurel Răduţiu, art. cit., pp. 220, 225.
81
Viorica Pop, “Din legăturile spirituale ale românilor în secolul XVIII”, in Acta Mvsei
Napocensis, V (1968), p. 572.
has severed the Transylvanians from their “brethren in the Romanian
Principality [Wallachia] and in the Land of Moldova”82.
It should be mentioned that there is even an extreme vision of this
national dimension, of the unity of all Romanians: once having reached
the Romanian Principality (Wallachia), Sophrony militated in favour of
setting up a national army83 to be placed at the disposal of the National
Party in Bucureşti and Iaşi, which should contribute to the union of the
Principalities either by diplomatic means, or by revolutionary action.
Consequently, the unification plan pursued by the Romanians during
the 1859-1918 period seems to have followed Sophrony’s thinking and
vision, as it would result from his writings!84
Finally, it would be interesting to contrast two antagonistic visions:
the first one ascribes to Orthodox movements anti-national instead of
national reflexes, while the second one aims at associating two types of
so-called exponents of the national fight: the monk Sophrony and the
greek-catholic bishop Grigorie Maior.
Thus, according to Keith Hitchins, Sophrony’s followers “felt
more closely related to Orthodox Serbians than to ‘united’ Romanians”85.
Even if the author never expounded on that statement, it offers too lightly
a possibility of interpreting an anti-national character of Sophrony’s
uprising. Several elements prove that an anti-national reading, affirmed
or not, is out of the question. If we are to quote N. Iorga, who qualifies
the Transylvanians’ fight “against a religious Latinism represented by
the same foreigners who had formerly aimed at the same assimilation
through the ancient Hungarian Calvinism” as a “work of national
82
Mircea Păcurariu, Mănăstirea Prislop – monografie istorică, 3ed., Deva, Episcopia Devei
și Hunedoarei, 2013, p. 162, note 319.
83
Ion Ionaşcu speaks about a confrontation – Sophrony, together with the Bishop Damaschin
of Argeş, had recruited volunteers during the Russian-Turkish war (1769-1774), in order
to chase the Turks away from Bucharest; Ion Ionaşcu, “Ieromonahul transilvan Nicodim în
Ţara Românească”, in vol. Omagiul lui Ioan Lupaş, Bucureşti, 1943, p. 368 apud Dragosin
Oană, Sfântul Sofronie şi mânăstirea lui din Plăişorul Ciorii, Alba Iulia, Episcopia Ortodoxă
Română de Alba Iulia, 1995, pp. 29-30.
84
Ioan Străjan, ”Ieromonahul Sofronie din Cioara – apărător al credinţei strămoşeşti”, in
Dacoromania, Alba Iulia, 2002, no. 11, p. 37.
85
Keith Hitchins, Românii 1774-1866, 2nded., translated from English by George G. Potra and
Delia Răzdolescu, Bucureşti, Humanitas, 2004, p. 252.
defense”86, then the very existence of this movement of rejecting a Western
religious pattern represents, in itself, a national preservation reflex. The
phenomenon is similarly understood by D. Prodan: the Orthodox, by
defending the “Romanian Law”, the nationally distinctive law/faith, are
fighting in the name of the “Romanian folk in Transylvania”, while by
rejecting the Union, the “German Law” (“Austrian Law”, imposed by
Wien), they are rejecting the rift within the great unity, being split from
their brethren across the Carpathians87.
If we consider the Habsburgs’ intention, consistently pursued
during the six decades elapsed from the proclamation of the Union
(around 1700), to suppress any ecclesiastic relations of the Romanians in
Transylvania with the Church in the Principalities88, it may be stated that,
in fact, it is precisely these measures that have an anti-national character.
And if we take into account that the Greek-Catholic Church offered its
support to that end89, and moreover, on some occasions it would come
closer to the Hungarian90 or Austrian element – as proven by the appeal
to the aid of the “kesarin” Maria Teresa, and the armed one of General
Bukow91 – then it is precisely in attitudes of the Greek-Catholic Church
that anti-national accents may be identified.
86
Nicolae Iorga, Istoria românilor, vol. VII, p. 201; within the Greek-Orthodox Church, the
same author says, the Jesuits’ tendency to abolish its Romanian character was obvious,
Ibidem, p. 224.
87
D. Prodan, Supplex Libellus Valachorum, pp. 216-218.
88
Viorica Pop, art. cit., p. 572.
89
In 1758 were recorded a range of acts of faith, vows of faithfulness to the Union, especially
by the Greek-Catholic Archpriests, whereby they undertook not merely to keep the Greek-
Catholic faith, but also to prevent some of their believers from crossing over to the extra-
Carpathian Principalities to be ordained, Ibidem, p. 573; the Greek-Catholic bishop Petru
Pavel Aron was the fiercest persecutor of priests ordained over the Carpathians, whom he
called “thieves” and “priests across the fence”, apud Ibidem, p. 572.
90
That is the case of the Greek-Catholics in Zlatna, Abrud and Câmpeni, who placed
themselves under the protection of the Hungarian officials, fearing the rioters, I. Toth
Zoltán, op. cit., p. 150.
91
During Sophrony’s uprising, the Orthodox were fighting on the side of the popular masses which
had remained faithful to their belief, while the greek-catholics resorted to the Empress and the
General: “…general Adolf Bukow with his troops… took the churches away from the schismatics
[i.e. the Orthodox] and their lands, and gave them back to the United [Greek-Catholics]”, says a
contemporary witness of the events, apud Antonie Plămădeală, op. cit., p. 200.
As to the second vision, it concerns an association as types, of
Sophrony with Grigorie Maior: “hope in national freedom shone forth
a little light in the days of Sophrony and of Grigorie Maior”92. Rettegi
mentions that the greek-catholic bishop Grigorie Maior would travel
around Transylvania during the years 1763-1765, urging the Romanians
to accept the Union with Rome in order thus to be freed from serfdom93.
We are convinced that I. Dumitriu-Snagov juxtaposed the two characters
as typologies at most, as models of national fight, because the characters
as such are irreconcilable. This rivalry is shown by Maior himself, in a
report of June 8th, 1774, in which he was expressing his satisfaction for
the intervention of the Apostolic Nuncio with the Imperial Aulic Council
in Vienna in view of chasing away the “schismatic Sophrony”94 and of
preventing him from ever returning. As a matter of fact, the greek-catholic
bishop was one of Bukow’s instruments, being nicknamed Magiore
Buccowiano – Bukow’s Major – for the protection and favour that the
latter would show to him, as is shown in a report of July 6th, 176595.
Even if both Sophrony and Maior, although rivals, could fight on behalf
of Transylvanian Romanians, each in their own way, this association
remains a curious and, probably, unique one.
Conclusions
Having originated in religious causes, Sophrony’s movement
rapidly extended both in space and in content, although its leader managed
to control it and impose a confessional orientation to it. The collective
manifestations recorded during the uprising, the popular solidarity,
the spirit of sacrifice, the attachment to the leader, are explained by
the general tension which was defining the atmosphere of Romanian
Transylvania at mid-18th century, generated by complex factors, ranging
from the religious to the social and even national ones. Therefore, if
we were to disconnect the former from the latter ones, we would incur
the risk of incompletely understanding a phenomenon hardly limited
in its contents, which can be explained neither by merely resorting to
92
I. Dumitriu-Snagov, op. cit., p. 22.
93
Ibidem.
94
Ibidem, p. 259.
95
Ibidem, p. 215.
confessional reasons, nor to exclusively social and national dimensions.
That the movement underwent an internal evolution, instinctively
perceived by the masses, which also integrated the social component
into the confessional programme, is an undeniable reality. In fact, within
the mid-18th century context, social accents would constitute inevitable
reflexes. Probably Sophrony himself was no stranger to these objectives,
but he deliberately strove to keep the fight within a confessional framework,
in order not to jeopardise the favourable end result. Anyway he was to
remain in the popular conscience as a fighter not just for Orthodoxy, but
also for the social emancipation of Transylvanian Romanians; that image
was cast for over two decades, being associated to that of Horea.
As to the national dimension, without identifying the genesis of
that conscience in the anti-Unionist movements, Sophrony’s uprising
may be considered a stage in the outlining of that feeling. Although
unable to be directly engaged in the political fight, the masses were
involved in a popular one, but with indirect national implications. Thus,
the conscience of belonging to one folk or people, identifiable in the anti-
Unionist movements, although rather ethnically defined, also played an
important role in the development of the modern national one.
This entire complex profile of the uprising – religious, social,
national –, even though lacking the coherence and efficiency of a
well-structured programme, still represents a proof that the 1759-
1761 moment was the most ample popular movement to date, whose
consequences shall mark not just Transylvania’s confessional landscape
– by reasserting Orthodoxy –, but also the political one of that age and of
the times which followed.
Ion REȘCEANU
Alina REŞCEANU
Old liturgical book circulation between

Transylvania and Oltenia in the context of the
prohibitive measure of the 18th century
Abstract:
This article deals with the circulation of old liturgical books
between the three Romanian countries Ţara Românească, Moldavia and
Transylvania, which has always been of interest for historians, linguists
and theologians. The phenomenon substantially contributed to the
consolidation of language and faith for the entire Romanian population
in the three countries. Therefore, we re-explore this topic, focusing on
the circulation of old liturgical books printed in Oltenia and Muntenia to
the southern part of Transylvania and, more particularly, in the region
of Hunedoara, based on the latest research carried out for Hunedoara
county and for Dolj, Olt and Mehedinţi counties, respectively.
Keywords:
old liturgical book, prohibitive measures, Transylvania, Hunedoara
county, Oltenia.
It is a well acknowledged fact that the church/liturgical books had a

significant impact on the preservation and affirmation of the national unity
in faith and language. These books proved to be a genuine cohesion factor
for the people of the three Romanian countries: Moldavia, Transylvania
and Tara Românească/ Wallachia, in the past. In the absence of a
hierarchical relation between Transylvania and the Romanian Orthodox
territories and, by extension, with the Eastern Orthodox ones, the old
liturgical books were the determinant element that provided the cultural
and spiritual interface between the Romanian Orthodox Christians in
Transylvania and those living over the mountains.
For Nicolae Iorga, the old church book was meant “to surpass
any political border, leading to identity in faith and tradition, as well
as to identity in spoken and written language, so that our people from
everywhere were given, in a different religious form, a most natural and
legitimate unity that has been much needed”1.
An impressive number of religious works2 testify for the effort of
hierarchs, scholars and monk priests in translating, copying or printing
liturgical books throughout the time “for the common benefit of the Romanian
people” as Radu Greceanu stated in the foreword to his Pravoslavniciei
Marturisiri de la Buzau (The Right Faith Testimony from Buzau) in 1691.
The problem of the unity of language and of the Romanian people as
a reflection of the national identity consciousness had been of interest for
the Romanian scholars living on both sides of the Carpathian Mountains.
Closely related to this, there was also the problem of defending the
identity in faith that has remained throughout the time the fundamental
cause of all the subsequent actions taken to support the Transylvanian
Romanians. The liturgical books were the most common form of support
offered in the periods of national and religious persecution.
In this article, we aim to describe exactly this context of national
and religious persecution, of oppression, of limitation of the religious
freedom and of the possibilities to manifest culturally, spiritually and
nationally. In the perspective of dealing with a classical topic, namely the
circulation of the liturgical books between the three Romanian territories,
1
Nicolae Iorga, Istoria Bisericii Româneşti şi a vieţii religioase a românilor, Tipografia
“Neamul românescu”, vol. II, pp. 117.
2
Mircea Păcurariu, Legăturile Bisericii Ortodoxe din Transilvania cu Ţara Românească
şi Moldova în secolele XVI-XVIII, Sibiu, 1968, pp. 85-120; Ioana Cristache-Panait,
„Contribuţii privitoare la rolul Bisericii în relaţiile dintre Ţara Românească şi Transilvania”,
in Biserica Ortodoxă Română (BOR), LXXXVI, 1968, no. 7-8, pp. 950-958; I. Lupaş,
“Rolul tiparului în pregătirea unităţii naţionale”, in AGR, Craiova 1931, pp. 86-94; Barbu
Teodorescu, “Episcopul Damaschin şi contribuţia sa la crearea limbii literare române”, in
Mitropolia Olteniei, XII, 1960, no. 9-12, pp. 627-645.
we present it from a more specific point of view: the circulation of the
old liturgical books between Transylvania – more precisely the south
of Transylvania – and Oltenia throughout the 18th century, a period of
cultural prosperity, but of significant political and religious unease.
The 18th century is representative in the view offered, considering that
during this period the Romanian Orthodox Church created a scholastic
civilisation, a “civilisation of the book”, with a significant impact on
the cultural and spiritual evolution and development of the Romanian
territories in the years to come.
The circulation of the old liturgical books in the southern Transylvania
is more thematically approached from the perspective of the latest evaluation
process and catalogue drawn up for the old liturgical books stored in the
preservation centre of old books and icons in Orăştie, affiliated to the
Bishopric of Deva and Hunedoara. The recently updated catalogue of the old
liturgical books found at Orăştie gives us both a general and a more detailed
view on the circulation of the liturgical books originated in Tara Romanească,
especially in Oltenia, in the Hunedoara County and, by extension, in the
entire cultural and spiritual area of the southern Transylvania3.
Moreover, the inventory registers and the specialised works
referring to the preservation centres for patrimonial goods (old
books, for example) belonging to the archbishopric centres in Oltenia
(Archbishopric of Craiova, Bishopric of Severin and Strehaia, Bishopric
of Slatina and Romananti) highlight the role that the old liturgical books
printed in Transylvania had for Oltenia and also their cultural influence.
As regards the preservation centre for old books and icons
in Orăştie, the inventory and cataloguing of the movable goods of
patrimonial interest done in 2013 confirm that there are no less than
3170 goods, of which 2397 old books. Out of these books, 2013 are
books of patrimonial value (dated before 1830) and 384 are books with
documentary value, mostly written in Cyrillic during 1830-1860.
3
This has been previously studied by Ioana Cristache-Panait, in „Circulaţia cărţii bisericeşti
tipărite la Vâlcea şi în alte tipografii din părţile noastre în Transilvania secolului al
XVIII-lea”, in Mitropolia Olteniei, XXIX, no. 11-12, 1977, pp. 724-746; „Cartea veche
românească”, in Episcopia Aradului. Istorie, Viaţă culturală, Monumente de artă, Arad,
1989, pp. 109-128.
The books included in this inventory belonged to the Orthodox
parishes in the Hunedoara County. The preservation centre in Orastie
was founded based on Law no. 63/1974 by the Bishopric of Arad, which
also administered the Hunedoara County then. However, a small part of
the initial patrimony consisting of old books, icons and liturgical objects
is to be found nowadays in the Bishopric centre at Arad or in the Museum
of Dacian and Roman Civilisation in Deva (especially old books) or in
the Brădeanu‘s private collection. At the same time, some old liturgical
books are still kept in the collection of the church parishes, but in a very
limited number, mostly dated after 1830.
In other words, despite the lack of a complete and thorough
research of all the old book inventories in the Hunedoara county, we base
our arguments and opinions regarding the circulation of old liturgical
books on the more familiar inventory in the Orăştie preservation centre.
The oldest work kept in this centre is Biblia Sacra, Antwerp, with its
foreword dated in 1547. There are also two manuscripts from the
16th century written in Old Church Slavonic (Cyrillic alphabet) from
Hunedoara, and a Venetian Repertorium printed in 15884.
We point to the fact that most of the works printed in Western Europe
that are included in the collection of the preservation centre belonged to
the former Greek-Catholic parish in Orăştie, a large number having been
part of the personal collection of the Greek-Catholic protopope (church
dean) Iuliu Ratiu whose ex-libris can be found on many of these books.
Regarding the old liturgical books from the 17th century, the
collection of the Orăştie preservation centre includes Varlaam’s Cazania
(1643), the New Testament from Bălgrad-Alba Iulia of Archbishop
Simeon Ştefan (1648), Îndreptarea Legii from Târgovişte (1652),
Evanghelia (1682) and Apostolul (The Apostle) from Bucharest (1683),
Evanghelia from Snagov (1697) or Chiriacodromionul from Bălgrad-
Alba Iulia (1699), a most common and wide spread book in Hunedoara5.
4
Ion Reşceanu, “Icoana şi cartea veche din depozitul de la Orăştie”, in vol. „Icoană şi carte
veche din judeţul Hunedoara”, Reîntregirea Publishing House and Bishopric of Deva and
Hunedoara Publishing House, Alba Iulia - Deva, 2013, pp. 11.
5
Maria Basarab, Cuvinte mărturisitoare. Însemnări de pe cărţi româneşti vechi din judeţul
Hunedoara, Deva, 2001, pp. 193.
However, the most numerous old books found in the inventory of
Orăştie preservation centre belong to the 18th century. This certifies the
fact that there had been as many uninterrupted, dynamic connections
between Tara Românească and Transylvania during the 18th century as
there were in the previous periods. The new political context in which
Transylvania entered when it became part of the Habsburg Empire and
the Catholic proselyte actions that subsequently led to the unification
of the Orthodox Church of the Transylvanian Romanians with the
Church of Rome under Metropolitan Atanasie Anghel, brought along the
intensification of the political and ecclesiastical relationships between
Ţara Românească and Transylvania.
Throughout the 18th century, the liturgical book proved to be a real
defence mechanism used to protect the Transylvanian Orthodoxy and to
fight against the proselyte actions intended to strengthen the Union (the
Unification to the Church of Rome).
It is interesting to note that the 18th century began with the first
restrictive measure regarding the circulation of the liturgical books in
Ardeal imposed by the Metropolitan Teodosie of Ungrovlachia. In a
letter sent on May, 3rd 1702, he rejected the request of Metropolitan
Atanasie Anghel for church books and other things, and also criticised
the fact that the latter had deserted the Orthodox faith. To this letter,
Metropolitan Teodosie annexed the sentence of anathema from the
Ecumenical Patriarch Calinic6. At the end of this letter, Metropolitan
Teodosie stated that Atanasie would only receive the books he asked if
he were willing to leave the Union and return to the Orthodox Church:
“I tell you to open your eyes and to abandon what you

started and only when we will see your pious constancy towards
the Orthodox Church, without the hypocrite veil, we will send you
not only the Octoih (n. r. printed in Bacău in 1700), but also the
Triod and the Penticostar (Buzău 1700 and 1701) and finally we
will send you everything you shall ask”7.
6
M. Păcurariu, op. cit., pp. 45.
7
Ibidem.
And indeed, these books mentioned above are neither on the
inventory list of the Orăştie preservation centre, nor in the other
collections found in Hunedoara County8. Nonetheless, we have to take
into consideration that the restrictive measure issued by Metropolitan
Teodosie was personally addressed to Metropolitan Atanasie Anghel. It
could not have been extended so to affect the collaboration between the
Orthodox Romanians from Transylvania and those from Ţara Românească,
since the collaborative activities were very much encouraged by the ruler
of Ţara Românească and by the hierarchs who constantly supported them
in keeping the Orthodox faith. In fact, the existence in the inventory of
the Orăştie preservation centre of a Liturghier (1702) and an Apostol
(1704), both books printed in Buzău (the former found at Ribiţa and
the latter at Cărăstrău), and of another Apostol printed in Buzău in 1704
that belonged to a church in Haţeg9 proves that the circulation of the old
liturgical books from Ţara Românească to Transylvania never ceased.
In 1705, the great hierarch St. Antim Ivireanu10 established the
printing house in Râmnic, which gave a new perspective to the circulation
of the old liturgical books in Ardeal and more specifically in Hunedoara
County. It was stated that the establishment of the new printing house
in Râmnic was meant to support the Orthodox Romanian people from
Ardeal due to its location, being closer to the territory of the southern
Transylvania.
Nevertheless, the number of old books printed in Râmnic in the
first three decades of the 18th century that was present in Hunedoara is
limited to only one copy of a Molitfelnic (1706), kept in the inventory of
the Orăştie preservation centre.
By contrast, the other printing houses in Buzău, Târgovişte
(Octoih printed in 1702, Molitvelnic 1713, Liturghii 1713, Ceaslov
1714, Catavasier 1714, Ceaslov 1715) or in Bucharest (Octoih 1720,
Molitfelnic (Evhologion) 1722, Evanghelie 1723, Catavasier 1724, Triod
1726, Liturghier 1728, Liturghii 1729, Molitvelnic 1729) had provided
more books.
8
M. Basarab, op. cit., pp. 203, 216.
9
Ibidem, p. 216.
10
Nicolae Şerbănescu, “Antim Ivireanu tipograf”, in BOR, LXXIV, 1956, no. 8-9, pp. 690-755.
Therefore, we come to the conclusion that not Râmnic, but the
other printing centres in Buzău and Târgovişte in the first two decades
of the 18th century and then in Bucharest after 1720 had provided
and facilitated the circulation of the liturgical books for the southern
Transylvania. This is in contrast with the commonly shared opinion that
Râmnic was attributed the “strategic role” in the distribution of liturgical
book to the population over the Carpathian Mountains.
After 1730 and until the end of the 18th century, the books from
Râmnic had a similar impact as those from the other printing centres
and thus we find an Antologhion (1737), an Octoih (1742), Penticostar
(1743) a.o. based on the catalogue of old book in the inventory of Orăştie
preservation centre.
It must be noted that in the absence of a self-administered printing
house (because the printing house in Bălgrad-Alba Iulia had become
non-functional after 1699) the books from Bucharest and Râmnic
successfully covered the need for liturgical books for the Transylvanian
Romanian community, be it Orthodox or United11.
At the beginning of the 18th century, the Jesuit monk who stood
beside Metropolitan Atanasie Anghel was responsible for the restrictive
measures concerning the liturgical books and for the censorship applied
to the books printed in Alba Iulia or to those sent from the printing houses
in the south of the Carpathians, in accordance with the empowerment
given to him by Cardinal Kollonich12.
In the first decade of the 18th century, the Jesuit theologians (Carol
Neurautter, Paul Barany, Francisc Szunyog) were concerned with the
strengthening of the Union among the Romanians by means of printing
Catholic catechisms in Romanian, such as: Pâinea pruncilor sau
învăţătura credinţii creştineşti strânsă în mica sumă (Alba Iulia, 1702),
Canisius’s Catechism, translated by Gheorghe Buitul (Cluj, 1703) and
Catehismul mare (Sibiu, 1709)13.
In order to counteract the Catholic proselyte activity in Transylvania,
11
Ion Reşceanu, op. cit., pp. 13.
12
Mircea Păcurariu, Istoria Bisericii Ortodoxe Române (IBOR), vol. II, Publishing House of
the Biblical and Mission Institute of Romanian Orthodox Church, Bucharest, 1992, pp. 309.
13
Ibidem.
Constantin Brâncoveanul and the hierarchs from Bucharest and Râmnic
supported the printing of books with importance and impact on the life of
the Orthodox Christians. An example could be the book of the scholar monk
Maxim the Peloponnesian entitled Manual contra schismei papistaşilor
(Manual against the Schism of the Papists). After having been printed
in Greek in 1690 in Bucharest, it is reprinted in Romanian by Antim
Ivireanu at Snagov in 1699, on the expense of Constantin Brâncoveanu,
with the title Carte sau lumină cu drepte dovediri din dogmele Bisericii
Răsăritului asupra desghinării papistaşilor, descoperite şi aşezate de
învăţatul ieromonah Maxim Peloponezianul14. It seems that this book
had also reached Transylvania since the Greek-Catholic bishop Atanasie
Rednic complained in a letter addressed to the Empress Maria Teresa in
1765 that the Orthodox had become stirred because of “a book full of
defamation against the Catholic religion distributed among the people;
this book was written by a Greek monk Maxim the Peloponnesian and
translated in Muntenia and from there transported to Ardeal”15.
Unfortunately, we do not have any reference to the presence of this
book in Hunedoara region. In 1703, the work of Sevastos Trapezuntiu
Chimenitul was printed in Bucharest with the title Învăţătura dogmatică
a preasfintei Biserici Răsăritene şi universale, with the purpose to protect
the Orthodox faith. In 1705, Tomul bucuriei is printed in Râmnic and
comprised five works against the Catholics, with clear references to the
actions initiated by the emperor in Vienna and by Cardinal Kollonich in
Transylvania16.
To provide support in defending the Orthodox faith, the book
entitled Panaplia dogmatică of Eutimie Zigabenul was printed in
Târgovişte in 1710 and comprised the treaty of Patriarch Fotie about the
proceeding of the Holy Spirit17.
A concrete measure proposed by the Greek Catholic Church in
14
Idem, Legăturile Bisericii Ortodoxe din Transilvania, pp. 41-42; I. Mateiu, “O carte din 1699
contra dezbinării religioase”, in Revista Teologică, XXVIII, no. 7-8, 1938, pp. 298-302.
15
Augustin Bunea, Episcopii Petru Pavel Aron şi Dionisie Novacovici sau istoria românilor
transilvăneni de la 1751 până la 1764, Blaj, 1902, pp. 225.
16
Mircea Păcurariu, op. cit., pp. 41.
17
Ibidem.
Ardeal against the books printed in the south of the Carpathians in Ţara
Românească (because these books disseminated the faith teaching that
was contrary to the Greek Catholic one) was taken in February 1725 by
the Great Synod of the Greek-Catholic Church assembled at Sâmbăta
de Sus under the supervision of Bishop Ioan Patachi and forbade the
distribution of the booklet entitled Învăţătura bisericească de cele şapte
Taine printed in 1724 in Râmnic. It was Ioan Patachi who proposed
this measure arguing that the book teaches that the prefiguration of the
offerings takes place at the epiclesis and not at the moment when the
priest says “Come and eat…” and “Drink out of this all…”18.
Bishop Damaschin of Râmnic would desperately try to change
this decision with the help of Counsellor Tiege addressing the imperial
authorities19. Moreover, in November 1725 the Austrian War Council
rejected the request of Bishop Damaschin to allow for the distribution in
Transylvania and Banat of the book printed in Râmnic. During that period,
the entire Oltenia as well as Râmnic were part of the same empire20.
Bishop Damaschin’s successor Bishop Inochentie had managed to
obtain the approval of the authorities to distribute the books he printed at
Râmnic to the Romanian people in Transylvania. An important part of the
books destined to Ardeal was stored at Dimitrie Moldovan, a tradesman
from Sibiu. The volumes were later confiscated by the authorities after
Inochentie’s death in 1735 and sold afterwards for a significant amount
of 6000 florins21.
Many specialists and researchers have been interested in studying
the activity of the printing house in Râmnic22. V. Moliu considers that
18
Idem, IBOR, vol. II, pp. 316.
19
Florian Dudoş, Vechi cărţi româneşti călătoare, Sport-Turism Publishing House, Bucharest,
1987, pp. 188.
20
Nicolae Dobrescu, Istoria Bisericii Române din Oltenia (1916-1739), Bucharest, 1905,
pp. 59.
21
Ibidem, p. 112; Mircea Păcurariu, op. cit., p. 188.
22
Aurelian Sacerdoţeanu, “Tipografia Episcopiei Râmnicului (1705-1825)”, in Mitropolia
Olteniei, XII, 1960, no. 5-6, pp. 291-349; Nicolae Şerbănescu, Antim Ivireanu tipograf,
pp. 690-755; Idem “Episcopii Râmnicului”, in Mitropolia Olteniei, XVI, 1964, no. 3-4,
pp. 171-212; Barbu Teodorescu, “Episcopul Damaschin şi contribuţia sa la crearea limbii
literare române”, in Mitropolia Olteniei, XII, 1960, no. 9-12, pp. 627-645; Dimitrie Coravu,
“Tipografia de la Râmnic din prima jumătate a secolului al XVIII-lea”, in Mitropolia
after a slightly slow pace during 1705-1730, the printing activity was
very productive during 1730-175323. The reason could be that Râmnic,
despite the usual difficulties of the age, had many opportunities to
distribute its printed books in southern Transylvania due to an increased
demand for liturgical books from both the Orthodox Romanians and
from the Greek-Catholics. And the offer met the demands. The book
inventory in the Orăştie preservation centre is a clear proof for that:
almost all the books printed in Râmnic during 1730-1753 (Molitfelnic
1730, Triod 1731, Antologhion 1937, Octoih 1742, Penticostar 1743,
Antologhion 1745, Ceaslov 1745, Evanghelie 1746, Psaltire 1746,
Apostol 1747, Catavasier 1747, Liturghier 1747, Cazanii 1748, Octoih
1750, Catavasier 1750, Psaltire 1751, Antologhion 1752, Ceaslov 1753
a.o.) circulated in Hunedoara.
Taking into consideration the aforementioned examples, we could
claim that the books printed in Râmnic were very much present in southern
Transylvania, overcoming scarce oppression from the representatives
of the Habsburg Empire and of the Greek-Catholic Church. In fact, the
printing house in Râmnic, as well as that in Bucharest, took over the
place left after the interruption of the printing activity in Bălgrad-Alba
Iulia. The books printed in Râmnic fulfilled the need of both Orthodox
Romanian and Greek-Catholic Christians for two reasons: firstly, the
liturgical books were printed in Romanian and secondly, the graphical
layout of the books printed here was quite appreciated in Ardeal24.
The flexible, mutually rewarding relationship between Ţara
Românească and Transylvania would soon come to an end in the
middle of the 18th century, as a result of the revolts and uprising of the
Romanian Orthodox population in Transylvania against the Habsburg
policy of encouraging all Romanians to join the Greek-Catholic Church,
such as those of Visarion Sarai (1744) and Sofronie of Cioara (1760),
Olteniei, XIX, 1967, no. 1-2, pp. 45-58; Alexandru Duţu, Coordonate ale culturii româneşti
în secolul al XVIII-lea (1700-1821). Studii şi texte, Bucharest, 1968; V. Molin, “Tiparniţa de
la Râmnic, mijloc de luptă ortodoxă împotriva catolicismului din Transilvania (1705-1800),
in Mitropolia Olteniei, XII, 1960, no. 7-8, pp. 458-471.
23
V. Molin, op. cit., pp. 460.
24
Ibidem, pp. 462; see also V. Molin, “Ilustraţia în vechea carte bisericească”, in BOR,
LXXVIII, 1960, no. 7-8, pp. 689-719.
which advocated for the freedom of worship. The revolts were also
supported by the Romanian population south of the Carpathians and as a
consequence the Austrian authorities counteracted with measures against
the relationship with the other two Romanian countries.
Thus, on 23 November 1746, in an Imperial Decree, the import of
books from Muntenia was forbidden and all the copies that were in use
in the Romanian Greek-Catholic churches were confiscated. On 5 May
1747, the official border officers were ordered to retain all the books
belonging to the Orthodox schismatic servants entering the country and
to be given to the Jesuits for censorship25.
The Imperial Order dated 18 June 1947 included the same
interdiction, but it also advised that the schismatics should be left with
all the necessary books for their cult in the settlements were they were
tolerated26. Another mention referred to the need to have a printing house
in Transylvania “in order to print book more suitable to the Union”27.
For that reason, the main goal of this measure was to assure the influx of
liturgical books from the south of the Carpathians.
Indeed, shortly after that, a printing house was established in
Blaj that managed to print its first books in 1750. At the beginning of
its activity, the printing house dealt with a series of difficulties due to
the lack of skilled printing workers and typographers and of a cultural
tradition that would make it known among the churchgoers and
clergymen. It was even forced to counterfeit the title pages to make it
look like the books were printed at Râmnic and to attract the typographers
and craftsmen from Râmnic. Only after such attempts did the printing
house in Blaj manage to print books which were signed by the famous
typographers and xylographers from Râmnic. The typographer Vasile
Constandin Râmniceanu signed Straşnicul blăjean (1753), Dimitrie
Râmniceanu signed Învăţătura creştinească printed in Blaj in 1756 and
then Evanghelia printed in 176528. Among the famous xylographers that
came to work in the printing house at Blaj in the second half of the 18th
25
F. Dudaş, op. cit., pp. 188; V. Molin, Tiparniţa de la Râmnic..., pp. 464.
26
Ibidem, pp. 465.
27
Ibidem.
28
V. Molin, Tiparniţa de la Râmnic, …pp. 467.
century we mention Petru Râmniceanu Popovici and Ion Râmniceanu29.
Once the activity in the printing house in Blaj flourished, the
circulation of the liturgical books printed in Bucharest or Râmnic
developed in a new context, a more competitive one. Thus, it can be
better understood the reason why Empress Theresa, reissuing the Imperial
Decree of 1746, forbade any kind of book import from the Romanian
countries and from Russia. The measure was proclaimed again in 1770,
which proved the inefficiency of the previous interdictions30. Once again,
the interdiction was not abided by since in 1771 the Greek-Catholic bishop
Atanasie Rednic complained in a letter addressed to the government that
Transylvania was invaded with Romanian books from Muntenia, which,
he argued, interfered with the activity of the Blaj printing house and
disrupted the faith of the unionists31.
Nonetheless, it must be noted that the Imperial decrees did not
exactly reach their purpose. Despite the guarded border check points,
books had been smuggled through the so-called “cuckoo’s trails”; these
were paths in the mountains unknown to the authorities but very much
used by the Romanian population to bring liturgical books in Transylvania
in the second half of the 18th century32.
We conclude that the liturgical books printed in Bucharest or in
Râmnic had an incredible influence on the strengthening of cultural,
linguistic and spiritual unity of the Romanian population in Transylvania.
The ideas promoted in the printing activity in the south of the Carpathians
represented the foundation for the subsequent actions undertaken by the
coryphaei of Şcoala Ardeleana33 (The School of Ardeal) for the unity of
language and belief. The personality of Ion Inochentie Micu was shaped by
books printed in Bucharest or Râmnic and, according to Samuel Clain, he
had been accused of allowing the reading of books in church which were
not printed by the unionists34. Bishop Petru Pavel Aron made references
29
Mircea Păcurariu, Legăturile Bisericii ortodoxe din Transilvania…, pp. 110-111.
30
F. Dudaş, op. cit., pp. 188-189; V. Molin, op. cit., pp. 468; Ioan Cristache-Panait, Circulaţia
cărţilor bisericeşti în Transilvania, … pp. 728.
31
F. Dudaş, op. cit., pp. 189.
32
Ioana Cristache-Panait, op. cit., pp. 728.
33
Ibidem, pp. 729.
34
Ibidem.
in Floarea adevărului, a book printed in Blaj in 1750, to numerous books
printed on the other side of the Carpathians. And there are many examples
like that, such as the references made in Păstoricească poşlanie to more
than 25 books35 printed in the other two Romanian countries.
Based on the inventory catalogue of the Orăştie preservation centre,
the Imperial decrees and the measures taken by the Greek-Catholic church
against the circulation of liturgical books between Transylvania and the
other Romanian countries over the mountains did not have any results. Not
even after the establishment of the printing house in Blaj did the afflux of
the liturgical books printed in Bucharest or in Râmnic stop. Thus, there are
many books printed in Râmnic part of the collection at Orăştie, such as:
Catavasier (1750), Psaltire (1751), Antologhion (1752), Ceaslov (1753),
Molitvelnic (1758), Catavasier (1759), Liturghie (1759), Triod (1761),
Octoih (1763), Antologhion (1766), Liturghie (1767), Penticostar (1767),
Molitvelnic (1768), Minei (1776), Octoih (1776), Triod (1777), Minei
(1779), Cazanie (1781), Triod (1782), T. Studitul - Cuvinte mărturisitoare
(1784), Evanghelie (1784), Ceaslov (1784), Penticostar (1785),
Antologhion (1786), Liturghie (1787), Cazanie (1792), Apostol (1794),
and there are also many books printed in Bucharest: Evanghelia (1750),
Octoih (1752), Psaltire (1756), Evanghelie (1760), Catavasier (1761),
Molitvelnic (1764), Antologhion (1766), Ceaslov (1767), Cazanie (1768),
Penticostar (1768), Triod (1769), Apostol (1774), Evanghelie (1775),
Antologhion (1777), Catavasier (1781), Penticostar (1782), Apostol
(1784), Antologhion (1786).
Nevertheless, the most prominent books that would become quite
numerous in the region of Hunedoara were the books printed in Blaj,
which, starting with the Ştraşnic (1753), were widely distributed in the
entire Transylvania in the second half of the 18th century36. The fact that
in the inventory of Orăştie preservation centre there only a few copies
of the Minei printed in Râmnic (1776-1780), demonstrates the capacity
of the Blaj printing house to impose itself on the region, despite the
countermeasures taken in the case of printing the Minologhion (1781)37.
35
Ibidem.
36
Ion Reşceanu, op. cit., pp. 15.
37
Ibidem.
In this context, it is understandable why not even the new printing
house for printing Romanian books established in Vienna as a privilege
awarded to typographer Iosif Kurzbech by Empress Maria Theresa
in 1777 would succeed in dominating in Transylvania. The same can
be argued about the case of the typographers Martin Hofmeister and
Petru Barth from Sibiu who benefited also from privileges given by the
Imperial authorities to print Romanian books. Martin Hofmeister even
addressed a request to the authorities in 1781 in which he asked to be
allowed to import books from Ţara Românească and, as expected, his
demand was denied38.
The prestige of the books printed in Bucharest or in Râmnic was
inalterably kept in the conscience of the people from Transylvania.
New patents and circulars were issued by the authorities and by the
Greek-Catholic Church in 1782 and in 1786 so that to put an end to the
circulation of Romanian books39.
However, starting with the seventh decade of the 18th century the
competition regarding the book distribution that existed between Bucharest
and Râmnic on the one hand, and Blaj and Sibiu on the other hand could
be noticed in the south of the Carpathians, too. Since 1778, Bishop
Chesaria of Râmnic pointed out in a letter addressed to the merchant Hagi
Pop of Sibiu that the Romanian printed books in Transylvania had been
circulating without limitation in the south of the Carpathians40. Both Bishop
Chesarie and then Bishop Iosif of Argeş intensely corresponded with Hagi
Constantin Pop of Sibiu in order to reprint the Minei41. Moreover, Petru
Barth confessed in 1792 that he travelled to Ţara Românească to distribute
the liturgical books he printed in Sibiu42.
The continuous presence of the liturgical books printed in Sibiu,
Blaj, Oltenia or Muntenia made Bishop Filaret of Ungrovlachia react and
write to Prince Alexandru Constantin Moruzi on March, 26th 1793, asking
him to ban the distribution of liturgical books printed in Transylvania
38
39
Ibidem.
40
Ibidem.
41
M. Păcurariu, op. cit., pp. 112.
42
just as it was the case with the book printed in Ţara Românească which
were not allowed in Transylvania43. This was intended as a measure to
protect the internal production of books, very much affected by the books
imported from Sibiu or Blaj.
As a consequence, on April, 2nd 1793 the prince of Ţara Românească
banned the circulation of the books printed in Sibiu or Blaj and his
decision was strengthen by the Court decision given in Bucharest on
March, 4th 179444.
We could argue that these measures achieved the purpose since
during 1793-1800 there was only one book printed in Transylvania that
circulated in the southern part of Oltenia, in Dolj, Gorj and Mehedinţi
counties, namely Liturghierul (Sibiu, 1798) found at Izverna (in
Mehedinţi)45. In fact, if we examine in detail the old book inventory that
belongs to the Bishopric of Severin and Strehaia, only five books were
identified to have originated from Blaj (Triod – 1771, Ştrasnic – 1773,
Minologhion – 1781), Sibiu (Liturghier – 1798) or Vienna (Cazania
– 1793)46, all being found in the area of Orşova. In Olt, based on the
research carried out in the Museum of Old Books at Clocociov Monastery,
affiliated to the Bishopric of Slatina and Romanaţi, a single book entitled
Evanghelia (1776) and printed in Transylvania was found47. In Dolj
County, the oldest book printed in Transylvania is Straşnic printed in
Blaj in 1753, which was donated to Mântuleasa Church in Craiova by
the Mânulescu Family48. There were also other books printed in Blaj
that circulated in Dolj county: a copy of an Evanghelie printed in 1765,
an Octoih (1770), an Evanghelie printed in 1776, another Octoih (1792)
43
Ibidem, pp. 190-191; V. Molin, op. cit., pp. 469-451.
44
45
Varavara Mâneanu, “Carte veche românească de cult în judeţul Mehedinţi”, in Mehedinţi
– istorie, cultură şi spiritualitate, vol. I, Didahia Publishing House, Drobeta Turnu Severin,
2008, pp. 559.
46
Ibidem.
47
Dorin Teodorescu, Carte veche românească de secol al XVIII-lea din judeţul Olt, Slatina,
1998, pp. 73.
48
Aurelia Florescu, Tezaur – carte veche românească (1557-1830), Aius Publishing House,
Craiova, 2000, pp. 30.
printed in nine copies and Catavasier (1793)49.
In the second half of the 18th century, the number of books printed
in Ardeal and distributed in the region of Oltenia is very limited. It is
possible that the books from Transylvania to have penetrated only the
northern part of Oltenia due to the opportunities provided by the larger
trade towns in the area. The measures imposed by Prince Alexandru
Constantin Moruzi at the request of Bishop Filaret of Ungrovlachia
in 1793 and 1794 could be regarded more as a counteraction to the
prohibitive measures taken in Transylvania than as means to protect the
internal production of books.
Thus, even though the lack of liturgical books from Transylvania
in the southern part of Oltenia might seem to reflect that idea that the
prohibitive measures imposed in Ţara Românească reached their goal,
this situation was only temporary. By contrast, after 1800, Oltenia was
practically invaded by the books printed in Transylvania. It is worth
mentioning the importance of the old book collection of the Bishopric
of Severin and Strehaia in which out of 404 books from 1800-1830, 140
are from Buda, 56 from Blaj and 17 from Sibiu, in contrast with 20 from
Râmnic or 30 from Bucharest50.
In conclusion, we claim that the prohibitive measures imposed in
the second half of the 18th century by the Austrian Imperial authorities in
Transylvania which targeted the circulation of the liturgical books, as well
as the measures taken in Ţara Românească in 1793 had a very limited
impact. The Romanian old liturgical books had continued to circulate on
both sides of the Carpathians so that to fulfil the needs of the Romanian
people. The circulation of books had provided safer means for a continuous
evolution and a unitary development of the mentalities, but above all, it was
efficient in establishing and maintaining the contact that was necessary to
assert the unity in language and in faith for all the Romanians.
49
Ibidem.
50
Varvara Mâneanu, op. cit., pp. 558, 570.
Ion CÂRJA
Aspects of the Image of the Orthodox with the

Greek-Catholics in the Second Half of the 19th
Century
Abstract
There are several important levels that may be found when dealing
with the image of Romanian Orthodox communities and structures with
the Greek-Catholic in the second half of the 19th century Transylvania.
Thus, one can identify a first level represented by Eastern Christianity’s
general image with the Holy See, which was being constructed in the
respective period due to the papacy’s relaunch of its unionist projects.
This may be seen in Rome’s documents concerning the East, in the debates
of the several Romanian dicasteries on this issue, in the documents of
the Ecumenical Council in 1869-1870, in Vatican’s correspondence with
the Apostolic Nunciatures and missions and, last but not least, in the
historical, canonical and liturgical literature on Eastern Churches.
Keywords:
Transylvania, Orthodox, Greek-Catholics, Ecumenical Council in
1869-1870, Vatican.
We are dealing with a complex picture, combining the necessity

of recognizing the traditions and particularities of Eastern Christianity
with plans of restoring the unity of Christian world and the imperatives
of organizing it round its “centre” – the Roman Apostolic See. This
pontifical construct will later be taken over by the Greek-Catholic in
Transylvania, who were constructing their own image of Romanian
Orthodoxy and Eastern Christianity, respectively. It is at this point that
a second distinct level of representation – that of the Orthodox image
with the Greek-Catholic Church – becomes clear. It contains, along
with the Roman component, elements generated by local cohabitation
and interdenominational relations. This image is not unitary in itself
since it is determined by different ecclesiastical options or pragmatic
calculation of the Greek-Catholic elite, as well as by an ambivalent
attitude towards Orthodoxy stemming from the cohabitation necessities
of the two Romanian denominations at the level of communitarian life.
The image of Eastern Orthodoxy in this period of time with both Holy
See and Romanian Church United with Rome is made up of veracious
elements, historically verifiable to which are added, in a variable alchemy,
generalizations, clichés, stereotypes and common places with no factual
basis, part of the representation games of “the other” generated by social
life mechanisms.
When dealing with the image of the Orthodox and Orthodoxy
with the Greek-Catholics in Transylvania the first thing that draws
our attention is, with a first category of sources, the denominative
“schismatic” applied to the former. Thus, in his report dated Blaj,
November 8, 1869 containing the answers to 116 questions and addressed
to cardinal Barnabo on January 20, 1870, the Metropolitan Ioan Vancea
uses the term “schismatic” when he refers to the Orthodox Church in
Transylvania that the Greek-Catholic Church and its believers came
into contact with. According to the 1859 census, there were in the Great
Principality of Transylvania 679.896 “schismatics” constituted in 1105
parishes, having their own “Metropolitan of the Schismatic Romanians
from Transylvania and Hungary” residing in Sibiu, their errors being the
same as those of “the Greek” under the jurisdiction of “the Schismatic
Greek Patriarch of Constantinople”. The “schismatics’ schools” are
like the ones of the Greek-Catholics, however those belonging to “the
heretics” (Lutherans, Calvinists, Unitarians) are better equipped. In
the case of those schools attended by children of both denominations,
the danger of altering the Catholic faith diminishes, says Vancea in his
report, through solid catechetical instruction. The report then goes on to
describe in the answer to question no. 108 the procedure to follow for
performing denominational mixed marriages1.
The discourses that the Romanian bishops delivered at the
ecumenical council contain invariably the term “schismatic” when
they refer to Romanian Orthodox communities and structures from
Transylvania and the extracarpathian territory. In the observations he
made about the second part of the project De Ecclesia Christi, handed
over to the council’s secretary on March 12, 1870, Vancea estimates that
the number of those following “the Greek Schismatic Rite nowadays”
amounts to 80 million, among them being the Romanian nation numbering
10 million2. In the descriptive material about the Romanian Church United
with Rome, turned over to American bishop Gibbons on March 28, 1870,
it is stated that, after the “Photian Schism” was established in the mid
11th century through Mikhail Kerularios, the Romanians, instigated by
Archbishop Leo of Ohrid, converted to “the Greek Schism” along with
the other provinces of the Constantinople Patriarchate; also there was
a “schismatic metropolis” in Sibiu, a “schismatic bishop” in Cernăuţi,
while in the United Principalities of Valachia and Moldavia “all the
Romanians are schismatic”3. In a memorandum handed over to the Pope
on the occasion of an audience on May 4, 1870, the metropolitan states
that, out of the 12 million souls living in all the Romanian historical
provinces, 1.200.000 “confess the Holy Union with the Catholic faith”,
while the other 11 million “belong to the Photian Schism”. The latter live
in those territories of Eastern Europe where “the Photian Schism held
the majority” and where “that schism appears to be a big threat to the
European Catholicism” because of the aggressive policy of the Russian
Empire. “The Romanian Schismatic Metropolis of Sibiu” following
the example of “the Serbian Schismatic Patriarchate of Karlovitz”
undermines the Union, Vancea states further arguing for the necessity
of elevating the Greek-Catholic Metropolis in Transylvania to a higher
1
Responsa ad quaestiones a S.Congregatione de Propaganda Fide Ordinariatui Graeco-
Catholico Alba Iuliensi propositas…, in Archivio della Congegazione per le Chiese
Orientali, Scriiture riferite nei congressi. Romeni 1865-1875, Busta no. 1, ff. 363 r-388 r.
2
Nicolae Bocşan and Ion Cârja, Biserica Română Unită la Conciliul Ecumenic Vatican I
(1869-1870), Cluj-Napoca, 2001, p. 370, in translation, p. 515.
3
Ibidem, pp. 387-394, in translation, pp. 527-531.
ecclesiastical rank4. This expression, which became a recurrent motif in
the Greek-Catholic discourse on Orthodoxy, is found in other parts of
the journal Vancea kept during the ecumenical council as well, while the
term “Orthodox”, in its denominational sense, does not appear in it at all.
In the report presented at the Propaganda on the occasion of his
ad limina visit in 1886, Vancea says that the Romanian Greek-Catholic
Church and the Archdiocese of Alba Iulia and Făgăraş respectively,
developed from “the Oriental Schism”, under whose “yoke” the
Romanian nation was until its Union with Rome in 17005.
It has probably been noted that the term “schismatic” – as a
designation of the Orthodox Romanians and of Orthodoxy in general
–appears recurrently in a distinct category of documents: the ones
addressed to the Holy See and the Catholic episcopate. The Greek-
Catholic discourse on the Eastern churches practically assumes the
official pontifical terminology and in this sense, as we have already
anticipated, we can speak of a first level of representation, part of that
general image of Eastern Christianity with the Catholics in the second
half of 19th century.
Secondly, it is worth noting that in the Greek-Catholic documents
with external address (those sent to Rome but not only) the term
“schismatic” does not exhaust the whole content of the image of
Orthodoxy with the Romanian Greek-Catholic milieus. It coexists with
another common theme, the one that describes the rite and discipline of
the Romanian Church United with Rome as being one and the same with
that of the Greeks’ Church. Vancea, for instance, states in the material
handed over to Gibbons that the Romanians “have followed the Greek
Rite of Constantinople since time immemorial” or that “the Greeks’
discipline is still in force with the Romanians” as far as the marriage
of priests is concerned. According to this a cleric “is allowed to have
4
Ibidem, pp. 415-421, in translation, pp. 540-544.
5
Relatio super statu ecclesiastico Archidioeceseos romeni ritus catholicae Alba-Iuliensis
et Fogarasiensis in Transsylvania Austro-Hungariae situatae Sacrae Congregationi de
Propaganda Fide substrata pro anno 1886, in Archivio della Congregazione per le Chiese
Orientali, Scritture riferite nei congressi. Romeni 1884-1892, busta no. 3, ff. 1443 r-1460 r.
one wife if she was a virgin before his being ordained subdeacon”6. The
very name of the church shepherded by Vancea was “Greek-Catholic”,
i.e. “Greek Rite Catholic”, expression that manifests itself as a common
theme in the self-image of the Greek-Catholic church along with the
equivalent denominative “Byzantine Rite Catholic”. Thus, we can speak
of a seemingly contradictory ambivalence: The Romanian Church United
with Rome denies the “Greek Schism”, but assumes “the Greek rite and
discipline” as an identity component!
Analyzing the image of Orthodoxy with the Greek-Catholics
at another level we find that the appellative “schismatic” disappears
completely. With a category of sources circulating inside the Romanian
Greek-Catholic Church, the image of Orthodoxy is rendered by
different terminology. In one of his books, Alexandru Duţu speaks of
two components of alterity: “the near” and “the far”7; in this sense the
Orthodox represented for the Greek-Catholics in Transylvania, an alterity
lying in proximity. Hence, the need to renounce the simplistic view in the
Greek-Catholic image-generating discourse about the Orthodox.
One of these sources, which came out a little before the election
of Vancea as metropolitan, is “The Catechism” published by Iosif
Papp-Szilágyi in 18648. Throughout this book the words “schism” and
“schismatic” are carefully avoided, being systematically replaced with
“non-union” and “non-united”. Thus, those belonging to “the greatest
and brightest Roman nation” along with the Italians, the French, the
Spaniards and other peoples “but not confessing the Roman faith”, “are
the so-called non-united, who live in the Hungarian land, in Banat and
Ardeal, in Bukovina, Valachia and Moldavia”. They remained “non-
united” because they “were under the influence of the Greek Empire and
the Greeks having broken away from Rome, the Romanians separated
as well.” The “Non-Union” appeared when the Greeks refused to submit
to the Patriarch of Rome, “Head of the entire Christian church” and
6
Nicolae Bocşan and Ion Cârja, pp. 389-392, in translation, pp. 528-530.
7
Alexandru Duţu, Modele, imagini, privelişti, Cluj, 1979, pp. 69-96.
8
Catechismul unirii besericeşti a tuturor românilor. Cuvânt părintesc cătră naţiunea română
a iubitorului de neamul său, episcop al Oradiei Mari, unit cu Roma, Iosif Papp- Szilágyi,
Oradea, 1864.
consequently “they became a separate church, which is not united with
Rome, hence the name non-united given to it and its believers”. It would
be of great benefit to the Romanians, spiritually as well as nationally,
argues Papp-Szilágyi, if they passed to the Union, “thus putting an end
to the discord within the nation about being or not united with Rome”9.
The journal that the Metropolitan Vancea kept during his
participation at the first Vatican Council supports, paradoxically as
it may seem, this idea of a nuanced picture of Orthodoxy. Apart from
the speeches and written observations the metropolitan made – which,
no doubt, targeted the participants, the Roman Curia and the pope and
were therefore reproduced in Latin –, the Diary never uses the term
“schismatic” in its descriptive part, written by the secretary Mihalyi,
but that of “non-united”, when it refers to the Orthodox Church in
Transylvania and extracarpathian territory in general10.
Another internal source, which can be taken into account here, is
the documentation of the canonical visitations made by Ioan Vancea in
1873-1876. The proceedings of these visitations are very important for
analyzing the image of the Orthodox, as they record both the appellatives
the official discourse operates with and those that reflect the cohabitation
of the two Romanian denominations: the Greek-Catholic church is often
situated near the Orthodox church in a village, children coming from
Greek-Catholic and Orthodox families often attend the same school.
These documents use two terms when referring to the Orthodox: “non-
united” and “Greek-Oriental”. Even the special case of the priest George
Spornicu from the parish of Cohalm, in Făgăraş, who converted to the
Greek–Catholic Church in 1872, is described in the following terms:
“theologian of the Greek-Oriental Seminary in Sibiu, ordained priest by
a Greek-Oriental hierarch in 1872”11.
We have noticed that the internal Greek-Catholic sources give up
the term schismatic when naming the Orthodox, using instead the terms
9
Ibidem, pp. 6-10.
10
See “Diuariul” [“The Diary”], in Bocșan and Cârja, op. cit., the expression “non-united”
can be found on the following pages: 422, 423, 430, 433, 434, 467, 483.
11
National Archives Directorate of the county of Alba, Fund Mitropolia Română Unită Blaj,
Cabinetul Mitropolitului, File no. 957/1873-1876, fo. 138 r.
“non-united” and “Greek-Oriental”. The latter was, in fact, common in
that age as a designation of the Orthodox Church in Transylvania. Şaguna
himself uses it, for example, when he refers to the church he shepherded,
in official documents such as the ecclesiastical constitution from 1868
entitled “Organic Statute of the Romanian Greek-Oriental Church in
Hungary and Transylvania”12. In our researches we did not identify any
source, coming from the Greek-Catholic milieu between 1868 and 1892,
to use the appellative “Orthodox”/”Orthodox Church”. We would argue
that the word “Orthodox”, in its denominational sense, had at that time a
relatively confined circulation, as the Orthodox Church itself did not use
it very frequently in its official terminology. The Greek-Catholic Church,
in its turn, avoided it because of its theological meaning, that of “right
teaching”, as they thought of themselves as the true possessors of the
“Orthodox” faith. It is a well-known fact that the meaning of this term
evolved throughout the history of Christianity. Beginning with the 4th
century until the 1054 schism, it had been used only with its theological
sense, that of “right thought, teaching”. Things changed for the first time
in the 9th century when the battle the Eastern church was leading over
iconoclasm drew to an end. The term “Orthodox” came to designate the
faith, the ecclesiastical structures and the communities that had opposed
the iconoclastic heresy, a fact recognized even by the Holy See. Some
time during the 11th century the word acquired a denominational sense
and began to be used by Eastern Christians to distinguish between their
church and the Catholic church, whose head was the Pope in Rome13.
This public picture of Orthodoxy, generated by the Greek-Catholic
official discourse with internal address, is further nuanced by expressions
of the local clergy and communities. A good example in that sense would
be the book Biserica română [The Romanian Church], published in 1883
by Ioan Marcu, archpriest of Satu Mare14. At the beginning of his work,
12
Statutul Organic al Bisericii greco-orientale române din Ungaria şi Transilvania, in
Ioannes Dominicus Mansi, Sacrorum conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio, tom 42.
Synodi Orientalis, 1865-1874, Ludovico Petit and Ioanne Baptista Martin, eds., Paris,
1910, col. 159-220.
13
Tertulian Langa, Credo. Dicţionar teologic creştin din perspectiva ecumenismului catolic,
Cluj-Napoca, 1997, p. 184 (voice: Ortodoxie/Orthodoxy).
14
Ioan Marcu, Biserica Română, Satu Mare, 1883, p. 14, a copy identified by us at Archivio
Marcu writes: “We, Romanians, belong to the Greek Church and most
of us to the Greek Orthodox Church”. “The Romanians from Romania
belong to the Greek Orthodox Church and take pride in the fact that
their church is, as they claim, autocephalous”, states the archpriest
further, showing that, in the name of that same Greek Orthodox Church,
Russia is oppressing the Romanians in Bessarabia, while the Greek are
doing the same thing to those living in Turkey. However, the aim of this
book is not to clear up terminology or clarify denominational identity,
but rather to create a Romanian rite and an ecclesiastical institution,
one for all Romanians, placed under the jurisdiction “of the Patriarch
of Rome”. As long as the Romanians go on practicing the Greek rite,
even though translated into Romanian, their very national existence is
in jeopardy, while their church remains nothing more than an unfruitful
branch in the barren tree of the Greek church. The Greek rite has the
disadvantage of having been altered and added to in the course of time;
it is long and hard to understand, by cantors and people as well. The
solution offered by Marcu: “Romanian church” with “Romanian rite”,
“Romanian hierarchical organization” with “Romanian ecclesiastical
law”15. The author is convinced that the organization form he imagined
would restore Romanian ecclesiastical life to the status it had before they
adopted the Greek rite and this way “we would enter into relations with
peoples of Latin origin, the greatest and most cultured in the world”16.
Ioan Marcu’s project is interesting from many points of view. Firstly,
the author does not use the terminology which, at the time, designated
denominational belonging. He calls “disunion” not “schism”, as it
had been consecrated by Catholic terminology, even the separation of
Eastern Christianity from Western Christianity in 1054. Secondly, this
project of a Romanian church, much influenced by the ideology of 1848
generation, subordinates denominational identity to national identity.
Obviously, Marcu regards this relation from the viewpoint of a layman
(even though he was a member of the clergy), which was typical of the
della Congregazione per le Chiese Orientali, Scriiture riferite nei congressi. Romeni 1884-
1892, busta no. 3. fo. 1375.
15
Ibidem, pp. 6-7.
16
Ibidem, p. 14.
Romanian elite in Austria-Hungary.
The case of the Orthodox archpriest Ioan Chendi, who in 1894-
1896 was considering the possibility of converting to the Romanian
Church United with Rome, makes us take more precautions when trying
to reconstitute the image of the Orthodox from the viewpoint of Greek-
Catholic perception. Reading through the documents that present this
case, we found that the official representatives of the Greek-Catholic
Church (the bishop of Lugoj and would-be metropolitan Victor Mihalyi
of Apşa) and those of the Holy See (the cardinal secretary of state Mariano
Rampolla, the apostolic nuncio Antonio Agliardi) employ, along with
other well-known consecrated expressions, the appellative “Orthodox”
in its denominational sense. Thus, in his letter to Agliardi, on October
1, 1894, Rampolla speaks about “the schismatic archpriest Ioan Chendi
from Aszonyfalva”, who wrote to the pope asking for permission to
convert to the Catholic Church17. In his next letter addressed to the nuncio
on December 31, 1894, Rampolla names Chendi again “schismatic
archpriest”, but further below in the text he states that the Transylvanian
archpriest has written another letter to Rome, from which one may deduce
“the goodwill of the religious communion to which Chendi belongs
towards the Roman Catholic Church”. The phrase “religious communion”
strikes our eye, as it is not at all in accordance with the terminology in
use in the pontifical documents concerning the Orthodox18. The same
phrase is used as a denominative of the Orthodox Church in Transylvania
in the letter sent by the apostolic nunciature to Victor Mihalyi, bishop of
Lugoj, on January 3, 189519, as well as in the short note sent from Vienna
to the cardinal secretary of state on February 2, 189520. This terminology
undergoes further changes in the letter sent by the apostolic nunciature
in Vienna to Augustin Bunea in Blaj on February 18, 189521, as well as in
17
Archivio Segreto Vaticano, Arch. Nunz. Vienna, busta no. 664, Agliardi Antonio, nunzio,
Tit. XIV, lettere e-h-Posizioni speciali (1892) 1893-1896, fo. 110 r.
18
Ibidem, fo. 107 r-v.
19
Ibidem, fo. 118 r.
20
Ibidem, fo. 129 r.
21
Ibidem, fo. 131 r-v.
the one addressed to Victor Mihalyi on the same date22. Both speak about
“the Heads of the Orthodox Church in Transylvania” and their alleged
willingness to pass to the Union with Rome, according to the account
of the above-mentioned archpriest. The term “Orthodox” can be found,
nevertheless, in both documents together with the older denominative
“schismatic”. The debate around this case ends with a detailed report (15
pages) sent by Mihalyi (who in the meantime had become metropolitan)
to nuncio Agliardi on January 22, 1896. In it the Greek-Catholic hierarch
uses mostly the word “Orthodox”/”Orthodox Church” when writing
about Transylvanian Orthodoxy, followed by “non-united” and, only
near the end, “schismatic”23. This terminological innovation, if we may
call it so, probably reflects a certain influence coming from Rome. At
the time when the Holy See, the Apostolic Nunciature, the Bishopric
of Lugoj and the Metropolis of Alba-Iulia were exchanging letters on
this issue, in Rome, Pope Leo XIII was initiating far-reaching unionist
projects, which found their expression in the two encyclicals he issued
in 1894, Praeclara and Orientalium dignitas. This was also the year
of the patriarchic conferences held in Vatican. These events may have
influenced the image of the Orthodox with the Catholics, at least at
the level of the denominatives in use, in that the terms with pejorative
overtones were slowly being replaced by words such as “Orthodox”,
preferred by the members of this religious denomination themselves.
Apart from the self-defining discourse that each of the two
Romanian denominations created, we find in the ecclesiastical debate in
the second half of the 19th century another one, which sought to subordinate
denominational identity to national identity. It is a discourse generated
by the elite supporting the Romanian national movement, which sounded
an echo in the Romanian newspapers and magazines in Transylvania,
where these intellectuals (of whom most were laymen) were drawing
attention to the fact that a greater attachment to denominational identity
was jeopardizing national interest and solidarity. An interesting example
in this respect would be a debate launched in Gazeta de Transilvania
[The Transylvanian Paper] in the autumn of 1872, entitled “Union, Non-
22
Ibidem, fo. 132 r.
23
Ibidem, ff.. 133 r-140 r.
Union, Greek-Catholicism and Greek-Orientalism”. According to the
author of this series of articles, the religious discord and the appellatives
“popish” and “schismatic” had been made up by Romanian church leaders
before 1848, when the number of the intelligentsia had been relatively
small. The article comes up with a history of these denominatives as well,
stating that genuine expressions such as “united” and “non-united” were
later replaced by “Greek-Catholic” and “Greek-Oriental”, for which “the
seducers of the Dacian-Romanian people” bear responsability. Having
been labeled “schismatics”, the Orthodox Romanians “did not think
much of the Union with the Pope in Rome and preferred Karlovitz or
anyone else, and, to prevent the Greek-Catholic from calling themselves
Greek-Occidental, they took the name Greek-Oriental, as such who were
subordinated to the Patriarch of Constantinople”. The denominational
labels are stimulated by the opponents of Romanian unity, “the new
scholars” who hold with this “strange new idea”, i.e. “the naming of
Greek-Catholic and Greek-Oriental”, unknown to the people24.
The consequences of interdenominational discord manifest
themselves, go on the newspaper, in the villages, where, due to lack of
collaboration between members of the two denominations, communal
schools will be built, while catechesis and education process will be
neglected. The article invokes decrees of Austrian Emperors, which
prove that the terms “Greek-Catholic” and “Greek-Oriental” did not exist
in the past and are artificial. The author insists on the improper character
of these arbitrarily made-up denominatives, as well as on the absence of
synods and disobedience of canon law and adds that “the Greek-Oriental
Romanians are also Catholic in their faith, since ‘Catholic’ means
‘universal’; the Greek-Catholic Romanians on the other hand are also
Greek-Oriental in their rite”. The self-image of the Greek-Catholic is
subject to bitter irony, because in Blaj they teach “popish” canonic law
and church history, while “in Pesta, at the Hungarian popish congress,
they are moaning and groaning about their autonomy being infringed.”
The pamphlet urges Romanians to give up futile dispute and evaluate
their ministers’ activity within the parish and school and their economic
24
Gazeta Transilvaniei, XXXV, no. 78 (1872), 18/7 October: 2-3.
initiatives, because “their mission is to help Romanian church and school
to make progress”. We are dealing here with a different view on the role
of the priest who “must endeavour to help people grow, first bodily, then
spiritually or both at the same time”, because “they prepare people only
for the life to come, and are neglectful of this one”. The priests might
contribute to the flourishing of Romanian nation “just as the priests of
other nations do”. The series of articles ends in a rather skeptical tone,
emphasizing the necessity of assembling a mixed ecclesiastical congress
that would settle the constitutional organization of the Romanian Church
United with Rome25. This debate is just a sequence of a campaign for
rising above denominational cleavage in the name of national interest,
carried on by the Romanian press regardless of religion in the second
half of the 19th century. The promotion of national identity represents a
conscientious systematic effort on the part of the intelligentsia towards
secularization in the Romanian society from Transylvania.
25
Ibidem, no. 79, 23/11 October: 2-3.
Bishop Lucian MIC
The Manifestation of Religious Freedom by the

Romanians from Banat through Hierarchical
Separation (1865-1870)
Abstract
The most important action of the Romanian Church from Banat
in the second half of the 19th century was the long and tortuous process
of hierarchical separation. This process occurred naturally after
the Romanian Orthodox Church from the Austrian Empire had been
reorganized by founding Transylvania’s Metropolitanate with the see
in Sibiu and by reactivating the Diocese of Caransebeş. The struggle
to separate the Romanians from the Serbian hierarchy, begun in the
early 19th century through the efforts of leading representatives of the
Romanian communities, was finalized, in its legal framework, by the
Synod of Karlowitz (1864-1865) and was a manifestation of religious
freedom. On the one hand, this freedom was guaranteed by the historical
development of the Romanian Church, and on the other hand, by the
modern component of the European society.

Keywords:
Banat, hierarchical separation, religious freedom, Romanian-
Serbian mixed parishes, Diocese of Caransebeş.
The most important action of the Romanian Church from Banat

in the second half of the 19th century was the long and tortuous process
of hierarchical separation. This process occurred naturally after the
Romanian Orthodox Church from the Austrian Empire had been
reorganized by founding the Transylvania’s Metropolitanate with the see
in Sibiu and by reactivating the Diocese of Caransebeş. The struggle
to separate the Romanians from the Serbian hierarchy, begun in the
early 19th century through the efforts of leading representatives of the
Romanian communities, was finalized, in its legal framework, by the
Synod of Karlowitz (1864-1865)1 and was a manifestation of religious
freedom. On the one hand, this freedom was guaranteed by the historical
development of the Romanian Church, and on the other hand, by the
modern component of the European society.
We ought to mention the fact that by 1865, the Orthodoxy from
Banat had been a unitary entity from a canonical standpoint. From
an ethnical point of view, things were quite different. The Orthodox
believers from Banat were mostly Romanians, while very few were
Serbians. However, the destinies of all the Orthodox believers were ruled
by the Serbian Metropolitanate from Karlowitz.
On 4 August 1864, the synod that established the framework
of the hierarchical separation was convened in Karlowitz, the town
that was also the religious capital of the Orthodoxy from the Empire,
and the main reason for the synod was to elect the Serbian patriarch2.
Although the Serbian representatives did not want the separation of the
Romanians from the Serbian Church, but merely a reorganization of
the Metropolitanate from Karlowitz and the discussion of some future
projects based on church canons, at the proposal of the Emperor, the
separation of the churches was also discussed3. In his letter dated 13
August 1864, Patriarch Samuilo Maširević wrote that the Emperor had
decided that the Orthodox Romanians should have church autonomy,
separate from the Serbian Church, and this issue would be discussed
by the synod4. In the following meetings of the synod, several issues
were discussed: the organization of the Romanian Metropolitanate, the
number of the suffragan diocesan sees, the division of the monetary funds
1
See Bishop Lucian Mic, Relaţiile Bisericii Ortodoxe Române din Banat cu Biserica
Ortodoxă Sârbă în a doua jumătate a secolului al XIX-lea, Cluj, Presa Universitară
Clujeană Publishing House, 2013, pp. 139-166.
2
Teodor V. Păcăţian, Cartea de aur, vol. III, Sibiu, 1905, p. 723.
3
Ibidem, p. 730.
4
Protocolul şedinţelor sinodale ţinute în 13 şi următoarele zile ale lui august 1864 în
Carloviţ, printed without indicating the place and the year, p. 9.
between the two metropolitanates, the subordination of the monasteries,
the structure of the eparchies and the situation of the foundations and the
funds of the church center in Karlowitz. The separation of the churches
was effected based on the criterion of nationality and in this way, the
Romanian protopresbyterates and localities came under the authority
of the Romanian metropolitanate while the Serbian ones – under the
authority of the Serbian metropolitanate. In the protopresbyterates and
localities were there were both Romanians and Serbs, the majority
criterion was used, and where the separation was demanded, a special
commission would examine the situation and decide accordingly. The
official recognition of the hierarchical separation came through a special
law that was passed in May 1868. On the basis of this law, in 1868, the
first National Congress of Transylvania’s Metropolitanate was held where
the delegates voted the Organic Statutes that would be the bylaws for the
Romanian Orthodox Church from the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy until
the Great Union of 1 December 19185.
In a massive work dedicated to Priest Nicolae Tincu Velia, scholar
and historian, former teacher at the Clerical School from Vršac and
protopresbyter of the protopresbyterate of Vršac, historian I. D. Suciu
from Banat talks about the hierarchical separation as a “hierarchical
emancipation” and regards it as one of the most important political
actions of the Romanians from Transylvania and Banat, whose purpose
was to save the Romanians from sure denationalization6.
In Banat, the Diocese of Caransebeş, (re)established on 6 July
1865 , had a large territory next to the Serbian space and therefore
7
included several localities that were the object of the disputes over the
hierarchical separation. The Diocese of Arad also included quite a few
localities with mixt Romanian-Serbian population where the separation
of the church properties was required. The religious freedom of the
Romanians from these parishes was manifested through the agreements
and disagreements concerning the partition of the church property from
5
L. Mic, op. cit., p. 166.
6
I. D. Suciu, Nicolae Tincu Velia (1816-1867). Viaţa şi opera lui, Bucureşti, 1945, pp. 146-147.
7
Nicolae Popea, Vechia mitropolie ortodoxă română a Transilvaniei, suprimarea şi
restaurarea ei, Sibiu, 1870, pp. 225-226.
the localities with mixt Romanian-Serbian population. Besides peaceful
agreements and formalities, there were many localities that resorted to
civil actions, which was the only possible way of separating the churches
from many of the diocese’s localities.
According to the wish expressed by the Romanian believers,
the separations in the Diocese of Arad started soon after the Synod of
Karlowitz, in the spring of 1865. In the Diocese of Caransebeş, however,
the separation started after 20 August 1865, the day when Bishop Ioan
Popasu, elected and consecrated to lead the religious destinies of the
Romanians from Banat, took over his duties as hierarch, just before his
official installation on 30 October/11 November by the metropolitan
representative Bishop Procopiu Ivacicovici of Arad and the imperial
commissary Antoniu Benko of Boitnik8.
The Serbs tried to cause disturbances in the reestablished eparchy
of Caransebeş and thus postpone the separation of the joint property from
the mixt parishes for as long as possible, which occurred at the beginning
of Ioan Popasu’s bishopric. The Romanian believers were incited to
disobedience to the new hierarch with the see in Caransebeş, there were
attempts to take possession of the property of several churches and the
Romanian bishop’s orders, advice and memos were distorted.
Not to mention the outstanding material effort that the Romanians
were required to make because the newly emerged Romanian parishes
were lacking in religious books and holy icons; more than 90,000
Romanians from the mixt Romanian-Serbian localities were in this
situation9.
Protopresbyter Nicolae Tincu Velia was given important duties,
some of which were included in the memo sent by Bishop Ioan Popasu
on 5 October 1865, when in fact the action for separation between the
Romanian and Serbian communities from the Protopresbyterate of Vršac
was officially revealed. The memo also included several dispositions
that were to be enforced by the Orthodox Romanian communities:
1. All the Romanians from the mixt localities should urgently lodge
8
Constantin Brătescu, Episcopul Ioan Popasu şi cultura bănăţeană, Timişoara, Mitropolia
Banatului Publishing House, 1995, p. 26.
9
Ibidem, p. 45.
a petition demanding the separation from the Serbs, the organization in a
distinct church community, subordinated to the Diocese of Caransebeş,
and the creation of a commission which would go to every mixt locality
“in order to implement the desired separation”.
2. The priests and the teachers, in agreement with Protopresbyter
Nicolae Tincu Velia, should collect the documents required to demonstrate
the concrete contribution brought by the Romanians to the building of
the churches and schools from the mixt localities.
3. To avoid excesses, the Romanians “must not accept bribes,
must not allow themselves to be deceived by Serbian promises that are
nothing but empty promises”.
4. Until the commission came to every locality, the Romanians
from the mixt localities should remain under the authority of the Serbian
Church10.
As a result of this memo and the decisive involvement of
the Romanian priests and protopresbyters from the areas of ethnic
interference, the Diocese of Caransebeş had received petitions from
numerous Romanian communities demanding the hierarchical separation
from the Serbian Orthodox Church ever since the last few months of
the year 1865. We would mention localities such as Foeni11, Denta12,
Alibunar13, Iabuca14, Marghita-Mare15, Mesici16, Mramorac17, Năidaş18,
Tolvădia19, Vlaicovăţ20, Jamul-Mic21, etc.
The news from the protopresbyterates of Biserica-Albă, Vršac and
10
I. D. Suciu, Nicolae Tincu Velia..., pp. 148-149.
11
Arhiva Episcopiei Caransebeşului (A.E.C.) [The Archives of the Diocese of Caransebeş],
Register 1/1865, doc. 451 and 540/1865.
12
Ibidem, doc. 321/1865.
13
Ibidem, doc. 145/1865 and 874/1866.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Ibidem, doc. 133, 322/1865.
Ciacova were very reassuring. Protopresbyter Iosif Popovici of Biserica-
Albă reported that the bishop of Vršac continued issuing orders to the
Romanian parishes22. Because of such abuse, the inhabitants from Satul
Nou requested to be relieved from the injustice caused by the Serbs, and
the appointment of Romanian priests as soon as possible23. The separation
protocol for this locality was signed in 186624.
Pavel Militaru, the priest from the mixt locality of Satul Nou,
wrote a report to the Consistory of Caransebeş in which he detailed the
untruths launched by the Serbs to win the Romanians over to the Serbian
hierarchy. They told the Romanians that Metropolitan Şaguna and
Bishop Ioan Popasu of Caransebeş would cross over to another religion
immediately after the separation from the Serbian hierarchy, considering
their diligence to introduce the Latin alphabet in churches or other new
foreign words such as Doamne îndură-te [Lord, have mercy]25.
In other cases, the Serbian hierarchy requested the separation
even where it was not necessary since the localities were preeminently
Romanian. For instance, Ignatius of Murányi, the supreme administrative
ruler of the county of Timiş, informed the Consistory of Caransebeş
that the bishop of Timişoara had requested a mixt commission for the
separation of the Serbians from the Romanians from the locality of
Omor. The Consistory decided that the protopresbyterate administration
of Ciacova answer and emphasize the fact that Omor was inhabited
by Romanians only and therefore the separation of property was not
applicable26.
Obstacles to the Romanians’ expression of religious freedom
also appeared in Mesici, from the Protopresbyterate of Vršac. Although
there was a large Romanian community that wanted to be canonically
subordinated to the Diocese of Caransebeş, the church and civilian
22
Ibidem, doc. 236, 237/1865.
23
Ibidem, doc. 31, 89/1865, 505/1866.
24
25
A.E.C., Fond bisericesc (III), Protocolul şedinţelor bisericeşti pe anul 1866, şedinţa din
4 aprilie 1866, 505/1866 [Protocol of church meetings for the year 1866, the meeting of 4
April 1866, 505/1866].
26
Ibidem, the meeting of 15 September 1866, 1175/1866.
Serbian authorities manifested their opposition. At stake was the local
church, the famous monastery of Mesici which the Diocese of Vršac did
not want to lose. There was also a false petition containing the signatures
of several local Romanians and stating that the Romanians from Mesici
did not want to be separated from the Serbian Church. Nicolae Tincu
Velia, the Protopresbyter of Vršac, was entrusted with the task of finding
out who had initiated the Mesici petition because it was believed it
had been written on the instructions of the monks from the monastery
or the Diocese of Vršac27. A detailed investigation was conducted and
every signatory from Mesici was heard. It was found that most of the
inhabitants had been listed in the petition without their knowledge and
it was suspected that the chief initiator had been the local judge, Iovan
Putnic, a fervent and vehement supporter of the Serbs28.
Protopresbyter Nicolae Tincu Velia reported to Bishop Popasu that
the Romanians wanted to share the monastery’s church with the Serbs,
even if it would mean alternative services for the Romanians and the
Serbs29. Knowing this would not be possible before a final decision on the
issue of the monasteries, Bishop Popasu suggested that the Romanians
build a separate place of worship30.
Metropolitan Şaguna also inquired about the situation from Mesici,
from where he had received a petition for support. On 10 February 1866,
while in Budapest, the metropolitan informed the Diocesan Consistory
of Caransebeş about the request of the people from Mesici to help them
27
A.E.C., Fond bisericesc (III), file 439/1870, unnumbered.
28
Ibidem.
29
Petru Bona, Episcopia Caransebeşului, Timişoara, Publishing House Marineasa, 2006, pp.
280-281.
30
On 23 October 1865, Bishop Ioan Popasu sent a letter to Nicolae Tincu Velea in which,
among other things, he wrote: “It has been decided to raise money and ecclesiastical
vestments and objects from our beloved and hard-tried people of Mesici so that they can
open a house of prayer and later on a proper church, because the existing church cannot
be separated from the monastery, and if they go to the monastery’s church, then they will
not be fully subordinated to our hierarchy, but will risk falling under the Serbian hierarchy,
which people must clearly understand… It is urgent that the house of prayer be opened
sooner, that our priest Munteanu be settled there, and until then, our people should have
their children baptized by their priest Munteanu in one of our Romanian Orthodox churches
nearby”. Ibidem, pp. 284-285.
regain the right to hold the religious service in Romanian in the church
of the monastery from Mesici31.
In the first half of 1866, the Romanian priests and Protopresbyter
Nicolae Tincu Velia continued to be watched and denounced to the
church authorities from Caransebeş by the bishop of Vršac, who did not
recognize the authority granted to them by the Diocese of Caransebeş. The
Diocesan Consistory had to appeal to the government authorities to obtain
the enforcement “to the letter” of the diploma issued on 24 December
1864, which stipulated the establishment of the Metropolitanate from
Sibiu, and to refute the accusations brought by the Serbian bishop from
Vršac against Tincu Velia, Priest Panciovan and Priest Ioan Pavlovici
from Rusova-Nouă according to which they had made “unofficial” trips
to the localities with Romanian population such as Iabuca and Biserica-
Albă32.
Because of such exaggerations, on 4 June 1866, the Diocese of
Caransebeş asked the Military Command from Timişoara to supervise
the separation commissions, as there were cases when the believers were
misled. For instance, Ştefan Popovici, the priest from Straja, sent the
Provincial General Command from Timişoara a document that shows that
the Emperor’s resolution about the establishment of the Metropolitanate
of Sibiu and the Romanian Diocese of Caransebeş was never read in the
separation commissions. The same priest requested that the Emperor’s
resolution be made public through No. 14 Serbian-Banat Regiment33.
The report made by Bishop Ioan Popasu on 12 April 1866 on the
issue of the hierarchical separation mentions the tension existing in the
relations between the two sister churches:
“I can’t, however, <omit> the fact that even the Serbian

clergy makes false promises, tells lies and makes threats
against the poor Romanians from the mixt localities; what
31
A.E.C., Fond bisericesc (III), Protocolul şedinţelor bisericeşti pe anul 1866, şedinţa VI
din 17 februarie 1866, 268/1866, cota 268 [Protocol of church meetings for the year 1866,
meeting VI of 17 February 1866, 268/1866, position 268].
32
Ibidem, meeting of 7 July 1866, 1000/1866.
33
Ibidem, meeting of 18 August 1866, 1145/1866.
I could say if I wanted to talk about recriminations … it’s
about documents, this is the only way to cure this evil, this
is the only way to put an end to these tensions, if the county
congregations from the counties of Timiş and Torontal were
to speed up the formation of the mixt separation commissions
in the mixt localities, because my repeated requests on this
matter that I have sent to the authorities of the County of
Timişiu have never been answered”.
In this document, Bishop Ioan Popasu emphasized the repeated

delays in approving the mixt commissions and requested that they be
urgently formed because such delays could only lead to “unrest”34.
In the villages situated in the range of No. 12 Romanian-Banat
Border Regiment, the hierarchical separation also had to be enforced
with the involvement of the General Banat Command from Timişoara.
This was the case of Biserica Albă, Satu Nou, Naidăş and Alibunar35.
The first locality where the hierarchical separation came into effect was
Biserica-Albă, with more than 500 poor Orthodox Romanians for whom
Bishop Ioan Popasu requested aid through collections36.
At the request of the Diocese of Caransebeş, so that the Romanians
from Biserica-Albă could express their religious option freely, the
Ministry of War from the Empire informed the Diocesan Consistory
that they had entrusted the Serbian regiment and the German-Banat
one to appoint a military officer on the separation commissions who
would agree with the commissary sent by the Diocesan Consistory of
Caransebeş on the day when the commission was to begin its activity37.
On 31 January 1866, the Consistory of Caransebeş had already been
informed by the military command about the members on the mixt
commissions representing the Consistory of Vršac on the issue of
34
35
A.E.C., reg. 2/1867 (Protocolul şcolilor consistoriale pe anul 1867/The Protocol of
Consistorial Schools for 1867).
36
C. Brătescu, Episcopul Ioan Popasu..., pp. 48-49.
37
13 ianuarie 1866, 38/1866 [Protocol of church meetings for the year 1866, meeting of 13
January 1866, 38/1866].
hierarchical separation from the localities of Biserica-Albă, Alibunari,
Satul Nou and Oreşaţ. At the consistorial meeting of 27 January 1866, the
following were discussed: because the Consistory of Vršac had also sent
the consistorial tax collector in order to safeguard the rights guaranteed
to the Serbian Diocese and stipulated in the decisions adopted by the
Karlowitz Synod from August 1864 and in the imperial resolutions from
24 December 1864 and 6 July 1865, Bishop Ioan Popasu, who was the
president of the Consistory, decided to send Dr. Demetriu Haţegan in his
capacity as consistorial tax collector, with the same mission to protect the
property of the Romanian communities. The General Imperial Command
from Timişoara was also informed about sending Demetriu Haţegan.
The General Command was also informed that the protopresbyters of
Biserica Albă and Panciova would be on the commissions. They were to
inform the Diocesan Consistory about the day when the activities of the
mixt commissions would start in the localities of the protopresbyterate38.
To this end, Iosif Popovici, the protopresbyter of Biserica Albă,
informed the Diocesan Consistory of Caransebeş that the activity of
the mixt commission for the separation of the Church’s property and of
the school for the Romanians from Biserica Albă was set to begin on 5
March (new-style calendar). The letter was discussed at the consistorial
meeting of 3 March 1866, and the separation process was approved39.
The same Iosif Popovici, besides the information about the mixt
commission from Biserica Albă, also reported on the Romanian priest
from Naidăş, who wanted the separation from the Serbians and had been
threatened because of his Romanian attitude. At the meeting of 3 March
1866, the Consistory sent a letter to the protopresbyter of Biserica Albă
indicating that there was no reason for the Romanian priest from Naidăş
to be afraid, as the national rights in the Church were natural rights, for
which he could not be punished40.
On 3 February 1866, the Provincial General Command from
Timişoara sent another document, informing the church authority from
Caransebeş that despite having a large Romanian population, the localities
38
Ibidem, meeting of 27 January 1866, 99/1866.
39
Ibidem, meeting of 3 March 1866, 292/1866.
40
Ibidem, meeting of 3 March 1866, 380/1866.
of Naidăş and Pojejena Română, the former as a mixt locality and the latter
as a branch of Serbian Pojejena, were listed as belonging to the Diocese of
Vršac and so, until their separation in compliance with the law, the episcopal
convention should be sent to the bishop of Vršac. At the same time, they
considered extending the activity of the mixt commissions to include these
two localities as well41. In what concerned other parishes from the Danube
Gorge, the Diocese of Caransebeş sent the Provincial General Command
from Timişoara a letter informing them that the localities of Sicheviţa,
Gornea-Liubcova, Berzasca and other two more remote localities, Straja
and Grebenaţi, were purely Romanian. Therefore, under the law, they
belonged to the Diocese of Caransebeş, without contest42.
In the matter of the hierarchical separation, the Romanians from
Banat also benefited from the support of the Imperial Ministry of War.
At the request of the Diocese of Caransebeş dated 18 April 1866, the
Ministry sent the letter number 409 of 1866, informing them that they
had ordered the Provincial General Command from Timişoara to speed
up the agreements of the commissions from the mixt Romanian-Serbian
localities and to inform them about such agreements so that the final
decision could be made43. Consequently, on 30 May 1866, the supreme
administrative ruler of the county of Timiş issued an order notifying about
the organization of the mixt commissions in the matter of hierarchical
separation for the localities of Sântgeorgi, Berecuţia, Butin, Gaiu Mic,
Ciacova, Denta, Vlaicovăţ, Jamu Mic and Iabuca44.
Sometimes, the Provincial General Command from Timişoara was
tendentiously informed, and this would generate confusion. For instance,
there was suspicion that the commission for hierarchical separation of the
Romanians and the Serbs from Satul Nou also included people who were
not on the commission, according to Serbian sources. The Consistory
of Caransebeş refuted such allegations and documented that no foreign
persons had been on the commission from Satul Nou45.
41
Ibidem, meeting of 27 January 1866, 121/1866.
42
Ibidem, meeting of 17 February 1866, 270/1866.
43
Ibidem, meeting of 21 April 1866, 597/1866.
44
Ibidem, meeting of 4 June 1866, 787/1866.
45
Ibidem, meeting of 4 June 1866, 850/1866.
In 1866, in the protopresbyterate of Biserica Albă, which included
many localities subject to church separation, protocols for setting
up mixt commissions for the separation of the Romanians from the
Serbian hierarchy were made only in Biserica Albă, Pojejena, Doloave
and Dobriţa. Protopresbyter Nicolae Andreevici, the director of the
Romanian national schools from the Romanian military border district,
was also informed about these protocols because they included school-
related matters46.
In the following years, the mixt commissions continued their activity
without, however, any notable results. At the beginning of 1867, Bishop
Ioan Popasu issued an order requesting a list of all the mixt localities at
the border and within the province which was to be kept in the archives
and to be used as a supportive document for any subsequent demands for
separation47. The bishop also requested a list of mixt localities that were
not under the authority of the Diocese of Caransebeş and where the service
was not held in Romanian in order to take measures accordingly48.
Thus, the protopresbyter of Panciova, Simion Dimitrievici, sent the
list of the mixt localities from the protopresbyterate of Panciova where
there had not been any services in Romanian, in church or elsewhere. At
the consistorial meeting, it was decided to send this information to the
General Command in Timişoara49. On 22 August 1867, Iosif Popovici,
the protopresbyter of Biserica Albă, also reported on the localities that
did not belong to the Diocese of Caransebeş, where no services were
held in Romanian and where Romanian children attended the Serbian
school50. Unfortunately, in order to avoid any possible conflicts, these
localities never requested the separation from the Serbs.
Many times, the problems of the hierarchical separation went
46
Ibidem, meeting of 29 December 1866, 1739/1866.
47
A.E.C., Fond bisericesc (III), Protocolul şedinţelor bisericeşti pe anul 1868, şedinţa XV
din 17 octombrie 1868, 911/1868 [Protocol of church meetings for the year 1868, meeting
XV of 17 October 1868, 911/1868].
48
18 august 1867, 866/1867. [Protocol of church meetings for the year 1867, meeting of 18
August 1867, 866/1867].
49
Ibidem, meeting of 7 September 1867, 898/1867, position 898.
50
Ibidem, meeting of 7 September 1867, 89/1867, position 889.
beyond the borders of the eparchies of Arad and Caransebeş. In several
cases, at the request of the communities, Metropolitan Şaguna also
intervened in the issue of separation to help find solutions. Interested
in the situation of the Romanians from Satul Nou, on 8 February 1867,
he sent a letter to the Diocese of Caransebeş in which he supported the
nomination of the protopresbyter of Panciova as commissary in the matter
of the separation from Satul Nou. The protopresbyter was to persuade the
Romanians from the locality that, in exchange for receiving the church,
they would help the Serbians to build their own church. At the same
time, he suggested that in order to ensure a correct enforcement of the
law, the help of the Regiment Command should be requested and that
the Regiment should send their commissary as well51. The Consistory
acted accordingly, and in another letter, the metropolitan expressed
his satisfaction with regard to the decisions made by the Diocesan
Consistory of Caransebeş in the matter of the mixt border localities, and
communicated his opinion that the Romanians from Satul Nou should
speed up the decision for separation. In the same letter, the metropolitan
inquires about the stage of the separation process from Biserica Albă
which had major implications for the life of the Romanian community
from the entire area of the locality52.
Following this letter, the protopresbyter of Panciova was entrusted
with the task of making a detailed report on the situation in the mixt
localities53. In the same matter of the separation from Satul Nou, on 28
November 1867, the General Command from Timişoara sent a letter
informing that the Emperor had not approved the request made by the
Serbian metropolitan and patriarch to acknowledge the Serbs’ ownership
to the church and school from Biserica Albă or the building of a church
51
A.E.C., Fond bisericesc (III), Protocolul şedinţelor bisericeşti pe anul 1868, şedinţa IV din
29 februarie 1868, 196/1868 [Protocol of church meetings for the year 1868, meeting IV of
29 February 1868, 196/1868].
52
A.E.C., Fond bisericesc (III), Protocolul şedinţelor bisericeşti pe anul 1867, şedinţa IV din
29 februarie 1867, 284/1867 [Protocol of church meetings for the year 1867, meeting IV of
29 February 1867, 284/1867].
53
A.E.C., Fond bisericesc (III), Protocolul şedinţelor bisericeşti pe anul 1868, şedinţa VI din
21 martie 1868, 349/1868 [Protocol of church meetings for the year 1868, meeting VI of
21 March 1868, 349/1868].
for the Serbs from Satul Nou at the expense of the locality. However, the
Emperor had instructed that mutual agreements should be made in the
matter of separation for which they should wait a more favorable time, and
that the priests should encourage the believers to implement the separation
in peace and order54. At the same time, the Emperor urged the Consistory
of Caransebeş to take all the necessary measures accordingly55.
In the same year, after the conclusion of the dual pact, on 28
October 1867, the Hungarian Royal Ministry of Cults issued a decree by
which they informed the Diocesan Consistory of Caransebeş that they
had instructed the supreme administrative ruler of the county of Timiş
to dissolve the mixt commissions for the separation of the property of
the Orthodox churches from Petroman, Icloda, Sacoşul Turcesc and
Racoviţa and they also recommended that the cases of passing from one
Greek denomination to the other (Orthodox and Greek-Catholic) should
be dealt with in compliance with the diet law from 1847-1848, art. 20,
especially paragraph 7. All the protopresbyters and parochial priests
were informed about this decree56.
The requests for separation in the mixt localities continued in 1868.
On 28 January 1868, the protopresbyter from Biserica Albă submitted to
the Consistory of Caransebeş the request of the locality of Naidăş to
be accepted under the canonical authority of Bishop Ioan Popasu57. The
diocese took the necessary steps, but on 29 October 1868, the General
Command announced that the separation between the Romanians and
the Serbs could not begin in Naidăş and that they did not want this to
happen and urged the Consistory to reach an agreement with the Serbian
Diocese of Vršac58. The same authority, in the document dated 11 January
1869, informed that the Ministry of War could not approve the request
54
A.E.C., Fond bisericesc (III), Protocolul şedinţelor bisericeşti pe anul 1867, şedinţa XVIII
din 30 noiembrie 1867, 1172/1867 [Protocol of church meetings for the year 1867, meeting
XVIII of 30 November 1867, 1172/1867].
55
Ibidem.
56
Ibidem, meeting VII of 2 November 1867, 1082/1867.
57
A.E.C., Fond bisericesc (III), Protocolul şedinţelor bisericeşti pe anul 1868, şedinţa III din
8 februarie 1868, 138/1868 [Protocol of church meetings for the year 1868, meeting III of
8 February 1868, 138/1868].
58
Ibidem, meeting XVI of 31 October 1868, 969/1868.
submitted by the Romanians from Satul Nou for the organization of the
local church and the endowment of the priests before the separation of
the mixt localities under the new law of 10 August 1868 concerning
the organization of the metropolitanate of Karlowitz. The Consistory
decided to send a copy to the metropolitan of Sibiu for his information,
and expressed their fear that the delays were not auspicious for the
Romanian cause59. In addition to this document, there was the request of
the Military Command from Petrovaselo recommending the Consistory
of Caransebeş to intervene beside the Romanians from Satul Nou so that
their separation from the Serbian hierarchy could be made amiably and
peacefully60.
On many occasions, the Serbian hierarchy was dissatisfied with the
decisions made by the believers and the result of the separations. In his
letter dated 8 January 1873, the Bishop of Arad informed the Consistory
of Caransebeş that the administrator of the Serbian Patriarchate protested
against the separation act from Ciacova and requested that the locality
be returned to Serbian hierarchical jurisdiction61. The Consistory decided
to send a letter to the administrator of the Serbian Patriarchate informing
him that as long as it was based on the agreement from Karlowitz, the
separation was final and the locality could not be returned to the Serbian
hierarchy62. However, on 25 September 1874, the administrator of the
Ciacova Protoprebyterate reported that the attempt of the Romanians
from Ciacova to separate from the Serbian hierarchy had failed. He
also informed that the Romanians from Sântgeorgiu and Berecuţea had
declared their intention to separate from the Serbian hierarchy63.
59
A.E.C., Fond bisericesc (III), Protocolul şedinţelor bisericeşti pe anul 1869, şedinţa I din
6 ianuarie 1869, 27/1869 [Protocol of church meetings for the year 1869, meeting I of 6
January 1869, 27/1869].
60
Ibidem, meeting XI of 24 July 1869, 676/1869, position 676.
61
26 ianuarie 1873, 20/1873 [Protocol of church meetings for the year 1873, meeting of 26
January 1873, 20/1873].
62
Ibidem.
63
31 august 1874, 739/1874 [Protocol of church meetings for the year 1874, meeting of 31
August 1874, 739/1874].
To conclude, we would say that thanks to the efforts of the bishops
of Arad and Caransebeş and the two eparchial consistories, despite quite
a few obstacles, in many mixt localities from Banat the Romanians
succeeded in having their own churches and confessional schools, and in
using Romanian as the liturgical language and the education language in
the national school. Although the separation from the Serbian hierarchy
lasted until the 20th century, the first years after the formation of the
Romanian Metropolitanate from Sibiu were defining for the establishment
of the practical principles that led to the subsequent development of the
separation process. These principles prevented the assimilation process
of the Romanian population.
Paul BRUSANOWSKI
Brief presentation of the Orthodox Church from

Old Romania (1866-1918)
Abstract
The paper contains a brief overview of the relationship between
Governments and the Church in the Old Kingdom of Romania, namely
between the years 1866-1918. Of all Orthodox churches, that of
Romania was the only one in which fortunes were entirely secularized.
The interference of State authorities were particularly large in the
elections of bishops and archbishops. In the paper are described the two
major politico-religious crises: that of Primate Metropolitan Ghenadie
(1896) and of the Bishop Saffirin (1909-1910). The last part of the
paper is submitted to the Minister Spiru Haret’s motivation to introduce
constitutional reform within the Church, through the establishment of
Ecclesiastical Supreme Consistory.
Keywords:
Orthodox Church, Romania, Holy Synod, Consistory, Spiru Haret.
1. The Romanian Orthodox Church in the Kingdom of

Romania as “dominant church”
It was a State Church, being considered, by the 1866 Constitution
(Article 21), as “dominant”:
“The Orthodox religion of the East is the dominant religion of the

Romanian State. The Romanian Orthodox Church is and remains
independent from any foreign hierarchy, keeping, however, its
unity with the Ecumenical Church of the East as far as the dogmas
are concerned. The spiritual, canonical and disciplinary matters
of the Romanian Orthodox Church shall be regulated by a single
central Synodal authority, according to a special law” 1.
Apart from the Constitution, the Church from the Old Kingdom
was regulated by the following laws:
• Law on the election of the Metropolitans and bishops, as well as

on the constitution of the Holy Synod of the Holy autocephalous
Romanian Orthodox Church, voted in 18722 and modified through
other laws in 1895, 1909 and 1911. The modification from 1909
introduced, apart from the Holy Synod, another central organism
- the Ecclesiastical Supreme Consistory, fact for which that
amendment also bore the name of Law of the Consistory3;
• Law on the clergy and on the seminars, voted in 1893 and
modified in 1896, 1900, 1906, 1909 and 19104;
• Law on the House of the Church5.
As a result, it enjoyed the full support of the State6, the mere obloquy
towards a priest or the Orthodox cult, on the street, being punished by the
Criminal Code7.
1
Ioan Muraru and Gheorghe Iancu, Constituţiile Române. Texte, note, prezentare comparativă,
3
ed., Bucureşti, 1995, p. 35.
2
The German translation of the Law in Paul Brusanowski, Rumänisch-orthodoxe
Kirchenordnungen (1786-2008). Siebenbürgen – Bukowina – Rumänien (= Schriften zur
Landeskunde Siebenbürgen 33), Böhlau Verlag, 2011, pp. 130-134).
3
Ibidem, pp. 134-141.
4
5
6
Spiru Haret, Criza bisericească, Bucureşti, 1912, p. 105.
7
Chiru C. Costescu, Colecţiune de Legi, regulamente, acte, deciziuni, circulări, instrucţiuni,
formulare şi programe începând de la 1866 –1816, aflate în vigoare la 15 august 1916,
privitoare la Biserică, Culte, Cler, Învăţământ religios, Bunuri bisericeşti, epitropii
parohiale şi Administraţii religioase şi pioase. Adnotată cu Jurisprudenţa Înaltei Curţi de
Casaţie şi Justiţie, dată până la anul 1916, Bucureşti, 1916, pp. 13-14, the jurisprudence
comments, no. 1-5, to article 21 from the Constitution.
2. Economical dominance of the Government over the
Church
At the head of the Church there was the Holy Synod, made up of
the two Metropolitans of the country (the one from Bucharest bearing
the title of Metropolitan primate), of the six suffragan bishops and of
all the titular bishops from Romania (Art. 9 of the Law of the Synod
from 1872). The titular bishops were, most of the times, Greek bishops,
ordained for diocesan Sees from Asia Minor or the Near East but who,
because of the extension of the Islam, no longer existed. The canonicity
of these bishops was more and more contested.
Only the “spiritual, canonical and disciplinary businesses” entered
the competence of the Holy Synod (Art.14 from the Law of the Synod
from 1872). The care for scholastic, vestry and foundational affairs,
which in the Church from Transylvania were solved by mixed ecclesiastic
organs (made up of clerics and laymen), was taken by the governmental
authorities8. The Professor of Canonic Law in the University of Bucharest
G. D. Boroianu wrote: “Today in Romania, as in the other countries,
the assets of the Churches are administered by the State”. Actually,
Boroianu was wrong. In the majority of Orthodox States, the Church had
an important word to say in the administration of its own patrimony. The
church from Romania’s Old Kingdom was the only Orthodox Church
that had absolutely no authority over the administration of the Church’s
assets. It was allowed, in 1893, and only at the level of the parishes, the
establishment of a vestry, made up of three members: the parish priest
and two laymen, one appointed by the Ministry of Religion and the
other one elected by the believers and confirmed by the prefect, in rural
parishes, or even by the minister, in urban parishes (Art. 14 from the Law
on the clergy and the seminars, voted in 1893).
In 1902 the so-called House of the Church was established, a
financial organism, through which the Government administrated all
the Church’s funds. The Law on the establishment of the House of
the Church, from 1902, was abrogated in 1906, when the Law of the
central organization of the Ministry of Education and Religion, as well
8
D. G. Boroianu, Dreptul bisericesc. Principii de drept. Organizaţiunea Bisericei Române.
Legile ţării pentru Biserica şi organizaţiunea Bisericilor Ortodoxe, vol. II, Iaşi, 1899, p. 54.
as of the other administrations dependent on it, entered into force. The
organization of the House of the Church was stipulated in Title IV of
the law, articles 77-89. In a “note of jurisprudence” to article 14 from
the Law on the clergy and the seminars, it was stated: “The assets that
are given to the churches are property of the State and the vestrymen,
executors or founders are only their administrators, and when they do
not conform to the provisions of the law of the House of the Church, this
House has the right to destitute them and to take the administration upon
its own”9.
3. The interference of the Government regarded the spiritual

issues and the election of the bishops
The interference of the Government did not limit itself to material-
administrative issues only, but regarded the spiritual ones as well. Thus,
the Ministry of Religion attended all Synodal meetings, with a consultative
vote. And the decisions of the Holy Synod had to be submitted, through
the Minister of the Religion, to royal sanctioning. The interference of
the State was even greater as far as the election of the hierarchs was
concerned. This act was done by an Electoral College in which took
part the members of the Holy Synod, as well as the Orthodox deputies
from the country’s Parliament. “The modality of election of the bishops
submitted them to a series of fluctuations and political interests”10. In
the case of vacancy of a Diocesan or Metropolitan seat, the ministers of
the Religion would make everything possible to get one of their party’s
political clients elected. There were also cases when those at power
struggled to dethrone the Metropolitan in office, considered as being one
of the “opposition”11.
In 1893, the conservative government of Lascăr Catargiu forced
the Metropolitan Iosif Gheorghian to resign, because Gheorghian did
not accept as canonical the Law of the clergy. Ghenadie Petrescu was
9
Chiru C. Costescu, Colecţiune de Legi, regulamente, acte, deciziuni…, p. 222.
10
N. Iorga, Istoria Bisericii româneşti şi a vieţii populare a românilor, 2ed, vol. II, Bucureşti,
1932, p. 298.
11
Ion Mamina şi Ion Bulei, Guverne şi guvernanţi. 1866-1916, Bucureşti, 1994, pp. 93-96;
Mircea Păcurariu, Istoria Bisericii Ortodoxe Române, vol. III, 2ed, 1994, p. 132.
appointed to the Metropolitan See, a man without a theological education,
so the same Government modified the Law of the Synods from 1872, in
order to allow his election. Yet, on October 4, 1895, took place a change
of government. The liberals took over. The leadership of the Government
was held by Dimitrie A. Sturdza, and the minister of the Religion was
Petre Poni. The Metropolitan Ghenadie soon came to terms with the
prime minister, even hooked up with him, both of them meddling in the
administration of the Brancovean endowments. Their administration was
in the care of the princes Gheorghe Bibescu and Alexandru Ştirbei. The
two complained to King Carol I of the interference of the prime minister
and of the Metropolitan primate. The King called them to orders, but the
Metropolitan refused to listen to him. But doing this, he entered an open
conflict with Sturdza, the prime minister. On the request of the minister
of Justice, Eugeniu Stătescu, the Metropolitan Primate was subjected to a
Synodal trial, and the result was his condemnation and defrock. Ghenadie
refused to leave the Metropolitan Palace, but he was evacuated by the
police force and put under restraint at the Căldăruşani Monastery. This
fact did not lead to the appeasement of the spirits. But, on the contrary,
due to the schemes of the former Metropolitan, a dissident group in the
Liberal Party appeared, under the leadership of N. Fleva. The latter allied
himself with the Conservative Party, organising, at Ghenadie Petrescu’s
expense, a series of public manifestations in several Romanian towns.
Thus, “the Ghenadie issue, starting from October 1896, finds itself in the
middle of politics, being nothing else than a political weapon with which
the opposition was seeking the overthrown of the Government”.
The conservative leader, Take Ionescu, stood up for Ghenadie
even in Parliament, by reading there a “Petition of the inhabitants of
Bucharest addressed to the King”, by which one demanded that justice
be done in the case of the deposed “oppressed” Metropolitan. Finally, the
Government of the majority fraction from the Liberal Party resigned, and,
on November 21, 1896, another cabinet was formed, a liberal-dissident
one, under the rule of Petre S. Aurelian, minister of the Religion being
George Mârzescu. It was a Government of the compromise, with only one
purpose: the settlement of the Ghenadie issue. There existing a political
consensus with the conservatives, the liberal-dissident governors managed
to obtain, from the part of the Synod, the rehabilitation of Ghenadie. The
latter, however, did not return to the See, but presented his resignation.
Two days later, Iosif Gheorghian was once again elected. So, it was the
liberals who deposed Ghenadie and also the liberals (though members of
the dissident wing) the ones who rehabilitated him, determining the Holy
Synod to give two verdicts totally opposed to one another.
A new ecclesiastical-political crisis took place between 1910 and
1911. The Conservative Party opposed the project of the Law on the
Consistory of the Liberal minister for Religion, Spiru Haret. They found
support in the bishop of Roman, Gherasim Saffirin. On October 12 1909,
Saffirin read in the Synod a declaration, in which he placed the anathema
on both Metropolitans and on the Bishop of Huşi, Conon Arămescu
Donici, under the pretext that they had sustained, in the Senate, the
modification of the Law of the Synods, supposed by Saffirin to be anti-
canonical. On January 13, 1910, he came back to the Synod, on condition
that the Government modified the law already voted by the Parliament.
At the same time, he started a frenzied campaign against the Metropolitan
Primate Athanasie Mironescu, installed on February 8, 1909. In
December, 1910, the liberal Government fell. The new minister of the
Religion, Constantin C. Arion, from the conservative Government, led
by Petre P. Carp, initiated the amendment of the law from 1909 and, at the
same time, supported Saffirin’s campaign of removing the Metropolitan
Primate. The latter was impeached for immoral life, and his trial was
done by the members of the Synod, in the presence of the minister Arion,
in May-June 1911. After 40 days of scandal, the process ended with
the acquittal of the Metropolitan Primate and the condemnation of the
Bishop Gherasim Saffirin to deposition without defrock. But, disgusted,
the Metropolitan Athanasie Mironescu forwarded his resignation the
very next day. None of the Bishops throughout the country was disposed
to accept Arion’s offer of becoming Metropolitan Primate. Only after
eight months of sedisvacancy, the Bishop of Huşi, Conon Arămescu
Donici, gave in the ministerial pressures becoming, on February 19,
1912, the leader of the Church from the Old Kingdom (he remained in
this function, until January 1, 1919, when he resigned, because of his
attitude, not to leave Bucharest during the German occupation)12.
4. The motivation of the intention of Spiru Haret to establish

the Ecclesiastical Supreme Consistory.
The authority of the Holy Synod in civil society had tremendously
fallen, due to its fault only. The Members of the Synod constituted a
privileged class of superior clerics, total disinterested in the faith of the
common clergy.
“The Synod, by remaining totally isolated from the rest of the

clergy, was like a tree which had been cut off the roots that kept
it alive. That is why for 37 years we saw it having no initiative
and no influence, in none of the occasions in which the important
interests of the Church were at stake […]. It would be unfair to
say that the Synod had been the cause of some downfall of the
Church; yet, it is a fact that, reduced to a rather honorific role, to
the solving of some current issues of discipline and administration
and, especially, deprived of the contact with the clergy, through
which to establish a wave of organic life in the entire Church, it
definitely could not offer more than it was giving”13.
Instead of being real spiritual leaders of the people, the bishops

allowed the entrance in the Synod of a “bad spirit”, and the consequences
had been: “intrigues, plotting, schemes, Byzantism at leisure!”. The
system of the clientele within the fraternity of the superior clergy from
Romania’s Old Kingdom grew bigger and bigger, “thus enthroning
inside the Romanian Church the most Byzantine system possible!”14. In
such conditions, the implication of the State in the life of the Church was,
according to Ioan Gh. Savin, a necessity. The State was forced to take
measures, in 1893, for the improvement of the salary of the priests, as
12
Spiru Haret’s work, Criza bisericească, Bucureşti, 1912 - presents this scandal in detail.
13
Spiru Haret, Criza bisericească, Bucureşti, 1912, p. 13.
14
N. Dobrescu, În chestia modificării Legii Sinodului. Lămuriri canonice-istorice asupra Sinodului
şi asupra Organizaţiunei bisericeşti din Biserica Ortodoxă, Bucureşti, 1909, pp. 33-34.
well as for the removal of many priests without the proper education but
who had been ordained by bishops in exchange for money. The result:
the Law on the clergy and seminars.
“At the moment of the proposal of the law, it was a necessity. It

envisaged the enthroning of legality and the retrenchment of the
abuses inside the Church. The situation had gone that bad, that this
was being asked from everywhere by the secular clergy, who were
not doing very well at the time, as they hadn’t done well in the
past either, with our without the secularization of the monasteries’
assets. This tendency of the law to establish inside the Church a
regime of order and legality can be noticed in each chapter”15.
The law had a negative result for the people. From the 6165
Churches existing at that time, the authorities recognised only 297 urban
parishes and 2734 rural parishes, establishing that this number could
annually increase by 12, and later on, by 20 new parishes. In 1906, there
were recognized 368 urban parishes and 3326 rural parishes. The priests
from the acknowledged parishes were to receive salaries from the State
budget, the Ministry reserving its right to confirm any new appointment of
a priest. But many priests from the churches that were not acknowledged
remained without a salary, fact which led to the increase in number of
the churches that were no longer ministered. If in 1893 there were almost
1000 churches that were no longer ministered, at the beginning of World
War I their number had doubled (from the 6768 existent churches, only
3810 were ministered).
In 1909, the minister Spiru Haret tried to continue the process
of instauration of legality and constitutionalism inside the Church.
His model was the reform of Metropolit Şaguna in Transylvania and
Hungary, based on the conception according to which the Church was a
living organism, and not a business of the bishops:
“As term of comparison, let us cast our eyes across the mountains,
where the fraternal collaboration of all members of the Church,
15
Ioan Gh. Savin, Biserica română şi noua ei organizare, Bucureşti, 1925, pp. 26-27.
hierarchs, laic clergy or simple laymen, make circulate in the
Church a life so intense and beneficial. Whilst in our case, the abyss
between the upper and the lower clergy, consecrated through the
Law from 1872, was growing bigger and bigger and made itself
present through worrying signs…, in Transylvania we find all of
them united in a common work, which lifts the Church and the
people itself so high (…) Şaguna found himself confronted with
an analogous situation. His work consisted of using in the most
rational manner the forces he disposed of, and to let the forces
which were still latent to develop themselves and become useful.
We could all notice the splendid result to which he arrived. To
repeat Şaguna’s piece of work in all its wholeness here, at us, would
have been impossible three years ago. Şaguna knew how to use a
set of favorable circumstances which where lacking here, at us;
and, on the other hand, the matter presented here some difficulties
that Şaguna didn’t have to fight with. That is why, our ambition
from 1909 could not go as far as wanting to do the same as he had
done. And yet we had both the possibility and the duty to make at
least the most obvious inconveniences disappear, inconveniences
that the experience had disclosed in the Law from 1872; let us try
to make out of the clergy a social force, vivid and active, placed at
the service of the nation; let us try to approach as much as possible
the upper clergy and the lower clergy, in order to facilitate their
common action, in order to augment the authority of the former
and the self-confidence of the latter16.
The bishops opposed themselves, considering the Synod as

their monopole. As a result, Haret instituted an Ecclesiastical Supreme
Consistory, made up on a certain representativeness of the secular clergy.
In the Consistory were supposed to enter the members of the Holy
Synod, then a professor from the Faculty of Theology (who had to be a
layman and chosen by the professors of the two faculties from Bucharest
and Iaşi), a professor from the Theological Seminars, two abbots (one
16
Spiru Haret, Criza bisericească..., pp. 14-15.
for each Metropolis of the country) and, then, 17 clerics (three for each
Diocese of Bucharest, Iaşi and Râmnic, two for each Diocese of Roman,
Huşi, Dunărea de Jos – Galaţi and one for the Dioceses of Buzău and
Argeş), chosen by the priests from those Dioceses. Regarding the manner
of election, a special regulation was issued, which left room for abuses.
And, indeed, the elections unfolded following all the rules of the original
democracy from Romania. Here is the report of some consistorial
elections in the diocese of Buzău:
“The one who reads the law and, especially, the one who knows
how the elections for the Consistory were done, can see that they
were not elections, but parodies of elections. The one who tries to
understand the regulation, after which the elections were made, can
only catch the blatant lies of the ones who support the Consistory.
The priests from the Consistory are anything but the chosen ones
of the clergy, they are anything but the expression of our will. And
how could it possibly be otherwise, when from the four, voted by
the priests, the minister confirms only one? At least, this is how
things were in our diocese from Buzău, where the one confirmed
(unfortunately) in the elections had had a much smaller number of
votes than another one, who, of course, deserved much more in the
eyes of the priesthood. What mattered were not our interests, but
the political ones; Mister Minister named his man. The elections,
as they were, were merely formal. This things is also emphasized
by the fact that, also through disposition of the regulation, an
important part of the clergy was excluded from the vote, namely
the young element, which, in the current circumstances, could be
of great help” 17.
The new Consistory received two types of powers: a) church

discipline (as the highest judicial court, but only in an advisory, because
decisions had to be approved by the Holy Synod); b) economic powers,
17
Nicolae Bălan, Chestiunea bisericească din România şi autonomia Bisericii noastre, Sibiu,
1910, pp. 22-23.
hitherto under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Religious Affairs
(especially government assets and organization of theological schools).
Following the change of Government, in 1910, the conservative minister
Arion modified the law. Consistory became an advisory body even in
economical issues, so that “the fearful Consistory gradually transformed
itself, especially after the amendments from 1911, in a new edition,
somewhat more diluted and anemic, of the Holy Synod”18. And “the
compromise which resulted could be seen in the hybrid existence of the
new institution, which wanted itself to be a great reform and ended up
being nothing more than a new and useless form”19. The new creation
was not just a “useless form”, but one which mixed up the ecclesiastical
life even more, because,
“the Holy Synod itself did not have sufficiently-well clarified

attributions and sometimes arrogated itself the right to take charge
of different ecclesiastic administrative issues, which should have
been in the exclusive competence of the Consistory. In other words,
we had to deal with a complete confusion of attributions, which
could no longer perpetuate itself, unless it was in the obvious
prejudice of the ecclesiastic interests”20.
Only after the Union of 1918 succeeded the Transylvanians in

the establishment of the constitutional principle in the whole Orthodox
Church of Great Romania (the Law and Statute for the Organization of
the Church from 192521, after six years of difficult negotiations).
18
Ioan Gh. Savin, Biserica română…, p. 18.
19
Ibidem, p. 13.
20
Ioan Lupaş, Legea Unificării bisericeşti. După note stenografice. Discurs în şedinţa
Camerei Deputaţilor, la 1 aprilie 1925, Bucureşti, Imprimeria Statului, 1925, p. 38.
21
Paul Brusanowski, Rumänisch-orthodoxe Kirchenordnungen…, pp. 318-370.
Camelia Elena VULEA
The Confessional Elementary Education from

The Vicarship of Hațeg between Secularisation
and Authonomy (1850-1860)
Abstract
The history of Transylvania in the decade of neoabsolutism had
a complex evolution, sprinkled with numerous changes in the internal
organization of the Empire. At the same time it was a period of constant
search for a viable political formula through which the state tried to
ensure its control over the domains of the public life, without impeding
the natural course of modernization in which they had enrolled, in
accordance with the requirements of that time. During this period the
reforming tendency which influenced in a positive way the educational,
economic and church fields was visible. The regime gave special attention
to the organization and development of the school system, reiterating some
of the principles of the enlightenment. The school initiatives promoted
by the neoabsolutist governing rekindled the conflict between the state
and the church for the control over schools and education. This period
was an ebullient one as far as the evolution of the primary education
in the County of Hateg is concerned, with obvious preoccupations for
equipping the schools, appointing qualified teachers and especially for
trying to persuade the people about the benefits of education.
Keywords:
elementary education, legislation, progress, educational process.
The transilvanian history had a complex evolution in the neo-absolutist

decade, marked by a lot of changes in the internal organisation of the empire.
It was, in the same time, a period of searching for a viable political formula
through which the state tried to assure its control over the domains of the
public life without damaging over the normal course of modernisation in
which it had been implied, according to the time’s requests. The integrity
maintenance of the Austrian Empire through centralisation, bureaucracy,
germanisation, prohibition of any kind of political actions of the
natinalities was compensated by a visible reformist tendency based on
the model of the Metternich1 regime which had positively influenced the
school domain, the economical and the ecclesiastical one. The regime
provided a special attention to the organisation and the development
of the school sistem, reiterating some of the illuminist principles. The
economical and social changes which took place in Transilvania and
Banat after the patents from 1853-1854, the school legislation with a
relatively modern and generous2 character for the nationalities had a real
contribution to a progress of the roumanian school from the Principality.
The school initiatives promoted by the neo-absolutist governing
updated the conflict between state and church for control over schools
and education, which started in the XVIIIth century, in the procedures
inspired by the Theresian and Josephian reformism. The year 1850
started , from the school system point of view, with the “general
principles for re-organisation of the school system în the monarchy3”,
by the Ministery of Culture and Instruction from Vienna, completed with
some other school degrees, standing together as a real school legislation
of the epoch. On the 19th of april 1850, ”The Principles” were published
in Transilvania by governor Wohlgemuth through a gubernyal degree.
The legislation emphasized the innovative spirit and the modernizing
tendencies, annoucing the generalisation and the requirement of the
elementary school. Other principles of the legislation regarded the
elementary school’s organisation in the mother tongue and the state’s
obligation to support the educational process. It was now agreed, after a
long time of marginalisation of the church’s involment with education,
ever the beginning of a new collaboration between state and church
1
Nicolae Bocşan, “Revoluţia de la 1848”, in Memorandul 1892-1894, Bucureşti, 1992, p. 169.
2
Teodor Pavel, Instituţii româneşti moderne în Transilvania. Prelegeri universitare, Cluj-
Napoca, 1994, pp. 80-81.
3
Ibidem, p. 78.
in an educational field. The next years strengthened the church’s role
in education’s organisation and coordination process anounced by the
Concordat with Rome (1855) and by the Normative Act from 1858,
which grounded the confessional principles, according to which, schools
were built, sustained and ruled with the church’s expense.
The present study has an objective to establish the way in which
this legislation was reflected in the organisation and development of the
elementary educational network from the Vicarship of Hațeg, realizing
an evolutional analysis of the realities of this controversal area, and
still so cosmopolite. The intention is to establish to what extend the
school keeps a certain rank of autonomy compared to the secularisation
tendencies of the Austrian state.
Border area, placed near the “Țara Românească”, Hațeg has
shown great variations in its evolution. Ștefan Moldovan, who knew
the realities in Hațeg very well, sadly found a total lack of any kind of
elementary school, when he was appointed as a substitute of a prelate.
As a matter of utmost importance, the education was always kept in
his attentions. The canonical visits he had made, were all occasions to
insistantly plead for the educational cause, asking the villagers to offer
support to all initiatives in this direction. His followers continued his
efforts on an educational level. The most amazing thing from this period
is the believers’ enthusiasm for the schools’ building, the struggle for
creating the first elementary schools. The result of this actions was the
opening of schools in 20 communities, in which, at the begining, the
teacher had been the priest till 1857, when the first graduates of the
pedagogical school from Hațeg4 were registered and apponted as teachers.
The entire situation makes the neo-absolutist schools’ achievements
to seenm spectacular, with a real exciting process of creating popular
school, altough their suppliement was very poor from all point of view.
Durring this years, in Hațeg, the problem of school’ location was
4
Ahivele Naţionale. Direcţia Judeţeană Hunedoara-Deva [ANDJHdD], fond Vicariatul
greco-catolic Haţeg, dos. 4/1856 ff. 1-4; Iacob Radu, Istoria vicariatului greco-catolic de
Haţeg, Lugoj, 1912, pp. 205-336; Gh. Naghi, “Un manuscris inedit al lui Ştefan Moldovan
privitor la Ţara Haţegului la mijlocul secolului al XIX-lea”, in Sargetia, XIV, 1979, pp.
314-317.
a sharp one, the documents of the age showing generous but modest
initiatives. Thus, the canonical visit between 1852-1853 emphasized
both the lack of these initiatives5 and also the fact that there were no
educational acts in the communities. The building of the schools started
later, the first school being mentioned only in 18556. Thus, in Paroș-
Peștera, there were two renovated rooms for the educational process,
and in Râu de Mori, the school was being built on a land donated by
the Badia family. Between 1855-1856, a school was also built in Râu
de Mori. The year 1856 brought about more initiatives in this direction7.
Bucova, Păucinești, Băuțaru de Sus and Coroieșteni had the necessary
stuff and, along the year, they started the work for buliding the schools8.
Other attempts for building schools were made in Sălașu de Jos, Hățăgel
and Sălașu de Sus, but the end of the century will not bring about the
finalisation of the buildings9. Besides these communities who owned
buildings for the educational process, tehre were 12 more parishes in
which educational acts were being developed by the priest in the parish
house.
Regarding the inventory of the schools’ supplies, a critical
situation was signalled. Generally, the school had the necessary
objects for the development of the educational process: tables, chairs,
blackbouard, supplies and text books, but in most of the cases, the
furniture was damaged and insuficient. One of the two defficiences of
the hategan education was the lack of the land property. It is not like
there would have been the so called fruit-growing gardens because the
parishes did not own the land for building the schools.
One of the features of the elementary education was its religious
content, which was obvious in the objects and textbooks used. The most
5
Ştefan Moldovan, Însemnare. Protocolul vizitaţiunilor canonice a Vicariatului Haţegului
începând de la 15 Noemvrie anului 1852 până în 13 ianuarie 1853, respectiv până la 31
ianuarie 1873 ziua în care s-a conchis vizitaţiunea prima cu vizitaţ[iunea] Bes[ericilor]
d[in] Haţeg.
6
Gh. Naghi, art. cit., pp. 425-430.
7
Camelia Vulea, “Reţeaua şcolară în vicariatul greco-catolic Haţeg între anii 1849-1867”, în
Sargetia, Deva, XXX, 2001-2002, p. 528.
8
ANDJHdD, fond Vicariatul greco-catolic Haţeg, 4/1856 f. 1-4.
9
Ibidem, 2/1857 f. 22, 2/1858 f. 28-29, 2/1862 f. 25, 2/1863 f. 18-19.
wanted textbooks for the schools were “Abecedarul” de Blaj și cel de
Viena, “Istoria biblică”, “Catehismul” and “Arithmetic books”. The need
for these books was great, their number being smaller than the number
of pupils, and even those which existed were in a high state of damage.
Between 1850-1860, the priests and the teachers, supported by the
prelats started a campaign for acquiring the necessary school textbooks10.
Although yhe interest for impprovement of the educational process was
increasing, the educational act in the primary school, often, did not pass
over the simle cramming, reading and arithmetics, learning the catechism
and religious songs. In the educational process of the time, the stress
was on the formative aspect of the teaching-learning process, having
as a proof the improvement of pupils’ knowledge with practical skills,
which were achieved durring the economy classes and by practicing in
the school garden.
The good functioning of the educational process mostly depended
on the presence of certain qualified persons who had a special vocation
for teacher’s mission. The teachers used to be appointed for the job.
For the same period, in the vicarship of Hațeg we cannot speak about
a real procedure for appointing teachers, because the teacher’s duty
was performed by the priest11. Since 1856, after the first teachers had
graduated the courses of the pedagogical school from Hațeg, the Eparchy
starts to be interested in solving certain major lacks of the educational
process in the area, by appointing qualified teachers. The procedure for
getting a teacher’s position was mainly the following one: the eparchy
announced the vacant position for teachers, through memorandum,
establishing a deadline for taking the candidates’12 applications.
Afterwards, the candidates were announced and those who asprired to
a position of a teacher handed in their file, after they had previously
obtained the prelate’s agreement13.
10
Ibidem, 124/1859 f. 11-17, 20-29, 32-39; 125/1859 f. 46-47, 70-71, 92, 108-109; ANDJHdD,
fond Vicariatul greco-catolic Haţeg, 2/1858 f. 21-22, 20.
11
I. Radu, op. cit., p. 67; A. A. Rusu, “Un manuscris inedit al lui Ştefan Moldovan privitor la
Ţara Haţegului la mijlocul secolului al XIX-lea”, in Sargetia, XX, 1988-1991, p. 224; Şt.
Moldovan, Însemnare…, passim.
12
ANDJHdD, fond Vicariatul greco-catoli Haţeg, 2/1857 f. 50, 58, 59; 2/1858 f. 15-16.
13
ANDJBN, fond Vicariatul greco-catolic al Rodnei, 42/1852 f. 1; 100/1857 f. 21, 22;
The file contained the necessary documents which should have
stated the candidate’s level of instruction (certificates about graduation
of the village school, the common-place, ordinary or of the gymnasium)
and there were real chances for those who owned as many certificates
as possible14. Certificates regarding the moral and political behaviour
were being attached, that were provided by the local authorities. The
particular evolution of the vicarship of Hațeg made the last cathegories
of documents to be required only after 1867, when we can speak about
the existence of an authentical school network. The appointment of a
candidate was conditioned by his/her file’s consistency and by the
prelat’s recommendation.
The youth aspiring to a teacher’s position had accurately
acquired, in a rather short time, the requirements imposed by the
Ordinariat under whose jurisdiction the vicarship of Hațeg was. If in
the first part of the neo-absolutist period, under the circumstances of a
lack of pedagogical institutions, the Diocese of Lugoj did not required
the criterion of graduating special studies, through the end of the 50’s,
after the graduation of the first qualified tteachers from pedagogical
schools, only these one could have been appointed on a vacant possition
of teachers. The neo-absolutism, thus, brings the uniformisation of the
exigencies started by the eccleziastic forums in the law, regarding the
professional training of the persons claiming the possition of a teacher.
meanwhile, the foundation of the pedagogical school15 (1854) pointed
the begining of the preocupations for a hard training for those claiming
a teacher’s position, which will progressivelly lead to an improvement
of the teachers’ quality. The activity of the pedagogical school from
Hațeg allowed this area to get lose, in a short time, of the handicap of
the schools’ absence and of the lack of qualified teachers, recorded at the
begining of the age. The statistics over the twenty schools functioning
ANDJHdD, fond Vicariatul greco-catolic Haţeg, 2/1857, f. 58, 59; 2/1858, f. 11-12, 13-14;
2/1860 f. 1, 2-3.
14
ANDJBN, fond Vicariatul greco-catolic al Rodnei, 28/1851 f. 40; ANDJHdD, fond
Vicariatul greco-catolic Haţeg, 2/1860 f. 19-20.
15
Ioachim Lazăr, “Din activitatea Preparandiei din Haţeg (1854-1857)”, în Anuarul Institului
de Istorie şi Arheologie, Cluj, XXIX, 1989, passim; Idem, “Învăţământul pedagogic
hunedorean între 1849-1883”, în Sargeţia, XXV, 1992-1994, passim.
in 1858 amphasizes a real progress underlined by the fact that 10 of the
schools had as teachers graduater of the pedagogical school16.
The teacher’s status represented for a lot o youngsters a chance
for overpassing their condition and for achieving a social position
appreciated by the community although the financial income was rather
modest. The state dealt only with the praisworthy legislative initiatives
on an educational level, leaving the burden of the material support of
schools on the church. The church also had the obligation of providing
the teachers’ sallaries, the poor material condition of the state being
reflected on the insufficiely of the remuneration for a decent life. In
Hațeg county, the payment was made by the villlagers who offered litle
sums of money, food, wood for fire or days of work. The quantum of
money was established through an annual share, which varied from one
parish to another according to the financial status of the inhabitants.
Thus, in Merișor, in 1857, the teacher received 40 cr./family and 7
fathom of wood, in Grădiște each family gave 20 cr. and one fathom of
wood, in Fărcădinul de Sus, in 1856, 30 cr./family, in Uricani-Hobiceni
30 cr./house17. Besides wood for fire, the teachers’ remmuneration was
oftencompleted with small quantities of food or with days of work. In
1852, in Subcetate, the teacher, who was the priest, asked for and got as
a payment only a small cantity of corn from each pupil, and in Clopotiva,
the teacher got one day of work from each house18. Sometimes, when
teacher was the priest of the village, he taught pupils “without any kinf
of remuneration”19.
According to the number of the inhabitants, the teachers’ wages
varied from 40-70 florini. In Șerel and Cârnești the teacher got 40 fl.,
in Ciula Mare 52 fl., in Uricani-Hobiceni till 70 fl., in 185920. But there
were also some exceptions, although less credible, when the teacher’s
wage increased till 100 fl., as it seemed to happen in Șerel21. There were
16
ANDJHdD, fond Vicariatul greco-catolic Haţeg, 2/1857 f. 50, 58, 59.
17
I. Radu, op. cit., p. 206, 213, 337.
18
Ibidem, p. 186.
19
ANDJHdD, fond Vicariatul greco-catolic Haţeg, 4/1856 f. 2.
20
I. Radu, op. cit., p. 337.
21
A. A. Rusu, op. cit., p. 263-264.
some unfortunate situations, when the teacher ad to leave the school
because he had not been paid anymore. The establishement of the
teacher’s remuneration quatum made by the community left him/her at
the villagers’ mercy. In order to facilitate the task of the school’s and the
teacher’s support, durring this period, a lot of attempts were made for
realising some educational funds, and thus, the villagers donated22, for
this pourpose, the interest of the state loan from the 1854, the income for
three months of innkeeping, small parts of the communal land, parts of
forest, quantities of grains or wood for fire.
If, in the first years of the 6th decade of the XIXth century, there
still were cases when teachers with a weak professional instruction were
preffered, but who had modest material requests, in the last two or three
years the situation changes. The presence of more and more qualified
teachers and the eparchy’s continuous efforts in this way, led to the raise
of the teachers’ wages after 1860.
The attendancy and the educational act also represented a constant
preocupation of the prelates from Hateg because the school absenteism
prooved to be an obstacle hard to overpass. The documentary material
does not allow an evidence of attendency for the vicarship of Hateg,
because in this period, there was a process of crystallization of the school
network. The school had to overcome numerous problems and overpass a
lot of obstacles, because the traditional mentality of the peasants ignored
the necessity and the usefullnes of education. The peuple believed that
what had been good for them, would be good for their children too.
Guilty for the weak attendly and for the lack of continuity where
mainly the parents who prefered to keep their children at home, for the
household work and for working the land. The hardship of the family,
thepowerty and sometimes the lack of one parent, or the ilnesses where
the reasons for the school absenteism. the state had attempts to solve
this problem through the law for declaring the school compulsory on the
13th of May 1857, no. 6813. It had establishes that the school attendency
was compulsory for children of both genders, between the age of 6
and 12 (for elementary school) and between 12-15 (for the repetition
22
ANDJHdD, fond Vicariatul greco-catolic Haţeg, 2/1857 f. 77; 2/1859 f. 2, 3, 12-46, 53-55,
57-58, 61-62, 65-82.
school) both from villages and from towns, with punishments for parents
opposing23. The preocuppation of the civil and ecclesiastical authorities,
and also the state is involment had, as a consequence, a change of
attitude of the community towards school, visible in the improvement
of the school attendency in 1857-1860. The advantage gained in these
yaers bysupported efforts would dispel in the years of liberalism when
the school attendency would decrease again.
On a carefully research, the neo-absolutist decade can be divided
in two stages if we take into consideration the criterion of the school
politics promoted by the austrian state, regarding the romanian elementary
education. Thus, the first stage developed between 1850-1858, having as
main feature the tendenlybnto perpetuate the states involvement in the
educational coordination and guidance. The novelty stands in that the
state associated with the church for leading the educational process. The
second stage took place between 1858-1860 when the state recognised
the confessional principle in organizing the primary education, which
was a consequence of the accord from 1855, fact that equated with the
entrance of the elementary schools in the attributions of the church. The
neo-absolutist regime, with all its defficiencies under political aspect,
defered a great perspective opening on a cultural-educational level, like
never before. The legislation of the age had a contribution to offering
new perspectives of evolution to establishing certain modern principles
for school guidance, like the one which declared the primary school and
attendence compulsory, the romanians understood the new legislation as
a consolidation of the confessional-educational authonomy, which was
the main condition for preserving the national identity.
The state confined itself to praise worthy legislative initiatives
on the educational level, leaving the burden of the material supportof the
school to the church. It had the obligation to provide the teachers wages,
and the poor materialcondition of the romanian state was reflected on
insufficient remuneration for a decent life.
In spite of the austrian states tendency, which could have been
identifiedin the legislation of the time, to overtake the lead of the
23
Dicţionar cronologic. Educaţia, învăţământul, gândirea pedagogică în România, Bucureşti,
1978, p. 112.
educational affairs, the romanian greco-catholic elementary education
remained underthe lead of the church, preserving a high rank of
authonomy. This status consolidated after 1858, as a consequence of the
proclamation of the elementary schools as confessional schools.

Mirča MARAN
Identity, Assimilation and Church Separation in

the Serbian Banat in the Second Half of the 19th
and Early 20th Century
Abstract
In this study we aimed to present some points of Church separation
in towns and villages of the Serbian Banat, carried out with greater
or lesser success, which created the conditions for the identity of this
population in the coming decades to be channelled towards the formation
of a national minority in the future Yugoslav and the present Serbian
state, where the national and cultural consciousness remain until the
present day a part of the Romanian ethnic being.
Keywords:
Separation of church, Romanians, Serbians, Banat, assimilation.
The separation of the Church is one of the crossroads moments in

the Romanian national emancipation in the former Habsburg Monarchy
and also one of the key elements in the Romanian-Serbian relations in the
modern era, which hid within itself the danger of a potential worsening
of these relationships, in otherwise very good millennial history of the
two peoples. However, the separation would end, the current tensions
being overcome after the Church property was divided and the two
nations continue to live, to this day, in friendly relations. It is certain that
the moments that were the backbone of the discord in the Romanian-
Serbian Church relations should not be neglected, or hidden, this being
a key part of the reality of national-emancipation era experienced by
the peoples of Southeastern Europe. The separation of the Church in the
towns and villages in the Serbian Banat should not be regarded as an
isolated phenomenon, but as a process that is a component part of the
Serbian-Romanian Church relations in the Monarchy in the second half
of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth century.
The only peculiarity may be the situation in the villages near Pančevo,
found at the periphery of the ethnic Romanian space and exposed to
a much stronger degree of the Serbian influence than in other parts of
the historical Banat, where the separation process encountered greater
difficulties, in some cases the result being unfavourable to the Romanian
population, the failure of the separation resulting in complete assimilation
of the Romanians in some villages.
We will focus our attention on issues of the separation of the
Church in a few villages in the Serbian Banat, carried out to a larger or
smaller degree, which in the coming decades created the conditions for
the identity of this population to be channelled towards the formation of
a national minority in the future Yugoslav and the present Serbian state,
where the national and cultural consciousness remain until the present
day a part of the Romanian ethnic being.
The separation of the Church in Satu Nou (today Banatsko Novo
Selo) near Pančevo, carried out in 1872, is of particular importance,
given the large number of Romanians who lived in this town (over 6,000
Romanians at the beginning of the twentieth century). All the issues related
to the separation in Satu Nou ended successfully, so by the end of the
nineteenth century, the headquarters of the Romanian Orthodox Parish of
Pančevo would be moved in this village with Trifon Miclea as its pastor.
Until then, the headquarters of the Romanian Orthodox Parish was
based in the village where the post of the parish administrator was, the
first of which was Simeon Dimitrievici, the parish priest of Ovča, a well-
known individual and a highly regarded personality in the area since the
revolutionary years of 1848-1849. He put strenuous effort in organizing
the Protopresbyterate that he administered through the formation of
new parishes, established in the ethnically homogeneous villages and in
those with mixed population, where, as we have seen, there were often
difficulties. He also tried through other actions to emancipate the rural
population, found in a situation not very favourable in terms of its degree of
cultural development. We mention in this context his intervention in Sibiu,
when he requested from the leadership of the Metropolitan typography to
send books to the Protopresbyterate of Pančevo and the response given by
the Metropolitan Şaguna himself to the protopresbyter Dimitrievici1. The
Metropolitan Şaguna noted: ”I was given the opportunity to be convinced
that there are Romanian priests and Romanian Christians in those parts
that await with eagerness to be taken again under the wing of the canonical
hierarchy of their nation”. The Metropolitan informs the following: “I
arranged for this opportunity for you to receive 20 Calendars, 20 writings
of John Chrysostom and 20 biographies of the Blessed Macrina as books
for the use of priests and Christians”, arguing that ” there is a need for such
books, which will strengthen the ancestral faith, the belief in the nation and
the good conduct”.
In other places, however, the separation process encountered
various problems, which proved to be irresolvable. Either the failure
or the delay of the formation of these Romanian Orthodox parishes,
followed by the inexistence of schools with Romanian as the language of
teaching in villages and towns where a parish would not be established,
would speed up the process of assimilation there. The case of Sefkerin, a
village near Pančevo, is known. There, a part of the Romanian population
comes from Transylvania (Răşinarii Sibiului), where the separation of
the Churches failed, despite the endeavours of the Romanian Orthodox
Protopresbyter of Pančevo, the efforts of the parishes in the surrounding
areas (particularly Glogoni) and the diocesan administration in
Caransebeş. Attempts to carry out the Church separation in this village
were present as early as the beginning of the seventies of the nineteenth
century, when a petition was made by the Sefkerin Romanians demanding
the separation, and the attempts continued unsuccessfully for decades,
until the end of the first decade of the twentieth century. Analysing the
situation of the Romanians assimilated in villages Borča and Sefkerin,
the publicist Alexandru Ţinţariu from Pančevo stated in 1909 that “e
semnificativ faptul că, deşi locuitorii acestor comune, şi mai cu seamă
1
The Archive of the Protopresbyterate of Pančevo, Satu Nou – Banatsko Novo Selo
(A.P.S.N.), the letter by Andrei Şaguna to Simeon Dimitrievici on 20th December 1865.
generaţiile tinere, absolut nu ştiu vorbi româneşte, şi acuma îşi păstrează
numele de familie a moşi-strămoşilor lor”[It is significant that although
the residents of these villages, and especially the younger generations,
absolutely do not know how to speak Romanian, they still retain the family
name of their ancestors]2. About such a situation present in areas with
mixed population, where the Romanians were serbianized, some consider
it to be the result of “negligence of competent factors, of intelligence
and, most of all, of the indifference of the gentlemen from Caransebeş”3
a statement which should not be accepted without reservation, since the
main fault is that of the local population, disinterested in the salvation of
the Romanian language and identity, which is also affirmed by Valeriu
Perin, the Romanian priest from Glogoni, employed by Caransebeş to
try to conduct the separation of the Romanians from Sefkerin. In a 1909
letter addressed to Trifon Miclea, the Protopresbyter of Pančevo, Perin
says: ” As for the hierarchical separation, I inquired, but everywhere I
got a negative response, because the Romanians from Sefkerin, even
those that can speak Romanian do not want to use a language other than
Serbian, dishonouring their own language, and with such people we
cannot conduct any process of separation...”4.
Such a situation was also present in many other places. The
separation attempt of the Romanians from Jasenovo, a village near Bela
Crkva, failed as well. In this village in the nineteenth century there was
a fairly large Romanian population, which was also not interested in
the Church separation. This can be deduced from the statement of the
Protocol of the Serbian Congressional Delegation at the meeting held in
Sremski Karlovci (Karlowitz) 8th/20th of April 1874, from which we learn
that “in the mixed community from Iasenova, neither the Romanians nor
the Serbs have asked for and do not ask for separation”, the Romanian
delegation only asked from the Metropolitan of Sibiu “a face paşii
necesari ca credinciosiloru de nationalitate romana din Iassenova sa li
se dee celu putinu mangaerea sufletesca si copiiloru loru instructiune
in limba loru materna – fiindu constatatu că acolo se află romani in
2
Alexandru Ţinţariu, ”Pierderi simţitoare”, in Ţara noastră, Sibiu, no. 17/1909, p. 137.
3
Teodor Filipescu, ”Glasul poporului”, in Ţara noastră, no. 12/1908, p. 11.
4
A.P.S.N., no. 71 Ex 1909, a letter from 9th/22nd June 1909.
numeru considerabile”[to make the necessary steps so that the believers
of Romanian origin from Iasenova would at least receive spiritual solace
and their children education in their mother tongue since it has been
established that there are Romanians in considerable numbers ]5. Similar
situation was found in Parta, a neighbouring village to Jasenovo, where
at the separation, by the order of Nicolae Tincu Velia, the Romanian
Orthodox Archpriest of Vršac, Ştefan Popovici was employed as the
pastor of Straža, who notified the Archpriest the following: “For the
transition of the Romanians from the military community of Parta we
cannot do anything at this time, they say that their priest conducts the
sermon in Romanian, they are satiated - they hear that justice is the same
in Romanian and Serbian…”6. The consequence of such an attitude of
indifference of the Romanians in these two mentioned villages was -
assimilation. Likewise, the Romanians from Gaj, Kajtasovo, Veliko
Središte, Mala Margita and elsewhere were also assimilated.
In Dobrica, on the other hand, the problems arising from the
process of the Church separation were very serious, both because of
the advanced stage of assimilation of the Romanian people and because
of the Romanian representatives from this village who insisted on
receiving the church building, in exchange for the compensation, which
would benefit the Serbs, the latter having strong arguments that they had
contributed more than the Romanians to the building of the ecclesiastical
edifice and therefore the building should belong to them. Even though
the separation committee was on site, there were no positive results,
so the separation was postponed. The Serbs succeeded in proving that
the building of the church was done exclusively by the contribution of
the Serbian families. In relation to this issue, we quote Lazar Nikolić,
the author of the Dobrica village monograph and the teacher who was
a member of the committee that in 1871 discussed the problem of the
Church separation in this village: ”How many Vlachs could have been
in 1802 when the calculations for the building of a church were made
and when it started? A few households! This still does not give them
5
Albina, Sibiu, no. 45, 1874.
6
Ştefan Popovici to Nicolae Tincu Velia, Straja, 3rd January 1866. Published in: I.D.Suciu,
Nicolae Tincu Velia, Timişoara, 1945, p. 339.
any rights to the entire church building”7. The committee consisted of
Colonel Karapandža, Archpriest Filip Trandafilovici from Vršac, on
behalf of the Serbs (in addition to representatives of Serbs from Dobrica)
and on the behalf of the Romanians Vincenţiu Babeş and Bishop Popasu.
In 1872, Bishop Popasu asked Simeon Dimitriević, the administrator of
the Romanian Orthodox Protopresbyterate of Pančevo, to send a letter
to the Romanians representatives from Dobrica - Toma Dimitrov, Alexe
Jebeleanu and Cuzman Neagu, and through their mediation to all the
Romanians from Dobrica that if “a new way of agreeing with the Serbs
would be prepared, in this case they should ask that the new committee
delegation going on site would go to Velika Margita to visit them too, in
order to try to bring reconciliation”8. If, however, the Romanians from
Dobrica still insisted on their demands ”then no other solution remains but
to file a lawsuit”, the Diocesan consistory will be prepared to recommend
“a lawyer capable of conducting the process”. The Church separation
in Dobrica was finally done in 1899, but a little too late, because the
vast majority of the Romanian population in this village was already
serbianized, a process that continued even after the establishment of
the Romanian parish, especially through the means of intermarriage
and it would finally end in the middle of the twentieth century with the
complete disappearance of Romanians and with the disestablishment of
the Romanian Orthodox parish9. According to the priest George Lungu,
there were attempts of joining the serbianized Romanians from the
village of Dobrica to the Romanian Orthodox parish in this town, but
they ended unsuccessfully, because “only a tenth of them returned to us
because they were ashamed of the Serbs, but even worse because when a
Serbian bride enters a house, the entire family is serbianized”10.
The same case is also present in other villages such as Omoljica,
Orešac, Deliblato, where the separation delayed but it did not stop the
process of assimilation of the Romanians, who nowadays are about to
7
Lazar Nikolić, Hronika mesta Dobrica u Banatu, Pančevo, 2002, p. 42.
8
A.P.S.N., A letter by Ioan Popasu to Simeon Dimitrievici, 12th October 1872.
9
Mircea Măran, Românii din Vovodina, Zrenianin, 2009, p. 236-240.
10
Romulus S. Molin, “Contribuţiuni la istoria Românilor bănăţeni. 1783-1792”, in Foaia
Diecezană, Caransebeş, no. 30, 1923, p. 3.
completely disappear with the full serbianization of this ethnic group.
Apart from the separation process itself in mixed communities,
there were a number of other problems to be solved, even in villages with a
homogeneous population. One of the positive consequences of the Church
separation for the Romanian clergy was that some of the priests returned
their old family names, renouncing the ones imposed by the hierarchy in
Sremski Karlovci. We mention the case of the priests in the family Neagoe
from San-Ianăş (Barice) (among the members is, in fact, also a well-
known scholar, teacher and author of the calendars with Latin characters
- Ştefan Popovici Neagoe). Namely, priests Ioan Popovici from San-Ianăş
and Vichentie Popovici from Malo Središte asked to return to their old
“conume familiariu” [family name] - Neagoe. Related to their request,
the Bishop Popasu instructed the Archpriest Nicolae Tincu Velia ”to ask
the mentioned priests to join to the existing petition the birth certificate
from the church baptismal records, because only if their imposed surname
Popovici is found in the baptismal records would there be a need to
ask for a concession of the higher instances to invalidate it”11. From the
church documents in the later years (although I did not found the official
document to confirming this), we realize that the two priests’ claim came
to completion and they returned to the name Neagoe.
The situation did not essentially differ in the towns of the Serbian
Banat from the one in the villages. Vršac was in the old times an urban
environment with a large Romanian population, which coexisted with
the Serbian co-religionists and the Church separation would result in the
establishment of the Romanian Orthodox parish in the early twentieth
century. In Pančevo, another important urban centre of the Serbian Banat,
a large Romanian population has been present since the 18th century,
which, like in Vršac in the 18th and 19th centuries, was exposed to strong
assimilation. Not even the establishment of the Romanian Orthodox
parish in 1899 could slow down this process. As a Tribuna correspondent
from Arad reported12, following the establishment of the Parish and after
the emergence of problems in the relations between local intellectuals,
”the number of Romanians, most of whom are already serbianized is
11
A.P.V., A letter by Ioan Popasu to Nicolae Tincu Velia, 7th October 1865.
12
We think that the correspondent is Alexandru Ţinţariu.
still large enough, (...) after numerous crises which affected our parish,
the feeling of national pride of the Romanians living here who are still
unserbianized began to degenerate once again”, because ”for years on
end nothing was done in any area, no sign of life was given, however
pale it may be...”13.
Finally, we mention the case of the Romanians from Bela Crkva,
certainly the most specific one, by the fact that the largest number of
Romanians were living in this town (out of all the urban environments
in the Serbian Banat), with the most crystallized national identity and a
bourgeoisie who started the fight for national rights with utmost vigour
since the late 18th century and early 19th century. The Romanian Orthodox
Parish of Bela Crkva was the first of the 40 communities with mixed
population within the Diocese of Caransebeş where separation was
achieved. This was asserted by Bishop Popasu14 himself, who presented
this case as a good example to be followed by the Romanians from other
mixed communities, arguing that ”if our Romanians from Bela Crkva
could separate and form a pure-Romanian church community, then so
could the tens of thousands of Romanians from other mixed villages
and towns break away from foreign hierarchy and form their own pure-
Romanian communities with a Romanian priest and the Romanian
language spoken in the church...”. The greatest merit for the success of
these events have been attributed to Vasile Radulovici, a merchant and
Romanian national leader from Bela Crkva15, who, in these decades,
undertook numerous actions with the aim to bring national emancipation
to the Romanians in this town and the entire area.
The intellectual stratum, large and very active on a national scale,
13
“De la românii din Panciova”, Tribuna, Arad, 9th October 1909, p. 6.
14
A.P.S.N., Nr. Cons. 207/869, Circular letter issued by Bishop Ioan Popasu, based on
decisions adopted at the meeting of the Diocesan consistory on 20th February 1869:
”Among more than 40 mixed communities found on the territory of the Diocese
of Caransebeş, the Romanian Orthodox parish from Biserica Albă is the first one
that was formed from the Romanians separated from the foreign hierarchy, it is the
first parish that has returned to its parent, to its national Romanian archiereus, to its
Romanian priest and the Romanian language, which is among others, a powerful
means of advancing the good conduct, the fear of God and religious devotion”.
15
Ibidem.
along with the foundation of the Romanian Corul vocal (Choir) in
1870 (with an excellent repertoire and of enviable quality), were most
surely indicators that were in favour of the continuity of the Romanian
population with a well-formed national identity. On the other hand, the
Parish consisted of approx. 500 souls, most of them poor16, who worked
strenuously to pay all the expenses related to the proper functioning of
the Romanian church and school. Therefore, the Romanians from Bela
Crkva, with the support of the Diocesan consistory, requested material
assistance from all the parishes within the diocese, for the construction
of the edifice of the Romanian Orthodox church, which would finally
be accomplished in 1871. But the result is completely unexpected: the
Romanians were entirely serbianized in Bela Crkva. The main reason
would be the poverty of the majority of the Romanian people and the
practice of having mixed marriages, plus a large number of townspeople
leaving for the Romanian motherland, following the division of Banat in
1919 and, finally, the economic decay that began suddenly in Bela Crkva
after setting the new borders, when the town became an “appendage” of
the Serbian Banat and the Yugoslav state.
Of course, one can also enumerate other interesting points
regarding the Church separation in the Serbian Banat, shown in archival
documents, the Romanian and Serbian contemporary press, and other
sources of the time. The final conclusion is that the Church separation
encouraged the creation of some Romanian communities with a clear
national identity, but that in many villages and town it took place too late,
so the assimilation process could no longer be stopped.
16
A.P.S.N., Nru. Cons. 331/869, The letter issued by Bishop Ioan Popasu, based on decisions
adopted at the consistorial meeting on 10th April 1869.
Florin DOBREI
Hunedoara Church and Austrian-Hungarian

Dualism

Abstract
The military defeats from the years 1859-1866, Austria’s political
isolation at a European level and its removal from the German
Confederacy, the acute financial crisis and the centrifugal tendencies of
the subjugated nations pressured the Vienna Court to enter a compromise
agreement with the Hungarian dominant class meant to maintain the
unity of the Empire; it has become known in history as the Austrian-
Hungarian Dual State. As inhabitants of their forefathers’ Transylvania,
which was now a part of Greater Hungary, the people of Hunedoara
participated in all the actions meant to protect the national flame against
chauvinistic, anti-Romanian laws; the priests and the confessional
teachers had a determining role.

Keywords:
Hunedoara, Austro-Hungarian dualism, Memorandum, political
activism-passivism, anti-Romanian laws.
Foreshadowed by the 1865 bilateral treaties (resumed at the

beginning of 1876)1, “the act of birth” of the Austro-Hungarian dual
state was finalized by crowning Emperor Franz Joseph I as Hungary’s
“Apostolic King” on 8 June 1867. From now on, the new state system
would include two distinct political entities, Austria and Hungary, which
would, however, jointly deal with matters related to foreign, military
1
In extenso, Ioan D. Suciu, Antecedentele dualismului austro-ungar şi lupta naţională a
românilor din Transilvania (1848-1867), Bucureşti, Albatros, 2000.
and financial policies. Also, there were two separate governments and
parliaments, and the legislative issues were the responsibility of a mixt
commission, which would meet in either capital alternatively. From a
territorial standpoint, Austria ruled over Cisleithania (the industrially-
developed western part), and Hungary ruled over Transleithania (the
preponderantly-agricultural eastern part). From then on, Hungary, as a
political individuality, had her own Council of Ministers and Parliament
as well as an army of Honved soldiers with police force duties. For Austria,
the pact was the result of a constitutional arrangement meant to consolidate
the Empire; for Hungary, at stake was Transylvania. The proclamation of
Greater Hungary, within the borders of the Crown of Saint Stephen, as
one single recognized political nation and one single official diplomatic
language, i. e. the Hungarian one, had already been stated in 1848.
Transylvania’s actual annexation to Hungary was legalized by the Diet
assembled in Cluj on 18 December 1866 and finalized in 1868 through a
special law; on 19 April/1 May 1869, the Transylvanian government and
the Diet were dissolved. The laws passed between 1870 and 1876 would
also finalize Hungary’s territorial organization, thus completing the
process by which the intra-Carpathian Romanian space was integrated
into the new dualist administrative structures. Transylvania’s autonomy
(included alongside Croatia, Slovakia and Vojvodina in the group of the
“Hungarian Crown Countries”) was cancelled2.
The consequences are easy to anticipate; “the national, unitary
and indivisible state” – although for five Hungarians there were eleven
people who were not Hungarians! – started a policy of total and effective
integration of Transylvania into Hungary at political, economic,
administrative and cultural levels. For the Romanians, the consequences
were disastrous; by a series discriminatory laws – “The Act of Union” of
1868 (cancelling Transylvania’s autonomy), “The Law of Equal Rights
of Nationalities” of 1868 (refusal to recognize ethnic individuality),
“The Law of Education” of 1868 (the obligation to teach Hungarian in
the nationalities’ elementary, secondary and normal schools, now under
the strict control of the state), “The Law of the Press” of 1872 (the
2
Dan Berindei (ed.), Istoria românilor VII/1. Constituirea României moderne. 1821-1878,
Bucureşti, Romanian Academy, 2003, pp. 748-751.
establishment of courts of jurors in Târgu Mureş, Cluj and Sibiu to judge
press trials), “The Electoral Law” of 1874 (arbitrarily establishing the
electoral qualification for Romanians in order to ensure a clear Hungarian
majority in the Parliament in Budapest), the “Trefort” laws of 1879
(introducing Hungarian in Romanian pedagogic and popular schools),
1883 (Hungarian as a compulsory subject in Romanian middle schools
and banning subventions granted by the Romanian State), and 1891
(making Hungarian compulsory in kindergartens), “The Bánffy Law” of
1896 (the Magyarization of the names of localities), the “Appony” laws
of 1907 (imposing the “cultural tax”) and 1917 (creating the “cultural
zone”), etc. –, the Hungarian authorities denied the Romanians all the
political, social and cultural rights and liberties they had fought hard to
obtain in the previous decades3.
Under the circumstances, removing the Austro-Hungarian dualist
regime became the main objective of the Romanian national fight,
generating an unprecedented solidarity movement in the Romanian
society4. Through protests, ample political actions, cultural events and
by strengthening the trans-Carpathian ties, the people from Hunedoara
gave their full support to the Transylvanian cause. Once again, the clergy,
both Orthodox and Greek Catholic, were among those who took over the
3
Ioan Lupaş, Studii istorice, vol. V, Sibiu-Cluj, Romanian Book Tipografy, 1945-1946,
pp. 361-381; Mircea Păcurariu, Politica statului ungar faţă de Biserica românească din
Transilvania în perioada dualismului (1867-1918), Sibiu, Institutul Biblic și de Misiune
al Bisericii Ortodoxe Române, 1986, pp. 31-44, 134-178; Anton Drăgoescu (ed.), Istoria
României. Transilvania, vol. II, Cluj-Napoca, „George Barițiu” Foundation, 1997,
pp. 67-86, 101-150; Alexandru Moraru, Biserica Ortodoxă Română între anii 1885-
2000. Biserică. Naţiune. Cultură, vol. III/1, Bucureşti, Institutul Biblic și de Misiune
al Bisericii Ortodoxe Române, 2006, pp. 615-633; Viorel Lupu, Şcoala hunedoreană şi
Marea Unire. Valenţe educaţionale în perioada 1860-1918 şi contribuţii ale slujitorilor
şcolii la realizarea Unirii Transilvaniei cu România, Cluj-Napoca, 2008, pp. 48-117,
143-182.
4
To see, Teodor V. Păcăţian, Cartea de aur sau luptele politice-naţionale ale românilor
de sub Coroana ungară, vol. II, Sibiu, Tipografia Arhidiezană, 1902; Ștefan Pascu
(ed.), Românii din Transilvania împotriva dualismului austro-ungar (1865-1900).
Studii, Cluj-Napoca, Dacia, 1978; Liviu Maior, Mişcarea naţională românească
din Transilvania. 1900-1914, Cluj-Napoca, Dacia, 1986; Keith Hitchins, Conştiinţă
naţională şi acţiune politică la românii din Transilvania, vol. II, Cluj-Napoca, Dacia,
1992 etc.
relay of the fight for freedom and unity from their forefathers5; aiming at
this ultimate ideal, confessional tensions were forgotten, rare exceptions
notwithstanding.
The first reactions against the dualist pact were signaled in the aria
of Zarand of the county of Hunedoara. Disgruntled at the replacement of
the Romanian county commissioner Ioan Pipoş with Francisc Ribiczei,
in the period between February and March 1867, the inhabitants of
the villages of Rişculiţa, Ociu, Ţebea, Cărăstău, Băiţa, Ormindea,
Crăciuneşti, etc. wrote a number of complaints to the Hungarian
Government in which they requested that the old Romanian component in
the county administration be maintained; fearing confrontations, another
Romanian, Dumitru Ionescu (1867-1868), was temporarily appointed
county commissioner by the Hungarian Government. Iosif Hodoş from
Zarand, deputy and delegate of the Brad constituency, also raised his
voice against the legalization of the dual system alongside the other
Transylvanian Romanians; after 1867, from the tribune of Parliament in
Pesta, he asked for laws favorable to the oppressed Romanian nation6.
Since a major political change was not anywhere near in sight,
the Romanians from Transylvania reacted by founding “The National
Party of the Romanians from Transylvania” at the Conference held at
Miercurea Sibiului on 7-8 March 18697. The “passivist” tactics, adopted
as a protest against the anti-Romanian dualist laws, were also voted by
the Electoral Club of the county of Hunedoara8. Actions continued along
the same lines after the foundation of “The Unitary National Party of the
Romanians from Transylvania, Banat and Hungary” at the Conference
from Sibiu on 12-14 May 1881; the participants from Hunedoara were
Francisc Hossu-Longin (notary) and George Secula (member of “Central
Permanent Electoral Committee” from Sibiu). The political “passivism”
5
Ioachim Lazăr, „Atitudini şi acţiuni politice hunedorene între anii 1875-1900”, in Restituiri,
Deva, II (1994), no. 2, pp. 184-185.
6
Vasile Ionaş, „Adunarea românească a comitatului Zarand între anii 1861 şi 1876”, in
Sargetia, Deva, XX (1986-1987), pp. 420-422; Ciprian Drăgan, „Mişcările naţionale ale
românilor din Hunedoara între 1849-1867”, in Sargetia, Deva, XXXII (2004), p. 224.
7
Istoria României. Transilvania..., II, pp. 567-596.
8
L. Maior, op. cit., p. 10.
became much more dynamic. In Hunedoara, Romanian meetings were
called in the main centers in the months of March – June with the
purpose of “educating” the voters from an electoral point of view; more
specifically, we are talking about the meetings held in Hunedoara (14/26
May), Deva (16/28 May) and Dobra (2/14 June). Among the organizers,
several members of the clergy could be found: Avram Păcurariu from
Hunedoara, Ioan Papiu from Deva and Romul Crainic from Dobra9.
On the same note, against the elimination of the Romanian
language from the Secondary School of Deva, which had been built with
Romanian funds, a petition signed by thirty-three “Romanian public
figures” was sent to the Hungarian Government; among the signatories
we can find Ioan Papiu, protopresbyter of Deva and one of the founders
of “The Romanian Society of Reading” (1868), “The Society for the
Romanian Theater Fund from Transylvania” (1870) and “The Reunion
of the Romanian Teachers” (1878) from Deva10. The content of the
“Memorandum” written by George Bariţiu – printed in Sibiu in 1882
in Romanian, Hungarian, German and French – was popularized in the
county of Hunedoara by Francisc Hossu-Longin and George Secula11.
Regaining autonomy for Transylvania, using the Romanian
language in administration and the justice system and appointing
Romanian civil servants in all the fields of the public life were then
just a few of the grievances of the 2,000 people from Hunedoara
gathered to attend a great Romanian conference in the “Saint Hierarch
Nicholas” Church from Deva on 10 March 1883; “host” for the 2,000
participants (lawyers, priests, teachers, peasants, etc.) was the same
protopresbyter Ioan Papiu, who, on 17 February 1883, had openly
protested against the Trefort laws. “The Convening of the Meeting”,
published in “Observatorul” [“The Observer”], the national-political
gazette, on 12/24 February 1883 stated that “in agreement with several
friends from all over our county of Hunedoara, the undersigned have the
9
Gelu Neamţu, „Din lupta intelectualităţii hunedorene împotriva dualismului austro-ungar
(1881-1883)”, in Sargetia, Deva, V (1968), pp. 267-270.
10
Maria Razba, Personalităţi hunedorene. Oameni de cultură, artă, ştiinţă, tehnică şi sport
(sec. XV-XX). Dicţionar, ed. a II-a, Deva, Emia, 2004, p. 400.
11
G. Neamţu, op. cit., pp. 270-272.
honor of calling a conference of all the Romanians from this county in
the usual locale from Deva at 3 pm on the day of 10 March 1883. The
main purpose of the conference will be: to consult the participants and
decide upon the best course of action about the new bill concerning the
education in secondary schools forwarded to the Diet in Budapest, which
threatens the education in our confessional national secondary schools
with a disaster and extinction. Deva, 4/16 February 1883, Ioan Papiu
m.p. [manu propria, N/A], Dr. Lazăr Petco m.p., George Secula m.p.,
Alesiu Olariu m.p., Francisc Hossu-Longin m.p.”12.
A strong echo was generated throughout the county by the
proclamation-manifesto of 18 August 1885 of “The Committee for
Initiative of the Romanian Irredentist Movement” from Bucharest, in
which the Transylvanians were called to make common cause in order
to accelerate the historic process of uniting Transylvania and Romania13.
The action of the Romanians from Transylvania that created the greatest
stir, however, was the well-known “Memorandum”, presented at the
Court in Vienna on 28 May 1892 by a delegation consisting of more
than 300 people. Thoroughly prepared, the text of this collective protest
of the Romanians from Transylvania – on the whole, it reiterated the
grievances included in the historic Supplex Libellus Valachorum of
1791-1792, now updated and amplified – was completely ignored by
the ruling authorities; at the end of a true odyssey, the memorandum
was returned to Ioan Raţiu, the president of “The Romanian National
Party.” The firm adhesion to the grievances of this memorandum was
expressed again at the National Conference held at Sibiu on 23-24 July
1893. In the so-called “Trial against the Romanian nation” that took place
in Cluj between 7 and 25 May 1894, the leaders of the memorandum
movement were sentenced to long years of imprisonment. The ample
protests organized during the trial and after sentencing by the Romanians
from everywhere but especially by “The League for Cultural Unity of All
12
Pentru libertate şi unitate naţională. Documente hunedorene (1848-1920), Bucureşti,
1990, pp. 249-251, no. 128-129; Gelu Neamţu, Momente zbuciumate din lupta românilor
pentru realizarea Dacoromâniei (1848-1918), Cluj-Napoca, Argonaut, 2005, p. 314.
13
Idem, „«Proclamaţia Iredentei române» din 1885, la Deva”, in Sargetia, Deva, VI (1969),
pp. 127-132.
Romanians” made Vienna pardon those imprisoned at Szeged and Vác14.
On this occasion too, the memorandum movement found the
intellectuals and priests from Hunedoara on duty, the latter category
being considered the most dangerous “adversary” of the Magyarization
process; on 4 November 1899, the Ministry of the Interior suggested
to the prefect of Hunedoara that they be “bought out.” After being
printed, in order to be popularized, some of the copies of the famous
Romanian political manifesto were sent to the brave protopresbyter
Romul Crainic of Dobra, who was investigated for this “offence” by
the Court of Ilia on 19 June and 18 September 1893; he declared that
he would only answer the questions if “the hearing is in the Romanian
language” and subsequently refused, on the same grounds, to sign
the minutes and filed an appeal against the proceedings. Among the
supporters of this Romanian political action, we can also count the
clerk Ioan Munteanu from Haţeg (member of the Romanian delegation
to Vienna, investigated on 17 December 1892 for having distributed
“The Memorandum”), the lawyer Silviu Moldovan from Orăştie, the
apprentice lawyer Augustin Nicoară from Deva, the doctor Avesalon
Feier from Brad, etc. As defenders of “the accused” the Romanian
National Committee appointed three lawyers from Hunedoara, namely
Silviu Moldovan from Orăştie, Francisc Hossu-Longin and Alexandru
Hossu-Longin from Deva. The trial itself took place between 7 and 25
May 1894 in a tense atmosphere; the group also included two defendants
from Hunedoara, Romul Crainic (because of “the lungs disease” he
could not appear in court and later on the proceedings against him were
14
Ioan P. Papp, Procesul Memorandului românilor din Transilvania. Acte şi date, vol. I-II,
Cluj, 1932-1933; Nicolae Cordoş, Memorandul din 1892 şi semnificaţia lui politică, in vol.
Românii din Transilvania împotriva dualismului austro-ungar (1865-1890). Studii, Cluj-
Napoca, Dacia, 1978, pp. 223-276; Liviu Maior, Memorandul. Filosofia politico-istorică
a petiţionalismului românesc, Cluj-Napoca, Centrul de Studii Transilvane, 1992; Pompiliu
Teodor (coord.), Memorandul. 1892-1894. Ideologie şi acţiune politică românească, 2ed.,
Bucureşti, Progresul Românesc, 1994; Istoria României. Transilvania..., II, pp. 513-566;
Gheorghe Platon (ed.), Istoria românilor, vol. VII/2. De la Independenţă la marea Unire.
1878-1918, Bucureşti, Romanian Academy, 2003, pp. 319-336 etc.
suspended due to the death of “the accused”) and Ioan Munteanu (at the
end of the inquest he was acquitted)15.
Throughout the trial as well as before or after sentencing, the
people from Hunedoara showed their solidarity with the Memorandum
defendants. Sympathy manifestations were organized in the most
important localities throughout the county; more than 2,000 Romanians
from the villages of Roşcani, Mihăieşti, Făgeţel and Stretea attended the
meeting held in Roşcani on 20 April 189416. The telegrams and the letters
of solidarity together with the endless lists of signatures raised the spirits
of those on trial; other lists of adhesion were published in “Tribuna”
[“The Tribune”] newspaper from Sibiu (issues 85-102/1894)17. The
tens of thousands of Romanians gathered in front of the Courthouse
in Cluj also included more than 2,000 people from Hunedoara,
among whom were many priests, both Orthodox and Greek-Catholic
ones, such as Ioan Ioanovici from Hărău, Simeon Băcilă from Băiţa,
Simeon Bobei from Petreni, Manasie Iar from Totia, Chiril Teacoi from
Cristur, Mihail Iubaş from Ostrovel, etc. The manifestations of protests
organized by the Romanians from Hunedoara against the abuses of the
Hungarian justice system were deemed as “dangerous;” the press even
mentioned “revolutionary movements” in the Apuseni Mountains and
around Orăştie. As a result, the authorities resorted to house searches,
confiscation of weapons and arrests, and important military troops were
massed in several locations18.
15
I. P. Papp, op. cit., I, p. 50 et passim; Ion Frăţilă, „Biserica şi slujitorii ei în apărarea vieţii
social-politice a românilor hunedoreni”, in Sargetia, Deva, XXV (1992-1994), pp. 379-
380; Pentru libertate şi unitate..., pp. 252-268 (no. 131-145), 274-275 (no. 149), 280-283
(no. 152-154), 297-304 (no. 163-167); Ioachim Lazăr, „Inculpaţi şi apărători hunedoreni în
procesul Memorandului din 1892”, in Ziridava, Arad, XVIII (1993), pp. 189-193.
16
Ioan Frăţilă, „Adeziunea românilor hunedoreni la Memorandumul din 1892”, in
Sargetia, Deva, XXI-XXIV (1988-1991), pp. 464-465; Vasile Ionaş, Roşcani, Mihăieşti,
Panc, Panc-Sălişte. File de istorie, Deva, Emia, 2002, pp. 50-51.
17
Ştefan Pascu, „Din răsunetul procesului memorandist în masele populare”, in Transilvania,
Sibiu, LXXV (1944), no. 8-9, p. 700, n. 5.
18
Victor Cheresteşiu (ed.), Din istoria Transilvaniei, 2ed., vol. II, Bucureşti, Romanian Academy,
1963, pp. 305-306; Ştefan Pascu, Făurirea statului naţional unitar român, vol. I, Bucureşti,
Romanian Academy, 1983, pp. 252-258; Nicolae Josan, Românii din Munţii Apuseni de la
Horea şi Avram Iancu la Marea Unire din 1918, Alba Iulia, Altip, 2001, pp. 316-317.
Since the anti-Romanian actions were unhindered, on 27 November
1897, the editor of “Revista Orăştiei” [“The Magazine of Orăştie”] and
future priest Ioan Moţa (1899-1940), proposed to the lawyer Francisc
Hossu-Longin from Deva that, “considering the plan to Magyarize the
names of localities and to include such names into our school books,
in the seals of the schools, churches and banks,” he should launch, by
private letters, a “secret appeal” to all the Romanian members of the
Hunedoara congregation meant to remove “the bill of destinies;” he also
undertook to bear the cost of printing and sending the appeal, although
“we are as poor as church bats”19.
During the same period, the Protopresbyter Ştefan Radic of
Petroşani protested against teaching Religion in the Hungarian language
in state schools, on 1 November 1898, and Priest Iacob Nicolescu of
Clopotiva, on 23 July 1908, both of them belonging to the Greek-Catholic
faith20. Answering the call launched by “Tribuna” [“The Tribune”]
newspaper from Sibiu, on the morning of 3/15 May 1898, the priests
Iosif Stupineanu and Ioan Pataky from Lunca Cernii de Sus concluded
the religious service by honoring Avram Iancu, Simion Bărnuţiu, Simion
Balint, Florian Micaş and Ioan Buteanu, the great heroes of the 1848-1848
Revolution, which prompted the Ministry of the Interior from Budapest
to ask the Eparchy of Lugoj to conduct an inquiry21; in 1903, the same
priest Iosif Stupineanu, transferred to the parish of Bârcea Mare, was
sentenced to three months in prison and a fine of 100 crowns because
he had asked the children from the village “to greet him in Romanian”22.
The need to reorganize “The Romanian National Party” brought
together some of the leaders of the political-national movement of the
Romanians from Transylvania (Aurel Vlad, Nicolae Comşa, brothers
Alexandru and Francisc Hossu-Longin, etc.) in a meeting at Deva on 22
19
I. Lazăr, op. cit., pp. 190-191.
20
Dumitru Barna, „Biserică şi societate – contribuţie la cultura din judeţul Hunedoara în
perioada interbelică”, in Sargetia, Deva, XXV (1992-1994), pp. 747-748.
21
Elena Bugnariu, „Aniversarea semicentenarului revoluţiei de la 1848 într-un sat din
Pădurenii Hunedoarei, Lunca Cernii, şi implicaţiile ei politice”, in Corviniana, Hunedoara,
I (1995), pp. 141-142.
22
Marina Lupaş-Vlasiu, Aspecte din istoria Transilvaniei, Sibiu, Dacia Traiana, 1945, p. 259.
April 1899), when a national conference was requested to this end23. In
addition to the “official” passivist movement, an “activist” branch was
beginning to take shape at Orăştie, closely connected with the group from
Arad (supporting the same political tactics); it was organized around the
“Ardeleana” Romanian Bank and the publications “Revista Orăştiei”
[“The Magazine of Orăştie”] (which had requested that “passivism”
be abandoned ever since 1898), “Activitatea” [“The Activity”] (which
appeared in 1900 and its editorial staff headed by Aurel Munteanu
militated to adopt the “activist” tactics) and “Libertatea” [“Freedom”]
(openly “activist”, it appeared in 1902 under the leadership of the
Orthodox priest Ioan Moţa, and published articles written by leading
personalities of the Romanian political scene from Transylvania such as
Aurel Cosma, Nicolae Comşa, Aurel Vlad, Alexandru Vaida-Voievod,
Valer Moldovan, etc.). On 15 February, in a “letter-platform” drafted by
Ioan Mihu (vice-president of “Ardeleana” Bank and main shareholder
of “Albina” [The “Bee”] from Sibiu), the Orăştie group made their neo-
activist intentions known and eventually successful by the election of
Aurel Vlad, the candidate from the Dobra constituency, to the Parliament
from Budapest. It was the first time after decades of absolutism when
a Romanian deputy was elected to the Hungarian high political forum,
which was an indication that “neo-activism” was likely to be successful24.
In March 1904, the Electoral Club from the county of Hunedoara
was reorganized according to the new tactics, thus obtaining, under
Ioan Mihuţ’s chairmanship, 140 seats in the General Assembly (three
thousand fewer than the Hungarians). At the conference from Sibiu on 10
January 1905, where eleven delegates from Hunedoara also participated,
a new platform of “The Romanian National Party” was drafted, adapted
to the new political vision25. Then, the “activism” quickly proved its
efficiency during the elections from 1905, 1906 and 1910; in the 1906-
1910 parliamentary term, the Orthodox protopresbyter Vasile Damian
23
Liviu Botezan, Nicolae Cordoş, „Câteva aspecte ale rolului jucat de oraşul Deva în viaţa
politică a românilor transilvăneni din ultimii ani ai veacului al XIX-lea”, in Sargetia, Deva,
13, 1977, pp. 415-418.
24
L. Maior, Mişcarea naţională..., p. 59-63.
25
Ibidem, pp. 63-72.
from Brad was the only Romanian deputy of the Romanians from the
Apuseni Mountains26.
In retaliation, the Hungarian authorities mounted an ample anti-
Romanian campaign, intoxicating the public opinion from Hunedoara
with rumors about an imminent “Vlach revolution” in the county;
however, the house searches, the fines, and the arrests that followed
united the Romanians even more27. In March-April 1907, ample
movements of solidarity with the leaders of “The Romanian National
Party” were organized in Deva and Orăştie, at the same time protesting
against the anti-Romanian education laws. In 1908, the electoral bill of
Count Andrassy, a supporter of the plural vote (literacy was a condition
for the participation in the voting process), caused general unrest in
Hunedoara. Iustin Popa, the delegate of Hunedoara at the Romanian
Central Committee, having the support of the reading associations,
the Romanian priests and teachers, started an ample campaign to teach
the village communities from Hunedoara to read and write, hoping
for a universal participation in the voting. At the beginning of 1912,
the fight for universal suffrage took the form of a mass political strike
accompanied by ample street demonstrations in which, to the surprise of
the authorities, even Hungarians and Germans from villages and towns
took place. From 1907 onward, these protests were supported even by the
representatives of “The Social Democrat Party from Hungary”, who, on
27 July 1913, summoned a great Romanian meeting at Orăştie, attended
by more than 2,000 intellectuals, workers and peasants from the county
of Hunedoara28.
At the turn of the 19th century, the trials against the Romanian
clergy had become quite common. For instance, in 1897, the Greek-
Catholic priest Vasile Morariu, born in Poiana, was sentenced to ten
months in prison for instigation against the State. On 20 June 1898, the
priest Mihail Rubinovici, born in Brâznic, was released from prison,
after he had been sentenced to six months for “instigation to hatred”
26
N. Josan, op. cit., p. 105.
27
Gelu Neamţu, „Documente privind mişcarea daco-română la Deva în 1885 şi 1905”, in
Sargetia, Deva, XX (1986-1987), pp. 356-361.
28
L. Maior, op. cit., pp. 85-88, 109-113.
by the Court of Lugoj29. Exaggerating the occasional unrests during the
elections from December 1905 – the discontent had been caused by the
abuses made by the Hungarian gendarmes –, the local authorities ordered
the arrest of the theologian Ignatie Vişoiu from Chitid when, during a
house search, they had allegedly discovered several “revolutionary
letters” and a book by Constantin Rădulescu-Motru, and of the priests
Adam Lupşor from Turdaş (Greek-Catholic) and Simion Suciu from
Petrila (Orthodox), accused by the press of having instigated to a new
“Horiada”; the clergy and the confessional teachers from around Orăştie
were accused of calling secret meetings in churches, of plotting against
the State or of organizing bomb attacks30. In 1908, after an “agitation”
trial, the Orthodox priest Petru Laslău from Vălişoara was imprisoned
at Szegedin, found “guilty” of having participated, as the leader of his
parishioners, in the election of deputies from the constituency of Dobra,
campaigning for the Romanian candidate dr. Aurel Vlad; upon his arrest,
the gendarmes broke his ribs as they wrongly accused him of having
thrown stones at them31.
According to a report sent to the Notary office from Simeria by
the Orthodox priest Adam Lula, “around 1906-1908, I was dragged in
trials at the Court in Deva for reasons of agitation for two years, because
I defended the confessional school from the small commune of Folt (sub-
district of Geoagiu) whose priest I was; during this time, the salary that I
used to receive from the Hungarian state was suspended. Around 1910-
1911, I was a priest in the commune of Biscaria [a village which is now
part of the town of Simeria, N/A]. I used to teach school illiterate peasants
at night; every night I was followed by the Hungarian gendarmes, who
would eavesdrop at the windows”32. Indeed, the confessional teachers
also had to suffer the same ordeal of the inquests; for example, on 30
April 1903, the teacher Filimon Cosma from Tătărăşti complained to
the Protopresbyter Gheorghe Oprea from Ilia that he was mentioned
29
I. Lazăr, op. cit., p. 189.
30
G. Neamţu, op. cit., pp. 335-340.
31
Ioan Lupaş, Paralelism istoric, Bucureşti, Univers, 1937, p. 29.
32
Grigorie N. Popescu, Preoţimea română şi întregirea neamului, vol. II, Bucureşti, Vremea,
1940, p. 137; M. Păcurariu, op. cit., p. 253.
by the Minister of Public Education and Instruction as having achieved
unsatisfactory results in teaching the Hungarian language because the
pupils that he was teaching also spoke Romanian outside school (!)33.
In Orăştie, before the official “activist” line was adopted, the
newspaper “Libertatea” [“Freedom”], which had appeared in 1902, took
over the flag of the Romanians’ fight for their rights; it published articles
written by leading personalities of the intellectuality from Transylvania
from a century ago such as Alexandru Vaida-Voievod, Aurel Vlad, Aurel
Cosma or Nicolae Comşa34. The founder of this publication was the
priest Ioan Moţa (1868-1940), sentenced to a year of prison for having
published the article Mathia has died and so has justice (3/16 May
1903); then his sentence was reduced to two months, which he served
in the prison of Cluj. In the following years, other two “agitation” suits
were brought against him35.
Protopresbyter Vasile Damian of Zarand (1855-1919) was a
promoter of the same “political activism”. He was headmaster of the
Secondary School from Brad (1884-1891), president of “The School
Fund”, member in the Congregation of the county of Hunedoara and,
after 1905, in the Central Committee of “The Romanian National Party”,
reorganizer of the local section of “Astra.” As a deputy in the Parliament
from Budapest (1905-1918), he took the floor more than fifteen times,
opposing legislative bills that were openly anti-Romanian and anti-
Orthodox. For instance, on 24 March 1909, he criticized the law for the
supplementation of the priests’ income in plenary, considering that the
salary of the clergy, set at 1,600 crowns per year, was insufficient, and
from the proposed raise benefited mainly the parishes with at least 800
parishioners and the priests with higher qualifications, while half of the
sum was supposed to be borne by the locals; consequently, more than
1,400 Transylvanian priests would have been affected36.
33
Keith Hitchins, Afirmarea naţiunii: mişcarea naţională românească din Transilvania
(1860-1914), Bucureşti, Encyclopedic Publishing House, 2000, p. 202, n. 130.
34
L. Maior, op. cit., pp. 63-72.
35
Gr. N. Popescu, op. cit., II, pp. 130-132.
36
Eugen Greuceanu, „Contribuţii cu privire la viaţa şi activitatea protopopului Vasile Damian”,
in Mitropolia Banatului, Timişoara, XXXVI (1986), no. 3, pp. 23-30; Mircea Păcurariu,
„Preoţimea hunedoreană sprijinitoare a năzuinţelor poporului în cursul veacurilor”, in
From the ninth decade of the 19th century onward, the material
basis for such political initiatives would be ensured by the Romanian
banks throughout the county: “Ardeleana” from Orăştie (1885),
“Hunedoreana” (1885), “Industria” (1910) and “Decebal” (1910) from
Deva, “Haţiegana” from Haţeg (1888), “Crişana” from Brad (1891),
“Corvineana” from Hunedoara (1895), “Hondoleana” from Hondol
(1895), “Grăniţerul” from Dobra (1899), “Zărăndeana” from Băiţa
(1900), “Geogeana” from Geoagiu (1904), “Matca” from Ţebea, etc.;
many priests were among their founders and on their administration
boards37. Thus, the priest Gheorghe Popovici from Leşnic, a member
in the county Congregation, was among the founders and shareholders
of “Hunedoara” and “Industria”, two banks from Deva38. Also, Vasile
Damian, the Protopresbyter of Zarand, is credited with the establishment
of “Crişana” Bank from Brad, whose director he was between 1891 and
1904; at the same time, he was also president of the “Grăniţerul” Credit
Institution from Dobra39.
The cultural events, organized by the Romanian intellectuals
from Transylvania, played an important role as well. “The Reunion
of the Romanian Women from the County of Hunedoara” (1886), the
Romanian publications, the reunions organized and the lectures given
by the teachers from around the county, the choral associations, “The
Society for the Romanian Theater Fund” (1870)40 and the branches of
“The Transylvanian Association for Romanian Literature and Culture of
Mitropolia Banatului, Timişoara, XVIII (1968), no. 10-12, p. 103; M. Razba, op. cit., p. 138.
37
Ion Enescu, Iuliu Enescu, Ardealul, Banatul, Crişana şi Maramurăşul din punct de vedere
agricol, cultural şi economic, Bucureşti, Dimitrie C. Ionescu Publishing House, 1915, p.
146; N. Josan, op. cit., pp. 99-100; Georgeta Filitti, „România acum o sută de ani. 1905”, in
Magazin Istoric, Bucureşti, XXXIX (2005), no. 11, pp. 47-48.
38
Nicolae Edroiu (ed.), Comuna Veţel. Studiu monografic complex, Cluj-Napoca, Eurodidact,
2002, p. 95.
39
M. Razba, op. cit., p. 138.
40
Enea Hodoş, Cercetări cu privire la trecutul şcoalelor confesionale ortodoxe româneşti
din Ardeal, Sibiu, 1944, pp. 147-159; Cornel Stoica (ed.), Din istoria învăţământului
hunedorean, Deva, Inspectoratul Școlar Județean Hunedoara, 1973, pp. 73-83, 178-180; L.
Maior, op. cit., pp. 61-62; Mircea Păcurariu, Istoria Bisericii Ortodoxe Române, ed. a III-a,
vol. III, Iaşi, Editura Trinitas, 2008, p. 316; Victor Şuiaga, Hunedorenii la Marea Unire din
1 Decembrie 1918, Deva, 1993, p. 13.
the Romanian People” (“Astra”) from Deva (1873), Baia de Criş (1873),
Haţeg (1874), Brad (1891), Orăştie (1891), Dobra (1899), Hunedoara
(1911), Simeria (1811) and Petroşani (1912) with the reading associations,
the popular libraries and the ethnographic exhibitions organized and run
by this association41 aimed at enlightening and uplifting the Romanians
from Hunedoara.
In what concerns the various branches of the “Astra”, which played
a major role in discovering the national values, we should mention the
fact that among the ten “collectors” whose task was to popularize the
purpose of the “Association” and raise its membership, on the date of
10 December 1861, half of them were Orthodox protopresbyters: Ioan
Papiu from Deva, Nicolae Craininc from Dobra, Vasile Pipoş from
Hondol, Ioan Raţiu from Haţeg and Sabin Piso from Săcărâmb; in the
years to come, others joined in: the Greek-Catholic vicar Petru Pop
from Haţeg, the protopresbyters George Barcianu from Cugir (Greek-
Catholic), Beniamin Densuşianu from Săcărâmb (Greek-Catholic) and
Nicolae Popovici from Orăştie (Orthodox), as well as the priest Avram
41
The fact that “Astra” had a great contribution to the cultural development in the county
of Hunedoara is proved by the impressively large number of pages dedicated to this issue:
Teodor Pavel, „Activitatea „Astrei” pentru dezvoltarea învăţământului românesc din
Transilvania (1861-1918)”, in Sargetia, Deva, X (1973), pp. 263-306; Rodica Andruş,
„Câteva date privitoare la activitatea despărţămintelor hunedorene ale Astrei”, in Sargetia,
Deva, XVIII-XIX (1984-1985), pp. 397-401; Idem, „Din activitatea bibliotecilor înfiinţate
de Astra în judeţul Hunedoara”, in Sargetia, Deva, XX (1986-1987), pp. 389-395; Idem,
„Lucrările adunărilor generale ale Astrei ţinute în judeţul Hunedoara”, in Sargetia, Deva,
XXI-XXIV (1988-1991), pp. 437-458; Idem, „Din activitatea despărţămintelor hunedorene
ale Astrei pentru păstrarea şi perpetuarea tradiţiilor populare”, in Sargetia, Deva, XXI-
XXIV (1988-1991), pp. 801-804; Ioachim Lazăr, „Despărţământul Deva al Astrei şi
înfiinţarea «Reuniunii pentru ajutorarea meseriaşilor»”, in Sargetia, Deva, XXI-XXIV
(1988-1991), pp. 807-815; Idem, „Despărţămintele hunedorene ale Astrei şi înfiinţarea
de biblioteci poporale (1873-1918)”, in Corviniana, Hunedoara, III (1997), pp. 145-148;
Dorin Goţia, „Din activitatea Astrei în perioada 1914-1918”, in Sargetia, Deva, XXV
(1992-1994), pp. 711-725; Idem, „Activitatea Astrei în perioada 1914-1918 şi locul ei
în istoria românilor”, in Sargetia, Deva, XXVI-XXIX (1999-2000), no. 2, pp. 369-374;
Aurelia Cozma, „Adunarea generală a Astrei ţinută la Haţeg în august 1891”, in Corviniana,
Hunedoara, II (1996), pp. 243-245; Mircea Dan Lazăr, „Din lucrările adunării generale ale
Astrei ţinute la Haţeg (1864)”, in Corviniana, Hunedoara, II (1996), pp. 171-179; Roxana-
Gabriela Nicola, Despărţămintele Astrei în comitatele Hunedoara şi Zarand (1873-1918),
Sibiu, Techno Media, 2009, 59 p. etc.
Păcurariu from Hunedoara (Orthodox). In addition to those mentioned
above, during the period from 1869 to 1874, the membership of the
high cultural forum from Transylvanian included other members of the
clergy from Hunedoara, Orthodox (Ioan Draia from Tomnatecu de Sus,
Gheorghe Nicoară from Deva, Samuil Trifon from Beriu, Gheorghe
Popovici, Nicolae Bârsan and Petru Vălean from Orăştie) or Greek-
Catholic (Ioan Suciu from Galaţi, Ştefan Sora from Râu Bărbat, Petru
Burlec from Iscroni, Vasile Ordean from Romos and Ioan Popovici from
Vaidei). Then, the membership grew constantly. From the presidents of
the Hunedoara branches we would mention the Orthodox protopresbyters
Iosif Morariu from Dobra, Ioan Papiu42 and Ioan Dobre43 from Deva.
Among the “contributors” to the fund of the “Association” we can
always find the parish priests and their parish communities44. Also, “The
Craftsmen Association” from Deva, with a similar purpose, chose the
priest Laurenţiu Curea to conduct their choir45.
In this political struggle, an important role was played by the
permanent ties maintained by the Transylvanians with the Romanians
from across the mountains as well as with those who were abroad to study
or in search of a better life. Mihai Eminescu (in 1883), Nicolae Iorga (in
1900), Grigore Tocilescu (in 1902) or Take Ionescu (in 1913) were just
some of those who visited the county of Hunedoara in that period. At the
same time, many personalities of the political and cultural life from the
county of Hunedoara crossed the Carpathians, carrying with them the
grievances of the oppressed Romanians from Transylvania; we would
mention Nicolae, Aron and Ovid Densuşianu, Ioan Budai-Deleanu,
Aurel Vlaicu, Ioan Moţa46 etc. In this context, we also mention the priest
Gheorghe Henţea from Lelese, who left for the United States of America
in 1902 to be a priest for the Transylvanian Orthodox communities that
had settled across the Ocean and that were increasingly large. After
42
R. G. Nicola, op. cit., pp. 16-25.
43
Adela Herban, „O personalitate marcantă a „Astrei”, protopopul tractului Deva, Ioan Dobre
(1875-1928)”, in Corviniana, Hunedoara, II (1995), pp. 175-180.
44
Pentru libertate şi unitate..., p. 150, nr. 81.
45
M. Razba, op. cit., p. 132.
46
Victor Şuiaga, Deva. Contribuţii monografice, vol. I, Deva, Emia, 2011, passim.
his return in 1910, he wrote a “notebook” in which he described his
transatlantic experiences47.
The solidarity of the Romanians from both sides of the mountains
had been exceptionally demonstrated during the War for Independence
(1877-1878). Intellectuals of all walks of life, priests, merchants and
craftsmen, peasants and workers, college students and pupils from
Hunedoara, all embraced the cause of the liberating war and contributed
with money, clothes, sanitary instruments, food and various gifts. The
money and the gifts collected, together with the subscription lists – from
June 1877 such collections were made all over the county –, were sent to
Sibiu or Braşov, and the names of the “contributors” were then published
in the periodicals “Telegraful Român” [“The Romanian Telegraph”] and
“Gazeta Transilvaniei” [“The Transylvanian Gazette”]. The activities
in support of the brothers from across the mountains did not stop even
after these local subscription committees (Deva, Hunedoara, Haţeg,
Sarmizegetusa, Orăştie, Dobra, Brad, Crişcior, Baia de Criş, etc.) were
dissolved by the Hungarian Government; the money and gifts would be
sent directly to “The Red Cross Society from Romania”48.
In parallel, political meetings were held in the homes of some
intellectuals from the county of Hunedoara such as the apprentice lawyer
Francis Hossu-Longin from Deva (sued by the Hungarian State), the
lawyer Avram Tincu from Orăştie (deputy in the Hungarian Parliament),
47
Mircea Păcurariu, „Aspecte din istoria vieţii bisericeşti a românilor din Statele Unite şi
Canada”, în vol. Autocefalie. Patriarhie. Slujire sfântă, Bucureşti, Institutul Biblic și de
Misiune al Bisericii Ortodoxe Române 1995, p. 302.
48
Mircea Păcurariu, „Ecoul războiului de Independenţă în „Telegraful Român” din Sibiu”,
in Mitropolia Ardealului, Sibiu, XII (1967), no. 4-5, pp. 315-344; Idem, „90 de ani de
la proclamarea Independenţei de Stat a României. Atitudinea Bisericii Ortodoxe Române
faţă de Războiul de Independenţă”, in Biserica Ortodoxă Română, Bucureşti, LXXXV
(1967), no. 5-6, pp. 602-617; Idem, „Războiul de Independenţă şi românii transilvăneni”,
in Biserica Ortodoxă Română, Bucureşti, XCV (1977), no. 5-6, pp. 471-490; Paul Abrudan,
„Solidaritatea hunedorenilor cu România în războiul pentru cucerirea independenţei”,
in Sargetia, Deva, XIII (1977), pp. 108-118; Elisabeta Ioniţă, „Contribuţia femeilor din
Transilvania la lupta pentru cucerirea independenţei de stat a României”, in Sargetia, Deva,
XIII (1977), pp. 121-128; Alexandru Matei, „Războiul de independenţă – moment de
manifestare a unităţii şi solidarităţii românilor. Contribuţii documentare”, in Sargetia, Deva,
XIII (1977), pp. 82-92; Victor Şuiaga, „O figură marcantă a mişcării feministe hunedorene:
Ana Petco”, in Sargetia, Deva, XIII (1977), pp. 997-999; N. Josan, op. cit., pp. 76-77 etc.
the lawyer Lazăr Petco from Deva, Ştefan Erdeli from Baia de Criş,
Aureliu Cuteanu from Hunedoara, Bucur Popovici from Haţeg, etc.49
“Actions instigating to a general revolt” were signaled by the authorities
at Baia de Criş50; the former tribunes of the 1848-1849 Revolution decided
at Braşov that in case the Hungarian troops attacked the Romanian-
Russian army from behind they should concomitantly trigger Romanian
popular uprisings in Hunedoara, around Sibiu, Făgăraş and Brașov51.
In addition to the 124,700 gold francs and vast quantities of food,
medicines and clothes52 sent from Transylvania, there was also a large
number of volunteers (soldiers, medical staff, military experts, etc.) who
took part in the liberating campaigns fought by the Romanian Army
between 1877-1878. From Hunedoara, from the press and the documents
kept from that time we only have the names of two soldiers – the silence
was easy to explain at a time when the authorities would take strict
measures against the volunteers and their families –, namely the young
secondary school student Emilian Ciuceanu from Orăştie (he took part
in the battles from Plevna and Vidin) and the pharmacy assistant Adam
Henţiescu from Rişca (wounded at the Griviţa siege, he was transferred to
the sanitary service with the rank of corporal sub-pharmacist; during the
First World War, although over 60, he was on the front from Moldova);
both of them were decorated with the medals “Trecerea Dunării” [“The
Crossing of the Danube”], “Apărătorii Independenţei” [“The Defenders
of Independence”] and “Virtutea Militară” [“The Military Virtue”]53.
The clergy from the county of Hunedoara also brought their
contribution to the war effort of their brothers from across the mountains
49
P. Abrudan, op. cit., pp. 105-106;
50
Al. Matei, op. cit., pp. 92-98.
51
Constantin Daicoviciu, Victor Cheresteşiu (ed.), Din istoria Transilvaniei, 2ed., vol. II,
Bucureşti, 1963, pp. 282-285.
52
Vasile Netea, Lupta românilor din Transilvania pentru libertatea naţională (1848-1881),
Bucureşti, Scientific Publishing House, 1974, p. 408; P. Abrudan, op. cit., p. 118.
53
Sextil Puşcariu, Răsunetul războiului pentru independenţă în Ardeal, Bucureşti, 1927, p.
17; Valeriu L. Bologa, Ajutorul românilor ardeleni pentru răniţii războiului independenţei,
Sibiu, Dacia Traiana, 1941, p. 3, n. 1; Paul Abrudan, „Voluntari ardeleni în războiul pentru
independenţă din 1877-1878”, in Transilvania, Sibiu, V (1976), no. 6, pp. 46-48; Emil Pop,
„Un reprezentant de frunte al luptei pentru independenţă şi libertate naţională a poporului
român: Adam Henţiu Henţiescu”, in Sargetia, Deva, XIII (1977), pp. 601-603;
by organizing money, food, medicines and clothes collections in the
centers from Deva, Hunedoara, Haţeg, Sarmizegetusa, Orăştie, Dobra,
Brad, Crişcior, Baia de Cris, etc. On behalf of the county’s Church,
an important role was played by the protopresbyter Romul Crainic of
Dobra, who, together with eighteen priests and two priest’s wives from
the villages under his jurisdiction, managed to collect the sum of 65.69
florins. In a letter sent to the periodical journal from Sibiu on 6/18 July
1877, he mentioned the problems he had as a result of this initiative;
denounced by Baron Kemény from Ilia, he was investigated by George
Nandra, the local administrative representative of the central authority54.
Lastly, we cannot overlook the moments of national enthusiasm in
which all the Romanians from the county of Hunedoara, young and old,
partook. Such a moment occurred at the funeral of Avram Iancu, “The
Prince of the Mountains”, on 13 September 1872, when the bells from all
the villages across the Zarandului Country tolled throughout the funeral
service55; the eulogy was read by Protopresbyter Ioan Mihălţan of Zarand
in the name of a group of thirty priests56.
In the autumn of 1909, an ample Romanian event was organized
in Haţeg to celebrate one hundred years from the birth of the great
metropolitan Andrei Şaguna, who was still alive in the memory of the
people from the county of Hunedoara; the celebration was a continuation
of similar festivities held in Sibiu and Răşinari on 4/17-5/18 October57.
A bust of the metropolitan, made by sculptor Constantin Kleber from
Sibiu, was unveiled in the courtyard of the Orthodox church. The Greek-
Catholic vicar Iacob Radu, who was present at the event, toasted “for the
union in thoughts and minds of all the members of the two confessions,
who are of the same blood and law, the sister Church celebrating Şaguna’s
memory as he was not only of his Church, but of all our nation”58.
54
M. Păcurariu, Ecoul Războiului..., pp. 315-344; Idem, Războiul de Independenţă..., pp.
481-484, 490; Idem, Preoţimea hunedoreană..., p. 102; Pentru libertate şi unitate..., pp.
234-243, no. 116-123.
55
Silvestru Moldovan, Zarandul şi Munţii Apuseni ai Transilvaniei, Sibiu, 1898, p. 28.
56
Pentru libertate şi unitate..., pp. 217-220, no. 108.
57
Ioachim Lazăr, Olga Şerbănescu, „O aniversare cu adânci semnificaţii: centenarul naşterii
mitropolitului Andrei Şaguna (1809-1909)”, in Sargetia, Deva, XXXII (2004), pp. 270-278.
58
Aurel Popovici, „Serbări centenare în Haţeg”, in Telegraful Român, Sibiu, LVII (1909),
From the examples presented above, it is obvious that in those
troubled times, before the Great War – during this unprecedented world
conflagration the Romanians were on duty once again, and through their
actions and the blood they shed they wrote a page of undying glory –
which led to the unification of the intra- and extra-Carpathian nation, the
people from the county of Hunedoara, both clergy and laymen, fought
for the same goal: to maintain the flame of Romanianness alive.
no. 115, pp. 481-482; Ioachim Lazăr, „Serbările de la Haţeg dedicate aniversării naşterii lui
Andrei Şaguna (1809-1909)”, in Ioan Glodean, Ioachim Lazăr, Nicolae Timiş (ed.), Ţara
Haţegului – 750 (1247-1997), Haţeg, Editura Polidava, 1998, pp. 149-157.
Nicolae BOCŞAN
The “Religion of War” as Reflected in the

Banatian Memoirs of the Great War
Abstract
From the rich, partially published corpus of Banatian memoirs
about the Great War, we have selected those representations entrenched
in the collective memory that were triggered by manifestations of religious
sentiment during the hostilities, primarily because the war was not only
an exceptional event, but also a moment of both rupture and continuity
with the previous period, with tremendous effects on human personality
and society, a moment of national and international magnitude that was
bound to incite the individual and the collective memory alike.
Keywords:
Religion of War, the Great War, Banat, Caransebeș, memoirs.
War meant, above all, death, which accompanied all its

manifestations. In an excellent study on the religion of war, Annette Becker
has approached the close link between faith and death, contending that
they “go together”1. She claims that during the Great War there occurred
a religious awakening, which she defines as a “return to the altars at
the time of departure to the battlefield”2. According to this renowned
specialist, “fear, the fear of death in particular, lies at the origin of this
return to the altars, which loses thus any religious content”3. Although we
do not subscribe to the latter statement, in light of the fact that the idea
of salvation was the monopoly of the church, even in modern times, we
1
Anette Becker, La guerre et la foi. De la mort à la memoire 1914-1930, Paris, 1994, p. 43.
2
Ibidem, p. 99.
3
Ibidem.
support the American testimony claiming that “there was more religion
in the trenches than anywhere else in the world” and that “before the ‘0
Hour’ many a boy read his testament and prayed to God”4.
We evoked above the moment when the troop spontaneously knelt
and started reading the prayer book on hearing the news that they would
engage in battle the next day. When the commander appeared, the bugler
tooted his trumpet “Attention!” The soldiers executed the order, but the
colonel whispered something to the adjutant, who ordered: “Battalion,
kneel down for prayer!” This attitude left a special, long lasting impression
upon the memoirist, who did not hesitate to note down: “Never have I
seen, either in church, or anywhere else, so much piety and so much
faith as in the eyes of these soldiers”. On seeing the battalion kneeling,
the memoirist from the Banat confessed: “we were seized by the same
undefined feeling that had taken possession of both the soldiers and the
commanders”5.
The practices of religious devotion during the war were much more
numerous. Death was lurking everywhere, both for the military and the
civilians. The individual or collective attitudes towards death generated
various manifestations of devotion and the most diverse behavioural
approaches to it. Memory retained, above all, the prayers and the books
of prayer owned by the combatants, the presence of military priests, or
the religious services on the most diverse of occasions. For the Christians,
the courage to face death, the ultimate sacrifice, stemmed from the hope
of resurrection in the afterlife. This interpretation belongs to the historian
Annette Becker, who writes that the martyrs died imitating Christ6, who
sacrificed himself on the cross to rise again from the dead for the salvation
of the many. The imitation of Christ was the reason why heroic death and
martyrial behaviour prevailed on the battlefield.
In his exploration of the psychology of war, D. Caracostea noticed
that in time of war, “the closer death was, the more religious people
4
Ibidem.
5
Mihai Petricoane Drugărin, Însemnările unui director de liceu, in Marele Război în memoria
bănăţeană 1914-1919. Anthology, edited and notes by Valeriu Leu and Nicolae Bocşan,
Cluj-Napoca, 2012, p. 710.
6
Anette Becker, op. cit., p. 17.
became”. Religious sentiment, he argued, “helped them not only to live,
but also to die”. It was “one of the most powerful means of overcoming
the fear of death”7.
Anette Becker has noted the fact that the war gave the church a
chance to recover the ground it had lost in the face of secularization,
which occasioned what the French called “the return to the altars,” to
faith, in the most sundry of forms8.
The intensification of the religious sentiment was the first
consequence of the religion of war, so much so that Coriolan Buracu
rightly wrote in Drapelul in 1915: “It is either that the religious sentiment
and love for the sole institution inherited from our ancestors, the church
that is still ours, will be cemented or that the connection will further
weaken and love will cease altogether”9.
The Banatians were impressed with the religiosity of the Russian
soldiers who were prisoners in a camp in Hungary.
“Often, in the evening, after dinner, prisoners form

groups of 100-200 people. They sing and dance. They
usually chant warlike marches, ‘Our Father’ and ‘Christ is
risen’, and they all take their caps off turning their faces east.
It was almost as if under the pressure of the singing done
by the prisoners of war not only the hearts but the air itself
trembled”10.
As we have seen, various forms of individual or collective devotion

manifested themselves in the most diverse ways. According to Annette
Becker, the daily, generalized presence of the books of prayer, the major
role ascribed to the military chaplain, and other forms of devotion offered
the soldiers, the injured or the prisoners an opportunity to reconnect
7
D. Caracostea, Aspectul psihologic al războiului, Bucureşti, 1922, pp. 247, 257, 262.
8
9
Coriolan Buracu, Amintiri, Timişoara, 2007, p. 71.
10
Coriolan Buracu, Amintiri, în Marele Război în memoria bănăţeană 1914-1919. Anthology,
edited and notes by Valeriu Leu and Nicolae Bocşan, Cluj-Napoca, 2012, p. 546 (hereinafter
Buracu, Amintiri, 2012).
themselves to their lives before the war11.
The memory of the Banatians retained the religious services
conducted for the military masses as forms of collective devotion.
Coriolan Buracu was the author of these events involving the prisoners in
the camps. In such a camp in Debrecen, “Divine service, held outdoors,
was attended by all the prisoners, about 500 people. The service was
celebrated in the Russian and Romanian languages. The answers,
of course, were given in Russian by an improvised clergy. It was an
inspiring sight. I have the impression that during the divine service, the
500 prisoners forgot that they were far from their loved ones...”12.
The most impressive was the image of the liturgy celebrated on the
front, in the open air, amid the boom of cannons. In Drapelul in 1915, C.
Buracu provided a realistic picture of such a religious service:
“As it was Sunday, we celebrated the first service

under the blue dome of the sky. The sun was our chandelier.
The roll of cannons was the chime of church bells and a
decorated podium was our altar... On a table covered in
white cloth there were two lamps, and in the middle there
lay a small wooden cross next to a plate of blessed bread...
The harmonious voices of the singers joined the dismal
sound of the cannons. Never in my entire priesthood have I
seen so much piety”13.
The books of prayer accompanied the Romanian soldiers on all

the battlefields. They were read at different times, before starting an
attack, after an attack, in the lulls between the attacks, during recovery, in
hospital or in camps. It is well known that there were many requests for
prayer books in Romanian addressed to Astra, to the Romanian dioceses
or to other institutions14. The Banatians’ memory retained one more, less
11
Anette Becker, op. cit., p. 57 sq.
12
Buracu, Amintiri, 2012, p. 546.
13
Ibidem, p. 531.
14
Rodica Groza, “Astra şi soldaţii români de pe front în primul război mondial,” in Anuarul
Institutului de Istorie şi Arheologie Cluj-Napoca, 28, 1987-1988, pp. 351-361.
often encountered aspect of the soldiers’ prayers: “Suddenly I see a guard
– a Romanian glotaş (pedestrian soldier) – bareheaded, holding his rifle
in the left hand and a prayer book in the right hand, who is reading with
reverence. He looked like a martyr... The next sentinel was doing the
same...”15.
The military chaplain Coriolan Buracu was appreciated in all the
garrisons where he served for the effort he undertook every day to supply
the soldiers with newspapers or books from the “People’s Library”
collection of the Association. He distributed prayer books all across the
place, and organized film watching sessions with “The Life of Jesus Christ
the Redeemer”. In 1916, in the newspaper Românul, he mentioned the
joy the Romanian soldiers experienced when they received the priest’s
assistance or could pray in Romanian: “The joy of the Romanian soldiers
was always very great. Alienated from their homes, parents, children,
wives, brothers and sisters, these soldiers are sent to different cities of
the country, where our language is categorically not spoken, it is not
known...”16.
The need to hear or read in Romanian was generalized among the
soldiers who were away from home during the war17. This is illustrated
by the letters the soldiers sent to Astra or the dioceses, requesting books
in the Romanian language, calendars, and libraries containing Romanian
writings which Coriolan Buracu set up in the soldiers’ centres he
organized in different garrisons of the empire.
The religious holidays and Sundays were also occasions for
collective devotion. Most of the images transmitted over time refer to
the religious services held by Coriolan Buracu for the Russian, Serbian
and Bessarabian Romanian prisoners at Pentecost, as well as for the
Transylvanian Romanian soldiers who ensured the guard services for
those camps. He confessed that he was usually accompanied by large
choirs, between 60 and 200 soldiers, who gave the answers to the liturgy
in Russian.
The military chaplain was a character whose presence on the front
15
16
Ibidem, p. 551.
17
Rodica Groza, op. cit., passim.
was constant and who was invariably retained in the collective memory.
“Every regiment, of any kind”, Buracu wrote in Drapelul in 1915:
“Must have at least one priest, usually of the

confession belonging to the majority in that regiment. The
priest must follow the regiment everywhere and must stay
in the immediate vicinity of the soldiers. When the regiment
is ready to begin operation, the priest must say a prayer -
according to circumstances - and give an encouragement
speech. When the battle commences, he must be, together
with the regiment’s doctors, in the place where the first aid
is given to the injured”18.
In 1916, in the newspaper Românul, the same priest noted:
“Never had the calling of these priests been more

sublime that in those times of misfortune, because now
our military priests who serve out in the open, in the heat
of the sun or in the dead of cold, amid the awful roar of
the cannons, on makeshift altars... must hearten some men
- who have never in their lives suffered more terribly and
atrociously than now - to fight and bring spiritual comfort
to them”19.
Besides these, another mission of the priests was delivering the

funeral service for those who fell in battle: “The priest of the regiment
must bury those who died for the freedom and happiness of the homeland
- irrespective of law and nation... he must carry the casualty registers in
his regiment”20.
Death was the constant companion of war, and the religion of war
was ecumenical. The fear of death was manifested in different forms
in different stages of the battles. War memory has preserved dramatic
18
19
Ibidem, p. 552.
20
Ibidem, p. 529.
images of collective death or burial rituals.
After fighting on the Russian front, Coriolan Buracu described in
Drapelul in 1915 an image that was difficult to forget, “the earth littered
with corpses,” accompanied by the “live” picture of the funeral:
“Before noon we buried 76 Russians in their own

trenches, putting a cross on their mounds. In the afternoon
we buried 64 of our army: a major, a captain, a lieutenant,
a cadet, and ordinary soldiers from various regiments. The
officers were laid in a common grave, while the soldiers
were placed in two. The whole regiment attended the funeral
service. A company gave military honours... Then a farewell
speech... and the whole regiment gave the last salute to their
comrades who had died for the throne and the country, when
a shy cross, hastily put together from tree branches torn off
by hand grenades, was thrust at the head of each grave”21.
A terrifying image of death was preserved in the memory of the

Banatians who fought on the front in Galicia:
“It was a terrible carnage. On the wire fence, the

bodies were gathered in piles that were 2 meters high, the
traps were full, and thousands lay on the mined fields.
More than 20,000 Russians covered the battlefield. Over a
mile-long holes were dug and priests of all denominations
conducted the funeral service. The largest in this war, in the
same place on the same day”22.
The Christians saw the war as a punishment from God23. Social

memory has preserved the idea, which also permeated the combatants’
memories. An illustrative example is the episode of the encounter
between a Russian patrol, consisting of Bessarabian Romanians, and
21
Ibidem, p. 533.
22
Ibidem, p. 539.
23
an Austrian one, comprising Romanians and Serbs. They did not fight,
and the Russian patrol asked for some food. After they ate, one of the
Bessarabian Romanians exclaimed: “Oh my God ! How harsh is your
punishment, making us fight against the brothers of our own law and
language”24.
Death came not only from the enemy’s bullets. “All wars”, C.
Buracu wrote in 1915, “are accompanied by its satellites (sic), epidemic
diseases”25. Among the Russian, Serbian or Bessarabian Romanian
prisoners from the camps, in crowded towns in Moldova, cholera and
typhus caused as many casualties – following the withdrawal of the
Romanian army – as military operations did. There was the case of the
Serbian prisoners in the city of Arad, about to be exterminated, who were
saved after the intervention of the lawyer Ştefan Cicio Pop and other
Romanian intellectuals from Arad. One of the survivors confessed to
Băran that he wanted to go to Arad to kiss Cicio Pop’s hand.
Coriolan Buracu witnessed the cholera epidemic and left many
memories about that scourge. “Every day I went,” he wrote, “twice to
the sick and prayed for those who has passed away and for the sick,
comforting and helping them with everything I could. I am powerless to
describe the scenes of which I was a witness. And I would not do anyone
any service if I described all the suffering a human being can endure”26.
For the devotion with which he nursed the sick, the Russian officers
in the camp addressed him a letter of thanks, and the commander of the
camp and garrison wrote him a letter of appreciation27. Hatred, brutality,
and the survival instinct accompanied death. Hatred, in particular, was
a feeling that motivated the soldiers, as D. Caracostea observed. C.
Buracu also described it vividly in Drapelul in 1915: “If we examine
the psychology of the fighter, we will see that the furious urge of a wild
beast awakens in his heart. Especially when he sees his comrade, friend,
or even brother fall, to his left, to his right, or before him, and when he
hears heart-breaking moans everywhere, if he does not aim at the enemy,
24
25
Ibidem, p. 535.
26
Ibidem.
27
Ibidem, p. 518-519.
it is he who will fall prey”28.
Memory has also retained another image of military chaplains,
concerned to live the moment and displaying a behaviour identical
to that of combatant officers, which a different facet from the pious
image described by C. Buracu. There were a few Banatian military
priests mentioned in the memoirs. Coriolan Buracu referred to Corneliu
Panciovan from Mărcina or Captain Fr. Emil Rusu from Blajova. He
mentioned their names because their behaviour was not too different
from that of the civilian officers during the quiet periods on the front.
Both were a constant presence at the gaming table in the mess and would
not turn down a drink or two.
They did not, however, neglect duties. Positioned with his regiment
in the vicinity of a camp with Russian prisoners, Fr. Rusu served on
Sundays and celebrated the liturgy for 10,000 prisoners. He officiated in
Romanian, and the answers were given by “a huge choir of at least 200
people, a male choir of four voices”29.
The commander of the Orthodox clergy in the Austro-Hungarian
army was a military chaplain from the Banat, Colonel Paul Boldea.
He was in charge of 42 priests, six of whom were Serbian and the rest
Romanian, most of them from the Diocese of Caransebeş30.
Boldea was the uncle of Coriolan Buracu. After being released
from prison, the latter was sent as a reserve military chaplain to Reg.
29 in Becicherecul Mare. He was not on the battlefield, but he served in
several garrisons. In 1916 he had a lot of work in Debrecen, where there
were “27 hospitals and nursing homes with seriously injured and sick
soldiers, suffering from various epidemic diseases, as well as a camp with
Russian prisoners”31. Coriolan Buracu collected books and newspapers
for the injured, held classes for the illiterate and projected movies. He
had an important role in the camp of 12,000 Russian prisoners, where the
cholera epidemic made 1,900 victims, 429 in a single day. Fr. Coriolan
28
D. Caracostea, op. cit., p. 110; Buracu, Amintiri, 2012, p. 536.
29
Coriolan Băran, Amintiri, în Marele Război în memoria bănățeană 1914-1919. Anthology,
edited and notes by Valeriu Leu and Nicolae Bocşan, Cluj-Napoca, 2012, p. 245.
30
31
Ibidem, p. 517.
Buracu officiated 42 religious services in the Debrecen garrison,
“attended by 6,860 Romanian soldiers and 95,568 Russian prisoners and
a few Serbs.” He gave communion to 4,582 soldiers, 1,081 wounded
and sick, buried 2,388, including 1,907 Russian prisoners. He purchased
a French cinematic device, with which he gave 40 viewings of the film
“The Life of Our Lord Jesus Christ” in hospitals, 4 at cultural institutions
and 2 in Calvinist and Lutheran churches.
For his special religious assistance, 27 Russian officers addressed
him a eulogistic letter, which is quite revealing about the atmosphere in
the camp and in which they wrote:
“Being a prisoner is a hard lot. But our fate was

a hundred times worse because of one of the greatest
misfortunes known to humanity: cholera paid us an
unexpected and terrible visit. And we saw it sickle everyone
around us, with such great rage that our eyes - long used to
seeing death on the battlefield - were nonetheless about to
weep. In these days of atrocious suffering that God sent us,
we, the Russian officers, saw, with much satisfaction, the
Romanian Orthodox priest coming to us here, abroad, with a
word of consolation and prayers”32.
As he was suspected by the police, he was transferred by his uncle

to Lublijana, to the “Kremsier” field hospital, where there were only
people sick with malaria. He delivered religious service in town and in
eight other localities in the province, where there were military hospitals.
Following his appeals to the Romanian dioceses, to Astra, and to printing
shops, he obtained newspapers, books of prayer or for reading. Besides
the films he presented, he collected gifts for the wounded or sick soldiers.
Following the decision of the Ministry of War to establish soldierly
cultural centres, he organized eight such centres. For the Romanian
soldiers he created special Romanian libraries and made subscriptions to
newspapers. In the autumn of 1917 he was moved to the 1007 Campaign
32
Hospital in Abbazia, by the Adriatic Sea, where he organized soldierly
centres. The outcome of his religious services between 1916-1918,
recorded with accountant-like precision, mentions 236 religious services
attended by 103,364 soldiers, 115 sermons and 246 conferences that he
delivered, 74 funerals where he officiated at, and 32 Romanian libraries
that he founded in various hospitals33.
Nicolae Brânzeu also mentioned in his memoirs the need of those
on the front for books in Romanian: “During the war, both those on the
front, buried in the trenches, and especially those in hospitals needed
something to read”. He recognized that the church was not ready for
something of this magnitude, that the few newspapers for the people
became even fewer, and that “nothing could come” from Romania.
Starting from the year 1915, Brânzeu edited The Book of Life and
published 20 issues in the collection “The People’s Books”34.
The teacher Paul Jumanca from Caransebeş had a different attitude
towards the church ministers. He deserted from the Austro-Hungarian
army in October 1915, from the Honved battalion stationed at Orşova.
With the support of some compatriots from Turnu Severin, he was
appointed teacher at Cosovăţ, Mehedinţi County, where he taught until
December 1915, when he went to Bucharest. Here he joined the many
refugees from across the mountains who wanted to enter the Romanian
army and fight for the “great national ideal”, as Jumanca often referred
to it in his Memories. With the support of the Cultural League, of the
engineer Constantin Lucaciu, the brother of Vasile Lucaciu, the director
of the salt mines from Romania, he obtained a job at the ammunition
factory in Lăculeţe, Dâmboviţa County and, respectively, at the grenade
factory that was built there.
He was a good observer of Romanian rural society, including of
religious life in Romania. Even before Romania entered the war, he
was critical about the priests ministering in the villages from Mehedinţi
County, which may be surprising for a man who was formed in the
33
Ibidem, p. 523.
34
Nicolae Brânzeu, “Memoriile unui preot bătrân”, in Marele Război în memoria bănăţeană
1914-1919. Anthology, edited and notes by Valeriu Leu and Nicolae Bocşan, Cluj-Napoca,
2012, p. 486.
atmosphere of the Romanian Orthodox Church from the Banat. Jumanca
contrasted the engagement of the Romanian priests from the Banat
engaging in social and national matters with the attitude of the priests in
the Kingdom, who were more concerned with material benefits: “Most
of the servants of the altar turn their calling into a job and the word of the
Gospel into a money-making means”35.
Like elsewhere in Europe, the mobilization of the Romanian army
was saluted by bell tolls. This is the image consecrated by the entire
European memorial literature dedicated to the war. “The Bells Are
Tolling” was how the first announcement of the Great War sounded. The
moment was captured by Jumanca in his Memories: “We rushed to the
church steeple across the street and tolled the bells for mobilization...
pulled by the defectors from the Austro-Hungarian army. Then the bells
started tolling across the valleys and the hills in a divine concert”36.
The withdrawal of the authorities and the Romanian army forced
the grenade and ammunition factory from Lăculeţe to withdraw gradually,
as the front was advancing towards Moldova. In February, the factory
and the workers who had worked there settled in Dângeni, a commune
located by the Iaşi-Dorohoi railroad. Although the refugees from the
Banat and Transylvania had asked to be incorporated into the army ever
since Romania entered the war, they were mobilized on location, being
considered more important for the war production. During the refuge
in Moldova, Jumanca made a series of observations on the Romanian
society here, which was confronted with disease, deprivation, famine
and poverty, as well as a large number of refugees.
One of the common images that he conveyed in his Memories
was the contrast between the people’s religiosity and their social mores,
which contradicted the Christian teachings: “The religiosity of this or
that in the world of those wandering around the hearths seems ridiculous
and the holiday customs seem mere antics when, at every step, all you
see is the honest people of yesterday deceiving one another”37. It was
Passion Week, an opportunity set in contrast Jesus’ sacrifice and the
35
Pavel Jumanca, Amintiri. În război, MS owned by Valeriu Leu, f. 1838.
36
Ibidem, f. 1894.
37
Ibidem, f. 2000.
self-centredness caused by the war. He thereby wished to illustrate the
reversal of values afflicting the Romanian society, its changing ideals, the
dismantlement of the human personality, and the contradiction between
faith put on display and the real conduct people adopted in situations of
war.
Consistent with his previous opinions about church ministers, this
time the priests of Moldova, Jumanca blamed them for the society’s
vanity and moral conduct:
“The whole world is insane now. The society has

quivered with all its joints and collapsed in disarray and
error. You see them all in church worshiping, counting
beads, kissing all the icons and rolling on the floor before
the great and almighty God. They go to the priest to have
various commemorative prayers and the liturgy read to them
and he dictates all manner of canons and atonements, which
are set so as to fill the bottomless purse of the priest. Now
is the time of rich crops. War, wandering has shaken off the
peel that covered our eyes and exposed the futility of human
life in all its nakedness. The terrified people take refuge in
church, seeking to reveal their souls to the priest, who then
tailors the canons for the atonement of sins by dictating 5-6
commemorative prayers, paid for with 4-5 lei each”38.
Jumanca was not an atheist. On the contrary, he was formed and

educated in the atmosphere of the Theological-Pedagogical Institute
under the patronage of the Orthodox Diocese of Caransebeş. Even
before the war, he was against the Romanian clergy’s morals, as their
sole concern was how they could increase their revenue. This behaviour
of the priests in time of war, coupled with the endemic poverty and death
lurking everywhere caused him to write about false faith, about the trade
that was staged in church, “when you see the teachings of Christ mocked
by the ministers of the altars, you are appalled and don’t feel like praying
38
Ibidem.
any more, for fear you might slur true faith”39. Such condemnatory texts
against clergy illustrate a contrast, if not a rift between a part of the
clergy and the majority of the population. Despite all these anticlerical
overtones, Jumanca’s conclusion was that in times of trouble man sought
refuge in faith, which “strengthened him in the fight against the troubles
and storms of life”40.
Although he did not explicitly confess to it, Jumanca hinted that
some priests were among those who took advantage of the war, that they
were among the categories that acquired material gains from the world
war, an overstatement, surely.
His critical comments against Bishop Miron Cristea, however,
were caused by personal frustrations and reasons. His allegations were
unfounded, but, to a point, they may explain the excessive, sometimes
generalized criticism against the representatives of the church and of
religious beliefs in general: “The time now seems to show the lie inherent
in all the faiths of the world... When you see the people’s deeds laid bare
thus, when the nature of the beast of prey sheds thus the enamel of the
so-called culture, it’s hard to believe in what the Saviour once said. His
teachings of life are so beautiful, but don’t have the meaning that the
descendants of the apostles, the ‘swindlers’ who serve at the altar, seek
to give us today”.
The manifestation of religious feeling was particularly strong
among those in the trenches, who were continually confronted with
death, stronger than among those on the domestic front, where the society
perpetuated certain types of behaviour from before the war. Jumanca’s
Memories illustrate the fact that the “return to the altars” was a reality
also behind the frontline, manifesting itself in different forms among the
various categories of regular people.
39
Ibidem.
40
Ibidem, f. 2001.
Daniel ALIC
“Modern” limitations of religious freedom.

Priests from the Diocese of Caransebeş who
were persecuted during the First World War
Abstract
For the Romanians from Banat, the First World War was a period
in which their desire for national freedom grew. As spiritual leaders of
their communities, the priests were preachers and agents of this goal. The
repressive measures taken by the authorities in some parishes against
the clergy prove the important part that the priests from the Diocese of
Caransebeş played in the fight for national affirmation. During the war, the
priests and all those who manifested Romanian beliefs were persecuted.
In order to fence the population from any „subversive elements”, many
priests and Romanian leaders were arrested and imprisoned. A large
number of priests and teachers were held in house arrest. For the same
reasons, Bishop Miron Cristea himself was threatened with defrocking
and imprisonment.
Keywords:
First World War, Diocese of Caransebeş, persecuted priests,
Bishop Miron Cristea, national freedom.
For the Romanians from Banat, the First World War was a period
when their aspirations for national freedom became stronger. As spiritual
leaders of their communities, the priests often took the lead of the
emancipation actions of the Romanian population, and for this reason,
as a rule, they were considered adversaries by the political power from
Budapest.
That is why a large number of churches from the Diocese of
Caransebeş were left without their priests as more than fifty priests
from the eparchy were mobilized for the front (mostly those from the
border areas)1. In addition to the priests, all the confessional teachers
who were fit for war were also mobilized, and so the majority of the
Church’s schools were left with retired teachers and parochial priests,
most of whom were quite old and ill. Not to mention the fact that food,
household goods and even the bells of the churches were requisitioned
for the needs of the army. Under the circumstances, the population grew
increasingly discontent, as did the desire for national freedom, especially
because the Romanians were forced to fight in a war that was not theirs2.
The fight of the priests and the believers from the Diocese of
Caransebeş is best illustrated in the repressive measures taken by the
authorities in some parishes. During the war, the persecutions against
the priests and everybody who would show Romanian sentiments were
unprecedented. In order to fence the population from “the subversive
elements”, numerous Romanian priests and leading figures were arrested
or interned in camps3. Another large number of priests and teachers were
held in house arrest4.
Soon after the beginning of the war, at the end of June in 1914,
the priests Antonie Miloşescu from Ogradena Veche, Mihail Costescu
from Eşelniţa, Constantin Dure from Orşova and Coriolan Buracu from
Mehadia were arrested and taken to the Courthouse from Caransebeş
for “the offence of agitation”5. In order to prevent leaving the parishes
without priests, Bishop Miron Cristea, who was bishop of Caransebeş
during the difficult period of the war, delegated the neighboring priests
1
Marcu Bănescu, “Graniţa bănăţeană şi unirea din 1918”, in Mitropolia Banatului, Timișoara,
XXVIII, no. 10-12, October-December, 1978, p. 600.
2
See Daniel Alic, Eparhia Caransebeşului în perioada păstoririi episcopului Miron Cristea
(1910-1919). Biserică şi societate, Cluj Napoca, Presa Universitară Clujeană Publishing
House/Episcopia Caransebeşului Publishing House, 2013, p. 323-328.
3
Ioan Clopoţel, Revoluţia din 1918 şi unirea Ardealului cu România, Cluj, 1925, pp. 65-81.
4
Ioan Munteanu, Vasile Mircea Zaberca, Mariana Sârbu, Banatul şi Marea Unire. 1918,
Timişoara, Mitropolia Banatului Publishing House, 1992, pp. 79-86.
5
Arhiva Episcopiei Caransebeşului (A.E.C.) [The Episcopal Archives of Caransebeş], Fond
Bisericesc (III) [Church Fund (III), file 284/1914, no. 4897/15 July 1914.
as parochial administrators. Priest Iacob Drăgulesccu from Plavişeviţa
was delegated to the parish of Ogradena Veche, Priest Pavel Magdescu
from Jupalnic replaced Constantin Dure from Orşova, and Priest Dimitrie
Popovici filled in for Coriolan Buracu6. The priests were freed after
the Emperor from Vienna issued a decree for pardon on 8 November
1914 which came through the good offices of the Consistory from
Caransebeş7. Miron Cristea visited the priests imprisoned at Caransebeş
and encouraged them to continue their national activities. After he visited
them in prison, he wrote a letter to the central committee of ASTRA
from Sibiu in which he asked them to supply the library of the Royal
Courthouse from Caransebeş with Romanian books so as to ease the
detention of the arrested priests8.
The Orşova area, situated at the border between the Empire and
Romania, was considered “a war zone” and was closely watched by the
Hungarian authorities. Therefore, not only the priests had a hard time, but
also the believers who were considered to be good Romanians. Besides
Priest Constantin Dure, others were also arrested in Orşova: primary
school teacher Eftimie Jianu, lawyers Dr. Ioan Popovici and Dr. Arsenie
Micu, the merchants Gheorghe Iovanovici (arrested together with his
wife and son), Gheorghe Mioc and Dimitrie Oprean, the head of the
Land Registry from Orşova, Fabio Bojincă, the accountant of the local
Albina Bank, Traian Miclea, and Reserve Colonel Pavel Novacovici9.
Among those arrested in the summer of 1914, we can find
General Nicolae Cena from Mehadia, called the Dacian-Roman by his
contemporaries as acknowledgement of his Romanian feelings manifested
throughout his military career. As he was a general, he was exiled to
Vienna, where, as a reward for the humiliations of the Hungarians, the
Emperor wanted to grant him a nobility title, but he refused it, saying that
6
Daniel Alic, “Aspecte din activitatea misionară şi pastorală a parohiilor de pe clisura Dunării
în perioada episcopului Miron Cristea (1910-1919)”, in vol. Mehedinţi, istorie, cultură şi
spiritualitate, Drobeta-Turnu Severin, Didahia Publishing House, 2008, p. 382.
7
A.E.C., Fond Bisericesc (III)[Church Fund (III)], file 284/1914, no. 4897/15 July 1914.
8
Ibidem, file 301/1914, no. 5147/1 August 1914.
9
Constantin Juan-Petroi, Biserica cu hramul „Sfântul Nicolae” (cel Sărac) din Orşova,
Drobeta-Turnu Severin, Didahia Publishing House, 2008, p. 48.
the title of Romanian was just enough10.
Priest Antonie Miloşescu was arrested again on 24 September
1916 by the order of Navy Sub-Lieutenant Henrich Andraş, commanding
officer of a guard ship patrolling the Danube. According to the report
written by the Gendarmerie Warrant-Officer Second Class Bella Gabor,
the priest was arrested together with Ioan Dubromirescu, the local mayor,
and other believers because they had met in a public place “conspicuously,
and talked in Romanian, saying that our redemption will come and
when it comes, then we will show who we are”11. The charges brought
against them referred to “an understanding with the enemy, or at least
an empathy with the enemy”12. At the trial before the Military Tribunal
from Timişoara, Sub-Lieutenant Henrich Andraş declared that although
he did not speak Romanian, he could understand it, and so he had heard
one of those arrested saying that “our Romanian brothers will come on
the Danube and then we will show what we know”13. After the inquest,
only Priest Antonie Miloşescu was sent to the camp in Sopron while the
others were released. The trial of the priest was held on 10 January 1917,
and the court decided that he should be released. After the trial, he could
not return to his parish, the house where he lived being occupied by the
military14. In a letter addressed to the Consistory of Caransebeş, Priest
Antonie Miloşescu shows that the real reason for his imprisonment at
Caransebeş and Szegedin was his pastoral zeal towards the believers in
both what concerned church matters, but especially in what concerned
national matters15.
Priest Coriolan Buracu was mobilized as a military priest, and
his parish was served by Priest Nicolae Goanţă. The protopresbyterate
administrator of Mehadia, Dr. Ioan Sârbu, requested the Consistory that
Priest Buracu have nothing to do with the parish until his return from
10
M. Bănescu, op. cit., p. 601.
11
A.E.C., Fond Bisericesc (III)[Church Fund (III)], file 284/1914, no. 49/3 January 1917.
12
Ibidem.
13
Ibidem.
14
Ibidem.
15
Ibidem, no. 80/5 January 1917.
the military and all his salary be given to Priest Goanţă16. The activity
carried out by Coriolan Buracu on the front was also in the service of the
national idea. In a letter addressed to Bishop Miron Cristea and written
on 6 July 1917, he said: “the priests are zealously fulfilling their calling
as pastors of the people and are keeping alive the faith in the revival of
our nation […] in the tranches or in the hospitals, the Romanian priests
are helping, are encouraging and are shaping the belief of the Romanian
soldiers in the victory of the national creed”17. He returned home at the
end of the war, at the beginning of November 191818.
There is yet another community from the Danube Gorge, an area
under strict surveillance by the authorities, whose church activity was
disturbed. When the Hungarian authorities could not find any fault with
Priest Iacob Drăgulescu from Plavişeviţa, they filed a petition with
Metropolitan Ioan Meţianu complaining that the priest did not help the
families left derelict by the war and behaved badly with his parishioners19.
The real reasons are shown by the priest in a report sent to the diocesan
Consistory in which he describes the situation of his parish as a result
of the armed conflicts. Several young civilians were shot dead, and the
frightened people fled to their shelters in the mountains. And the priest
was accused for not having advised the people to stay calm20.
Priest Cornel Ştefan from Oraviţa and Priest Valeriu Dabiciu from
Cacova suffered the same treatment. On 26 July 1914, they were arrested
and accused of espionage for Romania. After their trial in Timişoara and
Szegedin, only at the end of 1914 were they released21.
On 15 August 1915, Priest Emanuil Ciuleiu from Ciuchici was
accused by the communal judge from Biserica Albă that during the
mobilization for war, he had told the people from his parish to flee to
16
Ibidem, no. 6428/6 October 1917.
17
Ibidem, file 356/1914, no. 3855/28 May 1917.
18
Constantin Vlaicu, “Preotul Coriolan Iosif Buracu – Apostolul armatei române în primul
război mondial şi promotor al ideii de unitate naţională a românilor din Banatul de sud”,
in vol. Iosif Coriolan Buracu – o legendă vie, Reşiţa, Tim Publishing House, 2008, p. 87.
19
A.E.C., Fond Bisericesc (III) [Church Fund (III)], file 292/1914, no. 8159/21 December
1914.
20
Ibidem, no. 160/9 January 1915.
21
A.E.C., Fond Şcolar (IV)[School Fund (IV)], file 72/1913, no. 8299/24 December 1914.
Romania together and then “to return and fight against the Hungarians”22.
The priest asked the bishop to use his influence with the state authorities
on his behalf and prevent his imprisonment, as the accusations were
unfounded. Nevertheless, he was imprisoned on 1 September 1915, and
on 22 December the same year, his wife, Livia Ciuleiu, asked the bishop
to appoint him parochial administrator in an all-Romanian commune,
farther from the border. After the decision to appoint him in the parish of
Iam, the military first prosecutor released him, and on 11 January 1917,
in a thank-you letter addressed to the bishop, Priest Emanuil Ciuleiu
showed that the Greek-Catholic priest from Ciuchici had a contribution
to his arrest, upset because he had opposed the attempts at religious
conversion to the Greek-Catholic faith initiated in Ciuchici”23.
On 11 September 1916, Protopresbyter Andrei Ghidiu of
Caransebeş wrote in a report sent to Bishop Miron Cristea that Priest
Romul Jurchescu from Peştere had been arrested by four soldiers and
sent to the prison in Lugoj. The reason for his arrest was agitation against
the State and possession of compromising letters about the unity of the
Romanian people and language24. There was a house search, and the
letters that had been sent by the parish’s soldiers from the front, in which
they requested information about their families, were considered as acts
of espionage. Passages from the letters were read tendentiously as acts
of rebellion against the Hungarian state and pro-Romanian faith. The cult
books printed in Romania were also confiscated, and the children were
forbidden to read the poems by Octavian Goga from the school’s library.
The priest was also reproached with his connections with ASTRA, a
society which had saved the local school in 1914. After the inquest from
Lugoj, Romul Jurchescu was sent to the military prosecutor’s office from
Szegedin, where he was charged with espionage and sentenced to prison.
He was released on 4 January 191825. After his release, in a letter to
Protopresbyter Andrei Ghidiu, Miron Cristea wrote that he had taken
notice of the release from camp of Priest Jurchescu from Peştere, who had
22
Idem, Fond Bisericesc (III)[Church Fund (III)], file 284/1914, no. 2232/20 April 1915.
23
Ibidem.
24
Ibidem, no. 4958/12 September 1917.
25
Ibidem, file 136/1916, no. 1971/24 March 1918.
arrived at his parents in Ruginosu. The priest was temporarily assigned
to teach at the school from Peştere, where there was no teacher26.
Priest Aureliu Magheţiu from Toager was also arrested on 8
September 1916, and on 20 February 1917, he was sentenced to five
years in prison and ten years of deprivation of his job and public rights.
The charges against him were in connection with a speech that he had
given at his home, and in which he had explained to the people gathered
there that under no circumstances could the Romanians from the Empire
fight against Romania’s soldiers. The same priest, in his capacity as
headmaster, had asked that the teaching of the Hungarian language in the
confessional school be made only to save appearances and Hungarian
songs should be replaced with Romanian religious songs. The Diocese
was forced by the authorities to bring a religious suit against him resulting
in his loss of job. He was released in October 1918, and on 1 November
1918, he returned as priest in Toager27.
On 4 April 1916, the priest from Racoviţa, Costescu Gheorghe,
was arrested. Based on witnesses, he was accused that at a meeting in
front of the church whose priest he was, he had urged the people there
to stop paying taxes to the Hungarian State, to show disobedience to the
Hungarian laws that denied the Romanians their elementary rights and to
wait until Romania would enter the war and then get rid of the Hungarian
rule28. The charges proved unfounded, fabricated by Antoniu Peia, the
teacher from the local state school, who had been a confessional teacher
before. The priest was only found guilty of asking the schoolchildren who
would greet him in Hungarian to greet him in Romanian instead because
they were Romanians. For this, he was sentenced to eight months of
prison, but the Consistory from Caransebeş refused to start a disciplinary
investigation as long as there were no real charges29.
26
Serviciul Judeţean al Arhivelor Naţionale Caraş-Severin (S.J.A.N. Caraş-Severin) [Caraş-
Severin County Service of National Archives (S.J.A.N. Caraş-Severin)], Fond Protopopiatul
Ortodox Român Caransebeş [Caransebeş Romanian Orthodox Protopresbyterate Fund],
file 2/1918, sheet 1.
27
A.E.C., Fond Bisericesc (III) [Church Fund (III)], file 284/1914, no. 6151/1 November
1918.
28
Ibidem.
29
A.E.C., Fond Bisericesc (III) [Church Fund (III)], file 3957/1914, no. 80/1 July 1917.
The priest Alexandru Atnagea from Vrani was also arrested after a
complaint lodged by Redely Mano, the doctor of the sub-district of Iam,
before whom he had showed his adhesion to Romania on 6 December
1916. He was sentenced to six months in prison, the payment of the court
charges, and his property was seized30.
The priests also showed their opposition to the Hungarian
Government by helping some Romanians to cross over into Romania.
This was the case of priests Martin Vernichescu from Vârciova and
Damian Popescu from Ofcea31. Priest Martin Vernichescu was arrested
on 20 July 1915 on the charge of having urged the Romanian soldiers
that had taken the military oath to flee to Romania, and of showing the
hidden passages through the mountains to those who wanted to cross the
border. Together with him and on the same charge were arrested Ioan
Borlovan, a railway worker from Lugoj, Iuliu Stroia and Ioan Albulescu,
also from Lugoj. The priest was imprisoned at Szegedin, but only on 17
May 1917 was the Diocese informed that the priest would be detained
for the whole duration of the war32. Bishop Miron Cristea intervened on
behalf of Priest Vernichescu, trying to obtain his release, but to no avail.
In an attempt to make things easier for the priest’s family, the Consistory
from Caransebeş donated 200 crowns to the priest’s wife to help support
their children through school33.
Another priest who carried out a remarkable activity at a national
level was Gheorghe Tătucu from Iablaniţa. Before the war, “he had taken
an active role in almost all the actions demanding national rights for
the Romanians, and was under surveillance by the Hungarian authorities
who had often brought him to court for political reasons”34. He was
also involved in the actions to expose the Hungarian policy aiming at
strengthening the State’s control on the Community of Landed Estate
30
Constantin Train, “Preotul Alexandru Atnagea, un martir al cauzei româneşti”, in Mitropolia
Banatului, Timișoara, XVIII, no. 4-6, April-June 1968, p. 318-319.
31
Gheorghe Naghi, “Preoţii din Banat în evenimentele anilor 1914-1918”, in Mitropolia
Banatului, Timișoara, XXVIII, no. 10-12, October -December, 1978, p. 604.
32
Ibidem.
33
Ibidem.
34
A.E.C., Fond Bisericesc (III) [Church Fund (III), file 249/1914, no. 366/22 February 1920.
from Caransebeş35. In 1914, together with his wife, he took refuge in
Romania, being declared a spy by the Hungarian authorities, and the
gendarmes from Iablaniţa were ordered to shoot him should he return to
the village.
On 29 February 1916, a disciplinary action was brought
against Priest Gheorghe Tătucu from Iablaniţa, he was charged with
unjustifiable desertion of his post and the parish was declared vacant.
The priest had requested a one-month leave of absence on 24 June 1914
and had left for Romania36. Although he presented medical certificates,
the Consistory, upon the request by the state authorities, terminated
his employment as a priest and on 29 February 1916, he was found
guilty37. The punishment was the interdiction to ever function as a
priest in the Metropolitan See, also taking into consideration the war
circumstances38.
In Romania, together with other representatives of the Romanians
that had taken refuge from the Hungarian oppression, Sever Bocu,
Cassian R. Munteanu and Priest Iuliu Musta from Glimboca39, Gheorghe
Tătucu and Deacon Dr. Avram Imbroane carried out an intense activity
in favor of Romania’s participation in the War against the Central
Powers. In fact, many of the people from Banat who had taken refuge
in Romania had been sentenced to death by the Tribunal from Cluj
because they were supporting the idea of national unity for all the
Romanians40. In 1919, Priest Tătucu returned to Iablaniţa and asked the
Consistory to reinstate him as a priest. Since he had left without giving
notice, the Consistory appointed Protopresbyter Andrei Ghidiu to carry
out an inquest in the village; the inquest showed that the priest’s life
35
Dr. Antoniu Marchescu, Grănicerii bănăţeni şi Comunitatea de Avere, 2ed., Timişoara,
Mirton Publishing House, 2006, p. 406-413.
36
Arhivele Naţionale ale României (A.N.R.) [The National Archives of Romania (A.N.R.)],
Fond Miron Cristea [Miron Cristea Fund], file 1, sheet 135.
37
Ibidem.
38
Ibidem, sheet 136.
39
Horia Musta, Neamul Mustonilor în Banat, Timişoara, Marineasa Publishing House, 2009,
p. 104.
40
Ion Popescu-Puţuri, Augustin Deac, Gheorghe Unc, Unirea Transilvaniei cu România.
1918, Bucureşti, Politică Publishing House, 1978, p. 394.
had been at stake due to his nationalist activities. Consequently, he was
reinstated as the priest of Iablaniţa41.
In the person of Protopresbyter Dr. George Dragomir, the only
priest from the Caransebeş Diocese who died because of the detention
regime, the clergy from Banat made a sacrifice for national freedom.
George Dragomir was charged with instigating the population against
the State during the diet elections from the constituency of Sasca
Montană. He was imprisoned at Szegedin, then at Sopron, where he died
after a year due to the miserable conditions there42. On 12 January 1918,
Traian Oprea, the protopresbyterate administrator of Biserica Albă area,
announced the clergy and the teachers from the protopresbyterate that
former Protopresbyter George Dragomir had died on 11 January 1918 in
the Sopron camp43. He was buried in Lugoj, and the funeral was attended
by Protopresbyter Andrei Ghidiu and Dr. Cornel Cornean on behalf of
the Diocese of Caransebeş44.
Not only the priests but also the confessional teachers were accused
of “national agitation” by the authorities. On 16 November 1916, Bishop
Miron Cristea was informed by the Ministry of Cults and Public Instruction
from Budapest that the teacher Ion Vidu from the confessional school
from Lugoj had been detained45. The reasons for his arrest included the
fact that he was a member of the “Oltul” Cultural Circle from Romania, a
society that was not under the control of the Hungarian Government, and
that he possessed books promoting the union of all Romanians. During
the house search, they also found correspondence with the conductor of
the Singing and Musical Association from Turnu Severin and with other
people from Romania. All these were considered subversive activities
against the Hungarian State46. At the request of Protopresbyter Dr. George
41
A.E.C., Fond Bisericesc (III) [Church Fund (III)], file 249/1914, no. 366/1 July 1917.
42
I. D. Suciu, Monografia Mitropoliei Banatului, Timişoara, Mitropolia Banatului Publishing
House, 1977, p. 214.
43
S.J.A.N. Caraş-Severin, Fond Protopopiatul ort. rom. Biserica Albă [Fund of Biserica
Alba Orthodox Romanian Protopresbyterate], file 1/1918, sheet 1.
44
Foaia Diecezană, Caransebeş, XXXIII, 1918, no. 5 of 28 January, pp. 3-4.
45
Ioan Munteanu (coordinator), Făurirea statului naţional unitar roman. Contribuţii
documentare bănăţene (1914-1919), Bucureşti, 1983, p. 22.
46
Ibidem.
Popovici, the Diocesan Consistory of Caransebeş intervened before the
Hungarian Government and requested the release of the teacher Ion
Vidu, who was a well-known musical personality of his time. Bishop
Miron Cristea recommended the protopresbyter to insist upon the state
authorities from Lugoj to write a similar letter to the Ministry of the
Interior47. He was released following the prosecutor’s office decision of
2 May 1918, and on 10 May, he resumed his activity at the school from
Lugoj48.
After Romania entered the war on the side of the allied powers,
the oppression against the priests intensified. The petitions for release
signed by Bishop Miron Cristea would invariably have the same reply,
which showed that “after Romania’s declaration of war, the petition for
the release of the Romanian Orthodox priests cannot be approved”49.
From 1917, the bishop’s discourse on the national problem
became more obvious. The entry of the Unites States of America into the
war on 7 April 1917 meant a new step toward national freedom for the
peoples of the monarchy. The President of the U.S.A., Woodrow Wilson,
explained that the interest of his country in the war from Europe was to
free the various nationalities from the foreign rule50, and his statement
fueled a more energetic resistance movement of the Romanians from
Transylvania and Banat.
In this context, there was a political crisis at the level of the entire
Austro-Hungarian monarchy, and the government from Budapest was
forced to consider some popular demands. The most important of them
was that referring to the universal suffrage, which was also included in
the Romanians’ immediate demands51.
Present in Budapest on 21 June 1917 for the debates on the electoral
law in the Chamber of Magnates, the bishop of Caransebeş gave a speech
47
Ibidem, pp. 32-33.
48
Ibidem, pp. 34-35.
49
Ibidem, p. 606.
50
I. R. Abrudanu, Patriarhul României Dr. Miron Cristea – Înalt regent, Cluj Napoca,
Napoca Star Publishing House, 2009, p. 268.
51
Eugen Greuceanu, “Contribuţii privind activitatea ierarhilor din Ardeal şi Banat pentru
drepturile româneşti în epoca dualistă (1867-1918)”, in Mitropolia Banatului, Timișoara,
XXXVII, 1987, no. 4, July-August, pp. 70-71.
about the principles of democracy: “as a representative of the Romanians
from my homeland and as a son of this people, I know the political
views of the Romanians, who, for a long time, have been supporting
democracy and secret universal ballot. They introduced this principle in
their church administration in 1868, although one might rightfully expect
conservatism from the part of the Church”52. On the same occasion, he
spoke about the decrease in the number of the constituencies from 40 to
17, despite the fact that the population had grown, and such a reduction
denied the Romanians their rights as they were insufficiently represented
in the country’s legislative bodies53. He also emphasized the fact that the
law proposed by the Government had many passages that were prone to
interpretation and could elude the interests of the Romanians and their
right to a free universal vote54. The bishop concluded his speech delivered
in the plenary session of the Chamber of Magnates by saying that after
their brave feats of arms on the front, “the Romanian people deserves to
have its rights recognized and its free development guaranteed”55. The
law under discussion did not get to be passed, but the national freedom
of the peoples was recognized a year later, when the disintegration of the
Austro-Hungarian monarchy occurred56.
In the same year, the bishop demanded the release of all the
Orthodox priests that were detained in Hungarian prisons and camps,
but to no avail57. The bishop’s opposition against the Hungarian policy
continued. In his Christmas pastoral letter from 1917, the bishop talked to
the people about the democratic trend that had spread around the world.
Starting from a Biblical text about peace among peoples, Miron Cristea
developed a discourse about peace and its foundation, democracy58.
52
Drapelul, Lugoj, XVII, 1917, no. 64 of 10 June, p. 2.
53
Ibidem.
54
I. R. Abrudanu, op. cit., p. 269.
55
Drapelul, Lugoj, XVII, 1917, no. 64 of 10 June, p. 2.
56
E. Greuceanu, Contribuţii privind activitatea ierarhilor din Ardeal şi Banat…, p. 71.
57
C. Brătescu, “Episcopul Dr. Elie Miron Cristea (1868-1939)” in Foaia Diecezană,
Caransebeş, new series, year VI, 2000, no. 9-10, p. 10.
58
“It so happens that during this war, the enlightened men of the peoples have brought to light
the truth of what is called democracy, from one side of the world to the other. You will have
heard or read about democracy; so you should know what it means. True democracy cannot
The times demanded that the nations decide their fate on their own
“therefore, the leaders of countries, the diplomats, in the spirit of modern
democracy, must be guided in their steps toward peace by the eternal
truths of Christ’s law, according to which each people should receive
what is owed to it and what is its natural and God-given right, meaning
to show full justice to each and every people. Rendering justice to every
people, peace will follow […] And peace without justice cannot last.
Thus, true peace can only exist between countries on the basis of justice,
which is so vehemently demanded by democracy, but was preached by
the gentle Nazarene a long time ago”59. In the same pastoral letter, he
also spoke about the sacrifices that the Romanians, some of the bravest
soldiers of the monarchy, had made, and for that reason, they could no
longer be denied their rights and liberties, or prevented from gaining
a little part of the land they had defended with their own life, or even
dispossessed of their property. Through their fight, the Romanians had
be but the most pure love for the people of all walks of life. The spirit of this democracy,
preached by a large number of zealous scholars and apostles full of energetic will, has
caused such a large movement, such a lively trend nowadays that – like a strong wind – it
tends to overthrow the wrongs that have been done and are still being done to the huge mass
of the poor and partially devoid of their rights, or who are prevented from sharing in the
benefits of the lawful rights by a certain class of people who have been looking more after
their own interests. Such a movement for democracy demands that each class of people,
gentlemen and peasants, the rich and the poor, capitalists and workers, etc. should have
their say where the future and the fate of the peoples and countries are shaped so that, not
only for each people but – as much as possible – for each man, it can be fairly measured
what is rightfully theirs and so the injustice and the sorrows of the many will be erased or
diminished from the earth as much as possible.

Democracy demands that – just as the burdens of the countries lie on everybody’s shoulders –
everybody should take part in their ruling, directly or indirectly, should have the opportunity
to raise on the social ladder unhindered, no matter how high and where their honesty, brains,
talent and hard work will take them.
And, if democracy does not accept that a class of people look out for their own interests at
the expense and to the prejudice of other classes, it does not accept that a people oppresses
another people, but every nation, every people should have the right to live according to their
interests, speaking their language, having their faith, customs and traditions, and everything
that is theirs, that is in their own self. In short, it demands that every nation – large or small
– should be its own master, should rule itself for its wellbeing and its development toward
its country’s and mankind’s progress. That’s democracy”. Foaia Diecezană, Caransebeş,
XXXII, 1917, no. 52 of 24 December, p. 2.
59
Foaia Diecezană, Caransebeş, XXXII, 1917, no. 52 of 24 December, p. 3.
earned the right to become free masters of their property, both material
and spiritual ones60.
The obvious tendencies for national emancipation displayed by the
pastoral letter displeased the government in Budapest. Excerpts from the
letter were published in the press from Romania and Bessarabia, and the
bishop’s words circulated in all the media from Romania. At the beginning
of 1918, shortly after Christmas, the consistorial assessor Ştefan Jianu
visited the prisoners of war from the camp in Timişoara, where he was
welcomed by the Romanian officers, who praised the courage displayed
by Miron Cristea in his already famous pastoral letter61.
The authorities could not remain indifferent to the bishop’s bold
gesture and started political action against him. Shortly after the pastoral
letter, the military command from Caransebeş, the prosecutor’s office
from Timişoara, the supreme prosecutor from Budapest, the Minister of
Justice and the Minister of Cults requested telegraphically the text of the
pastoral letter62. From Budapest, Alexandru Vaida Voievod wrote Bishop
Miron Cristea to tell him that big troubles were in store for him as a
consequence of his courage, troubles that could go as far as defrocking.
The interim Minister of Cults, Prince L. Windischgaretz, actually invited
him to Vienna to an audience. After many reproaches, the minister asked
him to accompany him to Vienna to present his deed before Emperor
Charles IV, as King of Hungary. Since the emperor was busy with secret
negotiations for a separate peace with France, the bishop was announced
that he was allowed to leave Vienna, and the audience was cancelled63.
Shortly after this episode, the fate of the war became obvious,
and the Romanians’ wish for freedom and unity came true. The political
actions carried out by Bishop Miron Cristea and other dedicated priests
demonstrate that the Church answered positively to all the demands for
emancipation from its believers, including the issue of national freedom.
60
Ibidem.
61
Elie Miron Cristea, Note ascunse. Însemnări personale (1895-1937), an edition prepared
by Maria and Pamfil Bilţiu, forward by Gheorghe Bodea, Cluj-Napoca, Dacia Publishing
House, 1999, p. 52.
62
I. R. Abrudanu, op. cit., p. 272.
63
Ibidem, p. 273.
Liviu LAZĂR
The Romanian Orthodox Church and the Greek

Catholic Church in unitary action against the
Hungarian Revisionism in the inter war period
Abstract
The movement triggered in Romania against the Hungarian
Revisionism in the inter war period had a great support in the two
Romanian national churches, the Orthodox Church and the Greek
Catholic Church. Both the hierarchs of the two Romanian churches as
well as the priests from towns and villages acted all together for defending
the frontiers of The Great Romania acknowledged within the treaties of
peace signed at the end of The First World War The ministers of the two
churches were part of the local and central committees of the Romanian
Antirevisionist League and supported the organizing and spreading of
actions of antirevisionist character. In Transylvania, the collaboration
of the two churches was tighter, because of the fact that region was more
exposed to the danger of the Hungarian revisionism.
Keywords:
The Orthodox Church, The Greek Catholic Church, the
antirevisionist movement, Romanian Antirevisionist League (R.A.L.),
Transylvania.
The propaganda and activities expanded by the revisionist

countries in the inter war period, triggered an antirevisionist reaction,
backed up by the whole Romanian society. Together with the people in
charge with the political decision of the inter war Romania, the numerous
interventions in the press of scientists, lawyers, doctors, professors and
especially teachers, the two Romanian national churches acted together
within the antirevisionist frame triggered in Romanian society.
By 1929 all activities did not have a confessed antirevisionist
character. Yearly were organized anniversaries of the days of December
1st and January24th, of the 1848 Revolution etc. The motto of these
commemorations was: „Let us live in them, so they can live in us”1.
These popular gatherings always started with a Te-Deum through the
efforts of the hierarchs and priests from their living areas.
On May 20th 1929, on the occasion of the „Heroes Day” in Alba Iulia
were organized the Union Festivities to which were invited to participate
all Romanian citizens, regardless of the political party they might have
been members of, regardless of their nationality, or religion these being the
first large manifestations with antirevisionist character in Romania.
„Everybody is welcome – wrote the newspaper „Alba

Iulia” – all those who love justice and truth, law and homeland,
have the duty to take part. We will take care of you all to feel
all right at Alba Iulia, to enjoy the manumission of the people.
If Romanians enjoy as this is about the unity of the Romanian
people and about the replenishment of their country, so the
other nationalities do not have to be sad as injustice is done to
no one”2.
The same newspaper wrote related to the character of the gathering:
„Let us be present on the second day of Pentecost in the

citadel of our nation`s reunion to sum up our voices and wills
and so with one voice and one will to seal what had been made
10 years back here in this city on December 1st 1918. Let us
attest, if there is still need for, that no mind, no judgment, no
will with maggots in his minds to rethink another settlement of
the provinces of our country”3.
1
„Alba Iulia”, XI, no. 3, 23rd January 1927.
2
Ibidem, no. 21, 8th May 1929.
3
Ibidem, no. 23, 14th May 1929.
But starting with 1932, when the intensification of propaganda
and of revisionist activities had become obvious, the Romanian society
begins to be aware of the great danger drawn towards the frontiers of
the unitary national state. This way the need to help the state through
diplomatic endeavors was felt and so the world public opinion to know
the state of mind deeply antirevisionist of the Romanian society. The
beginning of wide scope activities having an antirevisionist character
were given by a series of personalities from Transylvanian villages and
towns who initiated actions of rising monuments in the memory of the
martyr’s fallen victims of blind fury of those who had left their dominance
in Transylvania in 1918.
From the list of these activities we mention here the one started by
the Greek Catholic archpriest Petru E. Papp from Beiuș meant to raise a
monument in the memory of Dr. N. Bolcaș and Dr. I. Ciordaș, who were
buried alive in the night of 3-4 April 1919 in the village Lunca4. Anticipating
the Hungarian revisionist offensive, the newspaper „Universul”, under the
patronage of Stelian Popescu, published numerous articles where it backed
up the idea of antirevisionist manifestations in whole country. The initiative
of the newspaper „Universul” was rapidly met in the whole Transylvania
especially in the localities at the western border.
The effect was extraordinary as it triggered the organic component
of antirevisionist in Romanian society. In towns were formed initiative
committees or for organizing antirevisionist manifestations on the
occasion of the day of 1st December when they celebrated 14 years
from the Union of Transylvania with Romania. In villages, the priests
informed people about the agitations of Hungarian revisionism and
urged people to take part in antirevisionist manifestations organized in
towns and villages. In the churches from Alba County on the Sunday of
27th November they decided upon the delegates to be sent with protest
memoirs against revisionist agitations5.
Following the effort of making these gatherings against revisionism
public, the number of participants was huge, this way proving the state
4
„The Vest Newspaper” (Oradea), Year II, No.745, 24 February 1932.
5
The Count National Direction Archive Alba, Archive trust: Alba prefecture. Prefect’s office,
File 2/1932, p. 1.
of spirit deeply antirevisionist that embraced all Romanian strata. The
start was given by Oradea where on Sunday 27 Noember 1932 gathered
20.000 Romanians, who gave the right answer to the Hungarian
revisionism6. After Oradea manifestation that was held on 27 November
1932 in Transylvanian towns and villages were held large antirevisionist
gatherings on Thursday December 1 when they marked 14 years from the
union of Transylvania with its fatherland. In the west border towns: Satu-
Mare, Carei, Cehul Silvaniei, Zalău, Arad tens of thousands of people,
in some places even 20.000 people gathered in large meetings „looking
towards the fields from which the wind brings howls of famished rage”
as the newspaper „Freedom” from Orăștie wrote on 8 December 19327.
In towns situated in the center of Transylvania: Cluj, Alba Iulia,
Brașov, Deva, Orăștie, Hațeg, Dej, Gherla the participation was also
numerous8. In the county of Hunedoara 6 manifestations took place
at Deva, Baia de Criș, Orăștie, Hateg, Lupeni and Petroșani9. At the
antirevisionist meeting from Arad spoke among others: Vasile Goldiș
and Grigorie Comșa, Bishop of Arad, who restated the resolution of
the Romanian people ready to defend the great act from 1 December
accomplished in the city of Alba Iulia10. At Brașov, among the speakers
were: the Orthodox archpriest Dr. Iosif Blaga, the Uniate archpriest
Hodăranu and professors Căliman and S. Turtea11.
In Alba Iulia the opening was done by Dr. Ioan Suciu - the
president of the organizing Committee. Among the speakers, the priest
Dr. Gheorghe Ciuhandru the president of the Clergy Association „Andrei
Șaguna” from the Transylvanian Mitropoly made himself noticed12. The
antirevisionist meeting in Sibiu was presided by Dr. I. Beu. Nicolae
Colan - rector of the Theological Institute declared at the end of his
speech: „We Romanians have never drawn the sword to conquer lands
6
„The Universe” (Bucharest), No. 330, 30 November 1932.
7
„Freedom” (Orăștie), 8 December 1932.
8
Ibidem.
9
Ibidem.
10
Ibidem.
11
Ibidem.
12
Ibidem.
and to humiliate foreign souls but we step inveterately for defending the
property gained with blood sacrifices”13.
Antirevisionist manifestations kept going after 1 December
1932 thus rounding the circle of large manifestations that Romanians
affirmed before as well as after the day that sanctified the union with
their fatherland. The beginning of 1933 coincided on world level with
the coming to power of Hitler in Germany, who gained success through
his virulent revisionist and revanchist stand up. The politicians and
Romanian public opinion realized the great danger of a possible drawing
near of Hungary towards Germany the same way the drawing near Italy,
another revisionist state, happened. In this hard time for Romanian
society, the perfect synchronizing between the organized and structural
antirevisionist movements was made up.
The first confirmation of this synchronization consumed at
Prague 28 May 1933 when delegations of the states from Little Entente
gathered for a conference. On that day in Bucharest, Prague, Belgrade
and even Warsaw delegations decided to organize large antirevisionist
manifestations. In Bucharest there were two large manifestations against
the request of revising the peace treaties on 21 and 28 May 193314. In
the rest of the country especially in Transylvania the antirevisionist
manifestations gained special momentum. On 28 May 1933 at Sibiu in
Ferdinand Square gathered 10.000 people from all county communes.
The same day at Cluj were spread out posters in all localities of the
county which informed population on the necessity of coagulation of
an antirevisionist front meant to back up the diplomatic initiatives of the
Romanian state. Hereby we reproduce fully the text of the poster made
by National Typography Bond Society from Cluj:
„Answer you all to the call of the great newspaper

Universul and come to the Great antirevisionist gathering” on
28 May 1933!
Let us coagulate the impressive antirevisionist front, by
counteraction of the revisionist tendencies of our enemies with
13
Ibidem.
14
„People`s Voice” (Sibiu), year XV, no. 22 June 1933.
our determinate will of guarding the borders and the treaties
that guarantee them.
On this great day will be held antirevisionist
manifestations in all towns from Romania Czechoslovakia,
Yugoslavia and Poland.
Romanian brothers! Facing this monstrous attempt to
Europe peace and the integrity of our borders ,we all have the
duty to raise as one and make our voice heard unambiguous and
energetically over the intangible boundaries of our homeland.
In this respect The Patriotic Action, having the blessing of our
churches, being helped by the leaders of the Romanian political
life from Transylvania capital, we invite all Romanians from
Cluj municipality and county to come at the Great Assembly
that is to be held on Sunday 28 May 1933 in the hall of the
National Theatre at 11 o’clock in the morning.
Nicolae Ivan - bishop of Cluj, Vadului and Feleacului
Iuliu Hossu - bishop of Cluj and Gherla.
Iuliu Hațieganu - president of Astra Cluj Department.
I. Cătuneanu - Municipal councilor of Romanian Block.
Retired General Dănilă Papp - president of Patriotic Action.
Dr. A. Frâncu - former defender in the Memorandum Trial.
V. Ghidionescu - president of the Cultural League.
Dr. Iuliu Moldovan - Astra`s president.
Sextil Pușcariu - President R.O.F.
Fl. Ștefănescu-Goangă - University of Cluj provost.
Gh. Sion - honorary citizen of Cluj15.
In Hunedoara county at the same day were held antirevisionist

actions at Hațeg, Orăștie and Hunedoara. To highlight the involving
of local forces of the intellectuals mainly we reproduce in short here
the developing of these actions after a written report of the Police
Quaestor from Deva. In Hațeg the manifestation was held in the center
of the town being there 1.000-1.200 persons under the chairmanship of
Toma Vassinca. There spoke Dr. Emil Selariu deputy, Eronim Ciocan
15
The Count National Direction Archive Cluj, Archive trust: The Romanian Antirevisionist
League, File: 65/1933-1938, p. 1.
- archpriest, Victor Savu - mayor of the town, Dr. Comes Petru, Iuliu
Nasta and Sabin Bunea - lawyers and Olariu Petru -headmaster of the
gymnasium. They all combated revisionism vehemently, which was
considered a danger for the whole mankind16.
In Orăștie, the meeting was held in the town square under the
chairmanship of Aron Demian - headmaster of the local high school and
participated 1.200-1.500 persons. There spoke Stanciu Zaharia - teacher,
Enea Ioan - archpriest, Dr. Braia Jeno -deputy, Dr. Radu Izidor - lawyer,
Crețu Nicolae - teacher, Dr. Munteanu Eugen - mayor`s secretary, Dr.
Alexandru Herlea - lawyer and Popa Ioan - peasant. The document
underlined that all above vehemently protested against propaganda which
meant the revisal of peace treaties, without criticizing the activities of
foreign persons17.
The meetings held in Hunedoara County as well as in all
Transylvanian towns ended with the adoption of some motions and
telegrams sent especially to the King and His foreign ministry Nicolae
Titulescu18. The great antirevisionist manifestations at the end of the
year 1932 and the following year proved the vitality of the Romanian
structural antirevisionism. On the other hand it was felt the need of
organizing this mass movement unleashed on the anniversary of the 14
years since the union of Transylvania with Romania, so as to be effective
both within the country as well as outside the country.
In this context on 15 December 1933 at Bucharest was formed
the Romanian Antirevisionist League which gained legal entity through
number 8 decree of 17 January 1934 of the Ilfov Tribunal, sector 119.
The Romanian Antirevisionist League appeared due to the effort for
organizing it done by Stelian Popescu headmaster of the great inter war
newspaper „Universe”. The purpose of R.A.L. as it was declared in its
constitutive Act and status was as follows:
16
The Count National Direction Archive Hunedoara, Archive trust: Police headquarters
Deva, File: 10/1933, p. 4.
17
Ibidem.
18
Ibidem.
19
The Romanian Antirevisionist League. Constitutive Act and status, Newspaper printing
„Universe”, Bucharest, 1934, p. 6.
„a) to develop the feelings of solidarity and opposition

of Romanian population organized against the attempts and
harms brought to the unity of Romanian territory and national
dignity of Romanian people;
b) To organize both in the country as well as outside
it an intense propaganda for maintaining and ensuring peace
based on the respect of treaties and within the interests of the
Romanian state forever united;
c) To work for the strengthening of political and soul
bonds with states and peoples friendly and allies that also strive
in maintaining peace treaties that guarantee them their historic
rights and their territorial integrity;
d) To fight for strengthening of national conscience in
the people and for a permanent mobilization of Romanian
moral forces so as to be ready at all times to answer and defend
the integrity of the national heritage;
e) To counteract both the propaganda and actions of any
kind and tendentiousness as caused by states or organizations
of any kind that work against the revision of peace treaties;
f) To permanently inform the public opinion from inside
and outside Romania over the subversive activities and the
means that work against the Romanian state and its territorial
unity and by this against peace itself”20.
Conceived as an organization status and separated from any

political of party concern The R.A.L. offered its help to the Romanian
state in any action undertaken diplomatic as well as military devoted to
the defend the idea of homeland and of the treaties that guaranteed peace
and the territorial unity of the United Romania.
Also the R.A.L. proposed itself to initiate action committees,
to organize antirevisionist manifestations in the country but also in its
centers from Europe and America especially in the regions inhabited by
Romanians. In these centers they tried to find the group of personalities
20
Ibidem, p. 5.
from Romania and abroad „meant to lobby the political and intellectual
world, to create favorable opinions towards the cause of the Romanian
nations as well as friendly and allied nations for defending the principles
and rights established through treaties”21. The motto of the league was:
„Peace based on treaties, on the respect of international obligations and
the consolidation of moral and material forces among nations”22.
The high hierarchs of the Romanian Orthodox Church and of the
Greek Catholic Church and also the priests from towns and villages
were among the first who took part in the enlisting of the Romanian
Antirevisionist League. The leadership of R.A.L. was of Stelian Popescu
and a Central Committee formed of high religious personalities, scientists
and cultural personalities, militaries, so as to suggest the remoteness
from any political party and solidarity of the Romanian society in the
line of antirevisionist struggle.
Members of the Central Committee were: Miron Cristea -
Romanian Patriarch, N. Bălan - Metropolitan of the United Church,
Nectarie - Metropolitan of Bucovina, Pimen - Metropolitan of Moldova,
Gurie - Metropolitan of Basarabia, Bishop Niculescu, Professor Ioan
Lupaș, Professor Gheorghe Titeica, Dr. Voicu - Nitescu, Mrs. Alexandrina
Cantacuzino, Professor Dragomir Hurmuzescu, Professor I. Nisipeanu,
Professor D. V. Toni., I. Gavanescu, Dr. Iuliu Moldovan ASTRA’s
president, Professor Silviu Dragomir, Professor Dr. G. Marinescu,
General Ion Manolescu, M. Naumescu, Professor G. Moroianu, A. D.
Mincu and others and the general secretary was G. Lugulescu23.
In favor of an easier functioning and due to the fact that in
Transylvania the population had reacted long before the birth of the
R.A.L., in this part of the country was constituted the Regional Committee
for Transylvania of the Romanian Antirevisionist League. The assembly
for its birth was held on 8 January in the building of the Romanian
Orthodox Bishop in Cluj. The chairmanship of the assembly belonged to
the Orthodox Bishop Nicolae Ivan, who in the inaugural speech exposed
the reasons for which in Transylvania was necessary the developing
21
Ibidem.
22
Ibidem, p. 7.
23
Ibidem, p. 6.
of the most intense action on antirevisionist field. Here is how the
metropolitan Nicolae Ivan exposed the necessity that Transylvania be
the first in the line of Romanian antirevisionist movement: „As we, those
from Transylvania are the most exposed to the danger of antirevisionist
danger it goes without saying that we have to fight it and the whole country
has its eyes upon us. That is why for the Regional Committee from Cluj
a serious work is needed without saving any effort through an intense
propaganda both here and abroad so as to keep the actual boundaries of
our country”24. At the end of his speech the bishop of Vadului, Feleacului
and Clujului said: „So help us God to be able to carry on the fine national
struggle in which the Romanian Antirevisionist League has involved, a
struggle in which we need and hope to have on our side the best sons of
the Romanian nation”25.
The appeal launched by the orthodox bishop Nicolae Ivan was
answered by elite of political, religious and cultural personalities from
Transylvania who no matter the political party they were members of
agreed to act at unison against revisionism. So as honor presidents of
the Regional Committee for Transylvania of the R.A.L. were chosen:
metropolitans Nicolae Bălan and Vasile Suciu, the Orthodox and Uniate
bishops Nicolae Ivan, Roman Cirogariu, Dr. Iuliu Hossu, Valeriu Traian-
Frențiu, Grigorie Comșa, Dr. Alexandru Rusu, Alexandru Niculescu,
Vasile Lăzărescu as well as political personalities Iuliu Maniu, Alexandru
Vaida Voievod, Alexandru Lapedatu, Octavian Goga, Francisc Hossu
Longin, Aurel Vlad etc26.
All positions of R.C. for Transylvania of the R.A.L. were honorary
and pay free the only thing that was discounted was travel for the League.
The founding members established the rule for the Regional Committee
to elect for three years the members of the Regional Committee and of
the county committee that according to the rule were entitled to the right
of voting.
As honorary president of the Regional Committee for Transylvania
24
League, File: 51/1934-1938, p. 1.
25
Idem, File 46/1934-1937, p. 46.
26
Idem, File 1/1932-1938, p. 5.
of the R.A.L., the bishop Nicolae Ivan assured everyone regarding the
support of the entire Orthodox clergy and of the two national-religious
publications „Renascence” and „Illustrated life” which he offered their
contents to the League27.
The first session after assembling the Cluj Regional Committee
took place on 11 January at the quarters of the Romanian Orthodox
Bishopric where they talked about the organizational structures of the
League in Banat. The central idea was that the Banat region be centralized
at Cluj even if there was to maintain a separate organization so as in the
eyes of the foreign the Transylvanian region is united28. The leadership
of the Cluj Regional Committee in a note addressed on 5 April 1934 was
asking the bishop Nicolae Ivan to support the organizing of the League
structures in localities from Transylvania based on the moral authority
and prestige enjoyed among the locals by the Hierarch of Vadului,
Feleacului and Clujului.
As it results clearly from the archive and the press of that time, the
action of establishing the organizations of the Romanian Antirevisionist
League from Transylvania was massively supported by the church with
both the hierarchs and the priests from towns and villages who were
among the first that called people to be organized and to counteract
the revisionist propaganda. From the multitude of documents dealing
with this theme, we have selected the address from 18 May 1934 of
the archpriest from Petroșani towards the Greek Catholic Parish from
Paroșeni where they asked for their help in organizing the local section
of the Romanian Antirevisionist League and sent them their bylaw:
„You most faithful father. By communicating these

bylaw dispositions we invite you with brother-like love to be
so kind so as to initiate together with the best persons in your
commune, the works for establishing the communal subsection,
with the benevolence of communicating about it to us we pray
to God to help us from above for the work we are starting”29.
27
Idem, File 46/1934-1937, p. 46.
28
Idem, File 51/1934 - 1938 , p. 3.
29
The Count National Direction Archive Hunedoara, Archive trust: Paroseni Greek-Catholic
The co-operation between the Romanian Orthodox Church and

the Greek Catholic Church on the field of the antirevisionist struggle
constituted a special moment of solidarity for the two Romanian
churches. This solidarity for a problem of maximum national interest was
many times affirmed by their leaders in the inter war period. This way at
the assembly of the Regional Committee of 16 April 1934, the orthodox
bishop Nicolae Ivan made a hearty appeal to all Romanian populace to
shake their hands and in full solidarity to act for defending the threatened
boundaries and on behalf of the Orthodox Church he promised the whole
support of the Romanian Antirevisionist League30.
On the same occasion the Greek Catholic bishop Iuliu Hossu,
insisted with impressive words, underlying the total unity of sight of the
two national Romanian churches whenever it came about major concerns
regarding the Romanian nation. In the proceedings of the session it was
mentioned that the Greek Catholic bishop Iuliu Hossu „Spoke about the
historic example from 1848, then about that from 1918 and emphasized
with chosen words the determination of the Greek Catholic Romanian
Church of fighting together with its sister the Romanian Orthodox
Church in defending the country borders. He made a concise historic
of Hungarian revisionism and drew the conclusion that our unity is like
God justice which the church has both the moral obligation and right to
defend with all its might31.
These declarations were not left as simple intentions, but the
representatives of the Romanian national churches acted together for the
organizing of the structures of the Romanian Antirevisionist League in
Transylvania.
The organizing of county committees on the Transylvanian territory
was preceded by the activity of the action committees from which were
part the local personalities. To illustrate these affirmations we mention
for example that in Arad had been formed a Committee of the Regional
parish, File1/1934, p. 109.
30
League, File: 51/1934-1938, p. 18.
31
Ibidem.
Section, that is it started on 10 Decembre 1933 before R.A.L. came into
being, as it is stated in the recording of proceedings number 1 of 10
December 1933 and the address number 111/9 February 1934 having as
honorary presidents Dr. Ștefan Cicio-Pop, Vasile Goldiș and His Holiness
Archimandrite Ioan Suciu32. This nucleus managed to establish the Arad
County Council of R.A.L. on 28 February 1934, being among the first
county councils of R.A.L. established in Transylvania. As president was
elected the Arad bishop, Grigorie Comșa, followed as vice-president by
Teodor Botiș (provost of the Romanian Orthodox Theology Academy)
and as secretary Aron Petruțiu (lawyer)33.
In Alba County on top of the organizing activity were also
intellectuals and priests. The honorary president of the R.A.L. here
was elected I. Stroia the army bishop, active president was Dr. Ioan
Pop, secretary Eugen Hulea and among members a series of first class
intellectuals of the town as Dr. Camil Velican, Dr. Zaharia Munteanu,
Dr. R. Boca etc34. In Bihor County the assembly of the R.A.L. was held
at the headquarters of 1 April 1934 at Casina National on Palm Sunday.
At the end of the assembly they elected the County Committee of R.A.L.
for Oradea and Bihor with honorary presidents the bishops Roman
Ciorogariu (orthodox) and Valeriu Frențiu (unite) Andrei Mager Crișanul
– the vicar of the orthodox bishopric and G. Miculaș - general vicar of
Romanian Unite bishopric35.
In short time after its came into being the County committee Bihor
made a series of proposals regarding developing the antirevisionist
movement at the west border of the country:
„a) The ethnographic map of Bihor be at disposal

based on the 1930 census so as to publish statistic data which
invalidates the numbers advanced by Hungarian propaganda as
support for the revising projects;
32
Idem, File 44/1933-1934, p. 2.
33
Ibidem.
34
Idem, File 56/1934-1938, p. 36.
35
The Count National Direction Archive Bihor, Archive trust: The Romanian Antirevisionist
League, File: 1/1934, p. 12.
b) The monographers of margin counties are encouraged
to show the cultural, economic and political life of the ancient
Romanian element;
c) To be raised, where the case may be,
commemorative slabs ,that tell the young generation about
the martyrs of Romanians stabbed by Bolsheviks and Szeklers
between1918-1919 (they spoke about 60 martyrs and showed
that every unveiling of a commemorative slab would be a
protest against yesterday ruling);
d) The Premonstratens and other monastic orders that
were dependant of Hungarian authorities are abolished.
e) The Romanian newspaper „The Vest Newspaper” from
Oradea be subsidized and in it be inserted an antirevisionist
page”36.
In the other county from the west border of Romania, the County
Committee Sălaj of R.A.L. was established on 29 March 1934 with
honorary president the vicar of Sălaj Petru Cupcea and active president
Dr. Ioan Ossian headmaster of the high school from Șimleul Silvaniei37.
The archive documents show that in Satu Mare the establishing
of R.A.L. was done very quickly, among the first in Transylvania. On
28 January 1934 the County Committee of R.A.L. in Satu-Mare was
constituted with honorary presidents Dr. Alexandru Rusu - Bishop of
Maramureș, Aurel Nistor - prefect, Aurel Dragoș –archdeacon and
senator, Ilie C. Barbu - deputy, Stelian Cherecheș- mayor and M Răutu
- archpriest38.
In Odorhei County, the establishing and enlisting in R.A.L. was
led by the archpriest Iuliu Laszlo Laurianul. After his death, the action
stagnated until the appointment of Ioan Steriopol who in a short time
resigned being elected then professor Ioan Banu as president of the
county council39.
36
Ibidem, p. 78.
37
League, File: 44/1933 - 1934, p. 16.
38
Idem, File 44/ 1933-1934, p. 17.
39
Idem, File 53/1934 - 1939, p. 32.
In Tirnava Mare County the R.A.L. was headed by professor
Horia Teculescu -headmaster of high-school „Prince Nicolae” from
Sighișoara and ASTRA’s president. In Mediaș the town section of R.A.L.
established on 5 November 1935 was led by this committee: president
Crăciun Ioan - orthodox archpriest, vice-president Rinea Ioan - Greek
Catholic archpriest, secretary Stefan Berbecaru - employee at Mediaș
customs and cashier Oltean Ioan - employee40.
In Turda County, the committees were lead by the following
supporters of antirevisionism: Dr. Gh. Onișca - notary at Luduș, engineer
Floraș at Câmpia Turzii, archpriest Vasile Spân at Baia de Arieș, archpriest
Sorin Furdui at Câmpeni41.
Referring to the establishment of R.A.L. in Sibiu County they held
a gathering on 1 December 1934 at the call of Transylvania Metropolitan
Dr. Nicolae Bălan at the county prefecture. At this gathering spoke
Metropolitan Bălan, Dr. Nicolae Regmon -prefect of the county,
professor Onisifor Ghibu, Dr. Gheorghe Preda - ASTRA vice-president
and Mrs Eugenia Tordășianu - president of „Society of Romanian
orthodox women”42. At the end of the gathering was established R.A.L.
Sibiu regional organization lead by Metropolitan Bălan helped by Dr.
Gheorghe Preda - sanitary general inspector as vice-president Nicolae
Martin secretary,I osif Lungaciu - cashier and Dr. Nicolae Colan, Dr.
Ieronim Stoicuța, Petre P. Petrescu, Mrs. Eugenia Tordășianu and Ștefan
Duca - members43.
Referring to the organizing within the county we mention that it
was made in almost all villages and hamlets. Here we resume by only
giving a single example from the multitude of data at our disposal
referring the establishments of R.A.L. sections in Sibiu. On 10 May 1935
was constituted the subsection of R.A.L. with the center in Miercurea
where took part over 3.000 persons from Miercurea, Gârbova, Reciu,
Apoldu de Jos, Apoldu de Sus and Cărpiniș. The central committee from
40
Ibidem, p. 4.
41
Ibidem, p. 64.
42
Ibidem, p. 7.
43
Ibidem.
Bucharest was represented by Gh. Lungulescu and Marin Nedelea44. As
to the number of participant, the documents mention only the request of
the county committee to be sent 3.000 enlistment cards45.
In Hunedoara County the organizing began only 3 days since the
forming of Cluj Regional Committee. Thus on 11 January 1934 at Deva
was formed the Romanian Antirevisionist League for Hunedoara Region
lead by the following committee: President Dr. Eugen Tatar, dean of the
Bar of lawyers in Deva,Vice-presidents Petru Perian - mayor of Deva and
Dr. Victor Șuiaga – lawyer, Sessions secretaries: Dr. Lazăr Dânșoreanu -
lawyer and Dobre Ioan, cashier, Iosif Stoica - professor46.
The action of establishing of sections and subsections for R.A.L.
went on in the year 1935 in Hunedoara County. So, on 8 December
1935 at Vulcan, as a local paper wrote, was held a large Romanian
manifestation to form The Committee of Antirevisionist League. This
committee was formed by priest Gheorghe Zamora -president, Dr. Eugen
Suciu - vice-president, notary Silviu Vladislav - cashier and teacher Ioan
Pascu - secretary47.
After the constituting of the organizational structures of the
League in Transylvania, the first concern of the leaders of antirevisionist
movement was given to elaborating of materials and publications of
their own, able to counteract the revisionist propaganda. In the series of
materials wrote by the Regional Committee for Transylvania of R.A.L.
were books, brochures newspapers magazines and calendars having
antirevisionist content meant to counteract the revisionist propaganda
inside and outside the country. All these publications bore the signature
of well-known representatives of the two Romanian churches.
The church press organs inserted within their publications
articles with antirevisionist character and information regarding the
antirevisionist movement in Transylvania. „Rebirth” - newspaper from
Cluj published on 23 Decembre 1934 Stelian Popescu`s conference held
44
Ibidem, p. 5.
45
Ibidem, p. 14.
46
The Count National Direction Archive Hunedoara, Archive trust: Police Headquarters
Deva, File: 27/1934, file 6.
47
„The mettle” (Petroșani), 15rd December 1935.
a week before and by which was inaugurated a cycle of antirevisionist
conferences organized by the Regional Committee48. In the pages of
this national-religious newspaper resolute answers were given to the
denigrators articles towards Romanians and the Orthodox Church
that had appeared in the Hungarian press. So, on 6 January 1935 was
published a firm answer to the insidious provocations from the Hungarian
newspaper „Nemzeti Ujsag” from Budapest49. In the same issue of the
newspaper the church goers were informed on the fact that the Orthodox
Brotherhood Congress from Sibiu has chosen as their first wish of their
future programme an intense action against the agreement from Rome
between Horthy Hungary and Fascist Italy. Having the floor as president
general of the congress Sextil Pușcariu said: „In the so unclear and
dangerous situation nowadays when we are appalled by the dramatics of
satanically assassinations and inside a wave of immorality agitates us, it
is a supreme duty for our church to set to light all its spiritual resources
so as to keep in check energetically all adversary currents that strike our
national and religious unity”50.
Articles and conferences of antirevisionist character were published
by churchmen in other papers and magazines, most of them in annual
calendars edited by the Regional Committee in Cluj. The antirevisionist
calendars were meant firstly for peasants most of them are given for free.
They contained news about antirevisionist actions as well as tables with
the antirevisionist works already published or under press.
In the 1937 calendar, Nicolae Colan, bishop of Vadului, Feleacului
and Clujului in the column „The arms of our antirevisionism” was urging
the leaders of the league to give priority to their actions in the villages,
where the deep patriotism of the Romanian peasant has remained
unaltered along centuries. In the column the orthodox hierarch, showed
that „Our well bread peasants are antirevisionist through their instinct,
as they are bound with their soul by the land they work. That is why,
simple as they are they do not easily go beyond themselves when they
are talked about treaties paragraphs but they see red when an enemy
48
„Rebirth” (Cluj), XII, 23rd December 1934.
49
Ibidem, 6rd January 1935.
50
Ibidem.
menaces their tilled soil” 51.
The antirevisionist calendars printed by the Regional Committee
published many articles coming from the orthodox and uniate churches
which due to their penetration force of the ideas expressed by words
reached the heart and mind of their readers52.
The Conference entitled „1 December” written by the Transylvanian
metropolitan Nicolae was printed by the Regional Committee so as to be
read at the manifestations held to celebrate this great union. One of the
arguments used by the Hungarian revisionist propaganda was that of their
long ruling over Transylvania. Facing this argument the metropolitan of
Transylvania said:
„That is Hungarian logics. Oh, but a ruling over a property

that does not belong to you and over which you are not entitled,
the longer, the more unjust and the more it accuses yourself for its
injustice. A thousand years of Hungarian ruling was nothing for us but
a thousand year’s dungeon”53.
The contribution of the national Romanian churches in spreading

and developing of antirevisionist movement from Transylvania, was
appreciated with gratitude by the leadership of the Regional Committee.
At the general assembly of this organization on 19 May 1935 president
Ioan Lupaș saluted with warm words the bishop Nicolae Ivan one of
51
The 1937 Calendar of the Romanian Antirevisionist League, p. 14.
52
We enumerate a few of the articles published in the league calendars:
-
The Ethnic unity of Romania towards Revisionism, written by I. Lupaș D. Marmeliuc
and Gurie Grosu.
-
The Purpose of Antirevisionist League in Transylvania, written by A. Nicolcescu Blaj
metropolitan.
-
God is with us, by Iuliu Hossu bishop of Cluj.
-
The national Problem at the west border by Vasile Lazarescu Caransebes bishop.
-
The Voice of blood by Vasile Lazarescu Caransebes bishop.
-
Towards a solidarization of Romanians written by Protopope Ioan Craciun - president
of R.A.L. Medias.
-
Calendars of the Romanian Antirevisionist League on years 1935, 1936, 1937 and 1938.
53
League, File 1/1932-1938, p. 2002.
the representatives of the antirevisionist movement on his 80 birthday.
Answering the salutation he had been addressed, Bishop Nicolae Ivan
made an appeal to all league members to bring their contribution by all
possible means to back up the so much useful activity for the Romanian
nation which that League was spreading54.
The death the bishop Nicolae Ivan was sadly received by the
leaders of the Regional Committee. At the session of 11 February 1936,
professor Ioan Lupaș made it clear that the initiative of starting the
league in Transylvania belonged to Nicolae Ivan who managed to gather
round him all intellectuals from Cluj as well as the whole intercarpathian
territory. Ioan Lupaș underlined that „the death of bishop Nicolae Ivan
was met with deep regrets by the Romanian Antirevisionist League and
such a constructive spirit such as of the late bishop cannot be replaced”55.
The passing over of the bishop did not diminish the contribution
of the church in spreading the antirevisionist movement in Transylvania.
Following Nicolae Ivan example, Andrei Mageru, bishop of Arad, took
part in the general annual assembly of the Regional committee that was
held 17 may 1936 and underlined that the antirevisionist movement has to
emphasize apart from the continuity of Romanian living in Transylvania,
the seal of the Dacian-Roman civilization forged along centuries56.
The antirevisionist activity of the two national Romanian churches
deployed also through the participation at the great antirevisionist
manifestations organized in collaboration with the Regional Committee
from Cluj. For example, After Mussolini’s statements at Milan to
which Hungary had been the „Great maimed country” after the war in
Transylvania followed a wave of great antirevisionist manifestations.
The most imposing one was at Cluj 5 November 1936. On behalf of
those who had called people to the manifestation the first to sign were
Nicolae Colan orthodox bishop and Iuliu Hossu uniate bishop. At the
end of the manifestation was voted an 8 points motion that repelled the
revisionist accused, expressing in the same time the disappointment that
a country member of the Latin race and a traditional ally of Romania,
54
Idem, File 51/1934-1938, p. 93.
55
Ibidem, p. 146.
56
Ibidem.
was encouraging revisionist Hungarian propaganda based on untruths57.
The total adhesion of the two Romanian churches at the
antirevisionist movement was also expressed in the final years of the
fourth decade, at a time when the rising of totalitarian states was heavily
manifesting. Regarding this situation, at the session of 29 May 1938,
bishop Nicolae Colan showed that it was necessary to stand together for
the antirevisionist members so that the League activity take flight and
have echoes as this was needed for the great cause of the Romanian right
it was serving58.
Speaking at the same session on behalf of the Uniate Romanian
Bishopric Monseigneur Emil Iuga underlined that he „joins with all his
love to the Antirevisionist League, contributing to its activity whenever
the need may be both in the country and abroad as the Uniate priest
knows it too well that his spirit and body is devoted both to God and to
his fatherland”59.
His determination of keeping the antirevisionist activity going on
was also expressed in the address to the Romanian Uniate Metropolitan
of Blaj sent on 25 February 1938 where he let the Regional Committee
know he will support them in organizing of antirevisionist propaganda
as it is expressed in the memoir addressed to the central leadership from
Bucharest60.
The observation of commitment made by the heads of the
Romanian national churches can be deduced from the fact that within
the clergy sessions were solved problems belonging to the antirevisionist
movement. So, at the Congress of „Romanian Orthodox Brotherhood”
from Oradea 24 October 1937, where took part more members of
the Regional Committee, who presented a report on the status of
Romanians living in Szekler region, asking for their helping developing
the antirevisionist movement in the region61. As a consequence of this
intervention in the Szekler region, but in other parts of Transylvania
57
Ibidem, p. 214.
58
Ibidem, p. 281.
59
Ibidem.
60
Ibidem, p. 257.
61
Idem, File 46/1934-1937, p. 168.
either, the orthodox and uniate priests supported the re-Romanization of
the Hungariated names since the dualist reign62.
An obstacle more difficult than re-Romanization was in those parts
the raising of churches to replace the old ones made of wood and building
churches in the villages where there were no Romanian churches. In
this action the antirevisionist movement involved through the Regional
Committee from Cluj who supported with funds the raising of Romanian
churches in the Szekler region. In a letter dated 14 July 1937, the Uniate
priest Crețu Emil from Troița Mureș County was asking the opening of
an offertory through the newspaper „Universe” lead by Stelian Popescu
President of Romanian Antirevisionist League63.
From those presented here we see the special example offered
by the two Romanian national churches, Orthodox and Uniate/Greek-
Catholic of involving in the antirevisionist movement both as institutions
and as private persons. Keeping alive the tradition of the Romanian
national being, the two sibling churches shook their hands worked
together within the antirevisionist movement. Significant for this is that
all levels of R.A.L. in Transylvania starting from hamlet committees and
up to the Regional Committee the priests or high hierarchs orthodox or
uniate were among the first being at once chosen by members of rural or
urban communities to run again the national and patriotic actions.
On the same level within the movement and vivified by churchmen
situated the intellectuals of villages and towns, professors and teachers
aware of the noble mission of disseminating to their country folks love
for the country sacrifice spirit required to its defense.
62
Idem, File 31/1920-1938, p. 84.
63
Ibidem.
Petr BALCÁREK
Religious Freedom and Repression in

Czechoslovakia
as Reflected in the Life of Hieromonk Ignatie
Ciochina (1899-1976)
Abstract
The present paper is most probably among the very few, if not the
first study on the life of hieromonk Ignatie Ciochina from Uličské Krivé
in Ruthenia (in the eastern part of today’s Slovakia). The author looks at
some of the aspects in this Orthodox monk’s missionary activity against
the background of the historical events that took place in the region
during the 20th century, emphasizing those features in his personality
which make him appear to some of the believers as being a modern saint.
Keywords:
Hieromonk Ignatie Ciochina, Ruthenia, Eastern Slovakia,
Orthodox Church, Greek Catholic Church, history of the 20th century.
Introduction1
“... Čecháčkové2 came here3; they had read about the poverty of
the Ruthenian people and wanted to let their nerves become excited
by drastic images; they were disappointed since they did not see any
living corpses or people wrecked by starvation; in the end they decided
1
For a better understanding of the jurisdictional problems in Czechoslovakia see the study:
Petr Balcárek, “Church-State Relations in Czechoslovakia. A Case Study on the Orthodox
Church” in Proceedings of 12th International Symposium on Science, Theology and Arts
(ISSTA 2013), Religion and Politics. The Church-State Relationship: From Constatine the
Great to Post-Maastricht Europe, Alba Iulia, 2013, pp. 437-449.
2
“Čecháčkové” is a derisive name for the Czech people.
3
The author means the North-Eastern part of the Carpathian Mountains.
that these people, whose origins date from the thirteenth century, were
guilty for their own misery and poverty, because they could not labour
as regular human beasts of burden of the twentieth century ... the vast
majority walked without seeing, looked without perceiving, perceived
without understanding...”4.
These are the notes of an anarchist and communist intellectual, the
writer and journalist Stanislav Kostka Neumann5, after the first of his many
visits to Ruthenia, a wild region in the north-eastern part of the Carpathian
Mountains, which had become a traditional place of inspiration for many
Central European intellectuals such as the writers Ivan Olbracht and Jiří
Langer or the Jewish thinkers Ellie Wiesel and Martin Buber. It is thanks
to their works that this most remote eastern corner of the recently founded
state of Czechoslovakia, formerly belonging to the Hungarian Kingdom,
became known to western readers. The present study will look at the life
of a less known man native of this region which the new railway and state
roads had made more easily accessible to visitors from the west. Monk
Ignatie Ciochina’s story6 is that of an individual’s resistance to collective
repression, to the ideologies of the various mass movements that swept
his home land during the twentieth century. Therefore, we shall look at
hieromonk Ignatie’s life as a missionary priest in the wider context of the
historical events that took place in the region where he was born, grew
up, lived, and died, by following these events chronologically.
4
Stanislav Kostka Neumann, Enciány Popa Ivana. Letní dojmy z rachovska, Fr. Borový,
Praha 1933, p. 58.
5
S. K. Neumann was of Jewish origin. In 1921 he became the co-founder of the Communist
Party and the initiator of proletarian poetry. He was editor of the communist magazine
Proletkult. There he published the Marxist-Leninist theoretical articles “Proletarian
Culture” (1921) and “Art of Agitation” (1923). After the Fifth Congress of the Communist
Party of Czechoslovakia (1929) he signed the Manifesto of the Seven, for which he was
expelled from the Communist Party. In the 1930s, he became seriously ill and was treated in
the Poděbrady Spa. During World War II he lived in seclusion in the countryside to escape
the attention of the Gestapo.
6
Hieromonk Ignatie Ciochina (1899-1976) is a very little known personality who was
rehabilitated and received some attention only after the collapse of Communism in this
region. Only one study about his life is known to this date, i.e. Martin Mitrik’s M.A. thesis
Otec Ignatij Čokina a jeho duchovný zápas (Prešov, 2000), supervised by professor Jan
Zozulak, former dean of the Orthodox Theological Faculty of Prešov University in Slovakia.
Under the Hapsburgs
Father Ignatie Ciochina7 was born (and baptised Ioan) in a small
village, Uličské Krivé8, on the south-western slopes of the Northern
Carpathians, at the time of the Austro-Hungarian Empire this being a
region of the Hungarian Kingdom. His village was part of the Estates of
Count Friedrich Beaufort-Spontin9, who, in 1908, had a small railway
built for better transport of persons and wood from the most remote
areas in the Carpathian valleys to the flat region of Ungvár10. At that
time little Ioan began attending school (1908-1909) two miles from
the wooden house where he was born, in the neighbouring village of
Ulič, the administrative centre; besides the school itself, there was also
a wooden church (just like in his home village), a parish house, a post
office and a railway station, Ulič being on the state road that connected
the villages in that valley with the rest of the world. He was taught the
Ruthenian and Hungarian languages, some writing, simple mathematics,
and religion by a Greek Catholic11. His schoolmates were children of the
inhabitants of the surrounding villages. This administrative centre had
an 18th century chateau owned by the ducal family of Beaufort-Spontin
7
His baptismal name was Ioan (John) and his name as a hieromonk was Ignatie (Ignatius).
8
Hungarian Görbeszeg, Ulics-Kriva, Ruthenian Уліч Kpivi / Ulitsch-Krivij (today is linked
with the Ulič, Hungarian Utcás – from the year 1907 Ulics, and by Ruthanian Language
Уліч/Ulitsch).
9
Frederic August Alexandre of Beaufort-Spontin (1751-1817), Count of Beaufort, Marquess
of Spontin and of Florennes, was elevated to the rank of Duke of Beaufort in 1782. He
was the last Governor of the Austrian Netherlands. Chosen Governor of the Netherlands
by the Allies in 1814, the Duke of Beaufort-Spontin tried to established a Kingdom of
Belgium as early as 1815, with a Habsburg as sovereign. The family moved to Austria in
the late 19th century, where they still live nowadays. The estate belonged to family up to
the beginning of the Second World War 1939. See: Herczeg Beaufort-Spontin Frigyesnének
(Friedrich) see: Magyarország vármegyéi és városai: Magyarország monografiája. A
magyar korona országai történetének, földrajzi, képzőművészeti, néprajzi, hadügyi és
természeti viszonyainak, közművelődési és közgazdasági állapotának encziklopédiája.
Szerk Borovszky Samu – Sziklay János, Budapest: Országos Monografia Társaság, 1896–
1914, see http://mek.oszk.hu/09500/09536/html/index.html, accessed on 1 October 2013
for general information also see: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beaufort-Spontin, accessed
on 1 October 2013 and http://www.eupedia.com/belgium/high_nobility_of_belgium.
shtml#Beaufort-Spontin, accessed on 1 October 2013.
10
Užgorod, in Romanian as Ujhorod, in today’s Ukraine.
11
In Ruthenia at the time the prevailing denomination was Greek-Catholic.
of Belgian origin, to which belonged a small hunting lodge (in the place
called Valalština)12 built by the family in the 19th century, as well as other
administrative and stone buildings mainly from 18th-19th centuries.
World War I
As we shall see from the history of this region, during Ioan’s life
there were several traumatic events that had an impact on the population,
the first of them being the military operations and battles during World
War I13. The war front kept moving on either side of the top of the
mountain ridge during the whole period of the war. In fact, the Russian-
Austrian front was not far away from Ioan’s house. At the time Ioan was
a teenager, that is, experiencing a most vulnerable period in his life. In
the school year 1916-1917 he finished his eight years of studies at the
local basic school. It was a time when his village was full of injured
soldiers. The school building, as well as the rooms in the basement of
the local chateau, may, as in many other places, have well served as a
hospital.
Many soldiers on both sides were killed in the area during the World
War I, mainly Czechs and Austrians in the Austro-Hungarian army, but
also “enemy” Russian soldiers. The neighbouring hills and woods are
full of war cemeteries that can be seen even today. Only recently have
the cemeteries in the Carpathian Mountains begun being looked after,
cleaned and made accessible to the public (on the Polish side in the north
and on the Slovak side in the south), due to the care of the Austrian
government. Among those killed in this region during World War I there
are also personalities such as general-major Baron Nikolaj Nikolajevič
von Mürbach (Mirbach)14 and, according to the local oral tradition, also
a member of Russian imperial family, the Grand Duke Alexej Alexejevič
Romanov. In the first years of the Czechoslovak republic the Romanov
grave, supposedly in the war cemetery in the village of Ulič, used to be
12
http://www.ulic.ocu.sk/sk/index.php?ids=3, accessed on 1 October 2013.
13
Marián Hronský, The Struggle For Slovakia and The Treaty of Triaton, Bratislava, Veda,
2001, pp. 13-34.
14
http://sk.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolaj_Nikolajevič_Mirbach; http://forum.valka.cz/viewtopic.
php/title/Kto-bol-general-Mirbach/t/102738, accessed on 1 October 2013.
frequently visited by the Russians who had fled the Soviet revolution and
taken refuge in Prague; in those years, the grave used to be a pilgrimage
place, nowadays it is almost unknown15.
Struggle for Independence

The 31st regiment of the Italian Legion helped the newly
independent Czechoslovak Republic, fighting on the side of the
Czechoslovaks against the Hungarian authorities in the region. After the
proclamation of independence and self-determination of the Czech and
Slovak nations, the Italians freed the main centres in Eastern Slovakia16.
Nevertheless, young Ioan and his family experienced the democratic
events in early Czechoslovakia in a less enthusiastic way than some of
their co-citizens, since the situation of the Ruthenians was politically
more complicated. While the Czechs and the Slovaks had their own
governments and the president of the Czechoslovak Republic had his seat
in Prague, the Ruthenian population had a government elected by their
own people only for half a year, later being ruled a governor imposed
by Prague. This meant that the Ruthenian people´s intellectual elite was
scarce and they had few if any political and cultural means of resisting the
ideological pressure of the mass movements during the political changes
that followed. This fact is, as we shall see later, important towards a
proper understanding of Father Ignatie Ciochina´s personality and the
role he played among the population of his native land.
The National Revolution
One of president Tomáš Masaryk´s first state laws was the
nationalization of the properties in 1918. This took place according
to the size of the estates (in the Ruthenian region they were mainly in
the hands of the Hungarian or international aristocracy and also of the
Greek-Catholic Church) and deeply affected the surrounding the estate
15
This unverified information is connected with the mystery of the cemetery; it is said
that Prince Alexej Alexejevič Romanov is buried here, in grave number 43. http://www.
panoramio.com/photo/15555225, accessed on 1 October 2013. According to the local
tradition, the Austrian officer who killed a member of the Romanov family and officer of
the enemy army had to be given the capital punishment by his own people.
16
Martin Hronský, The Struggle For Slovakia and The Treaty of Triaton, Bratislava, Veda,
2001, map on page 98. About the operation of the 31st regiment of the legion, see pp. 131-152.
and property owners. Part of the properties taken from the aristocratic
families was given to the village people, others became state properties.
Later, under the communists after World War II, the properties given to
the villagers by Masaryk were taken from them and became common
property of the people. These changes led to the dismantling of traditional
ethical, moral, and legal values since many people’s property, whether
movable or immovable, began to be stolen or destroyed on behalf of the
Czechoslovak nation or state.
It might well be that, in the middle of an unstable world, shaken
from its very foundations, young Ioan Ciochina thought of taking refuge
in monasticism where worldly values of property and justice were to be
transfigured.
The Communist International Revolution

The reshaping of the system of values that took place under
president Masaryk occurred within what was considered to be a national
movement. After the World War I, the same changes began taking place
within the wider international communist movement, properties being
“liberated” by the Red Army on behalf of the proletariat, of the “working
people”.
The Red Army consisted mainly of Hungarians, headed by Béla
Kun and financed by The Communist International (abbreviated as
Comintern and also known as the Third International from Moscow).
It also operated in the territory of Ruthenia17 and communistic units
were founded there, the one in Ulič as early as 1926. In 1933 they had
become overtly active and organized a woodcutters´ strike against the
bourgeois Czechoslovak regime18. V. I. Lenin, the leading person of the
international communist movement had a special vision for this region:
“Special attention was also devoted to Kun´s Bolshevik government
in Hungary, which under the slogan of internationalism, preferred the
conception of a revived greater Hungarian state to a federal organization
17
2001, p. 155, see also map on page 154.
18
See entries Ulič, Uličské Krivé in Milan Strhan and Miroslav Kropilák, Vlastivedný slovník
obcí na Slovensku, 3rd volume, Bratislava 1970.
of the Central European Region”19.
The Hungarians’ attempt to re-incorporate the region where Ioan
Ciochina lived into the Hungarian state was successful less than twenty
years later, which radically changed his life.
Czechoslovakia between the Two World Wars

There is not much known of young Ioan Ciochina in the period
between the years 1916 and 1923. At that time, the village of Uličské
Krivé had, for a short period, converted to Orthodox Christianity, under
the missionary influence of Father Michail Mejheš (Mejgeš)20, teacher
at the primary school in Ungvár (Užhorod, Ujhorod), According to oral
tradition, Ioan spent two months in a Czechoslovak prison, possibly
having taken the side of the Orthodox who may have wished to use the
village church for their services and entered into conflict with the Greek
Catholics; after that he leaves his homeland. There are two theories
concerning his departure, which have been transmitted orally and have
been recorded by M. Mitrik21. One is about Ioan’s violent conflict with
local Greek Catholic priest Alexander Firčák, which resulted in the
former’s escaping justice on the other side of the Carpathian Ridge. The
second story is more moderate and tells us about the missionary activity
of priest Ivan Černavin who, after having visited Uličské Krivé, sent
young Ioan to the seminary in Bushtina (lying on the other, eastern side of
the Carpathians ridge).
What we clearly know is that between 1923 and 1927 Ioan studies
at the Orthodox Theological Seminary in Bushtin (Rumanian Buștea),
in Maramureș. It is during these studies that Ioan is tonsured a monk
by Archimandrite Bogolep (Cerkovnik)22 and receives the name Ignatie,
from Ignatius of Antioch (Theophorus – the God bearer), who was
19
Ladislav Deák, Trianon a ilúzie, Bratislava, 1995, p. 15; Marián Hronský, The Struggle For
Slovakia and The Treaty of Triaton, p. 345.
20
Štefan Horkaj and Štefan Pružinský, Pravoslávna cirkev na Slovensku v 19. a 20. storočí.
Ĺudia – události – dokumenty, Prešov, 1998, p. 106.
21
M. Mitrik, Otec Ignatij Čokina a jeho duchovný zápas. Prešov, Orthodox Theological
Faculty, unpublished M.A. thesis, Prešov, 2000, p. 36.
22
Pavel Marek-Martin Lupčo, Nástin pravoslavné církve v 19. a 20 Století. CDK, Brno 2012,
pp. 402-403.
martyred in the lions’s den.
On 6th May 1926 Ignatie is ordained deacon by Prague’s Archbishop
Sawatij (under the Ecumenical Patriarchate) at the Seminary in Bushtin.
Shortly after this, during the celebrations on the feast of Ascension in
the same year, an archimandrite Vitalij finds him in the village church
in Uličské Krivé and takes him to the Russian Monastery of St Job
of Pochaiev in Ladomirová (at that time under the Russian Orthodox
Church outside Russia – ROCOR), situated in the Slovak territory,
twenty kilometres further northwest of Father Ignatie’s native village23.
He was the first native Ruthenian to join this monastery, founded
by Russian immigrants with the aim of founding a printing press and
produce materials that would combat the Bolshevik and atheistic
movement in Russia. This monastery was under the first hierarch of the
territory – Prague’s Archbishop Sawatij of Czechoslovakia24. The latter
was the same person who had ordained Father Ignatie in Bushtin and who
had founded the Orthodox Theological Seminary in Prague where we
find Father Ignatie studying at the time of his transfer to Ladomirová. On
6th March 1927 Father Ignatie is ordained priest by Archbishop Sawatij
in Prague and begins serving as a missionary, wandering priest in places
such as Hrabské and Krásný Brod. The latter was the centre of the Uniate
Church with a large Greek Catholic monastery.
In the year 1931 he becomes a parish priest in Ladomirová, where
he stays only for a short time, since the few Orthodox Christians there
were under the strong influence of Uniatism and in permanent conflict
with the Greek Catholics. After that he goes on mission visits to Tibava,
which was all in the hands of the Uniates, to Rebrina, Svetlice, as well
as to Chust and Malij Bereznyj, on the Eastern Side of the Carpathians25.
23
More about the monastery on http://www.krotov.info/history/20/1930/slovakia.htm, accessed on 1
October 2013.
24
This is the time when the struggle for jurisdiction between the official Serbian Church and
the Ecumenical Patriarchate headed by Archbishop Sawatij was taking place. The Church
of the Russians outside Russia eventually transferred from under the jurisdiction of the
Ecumenical Patriarchate to the Serbian one; later, during Second World War, it became
autocephalous.
25
Chust and Malij Bereznyj are in today´s Ukraine; at that time, this zone was on the border
between Czechoslovakia and Romania. In Malij Bereznyj Father Ignatie Ciochina built a
Later on, he travelled to other places in Slovakia such as Velatin, Stakčin,
and Čelovce (1934) where he converted a large part of the Greek
Catholic believers to Orthodoxy. Between 1939 and 1940 he travelled to
Ladomirová, Medvedie, Medzilaborce, Čertižné, Uličské Krivé, Pstriná
and to many other places.
Return to Hungarian Rule: the Vienna Arbitration and the

Declaration of the Slovak State
After the Treaty of Trianon (1920), the territory on both sides of
the northern Carpathian ridge where Hieromonk Ignatius did his mission
legally belonged to Czechoslovakia26. Less than twenty years later,
this region was incorporated again into Hungary (1939-1944). Part of
southern Czechoslovakia and Carpathian Ruthenia had been granted to
Hungary by the Germans and the Italians in the First Vienna Award of
1938, a situation similar to that of northern Transylvania in the Second
Vienna Award of 1940.
Slovakia proclaimed itself independent from Bohemia and Moravia
on 14th March 1939. This happened under the influence of political
demagogy and under direct pressure from Hitler. A day later, on 15th
March 1939, the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia was proclaimed
after military occupation by Germany.
It was at that time that the estate in Ulič owned by the Belgian
family was sold to a Prussian Protestant aristocrat Count Tielewinkler
(Tiele-Wincler), who stayed its owner all through World War II,
between1939-194427.
On 7th April 1939 hieromonk Ignatius’s village was occupied by
Hungarian soldiers and was made into a forced labour camp. The villagers
worked in the woods and produced charcoal, which was transported to
the German Third Reich. The work was done also by small children,
women, elderly people and without payment. This labour camp was
run by Admiral Horty’s organisation “Levente” (The Paladin), its aim
Russian Cross just opposite the Greek Catholic Monastery.
26
2001, p. 155; see also the map on p. 242.
27
http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiele-Wincklerowie, accessed on 1 October 2013.
being similar to Hitler’s Youth Organisation “Hitler-Jugend” that took
all youth from the age of 14 years old. Those among the local people,
mainly Ruthenians, who could flee took refuge to the Soviet Union and
became joined the 1st Czechoslovak Army in the Soviet Union or directly
the Red Army28. There was also active local opposition of the communist
party organization in the region; the Hungarians imprisoned ten of their
members, two of whom received capital punishment in 193929. The
village was freed by the Red Army on 26th October 194430.
This political situation explains why, during World War II,
Hieromonk Ignatius worked as a missionary mainly among the Greek
Catholic fellow Ruthenians who lived in the independent territory of
the Slovak state. He could not travel home, therefore he was based at
the monastery of Ladomirová, among the Russian monks. During this
period (1943-1944), there also lived at the monastery Prince Nikita
Alexandrovič Romanov, nephew of the last Tsar Nikolas II, his wife
Maria Voroncova-Romanova, and their two children31.
At the beginning of the war, Ignatius was made Igoumen by the
Serbian Bishop Vladimir (Rajič), the Serbian Church being the only
official one in that territory before it was taken under German jurisdiction
on 4th June 1940. He started serving in Medzilaborce, where he began
collecting money for the building of an Orthodox church. The abbot
of the local Basilian Greek Catholic monastery, Sebastian Sabol OSB,
joined by his believers, wrote letters to the official political authorities,
in which he blamed Igoumen Ignatius for allegedly organizing activities
against the Slovak state and against his monastery. Igoumen Ignatie
and Fr Sava Struve, another monk from Ladomirová Monastery who
28
Michal Kočan (born on 24.7.1925, soldier of the Red Army, killed on 5.2.1945 in Poland);
Juraj Čogan (born on 10.4.1919, member of the 1st Czechoslovak Army in the USSR, killed
during the siege of the Dukla pass). http://www.ulicskekrive.ocu.sk/sk/index.php?ids=4,
accessed on 1 October 2013.
29
Ulič, in: Vlastivedný slovník obcí na Slovensku, 3rd vol.
30
http://www.ulic.ocu.sk/sk/index.php?ids=3, accessed on 1 October 2013.
31
Lubica Harbulova, “Posobenie Ruskej pravoslavnej církvi v zahraničí na území Slovenska
v rokoch druhej světověj vojny,” in: Koniec druhej světověj vojny a problémy cirkevnej
politiky v následujucom období, ed. by Michal Barnovský and Daniela Kodajová,
Bratislava, 2006, p. 56.
helped him in his missionary work, were being followed and their lives
endangered by the Basilians.
With Serbia joining the war, Ladomirová monastery was also
transferred to the autocephalous Orthodox Church of Central Europe,
Igoumen Sáva Struve becoming the bishop administrating the territories
in Slovakia under the jurisdiction of Metropolitan Seraphim Lade from
Berlin.32 There is evidence that in December 1943 Igoumen Ignatie was
doing mission in Čertižné in Eastern Slovakia.
With the Red Army troops advancing into the cities and villages
of Slovakia, Russian intellectuals, as well as most of the monks in
Ladomirová fled westwards and finally reached the U.S.A.. There the
latter founded the monastery in Jordanville, one of the monks among
them, Vasilij Michailovič Škurla (1928 Ladomirová – 2008 Jordanville)
later becoming Metropolitan Lavr, head of the ROCOR Church, who,
just before his death, signed unity between ROCOR and Moscow
Patriarchate in Moscow, in 2007 (together with the president of the
Russian Federation Alexej Putin and the Moscow Patriarch Alexej II).
Only a very few monks stayed behind in Ladomirová, among them forty-
five year old Igoumen Sava Struve and two others who were very old
and ill.
After World War II

The period after World War II remained hectic for Igoumen Ignatie.
There were people who opposed communism and who, in Communist
historiography, were misleadingly called Stepan Bandera´s Army33. They
were local partisans who, by some, were considered heroes, but, having
killed Jewish communists, were considered by others to be anti-Semites34.
Even in such situations, Igoumen Ignatie continued his missionary
activity. The Ladomirová Monastery had been completely destroyed by
32
Sáva Struve (born on 11. 10. 1900 – died in 1948), see http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Савва_
(Струве) , accessed on 1 October 2013.
He was the son of Peter Berngardovich Struve, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_
Berngardovich_Struve, accessed on 1 October 2013.
33
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stepan_Bandera, accessed on 1 October 2013.
34
Four members of a Jewish family in Uličské Krivé were killed by this group in 6th December
1945.
the advancing Red Army. Only some 19th century prints of images of
Russian Monasteries and some religious lithographies were saved from
the fire by monk Ignatius and have remained in his hermitage up to the
present.
After the war, Igoumen Ciochina received the permission to become
a missionary priest again (from 1st February 1945). The official pre-war
Bishop of the Serbian jurisdiction Vladimir Rajič called the priests to a
meeting in Ladomirová on 20th December 1945, in order to reorganize
further Church activities. There is evidence that Archimandrite Sava
Struve35 and Igoumen Ignatie Ciochina asked Bishop Vladimir to allow
them to change jurisdiction and to go under the Moscow Patriarchate; this
was finally realized on 7th March 194636. They seem to have understood the
role that Moscow was to play in the near future of the country, since it was in
the same year (on 17th June 1946) that the Czechoslovak president Edvard
Beneš told the Russian emissary Grigorij G. Karpov that it was a good idea
to have the Greek Catholics in his country united with the Orthodox and
suggested: “… First you have to start in the Carpathian Ukraine37, after that
in Romania, and then in our country”38. The Soviets had already taken this
decision in the Lvov Unity Council in the same year39.
The Communist Period: from the Moscow Exarchate to the

autocephalous Orthodox Church in Czechoslovakia
In 1945, his fellow monk from Ladomirová Monastery,
Archimandrite Sava Struve, became parish priest in that village under
the Exarchate of the Moscow Patriarchate. Nevertheless, shortly after
35
The rest of the monks fled the monastery to save their lives; according to Russian Sources,
Struve was a Fool for Christ, see: http://ru.wikipedia.org/ Савва_(Струве) , accessed on 1
October 2013.
36
Pavel Marek-Martin Lupčo, Nástin pravoslavné církve v 19. a 20. století, Brno, CDK,
2012, p. 243.
37
President Edvard Beneš had agreed that this formerly Czechoslovak region should be
incorporated into the USSR.
38
For the translation from the Slovak, see: Galina P. Muraško, “Osudy gréckokatolickej
církvi na Slovensku po druhej světověj vojne” in Koniec druhej světověj… p. 120: “... Začať
treba z Vašej Zakaptaskej Ukrajiny, potom v Rumunsku a následne už u nás”.
39
In March 1946 the Uniate Synod in the Lvov cathedral voted for the end of the union with
Rome and for unity with Moscow Patriarchate.
that, he accepted to be Chairman of the local National Committee in
Ladomirová and later also a member of the District National Committee
in Svidník. He died in 1948 and, according to Russian Orthodox sources,
he was a ”fool for Christ”.
Igoumen Ignatij´s permission to serve as a missionary wandering
priest became invalid when, at the Synod of Unity that took place in
Prešov on 27th May 1950, it was decided that the Greek Catholic Church
would be prohibited by the state; the majority of the Greek Catholic
population thus became Orthodox overnight, others preferred to join
the Roman Catholic Church. In the same year, the Russian Orthodox
Church of Moscow Patriarchate proclaimed the Orthodox Church in
Czechoslovakia autocephalous, in the hope that this status would offer
more freedom to a local Church consisting of a great number of freshly
received Greek Catholic members. The state authorities and diocesan
officers did not consider it necessary further to promote Orthodoxy, to
allow missionaries to walk from place to place and talk with people about
Christianity; what they needed was consolidation and peace to convert
the inhabitants of a socialistic country to atheist communism.
In this situation, Igoumen Ignatije’s missionary struggle became
even more difficult, since the Greek Catholics, who had been made
forcefully to join the Orthodox Church in November 1950, expressed
their anger each time they met this Orthodox monk. He was made to
return to his native village of Uličské Krivé and was priest under the
first Bishop of Prešov, Alexij Dechtěrev, a former Soviet citizen. In 1951
Igoumen Ignatie wrote a letter to Bishop Alexij, asking for permission
to spend the end of his life in a monastery in the Soviet Union, but
Bishop Alexij did not respond. In the year 1953, during the Paschal feast
tide, Bishop Alexij named Čokina a parish priest in the next village of
Ulič, receiving, at the same time, the right to wear a golden cross with
jewellery. In 1954, again during the Paschal tide, Igoumen Ignatie was
given the right to wear “palica” (an abbot’s staff).
Nevertheless, for Ignatie Ciochina being a parish priest did not
mean sitting in his parish house and waiting for the believers to approach
him. His missionary journeys, especially to the places that were within
walking distance, continued. Even though he lived in Uličské Krivé, in
1958 he is known to have served in Pstriná, in 1959 in Topola. When he
served in the village of Runina, he was attacked by the local villagers,
mainly Greek Catholics. His mission was, as he saw it, to eliminate
Roman Catholic influence in the believers’ customs and in the Orthodox
liturgies, especially confessing filioque in the Creed.
Moreover, in the year 1967 the wood factory Tvarožná was
founded in the village of Ulič and many unemployed people in the area
found work there40. That also meant they had to obey the rules of their
atheistic employers and began attending Church services less frequently.
Prague Spring and Revision of Communism

What has been coined in the history of 20th century Czechoslovakia
as the “Prague Spring” movement was based on the revisionist communist
ideology unmasking Stalinist crimes and inhuman repressions. Prague
Communists wanted to create a socialist society with “a human face” by
allowing people to have small businesses and private houses, by making
space for more democracy and self-expression. It is in this climate that
the Czechoslovak government had to deal with the accusation that the
abolition of the Uniate Church had been a vile injustice.
As part of the “soft” ideology practised at the time, the Greek
Catholics were allowed to become an official Church again. This
happened, indeed, in 1968, after interventions from Vatican and also as a
consequence of the negotiations between the U.S.A. and the USSR41. A
period of rehabilitation of the Greek Catholics followed when, after one
generation, the majority of the Orthodox became Uniates again.
The feeling of guilt that the Greek Catholics felt for having
accepted the union with the Orthodox Church after the war raised a spirit
of revenge in them and some of them began behaving aggressively to
those whom they thought responsible for their own fate. Ignatie Ciochina
remained, as before, an Orthodox monk and priest, wearing his black
cassock and long beard. According to oral tradition, when he came to a
40
Ulič, http://www.ulic.ocu.sk/sk/index.php?ids=3, accessed on 1 October 2013.
41
Owen Chadwick, The Christian Church in the Cold War, London, 1993, esp. p. 56.
bus stop, he was not allowed to get on the bus and he was even stoned by
the people around.
The Soviet Invasion and Normalisation

On 21 August 1968 the armies of the Warsaw Pact, with the
exception of Romania, invaded Czechoslovakia in order to “save” true
Marxism-Leninism against any revision. After the invasion, only the
Soviet armies stayed in the country, until 1993. Their military units
spread all over Czechoslovakia and separate quarters were built for
officers with families. The Soviet troops very often operated on military
grounds in the surrounding woods, including those in the region where
Igoumen Ciochina lived.
The presence of the Soviet army in Czechoslovakia obviously
brought various disadvantages to the life of the country. On the other
hand, there was one aspect that proved positive for the life of the Orthodox
Christians, especially of those in the Slovak territories: the presence of
the Russian army relieved the Orthodox minority from the abuse they
suffered among the Greek Catholic population and clergy.
These were paradoxical times; in the period of the so-called
“normalisation”, people felt like in the period after World War II, with the
Orthodox taking back leading positions in the National Committee or the
District National Committees. The violent persecution of the Orthodox
believers by the Uniates (who had been forced to join the Orthodox
Church for a number of years) from the period of democratization linked
with the Prague Spring was stopped by the Soviet tanks.
Yet, Igoumen Ignatie’s life was taking a different path. On 15th
May 1968 the Orthodox Diocesan Director and Diocesan Council
terminated his work contract and forced him to retire.42 Since that time
he did not have any possibilities to serve liturgies in a parish church,
since he had no parish anymore. He could not do mission work in other
places (as in the period up to 1950), either, since the state law prevented
him from being a wandering priest. This is the reason why he served
liturgies in his private house, which had been left him by communist law.
42
This was an exception, since other priests in the diocese worked until their death in the
same parish receiving a state salary.
When the period of “normalisation” began in the 1970s, Igoumen
Ignatie had spiritually matured. He understood that becoming involved
in secular affairs was not the way for a priest and monk. That is why, with
great bureaucratic and personal difficulties, he built himself a hermitage
outside his native village of Ulické Krivé, on the edge of a ravine, a
piece of land nobody would have wanted. It is a small three-floor tower
in the style of the monastic dwellings on Mount Athos, with a room he
used as cellar and workshop downstairs, a room on the first floor used
as living quarters, and the third room on the top used as a chapel. Here
he would live proper monastic daily life: he would go to bed at midnight
and wake up at 3 in the morning. He would perform his personal prayer
rule, including saying the Jesus prayer 150 times a day. He would not eat
anything on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays, even during the periods
when the majority of the people around would, for example, be killing
the pigs and preparing rich meat meals.
The state had made an agreement with both the Orthodox and the
Greek Catholics that their Churches could officially exist on condition
that there would be no religious propaganda or church clashes. This made
mission impossible in the normalisation period; that is why the stubborn
presence of a wandering priest became even more of a discrepancy.
Having been forced officially to retire, Igoumen Ignatie was not, for
political and financial reasons, supposed to do the work he was doing.
However, his main enemies were the local fellow inhabitants, many of
whom were the newly rehabilitated Greek Catholics and, obviously, the
communists.
Despite all this, Igoumen Ignatie spent a lot of his time among
the villagers: he continued to visit them, most often walking to distant
places, celebrating Church services where no other Orthodox priest had
the courage to do it, trying to eliminate the filioque from Orthodox Creed,
helping those in need. He is said to have performed miracles even during
his lifetime. He was loved by the village children and always had sweets
and kind words to give them. He died in the hospital on 24 October 1976,
at the age of 77. He was buried, according to his will, in the grave he had
dug himself by his hermitage tower in his native village Uličské Krivé.
Conclusion
“The ancient Roman poet Terence already stated: Events, age
and experience always bring something new”43. Since his birth, Ioan
Ciochina, later Igoumen Ignatie, lived in a world of constant radical
changes. Such turbulent episodes in the history of his homeland had left
inevitable damage on people’s properties and especially in all human
souls. The traumatic events led to psychological damage, phobias,
numerous nervous diseases, alcoholism.
It has been the aim of this study to show how difficult it was,
under such circumstances, for anyone to go against the mass movements
of history. In his youth, Igoumen Ignatie occasionally joined the main
stream and participated actively in some of the world affairs, such as
his signing the letter in which the Serbian bishop was asked to leave
and expressing his wish to be received by the Moscow Patriarchate
instead. However, in most situations he refused to compromise and
behaved according to his world views and his faith. His enemies were
seldom people of other nations, ethnic groups or religious affiliations;
they were rather his nearest neighbours (among them the atheists and the
compromised nominal Uniates). He struggled to strengthen and keep his
Orthodox monastic identity, as opposed to his fellow monk Sava Struve,
for example, who had to make a fool of himself in order to escape being
sent to the concentration camp in Siberia or other types of repression.
In his life, Igoumen Ignatie experienced the consequences of the
numerous major historical events that took place in his country. The outer
dynamism of the dramatic stories made him look for stability in his inner
world and this was given him by the Orthodox faith which strengthened
him and made him a pillar of resistance for those in need around him.
Therefore, at various stages in his lifetime, he acted accordingly: from
fighting a Greek Catholic priest in his youth, through building Orthodox
crosses in front of Greek Catholic monasteries as a monk in his mature
age, up to walking in an Orthodox hieromonk’s cassock all his life,
including the latest period when the atheistic society was being built by
the communists. Trying not to comply with the sometimes rapid political
43
Marián Hronský, The Struggle for Slovakia..., p. 345.
changes that brought repression and had deep impact on the society
around him, he built up his identity and worked towards inner, authentic
freedom.
Today Igoumen Ignatie Ciochina’s native village Uličské Krivé
and the neighbouring village Ulič do not seem to have any historical
remains; the culture and life values from the period between the two
World Wars has disappeared. There are no historical buildings (except
for the wooden Greek Catholic churches), no railway, no connection
with the outer world; these were destroyed by the Soviet Union who, in
1945, took over a great part of Ruthenia and former Trans-Carpathian
Czechoslovak Russia and created a new border that disconnected these
villages from the cultural centres. There are no remains of the formerly
strong Jewish settlements, either; the Jewish cemeteries are abandoned
and overgrown, hidden among the now old trees at the edge of the
villages. During communism, the local inhabitants worked mainly in
the western part of Czechoslovakia and their houses, in the military
zone very near the border with the USSR, were abandoned, since it was
prohibited for people or domestic animals to move in this territory. This
could be the reason why Uličské Krivé and Ulič are in what is nowadays
considered to be the darkest place in Slovakia, in what is called “Park
tmavej oblohy” – “The Park of the Dark Sky”44, where myriads of stars
can be seen at night with the naked eye. It is the place in Eastern Slovakia
where the sky is most open to human eyes and where heaven could be
very near to open human hearts.
44
http://www.lightpollution.it/dmsp/artbri.htmlhttp://poloniny.svetelneznecistenie.sk/park-
tmavej-oblohy/kvalita-oblohy/, accessed on 1 October 2013.
Dorin Demostene IANCU
Testimonies from the Fight of the Romanian

Nation for the Building up of the Great
Unification, in the Sight of Constantin Potârcă
(1885-1974) – a Craftsman from Craiova
Abstract
The diary under discussion belonged to Constantin Potârcă,
corporal, born in October 24, 1885 in Gogoşu county, in a peasant’s
family. Once Romania entered the War in August 1916, Constantin
Potârcă was called up in the rank of a corporal. Owing a real sense of
history, corporal Constantin Potârcă of Battalion I, Regiment 26 Rovine,
entitled his diary:“Notebook for Life and Marching Remembrances, for
Historical Matters, for Fight Scenes, for All kinds of Poems, as well as
for Dreams. Alongside with its documentary value, the diary has also
an artistic value, because it originally and creatively registers the most
important moments of the evolution of the war, in verses crossed by a
vibrating patriotism and by a specific Romanian lyricism. It introduces
the reader into the way of life of the common people, able to sing the
ancient ballads (the “doina”), to admire the surrounding nature, right
even in the heat of the war, to always hope for peace and to always
soundly and optimistically believe in the future of Romania. The diary
can be considered a source of a genuine importance for underlining
the collective spirituality of the Romanians in a crucial moment of the
history of our nation, which is nothing but the natural way the Romanian
people think and act.
Keywords:
World War I, Constantin Potârcă, Craiova, the Romanian Nation.
It was especially the World War I that abounded in a multitude

of information as thousands of persons, involved in it, wrote their
memories; some of them were even published. Nevertheless, the daily
diaries of the persons directly participating in the battles were, by far, the
most interesting ones; they became real “barometers” recording all the
deeds and feelings of the respective soldiers. Most of those diaries were
written by officers and educated people yet, rare were the cases when the
diaries belonging to simple, uneducated people were kept.
The diary under discussion belonged to Constantin Potârcă,
corporal, born in October 24, 1885 in Gogoşu county, in a peasant’s
family; the village is situated at 40 km west from Craiova, on the route
Craiova-Breasta-Beloţ-Gogoşu1. Dumitru, the father of Constantin
Potârcă, died at the age of 28, when the boy was only 4 years old. Thus,
the boy was obliged to leave for Craiova were he became an apprentice
in a shoemaker’s shop. From a very early age the boy was attracted by
the Church and lived a life very much alike to a monk’s life. In the long
run, he tried his hand at commerce, and opened a shop selling colonial
goods and dainties, on the Madona Dudu street - an old commercial
district in Craiova. At the age of 33 he married Ana Pascu (April 7, 1902
Sineşti-Vâlcea, February 20, 1974); she belonged to a family whose
origins were to be traced in the Sibiu area (Turnu Roşu); the family was
forced to take refuge in Craiova because of the Hungarian authorities’
ethnical persecutions. Their relationship, consecrated by the Mystery of
Wedding, can be considered, even nowadays, an example of Christian
family. Moreover, he renounced to eat meat and dedicated most of his life
to meditation and prayer. His family inherited from him 15 notebooks of
moral advice - proofs of his impetuous love for Jesus Christ, the Saviour.
Here are some of the notes in which he expressed his feelings: “As for
wickedness, you shall run away, as not to be harmed by it; first, you
should be the ones to stop working the evil”. “When you look at Jesus
Christ’s face on the Icon - for He is the Christ, my Lord and God - you
1
*** The Church Life in Oltenia. Year Book of the Metropolitan Church of Oltenia, The
Printing House of the St. Metropolitan Church of Oltenia, Râmnic and Severin, Craiova,
1941, p. 236.
shall feel as if being near Him”. “The faithful shall not boast himself
with their baptism and, at the same time, break the law and do wrong”.
“He who loves silver, is insatiable for silver!”. “Each and every man
shall pray for the peace of his country and of his people!”
After having tried his hand at some other trades, he succeeded in
building his own house in Satu Nou - known today as district Lascăr
Catargiu, in Craiova. A quarter of a century later, his great-grand daughter
and the daughter of Mihai Neagoe, attorney and ex-dean of the Dolj Bar,
donated the Oltenia Museum the First World War diary of Constantin
Potârcă, her great-grandfather.
Once Romania entered the War in August 1916, Constantin
Potârcă was called up in the rank of a corporal. Owing a real sense of
history, corporal Constantin Potârcă of Battalion I, Regiment 26 Rovine,
entitled his diary: “Notebook for Life and Marching Remembrances, for
Historical Matters, for Fight Scenes, for All kinds of Poems, as well as
for Dreams”. The notebook was written in indelible pencil and was kept
by the author and by his successors as a very dear relic. The Regiment 26
Rovine - whose company corporal Constantin Potârcă belonged to – was
incorporated to Division 11 Infantry – on the Jiu front – and was led by
General Dumitru Cocorăscu2.
The Diary began with August 16, when the company he belonged
to - part of the leading group - was to go by train up to Bumbeşti-Jiu,
near the straits entrance - towards Ardeal, along the Jiu Valley, passing
through Coţofenii din Faţă – Dolj, on the Filiaşi-Târgu Jiu line. On
August 19 they arrived at the Lainici Abbey/Monastery and crossed
Livezeni to arrive in Petroşani and Merişor3. It was there that the first
impact with the enemy took place but, because they were in a too
advanced position, they withdrew to the Boli fortress where they were
confronted with a new impact with the enemy. That made it necessary
for the battalion to withdraw to Petrila and then, again, to Bumbeşti. A
2
See more about these operations: *** The Military History of the Romanian People vol. V,
Evolution of the Romanian Military Body from the Conquest of the State Independence until
the Carrying out of the Great Unification of 1918l Romania During the WWI, Bucharest,
Militară Printing House, 1988, pp. 412-413.
3
Gorges in the Carpathian Mountains.
day later, the sub-unit passed again in Transilvania through the Petroşani
Pass, towards the Parâng Mountain where, finally, the attack was ceased.
Under the pressure of the Bavarian troops they were forced to withdraw
to Aninoasa, in Gorj, at about 50 km south of Târgu Jiu. Following a very
rough path, after many losses, damages and casualties, they arrived at
the Dumitrana Pen, Dobriţa, Buliga, Vaideei, at approximately 15-20 km
north of Târgu-Jiu. Once arrived at the Muncel Mountain, on September
29, a new counter-attack of the Romanians took place, ended with the
seizure of the Little Mountain. The attempt to occupy the Big Mountain
was a failure and the sub-unit withdrew again to Leleşti, 8 km north-west
from Târgu Jiu. Constantin Potârcă pathetically described those heroic
fights that took place near Târgu Jiu; he himself participated in the battles
and described the heroic deeds, underlining the sublime spirit of sacrifice
of those in the battles of October 12-14 in Leleşti. The heroism of the
Romanian army obliged the enemy to repel; the Romanians captured 16
cannons, 26 machine guns and 14 prisoners. In the following battles of
October 15-16 – at the Leşu Mountain – 180 prisoners and 4 cannons
were taken. In the heat of those battles the descriptions were drier and
more concise: only mentions about the battles of the Copilul Hill and the
withdrawal to Curpen, along the Jiu Valley. The disproportion between
the endowment of the enemy army and that of the Romanian army was
evident, irrespective of the heroism manifested by the Romanian soldiers.
Many attacks were recorded and, in one of them (the one of October 30-
31, 1916) corporal Constantin Potârcă was wounded and taken to the
hospital for the wounded in Craiova, located in the headquarters of the
Bank of Commerce, the present Town Hall4.
The special care he was treated with by the volunteers – nurses
in the “Red Cross” Department – saved the life of the hero-corporal.
The attack of the enemy troops was an imminent threat for Craiova.
Consequently, the Romanian General Staff and the Commandment of
the Sanitary Service led by Dr. Charles Laugier decided to evacuate
the wounded during the first week of November 1916. Together with
4
For more about these battles, see Nicolae Mircea Pătrăşcoiu, From the Testimonies of an
Old campaigner of the World War I - Nicolae Pătrăşcoiu, retreat major general, in the
“Litua” Journal, IV, Târgu Jiu, 1988, pp. 490-498.
other wounded soldiers, corporal Constantin Potârcă was evacuated by
a military train to Brăila and then to Galaţi. On November 25, 1916, the
wounded were transferred to Bârlad. Cured and recovered, he demanded
to be restored to a sub-unit in Bălăşeşti, Regiment 41 Infantry (the double
of Regiment 1Dolj from Craiova).
Being appreciated by his elders for his amazing intelligence, for
his mildness and spirit of discipline, he was selected to be given a better
training with a view to the battles to come. So, he returned to Galaţi, at the
Body of Troops I and from there he was sent to Tecuci and incorporated
to Regiment 3 Călăraşi, in the training center and, thus, he followed his
unit to Mărăşeşti, Adjud, Sascut, Bacău where he was intensely trained
for the attack that was to take place in the summer of 1917. January
marked a dramatic period. Although the frost and the snow storms were
biting severely the soldiers stood firm “with no food and surviving
with 100 grains of maize a day and a loaf of bread every three days for
every six soldiers”; all of them endured all those lacks with stoicism in
their impatience to set their families free and to drive the enemy away;
they were all conscious of the fact that the process of creating a unitary
Romanian state could no longer be stopped.
In the framework of the army reorganization, that took place in
the winter of 1917, Regiment 3 Călăraşi was dissolved and corporal
Constantin Potârcă was transferred to regiment 4 Argeş which was
decorated with the military order “Mihai Viteazul” III-rd class; the
commander, together with more officers received the same high war
distinction for excellent war deeds and merits. A new period – February
27 - March 16, 1917 – followed: sound activities for the preparation of
the trenches, providing new attacks, armed conflicts - mutual artillery
attacks and patrol actions.
Together with sergeant Bălan - his mate from Craiova - he read
the then newspapers, the elders supplied them with, in order to get
information and strengthen the conscience of the soldiers. Constantin
Potârcă expressed his opinions on the future of Romania and of the world;
his opinions justified his wish that the Romanians should cooperate with
other peoples of the world. In his diary the folk traditions were very
vividly described, and so was the inspection – on April 30 on the Momâia
Hill – of King Ferdinand I, before the great offensive at Mărăşti.
All this period – within the Battalion I of the Regiment 4 Argeş –
corporal Constantin Potârcă made drudgeries for the artillery. On May 21,
1917 he attended the speech of Alexandru Averescu who announced the
resuming of the offensive. Further on, he described the training delivered
by a French captain, within the regiment; during that training, the author
of the diary attended telephony courses (from 3-23 June). For better
connections and for the synchronization of the actions among the sub-
units, he was appointed a telephone operator in Battalion 1 of Regiment
4 Argeş. On June 24, 1917 the Battalion was inspected by general Artur
Vătoianu5, the commander of the Body of Troops 2. The next day – June
25 – Battalions 1 and 2 of the Regiment 4 Argeş were on line: “We were
all very happy when we received the order” wrote the author of the diary,
underlining the Romanian soldier’s high moral spirit and responsibility
on the eve of the great offensive at Mărăşeşti. On June 28-29, 1917 the
telephones were fixed in the trenches. The preparations for the offensive
– the night of July 8-9th – were described very emotionally and with
a deep spirit of observation; the result of the offensive was the almost
complete destruction of the German line of attack followed by the attack
of the Romanian infantry. On Tuesday 11, 9 a.m. the Mărăşti village was
occupied by Battalions 1 and 2; the losses of the Battalion were: 10 dead
persons and some several more wounded. In the course of the offensive
Roşculeşti, Gogoi, Câmpuri villages were also occupied.
“It was on July 12, 12 p.m. that we were shifted and replaced by
Division I and received the order to arrange ourselves “as for a picture”
for Regiment 4 Argeş to be decorated for their acts of heroism: forcing
the very solid and dangerous enemy line, taking 2,000 prisoners, two
artillery batteries and 3 wagons with ammunition for the use of artillery.”
In the Roşculeşti village the Regiment was put into reserve for only 3
days, because on Saturday, July 15, 1917 at 5 p.m., after a 40 km’s march
passing by the Caşin Abbey/Monastery and by the CaşinValley, arrived
at the glass factory where - on Monday 17, 7 p.m. were to replace the
5
General Arthur Văitoianu (1864-1957) became President of the Council of Ministers in 1919.
Russians “because they said that they did no longer fight because a three
years’ war was too long”. The days of July 18-21 - although marked by
dreadful battles - found the corporal updating his. information on the
evolution of the war, by reading the “Romania” newspaper. Battalion I
advanced to Vizantea Mănăstirească where, at the information given by
a prisoner, they learnt that the enemy was ready for a new attack and that
Regiment 32 Mircea behaved heroically: the soldiers took their coats off
and only in shirts they took the enemy by surprise and took 50 prisoners.
Further on, the memoirist described some defense operations from
Mărăşeşti and Oituz, as well as the fact that on August 15, Battalion I
records very heavy human losses (more than a half of its effective forces)
in their attempt to seize a position/ height. After this fight, many other
local armed conflicts took place but, rumors about the long expected
peace went all around the battle field. In the diary it was mentioned that
at the headquarters of the Division there appeared 2 German majors, 2
captains and 2 lieutenants who declared that they wanted peace as well,
but that they fought in vain if the war was lost; they also added that
rumors went that Basarabia, Bucovina and part of Transilvania would be
attached to Romania and, consequently, they refused to fight against the
enemy. One of the merits of the diary consisted in the fact that the state
of mind of the German army, after the great battles of Mărăşti, Oituz and
Mărăşeşti, was very faithfully rendered.
With all the strictness that characterizes the Romanian peasant, the
diary recorded also weather changes (wind, sun, rain, etc.), information
about the food they received - very scanty, otherwise - but about which
they had no comments, as far as the main aim was to defend the country
with even the supreme sacrifice, if necessary.
The truce was concluded on November 23, 1917, 3:50 a.m.: the
corporal received a telephonic call from the Regiment meant to inform
the company commander that the Russian army concluded the truce
to which the Romanian army subscribed. The diary further describes
episodes from the life of the Battalion, as well as the corporal’s mission
in Basarabia, connected with the census of the population. The moment
of the unification between Bassarabia and the former Romania was
made evident in the diary through the Proclamation of annexation of that
Romanian province. Further on, there were described the preparations
for the army release and for their return to their families and homes.
Alongside with its documentary value, the diary has also an artistic
value, because it originally and creatively registers the most important
moments of the evolution of the war, in verses crossed by a vibrating
patriotism and by a specific Romanian lyricism.
It introduces the reader into the way of life of the common people,
able to sing the ancient ballads (the “doina”), to admire the surrounding
nature, right even in the heat of the war, to always hope for peace and to
always soundly and optimistically believe in the future of Romania. Here
are some of the titles of his poems: The Country’s Call; The Mobilization
- rendering the enthusiasm of the people at the beginning of the war;
September 1916; Longing for the Country; The Ardeal; The Soldier; The
Wrath of God; Army, Go Fighting - rendering the peasant - soldier’s
aspects of battles and moments of hope.
The diary also stirs the interest of the reader because most of it
contains descriptions of battles, very often seen from the point of view
of the participant-author; it adds the narrative the pulse of reality, of a
living, authentic experience rendered immediately after it had been
consumed. It implicitly offers information about the Merişor battle
(August 29 - September 2, 1916), about the fascinating landscape of the
Lainici Pass, as well as the feeling that once the old borders restored their
real limits, nothing would be able to divide the Romanians. The story
“Speaking with a Transilvanian inhabitatnt” introduces Ion Pop - the
mayor appointed by the Romanian army in Petroşani - who, in the face to
face talk with the corporal, makes a real synthesis of the Romanians from
Transilvania. The dreadful battles on the Jiu Valley and in Transilvania
are told in such stories as: “The Battle of September 30, 1916 from the
Muncelu Mountain”; “Riglău - September 14, 1916”; “Capturing the Leş
- October 16, 1916” – all of them standing for the deep attachment of the
Romanian soldiers for their commanders and for their bravery leading
them to acts of heroism based on the firm conviction in their right cause.
Some stories have a stimulating character, such as “The Story of a Prisoner
- October 17, 1916”) that presents episodes from soldier Becheru Ion
who was taken prisoner for a couple of days, being interrogated by the
enemy in a flattering manner; this made the author think that the enemy
wanted to learn from prisoners more about the matters of the country
as to later use them in heavy works; his creed was that: “we all have to
avoid being caught prisoners by the enemies”. Another episode much
insisted on was “Companionship” speaking about the spirit of mutual
aid of the Romanian soldiers showed with regard to the wounded. Some
other stories described the “Căluşarii” – an old native traditional dance;
that demonstrated the pride of the author for national values. There were
also mentioned the battles of Mărăşti, Mărăşeşti, Muşunoaiele, Pietrosul
and other places.
The diary can be considered a source of a genuine importance
for underlining the collective spirituality of the Romanians in a crucial
moment of the history of our nation, which is nothing but the natural way
the Romanian people think and act.
August 17. Leaving to War

August 16, 4 p.m. - we left Craiova for Coţofeni6 and slept there;
from there to Filiaşi and from there to Bumbeşti, by train; from Bumbeşti
we walked up to the Porcani village, passing through the Lainici Pass,
which is near the Lainici Monastery/Abbey.
August 19 - we passed the night in the straits/Pass, crossed the
border and arrived in the Livezeni village; from there we entered the
town of Petroşani, where we passed two days and where we came across
much beverage and, in the evening, we left for Merişor; we were faced
with winds and rains, and finally, on September 30, the enemy attacked
us; we withdrew to the Boli citadel and were attacked again; from there
we withdrew in front of the Petrila town, upwards Petroşani and, at 9
p.m., we withdrew - for 24 hours - in the village of Bumbeşti; we left
that place and entered Hungary for the second time, through the Recea
Pass, where we fought against the enemy and made them withdraw;
then, we withdrew ourselves through Petroşani and climbed the Parâng
6
A place located at 18 km North-West from the Craiova Railway Station.
Mountain fighting on against the enemy - whom we could not defeat -
so we withdrew to Aninoasa for 24 hours; at night we retreated to the
Dumitrana Sheepfold.
September 22-24 - snow storms; from there we fought with the
storm up to the entrance of the straits, fought with the enemy and then
retreated to the Dumitrana Sheepfold.
September 27 - we left Dobriţa and passed through Buliga; at night
we passed through the Vaideei village; from there we passed through
Dobriţa, where we stayed for two hours in a villager’s house and drank a
¼ of plumb brandy and bought some grapes for whom we paid no more
than one leu; then we left at dawns and climbed the mountain; so, by 3
p.m. we arrived at the Muncel Mountain on September 29 and slept in
the trenches; on September 30 we started the attack, retreated the enemy
and seized the Little Muncelu Mountain.
October 1 - we attacked the enemy on the Big Muncelu Mountain;
they made us retreat and we withdrew to the Little Muncelu Mountain.
October 2 and 3 - rest days: but rainy, windy and snowy; artillery
bombardments from both sides.
October 4 - we were sent to the reserved forces.
October 7 - sent back to the battle front; the snow on the front line
was 40 cm thick.
October 11 - we started the fight against the enemy; they made us
retreat, so we withdrew in the country, in the Leleşti village.
October 12-14 - ample fights were fought and we made the enemy
retreat; we captured 16 field guns, 26 machine guns and took 1,200 prisoners.
October 15-16 - we chased and fought against the enemy at the
Leşu Mountain; we made them retreat and seized 4 field guns, all kind of
ammunition and took 180 prisoners.
October 17-19 - remained in position but the wind blew and it
rained all the time.
October 20 - heavy fights were fought on a close-by mountain
between our artillery and infantry and the enemy’s.
October 25-26 - battles, wounded and dead people belonging to
both armies.
October 27 - we went to the Copilul Hill.
October 28-29 - heavy fights; 29 withdrew to Curpeni, on the Jiu
Valley.
October 30-31 - heavy and dreadful fights: many dead and wounded
soldiers; I myself was hurt in the head at 4 p.m.
November 1 and 2 - I was in the Craiova hospital but I could also
go home.
November 6 - on Sunday I went to the Brăila hospital; I arrived at
the Brăila hospital on November 11 and on November 23 we received an
evacuation order.
November 24 - I arrived at Galaţi, but there was no train, I went on
foot for three halts up to the Lascăr Catargiu railway station, and from there,
I took the train to Bârlad, where I arrived on the evening of November 25.
On Saturday morning I left Bârlad by train and arrived on November 26 at
Bălăşeşti, at Regiment 4. On November 27 I went to the Bălăşeşti railway
station and took the train for the Galaţi Corps I; from there I went to
Tecuci, to the training center where I stayed until December 6; from there
me and sergeant Bălan and Rădulescu - the brother of Dumitru Popescu, a
publican living Craiova, in the Kogălniceanu street - walked and slept in
a country inn at the foot of the Siret river bridge; there we stayed for three
days and ate polenta and the fried meat we had bought from the publican.
December 7 - we left passing through Mărăşeşti - a nice town with
a sugar factory in it; we arrived in Adjud - where we slept - and from
Adjud we went to Sascut - a nice provincial town with a sugar factory
in it; we slept there and then left and slept in the train; then we left for
Bacău and arrived there on December 11.
December 12-13 - we slept in a coffee-house and then we slept
in huts in the yard of the barracks; we were trained no matter of rains,
snows or mud.
January, 1 - we left that place.
January 6 and 7 - we lived in Căiuţ - a small town that had a market.
In the morning, at 8 a.m. we left the place in a full snowstorm. We have
been walking the whole day and, in the evening, we arrived at Vardea; as
it was a biting frost, we slept there.
January 9 - we went to our positions on the Drăgoteşti hill.
January 15 - we went to Bâlca for barbed wire and remained there
until January 28.
January 29 - we went to our positions; all this period of time there
heavy snows and biting frosts; we had no food and survived with only
100 maize/ corn grains a day per individual and every three days with a
loaf of bread that was to be divided among six persons.
February 15 - night time: reconnaissance mission on a very thick
snow.
February 16-18 - snowstorm and snow that reached 1.50 m.
February 10-20 - the snow was even higher.
February 22 - Regiment 3 Călăraşi was dissolved and transferred
to Regiment 4 Argeş.
March 4-26 - quiet; sporadic artillery and heavy machines combats;
heavy frosts.
March 27-28 - until March 16: trench diggings, artillery combats
and patrolling missions.
March 16 - in the evening: reconnaissance missions, cannon and
machine gun fires; many wounded during the night.
March 18 - I was swimming in the Albişoara Stream while enemy
shells were flying above my head.
March 19-20 - I and sergeant Bălan read the papers and saw that
the Russians and the English seized Baghdad and other Asiatic cities
and that were chasing the Turks in their retreat; on the Western front the
French and the English moved forward seizing 140 villages and towns;
Sarăil7 from Thessaloniki successfully advanced towards two directions.
March 25 - we ate spawn soup and read the “Romania” newspaper
about the war preparations of mankind; we also read about the speeches
of Czesnui8 and Bettman9 who were ready to conclude the peace only on
7
It is about the French general Maurice Sarrail (1856-1929), the commander of the Orient
Army made up of 16 divisions, of infantry (French, British, Serbian, Italian) and a Russian
brigade. See the Military History pp. 382-383, 503 and 699.
8
Idem, pp. 344, 507- it is about Count Ottokar von Czernin (1872-1932), Minister of the
Exterior of Austria and Hungary in1916-1918, ex-plenipotentiary Minister in Bucharest.
9
It is about Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg – Chancellor of Germany in 1909-1917; see
idem pp. 331, 340, 507.
the condition that the others should give up the idea of destroying the
Central Powers.
March 24 - we washed our laundry: tunics, soldier’s trousers; I
have also taken a bath.
March 26 - we read in the above mentioned paper that America
had declared war to Germany and, because it was the Palm Sunday, we
ate fish and spawn.
March 29 - night time: ravaging cannonade from the part of our
artillery.
March 30 - sent to reserved troops on the Vârlanu hill.
April 2 - the Holy Easter: we had dinner on the green grass and
ate meat soup, Easter cake and two red eggs each and, we knocked eggs
with the colonel; we were given plum brandy and wine to drink and the
officers have eaten together with us; fiddlers were playing, soldiers were
dancing; me and sergeant Bălan were talking about our traditions from
Oltenia, about how our families might live under the occupation of the
enemy or about what food might they have prepared for the day! On the
second Easter day we were given beans and wine.
April 10 - wind and snow.
April 13-15 - wind and snow.
April 15-18 - artillery bombardment and rare gun shots.
April 22 - we were taken to the Muşunoaia Convent.
April 23 - the King came for an inspection.
April 30 - we were sent again in position at the Momâia hill.
May 8 - we were again sent to Muşunoaia, and were given a shot/
an injection10. Until May 18 we did only chore work and drudgery daily;
in the night of 15 to 16 of May I came from the drudgery together with
the private of the second lieutenant Mălăncescu and found a stray rider
who got lost because of the thick fog; we certainly took him with us but
we had to take from a fire on the way an ember and lit papers with it as
to lighten the way before us and to thus get off the fog in the forest and
arrive at the Muşunoaia Convent at about 1 a.m.
May 16 - a rest day.
10
It is about the vaccine against the catching diseases, especially against the famine fever that
stared to spread among the military and the civilians.
May 17 - the whole company executed drudgery work in the
artillery department.
May 18 -19 - we were doing drudgery in the Convent, guards and
others.
May 20 - we were doing drudgery on the roads and in the artillery
department.
May 21 - Sts Emperors Constantine and Helena His Mother;
religious service in the Convent, General Averescu was there too and
delivered a speech about our soon offensive; we were standing at ease
and ate meat; as it happened to be my birthday I was congratulated by
the second lieutenant Mălăncescu who offered me Russian tobacco and
some cigarette papers, a ¼ of wine and intimate cigarettes11.
May 22 - we were doing drudgery work in the artillery department.
May 23 - vaccination against boils; In November, when I went
to Βălăşeşti, I met Staminescu, Becherescu, Coşoveanu Săpunaru, the
Borcea brothers, Gorică the butcher, Vigi the Italian and many others.
May 24 and 25 - we were doing drudgery work in the artillery
department.
May 26 - we were doing drudgery work on the main road.
May 27-28 - training.
May 28 - I met the son of Zănogeanu Marin, from the 2 Mountain
Corps, who came to take a bath in the Convent.
May 29-30 - we were doing drudgery work in the artillery department.
May 31 - we were doing drudgery work on the main road, and
were offered meat and wine.
June 1 - battles against the French captain12 and the medical
inspection.
June 2 - we were doing drudgery work on the main road and ate
fried beans and bacon.
June 3 - I went to the school for a telephone call.
June 3-5 - school training and telephone calls.
June 5 - we ate meat and drank wine.
11
It is about “Intimate” luxury cigarettes in fashion before the war period.
12
It is about a French captain who was in charge of the training of the military personnel of
the 4 Argeş Regiment.
June 6-7 - company drudging work; I was at school and ate fish
and fried beans.
June 8-9 - still at school, various calls, theories and so on; I ate
meat and fish.
June 10 - food: meat and fried beans. From June 1 until June 11 it
has been raining continuously.
June 11-12 - telephone examination.
June 13 - phone calls, rains all day long and food: fish and peas.
June 13-14 - rain and wind; food: beans and fish.
June 15-16 - hail storm; food: beans and fish; at the phone school
I learnt theory and how to install phone sets.
June 17-18 - rain every afternoon; I read a paper about the
dethronement of the king of Greece and his leaving the country. On May
27 I read about the dethronement of the king of Russia, his being arrested
and dent to France13.
June 19-20 - rains and hailstorms every afternoon.
June 21-22 - rains at night; I read about the alienation of Greece
from the Central Powers and about the fact that Venizelos said that within
three months he would succeed to attach the whole Greece to the allies.
June 22 - I met Michiţă Dondoneaţă who was very feeble and ill.
June 23 - I passed the phone examination and was sent to the
Battalion as a phone operator; on the same day the weather was fine and
we went to the Covent to confess our sins; during the nights of 20-24
heavy battles took place.
June 24 - there were so heavy rains that the rivers overflowed in
the valleys; General Vătoianu inspected us.
June 25 - sun and rain.
June 26 - sun; Battalions I and II were in position; we were happy
at the reception of that order.
June 27 - we, he phone operators, received the same order so, we
left at about 5.
June 28-29 - heavy rain and mire; by night I installed a phone cell
in the trench; artillery exchanges of fire.
13
It is about Nicholas II Romanov (1868-1918), Russia’s last czar – the information was false
as he, together with his whole family, were arrested by the Bolshevists and executed later.
June 30 - by telephone, we heard the official statement that during
the Galiţia battles, the Russians had taken 12 thousand prisoners, 80
cannons and, that the town of Zadikov was also seized by them. All the
day it was such a heavy rain that the water reached our ankles in the
hut we had the phone set; on the same day I read in the paper that the
Russians took 18 thousand more prisoners and that they were on their
way to the Lembert town.
July 1 - we were changed from the position we were and went to
Muşunoaie.
July 2 - the inspection made by the colonel; food: fried ground
maize and vegetalin.
July 3 - food: fried ground maize.
July 4 - food: fried ground maize and fried peas; the enemy attacked
the Muşunoaie position.
July 5 - food: fried beans and cocos, Russian canned soup; I read
in the “Romaina” paper about the resignation of the German Chancellor
Bhethman Holvic, who was replaced by Doctor Holmals.
July 6 - food: fried ground maize and tea; weather forecast: rain
for a few hours; a quiet day with the exception of some artillery attacks
in the evening and some machine gun plane raids made by the Germans.
July 7 - sun and fine weather; the battalion was doing drudgery
work in the trenches; events: some artillery attacks.
July 8 - food: tea and nothing else; the weather was fine and there
was a quiet period from both parts; I read in the paper that Germany
wanted peace, that their country should maintain its former borders, and
that it should allot neither money nor ground. In the night of 8-9 the
alarm was sounded and we all were in position; we left for Muşunoaia.
July 9 - 12:00 p.m.: the beginning of the offensive by a dreadful
artillery bombardment: rounds of cannon that made the smoke pour from
hills and valleys; the villages were burning with fire and everything made
you think that the air and the waters were shaking; the barbed wire fences
set to protect the Germans sprang up in the air together with the poles
they were fixed in, until the place was totally bare; the offensive lasted
until July 12, by midnight; immediately after the infantry started their
attack; that day we were given plum brandy and wine.
July 11 - 9:00 a.m. we seized the Mărăşti village; there were very
few losses: 10 dead from the Battalion II but more wounded.
July 12 - seized the Roşculeşti, Gogoi şi Câmpurile14 villages;
on the same day we were replaced by Division I; order was given the
all companies should make group picture so that Regiment 4 Argeş
be decorated for their bravery of breaking through the solid enemy’s
defense, for taking 2,000 prisoners, seizing two artillery batteries and
three wagons with all kind of ammunition, but especially artillery
equipment and ammunition.
July 13, Thursday - I was in reserve in the Roşculeşti village; good
weather; food: noon tea.
July 14, Friday and July 15, Saturday - same Roşculeşti village;
food: beans and meat. On Saturday 15, 5:00 p.m. we left and passed
by the Caşin Monastery/Convent situated on the Caşin Valley (Bacău
county); it was a 40 km’s walk until arriving at the glass factory.
July 17, Monday - 7:00 p.m. we replaced the Russians from their
position, because they refused to fight any longer; they said that a 3 years’
war was much too long.
July 18, Tuesday and July 19, Wednesday - in position at the glass
factory; on the hill or on the peak of the Măgura Caşin Mountain there
were infantry scouts and artillery bombardment - both day and night.
July 20-21 - infantry and artillery attacks; food: meat and bread.
On July 21 I read the “Romania” paper and found out that the Greek
Chamber blocked the general mobilization of Greece and that Venizelos
said, in one of his speeches, that Greece should go to war as soon as
possible, as the others did; the weather was good.
July 22, Saturday - rain; we left the place by night; we walked the
whole day of July 23, Sunday until we reached a plain where we slept
overnight and, on July 21, Monday, in the morning, we went away; at
noon we arrived at Vizantea where we ate meat; it was raining and on
July 23 it was a very heavy rain; the night between July 24-25 we slept
in Vizantea and at 2 a.m. we left the place and walked for 13 km until
14
Villages belonging to the Câmpuri, Vrancea county.
we stopped at the peak and rested until 8:00 p.m. when we left for our
position, where we arrived at 2 a.m.
July 26, early in the morning - the Germans beat the Russians off
and seized the small town of Mărăşeşti; at night, at about 10:00 p.m.
Division V Romania arrived and, at about 2:00 a.m. beat the Germans
and chased them up to Mărăşeşti and seized the height 1211.
July 27 - artillery bombardment; rain in the morning, clouds; non-
stop artillery bombardment; food: bread and butter and beans.
July 28-29 - sun in the day time and cold in the night; food: beans
and rice; the troop remained in position; artillery bombardment.
July 30-31 - rain in the evening, too; food: meat and beans. In the
night of July 31 to August 1 we withdrew through the Topeşti village
and stopped to the monastery estate of Vizantea, where we occupied our
position.
August 1- we remained in Vizantea; food: ration and canned food;
in the night of August 1 to August 2 we attacked the enemy’s patrols and
beat the off.
August 2 - food: meat; we stayed in position; a prisoner came to
us and told us that the enemy intended to us; we received some official
information saying that Regiment 32 Oituz took their coats off, remaining
in their shirts only and, together with the mountain corps, beat the enemy
off and captured 500 prisoners; that event took place on July 31.
August 3-4 - food: bread and butter, beans; wind, rain, cold; heavy
battles on the front, right and left us, at Mărăşti and Oituz.
August 5 - wind and rain; food: butter and meat; artillery
bombardments on the right and left of the front.
August 6 - wind but sunny; heavy battles from Mărăşeşti to
Siret; from the German division that participated in those battles there
remained only 200-300 hundred people for each regiment; an Austrian
division who refused to fight any more, was attacked from behind by the
Germans who forced the soldiers to advance and frontally, by us, so that
the division was totally exterminated. Their losses - as taken into account
our force and size - were constant and compared to those at Verdun.
August 7 - food: semolina and beans, meat and rice; artillery
bombardment from both sides; heavy battles at Oituz; favorable weather;
attacks of the enemy; 8,000 prisoners taken at Oituz; I received a picture
card from Vizantea, from sergeant Bălan.
August 8 - food: meat and semolina; good weather and quiet in
our sector.
August 19 - good weather, bombardments from both sides; me and
sergeant Bălan washed our linen in a small brook near Vizantea; it was
also that day that we received a cable informing that the French and
the Italians took 12,000 prisoners and that they continued to chase the
enemies; food: butter and rice and sugar.
August 10 - food: beans and boiled wheat; good weather; an enemy
shell boomed in our proximity so that fragments of it fell on us; I read
in the day paper that the Pope sent a note to the Central Powers saying
that the allies had renounced the war compensations and that the Central
Powers had to not only liberate not only the occupied territories but also
to reduce the number of armies.
August 11 - good weather; food: beans and boiled wheat; ample
night scout.
August 12 - good weather; food: meat and boiled semolina; quiet;
I read the “Romania” paper and found out that the French seized the
Verdun front and took 4,000 prisoners.
August 13 - good weather; food: butter and semolina or boiled
French barley; nothing new in the paper.
August 14 - good weather, rain at night; food: bread and butter.
August 15 - good weather; food: semolina, ground maize, dried
crust/ biscuits, no bread; today it is one year since the European War
began. Battalion I of Regiment 4 Argeş was ordered to attack the Germans
with two companies and to seize a height; the battle lasted for three hours
and, unfortunately, we could not succeed and the losses were huge: many
more soldiers were dead than alive. Today is Saint Mary’s feast and we
hide for survival in abysses and forests.
August 16 - good weather; food: semolina, biscuits and ground maize.
August 17, Thursday - good weather; food: bread, butter, cheese
and boiled rice; quiet; heavy battles in Panciu.
August 18 - rain all day and night; heavy battles at Panciu and
Mărăşeşti; food: biscuits, bread and boiled wheat.
August 19 - good weather; heavy battles at Panciu, the Tarniţa
Convent; dreadful battles; food: meat and boiled wheat in the evening.
August 20, Sunday - food: ground maize, beans, bread; good
weather; heavy battles at Mărăşeşti; today I felt sick in my stomach.
August 21-22, Monday and Tuesday - bloody battles at Mărăşeşti;
important losses for both us and the Germans; we had three exterminated
divisions and several regiments so that all the valleys in front of our
eyes were full of dead soldiers; it was a sorrowful sight; the Hungarians
simply refused to come and fight against us, but being pushed forward by
the troops marching behind them, they were forced to advance; they used
poisonous gas in their attacks; good weather; food: bread, meat, ground
maize and boiled wheat.
August 23, Wednesday - food: bread, semolina and wheat; good
weather.
August 24 - good weather; food: beans, semolina, bread; battles at
Mărăşeşti.
August 26 - good weather; artillery bombardment; food: meat and
semolina; cold at night.
August 27 - food: ground maize, semolina, bread; good weather; I
was still ill; cold at night.
August 28 - food: beans, wheat; rainy weather, cold night; I was
still ill; they did not conclude peace on August 28, as believed.
August 29 - good weather; food: beans and bread; I read in the
paper about the terms of peace; even about a peace signed separately by
us, the Russians and the Germans.
August 30 - food: boiled rice and fish; peace rumours; I was still
ill; good weather.
September 1 - food: boiled prunes and French barley; quiet and
calm from both sides; wind, thick clouds in the sky.
September 2 - rain and wind; food: meat and fish; total silence
about everything.
September 3 - I read in the “Romania” paper that China declared
war Austro-Hungary; rumours about separate peace conclusions with the
Russians, the Germans and the Romanians; food: fish, beans; cloudy sky.
September 4 - good weather; food: fish, bread; heavy battles, the
enemy was beaten; various peace rumours: Bucovina and Basarabia will
be returned to us; well, nothing but words.
September 5 - food: beans and butter; good weather; talking about
peace.
September 6 - food: meat and ground maize; two German officers,
members of the Parliament came to our company and said that even more
will come and go to the Division and talk to the General.
September 7- food: fish and ground maize; two more German
majors arrived, two captains and two lieutenants saying that they were
for peace and that they fighting in vain for they lose anyway; they also
said that rumours about Basarabia, Bucovina and part of Transilvania
would be returned to Romania; they also said they did not any more want
to fight against the Romanians.
September 8 - food: fish and ground maize; good weather.
September 9 - food: beans and ground maize; the Russians beat the
Germans at Riga, chasing them back for 12 km.
September 10 - food: meat and beans, bread; artillery bombardments
from both sides.
September 11 - food: fish and ground maize; good weather; in
these parts they sell the plum brandy with 15 lei per kg, the chicken with
4-6 lei, a duck with 10 lei, a goose with 10-12 lei, bacon with 9 lei, pork
with 6 lei, beef with 4 lei and cheese with 6 lei.
September 12 - cloudy and windy; food: meat and pickled tomatoes.
September 13 - food: ground maize, semolina; good weather.
September 14 - food: meat and French barley; good weather.
September 15 - food: beans and fish; clouds and wind.
September 16 - food: ground maize and beans; clouds, wind and rain.
September 17 - food: fish, semolina; cloudy sky.
September 18 - food: meat, and ground maize; rain and wind.
September 19 - food: fish, semolina; the commander of Corps II
came for the inspection; good weather.
September 20 - food: ground maize and semolina; good weather.
September 21 - food: ground maize and peas; good weather.
September 22 - food: beans and ground maize; good weather.
September 23 - food: meant and semolina; wind and clouds.
September 24 - food: ground maize and fish; rain and wind; letters
and journals from the Germans.
September 25 - food: meat and beans; wind, rain and sun; members
of the German Parliament came; journals.
September 26 - food: fish and ground maize; sun, and wins, rain at
night; talks about the would-be peace. From September 26 to October 1 -
food: fish, ground maize, wheat and beans; good weather. From October
1 to October 5 the weather was good; food: fish, beans, ground maize,
meat and wheat.
October 6 - rain and wind; I read in the “Romania” that there would
be no peace because the Germans would not surrender and the allies
would not be answered all their requests. From October 6 until October
13 the weather was bad: wind and mire; food: beans, peas, ground maize
and potatoes, soup; from October 13 to October 21 - mixed weather,
clouds, wind and fog; artillery exchange of fire from both sides; food:
the well-known food; today I read in the paper that the Italian were taken
80.000 prisoners, lost 600 cannon that were taken from the Germans.
From October until October 31 - food: ground maize, beans, potatoes,
meat; mixed weather, clouds, fog, cold, drizzle. From Wednesday,
November 1 until November 4: wind, clouds, snow and rain; food: fish,
ground maize and beans. From November 4 until November 16 - food:
beans, ground maize, beans and meat; mixed weather: clouds, winds fog;
bombardments from both sides and patrols clenches. From November 16
until November 19 the weather was good; food: ground maize, beans,
potatoes; quite front.
November 20, Monday - wind and snow; food: beans and ground
maize; from November 30 until November 23, wind and dry frost; on the
night of November 22, at half past three I was telephonically ordered by
the regiment to inform the commander of the company that the Russian
army concluded an armistice with the Germans and that Romania
adhered to it. The order said that beginning with November 22, 8:00
a.m. all hostilities should be ceased, no fire shots be heard, no bullets be
used, no cannons or machine guns should be in use; the King Himself
- by a Royal Decree, no. 19325 - ceded the command of the Romanian
army to General Prezan - the chief of the Army Headquarters, general of
the Romanian army - until new orders; food: semolina, grounded maize,
beans and beans. From November 22, Wednesday until November 30
there was dry frost and hoar frost; food: ground maize, beans, semolina;
silence on the front from both sides. From December 1 until December 3:
dry frost; food: ground maize, beans and meat. From November 22 until
December 3: daily rumors about peace; From December 4 to December
12: dry frost, no snow; food: ground maize, beans, potatoes and more
meat; silence of the front because the armistice was still in force; daily
peace rumors and encouraging signs of peace; the soldiers are eagerly
awaiting for the rumors to become true. In the night of November 13-
14 I had a heart fit: high fever, abundant urine, shivers; I thought I was
going to die, but I knew that it was a pity to die right at the end of the war
as I was still young; when I realized that my end was close, I entrusted
myself in God’s hands. From December 13 until December 17: heavy
clouds with no snow; food: beans; peace rumors. From December 17 to
December 25 - good weather, frost; Food: beans; peace rumors.
December 25 - 50 gr. of plum brandy, 200 gr, of wine and pork;
it was a little snow; convincing peace rumors. From December 25 to
January 31 1918 - good weather, sun; food: horse flesh, beans and ground
maize. February 1, Friday I went in the town of Corşani with the reform
to sent it y the Regiment train.
February 9 - I arrived in the Poiana and Scăriţa villages; good
weather; food: biscuits and beans. on February 18 I left Scăriţa to go to
Valea Seacă and from there to the railway station and I went up to Iaşi
by train; I crossed Iaşi on foot, passed through Bivolari - fair and town
and crossed the Prut river on the same day - February 26, 1918; I slept
at Pânzăreni. On February 26 I went for the Leurdenii Noi village and
remained there. On March 7, 1918 I left Leurdeni, passed through the
Foleşti town, ate there and went to the Mustaţă village and remained
there. On March 12, 1918 went working on the census of the village,
I stepped over something very soft and I sank up to the waist; I could
hardly got out of there, and whoever saw me said that I was lucky to
have escape safely, for a could drown myself. On March 13 there was a
very strong wind and it snowed a lot for several days, that is until April,
Sunday 1, 1918; food: beans, bread and ground maize. Various rumors
about the country, that is about the general release.
March 25, 1918, Sunday - I read the proclamation of affiliation
Basarabia to the old Romania. On April 1, Sunday - I was still in the
Mustiaci village; on April 5 I left Mustiaci for Izvoarele and stayed in
quarantine for 15 days. On April 24, 1918, at 12:00 p.m. the peace with
the Germans was concluded and we have received the good news only
at 4:00 p.m. I spent the Holy Easter in Izvoarele. On May 11, 1918 I
handed over my ammunition and stayed waiting the leaving order. From
May 15 to May 22 I was released together with those declared to be from
Modova and Basarabia; on May 27 I was in the station of the Glodeşti
village, on June 2, I went to dig a fountain, on June 8 I went to hoe the
maize, on June 10, I received a post card from home.
Seizing the Leş

The Leş was a mountain to be seized because of an order received
on October 16, 1916 by our Battalion. All of a sudden we were ordered
to be in a marching position and, only when on the way we found out
that we were going to Leşu; we were matching the whole day and the
whole night enduring the difficulties of the road because the more the
rain did not cease, the more the way became very difficult to be followed.
The second day at about 2:00 p.m. we were suddenly attacked by the
enemy’s guns. Then we shout out: “Here are the Hungarians, brothers!”
and all of us burst forward to seize the saddle of the hill in front of us;
rattling of guns was heard from us, then others an others went on rattling;
then the Hungarians’ machine guns started to rattle and the spreading of
their bullets had no end. But our bombs and bullets that fell in the midst
of them made every gun they used to shut down. Some of our soldiers
finished their ammunition and started to borrow from their comrades,
and went on hitting the enemy right and left with a speed that chased
the enemy until they encircled the enemies from the flanks. “Here, here”
were the shouts of the Hungarians who dropped their guns on the ground.
We captured 180 guns and took them to the brigade we belonged to; we
also captured mountain cannons and all kind of ammunition; the place
of the battle field looked horrible, but the Romanians were victorious
because the Luşu was theirs after their victory.
Speaking with an inhabitant from Transilvania

Then, when a part of the Romanian army occupied the river bed of
the Jiu, from the Hungarian territory, I found myself in a guard position
initiated by Mr. I Pop - a notorious trader from the Petroşani town -
where our Division was located. Mr. Pop was a native Romanian and he
practiced an extended commerce in the town, having a very well stocked
shop: ironmongery, chinaware, straps, cutlery, and many other things.
Besides, Mr. Pop was involved in mining coal and stone deposits in the
neighborhood of the town he was living in and, he employed almost 400
people. The Romanian military dictatorship – in order to discipline and
control the commerce – appointed Mr. I. Pop president of the Communal
Council. Some day, when Mr. Pop acquitted himself of his obligations
the commander of our Division invested him with, returning home
and passing, as usual, through a windowed room, where I myself was,
together with the people in charge with the shift, heard him saying: “Do
you know that our front seized the Merişor village?” In order to better
understand the question or to find out whom the above mentioned chief
liked, I showed my astonishment and asked him about what front did he
refer to: the Romanian or the German.
- “Our Romanian front, sir” answered he firmly. “Even from
the last night our troops took this position by storm”.
- “Mr. Pop, sir, if you care about our nation - and I do not
doubt about it - when I see that you speak Romanian language
very fluently the and have a Romanian name and keep the same
traditions the Romanians keep in the south of Romania, let me
please ask you something: What did the people around here thought
about the Hungarians or about Romania’s participation in the war?
- “My dear sir, these words are too important for me and I
am unable to speak about them as far as I live under a dictatorship
which has nothing to do with my origin. But, as you are a person
whom things can be explained and, as we belong to the same
nation, I think that you will forget my words, because, as far as I
could understand from hearsay, the Hungarians thought that such a
Romania like ours would have never dared to ask for Transilvania;
besides, neither the Romanians living here, in Hungary, would have
never liked it. But we, who know that were just excuses meant to
discourage the other Romanians, I kept silent and eagerly waited
for the day in which I could see you crossing the Carpathians. Be
that the good God help us to succeed, because this race of people
was too overwhelming for us”.
- “But what did they say when they saw that the army crossed
the mountains and beat them?”
- “What could they think?! They immediately ordered to
rally their workers in the coal mines to the struggle; all the 400
who had been trained in the military discipline so that, at the right
given time were to for rally to Romania - that they knew very well
the tight time - and were brought to welcome you at the border
and, when you crossed the mountains, their population spread all
over running up and down. So, our enemies could know the very
hour the mobilization was ordered in our country and this because
of the fore-spying system they had in this country, as well”.
Then Mr. Pop spoke to me about trade and about the value of
the Petroşani town as well, as about the life of the Romanians living in
Transilvania.
Radu TASCOVICI
Martyrs Priests in Muscel and Arges Counties

in the Communist Prisons
Abstract
It has been 23 years since the communist regime fell in Romania,
as a consequence of the events in December 1989. A new stage of
democracy begun for the Romanian Orthodox Church and for the whole
country; it implies the freedom of speaking. Within this context, numerous
disputes took place as concern the relation between the Orthodox
Church and the communist totalitarian state. Thus, they brought many
charges against Church, clergy and hierarchy of collaborating with the
communist state, with its political police and even worse, they said the
clergy betrayed its vocation of uttering the truth. The paper proposes to
present different situations that disprove such accusations, contouring
the profile as martyrs of spiritual resistance and heroism of the priests
in Arges and Muscel County as the priests all over Romania. We hope
this paper written on the purpose of establishing the truth would be also
considerate a modest homage to the Arges and Muscel counties priests
who suffered, but came clean Our Lord Jesus Christ. We will present only
the ones who died after had been put to question or were executed as a
result of the death sentence given by the so called “people courts”.
Keywords:
Romanian Orthodox Church, priest, communist regime, political
police, liberty.
1. The political context of the time
The communist regime in Romania started after the Second World

War. During the war, Romania was caught between the interests of the
two great enemy powers: the Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. On the
23rd August 1939 a peace treaty was signed by the above mentioned two
great states; it is known as Ribbentrop – Molotov pact. A consequence of
this treaty was the annexing the Romanian territories Bessarabia, north
Bucovina and Herța by the Soviet Union. Another consequence was the
Wien Dictate on the 28th July 1940 when Romania was forced to cede the
north-west part of Transylvania to Hungary and Cadrilater, that is South
of Dobruja, with Durostor and Caliacra counties, to Bulgaria.
The following international agreements had to decide the future of
Romania as a state that was lying within the influence sphere of the Soviet
communist regime: the Conference at Teheran (1943), the Meetings
at Yalta (February 1945) and Potsdam (August 1945). After the War,
Bessarabia, north Bucovina, Herța and South Dobruja were probably lost
forever. The horrible drama of refuge, deporting and massacres started
for the Romanian population.
On the 6th of September 1940, King Carol II abdicated and
entrusted marshal Ion Antonescu the responsibility of ruling Romania
during the hard years of the Second World War. The political and military
orientation of the country was to retrieve its losses. At first, marshal
collaborated with the Legionary Movement, led by Horia Sima; due to
the abuses committed by some members of the Movement, Antonescu
threw them aside from the political scene and even inflicted retaliation
after their rebellion.
To sum up, this was the context of Romania entrance the war on
22 June 1941, against the Soviet Union; its purpose was to retrieve the
nd
lost territories. Unfortunately, the alliance with Germany forced marshal

Antonescu to attack the Soviets beyond Nistru river, representing
Bessarabia border line. After the disaster of the German campaign in
Russia, Romanian statesmen were convinced that Romania had to make
peace with the Allied Powers. In 1943 Iuliu Maniu (the leader of the
National Peasants’ Party) sent several reports to London, asking for
guarantees in case Romania would leave the war. Other diplomatic efforts
took place during the first half of the year 1944, without any positive
effects. On the 12th of April 1944, the Soviet diplomats informed prince
Barbu Ştirbey about the armistice conditions, mentioning that they were
to be immediately complied with. In August 1944, the Soviet offensive
in Moldavia started. This determined King Mihai I and the main leaders
of the opposite parties to decide that Romania should leave the alliance
with Germany and join the Allies. King Mihai I invited the Marshal on
the 23rd of August 1944 to the Royal Palace, requesting him leave the
alliance with Germany. The Marshal absolutely refused and under these
circumstances, the King ordered the marshal and his main collaborators
to be arrested. Although precipitated and insufficiently prepared, the
decision made on the 23rd of August 1944 was necessary, because in
this way the Romanian territory did not become a battle field and the
Romanian state’s existence was saved. The Governments of Moscow,
Washington and London did not consider this overthrow could happen.
After the 23rd of August 1944, the situation of Romania was
determined by the agreements between the three great victorious powers:
the USA, the Great Britain and the Soviet Union. On the 9th of October
1944, in Moscow, Winston Churchill offered Stalin 90% control on the
Romania land in exchange of 90% control of the Great Britain on Greece.
There followed the Yalta Conference in February 1945, where the Three
Great Powers leaders declared that”in the freed Europe” they”would
jointly help” the liberated countries to organize”free elections”. The Soviet
Union interpreted this statement in conformity with its own interests. The
Control Allied Commission (Soviet, in fact) sustained numerous Soviet
orders which aimed at suppressing any forms of resistance in Romania.
The Communist Party in Romania was trying to gain power. It started
with malignant attacks against the historical parties (National Liberal
and National Peasants’) and Prime Minister Nicolae Rădescu, who was
supported by the above mentioned parties. In February 1945, the Soviet
representative Andrei Ianuarievici Vyshinsky imposed to King Mihai
I, through an ultimatum, the forming of a pro-communist government,
led by Dr. Petru Groza. The British and American ambassadors finally
accepted the Soviet command.
Between the 17th of July and 2nd of August 1945 the meeting of
the great three victorious powers at Potsdam (Berlin) took place. The
Communicate stated that”Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania were not
destined to be within any power’s sphere of influence”. As a consequence,
King Mihai I requested Prime Minister Petru Groza to resign, but he
refused; so the Sovereign interrupted the connections with the executive
government and addressed in writing the representatives of the three
great powers in the (Soviet) Allied Control Commission. He asked for
their support in order to form a government recognized by the Three
Great Allied Powers. However, the situation remained unchanged. On
the 8th of November 1945, on the name day of King Mihai I, thousands of
Bucharest citizens manifested their support and love for their Sovereign
in the Royal Palace square. The pro-communist government ordered
fire against people. The American observers recorded”the enthusiasm of
the people for the King; the courage of the people who maintained their
position against the fire attack; the fact that the demonstrators belonged
to all social categories”.
After this event, the Foreign Affairs ministers of USA and the Soviet
Union met in Moscow in December 1945 and accepted the reshuffle of
the government in Bucharest. This government was completed with two
members from the historical parties (one from the National Liberal Party
and one from the National Peasants’ Party). The task of this government
was to organize “free” elections. In fact, things did not happen that way. In
January 1946 the Romanian Communist Party aimed to gain the election
with a percentage of 80 or even more. Thus, they used violence, blackmail,
murder, censoring the mass media of the opposition and numerous false
votes. By all these means they only got 40% of the total number of votes.
Despite reality, they announced that the Block of the Democratic Parties
(Romanian Communist Party and the Hungarian Popular Union) had got
91,30% of the votes, i.e. 378 mandates in the future Parliament. During
the following period (1948-1965), Parliamentary elections were always
gained only by the Romanian Communist Party with more than 93%, and
during the Ceauşescu regime with up to 99,9%.
The last step in the process of transforming Romania into a
communist state aimed at abolishing the Monarchy. On the 10th of
February 1947, in Paris, the Peace Treaty with Romania was signed.
It was an implicit recognition of the Communist Government of Petru
Groza. Within a month from this event started the first wave of arrests,
thus inaugurating a brutal repression of all those who opposed the
Communist Party. The victims were mainly members of the National
Peasants’ Party in every county. The second wave took place during the
night of 4th of May; five days after the House of Commons in London
ratified the Peace Treaty with Romania. On the 5th of June 1947, the USA
also ratified the mentioned Treaty; on the 29th of July, the Communist
Government decided the abolishment of the National Peasants’ Party, the
most firm opponent. The process of setting up the total communist control
on Romania ended with three events: the condemnation of the National
Peasants’ Party leaders (including Iuliu Maniu and Ion Mihalache, both
died in prison on the 29th of October and 11th of November), based on
false and fabricated accusations; the exclusion of the National Liberal
Party from the Government; and the forced abdication of King Mihai I on
the 30th of December 1947. On the same evening, the Popular Republic
of Romania was proclaimed, with a totalitarian regime and with the
absolute political monopole of the Communist Party1. During the year
1948, groups of anticommunist military resistance were organised in the
Făgăraş mountains, Mehedinţi mountains, Banat mountains, Apuseni
mountains, Vrancea mountains, Arnota mountains, Argeş and Muscel
mountains, in the regions of Oltenia and Dobrogea. All of these groups
that were fighting for liberty were extermined by the Securitate until the
end of the year 1958.
1
Dennis Deletant, “România sub regimul comunist (decembrie 1947 - decembrie 1989)”,
in Mihai Bărbulescu et alii, Istoria României, Corint Publishing House, Bucharest, 2004,
pp. 407-423; Dinu C. Giurescu, “Prefaţă”, in Academia Română, Istoria Românilor, vol.
IX (România în anii 1940-1947), Enciclopedica Publishing House, Bucharest, 2008, pp.
XII-XVIII; Zicu Ionescu, Remus Petre Cârstea, “Pagini dintr-o cronologie explicată a
istoriei comunismului din România, in Martiri argeşeni şi musceleni, 1939-1989”, Tiparg
Publishing House, Piteşti, 2006, pp. 4-60.
2. The Situation of the Romanian Orthodox Church in

Communist Romania (1945-1964)
The communist regime of Soviet origin, which was imposed onto
Romania, determined the diminishing of the religious liberty. From the
communists’ point of view, the Romanian Orthodox Church was an
institution that had to be watched, overseen, compromised in the eyes
of population, excluded from state life and transformed into a tolerated
institution. Its activity had to be limited only to the places of worship in
each parish.
During the interwar period, the Romanian Orthodox Church
manifested against the religious persecutions in Soviet Russia. For
example, in March 1930, the Holy Synod sent to the Romanian priests
and faithful a pastoral letter asking them to pray for the Christians
persecuted in Russia2. On the 22nd of September 1936, the metropolitan
Nicolae Bălan of Transylvania wrote a pastoral letter against the
communist persecutions which had become stronger in the Soviet
Union3. The same positions were displayed by numerous Orthodox
theologians and intellectuals. More than that, during the Second World
War, our Church carried on an intense religious mission, in order to re-
evangelize the territory between the Nistru river and the Bug river (1941-
1944). The metropolitan Visarion Puiu of Bucovina led this mission,
helped by bishops Policarp Moruşca and Efrem Enăchescu4. Thus, the
Orthodox Church tried to offer a firm missionary answer to the challenge
of communist persecutions in those territories of Soviet Russia.
As a consequence, the Communist Government found here an
Orthodox Church in defence and with a strong anticommunist past. In
this situation, our Church had to fight for maintaining its moral religious
2
See ”Telegraful Român”, LXXVIII (1930), no. 19, from 8th of March, p. 2; no. 21 from 15th
of March, p. 2 and no. 23 from 22nd of March, p. 1.
3
Dumitru Stăniloae, “Biserica împotriva comunismului”, in Telegraful Român, LXXXIV
(1936), no. 42, from 11th of October, pp. 1-4.
4
Adrian Nicolae Petcu, “Urmând porunca Mântuitorului”, în vreme de război (1941-1944).
Misiunea Ortodoxă Română în Transnistria”, in Dosarele Istoriei, VII (2002), no. 11, pp.
17-25.
identity on the one hand, and on the other hand it had to find the best
solution for avoiding the transgressions already known by the Orthodox
Church of Russia after 1917, as well as the danger of dissolution
undergone by all religions in other two communist countries, Albania
and China. So, the Orthodox Church accepted to give up some of its
activities, thus saving its existence.
After the war, neither the clergy associations nor the lay
associations5 could continue their activities for the revival of religious
life. Until the beginning of the seventh decade, connections with the
ecumenical organizations and the Orthodox Romanian Diaspora were
interrupted. In 1948 all Church assets were nationalized. Within the
same period, the Church philanthropic activities could not be carried
on, because all its institutions were dissolved. The religious system of
learning was suppressed, as well as all religious assistance in hospitals,
asylums, prisons and garrisons. All Church magazines and newspapers
were annulated, excepting Telegraful Român in Sibiu; the same fate
was shared by the Faculty of Theology in Suceava, other four Theology
Academies in Transylvania and Banat, the Academy of Religious Music
in Bucharest and all the Seminaries6 in Muntenia and Moldova. In 1948
a few dioceses were dissolved7, up to 1948 twenty orthodox prelates
were forced to retire. More than 1800 orthodox priests were arrested,
prosecuted and imprisoned or sent to forced labour at the Danube - Black
Sea Canal; some of them were deported to Siberia8.
Father Nicolae N. Andreescu was born on the 20th of February
1918 in the village Poinărei, the commune Corbi, in Muscel county. He
5
We refer at lay associations such as: Oastea Domnului (The Lord’s Army), Frăţia Ortodoxă
Română (The Orthodox Romanian Confraternity), Societatea Femeilor Ortodoxe (The
Orthodox Women Society) etc.
6
“Seminar” means, in the Romanian system of learning, a high school with a theological
profile; the graduates who did not continue their university studies could become priests in
rural parishes.
7
The Oltenia Metropoly on the 20th of April 1945 and Bishopric Dioceses: Huşi, Argeş,
Constanţa, Caransebeş, Sighet and the Army’s Diocese. See Mircea Păcurariu, Istoria
Bisericii Ortodoxe Române, vol. III, Iași, Trinitas Publishing House, 2008, pp. 426-427.
8
This practice began in 1945 in a sporadic way, but it strengthened from 1948 to1952, then
reinforced in 1959 and ended in the summer of 1964 when the political prisoners were
released.
attended Seminary in Curtea de Argeș (1930-1938) and the Faculty of
Theology in Bucharest (1939-1944); he was ordained deacon on the 14th
of June 1943 and priest on the 20th of June 1943 for the parish church
in Maglavit, Dolj county. He was transferred at Aninoasa parish on
the 2nd of July 1948 and in 1950 at the Nucșoara parish, not far from
his native village9. Starting from 1949-1950 he was in collusion with
the opposition group led by Arnăuțoiu brothers that activated in the
mountains from neighbourhood. Although a careful person, he had the
courage of speaking plainly in his sermons counter the communists’
attitude against the Church. He thought that communist regime would
not last. During the Holy Mass he used to pray for all those in prisons for
their convictions. Security was informed about that on the 22nd of August
195410. On the 22nd of September 1955 the Security from Pitești started to
gather information about his activity; he was suspected of having relations
with Arnăuțoiu group. His mail was intercepted and all his relations with
relatives, friends and parishioners were closely watched. It is interesting
that some of Security informers confessed to him and were guided by
father Andreescu what they should write on the informative papers11. On
18th March 1958, Grigore Poinăreanu from Nucșoara, declared during
his interrogatory, that father Andreescu was helping the members of
Arnăuțoiu group with sums of money, food, clothes and foot wears. He
was also their comforters, encouraging and offering them useful books
for reading. Operative appliance for hearing was installed in his house,
because he was considered “an important and difficult element”. They
recorded discussions that father had with Iancu Arnăuțoiu and thus they
could understand the help father offered to the group members and the
fact that he knew their hidden places in the mountains12. Within this
context, Security framed him up participation to a missionary group
which had to deprecate the old calendar movement in north Moldavia
9
Adrian Nicolae Petcu, ”Andreescu Nicolae”, in vol. Martiri pentru Hristos în România, în
perioada regimului Comunist, București, 2007, p. 53.
10
ACNSAS, Informative Fund, dos. no. 675, vol. 12, f. 436, apud Ibidem.
11
According to a note wrote by the source (informer) “Hawk” on the 2nd of November 1954,
cf. ACNSAS, Informative Fund, dos. no. 675, vol. 12, f. 432-433.
12
Ibidem, f. 16, 23.
for one or two month; this was done through the medium of Ministry
of Worship and Bishopric of Râmnic and Argeș. Father was aware that
meant he would be put under arrest and warned some priests, friends of
him, about it. Although officially he was in Moldavia, beginning with 2nd
March 1958 he was arrested for 60 days, in the cellars of Internal Affairs
Ministry, in Bucharest. He was to be investigated by Minister Alexandru
Drăghici himself; father was suspected of “favouring the members of a
terrorist group together with other enemy elements” 13.
From the beginning, father Andreescu refused to offer any
information about his connections and the connections that other villagers
had with Arnăuțoiu brothers and the members of their resistance group.
Being confronted with this situation, the security constituted an agential
in father’s cell, so they introduced an informer who had to deceive father
and take notes on him. Discussing with the informer, father told him
about the relations with the group. Although he was asked to betray the
group in order to be liberated, father accepted the sufferings, confessing
to the informer in the cell: “how could he do such a thing, as he was a
priest and it was not for him to do such things. Even if he could die,
the sins were of those who killed him and his soul remained sinless”14.
From the informative notes we can see that father was tortured and
intimidated, was threatened that they would inflict retaliations to his wife
and children, even their shooting. The authors of the volume Martiri
argeșeni și musceleni, 1939-1989 mention that at the interrogatory on
4th March 1958, the security major Paul Costandache and his adjunct,
lieutenant Toma Codreanu, broke his both arms in order he not to cross
himself15.
On 20th May 1958, after the betrayal, the security troops captured
the group of anti-communist fighters in Nucșoara mountains. Under
these circumstances, on 22nd May 1958, father Andreescu was brought at
13
Idem, Penal Fund, dos. no. 250, vol. 77, f. 105, apud Adrian Nicolae Petcu, in vol. Martiri
pentru Hristos, din România, în perioada regimului comunist, Bucharest, 2007, p. 55.
14
Idem, Informative Fund, dos. no. 675, vol. 12, f. 148, apud Adrian Nicolae Petcu, in vol.
Martiri pentru Hristos, din România, în perioada regimului comunist, Bucharest, 2007,
p. 58.
15
Zicu Ionescu and Remus Petre Cârstea, Martiri argeșeni și musceleni, 1939-1989, Pitești,
Tiparg Publishing House, 2006, p. 63.
Pitești prison. The medical consult revealed gastric ulcer16.
On 5th May 1959, at trial, father recognised the connections and
help he offered to the group. On 19th May, the Military Court of the
military second region sentenced him to death and to value confiscation,
by the Sentence no. 107. He was executed on 19th of July 1959, at 22:15
in Jilava prison. His body was buried into a collective grave, without
a cross or any identification signs. At the same time his wife, Maria
Andreescu, was sentenced to 15 years of forced labour; she was released
on the 23rd of June 196417.
Father Ion Gh. Constantinescu was born on the 19th of October
1906 in the village Cerbureni, the commune Valea Iașului, in Argeș
county. After he graduated the Seminary in Curtea de Argeș, he was
ordained priest for the parish Poenărei, the commune Corbi, in Muscel
county. He came to the fore as an appreciated shepherd of souls, as his
parishioners remembered him. His parishioners were poor and only few.
They did not have a proper parish church. That is why, in 1937 – 1943 he
worked hard for building up a monumental place of worship dedicated
to Saint Parascheva. He took an interest about the spiritual and physical
health of his parishioners. He also used to help poor and ill people in his
parish, unable to go to the hospital for medical assistance; he got them
a doctor and made them the injections prescribed. That is why he was
called “our silverless doctor” 18.
He activated within the anticommunist group “Haiducii
Muscelului”, by the medium of father Nicolae Andreescu. So, he met
the members of the group led by Toma Arnăuțoiu and in his church the
group’s weaponry were hidden. During the following years he got clothes,
food, or money for the group; his wife, Justina, and his daughter, Iuliana,
were also involved. By their meetings, father Constantinescu gave them
heart, urging to be faithful and patient; he informed them about the facts
16
ACNSAS, Penal Fund, dos. no. 50, vol. 77, f. 69.
17
Ibidem, f. 158-207.
18
Cf. Grigore Constantinescu, “Preotul Ioan Constantinescu – un erou al altarului credinței
în veșnicia neamului românesc”, în Opresiunea cultelor religioase din Româniaîn timpul
dictaturii comuniste, Ilie Popa editor, vol. 2, Pitești, Fundația culturală „Memoria”, Filiala
Argeș, p. 174.
from Hungaria in October 1956: “even the contra revolution in Hungaria
failed, the anticommunist fight is not lost, because the Americans and the
English are to interfere”19. The relationship with Toma Arnăuțoiu was so
tide, that on the 28th of June 1957 father Constantinescu hosted him at
his place; the most significant fact was that he baptized Maria Plop and
Toma Arnăuțoiu’s little daughter, Ioana Raluca, who had been born into
a rock cavern20.
As a result of a betrayal, on the 22nd of June 1958 father
Constantinescu and the other members of the anticommunist group
were arrested under accuse21. The next day he was interrogated at Pitești
Security and because of the beatings and tortures, he couldn’t write his
name on the papers.
The trial started on the 5th of May 1959, in Bucharest, at the Military
Court of the Second Region. He was recriminated to have favoured the
Arnăuțoiu’s group by providing them supplies and that he “took the
false mask of priesthood behind which the horrible face of a despicable
murderer was hiding, in order to hurt with cruelty the honest people”.
On the 19th of May 1959 by verdict no. 107, father Ion Constantinescu
was sentenced to death and executed on the 19th of July 1959 at 22:30,
in Jilava prison. His body was buried into a collective grave, without
any identification signs. Father Ion Constantinescu’s daughter, teacher
Iuliana Preduț Constantinescu, was sentenced to twelve years of forced
labour for omission of denunciation; she was pregnant on the seven
month. She gave birth into prison to a girl baptized Justina – Libertatea
(Liberty). The child was taken to an orphanage; mother and daughter
reunited in 1964, after the mother was released from prison.
Father Ion M. Drăgoi was born on the 20th of October 1900, in
the village Vâlsănești, the commune Mușătești in Argeș county. After
he graduated the Seminary, was ordained priest for the parish Nucșoara,
in Muscel county, on the 15th of December 1925. He also attended the
19
Adrian Nicolae Petcu, in vol. Martiri pentru Hristos, din România, în perioada regimului
comunist, Bucharest, 2007, p. 155.
20
Alexandru Marinescu, “ Pagini din rezistența armată anticomunistă, zona Nucșoara –
Făgăraș”, in Memoria, no. 7, p. 55.
21
ACNSAS, Fond penal, dos. no. 50, vol. 78, f. 201.
Faculty of Theology in Bucharest. He was an exceptional priest, very
fond of his parishioners and of their religious and moral education. “He
performed nicely his services; he was singing nicely, he was preaching
nicely. When he took part to a priesthood meeting, or when he was
going to a funeral service ... the others priests use to tell him: Father
Drăgoi, allow me to speak the first one, otherwise my sermon wouldn’t
be appreciated”22. At the same time, he was attending the courses of the
Theology Faculty in Bucharest.
Beginning with 1932, he joined the National Peasants’ Party.
In 1949, after the group of anti communist fighters was formed in the
Nucșoara – Făgăraș mountains, father Drăgoi made and received an
oath of allegiance23, being at the same time the fighters’ confessor, so he
administrated them Eucharist and Confession24.
Soon, the Securitate (Security) made roundups in Nucșoara, but
father Drăgoi hid at his relatives in the neighbourhoods. His son Cornel
and his wife Elena were put under arrest, having to support harsh
investigations, in order to avow the father’s hidden place. On the 26th
of April 1950, father was arrested at Jilava. On the 1st of November
the same year the process started, the accusation was “caballing crime
against the social order, punished by the article 209, line 4 of the Penal
Code”25. On 20th of December 1950, the Military Court Bucharest,
section II, condemned him at 5 years of corrective imprisonment, 3
years of corrective interdiction, 4000 lei penalty and 4000 lei judgement
expenses. On the 4th of June 1954 he was at Gherla prison and on the
22nd of April 1955 he was set free from Poarta Albă, where he had been
transferred for work.
Once returned home, he was very welcomed by his congregation; at
parish he was put back in service on the 20th of November 1955, together
with father Nicolae Andreescu. The fighters in the mountains were still
22
Irina Nicolau, Theodor Nițu, Povestea Eisabetei Rizea. Mărturia lui Cornel Drăgoi,
București, Humanitas Publishing House, 1993, p. 148.
23
Alexandru Marinescu,”Pagini din rezistența armată anticomunistă. Zona Nucșoara –
Făgăraș”, in Memoria, no. 7, p. 48.
24
Ibidem and Adrian Nicolae Petcu, in vol. Martiri pentru Hristos..., p. 185.
25
ACNSAS, Penal Fund, dos. no. 50, vol. 70, f. 391-400 and vol. 107, f. 9.
there. The Security’s agents considered that father was still in relations
with them, as he participated at their fight group. Once the whole anti
communist group was captured, father was again put under arrest on
the 28th of January 1959 and investigated by the Security in Pitești for
the infraction of “favouring terror acts”. On 19th of May 1959 he was
sentenced to death and total fortune confiscation26. He was executed at
Jilava at 23:45, on the 19th July 1959. His son, Cornel Drăgoi, was sent
in a working camp and liberated on 25th of February 196227.
Father Nicolae N. Mănescu was born on 1st of December 1884
in the village Berevoești – Ungureni, belonging to the historical county
Muscel. He was an appreciated intellectual, taking his Bachelor Degree
in Law and Theology. In 1912 he was ordained priest for Apa Sărată
parish, a suburb of the town Câmpulung Muscel. His wife, Lucreția, was
the sister of Arnăuțoiu brothers’ mother.
During the First World War, father Mănescu participated as a
military priest, at the ambulance of the Ist Division, being appreciated by
the doctors for his courage and self-denial. He was elected member of
the General diocese meeting of Bucharest Archbishopric among 1932-
1944, in the Commission of organisation and validation. In 1926 became
a member of the National Peasants’ Party. For his precious activity, he
was elected the chairman of Muscel Commission; he was prefect of
Muscel county among 1932-193428.
After the communist regime was installed, he implied, from 1949,
in the anti communist resistance movement in Muscel mountains, led
by colonel Gheorghe Arsenescu. He was put under observation by
Security from January 1954, although he was 70 years old and suffered
tuberculosis.
For his relations with the anticommunist fighters, on 27th of June
1958 he was arrested. After a regime of torture at Security in Pitești, he
was judged by the Military Court of the IInd military region and sentenced
on the 21st of September 1959 to 4 years of corrective imprisonment,
fortune confiscation and 1000 lei judgement expenses. He died because
26
Cf. Adrian Nicolae Petcu, in vol. Martiri pentru Hristos..., p. 189.
27
Ibidem and ACNSAS, Penal Fund, dos. no. 50, vol. 78, f. 155-183.
28
Cf. Adrian Nicolae Petcu, in vol. Martiri pentru Hristos..., pp. 471-472.
of the inhumane conditions in prison, at Botoșani, on 13th of July 1961,
at the age of 77. In 1973, his daughter, Ana Stănescu, brought his corps
that was buried again in the cemetery of Apa Sărată parish church yard29.
Father Ion Postelnicescu was born on 13th of March 1884, in
Moșoaia commune, Argeș county. Among 1891-1895, he attended the
faculties of Theology and Law. On 15th of May 1923 he was appointed
priest at the church “Sfânta Vineri” (Saint Parascheva), in Pitești. He
gained church distinctions and the medal of Romania Crown with
degree of knight; founder member of the cultural Society “Argeșul” and
archpriest of Low Argeș area (with its centre in Pitești), from 1932 to
1934 and from 1939 to 1940; he was a teacher of religion at the girls’
high school “Ion and Sevastița Vasilescu”, nowadays “Zinca Golescu”
high school; he activated within the National Peasants’ Party and was
aggressed by the Legionary movement; put under arrest at the order
of ministry Alexandru Drăghici, on 21st of August 1952. During the
inquiries in the cellars of Security in Pitești, he was so hard beaten, so he
was declared incapable of working. He was liberated on 2nd of October
1952. In 1959 he was arrested for the second time and sentenced to 22
years of hard work; he was imprisoned at Jilava and Sighetul Marmației.
He died on 16th of July 1959, supporting several months of isolation and
starving regime30.
Father Nicolae I. Rădulescu was born on 7th of October 1904 and
functioned as a priest in the commune Sămara, in Argeș county. He was
a member of the National Peasans’ Party and because he criticised the
communist leadership of Romania in his sermons, he was arrested on 13th
of June 1951, under the accusation of “communist hostile manifestations”
and imprisoned into a working camp, being set free after 6 months. He
was put under arrest and harassed for many times. In August 1954 he
was liberated, as he was severe ill; he died on 18th of September the same
29
Cicerone Ionițoiu, Victimele terorii comuniste. Dicționar, M, Mașina de scris Publishing
House, Bucharest, 2004, p. 175 and Vasile Manea, Preoți otodocși în închisorile comuniste,
2
ed., Patmos Publishing House, Bucharest, 2001, p. 163.
30
Vasile Manea, Preoți otodocși în închisorile comuniste, 2ed., Patmos Publishing House,
Bucharest, 2001, p. 214.
year, because of liver insufficiency. He was only 49 years old31.
Father Constantin Gh. Savu was born on 29th of September
1915, in Dragoslavele commune, Muscel county. He attended the
Theological Seminary in Câmpulung Muscel, becoming priest on 5th of
April 1936, appointed at Chilii-Mărcuș parish; he also taught as a History
teacher at the school of church singers in Câmpulung. He was a member
of the Legionary Movement. In 1948, at the order of Internal Affairs
ministry, he was put under arrest. He was abusively kept imprisoned,
for two years, without being judged. On 18th of April 1950, he went on
hunger; the Security members tried to feed him artificially. He did not
recognise anything during the inquiries. On 18th of November 1950, he
was introduced in a working camp and liberated from Capu Midia. After
that episode he was several times imprisoned. He died at the prison in
Pitești32.
Conclusions
All these priests suffered because they believed in the divine
ideal of the Gospel and also because they loved liberty. They were the
martyrs of a repression against the Church servants; it was seen as a new
persecution as if the hard times during the first three centuries would
have come back.
Paid or anonymous denunciations were used against priests. As
the priests refused to sustain the decisions of the Communist Party as
concern the agricultural work or the rate of the contribution, they were
considered the people’s enemies. When the priests were supporting the
groups of anti communist fighters in the mountains, they were accused
of crimes against people. But these martyrs were not frightened and their
will was not treaded on their neck. Although they could not know the
life’s pleasures, but drank the bitter cup of life, they had the sureness
that they served the truth and the liberty; they were able to assume the
sacrifice of an ideal.
31
Zicu Ionescu, Remus Petre Cârstea, Martiri argeșeni și musceleni, 1939-1989, Pitești,
Tiparg Publishing House, 2006, pp. 137-138.
32
Dumitru Bordeianu, Mărturisiri din mlaștina disperării,2 ed., Bucharest, Scara Publishing
House, 2001, p. 428.
Within our days, only the Church presents the people a sublime
ideal and these martyr priests are the most beautiful icons of the Romanian
clergy. This is why they remain a vivid example for the present clergy.
Christ cannot be served without faith, will and love. The martyr priests
showed us they served Christ with the price of their lives.
Valeriu Gabriel BASA
Due to Belief in God and Hope in the Final

Triumph of the Good the Romanian Nation Has
Defeated

Abstract
The faith in God,deeply present in our nation itself made possible
that the Romanian nation,despite all the efforts of the Communist regime-
atheist installed after 1948,should have the strengh to overcome all the
difficulties,helped by the sacrifices and advice of the saint altars’servants
who believed in the divine love and the triumph of the Good against the
Evil. The great number of those who sacrified themselves just as during
the times of great Christian persecutions, is the result of the prayer
coming out from Jesus Christs’confession.
Keywords:
communism, faith, terror, prayer, persecutions.
Many pages have been written about Communism after December

1989, but the Romanian people even had to live such an experience. The
country was full of forced labour camps and the jails were crowded.
The Communist regime was to harm without discrimation any possible
oponents and especially the priests – so the flock would have no shephard,
and the Romanians could easily be manipulated, and even lose their
ethics and belief in the efficiency of their work1.
To get what they wanted, the communists set up the Security which
became more and more violent,harming doctors,engineers,teachers,
attorneys or even simple citizens or members of the Communist
Party. By any means they wanted to exterminate those who could not
1
Mihai Rădulescu, Rugul aprins, București, Ramida Publishing House, 1993, p. 45.
be ,,re-educated” in order to become docile instruments in the benefit
of the totalitarian regime. Thus the Security imposed strict rules, they
did not fear anything, they did not hesitate to make abbuses or judge
anybody. It is known that the military tribunals obeyed its orders2.
The pitiless treatment, the physical and moral torture, the terror,
the forced labour and isolation were the means by which they wanted to
get their aim – to throw away everything which did not match their own
ideology. Simply own a sheet of paper or a newspaper was considered to
be an act of sabotaging and was punished with cruelty.
Under such circumstances only the priets could teach the
people another doctrine different from the communist one. Promoting
Christs’doctrine, the priests could teach the people the Christian
doctrine as it was known in the Romanian families. They had to face
sufferings,terror,illegal confinements-from their homes or in the street,
days and nights of interrogatories followed, blows and tortures, long
years spent in jails. So they had no time to educate the true Christians
as reliable supporters of the country, of the world and of the Church.
What happened those days can be confessed only by those who are still
alive. I mean confessed, because only listening to them, one can deeply
understand what really happened during the whole period of Communist
domination which finished chronologically with the bloody events in
December 1989.
Christs’ confession was the main cause which led to the confinement
of thousands of priests or students at the Theology High School who
were training for the mission they would have to achieve. By confession,
the Security thought that the priests might get information to help them
anihilate any movement of resistance against Communism or even any
attempt to modelate people guided by Truth and Faith.
All the other causes of arresting those who served Him derived in
a way or another, from Faith and little was known from the sentences
passed. Only a few people know today that supporting in a Christian way
those in need as well as keeping Faith alive or simply belonging to a Party
or to another were the real causes which led to the priests’ confinement
2
Sergiu Grossu, Calvarul României creștine, București, ABC DAVA Publishing House,
1992, p. 335.
and their lack of liberty. Belonging to a Party or to an anti-communist
organization was due to the moral and Christian belief of those who had
been arrested, investigated and imprisoned. Unfortunately in most cases
these were pure inventions of the Security. The Security had no limits-it
investigated not only those who were members of a certain organization,
but also those who were enemies of Communism, making them members
of a phantom organization ,created by those who were devoted to it. This
aspect will be easily understood by reading the notes put down by one
of those who lived in Hunedoara County-the priest Oprea Crăciun, he
delivered his last speech on 25th of March 1949, during the trial held at
the Military Court in Timişoara.
„Mister President,
Honourable Court,
You know my deeds from the interrogatory; and their meaning
can be understood by the speech of Mister Gheorghiţă Viorel, to
whom I totally agree; and what I mean:
Twenty centuries ago the highest truth was revealed to the
mankind and the way to it through „the Christian love and the virtues
which derive from it, embodied by Jesus Christ, All those who
have understood the sense of their life to follow this way, were not
understood by people and especially by the Roman authority. Even
more, their deeds were misinterpreted and they were accused by
having altered the Empire’s order,led to circuses and given to the wild
beasts or burnt at the stakes.
We are far away from being Christians. Trying to get closer
to this way of life,our attitude was misinterpreted exactly as it was
long time ago.We are accused for the same thing and using the same
formula : We wanted to alter the social order.
A page from „Brothers Karamazov”, occurs to my mind in
which Dostoyevsky illustrates so plastically this reality: The author
thinks that Jesus comes down on the Earth from the clouds. The blind,
the lame, the sick flow from all parts, eager to be redeemed. Here He
is, in one of Sevilla’s squares. In the middle of the crowd He cures,
teaches and performs miracles just as long time ago. The inquisitor,
representative of power in Sevilla, troubled by the crowds flowing
towards this unknown person who is turning their heads, orders that
He should be arrested. During the intrrogatory the inquisitor asks who
He is and Jesus discloses. The inquisitor himself is convinced that He
is Jesus. Christ. Surprisingly, the representative of power and that of
justice have an astonishing attitude. Jesus Christ, the very image of
goodness, is accused to alter the law and He is condamned to be burnt
at the stakes.
Mister President,
Honourble Court,
We wanted and still want to be Christians in attitude

and teaching. If such a desire is still a crime the decision is
yours3.
The end of the speech, especially pointed out once again,

demonstates that the priests and the students at Theology were true
Christians who could influence people around them and give them the
opportunity to choose freely what to do with their own life. Concerning
the treatment applied to the priests and the students learning Theology, we
have to admit that it was a special one because they were ready to spread
all over the world the Christian teaching about love among people4.
If we look back to the regime of terror they had to face, we can
hardly imagine today the bestiality they had been put to – when their
bodies were full of wounds they were thrown down on the floor of
their cells, the torture being restarted soon. The diabolical mind of the
Security used all the possible means of blackmail – the children or the
parents of those who were interrogated were brought to be present at the
interrogatories or they were even ill-treated so that they might declare
what the Security wanted to The students at Theology had to perform
the so-called black religious services especially during the Passion
Week and the Ressurection night. The text of the so-called liturgy was a
3
Text offered to us by priest Oprea Crăciun in September 1994.
4
M. Rădulescu, op. cit., p. 19.
pornographic one. The Holy Virgin was called the “great whore” and Jesus
Christ “the idiot who died on the Cross”. The student oficially chosen to
“perform” was naked, covered with a sheet soiled with excrements; a
phallus made of DDt, bread and soap was hung at his neck5.
Very often the prists were forced to eat their own excrements
from their kettle .They were often driven mad to use the urine and the
excrements during a satanical parody of the sacrament. Such a priest was
asked by the pastor Richard Wurmbrand why he did not prefer death to
such an impiety, he answered: „Please don’t judge me! I suffered more
than Christ”6. The priests’ children were put out of schools or their jobs,
sometimes interrogated or arrested being forced to declare that they had
seen at home things that only a sick mind might imagine. It was something
similar to the persecutions stopped by the Saint Emperor Constntin the
Great by the well-known Edict of Tolerance from Milan in 313.
Terror was present even in the lives of those in liberty because the
services of Security were supervising everything. Jobs in administration
could be ocupied only with the recommandation and the agreement
of the Security. The officers were always present in all the religious
institutions as well as in the state institutions, any moment ready to
suppress every action considered hostile to the state interests and inform
about everything which was going on. All the associations with religious
feature were abolished. By the decree no.410 in 1959, hundreds of
monks and nuns were forced to leave the abolished monasteries and
small convents and sent back to their families or to forced labour in
different places. In Bucharest 20 churches were demolished among them
historical and art monuments, such as: the monasteries of Cotroceni,
Văcăreşti and Pantelimon, the churches St. Spiridon the Old, St. Vineri,
Biserică Albă – Postavari, Enei, Spirea the New, St. Treime – Dudeşti
and others. In some others such as: Sf. Trei Ierarhi in Iaşi, the church of
Neagoe – Basarab in Curtea de Argeş, Colţea in Bucharest, the religious
service was forbidden on pretext they were historical monuments7. Most
5
Virgil Ierunca, Fenomenul Pitești, București, Humanitas Publishing House, 1990, p. 38.
6
Richard Wurmbrand, Strigătul bisericii prigonite, București, Stephanus Publishing House,
1993, p. 44.
7
Mircea Păcurariu, „Mândrie confesională”, in Telegraful Român, Sibiu, 1994, no. 9-10, p. 2.
of the theological schools and the specialized publications were cut out
and the two theological univerities in Bucharest and Sibiu together with
the theological seminars and the specialized magazines were allowed to
exist only one nearby a metropolitan seat and under the direct and severe
control of the employees of this institution. Actually each institution had
its own “informers”. From time to time they used to meet the ,,security
men” in charge with the institution to which they gave “information”
about what was happening there, about people they had talked to
and especially about the “hostile activities” carried out by them. The
Orthodox Church as well as other religions did not miss such trators.
They were chosen out from the teachers of theology, vicars, hierarchs,
diocesan councellors, abbots, archpriests, priets, employees, students
and even believers (singers, guardians who were obliged to keep an eye
on their priest).
Nevertheless our priests resisted heroically although some of them
lost their mental capacity as pastor Richard Wurmbrand pointed out in
his paper “The Cry of the Persecuted Church”. How could one dare to
characterize their sacrifice despite the unbelievable treatments? Most of
our priests preserved their faith in God and did not deny the mission they
had been given. In jails secret services were kept, they prayed and even
gave the eucharist; in the jail of Aiud there was a never-ending prayer
from one cell to another. When the convicted were tired they used to
knock at the next cell wall, so their fellows knew that they had to go
on praying. In 1959 in Aiud, almost every Sunday the mass could be
listened to using the Morse system of communication (transmitted by the
pipes of the heating system).
During the long years of isolation spent in jails or in forced labour
camps at the Channel they could overcome all the difficulties only with
God’s help and their faith. They found ressources to work 12, 14 or even
36 hours without any break, to do what they were forced to. It is the case
of the priests of “Sârmă”, Cape Midia - the detachment 14 made up only
by priests8.
Concering “re-education” –the darkest experience appeared in
8
Paul Păltănea (23 May 1994, Galaţi).
Pitești, in that isle of absolute horror like any other in the geography of
the communist jails where the re-educated had to share the same cell
with the torturer so that he could not relax any moment, so his moral
resistance could be easily anihilated9, we should point out that many
people imprisoned there had such experiences. The terror they lived in –
they were trembling whenever the door was opened – (they got used to
it) made some of them lose their equilibrium, some others become saints
as they were considered by those who had met them, listened to them
or even could see them work in liberty to assure a conscious liberty of
mankind, a free life without bareers towards God’s Kingdom.
Only those who had the chance to observe and listen to them can
reach such a conclusion. Those who are still alive speak about those who
had never come back. They left this world, but they had never forgotten
about what they had loved the most. When someone convince them to
speak about themselves, every time the answer is the same-they are not
superior to those who lived and had to face the horrors of the totalitarian
regime. They are right-one may say-if one does not know their talent
given by God to them to perform true miracles by their prayers despite
all their physical deficiencies they speak about when, finally, one has the
chance to listen to their confession.
But for the priests of Hunedoara County, we can say that they had to
face different situations, determined by the fact that either they belonged
to old Romanian families or they had special activities meanwhile. Their
number equals that of the others from other counties, if we take into
account that about 30 priests had been arrested in our county, 3 died in
jails in tragic conditions. Their sacrifice must be pointed out because
mankind must understand that communism and its ideas should never
domineer over these regions again and people must have the liberty to
get Christ known and achieve life’s true aim.
Enumerating the cofessors of Hunedoara County: 1. Albu
Romulus, 2. Apostol Ion, 3. Ardeu Ion, 4. Baciu Aurel, 5. Benţa Emilian,
6. Boca Zian (ieromonahul Arsenie), 7. Boldor Petru, 8. Botici Adrian,
9. Bojescu Filaret, 10. Budai Alexandru, 11. Duma Ioan, 12. Felea
9
V. Ierunca, op. cit., pp. 12-14.
Ilarion, 13. Florea Nerva, 14. Floruţa Vasile, 15. Isac Nicolae, 16. Jura
Păun Marcu, 17. Laslău Dumitru, 18. Măciucă Lazăr, 19. Moşic Traian,
20. Oprea Crăciun, 21. Puiuţ Augustin, 22. Roşu Petru, 23. Săbău Ioan,
24. Stanciu Nicolae, 25. Ştefănie Ilie, 26. Tarcea Gheoghe, 27. Timişan
Emil, 28. Tomescu Cornel, ends with the presentation of the two priests
who are living in California, U.S.A., their situation being a special one,
because their action took place after 1981; it was not a political trial as
in the case of the others till 1964. They are Avramescu Cornel and Bibarţ
Remus.
All of them faced situations that nobody could imagine to be
possible .Facing them, the fear of death did occur .It made them
realize how weak their volition was and how deep their weakness and
finally become strong in faith. At those moments the blasphemy was
accompanied by Jesus’ prayer: “Oh God, Jesus Christ, Son of God,
give alms to me the sinner and only at those moments, those who were
imvolved in, understood that only God with His Power can redeem them
in a mysterious way. Those who were sufferring were imploring God to
help them and they were commending their soul to God crying „Thy Will
Be Done”10.
Under such circumstances, the servants of the saint altars as well
as the students at theology realized that the whole way of their sufferings
was part of a plan of Providence and it made them come closer and closer
to God. Just this strong faith makes them today to think of the future
which depends on us and even more, gives them the strengh to ask God
to forgive those who had ill-treated them.
Listening to the confession of those who are still alive, people could
have the chance to aware why these men who had to face the communist
jails and camps find so difficult to speak about such events when the only
thing they want is the peace of mankind. But this peace can be reached
only by praying every moment of our lives. This prayer helped these
martyrs to pass away, praying God for those who had persecuted them.
Presenting the total number of priests and theologians arrested-1785
from which 1546 priest, 194 monks and nuns, 45 students at theology
10
Viorel Gheorghiţă, Et Ego, Timişoara, Marineasa Publishing House, 1994, p.164.
is meant to set up a general glimpse upon the sacrifices made by the
servants of the saint altars. 150 of them died in prisons, 17 were shot
but ,comparing these data with the total number of the orthodox priests
at that moment, about 10,000 it shows that almost 20% of them were
arrested and from those who were arrested 10%, had never come back
home again.
Analizing both these data and the worthy behaviour of most of
them as well, let us state that they fully accomplished their mission,
working ceaselessly in the dark of the communist prisons or under the
pressure of the daily terror to keep the spiritual identity of our nation.
Our hierarchs and our great theologians as well worked in secret for
these causes, to keep open the doors of our saint churches even if they
had been punished when discovered and forced to retire or thrown in
prison. The existence of our old church is the most prominent proof that,
in Romania, the Communist regime was not able to turn off the light
which continues to be the hope in future.
II. Studies of Theology and Christian
spirituality
Bishop Nicodim NICOLĂESCU
Freedom from passions at the Philokalic Fathers

IV-VI centuries
Abstract
Having no existence in itself, evil is the absence of good. Passion is
bad because her nesting in the man’s soul is done by removing the good
of the Genesis, the natural nature, planted by God in us, being replaced
by a false normality. Philokalia Fathers have treated in their works the
passions process by which a man can reach salvation, route traveled by
man from the state of sinfulness to the state of Apatheia or deification.
The war against the passions is the hardest because it’s waged by the
man himself, but the victory over the fallen nature of our being brings us
the most priceless gain - Salvation.
Keywords:
parents, Philokalia, passion, dispassion, Apatheia.
Created in the image and the resemblance of God, the human nature
has not evil planted in her essence as a component. Patristic theology is
unanimous on this. Existential reality of evil, whatever form or shape is
undeniable. But its existence is nothing else than the removal, one way
or another, of the good of creation, planted by God in creation. For this
reason, between the spiritual and physical evil has always existed a close
connection, the first generating the later. The best example of this is the
sin of disobedience of our first parents, Adam and Eve, breaching God’s
commandment leading to death.
The state of sinfulness occurs when, persisting in sin, it becomes a
habit, normality, transforming itself into passion and putting on the false
garb of normality. War against the passions, which Fathers identify as
being seven in number1. is more difficult, as the passion settles more in
the human soul. Patristic theology of the golden age of Christianity treats
in detail the concept of passion and the whole process of freeing from
under their tutelage to achieve Apatheia, the state of deification.
I. Impassion and Dispassion

All the Philokalia Fathers from the IV - VI centuries (Anthony
the Great, Macarius the Egyptian, Evagrius Ponticus, John Cassian,
Nilus the Ascetic, Mark the Ascetic, Saint Diadochos of Photiki, Isaiah
the Hermit, Abba Dorotheus of Gaza, Barsanuphius, John the Prophet,
John Climacus, Maximus the Confessor) award numerous pages of their
works to this issue. The first of these, who talked about our duty to fight
our passions and reach the Dispassion, was St. Anthony the Great. He
exhorted the brethren: “If we try to heal the passions of the flesh for fear
the world will laugh at us, all the more strongly to endeavor to heal the
passions of the soul, as ones who will be tried before the face of God,
where it’s better not to lack glory or be worthy of derision. For having
free will, if we do not want to commit evil deeds, when we desire, we can
do it and it is in our power to live according to God’s liking. And nobody
will ever be able to force us to do any harm if we do not want to. And so,
fighting, we will be people worthy of God and we will be like the angels
in heaven”2.
In his writings, St. Anthony the Great emphasizes that man was
created with free will by God, that he is free to choose, he has the ability to
choose or be a slave to passions, or to be free. It is necessary to overcome
the passions, because this way the man is crowned with immortality. He
talks about the necessity of passions, about the necessity to fight against
them in order to be crowned. “If you wish, you are a slave of passions,
and again, if you want, you are free not to obey to passions, since God has
made you with free will. And he who overcomes the passions of the flesh
1
St. John Cassian speaks about eight evil thoughts and passions.
2
St. Anthony the Great, Învăţături despre viaţa morală, in Filocalia românească (= Fil.
Rom.), vol. I, București, Publishing House of the Mission and Bible Institute of the
Romanian Orthodox, p. 27.
II. Studies of Theology and Christian spirituality 333
is crowned with immortality. For if there would be no passion, there would
be no virtue, no crowns given by God to the most worthy of the men”3.
Also, St. Anthony the Great sees knowledge and fear of God as
a remedy against the passions, the road to dispassion. He says: “The
knowledge and fear of God brings healing from the passions of the
body. For harboring ignorance of God in our souls, the passion remains
unhealed and makes the soul to rot as through lengthy pus. And for this
we should not blame God, who gave men skill and knowledge”4.
Abba Dorotheus says that passions should be cut as they are young,
to care for it and not let it grow, so that last evil does not become greater.
He compares the process with the uprooting of plants: the plant is easily
plucked as it is smaller and it is much more difficult when it is a large
tree5. Abba Dorotheus also focuses not only on uprooting of a tree, but
also on the cleaning of the place of all the weeds. He says the following:
“But he that desires to purify his place needs to uproot

all the weeds thoroughly first. For if will not tear well all their
roots, but they will cut them just above the ground, they will
grow again. So he will pluck the roots first, as I said, and
cleanse the place better of weeds and roots and sorts and will
topple, and will plow it and prepare it for sowing. For only
then will he sow the good seed. For if after making this proper
preparations, you will leave it empty, weeds will spring up
again, finding a good and soft ground from this preparation
and will stretch the roots deep and they will grow stronger
and will multiply on it. The same it is with the soul. First you
have to cut the old passion and ill habits (...). So it is required
that these have to wage wars, like I said, not only with the
bad habits and passions, but also with their cause, which are
their roots, for if the roots will not be uprooted they will grow
straight again thorns”6.
3
Ibidem.
4
Ibidem, p. 45.
5
Avva Dorotheus, op. cit., P. G., t. 88, col. 1737 A; Φιλοκαλία, 12, ΕΠΕ, p. 472-474; Fil.
rom., vol. IX, p. 588.
6
Idem, P. G., t. 88, col. 1753 D – 1756 A; Φιλοκαλία, 12, ΕΠΕ, p. 504; Fil. rom., vol. IX, p. 603.
We see that Abba Dorotheus uses the term plucking for the
uprooting “for if he will not pluck all their roots, but only cuts them”
when he talks about passions. We must conclude that for the virtues he
uses the verb to sow, so he says:
“These things I have said many times, for as we have

uprooted the virtues and sowed the passions contrary to them,
so must we labor not only to remove the passions, but also
to plant the virtues and place them in their proper place. For
virtues are given to us from God through nature”7.
Another Philokalia Father who referred to the war the monk and
the ascetic Christian wages against the passions is Mark the Ascetic,
who says that “the law of liberty is known through true knowledge,
is understood through the commandments, and shall stand complete
through the mercy of Christ”8.
He also talks of the duty to hate passions, uprooting their cause,
because “he who is obedient to the causes he is fought by passions,
even if he does not want to”9. In the war against passions, the monk and
the Christian founds himself always in an unseen war. To prevail, he
emphasizes call for God’s help, which is the need for prayer. “For if we
are passionate, we must pray and obey. For only with help we can wage
war against the habits of sin”10.
For those who make the vote of virginity or those who want to live
in chastity, Mark the Ascetic highlights, following the apostolic teaching
that it is necessary to destroy the imagination of the passion, as well,
“the face and the movement of the passion” as he calls them11. He says,
among other things: for those mastered by a strong love, the blameless
angelic virginity to live inside their body and pray that any reminder of
7
Idem, P. G., t. 88, col. 1757 C; Φιλοκαλία, 12, ΕΠΕ, p. 508-510; Fil. rom., vol. IX, p. 605.
8
Marc the Ascetic, Despre legea duhovnicească, in Φιλοκαλία, 13, ΕΠΕ, p. 16; Fil. rom.,
vol. I, p. 282.
9
Idem, Despre cei ce-şi închipuie că se îndreptăţesc din fapte, in Φιλοκαλία, 13, ΕΠΕ, p. 66;
Fil. rom., vol. I, p. 314.
10
Ibidem, in Φιλοκαλία, 13, ΕΠΕ, p. 76; Fil. rom., vol. I, p. 319.
11
Idem, Epistolă către Nicolae Monahul, in Φιλοκαλία, 13, ΕΠΕ, p. 200; Fil. rom., vol. I, p. 383.
the appetite to go away, even if it arises only as a thought in the mind,
without movement of carnal passion at work”12.
Another father, St. Diadochos of Photiki, along with Mark the
Ascetic, emphasizes that the escape from the passion of fornication, which
he calls “the leprosy of voluptuousness” can be overcome by the fear of
God, facing to the harsh judgment of God. He says, “The soul, as long
as it’s untidy and fully covered by leprosy of voluptuousness cannot feel
the fear of God, even if someone would constantly herald the frightening
and severe judgment of God. But when he begins to cleanse with much
attention, he feels the fear of God as a real cure for life which, rebuking
him, is burning him like a painful fire. Finally, cleaning himself gradually
he reaches perfect purity, growing in love as the fear diminishes in him”13.
Saint Diadochos of Photiki also shows that if the devils fail to wage
war against the flesh and “push the heart to ignite shameful lust” then he
ignites the passions of the soul, especially high opinion of himself, which
he says is the mother of all evils14. He says:
“When, therefore, the demons that upset our soul ignite the
passions of the soul, especially for the high opinion of oneself,
which is the mother of all evil, to think about the death of our
bodies, and the swelling love of glory will be ashamed. But the
same must be done when demons, which wage war against our
bodies, push our heart to ignite towards shameful lust. For only
this thought united with the remembrance of God, can stop the
various works of the evil spirits. But if demons who wage war
against our soul want to use this thought, putting in our mind
the infinite nothingness of human nature as having no value
because of the body (for this they love to do if anyone wants to
torment them with this thought). Let we remind the honor and
glory of the heavenly kingdom, not omitting nor the bitterness
nor the darkness of the eternal damnation, but by one to sooth
our sadness and by the other to grieve our hearts’ levity”15.
12
Ibidem.
13
Diadochos of Photiki, Cuvânt ascetic, in Φιλοκαλία, 9, ΕΠΕ, p. 132; Fil. rom., vol. I, p. 411.
14
Ibidem, in Φιλοκαλία, 9, ΕΠΕ, p. 236; Fil. rom., vol. I, p. 447.
15
Ibidem.
Another father, Venerable Isaiah the Hermit, urges us to keep our
hearts and if we keep our hearts we keep our bodies, taking care as we
have always observed in our parents: “Let us strive, therefore, brethren,
within our power and God will help us by the multitude of His mercy.
And even if we did not kept our heart, as our parents did, to put all the
power to keep our bodies sinless, as God requires, and to believe that
during time of hunger that overwhelmed us He will show mercy on us,
as He did with His saints”16.
All Venerable Monk Isaiah the Hermit speaks of the three soul-
killing passions namely “gain, honor and rest, because these, surrounding
the soul they do not leave it to prosper”17. In the writings of the Holy
Barsanuphius and John it is shown that, being powerless, it is desirable
not to fall into passions. “Knowing that for the helplessness and our
carelessness we suffer these, let us do everything we can not to fall into
them. But it depends of the mercy (of God) to deliver us from them”18.
They urge us to be careful and to persist in patience, as not to leave
brothers beweakened by devilish passions and visions. And they also
make a beautiful comparison with the gold that becomes brighter in the
fire, thus showing the role of trials allowed by God:
“Do not let yourself beweakened by the multitude of

passions and devilish visions, but believe that their disturbances
and their temptations will not succeed, but they will increase
more your virtue, if we heed cautiously to persevere in patience
(...). For as meeting the fire gold becomes brighter, so is the
righteous one meeting the multitude of trials. Because God
allowed, following His testimony, the righteous one to be
tested, for the highest praise and glory of the Lord and to
shame the enemies. So do not get discouraged. For seals of the
promises are steadfast”19.
16
Venerable Monk Isaiah the Hermit, 29 de cuvinte, in Fil. rom., vol. XII, pp. 168-169.
17
Ibidem, p. 230.
18
St. Barsanuphius and John, Scrisori Duhovniceşti, 102, in Φιλοκαλία, 10 A, ΕΠΕ, p. 422;
Fil. rom., vol. XI, p. 131.
19
Ibidem, Φιλοκαλία, 10 A, ΕΠΕ, p. 452; Fil. rom., vol. XI, p. 154.
Father Dumitru Stăniloae, analyzing these words by Barsanuphius
and John, turns his thoughts to the patience of Job, which was received
with great glory by God. Father Stăniloae says: “God has received greater
glory through the tests that came upon Job, so that God’s testimony for
him proved true, and because it showed how strong those who trust in
Him are”20.
Another great French theologian, Olivier Clement shows how war
against passion can bring a victory beneficial to our spiritual prosperity,
“Because man is born to die and ‘world lies under the

curse’, the creative power of the face, this call that rises us,
it strikes the edge and becomes anxiety and fascination with
death. Here it fits, far from any romance, the ascetic notion
of ‘passion’. The passion that is conditional on all others is
death. ‘The passions’ (emphasis is put on the ‘passivity’ of the
one that suffers) are also flight from the face of this anxiety
and thirst for the absolute - and , in the later, deserves respect
- but in ignorance of the absolute. Thus ‘passion’ appears like
a swollen abscess, filled with nothingness that gives us for a
moment the illusion of being something more, but leaves us in
an unusual state of disarticulation. Energy usurped by passion
must not be suppressed, but metamorphosed. The return is
realized by metanoia, which means not so much repentance but
more renewal of our way to view reality”21.
Other two great spiritual fathers of the monastery Abba Serid

Palestine emphasize cleaning of the passions’ filth with tears. I say “wash
them with tears. For they wash the face clean of every stain. Cry out to
Jesus until your throat gets hoarse: ‘Lord, save us: we perish’ (Luke 8,
24). Remove the ashes and light a fire in your heart that the Lord came
to throw on the earth (Luke 12, 49). And burn all the stains and gold will
look good on you and probably imprinted in you as in an oven. It requires
20
Ibidem, note 187, p. 154.
21
Olivier Clement, Trupul morţii şi al slavei, Bucureşti, Christiana Publishing House, 1996,
pp. 31-32.
a lot of vigilance22.
Saints Barsanuphius and John, showing the importance of vigilance
and tears, talks about perfect humility and obedience in all, for all the
passions to be uprooted and in their place sowed all the virtues, virtues
which they call the good deeds. “Earn perfect humility and obedience
in all. For they are what uproots all passions and sow the good deeds
(virtues)”23. There is also the idea that the passions have to do with a
man’s probation. “As passions go, they cannot be moved against the man
to his testing. For the man not tempted is unproven”24.
Referring to fornication, which he calls ugly shameful passion, he
says it takes “heart and body pains to uproot it: of the heart by unceasing
prayer to God, of the body through oppression and obedience”25. We also
find the idea that passions are considered tribulations that God allows
and they urge to call for God’s help, citing the words of the psalmist “in
times of trouble call Me and I will deliver thee, and you will praise me”
(Ps. 90, 15). So “in every passion, nothing is more useful than calling the
name of God”26.
Keeping the commands plays an important role in overcoming the
passions. Here is the question of a brother and the answer given by Abba
John the prophet:
“Father, my mind says, ‘because you have pride, God does

not help you to master your passions, so not to fall into vainglory
by their possession, or this happens because receiving easy help
you lose it as easy, or wanting to receive help, run more often to
God or for something else’”. John’s answer was: “Strive to labor
and keep the commandments. And even if you are overwhelmed,
do not let yourself be weakened, nor will fall prey to despair, but
get up again and God will help you. For you may suffer for the
22
St. Barsanuphius and John, Scrisori Duhovniceşti, Φιλοκαλία, 10 A, ΕΠΕ, p. 174; Fil.
rom., vol. XI, p. 189.
23
Ibidem, Φιλοκαλία, 10 A, ΕΠΕ, p. 480; Fil. rom., vol. XI, p. 255.
24
Ibidem, Φιλοκαλία, 10 B, ΕΠΕ, p. 50; Fil. rom., vol. XI, p. 283.
25
Ibidem, Φιλοκαλία, 10 B, ΕΠΕ, p. 50-52; Fil. rom., vol. XI, p. 284.
26
first things that you said. And for this reason you do not master
the passion. But you can also suffer this because of weakness.
But you can release yourself of both, throwing yourself crying
before the goodness of God, to free you from these and other
passions, through the prayers of the saints”27.
Concerned with life of the monastery community, these parents

emphasize attention to ourselves and fear of God to drive the war away
from us. “Brother, let us remind ourselves of the fear of God. And if
God, in his love for man, will take away this war from us, let not show
ourselves careless. For many, relieving, no longer cared for them and fell
on their head. But being eased, to thank God that has delivered us and
stay praying not to fall into the same passions or others”28.
The state of Apatheia

The state of Apatheia or human deification is the culmination of
man’s spiritual ascent in achieving likeness with God, the Creator, in
whose image we are created. The process of deification begins, as the
Holy Fathers say, with the Sacrament of Baptism. Life brings ups and
descents onto the spiritual scale of the human being, but none of these
moments can compare to the man’s condition before baptism.
During the acute deterioration of his being, man transforms sin to
passion, but for His great love for us, God has endowed us with remedies
for each of these seven passions29. All these remedies are gifts of the
Holy Spirit, which we receive through the Sacrament of Chrismation,
thus deification is theandric work, impossible through man’s own power.
This is asserted by St. Mark the Ascetic, showing us that the “law of
liberty known through true knowledge, is understood by keeping the
commandments, and it is perfectly fulfilled by the mercy of Christ”30.
27
28
29
We noted above that St. John Cassian takes the number of passions to eight, making the
difference between vainglory and pride, but other scholars, starting with Gregory the
Theologian, unites these two into one, reducing the total to seven.
30
Marc the Ascetic, Despre legea duhovnicească, chapter 32, in Fil. Rom., vol. I, p. 240.
Acquiring the seven virtues, corresponding to the seven gifts of the Holy
Spirit and contrary to the same number of passions, as we have seen,
brings Apatheia, restoration of human nature to its real meaning, in the
image of the Creator. These seven virtues, as mentioned by Crainic are
“made up of faith, of hope and love, specific Christian trilogy, and the four
cardinal or moral virtues: prudence, justice, strength and temperance”31.
Of all these, the acquisition of temperance in its apotheosis
extension, that of humble thinking or humiliation, dispassion represents
the stage between dispassion, fight, and Apatheia or deification, because
as “pride is the mother of all passions, temperance (...) is the mother of all
virtues. Pride and humility are two peaks where the world of sin and the
world of virtue are facing each other”32. St. John Climacus shows us this
by the following words: “... destroyer of all passions is humble thought.
For those who have earned it, overcame all”33 or “with the righteous
men God left small passions, so they can slander very hard themselves,
because of small and not sinful passions, to gain riches that cannot be
robbed, that is humble thought”34. And St. Maximus the Confessor taught
us that one who has conquered self-love or glory is above all passion. He
says: “Love of your body is irrational love for the body. Who cuts this
one suddenly it means it cut all passions born from it”35.
The man who reached Apatheia is not totally devoid of temptation.
His fight, however, takes a different dimension, eradicating sin from the
first throb, as shown by St. Mark the Ascetic in the words: “the one, who
awaits the true crown of virginity, undefiled and perfect, bears his fight
not only to here, but following the apostolic teachings, will struggle to
kill even the icon and movement of the passion. But not content with
this much one who is gripped by a powerful love, wants to dwell in his
body the righteous angelic virginity, prays so that the very memory of
the lust to be extinguished, even if only arises in the mind, like a breeze
31
Nichifor Crainic, Sfinţenia – împlinirea umanului, Iaşi, Mitropoliei Moldovei şi Bucovinei
Publishing House, 1993, p. 106.
32
Ibidem.
33
St. John Climacus, Scara, word 26, chapter 29, in Fil. rom., vol. IX, p. 329.
34
Ibidem, chapter 44, in Fil. rom., vol. IX, p. 335.
35
St. Maximus the Confessor, Capete despre dragoste, the third hundred, chapter 57, in Fil.
rom., vol. II, p. 97.
of thought, without the movement and work of the bodily passion”36.
Taking these teachings St. Maximus the Confessor says: “The things
towards which we ever felt any passion make us wear afterwards their
passionate imaginings. The one, who overcame, therefore, the passionate
imaginations, despises of course, the things whose imaginings they wear.
For the fight with memories is more difficult, than the fight with the things
themselves, the more light the transgression in the mind as in deed”37.
The man who reaches deification becomes a god, created, however,
also inferior to the Creator, becomes, as Fr. Dumitru Stăniloae states,
“God, but does not cease to be human at the same time, it commits
them to God through the works by but conscious that he is a god by
the mercy of the unique and great God”38. This condition of the deified
man is exposed better than anyone else by St. Isaac the Syrian, the first
following the fathers of the Philokalia IV-VI century, his words coming
to a conclusion on the whole teaching in climbing dispassion – passion -
Apatheia mentioned by his predecessors: “The man worthy of the divine
grace and who tasted and felt something beyond does not leave them
(n.n. passions) to enter his heart. For instead of baits seized him another
bigger and better desire. And stay away from his heart they, or the ones
born out of them. But they remain outside, not working. Not that there
are not baits of passion, but because the heart that receives them is dead
to them and alive in something else. For his conscience is enough to
delight itself with something else”39.
Conclusions
The writings of the Phyilokalia Fathers of the golden age of
Christianity thus appears as a true guide on the path that leads from
the state of human sinfulness fallen into a perfect resemblance to the
image after which it was created. Their teachings have traveled more
than fifteen hundred years, ignoring impermanence and being as current
36
Marc the Ascetic, Ep.c.N. chapter7, in Fil.rom., vol. I, pp. 320, 321.
37
St. Maximus the Confessor, op. cit., the first hundred, chapter. 63, p. 62.
38
Dumitru Stăniloae, Ascetica şi Mistica Bisericii Ortodoxe, Bucureşti, Publishing House of
the Mission and Bible Institute of the Romanian Orthodox, 2002, p. 438.
39
St. Isaac the Syrian, Cuvinte despre nevoinţă, word 38, in Fil. rom., vol. X, p. 207.
today as when they were written.
Passion and fight against them is the true experience of the Christian
repentance, started from the depths of sinfulness, where human nature is
replaced by extreme passion, and, as we have seen that Abba Dorotheus of
Gaza teaches, is replaced by the acute shortage of human nature planted
by God in us. Passion is victory of sin over man’s will and replacement of
human nature planted by God and dictated by our conscience, by the habit
of sin, that has become second nature and it is felt by the man as normality.
As the state of sinfulness persists, the struggle with the passions becomes
heavier relevant in this regard is this association with the uprooting of a
plant that is much more easily achieved when it is just a sprout and much
harder when it becomes a towering tree.
Victory over passions brings man to the state of Apatheia as the
ultimate stage in the pursuit of life’s purpose, deification and, implicitly,
receiving salvation or the state of those on the right side. We conclude by
quoting a text by St. Isaac the Syrian where man is presented in this state:
“The heart received the feeling of the spiritual realm and

the vision of future things to come, remembers his passions,
in his consciousness, same as a satiated man looks at bad food
placed before him. He does not pay any attention and lusts not
at all at it, but rather repels to him and turns away from it, not
only because the food itself is disgusting and unpleasant, but
also because the food was great enough to satiate before. It’s
not the one who has wasted his inheritance and now is looking
for roots, after wasting parental wealth he received. And he
does not sleep who has been entrusted with a treasure”40.
40
Ibidem.
Bishop Macarie DRĂGOI
Seeking to heal the World spiritually, physically

and socially: The role of the Church
Abstract
Those who encountered Christ in the time of His earthly existence,
experienced, among other things, the wonder of healing. Christ revealed
Himself as a healer, as we can see from the parable of the Good Samaritan
(Luke 10, 33-35).
Keywords:
Christianity, role of the Church, the World spiritually, physically
and socially, Orthodox Christianity.
Further on, an early Father of the Church, experienced and affirmed

that the Eucharist, which is Christ as Sacrament, is the “medicine of
immortality, and the antidote to prevent us from dying”1; other Fathers
compared the Church to a hospital having Christ as the Great Physician,
“He is the good Physician, Who has taken upon Him our infirmities, has
healed our sicknesses, and yet He, as it is written, honoured not Himself
to be made a High Priest, but He Who spake to Him”2, and also His
1
St. Ignatius of Antioch, The Epistle to Ephesians, in Ante-Nicene Fathers, the
Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus, vol. 1, Alexander Roberts,
D.D., James Donaldson, L.L.D., revised and chronologically arranged, with brief
prefaces and occasional notes by A. Cleveland Coxe, D.D., Grand Rapids, The
Christian Literature Co., Buffalo, 1885, XX, 2, p. 122.
2
St. Ambrose of Mediolan, Epistle LXIII: To the Church at Vercellæ, in Nicene and Post-
Nicene Fathers, vol. 10, Second Series, Ambrose: Select Works and Letters, Philip Schaff,
servants as medics “Not without pain is a limb of the body cut off which
has become corrupt. It is treated for a long time, to see if it can be cured
with various remedies. If it cannot be cured, then it is cut off by a good
physician. Thus it is a good bishop’s desire to wish to heal the weak,
to remove the spreading ulcers, to burn some parts and not to cut them
off”3; then others even built hospitals as apses of the church.
We might say, perhaps that in Antiquity conditions did not allow for
the widespread cure of the diseases of the time, and this is why people more
exclusively sought after healing from God. Where do we stand in (post)
modernity when the science of medicine is so evolved? Has it taken over
the part of God Already some contemporary hierarch of the Church, who
are also scholars, like the Fathers of Old, describe Orthodox Christianity
not so much in institutional terms but as a psychotherapeutic science4.
Because of Christianity’s dominant position over the centuries,
the Church, both in the West and in the East, gave witness mainly to
the moral dimension of life; doing so chiefly in a prophylactic manner,
and sometimes giving morality an exclusive emphasis, binding people
to what is good and protecting them from what is harmful. Today, when
for so many people Christianity is no longer their guiding authority, at
least concerning morals, the Church needs to manifest again, as it did
in the Apostolic age, Her therapeutic dimension. Compared to the past,
many of Her contemporary members are very ill, wounded by the sins
of immorality. Yet the Holy Spirit is ever at work, that is why we live
a Patristic revival, rediscovering a healing therapy and above all, its
methods, which have been forgotten for so long.
First of all, before we speak of healing and its methods, we need to
see the causes behind the way we fall sick. Saint Maximus the Confessor
stated that there were three reasons: ignorance of God or erroneous beliefs
D.D., L.L.D. and Hary Wace D.D., New York, 1896, col. 47, p. 463.
3
St. Ambrose of Mediolan, On the Duties of the Clergy, in op. cit., vol. 10, Book II, ch. XXVII,
col. 135, p. 64.
4
Esther E. Cunningham Williams, Hierotheos Vlachos, Orthodox Psychotherapy. The
Science of the Fathers, Levadia, Greece: Birth of the Theotokos Monastery, 1994, 369 p.;
Archbishop Chrysostomos, with a foreword by Bishop Auxentios, A Guide to Orthodox
Psychotherapy: The Science, Theology, and Spiritual Practice Behind It and Its Clinical
Application, University Press of America, Indiana, 2007, 129 p.
about God (idolatry), excessive self-love, and the tyranny of passions5.
I cannot go beyond these causes, but the following presentation will
methodologically expand a little on them.Is the world in which we live
sick? Is the world (or at least the world with which we interact, namely
the European world, and our own local Scandinavian society, ignoring
God as He is revealed in Christ? Has this world become individualistic
and self-centered? Have we turned into a society of mass producers and
consumers, living under a tyranny of capitalism?
I do not think that you have to be necessarily a religious
fundamentalist to answer yes very easily to all three questions. To be
sure, the simple facts reinforce the biblical narrative about the fall of man
and the fall of all creation associated with him, and they encourage us to
develop a theology that needs to take sides “for” and “against”. Because
of size limitations in this present lecture I won’t go into extensive details.
It is more important that we can agree, at least on a simplistic level, that
the world in which we live is truly ill and urgently needs to be cured.
From Freud’s time onwards, the boom of psycho-therapeutical trends
in the ‘West’, at least for me, is a very visible crying out for healing
and redemption. We who are the church of Christ, know, at least, the
causes and effects of the many maladies and by the grace of our triune
God and thanks to His Saints we possess the Cure and the methods of
implementing the cure, which is Christ. In this presentation I will focus
on only one of the many hundreds of ways of speaking about maladies
and remedies in the Church.
First of all the ‘viruses’ which can cause a malady must have an
environment in which to develop, and that place is, according to the
Fathers, the nous, or the noetic part of the human spirit; or as Christ
calls it “the eye of the soul”. These noetic viruses are constantly being
brought up as logismoi or teeming thoughts by the demons and are
placed for incubation in the human nous. It is by this strength of spirit,
namely the nous, that man can know God. These logismoi ‘viruses’ have
5
St. Maximus the Confessor, Various Texts on Theology the Divine Economy and Virtue and
Vice, col. 31, The Philokalia, vol. 2: The Complete Text; Compiled by St. Nikodimos of the
Holy Mountain & St. Markarios of Corinth, G.E.H. Palmer, Philip Sherrard, Kallistos Ware
(trans.), Macmillan, 1982, p. 171.
the potential and the aim to sicken, to darken the knowledge of God,
and culminate in what Saint Maximus previously observed, namely the
ignorance of God or wrongly perceived attitudes about God. What the
world and the science does not know is that the nous is not the same
as these mental logismoi, because logic functions only within the brain,
whereas the nous-mind (intellective spirit) functions from the heart. One
of the widest and deepest spiritual illness of the world today is depression
and all the feelings and the malfunctions associated with it.
This illness, at the present moment, surpasses the range and abilities
of medical and psychiatric science, which operate within the frame of
logismoi. One of the most common manifestations of depression is the
feeling of loss of purpose in life, of emptiness and uselessness of things
and ideals. In other words the logismoi lead us to false goals. In addition,
associated with this phenomenon is the agitation of mind arising from the
multitude of teeming thoughts. People suffering from depression usually
spend great amounts of time speaking inwardly with their logismoi and
prefer fantasy over reality. How can the Church heal or deal with this
and other spiritual maladies? How can the healthy presbyters and the
lay Christian help this part of suffering world? First of all we have to
understand that the noetic faculty is manifested as the “incessant prayer”
(Thessalonians I, 5:17) of the Holy Spirit inside the heart (Galatians 4,
6; Romans 8, 26; Thessalonians I 5, 19) and is named by the Fathers the
“memory of God”. When man has in his heart the “memory of God”, in
other words, when he hears in his heart “the voice” (Corinthians I 14, 2;
Galatians 4, 6 etc.), he can sense God “dwelling” inside him (Romans
8, 11). So instead of demonic logismoi man ought instead to converse
with God continuously. In this way the nous liberates us from so many
“cares”, the thoughts of how to operate the complicated world and its
daily situations, leaving that to the logikos part of the spirit. Some of
the Fathers would say that this is the essence of what is meant by the
“ancestral sin”, the breaking of our communion with God by not using
the noetic power of the spirit, or by surrendering our nous to the logismoi
and therefore misusing it.
When man does not preserve the memory of God the nous
starts to die, because what sense is there left in a life without God and
eternity? Surely the preservation of God’s memory, or remembering God
in everything one does, belongs to the state of prayer that stems from
liturgical prayer. But where is it necessary to start; because the very act
of praying is already a sign that a cure is taking place? Simply we need to
make the people begin to love reading the Holy Scriptures, to make them
find in the Scriptures insights for their life. The Church of Antiquity, in
the East, had catechetical schools and placed high emphasis on education
prior to and after baptism. We Orthodox managed to preserved religious
memory by rituals, liturgics, iconography, feasts and the traditions
associated with them (carols, blessing of the house for Christmas and
Epiphany, and so on), but this was done much more easily in monolithic
orthodox societies. Nowadays the challenges are different and the media
has succeeded in occupying more than 70% of the life and the mind of
our faithful. Moreover, religion has started to be offered and selected
individualistically on-line to the detriment of communitarian life or
has been commodified in the selling of spirituality, falling into the trap
of kitsch. There is little place for God and for preserving His memory
nowadays, at least what we mean by an authentic Orthodox preservation.
If people do not watch TV or stay on-line they work intensively.
Moreover, Society as a whole is less and less tolerant of the presence
of public religious signs. Therefore we need to develop once again the
educational schools for adults, and not to limit them to the theologians
and clergy, or to imagine them as part of the secular Academy or
Faculties, with the end-purpose of a degree. The pro-Naos of the Church
should be a school of Christian spiritual education that guides people
towards real repentance. I envisage someone to be really present there
(clergy or laity) who can communicate with the people who may enter
and leave the church, without ever knowing what is really taking place;
some one who can ask them why they are coming so late, why leaving
so early, and so on. How otherwise can one re-enter the relationship with
God? With all the risks, this can have only positive effects, that people
should be invited to dialogue and consistent explications in depth could
be offered to them, without any other material end. I would call it an
“Orthodox Evangelization”. To sum up in regard to this idea, I stated
earlier that spiritual maladies, of which depression is the most salient,
are seeded as bad thoughts that the demons bring into the noetic part of
the human soul. It is the lack of proper awareness which makes people
entertain those thoughts and be turned aside from the real aim of life,
which is union with God. These fantasy thoughts present people with
many pointless aims and set them to be very busy with many things and
lead them to prioritize what in reality is only marginal.
As a remedy the Orthodox Church can offer in its first stages of
contact a more personal engagement, a charter that is the Scriptures
and the Fathers, and aim at presenting intelligibly the essence of their
teachings which is both prophylactic and therapeutical. At least we
need to make people more aware of the consistency of the Word of
God, which very often is presented in an impoverished form especially
in its most accessed and free on-line spiritual “markets” whether these
are orthodox or less orthodox in nature. Creating a spiritual school for
adults, coming into contact with adults who otherwise would never come
into contact with a priest, and who are religiously inconsistent because of
their ignorance and their spiritual wounds, is a thing that the Church did
in it’s “Golden Age” and should now do again to help people spend more
time with God and less time with their demonic logismoi.
The fallen man, the diseased man is the one that does not have
the presence of God in his nous and therefore will of necessity become
self-centered: a factor which is the continuation or the second stage of
spiritual malady, or its manifestation outwardly in the body. Man, even
the rational man (logikos), having nothing and nobody, desperately tries
not to die and to avoid all unhappiness, because this is against his nature.
At this stage man is still ‘religious’ but not further from idolatry, for
he employs God/the Force for his needs. This is the functionalist man
that does something only if he has a benefit or a privilege, only if he is
remunerated. If he does something voluntary, then he writes it in his CV.
Before speaking about physical healing we have to see, as we did above,
which is the greatest bodily malady which comes from the spiritual lack
of having God’s presence. I would take obesity and/or anorexia as the
opposite pole of same illness, the deification of the body.
A significant Christian text of the early 2ndcentury, “The Poemen
(Shepherd) of Hermas”, says that in order for us to become members of the
Body of Christ, we must be “squared” stones (that is, suitable for building)
and not rounded ones!6 So when God does not exist in the inner noetic
being, the body becomes as it were the ultimate reality and one believes
that all human potential can be realized within the sphere of the body.
Frustration concerning the body arises as a continuation and multiplication
of the logismoi those cognitive ‘viruses’ seeded by demons.
We, the Church, have an advantage here that we should use. People
are fed up with E-s and beautifully packaged artificial products, especially
those related to alimentation. Nowadays more people are searching for
biological-ecological products. A new spiritual trend has arisen, eco-
bio pursuits. And yet, these products are being sought after for the same
purpose that the artificially processed foods were looked for, namely for the
body alone. E products fattened the body and eco-bio ones are supposed
to make man slim and eternally young. Yet the Church can benefit from
the public acknowledgement and more frequent rejection of E products.
This is because fasting is the first remedy for the illnesses of the body, or
at least it prevents the extension of the malady into the whole body. Linked
to fasting, as it is recommended by the church, is a whole spirituality of
charity, spiritual fatherhood, liturgical practices (that is we fast to take
Communion) and finally we fast from E products in order finally to be able
to fast from E logismoi - “processed thoughts”. Whether clergy or lay, or
as church in general, we easily can relate to the ‘secularized’ man who is
suffering from the fattening of the body and he can easily and gladly accept
our method of the right use of food, as well as the earth that produces it,
and slowly he can be immersed into the depths of baptismal font and the
mysteries of the renewal of man. Yet there is a danger!
6
The Pastor of Hermas, Vision Third. Concerning the Building of the Triumphant Church,
and the Various Classes of Reprobate Men, in The Genuine Epistles of the Apostolic
Fathers, St. Clement-St. Polycarp, St. Ignatius-St. Barnabas, The Pastor of Hermas and the
Martyrdoms of St. Ignatius and St. Polycarp, written by those who were present, translated
and published with preliminary discourses by Archbishop wake, Broadway, Ludgate Hill,
Manchester and New York, 1893, Ch. II, pp. 271-272.
In the also “secularized” countries where Orthodoxy is the
majority, public mass-media can distort the message of fasting and
ecological, healthy eating and can use the authority of the Church to
draw the attention of Christians but to separate the fasting rules from their
ultimate purpose: union with Christ in the Church. As a brief conclusion,
the domain of the healing of the body, perhaps, is the most transparent
level of the Church, in its manifestation and practices and can be the
most easily accessed by ‘sick’ people, no matter what their dogmatic
convictions. Yet the advantage of such practices as fasting is that they
give the Church the chance to link the rules and the methods of fasting
with its scope: abstinence, self-control, and finally our progressive union
with Christ, as it is said in one of our liturgical prayers: “Let us commend
ourselves and each other, and our entire life, to Christ our Lord”. To be
sure, this does not cure the whole of disease but it is a great resource for
our present times, within the context of the eco-bio movement; which
might in some respects be favourable to it.
Thirdly, if a man does not take care of the first two stages of the
malady, which is a war fought at a personal level, then he harms not
only himself but his environment and his fellows. I asked rhetorically at
the beginning of my presentation if we are a society of mass producers
and mass consumers, living under many tyrannies: such as that of our
personal passions, or that of capital making and spending. The world, by
and large, stands in this condition. We have complicated our existence
and created artificial systems that surpass us, and we cannot control it
anymore. One clear example was, and still is, the global economic crisis.
Much of the world is outside the Church, on the ‘worldly’ side of the
road. There are so many very busy people. We can serve them when they
get tired perhaps. What can we offer practically? The simplicity of the
ascetical teachings of the Fathers as embodied mostly in our monastic
life, where there should no longer be a material tyranny of what we
must do; where there are not so many outside stimuli, and if they exist
they are godly ones. The communitarian way of simplicity that is the
monastic life, which is embedded in the teachings of the Fathers, can
serve as the most practical therapy against so many external and internal
tyrants. Perhaps it cannot heal the world , but it can change individuals
belonging to the world. And nowadays to heal society, we need to touch
the many individuals living in the world.
Finally, to sum up all my individual, arguments and theses, I would
say that the Church in its teachings and practices is not only prophylactic
but mainly therapeutical, for it seeks out fallen Adam who departed from
God. In the moment when Adam forgot God, the demonic suggestions
took over and dragged him nowhere and left him naked, beaten and
wounded. The Good Samaritan, who is Christ, cures him by assigning
him to the Church. As we have seen, the world in which we live is ill and
this dramatically affects our health. It is ill because it is ignorant of God,
because it is self-centered and enslaved. The vocation of the Church is to
heal individuals in society from maladies that are spiritual, physical and
social. The grace is there in the Church. We need to learn how to handle
it and to administer it to suffering people effectively, within the context
of the Fathers and the guidance of the Spirit. I took as an example of
spiritual illness depression, which is caused by the logismoi, bad thought
coming from demons, seeded in the mind. The Fathers speak about the
nous, the eye of the soul, the meeting place of man with God, the place
of the preservation of the memory of God and the logistikos part of the
soul, namely the intellect. When the logismoi or teeming thoughts takes
over the nous, God’s image within the nous is blurred and problems start
because the man is communicating with many godless thoughts. These
are the concerns of the world.
As a healing therapy I suggested that we should place more
emphasis on spiritual studies of the Bible and the Fathers, which is a
thing largely neglected in the Orthodox church, because there are other
means to remember Christ. The problem is, however, that those means
are not reaching the people anymore, as they once did in the past. By
creating some spiritual schools for adult instruction, by engaging the
large number of youth studying theology by means of a real mission
of Orthodox Evangelization the Church might more effectively heal the
spiritual maladies of the estranged people of our time. This way, the
message of God and the preservation of His memory in the nous would
eventually supplant and cure the logismoi of the demons. Reaching out
and placing an emphasis on reading and meditating of the Holy texts
can heal the nous and can restore God’s throne therein. But, if we
fail to heal spiritually, the battle is not lost. We still can reach out to
secularized people by various spiritual methods which are not so alien to
them. Our consumerist and kitsch culture makes people react against the
artificialities used in producing its products, be they food or whatever.
People on a large scale have re-orientated towards an eco-bio trend. Even
though it has several dangers, this can be used both for the benefit of the
Church and the healing of the individual.
Someone who has realized that his health is endangered by the
abundant plastic processed food often starts to search for something
considerably simpler and of higher quality. Fasting recommends us to
consume simple and qualitative things, and to do it within the context of
the dietetic recommendation the Church, whereby it adds in its spirituality
of fasting (confession, prayer, discipline, abstinence and self-control)
and the ultimate purpose and aim of fasting which is communion with
Christ in the Sacraments. If the complete healing might not be assured by
these methods (I mean if the soul itself will not be cured by them along
with the body), fasting methods still can protect an individual from the
tyranny of passions. The world is enslaved by the tyrannical demands of
individual passions.
This segment of the world is lost for us, it has become too
undisciplined to sustaiu a decent dialogue with the Church. But there
is still hope. Whoever feels enslaved and gets tired by this tyranny will
always want to search for some alternative form of living. What we as
Church can offer, practically speaking, is the example of monks living in
communities, in simplicity, in a context of assuring the necessary needs
by communal work but even so being freed from the urge of an agenda
or a sense of ”must do”. To heal socially means to heal individually.
And accordingly we have to work hard and privately with individuals
because the salvation of the world is directly and profoundly linked to
the salvation of the individual.
Bishop Emilian NICA (LOVIŞTEANUL)
Christian Freedom and Love in the Life of the

Church and of the People
Abstract
The context of year 2013 being chosen as the “Anniversary Year of
Holy Emperors Constantine and Helen in the Romanian Patriarchate”,
upon the celebration of 1700 years since the promulgation of the Edict
of Milan (313-2013), inspires us to show yet again that God’s love and
freedom manifested in the world through the people and the Church. God
Himself is the source of freedom and love of which we all partake. We
will also depict how love and freedom have been informing the Church
founded by Jesus Christ and the life of Christians. The freedom granted
by the Holy Emperor Constantine the Great to the Christian Church is
based on the love of God and the love of Christians. That is why, together
with his mother, Saint Helen, Constantine built a lot of churches in the
Holy Land, Constantinople and other parts of the Roman Empire.
Keywords:
Christian Freedom and Love, Church, Emperor Constantine the
Great.
The creation of the seen and the unseen world is the manifestation of
the freedom and love of the Holy Trinity: “In the beginning, God created
the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1, ff). The creation of man by God
demonstrates the same freedom and love expressed in the image and the
likeness: “And God said, <<Let us make man in our image and after our
likeness>> (...). And God made man in His image; in the image of God he
made him; male and female He made them” (Genesis 1, 26-27).
About creation, Nikolai Berdyaev writes: “Creation can not be
separated from freedom. Only the free creates. Freedom is the reason
without reason of existence and it is deeper than any existence”1. He also
shows that “In the creative act of love the creative secret of the loved one
is revealed. The lover sees the face of the loved one through the cover of
the natural world, through the scale that covers any face”2.
Therefore, the creation of the first people, Adam and Eve, means an
experience of freedom and divine love outside the Holy Trinity. The fall
of the first people is also an expression of the freedom of choice between
good and evil (cf. Genesis 2, 17; 3, 6); so does Cain’s attitude towards
his brother Abel show man’s choice to sin or not. After this bad evildeed,
God asks Cain, “Why are you angry and why is your face downcast?” If
you do well, will not your countenance be lifted up? And if you do not do
well, sin is crouching at the door; and its desire is for you, but you must
master it! (Genesis 4, 6-7).
The people of Israel experienced in Egypt the sufferings of
bondage and the joys of freedom when leaving the foreign land through
the entreaties of Moses and Aaron before God (Exodus 5, 16). Another
episode from the Old Testament that shows man’s freedom of expression,
as well as his freedom of obedience to God is the work of the prophet
Elijah the Tishbite. Elijah’s faith and hope that God will help him prove
His existence made the sacrifice brought by him to be well received. The
fire of God’s love consumes Elijah’s sacrifice, revealing once again that
He is the Creator of the seen and the unseen world.
In the New Testament, man regains his freedom through the
incarnation and sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Heaven and earth are united by
the sign of the Holy Cross, the altar for the sacrifice of the Son of God
and the symbol of freedom and love crucified for man’s liberation from
the bondage of sin and death. God does not force anyone to love and
obey Him. But many were those who expressed their gratitude for the
gifts received from Him. The Son of God became incarnate of the Virgin
Mary after she, following the conversation with the Archangel Gabriel,
freely accepts that “the Holy Spirit would come upon her and the power
1
Nikolai Berdyaev, Sensul Creaţiei, Bucharest, Humanitas Publishing House, 1992, pp. 142-143.
2
Ibidem, p. 201.
of the Most High would overshadow her”: “Behold the handmaid of the
Lord. Be it done unto me according to your word” (Luke 1, 38).
The coming or the incarnation of the Lord meant the release from
old age of Righteous Simeon, when he welcomed Him into the temple:
“Lord, as you have promised, let Thy servant depart in peace, according
to Thy word; for my eyes have seen Your salvation, which You have
prepared in the sight of all nations; A light to lighten the Gentiles, and
the glory of your people Israel” (Luke 2, 29-32). The Nativity of the Lord
(cf. Genesis, chapter 3), the Assumption of a human body, the Baptism
(cf. Matthew 3, 14-15), the Transfiguration (Matthew 17, 1-9), the
Crucifixion (John, chapter 19), Death and Resurrection (John, chapter
20) are divine-human events and works that Jesus Christ accepted freely
to free us from death and sin.
In the face of death, the Saviour prays: “My Father, if it be possible,
let this cup pass from me! But not as I will, but as thou wilt.” (Matthew 26,
39) Freedom in obedience and love shows how the human will follows
the divine will, in harmony with God the Father. The true freedom of man
is seen in the light of the Incarnation, Death and Resurrection of Jesus
Christ, as St. Paul says: “Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith
Christ hath made us free, and do not be entangled again with the yoke of
bondage” (Galatians 5, 1). He further explains: “For he that is called in
the Lord, being a servant, is the Lord’s free man. Likewise, also he that
is called, being free, is Christ’s servant” (I Corinthians 7, 22).
The Saviour said about Himself, “I am the way, the truth and the
life” (John 14, 6), and knowing the truth means freedom in Christ: “...If
you abide by my word, you are truly my disciples; and you will know the
truth, and the truth shall set you free” (John 8, 31-32). In addition to the
works of Jesus Christ on His person, there are also his works of charity,
to restore the people, always done with their free consent. God respects
human freedom in love and humility, because freedom also means
responsibility. But time will come when God, because He created man to
be free, will have His freedom, judging people with justice and equity.
The freedom, the love and the faith of people make possible Jesus
Christ’s healing work, the setting straight and resurrection of those
affected: the healing of a leper (Matthew 8, 2-4); of the centurion’s servant
(Matthew 8, 5-13); of the demoniacs (Matthew 8, 16); of the paralytic
at Capernaum (Matthew 9, 2); the resurrection of Jairus’ daughter (Luke
8, 41-56); the healing the man born blind (John 9, 1-38); the Raising of
Lazarus (John 11, 1-45), etc.
Wilt thou be made whole? The Saviour repeatedly asked the sick.
The Lord, therefore, respects human freedom, man’s desire to be healed
and to believe that He is the Son of God. It appears from the above that
love is the content of freedom; love is the freedom of the new Adam, the
freedom of the eighth day of creation. Christ the Saviour has given us
freedom in goodness, in love, in truth, that is, gracious freedom. We are
free to follow Him or not: “Whoever wishes to come after Me, let him
deny himself and take up his cross and follow Me” (Mark 8, 34). Only
those who wish so will follow Him, no one is bound to it.
Nikolai Berdyaev wrote that:
“Without Christ – the Redeemer, the world would have

remained for ever under the spell of necessity and determinism
would have always been right. Determinism is completely
overcome only in Christ – the Redeemer (...). Freedom
without Christ – the Redeemer is the freedom of the old
Adam, freedom without love, the freedom of the seven days
of creation”3. “Bondage forever follows to unfaithfulness to
God, to disobedience to Him, while liberation forever follows
to conversion, to repentance (...). And because only the Son of
God who became Man can liberate man from sin and death and
can give him the power to become the Son of God by the grace
of the Holy Spirit, there is no Christian theology of freedom
than starting from Christ and towards communion with Him”4.
Jesus Christ, our Saviour, was also faced with a free choice when
He was tempted by Satan in the wilderness (Matthew 4:1-10) and He
3
Ibidem, p. 148.
4
† Daniel, Patriarch of the Romanian Orthodox Church, Comori ale Ortodoxiei, Iaşi, Trinitas
chose to serve God, just like in the face of death, He had to choose freely
(cf. Matthew 26, 39):
“... To accept the love for the Father to survive, or to

accept death; or, in another version, to use all His power and
destroy the enemy to save His own life. Given this freedom to
choose, Jesus chose the love for the Father, in spite of death,
and refuses to give up the love for the enemy: “Father, forgive
them, for they do not know what they are doing” (Luke 23, 34)
[...] However, Christ’s perfect love for God and for the people
sets Him free to ask the Father all he wishes, to be sympathetic
to the sinners, the humiliated and the marginalized, to forgive
them, but also to confront and combat pride, hypocrisy and
injustice of those who put their trust in themselves”5.
In Christ the Resurrected, man is free to live forever and fully,

that is, in soul and body, after the Common Resurrection. The Apostles
who abided in the love of Christ enjoyed the experience of the Holy
Spirit in their life and their work, after the Pentecost. The Apostle Paul
himself declares that: “Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty”
(II Corinthians 3, 17).
“Freedom in its most authentic form is the freedom

to communion (...). Freedom that the Holy Spirit brings in
man translates into the familiarity established between man
and God, through their mutual spiritual indwelling (inner
being), but keeping at the same time, the radical distinction of
fundamentally distinct creature of his Creator, but not separate
from Him”6.
“The Spirit blows where it wills,” and this means that the grace of
God works in people if allowed, even if it does not find an opening, all
for the benefit of man. That is why the Apostles followed Christ the Lord
5
Ibidem, pp. 73-74.
6
Ibidem, pp. 62-63.
freely; after they received the Holy Spirit, it freed them from anxiety and
fear (which they had experienced during the Passion of Christ), turning
them from weak people into powerful servants, without fear of anything
in this world. Here we can see how freedom is used as a choice that can
lead man either to transfiguration or to disfigurement (dehumanization),
to the likeness of God or to alienation from Him. The church founded by
Jesus Christ is in itself a “school of freedom”.
The Sacraments (Baptism, Chrismation, Eucharist, Confession,
Ordination, Marriage, and Holy Unction), the sanctifying and healing
grace, are received by free choice, no one being forced to accept them.
Each Sacrament represents a new experience of the communion with
God, a free acknowledgment of the aid that comes from Him in order to
gain eternal life. Especially in the Sacrament of Penance, one can see the
free acknowledgment of the sins that alienate us from God.
About “freeing the Spirit from sins, from slavery, from bondage,
the bondage of the senses, about freeing the Spirit from the human
wisdom, the freedom to fully know God”7 wrote the Pope and Patriarch
Shenouda III. The most important freedom is that without sin, the
freedom to not sin. Fasting is also an exercise of free will, of considering
that the surrounding reality is not the limit and the purpose of our earthly
life. Fasting frees us from the material constraints of this fleeting world
and, together with prayer, it helps to overcome the barriers between God
and ourselves.
Prayer frees the soul and the human body from distress, coercion,
sin and helplessness. Prayer elevates man above this world, because
the love of prayer is directed to infinity, eternity, God. St. Paul says:
“Brethren, you were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to
indulge the flesh; rather, serve one another in love” (Galatians 5, 13).
In the Tradition of the Church, we can see how Christians use
their freedom in expressing their love of God, the fulfilment of freedom
in the world resulting from achieving the “Blessing Program”. Thus,
we can speak of freedom and responsibility in local, autocephalous
churches; in family and monasticism; in the lives of the sufferers and
7
Shenouda III, Eliberarea Duhului, Bucharest, Bizantină Publishing House, 2005.
martyrs; at the Ecumenical Councils; in the lives of the Saints (such
as St. Stephen the Great, St. Prince Constantine Brâncoveanu, St.
Hierarch Martyr Antim Ivireanul, etc.) and even in the acts that led to
separations in the Church: the Schism of 1054, the reforms of Calvin,
Luther, etc.
Here, the words of the Apostle Peter are helpful: “Live as free
men, but do not use freedom as a cover-up for evil” (I Peter 2, 16). The
gift of freedom must be cherished by every man, because the same Spirit
dwells in every baptized person who remains in the Church and hopes
for God’s love and His Kingdom. The inner freedom that comes from the
Holy Spirit gives us the power to forgive and be forgiven, to reconcile
with God and our fellowmen. This freedom is built on truth, faith, justice
and love, in this way we can gain freedom.
This is why “the value of our freedom is measured according to
the fruits of our good deeds committed freely and responsibly”8. The
Holy Fathers of the Church, and many other scholars and writers have
shown the importance of freedom and its use in life. St. John Chrysostom
said: “Freedom of choice is the force that drives us. We are not under
the necessity of fate, as many like to believe. Good and evil are found
within the limits of what we see or do not want to do. This is why God
has promised us His kingdom and threatened us with His punishment”9.
Writing about the freedom of the soul, Ilarion Felea asserts that,
“the man who is completely free is holy, a hero of moral and spiritual
perfection”10. He also writes:
“Among all virtues, holy love is the sign of supreme

freedom (...). Religious, social and cultural life is based on
freedom (...). Without free will and free conscience, religion,
culture, society and the state would represent only force and
tyranny, and thus they would lose any moral justification, and
man would lose the title and the dignity of religious, rational,
8
† Daniel, Bishop of Moldova and Bukovina, Dăruire şi Dăinuire – Raze şi chipuri de lumină
din istoria şi spiritualitatea românilor, Iaşi, Trinitas Publishing House, 2005, p. 400.
9
Apud Ilarion Felea, Religia Iubirii, Runc Monastery Publishing House, 1992, p. 253.
10
Ibidem, p. 249.
social and ethical being and would go down to animals’ level
who live on instinct, without conscience”11.
In another work of his, Despre sclavia şi libertatea omului [On

Slavery and Human Freedom], Nikolai Berdyaev shows how “the free
man does not run from responsibilities”12. Eschatologically speaking,
“only after man will perfect what is in line with his vocation, there will be
a second coming of Christ, there will be a new heaven and a new earth: the
kingdom of freedom”13. Metropolitan Antonie Plămădeală highlighted in
his work, Tradiţie şi libertate în spiritualitatea ortodox [Tradition and
Freedom in Orthodox Spirituality], the experience of freedom in the
New Testament, in Church, through virtues, through monastic vocation,
through prayer and service in the spirit of the gospel and of Eastern
Tradition. In his work On Liberty, John Stuart Mill points out that “the
struggle between liberty and authority is the most conspicuous feature in
the portion of history with which we are earliest familiar, particularly in
that of Greece, Rome and England”14. He also mentions “the liberty of
the press as a security against corrupt or tyrannical government”15.
For modern people, losing freedom is easier because there are so
many paths to addiction: TV, Internet, phone, drugs, alcohol, etc. We
find, together with Paul Evdokimov, that today “the secular man feels
God as an enemy of liberty”16; nevertheless, “the thirst for true freedom
is the hunger for the Holy Spirit who makes us free without measure”17.
Virgiliu Gheorghe wrote about these weapons threatening our life
in his book Ştiinţa şi războiul sfârşitului lumii [Science and the End of
the World War]18. Breaking free of the spell of the media world, of images
11
Ibidem, p. 251.
12
Nikolai Berdyaev, Despre sclavia şi libertatea omului, Oradea, Antaios Publishing
House, p. 73.
13
Ibidem, p. 263.
14
John Stuart Mill, Despre libertate, Bucharest, Humanitas Publishing House, 1994, p. 7.
15
Ibidem, p. 24.
16
Paul Evdokimov, Iubirea nebună a lui Dumnezeu, Bucharest, Anastasia Publishing House, p. 143.
17
Ibidem, p. 158.
18
Virgiliu Gheorghe, Ştiinţa şi războiul sfârşitului lumii. Faţa nevăzută a tele-viziunii,
Bucharest, Prodromos Publishing House, 2007.
and illusions, of the media that defines attitudes, shapes (disfigures)
behaviours, decides what is good and worthy, is necessary in order to
think freely, without the pressure of sick illusions. Let us guard our mind
and heart against TV and computer.
St. Augustine said, “Love and do what you want!” because the
man who truly loves, only does what he needs to stay always on the
path of holy love. He who loves recognizes only the freedom in God.
We conclude this brief presentation of Christian liberty with the realistic
words of Ernest Bernea from the chapter “Liberties and Freedom”:
“For centuries man has suffered and struggled for

freedom: freedom of conscience, of act, freedom for the gifts
of beauty and of faith. A futility as high as the mountain of
life. Man lives unbelievably intensely all the liberties of his
fallen self: freedom of lust, of lying, of laziness and theft, the
freedom of all sins, freedom that destroys, that changes life into
a swamp where only poisonous plants grow. This is because
the man did not understand and did not do anything to gain true
freedom, which is an absolute condition of humanity. Freedom
can only be found in your heart. Do not look around you for
what you have in you. Shatter the stone that covers the gold.
Freedom is a gift of God. Freedom can only be inner, can only
be creation; freedom is power open to the blooming meadows
of God. When there is a man of conscience and mission,
there will be freedom. In this case, freedom is not something
formal and relative, it is something essential and absolute, that
surrounds the true human being, in his acts and in his mind, in
the feelings that flow through him, freedom is a way of life and
of perfection, it is a condition of spirituality and a sign of man
in his highest purposes”19.
As regards “Christian love,” divine and human, this is the

outpouring of the merciful love of the Holy Trinity over the world and
the people. We can speak about “the Love of the Father that crucifies, the
19
Ernest Bernea, Îndemn la simplitate, Bucharest, Anastasia Publishing House, 1995, pp. 17-18.
Love of the Son that crucifies itself and the Love of the Holy Spirit that
triumphs defeating the cross. This is how God loved the world!”20. “Only
silence can make us understand the word of St. Maximus the Confessor:
God’s love and human love are the two sides of a total love”21.
Therefore, the counsel of the Holy Trinity was in the light of
externalized love for sharing the intra-Trinity love for man (cf. Genesis
1, 26) in whom it set Their image. It is for love of man, even after the
fall, that God has not left him forgotten and in loneliness, but promised a
Redeemer (cf. Genesis 3, 15). The people of Israel and many of His elect
(Abraham, Moses, Aaron, David, Solomon, Job, Elijah, etc.) had the joy
of knowing God’s love through shared discovery to gain eternal life.
When the time came, God the Father has revealed His infinite
love towards people, as St. John the Evangelist defined theologically
the meaning of the beauty of divine love: “For God so loved the world
that He gave His one and only Son, that whoever believes in Him
shall not perish, but have eternal life” (John 3, 16). Love is the basis
of the Incarnation of the Son of God, as He tells and bids us: “A new
commandment I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you
must love one another” (John 13, 34).
Christ’s love creatively pours over the world, and He expects us
to be like Him: “By this everyone will know that you are my disciples,
if you love one another” (John 13, 35). And on the sacrifice of the cross,
Christ the Saviour says, “Greater love has no one than this: to lay down
his life for his friends” (John 15, 13).
Hence the Holy Evangelist John emphasizes the Lord’s words:
“Hereby we perceive the love of God: because He laid down His life for
us. And we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren” (I John 3, 16).
He also tells us how to love: “Dear children, let us not love with words or
speech, but with actions and in truth. This is how we know that we belong
to the truth and how we set our hearts at rest in His presence.” (I John 3,
18-19). By healing the multitudes of people, through their resurrection, the
Saviour showed His merciful love for the humanity in suffering.
20
Melchisedec Ştefănescu, Cuvinte din cuvânt. Omilii inedite, Roman, Filocalia Publishing
House, 2011, p. 136.
21
Paul Evdokimov, op. cit., p. 40.
The Passion and the crucifixion forever show the longsuffering love
of the Son of God: “Father, forgive them for they do not know what they
are doing” (Luke 23, 34); even in the face of death, Christ demonstrates,
in forgiveness, the power of sacrificial love. He also forgives Judas and
Peter out of love verified by pain (cf. John 13). Thus we understand that
the Kingdom of God is love and freedom.
The beloved disciple St. John remains together with Virgin Mary
by the cross, but the time will come when all the disciples will sacrificially
love Christ, as St. Paul says: “Who shall separate us from the love of
Christ? Shall trouble or hardship or persecution or famine or nakedness
or danger or sword? (...) neither death, nor life, neither angels (...), nor
anything else in all creation will be able to separate us from the love of
God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 8, 35, 38, 39). In the same
context of perfect and selfless love, St. Paul wrote to the Corinthians
about love (I Corinthians 13), its fruit and its goods: “Love never fails
(...). And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. And the greatest
of these is love.” (I Corinthians 13, 8, 13)
Love is the main virtue of the saints, for they have suffered out of
love, they have led a rough life and received martyrdom, following to the
command of Christ our Saviour: “Whoever has my commandments and
keeps them, is the one who loves Me. And the one who loves Me, will be
loved by my Father, and I too will love them and show Myself to them”
(John 14, 21).
The saints have cultivated the Christian love of which the Apostle
Paul says: “Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to
love one another” (Romans 13, 8). If the world were ruled by love, there
would not be so many wars, crimes, poverty, strife, injustice, envy, pride,
hate, indifference, but a normal life in God. Love is the gift of the Holy
Spirit and every Christian should love God, his neighbour and himself
following the advice of Jesus Christ our Saviour: “Love the Lord your
God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.
Love your neighbour as yourself” (Matthew 22, 37-39).
This Christian love, on the one hand, begets virtues: kindness,
gentleness, dignity, humility, compassion, faith, justice, faithfulness,
hope, patience, and, on the other hand, it prevents greed, envy, lust,
malice, selfishness. In this sense we utter the Prayer of St. Ephrem: “O
Lord and Master of my life, a spirit of idleness, despondency, ambition
and idle talking give me not. But rather the spirit of chastity, humble-
mindedness, patience and love bestow upon me. So, O lord and King,
grant me to see my failings and not condemn my brother. For blessed art
Thou unto the ages of ages. Amen” (Horologion).
In his book Dragostea. Tâlcuire la Rugăciunea Sfântului Efrem
Sirul [Love. Interpretation of the Prayer of St. Ephrem], Archimandrite
Seraphim Alexiev shows that:
“There are many grounds for us to love God, but the

main ones are two: the inexpressible love of God for us and the
great blessings that the Heavenly Father is pleased to bestow
upon us every day [...] Love is of divine essence, it is above
the tongues of men and of angels, shining above the gifts of
prophecy, it is reflected above any Sacrament, it is superior to
any science, it is the absolute Faith and the infinite Hope, it is
above the Kingdom and the sacred world of the Sacrifice is
above all sacrifice”22.
In His endless love, God wants us with Him, “The biblical God
loves us with zealous love, wants us whole: the universal love is fulfilled
unhindered when God becomes «all in all»”23. Therefore, God loves
everybody: “He causes the sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends
rain on the righteous and the unrighteous” (Matthew 5, 45).
God’s love restores people, just like it restored Apostle Peter after
he denied Christ the Lord three times: “Simon, son of Jonah, do you love
Me more than these? Yes, Lord, he said, you know that I love you. Jesus
said: Feed my lambs” (John 21, 15-17). Much has been written about
love, love is often sung in poems, because love moves the soul: “Love is
22
Archimandrite Serafim Alexiev, Dragostea. Tâlcuirea la Rugăciunea Sfântului Efrem
Sirul, Bucharest, Editura Sofia Publishing House, 2007, p. 15.
23
Paul Evdokimov, op. cit., p. 46.
the heart together with the heart”24.
Often, we love those who love us and hate those who are our
enemies, but we must learn the attitude of Jesus Christ, who says: “Love
your enemies, pray for those who persecute you” (Matthew 5, 44). St.
Maximus the Confessor, in 400 Capete despre dragoste [400 Chapters
on Love], describes the merciful and the sacrificial love of God and the
thankful love of man.
Let us conclude with the words of the same Ernest Bernea, a
deeply Christian writer who also wrote about love, about how it should
be understood and put into action:
“Love first. Man is alone and poor, a running echo

among the rocks of a mountain. Man is sad, a stray and weak
being, orphan of the divine gifts. Poor of meaning and joy,
open door to all kneeling. Good man, put love first in your
mind and in your acts! Love first. Not insatiable love, love
of wealth, of women, of power, of authority, but the love of
beauty, of light, of truth, love that is comfort, support and
creation. Not the love that asks, wants for itself, but the love
that gives, that feeds another. No the love of the desolate soul,
but that of the overflowing soul. Love is the key of the moment
and of eternity. Love wipes out the ugliness – the ugliness of
loneliness; it melts the evil – the evil of darkness; it dissolves
patterns and borders, drives away adversities; everywhere, it
brings about a new and freeing being. Love breeds and matures
the fruit, transforms and elevates the soul; through love, the
divine image plays the lights of fire on waters in the world of
our pains. Where there is no love, the darkness and the ugliness
are masters; where there is no love, pride, envy, injustice and all
the sides of human stupidity are blooming. The man who does
not love, does not understand anything in the world of visible
and hidden things. The voice of wonders is completely silent.
Where there is no love, there is no deep knowledge. It is human
nature to overcome by love. Incarnate God has revealed to us a
24
Jose Ortega Y Gasset, Studii despre iubire, Bucharest, Humanitas Publishing House, 1995,
p. 16.
new world, the truth, the life and the power through love. Man
is man by the power of his love. Love a tree, a flower, a child, a
woman, love the hard ground and the arched blue sky; love all,
images and meanings, all: play, song, light, game and cosmic
harmony; and especially, love man, your brethren, good or bad,
strong or weak; love God with tenfold your power over your
sinful being. One who does not love, does not have senses; all
windows, from the blade of grass to the star that flashes in the
quiet distance, are closed. Love reveals and grows the grain of
good and beauty that we bear in our hearts. Love first. Love the
makes the cherry blossom, that grows the baby, that feeds the
hungry, that comforts the crucified, God’s love for His creation.
So comes peace, true peace, the peace of heaven and eternal
life. The ground is soft under your step, light like the flight of
pure thoughts; man, the light grows and flourishes on the lips,
the eyes, the sky of the wonders put there by the finger of God.
When you start to be human, know that love is the first virtue, it
is a sign of liberation. Your song is drowning without love and
your hand fumbles. Find the core of life. It is in you!”25.
In conclusion, without love there is no freedom, and without

freedom love can not grow, regardless of religion, society or era; in the
Church of Jesus Christ, love and freedom relate to eternal life.
25
Ernest Bernea, op. cit. pp. 69-71.
Tiziano SALVATERRA
Etica cristiana e liberta’ economia: quale

dialettica
Abstract
Il tema ci introduce in un campo delicato ed impegnativo: quello
del rapporto fra etica ed economia ed in particolare fra l’etica cristiana
cioè l’applicazione del messaggio evangelico all’economia che in
questi ultimi decenni stà diventando il punto di riferimento della vita
delle persone, in particolare nelle società cosi dette avanzate.
Keywords:
etica cristiana, economia, quadro macroeconomico, campo
economico.
1. Introduzione
La complessità deriva dal fatto che il mondo delle’economia
ha subito forti accelerazioni nel corso del tempo fino a diventare una
complessa macchina che di fatto coinvolge tutti i territori e tutte le
comunità
a) a livello macro cioè nell’ambito dello sviluppo
b) a livello di organizzazioni economiche fra cui le imprese
c) a livello d singolo cittadino sempre più coinvolto nella sfera
del’economia che tende a invadere tutta la sfera dell’esperienza umana.
In questo ampio spettro di azione il pensiero cristiano è ancora
in grado di esprimere una sua posizione ovvero deve rassegnarsi ad
essere semplice comparsa che si manifesta più nelle intenzioni e nelle
proclamazioni della predicazione,nelle riflessioni dei convegni e delle
riviste, incapace di esprimersi in comportamenti coerenti, azioni virtuose
in grado di testimoniare la possibilità d coniugare l’azione economica
con i principi evangelici mostrando cosi la possibilità di una coerenza
del cristiano nel proprio agire economico? Ed ancora è possibile una
dialettica fra l’agire economico e d il rispetto del messaggio evangelico in
una società complessa d articolata dove la dimensione economica sembra
essere preponderante rispetto a quella culturale, sociale, istituzionale?
Queste domande trovano oggi risposte diversificate ed articolate.
a. Chi pensa che non vi sia una possibile convivenza fra azione
economica e messaggio cristiano, che i due ambiti sono troppo distanti
fra di loro per poter essere conciliati, in quanto la vita economica deve
essere libera di agire secondo regole proprie che garantiscono sviluppo
e crescita infinita che porta cosi vantaggio a tutti e non può soggiacere a
valori, regole, principi che ne ostacolano la libertà come quelli posti dal
vangelo che parla di solidarietà, bene comune, fratellanza quando invece
il sistema economico raggiunge il suo massimo risultato quando riesce a
massimizzare il proprio profitto, a rendere efficienti le organizzazioni, a
massimizzare l’utilità per un numero maggiore di persone. Al massimo
si può ipotizzare che alla fine i risultati conseguiti possono avere un
qualche riscontro convergente con il pensiero cristiano.
b. Dall’altra vi sono coloro che pongono il dito sul fatto che
l’economia abbia un ruolo eccessivo nella comunità piccole e grandi,
dove tutto dipende dalle azioni economiche che si sviluppano sul
territorio, che è opportuno che l’uomo si fermi e rifletta sulle cose che
contano, sugli elementi ultimi per cui anche l’economia deve diventare
relativa rispetto ad altre componenti dell’esperienza come il pensiero, la
meditazione, la spiritualità.
c. Altri ancora ritengono che non è pensabile uno sviluppo illimitato
che di fatto genera disuguaglianze, povertà, vantaggi per pochi a scapito
di molti. Questi autori sostengono che è giunto il momento di fermarsi e
riprendere la rotta prima che sia troppo tardi e che il mondo si distrugga
da solo. Ciò indipendentemente dal fatto che questo comporti una
decrescita che tuttavia renda l’uomo più sereno, cercando di sostituire
l’avidità dell’avere con la serenità dell’essere. Per cui il Prodotto interno
lordo non rappresenta la misura del livello di benessere complessivo
ma solo di quello economico e che ci possono essere altri indicatori che
permetto di comprendere i livelli di benessere dei una comunità e le sue
evoluzioni nel tempo.
d. Infine vi è chi crede che sia possibile coniugare il pensiero
cristiano con l’esperienza economica sia nella governance, nella vita
delle comunità piccole e grandi, nei sistemi di impresa e nell’esperienza
personale. Il messaggio evangelico secondo questa impostazione contiene
elementi in grado di garantire adeguati livelli di vita in una logica di
miglioramento contino e di innovazione capaci di coniugare efficacia
(cioè la massimizzazione dell’Utilità) con efficienza e cioè l’utilizzo
razionale delle risorse dove le dinamiche economiche sono al servizio
del’uomo in tutte le sue dimensioni e di tutti gli uomini
La vastità del campo di indagine impone di fare delle scelte
cercando di evitare di essere troppo generici ma al contempo in grado di
dare una panoramica delle tematiche che investono il rapporto fra etica
ed economia.
Si è pertanto deciso di:
- approfondire solo l’approccio legato al rapporto fra etica cristiana
e libertà economica.
- di approfondire il tema sui tre livelli nei quali si manifesta
l’esperienza economica:
a. il quadro macroeconomico che caratterizza le comunità presenti
sul territorio.
b. Le organizzazioni economiche quali aziende, municipalizzate,
consorzi, reti aziendali.
c. La complessa ed articolata natura dei contenti ha suggerito
di non appesantire il testo con note e riferimenti bibliografici (che
sarebbero stati decisamente numerosi) preferendo mettere in bibliografia
i riferimenti essenziali per ogni paragrafo.
d. Il cittadino come soggetto che vive in mezzo ad esigenze e
stimoli economici alcuni indispensabili altri indotti altri voluti al quale
la comunità chiede un contributo di partecipazione almeno attraverso
l’esperienza lavorativa.
Molti sono gli autori ed i testi che affrontano le tematiche affrontate
nel primo paragrafo e cioè agli aspetti macroeconomici ed al loro legame
con gli aspetti etici. Gli autori più riconosciuti sono:
- A. Sen che in numerosi lavori affronta il tema dello sviluppo, il
rapporto etica ed economia, il rapporto fra il nord ed il sud del mondo;
- Z. Bauman la cui pregevole e numerose pubblicazioni
affrontano le principali questioni del nostro tempo non solo nel campo
dell’economia ma anche sul piano sociologico ed antropologico;
- S. Latouche ideatore della filosofia della decrescita intesa come
ripensamento dei modelli di sviluppo attuali e delle modalità di utilizzo
delle risorse;
- J. E. Stiglitz profondo conoscitore delle dinamiche della
globalizzazione e delle sue conseguenze per le diverse nazioni;
- E. Severino filosofo fra i più riconosciuti a livello internazionale
che ha studiato la crisi del mondo occidentale ed in essa del sistema
capitalistico;
- S. Zamagni economista che da anni si occupa dell’apporto che
il sistema no profit porta nella costruzione della ricchezza e di come sia
possibile pensare una economia che stà dalla parte della persona e delle
comunità;
- B. M. Friedman che si è occupato del rapporto fra sviluppo ed
etica verificando lo stretto legame fra i due approcci e le conseguenze
positive rispetto alla crescita.
Nei siti che propongono la vita e le opere degli autori sopra
ricordati si può trovare la vasta pubblicistica ed i relativi riferimenti
bibliografici. Di seguito sono presentati alcuni riferimenti che non
esauriscono l’approfondimento ma ne forniscono solo gli elementi
principali. Si citano i riferimenti delle edizioni italiane ma di quasi tutti
i testi indicati (anche nei paragrafi successivi) vi è anche l’edizione in
inglese che rappresenta per molti l’edizione originale1.
1
Z. Bauman, Postmodern Ethics, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford, UK, 1993; J. E. Stiglitz,
Il prezzo della disuguaglianza, Einaudi Torino, 2012; S. Latouche, Per un’abbondanza
frugale, Bollati Boringhieri, Torino 2012; B. J. Friedman, Il valore etico della crescita,
Università Bocconi Editore, Milano 2005; L. Bruni, S. Zamagni, Economia Civile.
Efficienza, equità, felicità pubblica, Il Mulino, Bologna 2005; E. Severino, Capitalismo
senza futuro, Rizzoli, Milano 2012; A. Sen, Etica ed Economia, Il Mulino, Bologna 1988.
2. Il quadro macroeconomico
Sul piano macroeconomico il nostro tempo è caratterizzato da una
visione mondiale dell’esperienza umana dove il sistema economico
prima ancora di quello sociale e culturale, si manifesta in ogni dove
proponendo con forza ed insistenza i propri prodotti e servizi e trovando
nel consumo l’alimento alla produzione e di conseguenza allo “sviluppo”
del territorio.
Questo fenomeno con il quale tutti noi dobbiamo fare i conti è
dovuto alle numerose scoperte scientifiche ed alle attività di ricerca
che caratterizzano il nostro tempo che ha offerto al sistema produttivo
occasioni per individuare nuovi prodotti, nuovi servizi supportati da
una eccellente tecnologia che riesce a costruire beni strumentali che a
loro volta contribuiscono alla produzione di beni di consumo. Queste
innovazioni hanno di fatto eliminato il concetto di spazio tanto che
oggi la comunicazione raggiunge in tempo reale ogni dove ed anche
il trasporto dei beni e delle persone ha subito una accelerazione senza
precedenti. Basti pensare agli strumenti di comunicazione come i
cellulari che invadono tutte le nazioni oppure ad internet e a tutte le
sue applicazioni che stanno trasformando le relazioni fra le persone.
Le imprese che producono questi beni hanno raggiunto dimensioni
molto elevate sul piano multinazionale tanto da riuscire a condizionare
pesantemente la vita delle nazioni generando bisogni indotti che non
sempre si accompagnano con i livelli di sviluppo. La responsabilità etica
di queste imprese è elevata in quanto hanno la possibilità di condizionare
la vita delle comunità ed indurre le persone ad assumere comportamenti
lontani dalla loro cultura e dalla loro sensibilità e necessità
Un secondo elemento che ha caratterizzato la globalizzazione è dato
dalla finanza e dall’attività finanziaria attraverso le borse internazionali
e la gestione finanziaria delle imprese. Nata come strumento di
capitalizzazione delle imprese, le borse sono diventate occasioni di
speculazione e di lotta economica fra i colossi dell’economia mondiale
condizionando pesantemente le economie delle nazioni specie quelle più
deboli. La finanza ha condizionato e condiziona i tassi di interesse ed
attraverso essi il costo del debito pubblico oltre a generare speculazioni
(con le plusvalenze) o la crisi (in caso di minus valenze) degli operatori
e delle organizzazioni economiche che rischiano i propri capitali o quelli
a prestito in azioni finanziarie azzardate. Oggi la finanza sembra aver
perso il suo ruolo originale diventando di fatto un settore economico fra
i più influenti, tradendo la mission che da sempre gli è stata affidata e
generando condizionamenti pesanti che nulla hanno anche vedere con
una morale legata alla persona ed alla sua valorizzazione. Da strumento
alla vita economica il suo assaggio verso settore economico complesso
integrato nel mondo ed in mano a poche persone ha portato questo
comparto in una zona grigia più al servizio del capitale che allo sviluppo
dell’attività economica.
E cosi il denaro reale o virtuale di fatto rappresenta il nuovo
dio del mondo, sostituendo il mondo religioso nelle sue articolate
manifestazioni territoriali, ed assurgendo ad elemento centrale nella vita
delle persone, protese alla ricerca della ricchezza come strumento che
garantisce qualità della vita e benessere. L’uomo occidentale per primo
ma nel tempo l’uomo planetario nel denaro la risposta a tutte le domande
della vita pensando che la dimensione umana sia esclusivamente quel la
economica e che le altre dimensioni dell’uomo siano a lei assoggettate.
Ne consegue che l’uomo pur di avere denaro in possesso è disponibile
a compiere atti altrimenti considerati poco seri o non opportuni; alla
convinzione che il denaro rappresenta la giusta corresponsione del lavoro
si sostituiscono nuove concezioni come quella secondo cui il denaro
può essere dato dalla fortuna attraverso il gioco (centinaia di miliardi
di giocate all’anno in Europa), l’inganno, la truffa, il traffico di prodotti
proibiti, la messa sul mercato del proprio corpo.
Se il denaro risulta determinante nelle transazioni altrettanto
decisiva è la qualità dei prodotti e dei servizi offerti. Quotidianamente
vengono diffuse notizie (positive da parte delle imprese, spesso negative
da parte delle associazione di consumatori) sulle caratteristiche dei
beni messi sul mercato, sulla loro composizione, sulle materie prime
utilizzate, sui tempi e le modalità di conservazione, sui prezzi praticati,
sulla correttezza amministrativa nel passaggi tra un operatore e l’altro.
Per quanto riguarda i servizi offerti al pubblico non sempre è facile
comprendere la qualità delle modalità di erogazione (ad esempio nella
sanità o nell’assistenza) le caratteristiche del servizio offerto (nel mondo
delle assicurazioni) i prezzi praticati (nei sevizi bancari) al punto che il
cittadino si trova in difficoltà nell’esprimere un giudizio sulla bontà di
quanto offerto.
Il sistema sembra realizzare la libertà economica intesa come la
capacità di fare quello che si vuole nella logica che il mercato da solo
è in grado di generare il giusto equilibrio fra i diversi attori della scena
economica evitando l’intervento di terzi in particolare delle istituzioni
con azioni correttive. Da solo il mercato è in grado di garantire lo
sviluppo infinito, la crescita continua nella risposta ai bisogni delle
persone. Questa libertà secondo alcuni studiosi ha garantito lo sviluppo
economico caratterizzato da apertura, intraprendenza, tolleranza,
collaborazioni, mentre altri evidenziano come il cosi detto sviluppo
non ha diminuito la disuguaglianza fra i territori e fra le classi sociali,
ha comportato un utilizzo di risorse immane molte delle quali non
rinnovabili depauperando il territorio e consegnando quindi alle future
generazioni un mondo impoverito. Da parte ci questi studiosi vi è l’invito
a fermarsi a riflettere meglio su cosa sia importante fare in futuro, senza
alcun pregiudizio rispetto al passato ma anche con la convinzione che,
se è necessario, di possono fare anche dei passi indietro in quella che
viene chiamata in maniera simbolica “la decrescita” che non rappresenta
un elemento negativo di ritorno al passato ma una scelta di ridurre le
velocità e di soffermarsi a riflettere sulle conseguenze dei comportamenti
e sulle azioni da compiere per garantire futuro all’umanità
Un’ulteriore questione legata alla vita economica è il suo rapporto
con l’ambiente e l’utilizzo delle risorse naturali: terra, aria ed acqua.
L’inquinamento atmosferico, la gestione dei rifiuti, l’emissione di fumi
la rottura di ecosistemi, l’utilizzo sistematico di territori verdi trasformati
in zone urbane, la deforestazione di zone strategiche e dall’altra
l’imboschimento delle aree di montagna, sono tutte conseguenze di scelte
per lo più economiche ed urbanistiche che di fatto hanno trasformato il
territorio ed alterato l’equilibrio di millenni. Di fronte a queste situazioni
il sistema economico non sembra retrocedere anzi a sua volta utilizza
questi aspetti per costruire nuovi business nella convinzione che ogni
opportunità può essere occasione per avviare un’attività economica.
Certamente il tema non è risolto e non sembra essere sufficiente la
mobilitazione popolare per superare la dialettica fra la qualità del
prodotto e sua utilità da una parte e quantità di scarti prodotti, la loro
natura i problemi legati al loro smaltimento
Tutte le questioni di cui sopra trovano un elemento comune
nel concettosi proprietà e della sua valenza: diritto assoluto o diritto
affievolito ed appiattito sul concettosi bene comune. In altri termini il
bene comune prevale sulla proprietà di un bene ovvero vale il contrario?
La domanda non è di poco conto in quanto qualora prevalga l’assunto
che la proprietà è un diritto assoluto nessuno può privare il proprietario
del bene nemmeno se è determinante per la vita di una comunità. Ne
è esempio la proprietà di un bene fondiario la cui collocazione è situata
lungo un percorso autostradale da costruire. Se è un bene assoluto allora
il proprietario può decidere ciò che vuole fare se invece è un bene
affievolito sarà possibile togliere la proprietà al proprietario a fronte di
un indennizzo. Detto con n esempio forte la risposta è facile; più difficili
sono molte altre situazioni dove non è facile decidere il prevalere
dell’utilità sociale a quella dell’utilità individuale. L’approccio liberista
prevede il prevalere del diritto personale mentre mana mano che i sistemi
sono interventisti la priorità si sposta sul bene comune.
La politica economica è lo strumento di cui si dotano i sistemi
istituzionali per governare i sistemi economici nella loro articolazione di
cui sopra si sono riportati alcuni aspetti significativi per il loro rapporto
con i valori di riferimento e quindi con la dimensione etica. Le azioni
di governo dell’economia si possono sviluppare a livello globale
attraverso gli organismi sovranazionale, europeo attraverso le azioni del
parlamento europeo o la commissione, nazionale da parte dei governi,
regionale, comunale secondo quanto previsto dalla normativa vigente.
Le responsabilità della politica e delle istituzioni in campo economico
sono decisamente elevate anche se non sempre è possibile governare tutti
processi che il sistema economico attiva. L’attenzione delle istituzioni
alla vita economica permette di indirizzare le azioni e le iniziative
che il sistema economico attiva nella logica del bene comune e della
crescita complessiva della comunità ed in particolare nel giusto rapporto
fra economia e cultura e tradizione, economia e dinamiche sociali,
economia e territorio, nella tutela del consumatore e del risparmiatore,
delle persone deboli e povere, nella garanzia dei diritti di cittadinanza.
I dettami costituzionali, la tipologia di governo, le caratteristiche delle
leggi di un territorio influenzano pesantemente gli interventi di politica
economica nel senso di indirizzarla in una o in un’altra direzione. E cosi
si trovano governi fortemente liberistiche lasciano che il mercato guidi
la vita economica senza intervenire in maniera eccessiva mentre altri
sono più interventisti approvando un quadro normativo più rigoroso
soggetto a norme vincolanti si solito a favore della popolazione talvolta
più a favore di particolari categorie sociali.
Nel corso degli ultimi anni accanto alle tradizionali imprese si
sono proposte con successo specie nei paesi avanzati le cosidette imprese
sociali dette anche imprese no profit per il fatto che, a differenza delle
imprese profit, operano nel campo dei servizi alle persone in particolare
a favore dei più deboli in una logica di base sociale allargata fatta sia di
lavoratori che di volontari, non divisione dell’utile che viene accantonato
e la sola remunerazione del lavoro dipendente e non del volontariato
cioè di coloro che operano nell’organizzazione senza remunerazione
animati dalla volontà di offrire un contributo nel dare risposte a bisogni
importanti. Accanto a questa categoria stanno sorgendo le imprese di
comunità organizzazioni non profit che hanno come mission l’animazione
di comunità ed il sostegno alla vita di un territorio attraverso l’offerta di
servizi ritenuti essenziali. Fra queste particolare attenzione meritano le
imprese che si interessano all’animazione culturale giovanile ed adulta.
In questo sintetico quadro di riferimento che ha cercato di tracciare
gli elementi essenziali e le principali questioni che caratterizzano la vita
economica mondiale, occorre chiedersi quale sia il rapporto con l’etica
cristiana che trova nel Vangelo il principale punto di riferimento. Il
pensiero cristiano non può sostituire in toto i valori dell’economia ma
al contempo non è pensabile che la morale cristiana sia estranea alla
vita economica. In particolare porre al centro dell’attenzione l’uomo
tutto l’uomo e tutti gli uomini, la sperimentazione della solidarietà, la
ricerca del bene comune, la salvaguardia del creato, la ricerca del giusto
profitto evitando forme di sfruttamento che vadano contro la dignità
delle persone, diventa una condizione indispensabile che il cristiano che
si interessa alla vita economica deve porre al centro della sua azione al
di sopra dei valori di riferimento e dai fini che il sistema economico
intende perseguire. Ed ancora la valorizzazione da parte dello stato del
principio di sussidiarietà, l’attivazione di politiche che favoriscano la
democrazia economica e non il prevalere di privilegi, la riduzione della
povertà e l’eliminazione di ogni forma di sfruttamento. Sono solo alcuni
degli obiettivi che un’economia orientata al pensiero cristiano deve fare
propri nei comportamenti e nell’organizzazione della propria attività.
Certo la concretizzazione di questi valori non è sempre facile in una
società poliedrica caratterizzata da una grande dinamicità che spesso
impedisce di riflettere sulle ragioni di senso di quanto proposto e di
individuare giudizi sereni di quanto accade o si intende attuare. A ciò
si aggiungano le numerose interdipendenze che i fenomeni economici
hanno fra di loro e con il contesto culturale e sociale al punto che non
sempre è facile distinguere le cause dagli effetti. Per questo non è
sufficiente mantenere fede ai principi al di là dei contesti delle origini
dei fenomeni e delle conseguenze dei comportamenti. Dall’altra non è
nemmeno pensabile di fermarsi alle conseguenze indipendentemente dai
principi ma è necessario porsi nell’ottica della responsabilità che è in
grado di coniugare principi, conseguenze e contesto nella ricerca della
situazione che riesce a meglio comprendere l’equilibrio fra i tre elementi
nell’ottica della mediazione più alta possibile.
Nell’ambito del rapporto fra etica ed impresa l’attenzione viene
posta in modo particolare sulle filosofie nella conduzione aziendale
e sugli strumenti che l’azienda ha a disposizione per raggiungere
obiettivi in linea con la propria mission. In particolare si fa riferimento
all’applicazione della qualità totale come filosofia nella conduzione di
un’azienda ed alla lean come metodologia per la riduzione degli sprechi.
Anche in questo caso i riferimenti bibliografici sono numerosi e
possono essere facilmente rintracciabili nei cataloghi anche on line delle
case editrici che si interessano alle tematiche aziendali2.
3. Etica cristiana e d’impresa

Un secondo livello di riflessione sul rapporto fra libero mercato e
etica cristiana fa riferimento al mondo dell’impresa fulcro del sistema
economico a sua volta sistema complesso che presenta tanti aspetti
rispetto ai quali è necessario assumere decisioni e quindi orientarla in
una direzione o in un’altra a seconda dei valori che ispirano le scelte.
Vi sono almeno 8 ambiti sui quali la vita dell’impresa si confronta
con la morale nell’individuare scelte e assumere decisioni:
a. La definizione della mission dei valori di riferimento e dello
stile aziendale. Ogni impresa deve interrogarsi a quale bisogno intende
dare una risposta, quale è la sua missione all’interno della vita di una
comunità, se questa missione è possibile e quali sono le condizioni per
poterla raggiungere, quali cono i competitors e quali vantaggi a favore
della clientela si pensa di generare rispetto a coloro che già operano sul
mercato. Ma anche quali sono i valori che ispirano la nascita e la vita
dell’azienda, cioè quali sono gli aspetti sui quali si intende puntare, gli
elementi che contano e saranno determinanti nelle scelte che l’azienda
andrà ad assumere nel corso del tempo. Mission e valori vanno a
definire lo stile dell’azienda elemento oggi determinante specialmente
per la visual interna ed esterna di tutti gli stakeholders che a diverso
titolo interagiscono con l’impresa siano essi operatori, fornitori, clienti
attuali e potenziali, l’intera comunità. Il legame di questa componente
con l’etica cristiana è assolutamente centrale. Assumere dei valori che
contrastano con il pensiero cristiano porta fin da subito l’azienda fuori da
un approccio etico compatibile con la fede cristiana.
b. Lo sviluppo organizzativo rappresenta un secondo elemento
che caratterizza ogni organizzazione economica. Con questo termine
2
A titolo puramente esemplificativo si ricordano: R. Kreitner, A. Kinicki, Comportamento
organizzativo, Apogeo, Milano 2013; L. Caporarello, M. Magni, Team Management, SDA
Bocconi, Milano, 2011; M. Amstrong, Come dirigere le persone, Franco Angeli, Milano,
2010; A. Donetti, L’eccellenza nei servizi, Guerini e associati, Milano, 2008; J. P. Womack,
D. T. Jones, Lean Thinking, Guerini e associate, Milano 1997.
si intende il modo in cui la proprietà o il management distribuiscono
ruoli e responsabilità (attraverso l’organigramma ed il funzionigramma)
le norme di comportamento e l’organizzazione dei processi produttivi
(regolamenti interni, procedure) l’utilizzo della tecnologia, i processi di
comunicazione organizzativa interna, le modalità di risolvere i problemi
e di assumere le decisioni, la gestione degli spazi ed in particolare degli
ambienti di lavoro. Sono tutti aspetti volti al miglior utilizzo delle risorse
interne dalle attrezzature ed alle risorse umane nell’ottica di rendere
efficace (cioè adeguata alle richieste) ed efficiente(cioè prodotto con
il minor utilizzo di risorse) il processo produttivo cercando di ridurre
al minimo gli sprechi di tempo, materie prime, il consumo dei beni
strumentali, il numero di errori e di pezzi difettosi. Discorso analogo
vale per le società di servizi dove al posto del prodotto vi è un servizio
alla persona o alle imprese.
c. La valorizzazione delle risorse umane rappresenta un punto
strategico sia della vita aziendale che dell’approccio etico alla produzione
di beni e all’erogazione di servizi. L’operatore rappresenta l’elemento
centrale del processo produttivo; nei suoi confronti l’azienda può assumere
diversi atteggiamenti: di sfruttamento, di utilizzo o di valorizzazione.
Quest’ultima accezione parte dal principio inderogabile che l’uomo e
la donna sono valori assoluti la cui collaborazione attiva rappresenta
elemento strategico per l’interessato e per l’impresa in una logica di
partecipazione per cui fra impresa ed operatore non vi è contrapposizione
di interessi ma convergenza di interessi. Da qui l’importanza della
motivazione, della professionalizzazione, dei riconoscimenti e della
valutazione dialogata delle prestazioni e dei comportamenti in un’ottica
di miglioramento continuo e di crescita umana e professionale, una giusta
remunerazione che sia comparata alla responsabilità che il lavoratore è
stato (ed ha accettato) investito. Dobbiamo dire che questa impostazione
in alcuni contesti è ancora lontana dall’essere condivisa preferendo la
proprietà o la dirigenza una gestione delle risorse umane basata su una
ferrea gerarchia e su una visione strumentale della forza lavoro vista
più come una componente del processo produttivo che l’elemento che dà
anima al processo stesso e permette di tenerlo sotto controllo.
d. Le modalità di produzione, l’utilizzo delle materie prime e delle
altre componenti che entrano a far parte del processo di produzione o di
erogazione del servizio, i criteri di gestione dello stabilimento, le condizioni
di lavoro, le performance richieste e le tecniche di controllo, la gestione
degli scarti sono elementi con i quali ogni impresa deve fare i conti ed
individuare modi e criteri sui quali basare i propri comportamenti. Sono
tutti elementi che contribuiscono a definire l’identità dell’azienda, le sue
caratteristiche specifiche che poi vanno a formare l’immagine dell’azienda
in primo luogo all’interno ma anche verso l’esterno ed in particolare verso
i fornitori la cui selezione diventa importante nel dare coerenza fra il
processo produttivo o di erogazione del servizio programmato e quanto
poi si riesce a realizzare. Il tema dei fornitori è un tema delicato spesso
sottovalutato eppure determinante nella qualità del prodotto o del servizio;
la loro individuazione deve essere preceduta da una definizione del profilo
richiesto che ha già in sé degli elementi valoriali.
e. Il rapporto con il mercato rappresenta per qualunque organizzazione
economica l’elemento centrale della propria attività. La mano invisibile
del mercato permea la vita dell’azienda nella sua attività commerciale, nel
rapporto con una clientela attuale e potenziale da soddisfare che ha delle
attese e delle percezioni rispetto al prodotto ed allo stile proposto, nella
definizione dei prezzi e delle caratteristiche dei prodotti e delle prestazioni
nel rapporto con i comeptitors e con le loro dinamiche, nella capacità di
promuovere i propri prodotti e servizi e di farsi comprendere dai potenziali
acquirenti attraverso processi di comunicazione sempre più articolati e
strutturati, nella creazione di reti di imprese e di partnership capaci di
penetrare mercati sempre più ampi attraverso modelli organizzativi di
proposta sul mercato che riduca gli sprechi ed avvicini l’azienda al
consumatore finale o al produttore a cui si fornisce prodotti semilavorati o
strumentali. I quadri normativi definiscono le modalità con cui un’impresa
può porsi sul mercato individuando comportamenti leciti da quelli non
ammessi; la diversificazione internazionale di queste norme genera spesso
confusione e permette di attivare azioni quanto meno sospette in grado di
generare vantaggi utilizzando in maniera strumentale la comparazione fra
i diversi approcci normativi.
f. Il rapporto con il contesto in cui ha sede l’azienda rappresenta
oggi un punto delicato in quanto può generare convergenze o conflitti a
seconda di come si sviluppa il confronto. Sempre più spesso si parla di
responsabilità sociale dell’impresa cioè del ruolo sociale che l’impresa
rappresenta in quanto generatrice di posti di lavoro , in grado di soddisfare
bisogni con i propri prodotti e/o servizi, di utilizzare il territorio (per
la costruzione della sede e dei luoghi di produzione, smaltimento dei
rifiuti talvolta di non facile collocazione) di collaborazione con altre
imprese come terzisti o come partners e quindi come soggetto che
genera ricchezza che poi inserisce sul territorio a favore di coloro che
a diverso titolo contribuiscono a generare valore. Significativo è in
questo ambito di azione la predisposizione e la diffusione del bilancio
sociale dell’impresa nel quale sono raccolte le finalità e l’utilità sociale
che l’azienda genera sul territorio e l’insieme di risorse ed opportunità
che l’azienda fornisce al territorio.
g. Un ultimo aspetto ma non per questo meno importante riguarda
la gestione finanziaria e la destinazione dell’utile. Il reperimento
delle fonti di finanziamento della propria attività, la definizione dei
canali nei quali cercare i capitali rappresenta una componente della
vita aziendale dal forte significato etico. Come illustrato in precedenza
sul mercato internazionale la finanza rappresenta una componente
sempre più presente e strategica ma al contempo non sempre sotto
controllo delle autorità e della legge. Ciò permette alle imprese, specie
quelle di grandi dimensioni di avere a disposizione tante modalità di
finanziamento che si moltiplicano man mano che il sistema finanziario
pone sul mercato nuovi prodotti e modalità di raccolta del risparmio.
Il riferimento a determinati valori nel fare le scelte legate a questo
aspetto sposta l’asse di interesse, i livelli di rischio ed anche il costo
delle operazioni elementi rispetto ai quali spesso la classe dirigente è
particolarmente sensibile al punto di sacrificare la coerenza nello stile
a scapito di qualche economia nei costi. Un discorso a parte merita
la formazione e la destinazione dell’utile indicatore della capacità
dell’impresa di stare sul mercato. La formazione del bilancio è oggi
una operazione complessa che presenta tanti ambiti di arbitrarietà e di
scelte da parte dell’organo di governo. Ne consegue che diversi sono
gli aspetti in cui l’uomo è chiamato a scegliere sia nella formazione
del bilancio e della definizione delle diverse voci quali ammortamenti,
accantonamenti, valore delle scorte e degli stati di avanzamento,
gestione delle sofferenze. A cui si associa la destinazione degli utili ed
il loro riutilizzo in azienda o la destinazione alla proprietà.
Il cristiano che si trova ad aprire un’impresa o ad assumere
ruoli di responsabilità all’interno di una organizzazione economica
quotidianamente si trova di fronte all’esigenza di confrontare i propri
comportamenti e le proprie scelte con i principi evangelici e con
i contesti in cui tali scelte devono essere operate. Ogni punto di cui
sopra ha in sè degli elementi etici con i quali deve confrontarsi pur in
un approccio positivo che vede nell’impresa un soggetto di sviluppo
in grado di creare occasioni di lavoro , di soddisfazione di bisogni
importanti per le persone e le comunità. Ma il fine di realizzare beni e
servizi utili non può giustificare l’utilizzo di strumenti e metodologie
lontane dal pensiero cristiano basato sulla dignità umana, sulla
destinazione universale dei beni, sulla salvaguardia del creato, sulla
solidarietà fra gli uomini sul principio di uguaglianza e di fraternità.
Anche sulla posizione dei soggetti verso il mondo dell’economia
vi è una vasta letteratura che affronta il tema dei consumatori,
della formazione delle professioni , del ruolo dell’educazione nella
preparazione di cittadini responsabili e solidali, delle motivazioni che
portano ad un approccio etico all’esperienza umana nel suo complesso
e pertanto anche nella vita economica3.
4. Persone ed etica nel campo economico

Ma il pensiero cristiano interroga ogni persona rispetto alle
scelte economiche che questa effettua quotidianamente, ai giudizi sui
3
Alcuni testi di riferimento sono: S. R. Covey, Le 7 regole per avere successo, Franco
Angeli, Milano, 2003; J. Delors, Nell’educazione un tesoro, Armando Editore, Roma 1997;
F. Malik, Il management come professione, Gruppo Sole 24 ore, Milano, 2007; R. e M.
L. Verdelli, Il marketing di sé stessi, Gruppo sole 24 ore, Milano, 2011; A. F. de Toni, A.
Fornasier, Knowledge manager, Gruppo sole 24 ore, Milano, 2012; D. Goleman, R. E.
Boyatzis, A. McKee, Essere leader, Rizzoli, Milano 2002
fatti economi, al proprio modo di contribuire alla vita economica con
l’intelligenza ed il lavoro, alle preferenze politiche che manifesta con il
voto e con altre forme di partecipazione alla vita pubblica. Sono questi
i modi in cui ogni persona partecipa alla vita economica sia locale che
globale;per ognuna di esse vi sono delle implicazioni etiche che il
messaggio biblico orienta con le proprie proposte ed interpretazioni.
Come consumatore il cittadino è chiamato sistematicamente a
chiedersi quali scelte operare di fronte ad un’offerta di prodotti e servizi
che si stà moltiplicando in maniera vorticosa e ad una promozione
pubblicitaria insistente ed onnipresente che finisce per condizionare
i comportamenti specie di coloro che hanno minori strumenti per
comprendere le dinamiche che caratterizzano il mercato dei beni di
consumo sul piano promozionale e delle politiche distributive e dei prezzi.
Le ricerche di mercato, lo studio sulle determinanti dei processi di scelta,
la generazione di appeal e la creazione delle giuste emozioni permettono
al mercato di attivare azioni commerciali in grado di raggiungere la
sensibilità dei consumatori e di condizionarne le scelte per il prodotto o il
servizio pubblicizzato. Il mercato si è inoltre segmentizzato per cui ogni
categoria di persona classificata per genere, classi di età status sociale
pensiero e valori ha propri stimoli ed una gamma di prodotti dedicata.
Questa invadenza rischia di opprimere il consumatore che non riesce ad
orientarsi nella vastità della proposta e si lascia andare alle emozioni più
forti compatibili con le proprie disponibilità e qualche volta anche oltre
Nel campo professionale l’uomo e la donna giocano un ruolo
strategico nell’impostazione della vita delle imprese specie da parte
di coloro che la costituiscono o che la dirigono. Costituire un impresa
rappresenta oggi una vocazione grande ed impegnativa che nobilita chi
si assume questa responsabilità di creare lavoro e valore per sé e per gli
altri, cosi come chiunque si assume responsabilità prende parte attiva
alla vita di un’organizzazione e di conseguenza della comunità con il
proprio contributo professionale. Tuttavia le scelte dell’imprenditore e
del manager sono intrise di elementi etici proprio per la dimensione
strategica dei loro comportamenti e le ricadute che hanno su tutti coloro
che a diverso titolo sono in contatto con l’azienda. Le tentazioni di
percorrere scorciatoie meno rischiose più facili ma che vanno a calpestare
diritti altrui o a cercare privilegi o sotterfugi sono tante in un periodo di
crisi dove è difficile rimanere sul mercato e la sensibilità ai prezzi da parte
degli acquirenti è elevata. Al lavoratore qualunque ruolo occupi viene
chiesto di essere professionale, di condividere e vivere un alto senso di
appartenenza, rispettando regole e procedure ma la contempo indicando
ambiti di miglioramento dei processi nell’ottica della partecipazione
attiva e responsabile, di coinvolgere i propri collaboratori nella logica
della sussidiarietà che vede chi ha responsabilità cedere ai propri
collaboratori tutte le responsabilità che loro sono in grado di gestire. Ciò
implica una visione attiva e positiva del lavoro visto come esperienza
esistenziale che è in grado di dar el suo contributo nella crescita della
comunità nella consapevolezza dei benefici personali che genera il lavoro
altrui. Nasce cosi il concetto di solidarietà intesa come quale condizione
che permette a tutti di godere dei beni prodotti da altri in una circolarità
per cui il valore generato da una persona di fatto si riversa su tutti coloro
che usufruiscono dei benefici di quanto realizzato. Di conseguenza i beni
prodotti ed i servizi attivati sono di tutti e per tutti secondo la logcia dei
diritti di cittadinanza enunciati nelle dichiarazioni sui diritti universali
dell’uomo molti dei quali hanno implicazioni nel campo economico.
Infine il contributo della persona alla vita economica passa
attraverso le scelte politiche che effettua nei momenti di partecipazione
alla vita pubblica sia esso un responsabile politico o un operatore
pubblico sia un elettore passivo che nell’urna esprime il proprio pensiero
rispetto alle proposte fatte dalle diverse proposte politiche in gara
durante le elezioni. Le scelte di politica economica non sono neutre né
sul piano dei risultati né tantomeno sul piano etico. La storia evidenzia
quotidianamente come le scelte di politica economica si ripercuotono
sui cittadini in maniera diversa ed i loro effetti si manifestano in una
poliedricità di manifestazioni non sempre fra loro compatibili. Per
coloro che hanno su di sé il peso delle responsabilità politiche in campo
economico il rapporto fra etica ed economia è molto stretto in quanto
ogni scelta comporta un discernimento etico e determinano l’esercizio
della responsabilità intesa come manifestazione etica delle proprie scelte.
Il cristiano è chiamato a saper discernere quali sono le compatibilità fra
il proprio credo e le proposte di politica economica fatte dalle diverse
formazioni politiche per poter poi scegliere con cognizione di causa al
momento delle elezioni o di fronte alla responsabilità di scelte che i cui
effetti andranno a ricadere sui cittadini.
In sede di sintesi non serve ribadire il ruolo che l’etica recita
nella vita economica di una persona e nemmeno quanto questi elementi
devono essere tenuti in considerazione da parte di chi manifesta la fede
in Dio Padre. Semmai può essere utile chiedersi come un cristiano
può allenarsi, quali iniziative deve intraprendere per poter poi gestire
con serenità e competenza questa difficile interlocuzione fra etica e
dimensione economica della sua esperienza. La prima componente che
può essere di grande aiuto è la conoscenza in campo economico e politico
che permette di comprendere i fenomeni ed i fatti nelle sue dinamiche e
nei suoi elementi essenziali. In questo modo è più facile il discernimento
e la capacità di immaginare le conseguenze dei diversi comportamenti.
Il linguaggio economico e politico si stà facendo sempre più complesso,
specialistico e di difficile interpretazione. A ciò si aggiunge la conoscenza
degli approfondimenti etico-teologici oggi ancora piuttosto limitati che
permettono di meglio comprendere i riferimenti che stanno alle base
delle diverse posizioni della chiesa verso il mondo dell’economia e
di individuare la posizione personale rispetto alle situazioni che si è
chiamati a governare.
Conclusione
In sede di premessa si era ipotizzato che esiste una relazione fra
etica cristiana e mondo dell’economia anche se vi sono elementi distintivi
e che l’economia ha le sue regole che si pongono in maniera dialettica
con i valori proposti dal messaggio evangelico. L’excursus schematico
proposto sia per quanto riguarda gli aspetti legati ai sistemi economici
locali nazionali internazionali legati oggi nel concetto di globalizzazione,
l’esame delle componenti della vita di un’organizzazione economica e gli
ambiti in cui qualunque cittadino si vede coinvolto in dinamiche legate
all’economia hanno messo in evidenza come sia stretto il legame fra
etica ed economia in quanto sistematicamente il mondo dell’economia
chiede di esprimere giudizi, fare valutazione operare delle scelte; e come
per noto ogni scelta interroga le coscienze ed i valori di riferimento
per comprendere in che misura quanto prospettato è in sintonia con
il proprio credo. In fatti il giudizio non è altro che il confronto fra un
fatto una situazione una ipotesi con i valori che stanno alla base del
contesto che deve giudicare o decidere. Occorre semmai chiederci quali
sono gli elementi che permettono di coniugare valori coni giudizi ed i
comportamenti in maniera significativa cercando di ridurre i margini di
errore che comunque una scelta comporta.
La conoscenza sembra essere l’elemento che meglio di tutti può
aiutare nel discernimento accompagnata dall’esperienza e dal lavoro in
team accompagnato da una seria riflessione sulla propria fede e la sua
portata rispetto ai comportamenti concreti. Solo cosi si ha la possibilità
di comprendere i contesti rispetto ai quali si deve decidere e scegliere
ed al contempo avere gli elementi teologici ed etici necessari ad una
scelta coerente con la propria fede. Si evita cosi di giungere ad una
scelta dogmatica basata solo sui principi senza tenere in nessun conto
del contesto in cui si deve scegliere e dall’altra si evita altresi di fare
scelte esclusivamente tecniche che tengono in considerazione solo i
contesti indipendentemente di valori di riferimento. Non è una operazione
semplice in quanto comporta margini di rischio e di indeterminatezza,
possibilità che quanto previsto non si avveri o che le conseguenze
sia diverse da quelle prospettate. Questo è un rischio che comunque
esiste e con il quale deve fare i conti anche il cristiano che, proprio in
virtù della propria fede non deve demordere dalla continua ricerca di
soluzioni eticamente ispirate cercando di trovare, attraverso lo studio,
il confronto, l’esperienza, il lavoro di gruppo, la meditazione, continui
miglioramenti nelle decisioni e nelle scelte ben sapendo che la coerenza
etica dei propri comportamenti è come un ideale che quando ti sembra
di averlo raggiunto si sposta un po’ più in là perché la realtà si è spostata
ed i contesti sono mutati. Ma questo non è una debolezza del metodo ma
semmai una continua opportunità nella ricerca.
Emil JURCAN
Interpersonal relationship in the comparative

religious context
Abstract
Any attempt to assimilate the two (guru and spiritual father) is
impossible. The differences are too big, starting with the objective
pursued in soteriology: salvation in the dialogue-communion with God
or disintegration into the divine nothingness. Therefore, any similarity
between the guru and the spiritual father, which some masters present
to their disciples in the Christian areas is blather, beautiful words, but
empty. These are sophisms due to which common man misses the essence
of revelation and his way to God, choosing instead the misleading
paths of the humans who lead only to humans and not higher. Only the
Romanian common sense will decide whether the book’s message will
revive the meaning of genuine Christian life in the spirit of Orthodoxy
that was once not a religion among other spiritual traditions, but it was
the everyday existence of the Romanian.
Keywords:
God, Church, logos, spiritual father, guru.
The Christian view on teognosia (knowledge of God) is very clear:

the Christian God is not an impersonal working hypothesis, He is not
an undefined, abstract being who has no relationship with man. The
Christian God is a Trinity of divine Persons who are both in dialogue
among them and with all creation. “God is pure subject or Trinity of pure
subjects”1. These Subjects provide man with an opportunity to consider
himself as human subject in the dialogue with God and not just a mere
object (he or the Divine) who does not have a reference point when
searching the divine.
This subjectivity of God gives us a reference point to which to
direct our prayers, hopes and ideals. The prayer cannot be answered
unless it is directed towards a person who listens to us and hears our
requests. A God lacking this quality, i.e. personality, cannot listen to us,
as a human being and therefore cannot help. Such a god is inferior to man
because he does not possess all the qualities that man has.
Firstly, in Christianity the Trinity-God is dynamic. God is active
in the world due to the divine grace. “The energies are uncreated, they
are God Himself in the truest sense, they always “pour forth” in the one
being of the Trinity...”2. It is not the master who helps the disciple to
approach God (he is only an instrument through which the aspirant may
find the way to heaven), but the divine grace, the energy through which
the divine being does not remain passive, is what makes the Christian
approach sacredness and change his way of life. The immobility of
Brahman cannot provide a divine dynamism because it does not have
that force of attraction manifested by grace. And whom to attract the
aspirant to, since there is no Who?
Secondly, the creation in which man lives, where he has to
integrate himself in order to save his soul, is seen totally different in
these two religions. From a guru’s point of view, the world is a virtual
reality, an illusion or, at best (if the guru thinking is dualist), is bad due
to its ontology. Therefore, the guru mainly recommends separation from
this world, because this is the only way to self-liberation.
In Christian theology, the cosmos and the world in particular is the
place of man’s salvation in the flesh. This is the environment that man
has to embellish to make it more attractive spiritually, like a lost, but
found paradise, since human sacredness and has to reflect on it. Many
1
Dumitru Stăniloae, Orthodox Dogmatic Theology, vol. I, Bucharest, Publishing House of
the Mission and Bible Institute of the Romanian Orthodox Church, 1978, p. 300.
2
Olivier Clement, The Orthodox Church, translated by Alin Ionescu, Bucharest, Universitas
saints (St. Seraphim of Sarov is an elloquent example) showed that the
surrounding world is part of the human holiness. In the eighth chapter of
the Epistle to the Romans, St. Paul connects the “groaning” of the world
to man. This is perfectly true, because if its destruction was due to the
primordial man, its restoration and perfection was achieved by Christ
and while the saints render this fact visible in time, its completion is to
be seen only upon the Second Coming (the Parousia).
In Christianity, nature is not an obstacle, but a chance to get to
the beautiful divine. “Nature proves to be a means by which man grows
spiritually and makes the most of his good intentions towards himself
and others, when it is maintained and used in accordance with itself ,
but when a man makes it infertile, poisons it and highly abuses it, he
obstructs his own spiritual growth and that of others”3. The call of the
authentic Christianity addressed to contemporary man is not to dominate
the world, but to pneumatize it, because he is destined to be sacerdote
of the world. The biblical phrase “fill the earth and master it”, which
was the excuse for so many religious wars or missions was a fallacy, a
judgment error. The world is meant to become a shrine, a church where
man can celebrate the cosmic liturgy. “Human priesthood requires using
the creature as something that was destined by God not only to survive,
but also “to be consecrated” through the hands of man”4. Christ, “the
Priest of Creation”5 gives us the relationship pattern that man has to
follow if he is willing to follow the true path to perfection. Or, such an
idea is not to be found in Eastern thinking. A different feeling can be
detected: that of compassion for nature, which entraps souls aspiring to
liberation. Ahimsa, the concept of non-violence, practised especially by
Jains, means lack of aggression towards any living being. As basis of
action, the compassion for the self reincarnated in an animal that one
should not kill because it is deprived of the opportunity to exhaust the
accumulated karma during his animal existence.
Great Indian thinkers like Rabindranath Tagore wrote about the
3
D. Stăniloae, op. cit., p. 325.
4
Ioannis Zizioulas, Creation as Eucharist, translated by Caliopie Papacioc, Bucharest,
Bizantina Publishing House, 1999, p. 88.
5
Ibidem, p. 89.
poetry of nature. Tagore considered nature as the most appropriate
environment for man to emprove and to attain liberation from the cruel
cycle of suffering. “India knew: if we separate by physical or spiritual
barriers from the endless life of nature, if we consider ourselves just
human being and not a part of the whole, then we wonder in the
labyrinth of fallacies”6. The conception of the world promoted by the
Eastern masters should be noted. When referring to nature, man takes
into account the idea of harmony that rests the mind on the attempt to
reach spiritual trance; on the other hand, man pities the trapped selves of
nature’s creatures that need liberation, compassion and help.
In Christianity things are different: the world is a macro-ecclesia, a
place where each, from his place, with his means, glorifies God. Therefore
one should be responsible for the creation because it is his/her salvation
environment. In conclusion, it is neither mercy that a guru should teach his
disciples, nor the concept of pantheism, union with the cosmic self, which
is the impersonal divine. It is the gracious bond that should connect man
with God, man becoming a celebrant on the shrine of creation and each
element of matter being received with gratitude, in a Eucharistic way, as
a gift. The spiritual father presents the world as a sacred reality, where the
“plasticized reasons” of God should be sought after7.
A different plan, where the spiritual father’s word is different form
the guru’s, is the holiness. The state of holiness is the utmost purpose
of human existence, in its spiritual dimension. For Christian Theology,
holiness is to become united with God by grace, the true finding of the
“Eternal Sought”, the immersion into the Divine Personality, which brings
the inflow of enlightenment, love and dialogue. In Orthodoxy, holiness
means transfiguration of man’s personality, not its annihilation. Élisabeth
Behr-Siegel’s opinion on this matter: “Human nature is changed by the
unprobed mystery of the acting grace. The darkness of matter is shattered
and, once defeated, it becomes transparent for the Holy Spirit and man
6
Rabindranath Tagore, Sādhanā, translated by Nichifor Crainic, Bucharest, Stress Publishing
House, 1990, p. 20.
7
According to professor D. Stăniloae, “Nature proves to be a plasticized reason that, in
principle, can be endlessly shaped by will and completely transferred within the loving
inter-human consciousness”, op. cit., p. 327.
is now worthy to behold God’s glory”8. The Christian holiness demands
respect for the human personality, not its annihilation. In eternity man
has to be in God’s image. Created in God’s image, man is called to be
like Him and this means to respect the entire body and soul. Both human
parts are called to take part in this state of “God’s image” leading to the
likeness of God. Not to respect man’s personality and to break his unity
into (material and spiritual) aspects is to ignore God’s creation. Man was
created by God, so to break his unity means to disapprove this creation,
to consider that it is not good, that it is not capable of salvation unless it
“frees” itself from the material aspect. That means God’s creation is not
good, so He made a mistake and He cannot be invested with omnipotence
and omnibenevolence.
On the contrary, according to the Christian view, human
personality as a whole is man’s provision for redemption, because the
human individual is moulded after the divine Tri-Personality. The divine
Tri-Personality is the source of man’s deification. Professor Dumitru
Staniloae says: “Trinity, radiant through its own love, can neither be
experienced nor understood in the absence of its uncreated energies”9.
Therefore man remains within grace in his integrity, since God’s calling
is accomplished through divine grace, which the man can feel on the
inside. This calling enables us to be in communion with all the people
dear to us. Should we accept the idea of complete disintegration, as
promoted by Indian religions, one question arises: whom of our loved
ones should we be able to meet, if nothing is left within us? Where is
God’s face, where are the faces of our loved ones, where is our cherished
hope that comforted us upon losing our parents or brothers? All that is
left is total despair, which grows higher when standing on the edge of
the grave. This is exactly what the Orthodox theology tries to avoid:
the despair when being faced with death or losing the loved ones. In the
Orthodox view “Abraham’s bosom” is the “bosom of communion” and
8
Élisabeth Behr-Siegel, The Jesus Prayer or the Sacrament in the Orthodox Monasticism
in “Happy Sadness” translated by Maria and Adrian Alexandrescu, Bucharest, Publishing
House of the Mission and Bible Institute of the Romanian Orthodox Church, 1997, p. 124.
9
Dumitru Stăniloae, Orthodox Moral Theology, vol. III, Bucharest, Publishing House of the
Mission and Bible Institute of the Romanian Orthodox Church, 1981, p. 36.
“dialogue” with God and with those who, having escaped the turmoil of
the world, found their way to God.
The divine grace we receive is what makes us godlike. That moment
man experiences transfiguration, thus “sympathizing” with nature, i.e.
sufferring for it in the ascension to the Divine. From that moment, human
life becomes epicletic, meaning that it is a constant invocation of the Holy
Spirit. The pouring forth of the Spirit on the human soul, the dialogue
and the Trinitarian feeling, this is what the Eastern Christian spirituality
has to offer and what the spiritual father teaches his disciples.
As for the qualities of the Christian spiritual father, when compared
to the oriental guru, they refer mainly to the content and not to their
outward manifestation, which can be similar at most times. We shall
briefly describe several aspects in a comparative approach.
First of all, the personality of the spiritual father is a charismatic
figure. One can feel in his presence, in his eyes, in his words that the Holy
Spirit is present in his life. This man has a permanent dialogue with the
Sacredness, he actually lives in a world where the transcendent and the
immanent interpenetrate to such an extent that all boundaries disappear.
In this case, the word “seer” is easy to understand, i.e. the spiritual father
has deep insight into the spiritual world, he is in a permanent dialogue
with God as he prays. “The spiritual father or starets is essentially a
‘charismatic’ and prophetic figure, accredited for his task by the direct
action of the Holy Spirit. He is ordained, not by the hand of man, but
by the hand of God. He is an expression of the Church as “event”10 or
“happening”, rather than of the Church as institution”. Therefore his
presence is closer to the Church as event, to the ‘impetuous life of the
Spirit”, which ‘blows wherever it wishes’11.
At the same time, his words are full of grace, he uses “words with
10
Kallistos of Diokleia, The Spiritual Father in Orthodox Christianity, printed as a preface to
the study of Irenee Hausherr, Spiritual Direction in the Early Christian East, translated by
Mihai Vladimirescu, Sibiu, Deisis Publishing House, 1999, p. 7.
11
Deifying energies cannot be organized or institutionalized. In addition to the “institutional”
aspects there are “eventful” aspects: “Do not quench the Spirit” (1 Thess. 5, 19), in
Orthodoxy, translated by Ireneu Ioan Popa, Bucharest, Publishing House of the Mission
and Bible Institute of the Romanian Orthodox Church, 1996, p. 139.
power”12, as Christ would do. His words are few, but each of them is full
of spiritual wisdom, of lived theology. And this is what most churchgoers
realize when coming into contact with the spiritual father. They feel as
if they are filled with grace when the priest speaks to them. They also
feel his eyes scanning their soul, because the spiritual fathers know
their soul even if they do not reveal their state. They do not make the
man self-dependent by imposing a mental rapport similar to a mantra.
Generally, mantra is meant to deny the practitioner the possibility to
think for himself, to analyze the aspects of life. In other words, through
mantra, the guru’s disciple does not have the time to be free, to be all by
himself anymore. This exercise provides a mental coercive dependence,
by which the disciple is under the master’s control and obedience is a
must. It is the opportunity “to attain spiritual accomplishment”, as any
disobedience (even soul-searching) is regarded as self-exclusion from
the first commandment that requires total obedience in order to reach
the state of liberation. Nevertheless, the spiritual father’s word is the
expression of the self. Bishop Ioannis Zizioulas asserts: “Christianity’s
logos is not word, but person; it is not voice, but living presence that
embodies by excellence the Eucharist, which is both gathering and
communion”13.
In other words, the spiritual father’s request to his disciple is not
a combination of words to be mechanically repeated, but the actual
conformity of life to the “life in the Spirit”, transcending both from the
Eucharistic communion and the observation of spiritual people. The
spiritual father guides others not by imposing14 rules, but by sharing his
life with them and by divine grace pouring forth on the heart of the listener.
12
“Today, we are inundated with words, but for the most part these are conspicuously not
words uttered with power. The starets uses few words, and sometimes none at all; but by
these few words or by his silence, he is able to alter the whole direction of a man’s life”
(Kallistos of Diokleia, art. cit., p. 12).
13
John Zizioulas, Creation and Eucharist, translated by Caliopie Papacioc, Bucharest,
Byzantine Publishing House, 1999, p. 22.
14
Paul Claudel noted: “The Logos (the Word) is the adoptive son of silence, because Saint
Iosuf studied the Gospel in complete silence. In order to hear the voice of the Word, one
must listen to silence, especially to learn it”, apud P. Evdokimov, Ages of Spiritual Life,
translated by Ion Buga, Bucharest, Christiana Publishing House, 1993, p. 176.
Another idea to remember is that the spiritual father shall never
supress the practitioner’s personality. Christian asceticism books do not
include a code of written or oral regulations given forth by spiritual fathers,
which assure salvation. These are counsels, at most, because “salvation
resides in extensive counselling”, in other words: “he who seeks salvation
should firstly ask questions”. Spiritual fathers are asked for words of
advice neither for the purpose of receiving meditation formulas, nor for
strenuous repetition of prayers or meaningless phrases, but aiming to find
out more about the chosen path: is it a good path, does it have an end or
is it, perhaps, devilish temptation. Such questions are addressed to those
who are already experienced in living a reclusive life. The spiritual father’s
charismatic personality provides certainty to his experience as warrant of
life into Christ, nor requiring a life-living template.
Another aspect worth mentioning is that the spiritual father avoids
publicity, unlike these masters who invaded the Western market of
souls. Renowned masters who promoted their beliefs in the U.S. needed
celebrities, media or the Internet and so on in order to make themselves
known to the people around. The aggressive proselytizing done by many
guru movements begins with the mere placing of advertising materials
in the mailbox and goes on with fakir demonstrations in the city parks or
itinerant preaching, combined with live concerts. All these methods seem
to force the human subconscious to get used to other versions of religion,
different from the familiar Christianity. At this point a person is offered
to engage in other religious practices, hoping one of these will appeal
to him. Such a method of attracting new members needs advertising.
The attraction to the religious movement is not necessarily related to the
spiritual personality of the master, but to the publicity that has taken hold
of the soul and one’s inwardness.
In Christian theology, the spiritual father does nothing to advertise
himself or to summon people. It is the “people who recognize the ‘Elders’
(...). It will be noted that, says Bishop Kallistos, the initiative comes, as
a rule, not from the master but from the disciples. It would be perilously
presumptuous for someone to say in his own heart or to others: Come
and submit yourselves to me; I am a “starets”, I have the grace of the
Spirit!” What happens, rather, is that—without any claims being made by
the starets himself—others approach him, seeking his advice or asking
to live permanently under his care. At first, he will probably send them
away, telling them to consult someone else. Finally the moment comes
when he no longer sends them away but accepts their coming to him as a
disclosure of the will of God. Thus it is his spiritual children who reveal
the “starets” to himself”15.
There is a clear contrast between the two personalities: the master
guru’s who suffocates the individual by means of the media in order to
attract him and the spiritual father’s, whom one has to discover. The
latter is close to suffering due to the fact that in the wilderness he is
capable of understanding the hardships of life of those who struggle
in the whirligig of life. The assistance offered by the spiritual father to
the world is not a demonstration of dialectic virtuosity regarding new
religions or philosophical thinking, but is reflected in his existence
of man of prayer. “Tell me how you pray and I shall tell you what to
believe in (...). In prayer, to be more specific, in the practice of prayer,
the essence of being Christian becomes obvious, how the faithful relates
to God and his neighbour. Therefore, a stronger formulation might say:
only in prayer is the Christian really himself16.
In his mission, the prayer is the most important tool of the spiritual
father and it comes before the word or the catechism. The spiritual life is
defined by prayer, not by knowledge. The great spiritual fathers are not
theologians or religious philosophers, but men of prayer, who transform
the surrounding reality and take it to the sacred-graceful place due to
the power of raising hands in prayer and of the mind descended into the
heart in order to reveal the sacred Christ to the world. Saint Polycarp
of Smyrna is said to have prayed before his martyrdom for two hours
“mentioning all those he had ever met (during his long life of 86 years),
important or insignificant, famous or unknown persons and the whole
Christian Church in the world”17.
15
Kallistos of Diokleia, art. cit., p. 7.
16
Gabriel Bunge, Earthen Vessels: The Practice of Personal Prayer According to the Patristic
Tradition, translated by Ioan I. Ica jr., Sibiu, Deisis Publishing House, 1996, p. 17.
17
The Martyrdom of Polycarp, translated by Ioan Rămureanu, in the “Church Fathers and
Moreover, the spiritual father’s prayer is often a substitute for the
lack of prayer of the disciple. The monk sent for food in a village almost
committed fornication with a young woman. That moment he prayed,
“Lord, for the prayers of my father, save me now!” And he suddenly
found himself on the bank of a river, not far from the monastery. Abba
Ammon18 clearly illustrates the spiritual father-disciple relationship, the
compassion in its deepest sense, namely the suffering with and for the
spiritual child. A story from the Sayings of the Desert Fathers tells that
a certain Abraham, disciple of Abba Sisoes was tempted by the devil
and he was not able to put off sin. Then Abba Sisoes prayed: “Lord, Our
Saviour who takes no pleasure in the death of anyone, but to repent and
live, heal Abraham. And immediately the disciple was healed”19. It is
therefore a typical case of substitute intermediation when the spiritual
father takes on his shoulders some of the apprentice’s burden in order
to ease him the way to salvation. Carrying the burden of salvation is
Christ’s requirement and genuine spiritual fathers do so by increasing the
spiritual effort in order to help the one who is tried.
The Orthodox spiritual father is and remains “a charismatic and
prophetic figure”, says a contemporary theologian20. He is not a fakir. His
powers do not come from the body’s daily training. The spiritual father
has nothing to do with what the Hindu understands by “power” (siddhi).
His only power comes from the Holy Spirit. The big difference is that the
master shows the power he acquired through exercises and asceticism. This
power is his to convey or to use arbitrarily, whereas the spiritual father was
poured forth the “gifts” (not “powers”) by God. He was accredited for his
task by the direct action of the Holy Spirit. He is ordained, not by the hand of
man, but by the hand of God. He is an expression of the Church as “event”
or “happening”, rather than of the Church as institution, although the two
aspects (institution and event) cannot be separated from one another21.
Writers” collection, vol. 11, Publishing House of the Mission and Bible Institute of the
Romanian Orthodox Church, Bucharest, 1982, p. 29.
18
He used to advice his disciples: “whenever tempted by the devil, pray: Almighty God, for
my father’s prayers, save me!”.
19
Apud Irenee, Hausher, op. cit., p. 142.
20
Kallistos Ware, The Inner Kingdom, translated by Eugenia Vlad, Bucharest, Christiana
21
Ibidem, p. 62.
The spiritual father is not defined by fakirism, but by
pnevmatophoria. He conveys grace. “Acquire inner peace and thousands
around you will find their salvation” said St. Seraphim of Sarov22. The
spiritual father‘s mission is not to help one annihilate himself, but to find
himself, to rediscover himself as a free person in grace. That person can
convey grace and thanks to it he can enter into communion with people
and the universe.
The spiritual father heals by his presence and not by concentration
or energy radiation. His presence is theophanic and pnevmatic. Neither
his words, nor his concentration, but only God through him delivers man
from the anxiety of the soul and from the diseases of the body. As a
spiritual father, he takes upon himself the spiritual burden of his disciple
as Christ did. He even shares the disciple’s penitence unless the latter
cannot complete it, whereas Guru does not assume such responsibility.
He can only help the disciple let go of the flesh and get rid of the “deeds”
sooner. He is not willing to burden himself with the “karmic” baggage of
his brother. In other words: ”I pity you, I can show you the way to attain
liberation, but I shall not take you out of the gutter”. This is similar to the
Levite and the priest who passes by the man fallen into the hands of the
robbers on the road to Jericho.
In conclusion, any attempt to assimilate the two (guru and spiritual
father) is impossible. The differences are too big, starting with the
objective pursued in soteriology: salvation in the dialogue-communion
with God or disintegration into the divine nothingness. Therefore, any
similarity between the guru and the spiritual father, which some masters
present to their disciples in the Christian areas is blather, beautiful words,
but empty. These are sophisms due to which common man misses the
essence of revelation and his way to God, choosing instead the misleading
paths of the humans who lead only to humans and not higher. Only the
Romanian common sense will decide whether the book’s message will
revive the meaning of genuine Christian life in the spirit of Orthodoxy
that was once not a religion among other spiritual traditions, but it was
the everyday existence of the Romanian.
22
Irina Goraïnoff, Seraphim of Sarov, Paris, Desclée de Brouwer Publishing House, 1979, p. 47.
Mihai HIMCINSCHI
Truth and freedom in democracy – a missionary

analysis
Abstract
It is already known that democracy, fully expressed since the
nineteenth century, directly concerns the ideological educational
issue (e.g.: promoting freedom, promoting the ideal model of society
organization, etc.), and Christianity insists on the evangelical values
of life. The Church cannot remain indifferent to the social and politic
activity, and to the problem of power clearly expressed in the world. It
is a subtle analyst that constantly analyses to what extent the above are
in accordance with the Gospel precepts, to what extent they minister the
Christian’s quality of life, knowing that they visibly manifest the will and
the power of God.
Keywords:
Church, society, freedom, state, democracy, pluralism.
1. Democracy supports human freedom

In the history of democracy, one can see that it has encountered, and
it experiences even today, difficulties in its understanding, stability and
functionality, although by dint of freedom, each state is free to choose its
political ideology and leaders. In terms of etymology, democracy means
the power of the people. It is a term, a concept met in Aristotle, but which
today indicates a society that is governed by representatives elected by
the people. The choice is made for the common wealth of all citizens,
without discrimination, for a just distribution of goods.
In normal situations, a non-democratic government cannot prove
its own legitimacy. Each government, in some way, must be made up of
men of the people, with the people and for the people. Democracy can be
achieved in various forms of government: monarchy, republic, federal
republic etc. Unlike political ideologies, which are created by people to
lead other people in this world, the Word of the Gospel is the Word of
God, created in order to lead the faithful towards eternal life and make
them partakers.
All monotheistic religions (Judaism, Christianity and
Mohammedanism) believe that in the divine Revelation, moral laws are
written in precise formulations. These formulations are then taken over
by the states’ legislation, which paradoxically declare themselves, in
the history of their democracy (especially in the nineteenth century), as
laic, in the virtue of self-determination as external and visible form of
democracy. The big difference between theology and politics is expressed
by the way they both legitimize their power.
The authority that conveys its power in and through Church is God
the Holy Trinity. He freely, but gradually shares His eternal energies with
the believers. They are always personal and put us directly in touch with
the godly Person(s), their living and inexhaustible Fountain. The Church
cannot exist without this gracious power, without direct communion with
authority, or without the One that shares them.
In the Holy Scripture, before commencing his public work, the
Saviour Christ, receives authority/power from the Father: And a voice
from heaven said: “This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased”
(Matthew 3, 17). And a voice came from the cloud, saying: This is my
beloved Son, my Chosen; listen to Him! (Luke 9, 35).
The power of God, through Church, sent in the world, is meant
to teomorphose all the other powers (political, economic, and even
military). All these in the shadow of the social mission of the Church and
its ministers, although the assertion of the secular fundamentalist states’
democracy hardly manages to publicly express its life ideal patterns of
life, of intellect or of morality, in accordance to human nature and its
degree of development.
Democracy is not only a form of government, but also a way
to understand and promote civil coexistence. Some1 believe it has an
anthropological foundation based on economic welfare, social cohesion
and political freedom. However, “if you have to approach the origin of
political and social action through God’s revelation of Himself and of
His relationship with His creation, and with people in particular, the
next danger is that our judgment about politics can influence our view of
Him rather than our understanding of politics. Not even hermits are free
of some assumptions about their time, in terms of normative political
structures and political action”2.
Given the need for practical principles in contemporary society,
democratic regimes tend to become more authoritarian under the pressure
of the need for global economic development. The democracy of political
coexistence, that willy-nilly involves the spiritual, mechanically becomes
cohabitation under the pressure of economic domination, hungry for
power and generating crises in various social structures. Homo civilis
is increasingly enslaved by Homo economicus. It is lost of sight the
essential fact, namely that democracy itself was based on the human
dimension, and today, it creates dilemmas: is it political philosophy? Is it
historical doctrine? Or is it empirical political science?
Regardless of the approach angle to the topic of democracy, its
tangent to theology cannot ignore two things: the truth and the man.
Without truth and human being, democracy can only exist in the abstract
as an ideology, or philosophy, with no content.
In Christian theology, especially in Orthodoxy, truth becomes man
with multiple ontological and existential consequences. Jesus Christ
is the God-Man and the Man-God. He is the absolute Truth. Or, even
contemporary political scientists say: “who does not believe in absolute
values, chooses democracy”3.
1
Ralph Darendorf, Quadrare il cerchio. Benessere economico, coesione sociale e libertá
politica, Laterza, Roma-Bari, 1995.
2
Costa Carras, The Doctrine of the Trinity in Relation to Political Action and Thought, in
vol. The Forgotten Trinity, BCC/CCBI Inter-Church House 35-41 Lower Marsh London
SE1 7RL, 1991, p. 161.
3
Michele Nicoletti, Introduzione a vol. Homo Politicus. I dilemmi della democrazia,
Gregoriana Libreria Editrice, Padova, 1995, p. 12.
Although mentioned ever since antiquity by Aristotle, the
democratic concept belongs however to modernity, being positively
influenced by the French Revolution (1789-1799) based on freedom,
equality and fraternity.
Specifically, democracy is achieved and supported by:
• The connection between the form of government and the universal
votes, regardless of age or sex (men, women, youth);
• How the government represents the people and guarantees the
exercise of the fundamental freedom (of thought, expression,
education, association in various political and non-political
groups, or religious).
A visible sign of democracy is the independence of the three
branches of government: the legislative, the judicial and the executive. In
democracy, institutional dialogue should represent the whole people, not
according to the different trends of the political parties’ plurality. When
there are doubts, it appeals to referendum, as the final decision should
reflect the basic orientation of the majority.
Thus, democratic governance is always in the service of the
common wealth of society, through the full development of all human
beings, without any discrimination.
From the ideological point of view, democratic governance
must always be at the service of truth and of human’s total integrity.
Democracies, regardless of their orientation (liberal or socialist), have a
common starting point: the conception of man. In liberal democracy, the
man is free to choose his path in the capital area. On the other hand, the
materialist socialist democracy proposes man the collectivism as a form
of implementing the civil life. Hence, the popular expressions: rightist
or leftist.
From the Christian point of view, the fundamental basis in
democratically analysing man is human dignity and its value for the
community4. The purpose of man’s creation was double: his happiness
and the glory of God. Human happiness must be the democratic
4
Juan Esquerda Bifet, Democrazia, in Dizionario dell’evangelizzazione, Napoli, Dominicana
Italiana, 2005, p. 244.
ideologies’ first concern. This happiness is consistent with the purpose
for which humanity was brought into existence, along with the command
to love one’s neighbour, through which Christianity, as a dogma, opens
and becomes the common denominator of all human democratic political
systems.
The collaboration or the dialogue between all Christians of the
world is itself a democratic process. This process is focused on the idea
of peace (primarily social), despite local and international totalitarianism,
respecting also the nuanced differences of state policies meant to
strengthen the society in unity and humanity, in order to promote a
culture of life and love so strong as the link between body and soul.
The Epistle to Diognetus is the document that explains the strategy of
pastoral and social faith of the Holy Fathers’ Church, the sad consistency
centuries of superficial conversions that are allowed to remain in the deep
pagan peoples (atheist), causing the Church’s mission a negative aspect.
“In a nutshell, what is the soul in the body that are the Christians in the
world. The soul is spread through all the parts of the body, and Christians
in all the world’s cities. The soul dwells in the body but is not of the body;
Christians live in the world but are not of the world. The unseen soul is
imprisoned in the seen body; Christians are seen too, as they are in the
world, but their faith in God remains unseen. The body hates and wars
the soul without having harmed it somehow, because it prevents it from
ceding the pleasures; and the world hates Christians, even though they did
not harm it, but because they resist its pleasures. The soul loves the body,
although the body hates the soul; the soul loves the members too, and
Christians love their enemies. The soul is imprisoned in the body, but it
is the one that holds the body; and Christians are confined in the world as
in a prison, but they hold the world. The immortal soul dwells in a mortal
tabernacle, and Christians temporally dwell in the corruptible ones, but
hope for incorruptibility in heaven. The tormented soul gets better with
little food and drink; Christians, punished every day, rise up their seeds
more and more. God ordained them in such a great horde that they are not
allowed to leave it”5.
5
Epistle to Diognet, translated by priest D. Fecioru, collection Părinţi şi Scriitori Bisericeşti
(further abbreviated as PSB), vol. I, Publishing House of the Mission and Bible Institute of the
2. Political ideologies pluralism and sectarian pluralism
In nowadays society, democracy is facing the permanently
increasing pluralism of the political and religious ideologies. Sects, for
example, have arisen along with politics. Initiation rites have always
served as a pretext to affirm faithfulness or devotion to a cause. The
political action does not relieve any of the strongly developed sectarian
movements. It is sometimes its secret engine. Today, these projects often
take on shades of Arianism, elitism, racism, and even eugenics. They
are often hidden behind some seemingly laudable intentions: saving the
planet, stopping the wars, promoting human equality.
In Japan, the Soka Gakkai sect exerts its influence through the
Komeito political party. Created after the Second World War, it is the
philosophical branch of an unorthodox Buddhist movement: Nichiren
Shoshu. Komeito, the third party in Japan, is part of the governmental
coalition and tends to be, together with the Renaissance party, the nucleus
of a neoconservative force. Sokka Gakkai, with ten thousand members, is
currently about 10 % of the Japanese voters. It is accused of expansionist
and authoritarian visions very far from the Komeito democratic facade.
These charges are the delight of another sect, the Soka Gakkai adversary:
Rissho Koseikai. It does not shine through its democratic virtues, but
it has a significant influence in politics, as it has six and a half million
members. “In relation to the latter, many of the new Japanese religions
offer a spiritual practice, which is also effective in solving the everyday
life problems; it can be the recitation of a sacred formula or of any other
technique. It is very difficult to emphasize enough the importance of
this very concrete dimension: a member of the Soka Gakkai explained –
confesses Jean -François Mayer6 – that one day, he felt unable to accept a
Church bringing promises for the beyond world. The movement attracted
him because of the need for a religion able to provide yet from the present
its values’ evidence in order to face the daily hardships”.
Another example of collusion between politics and sects is
the Unification Church, called today the Moon sect. If it has almost
Romanian Orthodox Church (further abbreviated as PHMBIROC), Bucharest 1979, p. 341.
6
Jean-François Mayer, Sectele, Bucharest, Encyclopaedic Publishing House, 1998, p. 84.
completely disappeared from the European sectarian scene, its political
subsidiary established in 1980 under the name Causa, has taken over the
fighting torch against Marxism. The fall of the Soviet empire somewhat
has certainly deflated its speeches, but it still finances European political
parties close to or belonging to the extreme right. Driven by Bo Hi
Pak, the right arm of the Moon, Causa continues to fuel the Manichean
dialectic that feeds the fascist right: on the one hand God and liberalism,
and socialism and Satan on the other. This speech has apparently achieved
some success in the anti-democratic right, as long as it is not too easily
conquered by the prospect of financing its election campaigns.
As its European targets were denounced, Moon has strengthened
it influence in Uruguay, where the sect has the third largest bank in the
country, the second national newspaper, several radio stations and various
agricultural fields. Meanwhile, the New Acropolis, the Transcendental
Meditation, Silo, the Movement, were taking over in Europe the way of
political infiltration7.
In 1933, the Transcendental Meditation was launched in the
legislative elections campaign. The same is true for the European
elections. Following its leader, Benoît Frappé, it gathered thirty thousand
voters, gaining thus an income source for five years, by the law on party
financing. A few years earlier, it had proposed George Bush, the U.S.
President, a meditation plan for recovering the hostages in Lebanon. In
1981, it did not hesitate to flirt with Marcos, the Tagalog dictator, and his
wife Imelda. Maharishi Mahesh Yogi saw in them the founding father
and mother of the “Enlightenment Age”.
In Mozambique, the stakes seems to be more important. Conquered
by the doctrine of Maharashi Mahesh Yogi, President Joachim Chissano
seems to have converted to transcendental Meditation. After a study trip
to Netherlands, the sect’s European headquarters, Chissano signed an
agreement whereby he leased twenty million hectares of agricultural
land to the Yogi followers for a period of fifty years without any real
compensation. In fact, the contract signed by Eneas Comiche, the Minister
of Finance of Mozambique, gives the Transcendental Meditation the
7
Yves de Gibon, Jean Vernette, Des sectes à notre porte, Paris, Éditions du Chalet, 1987, pp. 35-36.
opportunity to exploit an abandoned territory in order to create paradise
on earth by reversing 40% of the profits achieved by the sect8.
South America too appears as a land of choice to sects. The
integrist and reactionary Association of Tradition, Family, Property,
Catholic Sect, is particularly active there. Founded by Brazilian Plinio
Correa of Oliveira in 1960, it opposes the Brazilian agrarian reform, it
fights against Marxism, communism and wants to restore the monarchy. It
has attended the anti-militant political repression in Brazil, Argentina and
Chile; it has also supported the South African Apartheid. Integrated with
significant financial resources, it attended the installation of paramilitary
militias fighting communism. Declared as the Future of Culture, it was
made known in France through its actions against Martin Scorsese’s The
Temptation of Christ, and against Jean-Luc Godard’s Mary Greets You9.
In Brazil, the Universal Church of the Kingdom of God (UCKG),
surnamed The Universal by Brazilians, is the one that fills stadiums, under
its leader Edir Macedo. Daughter of the Pentecostal Church, it follows the
Assembly of God and the Quadrangular Church. Founded in the political
field since 1960, it controlled the President Ernesto Geisel, president from
1974 to 1979. It was the close guard of the Peruvian President Fujimori,
and at the same time, of the President of Guatemala, who converted to it
few years ago. The strategy is simple: it consists of controlling the media,
especially the radio and television. Macedo used to control 28 radio stations
and 850 temples. Due to its one million and a half followers, he has embarked
on an evangelistic campaign against animist cults. This campaign does not
lack fascist and xenophobic tendencies towards the black population. He
knows, however, to combine perfection with the themes that fascinates the
audience: success, wealth and healing by touching with hands for blessing.
His most prosaic goal is to seize the country, which brought him more
accusations that, for the moment, have not yet slowed his rise.
The influence of the Pentecostal Church and the success of its
subsidiaries still do not seem to be the result of chance or of Brazilians’
spiritual search. In 1984, in a report to the Vatican, the Brazilian Bishops
8
Le Monde Magazine, 25th of October 1994.
9
Pe larg, Jean-Marie Abgrall, La mécanique des sectes, Éditions Payot & Rivages, Paris
1996.
Conference denounced the CIA’s abusive seizure of the Pentecostal sects
and their use for mental and political manipulation.
«I am a man seeking truth. In this sense I do not pay attention to
the constitution, but to the Bible». These are the terms expressed in March
1982 by the General President Efrain Rios Montt, who had just taken
power in Guatemala Ciudad, following a trivial military coup. Adept of
the Church of the Verb, a fundamentalist sect in California, surrounded
by Alvaro Contreras and Francisco Bianchi, two other members of this
sect, President Montt only kept the power for seventeen months. Since
his departure, various Guatemalan sects compete for influence. There the
land is especially favourable, as 30% of the population belong to sects.
Similarly, following the sarin gas attack by the Aum sect, the
international investigation revealed the close ties between the Russian
political power and the sect. Asked about the investigation progress in
Russia, Vitali Savitski, chairman of the parliamentary committee on
religious organizations, said in July 1995: «The investigation was blocked
at the highest level of the State. The Aum sect trial will not happen».
Moreover, certainly, in Moscow, no real action has been undertaken in
order to clarify the relationship between Aum and the state services. Oleg
Lobov, Secretary of the Security Council, appears as one of the persons
responsible for the Aum’s introduction in Russia. In 1991, he was the
one who contacted Shoko Asahara on the pretext of collecting funds
for building a Russian-Japanese university. During his trip in Russia,
Asahara will meet Rouslan Khasboulatov, the Speaker of Parliamnet,
and Alexandre Routskoi, the vice-president of Russia.
“Today’s ever-changing face of sects has however a constant: the
desire to convert the whole planet, either freely, through proselytizing,
or, more prosaically, through developing networks of influence using
economy as good as the politics”10.
3. Christ is the truth that makes us truly free

There is no complete freedom outside the Incarnate Truth, or
enhypostasized in the divine-human person of Jesus Christ as the Son of God.
10
Flaubert Serge, Une secte au coeur de la République, Calmann-Lévy, Paris 1993, p. 54.
God the Father as Absolute Truth is testified by the Son from
eternity within intra-Trinitarian communion life, and in history, it is
testified by Christ, the Man-God and the God-Man. “Truth, or God
cannot be understand if we do not believe in His eternally existence with
the Son begotten of Him. That would be a «God» without love, namely
impossible. It would be an impersonal «God», or an essence subject to
laws under which it emanates a meaningless world. In such an essence
and in such a meaningless world there is no need for truth. The Son is
the light of the world, because it shows the existence of the supreme
truth, showing love without beginning, which is given as well to us, the
conscious creatures”11.
As early as the Old Testament, the Jews believed that only God
Himself has the laws of truth (Neh. 9, 13). They also believed that we
cannot approach God without the truth in our hearts (Ps. 14, 2) and that
our God is the God of truth (Ps. 30, 5) and he loves it (Ps. 50, 7). The
entire Psalm 88 can be axiological analysed as a psalm of the theology
of truth from an anthropological perspective. And not least, for us the
people, the greatest virtue is the truth (III Ezd. 4, 35).
The New Testament presents the fulfilment of Law as the grace
and the truth that came into the world only through the Incarnate Son
(John 1, 17, Eph. 4, 21). Without truth, we cannot approach Light (John
3, 21). Only the truth will set us free (John 8, 32) and the Saviour has
entitled Himself as The Truth (John 14, 6) and the bearer of the Spirit
of the Truth (John 14, 17): “and the Son is the Spirit and the Truth, more
rather Both are the Truth; or they are both the Truth together with the
Father. For only together are they the complete and perfect love. In Them
together is everything, or form Them together everything is explained
and finds a meaning”12. He Himself as the Son is the Word of God, which
is always the truth (John 17, 17).
An egocentric, purely autonomous, human reason, constantly asks,
just like Pilate: What is truth? (John 18, 38). For questionable reasons,
some people can change the truth with the lie (Rom. 1, 25). “The truth
11
Dumitru Stăniloae, note 110, to St. Cyril of Alexandria, Despre Sfânta Treime, in P. S. B.,
vol. 40, PHMBIROC, Bucharest 1994.
12
Ibidem, note 417.
is one with existence. The whole existence is the Truth par excellence.
The bounded ones are shreds of truth, or, if there is anything contrary to
existence, there is lie too”13. You can confess Christ only if you have the
truth within yourself (II Cor. 11, 10).
In everyday life, Christian must embrace the truth (Eph. 6, 14),
because the truth remains with us forever (II. 1, 2) if we fulfil the
Saviour’s commands (I In. 2, 4). “Only the truth is real. And the truth
lived through experience is also an uncreated independent existence, and
a world dependant on it, so caused”14.
Sharing with us the Incarnate Truth, His divine-human life through
the Sacraments in the Church, this condition makes us truly free, responsible
and aware of the mission that we have to accomplish in this secular society.
Hic et hunc the lie and the enslavement of sin is everywhere. Man lives
increasingly more aspects of a cycle spiritual life in which the two poles
are the pain and the pleasure that enchain human being.
Holding the Incarnate Truth, the Church must missionary engage
in the social plan, in a permanent dialogue with the civil society, with the
secular state, also guarantor of truth and freedom, but especially with its
institutions.
Conclusions
State ethics is rooted in Church morality, they are complementary
and the last fulfils the spiritual condition of the former.
There can be no current humanist ethics above the deified humanity
of Jesus Christ. He, for love, becomes Man, suffers for the man and gives
His life instead of the man. Christ is, and will remain forever, the Humanist
par excellence who makes his brothers personal entities. These entities
are completely free, have social awareness and responsibility that though
living in the world raise above it as some supporting on the one hand,
democracy as a means of civic life, on the other hand live in full freedom
and grace, and are fearless preachers of the Truth, of Jesus Christ.
13
Ibidem, note 269.
14
Ibidem, note 45.
Nicolae MORAR
Various Aspects in The Religiosity of Saint

Constantine The Great
Abstract
The correct understanding of the religious attitude of any great
personality in the history of the spirit presumes a minimal contextual
analysis. In the case of Saint Constantine (272-337), a careful study of
the historical, cultural, social, political and, obviously religious aspects,
of both the foregoing and of the contemporary to the illustrious sovereign
Roman world, is therefore, necessary for being able to understand the
dynamics of ideas that contributed to the delineation of his personality
and of his religiosity, which in fact we propose to show in this material.
Keywords:
Saint Constantine The Great, the Roman Pre-Constantinian world
1. Some religious paradigms of the Roman Pre-Constantinian

world
Starting with emperor Aurelianus (Lucius Domitius Aurelianus,
about 214-275) a strategy of revival for the Empire was elaborated, in
which moral aspects occupied a special place. This explains the fact that,
in the year 274, the sovereign made of the solar monotheism the official
State religion. What considerations were the basis for this decision? The
estimation that the territorial and the political unity of the Empire could
have been based on two pillars of a religious nature: a single religion and
the adoration of the emperor in all the occupied geographical regions - the
inscriptions on stone and the legends of the time acknowledge, however,
the fact that the sovereign became Deus Aurelianus, or Dominus et Deus1
for his subjects.
Aurelianus promoted Sol, his favourite god, to Rome. He built a
grandiose temple for him (in the year 274), made of the Palmyrian spoils2
and he merged, under the protection of Sol invictus = divinity of light, of heat
and of the creative force in nature, all the solar and the uranian divinities
of the subdued peoples (Apollo, Serapis, Mithras, Baal)3. Furthermore, he
designated a special board of priests, appointed from among the senators,
that was in charge with the religious ceremonies – every four years, the
board organized special festivities, dedicated to the solar god. As for the
propaganda in favor of the territorial and the political unity of the Empire,
this is confirmed by the coins of the time: on them there is the sovereign’s
effigy with the crown of rays on his head, with the globe and the whip
in his hand, accompanied by epithets like: “Undefeated”, “Peace maker”,
“Restorer of the Empire”, “Master of the Roman Empire”.
The same thing was done by Diocletian (Gaius Aurelius Valerius
Diocletianus Augustus 244-311) who took the name of Iovius, that is the
son of Iupiter and proclaimed himself akin to gods. Diocletian considered
himself to be the vicar of the Divinity on earth and the representative
of the living law of God4. Further, the Oriental conception of arts
made him give up the crown of laurels in favor of the diadem. As an
august sign, the diadem disclosed the fact that the sovereign’s selection
1
D. Tudor, Figuri de împăratați romani, vol. III, Bucharest, 1975, p. 53.
2
In the 1st century AD Palmyra came under Roman dominion, the city being raised to the
rank of “Roman colony” by the Roman emperor Caracalla (188-211). The city suffered
from the conflict between the Romans and the Sassanids (Persians) in 260. In 267 or 268
the queen of Palmyra, Septima Augusta Zenobia, declared the independence of the town.
In the year 272 Emperor Aurelianus defeated the Palmyrian troops and destroyed the town,
Zenobia being taken to Rome as a prisoner.
3
The sanctuary was built on the “Field of Mars”, following the plan of the Solar temple in
Baalbek (Syria). It was of a huge size owing to the colonnades of its courtyard, with large
porticoes and statues, dedicated to the solar divinities. Its ruins remained standing until the
6th century, when many of the columns were carried to Constantinople by Justinian, for
biulding the Hagia Sophia. C. Delvoye, Arta bizantină, trans. Florica-Eugenia Condurachi,
Bucharest, Meridiane, 1976, p. 23.
4
Bury, J., B., History of the Later Roman Empire, 1889, vol. I, p. 12. htp://penelope.uchicago.
edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/secondary/BURLAT/1*.html#1.
and investment was done by the Divinity, meanwhile generating the
widespread conviction that everything that was his own was iridescent
with sacredness: sacra were named the orders coming from him; the
palace he lived in was sacrum palatium; sacrum cubiculum was his
apartment, and his clothing was sacra vestis. In other words, the emperor
was Dominus for his subjects. It is certain, therefore, that the changes
of paradigm in the policy of the Roman imperialism were influenced
by the dynamics of the religious beliefs and of the philosophical ideas
and the theoretical constructs with impact on the civic consciousness
were taken by the Roman sovereigns and used in the political discourse.
Such a spiritual model with major influences on the imperial political
philosophy was Deus Aeternus.
Deus Aeternus5 – a celestial deity of oriental origin (probably
Chaldean) – permeated the Roman world, with its attributes and its
ritual, at the same time with the spreading of the Syrian gods, as it results
from the archeological materials6. Correlated by the Syrian priests with
the Primary factor, with Principium mundi, with the god situated beyond
time – the Jewish proselytism, with its Yahve7 and the Mithraism with
Caelus aeternus could have contributed to this representation – Deus
Aeternus, “the god with no beginning and no end”, doubtlessly stirred
interest among those, close to the sovereign, who were in charge with
the political strategies8.
5
Aeternus, combined with Deus, designated a special Oriental Divinity, comparable to
Caelus aeternus of the Mithraism. Deus Aeternus also covered the attributes of Aion-
Saeculum-Kronos-Ianus etc. The appellative contained the essence of Zurvan, god of
eternity and of destiny, of the initial fire, god of heaven, father of gods, the beginning of all
things in the world. Cumont, F., Les religions orientales dans le paganism romaine, Paris,
Librairie Orientaliste, 1929, p. 28sq. htp://archive. org/stream/MN40016ucmf_2# page/n5/
mode/2up.
6
The epithet Aeternus was added to some divinities identified as the gods: Iupiter, Sol,
Apollo, Silvanus, a.s.o.
7
Research in this field reveals trials of equating Deus Aeternus with other divinities, with the
Jewish Yahve, for instance. Silberman, L., H., art. God in Encyclopaedia Judaica, Second
Edition, vol. VII, USA, Keter Ltd. Thomson Gale Publishing House, 2007, pp. 652-669.
www.jevzajcg.com/judaizam/encyclopedia-judaica/encyclopaedia-judaica-v-07-fey-gor.
8
Such theories did not penetrate public consciousness: for the people, gods had always been
handsome, vigorous and strong. F. Cumont, op. cit., p. 192.
Things were the same with Neo-Platonism, with its Hen, with
The One, whom, owing to the abstraction of the philosophical language,
Plotin’s disciples (205-270)9 presented in the seductive images of the
mystical cults. Thus, the promotion of Sol invictus as the unique divinity
by Aurelianus and his successors, including Magnus Constantinus, was
more than natural. The emperors’ interest for the divinatory practices,
a direction developed by Iamblichos (about 242-325) with his mystical
Neo-Platonism, could also be explained in the same context. A subtle
mystagogue, adored by his disciples as a special being, as one who gave
orders to the demons and who spoke with the gods, Iamblichos was
teaching that he could provide, those who were interested, with means
of communication with the Divinity – how to approach Divinity or to
attract it to themselves, to hear it in their dreams or in oracles, or to know
directly from Divinity the nature and the plans for the world10.
2. Religion in the biography of Saint Constantine the Great

Emperor Constantine the Great made his debut on the stage of
history in the Roman Empire, in the year 310, when he was officially
recognized as augustus, being among the seven emperors blessed by
gods: Galerius, Licinius, Daia, Constantine, Maximian, Maxentius and
Domitius Alexandrus11. Like his father, he was loyal to Apollo12 and a
worshiper of the Invincible sun = Sol invictus and he considered himself
capable of sanctifying everything that he came into contact with13.
The sovereign’s religious sensibility was doubled by his wish to
master the most effective means of communication with Divinity: he
wanted to hear it’s will in dreams or in states of reverie, to know its
intentions – this was the period of time when superstitions, magical
practices, interpretation of dreams and other such naive beliefs were
9
Plotin intended to build in Campania, with the material help of emperor Gallienus (218-
268), a city-state in which to apply the organizational norms of Plato’s “Republic”.
10
Iamblichos, Misteriile egiptenilor, trans. T. Dinu, Iași, Polirom Publishing House, 2003.
11
In Gallia, Constantine was a wise ruler and was loved by both the population and the army.
I. Sarambei, N. Sarambei, Personalități ale lumii antice, Bucharest, Albatros Publishing
House, 1983, p. 95.
12
D. Tudor, op. cit., p. 70.
13
V. Muntean, Bizantinologie, vol. I., Timisoara, Învierea Publishing House, 1999, p. 58.
popular among all the social strata of the late Roman society. Our
supposition is confirmed, however, by the recordings of some of the old
writers, who monographed the great Roman emperor’s life.
The vision before the confrontation with Maxentius at Pons
Milvius (Vulture Bridge) or Saxa Rubra (Red Rocks) on Via Flaminia
(about 12 km from Rome), in 312, when, after a dream, or a reverie he
ordered the chrismon (H Greek, i.e. X and an R, also Greek, i.e. P)14 to
be applied on the soldiers’ shields or on the labarum (soldier flags) for
defeating the enemy15, or that vision connected with the setting up of
Constantinople, the sovereign evoking then the presence of an unseen
guide who was going in front of him to indicate the boundaries of the
future metropolis – both of them can be viewed in this same context16.
In the sense of the above mentioned, self-evident events followed
the victory in 312, like the decision of the Senate to dedicate it a “triumphal
arch”, a building that was finished in 314 and inaugurated on the 25th of
July 315. An analysis of the representations that appear on the monument
reveals, on the one hand, the desire of the Senate to promote the new
emperor among the former leaders adored and loved by the people and,
14
The chrismon represents the name and the abbreviation of Jesus Christ and it appears in
association with the basic symbols of early Christianity.
15
In 312 a conflict with Maxentius, another Christian (according to latest research), was
carried out. Then certain visions could have happened. There are, however, some
discrepancies in their narration. Lactantius speaks about only one dream that Constantine
could have had on the eve of the fight with Maxentius, near Rome, after which he ordered
, the next day, to have the monograph of Jesus applied on the soldiers’ shields. Unlike the
Latin writer, Eusebius of Caesarea places this revelation in Gallia, while Constantine was
heading to Italy. He narrates that the sign of the Son of Man could have been shown the
emperor in the sky, at noon accompanied by the words: “In hoc signo vinces = By this sign
you will conquer”. At night, in a dream, he was ordered to make a labarum (a soldier flag)
and to apply Christian signs on it. Lactantius, De mortibus persecutorum (Despre morțile
persecutorilor), trans. Claudiu T. Arieșan, Timișoara, Ed. Amarcord, 2000, XLIV-XLV.
Eusebius of Caesarea, Viața lui Constantin cel Mare, trans. Radu Alexandrescu, Bucharest,
Publishing House of the Mission and Bible Institute of the Romanian Orthodox Church,
1991, I, 28, I.
16
Philostorgios, Historia ecclesiastica, II, 9.The legend relates that the sovereign led the
procession of establishing the territory of the new town. The bewilderment of those surprised
of the impressive dimensions of the new town was met by the emperor with the following
remark: I will go until the unseen guide going ahead will ask me to stop! Banescu, M.,
Istoria Imperiului bizantin (313 AD-610 AD), Bucharest, Anastasia, 2000, p. 70.
on the other hand, the sovereign’s religious orientation17. The inscription
on the atic gives witness for the second aspect. It is identical on both
facades of the arch and it has the following content:
“Imp(eratori) Caes(ari) Fl(avio) Constantino Maximo

/ P(io) F(elici) Augusto S(enatus) P(opulus)q(ue) R(omanus)
/ quod instinctu divinitatis mentis / magnitudine cum
exercitu suo / tam de tyranno quam de omni eius / factione
uno tempore iustis / rem publicam ultus est Constantino
Maximo / P(io) F(elici) Augusto S(enatus ) P(opulus)q(ue)
R(omanus) / quod instinctu divinitatis mentis / magnitudine
cum exercitu suo / tam de tyranno quam de omni eius /
factione uno tempore iustis / rem publicam ultus est armis /
arcum triumphis insignem dicavit”18.
What does the inscription want to reveal? Some of the sovereign’s

qualities, as his brilliance of mind, his force as a strategist, but also a
special gift, namely that he got inspired “from above”. Furthermore,
besides the aforementioned inscription, there are the portraits of Hadrian
on the arch, reworked in order to represent Constantine in hunting and in
sacrificial scenes. Hence, we understand that, in the view of the Roman
aristocracy, the sovereign was an adorer of Sol and the most important
priest of the solar divinity.
Even if the official divination of the emperors was banned by
Christianity, Constantine did not hesitate, as we have already shown, to
consider that he had been “chosen”: “I myself, then” – said the emperor
– “was the instrument whose services He chose, and esteemed suited
for the accomplishment of his will. Accordingly [...] through the aid of
divine power I banished and utterly removed every form of evil which
prevailed, in the hope that the human race, enlightened through my
instrumentality, might be recalled to a due observance of the holy laws of
God, and at the same time our most blessed faith might prosper under the
17
I. Sarambei, N. Sarambei, op. cit., p. 96.
18
Broadhead, W., Triumphal Arches of Titus, Septimius Severus, and Constantine. htp://web.
mit.edu/course/21/21h.405/www/ArchesOfTitus/constantine-art.html.
guidance of his almighty hand”19. In other words, he thought of himself
to be responsible for the salvation of his subjects, to be a man called to
guide humanity to the true religion20.
That is why after the year 312 Constantine the Great declared
himself Christian, but at the same time he perpetuated pagan traditions21.
Thus, for decorating the new foundation, he brought to Constantinople,
from the towns of Asia and Greece, the most precious artifacts they had.
The statues of the gods and of the heroes, of the wise and of the poets
from ancient times were displayed for embellishing the new town.
For example the Forum raised in memory of the siege of old
Byzantion, had, at its two entrances, two triumphal arches, and the
porticoes that surrounded it from all sides, were decorated with statues.
Then, in the middle, a huge porphyry column rose and the statue of
Apollo, brought from Athens or from a town in Phrygia, dominated on
top of it. The representation of the god of light, with a halo of brilliant
rays that surrounded his image, with the scepter in his right hand and the
globe, on which the winged Victoria put her leg, to the left, was in fact a
representation of the sovereign himself22.
“The Circus” or the “Hippodrome”, again, had, on the axis that
divided the arena into two parts (the so-called spina), a bronze column,
made of three entwined snakes, on whose heads was placed the famous
golden tripod, dedicated by the Greeks to the temple of Delphi and
brought there by the sovereign to give beauty to the edifice23. In their
turn, the popular baths, or Zeuxippus24 were decorated with marble
columns, with numerous mosaics and more than eighty bronze statues.
19
Eusebiu de Cezarea, Viata lui Constantin cel Mare, II, 28, 1. Translator’s note: The Bagster
translation, revised by Ernest Cushing Richardson, Ph.D., Librarian and Associate Professor
in Hartford Theological Seminary.
20
A. Gabor, Biserica și Statul în primele patru secole, Bucharest, Sofia Publishing House,
2003, pp.191 sq.
21
D. Tudor, op. cit., p.70.
22
M. Bănescu, Istoria Imperiului Bizantin, p.71.
23
M. L. Rautman, Daily Life in the Byzantine Empire, Greenwood Press, 2006, p. 67 sq.
24
According to Greek mythology, Zeuxippus was the son of Apollo and of the nymph Syllis.
Smith, W., Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, London, 1873, art.
Zeuxippus www.ancientlibrary.com/smith-bio.
Some of them represented historical figures, like Homer, Hesiod, Plato,
Aristotle, Demosthenes, Julius Caesar, Vergil, while others represented
gods and mythical heroes25.
Finally, the Palace of the Senate and the Lausus Palace, both of
them were decorated with statues of gods – to this collection belonged
the statue of Zeus of Olympia, sculpted by Phidias (about 500 B. C.),
Aphrodite of Knidos, made by Praxiteles26, Hera of Samos and Athena
Lindos, as well as the statues of Eros and Kairos, while a wall was
dedicated to the animals27. The evoked representations – historical and
mythological – starting from the year 388, were destroyed following the
decision of Theodosius the Great (379-395).
Moreover, as it was customary, the august dedicated the
founded town to a Greek goddess, to Tyhe28 and, besides the names of
Constantinople and The New Rome, he also gave it that of Antusa =
The Flourishing29. Thye had her own statue in Constantinople, and she
was portrayed on the coins of the time too. Covered with a long chiton
(tunic) and a cloak, also a long one, sitting on the throne, with her legs
leaning on the front part of a ship, she was wearing a wall crown on her
head (modiolos)30 and in her left hand she was carrying the horn filled
with fruits.
What do the above evoked issues indicate? The fact that, in
parallel with coming closer to Christianity, The Great August continued
to be responsive to the Greek-Roman cultural and spiritual values.
Nevertheless, the year 313 represented a turning point: Constantine
25
Istoria declinului și a prabusirii Imperiului Roman, vol. I, trans. Dan Hurmuzescu,
Bucharest, Minerva Publishing House, 1076, pp.14sq.
26
Some researchers claimed that there were two sculptors named Praxiteles. One of them
could have been contemporary with Phidias, and the other, his grandson. The repetition of
a name in different generations was something habitual in ancient Greece. C. Rolley, La
Sculpture Grecque II: la periode classique.
27
J. Elsner, Imperial Rome and Christian Triumph, Oxford University Press, 1998, pp. 189 sq.
28
Tyhe – daughter of Oceanus, or of Zeus – was, in Greek mythology, goddess of destiny, of
fortuitous chance or of fateful misfortune. Kernbach, V., Dictionar de mitologie generala,
Bucharest, 1989, article: Thye.
29
Antusa, fata cu plete de aur .Basme populare grecesti collected by G. A. Megas, trans.
Maria Marinescu, Bucharest, 1971.
30
A. Gabor, op. cit., p.185.
abandoned the linear history, dominated by Paganism, introducing
Christianity into the religious equation.
The fact that he was preoccupied with the doctrine of the new
religion is demonstrated by the edict of Milan, where he insisted on
promoting the principle of officially recognizing Christianity as one of
the religions in the Empire. And the measures taken after that, at the level
of the imperial court, tell everything: he brought close to him bishop
Osius of Cordoba – a well credited personality in the Christian world of
the time – as a consultant in doctrinal issues and Lactantius, a well-known
Christian writer, for taking care of his sons’ education, in the spirit of the
Gospel values. At the same time, bishop Eusebius of Caesarea became
one of his closest collaborators, the previously mentioned Hierarch being
the one who elaborated a political theology, according to which both the
political power and the religious one were united under one authority:
that of the emperor. Consequently, although exterior, the state authority
became effective for the Church, and the authority of the Church, even if
autonomous, was subordinated to the exercise of the worldly power, to
the decisions of the temporal authority31.
The documents of the time also speak illustratively about the
emperor’s way of thinking. It follows from them that the emperor
regarded himself as “bishop“, “bishop of those outside” or “common
bishop”32, and also Pontifex Maximus, a position from which he led the
two great religions – Paganism and Christianity. He did not view himself
as a “theologian”, but he watched the unity of the church, obviating any
ecclesial schism, for keeping religious peace in the Empire.
The favors done for the Christians were essential: the Christian
clergy was relieved of the “urban labor conscriptions = munera”33;
Christian symbols were printed on coins – pagan images disappeared
from the monetary emissions in 323 – faith could be practiced in
conditions of total freedom34:
31
M. Meslin, Caesaropapisme, in Encyclopaedia Universalis, vol. V, Paris, 1990, p. 262.
32
Eusebiu, op. cit., IV, 4, 24.
33
V. Muntean, op. cit., p. 57.
34
Ibidem.
“Those who had been sentenced to work in mines or
to public works, or to serve women or dancers and those
who had been hit with infamous action, he forgave. As for
the army, he let the civilians choose whether to continue
wearing the uniform they had or, to retire from the army,
enjoying an honorable leave”35.
Other initiatives are related like this: “Restoring freedom for all
– it is about the imprisoned – he put them back to their rights. If those
sentenced to death had had their goods confiscated, he decided that
the legacy should have been returned to their closest relatives, and if
such relatives had not existed, the right of inheritance should have been
returned to any provincial church”36.
The reformatory emperor was reproached that he was baptized on
the death bed, but in the first Christian centuries many catechumens (those
who wanted to be baptized and were in the period of learning the rules
of faith) postponed the baptismal for years, in order to be really worthy
of receiving this Sacred Mystery. Anyway, his contemporary biographers
appreciated that he was “worthily” recorded among the gods37.
In conclusion, we are separated by an extensive period of time
from the days of Constantine the Great. Why are we “reevaluating” him?
Because he was the personality that has reconfigured the spiritual history
of mankind and, especially, he rewrote it in an exemplary manner. For
his merits and for the service he rendered to Christianity, The Church
honors him in a distinct way: he was put abreast of the saints, named
“alike to the Apostles” and attributed Solomon’s wisdom and David’s
virtue.
35
Casiodor, Scrieri, trans. Liliana and Anca Manolache, Bucharest, Publishing House of the
Mission and Bible Institute of the Romanian Orthodox Church, Bucharest, 1998, IX, 44.
36
Ibidem.
37
Eutropius, op. cit., X, 8.
Adrian D. COVAN
Triadologic doctrine on Symbols of faith and

baptismal practices during the antenicean
period
Abstract
Christianity, as a way of life, involves inner assumption of the two
principles raised by Christ the Saviour, that is: faith and confession.
They stand in a harmonious synergy, and that is the reason why, faith is
expressed by making confession while confession reveals the saving virtue
of faith. Brought together, they make up for what we call: The symbol of
faith. The sacraments of the Church are dependent on confession of faith,
otherwise we would not be able to speak about Christian life raised by
the graceful power of the Holy Spirit.
Keywords:
Catechesis, Symbol of faith, Baptism, Holy Trinity, Dogma.
The history of Christianity contains important testimonies about

the doctrine and practices of the Sacrament of the Holy Baptism, not
only as a debut act in the life of the Church, but also as a consequence,
in factum, a confession of faith for those who want to receive Baptism
in order to effectively take part in the Life and Devine Nature1. Saint
Paul antithetically presents Adam the old and Adam the new (Christ,
Jesus), making thus the distinction between the old man and the spiritual
one2, without hesitating to mention the ontological unity between us
1
II Pt. 1, 4; I Jn 1, 2.
2
Rom. 5, 17-18.
and Christ3. Therefore, the Apostle of the gentiles becomes the greatest
preacher of spiritual benefits arising from Baptism – passing through the
state of sacrifice and resurrection – thus becoming dead towards the sin,
but eternally believers in God4.
Since the beginning, there has been preaching within the Church
(kerygma), preaching of Christ as Son of God, the creedal believes of
the Holy Trinity developing, while in the West, in the Roman Church,
starting with the year 140, a baptismal confession has risen, confession
which in essence represents the essence of apostolic preaching5. There
has never been a period in the history of Christianity for the Church to be
devoid of belief – Ecclesia sine Symbolis nulla – every part of the entire
area touched by Jesus, having its own confession (credo, regula fidei, tÕ
sÚmbolon tÁj p…stewj).
Catechesis or initiation into Christian teaching, as a preamble
into the life of the Church, is present in most of the cases analysed,
first in the New Testament, during the period after the Pentecost over
the Holy Apostles and the foundation of the Christian Church, and for
later, during the post-apostolic period6. It contains the exposure of the
Trinitarian Doctrine which the disciples of our Saviour have taught it
to those who wanted to become Christian, under the command received
from our Lord Jesus Christ7. This results from the baptismal creed itself,
uttered at the time of the second birth bath: „I believe in Jesus Christ the
Son of God”8. We are dealing exclusively with a Trinitarian confession
considering the principle cited by Saint Paul9, but it can also be regarded
as an explosion of the binitarian creedal confession of Saint Peter
towards Christ: „You are Christ, Son of the Living God”10, which has
become a fidei rule for apostolic Christianity. As we can notice in many
places in the New Testament writings, some basic formulas, present in
3
Rom. 6, 5.
4
Rom. 6, 11.
5
Adolf von Harnack, Istoria dogmei, translated by Walter Fotescu, Bucureşti, Harald, 2007, p. 89.
6
Facts 2, 36-41; 8, 30-38; 10, 44-48; 16, 30-33.
7
Mat. 28, 19-20; Mk. 16, 15-16.
8
Facts 8, 37.
9
I Cor. 12, 3.
10
Mat. 16, 16.
the teachings of the Church, were binitarian, and not Trinitarian in their
verbal forms, making thus the connection between the first two Persons
of the Godhead, without referring to the Holy Spirit11. Why? Because
together with Christian teachings heresies has been born. Some of these
emphasized the humanity of Christ at the expense of His divinity, others
aimed at His deity, separating the Word of God from the Man Jesus
(germs of Nestorian heresy). That is why, at the heart of the apostles
and disciples principles stood the Person of the Son of God incarnated,
found in a special and unique relationship God, the Father. However, the
tripartite belief formula, consisting of listing the three hypostases of the
Holy Trinity: Father, Son and of the Holy Spirit, are the ones that shall
play an important role in establishing the confession of faith12.
Transiting the apostolic age and reaching into the post-apostolic
one, we observe that creedal formulas uttered at Baptism are extended.
In the primary tradition of the Church, Baptism or enlightenment directly
concerned also the moral and religious training of the person involved:
„Regarding baptism, let us baptise as follows: After you have said all the
above mentioned, baptise in the name of the Father, of the Son and of
the Holy Spirit ...”13. About the indissoluble connection between Baptism
and Eucharist, the latter being administered to the neophyte immediately
after baptism, we find written: „No one shall eat, no one shall drink from
your Eucharist, but only those who have been baptized in the name of
God. Because, on this matter the Lord said: Do not give the holy things
to dogs (Matthew 7, 6)”14.
These texts have been subject to various interpretations by certain
theologians of our days. For example, the Greek professor of Patrology,
Stelianos Papadopoulos, does not even mention them in his analysis
11
I Cor. 8, 6; Col. 1, 15-16; Heb. 1, 1-3.
12
Remus Mihai Feraru, “Simbolul Niceo-Constantinopolitan: Origine, dezvoltare şi
semnificaţie”, in vol. Sensul lucrurilor, A. Tat, G. Vǎlean şi C. Vǎlean (editors), Cluj-Napoca,
Napoca Star, 2012, p. 35.
13
Învǎţǎturǎ a celor Doisprezece Apostoli, VII, 1, translated by priest D. Fecioru,
collection Părinţi şi Scriitori Bisericeşti, Bucureşti, Publishing House of the
Mission and Bible Institute of the Romanian Orthodox Church, 1979, p. 28.
14
Ibidem, IX, 5, p. 31.
dedicated to that document15. Other specialists provide us just one
information, and this briefly concerning such fragments. According to
their opinion, within chapters 7, 8, 9 and 10 of the Didache, its author has
gathered very ancient liturgical material being influenced by the practices
of the Jewish blessings uttered at the table16. We do not know to what
extent, Jewish baptisms represented a source of inspiration for the rite of
Christian baptism, but what is known, based on the research conducted
by specialists in special liturgical texts is that, the central formula of
baptismal Sacrament consists in repeating the words of its establishment,
words spoken by our Lord Jesus Christ the Saviour17.
However, a question arises: is there or not a confession of faith
which precedes the baptismal act? The answer is the affirmative one.
Before the celebrant seen (bishop or priest) to utter the formula of the
Sacrament, the baptised person must publicly confess his faith in God
and in Jesus Christ the Saviour, true God and true man. And „although
the presence of faith of the converted person is not explicitly stated, the
former is evolved in receiving the catechesis and in the reference made
to the divine name”18. Therefore, no one is baptised until thoroughly
embracing the precepts of Christian faith and until confessing, with all
due conviction, the general belief of the Church. Performed in primary
stage, during the Paschal night, Christian baptism had engraved in it the
Paschal Mystery, the mystery of passing from death to life. It is therefore
understood that „baptism was created as having the significance directly
tight to the new time whose celebration and expression were the
Easter celebrations. And finally, Baptism and Anointment were always
committed through Eucharist – which is a sacrament of the Church
arising towards the Kingdom of Heaven, sacrament of the world to be”19.
15
Stelianos Papadopoulos, Patrologia, vol. I, translated by Adrian. Marinescu, Bucureşti,
Bizantină, 2006, p. 165-168.
16
Claudio Moreschinni, Enrico Norelli, Istoria literaturii creştine vechi greceşti şi latine,
vol. I, translated by Hanibal Stănciulescu şi Gabriela Sauciuc, Iaşi, Polirom, 2001, p. 148.
17
Mt. 28, 19.
18
Everett Ferguson, Baptism in the Early Church: history, theology and liturgy in the first five
centuries, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, 2009, p. 203.
19
Alexander Schmemann, Pentru viaţa lumii. Sacramentele şi Ortodoxia, translated by Aurel
Jivi, Bucureşti, Publishing House of the Mission and Bible Institute of the Romanian
Anointment or Baptism of the Holy Spirit must be understood as
a Pentecost of Christianity, through which it becomes full of the Holy
Spirit20, since the Holy Spirit leads us to peace and joy of the Kingdom of
Heaven, providing the Eucharist an eschatological dimension. Pentecost
baptismal offers us the chance of continuously being into God as His
Sons. It is, if you want, the man’s ordination towards himself, in order to
reach what God would want to become for eternity: „I into them and You
into Me... I want that, wherever I am they shall be with Me”21.
Water is not just the expression of cleaning through Baptism, but
also, the certainty of death of Logos incarnated on the cross22, becoming
thus a major element of human creation, but not any kind of water, but that
water over which comes down „the purifying work of the Holy Trinity
above the supernatural”23. Water, in the Johannine sense, corresponds to
one of the hypostases of the Holy Trinity, and blood likewise24. It, even
during the public activity of Jesus Christ our Saviour, was prefigured
by Him as being the image of the Holy Trinity in the World25, thus
remaining a vital element also after His raising into Heavens, together
with blood, for acquiring eternal life26. Water and blood become, in the
ecclesial assembly sacrosanct, commitment and fulfillment of the fire
Easter – Pentecost – at every Baptismal Eucharistic Synaxis. In the Book
of Genesis on which Pneuma spermatikos – Life-giving Spirit – has
perpetrated on primary water (term designating primary material chaos)
which the Trinitarian Good shall organize, dividing it into the elements
created afferent to every day of the conception cycle of material cosmos.
In this way, the ruah of God (the noun used at feminine to highlight
the maternal dimension of the Holy Spirit in relation to the creation)
provides primary water a spiritualized breath, brooding it, just as the
Orthodox Church, 2001, p. 81.
20
Facts 4, 8; 7, 55; 13, 9.
21
Jn 17, 23-24.
22
Jn 19, 34.
23
Molitfelnic, Bucureşti, Publishing House of the Mission and Bible Institute of the Romanian
Orthodox Church, 2002, p. 34.
24
Jn I, 5, 8.
25
Jn 4, 14; 7, 38-39.
26
Jn 3, 5; 6, 54-56.
chicken germinates the eggs found under it27. The Spirit of the Lord was
preparing primary material to receive the Creative word, since everything
was created by the power of the Word28. Thus, water, by Pneuamtic
sacralization becomes, „the symbol and matrix of life, constructive
nature of the livings”29.
Saint Justine, Martyr and Philosopher, is the first Christian
apologist who provides precious information concerning Baptism.
Several names of the Sacrament are being mentioned, of which:
regeneration, enlightenment and bath. Christian baptism is associated
with biological birth – when speaking about adults’ baptism, but it
is a wanted and conscious birth, –, it exists a direct reference to the
conversation between Jesus the Saviour and Nicodemus: „Epeita
¥gontai Ûf’ ¹mîn œnqa Ûdwr ™st…, kaˆ trÒpon ¢nagenn»sewj,
Ön kaˆ ¹me‹j aÙtoˆ ¢nagenn»qhmen, ¢nagennîntai: ™p’ ÑnÒmatoj
g¦r toà PatrÕj tîn Ólwn kaˆ despÒtou Qeoà, kaˆ toà swtÁroj
¹mîn ‘Ihsoà Cristoà kaˆ PneÚmatoj `Ag…ou, tÕ ™n tù Ûdati tÒte
loutrÕn poioàntai”30 (Then, they are taken by us, into a place where
there is water and they are reborn in the same way we have been ourselves
reborn; they shall take then a bath in the water in the name of the Father
and of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit).
„In the middle of second century, following the merger between
the Christological kerygmatic sequence and the Trinitarian baptismal
formula, the Apostolic Creed or the Roman Creed came into being at
Rome, Creed which is set at the basis of both the Baptismal creed -
transmitted by Hippolytus of Rome in the Apostolic tradition – but also
in the declarative formulation of the Roman Creed”31.
27
Sfântul Vasile cel Mare, Omilii la Hexaimeron, Omilia a II-a, VI, translated by priest
D. Fecioru, collection Părinţi şi Scriitori Bisericeşti, Bucureşti, Publishing House of the
Mission and Bible Institute of the Romanian Orthodox Church 1986, p. 92.
28
Jn 1, 3.
29
Christos Yannaras, Abecedar al credinţei, translated by Constantin Coman, Bucureşti,
Bizantinǎ, 1996, p. 166.
30
Sfântul Iustin Martirul şi Filosoful, Apologia I, 61, 3, in Vasile Ionescu şi Nicolae Ştefănescu,
Antologie din literatura patristică greacă a primelor secole, Bucureşti, Publishing House
of the Mission and Bible Institute of the Romanian Orthodox Church, 1960, p. 80.
31
Ioan I. Ică jr., Canonul Ortodoxiei. Canonul apostolic al primelor secole, vol. I, Sibiu,
Among the church writers that have informed us on the practice
of baptism in the Christian sunset, the first one who must be remindet
is Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullian (cca 160-220). From Tertullian
we have the oldest treatise on Baptism, consisting in precise instructions
given to those who prepared for baptism and to the newly born, often
sprinkled with anti-heretical accents. The Latin writer remembers a series
of pagan rituals which involved the use of water, highlighting that the
waters of the unbelievers are barren waters, while the water of Christian
Baptism abounds of the Holy Spirit, which comes down and stays upon
them, while the angels communicate His power32. The great apologist
underlines the relationship between the Trinitarian ritual of immersion
into the water of Baptism and the number of persons in the Holy Trinity,
mentioning that, our Lord Jesus Christ, after having sent His Apostles the
promise of His Father, the Spirit of Truth, „he shall send them to baptise
in the name of the Father and of Son and of the Holy Spirit, not in (the
name) of just one of them. Therefore, not once, but three times, and each
time in the name of only one Person”33. Every immersion was preceded
by a questioning on the principles of the rightful faith: „We are immersed
three times, while answering the most detailed questions than the ones
mentioned by God in the Gospel34.
Additional information on the practice of baptismal act, related
to the ones presented by Tertullian in his works, we find out from the
documents attributed to Saint Hippolytus of Rome (170-236) that is
apostolic tradition. The most important data cover the catechumens’
period proceeding baptism. As far as the training of catechumens is
concerned, it takes place during a three years period, with the possibility
of its reduction according to the progress and the moral conduct of
catechumens. The catechetical lesson is followed payers and lying of
the catechumens’ hands. Catechetical training ends with a new analysis
Deisis / Stavropoleos, 2008, p. 209.

32
E. Ferguson, Baptism in the Early Church: history, theology and liturgy in the first five
centuries, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, 2009, p. 336.
33
Tertulian, Adversus Praxeam, XXVI, translated by Dionisie Pîrvuloiu, București, Polirom,
2007, p. 555.
34
E. Ferguson, op. cit., p. 341.
of catechumen life, in order to observe if the latter assumed its Christian
living, followed by the proper training to receive baptism. During
such a period, the catechumens were being exorcised through special
prayers and by lying of hands. The Easter Sunday is the day dedicated to
receiving Baptism as a liturgical act, although training was initiated even
from previous days. Starting with the Holy Thursday of the Holy Week,
catechumens washed their hands, on Friday fasted and on Saturday they
were being exorcised, they blew over everyone’s forehead, ears and
nostrils. Saturday night they devoted themselves to paying and vigils,
receiving the last advice before baptism. Baptism was performed in a
stream, except for necessity, when any kind of water could be used.
The ordinance of baptism began with the blessing of the water, at night.
Candidates for baptism took of their old clothes and they put on new
ones. The newly baptized were called enlightened or neophytes and they
went around dressed with their new clothing, of white color, during the
entire Holy Week (from Easter until Thomas Sunday). Although at the
beginning Baptism was performed only on the Easter Sunday, in time
it began to be celebrated also in the eve of other Great Feasts: Birth,
Baptism, Whitsuntide, Palm Sunday. As a reminiscence (and proof) of
this aspect, there is the singing of the Divine Liturgy: „All of you baptized
into Christ, in Christ you have been dressed...”, instead of Trisagion.
Adults answered themselves to faith questions, while for children the
parents or somebody from the family answered, confessing the child’s
faith. If many persons were being baptized, the first ones baptized were
the newly born babies, followed by the elders, first the men and than
women. Before the baptismal act, the bishop blessed the holy oil put into
two vessels: the one from the first vessel through a thanking prayer, the
holy oil being called: thanksgiving oil, and the one placed in the second
vessel by an exercitation prayer, the holy oil being called: exercitation
oil. Following the ritual, every servant took each candidate at a time,
asking him to renounce Satan and said: „I renounce you Satan, and all
your services and all your deeds”35.
The proceeding continued with the anointing with pre-baptismal
35
Hippolite de Rome, La tradition apostolique d’âpres les anciennes versions, introduction,
traduction et notes par Bernard Botte, SC 11 bis., Paris, 1968, p. 86.
oil of exorcism, accompanied by the saying: „Any evil spirit shall depart
from thee”. Immediately, the person that followed to be baptized entered
the water accompanied by a performer. A set of questions concerning
the main teachings of faith followed. The priest, lying his hand on
the man’s head, asked him: „Credis in Deum Patrem omnipotentem?;
Credis in Christum Iesum, Filium Dei, qui natus est de Spiritu Sancto ex
Maria virgine, et crucifixus sub Pontio Pilato et mortuus est et sepultus,
et resurrexit die tertia vivus a mortuis, et ascendit in caelis et sedit ad
dexteram Patris, venturus iudicare vivos et mortuos ?; Credis in Spiritu
Sancto, et sanctam Ecclesiam et carnis resurrectionem?”36 – Do you
believe in God our Father, the Saviour (Almighty)?”. The candidate
answered: „I do (believe)”, and the priest emerged him for the first time.
Then the second question followed: „Do you believe in Jesus Christ, the
Son of God, Who was born through the Holy Spirit from Virgin Mary
and Who was crucified under Pontius Pilate and died (and was buried)
and the third day rose from the dead and is seated at the right hand of the
Father, Who shall come to judge the living and the dead?” „I do”, and
the candidate was emerged for the second time. The priest continued:
„Do you believe in the Holy Spirit, in the Holy Church and in the
resurrection of the body?”, and after the third answer, he emerges him
for the last time. After coming out of the water, the priest administers the
new Christian the second anointment with the thanksgiving oil, saying
the formula: „I anoint you with holly oil in the name of Jesus Christ”37.
Those baptized and anointed got dressed into new clothing,
enlightened and they came into the church kneeling before the bishop,
who put his hands over them, praying God, the One Who has forgiven
all his sins and reborn them through the bath of birth, to bestow on them
the grace of the Holy Spirit, to be able to eternally fulfil His Holy will.
Then the bishop took the holy oil of thanksgiving and with his hand
marked the foreheads of the baptized ones, in order to fulfil the post-
baptismal anointment performed by the priest, saying for each of them:
36
Heinrich Denzinger, Kompendium der Glaubensbekenntnisse und kirchlichen
Lehrentscheidungen, herausgegeben von Peter Hünermann, 39. Auflage, Herder, Freiburg
im Breisgau – Basel – Rom – Wien, 2001, 10, p. 24.
37
Ibidem, p. 87.
„I anoint you with Holy oil in the name of God our Father, the Saviour
(Almighty), in the name of Jesus Christ and of the Holy Spirit”. He then
kisses each of them saying: „God be with you”; and they answer: „And
with your spirit too”. At this point, the newly Christianized could pray
together with the faithful ones, being completely integrated within the
great Christian family38.
Saint Irenaeus of Lyon (+200), rightfully considered one of the
greatest Christian apologists, fact which results from his memorable
work entitled: Against Heresies, provides us a model of confession,
spread also as content due to its considerable apologist character, but
bettered structured as far as the healthy doctrine of the 2nd century Church
is concerned. Therefore, let-a follow the text of such confession:
„Even if the Church is spread all over the earth until its borders,
they have received from the Apostles and their apprentices, faith
in One God, Almighty Father, Who created the heaven and the
earth and the sea and all there is in it; and in One Jesus Christ,
Son of God, Who has incarnated for our salvation; and into the
Holy Spirit, Who confessed through his prophets God’s works
of salvation, the (two) comings and birth from Virgin Mary, the
passions and the resurrection from the dead, the work with the
body of our beloved Jesus Christ, our Lord, in heaven and His
return from heaven into the glory of the Father, to gather all
and to resurrect the bodies of the entire humanity, so that before
Jesus Christ, our Lord and God, our Saviour and King, to leave,
according to the will of the Unseen Father, all the knee (powers)
of heavenly matters, of the earthly ones and of the underworld
and to praise Him since He has the rightly judgement over all evil
spirits and over angels, who send (His command), as well as those
who have casted (Him), and those without God and those unjust
and wicked and blasphemers of God among men, He provided
eternal fire; and the righteous and holy, and those who have kept
His commends and have preserved his commands, either from the
start or after their return, He gives them life and immortality and
38
Ibidem, p. 89.
surrounds them with eternal glory. This confession and faith was
received by the Church, as above mentioned, although spread on
the entire earth and carefully preserved as if living into a house;
also, it is believed as if possessing a soul and a heart; it also
confesses, teaches and sends this in a courageous way as if having
a single mouth”39.
Based on the already existing tradition, both in the Sunrise and in

the Sunset, Saint Ambrose of Mediolanum, called Saint Basil of Sunset,
exposes us, in this way, the Trinitarian baptismal creed questioning
usages as practiced in the West since Ancient times:
„Were you asked: Do you believe in God – our Father the Lord
(all Mighty)? You answered: I do. And you were emerged, and
then buried. Then you were asked: Do you believe in Jesus
Christ and in His cross (passion, death)? I do. And you were
emerged. Thus being buried together with Christ; for those
buried together with Christ they rose with him. The third time
you were asked: Do you also believe in the Holy Spirit? Your
answer was: I do. And you were emerged for the third time,
since your triple confession erased all the wrongs from your
previous life”40. In the paper De sacramentis, Saint Ambrose
considered baptismal tradition of the Roman Church as being
inferior to the one from Milan. The later provided that together
with baptism the washing of the neophytes’ feet should be
performed41.
In the West, the Roman-Apostolic creed was imposed as official

confession, considered the old Creed of the Roman Church: „Credo in
Deum Patrem omnipotentem et in Christum Iesum, Filium eius unicum
39
Sfântul Irineu de Lyon, Adeversus haeresis, I, 10, 1-2, translated by A. Rouseau and
L.Doutreleau, S.C. 264, Paris, Du Cerf, 1979, p. 157-159.
40
Ambrosie, De sacramentis, 2.7.20, apud Jaroslav Pelikan, Credo. Ghid istoric şi teologic
al crezurilor şi mǎrturisirilor de credinţǎ în tradiţia creştinǎ, translated by Mihai Silviu
Chirilǎ, Bucureşti, Polirom, 2010, p. 327-328.
41
Jn 13, 8.
Dominum nostrum qui natus est de Spiritu Sancto e Maria Virgine, qui
sub Pontio Pilato crucifixus est et sepultus, tertia die resurrexit, ascendit
in coelos, sedet ad dexteram Patris, unde venturus est iudicare vivos
et mortuos et in Spiritum Sanctum, sanctam ecclesiam remissionem
peccatorum carnis resurrectionem”42 (I believe in God, all Mighty Father
and in Jesus Christ, His Unique Son, our Lord, Who was born from the
Holy Spirit and from Virgin Mary, Who was crucified under Pontius
Pilate and was buried and the third day rose from the dead and is seated
at the right hand of the Father, Who shall come to judge the living and
the dead and in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Church, into forgiveness of
sins and resurrection of flash).
All these confessions of baptismal faith have generated in time
the appearance of dogmatic symbols of the Universal Church, by their
presentation in Triadologic synods (the first two Ecumenical synods)
constituting a source of inspiration for the Nicene-Cosmopolitan
dogmatic Oros, which, in time, shall replace local baptismal symbols in
the entire Christianity.
As previously observed, until the fourth century, interrogative
creeds were used (the candidate to baptism was asked about his faith,
and he would answer by saying I do/I believe) as elements of baptism
ordinance. It has been preserved up to nowadays, in the ritual prior the
Holy Baptism, the doctrine interrogation made up of several questions
and answers, in Trinitarian form:
„Do you renounce Satan and all his works and all his
servants and all his deeds? – I renounce!
Have you renounced Satan? – I have!
Do you unite with Christ? – I unite with Christ!
Have you united with Christ? – I have united with Christ!”43.
Coming back to the West, we find in the common practice of

local Churches several confessions of faith, such as: Baptismal symbol
of the Church from Caesarea of Palestine, the Symbol of the Church
42
I. I. Ică Jr., op. cit., vol. I, p. 559.
43
Molitfelnic, Bucureşti, 2002, p. 28-30.
from Jerusalem, the Symbols of the Churches from Salamina, Antiohia
and Mopsuestia44.
The text Baptismal Symbol of the Church from Caesarea of
Palestine was brought forward by bishop Eusebiu, a close person of Arie,
Parents of the Ecumenical Synod I with the proposal for it to become
the official confession of faith of Universal Church: „PisteÚomen e„j
›na QeÕn patšra pantokr£tora, tÕn tîn ¡p£ntwn Ðratîn te kaˆ
¢or£twn poiht»n; Kaˆ e„j ›na kÚrion ‘Ihsoàn CristÒn, tÕn toà
Qeoà lÒgon, QeÕn ™k Qeoà, fîj ™k fwtÒj, zw¾n ™k zwÁj, uƒÕn
monogenÁ, prwtÒtokon p£shj kt…sewj, prÕ p£ntwn tîn a„ènwn ™k
toà patrÕj gegennhmšnon, di’ oá kaˆ ™gšneto t¦ p£nta, tÕn di¦ t¾n
¹metšran swthr…an sarkwqšnta kaˆ ™n ¢nqrèpoij politeus£menon,
kaˆ paqÒnta, kaˆ ¢nast£nta tÍ tr…tV ¹mšrv, kaˆ ¢nelqÒnta prÕj
tÕn patšra, kaˆ ¼xonta p£lin ™n dÒxV kr‹nai zîntaj kaˆ nekroÚj;
PisteÚomen kaˆ e„j ™n pneàma ¤gion”45 (We believe in one God, all
Mighty Father, Creator of all visible and invisible things; And in our Lord
Jesus Christ, the Word of God, God from God, light from light, life from
life, the First born Son, the first born from His entire creation, born from
Father of all ages and by Whom all things are made, Who for our salvation
incarnated and lived between people and suffered and rose again the third
day and ascended to his Father, and shall return again in glory, to judge the
livings and the dead. We also believe in the Holy Spirit”). Bishop Eusebiu
himself stated that he had learnt this confession of faith during the period
he was a catechumen, confessing it the moment of baptism came46.
One of the most known symbols of faith in the fourth century is the
Symbol of the Church from Jerusalem whose form was reconstructed after
the Catechesis of Saint Cyril of Jerusalem: „PisteÚomen e„j ›na QeÕn
patšra pantokr£tora, poiht¾n oÙranoà kaˆ gÁj, Ðratîn te p£ntwn
kaˆ ¢or£twn:; Kaˆ e„j ›na kÚrion ‘Ihsoàn CristÒn, tÕn uƒÕn toà
Qeoà, tÕn monogenÁ, tÕn ™k toà patrÕj gennhqšnta QeÕn ¢lhqinÕn
prÕ p£ntwn tîn a„ènwn, di’oá t¦ p£nta ™gšneto:; (tÕn katelqÒnta,
tÕn sarkwqšnta kaˆ) ™nanqrwp»santa, (tÕn) staurwqšnta (kaˆ
44
H. Denzinger, op. cit., p. 36-39; 42-44, 50-51.
45
Ibidem, p. 45, 50.
46
Teodoret de Cyr, Historia Ecclesiae, I, 12, Migne, P. G., 82, 783 A.
tafšnta kaˆ ¢nast£nta ™k nekrîn) tÍ tr…tV ¹mšrv kaˆ ¢nelqÒnta e„j
toÝj oÙranoÚj, kaˆ kaq…santa ™k dexiîn toà patrÒj, kaˆ ™rcÒmenon
™n dÒxV, kr‹nai zîntaj kaˆ nekroÚj: oá tÁj basile…aj oÙk œstai
tšloj:; (Kaˆ) e„j ™n ¤gion pneàma, tÕn par£klhton, tÕ KÚrion kaˆ
zwopoiÒn, tÕ ™k toà PatrÕj, tÕ lalÁsan ™n to‹j prof»taij,; kaˆ
e„j ›n b£ptisma metano…aj e„j ¥fesin ¡martiîn, / kaˆ e„j m…an ¡g…
an kaqolik¾n ™kklhs…an; kaˆ e„j sarkÕj ¢n£stasin; kaˆ e„j zw¾n
a„ènion”47 („We believe in one God, all Mighty Father, Creator of heaven
and earth, of all visible and invisible things; And in our Lord Jesus Christ,
the Newly born Son of God, Who was born from the Father of all ages and
by Whom all things are made, Who descended, incarnated and became
human, Who was crucified, buried and Who rose from the dead the third
day and went to heaven and ascended to His Father, and Who shall return
again in glory, to judge the livings and the dead and Whose kingdom shall
never come to an end. We also believe in the Holy Spirit, Paraclete who
spoke through his prophets; we believe into repentance baptism, into
forgiveness of sins, in one Church, saint and holly; into resurrection of the
body and into eternal life”).
Whether we talk about biblical symbols composed of brief biblical
utterances, or we refer to confessions of faith in every sense of the word,
both categories represent the essence of Christian doctrine built up by faith
in God – Holy Trinity, expressed in the ecclesiastical space by Baptism
and constantly preserved through the Eucharist of life. The importance
of confessing faith is a unequivocal act. No one can receive Baptism
or Eucharist until he/she declares faith to the Holy Church (Orthodox).
Only through Baptism of faith (confession) „the man ceases to be just
an individual, as in a biological succession, monad of an assemble. He
is now entering into the community of the saints, in achieving the trinity
of life. Each of us receives the name of a saint and dynamically achieves
within his/her own being the revelation of God’s love48.
47
Sfântul Chiril al Ierusalimului, Cateheze, VI-XVIII, translated by Dumitru
Fecioru, Publishing House of the Mission and Bible Institute of the Romanian
Orthodox Church, Bucureşti, 2003, p. 320.
48
C. Yannaras, op. cit., p. 167.
Vasile VLAD
The Return of the Sacred in Former Totalitarian

Societies
Abstract
The coming out of ideological modernity happened by moving
on to a pluralist, permissive society, lacking any ordering transcendent
element. The fear of any reinterpretation of the traditional message
that might be too liberal generated – either in Western Christianity of
in European Islamism – attitudes of scrupulous attachment to the letter
of the sacred books and the tradition, and attitudes of rejection and
condemnation of a too permissive postmodern society. Quite often, as a
reaction to the complete relativism of postmodernity, traditional religions
radicalized their message, delimiting themselves, through separation,
condemnation and lack of dialogue, from contemporary society. In
turn, European secular society, unified today in the political-economic
formula of the European Community and having experienced its own
ideologies (Nazi, communist), regards suspiciously both traditional
Christian Churches and any civil association that might be suspected of
ideological fundamentalism.
Keywords:
modernity, the sacred, occultism, postmodernity, totalitarian
ideologies.
A major theme, which reflexive modernity approaches within

its internal problematization, stems from a strong return of the sacred
symbol in the social field, or from a re-enchantment of the world. We are
dealing with a complex phenomenon that cannot bear facile, unilateral
explanations but invites to careful examination.
In the first place, we must ask, what kind of sacred (symbol)
are we talking about? Late modernity is flooded by what is hidden
behind forms of occultism, astrology, spiritualism, parapsychology,
clairvoyance, scientific fictions, etc. All these seem to be the revenge
of the irrational against the secular modernity that has been marked by
excessive rationalism, which has caused the traditional religious forms
to be relegated to the outskirts of society. “When religion no longer
organizes society, a latent religiosity surfaces which expresses itself in
multiple forms of faith”1.
The considerable setback of the sacred – referred to as the sacred
objectivized in traditional forms –, a setback brought about by the
lines of force of the initiating, accepted modernity, has transferred the
manifestations of the sacred to the level of the subjective experience.
However, the experience of the sacred at a subjective level is marked
by individualism and naturalism as theses-premises of modernity. Such
theses are anthropocentric par excellence and build a man that lacks
transcendence. For such a man, the recovery of the sacred will mean
rather a magic exercise, by which he tries to control his world, than a
perspective that takes into consideration the Revelation and the return
to the historical religious Tradition. Along these lines, postmodernity
will know a kind of religiosity, which is consumed within the data and
horizon of the immanent world. Occultism, whose practices will not be
an attempt to integrate man and life into a transcendent-divine order,
will proliferate; in fact, it will be an attempt to subordinate the para and
irrational forces to the here and now problematics of the existence.
In the second place, the return of the sacred in the reflexive stage
of modernity can be understood through the attitude of postmodernity.
Historical modernity began with a historical renaissance and enlightenment
stage, dazzled by the myth of unlimited progress and omnipotent science,
only to end up in the tragedy of totalitarian ideologies, in uncertainty
and social crises, the degradation of the environment, possible nuclear
catastrophes, and radical social fractures (the rich versus the poor)2.
1
J. Griesch J., L’âge herméneutique de la raison, Paris, 1985, p. 50.
2
G. Romanato, M. G. Lombardo, I. P. Culianu, Religie şi putere, translated by Maria Magdalena
Anghelescu şi Şerban Anghelescu, Bucureşti, Polirom Publishing House, 2005, p. 239.
Exasperated at itself, such modernity degenerated into a post-rational,
post-Marxist (post-materialist dialectical) stage in which the sacred,
taking various forms, was deemed to be a possible solution. An answer
to the ideologies of modernity of the materialist sort, which generated
vague fears among social masses, was materialized in the recrudescence
of the sects, just as fundamentalist and totalitarian as the ideologies.
However, this return of the sacred, in the fundamentalist forms of the
sects, did not mean a return to the Revelation and the historical religious
Tradition either, but only more and more deformed metamorphoses of
modernity itself.
In the third place, the sacred, as an element of postmodernity, took
shape in various fundamentalist tendencies within traditional Churches,
or within traditional religions present in the Western European space.
The coming out of ideological modernity happened by moving on to a
pluralist, permissive society, lacking any ordering transcendent element.
The fear of any reinterpretation of the traditional message that might
be too liberal generated – either in Western Christianity of in European
Islamism – attitudes of scrupulous attachment to the letter of the sacred
books and the tradition, and attitudes of rejection and condemnation
of a too permissive postmodern society. Quite often, as a reaction
to the complete relativism of postmodernity, traditional religions
radicalized their message, delimiting themselves, through separation,
condemnation and lack of dialogue, from contemporary society. In
turn, European secular society, unified today in the political-economic
formula of the European Community and having experienced its own
ideologies (Nazi, communist), regards suspiciously both traditional
Christian Churches and any civil association that might be suspected
of ideological fundamentalism. It is interesting to note the attitude of
the European Community power that shows totalitarian tendencies and
intolerance towards the presence of religious symbols in the public place
(for example, icons in schools in Romania, Christian symbols in France,
the crucifix in Italy) while it aggresses Christian conscience with occult
symbols and by a radical secularization of the same public space.
In the fourth place, one of the most important features of the return
of the religious in contemporary world is the new credibility of religion
in the social space and its use as an indirect tool in order to gain social
liberties, or in order to facilitate the installation in power of certain
political orientations and groups, or in order to delineate the spheres of
influence of the great powers. Radu Preda makes a pertinent radiography
of the rapport between the out-of-modernity State and the Church, which
“returns” to the public space after the fall of communism3. It would have
been expected, says the author, to see the reestablishment of the main
links between the isolated or anesthetized social factors, either by the
communist power or by the radical Western laicism; however, quite on
the contrary, we see that they are suspended in the name of autonomy of
the segments from postmodern vision.
“While, after the fall of communism, Eastern Europe is

trying to reestablish the hierarchy of values, the death of any
form of hierarchy is declared in Western Europe. What some
are striving to reunite, the others have already pulverized. In
the political field, however, things are reversed: if the West is
consolidating itself as a homogenous system, the East is eroded
by centrifugal tendencies and movements. Germany unifies, and
three new states appear in the Balkans. Multiculturalism, which
integrates in the West, becomes a segregating argument in the
East. Plurality in consensus becomes a plurality of consensus,
i.e. the lack of any consensus. What for some is an expression
of identity, for the others is evidence of fundamentalism”4.
The ideologues of contemporary postmodern world, whether in

power or ruling from the shadow, are deliberately keeping alive “the
poisoning of the rapport between the majority and the minority” and
are setting Eastern world adrift. The successive tragedies from former
Yugoslavia were not only caused by the obsolete, criminal nationalism
of the former communists in power, but also by the democratic West,
which, with the cynicism specific to the powerful one, hypocritically
3
Radu Preda, Biserica în Stat. O invitaţie la dezbatere, Scripta Publishing House, 1999, pp. 30-36.
4
Ibidem, p. 31.
and by manipulating the consciences of the European large masses, dealt
with the minorities they had no interest in – the Serbs from Bosnia, for
instance – and the minorities that interested them – the Albanians from
Kosovo.
“The postmodern challenge is based on the immense

hypocrisy of the powerful ones. Those who were the first to
persecute their minorities are those who are encouraging
others’ minorities today. And this, for any other reason but that
of redeeming their own guilt. The American government has
never acknowledged the crime against humanity represented
by the massacre of the Native-Americans. Nor does France
like to remember the assimilation policy of the Germans
from Alsace. Nor do Austria and Hungary have qualms of
conscience over the centuries of multiethnic imperialism. Nor
do Russia and Ukraine think of correcting their orientation
towards minorities, including the Romanian one. In fact, all
today’s powerful countries used force to achieve politically and
economically efficient national unity. None of today’s powerful
countries would be willing to embark on an ethnic-autonomy
internal gamble. That is because all today’s powerful countries
know the limits of plurality. And yet, these very countries are
the first to maintain, through a policy of both harshness and
sentimentalism, the chaos of ethnic plurality in East European
countries. Hence, the obvious conclusion that the double moral
standard of today’s powers is the expression of a policy in
which the minorities are just the tool”5.
I have taken this excursus into the fresco of recent European

geopolitics to understand the fact that the return of religion within
nations, and the influence of the Churches in the social space, may well
be controlled and instrumentalized processes. Controlled, in the sense of
being stirred up, manipulated, caused to take place, since the influence of
modernity’s institutions and ideologies has faded away, and the Church
5
Ibidem, p. 35.
could be a modality to accede to power through the trust it enjoys in the
social field of the peoples. There is a vast range of popularizing literature
on techniques of mass manipulation and control and on the occult
that, from the shadow, causes historic twists, revolutions and popular
uprisings as well as the choice of ideologies. Vague scares, artificially
generated and controlled, are maintained, the Church is intrumentalized,
economic crises, pandemics are triggered, so that everything seems the
game of an occult power. The confusion is even greater as a part of the
literature exposing the occult is, in fact, written by the power in the
shadow with a manipulating and intimidating purpose. The freedom of
the Church, its position in society, according to these theories, would
also be determined by the game and the reason from the shadow: “our
working tactics must be changed from the root! We will infiltrate agents
to cover all the hierarchical steps to be certain of our victory! The civil
servants, the museum curators, and the public institutions will have an
active role in Christian events… We can no longer act according to old
methods. We will stand by priests, however unpleasant it may be! We
will light candles, we will kiss icons if need be!”.
“European Orthodoxy too worries the authorities. Brought to
Europe by economically insignificant countries such as Romania, Serbia,
Bulgaria, Orthodoxy is seen as a tentacle of Russia. This is far from
the truth as these countries were Christianized even from the apostolic
period. The association between Orthodoxy and Russia was made in the
leftist press, which stigmatized the Church by using the same clichés as
those used by the French Revolution, Lenin’s Revolution and Stalin’s
and Khrushchev’s reprisals”. Modernity uses one of Giordano Bruno’s
principles: “everything can be manipulated, there is no one who can
escape inter-subjective rapports, be it the manipulator, the manipulated
or the instrument;” “modern states are holding a creative force: the press;
through it, we have obtained influence, while remaining in the shadow;
thanks to it, we have the gold in our hands, despite the waves of blood
and tears”; “speculating on the hunger for diverse information – from the
political information to the information from sport, a much loved field
of interest – the power, having concentrated the capital in its hands, has
seized the newspapers, the magazines, the television, the radio – which
it rules from the shadow, through its pawns that it has raised to positions
of owners and managers”; “the capital issue (in the art of manipulation)
is to weaken the public spirit through criticism, to make peoples to lose
the habit of thinking; since time immemorial, people have been satisfied
with the appearance of things, and rarely have they taken the trouble to
notice whether realization has followed promises regarding social life;
we (the occult) assume the physiognomy of any and all parties, of any
and all tendencies, and we will teach them to our orators, who will talk
so much that the world will become tired listening to them; in order to
get hold of the public opinion, we must confuse it by stating, in various
parts and for a long time, so many contradictory opinions that the masses
will end up losing their way in this labyrinth and understanding that it is
better not to have any political opinion”6.
Instrumentalized, in the sense of dangerously involving
confessional identities in either national or minority claims. The case
of Lásló Tökes, a Reformed bishop from Oradea, is illustrative. He
distinguished himself in the domestic and external landscape through
chauvinistic and extremists statements, and, unfortunately, was met
with the same unchristian coin by Romanian extremists’ answers. On
the occasion of the eleventh assembly of the Conference of European
Churches in Graz, June 1997, the Reformed bishop distributed to the
participants, mostly uninformed directly on the situation from Romania,
a document entitled Proposal Regarding the Minority Churches in
Romania (mss), in which he accused the Orthodox Church for naming
itself a “National Church” and suggested the existence of a privileged
rapport with the State after 1989 as well as a discriminating policy of the
State and the Romanian Orthodox Church against ethnic and confessional
minorities. Such instrumentalizations of religious denominations for
political purposes are a genuine threat not only to social and interethnic
peace, but they are also an occult way of compromising the presence of
the Church in society.
6
G. Romanato, M. G. Lombardo, I. P. Culianu, Religie şi putere, translated by Maria
Magdalena Anghelescu and Şerban Anghelescu, Bucureşti, Polirom Publishing House,
2005, p. 239.
Another distinction could be made: the return of God in society by
repositioning the Church within it is a true, fully-verifiable syntagm for
former communist countries while for Western free world, postmodernity
brings rather a retour of the sacred similar to the invasion of the gods. In
the post-communist space, things are quite heterogeneous, with notable
differences from one country to another and from one region to another.
At the bottom of the return of God in society are former Democratic
Republic of Germany and the Czech Republic (many people from these
countries declare themselves religionless) while at the top are Poland,
mostly Catholic, and Romania, mostly Orthodox; in between, there are
countries with a mixt, “confessional-agnostic” composition, such as
Hungary. Russia is one of the countries where the Church is particularly
visible on the social plane. The revival of religion in post-communist
space should also be understood as due reparation for atheist ideological
oppression, but also as a sign of breaking away from the totalitarian past.
The presence of God in social daily life is perceived as a sign of regaining
freedom. That is because the communist ideology “was projected in
terms of upside down metaphysics or, as Berdyaev puts it, an “atheistic
idolatry”, and its demise had inevitably a religious connotation.
“Slogans such as “we will die and will be free” or

scriptural quotes such as “God is with us”, shouted by young
people on the streets of Bucharest in the firing range of automated
weapons, gave spiritual emotional scope to a far reaching
social moment. Although from a historiographical viewpoint
there are various interpretations, based on the genealogical
effort to identify the direct causes, the announced failure of
communism was projected in terms of a legitimacy crisis, the
false gods of the regime being exposed by the authentic God.
Another example of religious preamble to the political change
is given by the Evening Vespers celebrated during 1989 in the
“St. Nicholas” evangelical church from Leipzig, attended by
both fervent believers and ecclesial illiterates”7.
7
Radu Preda, “<Revenirea lui Dumnezeu>. Ambiguităţile unui diagnostic”, in Studii
Teologice, București, no. 1/2009, p. 116.
The return of the Church in post-communist societies was met,
and still is, with well- or ill- meaning reserve and opposition. While
some fear that by the repositioning of the Church in society we might
see a radicalization of the ecclesial discourse along the coordinates of
frustrations accumulated during the communist period and, therefore,
it would lead to replacing one ideology with another, there are others
who “read wrongly from an ideological and methodological standpoint”
the dynamics of the ideas and of the history of the Church – State –
Society rapports and inevitably and invariably issue ill-meaning,
negative judgments against the return of God in society. A simplified and
deliberately reductionist reading of some complex realities, such as those
regarding the return of the Church in society, is offered by Lavinia Stan,
Lucian Turcescu8, or Olivier Gillet9.
In the fifth place, the return of the sacred in postmodern society
may also be understood in connection with the new scientific paradigm
mentioned in a previous chapter. On the one hand, modernity has
acquired unsuspected and unheard-of (in the past) scientific conquests,
materialized in a technique-dominated civilization; not only have these
scientific advances not satisfied people’s thirst for life and need for an
existential meaning, but they have also proved to be to the detriment
of man’s essential rationality. The science and technology of modernity
have undoubtedly improved the earthly human condition, but, at the
same time, have reduced man’s horizon of being to this world. Hence,
the more refined the technological progress, the more exacerbated and
satisfying the material and biological possibilities have become, the
more the existential dissatisfaction of modern man has accumulated;
in fact, there is even a diffuse fear of being and not knowing why (he
is). “The prosaicness of the technological era is leaving more and more
people in a dissatisfied state, discontent and unfulfilled in their souls.
They are perpetually searching for magical and supernatural things,
showing an increasing interest in mysticism, the broadening of the
8
Lavinia Stan and Lucian Turcescu, Religion and Politics in Post-comunist Romania, Oxford
University Press, Oxford, 2007.
9
Olivier Gillet, Religie şi naţionalism. Ideologia Bisericii Ortodoxe Române sub regimul
comunist, translated by M. Petrişor, Bucureşti, Compania Publishing House, 2001.
conscience, strong sensations, and a new approach to the spiritual”10. The
return to the sacred affirms that man cannot be reduced to his biological
needs or to the world. Regardless of the forms of the sacred (even the
postmodern surrogates) that man adopts, the fact in itself is an attempt
at personalizing man, at regaining his alterity in relation to the world.
On the other hand, against this background of “existential
dissatisfaction”, the new science, generated by quantum and sub-
quantum physics, was used in the process of the rebirth of the occultism
– in the sense of many scientists’ orientation towards Oriental and pagan
doctrines and systems of thought rather than towards the historical
dimension of Christian Religion. The phrase Princeton gnosis11 is already
famous; it proposes a new cosmologic, syncretistic religion, which,
though acknowledging the existence of a transcendent intelligence that
created the universe, a universe in which life is not a random occurrence
but the result of an order present in the intrinsic structure of the cosmos,
is, however, far from being Christian12.
The postmodern option for an open science, permeable to the
unification with multiple forms of knowledge, involves the risk of some
syncretisms. The issue of a dialogue between religion and science has
drifted towards a syncretistic, pantheistic and neo-gnostic direction,
which seems to offer the mirage of a unitary knowledge of reality,
knowledge from which no type of experience must be excluded. This
new gnosis tends “to unify everything, from mathematics to politics,
from physics to Oriental mystiques, from ecology to feminist theories”13.
It gathers together, in an amalgamated manner, multiple theories
from various fields in which science dilutes its established authority and
identity, becoming just one narrative among others. Thus, the difficulty
to distinguish between fact and fiction, real and superstition, since in the
postmodern discourse they all have the same status and the same value.
10
Lothar Gassmann, New Age, vine religia unitară mondială?, translated by Constantin
Moisă, Bucureşti, Stephanus Publishing House, 1996, p. 9.
11
R. Ruyer, Le gnose de Princeton, Fayard, Paris 1974.
12
F. Dyson, Les dérangeurs de l’univers, Payot, Paris, 1995, p. 293.
13
Adrian Lemeni and Răzvan Ionescu, Teologie ortodoxă şi Ştiinţa, Bucureşti, Publishing
House of the Mission and Bible Institute of the Romanian Orthodox Church, 2007, p. 109.
Therefore, the scientific discourse is often constructed in a social manner,
interfering with the political, lacking scientific accuracy and rigor. We
are increasingly dealing with a combination between modern science and
Oriental mystiques (Hindu, Buddhist, Taoist), and in this combination such
mystiques are “dressed up”, that is, presented, in a “scientific” language
and donning “scientific” clothes. The Westerners’ dissatisfaction with
their own Christian tradition promotes a lack of interest in Christianity
and a syncretistic orientation towards Oriental mystiques. Jean-Louis
Schlegel commented on this state of affairs: “others embark on Far-
Eastern “spiritualities” as well as on other ones, from other continents,
and above all, aspire to the inner experience or adventure, generally
following a guru or a disciple of the great guru. No matter how much
seriousness might be in these “mystic” travels (sometimes costly from a
financial point of view when they involve sessions, organized weekends),
they show, among other things, the Westerners’ dissatisfaction with their
own Christian of Judeo-Christian tradition. The churches, in particular,
seem quite marked by moral volunteerism, by bureaucratic organization
or by organization as such, by the dogmatism of the faiths, by social-
political activism, by the lack of interest in “spirituality”. Whence, the
attitude of retaining from monotheist traditions only the mystical or
spiritual tradition: from Christianity, they will be interested in the great
mystics (Meister Ekhart, John of the Cross, etc.); from Judaism, they will
only retain the esoteric tradition of the Kabbalah; from Islamism, only
Sufism will be accepted. This attitude shows distrust in and relativization
of the established religions, especially of the three monotheistic ones –
the personal God, supported by Christianity, Judaism and Islamism, is
accused of thousands of evils while, instead, preaching the existence of
an impersonal divinity within some vague pantheism”14.
According to Bruno Wurtz, the New Age movement is the main
agent of postmodern world orientating par excellence towards a crass
syncretism based on Oriental mystiques and towards a synthesis between
14
Jean-Louis Schleger, “Religia în societăţile moderne” in Jean-Michel Besnier (edit.),
Conceptele umanităţii. O istorie a ideilor ştiinţifice, politice şi sociale, religioase, filosofice,
artistice, coord., translated by Oana Mezdrea, Bucureşti, Lider Publishing House, 1996, pp.
123-124.
Western science, between the instrumental-expansive technology and
meditation-building techniques, between rational individuation and
unio mystica15. This syncretistic-pantheistic formula of the return of the
sacred in the Western world is called the re-enchantment of the world.
It has appeared as a counterweight and answer to the disenchantment of
the world proposed by modernity, as a return to the pantheist original
matrix in which the cosmos is no longer perceived as an inert object, but
as a living organism. The re-enchantment of the world aims to be a re-
sacralization of nature and a return to the cult of Mother Nature.
Thus, the postmodern man is a response to modernity’s homo
faber that had objectivized nature and the world in a neutral manner.
He discovers himself to be the carrier of a spiritual universe capable
of actualizing miraculous forces in his body and upon nature. Thus,
postmodern humanity discovers the world of “inner images.” And this
is done “not by a few charismatics and mystics, not by the mediated
elements practicing magic and other occult exercises, but by the quasi-
totality of present-day world society. This discovery is happening
gradually and manifests itself in the increasingly insistent affirmation
of the role of vision, imagination, kinesthesis, of the reflecting, ante-
conceptual qualities of the spirit, as well as of the extraordinary role
of consciously metaphysical techniques that aim at reestablishing the
still-repressed functionality of the right cerebral hemisphere. Scientists’
opinion is less and less frequently against “parapsychology”, a field they
no longer classify as “neo-superstition”; on the contrary, they often define
it as a technique of inner shaping of outer worlds”. The contemporary
Western scientist seems to be more and more willing to accommodate (or
even subordinate) the act of scientific research to a mythological vision
of the world. “Integrated into the New Age movement, the scientist is
also a “wizard” when he uses animist representations, myths and gnostic
clichés without stating whether he does it in a metaphorical way or a
defining way. On the other hand, the “wizards”, meaning those who
practice occultism preferentially, today embrace astronomy, biology,
15
Bruno Wurtz, New Age. Paradigma holistă sau revrăjirea vărsătorului, 2ed., Timişoara,
Editura de Vest Publishing House, 1994, pp. 122-123.
physics, electronics, etc. as amateurs, reinterpreting the field either with
the demonstration of the repeatable experiment or with the persuasion
of the transpersonal experience, supported by more and more personal
confidences and confessions”16.
This attempt at reciprocal support17 and expression of a field
through the terms of another one – i.e. science is integrated into the
mystical horizon, and the mystique is “scientifically” argued and expressed
– can only greatly confuse contemporary man’s already alienated
conscience. Since the Oriental mystique is pantheistic (Brahman, the
objective absolute, and Atman, the subjective absolute, are identical), the
scientist that approaches the secret of the universe through the lattices
of the mystique will also end up in pantheism: “the quantum vacuum is
identified with the Taoist vacuum, the subatomic movement is identified
with the dance of Shiva, the quantum non-separability is equivalent to
the unity of Ying and Yang concepts, etc. There is a convergence between
the religious schemes and those belonging to positivist science. The new
gnosis is situated along these lines. Under this term, various types of
thought are regrouped by which we can recognize in fact the existence
of a preeminence of the spirit in the world. Thus, science would discover
the other side of the matter: religion, habitation. Both of them, together,
make meaning possible”18.
In response, the mysticism of the New Age takes on scientific
clothes: “the doctrinarian philosophers of the New Age profess the
conception that everything in the universe is in a relationship of
innerness. It is wrong to say that the unity of the world consists in its
materiality; it is also wrong to say that the unity of the world consists in
its spirituality. Materialism, idealism are unilateralities. Eclecticism is
an error because it accepts the existence of both sides in a non-organic,
mechanistic way. There are not two substances, there are only two or
16
Ibidem, pp. 8, 115-116.
17
Fritjof Capra, Teofizica – o paralelă între fizica modernă şi mistica orientală, 3ed., translated
by Doina Timpau, Bucureşti, Technic Publishing House, 2004, p. 225.
18
Jean-Michel Maldame, Christos pentru întreg universul. Pentru o colaborare între ştiinţă
şi credinţă, translated by Lucia Fonta şi Ştefan Melancu, Cluj, Cartimpex Publishing
House, 1999, p. 24.
more aspects of different depths of one and the same cosmic substance.
Reductionism has no basis, the great traditional religions, more exactly
their speculative theologies, cultivate immature visions and make wrong
interpretations of the revelation they have. In humanity’s current stage
of maturity, the material (“visible”) world and the spiritual (“invisible”)
world cannot be looked upon separately and as being each sufficient in
itself. But the whole universe, with all its manifestations, is one single
organism, a living system in which each phenomenon has its importance
and everything is in an inextricable connection with everything”19.
This “harmonization” between Western science and technology
and pantheist Oriental mystique, to which we can add ancient (occult)
mythology, creates the new formula of postmodern world, meaning the
magical re-enciphering of the world. Within its lattices unfolds the new
religious gnosis, which is nothing but the reestablishment of paganism in the
world, with its whole gnostic philosophical edifice20 that has found an ally
in the new scientific language by which it expresses itself. The new gnosis
“juxtaposes a certain kind of mysticism, sometimes lacking in greatness,
with an always-queen technocracy which it cannot do without”21. Thus, in
the return of the sacred at the end of modernity, we are also dealing with
the old Gnosticism that has been reborn in a quasi-scientific form. The
neo-paganism that has invaded the postmodern world and that constitutes
the core of the sacred returned into the Western space expresses its mystic
fears in a scientific rather than theological language, causing the massive
presence of “scientific magic” in contemporary society22.
All these express a New Age kind of spirituality23 whose aim
19
Bruno Wurtz, New Age. Paradigma holistă sau revrăjirea vărsătorului, 2ed., Timişoara,
Vest Publishing House, 1994, p. 174.
20
Marko Ivan Rupnik, Cuvinte despre om. I. Persoana – fiinţă a Paştelui, translated by
Maria-Cornelia Oros, Sibiu, Deisis Publishing House, 1997, p. 43.
21
Ghislain Lafont, “Spre o nouă figură a Bisericii pentru timpul nostrum”, in Ioan I. Ică jr.
şi Germano Maroni (edit.), Gândirea socială a Bisericii, Sibiu, Deisis Publishing House,
2002, p. 612.
22
Nikolai Berdyaev, Sensul creaţiei, încercare de îndreptăţire a omului, translated by Anca
Oroveanu, Bucureşti, Humanitas Publishing House, 1992, pp. 65-66.
23
Jean Vernette, Secolul XXI va fi mistic sau nu va fi deloc, Bucureşti, Corint Publishing
House, 2003, p. 17.
is to remove Christianity from Europe and reestablish the old Indo-
European beliefs. This is particularly obvious in the mass media means
of communication. Television channels such as National Geographic,
Discovery, or Animal Planet, purporting to show “scientific”, informative
programs, promote evolutionism – although it has no authentic scientific
basis –, paranormal phenomena and occult practices, the belief in
extraterrestrials, as well as books of gnostic origin such as The Gospel of
Judas, The Gospel of Thomas, or so-called modern literature combining
elements of fiction and gnostic writings and ideas, such as The Da Vinci
Code. Through television, through mass media in general, or through the
technologization and ideologizing artificialization of the whole way of
life of postmodern man, “the scientific magic” and “the magical science”
are advanced as the new normality or the new ideology of the Age of the
Aquarius24.
Cardinal Paul Poupard synthesizes this new religious orientation
towards which the New Age wishes to take Europe in the combination of
four directions: a) an ensemble of archaic practices connected with the
magic and the attempt to predict the future; b) paganism, in the literal
sense of the word – i.e. the attraction for pre-Columbian, Egyptian, Hindu
deities, for Transcendental Meditation and Krishna’s Consciousness; c)
the neo-pagan interpretation of Christian faith – i.e. the faith assimilated
to a folklore and a superficial spirituality; d) the strong return of the
“Gnosticism”25. Thus, we are talking about an “invasion of the gods”
of the old pagan world. This invasion can also be explained by the
emergence of successive waves of immigrants beginning with World
War II, who were motivated by economic or political reasons and who
brought with them other cultural-religious paradigms. The relatively
homogenous Christian culture of the West was confronted with the
assault of non-Christian beliefs that demanded their right to existence.
The non-Christian (mostly Islamic) immigration phenomenon spread
allogeneic religious values quite easily across the Western public sphere.
24
Virgiliu Gheorghe, Revrăjirea lumii, vol II: sau de ce nu mai vrem să ne desprindem de
televizor, București, Prodromos Publishing House, 2006, p. 271.
25
Cristinel Ioja, Raţiune şi Mistică în Teologia Ortodox, Arad, Aurel Vlaicu Publishing
House, 2008, pp. 174-175.
Even more so, considering the demographic imbalance between
the downward tendency of the native Europeans and the upward
tendency of the newcomers, which was an important factor. Thus, against
the demographic background (“the neo-migrations”) and the cultural
background (“the invasion of the gods”), the Western (community)
countries had to regulate the coexistence of the newcomers with the
“historical” population. The logical solution to the problem has been
found within the horizon of the principle of secularity – the constitutive
principle of modernity –, and thus we are in the situation where the Christian
ethos is ignored or openly contradicted. “The legislative liberalization
concerning abortion, the legalization of same-sex marriages and placing
them at the same level as the traditional family, the revision of the legal
basis of the religion class in public schools, the legalization of euthanasia
and assisted death, the concession made to the pharmaceutical industry
in what concerns bio-ethically problematic experiments – here are only a
few legal and cultural aspects that constitute as many reasons to rethink
the relationship between the religious authority and the political power
in today’s Europe”26.
More and more systematically, the governments of the European
Community countries are deciding for an orientation towards a
fundamentally non-Christian legislation. For example, the legislative
decisions from Spain after 2003 made the Cardinal of Toledo, Antonio
Canizares, to say that the Spanish society was facing an anti-Christian
“social revolution”, purposely targeted at the Spanish society. The
Western legislative background has created a general atmosphere in
Europe, which, although formally granting equal rights and liberties
to all religious forms, in fact, favors and promotes “the invasion of the
gods” and “the re-enchantment of the world”.
26
Radu Preda, “<Revenirea lui Dumnezeu>. Ambiguităţile unui diagnostic”, in Studii
Teologice, 1/2009, p. 122.
Nestor DINCULEANĂ
The value of martyrdom in Hebraism, Islam

and Christianity

Abstract:
An overview over the three great religions of the world and the
importance that these religions give to the martyr act of congregation,
confirms the existence of two universal principles, namely: martyrdom is
based of worshiping God and the real sacrifice that need to be brought
to Him, and secondly the importance of confession in a visible and
public form of religious belief without the fear of facing death. By the
courageous act of giving up his own life in the name of faith, martyrdom
has always been regarded as a guarantee of communion with God and
also the right way to acquire eternal happiness.
Keywords:
martyrdom, death, happiness, sorrow, eternity, faith, sacrifices.
1. Martyrdom – a way to sanctity or suicide

Martyrdom, in a general sense, represents a person’s willingness to
face death, remaining faithful to his religious principles. A martyr can be
called only the one who dies in the name of faith. Martyr’s death comes
as a sentence to the denial to give up religious ideas and spiritual beliefs.
Two authors who closely studied the martyrdom phenomenon,
Arthur Droge and James Tabor, identified five elements that differentiated
the act of suicide1 of martyr’s death:
1
Margaret Cormack, Sacrificing the Self: Perspectives on Martyrdom and Religion:
Perspectives on Martyrdom and Religion, Oxford, University Press, 2002, p. 12.
a) The opposition and persecution state;
b) The choice of dying, seen as a necessary and heroic way;
c) The often situation we meet with is when the subjects submitted
to death, very rarely situations are when they take their own life;
d) Most of the times it exists the idea of the benefits arising from
the act of martyrdom;
e) The expectation of a reward after death, which is a motivation
for martyrdom.
The argument that determines to a large extent the martyrisation
is that denial of faith represents the alienation from life, apostasy that
is rewarded both through death and by divine alienation from the
communion with God. Instead, the assumption of death in the name of
faith, as a confession of life is anything but keeping faith to The One
Who has the power of give and take life, The One who rewords the
martyr temporal death through life and eternal happiness.
Therefore, martyrdom was regarded, in every religion, as a
resignation of earthly life for the hope of acquiring a life in eternity.
2. Martyrdom in Hebrew religion

In Hebrew religion, martyrdom is the sanctification of God’s name
as it is mentioned in the Old Testament in Leviticus: “I will be sanctified
among the children of Israel”. The sanctification of God’s name implies
an unaltering and indissoluble faith in Him. Also, doubting the words of
God, it brings punishment.
A testimony in this sense is the biblical episode in which the people
of Israel wandered in the wilderness and being thirsty, they asked for help
from God through Moses. God fulfilled their request and commanded to
Moses to speak to the rock, and it would give spring water to appease the
thirst of the people. Because Moses disobeyed God’s word and besides
speaking to the rock, he hit it with his cane, it placed him in a position of
disobedience to God. Thus he was also punished with the impossibility
of touching, together with his people, the Promised Land, the land of
Canaan.The reason for which he got punished was not the use of the cane
because with some other occasions the object used by God to fulfill the
miracles through Moses, was also the cane, but the sin of disobedience
or total distrust in the word of God. In other words, Moses, by his
actions, didn’t sanctify the Name of God by an Abraham faith. Even if
the reminded biblical episode seems to not having any close connection
with the martyrisation, the test of faith determines the sanctification of
God’s name through the sacrifice of his own life2.
Talmudic literature indicates a number of precepts on martyrdom
or resignation of his own life in the name of faith. According to Talmudic
doctrine, if a faithful Jew is forced to break the rules of the Torah, he can
do this if his life is in danger. But there are three situations where the
price of life is less important than those laws of faith, namely: idolatry,
bloodshed and incest. Violations of certain rules for preserving the life
are because for the Hebrew religion, life has a very important role. It
represents the gift of God and, due to which, Judaism is a religion of life,
a life that need to be blessed in the name of God3.
A Jewish martyrdom example is that of Isaac. Although Abraham
is not put in the situation to sacrifice his own life, that of sacrificing his
only son in the name of God, represented for him more than the loss of
his own life. It can be said that there was not even a test of faith, because
God knew very well his fait. It was rather a profound awareness of his
own faith in God.
A second witness of martyrdom in Judaism is mentioned in 2
Maccabees, Chapter VII, where the seven sons of a mother named Ana, are
forced to consume food prohibited by law. Each of them dies in horrible
tortures, preferring death to prescriptions violation of the law. Although,
that situation did not involve the violations of the three rules who imposed
the martyrdom. However, the unalterable faith in God’s name made them
to sacrifice their own lives for the sanctification of God’s name.4
Martyrdom is an exceptional situation for the Hebrew religion. It
2
Giuseppe Laras, Ebraismo e Martirio in Il martirio nell’esperienza religiosa di ebrei,
cristiani e musulmani, 13 novembre 2002; Le religioni nella costruzione dell’unità europea,
16 marzo 2004:Atti dei Convegni, a cura di Patrizia Pozzi, Università degli studi di Milano-
Bicocca, Fondo Alessandro Nangeroni, Mimesis Edizioni, 2005, p. 13.
3
Ibidem, p. 14.
4
Ibidem, pp. 15-16.
has never existed the witness for a martyrdom desire in the name of
God. Martyrdom is for the Hebrew a cruel reality, but a reality you must
be prepared to face when the situation requires. However, the general
concept of Judaism is that of preserving life to sanctify the name of God.
The God of Israel is a God of life and not death.
3. Martyrdom in Islam
The term that defines the martyrisation in Islam is “Sahid”. It is a
word used also as an appellative of divinity, specifically those who are
martyred in Allah’s are killed on the way to Allah by his will.
In Islam, the first martyr events are closely linked to the historical
beginnings of the Muslim religion. The exclusivist of Allah Islamic
divinity and the pagans’ attitude from Mecca towards Muslims led
to the appearance of new Islamic martyrdom precursors. One of its
representatives is Bilal, a Muslim Ethiopian slave. His master used to
persecute him very tough because of his faith.They say that he was
forced to stay in the sun glow having on his chest a big rock and being
forced to deny Allah as god. Even he was not dead, being bought by a
successor of Mahomet from his master and then released, Bilal is known
in Islam history as one of Allah first martyrs5.
The first martyr who died after confessing the Islam was a woman,
Sumayya bint Khayyat. His martyrdom occurred after a confrontation
with Abu Jahl, a great persecutor of the Muslims. He killed her after
hitting and abusing her by stabbing a knife in the abdomen. Her name
is rare among Muslims, and her sufferings are mentioned in Islamic
literature6.
The Koran texts, which are referring to martyrdom, arose some
questions that were for a long time debated by Muslim exegetes.
Muslims defeat at Uhud in 625, which resulted with the death of a large
number of devotees including Hamza, Muhammad’s uncle, converted
this suffering into a victory.This happened by changing the meaning of
the term “defender of faith” in that of the “martyr”. The Uhud defeat was
5
David Cook, Martyrdom in Islam, Cambridge, University Press, 2007, p. 11.
6
Ibidem, p. 13.
regarded as an equilibrium exchange with the previous Muslim victory
at Badr. They say about it was Allah’s choice. That was the time when it
appeared both the controversy about choosing martyrs imposed by Allah
and human ability to have a personal choice on the path of martyrdom.
Martyrs are those “killed on the path to Allah”, a phrase that is
representative in defining Jihad, a struggle for Allah, where you kill and
you are killed. Jihad is presented especially in suras 8 and 9 of the Koran.
The key to understanding this “holy war” is the belief that Allah is
fighting alongside of his adepts. Jihad is seen as a holy struggle in which
any victory or death gives you the status of martyr in front of Allah.
4. Martyrdom in Christianity
From a Christian perspective, Martyrdom is based on the Greek
term “Martys = witness”. The martyr is the one who gives testimony in
the name of faith. Sacrificing his life, he seals the truth of faith with his
own blood. Martyrdom itself is not a religion, but rather a philosophical
concept. A concept which sustains that the truth must be confessed even
with the risk of your own death. The human sacrifices, committed in the
name of certain ideals, which are nothing in common with the religion,
such as freedom, human rights, justice and peace stay as a testimony for
the existence of a philosophical martyrdom.
Martyr’s death may be a comparison between gladiators and
Christians. They both have a vote to accomplish; some worship an
earthly god, others a God in heaven. By a free will, they both choose the
suffering and death. The major difference between the two categories is
the attitude for death. For gladiators, being defeated and killed, it was
as equal as a shameful and humiliating death. For Christians, however,
suffering and death were an honor. Thus, by this way, they were able to
imitate the suffering and death of Christ by virtue of reward after death.7
During the IInd – IIIth centuries AC, the phenomenon of Christian
martyrdom was much extended. Writers such as Marcus Aurelius and
Celsus caused astonishment in the Roman world. Having madness
thinking, they accused Christians that they were easily giving up life
7
Margaret Cormack, op. cit., p. 13.
in the name of faith. Christian authors such as Clement, Origen and
Lactantius answered charges against the Christian martyrs, and few of
them received themselves the crown of martyrdom8.
Death is in the middle of the existence of Christianity. Its
importance comes from the fact of actually becoming the day of birth,
a birth into eternity.
In particular, seen from a Christian perspective, the martyrdom is
a gift of God. This is due to the fact that only God gives the necessary
power to the one who is wishing to sacrifice his life in the name of faith.
Historically, Christian martyrdom is not conditioned by time. Even
though there were times in the history of the Church when the number
of martyrs was significant, yet, due to the geographical, religious and
political context, there are still contemporary martyrs.
The beginnings of Christian martyrdom history are located in the
immediate period of the presence of Jesus Christ on earth. His disciples,
as witnesses of the Resurrection, testified with the cost of their lives that
Jesus Christ is the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies. In the first
centuries, the first Christians martyrdom had the mission to impose truth
of faith. In the Gospel of John, especially, the disciples of Jesus Christ are
called witnesses, witnesses of the Resurrection and Ascension of Jesus
to heaven. The Savior’s disciples had to confess, in the next historical
stage, the truths of faith, experienced by them and their ancestors9.
Martyrdom of Steven is the first example of a Christian supreme
sacrifice in the name of Christ faith which is mentioned in the biblical
book of Acts. Many such acts of courage took place in the following
period, that determined the apparition of some martyrdoms which kept a
live memory of the events from the first centuries of Christianity till the
present.10 There are pages of an inestimable value for the history of the
8
G. W. Bowersock, Martyrdom and Rome, Cambridge, University Press, 2002, p. 2.
9
Michael Jensen, Martyrdom and Identity: The Self on Trial, London, T. & T. Clark
International, 2010, p. 5.
10
Amos Blanchard, Book of Martyrs: Or, A History of the Lives, Sufferings and Triumphant
Deaths of the Primitive and Protestant Martyrs, from the Introduction of Christianity, to the
Latest Periods of Pagan, Popish, Protestant, and Infidel Persecutions, Publishing by N. G.
Ellis, Kingston, 1844, p. 16.
Church which are represented by the martyrisation consignment such as:
The Martyrdom of St. Policarp, The Bishop of Smirna, Saints Perpetua
and Felicitas Passions, Montanus and Lucius, Ciprian. The Bishop of
Carthage, St. Tecla etc.11
The large number of martyrs of the early Christian centuries gave
rise to a cult of them, especially due to the multitude of miracles that
their bodies accomplished. For example the tomb of St. Felix of Nola
emanated healing myrrh. Also, the miracles done with the relics of St.
Gervase and Protas in the presence of St. Ambrose of Milan confirmed its
orthodoxy in the fight with Arianism. Finally, Bishop Hilary of Poitiers
noted that the multitude of miracles that were done in the presence of
the tombs (which were housing the bodies of the apostles and martyrs)
confessed Christ12.
Martyrdom in Christianity can be also regarded as a control of the
uncontrollable. Because death is a phenomenon sometimes unexpected
and perceived as suffering and tragedy, in Christian death shouldn’t
be avoided. It becomes something familiar and glorious, having an
extremely strong impact for the Christians13. Death is not an end but
a beginning. Thus, in Christianity, death is a passing or a gate from a
temporary material world, in the eternal spiritual world.
In Christianity, martyr death is seen as a response to the sacrifice
that Christ Messiah accomplished for the humanity. Jesus didn’t die just
because He confessed The Kingdom of God and because this it was a
mission from Heavenly Father. He died for the entire humanity as a price
to pay for all the humans’sins. Thus, the martyrdom represents for the
Christians the communion with Christ by imitating His destiny, a destiny
of the saving and transfiguring suffering in the Holy Saint.

11
Brian Wicker, Witnesses to Faith?: Martyrdom in Christianity and Islam, Hampshire,
Ashgate Publishing, 2006, pp. 40-41.
12
Ibidem, p. 42.
13
David Cook, op. cit., p. 11.
LIST OF AUTHORS
ALBU, Alin: bishop, university lecturer, Ph.D., Faculty of

Orthodox Theology, “1 Decembrie 1918” University of Alba Iulia
ALIC Daniel: priest, cultural advisor of Caransebeș Diocese,
Ph.D., university lecturer at “Eftimie Murgu” University of Reșița
BALCÁREK Petr: director of the Institute for Byzantine and
Christian-Eastern Studies of Olomouc (Czech Republic)
BASA Gabriel: priest, religion inspector, Ph.D., university
lecturer at “Ilarion V. Felea” Faculty of Orthodox Theology of Arad
BOCŞAN Nicolae: historian, Ph.D., university professor at the
Faculty of History of Cluj-Napoca
BRUSANOWSKI, Paul: historian, Ph.D., university professor at
“Andrei Şaguna” Faculty of Orthodox Theology of Sibiu
CÂRJA Ioan: historian, Ph.D., university lecturer at the Faculty
of History of Cluj-Napoca
CHIFĂR Nicolae: Ph.D., university professor at “Andrei Șaguna”
Faculty of Orthodox Theology of Sibiu
COVAN, D. Adrian: priest, Ph.D., junior lecturer at the Faculty of
Letters, History and Theology of Timişoara
DINCULEANĂ Nestor: priest, monk, administrative-clerkly
advisor of Deva and Hunedoara Diocese
DOBREI Florin: priest, cultural advisor of Deva and Hunedoara
Diocese, Ph.D., university lecturer at “Eftimie Murgu” University of
Reșița
DRĂGOI Macarie: doctor, bishop of Northern Europe
GÂRDAN Gabriel-Viorel: priest, associated professor at the
Faculty of Orthodox Theology in Cluj-Napoca, researcher and manager
of the Institute of Ecclesiastic History of ”Babeș-Bolyai” University,
Cluj-Napoca, cultural advisor of the Diocese of Sălaj
GEORGIU, Gurie: Ph.D., bishop of Deva and Hunedoara
HIMCINSCHI Mihai: priest, Ph.D., university professor at the
Faculty of Theology of Alba Iulia
IANCU Dorin Demostene: Ph.D. in History, Library of the Holy
Synod of the Romanian Orthodox Church
IONAŞ Vasile: Ph.D. in history, researcher
JURCAN Emil: priest, Ph.D., university professor and dean of
the Faculty of Theology of Alba Iulia
LAZĂR Liviu: historian, teacher at “Sabin Drăgoi” Teacher-
Training School of Deva
LEB Ioan Vasile: priest, Ph.D., university professor at the Faculty
of Theology of Cluj-Napoca
MARAN, Mirča: professor, historian, Ph.D., Head of Department
of Philosophy and Social Sciences at Preschool Teacher-Training College
“Mihailo Palov” of Vršac (Serbia)
MIC Lucian: Ph.D., bishop of Caransebeș
MOLNAR Simion: historian, chairperson of “Clio” Association
of History Teachers of Romania – Hunedoara (Deva) subsidiary
MORAR Nicolae: priest, Ph.D., university lecturer at the Faculty
of Letters, History and Theology of Timișoara
NICA (LOVIŞTEANUL) Emilian: auxiliary bishop of the
Archdiocese of Râmnic, PhD, lecturer at the Faculty of Orthodox
Theology of Iaşi and the Faculty of Orthodox Theology of Craiova
NICOLĂESCU Nicodim: Ph.D., bishop of Severin and Strehaia
REŞCEANU, Ion: priest, Ph.D., lecturer at the University of
Craiova
REŞCEANU, Alina: lecturer at the University of Craiova
SALVATERRA Tiziano: rector at the Catholic University of
Tirana (Albania), professor at the Economic University of Trento (Italy)
TASCOVICI Radu, priest, dean, lecturer at “Sfânta Muceniță
Filoteia” Faculty of Orthodox Theology, Pitești University
VLAD Vasile: priest, Ph.D., university lecturer at “Ilarion V.
Felea” Faculty of Theology of Arad, education advisor of Deva and
Hunedoara Diocese
VULEA Camelia Elena: historian, chairperson of “Pro Școala”
Association of Deva, teacher at “Grigore Moisil” Secondary Technical
School of Deva
CONTENT
Bishop Gurie Georgiu: Word of blessing..................................... 5
I. Studies of Ecclesiastical History
Bishop Gurie Georgiu: The conversion of Saint Constantine –

genuine conversion or political reason? ................................................ 9
Nicolae Chifăr: The Donatist Movement and Constantine’s
Religious Policy ................................................................................... 25
Simion Molnar: The Crusades – between Religious Liberty and
Constraint ............................................................................................ 41
Vasile Ionaș: A document on appointing a protopope in
Hunedoara ....................................................................................... 49
Gabriel Gârdan: The Migration to the New World as a Form of
Religious Freedom. The Foundation of the Protestant Colonies in North
America during the Seventeenth Century ............................................. 53
Ioan Vasile Leb: Die Orthodoxen in Siebenbürgen im Lichte
von Reisebeschreibung des Pastors Conrad Jacob Hiltebrandt
(1629-1679) .........................................................................................71
Alin Albu: Confessional freedom. Social and national
emancipation. The dynamics of the vindication programme of Sophrony’s
movement (1759-1761) ........................................................................ 93
Ion Reșceanu, Alina Reșceanu: Old liturgical book circulation
between Transylvania and Oltenia in the context of the prohibitive
measure of the 18th century ................................................................. 113
Ioan Cârja: Aspects of the image of the Orthodox with the
Greek-Catholics in the second half of the 19th century ................... 129
Bishop Lucian Mic: The Manifestation of Religious Freedom
by the Romanians from Banat through Hierarchical Separation
(1865-1870) ...................................................................................... 141
Paul Brusanowski: Brief presentation of the Orthodox Church
from Old Romania (1866-1918) ......................................................... 157
Camelia Vulea: The Confessional Elementary Education from
The Vicarship of Hațeg between Secularisation and Authonomy (1850-
1860) .................................................................................................. 168
Mirča Maran: Identity, Assimilation and Church Separation
in the Serbian Banat in the Second Half of the 19th and Early 20th
Century ....................................................................................... 179
Florin Dobrei: Hunedoara Church and Austrian-Hungarian
Dualism .............................................................................................. 189
Nicolae Bocșan: The “Religion of War” as Reflected in the
Banatian Memoirs of the Great War .................................................. 209
Daniel Alic: “Modern” limitations of religious freedom. Priests
from the Diocese of Caransebeş who were persecuted during the First
World War ........................................................................................... 223
Liviu Lazăr: The Romanian Orthodox Church and the Greek
Catholic Church in unitary action against the Hungarian Revisionism in
the inter war period ............................................................................ 237
Petr Balcárek: Religious Freedom and Repression in
Czechoslovakia as Reflected in the Life of Ignatius Chiokina
(1899-1976) ......................................................................... 259
Dorin D. Iancu: Testimonies from the Fight of the Romanian Nation
for the Building up of the Great Unification, in the Sight of Constantin
Potârcă (1885-1974) – a Craftsman from Craiova ............................. 277
Radu Tascovici: Martyrs Priests in Muscel and Arges Counties
in the Communist Prisons .................................................................. 303
Gabriel Basa: Due to Belief in God and Hope in the Final Triumph
of the Good the Romanian Nation Has Defeated ............................... 319
II. Studies of Theology and Christian
spirituality
Bishop Nicodim Nicolăescu: Freedom from passions at the

Philokalic Fathers IV-VI centuries ..................................................... 331
Bishop Macarie Drăgoi: Seeking to heal the World spiritually,
physically and socially: the role of the Church ................................... 343
Bishop Emilian Lovișteanul: Christian Freedom and Love in the
Life of the Church and of the People .................................................. 353
Tiziano Salvaterra: Etica cristiana e liberta’ economia: quale
dialettica ............................................................................................ 367
Emil Jurcan: Interpersonal relationship in the comparative
religious context ................................................................................. 387
Mihai Himcinschi: Truth and freedom in democracy – a missionary
analysis .............................................................................................. 399
Nicolae Morar: Various Aspects in The Religiosity of Saint
Constantine the Great ......................................................................... 411
Adrian Covan: Triadologic doctrine on Symbols of faith and
baptismal practices during the antenicean period .............................. 421
Vasile Vlad: The Return of the Sacred in Former Totalitarian
Societies ............................................................................................. 435
Nestor Dinculeană: The value of martyrdom in Hebraism, Islam
and Christianity ................................................................................ 451
List of authors ........................................................................ 459

Identity Assimilation and Church Separat PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Identity Assimilation and Church Separat PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Religious freedom and constraint

Published with the blessing of

II. Dobrei. Florin (coord.)

Cover and graphics: Pr. Mircea Mihuleț

Religious freedom and constraint

Since the enthronement of His Beatitude Patriarch Daniel of

The conversion of Saint Constantine – genuine

“A number of the Empire officials, Emperor collaborators

Consequently, the Emperor’s gesture to refrain from official

“during sleep, was advised [in a dream] to mark the

Without making any other references to Christians or to the attitude

“one of God’s angels appeared at Licinius’ head, who

“I, Constantine Augustus and I, Licinius Augustus, when

The document allowed anyone to adopt the Christian religion

“Because from now so as to remove any suspicion or

Vita Constantini is a panegyric work written in honour of Emperor

“So at about noon, when the day began to tide away,

“Constantine, the emperor worthy of all praise, who

He does not mention anything about Licinius, implying that the

“The emperor, writes Eusebius of Caesarea, enriched

If the position and chlamis of pontifex maximus were accepted

The Donatist Movement and Constantine’s

The Crusades – between Religious Liberty and

As a token of the historiographic interest, we can highlight some

“Keep in your minds how God turned West into East

“You, the one who preach to laymen the necessity of

“Having no right or power over Greece, you have

A document on appointing a protopope in

The hierarchy of the Romanian Orthodox Church and the status

1506 April 24, Rokolnok

The Migration to the New World as a Form

The most well known British colonies of North America, later

Migration as a form of religious freedom

Pilgrims and Puritans in the British colonies of North America

Congregationalism, the effect of religious freedom

The doctrinarian fundamentals and the forms of manifestation

Education, a major priority in the Puritan colonies of North

Die Orthodoxen in Siebenbürgen im Lichte von

Wie im allgemeinen schon bekannt, sind die Reisebeschreibungen

Confessional freedom. Social and national

Considered the most important popular movement up to those

1. The religious dimension

2. The social dimension

3. The national dimension

Old liturgical book circulation between

It is a well acknowledged fact that the church/liturgical books had a

“I tell you to open your eyes and to abandon what you

Aspects of the Image of the Orthodox with the

We are dealing with a complex picture, combining the necessity

The Manifestation of Religious Freedom by the

The most important action of the Romanian Church from Banat

“I can’t, however, <omit> the fact that even the Serbian

In this document, Bishop Ioan Popasu emphasized the repeated

Brief presentation of the Orthodox Church from

1. The Romanian Orthodox Church in the Kingdom of

“The Orthodox religion of the East is the dominant religion of the

• Law on the election of the Metropolitans and bishops, as well as

3. The interference of the Government regarded the spiritual

4. The motivation of the intention of Spiru Haret to establish

“The Synod, by remaining totally isolated from the rest of the

Instead of being real spiritual leaders of the people, the bishops

“At the moment of the proposal of the law, it was a necessity. It

The bishops opposed themselves, considering the Synod as