On Compromise in the Hierarchy During the Communist Yoke
Excerpts from two books by Fr. Roman Braga
[Interviewer] Father, before we continue discussing your life in exile, tell us something about Romanian Orthodox
spirituality, because even we Romanians do not know what it is. It is evident
that we cannot separate spirituality from the Church because the Holy Sacraments
are the source of our sanctification. However, from what you have told us about
Church life in Romania at that time it seems to me that the visible body of the
Church was split into two parts and that only one was moved by the Holy Spirit
because many of the persecuted clergy and lay people who were imprisoned prayed
and lived a true spiritual life, and the others wanted to please the worldly
authorities. In Russia, as well as in Romania and in other Orthodox countries
under Communist control, the hierarchy made many compromises. They accepted
without any comment the orders which came from the government, while thousands
of spiritual fathers, priests, monks and nuns were imprisoned with the knowledge
of the Patriarchate, with the knowledge of the visible Church, who did not do
anything to bring about their liberation. Something is wrong here. There were
Christians at that time who believed that the Holy Spirit had abandoned the
Church hierarchy and gone to the prisons. I do not want to confuse the Church
with the hierarchy, and I do not want to accuse the hierarchy either. I think
they sincerely thought that compromise helps the Church as an institution—but
what about the Spirit of the Church? Some miracles happened even under
Communism. Even if the theological journals could not be printed without having
Ceaucescus picture on the first page, the contents of these magazines were of a
high theological level. This high spiritual level, however, was lost after the
Revolution when the Church became free. Let us not forget that during the
Communist regime, The Philokalia was printed, three volumes of Moral
Orthodox Theology, by Fr. Staniloae, and his four volumes of dogmatic theology,
etc.
Yes, but no simple catechisms, prayer books for the people or manuals of religious
instruction, lives of saints—nothing for the simple people. All written works
had to pass the Communist censors; in fact there was an official building where
the censoring was done. High theology was allowed to be published but not simple
spirituality or instruction that the common person could understand. The
Communists wanted to catechize the simple people in the Marxist materialistic
philosophy. There was no small village without a Communist library. There was a
special publishing house of the Education Department called Science for All,
which published very simple and clear demonstrations that there is nothing
besides matter and material laws and that man came from the apes; Darwinism was
in vogue. Highly intellectual people hardly fell under the influence of these
childish demonstrations; they were more inclined toward spirituality. But simple
working people and country people were easily given the impression that they
could learn everything by reading these brochures. The force of Communism was
half-knowledge. This is very dangerous,
because people think they know everything when they really do not know anything,
and they will not listen to reason. These people became the body of atheists in
Romania. Among them there was, however, a group of common sense churchgoers and
farmers who were not influenced by anything that was against the Church. But
these half-learned people would argue with the priests against anything
spiritual because they had read something at the popular Communist libraries.
These libraries were furnished with books against religion, and the priests were
not allowed to refute the ideas in them. The Church was not allowed to defend
herself; She could deal only with high theology and history.
What I want to learn from you is this: Is the Romanian Church today at the high point of her
calling, that calling which if she does not fulfill, she will lose for all time?
I think that the Church, at least in Romania and Russia, was strengthened during the
communist persecution. I dare to say that suffering matures not only the
individual but the Church also. N. Berdeiev, in one of his books, affirms that
the Church was strong during the 300 years of persecutions. Later, when
Constantine gave freedom to the Christians, the spiritual life of the Church
became diluted; the Church was more of an institution than a spiritual reality.
The same thing I happened during communism: the Church was obligated to limit
all her activities only to the inside of the four walls of the temple. I do
not know the situation in other countries, but the Romanian Church today
launched a campaign of physical and spiritual reconstruction. Priests are
reaching into the schools, into the hospitals, the army. I am optimistic; I
think the Romanian Church will have its contribution in re-bringing Orthodoxy
into the soul of the Romanian nation.
How do you see the situation in the history of the Church when there were patriarchs and
bishops who were iconoclasts and heretics, and even men who gave in to their
lustful desires?
To tell you the truth, Im not comfortable with the idea that if the hierarchy is sinful the
Church no longer exists, with the idea of so-called spiritual elitism, that all
the bishops, without exception, should lead an exemplary life above all
suspicion. Do not misunderstand, bishops should lead an exemplary life above
suspicion, but if they do not this does not negate the existence of the Church.... I do not dare to say that if there is a
bishop with personal sins the Spirit of God is no longer with him, because the
Holy Spirit always works for the salvation of all people, regardless of the
worthiness of those who officiate at the holy Sacraments. The Holy Spirit uses
today one hierarch and tomorrow another, but the Church is the same. Many
priests are not worthy, but the Holy Spirit does not come and go in relation to
our worthiness or unworthiness. The Holy Spirit is the life of the Church, even
if some of the members of the Church are sick or wounded by sin.
So you say that who the bishop is is of no importance.
Absolutely not—as long as that bishop believes in God and keeps the Tradition of the Apostles
and Holy Fathers unchanged. I said what I said because you mentioned heretical
bishops, monophysites and iconoclasts. Those bishops were not the hierarchy of
the whole Church. There were still other bishops who convoked the Ecumenical
Councils and condemned them—they were the true Church. If the bishops made
certain personal compromises, as happened in the Communist era, or were affected
by personal sins we cannot say that because of this they do not have within
themselves the Spirit of God or that the liturgical acts performed by them are
not valid, because then we would be acting as the Protestants....
As far as you are concerned, during the Communist regime there was never
really a split between the hierarchy and the faithful?
Never. The Orthodox faithful during this time were so wise that they never left the Church.
The churches during the Communist regime were never empty. Whether the hierarchs
were compromised or not, I do not know, but the churches were crowded with
people, more than during our so-called freedom when we enjoyed liberty and
democracy and our bishops were not compromised in any way. I told you that when
we were in prison we used to pray for the hierarchy, hoping that they would do
something to keep the churches open. I do not know the difference between the
hierarchs under the Communist regime and St. Genadius the Scholar, who, when
Constantinople was conquered by Mohammed II, signed the great compromise not to
ring the bells, not to have processions on the streets with holy relics, not to
have services outside the church building—and he is a saint in the calendar.
Our hierarchy, though, who managed to keep all the churches open during the
Communist occupations are blamed and condemned. What is the difference between
one situation and another? I strongly believe that if the Sacramental life of
the Church was guaranteed by the hierarchy during the Communist regime it was
the Spirit of God which worked through them. What is more important than to save
this Sacramental life, which is in fact the salvation of the people?
And I want to tell you something else. A certain Romanian Lutheran pastor invented the theory
of the underground Church in Romania, as if certain catacombs existed in which
faithful gathered, with the Communists chasing them to kill them. We never had
such things in Romania. The underground Church was in each individual. Each
bishop had one thing in his heart, while he was obligated to do something else;
he felt one thing, while he was forced to speak something else. Each one
possessed a dual personality. And this thing was painful; it was a real torture.
I heard it in the confessions of many hierarchs from the Communist period who
are now retired. We were in prison and we did not have the responsibility of
defending and maintaining the life of the Orthodox Church in Romania, and now as
refugees I think it is immoral to criticize them here from a safe distance. We
who are in America enjoy freedom; we should not criticize people who suffered
such psychological torture with the purpose of saving the institution of the
Church.
Surely it is
not they that saved the Church, because the Church is in Gods hands and not in
theirs, but I believe that God will not turn His face from them because of their
compromises. Their intention was to save the Sacramental life of Orthodoxy. And
let us be sincere: what did they re sacrifice? It was their good name, the
formal education of the young people, ceremonies and processions outside of the
church..., and these things are not essential to the Church. When St. Genadius
the Scholar, whom we mentioned earlier, sent a letter to the monks who were
revolting against him because of the concessions made to the Turks, he told
them, "It is time to sacrifice the forms in order to keep the essence."
The same things happened in Russia as in Romania. The hierarchy kept the
essence, sacrificing what is not essential; this means many of the ceremonial
aspects of the liturgical life were given up.
And now, a few
words on "spirituality", which you have repeatedly asked about. I live Orthodox
spirituality through the liturgical cycles. I strongly believe that the Holy
Spirit is in the Church. When I told you about the monks of Cemica and
Condritsa, I was speaking about some great unknown men. There were among them
great spiritual monastics whom no one knew about. I do not think "elders" are
some "gurus" to whom people go to see them performing miracles or hanging on
pillars or living as animals in the clefts of rocks. I think that true spiritual
elders live in the discipline of the Church, in obedience and humility. The
Spirit of God is in monasteries and in churches, together with the monks and
priests incorporated in the monastic and liturgical life, not in isolated
individuals. Monks are tempered like steel in humility and obedience. I know
that there are people looking at them like wonder workers, anxious to see
something miraculous, and they classify them as good or bad by how they
"perform". There was a woman in Iasi who once came to Father Bartolomeu Dothan
and asked me if he was a saint. I told her, "I do not know, madam." She
replied, "The world says so." And I said, "It might be." And she
said, "If he is a saint, why does he not perform some miracles?" She came
to such a humble man to see miracles! I am not comfortable with this idea about
the spiritual man. Spiritual men are not some spiritual elite, detached from the
regular life of the Church. When we mention them, we say "St. Seraphim of
Sarov". Sarov was a monastery. We speak of a man incorporated in a discipline.
The same thing with our Romanian saints like "St. Chiriac of Taslau". Taslau is
a monastery with a fixed discipline. "Iosif of Bisericani", another monastery,
"Onofrei of Sihastria", "Paisie of Neamts", "Daniel the Hermit of Voronets",
"Ghelasie of Rametsi"... all these are remembered by their monasteries which had
a fixed discipline and rules; these men were incorporated into this discipline.
The Spirit is there where the monastery is, where the Church is. Their spiritual
exploits are obedience and community discipline.
We speak today so much of Father Cleopa of Sihastria.
I have a videotape of him speaking to
some students from Bucharest University. Do you know what he told them? "Why
did you come to me, because I am like a rotten log, a piece of broken
pottery. May Paradise consume you! I want to see you in Heaven exactly as you
are here, but now because you are here, let us speak of something very
important." And he started, "In the name of the Father, the Son and the
Holy Spirit." And he continued with the beginning prayers, Heavenly King...,
Holy God..., Our Father.... See why they I traveled such a long distance to see
him? He did not tell them more than there is in a prayer book, in the Book of
Hours. "People went to him because in his youth he had been a
shepherd watching the monasterys sheep. They would not have gone to him if he
had a doctorate in theology, but he was a simple monk, like those I saw in my
youth at Condritsa and Cernica. He did not tell them what they should do. Each
young person had in his pocket a prayer book, and he did not do anything other
than direct their attention to that prayer book. Father Cleopa does not even
confess people; he sends them to their parish priest. So I think that we should
not transform this extraordinary, humble elite into something detached from
the Church, into something sensational or spectacular. I think that the wisdom
of God does not come to them directly from Heaven, but through the Sacramental
channels of the Church.
Nevertheless, Father, we cannot
deny that these personalities, not to say saints, radiate in a special way there
in the community of monks. I do not deny that any monk is a light in himself,
but not all shine with the Grace of the Holy Spirit in the same measure. You
know that even the stars in the sky do not sparkle in the same way, for as St.
Paul says, ...one star differs from another star in glory (I Cor. 15:41).
Some you can see clearly, but others you cannot see at all. Even if their
brilliance is not a result of their ascetic endeavors; these men nevertheless
constitute the body of the Church members with a special purpose: God wants
these members to use their merits to benefit the whole Church. It is true that
the Patericon is not a book of the spiritual elite; but nevertheless, it
is considered a book of models of the spiritual life.
The humbler
they are, the more they radiate. This is how I saw them and understood them. I
was witnessed by the barefoot monk who was the administrator of Cernica
Monastery. You see them as spiritual only if you are looking for spiritual
things. However, if you approach them out of simple curiosity or go to them with
intellectual problems or psychological theories, you question them in vain
because they say, "Let us pray," not "Let us discuss." For them
prayer resolves everything; as Father Cleopa says, "Go to the priest in your
parish, confess your sins, take Communion, do not commit adultery, be honest, go
to church on Sundays,... and you save yourself" There is no philosophy here.
It is true, Father. I have heard
all these things many times; I have read them in many books. Even so, they roll
off us like water off a ducks back. When we read about them in books they do
not touch the depth of our souls as they do when we hear them from a special
spiritual man because there is an unspeakable power of the Spirit that works
only through certain fathers who shake us into wakefulness and enlighten our
faith.
It is the power of the Church. It is the power of the Holy Spirit of God, Who works in the
Church through these men who live in and remain always in the Church. We do not
speak here only of monks but also of married priests. For example, you know
Father Gheorghe Rosca. He was the spiritual father of many members of the
Burning Bush Movement. He was a simple priest but all the intellectuals in
Bucharest came to him, and these intellectuals were theosophists, involved in
all kinds of false mysticism. There were many other married priests who were
great spiritual fathers. Spirituality is not connected only to monasteries, to
the harsh ascesis of the monks; it also exists in the lay priesthood, and I dare
to humble myself and say more; any village priest, regardless of his sins or
material interests, exercises a spiritual function.
Then how can you explain the spiritual crisis which has come about in some of the nations of the
world, diminishing the Grace of God in the people? I could be wrong; maybe the
Grace is still there, but the spiritual feeling in people seems to have changed,
and they do not seem to see the saving power of God working in the world. But, once
again, the same God says that He will take away His Spirit from them if they continue in their
sinful ways.
The crises are within us, I think, and they often come about because of some ill-fated cultural
influences. You said earlier that the same persecution of the Church existed in
the last century, before the era of Communism, only in a little more civilized
fashion. There is, nevertheless, a difference between that cultural persecution
by the intelligentsia who wanted to change the religious mentality of the people
and the Communist persecution. They wanted to introduce secularism and modern
institutions, copying the Western countries where secularism was more prevalent.
In the 19th century, the government wanted to bring Russia and Romania up to the
level of Western countries. Our countries were still living in the Middle Ages,
so to speak. Our constitution was still based on the holy canons of the Church
and on Christian traditions. They regarded Orthodoxy to be old fashioned
compared with Catholicism. However, Communism attempted to destroy the source of
faith within us. For example, Lunaciarski wrote Lenin: "If you want to
control a man, kill his intimacy." I consider intimacy to mean the temple of
God within him.
Father, it seems to me that the intellectual class of the 19th century, who distorted the
Orthodox Romanian tradition and broke with the spirituality of our people, are
presented in textbooks as being representative of the Romanian nation. Even
priests, monks and church people consider them as such.
I do not understand, Father; is it possible to present the
history of a nation completely detached from its spirituality?
It is true that our 19th
century intelligentsia thought that the social progress of our nation was
hindered by traditional Orthodox mentality. At that time there truly existed a
break between the Church hierarchy and the intellectual class, but there was not
a break between the hierarchy and the Romanian people as a whole. This kind of
break has never existed in our history. The intelligentsia does not represent
any country in its entirety. I do not think that there was a total break between
Orthodox people and the hierarchy during the Communist regime either. Our people
are wiser than we think. They have always understood the limits of the Church
leaders, what they can and cannot do, so they have never lost their faith in the
Church. Faithful people do not judge their hierarchy: who is worthy or who is
unworthy; they are ashamed to do that. They can see the good in the saying, "Do
as I say and not as I do." No matter how simple we consider the Orthodox country
people to be, they know what the Church and spirituality are, and they are never
scandalized by the sins of certain priests or hierarchs. They know that not all
the hierarchy was corrupt; there were enough good bishops and good patriarchs.
There were, of course, some necessary compromises made and, sure, as everywhere
there were bad priests, but the Church had at the same time holy people,
martyred priests and spiritual monks. People have in their hearts a discernment,
by the Grace of God, which comes from above. In my opinion, the Orthodox Church
and spirituality resides in people. This is why the urbanization imposed by
Communist leader Ceaucescu was a crime against the Romanian culture and the
spirituality which resides in the simple country people. And, finally, Orthodox
spirituality is in each individual who keeps within himself the eschatological
feeling, the feeling of eternity and the second coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Our simple countrymen in their simplicity always think of death, while the
intellectual class has lost this eschatological feeling. This waiting and
watchful spirit makes a monk out of each individual; there is something monastic
in each one of us.
What do you think, then, is the role of the Romanian Orthodox Church in the world?
I want to discourage the chauvinism of some of the intellectuals in the Romanian Orthodox Church today
who say that the salvation of the world will come from Romania. The role of the
Romanian Church is no other than the role of the Russian, Greek or Bulgarian
Churches. Orthodoxy in any country has the same purpose—to unite everyone in
God and to maintain Jesus in our hearts through the Holy Sacraments of the
Church. What other role could the Romanian Church have than the spiritualization
of Romanian culture on the national level? As Orthodoxy in Russia under the
influence of Optina Monastery transfigured Russian culture, I believe that we,
too, especially now after the Liberation, must continue to bring about the
transfiguration of Romanian culture with the help of our Orthodox intellectual
class. The Church does not play a political role, not even an intellectual one;
we must open the minds of our people to the resurrection and the transfiguration
of the world.
I have always feared the temptation of the anti-Christ hidden in an uncontrolled nationalism.
I do not see the evil to be in the clergy, whether they be good, very good or
weak, but I see the work of the anti-Christ in something that will surprise you.
We are not better than other nations in the world; we are not privileged and
favored by God in a special way, as certain contemporary movements in Romania
claim. Our role is the same as that of other nations. When we exalt ourselves,
we become proud, killing any trace of spirituality we might have had; in this
way, we truly fall into the hands of the anti-Christ. Orthodoxy in Romania
does not consist of only the hierarchy; we are all the Church. If the whole
Romanian nation, clergy and laity alike, do not fall on our knees, confessing
our sins and recognizing our unworthiness, we are not good Orthodox Christians.
How can the salvation of the world come from Romania when our women have
one-and-a- half million abortions a year, as many as in the entire United
States? Dare we say that we are pleasing to God and the salvation of the world
will come from us? This idea is a diabolic trap.
Father, what you say is true, but the people are not guilty.
How many hierarchs descend amidst the people to give them
spiritual counsel, I mean to walk on the street with them as our hermits of old
used to do? How many continue the tradition begun by our pre-Christian hermits
who lived in the mountains but came to the communities and exercised great
authority over the Dacian leaders and their people? Today, some Romanians
complain that they have never even seen the face of their
bishop. Why do not they come down to say, "Brothers, we are sinners. Lets
confess to each other, starting with the Patriarch of the country?" They are
as inaccessible as Pharaohs in their palaces. Christ did not talk from the top
of the mountain hidden in a cloud or from the Holy of Holies from behind closed
curtains. Here is the true power of the shepherd; the sheep follow him because
they know his voice, and he gives his life for his sheep.
Dear brother, I think that along with secularization there has developed an isolation of the
hierarchy from the people, and secularization came with the monarchy. Remember
from the Old Testament that people came to Samuel asking him for a king, and
Samuel, who was the judge and leader in Israel, said to God, "Lord, they do
not want me anymore." The Lord answered, Listen to the voice of the
people, because they do not hate you; they hate Me. They do not want Me to rule
over them anymore. (I Kings 8:7). Our medieval rulers reigned by the will of
God; they built our monasteries and churches. At that time bishops,
metropolitans and princes were present in church every Sunday, confessing their
sins and taking Communion together. But in the case of Romania, because our
kings were only nominal Christians and placed themselves above the people, the
hierarchy too have shut themselves up in an ivory tower and have become an
elite, I mean a caste.
From Exploring the Inner Universe, by Fr. Roman Braga, pp. 60-75.
+ + +
Between God and Satan (1976)
As the devil puts on a robe of light to deceive if possible even Gods chosen ones, in the
same way he wraps lies in the vestment of truth, giving the illusion to those
who utter lies that they proclaim universal principles.
We cannot give any other interpretation to contemporary Romanian theology, in which all the
intellectuals of the Church are mobilized and asked to write in defense of the
atheistic regime. The theological and religious press in Bucharest, which before
World War II dealt with the education of children and young adults and also
published religious books for country people as well as intellectuals, is
transformed today into an apologist of Communist reforms who attempt to justify
with evangelical texts or speculation from the works of the Holy Fathers.
Reading the book, The Servant Church, by Antonie Plamadeala, assistant
bishop to the Patriarch with a doctorate from Heythrop College in Oxford,
England, you immediately realize how in Rornania a "Marxist theology" was
initiated. The author is a prominent personality in the Church life of Romania.
No wonder, then, that he was forced to introduce Communist ideas into
theological teaching. The book is a perfect theological demonstration of the
Communist form of socialism. His Grace Antonie not only sees in St. John
Chrysostom a precursor of Marxism, but even finds in the sermons of this Holy
Father the "theory of plus value" treated by Karl Marx in Das Kapital.*
The author treats in depth the social aspect of the works of the Holy
Fathers: poverty, charity, the duty of the rich to help the poor, etc., but he
forgets to mention in his book that St. Chrysostom did not become a yes-man of
the Byzantine emperors, even though they were Christian, but he criticized them,
being revolted by their social iniquities. He attacked Eutropius and the empress
Eudoxia, urging the people not to participate in imperial festivities during the
Holy Liturgy but rather to enter the church and pray.
What if His Grace Antonie would deliver a homily from the ambo of the Patriarchal church in
Bucharest against the anti-Christian measures that the Romanian Communist
government took which prohibited high school and college students and professors
and soldiers from entering the church? St. John Chrysostom would not defend the
authorities; on the contrary, he invited them to enter the church and pray. What
if His Grace would protest against the atheistic speeches of Nicolae Ceaucescu,
defending the repression of individual liberties in Romania? We cannot
understand how His Grace, who spent years in the Communist prisons together with
thousands of believers, priests and monks, could promote Communist principles.
Does he think that if the Holy Cappadocian Fathers lived in Romania today they
would not refute the Communist Party because of the over one hundred atheistic
books they published in which the Mother of God is represented as a prostitute
and the Holy Trinity in the form of male sexual organs? Would they praise the
Communist leaders for such filthy works out of fear of offending them? Would
they urge the people with Biblical texts to obey the governing authorities
(Romans 13:1)? Does he think that St. Paul really obeyed the authorities when
they prohibited him from preaching the word of God in public? Did St. Paul not
die as a martyr because he did not obey the authorities? Would he have
the courage to preach against atheism and materialism in the public squares or
in the national Congress as St. Paul did in Athens in the Areopagus? Because we
live in a country under a Communist regime why does His Grace not employ his
literary talent and theological training in some apologies against those who
count religion as the opium of the people as the apologists Athenegoras,
Tertullian or St. Justin the Martyr did?
We know that this is not possible, and we understand. Fully enjoying the advantages of
freedom in the western countries, I cannot recommend to others who live in
terror and temptations to become martyrs. However, if you are afraid and forced
to collaborate with Satan, at least do not worship him and do not represent him
as an angel of light. It is a contradictory situation: the Church in Romania
today uses her best theologians and her missions abroad, as well as delegates
sent to ecumenical meetings, to defend the acts of an atheistic regime. We
accept the broad views of Romanian theologians who walk the middle line, but
when in the World Council of Churches someone raises the issue of persecutions
in Romania, the Romanian theologians jump in the air: "If there were not freedom
in Romania, we would not be here!" They feel offended and sometimes even leave
the meeting. We know that the government pays the Romanian Patriarchate for the
travel expenses of these delegates abroad. They are not paid to defend
Orthodoxy, which the Communists in Bucharest would like to eliminate as quickly
as possible, but paid to give the impression that in external relations, the
Romanian Church is totally free.**
It is well known that the innumerable external contacts of the Romanian Church would not be
possible without the approval of the Communist government, and they are
organized only through the Department of External Affairs. The government uses
the Church to make favorable propaganda abroad. As for religious freedom inside
the country, Romanian laws recommend this: "Any contact or communication of the
Church and Church orders and dispositions should be approved by the governmental
agencies of control which are branches of the Department of Religious Affairs.
This means that any letter published by the Church must pass through Communist
censorship.
Thus, Romanian hierarchs do not have even the freedom to be silent. They must praise the
government aloud. They must cense Satan and adore him as "the desolation of
abomination." (Dan. 12:11)
—Cuvantul Romanesc, May 1976
* The cost of manufacturing an item is much less than the sale price. The difference between
these prices accumulates in a capital, thus becoming the basis of
Capitalism.
** Some of these delegates abroad, however, who wanted to tell the truth, preferred to
remain in the free world and declared themselves political refugees [Author].
From On the Way of Faith, by Fr. Roman Braga, pp. 184-187.
+ + +
"STRIKE THE SHEPHERDS..." (1992)
Following the events of December 1989—revolution, coup, or whatever it was—the Romanian
Orthodox Church has launched a daring and grandiose program of material and
spiritual reconstruction. The historical episcopates and monasteries closed by
the Communists have been reopened, several new theological institutes have been
opened, ASTRA Society, Oastea Domnului ["The Lord's Army"], the Orthodox Womens
Guild and Orthodox children and youth organizations have been revived. A new
medical center, Christiana, is being built in Bucharest.
Evidently, all of this incites the jealousy of the Uniates and of the various sectarian groups
in Romania, who take every available opportunity—in the press and in public—
to attack the Orthodoxy of our nation and also our hierarchs. The sectarians
know well the saying from the Bible, "Strike the Shepherd and the sheep shall be
scattered..." (Zech. 13:7); but Zechariah the Prophet did not say this out of
maliciousness, jealousy or political envy; he did not say it to destroy the
Church but to strengthen it. But what is painful is the fact that even some of
the Orthodox clergy have placed themselves in the ranks of the enemies of
Orthodoxy. They do not understand that without a certain compromise made by the
hierarchy of the Church, even their own ordination and assignment to a parish
would not have been possible at that time. Why did they not protest then, and
why did they accept to be ordained by the same hierarchs they now consider to be
unworthy? How is it possible that when the bishops placed their hands on their
heads they possessed the Grace of the Holy Spirit, but now, after the
revolution, they have lost it?
How can anyone imagine that if the Romanian Church had been free, it would not have done more,
or at least as much, as it does today? But who was free? Were the political
parties free? Where were the leaders of these political parties, these heroic
voices, who are now shouting so loudly, and where was the opposition press? Why
be unfair only to the bishops who nevertheless remained near their flock during
the entire time of persecution. They did not abandon the faithful to flee to the
West. The Patriarch and the bishops will be judged by God, not by politicians,
because during the most critical moments in the life of the Romanian nation they
saved the Church, ensuring the sacramental life of the faithful, which is the
true essence of salvation for the people. In Romania, unlike in Russia, we do
not have millions of people who are not baptized. Only last year, Russian
newspapers mentioned the baptism of one and a half million adults. Romanians
were baptized and married, were confessed and received communion even during the
Communist dictatorship because the churches were open and priests and bishops
were available. All this was possible because of the ability of the leadership
of the Church to sacrifice the form in order to keep the content. Evidently, for
the unfaithful politicians, the sacramental life of the Church means nothing;
for them, only their political slogans are important.
For the majority of Orthodox faithful, however, the sacramental life of the Church has
always been and still is essential. Let, then, the faithful people, not the
politicians, judge their own hierarchs, who in the end will be judged by God.
When Khrushchev closed and razed eleven thousand churches in Russia—in addition to
those destroyed earlier by Stalin—in Romania old churches were being painted
and new churches were being built; the Church was printing the Philokalia
and the Holy Fathers, ten theological publications, seminary lectures,
calendars and prayer books for the people in its own printing shops; six
seminaries and two theological institutes were in operation. The fact that the
Church emerged from this struggle intact is a clear indication that this quiet
activity of the Church hierarchy dealt Communism the biggest blow.
The negative attitude of some writers about the Church is the result of their atheistic
education received in the course of forty-five cars of Communism. Communism left
its mark. I read with sadness in Romnia Libera that last year during
Pascha a priest who was a deputy in the Romanian Parliament opened his speech
with the Christian greeting, "Christ is Risen", and no one answered—and
there were in the audience not only representatives of the FSN Party but also
members of the Opposition. This means that something has been destroyed in the
soul of the Romanian people. History has been falsified, culture has been
altered. The Romanian people have forgotten that Stephen the Great was not
Baptist and Michael the Brave was not Greek Catholic; they have forgotten that
Orthodoxy is the essence of the nation, that it played an essential role in the
process of the formation of the Romanian people, of the language, of the
Romanian soul; that from it we have the first printing shops, the first
writings, the entire culture. In a country inundated with monasteries and
Orthodox monuments, how can one be against Orthodoxy without committing
spiritual and intellectual suicide, in other words without losing ones own
identity?
When the attacks come from non-Orthodox it is easy to understand that they plead "pro
causa sua" ["for one's own interest"], but we Orthodox need to use more logic.
An Orthodox author of a Catholic article published in London says that the
Orthodox Church is the cause of the backwardness of the Romanian people. As
one who has lived in Brazil, I asked myself what the cause is of the
backwardness of the Latin American countries which have been Catholic for five
hundred years and have remained primitive and in a state of moral and material
misery. Is Catholicism really the cause?
How can anybody suggest that we should be united with Rome simply because we have a
common Latin origin? First of all, we are not only Latins. And then, forgive me
for saying this, but why should a Polish Pope of Slavic origin protect the Latin
purity of the Romanian people; or what Latin origin does Uniatism protect in
Ukraine, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Abyssinia and Iran? Are all these also
descendants of Trajan? When politicians meddle in the affairs of the Church,
they become ludicrous. Imagine my speaking to specialists at a medical
conference concerning subjects on which they are experts.
Even Cuvantul Romanesc, the largest newspaper of exiled Romanians, resorts to
"blows below the belt," in the words of Father Cornel Todeasa. There is not one
issue of the newspaper that does not treat Patriarch Teoctist with irony. Of
course, we cannot expect Cuvantul Romanesc to be an Orthodox newspaper,
or even a Christian one. But there are a few Orthodox priests who must
understand that the Patriarch cannot be changed by a revolution. He is
accountable only to the Holy Synod, not to any group of fanatics who comes to
the door of the Patriarchate and shouts, "Teoctist the Communist!" This would
create anarchy in the Church so that no longer would any bishop be certain of
his seat. And with an inexplicable lack of ethical standards, Cuvantul
Romanesc republished, without even asking my permission, one of my articles
written sixteen years ago in which I criticized the doctoral dissertation of
Metropolitan Antonie of Ardeal, trying to demonstrate that I am inconsistent. In
his logics course, Nae lonescu said that only Gods judgments are absolute,
because He is the only One who knows everything. The intelligent person changes
his ideas. Otherwise, human thinking would never progress. I am very happy that
Cuvantul Romanesc has intelligent correspondents. Somebody published an
article titled, Ouo Vadis Rex, an article against the Romanian monarchy; only a
few months later in the presence of King Michael in New York I heard the same
person proclaim "Long live the King!" Another one writes in both Micro
Magazine and Cuvantul Romanesc, even though these two newspapers are
of totally opposite orientations. Who can accuse them of being inconsistent?
People change. When we judge the hierarchy of our Church, we must not forget
the years of oppression; we were here and they were there. We were responsible
only for ourselves, for our own individual selves which we had placed in safety,
while in their hands was the fate of Romanian Orthodoxy. What would we have done
in their place? We would have allowed ourselves to be arrested, and the people
would have been left without churches and without a sacramental life—an act of
cheap and destructive heroism.
I have followed for twenty years in The Orthodox Church the editorials of Father
John Meyendorff against Russian Communism, but I have not seen a word against
the Patriarch of Moscow; not one Jew criticizes Rabbi Moses Rosen for
collaborating with Communism; not one Baptist in America speaks against Pastor
Lucaci of Detroit, who invited Ambassador Bogdan to participate at all baptisms;
and, of course, no Catholic accuses the Pope for replacing Cardinals Mindzenti
and Slipici with people pleasing to the Communist governments of Hungary and the
Soviet Union. This is what the interest of the Church demanded at that time.
People know that by attacking the hierarchy, they are attacking the Church
itself.
Why do we never think of praying instead of criticizing? I think in reality we are talking
of a hidden atheism and of a hatred against God, not against the hierarchy
itself. "Let us stand aright, let us stand in fear, let us be attentive. The
enemies know that the Romanian soul is nourished by Orthodoxy. This is why they
are attacking the Church hierarchy with such great vehemence. "Strike the
shepherd and the sheep shall be scattered."
—Solia, March 1992
From On the Way of Faith, by Fr. Roman Braga, pp. 199-204. All excerpts
reprinted with the kind permission of Mother Gabriella, Abbess of the
Dormition of the Mother of God Orthodox Monastery, which publishes Fr. Roman's books.
About Fr. Roman. Father Roman Braga is a Romanian Orthodox monk whose
life always revolved around a monastic community.
Born in 1922 in Basarabia, as the seventh child of Cosma and Maria, he enters, at the
age of twelve, the Cldruani Monastery near Bucharest. A year later, he is sent to the Seminary
of Cernica, another monastery near the capital of Romania. In 1940-1942 he is enrolled at the Central
Monastic Seminary in Bucharest and in the year that follows he is studying at the Theological
Seminary in Chiinu. Between 1943 and 1947, Roman Braga is enrolled at the Theological Institute,
the School of Letters and Philosophy, as well as at the Pedagogic Seminary "Titu Maiorescu",
all in Bucharest.
He graduates from the Theological Institute in
1947, Magna cum Laude, and the following year receives the teaching certificate
for theology and Romanian language and literature. In the same year he is
enrolled in the Ph.D. program at the Theological Institute in Bucharest.
Arrested in 1948, he spends five years in
prison. After his release from prison in 1954 he is tonsured as a monk and
ordained deacon by the Metropolitan of Iai, Sebastian Rusanu. The following
five years are spent at the Iai Metropolia where he serves the Divine Liturgy
with other deacons and monks, sings in the choir, conducts theological sessions
with students discussing the Philokalia
and practices the Prayer of the Heart. All this time he is under surveillance by
the communist government. In 1959 he is arrested again and spends a full year
under interrogation. The authorities are not sure what accusations to bring
against him. He is finally accused of having been part of the Burning Bush
movement, along with fifteen other intellectuals of the time. After a mock
trial he is sentenced to 18 years of forced labor for having "discussed
inimical writings of Basil the Great in order to overthrow the government".
The next five years are spent in the labor
camps along the Danube Delta, building dams and cutting reeds. Here, in a
dormitory with 120 other people, he meets and lives together with other priests
such as Fr. Sofian Boghiu, Fr. Grigore Bbu, Fr. Felix Dubneac, Fr. Benedict
Ghiu, and others.
The year 1964 marked the general amnesty given
by the communist regime to all political prisoners. He is released and returns
to Iai to find that Metropolitan Sebastian was dead and replaced by
Metropolitan lustin. Not finding employment in Iai he is hired by Bishop Valerian
Zaharia to work in the archives of the Episcopate of Oradea. This same year
Bishop Valerian ordains him a priest.
On January 1, 1965 he is installed priest of the Parish of Negreti, a village
in the northern part of the country, where he will function for the next three
years. Here he organizes the Sunday School and a 100 children choir. Because of
the work he does in this parish, the government transfers him secretly to
another village, near Oradea, where he will function as parish priest until
1968 when he is sent by the Patriarchate to Brazil as missionary priest for the
Romanian community in So Paulo.
The four years in Brazil are difficult. In 1972, Bishop Valerian Trifa of the
Romanian Orthodox Episcopate in America asks him to come to the United States.
He will then live at the Vatra where he is involved in translating religious texts
and music from Romanian to English, participates in organizing the summer camps for
students and adults, and is very active in the religious education of the children.
In 1979 he is sent to be parish priest at the Holy Trinity Church in Youngstown,
Ohio and in 1982, becomes parish priest of the St. George Cathedral in Detroit.
From here, in 1984, he moves to Pennsylvania and becomes priest and spiritual father
for the community of the Orthodox Monastery of the Transfiguration in Ellwood City.
Today we fmd him as priest and spiritual father
of the community of nuns of the Dormition of the Mother of God Orthodox
Monastery in Rives Junction, Michigan. Here he is active not only in the busy
schedule of services, but in the rich
spiritual and intellectual life of the monastery. —The Editors, July, 1996
|