OF MIDDLEMEN AND INTERMEDIARIES NEGOTIATING THE STATE CHURCH RELATIONSHIP IN COMMUNIST ROMANIA THE FORMATIVE YEARS Anca Maria Şincan A DISSERTATION in History Presented to the Faculties of the Central European University in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Budapest, Hungary 2011 Supervisor of Dissertation ______________________ Professor Nadia Al-Bagdadi CEU eTD Collection i Copyright in the text of this dissertation rests with the Author. Copies by any process, either in full or part, may be made only in accordance with the instructions given by the Author and lodged in the Central European Library. Details may be obtained from the librarian. This page must form a part of any such copies made. Further copies made in accordance with such instructions may not be made without the written permission of the Author. I hereby declare that this dissertation contains no materials accepted for any other degrees in any other institutions and no materials previously written and/or published by another person unless otherwise noted. CEU eTD Collection ii Abstract The Church in Romania was pushed aside by the modern state in its endeavour to modernize the society. The Church was stripped of its social functions and left with ceremonial roles that served to legitimate the state. It was no longer an autonomous body but through economic, legal, cultural and social ties it became a dependant of the state. This put a dent in the much looked after doctrine of caesaro-papism since the Church had no longer a sufficiently strong status to challenge the state and negotiate its position in society. There were periods after 1918 when this situation was reversed by the Church. At the end of the Second World War a status quo characterized the relationship between the Romanian state and the Church. Much of its hierarchy was publicly outspoken in social, educational, political matters. While economically still dependant on the political administration politically it became an important factor in public life. The change of regimes after the Second World War brought about an increase in the new regime’s interest in the Church and its position in society. The communists acted on a pre-existing soviet model already tested in the regulation of the Soviet Union religious life. Policies were drafted following this model regarding the role of the Church, if and how it could have been replaced and by what. It was one of the few steady attempts to reform institutional religion to fit the role designed for it by the state. This research focuses on the church – state relationship as defined in the early years of Romanian communism (1948-1960). Through the lens of three case-studies it attempts to uncover the subversive factors (lack of trained cadres, an overlap between trying to use the religious denominations and trying to relegate them and so on) that compromised the “orthodox” model of relationship that came from the soviets or was fabricated by Party policy makers and introduced new regulations and ultimately a different/new model of relationship. Thus I show how the blueprints and policies regarding the regulation of religious life in communist Romania were challenged when put into practice from inside the central communist administration, from outside the political administration (by the Church) and from below. The research is organized into five parts, a theoretical and methodological overview, an introductory one that looks at the relationship between state and church in Romania and lays out the context of the regime change, followed by an analysis of three case- studies, all pointing out how internal and external factors influenced the relationship and changed the model and is concluded by a draw up of what the practiced CEU eTD Collection mechanism looked like. iii To my father CEU eTD Collection iv Acknowledgements During the long and intricate research process I have been counselled, taught, talked to/down to, involved, appreciated, menaced, discussed, and praised by a long line of people. Most of them brought valuable input to the research enterprise. I would like to thank those that facilitated my access into the archives: His Excellency Archbishop Andrei, Metropolitan of Cluj, Alba, Crişana, and Maramureş on whose personal recommendation I was granted access into the Archives of the Patriarchal Administration of the Romanian Orthodox Church, the State Secretary for Religious Denominations in Bucharest Romania, and that of the Romanian Orthodox Church Archbishopric of Alba Iulia, Fr. Constantin Pârvu, Administrative Vicar of the Romanian Patriarchal Administration, on whose acceptance I had access into the Archives of the Patriarchal Administration, Mr. Adrian Lemeni, State Secretary in the Ministry for Culture and Religious Denominations, Ms. Mona Muscă, former Minister for Culture and Religious Denominations, and Senator Eugen Nicolăescu. My co- option into the Presidential Commission for Analysing the Communist Dictatorship in Romania has rounded up my understanding of the state church relationship in communist Romania. I would like to thank Professor Vladimir Tismăneanu and Dr. Cristian Vasile for including me as an expert in the commission. To my interviewees that have accepted to be represented and quoted in the thesis I owe a great deal. I would also like to thank those that for various reasons declined to appear in the final version of the thesis. Their insights into the relationship between state and church in communist and post communist Romania were extremely valuable in the economy of the thesis. Along the years I benefitted from the exceptionally generous institutional support of several foundations and individuals to study the subject comparatively. I would like to express my gratitude to His Excellency, Archbishop Antonio Matiazzo of Padova, Italy, the Institut für Europäische Geschichte, Mainz, Germany, and the New Europe College in Bucharest, Romania for supporting periods of work on this research project. My professors and my reviewers have shaped my research and guided my work. I particularly benefited from the advice and suggestions of Mr. Sorin Antohi, professor Balazs Trencsenyi, professor Gianpaolo Romanato (Padova University), professors Anne Deighton and Peter Clarke (University of Oxford), professor Marsha Siefert. This thesis owes multiple debts to many friends and colleagues. My colleagues helped with advice and at times with a sympathetic ear. Many of the hypotheses tested during the research process were discussed and debated with Cristian Vasile, Valentin Săndulescu, Ionuţ Biliuţă, Narcis Tulbure, Răzvan Pârâianu, Raluca Cimpoiaşu, Marian Zăloagă and many others. I owe a great debt of gratitude to my supervisor, Professor Nadia Al-Bagdadi who has supported my undertaking and offered assistance in moments of confusion. I thank her deeply for the patience and understanding she showed in the long process of researching and writing the thesis. Her thoughtful comments and feedback were those CEU eTD Collection of a specialist, her encouragements were those of a friend. Finally, I would like to thank my father. He was my advisor, confidant, and supporter. He encouraged and helped me finish this undertaking. A countryside priest in the 1980s, his was the experience I relied most when writing my final chapter. His strive for normality in an abnormal situation was what best defined the struggle of the church during the communist period. v List of illustrations and tables Illustration 1. Example of file cover from the Direction for Studies dealing with the Patriarch of the Romanian Orthodox Church, (The Archive of the State Secretary for Religious Denominations), p. 14 Illustration 2. Example of file cover from the Direction for Studies dealing with the Romanian Orthodox Church catalogued in the archives (The Archive of the State Secretary for Religious Denominations), p. 16 Illustration 3. Gheorghe Gheorghiu-Dej, the new Patriarch Justinian Marina and Archbishop Nicolae Bălan, 1948 (Lucian Leuştean, Orthodoxy and the Cold War, Religion and Political Power in Romania, 1947-63, London: Palgrave, Macmillan, 2009, p. 75), p. 92. Table 4. Table: evaluation for the construction of churches process 1954 (The Archive of the State Secretary for Religious Denominations), pp. 178-179. Illustration 5. The old church of Cerghizel and the foundation of the new Church (Photograph from the personal archives of Fr. Ioan Tutecean), p. 195. Illustration 6. Dedication ceremony. Bishop Emilian Birdaş surrounded by villagers and officials. On his left, Traian Hărşan, the Communist Party’s First Secretary in Mureş County (Photograph from the personal archives of Fr. Ioan Tutecean), p. 198. Illustration 7. The ceremony of the consecration of the new church. Bishop Emilian Birdaş with archpriest Aurel Sămărghiţan and other priests. On the left, behind the bishop, village official. (Photograph from the personal archives of Fr. Ioan Tutecean), p. 200. Illustration 8. The new Orthodox Church in Cerghizel, 1982. (Photograph from the personal archives of Fr. Ioan Tutecean), p. 201. CEU eTD Collection vi Table of Contents Introduction 1 1. Research questions and hypotheses 4 2. The structure 9 3. Sources and methodology 12 I. Historiographical and theoretical overview 21 I.1 The use of the Russian case as base for asymmetric comparison 21 I.2 On the particularity of the Romanian case 25 I.3 On “Church” versus “churches” 38 I.4 Prior research on the subject 42 I.5 Conceptual base 51 II. Remnants of the past, problems of the present - a historical 54 overview II. 1 From the 1848 revolutionary to the associationist model of state church relationship 56 II. 2 The Church and the communist regime 62 II. 3 Conclusion 75 III. Administering authority: changing central policy from within 78 the political administration III. 1 Overview of Ministry for Religious Denominations 80 III. 2 On hierarchs and hierarchies 85 III. 2. a. Patriarch Justinian – a historiographical overview 86 III. 2. b. The double hierarchy of the Orthodox Church 91 III. 2. c. The new patriarchal administration 96 III.