Revista Studii Teologice


JA slide show

Historia concordatorum, historia dolorum? Istoria Concordatului cu Statul român (1920-1929) şi implicarea Bisericii Ortodoxe Române

Historia Concordatorum, Historia Dolorum? The History of Concordat with the Romanian State (1920-1929) and the Involvement of the Romanian Orthodox Church

Autor(i): Alexandru PRELIPCEAN

This study describes concisely the history of Concordat with the Romanian State in the interwar period. Beyond the need for a diachronic presentation of events occurred between 1920-1929, then from the first negotiation to Concordat ratificati-on, we aim to present and understand the relationship between Church and State, on the one hand, the Romanian Orthodox Church and the Romanian State, on the other hand, the relationship created – through the provisions of Concordat – betwe-en the Catholic Church and the Romanian State. In the background research, we intended to establish whether the Romanian Concordat is a paradigm for Church-State relations, or rather a painful reflection of the long history of Concordat.
Numerous bibliographic materials in addition to primary sources make the Concordat concluded by the Holy See with the Romanian state in the interwar period a chapter widely discussed by Romanian historiography. Objective investigation of materials produced in that period shows that the existence of a Concordat Romanian territory has generated interest from all members involved in this dialogue. From synthetic analysis of the concept of “Concordat”, moving quickly through internatio-nal arrangements, we come to examine in particular the history of Romanian Con-cordat – conducted over a period of almost a decade. We present not only the con-flict between the parties engaged in dialogue (Church/-es and State/-s), but also between members on the same "side".
Special attention was given to the Romanian Orthodox Church in relation to the conclusion of a Concordat. Based on the information provided by primary sour-ces, valuable works and studies published in the interwar period, as well as informa-tion drawn from national and international media, we hope that we were able to identify and outline the views held by the Orthodox Church on this bilateral act.
The creation of a Romanian Concordat was in our best national interests, but in the best interests of the Vatican. Also, as the Romanian Orthodox Church was less well-organized and wealthy than the Catholic one and other religious denominations, serious assault on Catholic opposition was seen as a mistake by the Romanian State. By debating and concluding the Concordat with Rome, Romanian governments between 1920-1927, and the monarchy in Romania showed their lack of patriotism, giving to the Vatican rights which threatened even the state. The first period in the history of Romanian Concordat (1920-1921) was particularly a period of “explorati-on” and “speculation” between the two “groups” engaged in dialogue. The skilful interpretation made by Octavian Goga and other persons involved in this diplomatic interaction led to the rejection of the two drafts of the Concordat, extremely favora-ble for the Vatican. Even though the Latin origins of the Romanian people were in-voked as a reason for concluding a Concordat, however the result was not the one expected by the Vatican. Nevertheless, neither did the proposed Concordat satisfy the Romanian national interests, because of its ambiguity stemming from our incomplete knowledge of Catholicism. The years 1921-1924 were “silent” concerning the Con-cordat. The country was undergoing political, economic and social turmoil, and the matter of a Concordat was not a priority for the Romanian State. During the period 1924-1926 several texts were suggested, but no one was signed. The involvement of Transylvanian Hungarians and their many notifications to the Vatican, as well as the pressure put by the Hungarian diplomat to the Holy See, led Catholic authorities to speed up, on the one hand, the signing of a Concordat, and on the other hand, not to make concessions. Again, the Romanian State proved to be extremely poorly pre-pared against Catholic diplomacy. The backstage games, the Romanian indifference and ignorance had adverse consequences for the Romanian State, a State unable even to keep some of its sovereign rights.
If for the theological world the presence of Concordat in our national history is one of its dark moments, for the political world the Concordat was regarded as a simple diplomatic document between two States. Moreover, the blame for concluding the Concordat was very easily put on the two “parties” or even between members of the same “party”.

Pagini: 123-208