The ethnogenesis of the Romanian people began with the colonization of Dacia and romanization of the autochthonous inhabitants; it continued by the gradual assimilation of the Slav element and of the other non-Roman ethnic elements who were within the Carpatho-Danubian space or arrived from South of the Danube.

Romanian is a Latin language, the only direct successor of the Latin language; it originated in the popular Latin used by the Roman colonists. It contains also Geto-Dacian and Slavonic lexical elements. Both the vocabulary and grammar are Latin in essence.

From then on the Christianity experienced continuous growth and development in the Romanian territories. Many Romanian emperors have stressed the importance of the Orthodox belief, setting a Christian model in their own behavior and also building many churches and covents all over Romania and on Mount Athos—seen as a spiritual centre of the entire Orthodoxy, and blessed by the presence of the Virgin Mary, Herself.

It is more appropriate to speak about a "Romanian Orthodoxy" than simply about "Orthodoxy" since there are specific features in the religious behaviour and attitude both of the common people and hierarchs in the Romanian territories.

The following are its characteristic traits:

a) the absence of the confessional wars; the absence of the crimes in the name of Bible; the absence of the propensity for revenge.

b) neutrality concerning dogmatic fights; an absence of heresies and heretics

c) strong attention to spirituality and the soul

d) fidelity towards tradition as source of Revelation

These characteristics are not determined by the ideological structure of Romanian theology, but are imposed in the Orthodox theology by popular religious thinking which assimilated Christianity as an indivisible part of the Romanian people’s psychology. In ordinary language, the word "Christian" is synonymous to the word "Romanian". The folk poetry is full of the presence of Jesus Christ and Mary. A Hungarian musician, Bela Bartok, considers that no neighbouring people has such rich musical material concerning Christmas as do the Romanians.

One of the important Romanian theologiens (I. Bria) describes the actual position of the Romanian Orthodox Church as follows:

Due to the restrictions of a missionary and educational order priests had became faithful custodians of a tradition, representatives of national institution that played an important role in the past; they were spiritual parents conveying the popular pious experience. Due to this activity, the priests could not exercise their critical spirit upon the evolution of the society and the state control of religious life. Believers have been left with the illusion that there could be no better society, and with the feeling that atheism were not so noxious as it actually was (1, p. 37).

 

After a period during which the aim, both at the ideological and the political levels, was desacralization of the Christian values, religious ignorance, suppression of faith and hope, and limitation of mystery people look for a key for reading the world and history, perhaps in an invisible realm. The dictatorship made of society a theatre whose idols hated each other. Because of this ideology, people became afraid of history, wanted to abandon the global ideological systems which were aggressing them, wished to retire into religiosity as an esoteric space, somehow irrational with revelations and mysterious apparitions. The 1992 census has revealed the impressive weight of Orthodoxy. Nobody believed that after a half century of restrictions and mutilations, the Church would still have so many believers.

But these favourable statistics need to be correctly interpreted, lest the Church would be an easy prey for illusions, for despite of these positive statistics there is no record of genuine participation by citizens in Church activities. This is in direct contradiction of the religious sentiment of the believers and the "Christian" image of the country. This situation is true not only of Romania, but can be found also in other countries that are experiencing an advanced process of secularization. But in Romania the erosion is more disguised and thus much the worse. The vestiges of the atheism are there, visible and invisible. In contrast there is also an amorphous spirituality, a diffuse faith, a stratum of piety untouched by secularism. The crisis of faith is a very complex one and needs a deeper analysis. At this moment, there is a great distance between the different groups of believers even inside of Church; there is also an important gap between these groups and those outside of the Church.

The question then is how the mission of the Romanian Church is to be accomplished in a situation field of religious and moral crisis. What is its historical mission in a country in which many people still yearn for times part?

Another significant feature of the Romanian Orthodoxy must not be forgotten: Romania is the only Orthodox country of Latin language. This characteristic has generated distinct traits in the Romanian Orthodox Church, while at the same time generating certain difficulties. This way explaining the struggle of the Church to preserve the religious and national identity while surrounded on the East by the Slavic imperial Orthodoxy, calling itself "the third Rome", and on the West by the Austro-Hungarian Empire that manifested a strong opposition to Romanian Orthodoxy (1, pp. 30, 31, 34, 50).

The communist ideology has destroyed the fundamental markers of Christian society. People no longer possess the elements that have determined the development of its Christian culture. This is one of the reasons for the tendency to re-defining the constituent coordinates of Christian institutions in terms of the past. Many people cultivated the illusion that once the political regime changed, it would be natural to return to a religious society. While others, noting the degree of economic, moral and cultural poverty, believed that religion itself had lost its power and influence so that in the present situation religion cannot be but a palliative. Actually, the society seldom used Church services as a palliative. While true that the Orthodox Church can intervene actively in education, the charity field or people’s welfare, these possibilities do not automatically assure their real fructification of them.

Due to this situation, two directions must be reconsiderated by the Romanian Orthodox Church in facing the present transformed society:

1. Building the Internal Unity of the Romanian Orthodox Church.

The first and main modality is the path of the Gospel, that is, of radical conversion to a transformation of human existence and community following the Gospel principles. Only in this context, through a sanctification of man and a real metamorphosis of society, can the healing virtues of the Orthodox faith and spirituality be found.

For this there is first of all need for an internal and external reconciliation, for communication inside and outside the Church. The Church is not free from the danger of the crisis that disintegrates society. Its internal unity, through cohesion of the priests and believers, is the main task. Also, if there is a real will for joint participation by laity and priests in decisions making, then the former must have access to the Church institutions and to clerical committees and meetings.

One of the concrete tasks of the theology is therefore to restore to Orthodoxy its popular character in the noblest meaning of the word, that is, its spiritual efficiency. This requires new interpretations and commentaries to help the Orthodox tradition to become the nucleus of the unity in every place instead (as sometimes happens now) of deepening confusion. This requires a popularization of the Orthodox theology itself, for every believer to become a catechumen.

Because, the Holy Liturgy is not exclusively a clerical service, theology is not only an academic mission but the witness of the entire faithful people. The Orthodox priests have to give special priority to the pastoral mission among those who are poor, discouraged, dispossessed, confused. These people are in the majority "unorthodox"; without knowledge and help they can be easily manipulated and lost. The priest has to give proof of a great and real compassion and solicitude toward those who are struggling with material and spiritual constraints, especially those relating to personal dignity. The priest has to make the effort to revive the trust and hope of the suffering people. The believer and any other person who suffers must find within the Christian community genuine therapy—a communion of support and help. Whether a nominal member of the parish or not, the person who suffers injustice and cruelty belongs to Church (1, pp. 138-139).

Another category of people requesting a special attention is the youth. Freed from of the captivity of a centrally ordered or "arranged" history, young people must be creators of history in a Christian spirit. The Church may give major importance to the ethics of teenagers, offering then programs of religious and moral education. The problems of adolescents are actually problems of society itself. They have to be approached with much pastoral skill in order to help young people to have clear vision and become able to see the horizons of their destiny (1, p. 33).

Another noticeable aspect is the urgent need for the conversion of the Christian family, the most important milieu for the spiritual growth of children and youth. The degradation or the loss of the familial milieu (more and more children roam streets to obtain the minimum for survival) leads to the loss of the child’s spiritual being. New dramatic situations constitute a crisis of the family and school: the failure of the schools, divorce of the parents, parents with severe health problems, unemployment, violence and prostitution.

To combat evils is not enough; responding to human sufferings is of equal importance. Parents must escape the confusion from lack of faith and moral complicity. The church cannot therefore be indifferent towards the hard conditions of life and education in the family.

None of the goals of the internal reform of the Romanian Orthodox Church can be accomplished without priests with ability to lead towards these goals. Therefore, the theological educational system must be changed in such a way that the young priests to gain the ability to understand secularised society. Without abandoning the knowledge of the Lord by prayer and cult, they have to learn how to retain their position as a spiritual leader while at the same time being involved in very concrete situations in order to claim help laymen. The most important condition for the Church’s renewal, and that of the country as well, is the renewal of the priests themselves. They will not succeed in re-kindling the faith in Christian hearts and in protecting civil society unless they radically change their way of life.

Accordingly, the important mission upon which the Romanian Orthodox Church has to concentrate at present time is the Evangelisation inside the already constituted Church:

The Church does understand by mission either combating other Churches legitimately engaged in preaching the Gospel, or diluting the Gospel within nationalist or ethnic traditions. The defence of the faith means the concentration of the priest’s attention and the believer’s interest upon the uninterrupted apostolic tradition, the only tradition that differentiates the Church belonging to Christ from other religious movements. This tradition is embodied in the life of the local martyrs and saints, in the local cult, culture and history of the believers who constituted a particular Church. The Orthodox Church doubts the truth of any mission that does not accept the historical, chronological transmission of the faith in Jesus Christ and the Gospel’s embodiment in the spiritual experience of a concrete people, existing in a certain place and time. The Church cannot withdraw from the responsibility to evangelize, to preach the Good News to the present generation. This mission is part of the essential and permanent calling of the Church. In this respect the Orthodox people are ready to take part in the evangelization of the present generation. However, by this, they do not understand the geographical extension of one Church to the detriment of another Church" (1, pp. 80-81).

 

Prone to ecumenism by its very pattern of the theological ideas, the Romanian Orthodox Church sees, however, a series of gaps. There are some examples of negative tendencies:

... various formulas are used, as for example ‘the genuine Church is only the Orthodox one, while the other Churches are just on the way to be born,’ or ‘the Orthodox Churches are Churches that do not fulfil the conditions for being a genuine Church’ ... some people even deny the general priesthood of the Christians that do not belong to the Orthodox Church, holding this affirmation as an infallible Orthodox dogma (1, p. 134).

That is why the Romanian Orthodoxy must select ecumenical themes and activities worthy further exploration.

There is a reciprocity between the mission of the local Church and the ecumenical unity of all Churches, between the specific identity of a Church and the identic universality of Christ in each of the Churches and at the same time, in all. In this context, the Romanian Orthodox Church has to develop continuously the relationships with other Churches and Christian communities in Romania. Proselytism is especially practised in "non-ecumenical" situations, when the Churches do not know mutually recognize or each other (1, p. 133). Due to sectarian proselytism, Orthodox priests are reluctant about what is called local ecumenism. Without the experience of active missionary evangelization, theologians and priests speak against the publishing of "Protestant Bibles" or against the un-Orthodox evangelization campaigns. They need to restrain this gratuitous behaviour to justified situations, while at the same time making an effort to demonstrate with missiological arguments the intention of proselytism, if indeed this is really the situation.

In an ecumenical epoch, the only form of missionary cooperation is the common witness. Ethnic, confessional, cultural factors are positive values that have to determine a common Christian testimony (1, p. 40).

The ecumenical dialogue requires certain concrete activities, first a "healing of memory"—by removing mutual condemnations and excommunications; by accepting the saints worshipped in every Church; by a full recognition of the other Churches based on their witness to the faith concerning the main dogmas. Missionary, catechetical and pastoral activity must be placed in an ecumenical context. The direction of God‘s work in the world, the direction of the redemption is the unity of all people. God‘s goal concerning the Church is inseparable from his plan for the unity and redemption of the world. Therefore the Church has to become a redeemed community, within which the barriers between the human races, sexes, the social categories are broken down (1, pp. 216;163).

Coming out from a long and difficult period, during which the only way to survive was a passive external resistance (together with a free spirit within) the Romanian Orthodox Church is aware that it needs an important transformation, following the radical change of Romanian civil society.

- Accordingly to this situation, there are few directions to be followed as important parts of the mission of the Romanian Orthodox Church today;

- A transformation in the theological education responsible for the young priests initial training and consequently, the building of a new model of the priest;

- A more accesible Church language and a rapprochement to laymen in the activities concerning the cult;

- A priority of the social aspect of the Orthodox Church mission concerning the material, psychological and spiritual help offered to people, mainly to those found in desperate situations;

- The entire mission of the Romanian Orthodox Church is focused upon the Romanians, wherever they are, not aimed at other nations or people who are already Christians but not Orthodox.

1. The first information about Getae, as the autochthonous population of the territories extending along the Lower Danube, are found in the literary and historical writings of the Greek authors (Hecateus, Sophocles, Herodotus, Thucydides). The name Dacia appears for the first time in the writings of Plinius the Elder and Tacitus. They mention the Geto-Dacians in the context of Darius‘ expedition (514 B.C.). These Geto-Dacians represented the northern, strongly individualised branch of the Thracians, speaking a language belonging to the Indo-European linguistic family (5).

2. "Having become the leader of a people exhausted by frequent wars, the Getic Burebista raised it so much through drilling, abstention from wine and obedience to orders that he achieved a powerful state within a few years, coming to be feared by the Roman themselves" (Strabo, Geography, VII, 3, 11) (5).

3. 150 years after the events, the historian Cassius Dio describes Decebal (Roman History, LXVII, 6, 1) as follows: "He was very experienced in war matters and skilled in deed, knowing how to choose the occasion to attack the enemy and withdraw at the right time. Clever in laying traps, he was valiant in struggle, knowing how to avail himself skillfully, of a victory and get off a defeat, on account of which he was a dreaded antagonist to the Romans" (5).

4. The basis for this affirmation is by the information given by the historian Eusebius of Cezareea in Historia Ecclesiastica III, 1 (8).

5. Dacia is considered among Christianized countries by Tertulian, in his work Apologeticum (year 200) (8).

6. Around 1435, John Hus’ followers found a refuge in Moldova and Pope Eugene IV expressed his discontent. In 1446 a new papal document said: "We find out with the most displeasure that in the Moldavian kingdom numerous heretics have sheltered, especially the ones from the abominable sect of the Hussites". In 1460 another numerous group of Hussites come to ask for Romanian hospitality, being expelled by the Hungarian king, or rather due to the fanaticism of the Catholic bishops. In the place where these unfortunate fugitives have settled, houses and churches were built, giving birth in this way to the little town Husi [‘hu i], the name of which is preserved until today in memory of its founders… The Romanians’ tolerance for any other religion were so absolute that without themselves making propaganda, they allowed people of other beliefs to conduct proselytism, one’s converting the others… In Moldova, the Catholics converted Hussites, in Walachia the Lutherans converted Catholics. Our forefathers, watching these theological fights, did not even think to convert to Orthodoxy these people who ate the Romanian bread and salt in the land of Romania (3, pp. 29-31).

Throughout history the same attitude is manifested toward Catholics, though they were aggressive towards the Orthodox people in Transylvania whom they came to call heretics. The Catholics tried also in the other Romanian lands (Moldova and Walachia) to convert the Orthodox people, but without success… The same tolerant attitude is manifested toward Tartars and Turks even if for centuries Romanian lands were subjugated by the Ottoman Empire. Between the XVth-XVIIth centuries many Tartars found shelter on Romanian territory being chased from Poland and Lithuania due to their religion. Hebrews lived without problem in Romanian territories; in the XVth and XVIth centuries Spanish Hebrews came here, having been forced to leave Spain and rejected by France, Italy and Germany. In that period in France and England, Hebrews were not considered human beings but "comme les animaux" (Merlin, Repertoire de jurisprudence); in Romania came also the Hebrews also came to Romania from Poland (sec. XV, XVII) (3, pp. 28-31; 62; 65).