Bishop Nicolae Popovici the Confessor
He attended primary school at the Saxon School in Biertan, where he learned to speak German and Hungarian fluently, then went to the Grammar School in Dumbrăveni, the Normal School in Sibiu and the “Andrei Șaguna” Grammar School in Sibiu between 1923-1927, then to Cernăuți, where he graduated in theology in 1934. He was noticed by Metropolitan Nicolae Bălan, who sent him to study at the Faculty of Theology in Athens in 1927-1928, then to Munich, at the Faculty of Philosophy, in 1928-1930, and to Tübingen, Leipzig and Breslau in 1930-1932.
In 1925, Nicolae Popovici made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, Palestine and Egypt. For four years, from 1932 to 1936, Nicolae Popovici was professor of dogmatic theology and apologetics, homiletics and Greek at the Theological Academy of Sibiu. In this capacity he was very active in the missionary field, preaching in the Metropolitan Cathedral or as a tutor and honorary president of the Students’ Reading Society. In 1934 he founded the “Christian Charity” fund within the “Oastea Domnului” Society, for the permanent help of the poor and needy. On 1 September 1929 he was ordained a celibate deacon and on 23 November 1934 a priest by Metropolitan Nicolae Bălan. On 28 April 1936 he was elected Bishop of Oradea at the request of the former titular, Roman Ciorogariu. He was ordained a monk in the monastery of Cozia, then an archimandrite, then an archpriest on 1 June 1936 in the cathedral of Sibiu, and consecrated on 28 June 1936.[1]
According to a report of the Diocese of Oradea dated 16 May 1942, as a bishop Nicolae Popovici made 110 canonical visits and unannounced inspections, organised and led the campaign to reduce concubinage, which resulted in the marriage of 12,000 concubines. From 1 April 1940 to 25 March 1941, he was auxiliary bishop of the re-established diocese of Timișoara, which he organised and provided with a bishop’s residence and a building for the eparchial council in the city centre, using his own funds. In Oradea, he led the campaign to build new stone churches to replace the destroyed wooden ones. Within five years, 20 churches and rectories were built and consecrated in the diocese. In 1937 he began the construction of an imposing cathedral in the centre of Oradea, buying buildings and raising funds. But the vicissitudes of history did not allow this to happen. At the same time, he built a girls’ boarding school in Beiuș, set up an eparchial fund to help those struck by disaster or misfortune, supported the bishop’s pamphlet “Romanian Law” and other spiritual publications, and paid special attention to the teaching of religion in schools.[2]
In 1938, Bishop Nicolae Popovici represented the Romanian Orthodox Church at the International Congress of the Alliance for the Twinning of Peoples through the Church, held in Faris Bad-Larvik (Norway), where he delivered a paper on minorities in Romania.[3]
During the Horst occupation of Transylvania, he was ridiculed and imprisoned, then expelled from his home town in a cattle train, together with 283 intellectuals from Oradea. He settled in Beiuș, near the border, to be close to his faithful under foreign occupation. With this gesture, the Bishop of Oradea was only following the example of Metropolitan Nicolae Bălan, who had protested against the application of the Vienna Diktat.
During the war, Bishop Nicolae Popovici was to take part in the offensive for the spiritual recovery of Transylvania, which was occupied by the Romanians after August 1941. He was to be part of the first team of missionaries across the Dniester, 53 clerics from Transylvania, led by Nicolae Bălan, Metropolitan of Transylvania, together with Bishops Andrei of Arad, Vasile of Timișoara and Veniamin of Caransebeș, who were to work in the communist-conquered territories of Bessarabia and Transnistria between 2 and 27 September 1941.[4]
In connection with these moments, we would also like to mention that on Sunday 21 September 1941, Bishop Popovici participated in the consecration of the Church of St. Dumitru in Sucleia, which had a great echo at the time. Our Bishop was there together with Nicolae Bălan, Metropolitan of Ardeal, Vasile Lăzărescu, Bishop of Timișoara, Grigorie Leu, Bishop of Huși, Partenie Ciopron, Bishop of the Army, Archimandrite Iuliu Scriban, Head of the Romanian Mission on the Dniester, and 10 priests, in the presence of Gheorghe Alexianu, Governor of Transnistria, Ion. D. Sandu, Secretary of State for Religious Affairs, General Nicolae Ghinăraru, Prefect and Mayor of Tiraspol, Romanian and German officers, and the people of the area, with the responses given by the choir of the Cathedral of Tighina.[5] The account of this moment is particularly important because the echo it received at the time contributed greatly to the negative image of the former missionaries in Transnistria during the post- 23 August political regime. The bishops who took part in this great mass were to be dismissed by the communist regime, one of the main reasons being their participation “in the anti-Soviet war initiated by Ion Antonescu”.
Between 10 July and 1 August 1942, Bishop Nicolae Popovici of Oradea made another pastoral visit to Transnistria, accompanied by the Protopope Aurel Mușet, the military priest Ion Croitoru, the priest Professor Cornel Sava and the deacon Aurel Dărăban, diocesan secretary. The Archbishop of Ardele visited and presided at services in a number of churches rebuilt by Romanians; he made memorial baskets in the Cathedral of Odessa, in memory of those killed in the attack of 21 October 1941, and in the cemeteries of Valea Dalnicului-Vacarjani and Bereșani; he visited 31 military units and 20 field hospitals, where he offered prayers for healing and encouraged the wounded; he consecrated the churches of Jura and Popencu. He attended the congress of Moldovan students from Transnistria in Tiraspol and accepted the invitation of the “School of Romanian Culture for Moldovan Teachers” in the same city, where he gave two speeches: “The Relationship between Science and Faith” and “Our National Creed”. He distributed 12,000 prayer cards and the same number of icons.[6]
After the political change on 23 August 1944, Bishop Nicolae Popovici urged his faithful to pray for a speedy peace. At the same time, he encouraged the Romanian soldiers at the front to fight for the liberation of the country by being constantly in their midst. A concrete example of this is his visit to the Romanian soldiers in Czechoslovakia from 4 May to 3 June 1945. Beginning on Good Friday, Bishop Nicolae, together with the priest Cornel Sava and the deacon Cornel Moba, was among the Romanian soldiers on the Western Front. For four weeks, the Bishop of Oradea was among the soldiers of the two Romanian armies between Pystiany, Prague and Brno, where he preached more than 44 occasional sermons, visited 7 field hospitals and celebrated more than 32 masses.[7] Together with the priest Cornel Sava, the military priest Ion Croitoru and the deacon Cornel Moga, he celebrated the Resurrection Mass in the village of Svetnov (Moravia) on the morning of 13 May 1945, with the participation of the 2nd Army Corps command of Romanian soldiers and the local population, who were impressed by the solemnity of the Orthodox religious ceremony.[8]
After the resumption of relations between the Romanian Orthodox Church and the Russian Orthodox Church, Bishop Nicolae Popovici was involved in establishing contacts with Patriarch Alexei I of Moscow. Thus, between 23 October and 6 November 1946, he visited Moscow and Kiev, together with Patriarch Nicodim Munteanu, Bishop Justinian Marina, and the priests Ioan Vască and Mihail Madan.[9]
In the same way, Bishop Nicolae Popovici was one of the companions of Patriarch Alexei I of Moscow when he visited Romania from 29 May to 12 June 1947 at the head of a delegation of the Orthodox Church of Russia. He was with the Moscow Patriarch in Ungheni, Bucharest, Curtea de Argeș, Cluj Napoca, Sibiu, Băcia, Timișoara, Suceava and Iași.
His responsible work on relations with the Church of Russia would again bring him into the role of advisor to the Commission which was to prepare the work of the Inter-Orthodox Conference to be held in Moscow in the summer of 1948. On this occasion he made another trip to Moscow in April 1948, together with Bishop Iosif Gafton and the theology professors Petre Vintilescu and Gala Galaction.[10]
Also after 1945, Bishop Nicolae Popovici was to feel the pressure of the new politicians installed with the help of the Soviets. At the same time, the advanced age of Patriarch Nicodim Munteanu led the members of the Holy Synod to consider the best solution for the future of the Church in the context of the already anticipated persecution to which it could be subjected, as had happened in Russia. Nicolae Popovici would follow the opinion of the Metropolitan of Transylvania, Nicolae Bălan, who was closely supported by the Prime Minister, Petru Groza, on 6 March 1945. The Archbishop of Oradea had the support of the members of the Transylvanian Synod, who formed a bloc around Nicolae Bălan and did not look favourably on the rise of Archbishop Justinian Marina, whom they knew was supported by the leader of the Communist Party, Gheorghe Gheorghiu Dej, as a reward for helping him escape in 1944. Another serious opponent of Nicolae Popovici’s ascension to the patriarchal throne was Archbishop Emilian Antal, nephew of Patriarch Miron Cristea, Metropolitan of Bucovina, supported by Emil Bodnares, another Communist Party leader.
However, on the eve of the election of the Patriarch in 1948, archival documents show that Nicolae Popovici, at the suggestion of his protector Nicolae Bălan, supported Metropolitan Justinian Marina for the post of Primate of the Romanian Orthodox Church. The Ardean bishops understood that in the difficult times that were to come for the Church, the unity of the Synodalists was the only factor of cohesion in the dignified relationship that they had to have with the state, now declared communist, on the Soviet model.
This unity of the Synodalists would bear fruit in 1949, when the former Greek Catholics, with the support of some representatives of the state authority – such as the Minister of Religion, Stanciu Stoian, or the Communist leader Vasile Luca – tried to provoke the transfer of Bishops Nicolae Popovici to Galati and Nicolae Colan to Iași. The plan of the returnees was to appoint bishops from their own ranks to the vacant seats in Transylvania. The dispute between Patriarch Justinian and the above-mentioned representatives of the state, but above all the categorical refusal of the people of Transylvania, saved the unity of the synodalists for the time being in the face of state pressure.
However, the Ardelenian bloc in the Synod suffered a major defeat with the removal of Bishop Nicolae Popovici from his seat. He believed that the communist regime would not last much longer and even advocated it. In addition, the compromises that the state authorities insistently demanded of him, and which came through his vicar, the returned priest Andrei Coman, provoked him more and more to openly oppose the political regime. Thus, at the opening of the Theological Institute in Bucharest, the diocesan bishop of Oradea, referring to the centenary of the great Romanian national poet, said to the theological students: “Let us look at Eminescu as he is, whole, great. Let us think of the geographical perspective contained in Eminescu’s poetry in all its greatness. What grandeur, what splendour, what pure geographical perspective! Young people, learn Eminescu’s poems as prayers, and his popular songs (referring to “From the Dniester to the Tisza”) as hymns of sacred song”.[11]
In fact, this was not Bishop Popovici’s only “outing” on this feast. Earlier, he had given a powerful speech on Church-State relations to students and priests attending the missionary orientation courses. The Archbishop of Ardeal recalled the dialogue between the pagan governor Modestus and the holy Hierarch Basil the Great, an allusion to the exponents of communism, namely the hierarchs of the Church, according to the informative note of “M. Stănescu” of 11 February 1950: “Bishop Nicolae Popovici of Oradei spoke in the sermon on behalf of the Patriarch. On the life of the three great hierarchs of Orthodoxy – Basil the Great, Gregory the Theologian and John Chrysostom – Bishop Popovici spoke about ‘Christian boldness'”.
The theme was treated with “audacity” and it really managed to electrify the priests and students in the hall. Speaking about the struggle of the Three Great Hierarchs with the pagan world of their time, about their courage in the face of all the dangers of political regimes hostile to the Church of Christ, Bishop Popovici easily managed to convince the reactionary audience that in today’s situation the priesthood must adopt an attitude identical to that of these stalwarts of Christianity.
The memory of the bitter dialogue between St Basil the Great and the pagan governor Modestus was particularly striking. Moved by the vehemence and courage with which St Basil defended his Christian faith, Governor Modestus exclaimed: “No bishop has ever spoken to me like that”. To which St Basil replied: “Because, of course, you have not yet met a true Bishop of Christ”. Bishop Popovici ended his speech with a prayer: “Let us ask the three great Hierarchs to bless from heaven all the supporters and defenders of the Church of Christ and to drive out all her enemies”.
The hall erupted in thunderous applause. Olimpul Căciulă, a librarian at the Theological Institute, commented:
“He spoke like a great hierarch. He rose boldly and courageously to the level of St Basil the Great. He probably did his political damage personally. But he said things that had to be said”. Priest Alexandru Teodorescu from Podu-Rizii, Dâmbovița, said: “He spoke like Christ; the priests wanted to embrace him. The communists will not succeed in destroying the Church with such words”. The priest Iustin Moisescu [sic!] said: “Popovici spoke a thousand times louder than Ciopron at the opening of the courses. I think the bald man just lacked the beadle’s cap”.[12]
The main theme of the Bishop of Oradea’s speech, however, was the much-discussed war against the Soviets. In this respect, the 1950 New Year’s sermon was perhaps one of the most striking. Linking his sermon to the significance of the year for Roman Catholics (the Holy Year), the bishop said: “It is the fiftieth year, the Jubilee year, in which all goods, all possessions are returned to their rightful owners, and all those who have left their homes, possessions and goods in this year will return to their possessions” […]. The half century that has passed over us has been the age of sin and atheism. The human mind has invented many things, murderous weapons, tanks, aeroplanes and the atom, so that the ravages of war could destroy hundreds of thousands of human lives and everything that had been built. Science, culture in this age has been and is in the service of the earthly man and not in the service of the One above, for which reason the world has suffered and is suffering. We do not lack science, culture, but we lack Christ, salvation, freedom of body and soul. We do not weep after these 50 years, but we hope that the next 50 years, and especially the year 1950, will bring relief, forgiveness and consolation, according to the Holy Scriptures, to the people who have lost their homes, their houses, their freedom and their souls. We have given and will give what is Caesar’s, but we will not allow what is God’s to be taken away from us; we will give our labour, our sweat, our wealth and, if necessary, our last skin, but we will keep our faith and our heart for God.
Fathers! Take care of your children, educate them in the spirit of the Gospel, because you have a responsibility before God, do not leave them in cinemas and sports fields, where young people are taken by force and where they receive an anti-religious education. Bring them to the Church, where they will receive an education pleasing to Christ. On the eve of the New Year, the Church sends her blessings to all people and especially to our youth, and to the teachers who are responsible for the education of our youth. Courageous teachers, do not forget that you too will be responsible for our youth who have gone astray.
We send our blessing to our hosts who, as in the past, are not left in the church to receive the blessing at the beginning of the year. Do not forget and pray and have the courage to follow the example of our great ancestors, Stefan the Great, Michael the Brave, Horia, Cloșca and Crișan, Avram Iancu and other great fighters of our nation. May they be a source of courage for you throughout your life.
We send the blessing of the Church to the rulers of the country, asking them to protect us with deeds and not with words, in the spirit of brotherly love, so that the rulers may be loved by the sons of the country, as the father loves the son and each other, all the more so because only a ruler loved by the people can rule forever.
We send the blessing of the Church to our nation everywhere, to the nation that has suffered and is suffering because many have forsaken Christ. We ask them, on the threshold of this Holy Year, not to follow the paths of wandering but to return to Christ.
We send our blessing to those who are imprisoned, to those who are suffering, to those who have lost hope for the future, we send our encouragement along with our blessing and we say to them: “Lift up your hearts, for there is salvation, but only if there is blessing and you ask for it”.
We have said all we could say, and our hot desires, unseen, only felt, can be read in our tears, which are the living language and speak better than any other. Wipe away your tears and have hope, for this Holy Year will bring salvation to us and to all who believe in Christ, our Lord God”.
The impact on the faithful was phenomenal: “In the last two years, it was the bishop’s most crushing sermon against the regime, it was a phenomenal indictment of the regime,” said a man from Oradea. The faithful, both men and women, also wept with joy after Popovici’s sermon, “experiencing moments of profound soul transformation”.[13]
The “violent” speech of the Bishop of Oradea against the regime will set the communist apparatus of repression on fire. Immediately, the head of the worship service of the DGSP, Captain Stănescu H., asked the DRSP Oradea to confirm every statement made by Bishop Popovici in this sermon with statements collected from various informants.[14]
Another “outing” of Nicolae Popovici took place at Easter 1950. Instead of reading the printed sermon that had passed the censorship filter, he delivered a free sermon “with an anti-democratic undertone”, according to a note dated 6 May 1950: “Jesus Christ was surrounded by enemies recruited from his surroundings and by the civil and military authorities who persecuted him until his death, and after his death he was guarded by armed soldiers who fell on their faces in the face of the truth, because no one can stand against the truth. The disciples of Christ were crushed, mocked, persecuted, restricted and even killed by the laws of the time for their righteousness and faith. Just as the Church was victorious in the past, just as Jesus buried all his enemies, so the Church will bury all those who fight against him”. And finally he says: “Fight to defend the faith of Christ. Fight to defend His Church. Do not be afraid! Do not be sellers and traitors of Jesus! Love Jesus! Whoever loves Jesus suffers for him and fears nothing.”[15]
Because of Nicolae Popovici’s increasingly “provocative” actions, the political power was determined to remove him from the bishop’s chair. Among other things, they resorted to the old method of administrative control. The bishop complained: “I am constantly harassed with inspections and para-inspections by the control bodies of the Ministry of Religious Affairs. Recently there was Director Dobocan, but he did not visit me. Now there are three inspectors in Oradea. Last month, one inspector, Constantinescu, even took our sack of flour and weighed it in the market, in the pouring rain. I am going to the Prime Minister to tell him all this. “[16] But even Petru Groza was no longer willing to protect him. The party, and above all the Securitate, wanted the bishop of Oradea to be dismissed at all costs, as he was making more and more “excursions”. In fact, it seems that Nicolae Popovici preferred to go all the way, even with his removal from the chair, probably to secure his “future”.
His supporter turned out to be Patriarch Justinian himself. He advised him to be more cautious, telling him: “Listen to them, but do what you know, as I do”.[17] The Patriarch’s attitude is understandable, since the Primate, in addition to appreciating the Bishop of Oradea for his qualities as a good administrator and theologian, thought that his dismissal could endanger the front of the Synodical Bishops of Oradea and, implicitly, the whole Synod.
On 19 September 1950, Justinian sent the bishops the agenda for the Synod, which was to meet on 3 October, without the “customary authorisation” of the Congregation for Religious Affairs. Item 7 on the agenda was an examination of the situation of Nicolae Popovici. However, the Ministry of Religious Affairs was surprised by item 6: “Examination of the situation of Vicar Andrei Coman”. Patriarch Justinian wanted to discuss the “Coman problem” in order to force the government to accept his sanction and, at most, to transfer the bishop from Oradea to Galati, as Metropolitan Nicolae Bălan expressed on 29 September. Especially since there was “no canonical reason” to condemn Nicolae Popovici, as the Patriarch claimed the same day. But the former Greek Catholic Traian Belașcu, the vicar of Sibiu, “noted that sanctioning Coman for his misconduct as a Greek Catholic priest would endanger the unity of the Church”.
Minister Stanciu Stoian therefore requested an audience with the Patriarch to clarify the issue on the Synod’s agenda. On 28 September, Justinian agreed to postpone the discussion of “the salaries of priests from parish budgets” and “the implementation of catechesis in the Church”; instead, “he refused to put on the agenda the case of Vicar Andrei Coman, even though it was pointed out to him how his catechism would disturb the former Greek Catholic clergy, especially since the trial was to be held for the abandonment of his wife, financial irregularities, and for the murder of a priest: abandonment of his wife, financial irregularities and hostility towards the Romanian Orthodox Church, all committed during his time as a Greek Catholic priest”. To this was added the resentment of the Patriarch towards Coman (supported by the ministerial advisor Petre Manu and the director of the Court Dobocan) for the intrigues he had carried out, for which he had “deepened the rift between Popovici and the authorities” (“diversionary action” initiated by Andrei Coman against the Bishop of Oradea). Thus, from a canonical point of view, Justinian could have censured Andrei Coman for: defamation of the bishop (can. 55 Apostolic), disobedience to the bishop (can. 8 IV) and conspiracy against his chiriarch (can. 18 IV, 34 Trulan).
After negotiations, the Patriarch proposed that Bishop Nicolae should be “disciplinarily transferred to Galati and Bishop Chesarie Păunescu to Oradea, while Coman should be catechised”.[18] The Minister for Religious Affairs addressed this proposal to the Prime Minister.
The Synod’s discussion of the Popovici case provoked debate among Orthodox bishops. In this situation, the Bishop of Cluj, Nicolae Colan, believed that “there will be a restructuring of the Church and the removal of a number of bishops and officials”. Metropolitan Firmilian of Oltenia was more explicit: “The regime wants Popovici’s head, and if we don’t give it to him, we may end up re-examining the relationship between the state and the church. Popovici doesn’t realise that his game of “defending the position of the Old Church without compromising with it” is doing great damage to the Church. He doesn’t understand that a possible arrest could even lead to his death”. In view of this, the head of the Church of the Archdiocese of Transylvania, Metropolitan Nicolae Bălan, concluded: “His wretched temperament and his speculations about the future have brought Vlad Nicolae to this situation. And if it were only him, the misfortune would not be too great, but the Synod also finds itself in an embarrassing situation”.
In Oradea, in view of the situation in which the Bishop Nicolae Popovici found himself, Cornel Sava and Aurel Mușet “communicated to the reactionary priests of the diocese that on the 1st, 2nd and 3rd of October this year they should hold special prayers for the salvation of the “Romanian Bishop Nicolae Popovici”[19].
On 2 October, Justinian was summoned by Groza and Dej. He spoke with the Prime Minister from 7 a.m. until 12:30 p.m. Later, the Patriarch resumed talks with them: “Popovici’s situation is more serious than I thought. I have never seen the Prime Minister so upset; he simply shouted at me. He told me in no uncertain terms that if the Synod did not remove Popovici as head of the Oradea diocese, he would arrest him. If he hasn’t arrested him yet, he has done so in order not to damage the prestige of the Church. The Prime Minister referred to a sentence in my report in which I said that Popovici was a young man, well prepared and able to be useful to the Church if we tried him elsewhere. The Prime Minister asked me to send Popovici to a monastery beyond the Carpathians […] Gheorghiu Dej received me very kindly, spoke to me as one of his own and quickly convinced me. However, I will try, through Metropolitan Nicolae Bălan and Metropolitan Sebastian Rusan, to make the Prime Minister feel better”.
The opening session of the Synod was to be marked by the anniversary of the return of Greek Catholics to Orthodoxy, an event planned by the Vicar of the Archdiocese of Sibiu, Traian Belașcu. This event was a foretaste of the failure of any possible questioning of Andrei Coman’s case by Justinian. The Patriarch, even if he still had some hope in a negotiation between the Metropolitans Nicolae Bălan and Sebastian Rusan and Petru Groza, was convinced that the political power was determined to “solve” the problem of the Bishop of Oradea. The only chance was a possible temporary resignation of Nicolae Popovici. In fact, the Patriarch, together with the canon Liviu Stan, was to outline the “decision of dismissal” of the Bishop: “For reasons of overriding ecclesiastical interest and because of illness, the Holy Synod, ex officio, retires Bishop Nicolae Popovici of the Diocese of Oradea, for the regulation of pension rights, on the basis of Article 7 of Law no. 166/1947, in conjunction with the Journal of the Council of Ministers no. 187/1950. For the time being, the Holy Monastery of Cheia, in the region of Prahova, is assigned to him for the recovery of his health. The Holy Synod delegates, from today, with the substitution of the Diocese of Oradea, until the election of the new incumbent, the Most Reverend Bishop Andrei Magieru. The Holy Patriarch is requested to convene as soon as possible the electoral college for the election of the new Bishop of Oradea”[20].
The two archpriests who were close to Petru Groza went to see him on the afternoon of 3 October, but were unable to convince him of the inadvisability of dismissing Popovici. Groza preferred to talk to Nicolae Bălan for two hours, trying to persuade him to present a case against the bishop of Oradea to the Synod, which the Metropolitan refused to do: “Bălan presented the counter-proposal of granting Popovici six months’ sick leave, but the Prime Minister rejected it. Bălan did not agree to take the floor to ask for Popovici’s dismissal, mentioning that he would approve the Patriarch’s proposal in this regard”[21].
In the Synod, although “Metropolitan Firmilian Marin of Oltenia and Bishop Andrei Magieru had promised to say a few words against Popovici, they remained silent in the meeting, so that Justinian alone had to state the case, and all those present agreed by a show of hands without saying a word”. The atmosphere of the Synod is explained by the fact that on 3 October the Patriarch had spoken to each member of the Synod, explaining the seriousness of Popovici’s situation and pointing out the threats of political power.
In drafting the synodal decision, “Bishop Nicolae Colan dictated the following formula to the secretary of the synod, Gheorghe Vintilescu: “Since all the IPSS members of the Holy Synod know in detail the situation of Bishop Nicolae Popovici and therefore there is no need for further information, the IPSS Patriarch Justinian makes the following proposal…”. Recognising that Nicolae Colan was trying to place the responsibility for Popovici’s dismissal on the Patriarch alone, the wording was amended as follows: “Since all the IPSS members of the Holy Synod are fully aware of the situation of Bishop Nicolae Popovici and therefore there is no need for further information, the Holy Synod unanimously decides:… “[22]
After this moment, “Nicolae Popovici got up and left the Synod, slamming the door and walking into the night in the garden of the Patriarchate. At the end of the Synod session, Nicolae Popovici took Nicolae Bălan, Vasile Lăzărescu and Chesarie Păunescu aside […] and told them that he had been informed that more dismissals would follow, since ‘the Communists do not stop halfway when it comes to destroying the Church’.”[23]
After the Synod, Bishop Popovici visited his new home, the monastery of Cheia, but he did not like it and asked for another monastery, possibly in Moldavia, but this was refused. Then he asked for the monastery of Sâmbăta de Sus because it was in his expensive Ardeal and there was Archimandrite Ioan Dinu, his former vicar in Oradea. This time he was refused entry by the political authorities, probably at the instigation of the Securitate, who feared a possible pilgrimage there. He went into seclusion in the chapel of Father Grigore Băbuș at the Cheia monastery in the Ploiesti area.[24]
The Synod discussed at length the case of the former bishop of Oradea, as the Securitate documents show. The Bishop of Cluj, Nicolae Colan, said: “The Popovici trial was the trial of each one of us; the condemnation of Popovici contains in its core the condemnation of each one of us. If we had been what we should have been, we would all have put down our crutches instead of beheading Popovici”. Instead, Andrei Magieru was predictable: “The disintegration of the Synod has begun; when will it be our turn?”
Sebastian Rusan, Metropolitan of Moldavia and Petru Groza’s godson, pointed out, “My brother, it breaks your heart, but I couldn’t do otherwise. I only spoke to the ‘godfather’ (Mr. Prime Minister), but things were so well put on the wheel that any persistence could not help. To have it on the heart of those “scheming” (scheming) cults, they would beat the Gospel out of the bastards”. The last and one of the most important archbishops, Nicolae Bălan, said: “I am sorry for his fate. I spoke twice with the Prime Minister, but to no avail. Father Nicolae is convinced that the Prime Minister will be convinced that he is not guilty and will rehabilitate him. God willing! Father Nicolae wanted to ask for the Sâmbăta de Sus monastery as a retreat; I decided that it was not good for him to go there, because the mountains are full of partisans of the resistance and the Vicar Popovici is afraid of agents of the Securitate, who could frame him for who knows what crime and not poison him with the food brought there.” Among the priests, discussions about the new dismissal were heated. The priest Ioan Lăncrăjean from the church of St. Nicholas said: “Finally, Orthodoxy has a precious sacrifice on the altar of the suffering of an entire people, not only Catholics.”
He went on to say that the bishop had visited him and told him: “Let it be done! Christ was crucified and Barabbas (Andrei Coman) was set free. Stanciu Stoian saw his dream with his own eyes. He knocked me down!”[25]
Bishop Nicolae Popovici would end up in seclusion at the Cheia monastery, after, when he went to pack his bags from his former residence in Oradea, he encountered hostility from those who had “arranged” his future. The conflict in which Bishop Nicolae was involved when he left Oradea for good had been instigated by those who “for years had sown wind in souls”, as he expressed it in a report to Patriarch Justinian on 20 October 1950.[26]
Bishop Nicolae Popovici did not have peace of mind at the Cheia monastery either. He was constantly followed by agents sent by the security officer, “who wanted to talk to him, but he shied away, and one told him to his face that he was an agent”, as he said on 7 July 1953 to the informer “Marcu”. Even a monk in the monastery, a Securitate informer, was to tell him: “Your Holiness, beware of me, because I am put by the Securitate to report everything you do in the monastery, who you stay in contact with, who visits you. Make sure that you keep out of my sight.” He was also wary of Securitate searches, especially in the chapel where he lived. Having compulsory residence imposed by the regime, Popovici was obliged to notify the local militia authorities every time he left the monastery, which he did not do, which is why he was closely watched.[27]
In the monastery, Bishop Nicolae fulfilled the liturgical program of the monastic community, as we learn from a note of the informant “Florică”, dated 12 March 1952: “Bishop Nicolae Popovici is like a saint. He goes to church almost every night, together with the monks of the monastery, and when he cannot go to church, he gets up in the middle of the night and prays all his prayers in his room. His attitude as a fair man, with great compassion for the old and sick monks, attracted the sympathy and respect of all the monks in the monastery. The bishop is upset because he is ill with tension”. The bishop was so popular that the faithful, who came to the monastery to pray, brought him food aid, which is why the Security Police blocked this initiative by investigating those concerned[28]. He was also forbidden to take part in the liturgical programme of the monastery and to preach, so that the faithful would no longer seek him out.
The two archpriests who were close to Petru Groza went to see him on the afternoon of 3 October, but they were unable to convince him of the inadvisability of dismissing Popovici. Groza preferred to talk to Nicolae Bălan for two hours, trying to persuade him to present a case against the Bishop of Oradea to the Synod, which the Metropolitan refused to do: “Bălan presented the counter-proposal of granting Popovici six months’ sick leave, but the Prime Minister rejected it. Bălan did not accept to take the floor to ask for Popovici’s dismissal, mentioning that he would agree to the Patriarch’s proposal in this regard”[21].
In the Synod, although “Metropolitan Firmilian Marin of Oltenia and Bishop Andrei Magieru had promised to say a few words against Popovici, they remained silent in the meeting, so that Justinian alone had to state the case, and all those present agreed by a show of hands without saying a word”. The atmosphere of the Synod is explained by the fact that on 3 October the Patriarch had spoken to each member of the Synod, explaining the seriousness of Popovici’s situation and pointing out the threats of political power.
In drafting the synodal decision, “Bishop Nicolae Colan dictated the following formula to the secretary of the Synod, Gheorghe Vintilescu: “Since all the IPSS members of the Holy Synod know in detail the situation of Bishop Nicolae Popovici, and therefore there is no need for further information, the IPSS Patriarch Justinian makes the following proposal…”. Recognising that Nicolae Colan was trying to place the responsibility for Popovici’s dismissal on the Patriarch alone, the wording was amended as follows: “Since all the IPSS members of the Holy Synod are fully aware of the situation of Bishop Nicolae Popovici, and therefore there is no need for further information, the Holy Synod unanimously decides:… “[22].
After this moment, “Nicolae Popovici got up and left the Synod, slamming the door and walking into the night in the garden of the Patriarchate. At the end of the Synod session, Nicolae Popovici took Nicolae Bălan, Vasile Lăzărescu and Chesarie Păunescu aside […] and told them that he had been informed that more dismissals would follow, since ‘the Communists do not stop halfway when it comes to destroying the Church’.[23]
After the Synod, Bishop Popovici visited his new home, the monastery of Cheia, but he did not like it and asked for another monastery, possibly in Moldavia, but this was refused. Then he asked for the monastery of Sâmbăta de Sus because it was in his expensive Ardeal and there was Archimandrite Ioan Dinu, his former vicar in Oradea. This time he was refused entry by the political authorities, probably at the instigation of the Securitate, who feared a possible pilgrimage there. He went into seclusion in the chapel of Father Grigore Băbuș at the Cheia monastery in the Ploiești area.[24]
The Synod discussed at length the case of the former Bishop of Oradea, as the Securitate documents show. The Bishop of Cluj, Nicolae Colan, said: “The Popovici trial was the trial of each one of us; the condemnation of Popovici contains in its core the condemnation of each one of us. If we had been what we should have been, we would have put down our crutches instead of beheading Popovici”. Instead, Andrei Magieru was predictable: “The disintegration of the Synod has begun; when will it be our turn?”
His health deteriorated more and more, he had heart attacks with high blood pressure, and in February 1952 “he was forced to take a considerable amount of blood to get back to normal”, as the monk Grigorie Băbuș told the informer “Pană”. He had to get a number of medicines from abroad, bought with money, some of which was given by Patriarch Justinian, through the vicar bishop Teoctist Arăpașu[29].
To this was added the pressure of the Securitate, which kept him under constant surveillance, frequently searching him and accusing him of supporting the mountain people with food. In fact, two monks who were Securitate informers “tried to poison him with some wine in the church”, as he claimed to the source “Florică” on 2 May 1955[30]. All these problems were to increase Bishop Nicolae Popovici’s suffering and even hasten his death. On 20 October 1960, he died in the monastery of Cheia and was buried in his native town of Biertan.
Opera: Among his theological works we can mention the fundamental work on the Eucharistic Epiclesis in the Christian Church, namely Epicleza euharistică, Sibiu, 1933, 351 p. Besides, he wrote numerous articles and polemics in the periodicals of the region: “Revista Teologică”, “Lumina Satelor”, “Telegraful Român” – from Sibiu and “Legea Românească” – from Oradea. His sermon work is “Lespezi de altar în slujba Bisericii și a neamului, la frontiera de vest a țării”, Beiuș, 1942.
(Adrian Nicolae Petcu – Martyrs for Christ in Romania during the Communist Regime, IBMBOR Publishing House, Bucharest, 2007, pp. 565-580)
[1] Dorel Octavian Rusu, Bishop Nicolae Popovici, a life sacrificed on the altar of the Church and the nation, in “RT”, year XVI(LXXXVIII), no. 2, April-June 2006, p. 216-222.
[2] ACNSAS, Information Collection, file 2669, vol. 1, f. 101-103.
[3] “Christian Transdnistria”, year I (1942), no. 1-2, p. 24; “BOR”, year LX (1942), p. 140; “Curentul”, year XIV, no. 4869 and 4893, of 5 and 29 September 1941 respectively; “Universul”, year LVIII, no. 242 and 264, of 7 and 29 September 1941 respectively. See also Nicolae Popoviciu, Lespezi de altar în slujba Bisericii și a neamului la fronteira de vest a país, Beiuș, 1942, p. 144-147.Also on this issue, see Adrian Nicolae Petcu, Missione Ortodoxă Română în Transnistria, in “Dosarele Istoriei”, year VII (2002), no.11 (75), p. 17-25.
[4] “Transnistria”, no. 10 of 29 September and no. 11 of 6 October 1941; “Telegraful Român”, year 90 (1942), no. 1, p. 2; “Transnistria Creștină”, loc. N. Popoviciu, Lespezi…, loc. cit.
[5] “Transnistria Creștină”, year I (1942), no. 3-4, p. 85; “Transnistria”, year II , no. 51-52, of 30 July 1942; “Legea Românească”, year XX , no. 15, 17, 18-19, 22, 23, of 1 August, 1 September, 15 September, 15 November, 1 December 1942.
[6] C[ornel] S[ava], His Holiness Bishop Nicolae among the soldiers of Czechoslovakia, in “Romanian Law”, year XXVII, no. 13-14, I-15 July 1945, p. 107-109.
[7] C[ornel] S[ava], Visit of His Holiness Bishop Nicolae to the 2nd Army Corps Command, in Ibidem, no. 15-16, p. 125-128.
[8] Ioan Vască, A Historical Journey, Visit of His Holiness Patriarch Nicodemus of Romania to Moscow, Bucharest, 1947, p. 29, 33, 37; “BOR”, year LXIV(1946), no. 7-9, p. 606-607.
[9] Adrian Nicolae Petcu, The Nicolae Popovici Case, in “Theology and Politics. From the Holy Fathers to a united Europe”, vol. coordinated by Miruna Tătaru-Cazaban, Anastasia Publishing House, 2004, p. 234-236, For a broader approach to the Nicolae Popovici case, see George Enache, Orthodoxy and political power in contemporary Romania, Nemira, 2005, p. 157-296.
[10] Adrian Gabor, Adrian Nicolae Petcu, The Orthodox Church and Communist Power under Patriarch Justinian, in “Anuarul Facultății de Teologia Ortodoxă Patriarhul Justinian, University of Bucharest, 2002, p. 118.
[11] Ibidem, doc. 8, p. 145-146.
[12] ACNSAS, Informative fund, file 2669, vol. I, f. 71-72, 75. Also here it is reported that, during the sermon, “he urged justice to keep in mind the Eternal Divine Law and also said that all those who do not believe in God, all the lawless, will be struck down this year” (Ibidem).
[13] Ibid, vol. 2, f. 9.
[14] Ibid, f. 21.
[15] Ibidem, Documentary fund, file 67, f. 611-612; Cristina Păiușan, Radu Ciuceanu, Romanian Orthodox Church during the communist regime, vol.1, INST, Bucharest, p. 191.
[16] ACNSAS, Informative fund, file 2669, vol. 1, f. 43.
[17] It should be noted here that, although the patriarch did not succeed in keeping Nicolae Popovici as titular bishop, in the same session of the Holy Synod, he would discuss the salaries of the priests, but especially the catechizing of the youth, problems that would be reported to the Securitate by informers in the patriarchal environment: “In the last minutes of the Synod, while tov. Stanciu Stoian had read the decree for the prorogation (postponement of the Synod), and the metropolitans Sebastian Rusan and Firmilian Marin had risen to leave, Justinian raised the issue of catechization. This came as a surprise, because it was known that Justinian had promised Fr. Stanciu Stoian that he would give up the discussion of this point until an acceptable way could be found for the Ministry of Religious Affairs. At Justinian’s proposal, without much comment, the Synod fixed the time for catechesis: from Saturday at 2 p.m. to Sunday at 2 p.m., instructing Patriarch Justinian to deal with the authorities in order to <<ensure all children the possibility to participate in religious lessons, without being detained in schools or forced to go to other events>>”. According to the summary of the Holy Synod, published in the central magazine “BOR”, the issue of Nicolae Popovici was discussed in the morning of October 5, and that of catechization in the afternoon – being indeed the last issue debated by the Synod (ACNSAS, Documentary fund, file 67, f. 116-118; Cristian Păiușan, Radu Ciuceanu, op. cit., doc. 111, p. 223-224: “BOR”, year LXVIII (1950), no. 10, p. 560-561).
[18] Cristina Păiușan, Radu Ciuceanu, op.cit., p. 221.
[19] ACNSAS, Documentary fund, file 67, f.119-120; Cristina Păiușan,Radu Ciuceanu, op. cit., doc. 111, p. 222; “BOR”, year LXVIII (1950), no. 10, p. 555.
[20] ACNSAS, Documentary fund, file 67, f. 118-120; Cristina Păiușan, Radu Ciuceanu, op. cit., 111, p. 222.
[21] ACNSAS, Documentary fund, file 67, f. 121; Cristina Păiușan, Radu Ciuceanu, op. cit., 111, p. 223. This last statement and the text sketched by the patriarch with Liviu Stan were published in the magazine “BOR”, 1950, no. 10, p. 555.
[22] Ibid.
[23] Cristina Păiușan, Radu Ciuceanu, op. cit., p. 224.
[24] ACNSAS, Documentary fund, file 67, f. 123-124; Cristina Păiușan, Radu Ciuceanu, op. cit., doc. 111, p. 224.
[25] ACNSAS, Informative fund, file 2760, vol. 1, f. 55-63, Bishop Nicolae pointed out, as guilty for his fall, especially the former Greek Catholics, whom he considered “returned with the body, but remained Catholics with the soul” (Ibidem).
[26] Ibidem, vol. 2, f. 27, 35.
[27] Ibid, f. 32, 37. Metropolitan Nicolae Bălan also sent him food (Ibidem, vol. 1, f. 166).
[28] Ibid.
[29] Ibidem, vol. 2, f. 33, 38.
[30] Ibid, vol. 1, f. 136.