Dear Mr. Vladimir, Moved by your propose of research, regarding Mihail Neamtus statement about fr.

Dumitru Staniloaes ethno-theology, with special reference to his article Between the Gospel and the nation: Dumitru Staniloaes ethno-theology, allowed myself to point some aspects of this article. a! "irstly, this article is more li#e a biographical treatment although one e$pects that the approach would refer more to Staniloaes ethno-theology. %n the other hand, it isnt all about an antagonism between preaching the &ospel and the nation, but it is about a complementary and a close communion between social and religious aspects. b! Secondly, Neamtu affirms that "ather Staniloae creates an interdependence between being 'omanian and being %rthodo$ and this is right. (ut this problem isnt put in an e$clusive or fundamentalist way, as he tries to e$plain, but it is put in a totally original way) "ather Staniloae ma#es a connection between the latinity, as ethnic part of the 'omanian people, and 'omanian *hristianity as a uni+ue one. 'omanian people is the only latin people from the viewpoint of ethnicity, but orthodo$ as religion and living in a Slavonic area. ts true that inside of the indirect dispute between fr. Dumitru Staniloae and *onstantin 'adulescu-Motru, they have discussed about the role of the romanianism ,'omanian spirit! and the role of the orthodo$y on the historical scene and mainly about the priority of one as a disadvantage for the other. 'adulescu-Motru sustained that the romanianism is a characteristic of the 'omanian spirituality, which, although it developed with the orthodo$y ,he understood the orthodo$y also as a characteristic of the 'omanian spirituality! together in the old times, now it is not possible anymore for the two components of the 'omanian spirituality to e$ist together in the history because the orthodo$y involves a contrary way for the evolution of the society and the human spirit. 'adulescu-Motru thought in a pantheistic way that the orthodo$y should rather conserve its transcendent way and should not interfere in the social problems. n this respect 'adulescu-Motru said) -the orthodo$y is tradition and the romanianism is vocation../ n the case of 'adulescu-Motru the *hristianism is nothing else than the person of *hrist. 0he person of *hrist is reduced at the simple historical state and more than that -this science about *hrist remains in the human mind li#e an isolated piece closed in an empty space, which doesn1t influence the thin#ing and the human integral life..2 3e says that -there is no meeting between general and special, between infinite and finite, between unchangeable and changeable, without the falling of one of these two ,orthodo$y and romanianism! from its ontological character by the melting together of one with the other..4 n this te$t we cannot overloo# the secularist vision of the philosopher 'adulescu-Motru about the -throwing. of the belief and of the religious element into the individualistic sphere, which is e$isting today in the occidental society, but which has begun to catch form in the actual 'omanian society, too. 0he answer of "r. Staniloae is that the %rthodo$y has not 5ust a statical role to #eep and conserve -the testimony of *hrist forever in an unspoilt form.6, but these doctrines have -to reform ceaseless the souls and the peoples e$actly in the direction of their spiritual virtualities..7 0his dynamism and this rhythm is considered by "ather Staniloae as being the -the read thread. of the ethnic character of 'omanian people. %n the other hand the theologian sustains logically that the orthodo$y is the mar# of the national character of the romanianism. 0his mar# is so deeply printed in the national being that it is practically
/ 2

8r. 8rof. Dr. Dumitru Staniloae, Ortodoxie si romanism, Sibiu, /949, p.64 etc. ibidem, op.cit. p.:2 4 ibidem,op.cit. p.66 6 ibidem, op.cit. p.64 7 ibidem, op.cit. p.64

impossible to ma#e a dissociation of these two or to ma#e a discharge of the 'omanian spirituality from the orthodo$ practice. ;mong the coordinates of the 'omanian spirituality which accentuate this reality, Staniloe reminds us about -the feeling of a mystical connection with the animal and vegetal nature. <, about the originality of the reports -between ndividual and society-:, about the 'omanian position regarding utopia and adventure, and the last, but not the least, about the harmony as a defining mar# for the whole spirituality. 'egarding the implementation of the %rthodo$y into the social life "ather Staniloae says that -=esus *hrist as person is for the *hristianity the fount of life and he cannot be replaced with no other system of principles, ideas or values..> ;s fr. Dumitru 8opescu would say) -0he Saviour did not come with a social or economic program in order to solve the social and economic problems of his time, but he brought us a religious revelation, which should be the endless well of inspiration for the moral behavior of the believers for all the times. *hrist discovered to the believers who &od is and open their eyes to see who they are and what #ind of connection they should have with their ne$t. 3e turned their eyes towards heaven, so that they with pure and transfigured soul turn their eyes bac# towards earth and see the things in the new light he brought to us..9 ?e 5ust can say that "ather Staniloae is indubitably right when he affirms that the love between *hrist and humanity serves li#e a paradigm for the national love and on the other hand the church and the human#ind are the faces of the one and the same divine-human reality. n our case, the ethno genesis process is a dynamic one, because the 'omanian people was constituted as orthodo$ and 'omanian people in the same time and this reality continued in time, in a wonderfully way, 5ust li#e the (y@antine symphony between the imperial power and church. 0he %rthodo$y of the 'omanian people comes from the apostolicity of the preached gospel here, especially in the sud-east region at the blac# see. 3ere was the gospel preached by apostle ;ndreas and his successors, soldiers, sellers, slaves of the 'oman Ampire and so on. c! 0hirdly 1 li#e to add a critic to Neamtu1s observation, who seems to ma#e a confusion. 0he effort of "ather Staniloae to introduce the %rthodo$y in the ethnology was partially misunderstood, because he sees it li#e a conservatory attitude towards the modernism and defines it as a fundamentalist and out-of-date way, which tries to put the percepts of the patristic theology into the modern society. Maybe even from the simplicity of the 'omanian peasant, as the great poet Bucian (laga said that -the eternity was born in the village., comes the uni+ueness of the 'omanian people and its orthodo$ *hristianity, which was not 5ust its company in the history, but especially its ontology. ;s a conclusion we can say that Mihail Neamtu is right when he affirms that "r. Staniloae thin#s about the %rthodo$y as a red thread of the 'omanian society and as a understanding lin# of the -'omanian., but he is not right when he identifies Staniloae1s attempt and success of a new better understanding of the patristic theology with fundamentalism and nationalism. Staniloae gave to the theology a new way and direction, which lays between the mysticism and less lucidity of the 'ussian theology and the scholasticism and rationalism of the &ree# thin#ing. 0he new direction is the so called ethno-theology of "ather Staniloae and it has its roots and proofs both in the (ible and at the Saints "athers ,observe Saint Dyonisius ;reopagiticus and
< :

ibidem, op.cit. p.72 ibidem, op.cit. p.7< > ibidem, op.cit. p.:9 9 8r. 8rof. Dr. Dumitru 8opescu, Hristos, Biserica, Societate, Aditura nstitutlti (iblic si de Misiune %rtodo$a, (ucuresti, /99>, p. 2/-22

Saint Ma$imus the *onfessor! and in the spiritual wealth and variety of a people, which lays at the crossing between the occidental and oriental gates, the 'omanian people.