Radio România Internațional

Tag: Roland Clark

  • Petrache Lupu

    Petrache Lupu

    Dans les années 1930, un berger du village de Maglavit, situé sur les rives du Danube dans le sud-ouest de la Roumanie, prétendait que Dieu lui avait apparu et parlé directement. Effrayé au début, mais gagnant ensuite du courage, le berger a raconté aux villageois le miracle dont il avait été le témoin et leur a transmis le message de Dieu. Cest ainsi que naquit le phénomène de Petrache Lupu, personnage mystique et guérisseur, qui allait faire la une des journaux et des magazines illustrés pendant longtemps. Il est rapidement devenu l’une des personnalités publiques les plus populaires, plutôt en raison de l’appétit de toute société pour le sensationnel que grâce à ses actions ou à sa personnalité.


    Petrache Lupu était un paysan quelconque, né au début du XXe siècle, en 1907. C’était l’année marquée par la dernière émeute paysanne d’Europe, une révolte qui allait apporter de nombreux changements législatifs et améliorer la vie rurale. Les valeurs modernes, que les Roumains avaient commencé à adopter depuis les années 1820, avaient mis du temps à atteindre aussi les villages, où elles avaient du mal à être considérées comme un mode de vie. Dans les campagnes, les superstitions restaient très fortes malgré une présence constante de l’Église, et dans ce contexte, la transformation de Petrache Lupu en sauveur ne fut pas une surprise.


    Orphelin dès l’âge de 5 ans, Lupu a été élevé dans plusieurs familles du village. Il n’a reçu aucune éducation scolaire, il ne savait ni lire ni écrire et son vocabulaire était basique. Le magazine hebdomadaire «Realitatea ilustrată/La réalité illustrée», qui, en juillet 1935, publiait un log article au soi-disant «miracle de Maglavit», notait que le berger avait des troubles de l’audition et de la parole, suite à la rougeole, quil avait contractée à un moment donné. Le jeune homme était décrit comme quelquun de réservé, sans être un solitaire. Il avait réussi à fonder une famille, à avoir une femme et deux enfants. Les 31 mai, 7 juin et 14 juin 1935, sur la route de la bergerie, Lupu aurait vu un vieil homme flotter au-dessus du sol. L’historien Roland Clark, qui étudie le phénomène religieux dans la Roumanie de l’entre-deux-guerres, travaille sur un volume dans lequel il analyse également le célèbre cas de Petrache Lupu, le héros de l’histoire de Maglavit : «Petrache Lupu était un berger qui a vu Dieu, en 1935. Il l’a vu 3 fois. La première fois, il a dit qu’il l’avait vu comme un vieil homme, qui sentait une certaine odeur. Il est allé raconter tout ça à son prêtre et, ensemble, ils ont établi que le vieil homme sentait lhuile sainte. Ses cheveux le couvraient de la tête aux pieds. Ce vieil homme a dit à Petrache Lupu qu’il était Dieu et qu’il voulait que Petrache exhorte les gens à se repentir, à aller à léglise, à ne plus jurer, à ne plus pratiquer lavortement, à faire sonner les cloches et à ne pas travailler les jours saints. »


    Petrache s’est rendu au village, où il a raconté au prêtre lextraordinaire apparition dont il avait été le témoin. Le pope l’a cru sur parole et, ensemble avec leur communauté, ils ont fait connaître leur village dans tout le pays. Roland Clark : «Lupu a reçu le soutien du pope du village et de l’évêque, ces deux derniers ayant gagné beaucoup d’argent. Des gens de tout le pays ont envoyé de l’argent à Maglavit, mais on ne sait pas combien en est arrivé à destination, ni combien sen est perdu en cours de route. Les gens ont découvert que Petrache Lupu avait le don de guérir certaines maladies, des paralysies, des troubles de la vue et du langage. On dit qu’il avait lui aussi un trouble du langage, mais selon certains il aurait été tout simplement muet. Des dizaines de milliers de personnes sont venues en pèlerinage dans ce petit village, ce qui a beaucoup inquiété les médecins. Le fait d’avoir beaucoup de malades dans un endroit serré, où il n’y avait pas beaucoup d’habitants, pouvait déclencher une crise sanitaire majeure. De plus, quelqu’un qui disait que l’on pouvait guérir par la foi pouvait influencer les gens à ne plus vouloir consulter un médecin. De toute façon, peu de gens chercher le conseil dun médecin, à l’époque. Ils faisaient plutôt confiance aux guérisseurs et à quiconque, sauf aux médecins. »


    Une déferlante de personnes souffrantes sest ruée sur le village de Maglavit, qui leur donnait de l’espoir. On dit qu’environ 2 millions de personnes sont aller voir le «Saint de Maglavit», en quête de guérison. Roland Clark déclare que beaucoup y ont trouvé leur compte et que le berger mystique était un cas typique, montrant le niveau d’éducation de certains segments de la population à cette époque-là : «Cette affaire montre tout ce que les gens pensent de la religion et des superstitions, de la science, de la médecine et de la politique. Le Mouvement Légionnaire, dextrême droite, a lui aussi essayé de s’y infiltrer, de se rapprocher de Petrache Lupu, tout le monde en était impliqué dune certaine manière et avait quelque chose à dire sur cet homme. En regardant cet homme de plus près, nous pouvons mieux comprendre la culture rurale roumaine des années 1930. Le mouvement « Oastea Domnului / l’Armée du Seigneur » a beaucoup soutenu Petrache Lupu, les néo-protestants ont dit que ce n’était pas bien de faire cela, ils ne lui faisaient pas confiance, pour eux il n’était qu’un charlatan et un imbécile. Mais l’Église Orthodoxe l’a soutenu. »


    Petrache Lupu est décédé en 1994, dans son village natal, à l’âge de 87 ans. Il a laissé derrière lui une légende et un monastère ouvert en 2019. (Felicia Mitraşca)


  • Petrache Lupu

    Petrache Lupu

    Back in the 1930s, a shepherd from Maglavit, a village on the bank of the River Danube, claimed he had a vision in which God had spoken to him. Terrified at first, but getting more confident by the day, the shepherd started telling villagers about the miracle he had witnessed, and spreading the word of God. This is how the Petrache Lupu phenomenon emerged. Seen as a mystic and a visionary, he grabbed the newspapers’ and illustrated magazines’ headlines for a long time. In a very short period of time, he became one of the most popular characters in Romania, not so much due to his personality or activities, but rather because of people’s appetite for the sensational.

    Lupu was a peasant like any other peasants of the early 20th century. He was born in 1907, the year when the last peasant uprising in Europe had just ended, an uprising that would bring many legislative changes, improving living standards in the rural areas. The modern values that Romanians had adopted starting with 1820 had taken a long time to reach the rural area and people there were very reluctant to embracing them as a way of life. Rural areas were known as places where superstitions were still extremely powerful, despite a consistent church presence. Therefore, against this background, Petrache Lupu emerging as a saviour should not be a surprise.

    An orphan since the age of 5, Lupu was raised by several families in the village. He had no formal education and was actually illiterate, with a very underdeveloped vocabulary. The weekly magazine ‘Realitatea ilustrata’ (The Illustrated Reality) covered widely in its July 1935 issue the so called ‘Miracle of Maglavit’. One of the facts mentioned in the article was that the shepherd had suffered from measles as a child, which left him with hearing and speech impairments. He was described as being lonely but not withdrawn. He was married and had two children. On the days of May 31, June 7 and June 14, 1935, while he was walking to the stables, Lupu allegedly saw an old man hovering above the land. Historian Roland Clark, who studies the religious phenomenon in interwar Romania, currently works on a book that also includes the famous Petrache Lupu case, the hero of the Maglavit story.

    Roland Clark: Petrache Lupu was a shepherd who saw God in 1935. He saw Him 3 times and the first time he said God came down on Earth as an old man. That old man smelled in a certain way. So Petrache went to the village’s priest and told him about the smell, and they decided together that the scent was that of chrism. The old man was covered in hair and told Petrache Lupu he was God and he wanted him to start preaching humility to people, to have them go to church, stop cursing, stop having abortions, ring the church bells and not work on holidays.

    Petrache went to the village, where he told the priest about the formidable apparition. The priest believed him and, together with the community, turned their village into a star, known all over the country.

    Roland Clark: Lupu was supported by the village priest and the bishop, and they both made a lot of money. People were sending money to Maglavit from all over the country, and nobody knows how much actually got there and how much was lost on the way. People discovered Petrache Lupu could heal some diseases, curing especially those who were paralized, deaf or could not speak. They say he himself had a speech impairment, while some say he couldn’t speak at all. Thousands of people organized pilgrimages to that small village and that raised a lot of concern among physicians. Having so many people gathered in a small space like that raised the danger of a serious health crisis. Moreover, if somebody said they got cured through faith, that could influence people and prevent them from seeing a doctor. Not many people would see a doctor back then anyway. They’d rather trust all sorts of healers rather than doctors proper.

    Waves of suffering people sieged Maglavit in search for hope. They say that approximately 2 million people went to see the ‘Saint of Maglavit’ hoping for a cure. Roland Clark says that many benefited from the mystic shepherd and that the case is illustrative of the level of education some of the segments of the population in those times had.

    Roland Clark: This case brings to the forefront many of people’s convictions about religion, superstition, science, medicine and politics. The Iron Guard too tried to infiltrate and get close to Petrache Lupu, everybody was somehow involved and had something to say about that man. By looking at him we can see what Romanian rural culture looked like back in the 1930s. the ‘Army of the Lord’ movement supported Petrache Lupu too. The neo-Protestants said he was just a con man and a fool that could not be trusted, but the Orthodox Church supported him.

    Petrache Lupu died in 1994 in his native village, aged 87. He left behind a legend and a monastery built in 2019. (MI)

  • Petrache Lupu

    Petrache Lupu

    Back in the 1930s, a shepherd from Maglavit, a village on the bank of the River Danube, claimed he had a vision in which God had spoken to him. Terrified at first, but getting more confident by the day, the shepherd started telling villagers about the miracle he had witnessed, and spreading the word of God. This is how the Petrache Lupu phenomenon emerged. Seen as a mystic and a visionary, he grabbed the newspapers’ and illustrated magazines’ headlines for a long time. In a very short period of time, he became one of the most popular characters in Romania, not so much due to his personality or activities, but rather because of people’s appetite for the sensational.

    Lupu was a peasant like any other peasants of the early 20th century. He was born in 1907, the year when the last peasant uprising in Europe had just ended, an uprising that would bring many legislative changes, improving living standards in the rural areas. The modern values that Romanians had adopted starting with 1820 had taken a long time to reach the rural area and people there were very reluctant to embracing them as a way of life. Rural areas were known as places where superstitions were still extremely powerful, despite a consistent church presence. Therefore, against this background, Petrache Lupu emerging as a saviour should not be a surprise.

    An orphan since the age of 5, Lupu was raised by several families in the village. He had no formal education and was actually illiterate, with a very underdeveloped vocabulary. The weekly magazine ‘Realitatea ilustrata’ (The Illustrated Reality) covered widely in its July 1935 issue the so called ‘Miracle of Maglavit’. One of the facts mentioned in the article was that the shepherd had suffered from measles as a child, which left him with hearing and speech impairments. He was described as being lonely but not withdrawn. He was married and had two children. On the days of May 31, June 7 and June 14, 1935, while he was walking to the stables, Lupu allegedly saw an old man hovering above the land. Historian Roland Clark, who studies the religious phenomenon in interwar Romania, currently works on a book that also includes the famous Petrache Lupu case, the hero of the Maglavit story.

    Roland Clark: Petrache Lupu was a shepherd who saw God in 1935. He saw Him 3 times and the first time he said God came down on Earth as an old man. That old man smelled in a certain way. So Petrache went to the village’s priest and told him about the smell, and they decided together that the scent was that of chrism. The old man was covered in hair and told Petrache Lupu he was God and he wanted him to start preaching humility to people, to have them go to church, stop cursing, stop having abortions, ring the church bells and not work on holidays.

    Petrache went to the village, where he told the priest about the formidable apparition. The priest believed him and, together with the community, turned their village into a star, known all over the country.

    Roland Clark: Lupu was supported by the village priest and the bishop, and they both made a lot of money. People were sending money to Maglavit from all over the country, and nobody knows how much actually got there and how much was lost on the way. People discovered Petrache Lupu could heal some diseases, curing especially those who were paralized, deaf or could not speak. They say he himself had a speech impairment, while some say he couldn’t speak at all. Thousands of people organized pilgrimages to that small village and that raised a lot of concern among physicians. Having so many people gathered in a small space like that raised the danger of a serious health crisis. Moreover, if somebody said they got cured through faith, that could influence people and prevent them from seeing a doctor. Not many people would see a doctor back then anyway. They’d rather trust all sorts of healers rather than doctors proper.

    Waves of suffering people sieged Maglavit in search for hope. They say that approximately 2 million people went to see the ‘Saint of Maglavit’ hoping for a cure. Roland Clark says that many benefited from the mystic shepherd and that the case is illustrative of the level of education some of the segments of the population in those times had.

    Roland Clark: This case brings to the forefront many of people’s convictions about religion, superstition, science, medicine and politics. The Iron Guard too tried to infiltrate and get close to Petrache Lupu, everybody was somehow involved and had something to say about that man. By looking at him we can see what Romanian rural culture looked like back in the 1930s. the ‘Army of the Lord’ movement supported Petrache Lupu too. The neo-Protestants said he was just a con man and a fool that could not be trusted, but the Orthodox Church supported him.

    Petrache Lupu died in 1994 in his native village, aged 87. He left behind a legend and a monastery built in 2019. (MI)

  • Religiöser Pluralismus im Rumänien der Zwischenkriegszeit

    Religiöser Pluralismus im Rumänien der Zwischenkriegszeit

    Rumänien war nach dem Gro‎ßen Krieg ein ganz anderer Staat als der, der 1859 durch die Vereinigung der Fürstentümer Walachei und Moldau gegründet worden war. Das Königreich Rumänien, das gro‎ße Gebiete hinzugewinnen konnte, die früher Teil des Russischen und Österreichisch-Ungarischen Reiches gewesen waren, wurde nach 1918 zu einem multiethnischen Staat, der neue Ambitionen hatte und vor neuen Herausforderungen stand. Während religiöse Minderheiten vor dem Gesetz die gleichen Rechte genossen, verschmolzen in der Realität Minderheiten und die Mehrheit zu einer einzigen Gesellschaft, und ihr Gleichgewicht hing oft vom Funktionieren dieser Gesellschaft ab.



    Das Rumänien der Zwischenkriegszeit, auch Gro‎ßrumänien genannt, war in den letzten Jahrzehnten Gegenstand zahlreicher Studien und Publikationen zur politischen und diplomatischen Geschichte. In seinem Buch mit dem Titel Sectarism and renewal in 1920s Romania. The Limits of Orthodoxy and Nation-Building“ (Sektierertum und Erneuerung im Rumänien der 1920er Jahre. Die Grenzen des Orthodoxie und die Nationenbildung“), untersucht der Historiker Roland Clark, Professor an der Universität Liverpool, den gesellschaftlichen Wandel, den der religiöse Pluralismus in der rumänischen Gesellschaft in den 1920er Jahren bewirkte.



    Clark stellt fest, dass die Entwicklung der Gesetzgebung und die institutionellen Veränderungen die Entwicklung des demokratischen Lebens in Rumänien in jenen Jahren förderten und das Entstehen eines bürgerlichen Geistes begünstigten. In seinem Buch identifiziert er drei Stimmen, die für den konfessionellen Pluralismus der Zeit charakteristisch sind: die Stimmen der Orthodoxie, des Katholizismus und der neoprotestantischen Konfessionen. Drei Geschichten, die zu einer werden, so Roland Clark:



    Drei miteinander verwobene, voneinander abhängige Geschichten. Denn man kann nicht über die Gründung des orthodoxen Patriarchats in Bukarest diskutieren, ohne über die Katholiken und die Neoprotestanten zu sprechen. Die neoprotestantische Bewegung verdankt ihrerseits viel den Entwicklungen der orthodoxen Kirche, Entwicklungen, die von den orthodoxen Theologen ausgingen, später von einigen Bischöfen schlie‎ßlich sogar vom Patriarchen übernommen wurden und die Türen ihrer Kirche für die Laien öffneten. Es sind in der Tat diese Entwicklungen innerhalb der orthodoxen Kirche, die das Entstehen von Bewegungen wie »Cuibul cu barză« (»Das Storchennest«) in Bukarest oder »Oastea Domnului«, (»Die Armee Gottes«), ermöglichten. Dann der Kalender, der zum Erscheinen der Stilistenbewegung führte und die Innozentisten in Bessarabien ermöglichten. All diese sind Teil einer gro‎ßen Geschichte.“




    Die 1920er Jahre waren die Jahre des Wiederaufbaus nach dem Krieg, aber auch des erneuten religiösen Eifers. Professor Roland Clark ist jedoch der Meinung, dass man das religiöse Phänomen der Zeit nicht studieren könne, wenn man die Ausweitung der politischen Rechte und die Integration der neuen Provinzen in den rumänischen Staat nach 1918 au‎ßer Acht lie‎ße:



    Die Entstehung Gro‎ßrumäniens ist von enormer Bedeutung. Diese Entstehung hat die Demokratie mitgebracht und die Einführung des allgemeinen Wahlrechts — [vorerst nur] für Männer. Es bedeutete die Demokratisierung des politischen Lebens, das früher der Oberschicht vorbehalten war. Die Vereinigung Siebenbürgens, der Bukowina, des Banat mit dem Altreich Rumänien fand symbolisch im Rahmen einer neuen Kirche statt. Eine nationale Kirche mit dem Rang eines Patriarchats wurde gegründet. Wie hätte man die Kirche in Siebenbürgen regieren können, die so viele Laien an ihrer Spitze hatte, aber auch die Kirche in Bessarabien im Kontext der russischen Revolution? Sie bekamen somit das Recht, Teil der neuen Kirchenhierarchie zu sein. Als der Erzbischof Miron Cristea, er selbst ein Siebenbürger, zum ersten Patriarchen der Rumänisch-Orthodoxen Kirche befördert wurde, wollte er die Kirche von Bukarest aus leiten. Aber die einflussreichen Erzbischöfe von Siebenbürgen und Bassarabien stellten sich ihm entgegen. Es waren Machtspiele, bei dem jeder die Präsenz und den Einfluss der eigenen Kirche hervorheben wollte.“



    Aber der konfessionelle Pluralismus hatte auch das Auftreten bestimmter evangelikaler Bewegungen aus dem Westen begünstigt. Sie wurden von der orthodoxen Kirche zwar nicht gutgehei‎ßen, aber die gesetzlich garantierte Religionsfreiheit hatte ihr Erscheinen begünstigt und die Ausübung ihres Gottesdienstes sichergestellt. Und dann hinterlie‎ß jede religiöse Bewegung ihre Spuren bei den anderen. Der Historiker Roland Clark dazu:



    Die neoprotestantischen Kirchen hatte nach 1918 dank ihrer Kontakte zur westlichen Welt Wind in den Segeln. Aber das beunruhigte die dominante orthodoxe Kirche, die sich bedroht fühlte, sich umzingelt sah und die Gefahr witterte, überrannt zu werden. Und dieses Gefühl einer belagerten Festung findet sich in allen orthodoxen Schriften und Publikationen der Zeit wieder. Die Orthodoxen stellten ihren Eifer in Frage und beschuldigten sich selbst, nicht religiös genug zu sein.“




    Die Auswirkungen des religiösen Pluralismus machen sich allmählich auch in den starrsten Strukturen und Konfessionen bemerkbar, wie zum Beispiel in der orthodoxen Kirche, sagt Roland Clark:



    Die orthodoxe Kirche musste sich in den 1920er Jahren weiterentwickeln, wie auch das Christentum. Die Sonntagsmesse, die Pflicht zum Bibellesen, die Einhaltung bestimmter Praktiken in der Öffentlichkeit, anständiges Verhalten, all das hatte sich zu Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts und nach dem Ersten Weltkrieg durchgesetzt. Immer mehr Menschen hatten lesen gelernt, und so wurde die Lektüre von religiösen Büchern zugänglich. Gleichzeitig gab es auch ein echtes Wachstum verschiedener Bewegungen, die eine religiöse Erneuerung förderten, die innerhalb der Gemeinschaften entstanden, ohne das Werk der Elite zu sein.“




    Der religiöse Pluralismus, der in den 1920er Jahren im rumänischen Raum herrschte, ermöglichte die Öffnung der rumänischen Gesellschaft für neue Formen der Spiritualität. Es ist eine Gesellschaft, die von neuen Denkweisen und Weltanschauungen durchzogen ist, von alten Bestrebungen, die wieder aufleben, von anderen, die für eine Reform oder eine Integration mit der westlichen Spiritualität eintreten. Aber einige der Gedankenströmungen, die in den 1920er Jahren durch das rumänische Geistesleben liefen, sollten sich im folgenden Jahrzehnt zu radikalen, ja extremistischen Flutwellen entwickeln.

  • Pluralism religios în România interbelică

    Pluralism religios în România interbelică

    România de după 1918 era o altă
    Românie, mult diferită de cea fondată în 1859 prin unirea Moldovei cu Muntenia.
    După unirea cu teritorii din imperiile vecine rus și austro-ungar, Noul Regat român
    devenea o țară mai diversă geopolitic și cultural, cu minorități mai multe și
    cu noi ambiții și provocări. Minoritățile religioase beneficiau de drepturi
    egale iar manifestările lor aveau legătură cu comportamentul majorității. De
    fapt, majoritatea și minoritățile au funcționat întotdeauna împreună iar
    separarea lor este ceva care ține de cercetarea științifică istorică.



    Despre România Mare s-a scris foarte mult în ultimele
    trei decenii, volumele de istorie politică și diplomatică fiind cele mai
    numeroase. Cartea istoricului Roland Clark, profesor la Universitatea din
    Liverpool, Sectarism and renewal in 1920s Romania. The Limits of Orthodoxy and
    Nation-Building, se concentrează asupra schimbărilor pe care le-a produs
    pluralismul religios și confesional în România de după primul război mondial. Schimbările
    legislative și instituționale au făcut ca România să devină mai democratică și
    spiritul civic să se dezvolte. Clark a identificat trei voci în pluralismul
    confesional: cea ortodoxă, cea catolică și cea a cultelor neoprotestante care
    spun trei povești ce trebuie privite într-una singură.

    Toate trei povești sunt dependente una de cealaltă și sunt
    amestecate. Nu se poate vorbi despre înființarea partriarhatului ortodox fără
    să se vorbească despre catolici și despre neoprotestanți. Mișcarea
    neoprotestantă a primit un impuls puternic de la schimbările care au început în
    Biserica Ortodoxă, de la teologi ortodocși, chiar episcopi, și de la însuși
    patriarhul care a orientat Biserica Ortodoxă către participarea laicilor.
    Aceasta a dus la apariția altor mișcări precum Cuibul cu barză din București și
    Oastea Domnului. Alte schimbări au fost calendarul de la care a pornit mișcarea
    stilistă și implicarea Basarabiei în mișcarea inochentistă. Este de fapt o
    singură poveste în care toată lumea este legată și nu se poate separa.


    Anii ’20 au fost anii reconstrucției de după Marele
    Război și elanul s-a manifestat și prin vocațiile religioase. Roland Clark
    crede însă că în observarea noului spirit religios al epocii nu se poate face
    abstracție de lărgirea drepturilor politice și de integrarea noilor provincii
    în statul român.

    Faptul că a
    apărut România Mare contează enorm. Apariția României Mari a presupus
    democrație și toți bărbații au primit dreptul de vot. A mai însemnat implicarea
    oamenilor de rând în politica statului, și că unirea Transilvaniei, Bucovinei
    și Banatului și a altor provincii s-a făcut într-o nouă Biserică. S-a fondat o
    biserică națională cu rang de patriarhat. Cum se putea guverna Biserica din
    Transilvania care avea foarte mulți laici implicați în conducerea Bisericii dar
    și cea din Basarabia din cauza revoluției ruse? Li s-a dat și lor dreptul la
    conducere. Când a venit în România, viitorul patriarh Miron Cristea a dorit să
    așeze conducerea Bisericii în mâinile sale și ale Bucureștiului. Dar
    mitropoliții Transilvaniei și al Basarabiei, foarte influenți, s-au opus. Era
    un joc de putere în care trebuia să dovedească puterea și prezența propriei
    Biserici.



    Pluralismul confesional a însemnat și prezența unor
    mișcări ecleziale și Biserici evanghelice din Occident, în afară de Biserica
    Catolică, în România. Ele nu au fost bine primite de Biserica Ortodoxă
    majoritară cu care erau în competiție. Însă cadrul legal care asigura dreptul
    egal al practicării convingerilor religioase a contat enorm și prezența lor a
    însemnat o influență reciprocă. Roland Clark: Biserica neoprotestantă crește repede după 1918 datorită
    legăturii cu lumea din Vest, ceea ce a îngrijorat Biserica Ortodoxă. Tot ce a
    vorbit public Biserica Ortodoxă în orice ziar și în orice carte era sub semnul
    asediului din partea neoprotestanților. Dar ea considera că problema era din
    interior, că ei înșiși nu erau suficient de creștini, că propria Biserică nu
    avea destulă viață, că trebuia ca Biserica să fie schimbată pentru a se proteja
    de neoprotestantism.



    Impactul pe care l-a avut pluralismul confesional asupra
    majorității ortodoxe a arătat că până și cele mai conservatoare structuri, cum
    erau considferate cele ale Biserici Ortodoxe, se puteau reforma. Roland Clark.: Biserica Ortodoxă s-a schimbat,
    la fel și creștinismul ortodox într-un mod radical în anii 20. Ideea de predică
    în fiecare duminică, ideea că oamenii de rând trebuie să citească Biblia, să
    aibă un comportament decent, să nu mai înjure, să meargă la biserică în fiecare
    săptămână, toate acestea au devenit normale la începutul secolului 20 și după
    primul război mondial. Din cauza sporului de educație, mult mai mulți oameni
    știau să citească, religia a devenit mai interesantă. Au apărut mișcări de
    reînnoire religioasă care au pornit de jos. Au avut sprijin de sus dar au
    pornit de jos de la oameni precum Tudor Popescu, Dumitru Cornilescu cu
    traducerile lu, Iosif Trifa. Acestea nu erau mișcări care au venit din Vest sau
    de la străini ci din sufletul românesc, de la oameni de rând.


    Pluralismul confesional din România
    anilor 1920 a însemnat o deschidere a societății către noile idei de după
    primul război mondial. A fost o combinație între tendințe noi, aspirații vechi
    și reformare și integrare. Multe obiective au fost atinse, multe au rămas
    neîmplinite, iar frustrările vor exploda în radicalismul din deceniul următor.