Aspects of the work of the clergy in Râmnic in the 18th century: Bishop Climent’s pastoral letter of 1743

At the Library of the Romanian Academy in Bucharest, in the Manuscripts and Rare Books Section, two copies are currently held, catalogued under the call numbers CRV 215 A and CRV 231 C respectively, which have been photographed, based on a rare printed edition by Bishop Climent of Râmnic from 1743. The work in question is Teachings during Lent 1, as listed in the Bibliografia Românească Veche (since the title page has not survived in the copy mentioned in that bibliography), a work of which we know, at least to date, that only two copies exist in the country. One of them is held at the University Library in Cluj 2 and this served as the basis for the photocopy of CRV 215 A from the Academy Library in Bucharest, as D. Simonescu noted on the latter, on 10 November 1937, that it was a copy made from the copy sent from the University Library in Cluj; the book is also mentioned by Simonescu in the additions made to the Bibliografia Românească Veche.

The second photographic copy from the Academy Library in Bucharest, with the call number CRV 231 C, not mentioned in the Bibliografia Românească Veche, is entitled Capete de poruncă and was produced based on another copy, this time held in the collection of the Sibiu Metropolitanate Library, currently at the Andrei Șaguna Faculty of Orthodox Theology in Sibiu; this printed work was first recorded under this title in 1964 by I. N. Beju, a librarian at the University Theological Institute in Sibiu, and subsequently mentioned by other authors as well. Beju described the work from Sibiu and noted that it is not listed in the Bibliografia Românească Veche because, in fact, D. Simonescu had only recorded the copy from Cluj there, albeit under a different name.

However, the two photographic copies at the Library of the Romanian Academy, produced from the printed copies preserved in Cluj and Sibiu respectively, actually reproduce the same work, published in 1743 by the Bishop of Râmnic, Climent, who served as bishop of his diocese between 1735 and 1748. Taking into account the importance of the text, on the one hand, and the fact that, although it has been noted or described, it has not been published in full transcription, on the other, we have opted, in the present study, to publish a full transcription of the text. We have chosen to transcribe the copy held at the Metropolitan Library in Sibiu, as it is better preserved and more complete than the one in Cluj. Consequently, in our study, we use the copy from Sibiu as the primary text for analysis; we reproduce it in the appendix both as a transcription and as a facsimile. Currently, the book held at the Andrei Șaguna Faculty of Orthodox Theology in Sibiu bears the call number I/19 and is bound together with three other printed works, namely Orthodox Teaching with Questions and Answers, Questions and Answers on the Seven Sacraments and Trepétnic de sémne omenești. The volume, measuring 15 cm in length and 10 cm in width, has light brown cardboard covers, with a slightly darker shade at the spine and corners, and the paper is thick, without a watermark. The work comprises 19 pages, numbered in the bottom left-hand corner of each page in pencil rather than by printing, whilst the title page, on which the exact title of the work—namely Capete de poruncă—is visible, is not numbered. The 12 provisions for priests are set out on pages 1 to 10, whilst pages 11 to 29 contain the pastoral letter for Lent, under which the entire work was known in the Bibliografia Românească Veche (based on the Cluj copy), though 3.

Furthermore, we intend to analyse the points of this pastoral letter not in isolation, but in conjunction with other similar texts that have already been published, namely: the 1731 pastoral letter by Bishop Inochentie of Râmnic, that of Climent from 1747, and the one from 1781, also by a Bishop of Râmnic, Filaret. At the same time, we also refer to the work by Antim Ivireanul from 1714, which we consider to have served as a model for these, although it was not reproduced in its entirety.

Without setting out to present the life and work of this hierarch—as these aspects have been the subject of numerous studies in historiography 4— we do, however, note that Bishop Climent served as Bishop of Râmnic between 1735 and 1748, when he retired—that is, entered paretisis—and lived for a few more years, until 1753. Prior to this, he had served as abbot at Polovragi and Bistrița. He distinguished himself through his extensive charitable and building activities 5; he rebuilt the Diocesan Church in Râmnicu-Vâlcea and its infirmary, founded the Pătrunsa Hermitage, Pietrarii de Jos, Colnic, the church in Bodești and the one in Bărbătești, and repaired other places of worship in the area. He also supported cultural activities and reorganised the ‘6’ printing house; during his time, numerous books were printed there, most of which were manuscripts by Bishop Damaschin (1708–1725), which he had been unable to publish but which were of great value, as they were Romanian translations of religious texts.

I. N. Beju, in his description of this work from 1743, noted that it had remained unknown to the public until that date, as the collection to which it belonged had been unknown; the book had come to the Sibiu Metropolitan Library from the old collection of the Theological Institute’s library, where it had successively held the call numbers 797, 110/II and 0358, the latter also being visible on CRV 231 C, which also bears the stamp of the Sibiu Metropolitan Library. It had been donated to the Theological Institute in 1877, after being purchased in Vienna in 1825 by Petru Bădilă, whilst he was studying there7

Subsequently, in an article dedicated to Bishop Climent of Râmnic, published in 1965, M. Păcurariu mentioned this printed work, which had been discovered a year earlier by Beju, and also drew a connection with the copy from Cluj that served as the basis for the photocopy of CRV 215 A from Bucharest. The author then presented the work, summarising the 12 commandments and the pastoral letter on fasting, but did not provide a transcription of the text ‘8’. Although not published in a transcription using the Latin alphabet, the work was subsequently referenced by other authors, including V. Molin 9, D. Coravu 10, D. Poenaru 11, I. D. Lăudat 12 and, more recently, D. Lupu 13.

The work, as preserved in the Sibiu copy, consists of two parts and is entitled Capete de poruncă; it was first printed in 1743 at the Diocese of Râmnic by the printer, the priest Mihai Athanasievici, during the reign of Prince Mihai Racoviță of Wallachia. The first part contains 12 commandments issued by Climent, Bishop of Râmnicu-Noul-Severin, to the priests of his diocese, whilst the second is a pastoral letter on the importance of Lent. The master printer mentioned here, Mihai, belongs to the renowned Atanasievici family of printers from Râmnic, being the son of Atanasie Popovici and the brother of Ieremia, Constantin and Gheorghe 14. The books printed by them in Râmnic are usually produced on high-quality white paper, imported from Sibiu, but also from Venice 15.

Of Climent’s commandments, seven are inspired by the work of the same title, namely Capete de poruncă (Headings of Commandments), printed by Saint Antim Ivireanul in 1714 16, during the reign of Ștefan Cantacuzino, at the Metropolis of Târgoviște, whilst the others are not found in the work of the Metropolitan of Wallachia and were either devised by the Bishop of Râmnic to meet the needs of his diocese or were inspired by an earlier epistle issued by the Bishop of Râmnic, Inochentie, in 1731.

The aspects taken from the Wallachian Metropolitan’s writing concern the celebration of the Divine Liturgy with fear and a humble heart, the prohibition on priests interfering in lay matters, namely testimonies or oaths, followed by the prohibition on obtaining the priesthood through bribery, on frequenting taverns, on selling wine, on abandoning one’s parish without cause, as well as the final exhortation to read these commandments and to put them into practice. Antim Ivireanu’s provisions concerning dowries and dowry deeds, as well as those recommending that priests spend a year with their bishop to learn the order of the priesthood, do not appear in the 1747 text.

The other commandments in Climent’s text address both moral and spiritual considerations, as well as practical advice concerning the maintenance of order within the church. In this regard, Clement advised priests to be ‘like the saints, gentle and fasting’17; to ensure that the church is swept and free of dust; and not to place broken icons or old books in the Holy Altar. It was further emphasised that priests must not shorten the service at the urging of any man, for: ‘the prophet says: God will shatter the bones of those who act to please men’18 Priests were obliged to protect the altar, so that neither mice nor vermin might enter it, and to take care in preserving the Holy Mysteries, ‘do not burn them or expose them to smoke, lest you fall into mortal sin’18

Hierarchical matters were also addressed, with Climent insisting that priests should remain under the authority of the local bishop: ‘Let the local bishop be your head in all things, just as the Apostles had Christ’19; no one was to act as a spiritual father without his blessing and written authorisation, with the decisions of the Council of Carthage being invoked in support of this statement. Another issue of a hierarchical nature concerned the practice of ordaining priests at Vidin, which was forbidden, as it disregarded the local hierarchy; furthermore, anyone who committed such an act was considered “a thief of holy things”20.

Some of these provisions were also reiterated in other pastoral letters, such as that of Bishop Filaret of Râmnic, dated 1781, published in 1891 by C. Erbiceanu 21. Noting the reprehensible practice of some candidates for the priesthood of being ordained south of the Danube or by foreign bishops, he forbade it once again, stating the reason: ‘for such as these do not do this for any other reason, but simply because either they were illiterate or had some shame regarding an unseemly deed, from which the holy canon protects them from being ordained; and for this reason they have gone across the Danube, so that they might receive the gift by deception’22 Filaret then pointed out that although these men “believe they will receive a gift, yet they are without ordination and still bound by the canon, as decreed by the Holy Fathers, in that, as law-breakers, they are not received by the Church, having acted without the consent and blessing of the local Bishop”22. The idea that their ordination was invalid, having been carried out by deceit, also appears in Clement’s work, which drew attention to the danger facing not only the priest but also the faithful who came to him: ‘you will fall into mortal sin, causing harm not only to yourself, but also to those who seek absolution from you; their sins remain unpardoned’20 In both cases, the guiding principles were the Holy Fathers and, respectively, the Council of Carthage.

The need for priests to hold a certificate of ordination and spiritual guidance from the local bishop was also emphasised in an earlier pastoral letter, dated 1731, from another Bishop of Râmnic, Inochentie. Its contents are reproduced by Radu Tempea in his work on the history of the church in Scheii Brașovului, compiled on the basis of documents held, at that time, in the church’s archive; Radu Tempea’s manuscript was subsequently published by Sterie Stinghe in 23. We thus learn that, in 1731, Inochentie ordered the priests to hold certificates of ordination and spiritual guidance issued by their bishop. And in this pastoral letter—the first known to have been written by a Bishop of Râmnic in the 18th century—several elements are emphasised which we also find in the writings of Climent and Filaret. For example, it was specified that in the sanctuary, on the Holy Altar, there should be no other objects apart from the Holy Eucharist (Holy Communion), the Holy Gospel, the Holy Cross and the Holy Liturgy (24). Climent also drew attention, in his third commandment, to the fact that the Holy Gospel and the Holy Communion should rest upon the Holy Altar, and that no old books or broken icons should be placed there 25. For his part, Filaret commanded the archpriests ‘to inspect the Holy Altar for the Holy Pre-Sanctified Gifts, to see where the priests keep them. They were to ensure that it was not kept in a place where it might become mouldy or be damaged by mice. It was not to be kept in the priests’ homes, but was to be stored in a small box within the holy altar’26

With regard to the celebration of the services, we recall that Bishop Climent commanded that these should not be shortened; in the same vein, Innocent recommended to priests that ‘you should perform the service in full’27, whilst Filaret commanded that ‘church services should be performed according to the order, in full’28.

Unlike Clement’s text, which only in the third and fourth commandments addresses practical matters relating to order within the church and the place and manner of keeping the Holy Mysteries, the pastoral letters of 1731 and 1781 dwell more at length on these matters. Thus, Innocent commanded that the Holy Antimis should be adorned with holy relics and placed on the altar; the Holy Chalice must not be cracked, so that the Holy Blood does not spill from it, and must be made of silver or pewter, not of wood or clay; likewise, the Holy Disc and the Holy Spoon must not be made of wood, and the Holy Sponge must not be soiled. The church was to be fenced off, so that cattle might not enter and trample upon the graves of the Christians 29. Filaret also highlighted several practical aspects, albeit of spiritual importance, which were to be taken into account: “The Holy Antimis must contain holy relics; it must not be worn out or broken, nor must it belong to another foreign bishop, but to the Diocese. The holy vessels must be of pewter, or, if possible, of silver, and not of earthenware or wood. It must be ensured that the church possesses all the necessary vestments in good condition”30. At the same time, the church had to be fenced off, so that “livestock might not enter the porch or the churchyard over the graves of Christians”31.

Climent’s pastoral letter of 1743 reminded priests not to read “heretical books”17to the people; this was the only provision that clearly referred to protecting the faithful from confessions foreign to Orthodoxy. We find no similar instructions either in the text by Antim Ivireanul or in Inochentie’s pastoral letter of 1731. Instead, in 1781, in Bishop Filaret’s circular, we find a clarification emphasising the correct administration of the Sacrament of Holy Baptism, as was customary in the Orthodox tradition, namely by immersion in water, rather than by sprinkling alone. In this regard, Filaret wrote: ‘For Holy Baptism, all churches shall have large and deep baptismal fonts, so that when children are baptised, they may be immersed in water to cover them, immersing them three times, as prescribed in the prayer book, with the sacred words of Holy Baptism, and not merely by sprinkling them. And there must also be Holy Chrism, for the celebration of the sacrament, adding holy oil to the water of Holy Baptism, in accordance with the established order’32”. There are two further details in this passage which emphasise adherence to Orthodox tradition, namely that baptism was administered to children and that the Sacrament of Chrismation had to be performed immediately after baptism. A specific reference to the size of the baptismal font is also found in the work Datoria și stăpânirea blagocinilor (The Duty and Stewardship of Blessings), first published in Iași in 1791, which is a translation from Russian. It was specified there that: ‘the baptismal font shall be […] at least one cubit in height, and the width at the top, two palms’33).

Beyond the requirement that the Sacrament of Holy Baptism be performed by immersion, rather than by sprinkling, as emphasised in these works, we also note that texts of this kind, containing advice for priests or archpriests, circulated throughout the Orthodox world, not just in Romania, as they addressed similar needs. In the present case, we have a translation of a work from the Russian Orthodox tradition, but advice of this kind is also found amongst Serbian Orthodox Christians. In this regard, we recall the guidance given to priests by Iosif Ioanovici Șacabent, Bishop of Vârșeț, in 1802 34, whilst also noting that certain circulars predating this year were retained.

Of all the pastoral letters from the bishops of Râmnic analysed in this context, these clarifications appear to be the only ones that clearly emphasise the need to protect the faithful from practices alien to Orthodoxy; otherwise, as we have seen, the emphasis is on preserving the hierarchical order, on moral, spiritual and practical matters, whilst the preservation of the true faith was ensured, in the other texts, by reference to the Holy Councils and the writings of the Holy Fathers.

Of the circulars issued by the bishops of Râmnic in the 18th century, that of Filaret, written in 1781, is the longest and most comprehensive. However, it incorporated provisions from earlier texts, including even the writing of Saint Antim Ivireanul from 1714, as it raised the possibility of priests and archpriests acting as witnesses to the drawing up of a ‘diata’, should the person who is ill or dying so desire: ‘And if they wish to have a diata drawn up […] you must take care, Archpriest, to go together with their confessor and other priests of high standing […] so that the diata of the sick person may be drawn up in an orderly manner’35

A notable aspect of the 1781 pastoral letter is the clarification made towards the end that anyone wishing to paint icons must first go to the bishop to verify that they paint in accordance with the canons: “No one who calls himself an iconographer shall be permitted to paint icons or churches until he has first presented himself to us, so that we may assess his craftsmanship […] lest, instead of beautifying the churches, they produce works that are not in accordance with the rules and, instead of piety, bring laughter and mockery through their incompetence’36

Furthermore, also in his pastoral letter of 1781, Filaret urged the archpriests to keep watch over the schools in their county and to ensure that the teacher makes every effort to educate the children, and that, as for those children who wished to become priests, they should take care to teach them church order and hymns as well, so that they might be better educated than the others: ‘to accustom them to good learning, so that they may be more accomplished and more intelligent than the common folk’37 The need for a sound education for priests had been emphasised as early as 1714 by Saint Antim Ivireanul, who, in his work Capete de poruncă, in the fourth point, required candidates for the priesthood to spend a year with their bishop, so that they might learn the order of the priesthood 38.

All the pastoral letters we are considering also emphasised the need for priests to uphold ‘the dignity of the priesthood as befits’39, both through their behaviour and their attire. Priests were forbidden from frequenting taverns or appearing drunk, a command issued both in 1743 39 and in 1781 40, but which is also found in Antim Ivireanul’s text, in the 7th commandment 38, a passage subsequently taken up by the other pastoral letters as well. Inochentie’s circular of 1731 emphasises the preservation of the dignity of the priesthood through outward appearance, recommending that priests wear woollen garments and boots, rather than white robes and straw sandals, “for the honour of the gift and of the priesthood […] so that the honour of the priestly gift may be distinguished from that of the common people, so that the honour of the priestly gift may not be diminished by the attire of peasants”27. These clarifications were necessary given that parish priests worked on weekdays just like ordinary people, in order to earn a living.

However, priests were exempt from certain taxes levied on ordinary people, a fact that is clearly evident from the text of 1743, when Climent warns the priests that if they do not conduct themselves in a manner befitting the dignity of the priesthood and commit certain irregularities, they would be stripped of the priestly office and required to pay taxes on a par with the rest of the country. In particular, he objected to ordinations carried out in Vidin or by other bishops through deceit, sometimes with the aim of securing tax exemption: ‘When someone sees that priests are not required to pay taxes alongside the rest of the country, and that within just twoa year, and wishing to be ordained, they go to Vidin and to other bishops to be ordained; let it be known that such a person shall be subject to taxation alongside the peasants and shall be punished as a thief of holy things’20 This clarification also appears in the writings of Saint Antim of Ivire, who, in the sixth point, prohibited ordinations carried out for personal gain, in order to evade paying the tax; anyone who acts in this way, the hierarch stated, shall be subject to taxation alongside the peasants 38.

Another pastoral letter by Climent, dated 25 June 1747 and addressed to the priests and deacons of his diocese, supplemented the earlier one from 1743, but differed in structure from both that and the others discussed so far. The circular was also published by C. Erbiceanu in 1894–1895, but had also appeared earlier, in the newspaper Menirea preotului on 15 March 1894 41, where it was stated that the owner of the document was I. Petraru of Bărbătești. Now, in the new text, the hierarch recalled that he had previously issued other commands and that the priests were bound to observe them; in other words, he was referring to the pastoral letter of 1743, but he now emphasised other aspects, namely the priests’ obligation to observe ‘the canons of the holy apostles and of the Holy Council’42 with reference to the celebration and veneration of the holy feasts throughout the year. We note that, although the focus was now on different aspects from those considered in 1743, the standard by which priests were to be guided was still provided by the canons of the Holy Apostles and the Councils.

The feasts throughout the year that were to be honoured by priests and laypeople were then listed: ‘And do not honour the saints as the idol-worshipping Greeks used to do, with games and dancing at the shrines, buthonour them through the divine services and the care of the holy churches, and with offerings, unleavened bread, candles, koliva and other acts of charity towards the needy; and not merely by taking the day off and ceasing work, for what sort of feast is that?”43 A very large number of feast days were mentioned, over 50.

The second part of the 1747 pastoral letter is addressed exclusively to the laity, whom the bishop urges not to judge the priests any longer, but to blame themselves if they observe any shortcomings in a priest, for it is they, the laity, who have not taught them from childhood to be good: ‘for they were not born priests, but laypeople; and why, then, do you not reproach yourselves and confront yourselves for having given cause to slander, dishonour and revile the priests? And you say that they have become bad disciples; but they have become so because they had you as bad teachers’44

On the other hand, the hierarch continued, the sins of the priests do not affect the laity; rather, they benefit from their prayers and grace; therefore, they must not be judged, for priests are ‘those who bestow blessings upon you, these are the ones who sanctify you, they are the ones who give you new birth through the waters of Holy Baptism, they seal you with the gift of the Holy Spirit, they tear up the record of your sins, they reconcile you with God. They make you partakers of the Body and Blood of the Lord Christ […] Do not look upon their faults with such envy and such anger, for they are merely human beings who bear flesh and live in this world’44

In support of his assertions, the hierarch drew upon the Holy Gospel, from which he quoted a chapter from Matthew, the holy canons, the holy councils and the writings of the Holy Fathers, expressly citing Saint John Chrysostom 45.

The text of this circular, in which Bishop Climent emphasised the need to observe the feasts and respect the priests, also appears copied in a manuscript that circulated in Transylvania. This is the Romanian manuscript 5911 46, held at the Library of the Romanian Academy in Bucharest, a miscellany of religious literature dating from the mid-18th century which contains, on folios 88v–97, this text by the Bishop of Râmnic.

The second part of the 1743 circular is in fact a teaching on the importance of Lent, which reproduces, with some modifications, an earlier text, namely the pastoral letter of Daniil, Metropolitan of Ungrovlahia (1720–1731). This is listed in the Bibliografia Românească Veche 47, under the call number CRV I 179 B, and a copy is held at the Academy Library in Bucharest. It is interesting to note that this printed work was bound together with the Romanian manuscript 3460 48, which entered the Academy from the Museum of Antiquities and which contains the Didachies of Saint Antim of Ivire, copied between 1722 and 1724. The manuscript and the printed work belonged, as we can see from the notes made, to Priest Stanciul of the Church of All Saints in Bucharest—that is, Antim—before being purchased by the hieromonk Parthenie of Sinaia and subsequently coming into the possession of Priest Thoma of the village of Mihăiești, on the estate of the Diocese of Râmnic.

Although they are linked, Daniil’s text, later adopted by Climent, is not inspired by Saint Antim Ivireanul’s sermon on Great Lent, included in the Didache and entitled ‘Sermon for Cheesefare Sunday’ 49. In some respects, we find similar ideas in all these writings, such as the notion that fasting involves not only abstaining from certain foods, but also from evil deeds, or that the period of fasting should also be used to purify ourselves of sins through confession, points emphasised by Saint Antim, Daniil and, later, Climent.

Whilst the work of Saint Antim of Ivire referred to Holy Scripture and to Saint Basil the Great and Saint Gregory, Climent’s text recalled figures from the Old Testament who, through fasting, drew closer to God or overcame their enemies: for example, the Prophet Moses received the law written by God; Daniel ‘through fasting shut the mouths of the lions’50; and the people of Nineveh, having repented, escaped God’s wrath. Compared with the text by Metropolitan Daniil of Ungrovlahia, Clement’s writing additionally includes the example of the three ‘youths: Ananias, Azarias and Misael’50, who, ‘by fasting, trod upon the flames of the fire’50, and that of Esther, who, by fasting for three days, saved the people from death.

Daniel and, subsequently, Clement then emphasise the bodily and spiritual sins from which man must purify himself, and the need to observe not only Great Lent, but also Wednesdays and Fridays throughout the year and the other periods of fasting, ‘as the holy councils have decreed’51 We see, therefore, that in this instance too reference is made to Holy Scripture and the holy councils, which have established the Orthodox doctrine of the faith and serve as a guarantee for the preservation of the true faith, protecting the faithful from erroneous teachings, which is why they are invoked in the pastoral letters of the 18th century.

Consequently, upon analysing the pastoral letter of Bishop Climent of Râmnic from 1743, which we reproduce in full in this transcription, and comparing it with other similar texts from the 18th century, we find that it consists of two distinct parts. The first part, containing the 12 commandments, was based on the work Capete de poruncă (Headings of the Commandments), written by Saint Antim of Ivre, but was supplemented with other points addressing the needs of religious life at that time. These aspects—relating to hierarchy, morality or liturgical practice—being important for the proper ordering of religious life, were also taken up by other circulars, which is why we find them in the pastoral letters of 1731 and 1781 as well. Somewhat different from the other texts is Climent’s circular of 1747, which emphasises the need to observe feast days and reminds the laity not to judge the priests. It does not reiterate the points from the 1743 circular precisely because it appears to be, as the text itself states, a supplement to an earlier pastoral letter, setting out what had not been covered in the previous document; consequently, it does not seek to repeat that content.

Of the texts analysed, the one from 1731 seems to dwell most extensively on liturgical practice, providing details on the celebration of services; we attribute this to the fact that it was issued by a bishop of Râmnic at a time when he also had under his pastoral care the Orthodox Christians in the Brașov area, who had not accepted union with Rome and who needed to be safeguarded, in some way, from dogmatic or liturgical innovations. Let us not forget that, as noted above, the text of the 1731 pastoral letter is reproduced by Radu Tempea, who wrote the history of the church in Scheii, Brașov.

On the other hand, in terms of the scope and complexity of the issues addressed, the most substantial is the pastoral letter of Bishop Filaret of Râmnic, dated 1781, in which he addresses the proper functioning not only of the Church, but also of religious education and church painting, for religious life encompassed the individual in the full range of his activities. Here we find aspects that were also emphasised by Saint Antim of Ivire, Inochentie and Climent, relating in particular to respect for the hierarchy and the rejection of ordinations carried out by deceit, without the blessing of the local bishop. Also of interest and specific to this pastoral letter are the references to the liturgical books and vestments that must be present in the church, and the text even lists the latter: epitrachelion, sticharion, felon, rucavițe and poias. There were also recommendations that all the faithful should go to confession, receive Holy Communion and attend the services.

We therefore consider that the work of Saint Antim of Ivirean served as a model for the pastoral letters of the bishops of Râmnic in the 18th century, even though the text by the Metropolitan of the Mountains was not adopted in its entirety; rather, a few points were selected from it. Guidance was then added which corresponded to the needs of the religious life of the Romanians of that time and which addressed hierarchical, moral and spiritual matters, as well as aspects relating to liturgical practice.

All these works make constant reference to Holy Scripture, including the Old and New Testaments, to the writings of the Holy Fathers—among whom the Three Holy Hierarchs are particularly cited—and to the Holy Councils, these being the sources upon which the pastoral letters were based. We should therefore not be surprised if they resemble one another in certain respects, since, on the one hand, they are drawn from the same sources of doctrinal teaching, and, on the other hand, they are intended to meet the same requirements of religious life. Their ultimate aim was the purification of the faithful from sin, which could be achieved through participation in services, confession and Holy Communion – aspects on which great emphasis is placed. Certain liturgical practices were also regulated precisely to ensure the preservation of the true faith and to protect the faithful from foreign teachings, whilst consideration was also given to certain hierarchical, moral and spiritual aspects, all of which were aimed at ensuring good order in the church life of the faithful.

The importance of these writings is not merely religious or historical, but also philological. They were written in Romanian and printed using Cyrillic characters; on reading them, we encounter a number of archaisms, such as ‘Pricestanie’ 52, for Holy Communion; ‘umivalniță’ 53 for ‘baptismal font’, and the variant ‘ispovedui’ 54 for ‘to confess’. We also find the words: ‘molitvă’ 55 for ‘prayer’, the verb ‘a prigori’ 56 meaning ‘to expose something excessively to heat’, ‘jiganie’ 57 for ‘parasitic insect’, and ‘mohorâciune’ 58 for a shade of dark red verging on black. We therefore consider that the model on which the circulars of the bishops of Râmnic from the 18th century were based was the work Capete de poruncă by Saint Antim Ivireanul, himself a former Bishop of Râmnic and founder of the local printing press 59. It is possible that the regulations governing church life in Oltenia were influenced, in form but not in content, by Austrian rule, which was present in the area between 1718 and 1739. For, in their desire to extend their influence over the monasteries – particularly for economic reasons – the Austrians drew up a series of questionnaires concerning the assets of the Oltenian monasteries, to which the abbots were obliged to reply. However, we must not forget that texts offering advice to priests existed not only within the Romanian Orthodox sphere, but also amongst the Russians and Serbs.

The oldest known Austrian questionnaires date from 1735–1736, and are therefore later than Saint Antim’s work of 1714 or Bishop Inochentie’s pastoral letter of 1731. The Austrian documents, structured around several points, concerned the management of the monastery, for which the abbot was accountable, but also addressed matters of internal order, as we see in the case of Dintr-un Lemn Monastery. In the 1736 text 60 concerning this monastery, the abbess was advised not to permit the nuns to leave the monastery without permission, and other practical matters relating to monastic obedience were also mentioned, but the emphasis was on the management of the monastery’s estates.

Although the two types of text differ—some being pastoral letters from hierarchs addressed to priests, deacons and laypeople, whilst the Austrian texts are more like guidelines setting out issues that abbots of monasteries had to take into account, particularly for the sound management of monastic assets, yet both share a common aim of bringing order to the ecclesiastical life of the Romanians of that time. Their purpose, however, was different: whilst the Austrian documents sought a clear record of the monasteries’ income and the establishment of the number of priests, for fiscal reasons, the pastoral decrees focused on the spiritual life of the faithful, their spiritual guidance, and raising the cultural standard of the priests, without seeking any material benefits. Nevertheless, it is possible that some impetus to bring order to church life may also have come from these Austrian decrees, for we see the bishops of Râmnic taking particular care to issue pastoral letters. On the other hand, we also find a reformist policy, which extended to the clergy, in the work of Constantin Mavrocordat 61, the Prince of Muntenia during whose reign Oltenia was returned to Wallachia in 1739. There is no doubt, however, that he drew inspiration from the practices of Austrian rule in Oltenia.

We can also explain this pastoral activity of the 18th-century bishops of Râmnic by the fact that, during the Austrian rule of Oltenia, the hierarchs of this territory also looked after the Orthodox Romanians in the Brașov area, who were facing the threat of union with Rome. Consequently, the bishops of Râmnic felt the need to organise church life in order to protect the faithful in their diocese from foreign teachings, a goal they achieved, internally, through pastoral letters and the printing of liturgical books, and externally, by sending liturgical books to Transylvania.

The printed works from Râmnic enjoyed the widest circulation in Transylvania and Banat, compared to those from Bucharest or the region of Moldavia, and reached not only the border areas, as one might have expected, but also into more distant regions; books from Râmnic were found in Sibiu, Făgăraș, Cluj, Orăștie, Abrud, Banat and Maramureș 62, despite the ban imposed by the authorities. For, as we recall, in November 1725 63 Bishop Damaschin had requested permission to introduce books printed in Râmnic into Transylvania and Banat, but his request was rejected 64, and in 1746–1748 and 1770, Maria Theresa took measures to prevent books from being brought in from Wallachia and Moldavia 65. Even prior to these years there were problems, with Orthodox books being confiscated whenever found, as we know from the decree of the United Synod of February 1725, which prohibited the entry into the country of the book Church Teaching on the Seven Sacraments, printed in Râmnic in 1724, and ordering its confiscation from those in possession of it 66. The books belonging to the Sibiu merchant Dimitrie Moldovan, worth over 6,000 florins, were also confiscated; the majority of these printed works were from Râmnic, as the Sibiu merchant was the brother-in-law of the Râmnic merchant Cârstea Iovipali 67.

The Austrian authorities sought to curtail the privileges of the clergy and to exercise control over the monasteries 68, primarily for fiscal reasons. From a hierarchical perspective, the Bishop of Râmnic was removed from the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan of Ungrovlahia and placed under that of the Serbian Metropolitan, who, in turn, sought to gain influence in the region, aspects particularly evident in the delay in Climent’s ordination as bishop by Metropolitan Vichentie Ioanovici 69, which lasted until May 1737. Although the authorities sought to restrict ecclesiastical rights 70, the clergy of Oltenia fought to preserve them, as conclusively demonstrated by the memorandum of 20 June 1731 from the abbots of the monasteries in Oltenia to Count Wallis, calling for the preservation of the monasteries’ independence from political authority 71. The clergy of Oltenia also fought to exempt priests and deacons from taxes, as shown by Bishop Inochentie’s intervention of 4 September 1730 72, which, although accepted on 10 October of the same year, was not upheld, for, in 1735, priests were paying taxes, just like the inhabitants 73.

This was the historical context for the issuance of the 1731 pastoral letter by Inochentie and subsequently for Climent’s ministry in its early years, having been ordained, as we have seen, in 1737, that is, at a time when Oltenia was still under Austrian rule. After 1739, when Oltenia returned to Wallachia, the Bishop of Râmnic would once again be answerable to the Metropolitan of Bucharest, rather than to the Serbian Metropolitan. In this new context, Climent witnessed the reformist policies of the Wallachian prince Constantin Mavrocordat, which also targeted the clergy; the prince granted priests and monasteries exemption from taxes, whilst insisting on the need for the clergy to be educated 74. Climent took part in Constantin Mavrocordat’s reform efforts, signing, alongside Metropolitan Neofit Cretanul, the 1746 act abolishing the ‘rumânie’ 75.

In conclusion, the 1743 pastoral letter by Climent, Bishop of Râmnic, in its first part seeks, through the issuance of provisions of a moral, spiritual or hierarchical nature, to bring order to church life within his diocese. The commands are addressed to the priests, reminding them of their duties regarding the conduct of services, the need to obey the local hierarch, and the necessity to behave in a manner and possess virtues befitting the dignity of the priesthood, to be ‘of good character, like the saints, gentle, wise, and observant of fasting’17. The second part, addressed to the faithful, emphasises the importance of observing fasts, which entail not only abstaining from certain foods but also renouncing sin.

Alongside the other texts I have mentioned, namely those from 1731, 1747 and 1781, the pastoral letter of 1743—modelled on the work of Saint Antim Ivireanul from 1714 and, for the second part, on that of Metropolitan Daniil of Ungrovlahia— it forms part of the efforts made by the bishops of Râmnic in the 18th century to raise the cultural standard of the priests and to organise the church life of the faithful in that region in an orderly manner. These written records can also be seen as a complement to the canonical visits made by hierarchs to their dioceses; of these, for the mid-18th century, those carried out by Neofit the Cretan, Metropolitan of Ungrovlahia, between 1746 and 1747 remain particularly well-known. Upon arriving in Râmnic, during the tenure of Bishop Climent, Neofit the Cretan noted in his diary: ‘Upon my arrival in the Diocese of Râmnic, on the morning of Sunday, 20 July, I celebrated the Divine Liturgy in the cemetery church of the Holy Diocese, which Bishop Climent had built and which is dedicated to the Dormition of the Mother of God. On Monday, 21 July, I celebrated the Divine Liturgy again in the same church and remained there on Monday evening. The old church of the diocese had been restored by the aforementioned Bishop Climent’76”.

Thus, both canonical and pastoral visits, which complement one another, were undertaken with the aim of organising church life and strengthening the bond between the faithful and their hierarchs. Unlike the encyclicals issued by patriarchs, which dealt chiefly with dogmatic matters 77, pastoral letters—issued less frequently in the eighteenth century than they are today—addressed specific practical, moral, or matters of church life and order 78. The issues addressed in the pastoral letters were of a varied nature, but they all served the same purpose of guiding the faithful—priests and laity alike—protecting them from erroneous teachings and, ultimately, sanctifying them through participation in the Holy Mysteries. Reference is made in each instance to Holy Scripture, the writings of the Holy Fathers and the teachings of the Holy Councils, these being the guidelines upon which the teachings in these circulars were based. Alongside the pastoral letters—of which we have focused on those from Râmnic in the 18th century— although they are not the only ones in the Romanian context, other instructional books for priests 79—with a particular emphasis on dogmatic matters—and works on the Holy Mysteries 80 have also circulated in our region and throughout the Orthodox world 81; however, these fall outside the scope of our study. It highlights how the complex nature of the political and religious situation in which the Diocese of Râmnic found itself during the period of Austrian rule and immediately thereafter spurred its social and pastoral activity.

Imagine

Appendix

Instructions to the entire ecclesiastical community, so that every priest and deacon may fully and honourably fulfil the duties of their office. Now printed for the first time, during the reign of the most exalted lord of all Wallachia, Io Mihai Racoviță Voivode, in the holy diocese of Râm<niculu>, in the year 7251 <1743>, by Father Mihai Athanasievici the Printer.

Climent, by the grace of God, Bishop of Râmnicu-Noul Severin

Through your prayers, to all the devout priests of Our Humble Diocese, we beseech the Almighty God to grant you mercy, peace, health, a pure life and the salvation of your souls. And from Us, prayer, blessing and i forgiveness.

Firstly

By the gift bestowed upon us bishops by the Most Holy and Life-giving Spirit, and through the laying on of our hands upon you, priests, making you ministers of the holy and awe-inspiring Mysteries and servants of God, together with the heavenly powers, for whose service I myself wish to witness those very powers. And may your work be according to the word of the prophet D<a>vid: that you may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of your life. And may you attend to His holy church, performing your appointed duties with all due care and diligence, and celebrating the Holy Liturgy with reverence and a humble heart, so that God may show His mercy to the police and to all the people.

Secondly

For you are bound to conduct yourselves with good character, just as <a> the saints do—gentle, wise, and abstinent; live a life of self-restraint; do not be frivolous, nor speak shameful words, nor be foolish, nor proud, nor arrogant, nor liars, nor lovers of feasts, nor greedy, gorging yourselves at the table; do not go to feasts uninvited, nor read heretical books to people; teach your children to walk in the right ways, without disgrace.

The third

When you enter the sanctuary, let your minds be pure, and let the laity not enter the sanctuary; for the sanctuary belongs to the priests and deacons. Let your servants not touch the church vessels, and do not bring meat or intoxicating drinks into the sanctuary; the church must be swept clean, free from dust and cobwebs; do not place old books or broken icons upon the Holy Altar, but only the Holy Gospel and the Holy Proskomedia. And on whatever day you celebrate the Holy Liturgy, take care not to be at odds with anyone, lest the Holy Spirit flee from you.

Fourth

And do not, out of fear of any man or to please any nobleman, shorten any part of the services and litanies, for the prophet says: God will shatter the bones of those who act to please men, and their service will not be counted as service to God, but as separation from God. Do not be ashamed to rebuke any man who is in sin, neither for the sake of a gift, nor out of fear, nor out of love. And guard the Holy Mysteries with the utmost care, lest, through your negligence, a mouse or some other vermin should defile the divine Mysteries. Likewise, priests, take care not to burn or smoke them, lest you fall into mortal sin.

Fifth

As for the poor and the poor widows who are ill and dying or giving birth, when you hear of such cases, go to them without being summoned. Administer Holy Communion to the living; not to those who are about to die. And do not be foolish like little children who do not understand the teaching.

The sixth

Above all, regard the local Bishop as the Apostles regarded Christ. And do not act as spiritual fathers without the permission of your Bishop, for you will be transgressing the decree of the Holy Council of Carthagea, and you will fall into mortal sin, causing harm not only to yourselves but also to those who wish to receive absolution for their sins from you; they remain unforgiven,

The Seventh

We command you, reverend priests and deacons, not to meddle in worldly affairs—that is, in false testimony and in matters under judicial investigation, in oaths, in bribes and in other such matters as these, which cause scandal amongst the people and arouse suspicion; and keep yourselves aloof from merchants, lest you fall into severe punishment.

Eighth

If anyone sees that priests are not required to pay tax alongside the rest of the country, but only twice a year, and, wishing to become a priest, they must go to Vidin and to other bishops to be ordained, let it be known that such a person shall be required to pay tax alongside the peasants and shall be punished as a thief of holy things.

The

of the priests and deacons shall be deemed not to be upholding the honour of the priesthood as is fitting: but instead frequents taverns and walks about drunk; let him know this well: that after the first and second warnings, he shall be stripped of all the privileges of the priesthood and placed among the peasants to pay taxes. And let them not suppose that, in time, they will regain their honour—whether through bribes or through someone’s intercession; but they shall remain until the end in that punishment, disgrace and shame.

The Eleventh

No priest shall dare to sell wine in his own home; nor shall he <i> allow his wife or his maid to sell wine; and whoever breaks this commandment and commits this unseemly and unlawful act shall be stripped of all the privileges of the priesthood and shall be consigned to the ranks of the peasants.

The seventeenth

No priest shall dare to leave his parish and go to another, without a godly reason and without a letter of recommendation from his bishop; for then he shall be unwelcome wherever he goes.

The Twelfth

Every priest shall carefully consider and observe our teaching, which we have set forth in these twelve commandments, and shall put into practice what is written herein; for if they fail to do so, they shall be punished.

Clement, by the grace of God, Bishop of Râmnic.

To all of you within our humble diocese, reverend abbots, devout priests, honourable boyars, you merchants and all other blessed Christians, beloved sons of our humility in the Holy Spirit, may grace be with you all, from the L<u>ord God Almighty. And from our humility, m<o>l<i>tva, bl<a>goslovenie and <i>ertăciune.

For, with God’s help, we have been deemed worthy to<m> reach the beginning of the Holy and Great Fast, and the salvation of our souls; which is like a cornerstone of the year’s days and a remembrance of the forty-day fast observed by our Saviour I<su>s H<ristos>. Therefore, it is the duty of every Christian—the elderly and the young, the great and the small—to honour this time and to purify ourselves from all defilement of body and soul; for God says through the prophet Haggai: ‘My people, desist from your wickedness and fast for me with a pure heart.’ But if you do not desist, I will withhold the heavens from giving rain<i> and the earth from yielding its fruit, and I will bring the sword upon your land, upon the trees, upon the grain, upon the vineyards, upon the olive groves, upon all that the earth produces, upon people, and upon all the labours of men’s hands. Let us therefore strive to purify ourselves through fasting, confession and repentance, lest we be deprived of heavenly and earthly blessings. And like newborn infants, as the great Apostle Peter says, we truly see, brothers and sons in the Holy Spirit, that holy fasting is all-powerful, as we are first assured by the words of our Saviour I<su>s H<rist>, Who says: ‘This kind, that is, of demons, comes out by nothing but fasting and prayer.’

Secondly, we see the power of fasting in the Prophet Moses, who, whilst fasting, received the Law written by Guus. Thirdly, the prophet Daniel, who through fasting silenced the mouths of the lions, and the three youths—Ananias, Azarias and Misael—who, through fasting, trod upon the flames of the fire. Fourthly, the people of Nineveh, upon hearing the cry of the prophet Jonah, immediately began to fast—from man to beast—and thus escaped the wrath of Guod. Fifthly, even the women made use of fasting, and overcame the devil both under the Old Law and under the New Law. Leaving other examples aside, let us bring to the fore Queen Esther, for she understood that Haman, the enemy, had slandered the Jews to the king, her husband, and the king, in his wrath, had ordered that all the Jews should be wiped out from the face of the whole earth. And he issued another, even more dreadful decree: that whoever interceded on their behalf, right here and now, should have their head cut off<i>, whoever they might be; so she, sighing from the depths of her soul, said: ‘Woe is me, O Lord! What <i> good is the kingdom to me if my whole people are to perish? I would rather die myself, together with my people! And, in defiance of the decree, I shall go to the king!

And first she began to fast, and commanded all the Jews in the s<p>us city to fast for three days, for she was about to die for them. And she, having put on mourning clothes, fasted and prayed with tears, saying: ‘O Lord, D<u>my God, that from the day I was born I have kept my virginity and have not been deceived by the serpent’s counsel, nor have I dishonoured my father and my mother, but have waited until I was of marriageable age, and have not desired the company of those of a different faith, nor the bed of any stranger. Nor do I love feasts and drunkenness. Therefore, do not let our enemy Haman rejoice over us and our destruction!

And after three days she ceased, having prayed, and she dressed in all her royal finery and went to the king, supported by two maidservants, for she had grown weak from fasting and her heart was paralysed with fear. And when they caught sight of the king, she fainted; and the king himself lifted her up and said: ‘Do not be afraid, Isthiră, for you shall not die.’ And when he had heard of her arrival contrary to his command, the king immediately decreed throughout the world that no Jew should be put to death, but that they should be held in higher esteem than all other peoples! And whoever among the nations commits a capital offence and dares to lay a hand on the Jews shall not die! Then the prophecy of the prophet Zechariah was fulfilled, which says: ‘In those days, ten men from every city will take hold of the hem of a Jewish man’s garment, saying: “We will gowith you, for we have heard that God is with you!’ See, then, Christians, how the fasting and prayer of one woman did such good for her whole people. And they overcame their enemy!

So too now, fasting defeats the devil, the enemy of the Christian people. Sixth: those who lived according to Christ and laboured through fasting became saints and miracle-workers, and the Church praises them to this day. Such are the praises of fasting! I speak of that fasting which is practised without hypocrisy. Therefore, we too, who have been sanctified and enlightened through Holy Baptism, are bound to observe it with the utmost care. According to the teaching and precepts of the holy councils: for whenever a person realises that both body and soul are slipping and falling into sin, and we are becoming enemies of Guod. Let us therefore fast against these two passions and turn away from all bodily and spiritual passions and desires.

And the bodily passions are those which are carried out through the body of man; these passions the most blessed Paul names one by one and urges us to flee from them (saying): Do not be deceived, my brothers: neither fornicators, nor adulterers, nor murderers, nor thieves, nor the sexually immoral, nor drunkards, nor revellers—they shall not inherit the kingdom of Guod! These and others like them are the passions of the flesh, which we see arise from excessive eating and drinking. And I say to you, my children and fellow Christians: if anyone should have fallen into any such passions, let them forsake them, confess their sins, and repent with all their heart. I bear witness and pledge before God <u> that he shall be <i> forgiven: for there is no one who, by fasting and praying, will not receive <i> forgiveness!

And the passions of the soul are these: lack of love, malice, injustice, unbelief, disobedience, pride, envy, jealousy, slander, lack of mercy, and vain thoughts. Therefore, let us prove ourselves victorious over bodily and spiritual passions, and let us fast in a manner that is acceptable and pleasing to G<u>od. For abstaining from these things I have mentioned is true fasting! Let everyone flee from adultery, fornication, drunkenness, murder, speaking ill of one’s brother and neighbour, and let them flee from envy. For all these things come from the devil; but let us not desire to have any fellowship with the devil, sinning at his will.

But let us commune with Christ through fasting, through confession, through repentance. For neither angel nor man has redeemed us from the bondage of the devil, save our Lord I<s>u<s> H<risto>s, who shed His blood for us; therefore let us not show ourselves ungrateful towards Him by abandoning His holy commandments and following the works of darkness; let us not cause Him disgust through our ungodly lives; but let us observe this forty-day fast, which even our sinless Lord I<isu>s H<risto>s observed, leaving us an example, so that we may repent of all our sins and wickedness. For what great joy there is among the angels for a sinner who repents! The merciful Guod is long-suffering and stands with open arms, awaiting our repentance, and drives no one away. He welcomes everyone, He calls everyone, through the prophet (saying): ‘Return to me, and I will return to you; though your sins be as scarlet, I will make them white as snow. And once again, sanctify this fast for me! Let every Christian, therefore, honour this holy fast and the other fasts, as well as the Wednesdays and Fridays throughout the year, apart from the weeks of feasting, as the holy councils have decreed.

For this reason, in all humility, we beseech you and remind you of what we have taught you above. And we urge you, as Christians and beloved children in the Holy Spirit, to guard yourselves during these holy days against the temptations of the flesh and the soul and against all impurity, and to run to your spiritual fathers, that is, to your <u>spiritual fathers, and to confess all your deeds—whatever you have done in deed, word and thought—and not to conceal any sin, for then the others will not be forgiven either.

And receive the fast with love and joy, putting on the armour of light, as good soldiers of <i> H<risto>s; so that you may stand firm against the wiles of the devil, with true repentance and righteous confession, that you may be pure and holy within as well. And do not set a deadline or put it off (saying) that after some time has passed, then we shall confess and repent. No, my sons, no, my brothers! This trick is from the devil, who always strives to thwart our salvation and deceives us with his cunning counsel (saying): ‘So, give me these things now, and give the future ones to Guod’—that is to say, ‘Do my will today, and tomorrow you shall do the will of Guod’. Flee from this counsel that kills souls, and with all your might, now, at the beginning of Lent, hasten to your spiritual fathers and confess your sins, and be ready, for we do not know when or at what time the thief—that is, death—will come; and if you repent, as we teach you, all your sins will be <i>forgiven by God; just as we pray that He may enlighten you, strengthen you and guide you, so that you may keep all His holy commandments.

And may you observe this holy fast to the <u>pleasure of God, cleansing yourselves of all sins, and may you be deemed worthy to celebrate the salvific Passion and Resurrection of our Lord I<su>s H<risto>s, through Whom the salvation of the world was accomplished. May we all be deemed worthy to attain it. In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, now and ever and unto ages of ages. Amen.

Thereafter, we command you, O priests of the churches, to read this teaching in all the churches; instructing the people how they are to fast and how we are to observe the holy Fast. Therefore, if you do this and read this teaching faithfully in your churches, instructing the Christians in the matters set out above, you shall receive from Guod the reward for your labours, and from us prayers and blessings. But if you prove disobedient to our command and negligent of this teaching, not only will you remain under God’s judgement, but whoever we find who does not act as we have written, such a person shall also receive ecclesiastical punishment.

End. And to God be the praise!u

Library of the Andrei Șaguna Faculty of Orthodox Theology in Sibiu, CRV I/19. Romanian print, Râmnic printing house, paper, cardboard covers (15 × 10 cm), 1743.

Imagine

• 1

  Bibliografia Românească Veche (hereinafter BRV), vol. IV, ed. I. Bianu, D. Simonescu, Bucharest, Atelierele Grafice Socec, 1944, p. 54.

• 2

  E. Mosora, D. Hanga, Catalogue of Old Romanian Books from the Collections of the ‘Lucian Blaga’ Central University Library, Cluj-Napoca (hereinafter the Catalogue), Cluj, 1991, p. 51, no. 85: Clement, Bishop of Râmnic, Teachings during Lent, Râmnic, 1737–1749; 14 folios (160 × 110); CN-U BRV 262 A, Inv. 10/1925; acquired from Aurel Filimon, Târgu-Mureș; recently bound in cloth; the title page and the end are missing; a rare printed work.

• 3

  The Andrei Șaguna Faculty of Orthodox Theology in Sibiu (hereinafter referred to as AȘ), Carte Românească Veche (CRV) I/19.

• 4

  N. Șerbănescu, ‘The Bishops of Râmnic’, in Mitropolia Olteniei, XVI, 1964, nos. 3–4, pp. 170–212; M. Păcurariu, ‘Bishop Climent of Râmnic (1735–1748)’ (hereinafter ‘Bishop Climent’), in Mitropolia Olteniei, XVII, 1965, nos. 1–2, pp. 22–49; A. Mironescu, The History of the Diocese of Râmnicu Noul Severin: Past and Present, Bucharest, Gutenberg Press, 1906, pp. 134–141; Ș. Andreescu, ‘A Reference to Bishop Climent of Râmnic’, in Mitropolia Olteniei, XVIII, 1965, nos. 7–8, pp. 631–632.

• 5

  I. Donat, The Religious Foundations of Oltenia, Craiova, Scrisul Românesc, 1937; P. S. Năsturel, ‘The Former Bunavestire Hermitage in Pietrarii de Jos (Hurez District)’, in Mitropolia Olteniei, VII, 1955, nos. 3–4, pp. 205–210; R. Crețianu, ‘A Great Founder of Holy Places: Climent of Râmnic’, in Mitropolia Olteniei, 1970, nos. 7–8, pp. 663–670.

• 6

  D. Lupu, Printing and Books in Wallachia during the Phanariot Reigns (hereinafter Printing and Books), Bucharest, Bucharest Municipal Museum Press, 2014, pp. 140–141: “A definitive reorganisation and refurbishment of the printing press, complete with a new set of type, took place during the tenure of Bishop Climent (June 1735 – May 1748), probably immediately after the end of the Russo-Austro-Turkish War (1735–1739)”. The use of a new typeface is also noted.

• 7

  I. N. Beju, ‘Unknown Old Romanian Printed Works’ (hereinafter ‘Romanian Printed Works’), in Mitropolia Ardealului, IX, 1964, nos. 1–2, p. 59.

• 8

  M. Păcurariu, Bishop Climent, p. 33.

• 9

  V. Molin, ‘Bibliographical notes on some little-known books’, in Mitropolia Olteniei, 1966, no. 3–4, p. 296.

• 10

  D. Coravu, ‘Printing Masters of Râmnic in the second half of the 18th century and the first quarter of the 19th century’ (hereinafter ‘Printing Masters’), in Mitropolia Olteniei, XIX, 1967, no. 3–4, p. 250.

• 11

  D. Poenaru, Contributions to Early Romanian Bibliography (hereinafter Contributions), Târgoviște, Dâmbovița County Museum, 1973, p. 28.

• 12

  I. D. Lăudat, ‘The Contribution of the Râmnicu-Vâlcea Printing House to the Promotion of Books in the 18thCentury’ (hereinafter ‘The Contribution of the Printing House’), in Mitropolia Olteniei, XXVIII, 1976, nos. 5–6, p. 364.

• 13

  D. Lupu, Printing and the Book, pp. 249, 282.

• 14

  D. Coravu, Master Printers, p. 250.

• 15

  B. Teodorescu, ‘The Circulation of Old Church Books: A Contribution to a Cumulative Catalogue’ (hereinafter ‘Circulation’), in ‘BOR’, 1961, no. 1–2, p. 177.

• 16

  BAR, Manuscripts – Rare Book, CRV 168. See also St Antim Ivireanul, Writings, ed. Arch. M. Stanciu, G. Ștrempel, Bucharest, Basilica Publishing, 2011, pp. 100–103.

• 17a17b17c

  AȘ, CRV I/19, p. 3.

• 18a18b

  AȘ, CRV I/19, p. 5.

• 19

  AȘ, CRV I/19, p. 6.

• 20a20b20c

  AȘ, CRV I/19, p. 7.

• 21

  C. Erbiceanu, ‘The Canonical Encyclical of Filaret, Bishop of Râmnic’ (hereinafter ‘The Canonical Encyclical’), in The Romanian Orthodox Church, XV, 1891, nos. 6–8, pp. 403–647.

• 22a22b

  C. Erbiceanu, The Canonical Encyclical, p. 630.

• 23

  S. Stinghe, The History of the Church of Șcheii in Brașov (manuscript from Radu Tempea) (hereinafter The History of the Church), Brașov, Ciurcu Printing House, 1899. On the pastoral letter of 1731, see also M. Manolache, The Life and Work of Bishop Inochentie of Râmnic (1725–1735), in Mitropolia Olteniei, 1967, nos. 9–10, p. 747.

• 24

  S. Stinghe, The History of the Church, p. 106.

• 25

  AȘ, CRV I/19, p. 4.

• 26

  C. Erbiceanu, Canonical Encyclical, p. 411.

• 27a27b

  S. Stinghe, The History of the Church, p. 108.

• 28

  C. Erbiceanu, The Canonical Encyclical, p. 515.

• 29

  S. Stinghe, The History of the Church, pp. 105–109.

• 30

  C. Erbiceanu, The Canonical Encyclical, pp. 412–415.

• 31

  Ibid., p. 410.

• 32

  C. Erbiceanu, The Canonical Encyclical, pp. 508–513.

• 33

  BAR, CRV I 544, f. 2. As we learn from the text, the blagocini were tasked with assisting the archpriests in their work of supervising the priests, to ensure the proper order of church life. A second edition of this work, published solely in Romanian—rather than as a bilingual Russian-Romanian edition, as in 1791—was also published in Iași in 1808. See BAR, CRV I 736.

• 34

  A comprehensive and interesting circular, comprising 40 points, was issued in 1802 by Iosif Ioanovici Șacabent, Orthodox Bishop of Vârșeț, which addresses many aspects also covered in the pastoral letters analysed in this study. It was published by P. Olde and Gh. Ciuhandru, Instructions for Priests, Deacons and the Entire Clergy. A Guide by Bishop Iosif Ioanovici Șacabent of Vârșeț (1802), (hereinafter The Guidance of Priests, Deacons and All the Clergy), Sibiu, Printed by the Archdiocesan Press, 1931.

• 35

  C. Erbiceanu, The Canonical Encyclical, p. 642.

• 36

  Ibid., p. 646.

• 37

  Ibid., p. 633.

• 38a38b38c

  St Antim Ivireanul, Writings, ed. Arch. M. Stanciu, G. Ștrempel, p. 102.

• 39a39b

  AȘ, CRV I/19, p. 8.

• 40

  C. Erbiceanu, The Canonical Encyclical, p. 635.

• 41

  ‘The Priest’s Vocation’, Vol. V, No. 2, 15 March 1894, pp. 2–4.

• 42

  C. Erbiceanu, ‘The Encyclical of Clement, Bishop of Râmnic’ (hereinafter ‘The Encyclical of Clement’), in ‘BOR’, XVIII, 1894–1895, no. 2, p. 124.

• 43

  C. Erbiceanu, The Encyclical of Clement, p. 124.

• 44a44b

  Ibid., p. 128.

• 45

  Ibid., p. 129.

• 46

  BAR, Ms. rom. 5911, f. 88v–97. The manuscript was noted by G. Ștrempel, Catalogue of Romanian Manuscripts (hereinafter the Catalogue), vol. IV, Bucharest, Ed. Științifică și Enciclopedică, p. 431.

• 47

  BRV, vol. IV, ed. I. Bianu, D. Simonescu, p. 44.

• 48

  BAR, Ms. rom. 3460. See G. Ștrempel, Catalogue, vol. III, Bucharest, Scientific and Encyclopaedic Publishing House, 1987, p. 133.

• 49

  BAR, Ms. rom. 3460, fol. 31.

• 50a50b50c

  AȘ, CRV I/19, p. 14.

• 51

  AȘ, CRV I/19, p. 19.

• 52

  Dictionary of the Romanian Language (hereinafter DLR), Bucharest, published by the Romanian Academy, 2012, vol. XII, p. 1392: Pricestanie – Holy Communion; a word of Slavic origin.

• 53

  DLR, vol. XVII, p. 142: umivalniță – a basin for washing hands during the service. Of Slavic origin. In our text, it is used to mean a baptismal font.

• 54

  DLR, vol. XV, p. 1423: a ispovedui – a regional variant of ‘to go to confession’; of Slavic origin.

• 55

  DLR, vol. IX, p. 824: molitvă – prayer, of Slavic origin.

• 56

  DLR, vol. XII, p. 1412: a prigori – to expose to the heat of a fire; to heat over a very hot fire or in the sun; a word of Bulgarian origin.

• 57

  DLR, vol. VII, p. 22: jiganie – a parasitic insect; a word of Slavic origin.

• 58

  DLR, vol. IX, p. 795: mohorâciune – a dark red colour (like that of a ‘mohor’) or a bright red; a shade of black; a word of Hungarian origin.

• 59

  For the history of the Râmnic printing press, see D. Lupu, Tiparul și cartea, pp. 132–149. On the importance of the Râmnic printing press, see also N. Iorga, The History of Romanian Literature in the 18th Century (1688–1821), vol. I, Bucharest, Ed. Didactică și Pedagogică, 1969, p. 422: ‘Here, through the legacy of Antim and the civilising influence exerted by German rule whilst Oltenia belonged to the Christian empire, a cultural movement and a religious school took shape. All the prelates who successively occupied the see of Râmnic supported this movement or took part in it, and by the end of the century, the finest religious printed works were produced in Râmnic in the most beautiful Transylvanian script. The school produced printers, writers of church registers, teachers of Slovenian and Romanian, translators and even writers: two of the most eminent chroniclers of Wallachia. It represented for Wallachia what the monastic school at Neamț represents for Moldavia, and both form the glory of 18th-century Romanian religious culture.”

• 60

  Sibiu County Branch of the National Archives (hereinafter SJAN Sibiu), L 1–5 / 206, f. 71–72, cited in Ș. Papacostea, Oltenia under Austrian Rule (1718–1739) (hereinafter Oltenia), Bucharest, Ed. Enciclopedică, 1998, pp. 294–295.

• 61

  Referring to the forms drawn up by the Austrians through which they sought to manage the monasteries’ revenues, and to their influence on Constantin Mavrocordat’s church policy, Ș. Papacostea, in Oltenia, p. 295, considers that: “The system of control established by the Austrians and the form through which it was implemented were adopted and applied by Constantin Mavrocordat throughout Wallachia”. And, by way of example, the author refers to Manuscript 377 from the Central National Historical Archives (ANIC), namely theRegister of monastic income and expenditure. N. I. also refers to five payments for the Dintr-un Lemn Monastery, dated 17 January 1746—that is, after Oltenia’s return to Wallachia— Șerbănescu, ‘A Monastic Settlement from the Time of Constantin Mavrocordat’, in Revista Istorică Română, XVI, 1946, pp. 294–297.

• 62

  See, for example, I. D. Lăudat, The Contribution of the Printing Press, p. 369, or Ș. Meteș, The Relations of the Romanian Orthodox Church in Transylvania with the Romanian Principalities in the 18th Century (hereinafter ‘The Relations’), Sibiu, Archdiocesan Press, 1928, p. 34. C. Marinoiu, The History of Books from Vâlcea in the 17th–18th Centuries, Craiova, Scrisul Românesc, 1981, pp. 115–118, provides a detailed account of the distribution of books from Vâlcea in Transylvania and the Banat, and even mentions the intention of the scholars from Râmnic to establish an Orthodox printing house in Timișoara.

• 63

  N. Dobrescu, The History of the Romanian Church in Oltenia (1716–1739), Bucharest, Carol Gobl Institute of Graphic Arts, 1906, pp. 163–164. In November 1725, Bishop Damaschin requested permission from the Hofkriegsrath to distribute in Transylvania, the Banat and the district of Arad the Romanian books he had printed.

• 64

  N. Dobrescu, The History of the Romanian Church in Oltenia, p. 167. Tige informed the Hofkriegsrath that he had prevented the Bishop of Râmnic from distributing the printed books outside Oltenia.

• 65

  D. Coravu, ‘Aspects of the Printing and Distribution of Romanian Ecclesiastical Books in Transylvania, Muntenia and Moldavia in the 18thCentury’ (hereinafter ‘Aspects’), in ‘BOR’, 1967, no. 11–12, p. 1222; Ș. Meteș, ‘Relations’, pp. 33–34; V. Molin, ‘The Râmnic Printing Press: A Means of Orthodox Resistance against Catholicism in Transylvania (1705–1800)’ (hereinafter ‘The Râmnic Printing Press’), in ‘Mitropolia Olteniei’, XII, 1960, nos. 7–8, pp. 464–465.

• 66

  I. M. Moldovanu, Synodal Acts of the Romanian Diocese of Alba Iulia and Făgăraș, Vol. II, Blaju, 1872, p. 110.

• 67

  N. Bănică-Ologu, The Golden Age of Râmnic, Bucharest, Oscar Print, 2000, p. 209.

• 68

  Ș. Papacostea, Oltenia, p. 289.

• 69

  N. Dobrescu, The History of the Romanian Church in Oltenia (1716–1739), pp. 115–130.

• 70

  See also N. Șerbănescu, ‘The Bishops of Râmnic’, in Mitropolia Olteniei, XVI, 1964, nos. 3–4, p. 194.

• 71

  E. De Hurmuzaki, Documents relating to the history of the Romanians (hereinafter Documents), VI, Bucharest, 1878, p. 419.

• 72

  D. Furtună, The Romanian Clergy in the 18th Century (hereinafter The Romanian Clergy), Vălenii de Munte, Neamul Românesc Press, 1915, p. 101.

• 73

  D. Furtună, The Romanian Clergy, p. 103.

• 74

  F. Constantiniu, ‘The Reforms of Constantin Mavrocordat and Alexandru Ipsilanti’, in The History of the Romanians, vol. VI, ed. P. Cernovodeanu, Bucharest: Ed. Enciclopedică, 2001, pp. 503–505.

• 75

  M. Păcurariu, Bishop Climent of Râmnic, in Mitropolia Olteniei, XVII, 1965, nos. 1–2, p. 46.

• 76

  Neophytus of Crete, Travel Journal, ed. Archimandrite Nectarie Șofelea, Bucharest, Basilica Publishing, 2013, p. 65.

• 77

  See, for example, the Encyclical of the Orthodox Patriarchs of 1848, translated by T. M. Popescu, in ‘BOR’, LIII, 1935, nos. 11–12, pp. 545–684.

• 78

  We would like to thank Ms Zamfira Mihail for kindly drawing our attention to the link between pastoral letters and canonical visits, and for highlighting the distinction between encyclicals and pastoral letters.

• 79

  See V. Chiru, ‘Textbooks for Priests from the 17th and 18th Centuries’ (hereinafter ‘Textbooks’) in Studii Teologice, XIII, Series II, 1961, Nos. 9–10, pp. 586–599.

• 80

  For example: The Seven Sacraments of the Church, Iași, 1644; Mystirio, Târgoviște, 1651; Very Useful Christian Teachings, Snagov, 1700; Teachings on the Seven Sacraments, Râmnic, 1724, etc.

• 81

  P. Mihail, Z. Mihail, Documents in Romanian Printed in Bessarabia, Vol. I, 1812–1830, Bucharest, Romanian Academy Press, 1993, pp. 4–9: pastoral letters issued by Metropolitan Gavriil between 1816 and 1820: regarding the swearing of an oath to the imperial throne; a pastoral letter against drunkenness; and a pastoral letter urging the faithful to observe Sunday as a day of rest.