Bishop Atanasie Mironescu (1898–1909)

His life up to his election as bishop

A prominent figure in our Church, Bishop Atanasie was born on 12 August 1856 in the village of Trohan, in the commune of Gârceni, Vaslui County, and was christened Alexandru. Although he was the 17th child of the priest Miron and Ecaterina Mironescu, he enjoyed a fine education, attending primary school in his native commune and then the Seminary at Socola, where he was admitted on a scholarship following an entrance examination in 1870. There he excelled academically, receiving honours in every year until 1877, when he graduated. Passionate about music and church services, he composed numerous choral pieces, which he regarded as the seminary’s most precious treasure, and he was deeply committed to upholding its reputation. Thanks to his talent, he became the choir’s conductor, gaining fame throughout Iași and earning the admiration of renowned musicians, such as Professors Gavriil Muzicescu and Dimitrie Vestali of St. Spiridon, with whose help he developed the richest repertoire of his time. During the school holidays, he served as a reader and sang in the choir at the church in his native village, striving to learn the order of the services as thoroughly as possible and to follow the spiritual path in life.

After graduating from the seminary, on 8 February 1879, he married Maria Popescu, also from Trohan, and at the end of April, he was ordained a deacon, then as a priest on 27 May in Huși Cathedral by Bishop Iosif Gheorghian, for the little church where he had grown up, thus fulfilling the wish of his father, who had passed away. Having been widowed in 1880, at the age of 24, he decided to further his theological studies, first at the Faculty in Bucharest, and from 1882 at the University of Chernivtsi, where he also studied Law and Philosophy. After completing his bachelor’s degree with a thesis on ‘The Temptations of Jesus’ in 1886, he obtained his doctorate in Theology1). Before leaving to study in the town on the banks of the Prut, he delivered an impressive address to the parishioners of Trohan on 6 January 1882, in which he urged them to roof the church and build a stove for it, to respect the priests, to repair the fence and plant flowers on the graves, to attend the holy services, to pray in their homes, to hire herdsmen for their livestock, to choose their fields for sowing, and to live in peace and unity 2.

On his return to the country, he held, one after another, several positions of responsibility, devoting all his energy to the service of the Church, until the moment he was elected Bishop of Oltenia. As spiritual director, then head of the Theological Boarding School in Bucharest and a part-time lecturer at the Central Seminary, in the Department of Philosophy, Homiletics and Patrology 3, he proved himself to be an eminent teacher, who knew how to nurture and instil in his students a strict discipline, in keeping with their calling as future priests 4. “In addition to the authority required of a leader of young men, he possessed the great tact to rein in the rebellious and undisciplined, who, as is often the case at the inception of a new institution, did not see a very bright future in Theology, especially when the newly established Faculty was reeling at every gust of wind’5. Throughout this time, he also distinguished himself as a fine orator, preaching from 1886 at the Metropolitan Cathedral at the behest of Metropolitan Iosif Gheorghian, who had held him in high regard ever since his time as Bishop of Huși.

On 1 January 1887, he was appointed, following a competitive selection process, as a lecturer in the Department of Moral Theology at the Faculty of Theology in Bucharest, which was then in its infancy. As a well-deserved reward for his theological work as a church scholar, following his appointment as professor, he was elevated to the rank of iconom-stavrofor, and in 1888, the Academic Council commissioned him, together with two other colleagues, to draft the well-known Memorandum on the Faculty of Theology and a bill for its recognition. Taking into account the requests set out in that memorandum, which contained a comprehensive overview of higher theological education, Dimitrie Sturdza, the Minister of Education, included in the 1888/89 budget funds for the establishment of the chairs of Canon Law and Practical Theology. During the 1887/88 academic year, this latter course had been taught free of charge by the future hierarch himself. 6

As his former students attested, as a lecturer in Christian Ethics, Alexandru Mironescu carried out work that was highly regarded by students, his colleagues in the Faculty of Theology and indeed throughout the entire University. Well-prepared, tireless and conscientious in the fulfilment of his duties, he had friends, but also many enemies, who, through various intrigues, had managed to keep him as far away as possible from the Church’s leaders, so that 7 would not be promoted. From the writings of the seminarian and later student Ioan Mihălcescu, the future Metropolitan of Moldavia and Suceava, we learn that the renowned professor was a stately priest, with a reddish beard and a keen gaze, who walked briskly, head held high, commanding everyone’s respect. “The most punctual and conscientious of the Faculty’s professors at that time”, he taught his course in the final two years (II–III) with thoroughness and solemnity, like a German professor. He had fully adopted the methods and demeanour of the German teacher from his erudite Romanian professors at the Faculty of Chernivtsi. “He was scrupulous in his examinations, yet fair and a warm supporter of good students even after they had entered society”8.

In order to maintain the high standards of teaching, “he worked tirelessly and with constant dedication”7; he published numerous books and articles in the journal Biserica Ortodoxă Română and edited the theological journal Amvonul. “A great scholar and eminent orator”, he knew many foreign languages, having cultivated a refined education through his reading of philosophical, theological and literary works, as well as through study trips to the West and the East 9. Both as a professor and as a high-ranking hierarch, he sought, through lectures and various published articles and writings, to contribute to the enlightenment of the clergy and the advancement of our Church 10. Among his published literary and theological works, we note: A Journey to the East (Bucharest, 1885), Memorandum on the Organisation of the Faculty of Theology (Bucharest, 1887), Modern Life in its Relations with Religion and the Church (Bucharest, 1890), Evolutionary Ethics and Christian Ethics. A Critical Study of Herbert Spencer’s Ethics (Bucharest, 1893), A Handbook of Moral Theology (Bucharest, 1895)11 (The Church and the State), as well as various studies, reflections and articles published in various journals12 For example, in the journal of the Holy Synod, he published, as early as the tenth year of its publication, several useful articles: Pessimism and Christianity, Reason and Revelation, Memorandum on the Faculty of Theology, Sermon on the Ascension of the Lord, A Journey to the East, Dölinger and Biographical Notes, Bibliographies on the Most Valuable Theological Writings, Blessed Theodoret – Bishop of Cyrus, Christian Ethics Today, and Evolutionary Ethics and Christian Ethics13.

An active and dynamic figure, he played a significant role in the founding of the Romanian Pulpit Society, in 1889, where he lectured to priests in Bucharest, and in drafting a petition, signed by 162 priests and deacons and 22 theology students, calling for the improvement of the moral and material lives of the clergy. In the introduction to this document, he stated: ‘Religion, through its powerful influence on the hearts of Christians, lends its authority to human laws, works vigorously to maintain order and discipline amongst the people, and, finally, preserves traditions and promotes morality amongst the masses […] If, in our country, the priest has in the past fallen short in the areas of preaching the Gospel and fostering morality amongst the people, the reason was that he was not given sufficient education and his livelihood was not at all secured. The Romanian priest is both a representative of the Church and a citizen at the same time, and history does not fail to show us clergymen who were also fine citizens, enduring the hardships of the times and sharing in the distress of our peasants during those difficult times’14

“Endowed with exceptional intelligence and great energy”, in 1893, he was delegated to oversee the affairs of the Diocese of Râmnic in place of Bishop Ghenadie Enăceanu, who had travelled to Paris to seek treatment for an illness from which he was suffering 15. In this capacity, he ordered that the ancient books from Arnota Monastery be brought to the diocesan centre, together with a small chest containing holy relics, including three hands encased in gold and silver, which belonged to Saints Philip, Michael the Confessor (Bishop of Sinada) and Marina16.

Bishop of Râmnic 

As a result of his efforts, on 27 January 1895, he was elected bishop by the Holy Synod and confirmed by the Government through a royal decree, with the title ‘of Craiova’. Three days later, he was tonsured a monk at Cernica Monastery, taking the name Athanasius, and on 2 February, he was honoured with the rank of archimandrite. His ordination as a deacon and his consecration as Vicar Bishop of Râmnic took place on 4–5 February in the Metropolitan Cathedral, in the presence of Metropolitan Primate Ghenadie Petrescu 17. Aware of the mission entrusted to him, he gave thanks to Divine Providence and the members of the Synod, then he pledged to preserve the pure faith and to respect the laws of the Church and of the country, being prepared to sacrifice himself “for the temporal and eternal good of every person, as well as of the community”18.

Upon becoming vicar, he placed himself at the disposal of Bishop Ghenadie Enăceanu until 14 January 1898, when the latter passed away 19. From 22 December 1897, when the titular bishop left for Naples, Italy, to undergo treatment, he was again delegated to lead the diocese for several weeks, until his death 20. During this time, he published books and attended meetings of the Holy Synod as secretary and as a member of various committees 21. Contemporary sources indicate that he was a lecturer at the Faculty until 1901 22.

When the diocesan see became vacant, on 12 March 1898 he was elected to the post with 128 votes out of a total of 221. Deeply moved by the honour bestowed upon him, in the speech he delivered on this occasion before the Grand Electoral College, the new head of the Diocese of Râmnic was to say, amongst other things: ‘I shall always guide my spiritual sons with counsel and by example to obey the laws of the country, to respect its authority and, above all, to be imbued with steadfast faith and boundless devotion to the throne and the Dynasty. As a son of the people, for I am the son of a priest, I shall regard as my greatest honour not only to work with all my might for the prosperity of our much-loved people, but also to seek out and employ the most suitable means for this end”23

Filled with respect for the King of the country, on 15 March, on the occasion of his consecration, he promised him that he would shepherd with great care and bear the episcopal crozier “with apostolic zeal and a spirit of gentleness”, so as to be of the greatest service to the Church and to our people: ‘I shall rely upon Him to lead the flock entrusted to me to the pastures of salvation, to proclaim day by day the glories of God amongst our people, to offer the consolations of our holy religion to those overcome by spiritual desolation and tossed about on the sea of this life, to seek out the lost or scattered sheep and bring them into the fold of salvation of the Church…’24

In this new office, on 28 March 1898, he delivered another memorable address in the Cathedral of Râmnicu Vâlcea, upon his installation in the episcopal see: “As a guardian of the house of the Lord, I shall watch over it sleeplessly to ensure that the faith, morals and institutions of the Holy Church remain unblemished. For Christians lacking spiritual fathers, I shall ordain priests in accordance with the holy canons and the laws of the land; for those lacking places of prayer, comfort and spiritual strength, I shall open churches and consecrate houses of God. I shall gladly and gratefully bestow visible marks of honour upon diligent priests who faithfully fulfil their duties, and I shall encourage them; conversely, I shall rebuke without favouritism, after I have, with all gentleness and long-suffering, admonished and rebuked those who are slow to fulfil their duty or whohave strayed from their holy calling; and everywhere I shall combat the vices that are disgraceful to Christians, to rid them of these and make them true servants of our Saviour.” 25

Pastoral work

“Energetic, kind, just and acutely aware of his high office”20, Bishop Athanasius carried out intense pastoral and missionary work in Oltenia. In his new role, he visited parishes, monasteries and hermitages as far as the remotest village, celebrated the Divine Liturgy and preached, guided the work of the priests and oversaw the construction or renovation of churches 26. Following his installation, he began his canonical visits to villages and towns, being received everywhere as warmly as possible. Inspecting the churches and parish houses in detail, he would note down in a notebook all the shortcomings he observed, whilst in the schools and homes of the faithful, he offered “a kind word, a helping hand, a piece of advice, a blessing”. For this reason, he was deeply loved and respected right to the furthest corners of the diocese, his preaching being felt everywhere 27.

Possessing a high level of education and exceptional spiritual qualities, he embarked on ‘a ministry bearing abundant fruit, the like of which is very rarely found’. For 11 years, he travelled throughout Oltenia, bringing comfort to the hearts of his flock, guiding and strengthening the weak, and encouraging or rewarding the deserving. There was no church or village he visited where the Gospel message he preached “did not pierce the hearts of the faithful like a holy ray of hope and comfort”28 At holy services, during occasional meetings, on canonical inspections or visits, on excursions, and at meals with his subordinates, he found a good opportunity to offer fatherly advice, urging them to work hard, to fulfil their duties precisely, respect for the laws of the country and its sovereign 29, or good cooperation between the priests and village teachers, whom he encouraged to establish societies for the strengthening of the people, many of which he supported financially 30. As a result, “many beneficial initiatives sprang up and flourished, such as: the Regulations for Priests’ Conferences; the magazine Cuvântul Adevărului; the ‘Providența’ Society, which eradicated counterfeit candles from churches; the Adult School; the reorganisation of the School of Singers; the establishment and construction of the school premises for the Nursery School; the establishment of the extensive library at the Holy Diocese; and many others’31.

The best source regarding his achievements is the magazine Cuvântul Adevărului (The Word of Truth), a remarkable publication that appeared in Râmnicu Vâlcea from 1902 until 1909, when he was elected Metropolitan Primate. To begin with, we consider it appropriate to recall his visits and sermons in the parishes of Oltenia, where he was greeted with unspeakable joy and love by the faithful who had come to seek his blessing and useful advice. First and foremost, we note his canonical visit to the parishes in the Lotru Valley, in Vâlcea County, where, on 24 August 1903, he praised the zeal of the parishioners of Brezoi for their care of the church dedicated to the Entry into the Church andassured them that all their deeds would be rewarded with ‘moral blessings’, which they would receive by attending the holy services regularly. In addition, he urged them to guard against certain deviations from the Lord’s law, such as cohabitation and alcoholism, which had found their way into their midst 32.

It is also worth noting that on 16 April 1904 he visited several prominent families in Turnu Severin, as well as the churches in the town and nearby villages, and was pleased with the condition in which he found them. On this occasion, he inspected the School of Chanters, where he asked the pupils in all year groups numerous questions on the subjects taught: Church Reading, Practical and Theoretical Chanting, Liturgy and the Typikon, and observed each pupil’s manual work, finding their answers satisfactory. 33

In particular, he took an interest in the situation of the churches in Craiova, which he inspected on 23 May 1904, when he ordained as deacons the priests Alexandru Petrescu of the Church of the Holy Archangels, the future Bishop of Râmnic, and Dumitru Lungulescu from the Church of St George the New. At the same time, he also visited the churches of Madona Dudu, Obedeanu, St George (the Old), the Dormition (Oota), All Saints (Bășica), the Dormition (Mântuleasa) and St Elijah. 34

It is also worth mentioning here his visit to the church in Muereasca de Sus, Vâlcea County, on 11 July 1904, near the Frăsinei hermitage. After the polyhronium, he urged the parishioners to view the drought affecting their crops as an opportunity to improve their lives through good deeds, by shunning sin, and by working tirelessly in the fields, tending to their animals, and keeping their homes, yards and bodies clean. Furthermore, “they should regard the present time of drought as a trial from God, intended to awaken them to the evils that have taken hold of them”35

We must not overlook the visit made on 28 July 1904 to the church in Cacova, in the commune of Stoenești, where he thanked the faithful for their special care in maintaining the church in good condition andurged them to strengthen their souls with the teachings drawn from the holy services, maintaining in all circumstances a spirit of love and mutual aid. Finally, he advised them not to neglect their daily duties, the church and the school, obedience to the authorities, the cleanliness of their homes and yards, as well as raising their children in the fear of God and respect for their parents, priests, teachers and Mayor36.

Between 22 and 25 August 1905, he visited the monasteries of Govora, Bistrița, Hurezi and Dintr-un Lemn, as well as the rural parishes of Vaideeni and Recea, and two days later, he travelled to the village of Gușoeni, where he was asked to consecrate the church, then inspected the Vâlcea parishes of Ștefănești and Sutești, followed by the Șerbănești Hermitage, maintained by the Bucharest Civil Hospitals Board 37.

His sermons, delivered on various occasions, are also of real interest; in them, alongside his explanation of the Gospel readings, he offered beautiful moral exhortations to the Christians of that time. Regarding his talent as a fine preacher, the editorial board of the magazine Cuvântul Adevărului wrote in 1905, on the occasion of the seventh anniversary of his installation in the episcopal see: ‘His work in preaching the Word of God is outstanding. During canonical visits, at church patronal feasts, at church consecrations and on many other occasions, he has proclaimed the truth of our salvation in sermons interwoven with beautiful parables, with which he adorns the teachings and profound mysteries of the Christian faith’38

No less relevant are the testimonies left by Archpriest Meletie Răuțu, one of his closest collaborators, who served him devotedly for many years and was present at numerous sermons and various events within the diocese: ‘Endowed by God with a powerful memory, through ceaseless study he amassed a vast store of historical and dogmatic knowledge; very eloquent in his expressions, with well-chosen and powerful arguments, wonderfully and timely applied; he has mastered the art of oratory to such an extent that, at least within our Church, he has few equals in this art of speech, which is so necessary and which so greatly enhances the prestige of a true shepherd’39”. The 1941 Yearbook of the Diocese of Oltenia was equally effusive in its praise of his intellectual qualities: “He possessed the gift of eloquent speech. He would captivate his audience with just a few sentences”40.

In this context, we consider it necessary to begin by mentioning the sermon delivered on 30 March 1902, in the Episcopal Cathedral, on the Fifth Sunday of Lent, in which he urged his flock to be good and righteous, “for then the Church’s exhortations and entreaties to reform would serve to make them better, since no one is perfectly good except God alone, as the Saviour Himself said. On the contrary, we humans are prone to error; this is what the Evangelist John himself teaches us to confess when he says: ‘If you say that you have no sin, you are liars, and the truth is not in you’41

Particularly impressive is also the sermon delivered on 3 June 1902, again at the diocesan residence, on the feast of the Holy Trinity, in which he urged the spiritual flock to care for those in misery and suffering, to preach peace and to be strengthened in the faith, calling upon the Holy Spirit for help, Who pours into our hearts: “love, joy, peace, kindness, goodness, patience, faith, and self-control”, and drives away ‘the works of darkness, which are: envy, greed, pride, avarice, sloth, drunkenness and sexual immorality’42.

It should be noted that throughout his ministry he showed constant concern for children, taking part in particular in the celebrations marking the start or end of the school year, where he never missed an opportunity to offer them a word of congratulations and encouragement. For example, on 29 June 1902, having been invited to the Adriani Theatre in Râmnicu Vâlcea to present prizes to pupils from the Alexandru Lahovary Grammar School and from the primary schools, “he expressed in moving words the close bond that must exist between parents and teachers—that is, between education at home and at school—each complementing, supporting and perfecting the other, with the aim of providing society with good citizens’43”. He also made a fine impression on 25 June 1905, when he presented graduation wreaths to the children of the town’s primary schools, alongside the civil and military authorities, addressing “words of encouragement to the teachers”44.

Nor should we overlook the sermon he delivered on 22 August 1902, at the memorial service held at the parish church in the commune of Orlești for the deceased members of the Capeleanu family from Bucharest. On this occasion, he sought to comfort the family members and strengthen them in their faith and love for God, and he denounced the vices afflicting the rural faithful, highlighting the consequences “of drunkenness and idleness, various lawsuits, divorces, cohabitation, etc., and the good that a sober, temperate, hard-working and honest person can derive from submission to the Gospel and obedience to the authorities”45.

Another account shows that on 29 August 1902, on the occasion of the blessing of the water and the unveiling of the bust of D. Simulescu in Drăgășani, he delivered an impressive speech on the benefits and significance of the water brought to the town at the expense of Laura Simulescu, the wife of the former politician, and then on his work, and after the ceremony had ended, he said a prayer at his tomb, located in the churchyard in the Momotești neighbourhood 46. It is worth noting that, on 14 October of the same year, he attended the patronal feast of the Church of Saint Parascheva in Râmnicu Vâlcea, where he spoke to those present about the church built by Pătrașcu Vodă and completed by his son, Prince Mihai Viteazul, and about the life of Saint Parascheva, whose relics are kept in Iași, and finally, he urged them to take her as a role model, alongside the church founders, who, in addition to their examples of heroism, have also left us with deeds of piety 47.

Also significant is the speech delivered before the soldiers and the civil and public authorities on 28 November 1902, on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of the capture of Plevna, in which he explained to those present at the Episcopal Cathedral the significance of the moment, which commemorated one of the most renowned military feats in the history of our people, ‘when the valour and military virtue of the Romanian army were solemnly recognised’. Finally, he urged the soldiers to acquire military knowledge under the guidance and supervision of their commanders and “to steel their arms, so that in times of hardship they may know how to defend their homeland and the law with the same unrivalled courage as the heroes of Plevna”, and after the parade, he signed, together with the authorities, a telegram expressing his devotion to the entire royal family 48.

Far more moving is the sermon delivered on the feast day of the Episcopal Cathedral on 6 December 1902, the gist of which is as follows: ‘In the Diocese of Râmnic–Noul Severin, Christians are competing to contribute their share towards the building of churches, and on the occasion of a church consecration in Gorj County – on 14 November this year —, it was reported to me that 25 churches are soon to be consecrated, without any contribution from the state towards their construction, but solely from the offerings of devout Christians, which brings them great honour”. And moving on to a new train of thought, he said that it is not enough to build churches, “but we must also seek to care for the church of our own bodies, as Saint Paul the Apostle says: ‘Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit?’ Did not the Son of God also bear this very body, and through it save us? If, then, He was deemed worthy of such honour, it is fitting that we too should keep it in the utmost purity, guarding it against deeds that would dishonour and corrupt it. We can therefore keep it well by attending church and heeding the divine teachings, which all Christians must heed. Although many come to church, they do not do so as they ought, for many love parties more and say that in church they hear the same thing over and over again. Indeed, let us admit that this is so, but – says the hierarch – are not the same things repeated at parties and card games, where they waste so much time? Are not health and money squandered in an atmosphere choked with smoke and tobacco, where slander and calumny are hurled at others? So may this pious occasion, as we remember those who restored this church, also be an opportunity for us to renew ourselves spiritually, putting off the old, corrupt man with his deceitful desires and putting on the new man’49

Furthermore, it is fitting to bear in mind a few teachings delivered on Good Friday in 1903, when he spoke to the faithful about the life and personality of the Lord Christ: “Whichever aspect of the Saviour’s life we consider, we find a treasure trove of teachings for our own lives. Although there have been righteous people, doers of good, and teachers in the world, He surpasses them all, as the sun surpasses the stars, as the mountains surpass the hills, as giants surpass dwarves. He lived in the flesh, yet He was above the flesh. He willingly fulfilled all that pertains to the flesh, except for sin. As a son, He was obedient to His parents and, whilst on the cross, He cared for His Mother. He lived a life of virginity, yet He blessed marriage, loved and called little children to Himself, and gained hundreds of millions of spiritual sons. No one ever saw Him laughing, yet they often saw Him weeping—sometimes for a departed friend, at other times for the imminent downfall of His homeland, and on the cross, for the vastness of human wickedness. He helped others in their time of need, yet He lived in utter poverty. He had nowhere to lay His head. He did not meddle in worldly affairs, yet He submitted to public duties. He was ready to give everything He had to the needy […]. Although the fullness of the Godhead dwelt in Him, He did not exalt Himself; He was not proud in vain; He set an example of gentleness and humility, of forgiveness and obedience even unto death—a death on the cross. He was among His own as one who serves. He came into the world to serve and to lay down His life for many…’50’.

Also worthy of note is the sermon delivered on 6 December 1903 in the Episcopal Cathedral, following the Te Deum service for the royal family, in which he highlighted “the most moving moments of the celebration: the memory of a hierarch renowned for the fervour of his faith, the kindness of his heart and his countless acts of charity, as well as the fact that one of the scions of the royal family bears the name of Nicolae as a strong guarantee for the future that the Orthodox Church will have him as a staunch supporter’51.

On 25 December, he spoke to those present in the Cathedral about the pleasures and joys that Christmas offers to all walks of life, rich and poor, children and the elderly alike; on the moral decline of humanity before Christ; on the spiritual gifts bestowed through His birth; and on the offering that all believers must bring in thanksgiving, like the Magi, so that they might rejoice together with the shepherds that their Saviour, Christ the Lord, had been born. After the Te Deum service on 1 January, “he delivered a sermon, beginning with the joy we all feel on New Year’s Day, for we can count yet another year of life”. In a concise manner, he affirmed “that true life is only that which is closely united with God—that is, righteousness, truth, wisdom and holiness—without which life is dead, whereas those who sacrifice their lives for truth, goodness, law and country, though they die, are alive, for their names are written in the book of life”, and finally, he explained how we should make good use of our time: “by dividing it between prayer and work”52.

It is worth noting that in the summer of 1904, on 13 June, Bishop Athanasius ordered a procession to be held in the fields for the faithful of Vâlcea, carrying the holy icons, due to the drought; this was to be preceded by a night service in all the churches of Râmnicu Vâlcea.

Following several petitions, he gave his blessing for the relics of Saint Gregory the Decapolite to be brought from Bistrița Monastery so that they might be honoured in all the villages along the route to the Bishopric. Upon arriving in the town, the bishop addressed the faithful in Zăvoi Park, speaking of God’s mercy, Who had sent rain upon the fields and the trees in the gardens, urging them to persevere in faith and good deeds 53.

In particular, we must note the sermon delivered on 2 July 1904 at the Episcopal Cathedral, on the occasion of the 400th anniversary of the passing of Prince Stephen the Great. With great admiration, he highlighted the figure of the valiant ruler, whom the people rightly called a saint, ‘for he defended, at the risk of his own life, the holiest treasures of this world: the homeland and the faith, as evidenced by the numerous wars that Stephen the Great waged during his reign against the enemies of our land and our people, as well as of Christendom […]. After every victory he would rush to the church and, kneeling before the altar, cry out with the utmost humility: ‘Thou hast triumphed, O Lord! May Thy Name be praised!’ Following the brilliant defeat of the Turks at Podul Înalt, near Vaslui, he and all his soldiers undertook a strict four-day fast. ‘Stephen the Great,’ says the Chronicler, ‘was seen after that war to have emerged victorious; they attributed the victory to God alone. For four days they ate nothing but bread and water’ […]. Thus, Stephen the Great lives on; Stephen the Great is a saint for his great deeds, for his humility, justice and faith. His name is renowned not only within the country, but also far beyond its borders. Let us, my dear friends, cherish in our minds and hearts the shining example left to us by this Great Prince, and let us each strive to follow it in our own sphere of activity54].

We should also mention here that during his tenure as pastor, an adult school was opened in Râmnicu Vâlcea. On this occasion, on 17 October 1904, he sent a telegram to the Management, in which he blessed the school’s opening, wishing the founders success in enlightening the youth and guiding them towards a virtuous life and honest work, and, through these, “the true happiness of the nation”55. As other sources indicate, on 23 May 1905, he attended the funeral of Boyar Barbu Otetelișanu at St Elijah’s Church in Craiova. In the presence of a large congregation, he delivered a comforting address, in which he emphasised “how justified is the deep grief felt by the family, friends and acquaintances at the loss of their beloved”, he then presented the teaching on the Resurrection “as encouragement and support in the difficult trial that has befallen them”. Finally, he spoke warmly of the bright aspects of the late boyar’s life—56 as a loving husband, a good steward and a devout Christian.

A few months later, on 6 August, he officiated at the Episcopal Cathedral at the consecration service for the flag of the Civil Servants’ Society, Râmnicu Vâlcea branch, addressing the members with a few words, in which he explained its significance and wished them “every success” in all their endeavours 57.

Another speech worth mentioning was delivered on 15 August, at the feast day of the Madona Dudu Church in Craiova, where he spoke to the congregation about Maria Clucereasa and her husband, Constantin, the first founders, and about the boyar Gheorghe Hagi, who sacrificed their wealth for this holy place. In simple yet meaningful words, he praised the church wardens, who had striven with great zeal to ensure that the wishes of the original founders were more than fulfilled, and urged the faithful to always keep in their hearts the praiseworthy deeds of these generous Christians, whom they shouldremember them in their prayers, with the Mother of God as their intercessor.

Also worthy of mention is the address delivered on the same day at the church of the former monastery in the village of Segarcea, situated 27 km from Craiova. Following a brief welcoming address by the priest, the bishop replied “with moving and wise words, first expressing his gratitude at seeing this beautiful house of God so well maintained”, then urged him “to work wholeheartedly, without delay and with the great reward from God in mind, for the salvation of such a large flock entrusted to him. Let him never forget in his prayers all those who have laboured and continue to labour for the adornment of this house, but to ask God ceaselessly to keep them under His holy protection and to seek always to be at peace and in harmony with everyone”. He advised the parishioners “to be diligent, to heed the counsel of their elders, to attend the holy church on Sundays and feast days, heeding the words of the Holy Gospel and the teachings of their priest”58.

Also in 1905, on 14 September, in the presence of the authorities and a select audience, he performed the service of the blessing of the water in Zăvoi Garden in Râmnicu Vâlcea, marking the laying of the foundation stone for the bathhouse built by the town council. From there, he visited the Agricultural and Handicrafts Exhibition organised by the rural primary school teaching staff of Vâlcea, offering words of encouragement to those who had collaborated on such a magnificent undertaking for the betterment of the rural population 59.

It should be noted, however, that Bishop Atanasie did not enjoy a particularly peaceful ministry, as various invectives against him were published in newspapers and pamphlets, causing discontent amongst his flock. Following the publication of some defamatory pamphlets in 1905, he was forced to respond to the insults on Christmas Day itself, stating from the Bishop’s Palace: ‘For eight years, ever since I have been shepherding the Diocese of Râmnic, I have sought to fulfil, to the best of my ability, the duty of spiritual ministry which God and the will of the nation have entrusted to me. My work in this regard is plain for all to see, and so let everyone consider what credence I can give to the delusions of certain troubled souls, which are vented in that anonymous publication60’.

As numerous leaflets from Bucharest containing vile insults directed at him had been circulated by post in Râmnicu Vâlcea, causing outrage amongst the faithful, the Primate responded once more to the New Year’s accusations, praying for those who had seen fit to tarnish his name: ‘For eight years now, ever since, by God’s mercy, I was called to this ancient episcopal see, I have spoken openly, both in the Senate and in the Holy Synod, on matters concerning the Church and its institutions. This attitude has caused discontent, but God is my witness that I have thought of nothing other than fulfilling my duty as I understood it to be required by the obligations of my ministry as a spiritual shepherd. To that person or those who saw fit, from the cover of anonymity, to swoop down like birds of prey in the dead of night and tomercilessly tear to shreds my honour and good name—which my pastoral work, known to all, and the love of my beloved spiritual sons in this God-protected Diocese have built upon a firm foundation—I shall not address them with harsh words of rebuke, but keeping in mind the words of Saint Peter the Apostle from his first epistle, which say: ‘Finally, all of you, be of one mind, compassionate, loving one another, merciful, gentle and humble. Not repaying evil for evil or insult for insult, but, on the contrary, blessing’ (1 Peter 3:8), I bless them and pray to God before you, as I do in the secret of my heart, He may have mercy on them with His abundant gifts, so that, from the darkness of their errors, He may lead them back onto the enlightened path of His word of truth61”.

In these circumstances, on 18 December 1905, Professor Ștefan Saghin of the Faculty of Theology in Chernivtsi, condemning that “unacceptable pamphlet”, sent the bishop a letter, in which he expressed his admiration for the bishop’s entire body of work, hoping that men of worth would be found who would know how to condemn and dispel this frivolous trend: ‘I have had the honour of knowing you as an intelligent and zealous man, who pursues his goal with the finest means and with great seriousness. Through your valuable publications to date, you have established a fine and respected reputation for yourself in our theological literature. As a diocesan bishop, as far as I can understand and observe, you have devoted – and continue to devote – your utmost efforts to the prosperity of the Church entrusted to your pastoral care. In every endeavour for the benefit of the Church and the Romanian people, Your Grace lends a hand and makes a contribution. Being fully convinced of Your Grace’s personal qualities and fruitful work, I was greatly surprised when, just yesterday, I received from Bucharest a pamphlet entitled: ‘A Tribute to a High-Ranking Prelate by a Most Pious and Good Christian’. I read it carefully. I could easily see that Your Grace, a person of such high esteem, is the target of the most unspeakable and vile invective […]. In our circles, this pamphlet has aroused just indignation, all the more so as Your Grace was one of the finest theologians in the Kingdom at our faculty62”.

Another statement of support against those who, under the guise of anonymity, distributed defamatory pamphlets is the address presented on 1 January 1906 by the delegation from Râmnicu Vâlcea, comprising Members of Parliament, senior civil servants, magistrates, etc., from which we quote the following lines: ‘Our love for you is assured. It is certain, however, that through your conduct and deeds you have earned the love and esteem of those you serve; you may disregard those who seek to mock and slander you, without realising that by doing so they are in fact winning over the hearts of your devoted spiritual sons even more”63

From contemporary sources we learn that on 6 January 1908, after the Epiphany service, the Bishop took part, alongside the entire clergy of the Diocese and from Râmnicu Vâlcea, in the religious procession from the branch church of Saint Paraskevi, the All Saints parish, in the presence of a large number of the faithful, civil and military authorities, and a detachment of soldiers from the 2nd Vâlcea Regiment, bearing the ‘64’ flag. On 30 August of the same year, to mark the commemoration of the capture of Grivița, he conducted a memorial service for the soldiers who had fallen in the War of Independence, surrounded by the cathedral clergy and civil and military authorities. After the parade, those present signed a telegram at the Bishop’s Palace addressed to the King, in which the priests and prominent figures of Vâlcea renewed their deep gratitude and allegiance to th65.

Finally, it is worth noting that on 26 October 1908 he was invited to consecrate the flag of the Frăția society in Craiova, founded that year, as he “follows movements of this nature with keen interest and contributes significantly, through material aid, to the advancement of such societies”. At the end of the Divine Liturgy, celebrated at the Madona Dudu Church, he invoked divine grace, then shared a few thoughts, saying, amongst other things: ‘Life’s troubles are many, and that is why God has allowed them to test our love. Some are stronger and wealthier, others weaker and in need. Why these differences? So that the strong may help the weak, the learned the uneducated, and the rich may open their hearts and arms to the poor’66”.

Of real interest, too, is the correspondence he maintained on an ongoing basis with the county archpriests and parish priests, whom he guided to ensure good order in the church and to watch over the religious and moral lives of their parishioners. This explains certain circulars in which he combated idleness, drunkenness, cohabitation, false testimony and other sins of the time, which did not contribute to the spiritual, cultural and economic advancement of the faithful. In this context, we note a circular order, sent on 12 March 1900, in which he urged the archpriests to speak to the priests about cohabitation and the fight against this evil, which contributes to population decline: ‘You shall instruct the priests to combat this vice and, once they have reported those who disobey, you shall oblige them not to visit the homes of those living in concubinage, neither for baptisms, nor with an icon on the eve of feasts; you shall not accept them as godparents at baptisms or at weddings; you shall not bless their offerings; and, in the event of illness, the Holy Unction, and to advise them on every occasion to join the ranks of true Christians by entering into lawful marriage, for no one knows the end that awaits them, and woe betide him whom you find steeped in any vice’67

Following the debates in the Holy Synod regarding the use of church lands (Article 7 of the Church Fund Act and Articles 84 and 95 of the relevant regulations), the Diocese of Râmnic issued Explanatory Order No. 1,406/1902, whereby parish staff were to be granted 17 pogoans of land, provided the church had received it under the Rural Law of 1864, with the remainder to be allocated for the benefit of the Church Fund 68. Noting the misuse of candles made from impure wax in the churches of the diocese, on 8 November 1902, Bishop Atanasie issued the following instructions to the priests: to use only candles made of pure beeswax; to no longer accept those brought by the faithful unless they bear the manufacturer’s mark; to remove from use those that are not made of pure wax, even if they are stamped, and to hand them over to the authorities for the prosecution of counterfeiters, and to observe these provisions strictly so as not to “incur serious liability”69

Another circular worth mentioning is that of 7 December 1902, in which priests are asked to ensure the cleanliness and good condition of places of worship, so as to instil in the souls of the faithful who gather at church at Christmas both reverence for all that is holy and a love of cleanliness and good order in daily life. Thus, he instructs the archpriests that ‘priests and all ministers of the Church are bound not only to be themselves adorned and worthy of honour, but also to ensure that the church in which they minister is adorned, and to take due care of all the vestments and sacred vessels with which they celebrate the Divine Liturgy. In particular, priests have the absolute duty to maintain the Holy Altar with great care and cleanliness, frequently cleaning and adorning it; to cover the Holy Table, which is the seat of God, with clean cloths and coverings. Nothing else is to be placed upon the Holy Table, save the box containing the Holy Mysteries for the year, which ought to be made of a more precious metal, symbolising Christ Himself – the King upon His throne; then the Holy Antimension, the Holy Gospel, the Liturgy book and the candlestick with lights. These alone ought to be placed upon the Holy Table; the consecrated priestly vestments ought not to rest upon the Holy Table, nor the box of incense, nor anything else. Priests are also bound not to allow laypeople to enter the Holy Altar, except for the cantors and other church ministers who have received a specific blessing; and even they should enter only for the purposes of the holy services and with the utmost reverence. Furthermore, they must not allow the meat brought by Christians at Easter to be taken into the Holy Altar, as this is strictly forbidden by Canon 99 of the Sixth Ecumenical Council, nor must they allow the loaves brought by the faithful on holy feasts to be taken into the Holy Altar the loaves brought by the faithful on holy feasts, but let them remain outside, in a separate place. Only the prosphora required for the Divine Liturgy shall be received into the Holy Altar, for it is not permitted to eat what is brought into the Altar with stews or other common dishes in people’s homes, according to Canon 5 of Nicholas, Patriarch of Constantinople. With such reverence and purity must priests guard the Holy Altar, for it signifies the innermost part of the iconostasis, which is called, according to Scripture, the Holy of Holies and the radiance of the King of Glory, God, which surpasses even the heavens. Priests and other church ministers are also duty-bound to keep the entire church adorned and clean, to tend to it frequently and to sweep both the floor and the candlesticks, torches, candelabra, analoga, iconostases, the pews and the walls, since it is the Church of the living God, as the Great Apostle Paul says, and a heavenly tabernacle, in which God dwells and walks, according to the words of St Germanus, not to mention the benefit of these measures for the health of all who come to the Church. Priests are also obliged not to celebrate the Divine Liturgy on antimensions that are torn or patched, with chalices and patens that are too old or pitted, or with torn and tattered coverings, or with sponges that are completely ruined, or with unclean and torn vestments. Church ministers who adorn and care for the house of God in this way shall be deemed worthy of the blessing which says: ‘May God sanctify those who love the adornment of His House’; but if, on the contrary (may it never be so!), they are lazy and do not frequently clean the whole church, nor take care to adorn all the holy vessels and vestments, and the covers of the Holy Chalice and Paton, let them remember the curse of the prophet Jeremiah upon those who perform the holy services of God with sloth. Therefore, Your Reverence, taking all this into account during your inspections, you shall report to me the diligent priests who thus adorn the house of God and the holy things within it, as well as those who are lazy and do notfail to safeguard the adornment and proper order of the Church; the former are to be promoted and honoured with ecclesiastical ranks, whilst the latter are to be reprimanded and disciplined with appropriate admonitions, so that they may be set aright70

On the initiative of the Minister of Religious Affairs, he issued Order No. 3,037/1902, in which he urged the priests of the diocese to support doctors and other health workers in combating epidemics, advising parishioners to strictly observe the disinfection measures recommended in such cases and to refrain from kissing the deceased or attending wakes or memorial services. By Orders Nos. 2,955 and 3,006, he ordered that future priests “not to serve in the parishes to which they are appointed as parish priests until they have been installed in accordance with the provisions of Articles 49 and 50 of the implementing regulations of the Law on the Secular Clergy. Furthermore, these orders prescribe the manner in which the installation of new parish priests is to take place, both with regard to the ceremony in the church and the handover of the parish endowment". With regard to candidates for the priesthood, the hierarch has decided that they should be examined by a commission established at the Diocese for this purpose, “so as to ascertain whether they are familiar with the church service from the pulpit and with the sacred priestly duties at the altar and amongst the congregation. Those found not to possess such knowledge shall be deferred to a later date, which under no circumstances may be less than one month.” 71

Seeing that the villagers did not understand the compulsory nature of primary education, and accusing the teachers of imposing fines for non-attendance at lessons, the bishop issued Order No. 95/1903, in which he instructed the priests to read the document ‘Notice to the Village Communities’, printed by the Ministry of Education in 1902, and to speak to their parishioners about the benefits of this law: ‘Priests should explain to the villagers that they must not hate the teacher for fining them, as he is merely an enforcer of the law, and they must not hate the teacher, who is one of their well-wishers, for he enlightens their children’s minds and enriches them with beautiful and useful knowledge. The priests must explain with great diligence that the cultivation of the mind is such a great duty for man that one might say that in it lies true spiritual salvation; for just as neglect of the body brings death, so too does neglect of the necessities for the cultivation of the mind bring about a death worse than that of the body, for man remains unlettered, without any guide in life, exposed to all manner of lawlessness and other spiritual depravities’72

In another circular issued on 31 January 1903, it was stipulated that pastors, in addition to administering the sacraments of God to the faithful, should read ecclesiastical literature or works of varied content, in order to provide appropriate answers to those who have doubts. In order to implement the 1893 Law on the Lay Clergy, which stipulated, amongst other things, that every parish should have its own library, and that priests should send the dean, every three years, a list of the books held therein, he asks them to ascertain where such libraries have been established and to urge the ministers of the Church to implement this provision as soon as possible, and that church councils funded by bequests should set aside a sum in their budgets to be used for the purchase of books for the library 73.

Wishing to guide his spiritual flock towards the church, in 1903 he issued Orders Nos. 215 and 216, by which he required that an attendance register be established at all places of worship, in which those attending each divine service were to be recorded, particularly community leaders and local authorities. A further order, No. 315, issued in the same year, clarified the religious services at the three cemeteries: Sineasca, Ungureni and Dorobanția in Craiova, so that all priests in the vicinity might attend, and the necessary provisions were laid down for the collection and distribution of revenues. Following the intervention of the Ministry of Religious Affairs, a new measure was introduced by Order No. 355, which stipulated that, on the first day of the month, priests were to perform the blessing of the water half an hour before the start of the afternoon lessons, so that teachers and pupils 74 could also take part.

To prevent false testimony before the judges, he issued Circular Order No. 255/903, instructing priests to advise their parishioners not to give evidence for anyone, anywhere, lest trouble should befall them because of undue gains. If they are unable to turn back from the path of spiritual ruin, ‘then those who have taken a false oath and those who have corrupted it are to be barred from attending religious services in their homes, until they repent, that is, until they prove by their deeds that they are true Christians, followers of the law of our Lord Jesus Christ’75

We must not overlook Circular Order No. 534/903, which prohibits archpriests from accepting from parishes various books, subscription lists, contributions, lottery tickets, etc., and from convening priests for meetings on the basis of invitations from persons outside the church administration 76. Equally interesting is Provision No. 871, issued to the archpriest of Vâlcea, by which several measures were taken: “a) At Christmas, the Divine Liturgy shall be celebrated according to the timetable set out in the programme, as celebrating it during the night is unusual; b) On Christmas Eve, priests shall wear only the epitrachelion; c) The Divine Liturgy of the Resurrection shall begin precisely at midnight on Saturday; d) The carrying of the Holy Epitaph to the graves and the reading of the Ektenia for the dead are to be completely discontinued at the churches in the town and at the cemetery.” By Order No. 895, it was decided that no further consecrations of churches would be approved unless, alongside the archpriest’s intermediary report, formal documents certifying that the church has no outstanding debts or that a legal agreement has been reached for their settlement 77. Also worth noting is Order No. 1,514, by which it was decreed that cantor posts should be declared vacant when the incumbents are called up for military service, and Order No. 1,561, which required that no further transfers to parishes be approved until it had been formally established that they had no debts to their former parishioners 78.

In accordance with the decision of the Holy Synod, the Diocese of Râmnic took the measure of no longer admitting to ordination “those candidates who have not reached the age of 21”. Furthermore, by an order of 1903, the superiors of monasteries were instructed no longer to accept or recommend those wishing to take monastic vows “who lack literacy and do not possess any trade suitable for ecclesiastical office”. 79

As reported in the magazine Cuvântul Adevărului of 1 January 1904, the Diocesan Centre issued new orders, drawing attention “to a bad custom practised in some places during the ‘walking with the star’ procession, namely the inclusion of scandalous and immoral songs and theatrical performances, urging them to ensure that priests provide the children in good time with traditional carols to learn, and at the same time to ensure they do not learn other songs. Furthermore, the priests themselves are to advise the faithful not to accept those children who do not sing those moral and edifying songs, but others instead”. 80

For candidates for the priesthood, the bishop decreed on 15 February 1904 that they should be examined on their knowledge of the liturgy, as set out in the syllabus published in 1902, as well as on their preaching style. Consequently, they were given the text of the Bible for one hour, under the supervision of a member of the committee, and, after meditating on it and jotting down the main ideas on a sheet of paper, they delivered the sermon from memory before the committee. Those who achieved an average mark of over 7.50 were ordained during each statutory holiday, in order of their ranking, whilst the others were deferred to subsequent examinations, once all those who had initially passed had been ordained. 81

Following the intervention of the President of the Romanian Academy, by letter no. II/7122, it was ordered on 15 July 1904 that all church offices – deaneries, parishes, etc. – were to use, in official correspondence, the spelling rules adopted by the highest cultural authority at its general session that year. By Order No. 1,477, the Diocese requested that archpriests ensure that recommendations for vacant posts be accompanied by the following information about candidates: full name; the post to which they are applying; the year of their birth; the year of their ordination and the specific church (if a priest); their educational background; the church from which they are being transferred (in the case of a transfer); any disciplinary action taken against them and the year in which it occurred. If the reports did not contain this information, they were rejected. 82

It should be noted that in many situations priests were also required to become involved in social and cultural matters. Thus, on 15 August 1904, the bishop urged the clergy to take part in the committees set up by the Minister of Finance to distribute maize to the peasants. 83 In a new circular, issued in the same year, on 15 December, addressed to the archpriests, he recommended the work Forty Popular Sermons, written by Protosinghel Iuliu Scriban, the superior of the Romanian chapel in Baden-Baden, with an earnest exhortation to circulate it as widely as possible amongst the priests. 84

By Circular Order No. 684/907, the Holy Diocese requested the county archpriests, following the intercession of the Minister of Religious Affairs, to instruct all priests, in connection with the unrest in the villages, to be apostles of peace and to urge their parishioners to steer clear of instigators, advising them not to disturb the peace through futile agitation, which undermines public safety 85.

It is also worth recalling Order No. 1,616/1907, by which he called upon the archpriests to make it clear to all priests that they were forbidden to demand fees higher than those set out in Article 355 of the implementing regulations of the Law on the Secular Clergy, as amended by Royal Decree No. 2,400 86.

No less significant is Order No. 4,135 of 31 December 1907, by which he requested the archpriests to provide all necessary assistance to the colporteurs of the National Library Cooperative Society in Bucharest, who travelled the country to bring holy images or moralising books to the parishes, intended to replace icons of foreign origin and books with dangerous content, which were being distributed by those interested solely in profit. Another order, No. 4,136, issued on the same day, stipulated that priests should procure for parish libraries the Orthodox Confession and the New Testament, published by the Church Books Printing House, so that they might be readily available to every Christian. To ensure compliance with this provision, during inspections, the archpriests would record in their reports how many books had been purchased and to how many Christians they had been distributed or lent for reading, so that, once negligent priests were identified, disciplinary measures could be taken 87.

In addition to these circulars, it is worth mentioning a letter sent to the archpriests of the counties of Gorj, Mehedinți, Dolj and Vâlcea on 1 September 1904, in which he expressed his gratitude for the hospitality with which he had been received during the August inspection, but also drew their attention to the shortcomings observed in some churches: ‘take the necessary measures to ensure that all holy places are maintained in good condition and kept clean both inside and out, that they are provided with the necessary furnishings, sacred vessels, vestments and books, and that the counterfeit candles be removed from the churches, and, to meet the costs required for these improvements, at least in part, ensure that the full sum provided for in the Clergy Act for the maintenance of churches is included in the municipal budget and approved by the honourable county administration, then ensure that the parish registers of baptisms, marriages and deaths are kept in order, so that the ratio of births to deaths may be known at all times, as well as the registers of church attendance and those relating to the chancery and accounts. […] I urge you, however, on every occasion to continue to impart to the devout priests and other church ministers the advice you have heard from me during this inspection, to conduct services in the church and throughout the parish with faith and the fear of God, and at the appropriate time, to live in peace and love with one another, to set an example to the faithful through word and deed, to work as far as possible and in good understanding with the teachers at the cultural circles to improve the moral and material lives of the villagers, to teach the parishioners with all zeal to observe the feast days as is fitting, namely those established by the Holy Synod, whilst pagan and superstitious festivals are not to be observed, for these are merely a waste of time; to urge them towards honest work and thrift, so that in times of scarcity, such as this year, they should not wait for maize from the state, but should have the means to buy it for themselves, not to live in concubinage, not to get involved in legal disputes, and to avoid drunkenness, especially now, in autumn, when they tend to make plum brandy instead of drying their plums for food and for sale in ovens, such as the one built by Mr Barbu Otetelișanu of Vâlcea, to keep their homes clean, to wear clean clothes and to eat, especially during fasting periods, beans, peas, lentils and potatoes, which are very nourishing; and therefore to advise them to sow these in their own gardens, alongside the necessary vegetables, and these vegetables as well, so that they are not forced to buy them; the diseases that plague the villagers stem largely from uncleanliness and poor diet […]; to advise them most earnestly to bring up their children in the fear of the Lord, to send them to school, and to take them to church regularly, on Sundays and feast days, for in church they learn to fear God, He who sees and knows all, and to shun evil, to keep the Gospel commandments and civil laws, to honour their elders, such as parents, priests and teachers, to submit to local and county authorities […]; to be gentle, peaceful, merciful and welcoming to strangers; to comfort those who suffer; to refrain from false oaths, false testimony, and from taking what belongs to others—their property, honour or life; for husbands to live with their wives in harmony and mutual understanding, for only thus can they establish a household […]”88

• 1

  † Atanasie Mironescu, The Holy Bishopric of the Diocese of Râmnic – Noul Severin: Past and Present, Gutenberg Press, Joseph Göbl, Bucharest, 1906, p. 445; Rev. Meletie Răuțu, Ecclesiastical Monograph of Vâlcea County, Vâlcea County and R.-Vâlcea Commune Printing House, R.-Vâlcea, 1908, pp. XIII–XIV; Eusebiu Popovici, Universal Ecclesiastical History and Ecclesiastical Statistics, translated by Atanasie Mironescu, Book I, 2nd ed., Church Books Printing House, Cernica Monastery, 1925, pp. 407–408. He was born in 1858 and attended primary school in Pungești and Vaslui. Vasile Romanescu, Metropolitan Athanasie Mironescu, Cartea Românească Publishers, Bucharest, 1942, pp. 10–11.

• 2

  Vasile Romanescu, Metropolitan Athanasie Mironescu..., pp. 31–42.

• 3

  Teodor N. Manolache, “† Athanasie Mironescu”, in Raze de lumină, vol. III, no. 4, 1931, p. 273.

• 4

  Vasile Romanescu, op. cit., p. IV.

• 5

  Meletie Răuțu, Ecclesiastical Monograph…, pp. XIV–XV.

• 6

  Teodor N. Manolache, † Athanasie Mironescu…, p. 273; Vasile Romanescu, Metropolitan Athanasie Mironescu..., pp. 11–14; ‘Biographical profile and selected bibliography of the lecturers of the Faculty of Theology and the Theological Institute throughout its hundred-year history’, in Studii Teologice, vol. XXXIV (1982), nos. 1–2, p. 34 (hereafter cited as ST).

• 7a7b

  Meletie Răuțu, Ecclesiastical Monograph..., p. XV.

• 8

  Vasile Romanescu, Metropolitan Athanasie Mironescu..., p. IV.

• 9

  Vasile Romanescu, ‘Metropolitan Athanasie Mironescu...’, pp. 12–13; Rev. Dr Niculae Șerbănescu, ‘The Metropolitans of Ungrovlahia’, in The Romanian Orthodox Church, vol. LXXVII (1959), nos. 7–10, p. 821 (hereafter cited as BOR); Rev. Prof. Dr Ilie Rusu, ‘Primate Metropolitans (II) – from autocephaly to the patriarchate’, in: Independența Română, 6 June 2019, https://www.independentaromana.ro/mitropoliti-primati-ii-de-la-autocefalie-la-patriarhat/, accessed on 21 October 2024.

• 10

  Mihail Popescu, ‘The editorial staff and contributors to the journal from its inception to the present day’, in BOR, vol. XXIV (1902), no. 1, p. 141.

• 11

  “Biographical sketch and selected bibliography…”, p. 35; Rev. Prof. Dr Mircea Păcurariu, Dictionary of Romanian Theologians, Andreiana Publishers, Sibiu, 2014, p. 402.

• 12

  Meletie Răuțu, Ecclesiastical Monograph..., p. XV; Vasile Romanescu, Metropolitan Athanasie Mironescu..., p. 12.

• 13

  Mihail Popescu, ‘The editorial staff...’, p. 141.

• 14

  P. G., ‘The Election, Consecration and Installation of the New Metropolitans’, in BOR, vol. XXXII (1909), no. 12, p. 1343.

• 15

  † Atanasie Mironescu, The Holy Diocese..., p. 172.

• 16

  † P.S. Athanasie, Bishop of Râmnic, ‘Holy Relics from the Cathedral of St. the Bishops in Râmnic’, in BOR, vol. XXVI (1902), no. 1, pp. 30–33.

• 17

  “The debates of the Holy Synod during its extraordinary and spring sessions. The year 1895. Minutes of the Holy Synod. The sitting of 1 February 1895”, in BOR, vol. XIX (1895), nos. 3–4, pp. 50–93; Eusebiu Popovici, Universal Church History..., p. 408; N. I. Șerbănescu, The Metropolitans of Ungrovlahia..., p. 821; Rev. Niculae Șerbănescu, “The Bishops of Râmnic”, in Mitropolia Olteniei, vol. XIV (1964), nos. 3–4, p. 204 (hereafter cited as MO).

• 18

  “Address delivered on 5 February 1895 by the current Metropolitan Primate at the episcopal consecration of His Eminence”, in Cuvântul Adevărului, vol. VII (1909), nos. 21–22, pp. 236–237 (hereafter cited as CA).

• 19

  Eusebiu Popovici, A Universal History of the Church..., p. 408; N. I. Șerbănescu, The Metropolitans of Ungrovlahia..., p. 821.

• 20a20b

  Meletie Răuțu, Ecclesiastical Monograph..., p. XVII.

• 21

  Vasile Romanescu, Metropolitan Athanasie Mironescu..., p. 16.

• 22

  Fr. I. Popescu Mălăești, ‘The Faculty of Theology in Bucharest (a brief historical outline)’, in ST, vol. III (1932), no. 2, p. 17.

• 23

  D., ‘Official Documents. The Election and Installation of the New Bishop of Râmnic and Noul Severin’, in BOR, vol. XXII (1898), no. 1, p. 3; Meletie Răuțu, Ecclesiastical Monograph..., p. XIV; Vasile Romanescu, Metropolitan Athanasie Mironescu..., pp. 16, 42–43; Hieromonk Marcu Petcu et al, Pages from the History of Orthodox Monasticism in Romanian Theological Journals * Notable Figures, National Library of Romania Publishing House, Metropolitan Iacov Putneanul Publishing House, Bucharest-Putna, 2011, p. 108; ‘The Election of the Bishop of Râmnic’, in Epoca, Series II, Year IV (13 March 1898), No. 710, 3rd ed., p. 3 (hereafter cited as Ep); ‘News. Meeting of the majorities’, in Ep, Series II, Year IV (13 March 1898), No. 710, 3rd ed., p. 2 (Magistrate Titu Frumușanu ‘believes that, as a native of Oltenia, he has the right to propose a candidate for the Diocese of Oltenia. And the candidate who would meet all the qualifications required by Mr Vergati would be Bishop Athanasie Mironescu, a cultured, young man, etc.’).

• 24

  D., ‘Official Documents. The Election and Consecration of the New Bishop of Râmnic and Noul Severin...’, pp. 9–10; Vasile Romanescu, Metropolitan Athanasie Mironescu..., pp. 44–45.

• 25

  “The address delivered by His Grace Bishop Athanasie on his installation in the episcopal see of the Diocese of Râmnic–Noul Severin on 28 March 1898, which was Lazarus Saturday”, in CA, vol. VI (1908), no. 24, pp. 225–226.

• 26

  “Biographical sketch and selected bibliography...”, p. 34; Ilie Rusu, “Metropolitans as primates...”, accessed on 21 October 2024.

• 27

  Vasile Romanescu, Metropolitan Athanasie Mironescu..., pp. 17–18.

• 28

  Editorial, ‘Ten Years of Ministry by His Grace Bishop Athanasie of Râmnic’, in CA, vol. VI (1908), no. 24, p. 224 (“Whether summoned or not, wherever His Grace deemed it necessary to go, he did not hesitate for a moment to hasten there, in summer as well as in winter, in sweltering heat, as well as in the cold and storms, through rain and snow, on the plains as well as in the depths of the mountains, in villages as well as in towns, always bringing a kind word, a wise piece of advice, or a gentle, fatherly comfort to strengthen the weak and to encourage or reward the deserving”.).

• 29

  Meletie Răuțu, Ecclesiastical Monograph..., pp. XVI, XVIII.

• 30

  “The address delivered by His Grace Bishop Athanasie on his installation in the episcopal see…”, p. 225.

• 31

  Meletie Răuțu, Ecclesiastical Monograph..., p. XVIII.

• 32

  “A canonical visit to the parishes in the Lotru Valley, Vâlcea County”, in CA, vol. II (1903), no. 12, p. 89.

• 33

  “News. P.S. Bishop Athanasius, welcoming the royal family”, in CA, vol. III (1904), no. 3, pp. 28–29.

• 34

  “News. His Grace Bishop D. D. Atanasie’s inspection of the churches in Craiova”, in CA, vol. III (1904), no. 4, p. 40.

• 35

  Desir., ‘Two canonical visits to Vâlcea on 9, 10 and 11 July this year’, in CA, vol. III (1904), no. 10, p. 102.

• 36

  Desir., ‘Two canonical visits to Vâlcea’, in CA, vol. III (1904), no. 14, p. 146.

• 37

  “News. Canonical Visits”, in CA, vol. IV (1905), no. 10, p. 104.

• 38

  Editorial, ‘28 March’, in CA, vol. III (1904), no. 24, p. 223.

• 39

  Meletie Răuțu, Ecclesiastical Monograph..., p. XVI.

• 40

  The Holy Metropolis of Oltenia, Râmnic and Severin, Church Life in Oltenia. Yearbook of the Metropolis of Oltenia, Printing House of the Holy Metropolis of Oltenia, Râmnic and Severin, Craiova, 1941, p. 112.

• 41

  “Sermon for the Fifth Sunday of Great Lent, delivered in the Cathedral of the Holy Diocese of Râmnic by His Grace Bishop Athanasie”, in CA, vol. V (1907), no. 23, pp. 179–181.

• 42

  “Sermon delivered by His Grace the Bishop of the Diocese of Râmnic – Noul Severin, D.D. Athanasie on 3 June 1902 (the Feast of the Holy Trinity) in the Cathedral of the Holy See”, in CA, vol. VI (1907), no. 4, pp. 26–27.

• 43

  “News”, in CA, Vol. I (1902), No. 7, p. 56.

• 44

  “News. R. Vâlcea. Award ceremony”, in CA, vol. IV (1905), no. 7, pp. 71–72.

• 45

  “News”, in CA, Vol. I (1902), No. 12, p. 96.

• 46

  “News. Festival in the town of Drăgășani”, in CA, vol. I (1902), no. 13, pp. 103–104.

• 47

  “The Feast Day of the Church of ‘Saint Parascheva’ in R. Vâlcea – A Document”, in CA, vol. I (1902), no. 14, p. 114.

• 48

  “News”, in CA, Vol. I (1902), No. 17, p. 135.

• 49

  “News. The Feast Day of the Cathedral of the Holy Episcopate”, in CA, vol. I (1902), no. 17, p. 135.

• 50

  “Sermon on Good Friday by His Grace Athanasie, Bishop of Râmnic”, in CA, vol. I (1903), no. 24, pp. 189–190.

• 51

  “News. The Feast of the Patron Saint of the Diocese”, in CA, vol. II (1903), no. 17, p. 135.

• 52

  “News. From the Holy Diocese of Râmnic – Noul Severin”, in CA, vol. II (1904), no. 19, pp. 150–151.

• 53

  “News. Religious processions”, in CA, vol. III (1904), no. 7, pp. 70–71.

• 54

  P. G., ‘The Feast of Stephen the Great and Holy. The sermon by His Grace Athanasie, Bishop of Râmnic, delivered at the commemoration in Râmnicu Vâlcea”, in BOR, vol. XXVIII (1904), no. 4, pp. 453–459; ‘Address at the commemoration marking the 400th anniversary of the death of Stephen the Great by His Grace Athanasie, Bishop of Râmnic’, in CA, vol. III (1904), no. 7, pp. 65–67; “News. 2 July in R. Vâlcea”, in CA, vol. III (1904), no. 7, p. 71.

• 55

  “News”, in CA, vol. III (1904), no. 14, p. 152.

• 56

  “News. Funeral Service”, in CA, vol. IV (1905), no. 7, p. 72.

• 57

  “News. From the Diocese of Râmnic”, in CA, vol. IV (1905), no. 10, p. 104.

• 58

  “The feast day of the ‘Mother of God’ Church in Dud, Craiova, and the canonical visit to Segarcea”, in CA, vol. IV (1905), no. 10, pp. 101–103.

• 59

  “News. From the Diocese of Râmnic”, in CA, vol. III (1905), no. 12, pp. 127–128.

• 60

  “News. From the Diocese of Râmnic”, in CA, vol. IV (1906), no. 18, p. 184; ‘Official Documents. Minutes of the Holy Synod’s Meetings’, in BOR, vol. XXXV (1911), no. 5–6, p. 505. The pamphlets were entitled ‘Țacherlin’ and ‘A Tribute to a High-Ranking Prelate’.

• 61

  “News. From the Diocese of Râmnic”, in CA, vol. IV (1906), no. 19, pp. 199–200.

• 62

  Metropolitan Athanasie’s Defence, delivered before the Holy Synod of the Holy Autocephalous Orthodox Church, Gutenberg Press, Joseph Göbl, Bucharest, 1911, pp. 156–157.

• 63

  The Defence of Metropolitan Athanasie..., p. 38.

• 64

  “News. From the Holy Diocese of Râmnic”, in CA, vol. VI (1908), no. 19, p. 169; “News. On 6 January”, in CA, year (1906), no. 19, p. 200.

• 65

  “News”, in CA, vol. VII (1908), no. 11, p. 132.

• 66

  “News. The consecration of the flag of the ‘Frăția’ society in Craiova”, in CA, vol. VII (1908), no. 15, pp. 179–180.

• 67

  “Circular Order of the Holy Diocese of Râmnic–Noul Severin to the County Archpriests”, in CA, vol. I (1903), no. 22, pp. 169–170.

• 68

  “News”, in CA, vol. I (1902), no. 5, p. 40.

• 69

  “Circular Order from His Grace the Bishop to the Most Reverend Archpriests of the Diocese of Râmnic – Noul Severin”, in CA, vol. I (1902), no. 15, p. 113.

• 70

  “Circular Order from His Grace Bishop D.D. Athanasie to the Reverend Protoierei of the Diocese of Râmnic–Noul Severin”, in CA, vol. I (1902), no. 17, pp. 129–130.

• 71

  “News. Administrative Provisions”, in CA, Vol. I (1902), No. 17, p. 136.

• 72

  “News. Circular Order No. 95/1903 of the Holy Diocese of Râmnic–Noul Severin to the Reverend County Archpriests”, in CA, Year II (1903), No. 20, p. 159.

• 73

  “Circular Order of the Holy Diocese of Râmnic–Noul Severin to the Reverend Archpriests of the Diocese”, in CA, Vol. I (1903), No. 21, p. 161.

• 74

  “News. Administrative Provisions”, in CA, vol. I (1903), no. 21, p. 167.

• 75

  “News. Circular”, in CA, vol. I (1903), no. 21, p. 166.

• 76

  “News”, in CA, vol. I (1903), no. 23, p. 184.

• 77

  “News. Diocesan Provisions”, in CA, vol. II (1903), no. 2, p. 15.

• 78

  “News. Administrative Provisions of the Holy Diocese of Râmnic”, in CA, Year II (1903), No. 6, p. 48.

• 79

  “News”, in CA, Vol. I (1903), No. 24, p. 191.

• 80

  “News”, in CA, vol. II (1903), no. 18, p. 144.

• 81

  “News and Miscellaneous. For Candidates for the Priesthood”, in CA, vol. II (1904), no. 21, p. 168.

• 82

  “News”, in CA, vol. III (1904), no. 7, p. 71.

• 83

  “News”, in CA, vol. III (1904), no. 10, p. 104.

• 84

  “News”, in CA, vol. III (1904), no. 17, p. 184.

• 85

  “News”, in CA, vol. V (1907), no. 23, p. 184.

• 86

  “News”, in CA, vol. VI (1907), nos. 5–6, p. 48. This refers to the epitrachelion’s income, distinct from the salary set by law. For example, for a baptism: 2 lei; for a wedding: 3 lei; for a funeral: 3 lei; for an anointing: 1 leu; for a memorial service with a liturgy: 3 lei.

• 87

  “News. Diocesan Provisions”, in CA, vol. VI (1908), no. 19, p. 169.

• 88

  “The Letter from His Grace Bishop Athanasius to the Reverend Archpriests of Gorj, Mehedinți, Dolj and Vâlcea”, in CA, vol. III (1904), no. 10, pp. 97–98.