POP, Lia (Oradea) RELIGION IN A ROMANIAN TOWN: VALUES AND 'INTERETHNICITY' IN ORADEA. DISKUS, 2 (1994) no. 1, pp. 43-55 Contact Address: Dr Lia POP Doctor in Philosophy Dept. Social Sciences University of Oradea [Universitatea Oradea], ORADEA, Romania Fax: 040-099-132789 (Univ. of Oradea; attn. Lia Pop, Sciente Sociale) Oradea is a town with a population of around 220,000 inhabitants and a complex national and ethnic structure. The following summary table shows the degree of multi-ethnicity according to the most recent (January 1992) census and based on respondents' religious self-identification. Romanians 143,212 64.8% Hungarians 73,272 33.2% Gypsies 2227 1.0% Germans 957 0.4% Slovaks 542 0.2% Jews 297 0.1% Others (inc. Greeks) 299 0.1% Total 220,806 (For a more detailed breakdown of religious affiliation see the Appendix) Historically and geographically, the town of Oradea has been characterised by disruption from outside - interference. Geographically, its position near the border is significant; its political and administrative affiliation has historically been Romanian, Hungarian and then again Romanian. Oradea also illustrates interethnicity through its urban cultural structure manifesting in more than a hundred churches of different denominations, four episcopates, three universities, etc. There is a street in Oradea parallel to the Crisul river, whose name varies along its length, where several churches are situated; Baptist, Pentecostal, Adventist, Orthodox, Catholic, Reformed, and a traditional and Neologue Synagogue. The 'interference' gave rise to a form of living together with nothing spectacular but with deep significance, which showed up in difficult moments. At the time of Horthy-Soos the Mayor of Oradea opposed, at great risk, the deportation of his Jewish townsmen asking to be pensioned off.<1> Also, after the war, the Catholic church which the Russians had used as a stable was rebuilt with the help of the Romanian communist Mayor.<2> Consequently, beyond the rigour of circumstances there has always existed some deep, profound value in Oradea which hindered extremism and promoted a peaceful living together. Therefore, Oradea is a town with several cultures, a multi-cultural town. The question is: has this coexistence of cultures turned into inter-culturality? Is the intersection of these cultures, the transfer from one culture into another - and hence the 'opening' towards the other's values - an effective value? What are the institutions which promote this 'opening'? The hypothesis In my study I started from the following hypothesis: Inter-ethnic relationships are the result of a process of living together based on values and creators of values. The most important value in this system is precisely the positive revaluation of inter-ethnicity; the judgement that inter-ethnicity is a value in itself; it is the basis of psycho-social comfort. This revaluation starts both from individuals and, especially, from socio-cultural institutions. I tried to check this hypothesis with reference to two specific institutions, the Church and the Hospital. I considered these two significant because: - The Church is the preserver of ethnic identity, within the wider framework of ethnic relationships with society in general, and by acting in this way it is the creator of a relative socio-cultural _distance_. The extent of this distance, the degree to which it is handled with moderation is a decisive element in the creation and preservation of the psycho-social comfort of the community and the environment in which it lives. The Church is an institution that the individual chooses, one to which s/he is attracted, not constrained by; this is why the member takes in profoundly the values promoted by the Church. The argument that one belongs by birth to a traditional religion does not mean that the individual cannot make his or her own choice. You are free to leave it at any time. - The Hospital is an institution which annuls ethnic distance - which programmatically 'forgets' differences in order to be able to see each individual only as a human being, a suffering human being. It is an institution where 'socio-cultural' and ethnic closeness is created, highlighting the fact that one cries or is in pain alike, irrespective of nationality or culture. The Hospital is a much-frequented institution, even if this frequency is due to situational constraints. The Method of Enquiry The method involved gathering data through interviews with individuals including personalities from these institutions. The interview focused both on the perception of one's own institution (church, hospital) as a framework for ethnic _distance_, or, alternatively, _closeness_, and on the perception of the other institution and its role in promoting interethnicity. The sample was aleatory. The Churches The churches have an image of multiculturality and a self-image differentiated in terms of multiculturality, according to whether they are Traditional or Evangelical. In general, they are perceived to be solid preservers of ethnic and confessional identity, and consequently of _distance_. However, compared with this social perception, the facts are more complex. In the context of assuring and preserving ethnic identity the churches also seek for an opening towards inter-ethnicity. The Mosaic (Jewish) church, especially the Hasidic one, is a firm preserver of ethnic identity. The Orthodox church in Oradea declares its support for ethnic identity, with openings towards inter-ethnicity. The Catholic church is universal by definition. It asserts ecumenism but in fact seeks to preserve and spread its own identity. In Oradea this church reunites Hungarian, German, Slovakian and Romanian parishioners but within distinct and separate communities. For instance, in Oradea in one and the same church building - the Church of the Premontre Order (Portile de Fier Street) - the liturgy is performed for both Hungarians and Slovakians but at different times, with different priests and without any contact with each other.<3> Some other factors indicating an openness may be cited; e.g. they perform some rituals without requiring a strict preparation. Recently, in April 1993, the baby of a Catholic mother and Orthodox father was baptized at the Episcopal church, despite having Romanian, non-Catholic godparents. The church has ecumenical openings too, principally towards the Reformed churches. For example, the church in Podgoria officiates in turn for the Hungarian Reformed people.<4> It also planned a common (Reformed and Catholic) hospital and high school.<5> Through 'Caritas' the Catholic church pharmacy offers medicines to all those in need. It also tried to finance the training of a class of 30 nurses chosen on Christian principles, though unfortunately this initiative was blocked along the way by the inertia of the officials, and finally the class was financed in Hungary). There are signs of openings among the churches, but this may be the result of the fashion promoted by the Council of Europe. In spite of their traditionalism, all the churches have begun ecumenical openings; the high hierarchs take part in common manifestations (e.g. "Varadinum '93") or philanthropic activities and actions. Among these, special mention should be made of activities organised by the Orthodox church through "Christiana", irrespective of religion, and the training of a class of nurses through tuition fees for students of different religions and nationalities. The fact is that no Christian prelate can allow himself to assert self-confinement and _distance_, even though in reality it may be perpetuated. For example, in the Reformed churches their nationalistic character is emphasised. At the Reformed church on Libertatii Street, with approximately 3,500 members, where Bishop Tokes officiates at the mass, Hungarian state symbols are raised and the Hungarian hymn is sung ritualistically. This is perceived by Romanians as a protest against the Romanian status- quo of Transylvania, and at the same time as a threat to the existing status quo. This fact, as well as its perception, create undesirable _distance_ between the two populations. The Churches and the Gypsies The relationship with the Gypsies is even more complex. All the churches pretend in good faith that they have real openings towards them and attempt to help them, yet the Gypsies do not feel any of this is real. Balogh Gyongyi, leader of the local Gypsy organisation, considers that they are not helped by the traditional churches even when they ask for assistance. She refers to facts such as the following: if a poor Gypsy who hasn't paid his church fees dies, he is not buried (this at the church in Valenta) until these fees are paid. Who pays them? The Gypsy community of course. It never happens that the Gypsies leave their dead.<6> The Evangelical churches - Reformed, Baptist, Adventist and Pentecostal - are inter-ethnic and multi-ethnic. They are perceived as ethnically non-exclusive even though some exclusivism occurs among them. For instance, it is known in Oradea that the Gabori Gypsies are Adventists and that the Pentecostal church 'calls' the Gypsies. These churches are considered to be genuinely inter-ethnical both from within and from the outside. Some Gypsies perceive an opening of this sort particularly on the part of the Reformed Church.<7> The facts are again more complex. Where the Gypsies belong to an Evangelical religious community they are assimilated in small numbers, but when their numbers reach a level sufficient to found a separate church, then one is constituted.<8> According to the opinions of 3rd year students from the Baptist Theological Institute of Oradea, there is more substantial opening at the level of the Evangelical churches because the major value in these churches is Christian confessional identity, not ethnic identity. This identity has five different stages or kinds of approach (i.e. evangelism to others), as follows: 1. Approaches between the Baptists 2. Approaches between the "Evangelical Alliance" 3. Approaches between the Evangelical denominations 4. Approaches between the Christian denominations 5. Opening towards all people as a Christian duty of offering the alternative of choosing Christianity 6. The students do not believe in approaches to Buddhists, Mosaics (i.e. Jews) or heretics such as the Jehovah's Witnesses. (See DIAGRAM following the Notes) In the face of confessional identity, ethnic identity is of no importance. The Baptist Gypsies have changed their behaviour, and have been quasi-totally assimilated to the religious community. They are no longer as the other Gypsies; 'they are clean, they work, they do not steal or beg'. From the students' point of view this new identification, this denial of the original structure can only be seen as a substantial good. Confronted with the dilemma of 'losing identity to gain prosperity' the students appreciated the problem and offered a dramatic illustrative example: Christian missionaries propagating monogamy among polygamists convince the husband to choose monogamy, that is, only one of his four wives. The choice was made but the other wives who hadn't been chosen committed suicide. For this situation the solution proposed by the students was slow assimilation during the next generation, but an assimilation based only on Christian values. For them, to raise the question of identifying with a culture which means only vigorous sexuality and strong feelings accompanied by an incredible material, social and moral misery is more racist than to propose assimilation. Christian identity for them meant identification with the basic nature of man; it is this major 'return to self' that is important, not the attachment to particular transient human circumstances, even if they are valued as desirable or superior under certain conditions. The reaction of believers to openings (to other groups) is perceived broadly in the same way. The believers theoretically accept the Gypsies; in practice they have restraints. The Baptist students mentioned that during an Evangelical programme nobody wanted to visit the Gypsies' homes, but after thinking this through, there was no problem. It is clear that the subconscious prejudice is that the Gypsies are inferior and dangerous. The Adventist pastor expressed the same opinion; the Adventists, the 'socializers' of the Gypsies, have restraints towards them too. In their turn the Gypsies feel - to quote their leader's opinion - the initiatives of the churches to be insufficient, and consequently they describe them as just a 'parade'. Balogh said "the priests steal more than the Gypsies. The Church does not help us'. They feel wronged, socially oppressed. The Gypsies, said Mrs Balogh, were always the first to be on the unemployment list. Inter-ethnicity through Mixed Marriages Real inter-ethnic connections - mixed marriages - are generally considered to be threatened by conflicts. Guiding the conversation to the issue of the nationality and religion of the children of mixed marriages, I noticed this problem can be solved in three ways: a. Traditionally, in Christian families, the boy inherits the father's religion and nationality and the girl her mother's. With the Jews, the mother is the one who is the source of the affiliation to the Mosaic cult and Jewish nationality, therefore, siblings have the same religion and nationality.<9> b. Veres Ildiko, a Catholic nurse, stated that it was frequently the case that children have imposed upon them the religion of whoever is the strongest and the most consistent character in their family. c. For neo-protestants the problem is simpler. The children are not born in a particular religion but choose it at maturity; they do not bother about nationality. "That's not my business" said the Baptist Pastor Glita. Regarding marriage with a person of a different religion or nationality, I have not personally come across any opposition in principle in the different religions, though it is not recommended. Pastor Glita thought that the young couple's choice should converge towards the same church. Even if this means that a member of the Baptist chuch is 'lost', he considers that the couple should go to one church together. In the Bible, family comes before the church. Even though there are solutions to the problem of children, inter-ethnic marriages are more often than not a victim of conflicts and misunderstandings because in these cases further conflicts are added to the usual causes of conflict, conflicts nourished by the greater differences between the origin groups. Dr Vass, a psychotherapist, thinks that the couple themselves do not usually have any problems, but then there come the parents who cannot accept "social weaning" - they cannot understand that "the ripe apple must be picked from the tree otherwise it rots"; that it remains an apple and from its seed an apple will grow, too, even if ten steps further on. In his opinion, genuine approaches are hindered by prejudices, by pseudo-identities. According to Dr Kovary Petru and Anna, Jews, the causes of such conflicts would be more numerous. Dr Kovary Petru identifies three of them: 1. different socio-cultural inheritance of the two partners 2. tendency to dominate of one party, if loaded with jingoistic, chauvinistic elements 3. tendency to maintain one's own ethnic and religious identity. This kind of conflict is less frequent in Jewish families where things stand clearly and firmly; it is the mother who provides nationality and religion. It is also less frequent in neo-protestant marriages where the religious choice is made at maturity. Strategies for inter-ethnicity Returning to the general framework of 'living together' in Oradea, it is thought possible that misunderstandings can be overcome and closeness between religions and nationalities can be achieved in the following ways: 1. Through the perspective of Christian ecumenism - an idea supported by priests, pastors and the Baptist students. 2. Through a moral perspective - an idea supported by Dr Kovary. Irrespective of our having a religious education or not, we have all, according to this view, been shaped in the spirit of the moral demands of the Bible, a morality common to Christians and Jews. We can regain unity through the perspective of an abstract monotheism (there is only one God, hence one moral ideal) and the uniqueness of Creation. Adam, which in Hebrew means 'man' is only one, and he was born without any ethnic, social or religious affiliation. 3. Through a general human perspective, by realising that first and foremost, before one religion or the other, or one nationality or the other emerges, we are human beings; by realising that approaches to each other should be positively revaluated before inter-ethnic _distances_. This idea was supported by Dr Vass. The Hospital Medical institutions are institutions where closeness is obvious whereas _distance_ is almost impossible. The question regarding possible differences (not conflicts) were invariably answered "NO, there are no differences of this kind". The common element - professional duty - makes any national distinctions superfluous. Consequently, in their self-representation the people working in the health system do not think they are in any way marked by ethnic distances. A nurse stated unequivocally: "All people are equal in sickness". The external image has several nuances. The pastors who have been visiting the hospitals regularly for years on end do not think such distances could exist. However, there are social distances! Dr Ana Nevelici, 53 years old, considers that especially after the Revolution there has been a tendency on the part of the staff to interpret observations, criticisms and sanctions as ethnic reprisals, when they are merely warnings for professional shortcomings. Dr Kovary Ana also thinks that all kinds of professional problems are clothed in this way but "the real reason is completely different! Ethnic differences are used only as a pretext! In a context where interethnicity is proclaimed, [differences have] taboo value!" The relationships of sick people to sick people or sick people to medical staff are not marked by national differences either. There is some restraint towards the Gypsies, however. They are not (socially) accepted, but this is only for reasons of hygiene. Dr Rittle Ladislav and Dr Crisan mention such cases. No cases of rejecting a Gypsy doctor have been registered. Attitudes to suicide and autopsy I would like here to mention a few instances with which the Laboratory of Forensic Medicine has been confronted. Dr Minalache considers that there are no ethnic differences among the victims of violent or accidental death, but there are differences among those committing suicide. Similarly there are no ethnic differences in the abandoning of the dead. Romanians and Hungarians are equally abandoned - but not the Gypsies! Regarding suicide, Dr Mihalache has noticed great differences as to frequency and manner of suicide between Romanians and Hungarians. First of all, only one in nine self-murderers is Romanian, so more Hungarians commit suicide. Secondly, the Hungarians commit ritualistic suicide, preferably by hanging, typical and complete. They are the ones who leave an explanatory letter. Whether these acts are demonstrative or, on the contrary, reminiscent of the Hungarian nobiliary model which valued one who concluded his grevious account with life by giving it up, in a kind of _hara_kiri_ (an entirely Asiatic model, entirely opposite to the Christian model) cannot be stated with certainty. For Dr Mihalache these are national. ancestral values. The Romanians commit suicide out of helplessness, atypically, incompletely, usually by throwing themselves from some height and without any letter. As stated, they are only a very small proportion of cases. For Dr Mihalache this manner of committing suicide does not represent an adherence to a system of values; on the contrary it represents a derogation from Christian values and it is viewed as such in the origin community. Regarding abandoned dead people, Dr Mihalache says that, after a long period in the morgue, they are buried by the Town Hall, sometimes in common coffins containing three, four, up to seven bodies, irrespective of nationality and religion. Those abandoned do not have a right to national or religious identity. There are differences - obviously of a cultural nature - in the attitude of the families towards the medical-legal act of autopsy. It is accepted naturally in the northern area, which is influenced by Hungarian culture, but rejected in the south. Dr Mihalache considers that the Hungarians have a culture of death which the Romanians do not have. Dr Vass however thinks that there is a cult of death among the Hungarians, but not a culture. The old Eskimo, he says, goes out to be eaten by the bear so that the bear will approach his hut and the family would be able to hunt for it and not die of hunger. They know how to die for life! With us, quite the opposite; one lives in the fear of death. In short, in medical institutions the national and ethnic differences are minimal. Where national differences exist, they do not promote separatist models in the society. Consequently, when people have common structures and values they approach each other simply and naturally, without problems. Conclusions In conclusion, these representatives of local intellectuals value the models of inter-ethnic and inter-confessional approach, and consider that the institutions they work in try to promote these values. There is a certain fear of _distance_ and the mutual suspicion that this distance is supported by institutions. Regarding an unfortunate phrase 'ethnic purification' used by Bishop Tokes, Dr Kovary points to a cultural parallelism which leads to misunderstanding. For the Romanians 'purification' means physical extermination, whereas for the Hungarians it means assimilation and discrimination (they feel discriminated against, for example, in not having Hungarian managers in the local industrial units). Tokes himself reconsidered his statement by explaining that he had not referred to 'purification' as in Serbia. Dr Kovary could not understand why Tokes had not put it in a different way, to avoid the meaning of a Horthyist 'purification' when 30,000 Jews from Oradea had been deported. Dr Kovary was speaking from the 'inside', from the experience of his own family. The value of inter-ethnicity in the two abovementioned institutions is different. In the hospital people live in inter-ethnicity. Inter-ethnicity is a fact and any doubt about it as a value seems out of place. The assertion made by the French philosopher Eugene Dupreel is thus verified: "Only the threatened values are treated explicitly as values, and not as forces or things." In the Church, inter-ethnicity is treated explicitly and affirmed constantly. This may be a beginning. ------------------------------------------------------------- Notes: 1. The deportation took place in three weeks through the 'energetic' Gyapayi brought from Gyor by the administration. Information from Dr Kovary. 2. Information from Vass - the son of the Catholic priest at the time. 3. Source: teacher Garai Ioan (Slovakian) 4. Source: Dr Kovary 5. Source: Vass 6. Information: The Laboratory of Forensic Medicine. 7. According to Balogh, Gypsy leader. 8. Source: Pastor Glita (Baptist), Pastor Rosca (Adventist) 9. Source: Dr Kovary ============================================================== [DISKUS Editors' note: When printing out the following diagram and table, you are advised to use a non-proportionally spaced font such as Courier, and turn off text Justification if you have it on. If printed in a proportionally-spaced font such as Times, Helvetica etc. the columns may not line up as on-screen. In order for the diagram to print properly, the following test line of should be unbroken on-screen: If not, please adjust your margin settings. **********************test line******************************* This note may be deleted from your _personal_ copy only of DISKUS without infringing copyright.] =============================================================* DIAGRAM RELIGIOUS APPROACHES (according to the Baptist students) _________________________________________ 1 1 1 _______________________________ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 _______________________ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 _______________ 1 1 1 ALL 1 1 1 1-> <-1 1 1 1 ALL PEOPLE 1 1 1-> 1-> <-1 <-1 1 1 PEOPLE -> 1-> 1-> 1-> 1-> <-1 <_1 <-1 <-1 <- 1-> 1-> 1-> 1-> BAPTISTS <-1 <-1 <-1 <-1 (but 1 1-> 1-> 1-> <-1 <-1 <-1 1 not 1 1 1 1_______________1 1 1 1 those 1 1 1 1 1 1 who 1 1 1 *EVANGELICAL ALLIANCE*1 1 1 'reject' 1 1 1_______________________1 1 1 i.e. 1 1 1 1 heretics 1 1 EVANGELICAL DENOMINATIONS 1 1 (eg JW**) 1 1_______________________________1 1 atheists, 1 1 Jews, 1 CHRISTIAN DENOMINATIONS 1 Buddhists 1_________________________________________1 Legend: The arrows -> indicate the direction, and the number of arrows broadly indicates the degree, of 'approaching' other faiths/denominations in Oradea [according to the Baptist students interviewed]. *the "Evangelical Alliance" is a special association in Romania between some Evangelical denominations which does not include all of them (e.g. it does not include the Adventists) ** Jehovah's Witnesses. -------------------------------------------------------------- APPENDIX Religious self-identification of the population in Oradea, 1992 Census. (Percentage figures based on a total of 220,741) 1. Orthodox 123,161 55.79% 2. Roman Catholic 29,723 13.47 3. Greek Catholic 7,605 3.45 4. Reformed (Calvinist) 43,878 19.88 5. Unitarian 307 0.14 6. Evangelical C.A. 229 0.10 7. Evangelist S.P. 268 0.12 8. Christian Old Rite 27 0.01 9. Baptist 4,799 2.17 10. Pentecostal 7,964 3.61 11. Adventist 397 0.18 12. Gospel Christian 179 0.08 13. Armenian 7 0.003 14. Muslim 13 0.005 15. Mosaic (Jewish) 294 0.13 16. Orthodox Church - Old Rite 117 0.05 17. Other religions 700 0.32 18. Atheist 203 0.09 19. No religion 750 0.34 20. Non-declared religion 120 0.05 Total 220,741