Text şi discurs religios Nr. 6 / 2014 Lucrările Conferinţei Naţionale Text şi discurs religios Ediţia a VI-a Timişoara, 15-16 noiembrie 2013 Consultanţi ştiinţifici Academician Michael METZELTIN, Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, membru de onoare al Academiei Române Academician Sabina ISPAS, Academia Română, Bucureşti Academician Răzvan THEODORESCU, Academia Română, Bucureşti Prof. univ. dr. Gheorghe CHIVU, Universitatea din Bucureşti, membru corespondent al Academiei Române Prof. univ. dr. Maria C T NESCU, Universitatea din Bucureşti Prof. univ. dr. Muguraş CONSTANTINESCU, Universitatea „Ştefan cel Mare”, Suceava Prof. univ. dr. Wolfgang DAHMEN, Universitatea „Friedrich Schiller” din Jena Prof. univ. dr. Wilhelm DANC , Institutul Teologic Romano-Catolic, Bucureşti, membru corespondent al Academiei Române Lect. univ. dr. pr. Lucian FARCAŞ, Institutul Teologic Romano-Catolic, Iaşi Prof. univ. dr. Constantin FRÂNCU, Universitatea „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” din Iaşi Prof. univ. dr. Gheorghe MANOLACHE, Universitatea „Lucian Blaga” din Sibiu Prof. univ. dr. pr. Vasile MIHOC, Universitatea „Lucian Blaga” din Sibiu Prof. univ. dr. Lăcrămioara PETRESCU, Universitatea „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” din Iaşi Prof. univ. dr. Alexandru RUJA, Universitatea de Vest din Timişoara Prof. univ. dr. pr. Petre SEMEN, Universitatea „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” din Iaşi Prof. univ. dr. pr. Ioan C. TEŞU, Universitatea „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” din Iaşi Prof. univ. dr. Vasile ÂRA, Universitatea de Vest din Timişoara Prof. univ. dr. Rodica ZAFIU, Universitatea din Bucureşti Editori Prof. univ. dr. Alexandru GAFTON, Universitatea „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” din Iaşi Lect. univ. dr. Sorin GUIA, Universitatea „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” din Iaşi Lect. univ. dr. Ioan MILIC , Universitatea „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” din Iaşi Responsabili de număr: Lect. univ. dr. Adina CHIRIL , Universitatea de Vest din Timişoara Lect. univ. dr. Bogdan ÂRA, Universitatea de Vest din Timişoara Dr. Valentin TRIFESCU, Universitatea „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” din Iaşi Text şi discurs religios Nr. 6 / 2014 Lucrările Conferinţei Naţionale Text şi discurs religios Ediţia a VI-a Timişoara, 15-16 noiembrie 2013 „Cel ce păzeaşte leagea îşi conteneaşte cugetul lui” (BB, Is. Sir., 21, 12) Editura Universităţii „ALEXANDRU IOAN CUZA” IAŞI – 2014 Autori Î.P.S. Nicolae CORNEANU , Mitropolitul Banatului Maria ALDEA, Lect. dr., Universitatea „Babeș-Bolyai” din Cluj Napoca Nicoleta-Ginevra BACIU, Dr., Universitatea „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” din Iaşi Alina BAKO, Asist. dr., Universitatea „Lucian Blaga”, Sibiu Carmen Maria BOLOCAN, Conf. dr., Facultatea de Teologie Ortodoxă, Universitatea „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” din Iaşi Lora BOSTAN, Prof. dr., Universitatea din Cernăuţi, Ucraina Doina BUTIURCA, Dr., Universitatea „Petru Maior” din Tîrgu Mureș Maria C T NESCU, Prof. dr., Facultatea de Litere, Universitatea din București Iosif CHEIE-PANTEA, Prof. dr., Facultatea de Litere, Istorie și Teologie, Universitatea de Vest din Timișoara Policarp CHI ULESCU, Arhimandrit dr., Biblioteca Sfântului Sinod, București Gheorghe CHIVU, Prof. dr., Facultatea de Litere, Universitatea din București, m.c. al Academiei Române Marius Daniel CIOBOT , Dr., Seminarul Teologic Ortodox „Chesarie Episcopul”, Buzău Carmina COJOCARU, Cerc. şt. dr., Institutul de Istorie și Teorie Literară „G. Călinescu”, București Claudiu-Ioan COMAN, Dr., Facultatea de Teologie Ortodoxă „Dumitru Stăniloae”, Universitatea „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” din Iași Simona CONSTANTINOVICI, Conf. dr., Universitatea de Vest din Timișoara Ioana COSTA, Prof. dr., Facultatea de Litere, Universitatea din București Garofi a DINC , Asist. cerc., Institutul de Lingvistică „Iorgu Iordan – Al. Rosetti”, București Amalia DR GUL NESCU, Cerc. şt. dr., Institutul de Filologie Română ,,A. Philippide” Iași Ovidiu-Adrian ENACACHE, Dr., Universitatea „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” din Iași Remus Mihai FERARU, Conf. dr., Facultatea de Litere, Istorie și Teologie, Universitatea de Vest din Timișoara Mihai FLOROAIA, Prof., dr., Liceul Tehnologic „Spiru Haret”, Piatra-Neamț Alexandru GAFTON, Prof. dr., Facultatea de Litere, Universitatea „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” din Iaşi Vasile GORDON, Prof. dr. pr., Facultatea de Teologie Ortodoxă, Universitatea din București Zamfira MIHAIL, Prof. dr., Institutul de Studii Sud-Est Europene, București Alexandru MIH IL , Lect. dr., Facultatea de Teologie Ortodoxă, Universitatea din București Delia Cristina MIH IL , MA, Universitatea din București Christina Andreea MI ARIU, Asist. dr., Universitatea Creștină „Dimitrie Cantemir”, București Nicolae MORAR, Conf. dr. pr., Facultatea de Litere, Istorie și Teologie, Universitatea de Vest din Timișoara Elisa MORIANO MORALES, Lect., MAEC-AECID, Universitatea de Vest din Timișoara Ileana OANCEA, Prof. dr., Facultatea de Litere, Istorie și Teologie, Universitatea de Vest din Timișoara Enikő PÁL, Lect. dr., Universitatea „Sapientia”, Miercurea Ciuc Cosmin PAN URU, Lect. dr. pr. , Facultatea de Litere, Istorie și Teologie, Universitatea de Vest din Timișoara Carmen Mihaela POTLOG, Prof., Colegiul Tehnic „Mihai Băcescu”, Fălticeni Cristina-Elena PURCARU, dr, Universitatea „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” din Iași Gabriela RADU, Lect. dr., Facultatea de Litere, Istorie și Teologie, Universitatea de Vest din Timișoara Dana-Lumini a TELEOAC , Cerc. șt. dr., Institutul de Lingvistică „Iorgu Iordan – Al. Rosetti”, București Valentin TRIFESCU, Cerc. postdoc., Universitatea „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” din Iași Maria-Cristina TRUŞC , dr., Universitatea din București Vasile D. ÂRA, Prof. dr., Facultatea de Litere, Istorie și Teologie, Universitatea de Vest din Timișoara C t lin VATAMANU, Lect. dr., Facultatea de Teologie Ortodoxă, Universitatea „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” din Iași Dora V ETUŞ, Drd., Universitatea din București Monica VLASE, Prof., Colegiul Tehnic „Anghel Saligny”, Cluj-Napoca Lumini a VLEJA, Conf. dr., Universitatea de Vest din Timișoara Cuprins Cuvînt înainte / 9 Cuvîntul de întîmpinare al Î.P.S. Nicolae CORNEANU , Mitropolitul Banatului / 11 Traducerea textului sacru Alexandru MIH IL , Non-Septuagintal Influences on the Bucharest Bible of 1688 / 15 Claudiu-Ioan COMAN, Actes 20, 28 dans les manuscrits byzantines: le texte, la traduction et l’exégèse / 27 Enikő PÁL, Reflections on the Hungarian Original’s Influence on the Romanian Translation of Palia De La Orăștie / 41 Delia Cristina MIH IL , Monogenes, Christological Term in Heb. 11:17? / 59 Dora V ETUŞ, Lexical-Semantic Dynamics in Romanian Biblical Versions. Case Study: The Parable of the Publican and the Pharisee / 77 Gabriela RADU, Acrostic Translation in the Invocation Prayer - Liber Manualis / 93 Cristina-Elena PURCARU, Terminological Connotations of the Translation of Dosoftei’s Psalms / 109 Cosmin PAN URU, Secular and Religious Archaic Terms from Archive Documents of the Parishes Bejan, Mintia (Hunedoara) and Fabric – Timişoara / 121 Alexandru GAFTON, O nouă traducere în limba română a Bibliei. Reflecţii pe marginea Notelor / 135 Retorica discursului religios Vasile GORDON, The Religious Discourse – Liturgical, Sacramental and Soteriological Act / 145 Marius Daniel CIOBOT , Affective Valencies of the Homiletic Discourse / 155 Garofi a DINC , Éthos et pathos dans le discours homilétique roumain / 171 Vasile D. ÂRA, Despre omiletica lui Samuil Micu / 181 Gheorghe CHIVU, Antim Ivireanul and the Unification of Old Romanian Literary Language / 189 Maria C T NESCU, Strategii descriptive în Didahiile lui Antim Ivireanul / 201 Ovidiu-Adrian ENACACHE, Manipulation Strategies and Techniques in the Letters of Antim Ivireanul / 211 Policarp CHI ULESCU, Romanian Hieratikons Printed by St. Antim Ivireanul: in 2013, 300 Years from the Printing of the Romanian Hieratikon at Târgovişte / 217 Ioana COSTA, The Muteness of a Prophet / 243 Ileana OANCEA, Rugăciunea Tatăl nostru, revelator al latinității limbii române / 249 Dana-Lumini a TELEOAC , Les figures de style et leur relevance dans le décodage sémiotique d’un texte : la comparaison dans le texte moderne des Psaumes / 259 Doina BUTIURCA, Recurrence and Religious Structures in Paremiology: Protection / 271 Christina Andreea MI ARIU, Human Nature and “Theognosia” according to St. Gregory Of Nyssa / 277 Maria-Cristina TRUSC , Αρε η / Αηαρ ια dans le discours Περι Φιζοπ ωχια de Saint Grégoire de Nazianze, une étude d’archéologie linguistique / 287 Remus Mihai FERARU, Aspects du sacré dans les cités grecques du Pont Gauche / 293 Carmen Maria BOLOCAN, Father Arsenie Boca – Paradigm for Acquiring Eternity / 321 C t lin VATAMANU, Marriage in the Old Testament. A Social Reality and a Theological Metaphor Reflected in the Biblical Rhetoric / 333 Literatura şi sacrul Maria ALDEA, Monica VLASE, Un ouvrage méconnu de nos jours : Catihismul omului creștin, moral și soțial. Pentru trebuința tinerilor din școalele începătoare [Le catéchisme du bon chrétien, moral et social. Pour les écoles élémentaires] de Florian Aron / 345 Valentin TRIFESCO, Sur les origines de la création d’un symbole régional des Roumains de Transylvanie : les églises en bois / 359 Lora BOSTAN, Contribuţia bisericii ortodoxe la afirmarea spiritualităţii româneşti în nordul Bucovinei (sec. XVIII-XIX) / 371 Mihai FLOROAIA, Le discours religieux et l’index des livres interdits durant l’Inquisition / 377 Alina BAKO, L’écrivain et le sacré. Les fictions biographiques / 389 Iosif CHEIE-PANTEA, Cioran despre credință și religie / 397 Nicolae MORAR, Sacrul în viziunea lui Nicolae Steinhardt / 403 Carmina COJOCARU, M. Eminescu’s Vision On Human – God Relation / 413 Simona CONSTANTINOVICI, Elements sémantiques et stylistiques du texte poétique d'Arghezi. La dénomination de la Divinité / 421 Amalia DR GUL NESCU, Inflexiuni biblice în lirica interbelică. Cântecele pescarului Seled de Alexandru Leontescu / 441 Carmen-Mihaela POTLOG, Religious Imaginary in the Poetry of Ion Barbu / 449 Nicoleta-Ginevra BACIU, The Road as a Metaphor of the Sacred Grammar in the Autobiography of Paisius Velichkovsky / 457 Elisa MORIANO MORALES, Lumini a VLEJA, La relación entre lo sacro y lo profano en la poesía lírica de Juan Rodríguez del Padrón / 465 Cuvînt înainte Începînd din anul 2008, Conferința Națională „Text și discurs religios”, organizată la Iași, de prof. univ. dr. Alexandru Gafton, lect. dr. Ioan Milică și lect. dr. Sorin Guia de la Catedra de limbă română şi lingvistică generală din cadrul Universităţii „Alexandru Ioan Cuza”, în parteneriat cu Mitropolia Moldovei şi Bucovinei şi cu Dieceza Romano-Catolică de Iaşi, a constituit prilejul întîlnirii unui număr tot mai însemnat de cercetători din domeniile lingvisticii şi filologiei, teologiei şi filosofiei, istoriei şi artei, preocupați de investigarea textului biblic și a literaturii de inspirație religioasă din perspectivă științifică și teologică. Dincolo de înalta ținută academică pe care a impus-o și de năzuința la excelență intelectuală pe care a transmis-o numeroșilor participanți, Conferința s-a distins printr-un spirit al dialogului între oamenii de știință, între culturi și între culte, care a determinat instituirea unor noi parteneriate între centrele universitare din țară, prin contactele stabilite între tinerii cercetători sau între aceștia și cei ajunși la maturitate științifică. Tocmai această deschidere a justificat dorința organizatorilor de a accentua caracterul național al întîlnirii prin desfășurarea ei și în alte centre universitare din țară. În 2013, misiunea onorantă de a găzdui cea de-a șasea ediție a Conferinței Naționale „Text și discurs religios” a revenit Facultății de Litere, Istorie și Teologie a Universității de Vest din Timișoara. S-a refăcut astfel, simbolic, drumul parcurs, în urmă cu jumătate de secol, de academicianul ieșean G. Ivănescu, întemeietorul Catedrei de limba română a Facultății de Filologie din Timișoara. Întrucît Conferinţa Naţională „Text şi discurs religios” este gîndită ca spaţiu al cercetării şi comunicării, în care participanţii îşi asumă libertăţile solicitate de propriile preocupări ştiinţifice – în interiorul cadrului creat de cele trei domenii de interes consacrate: sincronie-diacronie, scriere-oralitate, traducere-compunere originală –, dezbaterile şi comunicările s-au referit la o diversitate de probleme, începînd cu chestiunile traducerii sub aspect filologic şi lingvistic, trecînd prin analize de discurs religios, din perspectivă lingvistică (retorică, pragmatică, stilistică) și încheind cu modalităţile de desfăşurare şi de funcţionare a temelor sacrului în literatură, artă și cultură. Ca în fiecare an, Conferința a fost onorată de prezența reprezentanților cultelor religioase, în spiritul atitudinii ecumenice caracteristice locului. În cadrul ceremoniei de deschidere, s-au rostit cuvinte de întîmpinare din partea Bisericii Ortodoxe Române, Bisericii Romano-Catolice, Bisericii Greco-Catolice și a 9 Cultului Mozaic din Timișoara. În cele două ședințe plenare, au rostit alocuțiuni personalități marcante ale vieții academice din București: prof. univ. dr. Gheorghe Chivu, m. c. al Academiei Române, arhimandrit dr. Policarp Chițulescu, directorul Bibliotecii Sfîntului Sinod, prof. univ. dr. Ioana Costa, pr. prof. univ. dr. Vasile Gordon, prof. univ. dr. Zamfira Mihail, prof. univ. dr. Rodica Zafiu, din Iași: prof. univ. dr. Alexandru Gafton și din Timișoara: prof. univ. dr. Iosif CheiePantea, prof. univ. dr. Ileana Oancea și pr. conf. univ. dr. Nicolae Morar. Ecoul întîlnirilor, al dialogului și al schimbului de idei științifice formulate în cadrul manifestării se concretizează în cel de-al VI-lea volum dedicat lucrărilor Conferinței. Reunind contribuțiile majorității participanților, el completează, în mod firesc, seria edițiilor anterioare. În organizarea acestui eveniment științific, precum și pentru publicarea volumului de față, ne-am bucurat de sprijinul conducerii Universității de Vest din Timișoara, precum și de generozitatea partenerilor, a patronilor și directorilor unor firme comerciale din Timișoara: Primăria Municipiului Timișoara, Sindicatul Universitas Timisiensis, TVR Timișoara, Radio România Timișoara, S.C. Merpano S.R.L., S.C. Integral Com S.R.L., Scan Tim S.R.L., S.C. Luar S.R.L. și Fornetti România, spre care se îndreaptă mulțumirile organizatorilor. Adina CHIRIL George Bogdan ÂRA 10 Cuvînt de întîmpinare Î.P.S. NICOLAE CORNEANU Mitropolitul Banatului Onorată asistenţă, Religiozitatea constituie una din notele definitorii ale omului. Experienţa arată că sufletul nostru simte nevoia de a se afla în contact permanent cu Dumnezeu, ceea ce în realitate reprezintă dialogul nostru cu divinitatea. Bucuria întîlnirii cu textele sacre am avut-o de cînd am deprins să citesc scrierile evanghelice, dar şi pe cele păstrate de la vechii scriitori bisericeşti – cînd spun vechi, mă refer îndeosebi la autorii patristici din primele veacuri ale creştinismului. De atunci şi pînă acum nu m-a părăsit prima impresie asupra lor, şi anume că, în realitate ei sînt şi rămîn pereni, adică aparţin în egală măsură epocii lor cît şi vremurilor de acum, atît prin actualitatea nedezminţită a problemelor ce-i preocupă şi prin soluţiile luminoase şi edificatoare pe care ei le propun, dar şi prin limbajul folosit. Iar dacă ar fi să mă opresc la Sfînta Scriptură aş sublinia că, deşi este textul sacru de bază al învăţăturii creştine, nu a fost desprins de transmiterea orală a revelaţiei dumnezeieşti, motiv pentru care izvoarele învăţăturii creştine rămîn Scriptura şi Tradiţia, adică, am putea spune, ,,textul şi discursul religios”. De aceea socotesc oportună şi salut cu multă căldură orice studiere aprofundată a scrierilor sacre, atît în spiritul cît şi în litera lor, orice încercare de lămurire suplimentară şi desluşire a adîncilor înţelesuri teologice, filozofice şi umane ce pot fi identificate cu multă trudă în fibra lor lăuntrică şi nepieritoare. Chiar dacă ei au scris în greacă, latină, coptă ori siriacă, dincolo de substratul lingvistic pe care un bun filolog îl poate depăşi prin traduceri potrivite, fondul operelor pe care ni le-au dăruit cu generozitate, abordarea, tematica şi uneori chiar stilul redactării ne par şi astăzi foarte familiare, corespunzînd în mare măsură preocupărilor, frămîntărilor sau chiar idealurilor contemporane. Dincolo de familiarizarea oricărui credincios cu scrierile Părinţilor Bisericii sau cu textele clasice ale celorlalţi autori contemporani asociaţi cu aceştia, familiarizare ce se poate face tot mai mult şi prin traducerile numeroase de 11 specialitate găsite în română, rămîne datoria, aş spune sfîntă, a savanţilor şi cercetătorilor – cum este şi cazul celor reuniţi de mai mulţi ani sub genericul de Text şi discurs religios – de a aprofunda mereu prin mijloacele specifice fiecărui domeniu de care aparţin, fie el teologic, filologic sau istoric, toate sensurile ascunse ce se pot regăsi în acestea. Iar apoi, prin susţinerea şi publicarea lucrărilor respectivelor conferinţe sau simpozioane în volum, să contribuie la propăşirea modernă şi la mai buna cunoaştere a acestor texte minunate, de incontestabilă valoare de către un număr tot mai mare de cititori şi studioşi. Prin urmare, să renunţăm la omeneştile noastre ambiţii, să deschidem textele sacre nu pentru a ne ataca unii pe alţii, ci, respectîndu-le, să ne lăsăm pătrunşi de adevărurile lor eterne şi astfel desăvîrşindu-ne, să ne mîntuim. 12 Traducerea textului sacru Non-Septuagintal Influences on the Bucharest Bible of 1688 Alexandru MIH IL Die vorliegende Arbeit versucht, die nicht-septuagintischen Einflüsse auf die Bibel von Bukarest (1688), die erste gesamte Übersetzung der Bibel ins Rumänische, zu studieren. Erstens kann man einen protestantischen Einfluss auf den Kanon wahrnehmen, der dadurch erklärt wird, dass die Herausgeber der Übersetzungsvorlage, die Frankfurter Bibel von 1597, Hugenotten waren. Zweitens, kann man auch einen katholischen Einfluss erkennen, weil der Text selbst, zumindest im Buch des Propheten Jeremia, das als Fallstudie herausgezogen war, nicht-septuagintische Ergänzungen aus der Complutensischen Polyglotte hat, wo der griechische Text nach der lateinischen Vulgata umgestaltet wurde. Keywords: Bucharest Bible of 1688, Frankfurt Bible of 1597, Complutensian Polyglot, Aldine Bible, Sixtine Bible, Septuagint, Romanian Orthodox Bible translations. In the preface of his Bible translation (2001), Bartolomeu Anania wrote: “As part of the Eastern Orthodox world, the Romanian people had its Bible translated after the Septuagint”, the Bucharest Bible of 1688 being the first example from an array of translations that ended with the Synodal Bible of 1914. For Anania, starting from the Bible of 1936 a hiatus came in the Romanian biblical tradition because the Old Testament text reflected since then the intertwining of Hebrew and Greek versions. The idea that Septuagint should offer the text par excellence of the Old Testament in the Eastern Orthodox Church is sustained also by some eminent scholars, to give only a few names: Cristian Bădiliţă1, Ioan Ică jr.2 and recently a dissertation under the guidance of Ioan Ică sr. about the biblical text of 1 In the introduction of Cristian Bădiliţă / Francisca Băltăceanu / Monica Broşteanu / Dan Sluşanschi (ed.), Septuaginta, vol. 1, Colegiul Noua Europă / Polirom, Iaşi, 2004, p. 15, he wrote that the Septuagint “became an ‘official’ Bible of the Church” (in Romanian). Cf. Cristian Bădiliţă, Glafire: Nouă studii biblice şi patristice, Polirom, Iaşi, 2008, p. 232: “probably ‘the authoritative text of the Eastern Orthodoxy” (in Romanian). 2 Ioan Ică jr., “Înapoi la Septuaginta”, TABOR 1 (2008), no. 11, p. 5-25, reprinted in Canonul Ortodoxiei, vol. 1, Deisis / Stavropoleos, Sibiu, 2008, pp. 142-177. The title of the article is suggestive: “back to the Septuagint!”. 15 the Romanian Orthodox Church written by Anton Savelovici3. In the academic community abroad, this opinion is supported also by Mogens Müller4. This is the background on which I want to study the relation of the Romanian biblical translations with Septuagint. I limited myself to the relation of the first integral Romanian translation of the Bible, the Bucharest Bible of 1688, and its Greek prototype, the Frankfurt Bible of 1597 on the one hand, with the original Septuagint text5 as reconstructed today in the Rahlfs-Hanhart edition6 and the Göttingen edition7 on the other hand. I focused as a case study on the book of prophet Jeremiah, which has massive differences between the Hebrew Masoretic and the Greek Septuagintal text. It should be mentioned that from the strictly scientific perspective at the present it is argued that the Old Testament is based on more textual witnesses8, of which the Masoretic Text and Septuagint (more precisely the original Hebrew text/s used for translating Septuagint) represent the most important. The Bucharest Bible and its prototype, the Frankfurt Bible of 1597 As assumed in the foreword of the Bucharest Bible and of the 45 and 4389 manuscripts, the initial translator, Nicolae Milescu Spătarul (Chancellor) and the subsequent revisers used the Greek text of the Frankfurt Bible from 15979. It should be stressed that it is not only a Septuagint edition, as might be understood from recent studies, but an entire Greek Bible (including the New Testament)10. The Frankfurt Bible of 1597 was prepared by the Frenchmen Jean Aubry († 1600/1) and Claude de Marne († 1610), the heirs since 1582 of the publishing house of Wechel family11. The Wechel family, with German descend, began in the 20’s of the XVIth century a business in Paris in publishing humanistic books. 3 Anton Savelovici, Textul Sfintei Scripturi în Biserica Ortodoxă Română, Valahia University Press / Bibliotheca, Târgovişte, 2012. 4 Mogens Müller, The First Bible of the Church: A Plea for the Septuagint, Sheffield Academic Press, Sheffield, 1996, JSOTSupp 206. 5 The term “original” seems to be misleading and debatable, but I follow BHS siglum (G* = Septuaginta originalis). 6 Alfred Rahlfs / Robert Hanhart (ed.), Septuaginta. Editio altera, Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, Stuttgart, 2006. 7 Septuaginta, vol. XV: Jeremias, Baruch, Threni, Epistula Jeremiae, ed. Joseph Ziegler, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen, 32006 (11957). 8 Emanuel Tov, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, second revised edition, Augsburg Fortress, Minneapolis / Van Gorcum, Assen, 2001, p. 18. 9 Eugen Munteanu, Lexicologie biblică românească, Humanitas, Bucureşti, 2008, p. 24-25, 252. The Frankfurt Bible appeared in 1597, not in 1587 (p. 24). Subsequently, the year is mentioned correctly as 1597. 10 Cf. E. Munteanu, Lexicologie biblică românească, p. 252, 440 (“Septuaginta tipărită la Frankfurt”), 483 (“Septuaginta tipărită la 1597”), 513. Only by consulting the final bibliography the reader could be edified that in fact there is no Septuagint edition, but an entire Bible (p. 530). 11 Ian Maclean, Scholarship, Commerce, Religon: The Learned Book in the Age of Confessions, 1560-1630, Harvard University Press, 2012, p. 148. 16 Chrétien Wechel († 1554) specialized in bilingual editions of Greek and Latin classic texts12. His son, André Wechel († 1581), inherited the publishing house after the death of his father, but in 1572 he fled in Frankfurt am Main due to the persecutions against the Huguenots, whose acme was the St. Bartholomew’s Day massacre. In Frankfurt, André Wechel developed the publishing house, but died in 1581. Nevertheless, the business was taken over by the above mentioned heirs, which in 1597 edited a Greek Bible using an elegant font inspired from the medieval Byzantine manuscripts. It must be underline that the Wechel family, as well as the heirs from 1581, belonged to a Protestant milieu: they were Calvinist (Huguenots)13. In the Latin foreword of the Frankfurt Bible it says that the text followed the Basel edition published by Johann Herwagen (Hervagius) from Waderdingen (1497-1558)14, issued in 1545, which, on its turn, coincides entirely (prorsus congruit) with the Aldine Bible (Aldina) published in Venice in 1518 in the press of Aldus Manutius15. In order to reach the “Hebrew truth” (hebraica veritas), editions of the Complutensian Polyglot (Alcalá de Henares, printed 1514-1517, but on the market only in 1522), the Antwerp Polyglot (1572), the Strasbourg Bible (1524-1526) and the Sixtine Bible/Sixtina (Rome, 1587) were consulted. The Frankfurt Bible was used also for an unfinished revision of the Slavonic Bible from Moscow, 1663, by Epiphanius Slavinetsky, who translated the preface wrongly attributed by him to André Wechel, but that in reality belonged to the Frenchmen heirs16. The status of the Anaginoskomena books A major Protestant influence could be observed in the status of the books that are missing from the Hebrew canon, the so-called anaginoskomena (“to be read” books). I want to avoid the terms “uncanonical” or “deuterocanonical”. The first one is theologically inappropriate, because these books were never excluded from the canon in the Eastern Orthodox Church, except for the Russian Church 12 About the Wechel family, cf. “Wechel family”, in: Gordon Campbell, The Oxford Dictionary of Renaissance, Oxford University Press, 2003. 13 Robert John Weston Evans, The Wechel Presses: Humanism and Calvinism in Central Europe, 1572-1627, Oxford, 1975, Past and Present Society 2. 14 Peter G. Bietenholz, “Johann Herwagen of Waderdingen”, in: Peter G. Bietenholz / Thomas Brian Deutscher (ed.), Contemporaries of Erasmus: A Biographical Register of the Renaissance and Reformation, University of Toronto Press, Toronto, 1995 (republished from 1985), p. 186-187. 15 The Aldine Bible, published in Venice in 1518-1519 in the printing house of Aldus Manutius, contains the Septuagint and Erasmus’ New Testament (1516). The text was established by Andreas Asolanus, using manuscripts from the collection of Cardinal Bessarion (Vissarion), a Greek humanist who adopted the uniatism of the Council of Ferrara-Florence. 16 Francis J. Thomson, “The Slavonic Translation of the Old Testament”, in: Jože Krašovec (ed.), The Interpretation of the Bible: The International Symposium in Slovenia, Sheffield Academic Press, Sheffield, 1998, p. 690-691. 17 beginning with Tsar Peter the Great’s period.17 The second term is in fact of Catholic origin, designating the late inclusion into the canon of these particular books only during the XVI-th cent. at the Council of Trent18. Nevertheless in the Strasbourg Bible from 1526 (the Old Testament), the anaginoskomena books were grouped in a separate section, following Luther’s canon19. The Frankfurt Bible included them similarly into a separate section, entitled πσερυφοι. At page 760, the Frankfurt Bible has a note: πσερυφοι α παρ’ ίραέοιμ ε ο θ ιιοπέ ωθ ριγηο υΰεαγέ αθ αι, meticulously translated by the Bucharest Bible: “Ascunsele ceale ce-s la jidovi. Den numărul celor vreadnice de credinţă să află” (The hidden books of the Jews that are beside the trustworthy ones). The Ben Sira prologue is presented at page 811 in the Frankfurt Bible and at page 663 in the Bucharest Bible with the following note: Πρσζοΰομ παρεέ αε ομ άζου, “Cuvînt înainte den afară băgat, nearătat de cine e făcut” (preface from the outside, whose author remains unknown), that also shows a Protestant and humanistic approach. Case study: the book of prophet Jeremiah20 I picked up as a case study the book of prophet Jeremiah, focusing on the text missing from the Septuagint, as indicated in the apparatus of the critical edition of the Hebrew Bible (BHS)21. It should be taken into account that the Septuagintal book of Jeremiah is about 1/7 shorter (3097 words less) than in the Hebrew text22. 17 M. Jugie, “Le canon de l’Ancien Testament dans l’Église byzantine”, Échos d’Orient 10 (1907), pp. 129-135; Idem, “Les deutérocanoniques de l’Ancien Testament dans l’Église orthodoxe aux XVIe et XVIIe siècles”, Échos d’Orient 10 (1907), pp. 193-199; Idem, “Le canon de l’Ancien Testament dans l’Église russe depuis le XVIIIe siècle”, Échos d’Orient 10 (1907), pp. 263-274; Idem, “Les deutérocanoniques dans l’Église grecque depuis le XVIIIe siècle”, Échos d’Orient 10 (1907), p. 344-357. 18 Petros Vassiliadis, “The Liturgical Use of the Bible in Greek Orthodoxy: An Orthodox Critical Approach in 12 Steps”, paper delivered in an international conference on “The Present and the Future of Biblical Studies in the Orthodox and the Catholic Churches”, held in Firenze, Italy (67 June, 2013) (http://auth.academia.edu/PetrosVassiliadis/Papers). Cf. also Eugen J. Pentiuc, The Old Testament in Eastern Orthodox Tradition, Oxford University Press, Oxford / New York, 2014, pp. 129-131, who states that the Eastern Orthodox Churches have an open canon. 19 S. L. Greenslade (ed.), The Cambridge History of the Bible, vol. 3: The West from the Reformation to the Present Day, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2004 (republished from 1963), p. 57. 20 I thank my colleague, Emanuel Conţac, for sharing photocopies of the Venice, Sixtine and Frankfurt Bibles. The Venice Bible was photocopied by himself during an Oxford sojourn, while the Sixtine and Frankfurt Bibles are available online in Google Books (cf. http://books.google.ro/books?id=UMBIAAAAcAAJ&printsec=frontcover&hl=ro#v=onepage&q&f =false, respectively http://books.google.ro/books?id=JaERSsuDyjMC&printsec=frontcover&hl=ro#v=onepage&q&f=fa lse). 21 K. Elliger / W. Rudolph (ed.), Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, corr. by A. Schenker, Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, Stuttgart, 51997. 22 Jack R. Lundbom, Jeremiah 1-20: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, Yale University Press, New Haven / London, 1999, AB 21A, p. 57-58. 18 I signaled the big differences by placing an exclamation mark flanked by square brackets before the paragraph describing them. All the verse numbers are referred according to BHS and I have deliberately avoided the difficult problem of different numbering in Frankfurt Bible, Bucharest Bible (Complutensian Polyglot, Aldina and Sixtina are printed continuously, without verse numbers). Jer. 1:3 – ча Ѽ “the end”; omitted by Aldina, Sixtina and Frankfurt Bible. Jer. 1:18 – цЭрђЮЧ Ѩ нѬ‫מּ‬ЮьцЧ Ѭ “and as a pillar of iron”; omitted by Aldina, Sixtina and Frankfurt Bible. [!] Jer. 1:18 – чуЫъоЩ а хЧц “for the priests”; is missing in Aldina and Sixtina, but is added (εα οῖμ ερε ιθ α ο ) in Frankfurt. Jer. 2:1-2 – чЫ Юц ЯѡѬђЧ у уЬъЧрѦЧл Я‫ת‬кђЯ ЯёЧп ְֹЯо ђа шкЬц уЮцкЬ опоудђЮл Чн уЫоЧупЮ “and the word of the Lord came to me, saying: Go and cry in the ears of Jerusalem”; is absent from the Aldina, Sixtina and Frankfurt Bible. Jer. 2:2 – оЯьѬђЧр кֹ яђЭЭ кѨЧ ђЯѨ ЧншЫ ѨЮ “in the wilderness, in a land that was not sown”, omitted by all three versions. Jer. 2:17 – ְђЭ ЯѪЮѨ ְЬхуЫцѽш ‫ת‬ЬьѨЧ “when he led you by the way”, omitted by all three versions. Jer. 2:22 – уЯъанкЩ “Lord”, omitted by all three versions. Jer. 3:9 – яђѦЯ Э од‫ת‬кЭ эЮъсШ ЭѼЮп “and she polluted the land”, omitted by all three versions. Jer. 3:17 – чЫ уцЮ ЯѡѬђуЫц опоу чЬѡцЧ “to the name of the Lord, to Jerusalem”; omitted by all three versions. Jer. 4:12 – оЭѲкЬ шЬ “from them”, omitted by Aldina, Sixtina and Frankfurt Bible. Jer. 4:23 – Ѭоа ‫“ ת‬waste”, omitted by Aldina, Sixtina and Frankfurt Bible. Jer. 4:30 – нѬнЯѡ “spoiled”, omitted by Aldina, Sixtina and Frankfurt Bible. Jer. 5:15 – кѬо чЯцѽьЬш уѽѩ кѬо щ Я‫ת‬уЬк уѽѩ “it is an enduring nation, it is an ancient nations”, omitted by Aldina, Sixtina and Frankfurt Bible. Jer. 5:16 – сЮ Ѭ‫ת‬Я‫ פּ‬ђЭлёЭ ѱЧ ѽ‫ת‬Я‫פּ‬ѡ Ч Юк “their quiver is like an open grave”, omitted by Aldina, Sixtina and Frankfurt Bible. [!] Jer. 5:28 – Ѭ‫ת‬ѡ Ч ьЯ ѬъЧшѡ Я “they have become fat and sleek”, omitted by Aldina and Sixtina, but Frankfurt Bible added only one verb, παχτθγη αθ, according to Complutensian Polyglot. Jer. 5:28 – ьђду Я ђЧЬ л Ын “deeds of wickedness”, omitted by Aldina, Sixtina and Frankfurt Bible. Jer. 7:1-2 – a massive lack: ‫ת‬уЬѨ ђЮьѡ Ю ѨЧ на шЩь ‫׃‬ђа шкЬц опоу ‫ת‬кЬ шЬ ѬоЯ ушЧ ђЫЧ удцЭк оЯ уоЯ ђЭѡкЩ ђЯл ЯѪЮо ЯѼђЮЧ шѦЧп оЭѭоЮ ђЯл ЯѪЮод‫ת‬кЭ чЯѣ Я‫ת‬кђЯЯ ёпЧ опоу “the word that came to Jeremiah from the Lord, saying: Stand at the gate of the house of the Lord and there proclaim this word and say”, and then after a few words: ‫׃‬опоуЮц ‫ת‬ѽЩс ЮѼѡ Ч оЫ цЧ оЭѲкЬ оЯ чуђЯЫ ьѣ Ч ѨЮ чукЫ ѨЯ оЮ “who enter these gates to worship the Lord”, omitted by Aldina, Sixtina and Frankfurt Bible. Jer. 7:13 – опоудчкб Чъ “oracle of the Lord” and ђЬѨ ЮнЧп чЬѱѡ Ч оЮ “rising early and speaking”, omitted by Aldina, Sixtina and Frankfurt Bible. 19 [!] Jer. 7:27-28 – a massive lack: чЭоуЬцкЩ Я‫ת‬кђЯЯ ёпЧ ָуЭцкЬ ѬьЧшѡ Ч Ы у кֹЧп оЭѲкЬ оЯ чуђЯЫ л ЧѪЮодцЯѱд‫ת‬кЭ чЭоуЬцкЩ в Я‫ת‬ђЧ ЮшѦЧп ‫׃‬оЯхѬъЩьЮу кֹЧп “all these words, they will not listen to you; you shall call to them, but they will not answer you; you shall say to them”. The passage is omitted by Aldina and Sixtina, but Frankfurt Bible added a part: εα ο ε εοτ οθ αέ ε· εα εαζΫ αμ α ο μ εα ο ε ποεριθο έ οι. Κα ρεῖμ πρ μ α ο μ. Jer. 8:3-4 – чЭоуЬцкЩ ЯѼђЮЧ шѦЧп ‫ת׃‬ѽкЯлѐЧ опоу чбкЧъ “oracle of the Lord of hosts; and you shall say to them”, omitted by Aldina, Sixtina and Frankfurt Bible. Jer. 8:5 – чЫ ЮцЯѡѬђЧ у “Jerusalem”, omitted by Aldina, Sixtina and Frankfurt Bible. [!] Jer. 8:10-12 – massive lack: оֹбѱ щЬоаѱднЮьпЧ куЫлЯ‫נּ‬шЫ ьЮѐѨЯ ьЮ ѐЬ а Ѩ оֹбѱ цѽнЯѩднЮьпЧ ща тЯ‫קּ‬шЫ уЫѱ ѬѢЯь оЯльЬ ѽ‫ ת‬уЫѱ ѬѡЫлао ‫׃‬чѽцЯѡ щуЬкпЧ чѽцЯѡ чѽцЯѡ ђа шкЬц оЯѲёЮ ЧъдцЮь уЫ‫מּ‬ьЮ д‫ת‬ЮѨ ђЭлѡ Э д‫ת‬кЭ Ѭ‫פּ‬ђЧЮ упЮ ‫׃‬ђЭёׁѻ Я оЭѢаь ‫׃‬оЯпоЧ у ђЮшѦ ѬцЧѡѱЯ Ы у ч Я‫ ת‬ЯѪбё‫פּ‬Ч ‫ת‬ЬьѨЧ чуЫцюЧ а ‫נּ‬Юл ѬцЧ‫פּ‬Ы у щЬхцЯ Ѭь ЯнЯ у кֹ чЬцѱЯ оЫ пЧ Ѭѡа лЬ удкֹ ѡѽѨдчЮѩ “from the small to the great, all are greedy for gain, from the prophet to the priest, all act falsely. And they have healed the hurt of my people lightly, saying: Peace, peace!, when there is no peace. They have acted shamefully, because they have committed abomination, yet they are not ashamed, they do not know how to blush; therefore, they shall fall among those who fall, in the time of their punishment they shall stumble, said the Lord”. The fragment is omitted by Aldina and Sixtina, but inserted by Frankfurt Bible following the Complutensian Polyglot: ι π ηιερο ωμ ηεΰΪζου πΪθ εμ φιζαρΰυρέαθ πο ιυεου ι· εα ε προφά ου ωμ ερΫωμ πΪθ εμ ποιο ι οε ομ. Κα α ρετοθ αι τθ ριηηα ο ζαο ηου πρ μ ιηέαθ ζΫΰοθ εμ, ε ράθη ε ράθη· εα ο ε θ ε ράθη. χτθγη αθ, ι ί Ϋζυΰηα ποέη αθ· εα α χτθη ο ε χτθγη αθ, εα α χυθγ θαι ο ε ο α ι, ι ο ο πε ο θ αι θ ηΫ οθ πΫπ οθ εμ, θ εαιρ πι εοπ μ α θ πε ο θ αι, ζΫΰει ετριομ. Jer. 8:13 – чѬђЧльЩ Ю у чЭоцЯ щ ЬѼкЭ пЯ “and I gave them that which they transgress”, omitted by Aldina, Sixtina and Frankfurt Bible. Jer. 8:17 – опоудчкб Чъ “oracle of the Lord”, omitted by Aldina, Sixtina and Frankfurt Bible. Jer. 8:21 – у ЫѼђЯЧ Ѩѡ Ч оЯ “I am broken”, omitted by Aldina, Sixtina and Frankfurt Bible. Jer. 9:2 – опоудчкб Чъ “oracle of the Lord”; φημ ετριομ added by Aldina, Sixtina and Frankfurt Bible. Jer. 9:5 – опоудчкб Чъ “oracle of the Lord”; φημ ετριομ added by Aldina, Sixtina and Frankfurt Bible. Jer. 9:9 – уЫоЭъпЯ “and wailing”, omitted by Aldina, Sixtina and Frankfurt Bible. Jer. 9:14 – оЭѭоЮ чЯьоЯ д‫ת‬кЭ “this people”, omitted by Aldina, Sixtina and Frankfurt Bible. Jer. 9:21 – опоудчкб Чъ оа ѱ ђЬѨ ЮѪ “speak: thus is the oracle of the Lord”, omitted by Aldina, Sixtina and Frankfurt Bible. [!] Jer. 10:6-8 – massive lack: ָЩкђЫЯ у кֹ уЫш ‫׃‬ођѬлЧ Я мѨЫ ָЧшѡ Ы цѽнЯмпЧ о ЯѼкЮ цѽнЯѩ оЯпоЧ у ָѽшЯѱ щуЬкшЬ ђЮыѬш ѬцЯыхЧ Ы упЧ ѬђЩьлЧ Ы у ‫ת‬ЮсѥЧлѬ ‫ָ׃‬ѽшЯѱ щуЬкшЬ ч Я‫ת‬ѬхЧцшЮ дцЯхлЧ Ѭ чЫ уѽѩЮо уЬшхЧ сЮ дцЯхлЧ уЫѱ о Я‫ת‬ѦЯ у ָЧц уЫѱ чЫ уѽѩЮо ְЭцшЭ ‫׃‬кѬо яЬь чуЫцлЯ оЩ “No one is like you, o Lord, you are great and your name is great in 20 power. Who would not fear you, o king of the nations, for that is your due. For among all the wise of the nations and among all their royalty no one is like you. But they are dull and foolish, instruction from vanities, only wood”. The entire fragment is missing in Aldina and Sixtina, but Frankfurt Bible added after Complutensian Polyglot: Ο ε ιθ ηοιομ οι ετριε, ηΫΰαμ ε εα ηΫΰα θοηΪ ου θ χτρ. Σέμ ο φοίηγά ε αέ ε, ία ιζε γθ θ; ο ΰ ρ πρΫπει, ι θ π ι οῖμ οφοῖμ θ γθ θ, εα θ πΪ αιμ αῖμ ία ιζεέαιμ α θο ε ιθ ηοιομ οι. Ἅηα φροθεμ εα θση οέ ε ι, ι α εαζέα ηα αέωθ α θ ιτζοθ έθ. This case is particularly instructive because an erroneous transposition in the Complutensian Polyglot is inherited in Frankfurt Bible ( ρΰ ριοθ ορευ θ ιθ ο πορε οθ αι is transposed form v. 9 of the Hebrew Bible before v. 5, i.e. before α ρ ηεθα ργ οθ αι). Aldina and Sixtina have their own rendering, by transposing entirely v. 5 after v. 9 of the Hebrew Bible. Jer. 10:10 – ѬцЫхЯудкֹЧп яђѦЯ Э о ѡЮьђЧ ЫѼ ѽ‫פּ‬Чѐ‫קּ‬Ы Ыш чЯцѽь ְЭцшЭ Ѭ чуЫ ‫יּ‬сЮ чуЫоֹ ШкдкѬо ‫ת‬шЭ кШ чуЫоֹкШ оЯпоуЮп ‫׃‬ѽшЧьЮр чЫ уѽм “And the Lord is truly God, he is a living God and king of eternity; at his wrath the earth trembles, and the nations cannot endure his rage”, omitted by Aldina, Sixtina and Frankfurt Bible. Jer. 10:13 – ѽѼ ЫѼ цѽёЧц “when he gave the thunder”, omitted by Aldina, Sixtina and Frankfurt Bible. Jer. 10:16 – тЭлѡ Ь цЬкђЧЯ ѢЫупЧ “and Israel tribe”, omitted by Aldina, Sixtina and Frankfurt Bible. I limited the comparative study to the first 10 chapters of the book of Jeremiah, because the result is evident. In some cases, particularly where a big textual fragment is missing from the Greek version, the Frankfurt Bible editors followed the Complutensian Polyglot and not the Aldine or the Sixtine Bibles, which are closer to each other. But the most important issue is the location of chap. 46-51 of the Hebrew text immediately after Jer. 25:13a in the Septuagint, in a different order (Elam, Egypt, Babylon, Philistia, Edom, Ammon, Kedar, Damascus and Moab). Here the Septuagintal edition seems to be earlier.23 After Jer. 25:13a, Aldina and Sixtina followed the chapter order of the Septuagint, while Frankfurt Bible rearranged the order in accordance with the Hebrew text just as the Complutensian Polyglot. Conclusions It seems to me that the additions from the Hebrew text into the Greek one, attested in the Frankfurt Bible and the Bucharest Bible, the latter copying obediently the former, do not follow a particular criterion. The only criterion which might be perceived is to follow the Complutensian Polyglot, although not in each case, but especially when there was massive text missing from the Greek text. 23 Jack R. Lundbom, Jeremiah 1-20, p. 59. 21 At its turn, in regard of the Greek text, the Complutensian Polyglot was criticized for its poor quality: “When the editors were faced occasionally by passages present in the Vulgate but absent from the Greek they filled in these gaps by translation from the Latin. This led Bishop Walton, editor of the greatest of the Polyglot Bibles, that of London 1657, to describe the Complutensian edition of the Septuagint as ‘consarcinata’”24. Séamus O’Connell studied the Greek text of the Complutensian Polyglot and reached similar conclusions: “The Greek column is an eclectic text constructed by a number of editors who worked semiindependently”25, of which only one knew Hebrew. “The first and the most constant influence is that of Vg [Vulgata]. Compl [The Complutensian Polyglot] was edited using Vg as a key guide in establishing the text. It must be emphasized that this applies to the overall shape of the text. Vg does not always influence Compl but it is a constant factor in the editing. […] MT [The Masoretic Text] is a lesser influence”26. Unfortunately, O’Connell investigation on the 4th volume of the Complutensian Polyglot is very brief, being limited to the book of Ezekiel. For the modern biblical scholar such edition might look barbarian, but for those times such an endeavor only applied the belief that the Latin version of Vulgate is authentic. Cardinal Primate of Spain Francisco Ximénez de Cisneros (1437-1517) who led the entire project of the Complutensian Polyglot wrote in the preface that the Latin text lies in center as Christ on the cross, while the Greek and Hebrew text flank it just as the two thieves. Another contemporary, Erasmus of Rotterdam, assumed that at the unionist Council of Ferrara-Florence (1438-1445) it was officially decided that the Greek biblical manuscripts should be corrected according to the Latin version27. This assumption is certainly wrong28, but there were indeed some cases of Greek manuscripts (as for example Codex Montfortianus from the XV-XVI cent.) adapted to the Vulgate. Anyway, the general picture could be clear. The Bucharest Bible of 1688 is based indeed on the Septuagint, but on a stitched or patched Septuagint, if I am allowed to borrow Brian Walton’s term, more incisive than O’Connell sympathetic view. Nevertheless, these additions do not affect the biblical text, do 24 S.L. Greenslade (ed.), The Cambridge History of the Bible, vol. 3, p. 57. Séamus O’Connell, From Most Ancient Sources: The Nature and Text-Critical Use of the Greek Old Testament Text of the Complutensian Polyglott Bible, Academic Press / Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Fribourg / Göttingen, 2006, OBO 215, p. 166. 26 S. O’Connell, From Most Ancient Sources, p. 168. 27 Erasmus wrote in the preface Contra morosos quosdam ac indoctos of the 1527 edition of his New Testament: “It should be pointed out here in passing, that certain Greek manuscripts of the New Testament have been corrected in agreement with those of the Latin Christians. This was done at the time of the reunion of the Greeks and the Roman church. This union was confirmed in writing in the so-called Golden Bull. It was thought that this would contribute to the strengthening of unity.” (transl. de Jonge, p. 387-388 cf. the following footnote). 28 Henk Jan de Jonge, “Erasmus and the Comma Johanneum”, Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 56 (1980), no. 4, p. 381-389 (p. 388). 25 22 not alter the ideas nor change the content, but to the contrary enrich it through lections from the Hebrew text via the Vulgate. This fact should worry us when someone claims that the unique text of the Romanian Orthodox Church must be the Septuagint and appeals to the tradition until 1914. The present study argues for a different approach: the Romanian biblical tradition starting with the Middle Ages up until now used a hybrid text. Descending from the Complutensian Polyglot, these Hebrew insertions under the influence of the Vulgate could be labeled grosso modo as Catholic influences. Unfortunately, I had no access to the Strasbourg and Basel Bibles, so in my study I am unable to clarify whether the Frankfurt Bible was the first that used the Complutensian Polyglot for non-Septuagintal additions or just followed previous editions that had already done it. On the other hand, one can observe a strong Protestant influence regarding the canon, different from the pure Septuagint, probably because the editors of the Frankfurt Bible were Calvinist (more precisely Huguenots). The book of Odes is missing and the anaginoskomena books are grouped together at the end and entitled Apocrypha, in the Protestant manner. As a matter of fact, in the Romanian Church, the biblical canon of the Bucharest Bible was kept with only small changes up until now. In the present “Synodal” edition Ezra and Esther lost their initial verses (catastihuri), similarly Ben Sira lost its introductions. The book of Josephus, i. e. 4 Maccabees, was eliminated from the canon and King Manasseh’s Prayer (chap. 12 of the book of Odes) was introduces at the end of the Old Testament. The Bucharest Bible was also responsible for the transposition of the first verse in Psalms as title, so that in time, through simplifications of these titles, the biblical texts from the beginning of the Psalms were removed, although they were well attested in both Hebrew and Greek textual tradition. I might compare this canon with Protestant influence of the Bucharest Bible with another one from the Eastern Orthodox world, prior with almost a century: the canon of the Slavonic Ostrog Bible (1581), which could represent in some scholars’ opinion, an intended compromise between the Catholic and Protestant biblical canons. Francis J. Thompson argues that “in fact it merely reflects the fact that there was no printed edition of the Greek Old Testament by an Orthodox publisher to which they could refer”29. But his explanation is not satisfactory. Even if there were no Eastern Orthodox examples for printed Bibles, the editors might have turned to manuscripts. Maybe the ultimate reason for the Eastern Orthodox looseness regarding the biblical canon is the separation of the Orthodox Church in the Middle Ages from the direct appeal to the Bible as it was during the golden Patristic era. In the medieval period, the Eastern Orthodox Church used lectionaries, i.e. Evangeliary, Apostolos and Prophetologion (Paremoimiarion), so 29 Francis J. Thomson, “The Slavonic Translation of the Old Testament”, p. 684. 23 only a selection of the Old Testament texts30. Already since the Byzantine period (8th century AD) the Eastern Orthodox world was not acquainted any more with reading the entire Bible. More than this, the translation of the Bible in vernacular languages in the Eastern Orthodox milieu was deemed as a progressive and humanistic enterprise, seen by some clerics as dangerous. That is why the translation into Neo-Greek of the New Testament proposed in 1638 by Maximus Kalliopolites was condemned at three synods, and another version was publicly burned in 170331. The Bucharest Bible of 1688 represents a secular project, only with a formal blessing of the Church, having therefore a restrain circulation in the ecclesiastic world.32 It is no coincidence that the project was primarily assumed by the Wallachian voivode.33 In conclusion, the hybrid translation is far from being an innovation of the 1936 Bible, as often claimed, but appeared from the beginning in the Romanian Orthodox biblical tradition. Bibliography Bădiliţă, Cristian / Francisca Băltăceanu / Monica Broşteanu / Dan Sluşanschi (ed.), Septuaginta, vol. 1, Colegiul Noua Europă / Polirom, Iaşi, 2004 Bădiliţă, Cristian, Glafire: Nouă studii biblice şi patristice, Polirom, Iaşi, 2008 Bietenholz, Peter G. / Thomas Brian Deutscher (ed.), Contemporaries of Erasmus: A Biographical Register of the Renaissance and Reformation, University of Toronto Press, Toronto, 1995 (republished from 1985) Campbell, Gordon, The Oxford Dictionary of Renaissance, Oxford University Press, 2003 Cândea, Virgil, “Les Bibles grecque et roumaine de 1687-1688 et les vises imperials de Şerban Cantacuzène”, Balkan Studies 10 (1969), p. 351-376; in Romanian: “Semnificaţia politică a unui act de cultură feudală”, Revista de istorie 16 (1963), no. 3, p. 651-671 30 James Miller, “The Prophetologion: The Old Testament of Byzantine Christianity?” in: Paul Magdalino / Robert Nelson (ed.), The Old Testament in Byzantium, Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington, 2010, p. 55-76. 31 Eugen Munteanu, Lexicologie biblică românească, p. 22, n. 15. 32 Alexandru Gafton, “Biblia de la 1688. Aspecte ale traducerii”, Text şi discurs religios 2 (2010), p. 49-72 (p. 52). 33 Virgil Cândea argued for a political motivation of the Bucharest Bible, namely the imperial ambitions of the Wallachian voivode after the unsuccessful siege of Vienna (1683) and the decline of the Ottoman offensive, see Virgil Cândea, “Les Bibles grecque et roumaine de 1687-1688 et les vises imperials de Şerban Cantacuzène”, Balkan Studies 10 (1969), p. 351-376; in Romanian: “Semnificaţia politică a unui act de cultură feudală”, Revista de istorie 16 (1963), no. 3, p. 651-671. Cf. Emanuel Conţac, “Tradiţia biblică românească. O prezentare succintă din perspectiva principalelor versiuni româneşti ale Sfintelor Scripturi”, Studii Teologice 7 N.S. (2011), no. 2, p. 159-245 (p. 177-178). 24 Conţac, Emanuel, “Tradiţia biblică românească. O prezentare succintă din perspectiva principalelor versiuni româneşti ale Sfintelor Scripturi”, Studii Teologice 7 N.S. (2011), no. 2, p. 159-245 Evans, Robert John Weston, The Wechel Presses: Humanism and Calvinism in Central Europe, 1572-1627, Oxford, 1975, Past and Present Society 2 Gafton, Alexandru, “Biblia de la 1688. Aspecte ale traducerii”, Text şi discurs religios 2 (2010), p. 49-72 Greenslade, S.L. (ed.), The Cambridge History of the Bible, vol. 3: The West from the Reformation to the Present Day, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2004 (republished from 1963) Ică jr., Ioan, “Înapoi la Septuaginta”, TABOR 1 (2008), no. 11, p. 5-25 Ică jr., Ioan, Canonul Ortodoxiei, vol. 1, Deisis / Stavropoleos, Sibiu, 2008 de Jonge, Henk Jan, “Erasmus and the Comma Johanneum”, Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 56 (1980), no. 4, p. 381-389 Jugie, M., “Le canon de l’Ancien Testament dans l’Église byzantine”, Échos d’Orient 10 (1907), p. 129-135 Jugie, M., “Le canon de l’Ancien Testament dans l’Église russe depuis le XVIIIe siècle”, Échos d’Orient 10 (1907), p. 263-274 Jugie, M., “Les deutérocanoniques dans l’Église grecque depuis le XVIIIe siècle”, Échos d’Orient 10 (1907), p. 344-357 Jugie, M., “Les deutérocanoniques de l’Ancien Testament dans l’Église orthodoxe aux XVIe et XVIIe siècles”, Échos d’Orient 10 (1907), p. 193-199 Maclean, Ian, Scholarship, Commerce, Religon: The Learned Book in the Age of Confessions, 1560-1630, Harvard University Press, 2012 Miller, James, “The Prophetologion: The Old Testament of Byzantine Christianity?” in: Paul Magdalino / Robert Nelson (ed.), The Old Testament in Byzantium, Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, Washington, 2010, p. 55-76 Müller, Mogens, The First Bible of the Church: A Plea for the Septuagint, Sheffield Academic Press, Sheffield, 1996, JSOTSupp 206 Munteanu, Eugen, Lexicologie biblică românească, Humanitas, Bucureşti, 2008 O’Connell, Séamus, From Most Ancient Sources: The Nature and Text-Critical Use of the Greek Old Testament Text of the Complutensian Polyglott Bible, Academic Press / Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Fribourg / Göttingen, 2006, OBO 215 Pentiuc, Eugen J., The Old Testament in Eastern Orthodox Tradition, Oxford University Press, Oxford / New York, 2014 Savelovici, Anton, Textul Sfintei Scripturi în Biserica Ortodoxă Română, Valahia University Press / Bibliotheca, Târgovişte, 2012 Thomson, Francis J., “The Slavonic Translation of the Old Testament”, in: Jože Krašovec (ed.), The Interpretation of the Bible: The International Symposium in Slovenia, Sheffield Academic Press, Sheffield, 1998 Tov, Emanuel, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, second revised edition, Augsburg Fortress, Minneapolis / Van Gorcum, Assen, 2001 25 Vassiliadis, Petros, “The Liturgical Use of the Bible in Greek Orthodoxy: An Orthodox Critical Approach in 12 Steps”, paper delivered in an international conference on “The Present and the Future of Biblical Studies in the Orthodox and the Catholic Churches”, held in Firenze, Italy (6-7 June, 2013) http://auth.academia.edu/PetrosVassiliadis/Papers 26 Actes 20, 28 dans les manuscrits byzantines: le texte, la traduction et l’exégèse Claudiu-Ioan COMAN The text we will analyze is part of Chapter 20 of the Acts. This chapter can be divided into three parts: Acts 20, 1-6: Exposure trip of the Apostle Paul in Greece, Acts 20, 7-12 resurrection of a child in Troas, Acts 20, 13-16 the journey from Troas to Miletus and finally, Acts 20, 17-38: the sermon of the Apostle addressed to the presbyters of Ephesus. What we learn is the last part of the sermon in which the Apostle Paul, concerned that he anticipated the fate martyrique not allow him to find the middle of the Ephesian community sends priests net advice aimed at maintaining unaltered faith amidst the community. If Acts 20:28 a, in terms of writing does not have problems, we can not say the same Acts 20:28 b. We have a wide variety of manuscripts from which we select and analyze only those Byzantine . The analysis of the text requires first some methodological clarification. Verse 28b , which interests us in this study is difficult. Until now, we have a large number of manuscripts using interpolations more or less justified , the transmitted in different ways. In translation , the text of the critical edition prepared by Nestle -Aland is: ”Take care of yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to feed the church of God that he won with his own blood”. In what follows, our study is the historical and textual analysis of the verse, the establishment - as much as possible original elements, presenting it through a comparison of some editions of the Bible translated into Romanian and, not least as far as possible, indicating the original theological sense ,in other words ,the intention of the sacred writer. Keywords: textual criticism, manuscriptology, the byzantine text of Acts, papyrology, critical edition of the New Testament Avant de commencer notre recherche sur le texte, on doit préciser le fait que l’édition critique NA26 qu’on a parlé, présente, naturellement, la version universellement acceptée dans le cadre eclesiastique. Cette chose est, sans doute, bénéfique. Par conséquent, nous, qui de nos jours, étudions ou au moins lisons les textes du Nouveau Testament, on est privilegié car on a , grace au travail de certains chercheurs, une édition intégrale à la base de laquelle on peut remonter dans le temps et on a aussi la capacité de découvrir les intentions originales de l’auteur sacré et les modifcations souffertes par le texte aux interventions des scribes. Pour notre étude, il est nécéssaire de quelques travaux assez importantes, sans lesquels l’analyse textuelle, l’éxégèse et l’hermeneutique ne trouveraient pas 27 une finalité. Pour cette raison, les études de Bruce Metzger1, de Kurt Aland et de Barbara Aland2 sont d’une importance primordiale. L’histoire de la recherche de ce verset n’arrête pas dans ce point. Plusieurs chercheurs ont tenté d’éxpliquer en détail, de différentes manières, avec des arguments bien fondés, les interpolations textuelles qui, au fil du temps, sont apparus ici3 et de mettre en évidence les idées théologiques du texte, tirés de ces aspects passionantes de la critique textuellle néotestamentaire. La nécéssité d’un nouveau étude s’impose parce que, au moment, à notre connaissance, dans la théologie biblique roumaine, les informations concernant directement la critique textuelle lucanique et l’analyse des manuscrits byzantins manquent au cas que , comme d’ailleurs il est naturel, on ignore des homilies thématiques d’un caractère moralisateur. En Occident, on a rencontré un tout autre situation. L’étude des textes ,,de première main’’ des papyrus a suscité de nombreux études. 4 Alors, quel a été le sort du verset 28? Pour le verset 28.a, comme on a déjà mentionné, on n’a pas de problèmes particulières. L’édition 1 Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary On The Greek New Testament, Deutsche Bibelstiftung, Sttutgart, 21994, p. 425. 2 Kurt Aland, Barbara Aland, The Text of the New Testament. An Introduction to the Critical Editions and to the Theory and Practice of Modern Textual Criticism, Deutsche Bibelstiftung, Sttutgart, 21989, p. 317- 337. 3 Parmi les études dediées à ce verset on rapelle les plus rélévantes. Tout d’abord, les études qui font référence, parmi les autres, à ce sujet, sont particulièrement importantes ;E. Schweizer, Gemeinde und Gemeinde-Ordnung im Neuen Testament. Le travail apparu en 1959 se réfère au verset 28, dans les chapitres suivantes: §§ 5 I, 1, 24a; M. Dömer, Das Heil Gottes, Köln/Bonn, 1978, p. 195-200; F. Prast, Presbyter und Evangelium in nachapostolischer Zeit, Stuttgart, 1979, p. 37120; 86-185; 90-191. Parmi les études bybliques néotestamentaires dédiées exclusivement à l’éxégèse du verset 28 on rapelle les suivantes: J. Dupont, Le discours de Milet: Testament pastoral de Saint Paul, Actes 20, 18-36, 1962, p. 23-25; 98-135; A. W. Wainwright, The Trinity in the New Testament, London, 21966, p. 73-74. On ajoute que cet étude d’ Arthur W. Wainehright fait seulement une analyse sommaire? du verset 28 en soulignant le rôle de la Sainte Trinité Bruce M. Metzger, The Text of the New Testament, Oxford, 1964, p. 36-234. L’étude est importante grace au fait que contrairement à d’autres commentaires qui dogmatisent l’éxégèse, ici on analyse une série de manuscrits précoces. Ce travail est très précieux pour l’étude présent car il met en évidence de différentes aspects hystoriques qui, malhéuresement, sont ignorés par certaines biblistes; G. E. Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament, Grand Rapids Publishing House, 1974, p. 352-353, 532533. 4 Parmi cela on rappelle: Kurt Aland, Barbara Aland, The Text of the New Testament: An Introduction to the Critical Editions and to the Theory and Practice of Modern Textual Criticism, translated by E. F. Rhodes, Leiden/Brill, 21989, p. 96-102, et passim; on trouve une autre liste sur les plus précoces papyrus de Nouveau Testament dans Kurt Aland, Michael Welte, Beate Köster, Klaus Junack, Kurzgefasste Liste der griechischen Handschriften des Neuen Testaments, în ANTF (Arbeiten zur neutestamentlichen Textforschung), vol. 1, Berlin/New York, 21994, p. 3-16. Une étude exceptionnelle qui analyse les papyrus en détail c’est celle de Kurt Aland (ed.), Repertorium der griechischen christlichen Papyri, I: Biblische Papyri, Altes Testament, Neues Testament, Varia, Apokryphen, vol. 18, de Gruyter, Berlin, 1976, p. 216-360; C. M. Cobren, New Archaeological Discoveries, New York, 1917, p. 137, 144, la première table; Kurt Aland, Zur Liste der Neuentestamentlichen Handschriften VI, en ZNW (Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche), nr. 48/1957, p. 148, 151. 28 NA26, qu’on a utilisé comme base pour cette étude, n’offre pas aucune explication, aucun détail, que ce soit petit, concernant autres variantes, en dehors de la classique. Toutefois, même dans cette situation, on n’a pas des arguments plausibles d’exclure la possibilité de l’intervention des scribes sur cette partie. On sait que, souvent, ou même toujours, les intentions des copistes et des scribes généraient de nouvelles idées théologiques qu’il introduisaient dans le texte de l’Écriture pour le faire servir leur propres intérêts. Alors, on aura comme support la théologie pauline car dans les Actes 20, 28, le texte parle sur le témoignage de Paul, sur les conseils adressés par l’Apôtre des peuples au presbytres d’Ephèse. Pour connaître la pnéumatologie pauline il faut revenir à l’un des textes fondamentaux de Saint Paul, à savoir : 1 Cor. 12, 13-31. Dans ce texte, l’Apôtre Paul est intéréssé par la société antique, qu’il regardait comme un corps des plusieurs membres. Mais, il est peu probable que l’idée de société comme corps soit aussi la source de la conception pauline5, comme certaines études récentes le démontre. Pour reconstituer le texte, au possible, il est très important de vérifier le verset 13a du 1Cor., 12. Ici, Saint Paul se réfère au Saint Esprit qui est L’Un car on a été baptisés avec un seul baptême, la forme textuelle étant l’aoriste, ce qui dénote une référence à l’Éucharistie, tel qu’il apparaît, en première lecture, au lecteur amateur, ce verset. 1 Cor. 3, 16 montre l’opposition de l’Apôtre Paul face au secte ésseniene qui accentuait/soulignait le sacrifice spirituel6. Pour moment, il ne s’impose pas de tirer une conclusion définitive sur le fait que les scribes n’auraient pas intervenu dans le 28a. La recherche doit avancer. Même si on n’avons aucun texte original neotestamentaire, on a des imitations précoces, des manuscrits importantes qui, après l’étude, nous conduisent même à l’idée originale du vrai auteur, pas aux intentions théologiques que le scribe a eu. 1 Corinthiens a été écrite par l’apôtre Paul lorsqu’il était a Éphèse, peu avant le Pentecôte (cf. Actes 16, 8), probablement la dernière année d’y rester - c’est-àdire au début du 557. Il ne suffirait pas de montrer que cette lettre- au point de vue de la date de la rédaction- précède les Actes pour détérminer le fait que le verset 28a révèle une pensée typiquement pauline. Par contre. L’édition critique du NA, et l’édition Wescott/Hort8 sont contredites en ce qui concerne la singularité de la réception du texte par la variante EOB qui, ayant comme support un texte orthodoxe byzantin, présente dans sa forme originale grecque une particularité: le v. 28a, dans la partie de début, a la forme suivante: „προ Ϋχε ε οὖ αυτοῖ ”. Par 5 Raymond E. Brown, Joseph A. Fitzmayer, Roland E. Murphy (coord.), Introducere și comentariu la Scriptură: Literatura paulină, vol. VII, traduit et traité en roumain par P. Dumitru Groșan, Édition Galaxia Gutenberg, Târgu-Lăpuș, 2008, p. 127. 6 Ibidem, p. 91. 7 D. A. Carson & Douglas J. Moo, Introducere în Noul Testament, traduction par Dinu Moga, Édition Făclia, 2007, p. 514. 8 Brook. F. Wescott, Fenton J. A. Hort, Greek New Testament, Wake Forest, Noth Carolina, 1889, p. 443. 29 consèquent, EOB9 ajoute au pronom réfléchi, en cas datif, la troisième personne, pluriel, la conjonction „ο θ”, qui, bien qu’il apporte beaucoup de changements dans le texte, cependant, est un ajout qui n’est pas signalé dans les éditions critiques qu’on a consulté, fait qui affirme l’authenticité/la véracité de l’éxistence d’autres variantes textuelles, le plus probable d’origine byzantine, du moment que/puisque seulement les variantes orthodoxes ont cette insertion. Tout en revenant à 1 Corinthiens et à la pneumatologie pauline, il faut mentionner la contribution de J. C. Hurd, The Origin of 1 Corinthians10. Selon lui, la cronologie lucanique des Actes doit être desconsiderée. Il postule une variante supplémentaire: pendant deux années, Paul sera enseigné à Corinthe, est passé par le changement totale de position et ensuite il a adopté la „maturité” de 1 Corinthiens. Si on analyse de plus près, l’opinion d’Hurd ne peut pas être vrai: le temps serait trop court pour de tels dévéloppements et, dans une autre ordre d’idées, si Paul se préoccupait d’ offrir aux Églises de nouvelles récommandations extraites du Decret apostolique, c’est rémarquable que le dernier n’est même pas mentionné! Par consèquent, la recherche d’Hurd ne peut rester qu’une simple hypothèse11. Il faut aussi mentionner deux recherches eclesiologiques12 ou axées sur le problème des prêtres de la période post-apostolique13. On a déjà conturée une position dogmatique résidé par l’analyse du verset. Si on se dirige exclusivement sur les idées du Few, on rémarque que, pour lui, le terme „ekklēsia” a une conotation nationale, tel comme l’Église de Jésus Christ s’identifiérait avec un certain peuple14. À la fin de cette analyse préliminaire en ce qui concerne la réception du texte, la conclusion est claire: mettre en péril le texte -, biensûr , involontairement,- dirige vers des idées théologique qui n’ont assez souvent aucune liaison avec l’intention du début de l’auteur biblique. Malheureusement, beaucoup d’éditions critiques du Nouveau Testament, éditées dans des conditions difficiles. avec des éfforts considérables, conduisent vers une réception confessionelle du texte sacrée. „ ύ ο ” préféré par Luc, „ οῦ”, ajout des scribes? Les Actes 20,28 est un texte qui, au cours du temps, a subi de nombreux changements. Depuis le début il y a eu des différentes variantes textuelles sur ce verset. Parmi les variantes connues on rémarque en tête P74. Pour analyser ce 9 Laurent Cleenewerck (ed.), The Eastern/ Greek Orthodox Bible New Testament, 2007, p. 327. J. C. Hurd, The Origin of 1Corinthians, London, SPCK, 1965, p. 368. 11 Pour ce débat, l’étude de J.W.Drane est rémarquable, à savoir: Paul: Libertine or Legalist?, London, SPCK, 1975, p. 97 et les suivantes. Une monographie assez importante et plus complète c’est celle de Riesner, Paul`s Early Period: chronology, mission strategy, theology, Eermands Publishing House, Cambridge, 21998, p. 537. 12 R. N. Flew, Jesus and His Church, The Epeorth Press, London,31956, p. 142. 13 F. Prast, Presbyter und Evangelium in nachapostolischer Zeit, Stuttgart, 1979, p. 37-120; 86185; 91- 190. 14 Pour des détails sur ce sujet assez importante, voir l’ étude d’exception de George Bradford Craig, New Testament Theology, Oxford University Press, 1995, p. 381 passim. 10 30 papyrus datant du VII-ème siècle on a beaucoup d’études précieuses.15 On n’y insiste pas sur le sujet. Pour notre étude il est important parce qu’il est très probable qu’un scribe soit intervenu avec un „ajout” propre sur le texte. La thèse semble plausible car, tel que Raymond F. Collins16 le montre, P74 est plus récent que P66, P72 et P73. L’intérêt accru pour P74 dans cette étude a comme base le substantif propre, en cas génitif, masculin, singulier „γεο ”. Ce qui nous attire l’attention particulièrement est un seul aspect : est-ce que les manuscrits byzantins se sont rapportés à une tradition récente, ou ont utilisé les variantes textuelles plus anciens? Jusqu’au conclusion, il est nécéssaire une analyse plus détaillée sur v. 28b de P74. Il est rémarquable le fait que, lorsque Paul parle de Dieu, il utilise, comme on a indiqué ci-dessus, le substantif „γεο ”. Comme terme théologique, „γε μ” désignait, au début, pour la philosophie grecque, plutôt ce qui est lié au divin que la possibilité de décrire un dieu personnel.17 Les pères de l’Église ont emprunté/pris le concept et l’ont utilisé lorsqu’ils se référaient au Dieu18. Pour déterminer exactement si au cas P74 on se confronte avec un terme qui est conforme aux intentions de l’auteur, se rapporter aux écrits néotéstamentaires représente le coeur de l’éxégèse. Du point de vue de la gramatique on utilise „ ο γεο ” en génitif lorsqu’il est précédé par d’autres noms (par exemple, dans ce cas, „ θ εεζη αθ”, un nom à l’accusatif, féminin, singulier), en suggérant l’idée de „messager’’ du Dieu ou, dans ce cas-là, un concept (c-est-à dire l’Église) qui a été fondé du Sacrifice rédempteur et de l’Ascension de Jésus, le jour de la Pentecôte, au même temps avec la Descente du Saint-Esprit sur les Apôtres. Plusieurs fois, ce nom en génitif est utilisé par Luc dans son Évangile. Les versets lucaniques dont on se réfère sont les suivantes: Luca 3, 38; 6, 4; 6, 12; 9, 20; 11, 42; 11, 49 ou, en particulier, 20, 25 où l’expression „εα ο γεο γε ” „et celles de Dieu, au Dieu” se réfère au culte, au vénération due à Dieu. Ces références lucaniques nous aident à établir l’authenticité de l’utilisation du nom en génitif dans les Actes 20, 28b. Le verset 38b, est signalé au final par l’édition NA26 avec „\”, ce qui signifie qu’il y a des problèmes de réception du texte; plus précis, on se confronte à une 15 À propos de ce papyrus qui n’a pas soulevé très grands problèmes pour la critique textuelle néotestamentaire, l’ouvrage de Jesse Russell și Ronald Cohn, Papyrus 74, Book on Demand, 2012, pp. 128 reste comme une référence. Son nom, P74, est juste une variante que Nestle-Aland le préfere. Du point de vue de la classification, P74 fait partie de la première catégorie, puisqu’elle est de bonne qualité et d’un grand aide pour établir le texte original. Une autre étude assez importante liée aux papyrus decouverts par Martin Bodmer , integrés dans la collection qui porte son nom sont les suivantes: Rudolf Kasser, Papyrus Bodmer XVII: Actes des Apôtres, Epîtres de Jacques, Pierre, Jean et Jude, Cologny, Geneva, 1961. 16 Raymond F. Collins, Introduction to the New Testament, SCM Press LTD, London, 1983, p. 81. 17 Cf. Francis E. Peters, Termenii filozofiei grecești, traduit par Dragan Stoianovici, Édition Humanitas, București, 32007, p. 278. 18 On peut trouver beaucoup d’exemples dans ce sens en G. W. H. Lampe (ed.), A Patristic Greek Lexicon, Calderon Press, Oxford, 1961, p. 632-635. 31 omission. Il ne faut pas ignoré un aspect décissif: Luc écrit une narration historique et tel que David E. Aune19 en témoigne, il ne quitte pas les modèles classiques; plusieurs fois, les généalogies greco-romains sont dirigés de la même manière que celle de Luc: la ligne initiale avec Adam, en passant par l’histoire d’Israel, faite par foi et chutes, a été accomplie par Jésus. Comme début eschatologique de Dieu, Jésus est la tête de ceux qui appartiennent au Dieu20. On se trouve ici, probablement devant une narration originale car, si, par exemple, on compare Luc 3, 38b avec Luc 6,4 on rémarque qu’en 6, 4 le scribe ou les scribes ont intervenu, car ce passage semblait équivoque. Si en Luc 3, 38b: „ ο θ μ ο ΢ γ ο η ο γεο ” le texte ne présente pas des interpolations, en Luc 6,4 : „[ μ] ε ζγεθ ε μ θ ο εοθ ο γεο εα ο μ ρ ουμ μ προγ εωμ ζαί θ φαΰεθ εα ωεεθ οῖμ ηε ’ α ο , οὓμ ο ε ιε ιθ φαΰεῖθ ε η η θουμ ο μ ερεῖμ”, un texte qui parle sur le sermon que Jésus prèche aux pharisiens lorsqu’íl accuse les disciples qu’il ont cassé épices le samedi, il y a beaucoup de problèmes textuelles. Le scribe a la tendance d’harmoniser les passages et d’éliminer autre types de „problèmes”21. Dans la plupart des manuscrits, P74, A, C*, D, E, Φ, 33, 36, 453, 945, 1739, 1891 dans lequel le texte des Actes 20,28 apparaît, les différences de lire „ ο γεο ” ou „ ο ετριο ” sont nombreuses. Par exemple, on fera référence aux majuscules A,C et au final, к. Le dernier manuscrit a une particularité: bien qu’il est plus ancien que A et C, cependant, d’une manière bizarre, le scribe y préfere l’utilisation de „ ο γεο ”. Le manuscrit qu’on fera référence premièrement est к (Codex Sinaiticus)22. Le texte est le suivant: „-ουθ. ποιηεθιθ. [γυ]... ”23. L’abréviation [γυ], présente dans la plupart des éditions critiques du Nouveau Testament est – comme l’éditeur de ce codex en témoigne- une lecture douteuse; donc, on s’y confronte à un texte corrompu par les intentions ou par la négligence d’un scribe ou des plusieurs scribes, même si ce Codex est daté depuis le IV-ème siècle, bien avant les autres majuscules qui, curieusement, ont corrigé l’erreur. A (Codex Alexandrinus), un manuscrit qui date du V-ème siècle, contient „ ο Κτριο ” dans le v. 28 des Actes 2024. Il est très important le fait qu’une onciale si ancienne contient un texte qui se diffèrencie du sort des manuscrits tardives, car il nous aide à parcourir une 19 David E. Aune, The New Testament in Its Literary Environment, Westminster Press, 1987, p. 121. Raymond E. Brown, Joseph A. Fitzmayer, Roland E. Murphy, Introducere și comentariu la Scriptură. Evangheliile sinoptice, vol. VII, traduit et traité par P. Dumitru Groșan, Édition Galaxia Gutenberg, Târgu-Lăpuș, 2007, p. 373-374. 21 Sur cette thème, il est assez intéressant l’étude ample, en deux volumes de J. F. J. Klijn, A Survey of the Researches into the Western Text of the Gospels and Acts, vol. I, Kemnik & Zoon, Utrecht, 1949. La deuxième partie éditée au Leiden/Brill 1969 est aussi importante. 22 Cf. Frederick H. Scrivener (ed.), A full collation of the Codex Sinaiticus with the received Text of the New Testament, Cambridge, London, 1861, p. 131. 23 Ibidem, p. 131. 24 Cf. B. H. Cowper (ed.), Novum Testamentum Graece ex antiquissimo Codice Alexandrino, Williams & Norgate, London, 1860, p. 278. 20 32 distance considérable jusqu’aux textes originaux, qui, malheuresement, ne se sont pas conservés; la chance est que, du point de vue historique, on peut déduire, au moins comme une hypothèse, quel était le texte original. C (Codex Ephraemi), un manuscrit „de première main”, étant daté tout comme A dans le V-ème siècle, contient „ ο Κτριο ”, comme dans le cas de A. Les autres manuscrits, les majuscules, et les minuscules aussi, gardent cette règle de l’utilisation du nom en génitif „ ο Kτριο ”. Dans un autre ordre d’idées, une des thèses les plus intéressantes en ce qui concerne la création du vocabulaire lucanique, est celle de Brandly S. Billings25. L’auteur montre que le texte occidental, présent en D, est le plus probable une compilation des textes d’origines différentes et puis réunis dans ce qu’on appelle aujourd’hui Codex Bezae (D)26. Par consèquent, bien qu’on est tenté à penser que D est fondé sur une tradition unique, la possibilité que plusieurs traditions soit eloignés du texte initial de l’auteur sacrée est assez grande. Pour le problème de la réception du nom „ ο γεο ”, en génitif la thèse de Carsten Peter Thiede27 est utile. Pour Thiede, les choses sont simples: un chercheur des manuscrits doit connaître en détail les abréviations utilisés par les scribes dans les papyrus bibliques. Par exemple, „KS” signifie „KYRYOS”, c’est-à-dire „le Séigneur”. Ainsi, pour les scribes, les abréviations étaient ce que pour nous aujourd’hui on appelerait une sorte de code secret. C’est pourquoi si on prend comme vrai cette hypothèse que Thiede la propose on arrive à une autre conclusion: le nom en génitif „ ο γεο ”, aurait à la base le nom „ετριομ”28; donc, on considère que Thiede avance une thèse plausible. On soutient l’idée sur un texte pré-paulin inséré en Philippiens 2, 5-1129. 25 Brandly S. Billings, Do this in remembrance of Me. The Disputed Words in the Lukan Institution Narative (Luke 22, 19b-20): An Historico-Exegetical, Theological and Sociological Analysis, London, 2006, p. 12-21. 26 Ibidem, p. 15. 27 Carsten Peter Thiede, Papyrology, Biblical Papyrology, New Testament Papyrology- but what is this? în: „Evangel. The British Evangelical Review”, nr. 18/2000, p. 77-87. 28 Ibidem, p. 80. 29 Bien que le style de la lettre est caractéristique à Paul, toutefois, il y a une ample dispute entre les biblistes qui considèrent que le prétendu hymne christologique de Philippiens 2, 5-11 n’appartenerait à l’Apôtre des peuples. Une partie du vocabulaire paulin est totalement différente face au vocabulaire paulin „traditionnel”. Par exemple, -ηορϕά „forme” du vv. 6-7; Ϊρπαΰησμ qui peut signifier soit „quelque chose utilisé dans son propre avantage”, soit „” ou τπερυοσω,...et aussi autres mots semblables, ne se trouvent nulle part dans les lettres paulines. Pour des informations supplémentaires sur cette thème les études suivantes sont assez importantes: Peter T. O Brien, The Epistle to the Philippians: A Commentary on the Greek Text, Grand Rapids, Eermands, 1991, p. 186-202. O’Brien soutient que ces versets représenterait un hymne, le plus probable, liturgique. Des arguments contre cette théorie dans l’ouvrage de Gordon D. Fee, Philippians 2, 5-11: Hymn or Exalted Pauline Prose? în: „Bulletin for Biblical Research”, nr. 2/1992, p. 29-46. 33 Comme dans les Actes 20, 28, Philipiens 2,6 dans l’édition NA26 il y a le terme „γεο ”30 : „ μ θ ηορφ ῦ π ρχωθ ο χ ρπαΰη θ ΰ α ο ε θαι α γε ”. Soit-elle cette interpolation une qui a indiqué une ligne en théologie au cours du temps? Dans quelle mesure a t-elle influencé la Tradition, ce concept-là? Est-ce qu’il a été un changement bénéfique ou seulement une simple erreur des scribes sans un impact sur la doctrine? Toutes ces questions sont justifiées. Si, du point de vue doctrinaire, un texte n’a pas une influence considérable sur la Tradition chrétienne, alors, biensûr, il est très importante de préciser le plus exactement la términologie initiale. Dans ce cas, on a identifié des différences de texte qui seront importantes pour soutenir la priorité de „ετριομ” avant l’ interpolation des éditions critiques du Nouveau Testament „ ο γεο ”. Un des plus intéréssantes points de vue sur cette thème appartient à J.A. Fitzmeyer qui affirme que : „Luc, par le fait qu’il utilise ετριομ dans ces écrits, tant pour YHWH, que pour Jésus, continue le sens avec lequel le titre circulait déjà dans la communauté chrétienne primaire, qui, d’une certaine manière, considérait Jésus comme YHWH”31. Craddock parle sur le fait que Luc considérait Jésus comme pré–existant32. Entre ces deux opinions il y a une liaison très importante. Fitzmeyer semble adhérer aux idéés de Craddock à la mesure où il insiste sur le fait que, tel qu’on saissise de la lecture de son Évangile, il n’appelle pas Jésus „ετριομ” que s’il est sous l’inspiration divine (cf. Luc 1, 43, 76), s’il est un ange (cf. Luc 2, 11) ou s’il montre les alusions indirectes à Soimême de Jésus (cf.Luc 19, 31, 34)33. De même, l’exégète Dunn soutient que Luc n’harmonise pas le langage christologique avec la narration; pour Luc, Jésus n’a pas pleinement assumé les rôles de„Séigneur” „Méssie” pour toutes les choses qu’après son Résurrection et son Ascension. Cela ne signifie pas que Jésus aurait devenu un être différente de ce qui avait été avant, mais Il est entré dans une nouvelle étape de Son mission ou Il a assumé des nouveaux rôles après la Résurrection34. Comme une particularité l’étude de Frank J. Matera35 dediée à la hristologie s’éloigne un peu de la ligne éxégètique qu’on a suivi dans les recherches des biblistes qu’on est venu d’évidencier. Matera considére plus important l’accént mis sur l’ecclésiologie, sur le peuple de Dieu racheté par le sang de Son propre Fils, que l’approche textuelle pour déterminer si, au début, l’auteur a préféré „ετριομ” au „ ο γεο ”. Enfin, comme dernier argument pour 30 ***, Novum Testamenum Graece, op., cit., p. 517. La même dans le texte du Nouveau Testament édité par Erwin Nestle: ***, Novum Testamentum graece et latine, Stuttgart, 111932, p. 503. 31 J. A. Fitzmeyer, The Gospel According to Luke 1-9, Garden City, Doubleday, 1981, p. 203. 32 B. Craddock, The Preexistence of Christ in the New Testament, Nashville, Abbingdon, 1968, p. 192. 33 J. A. Fitzmeyer, op., cit., p. 34. 34 J. D. G. Dunn, Christology in the Making. A New Testament Inquiry into the Origins of the Doctrine of the Incarnation, Philadelphia, Westminster, 21989, p. 196-208. 35 Frank J. Matera, New Testament Christology, Westminster John Knox Press, Kentucky, 1999, p. 76. 34 lequel on considère que Luc aurait préféré „ετριομ” on utilise l’hypothèse de H.C. Kee36 qui traite trois passages des Actes: 7, 60; 13, 2 și 16, 14-15. Selon son hypothèse qu’il affirme en analysant trois passages, Luc suggére que Jésus est Celui dont la personne prie, le vénere et lui confie. Une telle ambiguité ne dérange pas Luc , car, dans sa conception, la terminologie est valable pour Dieu et pour Jésus aussi. En conclusion, on a des arguments plausibles pour penser que le nom en génitif „ ο γεο ” est un ajout qui a remplacé le nom „ετριομ”; la dernière variante est celle qui a été réconnue comme „textus receptus” et, ainsi, elle a été adoptée par les éditions critiques de Nouveau Testament. Les Actes 20,28b: le problème de l’interpolation de l’expression „αἵ ατο τοῦ ἰ ίου” Si au dessus on a débatu un seul nom, on propose ici un débat plus ample, car on a un nom en génitif, neutre, singulier „α ηα ομ” qui, en tranduction signifie „sang”, puis un article génitival, masculin, singulier „ ο ” et, enfin, un adjectif en génitif, masculin, singulier „ ου”. Le problème est plus ample: dans certaines éditions (par exemple celle appartenant à l’Église catholique), apparaît un ajout qui explique sur lequel sang il s’agit, à savoir: [le sang] du „Son Propre Fils”37. Bien que dans cette édition critique de l’Écriture les éditeurs fournisent une note explicative où ils précisent qu’ils ont choisi cette variante car elle est est très utilisé dans certaines éditions modernes de l’Écriture (BJ, RSV, TEV), toutefois, la nouvelle traduction modèle de l’Église Romaine-Catholique reste, de notre point de vue, incomplète. Alors on rémarque que les traducteurs ont utilisé les éditions modernes , sans passer en revue les plus importantes manuscrits après lesquelles on a établi ce qu’on appelle aujourd’hui les écrits du Nouveau Testament. Les traducteurs catholiques ont procédé de la même manière au cas de la traduction du Nouveau Testament38, quoique, de nouveau, on précise qu’ainsi le texte devient plus facile à recevoir pour le fidèle commun. Les traductions qu’on rélève ici ne sont pas arbitraires. Au contraire. L’ajout à ce qu’on appelle „textus receptus” est du à l’activité du C.Knapp39 celui qui, en 1797, a édité Le Nouveau Testament en utilisant les répéres de la critique textuelle du Johann Jakob Griesbach. L’édition de Knapp s’est répandue très vite en Allemagne, une preuve c’est le fait qu’elle est rappelée tant dans l’édition bilingve Novum Testamentum Graece et Latine d’Eberhard Nestle40, que dans les éditions Novum Testamentum Graece édités par E.Nestle et G.Aland41 aussi. La plupart des manuscrits 36 H. C. Kee, Good News to the Ends of the Earth: The Theology of Acts, Trinity Press International, Philadelphia, 1990, p. 30. 37 ***, Biblia, traduction, introduction et notes: pr. Alois Bulai, pr. Eduard Pătrașcu, Édition Sapientia, Iași, 2013, p. 2669. 38 Le Nouveau Testament, traduction, introduction et notes : pr. Alois Bulai, pr. Anton Budău, Édition Sapientia, Iași, 22008, p. 319. 39 Cf. David Fosdick Jr., Hugʼs Introduction to the New Testament, Massachusetts, 1836, p. 687. 40 ***, Novum Testamentum Graece et latine, Stuttgart, 1932, p. 365. 41 ***, Novum Testamenum Graece, op. cit., p. 384. 35 néotéstamentaires n’ont pas cet ajout. La variante que les éditions modernes le préfére est arbitraire et a été préféré pour que le texte biblique soit plus inteligible pour les lecteurs pas spécialisés. Un autre problème est celui des manuscrits byzantins. La plupart, soit qu’ón se réfère aux précoces minuscules, soit qu’il s’agit des minuscules plus tardives (par exemple la minuscule 33 qui date du IXème siècle) omettent la variante proposée par Knapp, comme attendu. La conclusion est claire : il est préférable qu’on omet un terme introduit par un traducteur de l’Écriture au lieu de lui attacher au texte original. C’est une des raisons qui ont conduit aux plusieurs variantes traductologiques où il y a le risque de se contredire ou, dans des autres situations, de déformer la réalité et d’offrir comme dans le cas de la traduction d’Anania - un support dogmatique consistant; or, la dogmatisation du texte, biensûr, ne fait pas partie de la zone biblique. Dans ce qui suit, on fera référence aux perspectives éxégètiques. Les Actes 20, 28 dans le débat éxégètique On a signalé dans une note le fait que beaucoup de Pères de l’Église se rapporte à ce verset des Actes42. Ni les biblistes postérieures n’ont fait autrement. Le problème c’est que , premièrement, Luc n’a voulu pas composer un „livre” historique; par contre, son histoire et, en fait, une théologie pure. Les éxégètes modernes ont fait de diverses connéxions entre l’historien” Luc et les historiens de l’Antiquité. Par exemple, Colin J.Hemer43 fait une comparaison entre l’histoire de Thucydide et le discours du Paul dans les Actes 20, 17-38. Thucydide recconaît que pas toutes les discours qu’il rélate sont reproduites avec précision. Hemer affirme que, contrairement à Thucydide, Luc suit à décrire avec précision ce que les hommes ont dit en réalité, au même mesure dans les Actes que dans l’Évangile. On pense que cette opinion est, au possible, objective et vraie. Elle est consolidé, heuresement, de la perspective du Pr. Lect. Dr. Constantin Preda qui, dans une étude dediée a l’analyse des aspects rhétoriques des Actes44. montre que le v. 28 est, en fait, le point central de la rhétorique pauline du chapitre 20 car „Dieu le Père a fondé Son Église, Son nouveau peuple, par le sang de Son propre Fils, Jésus Christ”45. Bien que pour Luc, l’accent est mis sur la kérigme apostolique, toutefois, Le Verbe de Dieu, fait les Apôtres rester des témoins fidèles; C.K.Barrett partage la même opinion: „L’accent de Luc sur la proclamation du Verbe [..] montre que même le Verbe a été un facteur décisif” et que l’Église est un agént de la rédemption „au mesure qu’elle offre le cadre où se 42 Voir la note 20. Colin J. Hemer, The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History, dans la collection: Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, vol. 49, Mohr-Siebeck, Tübingen, 1989, p. 421-426. 44 Lect. Dr. Constantin Preda, Propovăduirea Apostolică. Structuri retorice în Faptele Apostolilor, Édition IBMBOR, București, 2005, p. 279-283. 45 Ibidem, p. 280. 43 36 développe la prédication du Verbe”46. De même, Charles H. Talbert47 soutient que Luc n’est pas un „un catholique primaire”, mais un „proto-protestant”, car Sola Scriptura est un point fort dans sa pensée théologique. Biensûr, ces noms sont utilisés d’une manière stéréotypique. L’éxégèse proposée par I. Howard Marshall48 dans son commentaire éxégètique basé en particulier sur le texte original conservé dans les manuscrits byzantins est plus précise. Pour cet intérpret, l’Église appartient au Dieu car Il ne l’a pas obtenu, mais „l’a achèté” avec son propre sang49; la traduction qui propose „l’a obtenu” est insufisante. Le coût de la rédemption était littéralement Son sang. Plus loin, Marshall montre l’influence que les scribes ont eu sur le texte original. „L’Église de Dieu” apparaît sous cette forme car un scribe a essayé d’éviter l’implication selon laquelle Dieu est le sujet de la proposition rélative qui suit.50 Autrement dit, si nous voulons faire des connéxions entre l’exégèse de Marshall et les notes de la version corrigé par le Métropolite Bartolomeu Anania, on rémarque le fait que, finalement, les explications données par l’ancien métropolite sont de point de vue éxégètique, arbitraires. Il voit dans ce verset „un text évident sur l’existence de l’épiscopat comme degré de char, par la descente et l’oeuvre de Saint Esprit”51. Marshall montre que ce nom qui dans les manuscrits byzantins n’est pas affécté par l’intervention des scribes, ceux qui sont décrits comme évêques sont aussi décrits comme des prêtres dans le v.17, et dans 14,23 on lit qu’ils ont été nommés par Paul dans quelques églises avec prière et jeûne, c’est à dire en dépendant de Saint Esprit.52 De même, The New Jerome Biblical Commentary53, l’intérpretation du v 28.a suggére l’idée que la désignation d’un „officiel de l’Église”, survéillant/ évêque ne s’y réfère pas encore à la succéssion apostolique institutionalisé par l’Église catholique54. Le dernier aspect qui vaut la considération dans cette éxégèse est „la souffrance du Droit”. Jésus Christ „achète” la rédemption de l’homme par son sang. L’idée apparaît dans un autre 46 C. K. Barret, Luke the Historian in Recent Study, Epwort, London, 1961, p. 72, 74. Charles H. Talbert, „The Redactional Critical Quest for Luke the Theologian”, dans: Donald G. Miller (ed.), Jesus and Manʼs Hope, Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, Pittsburgh, 1970, p. 220 48 I. Howard Marshall, „Faptele Apostolilor. Introducere și comentariu”, în: Leon Morris (ed.), Comentariile Tyndale la Noul Testament, vol. 5, traduit par Lăcrămioara Novac, Édition Scriptum, Oradea, 2009, p. 352-354. 49 Ibidem, p. 353 50 Ibidem, p. 353. 51 ***, Biblia sau Sfânta Scriptură, une édition réviséé par le Métropolite Bartolomeu Valeriu Anania, l’archevêque du Cluj, soutenu par de nombreuses études, Édition IBMBOR, București, 2005, p. 1897, la note „a”. 52 I. Howard Marshall, „Faptele Apostolilor. Introducere și comentariu”, op. cit., p. 353. 53 On a utilisé la traduction roumaine de ces commentaires bibliques d’exception: Raymond E. Brown, Joseph A. Fitzmayer, Roland E. Murphy (ed.), Introducere și comentariu la Sfânta Scriptură. Evangheliile sinoptice, le vol. VIII, traduit et traité pour la langue roumaine par P. Dumitru Groșan, l’Édition Galaxia Gutenberg, Târgu Lăpuș, 2007. 54 Ibidem, p. 664. Par „l’Église Catholique”, l’auteur ne comprend pas la conféssion romanocatolique mais, par cette términologie on y comprend l’universalité. 47 37 texte lucanique, Luc 23, 47. Si au Mathieu et au Marc le centurion qui se trouvait près de la croix de Jésus affirme: „vraiment cet homme était le Fils de Dieu” (Marc 15,39. Mathieu 27, 54), Luc, en révanche, voit le centurion en disant: „vraiment cet homme est droit”. Cet idée, assez choquante de Luc suggére la l’innocence de Jésus. Luc a préparé ses lecteurs pour cette conféssion de foi, à savoir: par sa conduite de droit Jésus s’est montré comme le Fils de Dieu. Par la fidélité pour Jésus Dieu a montré que Jésus est Son Fils et qu’Il prend soin de ses créatures traités injustement, representés par Jésus. La logique de cette thème du droit de Dieu qui apparaît dans les Actes plusieurs fois (3, 14-15; 7, 52; 22, 14) est exprimé très claire dans la Sagesse 2,18: „Si le Droit est le Fils de Dieu, Il les va assister, les va élibérer des mains des ses rivals”55. Conclusions Dans cette étude, dediée à un verset principal de la rhétorique pauline des Actes, verset qui au fil du temps a subi de nombreux changements textuelles, même d’intérpretation, on a découvert les problèmes de rédaction suivantes: quoique la plupart des manuscrits du Nouveau Testament sont byzantins, cependant l’influence des scribes s’est fait sentir au cours du temps. Même si elle peut être intérprétée comme une mineure, quelque ajout au texte biblyque ressent son influence. On a beaucoup de traductions qui grace au fait qu’elles s’éloignent du texte original, présentent de différentes manières d’intérpretation. Souvent, lorsque l’éxégèse n’a pas comme support les manuscrits néo-téstamentaires, elle tend vers le formalisme et est confessionelle, et non plus très éloignée des intentions initiales de l’auteur sacrée. Les éléments de nouvéauté de cette étude sont, à notre avis, les trois éditions critiques dont on fait référence et les manuscrits bybliques et leurs comparaison avec les traductions modernes qui, dans beaucoup des situations, s’éloignent de l’original. Le deuxième élément de nou véauté est celui qu’on a éssayé à mettre en balance plusieurs intérprétations éxégètiques des biblistes célébres, en même temps, gardant, au possible, l’objectivité et la fidélité pour le Verbe de Dieu, tout cela, biensûr, en pensant toujours à une meilleure réception de la théologie néotestamentaire. Ce qu’on propose n’est pas une critique acèrbe des traductions modernes, mais un avertissement pour les biblistes de Roumanie: on a besoin, nous, les orthodoxes, d’une traduction le plus fidèle de la Bible, peut-être en plusieurs volumes, en ayant comme modèle la Septuaginte éditée à Polirom, réunissant le travail de beaucoup des spécialistes bibliques. Bibliographie *** Biblia sau Sfânta Scriptură, une édition réviséé par le Métropolite Bartolomeu Valeriu Anania, l’archevêque du Cluj, soutenu par de nombreuses études, Édition IBMBOR, București, 2005 55 Ibidem, p. 515. 38 *** Biblia, traduction, introduction et notes: pr. Alois Bulai, pr. Eduard Pătrașcu, Édition Sapientia, Iași, 2013 *** Le Nouveau Testament, traduction, introduction et notes :p r. Alois Bulai, pr. Anton Budău, Édition Sapientia, Iași, 22008 *** Novum Testamentum Graece et latine, Stuttgart, 1932 Aland, Kurt (ed.), Repertorium der griechischen christlichen Papyri, I: Biblische Papyri, Altes Testament, Neues Testament, Varia, Apokryphen, vol. 18, de Gruyter, Berlin, 1976 Aland, Kurt, Aland, Barbara, The Text of the New Testament. An Introduction to the Critical Editions and to the Theory and Practice of Modern Textual Criticism, Deutsche Bibelstiftung, Sttutgart, 21989 Aland, Kurt, Welte, Michael, Köster, Beate, Junack, Klaus, Kurzgefasste Liste der griechischen Handschriften des Neuen Testaments, în ANTF (Arbeiten zur neutestamentlichen Textforschung), vol. 1, Berlin/New York, 21994 Aland, Kurt, Zur Liste der Neuentestamentlichen Handschriften VI, en ZNW (Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche), nr. 48/1957, p. 148, 151. Aune, David E., The New Testament in Its Literary Environment, Westminster Press, 1987 B. Craddock, The Preexistence of Christ in the New Testament, Nashville, Abbingdon, 1968 Barret, C. K., Luke the Historian in Recent Study, Epwort, London, 1961 Billings, Brandly S., Do this in remembrance of Me. The Disputed Words in the Lukan Institution Narative (Luke 22, 19b-20): A Historico-Exegetical, Theological and Sociological Analysis, London, 2006 Brown, Raymond E., Fitzmayer, Joseph A., Murphy, Roland E. (coord.), Introducere și comentariu la Scriptură: Literatura paulină, traduit et traité en roumain par P. Dumitru Groșan, Édition Galaxia Gutenberg, Târgu-Lăpuș, 2008 Caird, George Bradford, New Testament Theology, Oxford University Press, 1995 Carson, D. A., Moo, Douglas J., Introducere în Noul Testament, traduction par Dinu Moga, Édition Făclia, 2007 Cleenewerck, Laurent (ed.), The Eastern/ Greek Orthodox Bible New Testament, 2007 Cobren, C. M., New Archaeological Discoveries, New York, 1917 Collins, Raymond F., Introduction to the New Testament, SCM Press LTD, London, 1983 Cowper, B. H. (ed.), Novum Testamentum Graece ex antiquissimo Codice Alexandrino, Williams & Norgate, London, 1860 Dunn, J. D. G., Christology in the Making. A New Testament Inquiry into the Origins of the Doctrine of the Incarnation, Philadelphia, Westminster, 21989 Fee, Gordon D., Philippians 2, 5-11: Hymn or Exalted Pauline Prose? în: „Bulletin for Biblical Research”, nr. 2/1992, p. 29-46 Fitzmeyer, J. A., The Gospel According to Luke 1-9, Garden City, Doubleday, 1981 Flew, R. N., Jesus and His Church, The Epeorth Press, London,31956 Fosdick Jr., David, Hugʼs Introduction to the New Testament, Massachusetts, 1836 Hemer, Colin J., The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History, dans la collection: Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, vol. 49, Mohr-Siebeck, Tübingen, 1989 Hurd, J. C., The Origin of 1Corinthians, London, SPCK, 1965 Kasser, Rudolf, Papyrus Bodmer XVII: Actes des Apôtres, Epîtres de Jacques, Pierre, Jean et Jude, Cologny, Geneva, 1961 Kee, H. C., Good News to the Ends of the Earth: The Theology of Acts, Trinity Press International, Philadelphia, 1990 Klijn, J. F. J. A Survey of the Researches into the Western Text of the Gospels and Acts, vol. I, Kemnik & Zoon, Utrecht, 1949, vol. II, Leiden/Brill, 1969 Lampe, G. W. H. (ed.), A Patristic Greek Lexicon, Calderon Press, Oxford, 1961 39 Marshall, Howard I., „Faptele Apostolilor. Introducere și comentariu”, în: Morris, Leon, (ed.), Comentariile Tyndale la Noul Testament, vol. 5, traduit par Lăcrămioara Novac, Édition Scriptum, Oradea, 2009 Matera, Frank J., New Testament Christology, Westminster John Knox Press, Kentucky, 1999 Metzger, Bruce M., A Textual Commentary On The Greek New Testament, Deutsche Bibelstiftung, Sttutgart, 21994 O Brien, Peter T., The Epistle to the Philippians: A Commentary on the Greek Text, Grand Rapids, Eermands, 1991 Peters, Francis E., Termenii filozofiei grecești, traduit par Dragan Stoianovici, Édition Humanitas, București, 32007 Prast, F. , Presbyter und Evangelium in nachapostolischer Zeit, Stuttgart, 1979 Preda, Constantin, Lect. dr., Propovăduirea Apostolică. Structuri retorice în Faptele Apostolilor, Édition IBMBOR, București, 2005 Riesner, Rainer, Paul`s Early Period: chronology, mission strategy, theology, Eermands Publishing House, Cambridge, 21998 Scrivener, Frederick H. (ed.), A full collation of the Codex Sinaiticus with the received Text of the New Testament, Cambridge, London, 1861 Talbert, Charles H., „The Redactional Critical Quest for Luke the Theologian”, dans: Miller, Donald G. (ed.), Jesus and Manʼs Hope, Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, Pittsburgh, 1970 Thiede, Carsten Peter, Papyrology, Biblical Papyrology, New Testament Papyrology- but what is this? în: „Evangel. The British Evangelical Review”, nr. 18/2000, p. 77-87 Wescott, Brook. F., Hort, Fenton J. A., Greek New Testament, Wake Forest, Noth Carolina, 1889 40 Reflections on the Hungarian Original’s Influence on the Romanian Translation of Palia De La Orăștie Enikő PÁL Le statut d’originaux hongrois qui étaient à la base de l'ancienne traduction roumaine émerge très particulière dans le contexte de la periode ancienne, d'autant plus que, dans cette période, seulement le grec, le latin et le slave ont été reconnus par l'Eglise comme langage culte. Parmi les traductions Calvino-roumaines du Banat-Hunedoara on trouve Palia qui est le plus important texte pour l'influence hongroise sur le Roumain; dans ce cas, nous pouvons voire certains conséquences profondes de la source hongroise sur la traduction roumaine. Comme toute traduction, la transposition du message divin d'une langue à une autre implique l'action successive, parallèle ou combinée de plusieurs systèmes de langage et de pensée. Parfois, les sources utilisées augmentent, autrefois, limitent les possibilités de choix des formes appropriées et les plus près du système linguistique pour le contenu traduit. L’original hongrois a pu fournir aux traducteurs une plus grande liberté dans la traduction que pour ceux qui traduissaient de langues cultes. Mais comme c'était naturel, la traduction roumaine n’a pas réussit à effacer complètement les traces de l'original hongrois dont les empreintes sont partout. Les conséquences les plus évidentes de la traduction sont, bien sûr, les emprunts lexicales du texte source, respectivement les interférences (les calques) lexicaux-grammaticaux qui seront illustrés dans la présente étude. Mots-clés: traduction, textes religieux, l’influence hongroise, les emprunts, calques linguistiques. 1. Translation of the Bible into vernacular languages has been of great importance for each and every Christian nation in order to profess its faith, while in case of certain laguages (such as German, for instance) it has played a major role in establishing its standard variety. Within Romanian cultural and linguistic space, translation of the holy books also contributed to the “nationalization” of the church (Gheție 1974: 26), in other words, it represented the premises and an opportunity to establish Romanian language use in liturgy and in writing 41 practices1. Initiated and promoted by Reformation, translation of the sacred books into Romanian in the sixteenth century meant, on the one hand, a battle against Orthodox canons. On the other hand, it was a revolution of the very tradition of these texts’ writing since, in this period, Greek, Latin and Old Slavonic were the only languages acknowledged by the Church2. Given these circumstances, Hungarian sources of Romanian translations and especially their great amount3 might appear as a curiosity, not entirely out of the common though4. Old Romanian translators often appeal to Hungarian (protestant) versions of the Bible which may be explained, on the one hand, by the fact that the great majority of these translations were produced by Calvinism5, 1 As a matter of fact, translation and printing of religious books which appeared under the auspices of Lutheranism or Calvinism had other purposes among which the most important being conversion (also with commercial, economic benefits). Their influence with respect to the encouragement of writing in Romanian was, therefore, of secondary importance. Nevertheless, the contribution of Protestantism to claim and, eventually, to establish the national (Romanian) language in church services is undeniable. 2 It is eloquent, in this regard, the preface of Palie, for instance, in which the autors’ dissimulation with respect to its sources actually seeks to legitimate the Romanian text. Thus, in their testimony, according to which the book has been “rendered from Jewish and Greek and Serbian languages into Romanian” (my translation), the translators seem to pursue the printing’s acknowledgment and acceptance by the church, on the one hand, and by the readers, on the other hand. However, it has been undoubtably demonstrated that those stated in this testimony are not true. 3 In the sixteenth century, “right after Slavonic, Hungarian language was the second most often recoursed to as source by Romanian translators” (my translation) (Gheție - Mareș 1985: 416). 4 The choice for one source over another was guided by various factors. For instance, cultural constraints had a great impact on the selection of sources. Adopting a model of Bible translation available at the time (Slavonic, Latin, Hungarian, German) was determined, on a restricted level, by the local authority (Gafton 2009a: 3), represented by the dominant confession (orthodox or protestant), and, on a larger level, by the cultural sphere of influence to which the region where the translation had been carried out belonged to. Regarding this latter aspect, in the sixteenth century the Romanian territory was divided into Moldavia and Wallachia, on the one hand, falling under the Eastern (Greek-Slavonic) sphere of influence, and Transylvania, on the other hand, under Western (Latin) influence (ibidem, p. 7). Thus, it is quite natural that, unlike the Bible translations from Moldavia and Wallachia with Slavonic sources, in the region of Banat-Hunedoara, translators of sacred texts frequently appeal, in different proportions, to Hungarian sources which played the role of an intermediator towards the West. 5 See Molitvenic [The Prayer Book] (1564) whose original is considered to be the Hungarian Agenda azaz Szentegyházi chelekedetec, Mellyeket követnek közönségesképpen a keresztényi Ministerec és Lelkipásztoroc [Agenda i.e. holy deeds of Church which are commonly pursued by Ministers and Pastors, my translation] (Drăganu 1921-1922: 267). The Romanian book contains whole passages of literal translation from the second edition of Heltai’s work (ibidem, p. 267) as well as many Hungarian loanwords (ibidem, p. 295). For other reflections on its original see also Gheție 1982: 13-15; Gheție – Mareş 1985: 267. Another product of the Romanian Calvinist movement is Cartea de cîntece [The Book of Psalms] (1570-1573) in which, like in the model provided by the Hungarian original (as a matter of fact, several Hungarian collections of songs), Romanian writing adopted Hungarian spelling. Additionally, the songs in this book are divided into verses which imitate the quantitative rhythm patterns of the Hungarian models (Gheție – Mareş 1985: 114). For examples of linguistique calques in this text see Ion Gheție, in TEXTE ROM.: 278- 42 also propagated by Hungarians. On the other hand, due to particular historical, political, cultural etc. conditions, in those regions where these translations can be located (in Banat-Hunedoara), Hungarian language enjoyed high prestige which could confer authority to the Bible versions written in this vernacular language. In addition, in these regions there existed long term and vivid contacts between Romanians and Hungarians, thereby Hungarian language could have been even more accessible for Romanian translators than the acknowledged worship languages. Hence, in these regions, translation of Hungarian sources or the use of Hungarian models, among others, has been only natural. Among the Calvinist Romanian translations from Banat-Hunedoara which are based on Hungarian sources there figures the Palie which we shall analyze in what follows. Beside its importance for Hungarian influence, our choice of this text has yet another motivation. Although contemporary with other Romanian translations of the sixteenth century (including those with Slavonic originals), this one shows a calitative progress, an improvement with respect not only to the act of translation itself but also to texts written in old Romanian language as such (Arvinte – Gafton 2007: 50). Beginning with this text, Romanian language acquires the premises to become an instrument of culture in the true sense of the word. Some of the difficulties which translators of old Romanian texts had met could have been solved precisely due to the fact that, beside the Latin source, this text has a Hungarian original too, i.e. a vernacular source. 2. Like any other translation, conveying the words of God from one language to another implies a successive, parallel or combinated interaction of several language and thought systems. In some cases, the sources employed may increase the translator’s possibilities to choose the appropriate forms which correspond to the content and, in the same time, as close to his own system as possible. Yet in other cases the source may impose certain constraints in the process of translation. In the sixteenth century, the principle of literal translation6 could also determine translators’ options. Since the sacred text could not be altered in the least, translators often remain faithful to the source and show less 279, 314-321. Last but not least, the most important work for Hungarian influence is Palia de la Orăștie [The Old Testament from Orăștie] (1581-1582) which, beside a Latin edition of Vulgata, follows Heltai’s Pentateuh (see the demonstration of M. Roques, in the Preface of his edition PO 1925: III – LXIII). As a matter of fact, on a lexical level, there can be found certain similarities between Palia, Cartea de cîntece, Cazania I [Homiliary the 1st] and Molitvenic (Iorga 1904: 75-76; Gheție - Mareș 1985: 361). 6 In case of sixteenth century’s translations of religious texts, the principle of literal translation is tightly related to the problem of legitimation. This could also explain why translators tended not to break the limits of religious conservatism even if this resulted in neglecting the requirements of Romanian language and/or the readers. On the other hand, the attempts to solve the incompatibilities between the two language and thought systems were not always successful but sometimes they led to the imitation of the source model. The authors free themselves from the constraints of literal translation in situations in which their concern for readers prevail or in which transmission of a hardly comprehensible content becomes primary (cf. Gafton 2010c: 1). 43 interest towards intelligibility or towards the requirements of the Romanian language system. Hungarian sources, on the contrary, could have provided translators a greater freedom in the translation process than other languages of cults used as sources in those times. 3. Nevertheless, the Romanian translation could not erase completely the traces of the Hungarian original whose marks can be found in many passages of the target text. Naturally, the most obvious consequences of translation are the loanwords from the source text, on the one hand, and lexical and grammatical interferences, on the other hand. The latter ones can be traced best in situations in which the replica of a grammatical pattern of the source language breaks an existing pattern of the target language, resulting passages of the original’s slavish imitation. Although aware of the constraints imposed by his mother tongue, the translator sometimes has a tendency to extend the liberties offered by the source language onto the target language, in which those would not be allowed. 3.1. Such passages may be regarded as “translation marks”7, as examples of the Hungarian source’s influence. Among these we could mention some discursive elements, loanwords and certain linguistique calques. 3.1.1.The first category includes inserts of expressions used in Hungarian conventional forms of address someone with affection and of interjections such as: ni ‘hey’ or batăr ‘at least, though’: Ni, batăr, așa să fie cum dzici ‘Behold, I would it might be according to thy word’ (Gen., 30, 34, cf. Am bator vgy legyen à mint mondod); inserts of adjective phrases as marks of affection in direct address: Ascultă-ne, bun doamne ‘Hear us my (good) lord’ (Gen., 23, 6, cf. Halgasmeg münket ió vram); drag fiiule ‘my (dear) son’ (Gen., 43, 29, cf. Szeretö fiam), Drag Doamne ‘my (dear) Lord’ (Gen., 44, 18, cf. Szeretö Wram), Drag tată! ‘my (dear) father!’ (Gen., 27, 18, cf. Szeretö attyam); or certain patterns of emotional reinforcement, common in Hungarian, such as in: Bine cunoaștem ‘we (well) know (him)’ (Gen., 29, 5, cf. Jol ismeryiuc). All these obviously follow the Hungarian speech patterns and formulas of discourse construction provided by the source text, preserving including Hungarian word order. Expressing the superlative with the words prea ‘so, very, really’ or tare ‘strongly, very’ also appear in the translation as a result of calques, in: tare plodit face-voi tine ‘I shall make you very fruitful’ (Gen., 17, 6), prea tare voiu înmulți ‘I shall make him (very) fruitful’ (Gen., 17, 20), păcatele lor tare se-au îngreoiat ‘their sin so (very) grievous’ (Gen., 18, 20), tare se spămîntă și tare tremura ‘(Jacob) was greatly 7 These “marks” undoubtably show that the translation follows the Hungarian source, especially in cases in which these elements of the Romanian text do not have correspondents in the Latin version but reproduce exactly what appears to be in the Hungarian one. For a detailed presentation of these marks see Arvinte – Gafton 2007: 52-188. 44 afraid and (very) distressed’ (Gen., 32, 7), the Romanian adverbs corresponding here to Hung. igen ‘really, indeed, greatly, very’8. Same here we could mention certain conjunctions which have the role of providing the discourse’s coherence. These represent a means of message construction offered by the Hungarian model, they being used in the target language even with the morphosyntactic value of their Hungarian correspondents, such as: încă ‘too, as well’, in: Lot încă mearse cu el ‘and Lot (too) went with him’ (Gen., 12, 4, cf. Lotthis elmene vele); După aceea ‘then’ (Gen., 8, 19, cf. Annakutanna), Așa ‘thus’ (Gen., 12, 5, cf. Eképen), În acest chip ‘in this way’ (Gen., 31, 20, cf. Ekepen), derept acea ‘therefore’ (Gen., 17, 23, cf. azokaert, see also derept aceaia ‘therefore’, Gen., 50, 25 or derept aceasta ‘therefore’, Gen., 19, 32, cf. Ezokaert). Representative of the Hungarian source’s influence is the frequent use of the conjunction iară ‘but, in turn’ as well (see also Arvinte – Gafton 2007: 77), which corresponds to Hung. kedig ‘but, in turn’, as in: Iară aceasta este legătura care voi țineți între mine și între voi ‘(In turn) This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you’ (Gen., 17, 10, cf. Ez kedig az én Kötesem, mellyet tü meg tarchatoc, én közettem s tü közettetec); in: El, iară, zise lor ‘He, in turn, said to them’ (Gen., 24, 56, cf. Ö kedig monda); Eu, iară, o bucățea de pîine aduce-voiu voao ‘I, but, a morsel of bread will fetch (you)’ (Gen., 18, 5, cf. En kedig egy falat kenyeret hozoc tünektec); Adunară, iară, într-o grămadă broaștele ‘Piled, but, into heaps the frogs’ (Ex., 8, 14, cf. Rakásba gyüytec kedig à békákat, where the Latin source has the narrative et ‘and’). In these cases, iară ‘but, in turn’ has a discoursive function rather than a grammatical value just like the Hung. kedig ‘but, in turn’ which resembles a modalizator. In fact, these constructions could have resulted from the overextension of these conjunctions’ certain (cvasi) equivalent semantic values in Romanian and Hungarian (such as the adversative or the conclusive values) in situations in which translators found it to be an acceptable procedure. Hungarian influence is obvious whith respect to the use of this conjunction since, in most of the cases, the Latin source does not include any conjunction. Somewhat similar to the situation above is the sometimes forced use of the adverb cum ‘as, how, like, (that)’ with a conjunction value resembling its formal correspondent, the Hungarian conjunction hogy ‘that’ (see also Arvinte – Gafton 2007: 73). Therefore, cum just like its Hungarian correspondent sometimes precedes purpose clauses instead of the characteristic conjunctions încît / ca…să ‘so that’, as in: i puse Domnul pre Cain un semn, cum nimea să ni-l ucigă ‘And put the Lord on Cain a mark, (so) that any (who found him) should attack him’ (Gen., 4, 15, cf. Es az WR Iegyet vete Cainra, hogy senki azoc közzöl ötet meg ne ölneyé); Cine afară am scos ei den țara Eghipetului, cum între ei să lăcuiesc 8 The superlative with igen ‘very, really’ has other Romanian correspondents too, as in: bărbat vîrtos mare ‘the man (Moses) was very great’ (Ex., 11, 3 – cf. igen nagy ember ‘very great man’, where igen is used with the meaning ‘very, really, indeed’). 45 ‘Who brought them out of the land of Egypt that I might dwell among them’ (Ex., 29, 46, cf. ki hosztam öket Egyiptusnac földéböl, hogy köztetec lakiam). Hungarian hogy ‘that’ typically precedes direct object clauses and due to the source text’s influence its Romanian correspondent cum ‘that’ is enriched with this value as well, as in: Plăcu lu Moisi cum cu acest om să rămîie într-una ‘Liked Moses that with this man he dwell with (i.e. And Moses was content to dwell with the man)’ (Ex., 2, 21, cf. Tetzéc Mosesnec hogy ez emberrel együtt maradna”); i cînd văzu cum că nu poate învince... ‘When (the man) saw that he did not prevail’ (Gen., 32, 25). 3.1.2. Loanwords, on the other hand, may also be regarded as translation marks although it is not absolutely necessary for them to be actual examples of the source text’s influence, since some of these words may precede the translation per se9. These lexical elements either close a conceptual gap, or appear as an immediate response to a difficulty in translation, or reflect the translators’ deliberate option which is meant to enrich a certain synonymic series, possibly with the purpose to achieve a more refined utterance10. Among the Hungarian loanwords of bookish origin which penetrated through and within the Romanian translation we could mention the following: a aldovani ‘to sacrifice (oneself), to offer (oneself)’ (in: Mielul paștilor noastre Hs. cine derept noi se-au aldovănit ‘Our Paschal Lamb Hs. (i.e. Jesus) who for us sacrificed (himself)’, Ex., 12 – cf. Hung. aldosztatot ‘sacrificed (himself)’); alnic 'cunning', 'sly', 'deceitful' (in: i șarpele era mai alnic de toate jigăniile pămîntului ‘(And) the serpent was more cunning than any beast of the field’, Gen., 3, 1; see also its derivative alnicie ‘deceitfulness’, in: Răspunseră … cu alnicie 'Answered… deceitfully', Gen., 34, 13 – cf. Hung. alnakul 'deceitfully'); batăr (see above); berc 'grove', 'copse', 'thicket' (in: Însă preastoalele acelora zdrobeaște [!] și bozii lor fringe și bercurele lor taie 'But ye shall destroy their 9 Some of these might have belonged either to the translators who were familiar with the Hungarian language or to the region, in general, where Hungarian influence had been quite strong. Sometimes it is difficult, if not impossible, to determine the folk or bookish nature of the Hungarian loanwords recorded in the translation since these two types of influences inextricably intermingle. 10 Borrowing a foreign word occurs most often when in the target language there is a lack of that element and it takes place in order either to close a conceptual gap, or to express a certain nuance of it, in other words when there is a necessity observed by the target language speaker. However, this necessity may not always be a real one (see Gafton 2010b: 79) or, at any rate, it is not always controlled by linguistic reasons only. For instance, the use of hasnă 'utility' (< Hung. haszna 'utility'), although in Romanian there existed folos 'utility', has its explanation beyond the requirements of the Romanian language system because neither did the two concurrent words specialize their meaning, nor did the old Romanian word semantically overload (ibidem, p. 79). Nevertheless, the use of hasnă 'utility' may not be regarded as superfluous nor parasitic because, at that time and especially in the region where the translation had been made, this word had been in current use, possibly regarded as according to the regional norm. Similarly, in addition to some differences in meaning, by using besadă 'word(s), speech, discourse, counsel' (< Hung. beszéd 'id.') the translators could have sought to enrich its synonymic series, endowing Romanian language with the necessary means of expression appropriate to religious discourse. 46 altars, break their images, and cut down their groves’, Ex., 34, 13 – cf. Hung. Berkeket 'groves’); gheman ‘diamond’ (in: În al doilea rînd fie carmel, safir și gheman 'And the second row shall be an emerald, a sapphire, and a diamond’, Ex., 28, 18 – cf. Hung. Gemāt 'diamond’, cf. Lat. iaspis)11; giolgiu ‘linen, shroud, fine cloth’ (in: Fă lor den giolgiu și cămășui 'Make them linen breeches’, Ex., 28, 42 – cf. Hung. gyolch 'linen’); jemblă ‘fine meal, white bread’ (in: …grăbeaște-te și meastecă trei măsuri de făină de jemble și coace pîine ‘Make ready quickly three measures of fine meal, knead it, and make bread’, Gen., 18, 6 – cf. Hung. semlye ‘fine meal’, cf. Lat. similae); lepiniu ‘wafer, pita, crumpet’ (in: Pîine adzimă cu oleiu mestecată pogace și cu uleiu uns lepiniu de adzimă ‘unleavened bread, and cakes unleavened tempered with oil, and wafers unleavened anointed with oil’, Ex., 29, 2 – cf. Hung. lepént ‘wafer, crumpet’); mereu '(of gold) authentic, pure' (in: i tot acest lucru dentreg și mereu aur era 'all of it was one beaten work of pure gold’, Ex., 37, 22 - cf. Hung. merö 'pure’); nașfă 'binding', 'ornament (of clothing)', 'jewelry', 'ouch' (in: Fă și doo nașfe și doo lanțure den curat aur 'And thou shalt make two ouches (and two chains) of (pure) gold’, Ex., 28, 13)12; pint 'measure for liquids' (in: și un pint de uleiu de lemn 'and an hin of oil olive’, Ex., 30, 24 – cf. Hung. Hin, cf. Lat. hin)13; rudă ‘bar’ (in: i polei cu aur scîndurile, rudele încă le polei 'And (he) overlaid the boards with gold, the bars he also gilded’, Ex., 36, 34 – cf. Hung. rudakat 'bars’); sicluș 'old Hebrew coin, shekels' (in: care 10 sicluș de aur cumpăniia 'of ten shekels weight of gold’, Gen., 24, 22 cf. Hung. syclus 'shekels’, cf. Lat. siclos); siriu ‘tool’, ‘instrument’, ‘weapon’ (in: Ia, derept acea, siriul tău, cucura, arcul și pasă la cîmp și prinde vînat mie ‘Take, therefore, thy weapons, thy quiver and thy bow, and go out to the field, and take me some venison’, Gen., 27, 3 – cf. Hung. szerszam ‘weapon’, cf. Lat. arma); a sucui ‘(get) used to, to accustom’ (in: Cum omul cu priiatnicul său au sucuit a grăi ‘as a man (used to) speaketh unto his friend’, Ex., 33, 11 – cf. Hung. szokot ‘used to’); șinor 'lace', 'snare', 'string', 'cord' (in: i leagă aceaia cu șinor de mătase galbină 'And thou shalt bind it with yellow silk lace’, Ex., 28, 37 – cf. Hung. sinor ‘lace’) and a văndăgi 'to precipitate, to (over)throw', 'to besiege' (in: i văndăgindu-i pre ei Domnedzeu înecă-i în mijloc de unde 'and the Lord overthrew (the Egyptians) in the midst of the sea’, Ex., 14, 27)14. Some of these See also in: Carmen, safir și gheman 'An emerald, a sapphire, and a diamond’, Ex., 39, 11 – cf. Hung. Gemant 'diamond’. The Romanian form could have resulted due to a false association with the Hungarian accusative case desinence –t which, therefore, has been omitted. 12 Its etymon (Hung. násphát 'binding', 'ornament (of clothing)', 'jewelry, ouch') does not appear in the same context as the loanword, the former one preceding, in the source text (see in Gen., 24, 22), the latter one which renders here Hung. boglarokat 'id.'. 13 The term derives from Hung. pint ‘pinta, mass’, MNYSZ < Lat. med. pinta; Germ. Pinte, Pint; cf. EWUR, p. 613. 14 The word derives from Hung. vondogál ‘tracto, wiederholt ziehen’, MNYSZ, cf. ILR, II, p. 345; cf. Pamfil 1958: 241; EWUR, p. 845; etymology also sustained in Arvinte–Gafton 2007: 390. This loanword might have had a spoken usage in the dialect of Romanians from Banat-Hunedoara since its Hungarian etymon does not appear in the same passage as its Romanian correspondent, the latter 11 47 words were borrowed from a spoken regional variety of Hungarian language, others are savant neologisms which belong to the Hebrew terminology of the Bible and which translators could have borrowed, sometimes without any formal adaptation, directly from the Hungarian text. Their use enriched the old Romanian religious vocabulary with new elements, some of them being preserved in later translations of the Bible and/or in works from the next centuries as well15, thus contributing to the consolidation of old Romanian religious discourse on the one hand, and to the establishment of old Romanian (literary) language, on the other hand. Then again other loanwords, not completely unfamiliar in Romanian but perhaps part of its passive vocabulary, might have been reintroduced and reinforced by the frequent use of their possible etymons in the source text and, last but not least, some others could have gained a wider diffusion in spoken language precisely due to their penetration into religious discourse. In addition to common names, the number of proper names in Romanian encreases as well, some of the latter ones being obviously influenced by the Hungarian source text. For instance, this is the case of certain anthroponyms which the translators, being preoccupied not to modify the names they might not have been familiar with, borrowed in their Hungarian inflexional forms in which they appear in the source text, such as: Ananimot, Leabimot, Ludimot ‘Ludim, Anamim, Lehabim’ (Gen., 10, 13), where -(o)t is the Hungarian accusative case desinence (see also Arvinte – Gafton 2007: 89). In other cases, Hungarian influence exerts its power on the target text precisely while translators attempt to avoid Hungarian inflexional forms. Thus, in the passage: o fântână ce iaste lăngă Saru ‘by the fountain in the way to Shur’ (Gen., 16, 7), the toponym seems to be due to a false association with the Hungarian accusative case desinence which, therefore, has been omitted although, in this case, the Hungarian correspondent is not an inflexional form Saru + -t but a compound: Sar (cf. Lat. Sur ) + ut ‘road’ (M Roques, in PO 1925, p. XLIV). 3.1.3. The most remarkable traces of the Hungarian original within the Romanian text are obviously the linguistic calques16. These are meant to solve, one translating here the Hungarian expression: szoritabe öket az WR 'the Lord (over)threw (…) into' (see the Hebrew: shook off). 15 For instance, Hungarian loanwords like: alnic 'cunning', 'sly', batăr 'at least, though' (see also batîr), siriu 'tool, instrument, weapon' (see also sir), a sucui 'to accustom' are characteristic for Calvinist Romanian texts and they are attested in the seventeenth century too as “regional literary” terms (see DLRLV, s.v.). 16 Beside the translators’ involuntary or deliberate choice determined by merely linguistic constraints, such as their bilingual status, the presence of these calques in the Romanian translation has yet another motivation which explains their great number. Since the words of God could not be altered at all, the most often and widely accepted way of rendering the sacred text was that of a literal translation which obviously led to numerous calques in each and every vernacular language in which the Bible had been translated. (Arvinte 2006: 463). Therefore, in the case of PO, a certain calque may be of Hebrew origin but since it has been preserved both in Heltai’s version and in the Latin Vulgata it is quite difficult to state from which of these latter two it penetrated into the Romanian translation. This might be the case of certain iterative constructions such as: cu moarte 48 even if temporarily, a certain conflictual state due to difficulties in translation. Influenced by the Hungarian text sometimes translators translate words and phrases by their Romanian correspondents regardless of the context in which they appear, overtaking a new meaning from the source language onto the Romanian word despite the fact that this may be incomprehensible or, in any case, unnatural for Romanian speakers. These calques not only extend the Romanian words’ semantic field but they also nuance and refine the existing means of expression. 3.1.3.1. Most often semantic calques result from an equivalence or a proximity found with respect to the meaning of a Hungarian word used in the source text and its Romanian formal correspondent, the latter one being enriched by the former’s meaning. Such semantic congruity between Rom. putere ‘power, strength’ and Hung. erő ‘power, force’ led to the calque in: cu puterea era luați (Gen., 21, 25) which translates Hung. Eröuel elvöttenec ‘had by force (i.e. violently) taken away’. Similarly, Hung. chapas ‘stroke, blow’ is translated by Rom. izbeală ‘stroke’ (Ex., 30, 12) which extends its semantic field including the meaning ‘disaster, misfortune’17 found in the Hungarian correspondent. To the same semantic field belongs Rom. bătaie ‘beat(ing), stroke, fight’ which appears in: Cu o bătaie voiu lovi pre faraon ‘Yet will I bring one stroke (i.e. plague) more upon Pharaoh’ (Ex., 11, 1) and in: bătaie pierdzătoare ‘pernicious stroke (i.e. the plague)’ (Ex., 12, 13) translating the same Hung. chapas ‘disaster, calamity’. In a similar situation is the Romanian derivative călcătură ‘footprint’ (Ex., 3, 17) which overtakes the meaning ‘misfortune’, ‘misery’, ‘oppression’ found in its Hungarian correspondent nyomorusag ‘misery’ from Heltai’s text (see nyom ‘footprint’+ noun suffix –sag). The notion of 'destruction', 'annihilation' is expressed by the verb a pierde ‘to lose’ in: Domnezeu pierdea pre aceale orașă 'God destroyed the cities of the plain’ (Gen., 19, 29) which is another calque resulted as a consequence of assigning an existing meaning of the Hungarian equivalent eluesztenye 'to lose, to destroy' to the Romanian term. Several calques may be included in the semantic field of conjugal life. For instance, the Romanian verb a intra ‘to enter’ is used with the meaning ‘to have veri muri 'by death thou shall die (i.e. thou shalt surely die)’ (Gen., 2, 17 – cf. Hung. Halalnac Halaláual halsz 'by death’s death thou shall die’), cu moartea morției veri muri ''by death’s death thou shall die (i.e. thou shalt surely die)’ (Gen., 20, 7 – Hung. halalnac halalaual halsz 'id.’) or cu moarte să moară 'by death to die (i.e. shall be surely put to death)’ (Ex., 21, 12 – cf. Hung. halálal halyon 'id.’). Although the expression belongs to the Bible tradition (see also Lat. morte morieris, morte morietur), it is not excluded that in the Romanian text it appears due to Hungarian influence especially considering its forms shown above in passages where its Hungarian correspondents occur. In Hungarian this figura etymologica is quite old, it appears in Halotti beszéd és könyörgés [Funeral Oration and Prayer] (1192-1195) - see „halalnec halalaal holz” 'by death’s death thou shall die’ – and beside religious tradition it has other usages as well functioning as a stereotype in folk literature frequently used in folk tales (see Magyar Néprajzi Lexicon, II, s.v. halálnak halálával halsz (haljon) meg). 17 The translator could have found this translation solution not only useful and understandable for Romanian readers but also “enriching for the Romanian literary variety unestablished yet” (my translation) (Arvinte – Gafton 2007: 142). 49 sexual intercourse’, in: întră la ea ‘and he went in unto her’ (Gen., 29, 23, cf. Hung. Be mene hozzaia), Întră ... la Rahila ‘he went in unto Rachel’ (Gen., 29, 30, cf. Hung. Bemene) by overtaking this use of its Hungarian correspondent. The same semantic field is illustrated by calques such as: a merge lăuntru ‘to come in’ (see in: Lăuntru la ea megînd, întăroșe-o ‘and came in unto her and she conceived by him’, Gen., 38, 18, cf. Hung. Be menuen), a întra lăuntru ‘to enter’ (Gen., 38, 8), a veni lăuntru ‘to come in’ (Gen., 38, 16), all of these following Hungarian models. The notion ‘to get pregnant’ is also expressed in the Romanian text by several calques of Hungarian idioms. Among these there figures the verb a prinde ‘to get’18, in: prinse și născu un fecior ‘the woman conceived, and bare a son’ (Ex., 2, 1-2, cf. Hung. fogada ‘to get’, ‘to receive’) and in: Prinseră-se...oile...și fătară pistrui ‘and the flocks conceived’ (Gen., 30, 39, cf. Hung. fogadanac). Another verb used with the meaning ‘to be born’, ‘to spawn’ is a (se) ridica ‘to rise’, in: Mulți oameni crai rădica-se-vor din ea ‘she shall be a mother of nations; kings of people shall rise from (i.e. be of) her’ (Gen., 17, 16, cf. Hung. Tamadnac ‘to rise (from)’). Sometimes word for word translation of Hungarian compounds result periphrastic constructions in Romanian, such as: fapt de ciudă ‘(deed of) miracle’ (Ex., 4, 8, cf. Hung. csodatett ‘miraculous deed (i.e. miracle)’), păstoriu de dobitoace ‘cattle herder (i.e. shepherd)’ (Gen., 46, 32, cf. Hung. barom pasztoroc ‘id.’), țietori de dobitoace ‘cattle herdsman (i.e. shepherd)’ (Gen., 46, 34, cf. Hung. barō tarto ‘id.’), loc de lăcuită ‘place of residence (i.e possession)’ (Gen., 47, 11, cf. Hung. lako helt ‘place of residence’), tăiatul împregiur ‘circumcision’ (Ex., 4, 26, cf. Hung. környülmetelkedesert), soț de căsătorie ‘a spouse to marry (i.e. a man’s wife)’ (Gen., 20, 3, cf. Hung. hazass tarsa)19. 3.1.3.2. The tendency to translate as faithful as possible without omitting a thing sometimes leads to structural calques in Romanian where these forms are discrepant because a compulsory element in Hungarian may have a superfluous or, in any case, unfamiliar and sometimes odd correspondent in Romanian. For instance, some Romanian adverbial phrases imitate the Hungarian pattern of verbal prefixes (see Rom. afară = Hung. ki ‘out’, într-una = öszszue ‘together’, gios = le ‘down’, sus = fel ‘up’ etc.), like in: a aduce afară ‘to get/take out’ (cf. ki-hoz – in Ex., 12, 17), a (se) aduna într-una ‘to gather, to bring together, to reunite’ (cf. öszszue-gyüjt – in Ex., 4, 29), a alege afară ‘to separate (out)’ (cf. kiválaszt – in Ex., 13, 12), într-una să se cuvină ‘to match, to fit (together)’ (cf. öszsze–illeni – in Ex., 26, 24), a goni afară ‘to banish (out)’ (cf. el-bochatani – in 18 For other calques with this verb see Arvinte – Gafton 2007: 403-404. The word soț ‘companion, spouse’ enters other calques too, such as: a avea soț de căsătorie ‘to be a man’s wife, to be married’ (Gen., 20, 3) although this latter one could have been formed independently in different languages (Arvinte – Gafton 2007: 134). On the other hand, it is not excluded either the possibility that the word soț ‘fellow, companion’ had undergone a semantic evolution. In this case, the etymological value, if not exceeded, at least coexisted with the new one provided by its determinants which could add the missing specification. 19 50 Ex., 5, 23), a lăsa afară 'to release (out) (from prison)’ (cf. ki-bochatac – in Gen., 41, 14), lepădă gios ‘to undress’ (cf. le-uete – in Gen., 38, 19), a lua sus (căștiga) 'to take up (his gain) (i.e. to look upon someone)' (cf. vel-vōue – in Ex., 2, 25), a merge afară ‘to get out’ (cf. ki-menni – in Gen., 44, 28), a merge gios ‘to go (down)’ (cf. le-menni, in Gen., 18, 21: cf. alá-megyec), a merge sus ‘to go (up)’ (cf. menyetek-fel – in Gen., 44, 17), a prinde lăuntru (ochii) ‘to close (in) (eyes)’ (cf. fogja-be – in Gen., 46, 4), afară am scos ‘brought out’ (cf. ki-hosztam – Ex., 29, 46), ștearge afară ‘to blot out’ (cf. töröl-ki – în Ex., 32, 32)20. The Romanian text includes many calques produced as a consequence of Hungarian idioms’ translation as well. In such cases, the projection of Hungarian phrases consolidated during long periods of time through repeated mental associations results odd word combinations in Romanian because, on the one hand, they appear spontaneously and unexpectedly in Romanian where they were not in use nor familiar. On the other hand, they might appear strange to Romanian speakers because of the different ways of conceptualizing the world and of expressing it through and within language. Here we could mention the following calques: au cădzut ... greșală ‘fell in … misdemeanor (i.e. to make a mistake; an oversight)’ (Gen., 43, 12, cf. Hung. vétség esett ‘fell in misdemeanor’, cf. Lat. errore factum), îmbla în negoț ‘(about money) walked in trade (i.e. to circulate)’ (Gen., 23, 17, cf. Hung. aruba iár vala ‘to walk in trade’, cf. Lat. monetae publicae), îmblară tabăra ‘walked (in) camp (i.e. to camp)’ (Ex., 19, 2, cf. tabort iaranac ‘walked (in) camp’)21, pune hotar ‘set bounds’ (Ex., 19, 12, cf. vess határt ‘id.’) sau aruncă hotar ‘set bounds’ (Ex., 19, 23, cf. vess hatart ‘id.’), ține prins ‘to hold caught (i.e. to detain)’ (Gen., 43, 14, cf. fogua tart ‘to hold caught’), vădzu vis ‘to see (in) dreams’ (Gen., 41, 22, cf. álmot latéc ‘id.’), vedeare de vis ‘dreaming’ (Gen., 41, 8, cf. alom latas)22. Word for word translation can be found in case of Hungarian iterative phrases as well, like in: den rudă în rudă ‘from generation to generation (i.e. throughout 20 Although, in some cases, the Romanian terms corresponding to the Hungarian particles do not add any specification to the verb they accompany (see a merge gios ‘to go down’ = a merge ‘to go’ vs. a merge afară ‘to get out’ where the adverb specifies another action denoted by another verb a ieși ‘to get out’), these calques are not entirely unjustified. The translators who were familiar with Hungarian language might have considered these phrases as a possible way of enriching the Romanian means of expression (Arvinte – Gafton 2007: 135). 21 This might be the result of a “mechanical equivalence” (Gafton 2009b: 3). Most likely the translator did not understand exactly the meaning of the phrase, hence he equates the Hungarian jár ‘to wander’ with its Romanian correspondent a îmbla ‘to walk’ without taking into account the fact that the verb is only part of an idiom. 22 These constructions serve as models for Romanian language opening it “the way to enrich its [Romanian’s] means of expression” from which the norm could make, then, its choice (Gafton 2012: 208). Some of these might reflect the Hebrew tradition of the Bible (see also: lăsă... somn pre (Adam) ‘(God) caused a deep sleep to fall upon (Adam)’, Gen., 2, 21, cf. Hung. Almot bochata ‘to make (someone) fall asleep’, cf. Lat. inmisit... soporem in Adam). Nevertheless, in PO, these might be regarded as being influenced by the Hungarian source text since it is the one which conveys them also being the primary source for the Romanian translators. 51 their generations)’ (Ex., 30, 21, cf. Hung. nemzetségrül nemzetségre ‘from generation to generation’, cf. Lat. semini eius per succesiones); or in: făgăduită făgădui ‘vowed a vow’ (Gen., 28, 20, cf. Hung. fogadast fogada ‘vowed a vow’, cf. Lat. vovit etiam votum)23. 3.1.3.3. Structural calques may also be found in the domain of morphology where these aim especially the verbs’ class. There are some cases in which the Romanian verbal inflexion almost slavishly imitates the Hungarian inflexion. Thus some Romanian verbs seem to have adopted the case assignment patterns of their Hungarian correspondents, though not completely strange in Romanian either. For instance, in the passage: se vor da cătră vrăjmașii noștri ‘they join also unto our enemies’ (Ex., 1, 10), the verb in accusative meaning ‘to betray’, ‘to take the enemy’s side’, translates the Hungarian accusative pattern a mi ellensegeinkhoz adnaia magát. Similarly, less common in Romanian is the verb a strica ‘to damage’ followed by a dative as in: să stric voao ‘to hurt you’ (Gen., 31, 29, cf. Hung. hogy arthatnèc tünektec). Same here we could mention other examples too in which the accusative use of a verb, altough not incompatible in Romanian either, seems to have been governed by Hungarian influence as in: giurase…pre feciorii ‘he had … sworn the children’ (Ex., 13, 19), which translates the Hungarian factitive: esköte...fiait; izbîndi-voiu pre ei ‘(my hand) shall destroy them’ (Ex., 15, 9) follows the Hungarian: Ki töltem boszszumat raytoc; or Năvălească pre ei frică ‘Fear (and dread) shall fall upon them’ (Ex., 15, 16), correspondent of a Hungarian idiom: Bochass félelmet reaioc. 3.1.3.4. In many occasions, the Romanian text adopts Hungarian word order. For instance, characteristic for Hungarian language is the relatively fixed word order of a noun preceded by its modifier which sometimes is kept in the Romanian translation too. In other cases, the translation keeps the word order regarding the verb and its arguments found in the source text. Here are a few examples of these two cases: în mare bucurie va fi ‘in great joy he will be (i.e. he will be glad in his heart) ’, cf. nagy örembe leszen (Ex., 4, 14); de bună miroseală ‘of good smell’, cf. ió illatú (Ex., 25, 23); în tabără lăcuiia ‘in camp (they) dwelt (i.e. in Hazezontamar they dwelt)’, cf. Tamarba laknac vala (Gen., 14, 7)24; gios nu vom mearge ‘down (unto) we shall not go’, cf. alá nem megyünc (Gen., 44); luați sus pre tată vostru ‘take up your father’, cf. vegyetek fel a tü attyatokat 23 As a matter of fact, iterative constructions are characteristic for Bible translations, many of them being translated word for word from the Hebrew original and preserved in later versions of the Bible too. In these constructions reduplication is meant to express the intensity of an action or of an attribute, the supreme quality of a virtue or of an object (Munteanu 2008: 72). But this state of affairs does not reduce in the least the Hungarian version’s contribution with respect to the passages above, which may be sustained, in the first case, by the absence of a repetitive structure from the Latin text and, in the second case, by the presence of the Hungarian loanword. 24 The phrase în tabără ‘in camp’ instead of în Tamar ‘in Hazezontamar’, as it would have been the correct translation (cf. Lat. qui habitabant in Asasonthamar) may be due, according to M. Roques, to a subsequent correction which no longer reported to the original text (in PO 1925, p. XLV). 52 (Gen., 45); mierse sus dereptu aceia Iosif ‘went up therefore Ioseph’, cf. Felmene ezokaert Ioseph (Gen., 50); cui tine uraște ‘whom you hate’, cf. a ki tégedet gyülöl (Ex., 23)25; cine pre noi den Egiptu afară aduse ‘who us up out of the land of Egypt brought’, cf. ki münket Egiptus földeböl kihozot (Ex., 32); Bine iaste mie lucrul ‘Well it goes my (every)thing (i.e. Happy am I)’, cf. Iol vagyon dolgom (Gen., 30, 13); Cu obrazul pre pămînt plecă ‘facing the gorund he fell’, cf. Artzel a földre borula (Gen., 19, 11). Hungarian source’s presence is prominently marked within the target text in the following passages as well: i tare pre bărbat Lot năvăliră ‘And strongly upon the man Lot attacked (i.e they pressed sore upon the man, even Lot)’ (Gen., 19, 9, cf. Es erössen rea tudulanac a Firfiura Lothra); or in: Cine pre noi den Eghipet afară aduse ‘Who us out of Egypt brought (i.e. the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt)’ (Ex., 32, 1, cf. ki münket Egiptusföldeböl kihozot). In the passage: Cine va vărsa sînge de om, aceluia sîngele prin omul să se vearse ‘Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed’ (Gen., 9, 6, cf. Aki Ember vért ont: Annac vere Ember által ontassec ki), preserving the Hungarian word order also leads to an unusual juxtaposition of two Romanian inflexional forms aceluia sîngele ‘whose blood’ which makes the Romanian passage less clear. A similar case could be found in: Că acestora era cu Avraam legătură ‘That their was with Abram covenant (i.e. and these were confederate with Abram)’ (Gen., 14, 13, cf. Ezeknec Abrammal Kötésec vala) where the Romanian inflection acestora ‘their’ translates the Hungarian dative ezeknec ‘their’. In the same way, Hungarian word order is kept in: Legătură puse Domnul cu Avraam ‘Covenant made the Lord with Abram’ (Gen., 15, 18, cf. Kötest tön az WR Abrammal), where legătură ‘relation, connection’ is a semantic calque of the Hungarian word Kötest ‘alliance, covenant’. The passage: Care se-au ție arătat ‘that unto thee appeared’ (Gen., 35, 1) translates word for word the Hungarian a ki teneked meg ielenéc, with the dative placed before the verb (unlike the Latin order: qui apparuit tibi). Hungarian word order may also be found in: Spuse Faraon lu Iosif visul dzicînd ‘Told Pharaoh unto Ioseph his dream saying’ (Gen., 41, 17) which corresponds to the Hungarian passage: Meg beszelle Pharao Iosephnec (az álmot moduan), entailing some morphological adjustments, such as the use of the imperfective aspect26 following the Hungarian gerund moduan ‘saying’ instead of the Latin perfective narravit ergo ille quod viderat. The Hungarian text’s internal organization of the linguistic material within a unitary sequence is also reflected in: (fură...) și trîmbiteei foarte mare glas și toată dihania cutremurase în tabără ‘and the trumpet’s exceeding loud voice; so that all the people trembled in the camp’ (Ex., 19, 16) which translates es kürtnec igen 25 Recorded by I. Popovici among “the forms which are foreign to Romanian language system” and which prove the existence of a Hungarian source (Popovici 1979: 276). 26 Hungarian deverbative suffixes -ván, -vén carry the meaning ‘continuously’, ‘without any interruption’. The verbs to which these are attached to form a distinct morphological class in Hungarian, namely határozói igenév, which relatively corresponds to Romanian gerund. 53 nagy zöndülése: Es mind az egesz nép meg rettene a taborba. Some of the passages are even more extensive, such as: Îmblară tabăra acolo împrotiva muntelui // i Moisi iară sus mearse pre munte cătră Domnedzeu ‘and there (Israel) camped before the mount. // And Moses went up unto God’ (Ex., 19, 2-3, cf. Es tabort iaranac ot à hegy ellenébe // es Moses felméne az Istenhöz)27; Căndu-ți va fi lucrul bine și fă milă cu mine ‘When it shall be well with thee, and have mercy on me (i. e. shew kindness)’ (Gen., 40, 14, cf. Mikor ‘when’ iól ‘well’ leszē ‘shall be’ dolgod ‘with thee’ and tegy ‘have’ irgalmassagot ‘mercy’ velem ‘on me’). Often it is difficult, if not unintelligible, for Romanian speakers to understand such linguistic constructions, as it happens in: Prădatu-m-ați de cătră feciorii mei ‘Me have ye bereaved of my children’ (Gen., 42, 36, cf. Meg fosztatoc ‘to bereave’ az én gyermekimtöl ‘of my children’). Another example is in: (Iosif aduse lăuntru și pre tată-său) și-l stătu pre el înaintea lu faraon ‘(And Joseph brought in Jacob his father), and set him before Pharaoh’ (Gen., 47, 7, cf. es alatta Pharao eleibe). Although similar to the Latin version as well, the passage: protivitoriu va fi aleaneșului tău și turburătoriu cui tine turbură ‘I will be an enemy unto thine enemies, and an adversary unto thine adversaries’ (Ex., 23, 22, cf. mgh. ellensége leszec à te ellensegidnec, es à téged haborgatoknac haborgatoia) follows the Hungarian source rather than the Latin one which may be sustained by the choice for the words protivitoriu ‘enemy’ and aleaneș ‘adversary’ (cf. Lat.: inimicus ero inimicis tuis) or that for turburătoriu ‘perturber’ which is closer to Hung. haborgatoia ‘perturber’. 3.2. The Hungarian source text may exercise its influence on the Romanian translation in terms of formal adjustments too. A formal approximation to the Hungarian model might be observed, for instance, in the case of words with -us/uș, -os/-oș ending which denote either nations (Amorreoșilor, in Gen. 15, 16; Heteuș, in Gen. 23, 10) or common nouns (see sicluș ‘old Hebrew coin’) and which reflect the process of Latin words’ transcription in Hungarian language (cf. also teteluș ‘rank’)28. Such forms could have entered the Romanian text directly from the Hungarian original in which the Latin terms had already undergone a phonetic treatment or they could have been taken from the Latin source, these forms being subsequently altered by the translators familiar with the Hungarian transcription (M. Roques, in PO 1925, p. XXXVII). In other situations, the Hungarian text might have contributed, in a way or another, to the translators’ selection of certain lexemes over others. In other words, sometimes the use of some particular words, either of Latin origin or borrowed from a language (most often Slavonic) which is also the source of its Hungarian loan counterpart, might have been influenced by the occurrence of the 27 See also Popovici 1979: 276. As a matter of fact, throughout the Middle Ages several Latin words, especially those related to the domain of officiality, to political life or to diplomatic relations, such as: canțilarie ‘chancelerry’, gobărnator ‘governer’, secretariu ‘secretary’ etc., penetrated Romanian language through Hungarian mediation (O. Densusianu, in ILR, II, p. 352). 28 54 latter one in the Hungarian text. This might be the case of formă ‘form’, of Latin origin both in Hungarian and in Romanian, which appears in the phrase: în formă de migdeale ‘in form of almonds (i.e. made like unto almonds)’ precisely under the influence of the Hungarian source (see Ex., 25, 34, cf. mondolaformara), since in every occasion the Latin version presents another word in this phrase: in nucis modum. Similarly, the option for the word zălog ‘pawn’ (< Sl. zalogŭ), in: Dă-mi dară ceva zălog ‘Give me but some pawn’ (Ex., 38, 17) might have been favoured by the presence of its Hungarian counterpart zalagot ‘pawn’ in Heltai’s text. In the same way, medelniță ‘vessel’ in: Feace și ... medelnițele... toate aceastea de arame le feace ‘all the vessels thereof made he of brass’ (Ex. 38, 3) might have been selected under the influence of the Hungarian model: medentze ‘vessel’. In addition, whenever the term păharnic ‘butler’ appears (Gen., 40, 1, 2, 5, 21), it has its Hungarian correspondent (even its possible etymon29) poharnok ‘butler’ in the same passage of the text. The co-occurence with pogacha ‘dough’ from the Hungarian source (Ex., 12, 39) might have favoured the choice for Rom. pogaci ‘dough’ in that particular passage, otherwise rendered by Rom. pîine ‘bread’ (Gen., 18, 6). Hungarian influence (even Hungarian etymology) may also be accepted in the case of tabără ‘camp’ (< Hung. tábor ‘camp’, cf. Lat. castris, loco castrorum, in Ex., 19, 16, 17), frequently used in the translation including in various Hungarian idioms which are calqued in the target text, such as in: îmblară tabăra ‘(they) camped’ (Ex., 19, 2). Dictionaries usually record a Polish etymology for comornic ‘pantryman’ (see CADE, s.v. comornic1) but in: Putifar, comornicul lu Faraon ‘Potiphar, the pantryman of Pharaoh (i.e an officer of Pharaoh’s and captain of the guard)’ (Gen., 37, 36) this loanword might have been chosen under the influence of its Hungarian correspondent komornik ‘pantryman’ (cf. Lat.: eunucho). Conclusions 1. The translators’ option to resort, on various occasions, to Hungarian sources, suspending for the time being the other versions available, shows, on the one hand, that the Hungarian model has been regarded as useful and understandable both to those who translated it and to the readers addressed to. The Hungarian source might have provided, here and there, a deeper understanding of the sacred text and, at the same time, an appropriate form to express what was understood. 29 Most often the term in question has been explained by an old Slavonic etymon (see CADE, in it is considered to have entered Romanian language through Bulgarian and Serbian influence). But there is nothing against neither for it to be of Hungarian origin, at least in the region where the translation have been made (Rom. păhar-nic < Hung. pohár-nok ‘butler, pantryman’, possibly accompanied by a replacement of the Hungarian suffix –nok with a Romanian form –nic found more suitable, cf. Hung. álnok > Rom. alnic ‘cunning’) nor for it to be a Romanian derivative from Rom. păhar ‘glass’ (< Hung. pohár ‘glass’, otherwise accepted as a possible etymon). SD 55 2. By searching for the best translation solutions, translators might have pursued not only to enrich the Romanian language, not mature enough30 to render, at all steps, the conceptual construct of the Bible’s complexity, but also to create the necessary means to express those conceptual forms and contents of the sacred text, thus providing Romanian language the prerequisites for it to become an instrument of culture in the true sense of the word31. Therefore, as a whole, the Hungarian original stands for Romanian translators as a source and model32 for establishing and consolidating the written liturgical tradition, mediated also by Slavonic culture, as well as for establishing the old Romanian standard language. 3. Some of the translation solutions which carry the Hungarian source’s influence proved to be edifying for the biblical text’s crystallization and completion continuing, as a matter of fact, an existing tradition, whereas others are ad hoc, spontaneous and momentary, adopted under the pressure of certain linguistic constraints which did not have lasting repercussions on Romanian language system. It is true that not all of the introduced Hungarian elements close an either conceptual or formal gap nor do they correspond to a real necessity. Nevertheless, the use of those Hungarian loanwords which already had a Romanian correspondent to compete with should not be regarded as superfluous nor parasitic since by these words translators could have intended to enrich and refine Romanian means of expression appropriate for religious discourse. Abbreviations and bibliography A. Text editions PO 1925 = Palia d’Orăştie 1581-1582, I (...), Préface et Livre de la Genèse publiés avec le texte hungrois de Heltai et une introduction par Mario Roques, Paris, 1925 PO 1968 = Palia de la Orăştie 1581-1582 [The Old Testament from Orăştie 1581-1582], text-facsimile-indice, ediţie îngrijită de Viorica Pamfil, Bucureşti, 1968 30 According to Al. Gafton, the precarious condition of Romanian language at the time could have been, actually, to its advantage because, being more responsive and more easily modeled, it could reach, thus, a stage of development “in which it became able to render such a complex text” (Gafton 2010a: 3). 31 In this sense, the translators’ greatest difficulty has been “to acquire and create in Romanian culture and language those productive means [of expression] which are necessary to render [the Bible’s] forms and contents” rather than understanding the foreign structures or the conceptual content of the sacred texts (Gafton 2009a: 4). Likewise, the source language “has been not only a vehicle for certain contents to be conveyed to Romanian culture by the concrete form of a text, but also a model for Romanian language system to gradually create a variety able to convey itself those contents” (Gafton 2012: 21). 32 See also Gafton 2009a: 6. The same author rightfully concludes that “at a deeper level, the source text partially becomes the model on which Romanian language establishes its standard variety” (Gafton 2010c: 1). 56 2005 = Palia de la Orăştie (1582), I., Textul [The Old Testament from Orăştie (1582), I., The Text], Text stabilit și îngrijire editorială de Vasile Arvinte, Ioan Caproșu și Alexandru Gafton, Editura Universității ,,Alexandru Ioan Cuza,” Iași, 2005 TEXTE ROM. = Texte românești din secolul al XVI-lea. I. Catehismul lui Coresi. II. Pravila lui Coresi. III Fragmentul Todorescu. IV. Glosele Bogdan. V. Prefețe și epiloguri [Romanian Texts from the Sixteenth Century. I. Catechism of Coresi. II. Laws of Coresi. III. Fragment of Todorescu, i.e. The Book of Psalms. IV. Glosses of Bogdan. V. Prefaces and Epilogues], Gheție, Ion (coord.), Editura Academiei, București, 1982 PO B. References Arvinte,Vasile 2006: Studii de istorie a limbii române, Iași, Editura Universității ,,Alexandru Ioan Cuza” Arvinte, Vasile, Gafton, Alexandru 2007: Palia de la Orăştie (1582). II. Studii, Iași, Editura Universităţii „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” Drăganu, Nicolae 1921-1922: Din cel mai vechiu molitvenic românesc, in ,,Dacoromania”, II, p. 253-326 Gafton, Alexandru 2009a: Rela ia dintre sursele traducerilor biblice şi concep ia de la baza acestora, in „Text şi discurs religios”, 1/2009, p. 125-134 [Online: http://media.lit.uaic.ro/gafton/relatiacusursele.tdr1.pdf - 25 July, 2012] Gafton, Alexandru 2009b: Traducerea ca formă de achizi ie a conceptelor şi mentalită ilor, in „Tabor”, III, 2/2009, Cluj, p. 52-57 [Online: http://media.lit.uaic.ro/gafton/traducerea.tabor.pdf - 25 July, 2012] Gafton, Alexandru 2010a: Biblia de la 1688. Aspecte ale traducerii, in „Text şi discurs religios”, 2/2010, p. 49-72; [Online: http://media.lit.uaic.ro/gafton/tradbb.tdr2.pdf 25 July, 2012] Gafton, Alexandru 2010b: Consecin ele profunde ale contactelor lingvistice, in Gheorghe Chivu, Oana Uță Bărbulescu (coord.), Studii de limbă română. Omagiu profesorului Grigore Brâncuş, Editura Universităţii din Bucureşti, p. 77-100 Gafton, Alexandru 2010c: Traducerea ca literă şi glosa ca spirit, in „Tabor”, IV, 4/2010, p. 53-61; [Online: http://media.lit.uaic.ro/gafton/trad-glose.pdf - 25 July, 2012] Gafton, Alexandru 2012: De la traducere la norma literară. Contribuția traducerii textului biblic la constituirea vechii norme literare, Iași, Editura Universității ,,Alexandru Ioan Cuza” Gheţie, Ion 1974: Începuturile scrisului în limba română. Contribu ii filologice şi lingvistice, Bucureşti, Editura Academiei Române. Gheţie, Ion, Mareș, Alexandru 1985: Originile scrisului în limba română, Bucureşti, Editura Ştiinţifică şi Enciclopedică ILR, II = Densusianu, Ovid 1961: Istoria limbii române, ediţie îngrijită şi traducere în limba română de J. Byck, vol. II, Secolul al XVI-lea, Bucureşti, Editura Ştiinţifică. Iorga, Nicolae 1904: Istoria literaturii religioase a românilor până la 1688, București 57 Munteanu, Eugen 2008: Lexicologie biblică românească, București, Humanitas; [Online: http://www.philippide.ro/persoane/Volume/E.%20Munteanu_ Lexicologie%20Biblica.pdf – 10 December 2012] Pamfil, Viorica 1958: Elemente regionale în lexicul „Paliei de la Orăștie”, in ,,Cercetări de lingvistică”, III, p. 227–248 Popovici, Iosif 1979: Scrieri lingvistice, Timişoara, Editura Facla Rosetti, Al. 1931: Limba română în secolul al XVI-lea, București, Editura ,,Cartea românească” C. Dictionaries CADE = I.-Aurel Candrea, Gheorghe Adamescu, Dic ionar enciclopedic ilustrat [Illustrated Encyclopedic Dictionary], Editura „Cartea Românească,” Bucureşti, 1931 EWUR = Tamás Lajos, Etymologisch-historisches Wörterbuch der ungarischen Elemente im rumänischen, Budapest, 1966 DLRLV = Mariana Costinescu, Magdalena Georgescu, Florentina Zgraon, Dic ionarul limbii române literare vechi (1640–1780). Termeni regionali [Old Literary Romanian Language Dictionary (1640-1780). Regional Terms], Bucureşti, Editura Ştiinţifică şi Enciclopedică, 1987 Magyar Néprajzi Lexicon, II [Hungarian Etnographic Lexicon, II], Ortutay, Gyula (ed.), Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 1977-1982; Online: Hungarológiai Alapkönyvtár: http://mek.oszk.hu/02100/02115/html/index.html - 3 January 2013 MNYSZ = Szarvas Gábor, Simonyi Zsigmond, Magyar nyelvtörténeti szótár [Historical Dictionary of Hungarian Language], I–III, Budapest, 1890, 1891, 1893 SD = Scriban A., Dic ionaru limbii româneşti [Dictionary of Romanian Language], Iaşi, 1939 58 Monogenes, Christological Term in Heb. 11:17?1 Delia Cristina MIH IL En conformité avec la herméneutique biblique orthodoxe, en tenant compte des principes herméneutiques comme la continuité et l’unité des termes spécifiques de l’Ancien au Nouveau Testament ou l’interprétation d’un texte biblique par un autre texte biblique ou patristique, dans Hebr. 11:17 montre lui-même pour être le tournant du Nouveau Testament où le terme a une valeur technique en référence au Christ. La continuité entre et нуЫсЯу (yahid) de la tradition hébraïque (MT) doit être déclaré, ce que reflète le fait qu’une valence terminologique messianique est devenue christologique. Du point de vue de la logique interne du fragment, Hebr. 11:17-19 représente une unité avec trois termes clés, , π α et πα α , et parmi eux l’accent semble être mis sur (11:17). Regardé de v. 19 à v. 17, πα α crée sémantiquement un double niveau sur : d’une part il caractérise Isaac, mais d’autre part il points la relation typologique Isaac - Christ et déclare effectivement que cette référence typologique est faite indistinctement. Cependant, lorsque ce rend comme un terme christologique dans Hebr. 11:17, ainsi qu’on le voit en énigme, le terme est utilisé dans John and 1John comme un titre christologique clair. La continuité entre нуЫсЯу dans Genèse 22 et dans Hebr. 11, ainsi que la distinction entre et π ω , comme différentes références à la même réalité christologique dans Hébreux, sont prouves pour la considération du dans Hebr. 11 un terme christologique. Keywords: ‫( יָחִ יד‬yahid), , πα α ,π ω , orthodox hermeneutics. 1. Introduction Hebr. 11:17-19 stands up as a model of belief in resurrection, a cornerstone of Christian belief (cf. 1Cor. 15:17.20; Matt. 22:31-32//Mark 12:26-27//Luke 20:3738; Facts 2:24.30-32) and the point the author is making here is to be seen through a Christological hermeneutical key, what he actually asserts being the Resurrection of Christ. 1 This article is connected to Delia Cristina Petreanu, “Hebrews 11:17-19, a Hermeneutical Analysis from the Perspective of Hebrews’ Author Reference to the Old Testament”, in Text şi discurs religios, 5/2013, eds. Alexandru Gafton, Sorin Guia, Ioan Milică, Editura Universităţii „Alexandru Ioan Cuza”, Iaşi, 2013, p. 127-146. Hence, there is some conceptual overlapping between the two articles. 59 First, from the internal logic of the fragment point of view, Hebr. 11:17-19 represents a unit with three key terms, ηοθοΰεθάμ, π ρηα and παραίοζά. Among them, the emphasis seems to be put on ηοθοΰεθ μ (11:17) as a key term in rapport to which 11:18 is explicatory and 11:19 is an effect. Reversely looked at, from v. 19 to v. 17, θ παραίοζ semantically creates a double level on ηοθοΰεθ μ: on one hand characterizes Isaac, but on the other points to the typological relationship Isaac-Christ (largely, to the Old - New Testament events typological relationship) and actually states this typological reference is made indistinctly. However, this makes ηοθοΰεθ μ a Christological term in Hebr. 11:17, as is seen in enigma, while as a clear Christological title the term is used in Johannine occurrences. In fact, the aim of the present article is to assert ηοθοΰεθ μ is a Christological term in Hebr. 11:17 with the above terminological distinction from Johannine occurrences. Secondly, in what concerns the context for Hebr. 11:17-19, ηοθοΰεθάμ seems again to be emphatic. If we look at the whole chapter 11 through a typological key, the chaining of events shows the centrality of Christological event, the Sacrifice and Resurrection being the source for believers’ reaching of perfection (11:40), city of the living God (12:22), unshaken Kingdom (12:28). Hebr. 11:1719 gets a central position inside chapter 11, being flanked by the pattern Sacrifice, Resurrection, Baptism, Theosis and inside this construction the term ηοθοΰεθάμ is at its very core, showing itself as the emphasis that from an essential point of view concludes the discourse of Hebrews. Thirdly, the differentiation of ηοθοΰεθάμ and πρω οεομ as Christological terms in the Hebrews’ author understanding is to be asserted for sustaining our discussion. At last, but not least, the continuity between ηοθοΰεθάμ and нуЫсЯу Hebrew tradition (MT) is to be stated, reflecting that a terminological messianic valence became a Christological one. Hence, from an Eastern Orthodox biblical hermeneutics, considering hermeneutical principles such as the continuity and unity on specific terms from the Old to the New Testament or the interpretation of a biblical text by another biblical or patristic text, ηοθοΰεθάμ in Hebr. 11:17 shows itself to be the New Testament turning point where the term has a technical value with reference to Christ. 2. The continuity between ο ογ ή and ‫ יָחִיד‬and the distinction of ο ογ ή and π ωτότο ο as Christological terms in the Hebrews’ author understanding. 60 Hebr. 11:17 (Greek critical text - NA27 = Byz2): Π ει προ εθ θοχεθ ίρα η θ Ἰ α ε πειραα ηεθομ εα θ ηοθοΰεθ προ φερεθ, μ παΰΰεζ αμ θαGen. ει22:2(MT): ηεθομ ָЧцдְЭцпЧ ёЯсѐЧ Ы уд‫ת‬кЭ ЯѼЧлоЮ Ѧдђѡ Э кЩ ָ Чнуг ЫсЧ уд‫ת‬кЭ ָЧъѨЫ д‫ת‬кЭ кЯъдсЮё ђЭшка ‫יּ‬Юп оЯ ‫יּ‬ђаЫ ‫מּ‬Юо яђЭЭ кдцЭк ‫ָ׃‬уг ЭцЬк ђЮшак ђЭѡкЩ чуђЯЫ ог Эо нЮсѥ цЮь оЯцаьЧц чЯѡ ѬоЬцьЩ оЮ пЧ Gen. 22:2 (LXX): „εα ε πεθ ζαί θ υ θ ου θ ΰαπη θ θ ΰ πη αμ θ Ι ααε εα πορε γη ι ε μ θ ΰ θ θ οηζ θ εα θ θεΰεοθ α θ εεῖ ε μ ζοε ρπω ιθ φ᾽ θ θ ρ ωθ ὧθ θ οι ε πω” Hebr. 11:17 makes allusion to Gen. 22:2. However, a significant difference for our disscusion between Hebrew and Greek traditions, which reflects itself in translations, is to be noted: while the Hebrew text has ЯѼЧлоЮ Ѧдђѡ Э кЩ ָ ЧнуЫсЧуд‫ת‬кЭ ָЧъѨЫ д‫ת‬кЭ (MT), the only begotten/only,unique son whom you have loved, the Greek one has instead θ ΰαπη θ θ ΰ πη αμ (LXX), the beloved one whom you have loved. Both terms, ηοθοΰεθ μ and ΰαπη μ, are in the New Testament and later on Church Tradition Christological titles, but the important issue here is that in alluding to the episode of Gen. 22, the Hebrews’ author seems to prefer the Hebrew tradition by using the term ηοθοΰεθ μ in Hebr. 11:17. The Hebrews’ author takes out from the Old Testament’s pool, with respect to Abraham’s sacrifice episode, two ideas, common to both Hebrew and Greek tradition, the testing and the offering, but selects the Hebrew tradition in order to characterize the son of promise and the purpose of this selection seems to be for sustaining a precise hermeneutical point of view. In Genesis, yahid has three occurrences (Gen. 22:2.12.16). In Gen. 22:2 (MT), bot ָ ЧнуЫсЧу and ЯѼЧлоЮ Ѧдђѡ Э кЩ , only/only begotten and whom you have loved, are used. At the next two occurrences, later in the story, only yahid is used, in both cases the theological context speaking of the offering indeed ready to happen, the climbing of the action and tension of the narrative reaching its peak of certitude, especially from readers’ point of view. At this point in the story there is no more battle between flesh, natural human affection of a father for his only and beloved son, and God’s will that seems to be in contradiction with His promise; the decision is finally taken by Abraham, he will sacrifice his only begotten son. Hence, we notice a term selection already inside episode of Gen. 22 and may argue that this related to the accomplished sacrifice term selection is also applied in Hebrews. There, the selective use of ηοθοΰεθ μ, only begotten, has to do with the Sacrifice of the Great Priest (Hebr. 5-10) who is also the Only Begotten Son of the Father, Incarnated for the beloved world’s3 eternal life (John 3:16; cf. 1John 4:9-10). 2 Maurice A. Robinson and William G. Pierpont, The New Testament in the Original Greek: Byzantine Textform, Chilton Book, 2005. 3 The term world has not being used with its negative meaning, related to sins, as in 1John 2:1516, but as God’s creation for which the Incarnation of the Only Son of God took place. 61 The New Testament Christological title, ΰαπη μ, the beloved4, as revealed by God the Father during the baptizing and transfiguration episodes of Jesus (Matt. 3:17/Mark 1:11/Luke 3:22 and Matt. 17:5/Mark 9:7/Luke 9:35 – BYZ and GOC5, not NA 27/2Peter 1:17)6 does not seem to be underlined when the narrative focuses on the Sacrifice issue7; rather, the Christological title ηοθοΰεθ μ, only begotten, comes now into play and seems more appropriate in this theological context, and the beloved world, God’s creation, is to whom the Sacrifice is made by the Only Begotten Son of God. Even Gen. 22’s episode gives an insight that during his testing, Abraham deeply reached the certitude God will conceal His promise with His request, as explicitly said in Gen. 22:5, оЭпсЩ ЮѼѡ Ч г ъЫ пЧ оЯлѬѡЯъпЧ , we shall worship and come back, and implicitly throughout the entire narrative, in all his firm actions directed to accomplish God’s will, culminating with Gen. 22:12. But, it is for Hebr. 11:19 to certify Abraham’s belief in God’s power to raise someone up from the dead. It is v. 19, which connects the ideas of resurrection and sacrifice, that ultimately motivates the author selection of ηοθοΰεθ μ as a Christological term; through the Incarnation of the Only Begotten Eternal Son of God, His priestly office is according to the power of an endless life (Hebr. 7:16 NKJV). The term yahid has 12 occurrences in the Hebrew Bible, out of which four are translated in LXX by ηοθοΰεθ μ (Jdg. 11:34; Psa. 22:21; 25:16; 35:17), but seven are translated by ΰαπ ω (Gen. 22:2.12.16; Prov. 4:3; Jer. 6:26; Amos 8:10; Zech. Beyond its use as a Christological title, the frequent use of the term ΰαπη μ (a total of 86 occurrences), many times in plural, also reflects a quality of Christians on which basis they are addressed as beloved, as St. Apostle John pictures very well: ε ε πο απ θ ΰ πηθ ωεεθ ηῖθ πα ρ, θα εθα γεο εζηγ ηεθ, εα η θ (1Jo 3:1 NA27); God the Father has bestowed upon us such a love we are called sons of God. So, the Only Begotten Son of God is the Beloved One and Christians, as sons of God in Christ, are the beloved ones. When searching for participial use of ΰαπ ω, we find some situations where the people of God is called His beloved (Deut. 33:12; Jer. 11:15, although another Hebrew term is used there, yadid, translated by LXX with ΰαπηη θομ). One participial New Testament’s occurrence of ΰαπ ω is a clear Christological title: ε μ παιθοθ ιημ μ χ ρι ομ α ο μ χαρ ω εθ η μ θ ΰαπηη θω (Eph. 1:6 NA27). 5 The New Testament Approved by the Great Church of Christ, Patriarchal Printing House, Constantinople, 1904. See John Karavidopoulos, “The Ecumenical Patriarchate’s 1904 New Testament Edition and Future Perspectives”, https://www.academia.edu/2563944/Textual_criticism_in_the_Orthodox_Church. 6 When comes to Jesus’ baptizing episode, St. Ap. John does not use the ΰαπη μ Christological title, but the verb ΰαπ ω: πα ρ ΰαπ θ υ θ εα π θ α ωεεθ θ χειρ α ο (John 3:35). Rather, both John and 1John show a preference for the ηοθοΰεθ μ Christological title, though the ΰαπ ω language is widely represented (37 occurrences in John and 28 in 1 John). 7 In Matth. 12:18, which quotes from Isa. 42:1, the suffering servant of God is identified with the beloved son of God; the Hebrew term у ЫѪЧльЮ (MT), my slave/ servant, is translated by a Greek term which has a larger meaning, παῖμ (Isa 42:1 LXX; Matth. 12:18 NA27, BYZ), servant or son, and also a new qualifying term, ΰαπη μ, appears. Although Matt. 12:18 makes such an identification, the suffering chosen servant of God being in fact the Beloved Son of God revealed in His Glory by God the Father, when speaking of Jesus Christ Sacrifice other texts focus on His ηοθοΰεθ μ quality (John 3:16; Hebr. 11:17). 4 62 12:10)8. A good observation would be that six of the lastly mentioned texts have a messianic character (Gen. 22:2. 12. 16; Jer. 6:26; Amos 8:10; Zech. 12:10)9 and through its translation, LXX directs to the Christological title ΰαπη μ. A possible explanation for the different LXX’s translations of yahid may also lay in the resemblance with yadid,10 beloved, translated by ΰαπηη θομ or ΰαπη μ. Such an example, interesting for its theological meaning, is Isa. 5:1 which is alluded to in Mark 12:6//Luke 20:13. From the content of the parable, is quite obvious that both these New Testament’s texts contain the Christological title ΰαπη μ. The title beloved (yadid) from Isa. 5:1 is correlated with the Lord of hosts, (Isa. 5:7 MT) ‫ת‬ѽкЯлѐЧ оЯпоЧ у / ευρ ου αίαωγ (LXX), the Holy God, ѡѽн‫קּ‬Я оЮ цЬкоЯ пЧ (Isa 5:16 MT)/ γε μ ΰιομ (LXX) and the Holy One of Israel, цЬкђЧЯ ѢЫу ѡѽнёЧ (Isa 5:19 MT) / ο ΰ ου Ι ραηζ (LXX), and His vineyard11 with His people (Isa. 5:7) who showed themselves unfruitful (Isa. 5: 2. 4) and unprepared for His coming Judgment (Isa. 5: 7. 24-25). In the two New Testament texts which allude to Isa. 5, the Beloved is the vineyard Owner’s Son. Hence, Mark 12 and Luke 20 construct a new theological context that conveys to the Sacrifice of the Beloved Son of God. The parable presents winegrowers to whom the Owner rented His vineyard as those who eventually put to death the Owner’s Beloved Son, before that taking place prophets’ wounding or killing; in fact, some ideas from the prophetic discourse in Jer. 6, Amos 8, and especially Zech. 12 may be found in the parable of the vineyard workers from Mark 12//Luke 20, contributing to the 8 Although much later, Vulgate generally translates yahid by unigenitus (Gen. 22:2. 12. 16; Jdg. 11:34 – unigenita; Prov. 4:3; Jer. 6:26; Amos 8:10; Zech. 12:10), namely, texts with a messianic character (except Prov. 4: 3; if considering only masculine gender terms, also Jdg. 11:34 is excepted, as LXX seams to group the messianic texts; but if looking only at the concept, Jdg. 11:34 may be included, as may be reflected by Vulgate’s translation). Regarding the texts from Psalms, Vulgate prefers to translate yahid by unicus/unica (Psa. 22:21; 25:16; 35:17) and unus in Psa. 68:7 (in this case also the Greek term being different from ηοθοΰεθ μ: ηοθ ροπομ). 9 Zech. 12:10 is partly cited by St. Ap. John: “They shall look on Him whom they pierced” (John 19:37 NKJV) and also gathers the ideas of the only son’s sacrifice (Gen. 22) and the mourning for the only son (Jer. 6:26; Amos 8:10): нус֔Ы Я ‫יּ‬оЮ дцЮь н֙ ‫פּ‬Ь ыЧ шЫ ѱЧ пуцЯ ьЯ ѬнЧ֣ юыЯ пЧ Ѭђё֑ Я ЯѪдђЭѡкЩ ‫ת‬к֣ Ь у ЮцкЬ Ѭту ֥ ЫѨЫопЧ (Zech. 12:10 MT). The new element Zech. 12:10 brings to the prophecy is exploited by John 19:37, but the term нус֔Ы Я ‫יּ‬оЮ (Zech. 12:10 MT) has not come into play in this case of New Testament citation from Old Testament. 10 This aspect was postulated to be due to the fact “different translators were at work”. (Büchsel, “ηοθοΰεθ μ” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, vol. 4, eds. Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich, translator and editor Geoffrey W. Bromiley, D. Litt., D.D., WM. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1964, p. 737). 11 Some Old Testament passages refer to Israel as wine: Psa. 80:8-16; Isa.5:1-7; Jer.2:21; Eze.15:1-8; Ezek. 17:5-10; Ezek. 19:10-14; Hos. 10:1, although in these texts Israel appears as faithless to God and punished by Him. Nevertheless, John 15:1 describes our Lord Jesus Christ as the true vine, as providing the indispensable condition for a fruitful Christian life, as the fulfilled purpose of God regarding humankind. Hence, texts like Psa. 80:15-16, Isa. 5:1 and John 15:1 show themselves connected. This could be why the Christ Pantokrator icon from the churches' central dome is sometimes surrounded by a citing from Psa. 80:15-16: it is God Almighty, the Incarnated Son of God, The One who makes His vineyard to yield fine grapes, although together with every Christian will to remain in Christ and work a fruitful Christian life. 63 reconceptualization of Isa. 5. The Christological title of the Beloved and the idea of the Sacrifice of God’s Son are united in Mark 12:6//Luke 20:13, but when searching for the Hebrew term from Isa. 5:1 to whom allusion is made, we do not find yahid, but yadid. Now, we are speaking of a Hebrew term with a different root, hence a different linguistic meaning, to which LXX shows itself consistent, always translating it in the same way. Therefore, it seems more importantly for LXX to construct from different theological contexts a messianic term that will become in the New Testament a Christological term/ title, the linguistic issue being at some point secondary. So far we can say that LXX constructed a strong tradition around the term ΰαπη μ in reference to different theological contexts such as the sacrifice of the only son or the story of the vineyard’s Owner, which are expressed by different Hebrew terms. Nevertheless, we can also say the New Testament has not referred itself only to LXX’s translation choices regarding the Hebrew Old Testament, but directly to the latter. This aspect, which could be proved, for example, by the election the Hebrew’s author makes in Hebr. 11:17, using ηοθοΰεθ μ with reference to yahid, marks the continuity between the New Testament and not only the Septuagint tradition, but also the Hebrew Bible. At this point, a useful approach would be to search when the Greek text (LXX, NA27 or BYZ) uses the term ηοθοΰεθ μ either with a messianic character or with a Christological one. Such occurrences in LXX could be Solomon’s Psalm 18:4 and Wisdom 7:2212, although none of these is connecting the idea of sacrifice with the term ηοθοΰεθ μ, leaving less probable a continuation of these occurrences in Hebrews and John (especially John 3:16). However, a worth to mention occurrence is in Ps. 22:21 (21:21 LXX). Although there ηοθοΰεθ is a feminine adjective in relation to θ ουχ θ, in Dialog 98. 105, St. Justin the Martyr applies this verse (as the entire psalm) to Christ, considering reference to His divine nature is made by ηοθοΰεθ .13 Moreover, in this case the connection with the idea of sacrifice is present. Nevertheless, even with this occurrence, we cannot admit LXX creates other than a very loose tradition regarding ηοθοΰεθ μ (with rather unclear and unconnected usages of the term), at most a terminological transition “zone”, and it seems quite improbable the Hebrews’ author relied on 12 These texts are considered late, ranging from the late third/second to the first century before Christ for Wisdom and from the second century before Christ to the first (but even to the fifth) century after Christ (or a narrower dating:70-45 before Christ) for Solomon Psalms. In Sol. Ps. 18 Israel is μ υ θ πρω οεοθ ηοθοΰεθη and in Wisdom 7 personified wisdom conveys to our Lord Jesus Christ, considering also 1Co. 1:30. Between these two, Sol. Ps. 18:4, only if dated earlier, could be a root for a Septuagint tradition on ηοθοΰεθ μ; although here, ηοθοΰεθ μ is rather bringing an intensification to πρω οεομ (cf. Exod 4:22), than conveying to a messianic meaning. Büchsel, “ηοθοΰεθ μ” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, p. 739. Septuaginta 4/II, Iov. În elepciunea lui Solomon. În elepciunea lui Iisus Sirah. Psalmii lui Solomon, p. 161. 440-441. 13 The v. 21 is understood by St. Justin as „teaching and prophecy” about Christ, “the Only Begotten of everyone’s Father”, Who was uniquely born from the Father, and then was born human from the Virgin. Apologe i de limbă greacă, PSB 2, trad., introd., note şi indice de pr. prof. T. Bodogae, pr. prof. Olimp Căciulă, pr. prof. D. Fecioru, EIBMBOR, Bucureşti, 1980, p. 216. 64 this one rather than directly on yahid Hebrew tradition. Among the synoptic authors, only St. Luke14 uses the term ηοθοΰεθ μ, with the meaning of “only child”, and the theological context refers here to either rising from dead (Luke7:12. 14; 8:42. 54) or healing (by getting out a demon in this case, Luke 9:38-39. 42), those only children by the Lord Jesus Christ. The context of rising from dead or healing conveys to the renewal which is to be and already began in our Lord Jesus Christ, but these events are not types of Christ’s Sacrifice and Resurrection. Hence, the usage of ηοθοΰεθ μ as a Christological term/ title is absent at the synoptic authors, but appears at the Hebrews’ author and, with a general acceptance, in John (1:14.18; 3:16.18) and 1 John (4:9). This aspect is different from the usage of the Christological title ΰαπη μ by the synoptic authors, the ΰαπη μ title obviously continuing the Septuagint tradition. On the other hand, ηοθοΰεθ μ Christological term seems to be shaped later, within the Epistle to the Hebrews’ main theological stake, and being already in use, is theologically developed as a Christological title by St. Ap. John’s Gospel. Hence, ηοθοΰεθ μ as a Christological term/ title is continuing and recovers from the Hebrew tradition the term yahid, viewed as messianic, rather than from the much weaker Septuagint tradition on ηοθοΰεθ μ. Vulgate sustains ηοθοΰεθ μ as a Christological title/ term for both John and 1John’s occurrences and Hebrews’: for all occurrences of the term in Luke, Vulgate translates by unicus, while for those in John, 1John and Hebrews it translates by unigenitus. However, it is to be stated a distinction between ηοθοΰεθ μ usage in Johannine writings and Hebrews, the Johannine writings showing more elaboration, theological deepening of the same concept, although it is for Hebrews to make the turning point. The kind of theological presentation of the unique relationship between the Son and the Father as in John’s Gospel is not the only defining one for ηοθοΰεθ μ as a Christological term/ title. The ηοθοΰεθ μ usage in Hebr. 11:17 places the ideas of sacrifice of the only begotten son and his resurrection, θ παραίοζ (Hebr.11:19) to the Christological event, offering the first New Testament’s occurrence of the term as a Christological one. The ideas of sacrifice of the only begotten and his resurrection in typos have to be connected to the entire discourse of Hebrews about the Great Priest chosen by God the Father among men (Hebr. 5:1.4-5), but Who, at the same time, is the eternal Son of God (cf. Ps. 2: 7 cited in Hebr. 1:5; 5:5). This is the reason for His priesthood being unique and everlasting 14 St. Luke, who generally uses a similar terminology and theological content with St. Ap. Paul, employs three times ηοθοΰεθ μ, different from St. Paul’s no usage of the term, if in accord with modern exegesis who considers Hebrews not St. Paul’s. Nevertheless, St. Luke’s usage of ηοθοΰεθ μ is not as a Christological term/ title. Hence, Hebrews, whose chronological position is generally placed before St. John’s Gospel, may be the first occurrence of ηοθοΰεθ μ as a Christological term, earlier than the well-known occurrences rather designated as Christological title from John 1:14. 18; 3:16. 18, and 1 John 4:9. 65 (Hebr. 7:24; cf. Ps. 110:4 cited in Hebr. 5:6; 7:17), as well as His intercession for us; hence He saves us to the uttermost (Hebr. 7:25). At this point it has to be noted the Hebrews’ author probable understanding of ηοθοΰεθ μ includes the aspect of the divine nature of Christ as a semiotic valence of the term. For St. Ap. John, “ ηοθοΰεθ μ υ σμ is simply a special form of υ μ ο γεο ”.15 The Son shares the divine glory with His Father forever, before the existence of the world, due to the love God the Father has for His eternal Son (John 17:5.24). The special relationship between Jesus and God, which excludes the same relation to others, is also sustained by the fact St. Ap. John calls God the πα ρ ιομ of Jesus (John 5:18). This gives to ηοθοΰεθάμ a designation of Jesus16, but puts an accent on His divine nature. In John “ηοθοΰεθάμ denotes the origin of Jesus. He is ηοθοΰεθάμ as the onlybegotten”. The concept of the divine sonship is to be understood in terms of eternal begetting from God (1John 5:18: ΰεθθηγε μ ε ο γεο )17. By receiving Him through belief we too become God’s sons (John 1:12.13: ε γεο ΰεθθ γη αθ), with the mention we are sons by grace, not by nature, being adopted as sons (cf. Rom. 8:23); on the other hand, lack of believing in the Only Begotten Son of God already brings condemnation (John 3:18: η πι ε ωθ ἤ η ε ερι αι, ι η πεπ ευεεθ ε μ θοηα ο ηοθοΰεθο μ υ ο ο γεο ). Jesus’s glory is “as that of the only-begotten Son”18 (John 1:14: ιαθ μ ηοθοΰεθο μ παρ πα ρ μ), hence He is the Only One able to reveal God the Father (John 1:18: ηοθοΰεθ μ γε μ θ ε μ θ ε ζποθ ο πα ρ μ εεῖθομ ιηΰ α ο), the only path we have to God the Father in order for us to see the divine glory (John 17:24) and share the eternal life (John 14:6). But the divine sonship in terms of only begotten is also present, right from the beginning, in Hebrews. The quotation from Ps. 2:7 in Hebr. 1:5 (υ μ ηου ε , ΰ ηεροθ ΰεΰ θθηε ε) is applied to Jesus, as one can acknowledge from the first two chapters of Hebrews, and υ μ ηου is understood by the Fathers of the Church in reference to the divine nature of Christ, hence in terms of Onlybegotten. This sonship quality, reflected by the more excellent, unique name He has inherited (Hebr. 1:4 RSV)19, would convey to a title referring to His divine Büchsel, “ηοθοΰεθ μ” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, p. 741. Büchsel, “ηοθοΰεθ μ” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, p. 740. It can also be noticed St. Ap. Paul uses the expression ιομ υ μ with reference to Jesus Christ. (Rom. 8:32), undoubtedly with the same meaning ηοθοΰεθ μ υ σμ has in John 3:16. 17 Büchsel, “ηοθοΰεθ μ” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, p. 741. 18 Büchsel, “ηοθοΰεθ μ” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, p. 740. 19 St. John Chrysostom points out in this verse (1:4) is made reference to the human nature of Jesus Christ, since His divine name, the Word of God, He ever had. Nevertheless, the quality of Heir of all things (1:2) “is declaring two things: His proper sonship and indefeasible sovereignty.” St. John Chrysostom, Homilies on the epistle to the Hebrews. I.2-3, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First series, vol. IV (Catholic Edition), ed. Philip Schaff, D.D., LL.D., The Christian Literature Company, New York, 1889, pp. 367-368. In 1:4, being made should be understood as “being shown forth” because His Name, more excellent than the angels’, declares His true sonship 15 16 66 nature, as ηοθοΰεθ μ υ σμ is. Meanwhile, when referring to His sending into the world by God the Father, θ πρω οεοθ ε μ θ ο εουη θηθ (Hebr. 1:6 NA27)20 is used, πρω οεομ21 title rather reflecting His human nature (as today I have (the Son is of the Father). In 1:5, You are My Son, today I have begotten You “expresses nothing else than from [the time] God is” and today seems to be said with respect to the flesh. It might be asserted that in these verses both the divine and the human nature of Christ are referred to. St. John Chrysostom, Homilies on the epistle to the Hebrews. II.2, p. 373. Also when commenting Psa. 2:7 other Fathers of the Church assert that both the divine and the human nature are referred to. In You are My Son, the begetting of the Son from the Father before time, in conformity to His Divinity, is pointed out, while today I have begotten You is to be understood regarding His Incarnation, hence after God’s economy. Cuv. Eftimie Zigabenul, Sf. Nicodim Aghioritul, Psaltirea în tâlcuirile Sfin ilor Părin i, vol. I, transliterare, diortosire, revizuire după ediţia grecească şi note de Ştefan Voronca, Egumeniţa, p.72. Speaking about the name above every name given to the Son (Phil. 2:9), which is a reference to His human nature, Thedorit asserts this name is the Only-Begotten, ηοθοΰεθ μ υ σμ, that God the Word has had since ever as God and also takes it as human. The same understanding is to be applied when referring to Psa. 2:7. Fer. Teodorit al Kirului, Tîlcuirea celor 150 de Psalmi ai Proorocului Împărat David, Mănăstirea Sfinţilor Arhangheli Mihail şi Gavriil Petru Vodă, 2003, p. 10. 20 While some texts refer to Lord Jesus Christ “coming in the flesh” as to an “exodus or going out” (cf. Matth. 13:3; John 16:28), “for we were out from God”, some others (Hebr. 1:6) refer to it as a “Bringing in or taking on Him flesh”. “Having gone out to us, that is, having taken flesh”, “He brought us in, having purged the sins, and making reconciliation” with God. Hence, the image of “Coming in” (Hebr. 1:6) stands for a “metaphor of those who come to an inheritance and receive any portion or possession”. The Bringing in of the First-Begotten into the world has the meaning of putting “the world into His hand”, for “when He was made known, then also He obtained possession of the whole thereof”, and this has being said “according to the flesh”. St. John Chrysostom, Homilies on the epistle to the Hebrews.III.1, p. 375. 21 In the Hebrew Bible, Israel is sometimes referred to as God’s first born (Exod 4:22-23; Jer. 38:9). A whole conceptualization is mounted around “first-born”, which has over a hundred occurrences in the Old Testament, from Abel’s offering pleased to God (the first occurrence of πρω οεομ is in Gen. 4:4: θ πρω ο εωθ θ προί ωθ α ου; cf. Deut. 15:19*3) and the birthrights of the first-born (Gen. 43:33; Deut. 21:17), to the sacrifice of the first-born from Egypt, animals and humans (Exod 11:5*4; 12:12.29*4; Ps. 78:51; 105:36; 135:8; 136:10) and the consecration of every first-born from the sons of Israel (Exod 13:2; 22:29; cf. Num. 3:13*3; 8:17; Neh. 10:37; later on this consecration being transferred to the Levites: Num. 3:12;8:18). Although totally forbidden for Israel, human sacrifice together with first-born quality is considered the most efficacious offering. Such episodes are narrated in Judg. 11:31-34, the offering of judge Jephthah as a vow to God, where ηοθοΰεθ μ/yahid is used, in 2Kings 3:27, the offering of the Moabite king Mesha which frightens the Isrelites, and in Mic. 6:7, the problematization of the prophet Micah which is offering his first-born for his sin, as the Hebrew text says. These last two cases associate the sacrifice with the quality of first-born, πρω οεομ/bekhor being used. The occurrence from Zech. 12:10, a messianic text, is interesting because of the association between πρω οεομ/bekhor and ΰαπη μ/yahid, both of them messianic terms, and the idea of sacrifice, although a differentiation of these terms is not apparent from this text. πρω οεομ is a messianic term also in Psa. 89:28 (cf. Psa. 2:8; 45:7). The first New Testament occurrence is Luke 2:7 which refers to the Virgin Mary, Theotokos, giving birth to the Lord Jesus Christ. Hence, in Luke 2, πρω οεομ is a Christological title with respect to Lord Jesus human nature. St. Ap. Paul uses πρω οεομ three times, Rom. 8:29; Col. 1:15.18 with the same meaning as in Luke. The ιομ Son of God (Rom. 8:32) is the First-Born among many brethren in Christ, υηη ρφουμ μ ε ε θομ ο υ ο α ο (Rom. 8:29). υ μ μ ΰ πημ (Col.1:13) of God the Father, ε ε θ ο γεο ο ορ ου (Col. 67 begotten You was already suggesting in 1:5). Besides Hebr. 11:28 that remembers the saving from dead of the first-born of Israel as foundation for Passover celebration, the other two occurrences in Hebrews refer to πρω οεομ as a Christological title pertaining to Jesus Christ’s human nature (Hebr. 1:6) and to Christians who form εεζη πρω ο εωθ ποΰεΰραηη θωθ θ ο ραθοῖμ (Hebr. 12:23) on the basis of their ηηορφομ with Christ quality (Rom. 8:29). The references to the divine and human natures which are united in the same Person of our Lord Jesus Christ are blended along the text22, “both to establish the economy and the incorruptible nature”23. The usage of the citation from Psalms at the Hebrews’ author, for the purpose of interweaving the references to the human and divine natures of Christ, shows that his interpretation of these Old Testament texts is in accordance with later interpretations of the Church. Hence, we can assert at the Hebrews’ author, right from the beginning of this letter, the existence of conscience of ηοθοΰεθάμ concept in terms of the divine nature of Christ. It is also interesting to notice that St. John Chrysostom uses several times the term ηοθοΰεθάμ when interpreting the first chapter from Hebrews, although the term does not appear per se in it. When St. Chrysostom explains who is the Son by Whom God has spoken to us (Hebr. 1:1), he uses three times the term OnlyBegotten: “For to us [God the Father has sent] His own only-begotten Son 1:15), is the First-Born of the whole creation (Col. 1:15), the Head of the Church (Col. 1:18), the whole creation being recapitulated ( θαεεφαζαι ω Eph. 1:10) in Him. He is ρχ , πρω οεομ ε θ θεερ θ (Col. 1:18 cf. Rev. 1:5: πρω οεομ θ θεερ θ, εα ρχωθ θ ία ιζ ωθ μ ΰ μ). These utilizations for πρω οεομ with respect to Jesus show either the ΰ θε ιμ Ἰη ο Υρι ο υ ο αυ υ ο ίρα η (Matth. 1:1; cf. Luke 3:38 ο η ο γεου) or the idea of creation and recapitulation of the world in the Lord Jesus Christ. 22 The interweaving between the references to the human and divine natures in the Person of Christ is clearly present in the first chapter of Hebrews. Besides the earlier discussion on this matter, through its citation from Ps. 45:7, γρ θομ ου γε μ ( чуЫоֹкШ ֭ ) ε μ θ α θα ο α θομ, the Hebrews author refers in Hebr. 1:8 to the divine nature of Christ, as ascertained by the Fathers of the Church who comment on the Psalm. God’s everlasting throne is a symbol for His Kingdom and Christ is called here God, as St. John Chrysostom, St. Basil the Great, St. Nicodemus Hagiorites and Theodoret of Cyr are asserting. Meanwhile, the next verse cited, Psa. 45:8, χρι θ ε γε μ γε μ ου ζαιοθ ΰαζζι εωμ παρ ο μ ηε χουμ ου, refers to the human nature of Christ. After flesh, Christ is the First-Born among many brothers or partakers (Psa. 45:8; Hebr. 1:9; cf. Hebr. 3:14) and has the gifts of the Holy Spirit, says Theodoret. Moreover, Christ has all the gifts of the Holy Spirit, being both God and Man, says St. Nicodemus; it is by the union of the Only-Begotten with flesh, that He received this whole gift. The true anointment is that of Jesus, by the Incarnation the entire Holy Spirit dwelling in Christ’s Body, and this has being shown to anyone at His Baptizing, say St. Basil and St. Chrysostom. Everything about Christ is unique, both after His Economy and His Divinity; only Him is the Lamb (John 1:29) among many lambs and the Only-Begotten Son among many sons, says St. Chrysostom. Fer. Teodorit al Kirului, Tîlcuirea celor 150 de Psalmi ai Proorocului Împărat David, p. 153. Sf. Ioan Gură de Aur, Omilii la Psalmi, trad. din limba greacă veche de Laura Enache, Doxologia, Iaşi, 2011, p. 272.274-275. Sf. Vasile cel Mare, Tîlcuire duhovnicească la Psalmi, EIBMBOR, Bucureşti, 2000, p. 173-175. Cuv. Eftimie Zigabenul, Sf. Nicodim Aghioritul, Psaltirea în tâlcuirile Sfin ilor Părin i, vol. I, p. 526-527 (note 116). 23 St. John Chrysostom, Homilies on the epistle to the Hebrews. I.3, p. 368. 68 Himself”.24 A crescendo in the description of the Son of God can be noticed in Hebrews. At first, the text pertains to a Son by Whom God the Father has spoken to us π᾽ χ ου θ ηερ θ (Hebr. 1:2; cf. Gal 4:4: πζ ρωηα ο χρ θου, ιαπ ειζεθ γε μ θ υ θ α ο , ΰεθ ηεθοθ ε ΰυθαιε μ), then is said about this Son: θ γηεεθ εζηροθ ηοθ π θ ωθ, ι᾽ ο εα πο η εθ ο μ α θαμ (Hebr. 1:2). Moreover, this Son, being the brightness of the glory of God the Father and the express image of His person (NKJV)/nature (RSV) ( μ θ πα ΰα ηα μ ιημ εα χαραε ρ μ πο εωμ α ου - Hebr. 1:3 NA27),25 and upholding all things by the word of His power26, is also the One who cleans our sins by Himself27, through His Sacrifice (Hebr. 1:3 NKJV). Then the distinction between the two natures of Christ is made more apparent, although, in relation to His human nature, only the term πρω οεομ is expressed, ηοθοΰεθάμ, related to His divine nature, being yet unexpressed. By citing Ps. 45:7, Hebr. 1:8 speaks of the Son from the perspective of His divinity, as in St. Basil’s interpretation of this psalm: through this verse the Psalmist conveys his word “to the heights of the Only-Begotten”28. However, the Hebrews’ author gets to the expression of ηοθοΰεθάμ only after the chapters speaking of the Son of God from a human priestly perspective, but Whose Sacrifice is made once for all and priesthood is everlasting. The sacrifice issue, implicit in NA27 and made clearer by BYZ (Hebr. 1:3), has the result the human nature in Christ is sitting at right hand of the Majesty on 24 St. John Chrysostom, Homilies on the epistle to the Hebrews. I.1, p. 366. As the Father “is personally subsisting, being in need of nothing, so also the Son”, the Son “is in subsistence by Himself”; to the Son is assigned by the Father “absolute authority” in “governing all things”. He is “the express image”, “[substantive existence]”, which means “similarity in all respects” and that He is “of equal honor with the Father”. By “the brightness” is to be understood that the Son is of the Father and “the nearness of the Being [of the Father and the Son]”. Thus, this verse is leading “to the unapproachable light, to the very brightness itself”, telling about the divine nature of our Lord Jesus Christ. St. John Chrysostom, Homilies on the epistle to the Hebrews. II.1-2, pp. 370-372. St. John Chrysostom, Homilies on the epistle to the Hebrews. I.3, p. 367. 26 In the whole part of this verse is applied “to the Son which is proper to the Father”. From upholding all things by the word of His power is to be understood that the Son is “both a Creator and before all ages”; as in John 1:1.3 is said He is God and the Maker of all things, so in Hebrews, of Him is said: the Word (1:3) by Whom also God made the worlds (1:2). St. John Chrysostom, Homilies on the epistle to the Hebrews. II.1-2, p. 370-372. 27 In Hebr. 1:3, NA27 has εαγαρι η θ θ ηαρ ι θ ποιη ηεθομ, without the BYZ addition, ι᾽ αυ ο : ι᾽ αυ ο εαγαρι η θ ποιη ηεθομ θ ηαρ ι θ. St. John Chrysostom too cites this verse with the addition of “by Himself”. He explains that about the Son are asserted “two very great proofs of His care: first purifying us from our sins, then the doing it by Himself. Not only our reconciliation with God issue is to be seen here, but also that this truly great gift for us is accomplished through the Son. St. John Chrysostom, Homilies on the epistle to the Hebrews. II.2, p. 373. 28 Sf. Vasile cel Mare, Tîlcuire duhovnicească la Psalmi, EIBMBOR, Bucureşti, 2000, p. 173175. 25 69 high (Hebr. 1:3 NKJV)29. Hebr. 2:9 (NA27): Ἰη ο θ ι π γηηα ο γαθ ου ι εα ιη εφαθωη θοθ, πωμ χ ρι ι γεο π ρ παθ μ ΰε η αι γαθ ου, retakes into consideration Jesus’ offering up aspect (cf. Hebr. 7:27; 9:12; 10:10. 20) and the glory of the human nature in Him (cf. Hebr. 1:13; 10:12-13; Hebr. 12:2: θ μ π εωμ ρχηΰ θ εα εζειω θ Ἰη ο θ, μ θ μ προεειη θημ α χαρ μ π ηειθεθ αυρ θ α χ θημ εα αφροθ αμ θ ειι ε ο γρ θου ο γεο εεε γιεεθ). Hence, the offering and glorifying of Jesus, the Apostle and High Priest of our confession (Hebr. 3:1 NKJV), pertain to His human nature and 29 The Cross is connected with the Resurrection and the Ascension. Sitting on the right hand of the Majesty on high signifies the Son’s “equal dignity with the Father”; on the other hand, this verse makes reference to the Incarnation and to the fact in Christ human nature has ”ascended up above all things” because of His divine “being higher than all things”. St. John Chrysostom, Homilies on the epistle to the Hebrews. II.2, p. 373. This text makes allusion to Ps. 110, 1, also cited in Hebrews (1:13), the Old Testament fragment most frequently cited or alluded to in the New Testament. The novelty which the New Testament interpretation brings to this text is that the place of Jesus’ sitting at the right hand of God is θ οῖμ ο ραθοῖμ (Mark 16:9; Acts 2:34; 7:55-56; Col. 3:1; Efes. 1:20; Hebr. 1:3; 8:1; 1Peter 3:22), which is in accord with Jesus’ entering for us the Heavenly Sanctuary as a Forerunner (Hebr. 6:20). Leslie C. Allen, Psalms 101-150, revised (vol. 21), in Word Biblical Commentary (WBC), Word Books, Publisher, Dallas, Texas, 2002, pp. 118-119. Ps. 110:1 has been referred to by many Fathers of the Church. Among them, Jerome observes the difference between the two textual traditions, Hebrew (MT), уЫъанкг Юц оЯпоЧ у чбкЧъ, the saying of Yahweh to Adonay, and Greek (LXX), ε πεθ ε ριομ ευρ ῳ ηου, Kyrios said to my Kyrios, and ascertains that the calling to seat on the right hand of God pertains to Jesus’ Ascension, hence this was said according to flesh. Septuaginta 4/I, Psalmii. Odele. Proverbele. Ecleziastul. Cântarea Cântărilor, vol. coordonat de Cristian Bădiliţă, Francisca Băltăceanu, Monica Broşteanu în colaborare cu pr. Ioan-Florin Florescu, Polirom 2006, p. 276 (note). Ps.110:1 is to be understood as such: God the Father said to my God and His Son after His Ascension, assert also St. Nicodemus. One of the two Lords of David, Who is also referred to in Hebrews’ citations, is the Only-Begotten Son after His divine nature (cf. Ps. 109:3 LXX in most Parents’ interpretation; cf. Ps. 2:7 cited in Hebr. 1:5; 5:5; cf. Ps. 45:7, the only place from the Old Testament where a king has been called God, cited in Hebr. 1:8), and the Priest for ever (cf. Ps.110:4 cited in Hebr. 5:6; 7:17.21) after His human nature, hence our Lord Jesus Christ, both Man and God. By the sitting on the right side is shown the equal dignity of those whose sitting and Kingdom are common, God the Father and God the Son Who have common attributes and works. Cuv. Eftimie Zigabenul, Sf. Nicodim Aghioritul, Psaltirea în tâlcuirile Sfin ilor Părin i, vol. II, p. 459-460. 465 (nota 10). Sf. Ioan Gură de Aur, Omilii la Psalmi, p. 390. The saying about the two Lords conveys to the same divine nature of God the Father and the Son, asserts also Theodoret, but this verse is also said according to flesh because the Only-Begotten Son did not get this honor “after Cross and Passion as God, but as man He has got what has had as God”. Fer. Teodorit al Kirului, Tîlcuirea celor 150 de Psalmi ai Proorocului Împărat David, p. 409-410. Everything the Father has the Son has and vice versa (John 17:10) and for ruling over the enemies (Ps. 110:1; cf. 1Co15:25) They are both responsible, but all the Father’s victory is through the Only-Begotten, says St. Chrysostom. Sf. Ioan Gură de Aur, Omilii la Psalmi, p. 394. The rod of Christ’s strength that Lord has sent to Him out of Zion (Psa. 110:2) can be understood as the Cross of Salvation, as Theodoret asserts. Fer. Teodorit al Kirului, Tîlcuirea celor 150 de Psalmi ai Proorocului Împărat David, p. 410. That the Cross can be considered a rod because it beats the demons, also Hesychia says, and this rod was sent out of Zion, the place where the Only-Begotten has offered Himself. Cuv. Eftimie Zigabenul, Sf. Nicodim Aghioritul, Psaltirea în tâlcuirile Sfin ilor Părin i, vol. II, p. 463 (nota6). 70 a title like πρω οεομ seems more appropriate in these contexts30. However, when showing the Sacrifice of the Son of God from the perspective of the unique divine relationship of love and sonship between God the Father and God the Son and from the perspective of resurrection, the ηοθοΰεθ μ term/ title seems the most suitable. Although not per se expressed, ηοθοΰεθ μ υ σμ as a concept is present at the Hebrews’ author. Moreover, a conceptual differentiation between ηοθοΰεθάμ and πρω οεομ can be found in Hebrews. Hence, this conceptual shaping and delimitation identifiable throughout the Epistle to the Hebrews leaves room for the consideration ηοθοΰεθ μ in Hebr. 11:17 functions as a Christological term expressing the unique divine relationship between God the Father and God the Son because of the θ παραίοζ reference to the Old Testament relationship of Abraham and Isaac during the episode of Isaac’s offering. For Philo, the term ηοθοΰεθ μ has no significance. He calls the ζ ΰομ, πρω σΰοθομ. When referring to Hebrews’ usage of ηοθοΰεθάμ, Philo describes it “ ΰαπη θ εα ησθοθ … ΰΰοθοθ (the beloved and only progeny, used of Isaac as the son of Abraham)”. Meanwhile, Josephus uses ηοθοΰεθάμ in the common sense of “only born”, but not with the meaning of “unique”31. Although these aspects correlated with data regarding lifetime of Philo and Josephus usually lead to the idea that the usage of ηοθοΰεθάμ with Christological meaning begins only with St. Ap. John’s Gospel, it still can be inferred that ηοθοΰεθ μ can be understood as a Christological term in Hebrews, though not present in Philo’s and Josephus’ thinking; on one hand they were not part of a close to Church exegetical milieu and on the other, from a history of Church perspective, a Christological designation for the term ηοθοΰεθάμ at large scale was not yet apparent since Christological dogmas, although it is very probable that St. Ap. John’s texts had constituted the basis for that part of the Church Creed regarding υ μ ηοθοΰεθάμ and for the related discussions at the first centuries’ Ecumenical Councils. Nevertheless, as sustained above, such an understanding still could have been existed at the Hebrews’ author and also as part of his intention when using ηοθοΰεθάμ. The Christian writers and Fathers of the Church have used ηοθοΰεθάμ as a Christological title regarding Christ’s divinity beginning punctually with the 2nd and 3rd, but mainly in the 4th century A.D. The main context for using ηοθοΰεθάμ is the supreme event of kenosis of the Son of God, the Incarnation. However, the With respect to His human nature (Hebr. 2:14-16), Jesus is θ ρχηΰ θ μ ω ηρ αμ (Hebr. 2:10) of his brethren (Hebr. 2:11-12), sons of God (Hebr. 12:13) by adoption and by Father’s will and calling (cf. Rom. 8:23.29-30), which pertains to πρω οεομ title. 31 Büchsel, “ηοθοΰεθ μ” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, p. 739. Josephus Flavius lived between 37 and approximately 100 A.D., while concerning Philo, the Hellenistic Jewish philosopher of 1st-century Alexandria, the only certain date from his life is around 38 A.D. Louis H. Feldman, “Josephus”, in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, ed. David Noel Freedman, vol. 3, Doubleday, 1992, p. 981. Peder Borgen, “Philo of Alexandria”, in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, vol. 5, p. 333. 30 71 term is also used in relation to other economic events of Lord Jesus, the Cross and Resurrection, the Ascension, the Second Coming and the Final Judgment, and the reference is always made considering the Godhead of the Only Son of God, uniquely born from the Only God the Father32. Particularly, the association between ηοθοΰεθάμ and the Cross and Resurrection is interesting for this study, being found, for example, at St. Gregory of Nazianzus33, St. Cyril of Jerusalem34, St. Cyril of Alexandria35 and in cult, at the Great Saturday’s Vespers36. A differentiation between ηοθοΰεθάμ and πρω οεομ is encountered at the 4th century Fathers of the Church, for example St. Cyril of Alexandria distinguishes between these two Christological titles understanding the first one in relation to Christ divinity and the second, to His human nature. As such, the believers “inherited also the glory of the first born children because of the First Born Who is in them and is also the Only Begotten” on the basis of their ηηορφομ with Christ quality by their second birth in the Holy Spirit, in holiness37. The First Born title for Christ has to do with the Incarnation of the Only Begotten, God by nature38. Christ is “the Only Begotten as God and the First Born for humanity”39. 32 Cf. Sf. Grigorie de Nazianz, Cele cinci cuvântări teologice, trad., introd. şi note pr. dr. acad. Dumitru Stăniloae, Ed. Anastasia, Bucureşti, 1993, p. 88 and Sf. Chiril la Ierusalimului, Cateheze, trad. şi note pr. prof. D. Fecioru, EIBMBOR, Bucureşti, 2003, p. 53. 145. 153. 33 Sf. Grigorie Teologul, Cuvânt la naşterea cea după trup a Mântuitorului Iisus Hristos. Cuvânt la Sfintele Paşti. Panegiric (Cuvânt de laudă) la Sfântul Vasile cel Mare, EIBMBOR, Bucureşti, 2009, p. 43. 57. 34 Sf. Chiril al Ierusalimului, Cateheze, p. 189. 238. 35 Sf. Chiril al Alexandriei, Scrieri. Partea a doua. Glafire, PSB 39, trad., introd. şi note pr. prof. dr. Dumitru Stăniloae, EIBMBOR, Bucureşti, 1992, p. 399-400. Sf. Chiril al Alexandriei, Scrieri. Partea a doua. Glafire, pp. 95-96 and notes 161-162, p. 95-96. Sf. Chiril al Alexandriei, Scrieri. Partea a patra. Comentariu la Evanghelia Sfântului Ioan, PSB 41, trad., introd. şi note pr. prof. Dumitru Stăniloae, EIBMBOR, Bucureşti, 2000, p. 649. 36 Triodul, EIBMBOR, Bucureşti, 2000, p. 671. „Σ θ ηεροθ ηυ ιε μ, η ΰαμ Μως μ προ ιε υπο ο ζ ΰωθ· Κα ε ζ ΰη εθ Θε μ, θ η ραθ θ ί ηηθ· ο ο ΰΪρ ι ε ζοΰηη θοθ ΢ ίία οθ· α η θ μ εα απα εωμ η ρα, θ ᾗ εα παυ εθ π π θ ωθ θ ρΰωθ α ο , Μοθοΰεθ μ Τ μ ο Θεο , ι μ εα θ γ θα οθ ο εοθοη αμ, αρε αίία αμ, εα ε μ θ, π ζιθ παθεζγυθ, ι μ θα εωμ, ωρ α ο ηῖθ αω θ θ α θιοθ, μ η θομ ΰαγ μ εα φιζ θγρωπομ.” Τ αα υ , ε σ ειμ ΦΩ΢, Αγ θαι, 1983, p. 487. The same kind of ηοθοΰεθάμ usage as basis for union of sacrifice and resurrection is also encountered in Hebr. 11:17-19 which emphasizes ηοθοΰεθάμ as an Christological term. 37 Sf. Chiril al Alexandriei, Scrieri. Partea a doua. Glafire, Iarăşi despre Iacob (IV) 3, p. 171. Rev. Prof. D. Stăniloae considers „Christ is the First Born as the new resurrected Man”, as God being the Only Begotten. „If he hadn’t been the Only Begotten as God, He couldn’t have been the First Born as Man either, because He wouldn’t have raised from the dead the first one”. „As Creator He didn’t make Himself the First Born among men because He remained above us after being”. But for our salvation “He made Himself also the First Born of mankind” (note 287, p. 171). 38 Sf. Chiril al Alexandriei, Scrieri. Partea a doua. Glafire, Despre oferirea celor întâi născuţi 1, p. 295. 39 Sf. Chiril al Alexandriei, Scrieri. Partea a doua. Glafire, Despre oferirea celor întâi născuţi 2, p. 298. Rev. Prof. D. Stăniloae considers the Son of God Who is the Only Begotten as God is also “the First Born among us and for us who are born out of His power to a new life… because He dwells in us”. This indirectly gives us some of His quality of Only Begotten and we are loved by 72 Referring to St. Apostle John comment that Abraham has seen the day of Christ (John 8:56), St. Cyril asserts God gave to Abraham to see Lord Sacrifice showing Isaac as a type of His Only Begotten and First Born Son. Hence, in this context, St. Cyril uses the two Christological titles, ηοθοΰεθάμ and πρω οεομ40. Later on, St. John from Damascus will synthetize about these two Christological titles. Christ is “the first born from the entire creation (Col. 1:15) because Him too is from God, but also the creation is from God; but because He is the only born, beyond time, from the being of God and the Father, He is justly called the Only Begotten, First Born and not first created… He is called the First Born among many brothers (Rom. 8:29) because He is the only born also from mother” by the Incarnation, and through Him we too became sons of God41. 3. Conclusions Out of those studied regarding yahid and monogenes, we can compose the probable biblical trajectory which the term only begotten has from the messianic valence already existent in Gen. 22, to Hebr. 11:17 where it shows its Christological valence, continuing with getting contour as a Christological title in John, a more hermeneutically elaborated level of the term than in Hebrews. It is in John where the more commonly up to then used Christological title agapetos suffers a terminological quality transfer; hence, from the Beloved title, the term is used in reference with those beloved, the beloved world by God, and the Only Begotten gets its undoubtedly place as Christological title. However, it is the Hebrews’ author the one who selects out of the Hebrew textual tradition the bearing messianic value term yahid and indicates its Christological valence; then, inside the Church Tradition, monogenes makes another vault in time having to be put in its whole light only in the 4th century with the dogmatic formulations regarding Christ. Even if the Creed most probably takes its formulation regarding the Son of God from John, the writings of the Church Fathers show, nevertheless, liberty in using monogenes, including in reference to Hebr. 11:17-19. The context of the first two Ecumenical Councils which dogmatically establish the Christological problem represents the background for the full development of the Only Begotten Christological title and from here, reverberation in the later writings of the Church Fathers and in cult took place. The differentiation between monogenes and prototokos seems to show a similar course being probable at the Hebrews’ author and crystalized in the 4th century Fathers of the Church thinking. The continuity between yahid in Gen. 22 and monogenes in Hebr. 11, as well as the distinction between monogenes and prototokos as different references to the God the Father as first born, but also as having something from the quality of the Only Begotten Son (note 539, p. 301). 40 Sf. Chiril al Alexandriei, Scrieri. Partea a patra. Comentariu la Evanghelia Sfântului Ioan, PSB 41, trad., introd. şi note pr. prof. Dumitru Stăniloae, EIBMBOR, Bucureşti, 2000, p. 649. 41 Sf. Ioan Damaschin, Dogmatica, 4:8 (În ce sens Se numeşte Prim Născut Fiul Unul Născut al lui Dumnezeu?), ed. 3, trad. pr. D. Fecioru, Ed. Scripta, Bucureşti, 1993, p. 154. 73 same Christological reality in Hebrews, are proves for considering monogenes in Hebr. 11 a Christological term. Last but not least, it should be noticed orthodox biblical hermeneutics has to be impregnated by the liturgical rhythm which sees the developing of salvation events from an above time perspective, as reflected by the liturgical anamnesis42. As a consequence, the same reality can be present in different degrees of expression at several persons, contexts or moments in time. Hence, the text and its reception convey to the reality and are on the same axis. This course that firstly looks for the reality by taking part to it admits the words on their way to express it attain in picturing the truth a moment of minimal essential which can be reflected in a technical value of a term or a dogmatic formulation. Nevertheless, this expression of the essential remains open to more elaborated forms and meanings and jointed to the mystery and dynamism of the reality. Hence, from the perspective of orthodox hermeneutics, the translation of yahid in Gen. 22, respectively monogenes in Hebr. 11 is only begotten because it refers to the same Christological reality recognized in different degrees by Genesis or Hebrews. While in Genesis we have a messianic term, in Hebrews, by the effect of parabole on monogenes, which is a double reality that is referred to, we have a Christological one. Selective bibliography Apologe i de limbă greacă, PSB 2, trad., introd., note şi indice de pr. prof. T. Bodogae, pr. prof. Olimp Căciulă, pr. prof. D. Fecioru, EIBMBOR, Bucureşti, 1980 Biblia sau Sfânta Scriptură, tipărită cu binecuvântarea Preafericitului Daniel, Patriarhul BOR, cu aprobarea Sfântului Sinod, EIBMBOR, Bucureşti, 2008 Borgen, Peder, “Philo of Alexandria”, The Anchor Bible Dictionary, ed. David Noel Freedman, vol. 5, Doubleday, 1992 Chiril al Alexandriei, Sf. Scrieri. Partea a doua. Glafire, PSB 39, trad., introd. şi note pr. prof. dr. Dumitru Stăniloae, EIBMBOR, Bucureşti, 1992 Chiril al Alexandriei, Sf., Scrieri. Partea a patra. Comentariu la Evanghelia Sfântului Ioan, PSB 41, trad., introd. şi note pr. prof. Dumitru Stăniloae, EIBMBOR, Bucureşti, 2000Chiril la Ierusalimului, Sf., Cateheze, trad. şi note pr. prof. D. Fecioru, EIBMBOR, Bucureşti, 2003 Feldman, Louis H., “Josephus”, The Anchor Bible Dictionary, ed. David Noel Freedman, vol. 3, Doubleday, 1992 Grigorie de Nazianz, Sf., Cele cinci cuvântări teologice, trad., introd. şi note pr. dr. acad. Dumitru Stăniloae, Ed. Anastasia, Bucureşti, 1993 42 ...remembering this salvation’s commandment and everything that has been made for us: the cross, the death and the third day resurrection, the ascension, the sitting at the right hand and the second and glorified coming… 74 Grigorie Teologul, Sf., Cuvânt la naşterea cea după trup a Mântuitorului Iisus Hristos. Cuvânt la Sfintele Paşti. Panegiric (Cuvânt de laudă) la Sfântul Vasile cel Mare, EIBMBOR, Bucureşti, 2009 Ioan Damaschin, Sf., Dogmatica, ed. 3, trad. pr. D. Fecioru, Ed. Scripta, Bucureşti, 1993 Ioan Gură de Aur, Sf., Omilii la Psalmi, trad. Laura Enache, Doxologia, Iaşi, 2011 John Chrysostom, St., Homilies on the epistle to the Hebrews. I.2-3, Nicene and PostNicene Fathers, First series, vol. IV (Catholic Edition), ed. Philip Schaff, D.D., LL.D., The Christian Literature Company, New York, 1889 Kittel, Gerhard, Gerhard Friedrich (ed.), Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, translator and editor Geoffrey W. Bromiley, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 10 vol., 1964-1976 Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece Editio XXVII (NA27), eds. Eberhard Nestle, Erwin Nestle, Barbara Aland, Kurt Aland (Critical Apparatus is elaborated by Kurt and Barbara Aland), Universität Münster. Institut für Neutestamentliche Textforschung, 1993 (c. 1979) Roberts, Alexander, James Donaldson (ed.), Ante-Nicene Fathers: The Writings of the Fathers down to A.D. 325. Volume 1: The Apostolic Fathers, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Revised and Chronologically arranged with brief prefaces and occasional notes by A. Cleveland Coxe, Christian Literature Publishing Co., New York, 1885 Septuaginta 4/I, Psalmii. Odele. Proverbele. Ecleziastul. Cântarea Cântărilor, vol. coordonat de Cristian Bădiliţă, Francisca Băltăceanu, Monica Broşteanu în colaborare cu pr. Ioan-Florin Florescu, Polirom, 2006 Septuaginta 4/II, Iov. În elepciunea lui Solomon. În elepciunea lui Iisus Sirah. Psalmii lui Solomon, vol. coordonat de Cristian Bădiliţă, Francisca Băltăceanu, Monica Broşteanu în colaborare cu pr. Ioan-Florin Florescu, Polirom, 2007 Teodorit al Kirului, Fer., Tîlcuirea celor 150 de Psalmi ai Proorocului Împărat David, Mănăstirea Sfinţilor Arhangheli Mihail şi Gavriil - Petru Vodă, 2003 Triodul, EIBMBOR, Bucureşti, 2000 Vasile cel Mare, Sf., Tîlcuire duhovnicească la Psalmi, EIBMBOR, Bucureşti, 2000 Zigabenul, Eftimie şi Sf. Nicodim Aghioritul, Psaltirea în tâlcuirile Sfin ilor Părin i, vol. I, transliterare, diortosire, revizuire după ediţia grecească şi note de Ştefan Voronca, Egumeniţa 75 Lexical-Semantic Dynamics in Romanian Biblical Versions. Case Study: The Parable of the Publican and the Pharisee Dora V ETU Dans cet article1, nous nous proposons d'étudier la dynamique lexico-sémantique en visant le processus de traduction et de révision, sur un corpus formé de plusieurs versions bibliques roumaines: notre démarche consiste à comparer huit versions partielles ou intégrales des Saintes Écritures: l'Évangéliaire de Coresi (CORESI 1561), le Nouveau Testament de Bălgrad (NTB 1648), la Bible de Bucarest (BIBLIA 1688), la Vulgate de Blaj (BIBLIA 1760), la Bible de Blaj (BIBLIA 1795), la Bible Cornilescu (BIBLIA 1921), la Bible Radu-Galaction (BIBLE1939), la Bible Anania (BIBLE 2001). Notre étude envisage les substitutions lexicales identifiées dans un fragment représentatif de chacune des éditions biblique énumérées ci-dessus; il s'agit de la Parabole du publicain et du pharisien (l'Évangile selon Luc, chapitre 18, versets de 9 à 14). À la fin de notre investigation, une certaine dynamique lexico-sémantique manifestée par des substitutions lexicales sera évidente, mais, à part ces divergences, on rencontrera de nombreuses coïncidences lexicales qui offriront des indices en ce qui concerne la filiation des textes. Nous entreprendrons aussi une recherche comparative, pour relever les correspondances lexico-sémantiques entre la langue roumaine et les langues latine et grecque, impliquées dans le processus de traduction ou de révision. Mots-clés: dynamique lexico-sémantique, versions bibliques roumaines, substitutions lexicales. Theoretical Preliminaries The dynamics of the language represents, according to DSL, ‘the variation of a language both from a diachronic perspective, namely during its evolution from a historical stage to another, but also from the perspective of synchrony, which refers to its manifestations that are synchronically diversified’. Our attention is focused on the dynamics of the language in diachrony, which concerns ‘its successive transformations, determined either by the internal evolution, so by the evolution of its 1 Acknowledgment: This work was supported by the strategic grant POSDRU/159/1.5/S/140863, Project ID 140863 (2014), co-financed by the European Social Fund within the Sectorial Operational Program Human Resources Development 2007 – 2013. 77 own linguistic system, or by external factors, historical or cultural factors, such as: territorial unification or breakdown, contact between languages, whether direct or indirect, the express contribution brought by certain cultural personalities, in the given historical conditions, to the imposition of a linguistic norm’ (DSL: 180). From the numerous aspects of the dynamics of the language, we shall only discuss the lexical-semantic dynamics: it is common knowledge that the vocabulary is the most dynamic part of a language, as it is subjected to certain extra-linguistic influences, thus illustrating the interdependence between language and society. In contemporary Romanian language, a tendency to use newly-coined words excessively, generally, loan-words from American English, with the risk of disregarding the words inherited from Latin or the old loan-words. In contrast to the current tendencies of modernization of Romanian, the current church language is characterized mainly by simplicity, accessibility and conservatism, and this is why the dynamics of the vocabulary does not know the amplitude that is common to other fields. The lexical dynamics is manifested through the enriching of the vocabulary through internal means (the formation of certain words in Romanian through derivation, compounding, abbreviation) or through external means (borrowing and loan translation). In terms of the sense dynamics, we analyze the means of broadening/extending of sense of certain words or, less often, the restricting of the sense, the complimentary and the pejorative senses respectively, the metaphor, metonymy etc. The semantic evolution is a very complex phenomenon that can be explained by appealing not only to etymology, but also to the referential domain and the functional styles of the language. The dynamics on a lexical and semantic level also entails passages from the active stock of the language to the passive stock (for instance, the case of lexical or semantic archaic words) or the other way round, and stylistic interferences (passing from a style or a stylistic register to another one, terminological specialization or, on the contrary, de-terminologizing words). The lexical-semantic dynamics of the biblical versions is explained metaphorically by metropolitan bishop Andrei aguna in Preface to the 1856-1858 Bible: ‘our language is a living tree, one that changes constantly all spring long; the old branches, lacking sap, get dry and fall down, new scions come up and grow, the leaf dries up and is shed down, but is soon followed and or decorated by a new one – all that belongs to it changes again and again, and it is only the stalk that always remains the same’. Corpus From the Romanian biblical versions, we have selected a number of eight texts that are representative for a comparative analysis of the Parable of the Publican and the Pharisee, from Gospel after Luke, chapter 18, v.9-14: Coresi’s Four Gospels (CORESI 1561) – the first extant translation of the four Gospels; the source of the translation is Church Slavonic; 78 The New Testament From Bălgrad (NTB 1648) – the first integral translation of the New Testament into Romanian language; the source is a 1611 polyglot edition (NTGL 1611, with the text published on three columns: in Greek, in Latin – Vulgata and still in Latin – Théodore de Bèze’s version, followed mainly by the new Latin version of Beza; this probably due to the fact that previous translations were used, among which we include CORESI 1561 (see Pavel 2001: 166-171); The Bible from Bucharest (BIBLIA 1688) – the first integral translation of the Bible into Romanian, with The New Testament being a revision of NTB 1648; The Vulgata From Blaj (BIBLIA 1760) – the translation of the Bible from the Latin text of the Vulgata from the edition entitled Biblia sacra printed in Venice in the year of 1690; The Bible From Blaj (BIBLIA 1795) – the revision of The Bible From Bucharest by Samuil Micu; this was the basis of the biblical editions during the 19th century and of the 1914 Synod edition; The Cornilescu Bible (BIBLIA 1921) – the translation is made by Dumitru Cornilescu from the French version of Louis Segond (Conțac 2011: 121-145); The Radu-Galaction Bible - the translation is made by priests Vasile Radu and Gala Galaction from the Masoretic text (Kittel edition), confronted with Septuaginta, edited by R. Rahlfs (1935) and with the text of A. Merck (Rome, 1935); Biblia Anania (BIBLIA 2001) – a version proofread according to the Septuaginta by metropolitan bishop Bartolomeu Valeriu Anania. Lexical-semantic analysis 1. A grăi/a zice/a spune/a rosti DLR indicates the fact that the verb a zice [=to say] is also used in an absolute manner to compete with the verb a spune [=to tell]. Both of them have in this context the meaning ‘to express by uttering’. Both verbs have a Latin etymon, dicere and exponere respectively. In the old language a zice is more frequent (16th century: 3675, 17th century: 1717, 18th century: 435) compared to a spune (16th century: 533, 17th century: 265, 18th century: 77 - see the frequency of words in the vocabulary of old Romanian language – Tudose 1970: 126-148). The frequent use of the verb a zice in old Romanian language is confirmed by its presence in all the biblical versions from the old period. It is only the BIBLIA 1921 and BIBLIA 2001 that use the verb a spune, which constitutes a simple stylistic processing, meant to avoid the repetition of the verb a zice, which is frequent in the text. In CORESI 1561, we also encounter the verb a grăi [=to utter], which appears mainly in old and folklore texts, especially in Transylvania. It is a synonym of a zice, a spune, a vorbi [=to talk], a cuvânta [=to speak], a glăsui [=to utter]. It is a word with a Slav origin (a borrowing from the Serbian grajati ‘[=to croak, to caw]’ (DLR). A rosti [=to utter] enters the series of synonyms enumerated above. It is derived from the noun rost (from the Latin rostrum ‘beak’) which keeps in old language the sense ‘mouth’ (DLR). BIBLIA 1939 probably uses it due to stylistic reasons too, in order to avoid the repletion of the verb 79 a zice. There are no problems of lexical-semantic equaling between the Latin dico and the Greek ω respectively and their correspondents in Romanian. 2. Pildă/parabolă Pildă [=parable], from the Hungarian példa, is encountered in all the old editions, while the recent ones witness the neologism parabolă [=parable], from the French word parabole, the Latin parabola. The contextual sense for the two words is ‘allegorical story with a religious content’ (DLR). In old Romanian, the word pildă has the following frequency, distributed during centuries, in the corpus analyzed in Tudose 1970: 126-148: 16th century: 170, 17th century: 29, 18th century: 3. We can notice a decrease in its frequency, which implies the competition with another word – parabolă [=parable]. Pildă has not disappeared from contemporary Romanian, and is still being used in folk language and in church language. Pildă and parabolă respectively are lexical equivalents for the Greek πα α and the Latin parabola. The differences of translation from the Romanian editions are not due to the utilized sources, but to the evolution of Romanian language. The Greek word πα α has in NT the meaning of ‘parable, fictional story which conveys a religious or moral teaching (Lidell – Scott). The same sense of ‘parable’ is also kept by the Latin parabola. 3. A se upovăi/a (se) nădăjdui/a se încrede/a avea despre sine încredințarea/a se crede A (se) upovăi [=to direct] is a lexical archaic word (if we compare it to contemporary language) that appears only in CORESI 1561 and in the context has the sense ‘to go in the direction of somebody in good faith, to address someone in the hope of achieving help, leniency, shelter’. It is a borrowing from Church Slavonic, its etymon being upovati/ upŭvati. The verb a nădăjdui [=to hope], which is present in three biblical versions, has the completion întru (sine) [=in oneself] and in the context has the meaning of a upovăi. The construction a nădăjdui întru (cineva) [=to hope in/for somebody] is no longer used today in the standard language, but only in church language. It is a verb formed in Romanian through derivation with the suffix –ui from the noun nădejde [=hope], which has a Slav origin (Paleoslavonic nadejda). BIBLIA 1795 already replaces it with a se încrede întru sine, which has the meaning ‘to believe in oneself, to be conscious of one’s worth’. It is formed by derivation with the prefix în-, like in other Romance languages, old French encroire, Spanish encreer ‘to borrow’ (DLR). We notice in this case the tendency to replace the Paleoslavonic/Slavonic terms (see even the word ‘nădejde’) or the words derived from a Slav basis with other words that have a Latin origin, after the Romance model. In BIBLIA 2001 we encounter a crede (from inherited Latin word credere), in a reflexive use, with the sense ‘to deem, to consider oneself’, which by extension evolved into ‘to have an inflated opinion about oneself, to deem oneself better than one actually is, to be self-conceited, haughty’ (DLR). A avea (despre sine) încredințarea [=to have the faith (about oneself)] from BIBLIA 1939 is a paraphrase 80 that attempts to render the same contextual sense of a crede [=to believe]. Greek π ω (at perfect participle active) that has the meaning here ‘to be convinced,’ while the Latin confido (in se) means ‘to have faith (in oneself)’. 4. D(i)rept/neprihănit Drept [=right(eous)] has in this context the sense ‘who lives and acts according to justice, truth, kind-heartedness, the good; honest, righteous, proper’, even ‘innocent, free of sins’ (DLR). It is inherited from Latin directus, but here it is an equivalent of the sense of Latin iustus and of Greek α . Probably because of the polysemy of the adjective drept [=just] or the influence of the source, BIBLIA 1921 prefers the word neprihănit [=chaste] ‘free of stain, free of sin, free of guilt’, a word derived from prihană’ a guilt with a moral nature, a deed that trespasses the moral and makes a man sinful’, a loan-word from Ukrainian prigana, Polish przygana (DLR). 5. A ocărî/a ține în nemică/a defăima/a urgisi/a disprețui/a privi de sus A ocărî has the sense here, which is obsolete nowadays, ‘to disregard, to despise, to mock, to think little (of)’. The word is a borrowing from Paleoslavonic ocariati. The loan translation in the phrase a ține în nemică from NTB 1648, which tries to render the same sense as the verb a ocărî indicates very clearly the source of the translation: the new Latin version translated by Beza present in the polyglot edition NTGL 1611 (where pro nihilo habebant corresponds to the Greek υ ῦ α ; cf. Latin aspernor with the sense ‘to repel’). A defăima [=to libel], used transitively, with the complement indicating people, is obsolete nowadays in literary language. Its meaning is ‘to repel with contempt, admonishment, to despise, to disregard, to demean’. It is inherited from the Latin word *diffamiare (=diffamare). The presence of a defăima [=to defame] in BIBLIA 1688 and in BIBLIA 1795 may be proof of the fact that BIBLIA 1795 is a revision of the 1688 BIBLIA. In BIBLIA 1760 a urgisi appears, another lexical archaic term in contemporary language, which has the sense ‘to have hostile sentiments (towards somebody), to detest, to show enmity/ill-will to’. It comes from the Neo-Greek ω. A disprețui [=to despise] has the sense ‘to have or manifest contempt to somebody, to disregard somebody, to ignore’. It is derived with the suffix –ui from the noun dispreț [=contempt] (from the Italian word disprezzo, cf. the verb disprezzare) (DLR). The neologism a disprețui, which eliminated its earlier competitors a ocărî, a defăima, a urgisi, is preferred in BIBLIA 1921 and in BIBLIA 2001. BIBLIA 1939 utilizes the phrase a privi de sus maybe due to the tendency not to use neologisms in the biblical text. 6. A se duce/a merge/a intra/a se sui A merge [=to go] is accompanied by the local determination în besearică [=to church] and has the meaning ‘to walk by moving from one place to another’. It is inherited from the Latin word mergere ‘to submerge’, without keeping its meaning. The verb a merge belongs to the fundamental vocabulary of old Romanian, with the frequency: 16th century: 897, 17th century: 562, 18th century: 185 (Tudose 1970: 126- 81 148), a fact that is confirmed by its presence in three biblical versions from the old period: NTB 1648, BIBLIA 1688 and BIBLIA 1760. A intra (a întra), which appears in BIBLIA 1795, is less frequent: 16th century: 424, 17th century: 296, 18th century: 78. A intra, which also has a Latin origin – intrare, has the sense ‘to pass from outside inside, to go from an outdoor place to an enclosed one’. A se sui, inherited from the Latin subire (DLR) is accompanied by a local determination introduced by the preposition la, having the sense ‘to move or to go to a place that is higher (and higher) (compared to a given point of reference or to the place that somebody is situated); to climb’. Its use in BIBLIA 1921 and in BIBLIA 2001 is explained by the fact that the church or the temple are usually built on a higher place (while the corresponding Greek word ἀ α α ω and the Latin word ascendo have the sense ‘to climb’). It is possible that in BIBLIA 2001 the reviser kept the variant proposed by BIBLIA 1921 (like in the case of a disprețui). A se duce [=to go] is a partial synonym of a merge and in the context has the sense ‘to start moving in order to arrive somewhere, to leave somebody or something in order to head to a different place’. It is only the verb a se sui that is an equivalent of the Greek word ἀ α α ω and the Latin word ascendo, while all the other variants only convey the idea of movement. 7. Besearică/templu Biserică has the concrete sense ‘building erected especially for the celebration of a Christian cult, and by extension of any religious cult’. It is inherited from the Latin basilica (DLR). The frequency of this word in old language is the following: 16th century: 286, 17th century: 254, 18th century: 50 (Tudose 1970: 126-148). In order to eliminate the confusion linked to the cult, it is replaced in BIBLIA 1921 by templu [=temple]. For templu, a loan-word from the French temple, Latin templum, the lexicographical definition is ‘edifice destined to the practice of the religious cult (for some peoples in ancient times, nowadays for the Mosaic believers, Protestants, etc.)’. It is the hypernym for biserică, capiște, geamie, havră, moschee, pagodă, sinagogă (DLR). The translation of the Latin templum or the Greek word ἱ that has the meaning of ’temple’ by biserică in the biblical versions from the old period is a cultural adaptation to the Romanian context (in the context the subject is the Judaic synagogue, although in the interpretation of the parable the place of worship is the Christian one). 8. Mitar/mitarnic/vameș The words mitarnic and mitar [= publican, tax collector] have the sense ‘person who had a lease on collecting taxes; revenue officer’ the same as the Latin publicanus and the Greek ώ . Mitar is a loan-word from the Slavonic mitarĭ, while mitarnic is a word derived with the suffix –arnic from the noun mită [=bribe], from the Slavonic mito. Both mitar and mitarnic have become obsolete words, even in church use (which however keeps using the derived word nemitarnic). We note that the Slavonic terms appear up to BIBLIA 1688, while in the subsequent versions they are replaced by vameș [= publican, tax collector, revenue officer]. Vameș, an old 82 borrowing from the Hungarian vámos, has in this context the sense ‘person who collected taxes,’ the same as in the case of the words mitar and mitarnic. This sense is still kept in church language use, though it may be considered to be a semantic archaic term if we correlate it with the contemporary literary language, in which it carries the meaning ‘clerk whose duty is to control the luggage, merchandise, means of transportation, etc. and to collect the products that pass through the customs’ (DLR). 9. Deusebi/departe/de departe The adverb osebi (obsolete) has the sense ‘apart, to one side, separate’, to which DLR adds the variant deosebi, which is used in BIBLIA 1688. It comes from the Slavonic word osobĭ.The Slavonic term is only encountered in NTB 1648 and in BIBLIA 1688. Departe [=far (away)] has a local sense here, ‘at a great distance from a fixed point’. It is a word formed in Romanian, by compounding, from the words de and parte. We note the fact that this local determination is not present in all the Romanian biblical versions, and from the sources we studied, it only appears in the Latin version of Beza: seorsum ‘separate, apart from’, which demonstrates the correlation between NTB 1648 and NTGL 1611 and the filiation between NTB 1648, BIBLIA 1688 and BIBLIA 1795 (with the last two being revisions). We are surprised by the presence of the local determination in BIBLIA 1760, which is a translation from BIBLIA SACRA 1690 (Vulgata), but in the Latin version of the Vulgata there is no correspondent for departe. 10. Doamne/Dumnezeule The word Domn [=Master], inherited from Latin dominus ‘master’ (often articulated, behaving as a proper name, with the Vocative form Doamne), has in monotheist religions the sense ‘supreme, eternal being, primordial transcendent cause, fundamental principle of existence and of universal order, creator and judge of the world who, in Christianity, is three-fold in the Father, Son and Holy Spirit; Dumnezeu [=God]’. It often appears as an epithet given by Christians to Jesus Christ. Dumnezeu, inherited from Latin Dom(i)ne Deus (Vocative) has in DLR the same definition that we showed above for Domn (V. Doamne) and, by extension, in Christianity, also refers to Jesus Christ. The Latin correspondent Deus and the Greek correspondent have the sense ‘Dumnezeu’. 11. A da laudă/a da har/a mulțumi The verb a mulțumi [=to thank] is derived from the greeting formula (la) mulți ani and in the context has the sense ‘to express (by words) one’s gratitude or satisfaction for a gift’ (DLR). It is encountered in all the biblical versions we studied, with the exception of the first two: CORESI 1561 uses the translation a da laudă [=to give praise], which is probably a loan translation under the influence of the Slavonic source, and the NTB 1648, as a consequence of the influence of the source, the loan 83 translation a da har from the Latin gratias agere, with the sense ‘to thank’ (the same as the Greek ὐχα ῶ). Har here has the sense ‘thanks to, by grace of, by virtue of’. 12. Răpitor/jefuitor/hrăpăreț Jefuitor [=plundering], an adjective also used as a noun, has the sense ‘(one) who plunders, plunderer’, and, by extension ‘avaricious, predatory’ (translating the Slavonic histniku). The verb a jefui [=to plunder] (DLR) from which the word is derived with the suffix –tor has in Moldavia the variants jăfui, jăhui and id derived, at its turn, from the word jaf (jah) or is borrowed from the Ruthenian zekuvati, zakuvati ‘to plunder’ (cf. Hungarian zsâkolni ‘a jefui’). In the regional variant jăhuitor is encountered in NTB 1648 and in BIBLIA 1688, while the literary variant jefuitor appears in BIBLIA 1795. The adjective răpitor, used also as a noun, has the sense ‘(person) who unjustly takes somebody else’s good, who plunders somebody else, who usurps someone else’s right’. It is a word derived with the suffix –tor from the verb a răpi [=to rob, to carry off/away], inherited from the Latin word rapire (rapere) (DLR). It is interesting that this word appears in three biblical versions between which there is no affiliation or genealogy and which belong to different periods – CORESI 1561, BIBLIA 1795 and BIBLIA 2001. The word hrăpitor is an old variant for răpitor, just like a hrăpi is related to a răpi. The presence of hrăpitor in BIBLIA 1921 is probably motivated by the stylistic intention to use archaic words. Hrăpăreț, a word derived with the suffix –ăreț from the verb a hrăpi, has the sense ‘who tries by any means to get rich; greedy for wealth, rapacious’ (DEX). We consider that it is used in BIBLIA 1921 with the same stylistic intentions, because it is more suggestive. The Greek word ἅ πα , like the Latin word rapax (Beza), has the sense ‘rapacious’, and the Latin raptor (Vulgata) would be translated more readily by ‘răpitor’. The correlation with the correspondents from Latin and Greek do not indicate differences between the Romanian versions as regards the utilized sources. 13. Curvar/preacurvar/necredincios în căsătorie/adulter Curvar [=lewd, libertine, debauched (person)] has the meaning ‘one who is debauched, dissolute, licentious’ (DLR). It is a word that is encountered especially in old language, although it still survives, albeit it is to be avoided in literary language. Regarding its etymology, DLR indicates that the word is formed by derivation from curvă [=whore] with the suffix –ar or that it is a borrowing from old Paleoslavonic kurŭvari. Preacurvar has the sense ‘who engages in adultery; who is extremely debauched, dissolute’. Even if we correlate it with the current literary language, the word is a lexical archaic term, the proof being that it is replaced by adulter [=adultery] in BIBLIA 2001, it can still be encountered in church language nowadays. It is formed by compounding prea and curvar, according to the Slavonic model prealiubodeai. The word adulter, a neologism from French adultère, Latin adulterium, has, as an adjective, the sense, when it refers to spouses, ‘who has violated the conjugal fidelity’ (DEX). The paraphrase necredincios în căsătorie [=unfaithful in marriage] from BIBLIA 1939 illustrates the sense of adulter, probably 84 in order to avoid the utilization of the neologism in the biblical text. The Latin word adulter (Vulgata) has the sense ‘adultery’, while moechus (Beza), corresponding to the Greek χ , means ‘adulterous, debauched’. 14. A zeacea/zeciuială The ordinal numeral a zeacea [=the tenth] (cf. Latin decima) is used with the ellipsis of the determined noun parte, in an archaic construction that is nowadays absent even in church language use. We note its replacement in the versions subsequent to BIBLIA 1688 with the noun zeciuială [=tithe], which is a word derived with the suffix –eală from the verb a zeciui [=to levy tithe on] (cf. Greek ἀπ α ῶ), with the sense ‘contribution (in nature or in money) that amounted to the tenth part of the products one had; quitrent’. 15. A câștiga/a avea/a birui/din toate veniturile mele/a agonisi A câștiga [=to earn] has in this the sense ‘to acquire through work, toil, sustained activity’ (cf. Greek ῶ α ) and its complement usually is averea [=wealth] or pâinea cea de toate zilele [=the daily bread]. The word is inherited from the Latin castigare ‘to scold, to punish, to contain, to gather’. It appears in three versions: CORESI 1561, BIBLIA 1688 and BIBLIA 2001, with the latter two being correlated with the Greek source. A avea [=to have], a word inherited from the Latin habere, has here a specialized sense, namely ‘to possess (money, wealth, estates, etc.)’, being the semantic correspondent to the Latin possidere. It appears in NTB 1648 and in BIBLIA 1760, as an influence of the Latin source of the translation. A birui [=to conquer] with the sense ‘to own riches, to be wealthy’ is a word borrowed from Hungarian, its etymon being the Hungarian word birni. Its presence in BIBLIA 1795 is explained by the fact that it is a regional term (common in the region of Ardeal) that is used in literary language. The paraphrase din toate veniturile mele [=from all my income] from BIBLIA 1921 is probably also an influence of the French source. Venit [=income] has here the sense ‘totality of financial or material means resulted from the running of a property; material or financial means that come from a certain source’ (DLR). A agonisi [=to acquire], used in BIBLIA 1939 with the contextual sense ‘to acquire, to obtain, to earn something hard, by toil,’ is a borrowing from Middle Greek ἀω α (aor. ἀ α) ‘to fight’ (DLR) and is an equivalent of the sense of the Greek word ῶ α . 16. A ucide/a (se) bate A ucide [=to kill] appears only in CORESI 1561 and has the sense, an obsolete and regional one, of ‘to beat harshly, to hit hard’ (DLR). The word is inherited from the Latin occidere. Probably due to the evolution of the language, it is replaced in the other versions by a bate [=to beat], from the Latin battere (battuere) with the sense ‘to heat repeatedly’ (DLR). The Latin percutio, caedo and the Greek word π ω have the same sense: ‘to hit’. 85 17. A fi milostiv/a ierta/a avea milă A ierta [=to forgive] only appears in BIBLIA 1688 and has in this context a specialized sense, namely that of ‘not to punish, to absolve from punishing for the sin, guilt or mistake of someone’, as God is the one who forgives. The word is inherited from the folk Latin word libertare ‘to free,’ a word that is derived from libertus ‘freed from slavery’ (DLR). (A fi) milostiv, in contrast to a ierta, appears less frequently in contemporary Romanian, although it is still used in church language. We can notice its presence in six of the eight Romanian biblical versions we researched. Milostiv, from the Slavonic milostivŭ, has the sense ‘full of pity for the troubles or misfortunes of somebody, compassionate, forgiving’. (DLR) specifies that in religious concepts it refers to the divine forces ‘who give man good will and help’ (like in the case of the Latin adjective propitius and the Latin verb placo and its Greek correspondent ἱ α ). Milostiv also appears with the role of a noun, as an epithet given to God. A avea milă [=to show mercy] appears only in BIBLIA 1921. Milă [=mercy, pity, forgiveness], from the Paleoslavonic word milŭ, has, in religious concepts, the sense ‘good will and help that are given by God to man; Godly gift, divine grace’ (DLR). 18. Dereptat/(mai) îndreptat/socotit neprihănit Îndreptat, which has as variants the words dereptat, îndereptat, îndireptat has here the sense ‘just, honest; one who has found the right path’, being the participle of the verb a îndrepta [=to straighten] which means ‘to change for the better’ (cf. the Latin adjective iustificatus and the Greek verb α ω). A îndrepta comes from the folk Latin word *derecto, -are (from *derectus = directus ’just’) and is derived subsequently with the prefix în-. The paraphrase socotit neprihănit [=deemed immaculate] from BIBLIA 1921 illustrates the idea of lack of a guilt ‘of a moral nature, one that encroaches upon moral and makes a man sinful’. Îndreptățit [= justified], which appears in BIBLIA 2001 and has the contextual sense ‘just, justified’, is also a participial adjective from the verb a îndreptăți, with the sense ‘to give justification to somebody (for a guilt brought before somebody), to declare someone as innocent’. The verb a îndreptăți is derived with the prefix în- from dreptate [=justice] (DLR). 19. A descinde/a (se) pogorî, a se coborî A descinde [=to descend], borrowed from the Latin word descendere, which is present in CORESI 1561 in the old inherited form deștinse, has in this context the sense ‘to descend’. The inherited form was replaced due to the evolution of the language (though the neologism a descinde is still in use). A pogorî is derived from the adverb pogor, which comes from the Paleoslavonic word pogorǐ, which means ‘downwards’. The form coborî [=to descend], which is more recent, appears only in BIBLIA 2001 and is formed by metathesis from the word a pogorî. A coborî is often in opposition to a urca [=to climb] and means ‘to head towards the valley (from the mountain), to go downwards (from a higher place), to climb down, to descend’ (DA). The Latin word descendo and the Greek word α α α ω have the same sense. 86 20. A (se) pleca/a (se) smeri The verb a (se) pleca, inherited from the Latin word plicare, is used twice in the text in the first three biblical versions we studied. A pleca1, (cf Greek απ ω ‘to humiliate’, Latin deprimo ‘to lay down,’ humilio ‘to humiliate, to demean’) is a factitive transitive verb used in the passive voice (with se as a mark) corresponding to the Greek απ ω α and the Latin deprimetur/ humiliabitur) and has the contextual sense of ‘to subject, to make somebody have a humble, pious attitude in front of divinity, to subdue oneself’. A se pleca2 is the same verb used in the reflexive voice (corresponding to the Greek απ ῶ αυ and the Latin se deprimit/ se humiliat) and has the contextual sense of ‘to subdue oneself to the precepts of Christian faith, to the authority of God, to have a humble attitude in front of divinity’. It may be said to be a semantic archaic word, if we correlate it with contemporary Romanian literary language use. Even in church language use, it is replaced by the verb a se smeri and in fact we notice that it among the compared editions, it appears only in BIBLIA 1688. The same semantic nuances are also obtained by switching the grammatical voices in the case of the verb a (se) smeri. A smeri1 is transitive and has the sense, obsolete nowadays, of ‘to humiliate.’ It is used in the text in the passive voice (va fi smerit) [=will be humiliated] and in some versions it has the mark se (smeri-se-va) [=will humiliate oneself]. A se smeri2 in the reflexive voice means ‘to subdue oneself to the precepts of Christian faith, to the authority of God, to have a humble attitude in front of divinity; to abase oneself’. In spite of the fact that it is a Slavonic word (from sŭmĕriti) it has survived until today both in standard and in church language. Conclusions In some cases, we note the presence of lexical coincidences in successive versions of the Bible: a word that has not been replaced at all, resisting during several centuries. The stability of a word is usually proof of its framing within the basic vocabulary of the language and an index concerning the genealogy of texts. The lexical substitutions from the biblical versions we researched have different explanations, and it can be quite difficult to distinguish between different types of lexical substitutions. Some lexical substitutions occur due to the use of different sources: the Slavonic, Greek or Latin sources were regularly used as basic texts, while other texts from these sacred languages and vernacular languages were also used as control texts. In this respect, the identification of the sources of the Romanian biblical versions and their use (only of the Latin and Greek sources) was an initial stage of our approach. In the contact between the Romanian language, as target-language, and a sourcelanguage, usually a sacred language, we notice the differences between the two linguistic systems, including on a lexical-semantic level. At the beginnings of our literary language, Latin and Greek were at a stage of development that was far more advanced than Romanian because their literary tradition was longer. The Romanian 87 literary language and the Christian religious terminology were just emerging and in the process of being formed and at the same time had to deal with the problem that the vocabulary had no words to designate referents that were unknown in the Romanian space – elements of culture and civilization from another space – this aspect, namely the shortcomings that are characteristic of the Romanian language is often referred to in the prefaces of old religious books. That is why in the early translations there appeared the need for borrowings and loan-translations. This is also an explanation for the principle for the literal rendering, which is predominant in the first translations from the sacred languages into the vernacular languages. But the literal rendering character, beyond its just character, had the disadvantage that it often led to ambiguity or obscurity, making the Romanian text hard to understand for the reader. In the passage from the principle of literal to the literary translation, there appears another type of lexical substitution: instead of the borrowings, of the linguistic loan-translations or of the literal paraphrases there appear cultural adaptations, lexical creations or functional equivalents in later biblical versions. At a lexical-semantic level, the contact between two languages raises difficulties especially regarding the semantic values. If the denotation is simpler to transpose in the target-language, the connotation, achieved through metaphor, metonymy, synecdoche, etc. implies an increased effort on the part of the translator. The semantic evolution of a word from the source-language often differs from the semantic evolution of its correspondent in the target-language. Other lexical substitutions are owed to the dynamics of the language in diachrony and to the change of literary norm. It is difficult to notice the lexical-semantic dynamics for a period that is so distant from contemporary Romanian language, because the dictionaries do not offer in all the cases real information about the first attestation of a word (admission of a neologism into the language), while the passing of a word from the active stock to the passive stock (as a lexical or semantic archaic word) is all but impossible to date. We have also tried to follow the diatopic distribution of words and the admission of certain regional terms into the literary language. We have also attempted to reconstitute the information on the diastratic and the diaphasic distribution of words in Romanian. Other substitutions are achieved by partial synonymy and are explained by the options that Romanian offers to translators. The stylistic processing of the revisers is based on the partial synonymy. Abbreviations and bibliography Sources: BIBLIA 1688 = Biblia adecă Dumnezeiasca Scriptură a Vechiului și Noului Testament, tipărită întîia oară la 1688 în timpul lui erban Vodă Cantacuzino Domnul ării Românești, retipărită după 300 de ani în facsimil și transcriere cu aprobarea Sfântului Sinod și cu binecuvântarea Prea Fericitului Părinte Teoctist Patriarhul Bisericii Ortodoxe Române [=The Bible namely the Godly Scripture of the Old and the New Testament, printed for the first time in 1688 during the reign of erban Vodă Cantacuzino Ruler of Wallachia, re-printed after 300 years in facsimile and 88 transcription with the approval of the Holy Synod and with the blessing of Holy Father Teoctist Patriarch of the Romanian Orthodox Church], București, Editura Institutului Biblic si de Misiune al BOR, 1988 BIBLIA 1760 = Biblia Vulgata, Blaj, 1760-1761, Cuvânt înainte de Eugen Simion [=Foreword by Eugen Simion], Bucureşti, Editura Academiei Române, 2005 BIBLIA 1795 = Biblia de la Blaj, 1795, Ediţie jubiliară, cu binecuvântarea Î. P. S. Lucian Mureşan mitropolitul Bisericii Române Unite [The Bible From Blaj, 1795, Anniversary Edition, with the blessing of the Holy Lucian Mureşan, Metropolitan Bishop of the United Romanian Church], Roma, 2000 BIBLIA 1921 = Biblia sau Sfânta Scriptură, Traducerea Dumitru Cornilescu, Ediție de studiu Thompson, Oradea, Editura Universității Emanuel, [2002] BIBLIA 1939 = Biblia adică Dumnezeiasca Scriptură a Vechiului și a Noului Testament, tradusă după originale ebraice și grecești de preoții profesori Vasile Radu și Gala Galaction din înalta inițiativă a Majestății Sale Regelui Carol II [=The Bible namely the Godly Scripture of the Old and the New Testament, translated from the Hebrew and Greek originals by the priest professors Vasile Radu and Gala Galaction by the lofty initiative of His Majesty King Carol II], București, Fundația pentru Literatură și Artă „Regele Carol II” BIBLIA 2001 = Biblia sau Sfânta Scriptura, Ediţie Jubiliară a Sfântului Sinod (…), redactată şi adnotată de Bartolomeu Valeriu Anania [The Bible or the Holy Scripture, Anniversary Edition of the Holy Synod (…), written and annotated by Bartolomeu Valeriu Anania], București, Editura Institutului Biblic şi de Misiune al Bisericii Ortodoxe Române BIBLIA SACRA 1690 = Biblia sacra Vulgatae Editionis, Veneția, 1690 CORESI 1561 = Tetraevanghelul tipărit de Coresi: Brașov, 1560-1561 comparat cu Evangheliarul lui Radu de la Mănicești, 1574, ediție alcătuită de Florica Dimitrescu [The Four Gospels Printed By Coresi: Brașov, 1560-1561, Compared to Radu de la Mănicești’s Gospel], București, Editura Academiei Republicii Populare Române, 1963 NTB 1648 = Noul Testament, tipărit pentru prima dată în limba română la 1648 de către Simion Ştefan, mitropolitul Transilvaniei, reeditat după 340 de ani din iniţiativa şi purtarea de grijă a Prea Sfinţitului Emilian, Episcopul Alba Iuliei [=The New Testament, printed for the first time in Romanian in 1648 by Simion Ştefan, Metropolitan Bishop of Transylvania, re-edited after 340 years due to the initiative and care of the Holy Father Emilian, Bishop of Alba Iulia], Editura Episcopiei Ortodoxe a Alba Iuliei, 1988 NTGL 1611 = Novum Iesu Christi Testamentum Graece et Latine: Theodoro Beza interprete. Cum duplici interpretatione, Geneva, Apud Samuelem Crispinum, MDCXI Dictionaries: DA = Dicționarul limbii române, București, 1913-1949 DEX = Dicționar explicativ al limbii române, Ediția a doua, Univers Enciclopedic Gold, București, 2009 DLR = Dicționarul limbii române (serie nouă), București, 1965 și urm. DSL = Angela Bidu Vrânceanu et alii, Dicționar de științe ale limbii, București, Editura Nemira, 2005 GAFFIOT = Félix Gaffiot, Dictionnaire latin français, Paris, Hachette, 1934 89 LIDDELL – SCOTT = G. Liddell, R. Scott, A Greek–English Lexicon compiled by Henry George Liddell and Robert Scott, revised and augmented throughout by sir Henry Stuart Jones, with the assistance of Roderick Mckenzie (…) Oxford, 1996 Studies and articles: Anania 2009 = Bartolomeu Valeriu Anania, „Biblia lui erban, monument de limbă teologică și literară românească”[=Şerban’s Bible, A Monument of Romanian Theological and Literary Language], în TDR 2009, p. 25-36 Andriescu 1988 = Al. Andriescu, „Locul Bibliei de la București în istoria culturii, literaturii și limbii române literare”[=The Place of the Bible From Bucharest in the History of Romanian Culture, Literature and Literary Language], în MLD, Pars I. Genesis, p. 7-45 Chindriș 2000 = Ioan Chindriş, „Secolele Bibliei de la Blaj” [=The Centuries of The Bible From Blaj], în BIBLIA 1795, p. 1-68 Chindriș 2005 = Ioan Chindriș, „Testamentul lui Petru Pavel Aron”[=Petru Pavel Aron’s Testament], în BIBLIA 1760, p. XI-LXXVIII Chițimia 1988 = I. C. Chițimia, „Un monument de valoare literară perenă: Biblia lui erban Cantacuzino (1688)” (postfață) [=A Monument of Perennial Literary Value: Şerban Cantacuzino’s Bible (1688)], în BIBLIA 1688: 978 Chivu 1997 = Gheorghe Chivu, Civiliza ie şi cultură. Considera ii asupra limbajului bisericesc actual [=Civilization and Culture. Arguments About Contemporary Church Language], Bucureşti, Editura Academiei Române Chivu 2012 = Gheorghe Chivu, „Les écrits religieux, une composante définitoire de la culture roumaine ancienne”[=Religious Writings, A Defining Component of Old Romanian Culture], în TDR 2012, p. 19-35 Conțac 2011 = Emanuel Conțac, „Influența versiunii Segond asupra versiunii Cornilescu 1921”[=The Influence of The Segond Version On the Colrnilescu Version], în Munteanu 2011, p. 121-145 Coteanu – Wald 1970 = I. Coteanu, Lucia Wald (coord.), Sistemele limbii [=The Systems of the Language], Republicii Socialiste România Dimitrescu 1973 = Florica Dimitrescu, Contribuții la istoria limbii române vechi [=Contributions to the History of Old Romanian Language], București, Editura Didactică și Pedagogică Dimitrescu 1988 = Florica Dimitrescu, „Importanța lingvistică a Noului Testament de la Bălgrad”, în NTB 1648 [=The Linguistic Importance of the New Testament From Bălgrad, in Introductory Study for NTB 1648], p. 77-96 Dimitrescu 1994 = Florica Dimitrescu, Dinamica lexicului românesc [=Dynamics of the Romanian Vocabulary], București, Editura Logos Gafton 2005 = Alexandru Gafton, După Luther. Traducerea vechilor texte biblice [=After Luther. The Translation of Old Biblical Texts], Iaşi, Editura Universităţii «Alexandru Ioan Cuza» Lupaș 2004 = Liana Lupaș, „Suma capetelor şi sursele Noului Testament de la Bălgrad”[=The Sum of Heads and the Sources of the New Testament from Bălgrad], în Wald - Georgescu 2004, p. 246-256 MLD = Monumenta linguae Dacoromanorum. Biblia 1688, pars I. Genesis, pars II. Exodus, pars III. Leviticus, pars IV. Numeri, pars V. Deuteronomium, pars VI. Iosue. Judicum. Ruth, pars VII. Regnum I. Regnum II, pars IX. Paralipomeni I. Paralipomeni 90 II, pars XI. Liber Psalmorum, editori coordonatori: Al. Andriescu, Vasile Arvinte, Paul Miron, Eugen Munteanu, Iași, Editura Universităţii „Alexandru Ioan Cuza”, 1988-2011 Munteanu 2008 = Eugen Munteanu, Lexicologie biblică românească [=Romanian Biblical Lexicology], București, Humanitas Munteanu 2011 = Eugen Munteanu (coord.), Receptarea Sfintei Scripturi: între filologie, hermeneutică și traductologie[=The Reception of the Holy Scripture: Between Philology, Hermeneutics and Translation Science], Lucrările Simpozionului Național „Explorări în tradiția biblică românească și europeană”, Iași, 28-29 octombrie 2010, Iași, Editura Universității „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” Pavel 2000 = Eugen Pavel, „Un monument de limbă literară: Biblia lui Samuil Micu”, în BIBLIA 1795 [=’A Monument of Literary Language: Samuil Micu’s Bible’ in BIBLIA 1795], p. 1-22 Pavel 2001 = Eugen Pavel, Carte și tipar la Bălgrad (1567-1702) [=Book and Printing in Bălgrad] , Cluj-Napoca, Editura Clusium Tudose 1970 = Claudia Tudose, „Vocabularul fundamental al limbii române vechi”[=Fundamental Vocabulary of Old Romanian Language], în COTEANU WALD 1970: 119-164 Wald – Georgescu 2004 = Lucia Wald, Theodor Georgescu (ed.), In memoriam I. Fischer, Bucureşti, Humanitas Online resources: NTG = Novum Testamentum Graece, ed. E. Nestle, K. Aland, B. Aland, ediția nr. 27, Stuttgart, Deutsche Bibelstiftung, 1993, pe site-ul http://www.academic-bible.com TDR 2009 = Text și discurs religios, Lucrările Conferinței Naționale ”Text și discurs religios”. Iași, 5-6 decembrie 2008, ediția I, ed. Alexandru Gafton, Sorin Guia, Ioan Milică, Iași, Editura Universității ”Alexandru Ioan Cuza, pe site-ul http://www.cntdr.ro TDR 2010 = Text și discurs religios, Lucrările Conferinței Naționale ”Text și discurs religios”. Iași, 13-14 noiembrie 2009, ediția a II-a, ed. Alexandru Gafton, Sorin Guia, Ioan Milică, Iași, Editura Universității ”Alexandru Ioan Cuza, pe site-ul http://www.cntdr.ro TDR 2011 = Text și discurs religios, Lucrările Conferinței Naționale ”Text și discurs religios”. Iași, 12-13 noiembrie 2010, ediția a III-a, ed. Alexandru Gafton, Sorin Guia, Ioan Milică, Iași, Editura Universității ”Alexandru Ioan Cuza, pe site-ul http://www.cntdr.ro TDR 2012 = Text și discurs religios, Lucrările Conferinței Naționale ”Text și discurs religios”. Iași, 10-12 noiembrie 2011, ediția a IV-a, ed. Alexandru Gafton, Sorin Guia, Ioan Milică, Iași, Editura Universității ”Alexandru Ioan Cuza, pe site-ul http://www.cntdr.ro VULGATA = Biblia Sacra Vulgata, ed. R. Weber, R. Gryson, editio quinta, Stuttgart, Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2007, pe site-ul http://www.academic-bible.com 91 Annex 1: Synoptic table Nr. crt. 1. CORESI 1561 2. 3. Cap., v. 18, 9 18,14 18, 9 18, 9 NTB 1648 BIBLIA 1688 BIBLIA 1760 BIBLIA 1795 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. zise grăiesc pilda se upovăiia zise zic pilda să nădăjduiia zise zic pilda să nădejduia au zis zic pilda nădăjduia au zis zic pilda să încredea a spus vă spun pilda se încredeau 18, 9 18, 9 derepți ocărâia direpți defăima drepți urjisiia drepți defăima neprihăniți disprețuiau 11. 18,10 18,10 18,10 18,11 18,13 18,11 18,11 18,13 18,11 12. 13. 18,11 18,11 duseră-se besearecă mitar mitarnic mitarnicul așa Doamne Doamne laudă ție dau răpitori curvari derepți îi ținea în nemică mearsără besearică mitarnic mitarnic mitarnicul deusebi Doamne Doamne har ie dau jăhuitori curvari mearsără în besearică vameș mitarnic mitarnicul deusebi Doamne Doamne mulțămescui jăhuitori preacurvari au mers în besearică vameș vameș vameșul departe Doamne Dumnezeule mulțămescui răpitori preacurvari au întrat în besearică vameș vameș vameșul de departe Doamne Dumnezeule mulțemescui jefuitori preacurvari s'au suit la Templu vameș vameșul vameșul Dumnezeule Dumnezeule Îți mulțămesc hrăpăreți preacurvari 14. 15. 18,12 18,12 a zeacea câștiga a zeacea am a zeacea cîștig zăciuiale am zeciuială biruiesc 16. 17. 18,13 18,13 18,14 bătea milostiv fii mie îndreptat 19. 18,14 deștinse bătea fii milostiv mie mai îndereptat pogorî bătea iartă mie 18. ucidea milostiv fii mie dereptat 20. 18,14 pleacă-se pleca-să-va s-au pogorât smeri-să-va bătea fii milostiv mie mai îndreptat s-au pogorât smeri-se-va zeciuială din toate veniturile mele se bătea ai milă de mine socotit neprihănit s'a pogorît 18,14 pleca-teveri să pleacă pre sine să smereaște să smereaște 9. 10. pleca-săva să pleacă mai îndireptat pogorî 92 BIBLIA 1921 BIBLIA 1939 BIBLIA 2001 a rostit zic parabola aveau despre sine încredințarea drepți priveau de sus s'au dus în templu vameș vameșul vameșul Dumnezeule Dumnezeule îți mulțumesc a spus vă spun Eu parabola se credeau hrăpitori necredincioși în căsătorie zeciuială agonisesc bătea fii milostiv mie mai îndreptat drepți disprețuiau s'au suit la templu vameș vameș vameșul Dumnezeule Dumnezeule mulțumescui răpitori adulteri zeciuială câștig s'a pogorît bătea milostiv fii mie mai îndreptățit s'a coborât va fi smerit se va smeri va fi smerit se smerește se smerește se smerește pre sine Acrostic Translation in the Invocation Prayer - Liber Manualis Gabriela RADU Das autobiographische Schreiben, die religiöse Meditation und die Ahnenforschung sind Genres die sich in Liber Manualis, eine mittelalterliche Schrift aus dem 9. Jahrhundert, wiederfinden. Dodana oder Dhuoda ist nicht die erste Autorin, die ihren Namen im Text einfügt. Doch ist das Akrostichon im Liber Manualis, ein gewöhnlicher Gruss an den Leser, ihren Sohn in diesen Fall, zur gleicher Zeit der Beweis der Annahme der Beraterrolle, die die Autorin durch den Auspruch lege („lese‟) zum Ausdruck bringt. Welche Rolle spielt das Akrostichon im Text, welche sind die Probleme die die Übersetzung mit sich bringt und welche Wiedergabelösungen des Akrostichons aus dem Latein ins Rumänische, sind einige Aspekte, die wir in dieser Arbeit zu erläutern versuchen. Durch den Aufruf im Akrostichon, Dhuoda setzt sich nicht nur selbst Grenzen in ihrer Fähigkeit einen literarischen Text zu verfassen, sondern zur gleichen Zeit bringt sie klar ihre „Stimme‟ des Autors zum Ausdruck. Als solches ist das Bewahren des Akrostichons eine Notwendigkeit, nicht optional. Stichwörter: Akrostichon, Übersetzung, religiöse Beschwörung, des Autors Preamble Liber Manualis is written during the so-called Carolingian renaissance, a period of notable cultural activity when literature, arts, architecture and Scriptures studies were undergoing a real revival process1. The text is a valuable document, not only as a source of historical knowledge about Carolingian time, but also as an evidence of educational standards achieved by a woman living in Middle Ages society. Indeed, the author of this work is a woman, Dhuoda, wife of Bernard, Duke of Septimania, mother of two children, Wilhelm and Bernard. She has been separated for a long period of time from her husband whose duties forced him to be present near Louis the Pious2. For a short time Dhuoda raised her children at Uzes. After King Louis the Pious died, her husband accepted the authority of Charles the Bold 1 Frederik B. Artz, The Mind of the Middle Ages, An Historical Survey A.D. 200-1500 Third Edition, Revised, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, p. 195. 2 Louis the Pious (778 – 840) was the King of Aquitaine. 93 under constraint. He gave his older son, Wilhelm, to the king as a guarantee of his loyalty. Under and through these circumstances and soon after her son was taken in captivity, Dhuoda started composing the Manual. She sent the work to Wilhelm two years later, in 843. It is not known whether the Manual came to be read by its addressee since Wilhelm was killed around 850. Book of advices: imitation versus innovation As a genre Liber Manualis belongs to the category of advice works, a favorite type of writing in western and eastern Middle Ages. What makes this handbook to stand out from the template of such works of advices is the feminine voice that manages to make itself heard beyond the pattern. Although the author follows two traditional genres, the handbook and the mirror, genres that are usually full of scriptural teachings or patristic text quotations, the formal frame is repeatedly eluded. The text of the Manualis is the only way through which Duoda can utter her longing for her son. It is simultaneously, the only maternal image which she is able to offer to her son as it can be seen in the next translated3 excerpt: “I am well aware, that most women rejoice that they are with their children in this world, but I, Dhuoda, am far away from you, my son William. For this reason I am anxious and filled with longing to do something for you. So I send you this little work written down in my name, that you may read it for your education, as a kind of mirror. And I rejoice that, even if I am apart from you in body, the little book before you may remind you, when you read it, of what you should do on my behalf”4. Liber Manualis has been edited by P. Riché in Sources chrétiennes, vol. 225, Paris, 1991. The English translation The Romanian translation was made following this edition. The acrostic – a subdued signature Epistolary autobiography, religious meditation and genealogy are all literary varieties that can be found together in Liber Manualis. From the beginning of the handbook, Dhuoda assumes the authorship as well as the role of the teacher: “The little book before you branches out in three directions. Read it through and, by the end, you will understand what I mean. I would like it to be called three things at once, as befits its contents - rule, form, and handbook. All of these parts of speech appear to be held together 3 The English translation of the text belongs to Carol Neel in Handbook for William A Carolingian Woman's Counsel for Her Son by Dhuoda. Translated and with an introduction by Carol Neel University of Nebraska Press: Lincoln NE, 1991. 4 “Cernens plurimas cum suis in saeculo gaudere proles, et me Dhuodanam, o fili Wilhelme, a te elongatam conspiciens procul, ob id quasi anxia et utilitatis desiderio plena, hoc opusculum ex nomine meo scriptum in tuam specietenus formam legendi dirigo, gaudens quod, si absens sum corpore, iste praesens libellus tibi ad mentem reducat quid erga me, cum legeris, debeas agere.” 94 in our mirror. The rule from me, the form in you. And so the handbook moves from me into you, gathered together by me and assumed within you”5. The message contained in the Liber Manualis’ prologue is followed by invocatio6 Dei, a rhetorical strategy for capturing reader’s attention. In the same time, this strategy evokes the ancient Invocation of the Muse . It is formed of seventy-six lines, and interweaves in its content the following message: DHUODA DILECTO FILIO VVILHELMO SALUTEM LEGE ( Dhuoda sends greetings to her beloved son William. Read! ). Dhuoda is not the first writer who interlaces her own name in the text. At first view, the constraint of acrostic format on the poetic expression could appear as something artificial and out of the context. The acrostic in Liber Manualis is not only a conventional greeting structure7 to Wilhelm, the addressee of her book, but is also a proof that the author assumes her advising role when she urges her son to read the text: lege ( Read! ). Besides, the acrostic is a powerful statement of authorship. By using the acrostic, Dhuoda purposely imposes semantic limitations which are designed to demonstrate her ability of composing a literary text. For this reason only, preserving the acrostic in translation is mandatory, not optional. The origin of the acrostic is not certainly known, although the oldest evidence of its existence can be traced back to the Babylonian prayers. The acrostic is encountered not only in religious hymns, but also in laic poetry8. Between the two types of acrostic, namely the alphabetical9 and the onomastic, in Dhuoda’s handbook the latter is used. In this case, the first letter of every other line, starting with the first, creates vertically a name or a word that reveals the authorial intent. Thus Invocatio Dei is organized of distiches10, out of which only the letter of the first distich forms the acrostic. The authors of many translations incline to disregard the acrostic as an insignificant matter. The recognition of the important role of the acrostic in original text can plead for the necessity of preserving it in translation. It is well known that the acrostic was used as memory aid in religious hymns, as its logical layout was 5 “Praesens iste libellus in tribus virgulis constat esse erectus: Volo enim ut simili modoin tribus lineis secundum auctoritatis seriem utilissimum habeat nomen: id ist Norma, Forma et Manualis. Quod utrumque hae partes locutionis in nos specietenus continentur cuncta: Norma ex me, Forma in te, Manualis tam ex me quam in te, ex me collectus, in te receptus.” Incipit textus 7–12. 6 Origen identifies in the Bible two meanings of invocation (proseuchè): the first more common one as “prayer”, and the second as “promise” (Origen 2006: 37). 7 “Dhuoda stands behind and inside her work, together with her son. Her purpose goes beyond the epistolary conventions of signature and name of addressee.” afirmă în Dhuoda Handbook for her Warrior Son Liber Manualis, edited and translated by Marcelle Thiebaux, Cambridge University Press, 1998, p. 30. 8 Used in Latin for the first time by Cicero, and then by Dionysius of Halicarnassus, the acrostic has become as important as the chorus refren during the first centuries of Christianity. 9 The alphabetic acrostic has emerged in the Christian hymnography through Hebrew tradition (Psalm 118). The first known Greek poet to use the alphabetic acrostic is Methodius of Olympus in Τ Πα . 10 Two lines of poetry, sometimes rhyming, that form a complete unit in themselves. 95 facilitating the ability of learning the text by heart. Even in teaching works, moral and religious exhortations were composed so that they were able to be easily memorized. However the mnemonic function is not the main reason for which Dhuoda has used the acrostic in Invocation. On one hand, Dhuoda uses the acrostic as a poetic way to dedicate this handbook to her oldest son. Hence, it is mandatory to preserve this dedication in any translation attempt as it represents the clear intent of the author to embed the name Wilhelm who is the main addressee of the text. The acrostic represents a part of the communication process that cannot be ignored. On the other hand, by constraining herself to the acrostic use, Dhuoda wants to prove her abilities as a writer to maintain both, the accuracy, and the coherence of the message, in spite of the self-imposed restrictions, all of that within the poetic expression. The explicit desire of the author to make her presence known to her son and to make the reader aware of her poetical abilities, in other words, to over-sign her work, leads to the idea that authorship was also an important reason for Dhuoda in choosing the acrostic format. The incitement contained by Invocatio further strengthens the author’s intent: “Reader, if you desire to know the key, / Look at the beginning of each verse”11. Most of the translators know that is almost impossible to keep the original order of the words. Furthermore this difficulty is recognized in the case of the acrostic, when the limitations regarding the initials of the words, occur every other line of the verses. Different technical solutions are applied by the translator when dealing with such texts in order to preserve the original structure: inversion of the verses, paraphrase, word additions or omissions, choosing of neologisms, archaisms, uncommon words, choosing of the second word from the line for acrostic initial, using of some abbreviations or reductions, repetition, alternative forms of addressing. Many of these techniques were used while translating Dhouda’s Invocation in Romanian language, in an attempt to preserve the acrostic format12: Acrostic for the next work Latin text Deus, summe lucis conditor, poli / Siderumque auctor, rex aeterne, agius, Romanian translation Doamne, preaînalte Creator al luminii şi Ziditor / al stelelor şi al cerului, Împărate Acrostic solutions The acrostic has been achieved by equivalence: there is a relation of identity between the Latin word Deus and 11 English translation God, highest creator of light, and author Of the heaven and the stars, eternal king, holy one, “Lector qui cupis formulam nosse, / Capita perquire abta versorum.” The next lines compose an acrostic: DHUODA DILECTO FILIO VVILHELMO SALUTEM LEGE (“Dhuoda sends greetings to her beloved son William. Read!”). 12 96 Latin text Romanian translation sfînt, făr’de început şi făr’ de sfîrşit, Acrostic solutions Romanian word Dumnezeu. Both of them have the same initial D . The acrostic has been Hai, Hoc a me accomplished by Îndurătorule, coeptum tu perfice clemens. / desăvîrşeşte ceea addition: the ce eu am început. interjection hai is a Quanquam grammatical insertion / Deşi sunt ignara, ad te that precedes and perquiro sensum, neştiutoare, îţi emphasizes the cer înţelepciune, Romanian word desăvârşeşte as imperative and makes the transition from implicitness to explicitness. It is not a useless element. Urmărind cele The acrostic has been Ut tua capax plăcute ie, să fiu achieved by using the placita în stare / Să last word of the line, perquiram, / urmez, acum şi Praesens et perquiram, and mai departe, futurum tempus translation of it in calea cea dreaptă. Romanian by recurram aptum. categorization. The process implies changing of category shift: the Latin subjunctive verb perquiram turns into Romanian gerundive urmărind. Omnia per cuncta Oricîte se află în The acrostic has been trinus et unus, / lume, Tu, Întreit accomplished by equivalence between Tuis per saecula şi Unic / Îi the Latin word omnia prospera largiris. răsplăteşti pe ai from the original text tăi de-a lungul and the Romanian veacurilor word oricâte used in translation. 97 English translation In your mercy complete this task begun by me. Though I am ignorant, I seek understanding of you, So that I may know what pleases you And, now and in the future, follow the right path. One and triune in all the universe, You grant your servants prosperity through the ages. Latin text Digna dignis semper meritis ad singula / Tribuis celsam tibi famulantes. Romanian translation Dăruieşti doar demnităţi celor vrednici / şi cinstire celor ce Te slujesc. Ad te, ut valeo, poplito flexu, / Gratias refero conditori largas. Atît cît sînt în stare, în genunchi, / Îţi aduc depline mulţumiri, Ziditorule. De tua mihi, obsecro, largiri / Opem, ad dextram sublevans axem. Dă-mi ajutor, te rog fierbinte / La cer de mă ridică, la dreapta Ta. Illic namque credo tuis sine fine / Manere posse quiesci in regno. În acel loc - am crezământ - cei ce cred în Tine / Îşi pot afla odihna în Împărăţia fără de sfârşit. Lipsită de putere, nevrednică şi însingurată / Căzută la pămînt, târîtă în adîncuri, Licet sim indigna, fragilis et exul, / Limo revoluta, trahens ad imma, Acrostic solutions The acrostic has been accomplished by using the second word of the line. The equivalence between the Latin word dignis and the Romanian word dăruieşti, has been used. The acrostic has been obtained by translating the third word of the line, ut [valeo], and not the first one that owns the acrostic initial in the original text: ad (către, spre). The acrostic has been accomplished by translating the Latin verb obsecro placed in the middle of the first line into the Romanian dă[-mi ajutor]. The acrostic has been achieved by equivalence between the Latin adverb illic and the Romanian syntagma în acel loc. After omission of the Latin word licet, that does not alter the general sense of the phrase in Romanian, the acrostic was obtained by using the 98 English translation You assign just rewards to these men's worthy actions, And heavenly honor to those who worship you. As much as I am able, on bended knee I give thanks to you, my maker. I beseech you to bestow your aid upon me, Raising me to heaven on your right side. For I believe that there, in your kingdom, Your servants may forever remain in peace. Although I am unworthy, weak, and an exile, Made of earth, drawn to the lowest depths, Latin text Romanian translation Est tamen michi consors amica / Fidaque, de tuis relaxandi crimina. Este totuşi o prietenă13 care mă însoţeşte / Şi nu şovăie să-i despovăreze de păcat pe cei ce cred în Tine. Centrum qui poli continens girum, / Pontum et arva concludis palmo, Centru ce ţine bolta cerească / Marea şi ogorul le cuprinzi în palmă14 Tibi commendo filium Wilhelmum: / Prosperum largiri iubeas in cunctis. ie pe fiul meu, Wilhelm, ţi-l încredinţez / Ca să-l îndemni să fie prosper în toate. Oris atque semper currat momentis; / Te super omnem diligat factorem. Ore şi clipe să se grăbească mereu / Să te iubească pe Tine, Creatorule, înainte de toate. 13 14 Acrostic solutions forth word of the line, fragilis. It was rendered by periphrasis with the Romanian syntagma lipsită de putere. The acrostic has been accomplished by equivalence between the first Latin word that provides the acrostic initial in the original text est and Romanian word este. The acrostic has been accomplished by equivalence between the first Latin word that provides the acrostic initial in the original text centrum and Romanian word centru. The acrostic has been accomplished by equivalence between the first Latin word that provides the acrostic initial in the original text tibi and Romanian word ie. The acrostic has been accomplished by equivalence between the first Latin word that provides the acrostic initial in the Dhuoda refers to Virgin Mary, as Riche suggests it (Dhuoda, 75 n. 2). Cf. Isaiah 40.12. 99 English translation I nevertheless have a friend, my lady-companion, Who is sure to set your people free from sin. You, center who hold the turning of the heaven, Who enfold in your hand the land and the sea, To you I entrust my son William: May you ordain that he be prosperous in all things. May he stay his course at every hour and minute; May he love you, his creator, above all. Latin text Romanian translation Acrostic solutions English translation original text oris and Romanian word ore. Filiis cum tuis mereatur felici / Concito gradu scandere culmen. Fiilor Tăi să le păşească alături demn / Cu pas fericit şi iute spre culmi. In te suus semper vigilet sensus / Pandens; per saecula vivat feliciter; Înspre Tine gîndurile să-i fie treze mereu / Veghind; să trăiască mereu în fericire. Lesus nunquam ille incidat in iram / Neque separatus oberret a tuis. Lezat dacă este, să nu cadă pradă mîniei niciodată / Şi nici despărţit de cei ce cred în Tine, să nu rătăcească. Iubilet iocundus cursu felici, / Pergat cum virtute fulgens ad supra; În veselie să se bucure de un drum fericit / Să tindă spre culmi, strălucind cu The acrostic has been accomplished by equivalence between the first Latin word that provides the acrostic initial in the original text fillis and Romanian word fiilor. The acrostic has been accomplished by equivalence between the first Latin word that provides the acrostic initial in the original text in and Romanian word în. The acrostic has been accomplished by equivalence between the first Latin word that provides the acrostic initial in the original text lesus and Romanian word lezat. The original syntactic structure is preserved (participle in nominative). With your sons may he be worthy To ascend to heaven with swift and happy step. The acrostic has been accomplished by using the second word of the line and translation of it in Merry, may he rejoice in a happy path And may he arrive above 100 In you may his mind always keep watchful, Attentive; may he always live joyously. When he is wounded, may he never fall into anger Nor lose his way from among your servants. Latin text Romanian translation virtute. Omnia semper a te abta petat. / Qui das sine fastu, dona illi sensum, Obţină de la Tine cele potrivite mereu / Tu care dăruieşti fără răsplată, dă-i lui Ut te intelligat credere, amare, / Laudare gratiis duplicatis agium. Virtute ca să ştie să se încreadă în Tine, să Te iubească / Şi pe Tine, Sfinte, să Te cinstească cu îndoită recunoştinţă. Vină asupra lui harul Tău neţărmurit / Iar în trup şi în suflet, pacea şi împăcarea. Veniat in eum larga tua gratia, / Pax et securitas corporis et mente, Acrostic solutions Romanian by recategorization. The process implies changing of category shift: the Latin Passive participle iocundus turns into the Romanian prepositional noun în veselie. The acrostic has been accomplished by equivalence between the last Latin word of the line, petat, with the Romanian subjunctive ob ină. The acrostic has been accomplished by using the last word of the previous line, sensum, and translating it by the Romanian word virtute. The acrostic has been achieved by equivalence between the first Latin word of the line, veniat that provides the initial letter in the original text and Romanian word vină. The omission of the word să from the structure of the Romanian subjunctive să vină, was required. 101 English translation shining in virtue; May he always seek from you what he ought. You who grant without recompense, give him understanding, That he may know to believe in you, to love you, And to praise you who are holy with redoubled thanks. May your expansive grace come to him, Peace and security in body and in mind. Latin text In quo in saeculo vigeat cum prole, / Ita tenens ista careat ne illa. Romanian translation În această lume să prospere împreună cu vlăstarele lui / În aşa fel păstrîndule pe acestea ca să nu le piardă pe celelalte. Legensque revolvat volumen ad tempus, / Dicta sanctorum obtemperet sensu. La răstimpuri să recitească acest volum, iar citindu-l / Cuvintele sfinţilor să se întipărească în mintea lui. Habeat acceptum a te intellectum, / Quid, quando, cui, sublevet opem. Hai, aibă din partea Ta plăcută înţelegere / Cum, cînd şi cui să-i facă osteneala mai uşoară. Et tibi iugiter quaternas percurrat / Virtutes, multorum teneat capax. Etern să urmărească cele patru virtuţi15, / În stare fiind să dobîndească mai multe. Acrostic solutions The acrostic has been accomplished by equivalence between the first Latin word that provides the acrostic initial in the original text, in, and the Romanian word în. The acrostic has been accomplished by the usage of preposition ad, the fourth word of the line, in order to obtain the initial letter and translation of it with the Romanian preposition la. The acrostic has been accomplished by addition: the interjection hai is a grammatical insertion that precedes the Latin hortatory subjunctive habeat. It is rendered by Romanian subjunctive aibă with the omission of the particle să. The acrostic has been accomplished by translating the Latin adverb iugiter, that is placed in the middle of the line, with the Romanian word etern. 15 English translation May he flourish with his children in this world, But may he have the other world's gifts as well. May he read and reread this volume from time to time, And may the words of the saints shape his thought. May he draw understanding from you-How, when, and to whom he should give aid. And may he pursue the fourfold virtues assiduously, So that he remain capable of many things. These virtues are: the justice, the courage, the prudence and the moderation. 102 Latin text Largus et prudens, pius et fortis, / Temperantiam necne deserat unquam. Liniştit şi mărinimos, Mis michi similem non habebit unquam, / Quanquam indigna genitrixque sua, Romanian translation devotat şi brav / Niciodată să nu renunţe la cumpătare. Mamă ca mine nu va avea niciodată / Deşi sunt nevrednică, Omnibus semper momentis et oris / Rogans te obnixe; miserere illi. Ore întregi şi clipe, mereu, / Te rog cu devotament: ai milă de el. Sunt michi multae anxiarum turmae, / Flagitans pro illum fragili labore. Sunt multe motive de îngrijorare pentru mine / În vreme ce lupt pentru el cu nevolnicele mele puteri. Ad te, largitorem omnium bonorum, / Eum in cunctis commendo gratantem. Aceluia care dăruieşte toate bunurile / Îl încredinţez pe el care pentru toate recunoştinţă poartă. Acrostic solutions In order to obtain the acrostic initial, the third word of the line, prudens, has been used, and translated with the Romanian word liniştit. The acrostic has been achieved by the inversion of the two distiches and by the usage of the third Latin word of the line, genitrix, translated as mamă in Romanian. The acrostic has been accomplished by using the third word of the line, momentis, and translation of it with the Romanian word ore. The acrostic has been accomplished by equivalence between the first Latin word that provides the acrostic initial in the original text sunt and the Romanian word sunt. The acrostic has been accomplished by using the second word of line for the acrostic initial and translation of it in Romanian by re- 103 English translation Generous and wise, just and brave, May he never abandon moderation. He will never have another like me, Unworthy though I am, but still his mother, Who always--in every hour and minute-Prays to you devotedly: have mercy upon him. Many storms of troubles beset me As I struggle for him with my feeble strength. To you, who are the source of all bounty, I entrust him, in all that he does giving thanks to you. Latin text Romanian translation Licet sit discors regnum et patria, / Tu tamen manes solus immutabilis. La necaz, ţara şi regatul dacă se află, / Tu singur statornic rămîi. Utrum digni abta placita perquirant, / In tuo nutu continentur cuncta. Urmăresc cei vrednici ţeluri drepte sau nu, / De vrerea Ta, atîrnă totul. Tuum est regnum tuaque potestas / Plenitudo terrae diffusa per orbem, ie îţi este Împărăţia şi a Ta este puterea16/ Al Tău este belşugul pămîntului în lumea17 întreagă, 16 17 Acrostic solutions categorization. The process implies changing of category shift: the Latin pronoun in Accusative, te, preceded by the particle ad, turns into Romanian demonstrative pronoun in Dative case. The acrostic has been achieved by using the third Latin word of the line, discors, translated by the Romanian syntagma la necaz. The acrostic has been accomplished by translating the Latin verb perquirant that is placed at the end of the line, and not by the first one that provides the acrostic initial in the original text. The acrostic has been accomplished by the equivalence between the first Latin word that provides the acrostic initial in the original text, tuum, and the Romanian word ie. Cf. Matthew 6.9-13, Luke 11.2. Cf. Psalm 23.1. 104 English translation Although there may be discord in the kingdom and the fatherland, You alone remain unchanging. Whether worthy men seek fitting ends or not, All depends on your judgment. Yours is the kingdom and yours the power, Yours the universal governance of the earth, Latin text Et tibi soli famulantur cuncta. / Qui regnas semper, miserere prolis. Romanian translation Efemere sau nu, toate îţi sunt supuse doar ie. / Tu cel care domneşti de-a pururea, ai milă de vlăstarele mele! Mis duo nati ostensi in saeculo / Vivant, obsecro, teque semper diligant. Mă rog ie ca fiii mei, în lumea asta născuţi / Să trăiască şi să Te iubească mereu. Lector qui cupis formulam nosse, / Capita perquire abta versorum. Lămurire de vrei să afli, cititorule, / Urmăreşte începutul potrivit al versurilor. Exin valebis concito gradu / Sensu cognosci quae sim conscripta. Estimp, cît de grabnic, vei fi în stare / Să cunoşti cu mintea ceea ce am scris. Genitrix duorum masculini sexus, / Grabnic, eu, mamă a celor doi Acrostic solutions The acrostic has been achieved by the omission of the Latin word et that provides the acrostic initial in the original text and by the addition of the word efemere as unnecessary information. The acrostic has been achieved by the inversion of the two distiches and by the usage of the second Latin word of the line in order to obtain the acrostic initial, obsecro. It was translated by the Romanian syntagma mă rog. The acrostic has been accomplished by the equivalence between the fourth Latin word of the line formulam and the Romanian word lămurire. The acrostic has been accomplished by using the first Latin word that provides the acrostic initial in the original text, exin, translated in Romanian by the regionalism estimp. The acrostic has been achieved by the 105 English translation And to you alone all things are subject. You who reign always, have mercy on my children. May he and his brother--my two sons born to this existence-Live long, I pray you, and may they always love you. Reader, if you desire to know the key, Look at the beginning of each verse. Then, passing through swiftly, you may see What it is that I have written. I, mother of two boys, Latin text Rogo, ut ores conditori almo: Erigat ad summum genitorem prolis / Meque cum illis iungat in regnum. Romanian translation băieţi, / Îţi cer ca tu să-l implori pe bunul Ziditor El să-l înalţe pe culmi pe tatăl acestor vlăstare / Şi să mă alăture lor în Împărăţia lui Dumnezeu. Acrostic solutions addition of Romanian adverb grabnic as supplementary information. The acrostic has been accomplished by the usage of the first Latin word of the line. It has been rendered by explicitness: the Romanian pronoun el is missing in the Latin text but it is understood from the Latin word erigat as verbal desinence. English translation Ask that you pray to the gracious creator That he raise these children's father up to heaven And join me with them in God's kingdom. The above solutions for the acrostic achievement in translation are neither final nor unique. They constitute a proof that the acrostic format can be preserved in translation as a specific feature of authorship and a distinguishing mark. When both languages have the same origin this desideratum can be fulfilled by revaluing all the lexical and grammatical resources of the target language. Ultimately, Dhuoda’s advice has to be followed: “Reader […] / Look at the beginning of each verse”18. References Artz, Frederik B., The Mind of the Middle Ages, An Historical Survey A.D. 200-1500 Third Edition, Revised, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, p. 179-222 Assis, Ellie, The Alphabetic Acrostic in the Book of Lamentations in “The Catholic Biblical Quarterly”, 2007, p. 710-724 Cameron, A. (1995): Ancient Anagrams in “American Journal of Philology” 116, p. 477484 (www.academicroom.com/article/ancient-anagrams) Cherewatuk, Karen, Speculum Matris: Duoda’s Manual in “Florilegium 10” (1988–91): p. 49-64 (http://gilles.maillet.free.fr/histoire/pdf/dhuoda.pdf) Riché, Pierre (ed.), Bernard de Vregille and Claude Mondésert (trs.), Dhuoda: Manuel pour mon Fils. Sources Chrétiennes 225. Paris, 1975 (French translation) Neel, Carol (tr.). Handbook for William. A Carolingian woman’s counsel for her son. Regents Studies in Medieval Culture. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1991 18 See note 8. 106 Marcus R., Alphabetic Acrostics in the Hellenistic and Roman Periods in “ Journal of Near Eastern Studies 6” (1947), p. 109-11 Mairs, Rachel, Acrostich Inscriptions at Kalabsha(Roman Talmis): Cultural Identities and Literary Games in “Chronique d'Égypte 86” (171-172), p. 281-297 (www.reading.academia.edu/RachelMairs) 107 Terminological Connotations of the Translation of Dosoftei’s Psalms Cristina-Elena PURCARU Toutes les traductions des textes bibliques nationalisent le trésor de la fois de l’humanité, mais une equivalence en verses des psaumes ayant les mouvements internes du home de letters est le Psautier en verses du métropolite Dosoftei. Il a été écrit entre 1660-1666, pendant la deuxième moitié de son épiscopat à Roman, édité en 1673 à Uniev, en Polonie, pendant son premier réfuge. Dans la feuille de titre, l’auteur confesse que le livre „a été le résultat de son grand effort de le traduire en verses à partir des saints livres.” En plus, Dosoftei caractérise son œvre comme une „tâlcovanie”, ayant le sens „d’interprétation” qui est aussi trouvé dans d’autres contextes dans le Psautier en verses: „Voit l’interprétation du livre saint”, „l’interprétation de ce psaum” ou dans l’affirmation explicite de Dosoftei qui dit qu’il s’agit „du Psautier de prophète et empéreur David qui a été traduit en verses en roumain”. A partir de ces deux formules, on constate qu’il y a deux directions, l’une est esthetique et l’autre herméneutique, toutes les deux ont été utilisées par le métropolite. Mots-clés : traduction, Métropolite Dosoftei, le Psautier en verses. Aesthetic aspects Though it has been discussed (Ion Bianu1, Gheorghe Perian2, Dan Horia Mazilu3, Petru Caraman4, Al. Andriescu5, probably by the others) his fidelity to the original text, we notice that, in reality, the Romanian version is the result of some partial transformations which can be explained, on the one side, for Dosoftei „is the first poet who dresses the deep lyric throught of David’s psalms in the coat of the Romanian verse”6 and thus he had to deal with elements which had not been 1 I. Bianu, Introduction to the Quoted Edition, p. XXXII. Gheorghe Perian, Our First Poet, in „Vatra”, 1994, nr. 3, p. 3. 3 Dan Horia Mazilu, Introduction to the Work of Dosoftei, „Minerva” Publishing House, Bucharest, 1997, p. 107. 4 Petru Caraman, Kochanowski – Dosoftei. The Psaltery in Lyrics. An edition and a chronological table by Ion Ciubotaru, Foreword by Al. Andriescu, „Trinitas” Publishing House, Iaşi, 2005, p. 58. 5 Al. Andriescu, The Psalms in the Romanian Literature, The Publishing House of „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” University, Iaşi, 2004, p. 18. 6 I. D. Lăudat, 350 Years from Dosoftei’s Birth, the Metropolitan of Moldavia, Iaşi, 1975, p. 16. 2 109 recorded before him; on the other hand, he creates new words, necessary for transforming the psalms into verses. Dosoftei introduced, as he confessed, numerous original verses, for example those referring to peace and unity between peoples, representing a commentary on Psalm 132: „Who makes his wall of peace,/ Towers of brotherhood,/ Has a guiltyless life/ And one is rich./ Because it is better, together,/ Brotherhood and sisterhood/ Than the gun whicj destroys/ The courageous soldiers”. Furthermore, Dosoftei’s originality can also be seen in the fact that Dosoftei introduced verses referring to personal bitterness due to the love for his country while he was a refugee with Petriceicu Vodă in Poland in 1673. These lyrics have the aspect of a folklore doina, a specific Romanian song expressing sorrow: „Ohhh, my will is sour/ Being away from the country/ Being so far away” (Psalm 119, Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, p. 430). Dosoftei cries for his own situation, that of feeling as a stranger out of his country, while David talks about another „estrangement”, that from God, having the same consequences in both cases, living in „Chedar’s place”- the prototype of fatal places7, just like in the lyrics below: „Oh, my roguery has worsened; inhabiting me as if I am Chidar’s place” (Psalm 119, The Bible from 1688, p. 332). The same originality comes from being away from the country (Moldavia, in the case of Dosoftei, and David mentions Jerusalem) as we can see in the following lyrics: „How strange it feels/ To sing in a foreign country./ If I forget you, holy country,/ It would be as if I forget what’s right/ Therefore, I change my words into lyrics, /So that I can cry my sorrow” (Psalm 136, Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, p. 463). „How will we sing God’s song in a foreign land?/ If I forget you, Jerusalem, punish me with taking my right hand!/ May my tongue be stuck in my throat, if I do not remember you” (Psalm 136 from The Bible from 1688, p. 344). If in some psalms, melancholy or personal thorough of the authors appear (David and Dosoftei), in others, the oppression of their own country is felt, passing through hard times, like in the lyrics: „They quickly invaded,/ Your holy country having dark thoughts./ - «damn, let’s annihilate them, / So that not even their tongue remains” (Psalm 82, Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, p. 278) or „They had hiiden plans for you people, and they talked about your saints./ They said: «Come and make all of them disappear, So that the name of Israel is no longer mentioned»” (Psalm 82, The Bible from 1688, p. 276). In these moments, Dosoftei forgets about the feeling of holiness and meekness and violently asks the divinity: „Until when, Holy God,/ The hot anger is going to be here/ Together with the fury/ Which is like a fire spilt over us?/ God, have no mercy of the pagans/ And spill your anger on them” (Psalm 78, Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, p. 267) or in the verses: „Until when, you, merciful one, are you going to hide your holy face/ From me, the fiend,/ Until when the poor soul receives advice/ Though 7 Ioan Sorin Usca, Ioan Traia, The Old Testament in the Interpretation of the Saint Parents, XIII, Psalms, „Christiana” Publishing House, Bucharest, 2009, p. 596. 110 one’s conscience is full of pain in the night?/ Until when the evil is supposed to grow?” (Psalm 12, Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, p. 39). Moreover, David’s sincerity should be appreciated. He, the emperor of Israel, the liked singer of his people, the one named by God „a man liked by My heart” (Facts 13, 22) does not hide his troubled soul. The psalms 12 and 82 are a proof in this respect: „Until when, God, we are going to feel your fire anger?/ Have no mercy on those who do not know you and on the emperors that did not call for your name” (Psalm72, The Bible from 1688, p. 272); „Until when, God, I am going to be forgotten?/ When are You going to turn Your face towards me?/ Until when Am I going to give myself pieces of advice, when is the pain going to go away from my heart, day and night?/ Until when is the evil going to have power over me?” (Psalm 12, The Bible from 1688, p. 182). The mentioned psalms are the expression of an aggrieved heart full of troubles and doubts before God. The four questions from Psalm 12 which start with the same expression- „Until when?” –are, in reality, some indirect accusations addressed to God who forgets His subjects, hides His face, does not make their burden easier and does not protect them from their enemies. Consequently, the Psaltery does not contain only mystical chants, but different feelings determined by the historical vicissitudes of ancient peoples. The victories over the enemies brought the psamists’s cry for joy, while the endured abasement lead to curses and rebellions against destiny, this is the reason why Dosoftei is called „an exceptional political poet”8. We notice that Dosoftei has the extraordinary quality of writing, based on different moods or feelings: joy, lament, prayer, delicacy, the state of sin etc. Here is a solemn-sour portrait of the sinner in Psalm 9: „One’s mouth is full of bitterness,/ Of curse, of blasphemy and deceit” (Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, p. 33). In a metaphorical way, it is presented the one who feels abandoned by God, left alone and threatened in Psalm 21. In an original way and full of details is expressed the thirst of God, both of body and soul: dryness, ugliness of the body just like in the desert is impressive: „For my body yearns for God so much/ It, the lamb, becomes ugly,/Just like in the desert and in dry places,/ Without any water and people” (Psalm 62, Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, p. 201). In another psalm, we feel fatigue, the fear which follows the committed sins (Psalm 68). Various feelings are reproduced and nuanced by the psalmist interpreter who preserves the Biblical essence unbroken. People pray to God and they do not bring only „greasy sacrifice” like in the Old Testament, but also „sweet wheat”, sometimes even braids like in the Psalm 50 of both editions taken into account: „Braids and gifts as You like them”, Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, p. 171); „will bring calves to Your sacrifice table” (The Bible from 1688, p. 234). During the reading of the psalms, one can meet various specific Romanian words. Regionalisms, folklore words or those created by Dosoftei from various languages, make the Psaltery special, as the following verses say: „The unseen 8 Dan Zamfirescu, A Hero of the Spiritual: Dosoftei, in „The Daystar”, year XVII, 1974, no. 42, p. 8. 111 evil”- still burning from the verb „to burn down” the coals with water (Psalm 78, Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, p. 267); „To make me think my words before I say them/ .../ I am as silent as a mute” (Psalm 38, Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, p. 129). The same verses are written by David: „I do not want to make sins with my tongue” (Psalm 38, The Bible from 1688, p. 218), „Punish those people who do not know You” (The Bible from 1688, p. 272). Moreover, we notice that the Psaltery in lyrics has a fluent and expressive style through which Dosoftei expresses the beneficence of the nature through local elements: „Sheep and oxen and everything from the holy sun,/ The wild animal from the field” (Psalm 8, Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, p. 28). We notice in Dosoftei’s lyrics folklore terms from the peasant’s daily life (oxen, sheep, animal, field) and from the world of fairy tales. The expression „animals that destroy”9 is used even today by the pople from the countryside, when the wolf, the bear, the boar attack the cattles from the yard or from the fold. In The Bible from 1688, „man- the prototype of the human specie”10 was made the master of the all-created ones, this idea is to be found also in Dosoftei, but David reminds us of the nature ust as it is presented in the Book of Genesis: „And they made him master over the results of Your hands./ Everything was put at his feet./ Sheep and cows, all of them, and even the animals of the earth./ The birds in the sky and the fish of the sea, everything that is to be found on water paths” (Psalm 8, The Bible from 1688, p. 178). Unlike David, Dosoftei uses an extremely rich vocabulary, combining folk terms with neologisms and inventing terms based on the languages that he knew, adapting the Biblical vocabulary to the images of autochtonous realities. The one who first discussed the problem of the „Romanianization” of the Psaltery was Hasdeu11 in the 19th century, he noticed that the nature described by the Romanian translator was not the one specific to the Orient, but to Moldavia. Dosoftei has a text which is full of images from the nature, with equivalents of the Moldavian scenery in the Hebrew world. From the analyzed editions, we remark that Dosoftei’s „Palestina” is marked by winters with dark forests haunted by bisons, with high cliffs and rapid springs. The Biblical nature in a warm country is coloured in the Romanian way, with winters, freezing cold and ice; the sea is transformed into rivers or in large forests; the desert becomes high mountains with grass.This type of lyrics give us the chance to admire an authentic Romanian creation having an original landscape and fauna. Thus, poetry has fresh, unexpected images of „localizations” which give it an unseen charm. In other cases, the images are extremely concrete, even characterized by a dense materiality, sometimes having Apocalyptical nightmare forms: „Oxen and cows surround me,/ Having their opened mouth that threaten to kill me./Like the lions which roar/ Having their savage mouth open, towards the pray,/ Just like water I 9 Dan Simonescu, art. cit, p. 350. Ioan Sorin Usca, Ioan Traia, op. cit., p. 58. 11 Hasdeu at Antonio Patraş, Dosoftei – the discovery of poetry, in „Literary Discussions”, 2003, no. 5, p. 69. 10 112 was pushed outside/ And my bones were spread./ My heart melts,/ Just like a burning candle./ My virtue is like a bag,/ My tongue and my gums stuck on my sleeve” (Psalm 21, Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, p. 66). The originality of Dosoftei also consists in catching the atmosphere of the simple life from the countryside, it becomes obvious in the used comparisons which contain rustic images such as the frequency of fences which are about to fall in order to translate ruin („Do you think that it is going to be like a broken fence”, Psalm 61, Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, p. 199; „No boundaries fixed by fences”, Psalm 88, Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, p. 308), the wine cellars whose wine is stolen („Like a wine cellar in the moment when its wine is stolen”, Psalm 78, Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, p. 267), of the cut wheat, to underline the reduced number of fighters just like in the Romanian ballads (Psalm 54), of the buciums instead of bugles, a very often used term (Psalms: 46, 97, 136, 150 ) and of other folklore instruments, like in the following examples: „Play for God/ Having good lyrics,/ And from closed buciums/ The psalm lyrics should triumph,/ Using an ox’s horn,/ Let it be heard up in the clouds”12(Psalm 97, Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, p. 336); „With clarions and with the voice of a horn’s clarion” (Psalm 97, The Bible from 1688, p. 296); „On mountain peeks/ Many voices are heard/ Of large buciums/ With a high voice” (Psalm 46, Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, p. 154); „And closed buciums/ Let alone among the willows” (Psalm 136, Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, p. 463); „Praise God/ By playing the bucium” (Psalm 150, Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, p. 496). In the psalms from The Bible from 1688, the Romanian instrument called „bucium” is represented by a clarion or a tool, as the above lyrics present it: „At the willows, in the middle, we hanged our tools” (Psalm 136, The Bible from 1688, p. 344); „The Lord having a trumpet voice” (Psalm 46, The Bible from 1688, p. 228). Unlike David, „Dosoftei discovers the mistic poetry of patriarchal life which is for him a way of getting closer to the Biblical model, meaning the first step towards the nationalization of the message.”13 Autochtonizations and updated are considered „vocabulary effects”14, which are not that importantto include The Psaltery in Lyrics from the literate and religious tradition. Though it is faithful to the text –as I. D. Lăudat remarks on the occasion of the commemoration of the Moldavian poet - „as a man of the Orthodox church, he sometimes allows himself some liberties in the text, but they do not alter true faith”15. Therefore, in the previously presented comparisons and in others to be found in the same editions, 12 It is here an ingenuity and unseen onomatopoeia in other translations, see Anca Podgoreanu, Dosoftei. Bibliography, Bucharest, 1994, p. XV. 13 Aureliu Gogi, Edition, afterword, chronological table, critic references in Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, „Gramar” Publishing House, Bucharest, 2004, p. 293. 14 Gheorghe Perian, art. cit., p. 3. 15 I. D. Lăudat, op. cit., Iaşi, 1975, p. 15. 113 we notice that the Psaltery on verses is adapted with more images than the original had, just like he personally did in more cases. Regarding the „liberties” that Dosoftei allowed himself to make by versifying the psalms, there was a debate in our literary history. His mistakes – shows Ioan Bianu – were the necessity of „winning against the difficulties of creating verses that he obviously was not a master of. Generally speaking, Dosoftei did not affect the meaning of the psalms and did not change it”16. The position of Eugen Negrici17 can be considered correct only if we interpret it in general terms and we put it in connection with an object which refers to the semantic field of the texts (the rules of versification allow some deviations) that Dosoftei managed to encapsulate in verses. But, it loses this assumed availability, if we try to apply it to the way in which Dosoftei approached the psalms as microunities and the Psaltery as a carefully organized macrounity. As a translator and a creator of verses, Dosoftei is not always as inspired in choosing or creating words, in creating rhymes, in the spontaneous creation of the rhythm. This fact can be explained by the fact that one cannot achieve performance at the beginning of poetry, as it was the case of the moment when Dosoftei started to create lyrics. Beyond the problem of the „incorrect” rhyme, which can be taken as a prejudice of literary historians, Dosoftei is a creator of rare rhymes, just like Titu Maiorescu remarked18. Even if Dosoftei adopted all the forms of versification of the Polish poet Jan Kochanowski, almost all forms of versification (the length of the verses, the division in stanzas and sometimes the type of rhyme) are marked by the poet’s influence of the folklore verses that he sometimes imitates (Psalm 36, Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics). Regarding the length of the verses from Psalm 50 in which the first four verses have ten syllables each, the rhythm is trochaic, specific to the folklore poetry and the rhyme is successive. This perfection of the syllables is not constant, because it is related to the form of the verses which differs from one psalm to another. For example, in Psalmul 46, said by the carrol singers, the verses are short, of six syllables, but they have melody. The rhythm of these verses is also trochaic, and in this case, we can speak about monorhyme. Some fragments from the psalsm which were insignificantly transformed became star songs or carrols. In this respect, there are four examples from his psalms („Should tongues go up”- Psalm 46, „Can you, people, hear this” - Psalm 48, „Come all together to be joyful”- Psalm 94 and „God is the ruler of the country” Psalm 98), which became carrols after they were transformed by Anton Pann. 16 Ion Bianu, Introduction to the critical edition, p. XXXII. „The target from the end of the verse”, rhyme was the element under whose pressure took place not only the „movements” from the linguistic structures (with some remarkable, but unsearched for, involuntary stylistic victories), but also enough deviations from the „original spirit of the text” – believes Eugen Negrici, Medieval Poetry in the Romanian Language, Polirom Publishing House, Iaşi, 2004, p. 51-53. 18 Titu Maiorescu, Critic Works, An Edition and Chronological Table by Domnica Filimon, „Eminescu” Publishing House, Bucharest, 1978, p. 61. 17 114 Not only star songs were enriched due to Dosoftei’s psalms, but also the entire Romanian language and literature because the poet worked the language as an artist and as an educated man. His culture and sensitivity helped him obtain some equivalents, having the same meaning as the Liturgical one and resistant in themselves, having a specific language, rhymes, syntactic formulas, fluency and usage of a tonic accent. Dosoftei knew not only folklore poetry and archaic language in local and dialectal expression, but he also had knowledge about versification (having Kochanowschia as a model) and the exercise of versification norms. Some mistakes are almost normal for a poet, since they were misunderstood by some researchers (Bianu)19 who accused him of lack of knowledge of the Romanian language. But, they state the opposite: „Dosoftei was a man who loved books, a scholar of the best”20. Dosoftei is an authentic poet, a logo-type, that when he creates and modifies a canonic text, he cannot refrain from experimenting. This is why we agree with Aureliu Gogi’s opinion: „referring to the modern acception of the word, the cultural act of Dosoftei has the value of an experiment”21. Consequently, in The Psaltery in Lyrics, Dosoftei is the first Romanian poet who enriches our literature with a remarkable poetic work whose original and beautiful parts can be considered innovative creations of his time in the Romanian and European context. Hermeneutic Aspects The originality and fidelity of The Psaltery in Lyrics compared to the Psalms of David is enriched by the author through marginal notes through which the poet directs his reader to provide clues for the syllabic structure of the lyrics or to clarify obscure fragments. Numerous notes from the version kept in ms. no. 446 from B.A.R., edited by Ion Bianu in 1887 (written after the initial version of the versified Psaltery in which the foreword– a dedication addressed to the voivode Gheorghe Duca), and the differences between the manuscris and the printed version from 1673 prove a continuous work on the text (the time-consuming work for each page and the retrieve were the characteristics of the work of Dosoftei as an artist), his exertion of the creator of verses to achieve perfection. Towards the Psalm 94 (then, the indications are given by the poet to guide his readers, offering, through his marginal notes, indications regarding the syllabic structure of the verses (indications which are available for a loud reading). Consequently, Dosoftei „convinces us that he understood poetry as an rhetoric exercise22, as an external ornament capable of qualitatively modifying a discourse”23. Such indications prove the fact that Dosoftei was preoccupied to fix a specific „terminology”, for the 19 Ion Bianu, Introduction to the Quoted Edition, p. IX. Ibidem, p. XXVII. 21 Aureliu Gogi, The Quoted Edition, 2004, p. 290. 22 Mircea Scarlat, The Old Romanian Poetry, Bucharest, Minerva, 1985, p. 216. 23 Dan Horia Mazilu, Towards another Dosoftei, in „Language and Literature”, 1993, no. 3-4, p. 136. 20 115 notion of „ syllable”, using the term „slovenitură” in Psalm 1 („In these sloveniturĭ”, Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, p. 11), Psalm 2 („In eight catguts, meaning sloveniturĭ”, Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Rhymes, p. 13), Psalm 6, Psalm 32, the examples could go further. Based on numerous marginal notes made by Dosoftei, we will understand the genesis of some of the lyrics that he composed or only translated by him and we will see that the sources are almost always scholarly, because most of his lyrics were written based on the selected material from the books that he read. Before translating and creating verses, The Psaltery was „thought about and regarded through holy books”, it was the object of a long study („a lot you did”) of the Biblical exegesis („the Holy Bibles of the Holy Parents, the teachers of the saint church”). Dosoftei takes into account the rich paper works of some parents of the church such as Ioan Zlatoust24 or Saint Ciprian25, that he mentions. Moreover, the notes on some of the psalms prove the fact that he was informed regarding historical facts from chronography and from the works of medieval historians. In Dosoftei’s work, there are book references which prove the cultural origins of most of his verses. In this respect, it is significant the fact that, talking about The Psaltery in Lyrics, he does not use the term „tălmăcire” (meaning „explanation”), which will be later be used. Unlike later researchers who did not show interest for the intentions of the author, the Psaltery was considered a translation. His work was especially one of providing explanations („I explained and I wrote”), his work does not suppose only linguistic competence, but especially a cultural one. The thoroughgoing study „of the saint books”, which is reminded above, had the role of preparing the explanation activity of the psalms. While he translated and created the verses of the Psaltery, he saw more than one translation „in the Romanian language” of the ancient Hebrew poetry, he saw a hermeneutic act. Therefore, „Dosoftei translates the «human substance» of the psalms that he understood and interpreted”26. The literality of the text preoccupied him less than deeper meanings, this is obvious in the advice addressed to the reader, to „understand in depth these saint words”. Preserving the medieval tradition of invoking the name of an authority, Dosoftei confesses that he found out about his „homonym”, the archdeacon Dosithei, the future patriarch of Jerusalem, that there are „four meanings in the Holy Book”: the first is the literal one („pre-history”), the second would be the moral one („customs”), the third is the allegorical one („saying something in a masked way”), and the last one would be metaphoric („on mutation”)27. In Psalm 80, Dosoftei explains first of all the literary meaning of the introductory term at „stepping on the wine”: „Maybe this psalm was sung at the celebration of 24 Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, The Edition of Bianu, p. 3. Ibidem, p. 4. 26 Ştefan Pascu, 350 Years from Dosoftei’s birth in the Romanian Culture in „The Literary Romania”, 1974, no. 39, p. 15. 27 Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, p. 7. 25 116 harvesting the vineyard”, but he does not forget about the anagogic one: „Harvesting is associated by the soul with the end of the world”. By this „by the soul”, Dosoftei understands a symbolic, spiritual meaning: „Stepping on the grapes and wine presses were connected to the blood of the saints, followed by the one of Christ…blood and repentance with tears... so that the saint altars understand...” (Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, p. 273). In Psalm 118, after he explains the song of steps from a historical, liturgical point of view: „maybe they were sung at the altar, just like we sing it at the Liturgy on Sunday...”, Dosoftei finds an allegorical menaing for it: „the ascension of through towards God”, „that this song is meant to go up, to the depth of meaning and knowledge towards God” in which we notice the simultaneous perception of contraries: goes up… to the depth (Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, 188 p. 428). Dosoftei was especially attracted by/to the allegorical meaning that he thus defined: „it is like the special songs called „cimilituri”, one thing you sing and something totally different is understood”. But, the attitude of Dosoftei regarding the levels of meaning varies, because in a commentary of Palm 87, he states that there are three meanings: „Is there any psalm which does not worship Christ, combining prayer with history?” Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, p. 300). But, beyond these hermeneutic problems, it is essential the idea that in the versified psalms, we find the traces of the religious culture which was considered by the author necessary and he transmitted it to the reader. For Dosoftei, every psalm is an allegorical text, containing a prophetic meaning, we are invited to decipher it through commentaries or marginal notes („See the explanation of the Holy Book”). Examples of hermeneutic reading, these commentaries and notes are, in fact, some spiritual exercises which can be seen as a beginning of Biblical allegory in the Romanian Culture. Some passages from larger allegroies have an epic candidness, the sweetness of the story reminds us of the „fairy tales” from The Lives of the Saints: „A long time ago, the patriarch Jacob, the father of the Israelits went to Siria, to run away from the evil that his brother Isavŭ did to him; he had to sleep over night there, in Sion, and they slept having a rock as a pillow, because that place was not inhabited at that time. In his sleep, he saw the open sky and God leaning against the stairs that united the sky with the earth, and His angels were coming up and down on the ladder... ” (Psalm 86, Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, pp. 290-291). In most cases, there are allegorical interpretations of the psalms, based on analogies with the Old Testament and the New testament which suppose a subtile understanding of the Biblical text, just like in the explanations given by the Psalm 86, „on the ladder, the saint relative and the earthly one united to give birth to Jesus Christ. The same ladder is considered to be The Virgin, for She was the one chosen by God to bring Christ on Earth, during 12 generations, a lion was bron from this Jacob” (Psalm 86, Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, p. 291). 117 Deciphering the meaning of the psalms involves a historical and religious culture, but also the desire to surpass all limits imposed by the nowadays meaning of the words. The reader nowadays who has passed through the experience of a few centuries of poetry, sees in the last lines of Psalm 64 a beautiful song of galore: „The land becomes full of juice,/ To have a rich crop./ Having good rainy days, plants will grow/ Multiplying one’s richness”. But, in a marginal note, Dosoftei imposes us a hermeneutic reading, specific to medieval allegory: „good rains are the wisdom thoughts of the saint apostles who are not heretics, because heretics are similar to destroying rains” (Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, p. 208). Often quoted and truly beautiful are the lyrics: „And Mary, though she truly is large and spoiled, / There are inside of her big and small animals./ Over the abyss/ Ships managed to go by marvelously./ There, they had the thought/ Of disappearing mysteriously” (Psalm 103). After Dosoftei, the meaning is understood differently: „The abyss, the world with various waves. The ships, souls, can get beyond obstacles” (Bianu, Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, p. 357). The purpose of these commentaries is that of offering the reader a way towards his writing, orienting one towards a cult, spiritual perception. Handbook for reading, a proof of the theological culture of the metropolitan, was probably written for fear that the reader does not go beyond the religious meaning of the psalms and is impressed by their imagistic surface. The preoccupation is justified by the diversity of the mentioned structures, but also the lack of adequate habits in order to correctly „decipher” the message. Conclusions Reaching the final part of the analysis, without having said all about this topic, our intention is to underline a few relevant aspects of the versified Psaltery of Dosoftei. Dosoftei is not a creator, but a translator (without denying the part of creation which exists in the case of the translation) or he was also called a rhymester. As a man of the church, Dosoftei ewas careful, first of all, not to betray the Biblical text, his intention was that of making it accessible to his congregation (this is why there are some marginal glossaries on the psalms), not that of proving his creative abilities. The lyrics of Dosoftei closely resemble those of the psalmist David, without total overlapping. His translation is, in fact, a recreation of the psalms in the Romanian version, in other words „it reconstructs that universe gathered from the walls of Voroneţ in the order of the visual”28. Far from being a simple translation in lyrics of a Hebrew poetic book, after a foreign model, The Psaltery in Lyrics is a work of an original creation. Being the first creation of this type in our history, it „constitutes the birth certificate of the Romanian cult poetry”29. Today, almost all the researchers of our old culture place 28 Zoe Dumitrescu Buşulenga, A Humanist of the European Culture, in „The Literary Romania”, 1974, no. 39, p. 15. 29 George Ivaşcu, The History of The Romanian Literature, vol. I, Bucharest, 1969, p. 200. 118 Dosoftei on the first rank in the „Pantheon” of great Romanian poetry”, and in the history of the European culture, the translation in verses of the Psaltery of David by Dosoftei settles down the „act of maturity of the Romanian artistic conscience, the corollary of its conscience of liberty and dignity of our people”30. Bibliography Sources Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, published from the original manuscript from the edition of 1673, by I. Bianu, The Romanian Academy, Bucharest, 1887 Dosoftei, Works, I. Verses. The critical edition by N. A. Ursu, an introductory study by Al. Andriescu, Minerva Publishing House, Bucharest, 1978 The Bible from 1688, in Monumenta Linguae Dacoromanorum, Pars XI - Liber Psalmorum, The Publishing House of „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” University, Iaşi, 2003 Other works Andriescu, Al., The Psalms in the Romanian Literature, The Publishing House of „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” University, Iaşi, 2004 Buşulenga, Zoe Dumitrescu, 350 Years from the Birth of Dosoftei. A Humanist of the European Culture, in „The Literary Romania”, 1974, no. 39 Caraman, Petru, Kochanowski – Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics. Edition and chronological table by Ion Ciubotaru, Preface by Al. Andriescu, „Trinitas” Publishing House, Iaşi, 2005 Gogi, Aureliu, Edition, an afterword, a chronological table, critical references in Dosoftei, The Psaltery in Lyrics, „Gramar” Publishing House, Bucharest, 2004 Ivaşcu, George, The History of the Romanian Literature, I, The Scientific Publishing House, Bucharest, 1969 Lăudat, I. D., 350 Years from the Birth of Dosoftei, the Metropolitan of Moldavia, Iaşi, 1975 Maiorescu, Titu, Critic words, edition and chronologic table by Domnica Filimon, „Eminescu” Publishing House, Bucharest, 1978 Mazilu, Dan Horia, Towards another Dosoftei, in „Language and Literature”, 1993, no. 3-4 Mazilu, Dan Horia, Introduction to the Work of Dosoftei, Minerva Publishing House, Bucharest, 1997 Negrici, Eugen, Medieval Poetry in the Romanian Language, The 2nd Edition -revised, Polirom Publishing House, Iaşi, 2004 Pascu, Ştefan, 350 Years from the Birth of Dosoftei in the Romanian Culture, in ”The Literary Romania”, 1974, no. 39 Patraş, Antonio, Dosoftei – the Discovery of Poetry, in „Literary Discussions”, 2003, no. 5 Perian, Gheorghe, Our First Poet, in „Vatra”, 1994, no. 3 Podgoreanu, Anca, Dosoftei. Bibliography, The Publishing House of the University of Bucharest, Bucharest, 1994 30 Zoe Dumitrescu Buşulenga, art. cit., p. 15. 119 Puşcariu, Sextil, The Language of Holy Books, in „The Romanian Orthodox Church”, 1938, no. 1-12 Scarlat, Mircea, The Old Romanian Poetry, Bucharest, „Minerva” Publishing House, 1985 Simonescu, Dan, Points of view for Appreciating The Romanian Religious Medieval Literature, in „The Voice of Church”, 1958, no. 4 Simonescu, Dan, The Problem of the origin of the Romanian Literary Language and the Church Literary Books, in „Theological Studies”, 1961, no. 9-10 Ursu, N. A., Dascălu, Nicolae, Proofs regarding the Life and Activity of the Metropolitan Dosoftei, Trinitas Publishing House, Iaşi, 2003 Usca, Ioan Sorin, Traia, Ioan, The Old Testament in the Interpretation of the Saint Parents, XIII, Psalmii, „Christiana” Publishing Book, Bucharest, 2009 Zamfirescu, Dan, A Hero of the Spirit: Dosoftei, in „The Daystar”, year XVII, 1974, no. 42 120 Secular and Religious Archaic Terms from Archive Documents of the Parishes Bejan, Mintia (Hunedoara) and Fabric – Timişoara Cosmin PAN URU Les termes archaïques, les archaïsmes signifient des mots, des expressions, des formes phonétiques ou grammaticaux qui ne s’utilisent plus au présent. Pour les trois unités étudiées Mintia et Bejan situées à proximité de la ville de Deva et respectivement Fabric à proximité de la ville de Timişoara, ces termes s'intègrent des années 1845-1945 pour les parois de Hunedoara et des années 1830-1930 pour la paroi de Timisoara. Deux écritures holographes datées du 1698 et 1713 apparues en Munténie dans deux livres de culte ont été employés dans la paroi de Fabric grâce à la circulation des livres dans les provinces roumaines. Les mots employés notamment au discours religieux se retrouvent au langage simple des quels qui l’ont employé. Certains archaïsmes (peu à nombre) sont utilisés même aujourd'hui, notamment dans les zones rurales Mintia et Bejan, en retrouvant les locuteurs natifs qui les ont appris en les entendant de leurs parents. Les autres archaïsmes comme ceux du quartier Fabric de Timişoara, ne s’utilisent plus de nos jours grâce à l’évolution et au développement de la langue roumaine. Tous les archaïsmes ont un caractère spécifique même attractif (pourquoi pas ?), donné des temps passés, mais qui maintient la beauté de la vieille langue de Transylvanie et du Banat. Mots-clefs: eglise, paroais, archaïsme, vieux livre, archive Archaic terms, i.e. archaisms consist of obsolete, that is unused words, phrases, phonetic and grammatical forms in present times. We studied three church units: Mintia and Bejan, in the vicinity of Deva town (Hunedoara County) or Fabric from Timisoara. These terms fall in the period 1845-1945 for Hunedoara parishes, respectively from 1830 to 1930 for the parish of Timisoara. For the present study, concerning the Fabric perish, we used two handwritten writings dated 1698 and 1713, that had been found in two books of worship in Muntenia (because of the religious books movement in Romanian provinces). In our text, the archaisms found in the documents are given in italics and their significance is highlighted in the same way in parentheses, indicating the source of their interpretation. To 121 explain these terms I used different dictionaries1 in electronic format; for some I used my knowledge, but for others I did not find their present meaning. For Mintia and Bejan, the oldest notes were kept in books of worship2. On a Menaion and Apostle or General Menaion (1781), two notes dated 1845 refer to the costs of restoring some prints and to some weather phenomena. Thus, for the restoration of several books “the church paid 14 zlo i de aramă (name given in Transylvania for the Austrian florins - DER) for nine dărabe (pieces - DEX) of books”. “On Christmas Day it snowed all day. On the fifth day Saturday... it was cloudy and bad wind all day long, but s-au turnat (it changed direction - DER). On the sixth day, Sunday morning, it morgurat rain and mist and in de sară (in the evening - Şăineanu; Scriban) – there was nice weather ...”. The handwritten text from the Apostle dated 1856 (Rîmnic, 1747) indicates that bishop Alexandru Şterca Şuluţiu “... au sălăşluit (dwelt, lived) in Hunedoara at the parish cvartiriul at the most-honoured Archpriest Mr. Ioann E. Fodor ... and was waited at the place where the triumphant porta (gate) was errected...”. When purchasing a Pentecostarion (Sibiu, 1859), the priest who administered the parish notes that “he globitu (fined, here in church language by "fine" is meant a canon, a correction, a material one in this case, probably applied in the Sacrament of Confession - DAR) on the apiarist (beekeeper) Crişanu Toma from Bizani with 4 florins A.(ustrian) C.(urrency) and this globi i money were given to help buying a book. Kajnilu, January 10, 1862, Avram Suciu factu priest” (“de facto” priest is a diplomatic formula to recognize a certain situation, which did not acquire the necessary legal consecration - MDN). He also donated the church a silver chalice that is engraved: “Besian (Bejan - our note) Avram suei (himself, his) of remembrance 1877”. A note from the Triodion (Blaj, 1890) testifies that “since the first year of the holy union in 1875 we had not a Triodion until June 10, 1890 that the undersigned believers conferred with elimosina”. On the Apostle (Sibiu, 1917) it is written: “it was purchased in 1925 by the good Christians Gheorghe Berariu and Saveta Vasiu through the persistence of the parish manager Avram Laslău and we legăm (bind, make a covenant, here, perhaps with 1 Academia Română, Institutul de lingvistică din Bucureşti, Dic ionar explicativ al limbii române, ediţia a II-a, Ed. Univers Enciclopedic, Bucureşti, 1998 (DEX); Idem, Dic ionarul limbii române moderne, Ed. Academiei, 1958 (DLRM); Alexandru Ciorănescu, Dic ionar etimologic român, Ed. Universidat de la Laguna, Tenerife, 1958-1956 (DER); Lazăr Şăineanu, Dic ionar explicativ al limbei române, ediţia a VI-a, Ed. Srisul românesc, 1929 (Şăineanu); August Scriban, Dic ionarul limbii româneşti, Ed. Institutu de Arte Grafice „Presa bună”, 1939 (Scriban); Gh. Bulgăr, Gh. Constantinescu-Dobridor, Dic ionar de arhaisme şi regionalisme, Ed. Saeculum Vizual, Bucureşti, 2002 (DAR); Florin Marcu, Marele dic ionar de neologisme, Ed. Saeculum, 2000, (MDN); Ioan M. Stoian, Dic ionar religios, Ed. Garamond, 1994, (DR); Noul dic ionar explicativ al limbii române, Ed. Litera Internaţional, 2002 (NODEX); Mircea şi Luiza Seche, Dic ionar de sinonime, Ed.Litera Internaţional, 2002 (SIN); Dorin Ştef, Dic ionar de arhaisme şi regionalisme din Maramureş, Ed. Ethnologica, 2011 (DRAM). 2 See Cosmin Panţuru, Via a bisericească a românilor din Parohia ortodoxă Bejan-Mintia, Editura Universităţii „Aurel Vlaicu” din Arad, Deva, 2010, p. 54, 158, 160, 161, 162, 163, 167. 122 the meaning of the priest praying to God for the sacrifice of the two donors) the Lord reward their gift a hundredfold. I wrote with mâna de ărâna / my dust hand (metaphor for the created mortal human body, made of earth or dust), I, Avram Laslau - priest (from the) Tampa”. The Book of Akathists (Blaj, 1816) conceals a record, this time personal, of one of the church officers “Râmătoarea (the sow - Scriban) was erit on August 9 1891 by a ghier (uncastrated pig, boar - DEX)”. Ecclesiastical terms The word Greek-oriental or Greek-Orthodox used in many notes designates the ancient name of the Orthodox Church which highlights the ethnic and geographic origin and membership of the Romanian Orthodox Church to the universal Church. Thus, in 1893, the priest Nicolae Berar was “priest of the Greek-Oriental church in Mintia”3. On a copy of Kiriacodromion (Sibiu, 1855) it is specified that “This book that we call Speeches belongs to the gr.(eek) – or.(iental) Holy Church of Bejan, bought by Bejan village with 10 f.m.k.i. year of G(od) (1)8554. On a Pentecostarion (Sibiu, 1859) it is written that "this holy book was bought on behalf of our gr.(eek) - or.(thodox) Holy Church from Mintia with the price of 12 florins, money taken from the treasury of the Church through my intercession in y(ear) 1882 23/3. Berariu-priest”. The church village (parish) was organized as materă5 (parish, church mother DR; parish - SIN). In time some filii were added (branches, small affiliates). Priest Aron Munteanu stated: “... I was, however, unhappy when in my parish materă and filii no priest showed at the conference ...”6. Among the objects of the church include: three wooden crosses, a iitoare (ark, special box) for the Holy Communion, măsări e (tablecloths - DEX), towels, etc.7. In the bell tower the campanea (or compana, bell - MDN) weighed 87 kg8. On July 14, 1899, the protopope of Deva exhorts the priest from Fornădia that “the accounting documents he will return him regarding the ra iociniul of the parish (old name for the current “income and expenditure budget” prepared by 3 The archive of the Romanian Orthodox Parish Bejan - Mintia (hereinafter APORBM), Document oficial – act notarial nr.148/1893, in Ds. proprietă i, without no. 4 C. Panţuru, op. cit., p. 159. 5 The National Archives of Hunedoara County, Fond 306 - Greek - Catholic Parish Hunedoara II (hereinafter DJHAN), Conspect despre parohiile matere şi filiale apar inătoare de Districtul Protopopesc greco-catolic al Hunedoarei, în Ds. nr. 1/1887, f. 65. 6 APORBM, Raport nr.34/1942 privind activitatea Cercului Pastoral VI - Deva pe anul 1941, in Ds. nr. 1/1942, f. 29. 7 APORBM, Inventar despre averea imobilă şi mobilă a susnumitei parohii la finea anului 1933, in Ds. nr. 1/1932, f. 1. 8 DJHAN, Inventarul parohiei greco-catoloice din Mintia din 14/2 iunie 1891, in Ds. nr. 5/1891, f. 6-8; Adresa Parohiei Mintia nr. 9/1881, in Ds. nr. 1/1881, f. 37; Conspect din 9 ianuarie 1897 despre numărul caselor, familiilor şi sufletelor pe anul 1896, in Ds. nr. 5/1897, f. 2; Raport nr. 147/6 septembrie 1877, in Ds. nr. 1/1877, f. 158. 123 each parish at the end of a calendar year) should be deposit at the parochial archive”9. On the back of several icons appear the word spreînnoit (correctly preînnoi meaning to upgrade, restore, renew, renovate - SIN) used by painters for the restoration of icons. For example the icon of St. Nicholas from 1778 or the Virgin Mary with Child and Saviour (some dated the second half of the 18th century). After trying to restore it there is a record: “It was spreînoitu in 1904. Blasz Veronica, mother of Popa Aron. Maler (painter of icons - DAR), painter Franz Teshel”10. The term is used for other more extensive repair: “The tower was spreînnoitu and church was şindrilit”11 (covered with shingle - NODEX). Common Terms At Bejan the rectory was covered with prăştilă12 (shingles - Şăineanu). This material was used for private households too. The chapel was made of old wood of lascobe de gorun-stugeni (peeled oak)13. The houses designed for the priest were very large consisting of two bodies and a conie (room, summer kitchen), made of wood and covered with prăştilă14. The roof of the school corridor “is so weak that from the teacher’s chilia (small living room, small room - DLRM) until the school he had to pass under a parapleu (umbrella); the banks stumbled and are not provided with puiucuri (drawers), the teacher has no chair or table in the sala de propunere (meeting room) and room care of the sală scolastică (classroom) is entrusted to the children ...”15. “They receive docentele (teacher) in cvartiriu (temporary dwelling; host DEX). However, they will not sit in the homes of the un-united because they hosted them in a house, where the docentele sat with another man who was smith with his muierea (wife) in cvartiriu. The priest took in arendă (rented) Mr. Saidelhöfer Ianos’ homes with 130 fl. /year…”16. One of the religious school teachers in Mintia, Augustin Pop- Bociat, talks about the importance of the union in 1918, the meeting for election and a delegation of representatives to the National Assembly in Alba Iulia: “In a măduoasă (energic) speech he shows that today we have to decide on what we value most and he asks the people coadunat (gathered) there to elect trusted men among them. The people ... exmite (appoints, proposes, delegates) six members of 9 APORBM, Adresa nr. 313/14 iulie 1899 a Oficiului Protopopesc Geoagiu I, in Ds. nr. 1/1899, f. 1. 10 C. Panţuru, op. cit., p. 164 -166. C. Panţuru, op. cit., p. 165. 12 APORBM, Inventar despre averea mobilă şi imobilă a susnumitei parohii (Bejan – n. n.) la finea anului 1913, in Ds. arh. nr. 1/1913, f. 1. 13 DJHAN, Inventarul parohiei greco-catoloice din Mintia din 14/2 iunie 1891, in Ds. nr. 5/1891, f. 6-8; Adresa Parohiei Mintia nr. 9/1881, în Ds. nr. 1/1881, f. 37. 14 DJHAN, Adresa Parohiei nr. 7/6 septembrie 1880, in Ds. nr. 2/1880, f. 34. 15 DJHAN, Adresa Episcopiei Lugojului nr. 2675/16 noiembrie 1900, in Ds. nr. 2/1900, f. 45. 16 DJHAN, Adresa Parohiei Mintia nr.42/6 noiembrie 1893, in Ds. nr. 2/1893, f. 105. 11 124 trust as representatives of Mintia located in Hunedoara County...”17. He also "had cortel natural18 (host - BUT, simple, modest housing). He was sick of morb19 (disability, illness - DER, “Pott's desease” - bone tuberculosis localized in the spine - DEX). In 1901, the priest also got “debilitat (weak, feeble, frail - DEX) due to old age and morb and could not manage the parish and subsidiaries”20. Finally, “priest Teodosie Lupşa repausând (dying - DR), the locals pleaded in front of the Greek Orthodox archpriest to make teacher Ioan Lupşa their priest, anglo-saxon he was the repausat (departed) priest’s son”21. After frequent interventions before ecclesiastical authority, priest Lupşa was called “to have a different cau iune (attitude, behavior) towards the people (...). And until making a stone church the faithful should build a smaller one of wood, which is much easier to build and lezne”22 (cheap - DER). In a request to the same authority is required: “We add the suplica (request with obedience, perseverance Şăineanu) that His Majesty Lord Bishop endure to help us another way with a foundational stipendiu (cash aid - Şăineanu) to the building of a new church”23 because “The chapel we used so far from the mercy of His Highness the count in the shortest time will retrage (be given back) as quoartiriu (home, host) for the reformed priest venitoriu (from another place, non-native) and we will remain mizeri (poor) and negăti i (unprepared), without church and chapel... and we know that their attempt to restarce us (turn us back) was left vain; and by losing these in addition to all paupertatea (poverty - Scriban; Şăineanu) we are forced to build our own church. The swarm got out of basket will not wait to come the coşni a (bee rush basket - DRAM) of glajă (glass) from distant cities and if the basket is made of offshoot the swarm should be taken out of it, otherwise the cluster runs in the woods...”24. To another cleric who did not received his salary for a longer period of time they recommended to be “with pacien ă (patience - Şăineanu). And for the last 3-4 months they are all with pacien ă...”25. 17 Convocare din 1918 noiembrie 23, Mintia, în Muzeul Unirii Alba-Iulia, Documentele Unirii, tom I, f.913-914, from Ion Frăţilă, Mihai Gherghedan, Vasile Ionaş, Dumitru Barna, Viorel Vânătoru, Pentru libertate şi unitate na ională – Documente hunedoarene (1848-1920), Bucureşti, 1990, p. 363. 18 DJHAN, Arătare tabelară despre statul religios-moral al cantorilor greco-catolică din Protopopiatul Hunedoarei pe anul 1910, in Ds. nr. 1/1911, f. 16. 19 DJHAN, Informa iune despre cantorul Bisercii din Mintia pe anul 1914, in Ds. nr. 1/1914, f. 17. 20 DJHAN, Adresa Protopopiatului Hunedoara nr.233/5 decembrie 1901, in Ds. nr. 1/1901, f. 42. 21 Toma Nistor, Istoria Parohiei Mintia. Temă pentru sinodul de primăvară a anului 1934, in Arhivele Episcopiei Lugojului-Dosarul Parohiei Mintia, f. 2-4. 22 DJHAN, Adresa Preotului Alexandru Munteanu din 8 decembrie 1876, in Ds. nr. 1/1876, f. 160. 23 DJHAN, Adresa Poporenilor din Mintia din 28 decembrie 1875 către Episcopul Lugojului, in Ds. nr. 1/1875, f. 16-17. 24 DJHAN, Adresa Parohiei Mintia nr. 16/9 octombrie 1877, in Ds. nr. 1/1877, f. 172. 25 DJHAN, Adresa Parohiei Deva nr 3/17 februarie 1922, în Ds. nr. 1/1922, f. 1-2. 125 Probably because of the too low payment, and the shuttle he was supposed to do, in order to more revenue, “the teacher brings sugar whistling and bombo (candy) to sell them to the pupils... On March 9th birăi a (the mayor’s wife) went to school to light a fire for the children because it was cold. They were ready to fight each other. The birăi a came pe ponoslu (with complaint - Şăineanu). I can’t do anything about it because for fiece (everything) the teacher says to children: go to your popa (priest) pe ponaslu (to complaint)”26! Not being able to take certain steps in the establishment of a new cult, the people involved asked: “Can this insinuare (subtle way of making another to receive your opinions - Scriban) to remain in tărie (valid, legal)? I pray God to give him tărie (power) and virtue to be able to defeat all bater (at least, even DER) only contrarii (those against) and pizmaşii (the envious) did not cease to dezbate (divide) them...27. They wanted the started action not to delay unduly in time, lest the people desporindu-se (lessen) it will lead to our scădere28 (reduction). However, the priest Toma Nistor show that in 1733 the church is suscepută (regarded) as united parish, but later it defec ionat, and only in 1875 was restored29, but the people from Mintia did not maculat (spotted, stained - DER) anyone. Finally the faithful being in "most dezola iune”30 (great devastation, extreme sorrow - Scriban) by contributing according to their “debile”31 (modest – our note) ability, bought the site to build the church. On the other hand some clergymen thought that “some people made priests even from păcurari (shepherds - Şăineanu) with no culture and from murari (owner of a mill or its leader - Scriban) for simonie ...”32 (bribes). Units, taxes, subsidies, guarantees To have a new priest the people must show they want him and undertake to support their priest as following: how many mertice (old measure for grain, equal to about. 1-2 ocale - DEX; small bushel of twenty ocale - Şăineanu) of food and how many working days per year with hand and with yoke33. They finally decide “to organize a competition in which to specify the following conditions: a salary of 150 florins; 50 metrete of stripped corn in nature with 50 florins; 4 orgi of 26 DJHAN, Raport din 1894, în Ds. nr. 2/1894, f. 32. DJHAN, Adresa Parohiei Ve el nr. 18/1875 adresată Protopopiatlui Hunedoara in Ds. nr. 1/1875, filele 47-48. 28 DJHAN, Adresa Parohiei Ve el nr. 22/1 mai 1875 înaintată Protopopiatului Hunedoara, in Ds. nr. 1/1875, f. 40. 29 Toma Nistor, op.cit., filele 1-5. 30 DJHAN, Adresa Protopopiatului Hunedoara nr. 6/1876 către Parohia Ve el, in Ds. nr. 1/1875, f. 79. 31 DJHAN, Srisoarea credincioşilor greco-catolici din Mintia către Victor Mihaly din 13 decembrie 1876, in Ds. nr. 1/1876, f. 162. 32 DJHAN, Adresa Parohiei Ve el nr.25/15-3 mai 1875 înaintată Protopopiatlui Hunedoara, in Ds. nr. 1/1875, f. 64. 33 DJHAN, Adresa Parohiei Mintia nr. 575 din 13/1mai 1875, in Ds. nr. 1/1875, f. 62. 27 126 firewood, which was to heat the school and cortelul (residence, home) of the teacher and the priest from Mintia should not join the reformed school nor should receive the Greek Orthodox docentele (teacher) until he receives the decision from the Venerable Order”34. “To repair the church and rectory in cases of shortage it was assigned according to the fumuri (house number, ie a parish families, household - NODEX) by 2050% fumuri and not infrequently, 150-200%. In these ten very weak economic years the believers exhauriat (exhausted) the former material almost completely, leaving even the churches in a deplorable state and they almost cannot help them at all. To support the priests and the cantors (singers), the believers should contribute with the so-called adeu (cult contribution of a believer - SIN) of 20 liter (unit of weight equal to a quarter of a kilogram - NODEX) consisting of 15 cupe (measure for liquids more than one liter, respectively mug, bowl having this ability - DEX) de cucuruz (corn), which, however, in most cases, and especially today, on time of resbel (war - Şăineanu) cannot collect at all due to the economic misery of the faithful”35. Therefore the parishioners did not pay to the teacher the 2 cupe (measure for liquids - DEX) of cucucruz (corn) in grain...36. The political authorities threatened and forced the believers to raise a proper stone school according to the law, requiring 10 ogi of stone and 10000 bricks37. For the religious school building, people gave no more than 5 cruceri in Austrian currency after florenul de dare (tax). However, for the public school, the count will pay 100 florins after florenul de dare38. The confessional school could be supported from the Innkeepers tax and “censul of the school (annuity in money or nature specific for the feudal society and owed to the lord by the owner of land - DEX) will be cover from the rent of râtului (plain along a flowing river with grass for mowing or grazing - DEX) of the annual communal pasture...”39. In 1904, “the mayor Iosif Lupşa – one of the three children of priest Ioan Lupşa, who was not counted among erezii (heirs) of the deceased Ioan, because he contributed nothing to spesele (expenses) for the funeral of his father nor did go to the grave of his deceased parent- did not deposit to a certain institute 240 crowns from sheep grazing in the border village of Mintia…”40. In the studied rural area over time, “priest is exposed to destruction: very little earth, eclejie (meadows and land owned by the church, the local parish; are place names frequently in Maramures - DRAM); we do not receive adăul anymore of malevolence and impossibility; no parish house; few and poor parishioners that 34 35 DJHAN, Adresa Protopopiatului Hunedoara nr.132/1 august 1886, in Ds. nr. 2/1886, f. 30. APORBM, Adresa Parohiei Bejan - filia Mintia nr. 22/ 22 martie 1918, in Ds. nr. 1/1918, f. 27. 36 DJHAN, Adresa Parohiei Mintia nr. 9/7 februarie 1886, in Ds. nr. 6/1886, f. 21. DJHAN, Înştiin are din 1 august 1885, in Ds. nr. 2/1885, f. 33. 38 DJHAN, Raport nr. 10/14 octombrie 1885, in Ds. nr. 2/1885, f. 48. 39 DJHAN, Adresa Protopopiatului Hunedoara nr. 203/8 octombrie 1902, in Ds. nr. 2/1902, f. 29. 40 DJHAN, Adresa Parohiei Mintia nr.14/7 februarie 1904, in Ds. nr. 2/1904, f. 7. 37 127 stola (income earned by the priest from the altar service - DAR) is void ...”41. How much stola (would be needed - Ed) for each sacred and parochial service42? Many times the clergyman did not receive “the legal adăul, of which the priests of this parish support their living”43. Since incomes were very low, the priest was to give the teacher lecticalul (adăul) received from parishioners, namely: 50 measures of cucuruz of 1 florin a measure (50 florins). In case the subsidiul (subsidy) might return to the teacher with 30 florins he was to get 80 florins in the future years. It notes that “during the latter years the adeul was cut off by the people under the pretext that the priest receives the congruă (the minimum income any servant of the church need to have; state interest for the church loans - DAR). The parish cannot arânda (temporary leasing of rights to use certain goods in return for payment; lease - DRAM) a house cheaper than 1000 crowns as there are no houses de arândat”44. Because of the many loans, the bonds of Greek-Catholic faithful from Mintia will be străpune (transposed) by the political judge in the possession of the remaining Greco-Orientals alond with the collection of outstanding cametelor (interest above the legal fees - Şăineanu)...”45. This is why the “Archpriest’s trip cannot be supported by the parish as crucerii (crei arii, bănuții, gologanii - DAR) received on Sundays and holidays are given to Fekete George for paying progăzii (courtyard of a church used as a cemetery - DEX)46. Teacher Augustin Pop-Bociat complained to the Archpriest: “The priest does not solveşte (pay - DEX) the fee established by the diocesan statutes, while only 5 families (out of 60) give me the lecticul and priest shared the prosphora according to his pleasure. From 7 Liturgies (here: prosphoras), the priest has 4/7, cantor has 2/7, and clisierul (altar man) has 1/7. Then the diptychs for which every family is charged four crowns a year, I think that I compete (I would be entitled to) to a third; however, I did not get any part. From the Church revenue in cash to me nothing is solveşte. Priest should have întregire de congruă (completion of salary) from the minimum amount of 800 crowns annually”47. The cantor “cannot claim stolă because along with closing the Greek-Catholic religious school the instrumentul dota ional lost its value and has no binding power48. The main real estate of parish consists of sesiile parohiale (allotments). They included dota iunea preo ească (priestly dowry, gift) and dota iunea bisericeacă 41 APORBM, Raport nr. 90/14 decembrie 1943 a Parohiei Ortodoxe Bejan - filia Mintia privind situa ia Parohiei Bejan, in Ds. nr. 1/1943, f. 69. 42 DJHAN, Adresa Parohiei Mintia nr. 575 din 13/1mai 1875, in Ds. nr. 1/1875, f. 62. 43 APORBM, Adresa Parohiei Bejan - Mintia nr. 50/5 august 1943, in Ds. nr. 1/1943, f. 40. 44 APORBM, Contul capitalelor active la filia Mintia pe anul 1919, Coala B, in Ds. arh. nr. 2/1919, f. 2. 45 DJHAN, Adresa Episcopiei Lugojului către Protopopiatul Hunedoara nr. 811/10 iulie 1875, in Ds. nr. 1/1875, f. 80. 46 DJHAN, Adresa Parohiei Mintia nr.14/16 mai 1887, in Ds. nr. 2/1887, f. 23. 47 DJHAN, Cerere personală din 7 septembrie 1910, in Ds. nr. 1/1910, f. 33-35. 48 DJHAN, Adresa Episcopiei Lugojului nr. 2946/29 ianuarie 1914, in Ds. nr. 2/1914, f. 1. 128 (patrimony church)49. Por iunea canonică (canonical possession) of the priest was 4 iugăre and 800 stânjeni, and the sesiunea (session) of the cantor (land plot used by the singer) of 800 stânjeni50. The priest does not give up dota iunea parohială of 20 metre from his lecticalul for the teacher51. Two books of worship, Strastnicul (The Holy and Great Week Book - Blaj, 1817) and Octoechos (Blaj, 1825) were given “on behalf of the Greek-Catholic church from Mintia and the spesele (fees, expenses - Scriban) were paid by bishop Ordinariate of Lugoj in AD 1881”52. Activities, occupations, professions, institutions In 1883 there were held prelegeri (courses) with children at school and an exam took place in the presence of the notary Rettegi Miclos, the judelui comunal (village judge or mayor - Şăineanu, DEX, DER) and a jurat from the place53. The house was designed for school for several years when there was German tisturia (service, job - Şăineanu)54. Provisionally it was found “a house that serves as the chapel for the celebration of divine worship and is situated in localitatea (place, property) of the Illustrious Sir Count Geiza Kunn, primarintiu, owner from the village. It is built with the money of the curiei dominale (ruling, form of the verb to rule) on account of the reformed spiritual pastor of the court, near the Reformed Church which is built by the illustrious comi i (administrative leader of a county - DEX) from the Geiza family”55. Since the building was not appropriate the communal antista (City Hall) sent them a notice56. People did not pay docentelui (teacher) 2 cups of cucucruz in grain also because he is busy with birăirea (taxation, collector of tax)57. In the common days he was prevented in accomplishing the cantoral agendas because he was docente de stat58 (state school teacher, not religious teacher). Instead, in 1919 one of the curatori (trustees) was Petru Ioja59. APORBM, Inventar despre averea imobilă şi mobilă la finele anului 1939, in Ds. nr. 1/1939, f. 23; Inventar despre averea imobilă şi mobilă a susnumitei parohii la finea anului 1933, in Ds. nr. 2/1934, f. 1; Consemnare nr. 15/ 12 ianuarie 1941 despre starea averilor bisericeşti la finea anului 1940, in Ds. nr. 2/1941, f. 19. 50 APORBM, Inventar despre averea imobilă şi mobilă a susnumitei parohii la finea anului 1933, in Ds. nr. 2/1934, f. 1; Adresa Parohiei Bejan - filia Mintia nr. 8/26 mai 1944, in Ds. nr. 2/1944, f. 11. 51 DJHAN, Adresa Episcopiei Lugojului nr. 2019/11 decembrie 1887, in Ds. nr. 2/1887, f. 4. 52 C. Panţuru, op. cit., p. 163. 53 DJHAN, Înştiin are f. nr. din 28 noiembrie 1883, in Ds. nr. 2/1883, f. (4)8. 54 DJHAN, Adresa Parohiei Mintia nr. 23/6 august 1886, in Ds. nr. 2/1886, f. 33. 55 DJHAN, Adresa Protopopiatului Hunedoara nr. 124/8 iulie1876, in Ds. nr. 1/1876, f. 112. 56 DJHAN, Adresa Parohiei Mintia nr. 6/13 septembrie 1886, in Ds. nr. 2/1886, f. 38. 57 DJHAN, Adresa Parohiei nr. 9/7 februarie 1886, in Ds. nr. 6/1886, f. 21. 58 DJHAN, Arătare tabelară despre statul religios-moral al cantorilor greco-catolici din Protopopiatul Hunedoarei pe anul 1910, in Ds. nr. 1/1911, f. 16. 59 DJHAN, Adresa Parohiei Ve el nr. 62/6 noiembrie 1919, in Ds. nr. 1/1919, f. 44. 49 129 Because many fights took place, but also "3-4 poporeni (villagers) threw pâra (blame) an investigation commission was formed together with Protopresbyter Papiu and Mr. Procedural Judge Mahrai... (who – our note) favoured the people and said to Archpriest that according to the law, everyone is allowed to move freely to any lege (faith, religion). * In Timisoara, the oldest record is in two religious books. In 7207 from the creation of the world (1698 AD) the January Menaion was donated to the church from the Serbian slums in Targoviste, the donor specifying: “to be stătătoare (stable, fixed) for the church from priest to priest and no one should be volnic (free, entitled - SIN) to take it or give it as gift elsewhere”60. On pages 15-22 from May Menaion printed in Buzau in 1698 (19963), there is a note from the year 7221 from creation of the world (1713 AD): “Let it be known that I bought the land from Picir on Părău Doamnii of Zmid. I gave it asalms until rătu (plain along a flowing river - DEX) at the top to 9 lii all. Do not oară care (any) man search it sal (or) take, him or son, or nephew, or cousin, or anyone else. And who would take it from the monastery be anathima (anathema, curse) and proclet (damn, anathematized - DER), as I dedicated it to the the monastery and I vădit (revealed - Sriban), I, Ion Luca,with so ul meu (my wife) Ana and my boys and my girls 12, 7221” (1713)61. On November 13, 1830, in the old church dedicated to “St. Elias” in “Fabric forştatul” in Timisoara there were more objects. Thus, "Beserica (the church) has 12 windows of uiagă (glass) made of lead, 7 şuhi (feet) high, 4 şuhi wide. Templa (veil) of fir plank made by tişler (carpenter) adorned with iraturi de bildhaur; a lamp of yellow mesing. Firangu (curtain) from the royal doors is of green ti with yellow flowers. In the Holy Oltariu (Altar) the table has 8 măsae (tablecloths), one of German cloth and 7 of cercelie. Năstrăgar (ark) for the Holy Communion. A cross and 6 seraphims worked of bildhaur with îndoită (double) farbă (paint) dyed and golden. At proscomidy a to ască cloth. For mixing cara-findlă (vessel) of uiagă (glass). The other airs tiny of white raih surrounded with port. A veil for the communion made of cloth which is called sadă sewn with gold and surrounded with golden cipcă (lace). A lipleş (Lithia vessel) for blessing the five loaves made of compozi ie (mixed metal) overlaid with silver. The washing sink has 12 peşchire (towels - DAR) to dry the hands of the priest. 31 dărăburi (pieces) of iron which is called plec (iron). Two analoghii (analogue) with red cordovan (sheep or goat leather); six tin tănere (dishes) for anaphora; a tin blid for water blessing; a large dolap (closet) dyed silberfarb, a olcu ă (pots, 60 P. P. Panaitescu, Însemnări din căr ile bisericeşti româneşti (greco-orientale) din Timişoara, in Revista istorică, nr.10-11/1922, p. 201, at Ion B. Mureşianu, Cartea veche bisericească din Banat, Ed. Mitropoliei Banatului, 1985, p. 264. 61 Ibidem. 130 cup) of clay for heat, two pots of yellow mesing for fumare (incense) that are called censer. In the church there were six candles for the dieci (cantors). An iconostasis of măsariu worked with deschilinite (different) paints and marbled. For singers, răstăni ate chairs that are called păvni e, made by tişler (carpenter) worked with embellished irate de bildhaur. The seat of the bishop maed of mesariu, silberfarb, marmoriruit (marbled) with irate de bildhaur, all embellished and golden. Three tin scafe (plates) that are called tasuri. One karanfindlă (vessel) of uiagă (glass) for the holy oil. A large șofei (tub) of gorun (oak) linked with iron hoops; the iron cross above is clad in futrol of brass with globe that is cugla (ball) of bronze. A șuc (a sixth of a fathom) of wood to the cross. In the tower there are two bells, one of 2 țente and 9 t, the second of 1 țent and 12 t. The churchyard was half with stobori (groove seem fence), and half fenced with plank”62. To improve the parish hearth, "they regulate the flow of water from the eaves of the churchyard and bring 500 bricks and three cocii (wagons) of țărigă (sand DAR)”63. In order to build the new church, "the architect Iosif Kremmer was entrusted by the parish to compose plan and preliminar de spese (expenses) for a building with etagiu (upstairs) in cvadrat (square - DEX)64. At the bidding of some works, Iosif Ecker Jr. filed as (collateral) bank coupons representing 4% of the nominal value of 12,000 crowns and further he undertakes to complete to 10% of the value”65. At the same auction Iosif Kremmer senior presented too whose offer was refused because "vadiu missed ..."66. As regards school, it was “of earth, covered with şindrile, 11 stînjeni long and 3 wide, had 2 sobe (rooms), a cuina (kitchen – SIN) and a pantry. It has 7 windows of uiagă (glass) and 4 doors made by the tișler (carpenter - SIN) with good încuietori (locks). Soba (room) din nainte (in front) is hotărâtă (destined) for the young pupils. The schoolyard is fenced by stobori (fence, groove - DER)67. “Vălăul 62 Timişoara, Arhivele Statului. Registre stare civilă, Parohia Beregsău Mare, u.a.5, f. 45—49, Inventarul bisericii Sf. Ilie şi al şcolii confesionale române din Timişoara-Fabric, at I. D. Suciu, R. Constantinescu, Documente privitoare la istoria Mitropoliei Banatului, vol.I, Ed. Mitropoliei Banatului, Timişoara, 1980, p. 612. 63 The archive of parish Timişoara-Fabric (APTF), Conclusul nr.25 al Şedinţei a V-a a Comitetului parohial din 27 aprilie 1898, in Protocolul şedin elor Comitetului parohial Sfântul Ilie şi Sfdntul Gheorghe (1892-1908). 64 APTF, P.V. al Şedin ei a IV-a din 15/28 ianuarie 1911, in Protocolul şedin elor Comitetului Parohial Sfântul Ilie (1908-1913), f. n. 65 APTF, P.V. al Şedin ei a XI-a extraordinară din 18/31 iulie 1911, în Protocolul ... (19081913), f. n. 66 Ibidem. 67 Timişoara, Arhivele Statului. Registre stare civilă, parohia Beregsău Mare, u.a.5, f. 45—49, Inventarul bisericii Sf.Ilie şi al şcolii confesionale române din Timişoara-Fabric, at I.D.Suciu, R. Constantinescu, Documente ..., vol. I, p.612. 131 (gutter - DAR) from the eaves of the school for boys postpones for other times"68. The roof of the school for boys (has to be made) with spese as possible cheaper, with “cloth cătrănită”69 (tar and tarred). For the post of teacher, besides coalifica iunea (qualification) prescribed by law the competitors have to present testimoniu (note, documentary proof, certificate, attestation - DEX) of graduating four middle class. Other candidates were admitted too who gave in their praxis (practice) clear evidence of commendable progress in education70. At the request of the teacher Nicolae Nicorescu “the committee decides to do at his cvartirul a double door of uiagă (glass) for scutirea (protection) of the cvartirul from cold because the entrance is ambit”71 (outside, direct out). He was given “6 orgii of wood and half of the income stolar (of the services)...”72. A house owned by the church “was built of brick and văiugă (adobe bricks dried in the sun - DER)”73. In 1903 they had “to close a door that united two cvartire (housing, temporary rooms - DEX) for the tenants threaten abzicerea (renouncing) cvartirului because of this”74. At one of the houses George Ioanovici requests “the necessary renovations to be made for din contră (otherwise) he abzice (refuses - spelling) arânda (rent) by May 1, 1913”75. "The yard wall to Griviţei str. s-a îmburdat (fell). Cuglaua (Bowler - BUT) is 25 m length...76. “In order to keep the birt (bar)” one of the conditions imposed to the tenant was "cleansing amblătorei (latrine-Scriban, bathroom - DEX; SIN), the chimneys and the garbage”77. A craftsman repairs the fountain roof with cloambe78 (chipper - DAR). The venerable committee supplemented the preliminar (provisions for expenses) with 20 crowns as “help fot Beiuş boarding school” and the purpose for APTF, Conclusul nr. 22 al Şedin ei din 4/17 octombrie 1905, in Protocolul ...(1892-1908). APTF, P.V. al Şedin ei a III-a din 8/21 decembrie 1910, in Protocolul ... (1908-1913), f. n. 70 APTF, P.V. din 6/19 iulie 1900, in Protocolul şedin elor comitetului parohial Sfântul Gheorghe (1899-1925), f. n. 71 APTF, Conclusul nr.27 al şedin ei a IX-a a Comitetului Parohial din 13/26 octombrie 1903, in Protocolul... (1892-1908), f. n. 72 Virgil Popovici, Ortodoxismul şi Biserica na ională românească din Timişoara, Timişoara, 1935, p. 72-73. 73 APTF, Primăria municipiului Timişoara, Serviciul econom. Biroul inventarelor. Proprietatea imobilă a diferitelor institu iuni şi culte etc. de pe raza Municipiului Timişoara. Dosarul imobilului nr.11: Str. Renaşterii, f. n. 74 APTF, Conclusul nr. 11 al Şedin ei Comitetului Parohial din 10/23 martie 1903, in Protocolul ...(1892-1908), f. n. 75 APTF, P.V. al Şedin ei a XVIII-a extraordinară din 5/18 septembrie 1912, in Protocolul… (1908-1913), f. n. 76 APTF, Scrisoare-sesizare din 5 mai 1931 adresată de Nicolae Despot Consiliului Parohial din Fabric, f. n. 77 Conclusul nr.18 al Şedin ei a III-a Comitetului Parohial din 17 aprilie 1893, in Protocolul ...(1892-1908), f. n. 78 APTF, Ofert din 28 august 1916. 68 69 132 which this aruncul (counting, release - DRAM) of 20 crowns was done does not affect immediately our village church...”79. For a plot of land the saleswoman received a căpară (earnest - SIN) of 300 crowns80. * Of the above, the words employed including religious language found in common speech of those who used them. To a small extent, some mentioned archaisms are in use today, especially in rural areas of Mintia and Bejan, being found at native speakers who learned them "by hearing" from their parents. Others, such as from Fabric district of Timisoara, are far from finding their use nowadays due to the evolution and development of the Romanian language. However all have a personalized, specific and unique character (and why not? even attractive) from times that are already gone. But they still retain their charm of the old dialect used by few speakers in Transylvania and Banat... Bibliografie selectiv Mureşianu, Ion B., Cartea veche bisericească din Banat, Ed. Mitropoliei Banatului, 1985 Panţuru, C., Via a bisericească a românilor din Parohia ortodoxă Bejan-Mintia, Editura Universităţii „Aurel Vlaicu” din Arad, Deva, 2010 Popovici, V., Ortodoxismul şi Biserica na ională românească din Timişoara, Timişoara, 1935 Suciu, I. D.; Constantinescu, R. Documente privitoare la istoria Mitropoliei Banatului, vol.I, Ed. Mitropoliei Banatului, Timişoara, 1980 79 APTF, Conclusul nr. 26 al Şedin ei a IX-a din 13/26 octombrie 1903, in Protocolul... (18921908), f. n 80 APTF, P.V. al Şedin ei a V-a din 22 ianuarie/4 februarie 1911, in Protocolul ... (1908-1913), f. n. 133 O nouă traducere în limba română a Bibliei1. Reflecţii pe marginea Notelor Alexandru GAFTON The present paper is trying to observe the quotations and comments made by the translators in two Romanian contemporary versions of the Bible. The author outlines some of the most important difficulties that the translators of the Bible have had to face, only to reveal that the most recent Romanian version of the Bible (2013), provided by Alois Bulai and Eduard Pătrașcu, includes a vast repertoire of notes and comments that ultimately act for the benefit of the reader. This successful and competent translation also reveal the scientific pursuit that favoured the development of a rich and balanced critical apparatus. Keywords: Bible translation, Romanian language, notes and comments. Încă din etapa constituirii sale, creştinismul se prezintă ca o religie adresată maselor, dincolo de etnii şi de rase, de condiţia socio-culturală, economică, de gen ori de alt criteriu deosebitor. Esenţa şi forţa creştinismului au stat dintotdeauna în caracterul său public şi deschis, larga sa răspîndire teritorială şi adînca sa pătrundere în conştiinţe asigurîndu-i trăinicia şi vitalitatea, precum şi capacitatea de a clădi o mentalitate care a modelat două milenii de civilizaţie. Probabil că elementul cel mai important, aflat la baza factorilor convergenţi ce-au generat acest complex, a fost cuvîntul. Acela care exprima o doctrină sub forma unei poveşti ce putea genera un mod de a gîndi, şi din care decurgea o filosofie de viaţă. Un cuvînt fixat şi perenizat prin literă, un cuvînt repetat public şi aflat în continuă colaborare cu mişcătoarea realitate. Acest cuvînt purtător de spirit şi dătător de impulsuri cognitive, morale şi comportamentale îşi are locul cel mai legitim în Biblie - o carte la îndemîna tuturor. Dar Biblia este un text atît de variat încît cuprinde toate tipurile de text, toate genurile literare, toate stilurile ştiinţifice, elemente ale întregii cunoaşteri a umanităţii: afectiv-intuitive, istorico-empirice, ştiinţifice, mistice. În plus, ea ridică obstacole în calea traducătorului, începînd cu marea dilemă a urmării formei sau a căutării conceptului şi a spiritului purtate de acea formă, trecînd prin hăţişul anevoios dat de limbile care au participat la acest text şi de inexistenţa unui text de 1 Biblia, traducere, introduceri şi note de pr. Alois Bulai şi pr. Eduard Pătraşcu, Iaşi, 2013. 135 bază, se amplifică datorită dinamicii şi a relaţiilor interactive ale elementelor triadei limbă-gîndire-societate şi devin aproape insurmontabile atunci cînd traducătorul ar vrea să transleze textul aşa cum este, adică fără precizări de vreun fel (pe care să nu le conţină textul), fără variante, fără note, fără comentarii, fără un aparat interpretativ, explicativ, nuanţator. Biblia este un text ce înglobează cîteva mii de ani care se înşiră începînd de dinaintea apariţiei ei, curg de-a lungul perioadei elaborării ei şi, oricît de paradoxal ar părea, se continuă mult după apariţia ei. Faptul că limbile moderne şi-au generat marile traduceri integrale ale textului abia în ultimele 500 de ani, iar limba română abia în ultima sută de ani nu reflectă doar decalajul dintre nivelul de dezvoltare al lingvisticii şi mersul impavid al religiei, ci şi diferenţele dintre nevoile ştiinţei şi cele ale credinţei. Creştinismul şi-a putut statornici tăria succesului său şi în lipsa accesului larg al indivizilor la text, în vreme ce lingvistica a reuşit cu greu să afle căile traducerii optime ale Bibliei. Probabil că acesta este şi motivul pentru care, oricît de laborioase şi de bine întocmite din punct de vedere traductologic, lingvistic şi filologic, traducerile obţin cu greu canonizarea. Chiar acest fapt, însă, arată că traducerile nu au neapărată nevoie să pătrundă în altar, ele împlinindu-şi lesne existenţa în spaţiul destinat vieţii de zi cu zi a credincioşilor de rînd. * După cîteva încercări cu rezultate rezonabile, limba română a produs, în anii noului mileniu, două traduceri. Privind lucrurile din perspectiva achiziţiilor şi a evoluţiilor culturale, traducerea Anania, din 2001, este una excepţională. Ca orice produs uman are, desigur, carenţe, inegalităţi şi slăbiciuni. Dar lucrul acesta nu se poate afirma decît privind la nivel de detaliu şi, eventual, din perspectiva cuiva care nu s-ar împovăra cu un travaliu de amploarea şi suflul cerute de un text de complexitatea celui biblic, sau nu ar imagina cerinţele şi căile unui astfel de efort. Concepţia de la baza traducerii şi soluţiile ce decurg de acolo, opţiunile traductologice, lingvistice, narative, dramatice poetice şi stilistice, interpretările şi ajutorul oferit cititorului, toate modalităţile de satisfacere a cerinţelor ce vin dinspre text şi dinspre cititor - fiecare cu reţeaua sa labirintică de constrîngeri - indică pe traducătorul cu profundă înţelegere a unui text avînd nelimitate resurse, traducător capabil de a da soluţii optime şi de a lua decizii echilibrate în situaţii în care orice decizie poate fi validă. Cealaltă traducere, apărută în 2013, este de acelaşi rang, chiar dacă, prin concepţie şi prin rezultate, o depăşeşte pe cea dintîi. Ambele traduceri constituie un bun semn al maturităţii culturii române, conţinînd încorporarea, cernerea şi depăşirea unui efort valoros. * Nu putem descrie amănunţit aici toate calităţile şi elementele de forţă ale acestei traduceri, dar se pot reliefa anumite aspecte, desigur, înţelegînd că, nici în acest caz, concepţia, tehnicile şi soluţiile traducătorilor nu avut cum să ofere imposibilul: textul perfect. De asemenea, probabil că nici unul dintre elementele de concepţie nu este invenţia traducătorilor, cum nici toate soluţiile nu le pot fi atribuite integral. 136 Ceea ce, însă, aparţine traducătorilor este concepţia globală ce generează această constelaţie particulară de tehnici şi de soluţii puse în act, şuvoiul ideatic unitar dozat din care decurge şirul de opţiuni ce duce către această configuraţie unică. Primul lucru de natură să confere echilibru mîinilor laicului ce ţine cartea deschisă îl constituie notele de subsol. Imensa bogăţie a notelor de subsol. În primul rînd, acestea îl asigură pe cititor că nu este singur cu textul, că traducătorul a deschis - cu binevoitoare disponibilitate şi competentă preocupare - un dialog cu cititorul. Varietatea şi multitudinea notelor decurge din supleţea cu care traducătorii se adaptează particularităţilor textului, cerinţelor traducerii şi nevoilor cititorului. Deşi dotate cu o complexitate care decurge în mod firesc din aceea a textului, perspectivele de care se preocupă notele pot fi înmănuncheate. O parte a lor ţine de componenta lingvistică şi traductologică a textului, o alta se referă la sfera conceptuală a acestuia, o alta oferă precizări şi explicaţii ale unor contexte şi obiceiuri antice. Aici apar etimoanele şi valorile paradigmatice şi sintagmatice ale cuvintelor, nuanţele de sens şi sensurile contextuale ale termenilor, explicaţii ale unor opţiuni de traducere, adesea cu prezentarea situaţiilor din textele-sursă, de autoritate şi conexe, indicaţii explicative în vederea corectei lecţionări a textului. Altele sînt precizări de ordin istorico-geografic, de arheologie biblică, însoţite de digresiuni lămuritoare asupra epocii şi mentalităţii, a culturii şi spiritualităţii antice din Orientul mijlociu şi asiat. Adesea, în acest cadru, cititorului i se prezintă interpretări, variante, posibilităţi, soluţii paralele, traducătorul declarîndu-şi astfel, şi asumîndu-şi totodată, limitele. În felul acesta apar note precum cele de mai jos: „iată, eu voi lovi cu broaşte în tot ţinutul tău!” (Ex. 7, 27): „Această plagă este potrivită pentru situaţia Egiptului datorită umidităţii şi inundaţiilor apelor Nilului. Broasca are un rol şi în mitologia egipteană ca încarnare a unei forţe care dă viaţa, în timp ce, în Israel, broasca nu avea nici o importanţă. Termenul nu apare decît aici şi în textele care se referă la această plagă (Ps. 78, 45;105, 30)”2. „pomul vieţii” (Gen. 2, 9): „Este comun în multe povestiri mitice din ambientul sumeroacadian. El indica vegetaţia cu care se hrăneau animalele şi oamenii, ba chiar şi zeii în sanctuarele lor. Întrucît zeii nu mureau, acest arbore ar putea să se refere la o hrană a nemuririi”3. 2 În B 2001, secvenţa face parte din versetul al doilea al capului următor. Nota autorului traducerii nu se referă la conţinut, dar este importantă deoarece explică opţiunea de a rămîne în rînd cu ediţiile româneşti precedente, deşi se pare că opţiunea aceasta nu este una liberă, ci o constrîngere asumată: „Într’o seamă de texte ebraice, ca şi în unele versiuni ale Septuagintei (inclusiv ediţia Alfred Rahlfs), următoarele patru versete îi aparţin capitolului 7, cu numerotarea 26, 27, 28, 29. Pentru concordanţa cu principalele ediţii româneşti de pînă acum, versiunea de faţă păstrează ordinea acestora”. 3 Nota din B 2001 doar încearcă să descifreze sintagma pentru cititor: „pomul vieţii, simbol al nemuririi.” 137 „Duşmănie voi pune între tine şi femeie, între descenden a ta şi descenden a ei. Acesta îţi va zdrobi capul” (Gen. 3, 15): „Termenul zerac în mod obişnuit se referă la descendenţa pe linie bărbătească (Gen. 21, 13; 15, 3-4), dar cuvîntul poate să desemneze şi o descendenţă spirituală, de exemplu, discipolii unui profet (Is. 53, 10). Cînd este vorba despre şarpe, sensul nu poate fi decît: «descendenţă rea, nelegiuită». Termenul este folosit în context mesianic: mîntuirea va fi încredinţată «descendentului» lui Abraham (Gen. 12, 7), apoi a celui al lui David (2Sam 7, 12-15). Sfîntul Paul îl va identifica pe acest descendent cu persoana lui Cristos (Gal. 3, 19)”. „LXX traduce acest pronume cu masculinul «autos» (acesta), care nu se acordă în limba greacă cu nici un element din fraza precedentă (femeie - genul gramatical feminin - ori descenden ă - genul gramatical neutru). În felul acesta, s-a creat posibilitatea interpretării textului în cheie mesianică: învingătorul şarpelui va fi un descendent precis al femeii”4. O altă parte a notelor (legate de unele din cele ale primei categorii sau chiar contopite cu acelea) se referă la modalităţile de edificare a textului însuşi, văzut în relaţiile sale cu alte texte, atît sub aspect formal, cît şi sub cel al elementelor de conţinut. De aceea, situaţiilor în care cititorului i se prezintă lipsurile, adăugirile, variantele textului, formele literale sau, invers, echivalenţii, li se adaugă cele în care se compară texte antice, se menţionează posibilele surse ale Bibliei - în acel loc - (adesea cu citări pe larg ale soluţiilor altor versiuni-sursă), se fac felurite observaţii asupra textului - văzut cu ochii filologului care priveşte la construcţia şi la limba textului, la aşezarea elementelor de conţinut, la coerenţa internă a textului abia apoi extrăgînd concluzii asupra textului (Ier. 10). Elementele de istorie a textului sînt foarte explicite uneori: sub 1I, 5, 7: „Începînd din sec. al IV-lea, s-a introdus aici următorul text (cunoscut sub numele de «Coma lui Ioan»): «în cer: Tatăl, Cuvîntul şi Duhul Sfînt, şi aceştia trei sînt una; şi sînt trei cei care dau mărturie pe pămînt». În Vg, această adăugire a rămas pînă în 1969. 4 În B 2001, merge de la descifrarea sensului simbolic la interpretarea în cheie exegetică. De data aceasta, opţiunea traducătorului este liberă. Ea ilustrează puternica prezenţă a căii exegetice, care apare şi în Introduceri, şi la nivelul traducerii, şi în Note: „Lupta dintre om (specia generată de Eva) şi diavol (al cărui simbol este şarpele - vezi Ap. 20, 20). Textul grecesc foloseşte verbul teréo = a pândi, a urmări, a se ţine după, a supraveghea - ceea ce ar sugera o luptă infinită şi nedecisă, spre deosebire de Textul Ebraic care e mai concludent. În schimb, Septuaginta înceăe fraza prin pronumele personal masculin autós = El (sau Acela), implicându-l şi în segmentul al doilea (autoū = al Lui), ceea ce face din acest verset un text profetic, referitor la Mesia, descendent trupesc al Evei şi Fiul Mariei (Eva cea nouă). În paralel, Vulgata începe fraza prin pronumele personal feminin ipsa (ea), interpretat de exegeţi ca referindu-se la Fecioara Maria. Fie că versetul are o dimensiune hristologică (Septuaginta), fie una mariologică (Vulgata), tradiţia exegetică a Bisericii l-a supranumit Protoevanghelia, întâia deschidere a speranţei pentru mântuirea celui căzut”. 138 Dar în textul grec revizuit al Noului Testament, acest text a fost exclus pentru că nu apare în cele mai vechi manuscrise. Şi NVg, ediţia a II-a (1986), îl exclude”5. „Şi a zis Dumnezeu: «Să fie luminători pe firmamentul cerului»” (Gen., 1, 14): „LXX adaugă: ca să lumineze pământul”, iar în B 2001, unde apare: Şi a zis Dumnezeu: „Să fie ’ntru tăria cerului luminători care să lumineze pământul” explică: „Sintagma «care să lumineze pămîntul» (literal: «spre luminare pe pământ») se află numai în Septuaginta”. Sub titlul „O altă relatare a chemării lui Moise” (Ex. 6, 2-13): „Ex. 3, 4 au prezentat prima relatare a chemării lui Moise după tradiţiile elohistă şi iahvistă. După eşecul lui Moise din cap. 5 este prezentată o a doua relatare a chemării Ex., 6, 2-7, 7) care aparţine tradiţiei sacerdotale. Textul, într-un stil deosebit de solemn, prezintă marile etape ale mîntuirii (de la alegerea lui Abraham pînă la posedarea ţării promise - cf. Dt. 26, 5-10; Ios. 24, 2-13). Revelarea numelui divin este plasată în Egipt şi numele de Domnul (cf. Ex. 3, 13 este înlocuit de «†ēl šadday» = Dumnezeul Atotputernic) folosit de patriarhi”. Alte note încheagă textul comparînd personajele şi întîmplările sub aspectul modalităţilor de construcţie şi existenţă ale acestora în întregul text (Tob, 11, 3). În Epistole traducătorii arată cititorului exersat în alte direcţii felul în care se constituie creştinismul ca filosofie şi concepţie de viaţă - uneori prin lupte cu alte secte contemporane, dar şi între indivizi şi facţiuni -, iar în Psalmi, apar adesea note care, ceva mai mult decît în alte locuri, precizează formele literale sau explică sensurile reale şi valorile poetice ale termenilor, în contextul epocii şi al spiritualităţii acelei lumi. Stilul notelor poate fi dominat de rigori ale descrierii ştiinţifice, indiferent de aparentele cerinţe de conţinut: (Gen. 3): „În v. 9-13, Domnul intervine ca un judecător în cadrul unui proces. Stabileşte responsabilităţile, îi interoghează pe vinovaţi şi stabileşte sancţiunile. Relatarea face să se înţeleagă faptul că Dumnezeu nu este dezinteresat de om şi nu-l abandonează în mîinile celui care l-a sedus. Bărbatul, la fel ca şi femeia, aruncă responsabilitatea a ceea ce s-a întîmplat asupra altuia, în ultimă instanţă asupra lui Dumnezeu. Şarpele nu este interogat cu privire la responsabilitatea lui pentru că numai bărbatul şi femeia sînt răspunzători de ceea ce s-a întîmplat. Răul nu este o fatalitate, ci o decizie eronată a libertăţii omului. Şarpele ar trebui să explice de ce a venit cu ispita, însă acest lucru nu se întîmplă. Originea răului rămîne fără răspuns, chiar dacă manifestarea lui este evidentă”. „Şarpele era cel mai viclean” (Gen. 3, 1): „şarpele apare aici ca o fiinţă în spatele căreia se află duşmanul prin excelenţă al omului, în care Cartea în elepciunii şi, mai apoi, Noul Testament şi toată tradiţia creştină, au recunoscut Diavolul (cf. Iob 1, 6). Este aici o 5 În B 2001, versiune care înglobează coma lui Ioan, acest lucru nu este explicitat, doar o lămurire apărînd: „Textual: aceştia trei sunt (orientaţi) spre unul (şi acelaşi centru), dar cu ideea dinamică de intercomuniune”. 139 polemică împotriva mitologiei popoarelor învecinate, unde şarpele era considerat semn al fertilităţii în Canaan şi al puterii politice în Egipt. Este o simplă creatură şi nu o divinitate a vegetaţiei, un apărător al sanctuarelor şi al graniţelor, un simbol al vieţii, păzitor al ierbii dătătoare de viaţă, un mijloc pentru a ghici evenimentele viitoare şi pentru a practica magia neagră”. „Termenul ebraic cārûm poate însemna: a) înţelept, abil, isteţ, prudent; b) şiret, viclean”. În sfîrşit, deşi textul conţine mii de note de zeci de feluri, deşi traducătorii se apleacă cu vizibilă deschidere către cititor, ei păstrează cumpătul dintre traducere şi interpretare (atît lingvistică, cît şi tematică, de sens), călăuziţi de respectul filologic pentru text şi litera lui, mai degrabă reticenţi faţă de traducerea exegetică, dar nu refractari la a îngloba cu măsură şi discernămînt acele elemente care, în fapt, constituie dezlegarea sensurilor reale pe care textul - resursa cu unică autoritate - le impune. „Şi a făcut Dumnezeu cei doi luminători mari: luminătorul cel mare - ca să stăpînească ziua - şi luminătorul mic - ca să stăpînească noaptea - şi stelele”. (Gen. 1, 16): „Autorul nu numeşte soarele şi luna, prezentîndu-le ca simple creaturi pentru a lumina ziua şi noaptea şi a marca timpul, ca polemică împotriva cultului idolatric ce li se aducea la popoarele vecine”. (Exegeza valorificată aici este veche, posibil de dinaintea vremii la care a fost scris textul.) „Şi a zis Dumnezeu: «Să-l facem pe om după chipul şi asemănarea noastră (...)». (Gen. 1, 26): „Acest plural poate indica deliberarea lui Dumnezeu împreună cu curtea cerească (îngerii - cf. Gen. 3,5.22: astfel a înţeles traducerea greacă a Ps. 8, 6 (urmată de Vg) reluată în Evr. 2, 7. Acest plural ar putea exprima maiestatea şi bogăţia interioară a lui Dumnezeu al cărui nume obişnuit în ebraică este o formă de plural („=ēlōhîm”). Sfinţii Părinţi au văzut insinuată aici realitatea Sfintei Treimi. Din punct de vedere gramatical s-ar putea înţelege ca pluralis deliberationis /cf. Gen. 11, 7-8; Is. 6, 8)”. Cazul acesta prilejuieşte o notă şi în B 2001, redusă la dimensiunea exegetică: „Acesta nu este un plural al majestăţii, ci un plural gramatical autentic: Sfinţii Părinţi văd în el prima revelaţie scripturistică asupra persoanelor Sfintei Treimi”. De asemenea, ei nu corectează textul, din teama de a nu sminti pe nevolnicul cititor, însă nici nu îl lasă pe acesta lipsit de călăuză. „Domnului i-a părut rău că l-a făcut pe om pe pămînt şi s-a mîhnit în inima lui” (Gen. 6, 6): „Un astfel de verset aminteşte că Dumnezeul Vechiului Testament nu este incapabil de a simţi durere, amărăciune şi regret. Definirea lui Dumnezeu ca «absolut impasibil» este doar o parte din adevăr”. „Şi Dumnezeu a binecuvîntat ziua a şaptea” (Gen. 2, 3): „Unele versiuni au: «în ziua a şasea» pentru a evita să se înţeleagă o lucrare a lui Dumnezeu în zi de sîmbătă. La popoarele semite, sîmbăta era ziua în care munca era nefastă şi interzisă. Revelaţia biblică 140 i-a dat o semnificaţie teologică: a) Ex. 23, 13 şi Dt. 5, 12-15 garantează odihna săptămînală a omului; b) în Ex. 20, 8-11, ziua a şaptea a sîmbetei evocă împlinirea creaţiei; c) în Ex. 31, 12-16, sîmbăta este semnul alianţei între Dumnezeu şi poporul său. Evr. 4, 1-11 revine asupra participării omului la odihna lui Dumnezeu de la sfîrşitul creaţiei. Sîmbăta nu este un spaţiu gol destinat lenei. Odihna biblică este un concret pozitiv care nu se reduce numai la absenţa oboselii. Ea este prin excelenţă simbolul comuniunii depline şi perfecte cu Dumnezeu. Cadrul săptămînii divine nu reprezintă succesiunea reală a lucrărilor lui Dumnezeu; această durată fictivă a creaţiei îi slujeşte autorului pentru a face din lucrarea divină modelul activităţii umane”. Atitudinea atît faţă de text cît şi faţă de mîna care îl scrie, rămîne obiectivă şi pur ştiinţifică: „Aceasta este cartea generaţiilor lui Adam” (Gen. 5, 1): „Prin menţionarea cărţii genealogiilor (tôl†ḏōṯ), documentul sacerdotal reia istorisirea de la Gen. 2, 4a şi vrea să umple intervalul dintre creaţie şi potop. Nu trebuie să căutăm aici o istorie în sensul modern al cuvîntului şi nici o cronologie. Numele sînt resturi din tradiţii vechi, unele sînt reluate din lista descendenţilor lui Cain”. Desigur, în anumite cazuri, apar accente, precum sub Mt., 19, unde, fiind vorba despre celibat şi adulter, traducătorii par orientaţi, dar cu multă fineţe şi, de înţeles; (mai dur pare Anania cu adulterul, el urmînd versiunile care fac adulterin şi pe cel care are relaţii cu o femeie lăsată de bărbat). * Deşi are parte de explicaţii, cititorul are şanse - cînd acest lucru este posibil, desigur - să se edifice doar prin text. În fapt, explicaţiile apar doar atunci cînd principala cale nu funcţionează, altminteri traducerea este cea mai bună. Cu alte cuvinte, nu de la note se pleacă, ci acestea urmează textului. Pe acesta îl ameliorează şi nuanţează notele şi glosele, ducîndu-i valenţele la nivele concrete sau abstracte, complexe, rafinate, revelatoare ale întregii bogăţii a textului şi a limbilor izvoarelor sale, dar mereu inteligibile. Urmarea literei poate crea dezechilibru, însă unul generator de impuls. În acest context, explicaţiile şi îndrumările devin proces de căutare a echilibrului, căutarea fiind cea care creează mişcarea ordonată şi rodnică, cea care dă viaţă şi prilej de a da rost existenţei. Cititorul devine astfel alert, conştient, competent, învăţînd a se descurca prin complexa materie, căpătînd deprinderi critice, urmînd căile textului, trecînd dincolo de cuvintele şi de sensurile propriului univers lingvistic şi conceptual şi urcînd către modalităţi complexe de înţelegere a lumii. Centrată pe cititor, dar armonizînd această miză cu cea formală, traducerea în discuţie nu extrage din glosocosmosul textului un cosmos imaginat de mintea umană şi închegat coerent pe principii doctrinare, ci doar caută cu onestitate să aducă la lumină un cosmos conceptual, spiritual, care decurge din decodarea lingvistică a încodării lingvistice. Versiunea se edifică prin utilizarea judicioasă şi critică - avînd mereu înainte respectul pentru cititor - a unor surse de prestigiu şi de 141 încredere, folosite cu mult discernămînt. Perspectiva este filologică, erudită, morală, ecleziastă, fără accent pe hermeneză exegetică, aceea care desfăşoară o retorică al cărei ţel este de a reduce totul la un singur tip de înţelesuri, dînd impresia că le găseşte în text, cînd, de fapt, doar le pune acolo. * Se spune că Biblia este cea mai citită carte a umanităţii. Dar o recitim la nesfîrşit, o studiem şi, eventual, o urmăm, tocmai pentru că nu are o singură dimensiune, pentru că nu ne supune, ci ne luminează şi ne edifică. Această traducere se desfăşoară în acest spirit iluminist, oferind cunoaştere şi fundament hrănite de virtutea sincerităţii, tratînd fiinţa umană ca pe una capabilă de evoluţie, demnă de darul liberului arbitru - aşa cum a făcut-o Dumnezeu. 142 Retorica discursului religios The Religious Discourse – Liturgical, Sacramental and Soteriological Act Vasile GORDON L’auteur de cette étude se propose de mettre en évidence le fait que le sermon, la forme la plus fréquente du discours religieux, avant d’être production littéraire (et analysée comme telle) est un acte liturgique, sacramental et sotériologique. Plus précisément: acte de culte, source de grâce et de foi, préparation pour l’Eucharistie, absolument nécessaire pour le salut. En subsidiaire, l’étude présente quelques associations illustratives, pour mieux comprendre le caractère liturgique du discours religieux: le lieu de culte, les chants du chœur ou bien autour du lutrin, les pèlerinages, etc. Mots-clés: culte, sermon, liturgie, sacramental, sotériologique, art. Premises The sermon delivered within the divine service is the most frequently used form of religious discourse at all Christian confessions. The term „sermon” has a general meaning, including all the other names: preaching, didaché (theacing), homily, panegyric, parenesis, etc. Another form of religious discourse, less frequent, but no less illustrative, is that of the religious conferences. Still, they do not have a part within the divine office as such, but in various lay and church-related institutions, generally academic. This presentation will be limited to the sermon, a religious discourse pre-eminently liturgical, sacramental and soteriological. In the recent past, philologists analyzed many of the sermons delivered by important Romanian preachers mostly from the point of view of their content of ideas and of the stylistic and literary strategies used. This also happened within the set of conferences „Religious Text and Discourse”. We consider necessary to enrich this approach with the liturgical perspective, taking into account the fact that the religious discourse is pre-eminently part of the cult. With few exceptions, the sermons published in various books and magazines had been previously delivered within the divine office on Sundays or feast days. Their purpose, as well as their effect, is not only didactic and pedagogical, but, first of all, sacramental (sanctifying). This effect results in their soteriological end (related to salvation). Therefore, the religious discourse, before being a literary work, is a work of salvation. This situation is similar to that of our church buildings: before being art monuments (even if they are, especially the old ones), they are places of worship, 145 meant for salvation. That is why we do not actually mean „art for art” when we speak about the church or the religious discourse. We mean art for God’s glory and for human salvation. 1. Homiletical function of the word1 In biblical and patristic terminology, the notion or concept of „word” has three meanings: divine hypostasis (Jesus Christ – Embodied Logos), the word that He communicates and The Holy Scriptures (the revealed Word). Beside these, by „word” we understand speech sounds, as well as the inner word, unspoken, but present in our hearts. When Saint John the Evangelist writes „In the beginning was the Word…” (1, 1) and „All things were made by Him (by the Word)…” (1, 3), he shows us both the eternity of the divine hypostasis, Jesus Christ, and the primordiality of speech in the act of creation. The consecrated terms, the Greek „ζσΰομ” and the Hebrew „ђлн” (davár/dabár) mean, simultaneously, the word and the action, but they also mean reason, report, sense, good order. The Romanian „cuvânt” („word”), as Eminescu wrote in one of his notebooks, „comes from conventus, which means human gathering”2. The Latin word „conventus” is indeed a passive perfect participle from „convenio-ire…”, verb translated by come together, gather, agree (hence the Romanian verb „a conveni”- to come to an agreement), which indicates the meaning of communion, relation, harmony, unity. Therefore, the word’s mission and structure are dialogical and it is complete only when it becomes communication of something, but also response to that communication. The word, or articulated speech, makes the human being essentially different from all the other beings. Saint Gregory of Nyssa expressed this fundamental difference between humans and animals when he metaphorically showed the utility of the hands, saying: “The hands were given to humans to help them speak. If they did not have hands, then their lips and tongue would be similar to those of animals, to help them seize the grass and cut it. But as hands took over food procurement, the mouth’s role remained that of expressing words. Therefore, it is right to say that the hands are an instrument typical for beings gifted with the faculty of speech”3. Words’ power of influence is huge, as one can easily notice not only from the great historic moments and cultural works, but also from every-day „trifles”. As in fairy tales is the power of the word! – this is the poetical warning of Al. Vlahuţă (The Word), because every word involves concrete, personal relations. The word goes from one person to another. People do not speak in vain. They do not speak for themselves, to hear themselves, but to be listened to. The word is not somebody’s property, it is a common good. That is why, as of any common good, 1 Paragraphs 1 and 2 of this study belong to the “Homiletics course for students”, chapter “The Sermon, the Preacher and the Listeners”, prepared to be published very soon, under the supervision of the undersigned. 2 Ms. 2275 B, f. 93. 3 Π αα υ Α π υ / De hominis opificio, PG, 44, 149. 146 one can make use of the word only within certain limits, observing certain rules, being always aware of its normal function, that of conveying what is right and true. Moreover, in the economy of salvation, the word has a sacramental power, both within the cult and in the sermon, because liturgical and homiletically texts are not exclusively the product of the human mind, but the result of a divine and human synergy. In his well-known book „The Power of the Word”4, the orthodox priest John Breck remarkably showed the great power of the word, pointing mostly to its liturgical and sacramental role. In the present study, in order to follow the word’s homiletically functions or qualities step by step, we shall first present the positive, beneficial influences of the inspiring words of wisdom, as opposed to the negative influences of bad, degenerate words, part of a vulgar and destructive anti-language. Apart from the vocabulary that we can hear in the street, which seems to be more and more polluted, we must notice the fact that the word is often turned from its sacred, unifying role of communion even within the parish-based communities, in Christian families’ life, as well as in any type of institution. From discussions with spiritual sons and daughters, over the years during Confession or in private dialogues, priests realize that most of the wounds and sufferings felt by their parishers have not necessarily resulted from diseases or material needs, but rather from harsh, insulting words that they have to endure days and years on end. Their origin? An extremely intolerant and angry boss, parents that are too strict, a spouse with ultra-dictatorial discourse, colleagues always trying to find fault with somebody, unknown people who, wherever they may be, cannot refrain from poisoning with their words whoever they come across, and so on. We are sometimes doomed to hear, directly or indirectly, destroying words coming from close people that we love, from whom we did not expect such treatment, or from people highly „educated”, which makes the shock and the wounds even worse! Therefore, the more beneficial and constructive are the good and beautiful words, the more harmful are the bad ones. In this respect, Father Stăniloae gives a concise and clear warning: „The word can build, but it can also destroy!”5. In the same line, Father Rafail Noica subtly writes: „The word is a creative energy, but an energy that becomes dangerous, mortal, when it is improperly used”6. What does the Holy Scripture say about this? There are a lot of references to the inspiring words of wisdom and their wonderful impact, but also to the bad ones, with the most toxic effect. Here is a short selection, without further comments. First of all, about the good ones: „Pleasant words are as honey-comb, sweet to the soul and health to the bones…” (Proverbs 16, 24); „A good word makes the heart glad!” (Proverbs 12, 4 J. Breck, The Power of the Word, St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, New York, 1986. See also the Romanian translation: Puterea Cuvântului în Biserica drept-măritoare, Ed. Institutului Biblic şi de Misiune, Bucharest, 1999. 5 Pr. D. Stăniloae, Jesus Christ or the Restoration of Man, Sibiu, 1943, p. 219. 6 *** The Other Noica – Testimonies of Monk Rafail, accompanied by some useful words of Father Symeon, edited by Pr. Eugen Drăgoi and Pr. Ninel Țugui, Editura Anastasia, Bucharest, 1994, p. 67. 147 25); „A good man out of the good treasure of the heart brings forth good things…” (Matthew 12, 35). As for the bad words, there are plenty of warnings in the Holy Book: „A fool’s lips enter into contention, and his mouth calls for strokes” (Proverbs 18, 6); „An evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth evil things” (Matthew 12, 35); „These (unrighteous false teachers)… (often) speak evil of the things they do not understand” (2 Peter 2, 12); „But avoid irreverent babble, for they will increase into more ungodliness. And their word will eat as does a canker” (2 Tim. 2, 16, 17). Words’ restoration and rehabilitation. Let us consider the fact that by the fall of mankind into sin, along with the degradation and darkening of the creation, in general, the word also suffered degradation and darkening. That is why Jesus Christ, the Saviour, while restoring the creation, also restored the human words, rehabilitating them and even more, making them divine. By taking human body, He also took human speech. He came to sanctify the body, but also speech. “Never man spoke like this Man!” – exclaimed those who listened with fascination to the Lord’s words (John 7, 46). His godly power, by which he healed, comforted, encouraged etc. was revealed, in fact, by words. We can see, therefore, that our Saviour gave us example and earnest to improve the use of words, His New Testament being also an exhortation to use Bible-inspired, Gospel-based words not only within the liturgical context of the divine office, but also for „the completion of our life”. Still, we have to insist on the fact that the exercise of improving their use takes place in the Holy Churches. Listening to the divine office, but also to the properly delivered sermons, every Christian has the chance to clean, to detoxicate and to improve the use of their own words. Back home and then out into the world, the healed word, with the seal of grace, will be full of dignity and beauty, pleasant, inspiring, tonic and it will positively influence all people around, known and unknown, just like the little leaven that leavens the whole lump (Gal. 5, 9). From the homiletical point of view, the word has some well determined functions: - practical function, in that of concrete applicability. If ordinary words transmit ideas and information that can remain abstract, homiletical words always transmit teachings that can be applied in the life of those who listen, with a view to salvation. For example, teaching the love of the enemies is not meant to offer a theory, but to be applied in every-day behaviour. When the Lord gave us this commandment, he did not do it with a view to make us start speculations and abstractions, but to make us have relations with them, with the „unfriends”, show understanding, love, patience and perseverance. Same situation for teachings about pity, kindness, humility, hope, justice, self-sacrifice, etc.; - scripturistic function, as the sermon transmits and interpretes God’s word, not something else. Let us consider that our Saviour said, go... and teach all nations… to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you (Matthew 28, 19). Therefore, what was commanded through the Gospels, not elsewhere. As St. Paul the Apostle warns, as well: „For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the 148 Lord” (2 Corinthians 4, 5). Meaning that we preach His teaching, not our teaching or that of others; - charismatic function, because the sermon transmits not only knowledge, but also grace and its power, originating in Christ. Let us remember the words of Saint Matthew the Evangelist: „For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes…” (7, 29). He obviously writes about the grace of faith, grace that prepares the way (does not necessarily save!) in order to get people closer and closer to the Eucharist, the only one that can save; - liturgical function, meaning that the sermon is not an isolated act, a didactic addition, but liturgical act, part of the divine office. We shall enlarge upon these last two functions in the next paragraph, in which we shall explicitly approach the liturgical, sacramental and soteriological nature of the sermon. 2. The sermon – liturgical, sacramental and soteriological act Etymologically, the Romanian term „predică” (sermon) has its origin in the Latin word „praedico” – to proclaim, to make known, to praise (praedicatio – public proclaiming, announcement, praise). In patristic literature, the word „predică” (sermon) was consecrated by Tertulian (160-240), taken over from Greek and Roman rhetoric. We can find it, for example, in Cicero’s famous treatise on oration (ex.: Haec eo mihi praedicenda fuernut…)7. The sermon is generally defined in lay dictionaries as a speech made by a clergyman in the church, explaining and commenting a biblical text and giving moral guidance to the faithful people. From a homiletical point of view, the sermon is a liturgical act, integrated within the divine office, by means of which consecrated ministers transmit God’s teachings to the faithful in order to lighten their mind, to warm their heart and turn their will towards good deeds, with the purpose of salvation. Pr. Dumitru Belu has a significant approach to the sermon. According to him, the sermon is the actualization of the Lord’s prophetic activity, insisting on the fact that it is neither reading of sacred texts, nor mere paraphrasing or exegesis, but the interpretation of the divine message in the contemporary context8. Under the influence of the Slavonic language, old homiletical literature also registered the term of „propovedanie” (sl. в sermon), hence the expression „a propovădui” – to preach. The types of sermon vary according to the service, context, audience, etc. The term „sermon” is very general, meaning any „church speech”. Still, in homiletical practice, church speeches are divided into more categories, according to the type of service, place, purpose and the way in which they are delivered. The principle of distinction must be applied here: bene docet qui bene distinguit (learns well he who distinguishes well). Thus, comparing the most recognized bibliographical sources with the liturgical reality in our Church, we admit the following distinct types of sermon in 7 8 Cicero, De Oratore, X, 3, 37. Pr. D. Belu, Homiletics Course, BFT Sibiu, ms. 485, f.a., p. 32-33. 149 use: the homily, the thematic sermon (also called synthetical), the panegyric and the parenesis9. The sermon – liturgical and synergic act. The sermon is not an isolated act, but always integrated within the divine church worship. It has been like this from the beginning. Religious gatherings in the Church of the first centuries had the following liturgical moments: breaking the bread, prayer and praise to God, reading from the holy books, sermon and religious chants, moments united with the brotherly repasts, collections for the poor and the manifestations of the gift of grace. The well-known testimonies from the Holy Scripture (Acts 2, 42; 20, 7 etc.) are completed with those from later writings, as, for example, The First Apology, written by St. Justin, Philosopher and Martyr: “And in the so-called Sun day, there is a gathering of all those living in towns or villages and the memories of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits. Afterwards, when the reader stops reading, the first minister delivers a speech, giving advice and inviting people to imitate these wonderful teachings ( π ῶ υ υ α α π ῶ α ῶ ύω ω π ῖ α )” 10. At the same time, the sermon is a synergic act (of working together). The priest (minister) delivers the sermon, but the teaching is not from him, but from Christ (2 Corinthiens 4, 5), as it was mentioned above. Furthermore, the priest preaches due to his teaching power received by the grace of the Sacrament of Priesthood, but always renewed by the grace of the divine service within which he preaches. On the other hand, the priest’s approach involves ”working together”, as he also teaches from his own experience and spiritual life, with a real impact in the hearts of the audience, but only as long as these teachings, pieces of advice, examples, etc. are in accordance with the Evangelical ones. With this view in mind, it seems obvious that the preacher does not merely repeat the Evangelical message, as the teaching received from the Church becomes part of himself; consequently, the message that he transmits and continues to be that of the Church, ends by becoming his own message, in an amazing and paradoxical way. The Sermon - sacramental and soteriological role. According to the Christian doctrine, we reiterate the premise that man’s sanctification and salvation are possible only through the grace granted by the Holy Sacraments. At the same time, realities and testimonies registered over 2000 years of Christianity prove that the sermon is not only a simple means of transmitting certain teachings, without any sacramental and soteriological implication. The sermon is actually the tool that can facilitate the access of the believers to the Holy Sacraments, but it can also consolidate their devotion to the Church, especially in what is related to the salvation of the soul. On the very birthday of the Church in history (the Penticost), those who listened to the sermon made by Saint Peter the Apostle were cut to the 9 See details at Pr. V. Gordon, Introduction to Homiletics, Edit. Univ. Bucureşti, 2001, p. 262-279 (ebooks.unibuc.ro/ Teologie/ om iletica/ index.htm ). 10 Migne, PG, VI, col. 429. “Proestos” – “First minister”: the bishop or the priest, coordinator of divine service. 150 heart (Acts 2, 37)11 and therefore determined to ask: „What shall we do?”. We know what followed: the decision to be baptized, receiving thus the grace needed in order to enter the Kingdom of God. Being „cut/pricked in the heart” actually means a work of grace, namely „the grace of faith”, as Saint Paul the Apostle confirms: „Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Romans 10, 17). The wonderful example of the Pentecost has been repeated (and will repeat), obviously at different measures and „scales”, all along the history. The three phases of preaching from the early Church, kerygma, catechesis and the sermon, are in fact made actual again and again in people’s life. The Gospel was announced by kerygma (and here people were seized by the grace of faith), by catechesis people were instructed in order to prepare for baptism, whereas the sermon, made within the divine church service, became in this way a concrete liturgical act, with its well-known role. Nowadays (and until the end of times) we still have „candidates” to baptism, that can be pricked in their heart by a good sermon and thus determined to „put on Christ”. On the other hand, the sermon can enforce the devotion to Christ and his Gospel for those who are baptized, by the same permanent deep experience of grace. 3. Some comparative examples Further illustrations would be useful in order to better understand the importance of the reception of the religious discourse as source of divine grace. The grace of faith transmitted by the sermon can also be found in other forms and realities, related, of course, to the space and heritage of the Church: the Holy Places themselves (painting, icons etc.), the chants of the choir or around the lectern, pilgrimages, reading of the Holy Scripture etc. - The Holy Church, understood only as an art monument, will arouse admiration at the most and may inspire those who are initiated to descriptions and relevant analyses. Seen and respected as a sacred space, the Holy Church will fill up the visitors’ souls, be them weak in faith, with the grace of the Holy Spirit and they will feel the warmth and the joy of the heart as essentially superior to the cold professional satisfactions of an atheist art critic, be him academician. The same situation occurs when somebody refers to icons, painting, chants of the church. The perspective is different if they are seen as „pieces of the sacred art” or as sacred means of transmission of the divine grace. Before being an art monument, the church is a place of worship. In this respect, the attitude of certain employees of the National Office for Art Monuments or of the Art Monuments Commissions who treat churches only as museums and nothing more is unacceptable. That is why when they approve of a mural painting restoration, for example, they do not admit that the deteriorated face of a saint should be completed (because the law says that!), the result being a face partly painted and partly not. An intellectual Christian may understand the restoration 11 Cf. English Standard Version. „Were pricked in their heart”, according to King James Version. 151 laws, but the poor ordinary peasant that came to pray in front of that saint, whose face he sees as mutilated, what will he understand? Only this: the present-day painters, with so much instruction and modern techniques, cannot remake what old-day painters like Pârvu Mutu and his mates would have done without any problems… - The chants of the choir or around the lectern must also be seen in the context for which they were created, as text and melody, within the divine church service. Received as music art productions, they can, at most, enchant the ears; whereas if received as sacred means of creating an atmosphere of prayer, the chants will make the heart feel the grace. The optimum finality of chanting in the choir or around the lectern depends, undoubtedly, on the way it is approached by the chanters: it is one thing to use the texts as „pretexts” to show off your voice and it is totally different to be aware of the fact that your voice (performance) must serve the text with delicacy, modesty and humility; - Pilgrimages, individual or in a group, organized at churches and monasteries are a wonderful opportunity of cleaning and renewing our heart. The main condition: not to behave as a tourist, but as a pilgrim; to try to integrate within the liturgical programme of that place and not to see it from outside, as an ordinary show. And one more condition: not to trouble in any way the sacred atmosphere of the place, but, if possible, to add some prayers, piety and meditation12; - Reading of the Holy Scripture (and of any sacred text) can be done in two ways: „from the outside” or „from the inside”. In the first case, seeing in the sacred texts only literary species, valuable in terms of language and style; in the second case, recognizing their soteriological value, as well. From this extremely important point of view, we have a number of good examples, not only among the well-read clergymen, but also among lay cultivated people, philologists, philosophers, especially university professors. From among them, professor Eugen Negrici and Andrei Pleşu, philosopher, showed great persuasive force. The first one has distinguished himself for years by the pertinent exegeses made to the ”Didaches” of Antim Ivireanul, the martyr hierarch and scholar. Analyzing their structural line, E. Negrici notices, not accidentally, that at the end of almost all his Didaches, Antim resorts to what is called „invocation”, a prayer or a part of it which enhances considerably the sacramental and liturgical character of the respective sermon, along with its level of persuasion. The Metropolitan is humbly aware of the fact that „the things which are impossible with men are possible with God” (St. Luke 18, 27) and Prof. Negrici sees this aspect13. Andrei Pleşu, in his 12 Father C. Coman, Professor of Biblical Studies at the Faculty of Theology in Bucharest, who had studied for many years in Greece, told us a very interesting experience in the Vathoped Monastery, whose abbot, Efrem, is his close friend. As long as he manifested as a favourite guest, he didn’t feel any spiritual profit, except for the touristic special comfort. But, after the integration in the very hard community program (including the night’s prayers), he felt a great spiritual joy, doubled with a fortification of his entire human being.... 13 E. Negrici, Antim Ivireanul, Ed. DU Style, Bucureşti, 1997, p. 18. 152 turn, after having surprised us so pleasantly by his book Despre Îngeri (On Angels) 14 , proves to be an extremely well-intentioned researcher of the meaning of the Lord’s Parables, in his volume Parabolele lui Iisus. Adevărul ca poveste (Jesus’ Parables. The truth as a Story)15. Annoyed at first by the Lord’s paradoxical words: „Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not: and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand!” and „it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given” (St. Matthew 13, 13, 11; Ed. Anania), Pleşu finally discovers, not without consistent bibliographic support, that only those that are inside can understand… Namely, concisely expressed, those who, by their life and deeds are on the way to the Kingdom of God16. Instead of conclusions: the wisdom of being „inside” We realistically admit that the religious text and discourse can be read, heard and discussed also from the „outside”. Any specialist in the subtle aspects of philological sciences has access to them, according to their faith, denomination, religion. The fundamental problem is, nevertheless, that of the meaning. The specialist who is also liturgically integrated has the possibility to observe, to experience directly the sacramental and soteriological nature of religious texts and discourses, essentially more important than the literary value of the language and style as such. That is why we were happy to see good examples even among the authors of studies and articles for the Magazine of the Conference „Religious Text and Discourse”. We may have seen more than intended by certain authors, but we consider that the error is smaller when seeing, well-intentioned, something that is not, then intentionally ignoring what is there. For example, Prof. V. âra mentions the fact that „sermons influence the audience’s spiritual experience and life…” (The religous discourse, model and norm…,2009); Prof. Carmen Dura, analyzing the sermons of His Eminence Bartolomeu Anania, shows the soteriological importance of the belief in resurrection (Rhetoric of religious discourse…, 2012); Prof. Sorin Guia sees the sermon as „a call to repentance” (Structures argumentatives dans le discours religieux de Bucovine – 2012); Prof. Rodica Zafiu admirably describes the function of the ethos in obtaining persuasion (along with that of the pathos and the logos), as a means of transmitting „something” from the holiness of the speakers’ personality, not only certain teaching (Ethos, pathos and logos in the text of the sermon predicii - 2010). Moreover, Acad. Gh. Chivu consacrated the phrase „From letter to spirit” as a leitmotiv of many conferences. It was a great joy to find such examples within the studies of some of the most recognized philologists. This is actually what we have in view within the texts of the sermons: a meaning that goes beyond the letter, meaning that has been brought forward by all the preachers, from our Saviour Jesus Christ to the present-day 14 Humanitas, 2003; ed. a II-a, 2010. Humanitas, 2012. 16 To understand the report “outside – inside”, see especially p. 66-67. 15 153 hierarchs and priests. And not only priests and hierarchs, as we could see. It is a great joy that we can find among contemporary philologists personalities that, by their writings and mission, directly and indirectly support the message and the mission of the Church, as in the more distant or more recent past did well-known lay intellectuals such as Simion Mehedinţi, Nicolae Paulescu, Vasile Băncilă, Nae Ionescu, Onisifor Ghibu, Petre uţea, Ioan Alexandru, along with contemporary representatives such as Sorin Dumitrescu, Costion Nicolescu, Andrei Pleşu, etc. Bibliography: *** The Other Noica – Testimonies of Monk Rafail, accompanied by some useful words of Father Symeon, edited by Pr. Eugen Drăgoi and Pr. Ninel ugui, Editura Anastasia, Bucharest, 1994 Belu, D., Pr., Homiletics Course, BFT Sibiu, ms. 485, f.a. Breck, J., The Power of the Word, St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, New York, 1986. The Romanian version: Puterea Cuvântului în Biserica drept-măritoare, Editura Institutului Biblic şi de Misiune, Bucharest, 1999 Gordon, V., Pr., Introduction to Homiletics, Editura Universității din Bucureşti, 2001(ebooks.unibuc.ro/Teologie/omiletica/index.htm) Negrici, E., Antim Ivireanul: Logos și personalitate, Editura Du Style, Bucureşti, 1997 Stăniloae, D., Pr., Jesus Christ or the Restoration of Man, Sibiu, 1943 154 Affective Valencies of the Homiletic Discourse Marius Daniel CIOBOT Cette étude vise à mettre en évidence les éléments de l'arrière-plan psycho-affectif, dans l'interaction homilétique. Au-delà des idées religieuses et des concepts, des images et des conseils éthiques, le prédicateur et les fidèles qui reçoivent le message du sermon se rapportent dans une manière interpersonnelle, en utilisant à cet effet-là une gamme complète de réactions cognitives et émotionnelles en particulier. Loin de rattraper des significations extérieures dans une manière passive et mécanique, les personnes engagées dans le processus homilétique construisent des significations communicatives par leur coorientation intérieure, selon les repères contextuels. L'interaction directe actionne des énergies personnelles profondes, des univers intérieurs à peine discernables, qui ont une fonction sous-textuelle, comme une matrice génératrice d'idées et d'émotions spécifiques à l'intérieur du discours homilétique. La sélection lexicale, la création phrastique, le style de composition et de prononciation, le geste, tous sont (chacun avec un rôle complémentaire et bien défini) des marques représentatives de la personnalité du prédicateur, en intégrant sa compétence culturelle aussi, avec tout ce que cela implique. Les effets du sermon dépendent finalement du niveau de la participation des acteurs homilétiques (le prédicateur et l'audience chrétienne) dans la relation interpersonnelle présumée par une communication authentique. Dans la création de cette connexion affective spécifique à l'homélie chrétienne, un rôle important est joué à la fois par la disponibilité communicative des personnalités concernées (un aspect qui dépend de la typologie psychologique en question), et par les moyens stylistiques, paraverbaux et mimiques-gestuels pour la construction d'un tel lien spirituel. En dépit d'un préjugé assez répandu qui s'avère être une cause des échecs homilétiques fréquents, la dimension strictement référentielle du message du sermon, bien qu'elle soit extrêmement importante, elle n'est pas la source suffisante de succès. Il faut découvrir, à partir de l'exercice pastoral et d'enseignement permanent, que l'homélie atteigne son efficacité maximale seulement quand elle se concentre sur l'interaction humaine directe entre le prédicateur et la personne du fidèle, à laquelle le discours ecclésial est destiné. Mots-clés: homiletique, communication verbale, stylistique, affects. In a previous paper1 we argued that the homiletic process cannot be reduced, despite its today monologue form, to a communicative unidirectional action, Marius Daniel Ciobotă, Discursul omiletic din perspectiva științelor comunicării, cuvânt înainte de prof. dr. Mihai Dinu (foreword by Mihai Dinu), postfață de pr. prof. dr. Vasile Gordon (afterword by Vasile Gordon), București, Editura Universitară, 2012. 1 155 deprived of the dynamism of reciprocity and exclusively endowed with the role of transmitting (religious knowledge, information, interpretations, Christian doctrines, ethical advice etc..) and, thereby, incapable of actively integrating in its economy the multiple amount of the perceptible reactions from the receiver. The conclusion we reached is that only by continuously restoring the semantic preeminence, of maximum evidence, of the generic etymon2, we come to conceive and practice the Christian homily in a structural psycho-dialogical manner. The recovery of meaning and functional features it had “at the beginnin” can be the only way to rediscover its communicative valence of unquestionable efficiency. Although the current form of religious speech, under the influence of rhetorical technique taken as far back as the fourth century B.C, retains almost nothing of the manifestations of the primary homiletic dialogue, practiced until that time in the meetings typical of the Christian worship3, the circularity, informal and inexplicit, of the messages specific to preacher-type interaction are preserved, taking place in a complex interpersonal setting by its nature, with many variables and psycho-emotional interferences. Person and personality in the homiletic process If we admit the assumption that the homiletic act is based on interpersonal relationship (be it even embryonic, with all its potentialities and variables, more or less perceptible, but existing), then our analysis is focused on that psychodiscursive area hosting the relationship between persons - that of the preacher and of his receptors4. At this level, communicative processes occur, which usually 2 The original meaning (used both in the New Testament texts and in the language of the later Christian eloquence) of the Greek noun οηιζέα is, on the one hand, "conversation, discussion, talk" and ”companionship, relationship, connection, friendship”, coming from the verb οηιζΫω = “to talk, to have o conversation”. The Latin mentions, as an equivalent of οηιζέα, the noun Sermo,-onis, meaning ”informal conversation”: Sermo potius quam oratio (ordinary speech rather than discourse), cf. Gheorghe Guţu, Dictionar Dicționar latin-român, Bucuresti, Humanitas, 2007, s.v. Sermo; behold the etymological reason for which, giving them the form of a dialogue (with Gaius Maecenas, the influential Roman nobleman who promoted arts), the Latin poet Horace used for his famous Satirae the word Sermones (Conversations). Besides, the literary technique of dialogue becomes favourite in the great works of the humanist culture due to Socrate’s subject of eros and, subsequently, to the Dialogues of Plato. It is significant, at the same time, the way in which the homily was performed (the Christian speech integrated into the worship) in the early Church: conversational, with rhetorical simplicity, against the background of expositions or paraphrases according to the evangelical text previously lectured, coupled with extempore efusions of the speaker (“the sermons of the faithful in the early ages were of the simplest kind, being merely expositions or paraphrases of the passage of the Scripture that was read, coupled with extempore efusions of the heart”, Original Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. VII, Encyclopedia Press, 1913, s.v. Homiletics). 3 Aspect of the primary Christian ethos upon which the signs of the missionary and pedagogic ecclesiastical regression nowadays urge us to reflect thoroughly. 4 In spite of a certain technicality, taken from the modern theory of communication (founded by Karl Bühler since 1934), the term ”receptor” is preferable to ”listener”. As shown by its morphological structure too, the original meaning of the hiperused term ”audience” (Engl. ”audience”) concerned an auditive act; from lat. audio-ire,-ivi,-Itum = ”to hear” resulted auditor - oris 156 remain in the shadow of the theoretical observations provided by the manual, but which, in fact, by their pragmatic and complex range of reactions, clues and messages it expresses, represent the determining background of the respective homiletic effect. One of the “axioms” of the School of Palo Alto confirms this reality, establishing the duality, typical of any process of interpersonal communication, of the informational and relational coordinates, without forgetting to mention that the second dimension provides decisive clues for the interpretation of the former. Thus, the first conveys the objective informational content of the message (in the case of sermon, the Christian doctrines and precepts), while the other involves psycho-emotional manifestations (the ethical and affective perception of the person of the preacher, his verbal and nonverbal behavior during the sermon, the internal emotional and cognitive responsiveness of the receptors, etc..), invariable defining, playing the collective role of interpersonal matrix of the respective conceptual content. We must not understand that, from this perspective, the role of logical-textual factors, argumentative or linguistic, is somewhat minimized, but nor they should be generalised by giving full importance in the economy of preaching. The words, utterances and ideas of homily - intradiscursive reviewers, in the terminology of Maria Catanescu5 - cannot be regarded abstractly and dissociatively, organically non-integrated in the global communicative context. Perceived only in their syntactic logic or at most argumentative, these reviewers do not exceed the status of simple utilitarian linguistic elements. When they manage to avoid, by relevance, aesthetic value and concision, the pointless profusion of the ”void speech”6, the ideas and locutions of the sermon open hermeneutic-emotional passages that build and maintain the relational dimension of the homily7, this becoming the = "listener, auditor, disciple of someone" and, finally, audientia-ae = ”listening”, a word which The Dictionary of Latin - Roman borrowings in the old Romanian language (1421-1760), Bucuresti, Editura Stiintifica, 1992 (authors: Gheorghe Chivu, Emanuela Buză and Roman Alexandra Moraru) mention it, with a multiple etymology, as having entered the Romanian language at the end of the seventeenth century. Although it doesn’t contain a special indicator for the visual action, the term ”receptor”, preferred by us in this case, is based on the assumption that people present not only hear the sermon, but also notice the nonverbal behavior related to it, recepting certain messages also visually, which, for the persuasive motivation of the preaching, is an essential factor. The receiver hears, sees, feels, reacts spiritually before the whole homiletic dramaturgy of the preacher. Recent research in the field of kinesics reveals that “persons in direct interaction predominantly transmit nonverbal messages" (Mihai Dinu, Comunicarea – repere fundamentale, 2007, p.17). According to Ray Birdwhistell, the "father" of kinesics, they cover 65% of the importance of discursive efficiency, while the American psychologist Albert Mehrabian gives the non communicative function of the non and para verbal a significant percentage of 93%! 5 Maria Cătănescu, „Retorica elogiului în Didahiile lui Antim Ivireanul”, in Al. Gafton, Sorin Guia and Ioan Milică (ed.), Text şi discurs religios, II, Iaşi, Editura Universităţii „Al. I. Cuza”, 2010, p.187. 6 Petru Creţia, Eseuri morale, București, Editura Muzeul Literaturii Române, 2000, p.143. 7 Although the term, in the treaties of homiletics, has a well-defined technical sense (namely explanatory discourse, exegetic-thematic of direct scriptural inspiration), we prefer here the basic meaning (native), of psycho-dialogic moment, the natural product of an interpersonal Christian 157 germinating soil of the ideas communicated. Since “through language emotions transform into ideas and thus become communicable”8, the language transcends its conventional primitive function, becoming partaker of the determinant environment of our thinking and emotions9. It becomes, in other words, means of communication and intellective knowledge, but also interpersonal. As for the receptors, the appropriation of homiletic message releases decodifying processes that contain a deep subjective mark. Both as fundamental linguistic units, and within their syntactic and stylistic relations from the structure of that homiletic text, words involve those distinct psychic marks (the famous expression of Ferdinand de Saussure) which the system of the language determined in the consciousness of receptors on other communicative occasions. As such, by virtue of the unique intrapersonal profile of each of them, the semantic echoes of the locutionary level is amplified in an unquantifiable manner. For instance, the fact that the same utterance can be expressed using tonal variations ranging from “kind” to “rigorous” is an easy but telling example regarding the decisive influence of the relational (affective) level on the quality of the reception act. From this perspective, in case of sermon, the quality of the pastoral relation between the church orator and the receptors of his discourse plays an essential role. Represented by the concept of relational authority, it is expressed by the level of listeners’ confidence in preacher’s words, resulted from the “development of good pastoral and personal relationships and from the stimulation of a sense of human research for authenticity and values shared”10. Being possible only in terms of a minimum relational setting, the knowledge of psychological data about the receptors of the sermon will allow the orator to anticipate, with some limits, of course, the reactions generated by speech. The possible information gaps can be improved by using tools such as dictionaries, books or asking experts, a much more difficult solution, if not impossible, in the case of interpersonal relationship dysfunction. “Man affects message. Listeners do not hear a sermon, but a man”, says the American Professor Haddon W. Robinson in his course of relationship, that can be perfectly illustrated in the model given by the Old Testament by describing the hierophanic dialogue on Mount Sinai: " face to face, as a man may have talk with his friend" Exodus 33:11. 8 Henri Wald, Limbaj și valoare, București, Editura Enciclopedică, 1973, p.126. 9 The explanations on the subject, essential in the philosophy of language, that “word is not only the coat of the idea, but directly participates in the formation of the idea itself” were the concern the famous philologist Henri Wald: Realitate și limbaj (1968), Homo significans (1970), Limbaj și valoare (1973), Expresivitatea ideilor (1986), Homo loquens (2001). H. Wald follows the linguistic doctrine of Wilhelm von Humboldt, the founder of the modern university, according to whom “language is the maker organ of thought” (central idea of a text entitled On the Diversity of Human Language Construction and its Influence on the Mental Development of the Human Species, published by Humboldt in 1836). 10 „Relational authority comes from developing good pastoral and personal relationships and fostering a sense of a human quest for authenticity and shared values so that listeners will trust what the preacher says”, John S. McClure, Preaching Words. 144 Key Terms in Homiletics, Louisville – London, Westminster John Knox Press, 2007, s.v. authority. 158 homiletics11, paraphrasing the famous definition of preaching given by Phillips Brooks, namely the “truth expressed through personality”. “An endless mystery that wants to be known by itself and also to make it known more and more”12, the human person remains, paradoxically, a universe ultimately unknowable, which makes it perhaps the most difficult epistemological object. If we consider the structural similarities, postulated by the Christian personalism (where the “mystery of the human person reflects the mystery of the Godhead”13) we come to the conclusion, far from being satisfactory to us, that both God and man can be known only on the basis of the personal energies manifested in relation to otherness, the depth of their inner existence obstinately eluding the direct epistemic approach of the others. If, on the one hand, in the interpersonal knowledge it represents the great obstacle, on the other hand, in a self-referential regard, this apofatism of the person is not necessarily valid. Self-knowledge is one of the principles to which the universal philosophical reflection has paid special attention. Socrate’s advice of ascetic doctrine value, the true knowledge of the limits of your own interiority is the key to overcome the limits of the self. In other regards, not too different, but theocentric, identifying perfection in the man “descending into humility”, in the saint who feels and sincerely bewails his moral falls14, everything in the sense of an ascension to the inner lights of perfection, the Christian spirituality of philokalic origins assigns (even if somewhat metaphorically) to the intrapersonal knowledge some virtues that are much superior to others, such as seing angels or rising from the dead. All personalist thinkers agree on certain defining traits of the human person: its irreducible uniqueness (individuality), interiority (consciousness) and autonomy (freedom). Although not completely independent of the various circumstantial factors, the human personal entity is exercised according to an internal autonomy, a stability or consistency, that allows a predictability of the behavior depending on the personality structure, and finally, on the motivational specificity that cannot be assessed but based on its effects. As a sum of psychosocial traits inherited or acquired (environment, education, cultural influences), personality, in its turn, has three essential functions - epistemic, pragmatic and axiological15 – in the virtue of 11 Haddon Robinson, Arta comunicării adevărului biblic, Cluj-Napoca, Editura Logos, 1998, p. 24. 12 Dumitru Stăniloae, Iisus Hristos – lumina lumii și îndumnezeitorul omului, ediție îngrijită de Monica Dumitrescu, București, Editura Anastasia, 1993, p.189. 13 Paul Evdokimov, Viața spirituală în cetate, prefață de Michel Evdokimov (preface by Michel Evdokimov), traducere de Măriuca și Adrian Alexandrescu, București, Editura Nemira, 2010, p.108. 14 “The saints are holy only for the others, to themselves they are seen burdened with sins [...] as the hero knows not that he is a hero, the scholar knows not that he is a scholar, while the wise say that the foolishness of the world is wiser than him”, Constantin Noica reflected, in an essay entitled “Regula, excepția și nașterea culturilor”, in Despre demnitatea Europei, ed. a 2-a (second edition), București, Editura Humanitas, 2012, p.21 15 Paul Popescu-Neveanu, Dicționar de psihologie, București, Editura Albatros, 1978, s.v. personality. 159 which it creates a relative extent of ideological meanings and sets the coordinates of the interpersonal relationships in which it is involved. Despite these theoretical guidelines about it, the person frequently proves, in situations that would justify the predictability of its behavior, a deep spontaneous character, inconsistent with the expectations of the others. Avoiding strict classifications and epistemic patterns that try to assign an identifiable constancy to it, the human personality is actually controlled by a dialectic tension (Emmanuel Mounier), a dynamism, internal but perceptible also in the exterior, by which it manages its identity crises. This is how, despite current talk about the peers, the essential dissimilarity that human persons actually present among them, by their internal unrepeatable structures, has all chances to contradict the appearances of this term so frequently used. As personal beings, we considerably resemble at the generic level, but we are fundamentally different regarding the modes of perceiving external reality. Personality remains a praxeological concept, because, as it is “a diffuse force, irreducible to intellectual qualities or certain tendencies of the individual (choleric, phlegmatic, passionate)”16, the only analytical grid valid remains the way in which our own manifestations are perceived by the other personalities whom we interact with. At this level of discussion, the ultimate and most desirable attribute of a personality remains authenticity, a concept synonymously associated, not without insignificant differential nuances, with notions of honesty, truth and spontaneity. Despite the result, inevitably obscure, of our use of the language services, the authenticity of the speaker's personality reflects the way in which his spiritual substance, ultimately untranslatable, transposes however, spontaneously and honestly, to verbal and mimic-gesture expressions meant to share, as much as possible, that inner content entirely faithful to the Truth. Considering that in the act of perception “the understanding scheme is personalized”17 according to the extent of our own emotions and cognitive marks18, the semantic asymmetry that we find in the current practice of communication is due to the essential difference between the intrinsic experience of the participants. This happens because our spiritual substance (the connotative meanings assigned to words, the domination of different cultural patterns, the intimate semanticassociative mechanisms, values assumed, beliefs, aspirations, likes, etc..) is nothing but the result of an unrepeatable formative direction. In case of verbal communication, although dictionaries commonly assign a linguistic equivalent of Didier Julia, Dicționar de filosofie, traducere, avanprefață și completări privind filosofia românească de dr. Leonard Gavriliu (translation, preface and annotation by ph.d Leonard Gavriliu), București, Editura Univers Enciclopedic, 1996, s.v. personality. 17 Eugen Negrici, Imanența literaturii, București, Editura Cartea Românească, 1981, p.8. 18 The order of the enumeration of these perceptive factors is not random. The American researcher Joseph E. LeDoux found that the amygdal nucleus, the intracefal organ responsible for our affective life, is the one which receives first, before the neocortex, the optical or acoustic signals we receive, which explains the anteriority and the prevalence of emotion upon the logic in the human receptive behavior. See the work The Emotional Brain: The Mysterious underpinnings of Emotional Life, New York, Touchstone, 1998. 16 160 words (denotation), in the consciousness of each user there are different semantic polychromies of a word (connotation), which, in the process of reception, exceed by far the pure denotative function. In this phenomenon specific to the receiving consciousness we must find the explanation of the feeling we have, almost every time, that our utterances do not find themselves, from a semantic point of view, in the mind of the other but with some variable differences. Sometimes, the answer or reaction we receive shows, as clearly as possible, the change which the content of our message suffers, once arrived in the psychic environment of the receiver. Other times, this incongruency between the intended meaning of the one emitting a message and the one the receiver proves is felt much later, together with its consequences, some even unpleasant. A relative substitute of the human instinct of unity and communion, the verbal communication ends up by finding the fundamental incommunicability of the states of consciousness that generate the words: “between what we say and what we would want to say the equivalence seldom obeys the mathematical rule”19. By virtue of this assumption, the homiletic communicative background puts to dialogue several axiological personal patterns that exist, of course, against the background of an identitary plurality. The preacher shows a certain type of personality, which comes in touch with similar personalities or very likely, different, with personal cognitive and emotional organisations, which makes the progressive dynamics of the homiletic relation involve, as expected, adequate variations. As „we cannot speak of person/personality outside the interaction with other persons/personalities”20, the homiletic relation channels initiated have, in fact, two interacting poles, of a constitution that is radically different in terms of numbers and, of course, in terms of structure: the singular personality, of the preacher and the collective one, of the receiving public. Therefore, the different intensities of the personality of the preacher become sensitive (and, thus, susceptible to influence), to the same extent, both to the autogenerative ideation of the discourse and to the personal presence of those he has in front. He has to manage, from a psychic-discursive point of view, „the cadence of a double rhythm: the personal spiritual rhythm and the spiritual rhythm of the listeners”21. The „Grammar” of this inexplicit conversation will configuratively depend on the level of reciprocal sensitiveness of the homiletic interacting persons, which will make the rhetorical global effort of the preacher concentrate on the „knowledge of the nature of his receptors, with a view of understanding their passions”22 and place, from a quasi-physical point of view, in the position of receptor. The empathic 19 Ştefan Munteanu, Introducere în stilistica operei literare, Timişoara, Editura de Vest, 1995, p.71. 20 Mihai Dinu, Fundamentele comunicării interpersonale, București, Editura All, 2008, p.21. Sebastian Chilea, „Predicatorul”, in Mitropolia Olteniei, Anul X (1958), nr.3-4, p.178. 22 “to understand the nature of listeners in order to comprehend their passions”, Thomas O. Sloane (ed.), Encyclopedia of Rhetoric, Oxford University Press, 2006, s.v. Audience. 21 161 ability is, thus, one of the sine qua non qualities of the personality of an efficient homiletic communicator. In the light of the unique amalgam of positive features (and, inevitably, of imperfections) that constitute its inner nature, that anima with which C.G. Jung identified “the real internal force of the personality”23, the adaptive-flexional capacity of the speaker provides, ultimately, the level of success of communication. Practically, the religious orator is involved in an interpersonal relationship with each receptor, a fact which, obviously, considerably amplifies the complexity of the homiletic interactional environment, determining us to focus even more on what happens beyond ideas and words, but also to find, at the same time, “the relation of forces” in which the preacher is, from the beginning, minoritary24. At this level of communication, based on the fact that “the significance given to signals (words, paralanguage, mimic-gesture n.n MDC) cannot be identical for all those taking part in the communicative act25, but also, as through the agency of the conotative function, “the context can change any type of language”26, we have to admit the existence, necessary indisputable as a matter of fact, of a interactional psycho-mechanics powerfully depending on the specificity of the personalities involved, meant to built the semantic globality of the homily. Verbal pathos or emotionality in and by word Although in their paradigmatic dimension (virtual) the constituent elements of the language compose the linguistic selection background of a socio-cultural community, in terms of syntagm and, implicitly, phonematic (the material side of language) words prove their descent from an inner space streaked with emotional preponderance specific to the person who uses the language. Beyond the grammatical principles established by regulatory convention, the choice of words, their syntactic-semantic coordination and stylistic expressiveness have as a source, 23 Paul Popescu – Neveanu, op. cit., s.v. person. This aspect can generate an inferiority complex in the psyche of the preacher, expressing through hyper-emotivity or fright. The intention to provide all listeners present with homiletic “satisfaction” makes him try an inhibitive feeling of affective and intellectual weakness, the negative rhetorical consequences of which are easy to be inferred. In a study dedicated to the occurences of psychological phenomena in the act of preaching, Marcu Banescu gives the following recommendations to eliminate the fright and timidity in the sermon: 1) a permanent a self-education effort aimed at enhancing the potential qualities, 2) thorough preparation of speeches (which makes the speaker “master of the sermon content, master of himself and master of his listeners), 3) autonomy in drawing up the sermon (without many “loans”), 4) avoiding hidden oratorical narcissism, which, paradoxically, acts harmfully on the creative capacity, 5) continuous exercises of visual interaction with the public; cf. Marcu B NESCU, „Emoție – trac – timiditate”, în Mitropolia Banatului, Anul XXXIV (1984), nr. 5-6, p. 332-337. 25 J. J. Van Cuilenburg, O. Scholten, G. W. Noomen, Ştiin a comunicării (Communication Science), versiune românească și studiu introductiv de Tudor Olteanu, Bucureşti, Editura Humanitas, 1998, p. 26. 26 Eugen Negrici, op. cit., p. 7. 24 162 “often subconsciously, the temper and character of the speaking subject”27. The literary and oratorical concept of style is based exactly on this individualized mark which the author imprints on the text issued, at the level of the linguistic code used, but also at the level of the global message. Interacting with the communicative context (which includes, in the first place, the receptors of his speech) and lexical material available, the orator comes to innovate in terms of style, using linguistic means meant to intensify the expressiveness of speech. “There are the same words, no doubt, but not the same values at all”28. Even if the issuer from the pulpit of the Christian message does not share to the audience a personal thematic corpus, unique and personal, but a system of precepts previously formed in the history of the Church, therefore supra-individual truths, however, “the catalytic power of the sermon in the discovery or rediscovery of the structures of this doctrine is based on the ideas, beliefs and attitudes of the preacher”29. In the stylistic phenomenon, the referential component of communication deeply interferes with the subjective one. A verbal message never contains pure ideas, but, as impersonal as one would like, communicates, hiding and revealing at the same time, “a reflection of the speaker’s psychic intimacy”30. Thus, in a perfect complementarity, the grammatical sense, the degree of emotionality transposed by speaker to expression by means of verbal and paraverbal vectors and the intentional dynamics of the nonverbal language determine the stylistic profile of that homiletic production. The coordinates of the public perception on the personality of the preacher form what the modern rhetorical studies call the persuasive ethos or the charismatic virtues of the speaker31, a factor credited with a major share in the economy of speech. This extraverbal influence of the transmitter can have three stages: initial (the qualities previously recognized by the public: competence, morality, common sense, willingness, authenticity, etc.), derived (the public impression can change during the speech, depending on the logical quality and the expressiveness of the presentation) and final (the first two stages, accumulated). The ideas, but especially 27 Dumitru Irimia, Structura stilistică a limbii române contemporane, București, Editura tiințifică și Enciclopedică, 1986, p. 13. 28 Paul Valéry, Poezii. Dialoguri. Poetică şi estetică, traducere Marius Ghica, Bucureşti, Editura Univers, 1989, p. 570 apud Irina Petraş, Teoria literaturii. Dic ionar-antologie (curente literare, figuri de stil, genuri şi specii literare, metrică şi prozodie), Bucureşti, Editura Didactică şi Pedagogică, 1996, s.v. trop. 29 Marcu Bănescu, „Emoție – trac – timiditate”, p. 336. 30 Tudor Vianu, „Dubla intenție a limbajului și problema stilului”, in Modele de analize literare și stilistice, ediție îngrijită și prefață de Al. Hanță, ediția a II-a revăzută și adăugită, București, Editura Albatros, 1989, p. 80. 31 To analyse this concept from a rhetorical perspective, see Constantin Sălăvăstru, Mic tratat de oratorie, Iași, Editura Universității „Alexandru Ioan Cuza”, 2006, p. 59. On the same topic, a very good writer of homiletic studies duly noticed: „A preacher is different from the other not so much by the soources he uses or the topic he approaches, but by what he has and offers from his human personality, from his labour and sensitiveness”: Pr. dr. Marcu Bănescu, „Păcatul suficienței”, in Telegraful Român, nr.15-16/1986, p. 4. 163 the words of the sermon borrow, therefore, the ethical and emotional authority of the one who uses them. It is this “ability to put his emotional life in the service of speech”32 that turns the preacher into what the Christian missiology calls a confessor of the Gospel, not just a messenger of it. The personality of the orator achieves a nex with the conceptual universe he preaches and, from this existential position, seeks to obtain the affective consensus of the others. It is only under such conditions that his sermon becomes genuine “teaching utterance”33, according to the model of Christ and the Apostles. By the virtue of the conative function of the sermon, this personal expressiveness of emotional origin has an „energetic” character too (in the Humboldtian sense), as, based on the concept of behavioral synchronism, the emotions, transposed to verbal and mimic and gesture expressions, exert an important influence on the receptor, stimulating his thinking and particularly the feelings. In the reception of the sermon, people exceed the pure intellective dimension, letting themselves dominated by feelings, aspirations, positive or negative moods etc. Given this inner dynamics, extremely hard to be predicted, of the receptive process, the preacher is fully aware of the reality according to which “the speech conveys not only the logical dimension of the idea – the judgment - but also its infralogical area - the pragmatic-affective attitude”34. A fundamental generative principle of style is the linguistic choice or option35. Determined from double direction - the expressive value of the word and the individual attitude of the speaker towards the subject and the receiver36 - the lexical selection configures the stylistic identity of the text. Arguing the existence of anamnetic-semantic resources of the word, Gh N. Dragomirescu wrote in the pages of his matchless encyclopedia of the figures of speech: "Word is, by definition, a deposit of latent images expecting nothing but the lucky integration in a syntagmatic uniqueness that would activate its meanings: to make it "expressive" and “original”37. The appropriate syntactic gesture, the happiest combination of sentences are born in the inner dynamics of the speaker, stimulated, of course, by two other important factors: the personal-affective specificity of the receptors and the extraverbal context (psychological, social, cultural, physical, temporal). All these elements are added the influence of the discursive subtext, namely the totality of meanings that the message involves. That is why the preacher, the verbal homiletic transmitter, but also the listeners to a significant extent, "personalise the 32 Ibidem, p. 60. Bartolomeu Anania, Cuvânt înainte la Ioan Toader, Metode noi în practica omiletică, ClujNapoca, Editura Arhidiecezană, 1997, p. 3. 34 Henri Wald, Expresivitatea ideilor, București, Editura Cartea Românească, 1986, p.66. 35 Together with two other, as present and active in the stylistic genesis: deviation (deviation from the linguistic rule) and specialization. 36 Roman Jackobson called it emotive or expressive function of the linguistic communication, identifying it, together with five other (referential, poetic, metalingual, phatic and conative or rethoric). 37 Gh. N. Dragomirescu, Mică enciclopedie a figurilor de stil, chapter. „Sursa stilistică a limbii la nivelul gramaticii”, București, Editura tiințifică și Enciclopedică, 1975, p. 9. 33 164 message to different extent”38. The reflexivity of issuance encounters the emotional patterns typical of the addressees (transitivity), which facilitates, through the locutionary values, the affective transfer. From the perspective of the homiletic transmitter, the solution of maximum efficiency lies in the sense of the responsible combination of different linguistic registers, subordinated, obviously, to the effective preaching of the Christian precepts and, ultimately, to the soteriological purpose of preaching. As a complementary element towards the stylistic profile of speech, the affective accent or insistence becomes perceptible at the phonetic level, a “subjective way of emphasis, determined by emotional reasons, with expressive function”39, based on the relation between the dynamic accent (physiologicalexpiratory) and the musical one (generated by the extension of some vowels). In constant correlation with other phonological elements (intonation, duration, intensity, rhythm) and with the prosodic ones (rhythm, rhyme, pauses, tempo), the affective accent creates new stylistic valencies in the context. Thus, the preacher priest prefers certain words, which he places in different discursive sequences, giving them an obvious affective mark, meant to transmit the state of mind of the speaker, but also to change, in the same direction, the feelings of the homiletic receptors. In the following examples, the spiritual presence of the speaker becomes perceptible, especially phonetically: “Replace the good deed with the better deed” (the stylistic accent placed on the modal adverb better suggests the idea of qualitative progress of the current Christian practice), “Through maany attempts passed the first Christian martyrs to overcome the persecuting paganism of those times!” (the affective accent takes the form of vocalic extension, showing the sympathy and admiration of the preacher towards those people and, at the same time, aiming at the religious and moral impulsion of the audience), “This re-vol ting attitude of Cain was the first murder in the biblical history of mankind!” (the phonetic separation into syllables of the adjective and the concentration of the articulation energy on the first syllable highlight the speaker’s indignation towards that gesture, intending to create the repulsion of receptors to the sin of murder). The argumentative and linguistic instrumentation specific to the pathos dimension aims, thus, at stimulating the passional character of the public. It is found in that rhetoric function called by the ancient theorists animos impellere (resort to feelings, to soul) and which found a favorite ground of manifestation in the exordium and epilogue. In fact, analyzing the structural taxonomy of the oratorical speech, we reach the conclusion that the dominant manner in which it was designed and presented meets the emotional demands: 1. Exordium (affective mark) → 2. Narratio (logical-demonstrative intention) → 3. Confirmatio (logical- 38 Dumitru Irimia, op. cit., p. 8. Angela Bidu-Vrănceanu, Cristina Călăraşu, Liliana Ionescu-Ruxăndoiu, Mihaela Mancaş, Gabriela Pană-Dindelegan, Dic ionar de ştiin e ale limbii, ed. a 2-a, Bucureşti, Editura Nemira&Co, 2005, s.v. affective. 39 165 demonstrative function) → 4. Epilogue (affective mark)40. The Logos is, thus, enclosed by pathos and ethos, rhetorical dimensions that predominantly communicate the speaker, intending to involve, by this, the feelings of the receptors. This entitles us to infer that the appropriate environment to exert the persuasion is an emotional one. For this reason, as an homiletic text inevitably bears the mark of the state of mind of its transmitter, “that emotive and musical meaning of things, hastened in its subjective intimacy”41, but also, to an equal extent at least, of the collective receptor (what Michel Riffaterre called “the stylistic of decodifier” or the effects of language), the semantic level of the sermon is the product of this affective hermeneutics. The homiletic type interaction presents perceptive manifestations similar to those of conversation. The researchers in the field of interactionist psychology reached the conclusion that during the conversational exchange communicators undergo, in stages or discontinuously, interactional micro-emotions, which they do not retain as such, they remaining in a stage rather subliminal42. In the case of orator, this affective substratum becomes perceptible in the lexical typology used, in the declarative and phraseological combinatorics, at the supra-segmental level of the language (phonetic variability, verbal flow, pitch of voice, intensity, pause etc.), in the mimicry and gestures complementary to the speech and in the synthetic organization of the discourse (the global semantics of the sermon). The most productive stylistic quality for the creative liberty of the preacher remains the novelty of the linguistic units used (words and syntagms). This transformational dynamics of the style reflects what the linguist academician Iorgu Iordan called, using an expression that became legendary, the life of words, namely “the speaker’s heart into the words”43. In this regard, it is impossible to ignore the fact that the homiletic discourse enhanced for many centuries the old church language, that “turned from a defining component of our old literary writing into the distinct variant of the modern Romanian culture”44. Therefore, the importance that church 40 According to the model of a known trope, the French semiologist Roland Barthes sees this affective framing of the message as a “chiasmus construction”; R. BARTHES, „L’ancienne rhetorique”, Communications, 16, 1970, p. 214. 41 Tudor Vianu, op. cit., p. 80. 42 Jacques Cosnier, Introducere în psihologia emoțiilor și a sentimentelor. Afectele, emoțiile, sentimentele, pasiunile, traducere de Eliza Galan, Iași, Editura Polirom, 2007, p. 87. 43 Iorgu Iordan, Stilistica limbii române, București, Editura tiințifică, 1975, p. 13. 44 Gheorghe Chivu, „Am devenit lingvist?”, in De ce am devenit lingvist? Omagiu academicianului Marius Sala, volum îngrijit de Emanuela Timotin și tefan Colceriu, București, Editura Univers Enciclopedic Gold, 2012, p.57; for the importance of the religious language in the configuration of the European culture, see also Eugen Munteanu, Lexicologie biblică românească, București, Editura Humanitas, 2008: A privileged factor in the interference between the cultures and implicitly between the national languages of Europe is the biblical text" (p.407). On the same argumentative direction, Rodica Zafiu notes, in an excellent study dedicated to homiletic language, that "sermon is one of the most stable types of texts by which the tradition of the rhetoric was preserved and continued in the European culture", „Ethos, Pathos și Logos în textul predicii”, in Al. 166 terms and expressions hold (the lexical set which, by its obvious archaic character, has a diminished affective potential) in the linguistic competence of the preacher represents the main factor of the tension between traditionalism and innovation at the level of their discursive performance. Drawing a conclusion, for the time being, to a problem that is still open and actual, we believe that the presence of the church vocabulary in the stylistic structure of the preacher nowadays becomes a secondary demand, rather aesthetical, being justified as long as it does not affect the semantic congruence, a sine qua non condition of the effective communication45. Conclusion The homiletic communication undertakes a semantic territory deeply rooted in terms of interpersonal relationship, between the preacher and the faithful receptors. Far from taking, passively and mechanically, exterior meanings, the persons involved in the homiletic process forge the communicative meanings through their inner co-orientation according to the contextual marks. The direct interaction puts into action deep personal energies, inner universes that are hard to discern, performing a sub-textual function, with the role of a matrix generating the ideas and emotionality specific to homiletic discourse. The lexical selection, the creations of phrases, the compositional and prononciative style, the gestures, all are (each with its well-defined and complementary role towards the other elements) representative marks of the personality of the preacher, the scope of this concept integrating the cultural competence too. The spiritual effects of the sermon depend, Gafton, Sorin Guia şi Ioan Milică (ed.), Text şi discurs religios, II, Iaşi, Editura Universităţii „Al. I. Cuza”, 2010, p. 27. 45 Although aware of the undeniable historical and literary value, but also of a certain spiritual expressivity of the church language, we believe that the persuasive motivation and the psychopedagogical one of the sermon can persuade the Orthodox orator nowadays not to sacrifice, by linguistic attachment to the past, the principle of discursive accessibility, the inviolable condition of a good communication. The obsolete (archaic) forms of the ecclesiastical speech often produce semantic obscurity, therefore, they must be trusted to the specialized philological approach (diachronic study of texts and linguistic typologies), for scientific purposes only. As for it, the homiletic language will facilitate the understanding of the Christian message by the actual world only if it adapts, with maximum communicative realism, to the linguistic competence of the receptors in the respective historical period. To this end, the practice of permanent dialogue with the parishioners (in order to perform a thematic and linguistic diagnosis), the synonymous variation updated (to avoid lexical monotony) and the prophylaxis of wooden language (an anti-language phenomenon characterized by the very annihilation of subjectivity in the written and oral expression) are just some of the means advisable. However, we must also draw attention on a few “traps” watching the church orator eager for such a stylistic compatibility: the extreme of the linguistic picturesque, of the metaphorism which “impresses before convincing” (Rev. Stephen Slevoacă), the excessive colloquial orality (“the familiar language, Rodica Zafiu drew attention in one of her curative interventions in Romania literară, is a counterweight and useful store for language varieties, but can also assume a negative dominant role the moment when threatening to break into any context, erasing the boundaries between registers and leveling the expression”), the frequent use of slang register, media topics, politics and so on. 167 ultimately, on the level of involvement of the homiletic actors (the preacher and the Christian public) in the interpersonal relationship implied by an authentic communication. In carrying out this affective connection specific to the Christian homily, a very important role is played by the communicative availability of the personalities involved (aspect dependent on the psychological typology in question), but also the stylistic methods, paraverbal and mimic and gesture in order to build such a spiritual connection. Despite a quite widespread prejudice, that turns out to be a cause of the frequent homiletic failures, the strict referential dimension of the message of the sermon, although extremely important, is not a sufficient source of success. We shall discover, from the continuous pastoral and didactic exercise, that homily reaches its maximum efficiency only when it focuses on direct human interaction between the person of the preacher and the person of the believer to whom the ecclesial speech addresses. Bibliography Bidu-Vrănceanu, Angela; Călăraşu, Cristina; Ionescu-Ruxăndoiu, Liliana; Mancaş, Mihaela; Pană-Dindelegan, Gabriela 2005: Dic ionar de ştiin e ale limbii, ed. a 2-a, Bucureşti, Editura Nemira&Co Barthes R. 1970: L’ancienne rhetorique, in „Communications”, nr. 16, p.172-223 Ciobotă, Marius Daniel 2012: Discursul omiletic din perspectiva științelor comunicării, București, Editura Universitară Chilea, Sebastian: Predicatorul, in „Mitropolia Olteniei”, Anul X (1958), nr.3-4, p.176-190 Cosnier, Jacques 2007: Introducere în psihologia emoțiilor și a sentimentelor. Afectele, emoțiile, sentimentele, pasiunile, traducere de Eliza Galan, Iași, Editura Polirom Creţia, Petru 2000: Eseuri morale, București, Editura Muzeul Literaturii Române Cuilenburg, J. J. Van, SCHOLTEN, O., NOOMEN, G. W. 1998: Ştiin a comunicării (Communication Science), versiune românească și studiu introductiv de Tudor Olteanu, Bucureşti, Editura Humanitas Dinu, Mihai 2007: Comunicarea. Repere fundamentale, București, Editura Orizonturi Dinu, Mihai 2008: Fundamentele comunicării interpersonale, București, Editura All Dragomirescu, Gh. N. 1975: Mică enciclopedie a figurilor de stil, București, Editura tiințifică și Enciclopedică Evdokimov, Paul 2010: Viața spirituală în cetate, prefață de Michel Evdokimov (preface by Michel Evdokimov), traducere de Măriuca și Adrian Alexandrescu, București, Editura Nemira Iordan, Iorgu 1975: Stilistica limbii române, București, Editura tiințifică Irimia, Dumitru 1986, Structura stilistică a limbii române contemporane, București, Editura tiințifică și Enciclopedică Julia Didier 1996: Dicționar de filosofie, traducere, avanprefață și completări privind filosofia românească de dr. Leonard Gavriliu (translation, preface and annotation by ph.d Leonard Gavriliu), București, Editura Univers Enciclopedic Noica, Constantin 2012: Despre demnitatea Europei, ed. a 2-a (second edition), București, Editura Humanitas 168 Petraş, Irina 1996: Teoria literaturii. Dic ionar-antologie (curente literare, figuri de stil, genuri şi specii literare, metrică şi prozodie), Bucureşti, Editura Didactică şi Pedagogică Popescu-Neveanu, Paul 1978: Dicționar de psihologie, București, Editura Albatros Robinson, Haddon 1998: Arta comunicării adevărului biblic, Cluj-Napoca, Editura Logos Sălăvăstru, Constantin 2006: Mic tratat de oratorie, Iași, Editura Universității „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” Sloane (ed.), Thomas O. 2006: Encyclopedia of Rhetoric, Oxford University Press Stăniloae, Dumitru 1993: Iisus Hristos – lumina lumii și îndumnezeitorul omului, ediție îngrijită de Monica Dumitrescu, București, Editura Anastasia McClure, John S. 2007: Preaching Words. 144 Key Terms in Homiletics, Louisville – London, Westminster John Knox Press Munteanu, Ştefan 1995: Introducere în stilistica operei literare, Timişoara, Editura de Vest Negrici, Eugen 1981: Imanența literaturii, București, Editura Cartea Românească Toader, Ioan 1997: Metode noi în practica omiletică, Cluj-Napoca, Editura Arhidiecezană Wald, Henri 1986: Expresivitatea ideilor, București, Editura Cartea Românească Wald, Henri 1973: Limbaj și valoare, București, Editura Enciclopedică Vianu, Tudor 1989: Dubla intenție a limbajului și problema stilului, in Modele de analize literare și stilistice, ediție îngrijită și prefață de Al. Hanță, ediția a 2-a revăzută și adăugită, București, Editura Albatros 169 Éthos et pathos dans le discours homilétique roumain Garofi a DINC The present article deals with the concepts of ethos and pathos which were studied on a corpus comprising Andrei Şaguna’s sermons (1809-1873), Orations. The former concept refers to the orator's self image, as illustrated by the collective mentality, to his/her reputation (the preliminary ethos) and to the orator's self image which depends on the communicative situation (the discursive ethos). The pathos is the emotional reaction that the orator intends to create in the audience. We reveal the rhetorical means that the orator uses in order to achieve his purpose. Among these range stylistic figures such as the analogy by dissimilarity, the example of authority, the correction, the preterition, the antiphore etc., as well as several self introducing formulas and self-evaluating syntagmas. Keywords: ethos, oration, pathos, religious discourse, rhetoric. Le concept d’éthos, en tant qu’il a été décrit par Aristote et repris par la néorhétorique et par l'analyse du discours, décrit l'image de soi du locuteur (orateur), ainsi que son influence sur l'auditoire, auquel il induit l'idée d'autorité (crédible ou non), de valeur ou de non-valeur. Nous convaincons donc à l'aide du caractère du locuteur, c'est-à-dire que le discours est prononcé de telle manière qu'il rend le locuteur crédible, car, d'une part, nous nous fions plutôt à des gens exquis, en génèral, en ce qui concerne toutes les questions, et d'autre part, entièrement, en ce qui concerne les problèmes qui ne présentent pas de certitude, mais des doutes. Il faut cependant que cela s'ensuive du même discours, et non pas d'une décision antérieure, c'est-à-dire non pas du caractère-même du locuteur1. L'éthos positif est l'une des conditions de base qui garantit la relation coopérante, de solidarité entre les deux pôles de la communication (l’émetteur et le récepteur)2. La recherche moderne distingue entre l’éthos préalable et l'éthos oratorique ou discursif, les deux notions désignant deux images de soi complémentaires. L'image préalable, primaire, représente la marque d’identité de l'individu, fixée dans la mentalité collective, déduite et construite à travers le temps sur le fondement de quelques indices sociaux, culturaux, comportamentaux qui individualisent une personne dans une certaine collectivité. Complètement 1 2 Aristotel 2004: I.2.1356.a.5-10. Cvasnîi-Cătănescu 2006, p. 593-601. 171 indépendant du discours et extérieur à celui-ci, l’éthos préalable (l’imaginaire social) reflète la renommée/la réputation d'un individu, en déclenchant des attentes que ses interventions verbales peuvent confirmer ou infirmer. D’autre part, l’éthos discursif (oratorique) se crée continuellement, se redéfinit dans le cadre et par l'intermédiaire de chaque discours du même auteur. L'éthos discursif est, en fait, l'image autoconstruite, et subit des modifications qui dépendent du contexte communicatif, premièrement de la situation de communication. L'éthos discursif s'actualise dans des variantes explicites (par des formules de présentation et d'évaluation de la personne-même de l'orateur), mais surtout dans des variantes implicites (le rôle qui revient au récepteur est celui de les dépister et de les interpréter). Loin d'être des signes de la versatilité, les multiples „images” ou „faces” possibles du locuteur (officielle, autoritaire, familière, tolérante, amicale, réfractaire etc.) ne sont que des formes d'adaptation au contexte situationnel3. Éthos et pathos dans les homélies du Métropolite Andrei Şaguna (le XIXème siecle) L’éthos préalable d’Andrei Şaguna a les données suivantes: Métropolite de la Transylvanie, ayant une riche activité théologique, culturelle et politique dans la deuxième moitié du 19-ème siècle (premier président de la société ASTRA de Sibiu, a fondé 800 écoles, président de la Grande Assemblée Nationale du Champs de la Liberté de Blaj de mai 1848, traducteur du slavon de quelques livres de culte etc.). L’éthos discursif se concrétise dans les Oraisons de Şaguna, dans quelques idées telles: - une affectation modérée de la modestie. Par exemple, dans l'homélie prononcée le jour de célébration de notre père Basile le Grand, Archevêque de la Césarée de Capadochie, l'orateur fait une remarque métatextuelle, ainsi qu'un renvoi à un texte homilétique écrit antérieurement par lui-même: Vous pourriez apprendre davantage sur les Fêtes dans mon oraison, en ce livre, sur le Jour lumineux des Saintes Pâques, donc que ce soi suffisant ce que nous venons de dire ci-dessus sur les deux établissements de l'Église (ŞA, C, p. 25); - dans la part médiane de l'homélie, qui est une part explicative-argumentative, l'éthos modestie/humilité vs autorité s'accentue; à l’opposition d'Anthime d'Ivirie par exemple, qui, en ce moment précis de l'homélie, se déchaîne dans des conseils, des reproches, des avertissements et même des menaces, Andrei Şaguna recourt à des formules paternes, qui expriment la protection, sa tonalité est pédagogique, contenant des exhortations et des questions rhétoriques - des indices de l’auteur omniscient, mais non pas justitiaire. De même, il n’y a pas peu d'occurences des indices d'empathie; - un procédé assez rare chez cet auteur est celui d'hyperboliser par l'amplification de la modestie: J’avoue que ma pensée est trop limitée, donc je ne 3 Ibidem, p. 594. 172 pourrais pas appréhender le mystère pour lequel, alors qu’il a établit l’interdiction de sacrifier aux idôles, Dieu n’a pas explicitement nommé l'être humain; cependant, étant données la pieuse attitude que j'ai envers l'être tout saint de Dieu et la conviction que chaque être humain doit l'avoir en même temps que moi..., je l'audace de dire que seul l’être qui glorifie Dieu en tant que Trinité mérite d’être nommé un être humain. (ŞA, C, p. 54); -la tonalité gnomique et paterne a sa part la plus grande dans la péroration. Du point de vue lexical, l’effet hortatif s'obtient par des impératifs des verbes écouter, comprendre, penser (ce dernier est spécial, car son utilisation à l'imperatif est peu habituelle): Pensez et faites ainsi, et vour serez heureux sur la terre, et vous hériterez du royaume de Dieu après cette vie passagère, et ainsi vous vous convaincrez totalement que notre Seigneur est longuement patient et fort miséricordieux. Amen. (ŞA, C, p. 16); Écoutez mon enseignement et accomplissezle, et avec cela préparez votre trésor dans les cieux. (ŞA, C, p. 46). Alors chers auditeurs, cherchez à faire de la sorte que rien ne puisse vous séparer de l’amour de Dieu, vous non plus. Et cet amour que vous ayez que ce ne soit pas vanité, mais qu'il vienne de votre conviction intérieure, c'est-à-dire qu'il soit conforme à la pensée saine de laquelle tout homme est doué par Dieu. Parfois la tonalité est intime, de confession, comme justification des conseils que l'orateur donne à ses auditeurs. Le pluriel de majesté est remplacé par la première personne du singulier, dans les passages comme ceux-ci. L’auteur nous confie des témoignages de sa démarche cognitive (il dévoile la modalité dont un sujet déclenche des idées similaires dans sa mémoire): C’est pourquoi la présentation de mes pensées me rappelle aussi d'autres mots de notre Seigneur cités par l'Evangeliste Matthieu, dans le chapitre 6, verset 33, où notre Seigneur dit: Cherchez premièrement le royaume et la justice de Dieu, et toutes ces choses vous seront données par-dessus. (ŞA, C, p. 107); Le zèle envers la maison de Dieu et envers le partage de la nourriture spirituelle à tous les peuples chrétiens me détermine à vous faire attentifs à l'importance des parents, d'après les pensées que la célébration d'aujourd'hui réveille en moi. (ŞA, C, p. 48); Je pense, mes bien aimés auditeurs, que je n'aurai pas tort si je dit que, de la belle position, exquise et honnête d'un père et d'une mère, ce sont les parents seuls qui suivent les conseils du Saint Apôtre Paul qui puissent se réjouir de leurs enfants. (ŞA, C, p. 51); Ici je suis obligé de dire que notre peuple est profondément malheureux, car il travaille beaucoup, il transpire beaucoup, il acquiert tout ce dont il a besoin pour sa nourriture quotidienne, mais très souvent il gaspille sans rien épargner de tout ce qu'il a acquis. (ŞA, C, p. 98); Mais de quel sacrifice s'agit-il? J'ai peur rien que d'en prononcer la réponse. (ŞA, C, p. 55); -le pluriel inclusif marque le placement de l'auteur sur le même plan que l'auditeur: Voyons maintenant le comportement des fils d'Adam. (ŞA, C, p. 13) L'auteur accueille et anticipe les questions du public: Et vous voulez peut être que je vous offre un exemple vivant du vrai amour envers Dieu. J'accomplis avec joie votre désir et je vous dévoile l'exemple de l'amour envers Dieu d'un homme 173 qui, meme s'il avait vécu il y a mil six cents ans, est célébré aujourd' hui par toute la chrétienté, et on le nombre parmi les bien aimés de Dieu (ŞA, C, p. 68). Le pathos est défini comme l'état /la réaction émotionel(le) que l'auteur a l'intention de provoquer sur l'auditeur - individuel ou collectif, homogène et hétérogène4. Par l'induction du type adéquat d'émotions, on crée l'environnement qui favorise la réception, correspondant aux intentions persuasives de l'orateur. L'éthos se retrouve dans l'aspect spectaculaire de l'oratorie, tandis que le pathos articule la part informative-explicative et argumentative, parce que celui-ci se constitue, grâce aux moments d'escaladation des contraintes normatives, dans une bonne occasion pour développer un système éclectique de procédés qui servent le pathetisme. Les appelatifs sont paternelles: les substantifs fidèles ou auditeurs apparaissent sans déterminants ou bien ils sont déterminés uniquement par des adjectifs comme: bien-aimés ou pieux: mes bien-aimés chrétiens (p. 16, p. 25), mes bien-aimés auditeurs (p. 71, p. 76, p. 134); on rencontre aussi l'adjectif substantivé bien-aimés (p. 26). L'actualisation comme moyen de vérifier l'attention, de quantification de l'effet du discours sur les auditeurs, connaît la variante par laquelle on vérifie l'état psycho-physique provoqué. Dans l'exemple suivant, l'orateur incite le public à réflechir et a formuler une opinion sur la pratique du sacrifice humain relatée dans l'Ancien Testament, coutume courante chez les peuples païens: N'avez-vous pas senti votre sang se coaguler, mes chers auditeurs, en écoutant des histoires si affreuses? (ŞA, C, p. 56). Voici un exemple pour illustrer le soin de l'orateur pour euphémiser toute admonestation: Il y a quelques-uns qui, en dépit de leur croyance chrétienne, baptisent leurs enfants du nom de Traïan, qui a été un homme célèbre pour son audace parmi les anciens Romains païens; ces gens oublient cependant que ce Traïan n'a pas été chrétien et qu'il n'a rendu aucun service à l'Église de Dieu ou à la chrétienté. Alors, ent tant que Romain audacieux, il a du prestige dans l'histoire laïque, mais non pas dans l'histoire de l'Église, car il n'a pas été chrétien; Il s'ensuit donc qu'on ne peut donner son nom à aucun des chrétiens. (ŞA, C, p. 25) Le prédicateur utilise le pronom indéfini quelques-uns (sous-entendu, non pas même présent dans la structure de surface du texte), puis il introduit une structure laudative (un homme célèbre pour son audace), dont l'effet est de provoquer la sympathie à l'égard du personnage historique évoqué; mais tout d'un coup, dans la même phrase, la tonalité change (change aussi l'attitude anticipée des auditeurs): il y survient une chute de l'enthousiasme, accomplie au niveau stylistique par un zeugma: Traïan, qui a été un homme célèbre pour son audace parmi les anciens Romains païens... L'effet en est l'induction d'une attitude d'antipathie pour un personnage antérieurement présenté sous un angle positif. Ibidem, p. 597. 174 Dans la catégorie de l'euphémisation des expressions négativement orientées on retrouve l'utilisation de la 3-ème personne du singulier, auprès du terme générique l'homme, au lieu de l'adressation directe par l'intermédiaire de la 2-ème personne: Et si l'homme voit enfin que le travail de sa pensée et de sa compréhension ne concorde pas avec les exploits des saints et des droits de Dieu, il devrait renoncer à sa pensée et à sa compréhension et suivre et imiter les exploit de ces hommes-là, qui ont été sa lumière, et les véritables enseignants de ceux qui ont besoin de bons enseignements rédempteurs (ŞA, C, p. 29). Les effets des énoncés/paragraphes qui affectent la modestie ont une influence importante sur toutes les facettes du discours: Bien que je n'aie pas l'intention de vous ennuyer de ma longue oraison et tout en connaissant votre attitude pieuse à l'égard de la fête d'aujourd'hui, et en voyant sur vos visages l'insatiable désir qui vous rend avides d'apprendre toute la signification de la grande fête d'aujourd'hui, je ne peux pas finir mes pensées sans faire appel à la magnanimité et la générosité indicibles de Dieu à l'égard des humains (ŞA, C, p. 62). En ce qui concerne la manière d'agir des récépteurs, le public se sent égal à l'orateur, donc on a un captatio benevolentiae presque parfait. C'est le même effet, de captatio benevolentiae, qu'on obtient par le biais des exordes plutôt amples, quelques-uns réalisés par insinuation, comme par exemple dans L'oraison à la fête du premier Martyre et Archidiacre Stéphane. Nous citons ici seulement la première partie de cet ample exorde, où on fait une parenthèse très dévelopée, pour revenir ensuite à la signification de la fête et à l'histoire de la vie du saint fêté: À quoi sertil à l'homme de gagner tout le monde s'il perd son âme? (Marc, 8, 37) Il ya des circonstances et des événéments dans la vie des êtres humains, qui donnent l'occasion de parler des sujets importants, dont la mention apporte d'autant plus d' utilité, au fur et à mesure que la personne appréhende, la grandeur et l'importance de ces circonstances et de ces événéments. Les fêtes des saints sont, entre autres, de telles circonstances; pour leur actualisation, l'Église a établi des jours spéciaux, où l'homme, en renonçant aux préoccupations terrestres, prêtera attention aux activités spirituelles qui nourrissent son âme (ŞA, C, p. 17). Au niveau de la composition et à celui de l'organisation séquentielle de l'homélie, l'éthos réalisé par l'aveu de l'ignorance représente un stimulus pour la modification et la diversification des techniques qui servent à structurer le discours. Ces techniques sont multiples: le parallèle par dissimilitude et dissociation, formée par l'alternance de deux types de séquences évaluatives (ayant des référents distincts), celles-ci étant des séquences typiques pour le discours épidictique aussi. Ces deux séquences-pendantes sont: la discréditation (dans la variante qui consiste à apparemment minimiser la personne de l'orateur) et le discours laudatif porté sur une personne (référent) biblique. L' insertion du fragment laudatif marque la transition du protoccol pétrifié de la mise en thème au développement du thème proprement dit. En outre, on radicalise l'opposition entre l'image délibérément dérisoire de l'orateur et le caractère exemplaire de l'événement/de la personne 175 élogié(e). Comme procédé de composition, le parallèle antithétique est le résultat de la succession des paragraphes hyperbolisants par minimisation et des paragraphes hyperbolisants par amplification. La citation d'une source sacrée. Cette catégorie d'indices du pathos est très ample et hétéroclite: à part les citations des Évangiles, des Psaumes et d'autres textes scripturaires, qui apparaissent en position de motto, on remarque aussi la citation allusive des textes du culte. Ainsi, à la fin de la Liturgie eucharistique, après le congé, on énumère les qualités de Jésus sur lesquelles on a insisté pendant ce jour-là. Il ya des formules classiques, courantes, mais il y a aussi des formules plus spéciales, utilisées à l'occasion de diverses fêtes: Celui qui est ressuscité d'entre les morts, le Christ, notre vrai Dieu - cette formule est classique, usuelle, en rappelant la Résurrection, car chaque Liturgie eucharistique est une célébration effective de la Résurrection. Des formules spéciales sont: Jésus Christ, Celui qui est monté vers les Cieux; Jésus Christ, Celui qui est transfiguré sur le mont du Tabor... etc. Ces formules ont été adoptées par le Saint Métropolite Andei Şaguna et utilisées à la fin de ses sermons des fêtes majeures. Ainsi, dans le sermon de la Sainte Rencontre, l'orateur conclut de la manière suivante: Partagez la bénédiction temporaire et éternelle aussi, pour notre Seigneur Jésus Christ, Celui qui aujourd'hui, lorsqu'Il, dans les quarante jours de Sa vie, est emmené à l' Église (ŞA, C, p. 52). L'antiphore5 prend de formes diverses: soit le couple question / réponse apparait tout seul, soit il est précédé par une énonciation qui incite le public à la méditation: Pensez un peu, chers auditeurs, au contenu de ce conseil du Saint Apôtre Paul, et vous verrez son acharnement pour annoncer la bonne nouvelle de la Loi de Dieu. (ŞA, C, p. 95); Il faut nous demander. Qu'est-ce que nous devons penser et faire à l'occasion de la fête d' aujourd'hui? Si nous voulons passer la fête de la Nativité de telle manière qu'on obtient un gain physique et spirituel, nous devons penser à obéir notre Dieu. (ŞA, C, p. 16); Maintenant il est bon que nous nous demandions comment nous devrions regarder la vie et la mort de ce saint de Dieu. Avant de découvrir la réponse à cette question, il faut que nous nous souvenions de deux établissements de l'Église: d'une part, c'est le saint Baptême, et d'autre part, ce sont les fêtes que l'Église a établies pour la glorification et la mémoire des saints de Dieu (ŞA, C, p. 24). La disuassion est, directement ou indirectement, présente: Ne vous étonnez pas, mes chers auditeurs, de la vérité et de la beauté de ces mots (ŞA, C, p. 65). Par le biais d'une prémise donnée comme sûre, on ménage, délicatement, la sensibilité des auditeurs, puis on introduit un exemple et un conseil: Je sais que nos chrétiens sont partout des gens brillliants et appliqués. Je dois avouer cependant que beaucoup d'entre eux font leur travail même aujourd'hui exactement comme ils 5 L'antiphore est une figure stylistique qui réside dans une question suivie de la réponse que l'orateur se donne tout seul, en anticipant ainsi un dialogue avec les auditeurs. V. Grigoraş 2000: 141. 176 voyaient faire chez leurs ancêtres (ŞA, C, p. 96). On présente ensuite des arguments hiérarchiquement enchaînés, pour démontrer la justesse des procédés par lesquels les étrangers des pays qui profitent depuis longtemps de la paix ont fait des progrès techniques comme conséquence de leur désir d'obtenir plus de produits, qui couvrent les besoins d'une population en évolution démographique. Ainsi, l'orateur ne méprise pas la tradition, mais il loue le progrès technique. Dans l'homélie sur le prophète Élie, on introduit l'exemple négatif des israélites, qui ont été punis pour leur désobeïssement, par une sècheresse qui a duré trois années (ŞA, C, p. 103). La précision des sources est modérément détaillée, sans toutefois charger le texte de l'homélie par des formules prolixes. Ce procédé a toujours un rôle fortement argumentatif, en introduisant un exemple d'autorité, soit sous la forme d'une personne exemplaire, l'experte (le saint, la Bible), soit de l'autorité de l'ensemble des gens (comme tout le monde le sait, on sait bien que...)6: C'est de la manière suivante que les Saintes Écritures la décrivent dans le livre de la Genèse, chapitre 6... (ŞA, C, p. 13). D'autres fois la source est nommée très brièvement, sans aucun détail: L'histoire de l'Église nous donne beaucoup de preuves en ce qui concerne les chrétiens qui, après que leurs semblables avaient reçu une mort martyrique pour leur foi en Jésus Christ, prenaient les corps des martyres avec grand respect et les enterraient très pieusement, en chantant des hymnes et des psaumes, et bâtissaient des églises, pour la gloire de Dieu, au dessus de ces tombeaux (ŞA, C, p. 26). Parfois on rencontre dans la structure de surface du texte, sans préciser le type de la source scriptique ou scripturaire, l'émetteur du message (dans l'exemple cidessous, il s'agit du saint Apôtre Paul) avec un autre anthroponyme, qui désigne et le destinataire, et le nom de la source écrite (dans notre exemple, il s'agit de Tite et de l'Épître pour Tite du Saint Apôtre Paul), et cela pour des raisons d'économie discursive et pour fluidifier l'énonciation. On introduit ainsi un exemple d'autorité aussi, à double force: la parole divine (la Bible, les autorités de l'histoire ecclesiastique et laïque), ainsi que la personne qui a incorporé ces mots, qui les a vécus, en démontrant ainsi leur véridicité: C'est ainsi que Saint Paul décrit pour Tite l'icône du bon père: Il doit être sobre, honnête, orthodoxe, ayant la santé de la foi, de l'amour, de la patience. (ŞA, C, p. 49); Il n'observe pas le conseil du sage Sirah du chapitre 18, 25... (ŞA, C, p. 98); Le prophète Isaïe a bien dit: „Qui a connu la pensée du Seigneur? Et qui a été le conseiller qui Lui apprenne ces pensées?” (Chapitre 40, 30) (ŞA, C, p. 84); Pour clarifier notre enseignement, voyons maintenant l'histoire évangélique, que le saint Évangéliste Luc nous raconte, dans le chapitre 1, en écrivant comme il suit... (ŞA, C, p. 85). La source peut être culturelle – et chez Andrei Şaguna elle l'est souvent. Cette source peut être précisée ou vague. L'auteur entre parfois dans une polémique avec 6 Lo Cascio, 2002 : 121-122. 177 la source, soit pour la préciser, soit pour la compléter ou pour la corriger: L'historiographe Diodore dit dans le chapitre 20... (ŞA, C, p. 55); Les écrivains, soient-ils anciens ou nouveaux, appellent un tel homme serveur des idôles, mais moi je crois que ce nom est approprié à un serveur des idôles seulement dans la mesure où il montre cela par ses actions extérieures; en ce qui concerne ses sentiments intérieures, on n'a pas encore trouvé un nom jusqu' aujord' hui, pour désigner la fausse foi que l'âme d'un serveur d' idôles nourrit. (ŞA, C, p. 54); … comme on peut lire chez l' Évangéliste Luc, dans le chapitre 12, verset 32... (ŞA, C, p. 72). Un autre repère du discours est l'appel à la cognition commune, collective: À ce que tout le monde sait, il a ordonné que tous les enfants de Béthléem fussent tués. (ŞA, C, p. 86). L'argumentation, le plus souvent inductive, mise sur la force persuasive de plusieurs procédés et techniques d' influencer l'auditoire: des citations, des exemples, des exemples négatifs, des contremodèles, des topoï fondammentaux, des paralogismes (des arguments faux): L'homme d'aujourd'hui peut croire que, puisque Noé était droit et bien aimé par Dieu, ses fils et tous ses descendants fussent droits et bien aimés par Dieu. Mais quiconque croit cela a tort, car ses descendants ont fait la preuve d'un grand orgueil, par lequel ils ont nui à Dieu, en voulant construire une tour, par laquelle atteindre le ciel (ŞA, C, p. 14). L'exclamation rhétorique accompagne l'anaphore, pour emphatiser une certaine idée. On utilise aussi un climax, de sorte que les dernières exclamations sont des phrases averbales: Un grand jour importante pour la Loi de Dieu! Un jour plein de tendresse spirituelle! Un jour dont il est digne de se souvenir! Un jour de la victoire de la chrétienté contre les serveurs d' idôles! Un jour qui apporte la couronne aux défenseurs de la foi. L'exemple est une preuve technique qui représente, dans la littérature homilétique, un procédé courant, ayant des formes de manifestation diverses. L'analogie par dissimilitude en est une. Cela consiste à mettre en parallèle deux objets, à l'intention de souligner leurs ressemblances. L'une des séquences, strictement dénotative, glosse la deuxième, à valeur symbolique. Il s'ensuit une grande force de l'analogie, celle de capaciter la réaction émotionelle du public. Le plus souvent, on met face à face l'univers laïque et celui ecclesiastique ou spirituel, de manière catoptrique. Inévitablement, il y a des répétitions qui surgissent, avec des termes qui fonctionnent aussi bien dans la plan dénotatif, que dans celui symbolique. Dans le plan sémantique, l'alternance dénotation/connotation homogénise et en même temps différencie subtilement les deux plans analogiques: Alors ceux d'entre vous qui êtes des parents et surtout des mères, vous avez devant vos yeux la grandeur et la sainteté de votre vocation; soyez un exemple vivant de tout bon exploit; éduquez vos enfants selon la loi de Dieu, car vous voyez aujourd' hui que la Mère de Dieu elle-même emmène le divin Enfant dans l'église, après quarante jours depuis sa naissance, et elle le promet à Dieu. (ŞA, C, p. 52); Et comme nous savons de l'expérience courante que tout homme prête attention à son 178 action, de la même manière les serveurs d'idôles prêtent attention à répandre l' idôlatrie (ŞA, C, p. 56). La correction se réduit à la double formulation, négative et puis affirmative, d'une idée, ayant un effet emphatisant puissant; fréquemment associé avec d'autres figures (énumérations, climax, répétitions anaphoriques), la correction a un rôle très important pour la construction des symétries narratives et descriptives à fonction d'éloge. En liaison avec ce procédé, c'est la prétérition: l'orateur annonce qu'il va parler court sur un certain sujet, mais il fait une digression et il en parle exhaustivement. La conclusion est annoncée aussi par des indices métatextuels: Faisons mantenant, chers auditeurs, un résumé de ce que nous avons dit jusqu' ici et voyons ce qui en résulte (ŞA, C, p. 63). La parabole (et son explication par l'isolement et l'explication de tous les termes à valeur symbolique) réprésente un élément-clè de chaque homélie. Les allusions et les références culturelles ne manquent pas, ayant le but de rendre le texte sacré plus proche des auditeurs moins récéptifs à son spécifique, et d'autre part de préparer les auditeurs pour une juste perception de l'univers, même laïque, de leurs vies: Dans un mot, l' Europe entière doit remercier à la chrétienté pour son bon état fleurissant et brillant, dont elle se réjouit de nos jours et qui la fait être un modèle de culture pour les autres parties du monde (ŞA, C, p. 77). Nous avons vu les moyens principaux par lesquels on réalise la présence de l'orateur dans le discours, sa quête pour déceler la réponse du public, pour sentir son frémissement, son émotion, qui lui apporte la conviction que l'intérêt est mutuel. En même temps, nous avons souligné les procédés qui permettent non seulement de manifester la personnalité de l'orateur, mais de vérifier l'attention de l'auditoire et les effets du discours sur celui-ci. Il est certain que les moyens paralinguistiques sont aussi nécessaires pour quantifier l'intérêt du public (étudier la mimique, observer les sourires et les grimaces etc.), mais il est tout aussi vrai que les modalités inventoriées aide l'orateur a bien canaliser ses mots et son énérgie pour réaliser un acte de langage réussi, notamment pour prononcer une homélie qui ne s'oublie pas immédiatement que l'auditoire ait quitté l'église (même s'il garde en mémoire les idées principales du sermon). Ce que l'orateur ecclesiastique essaie, par une élaboration stylistique de ses homélies, c'est de rattacher aux belles idées qu'il expose (sur les êtres saints) un langage choisi, qui, lui aussi, exalte l'âme des auditeurs. Bibliographie sélective Aristotel 2004, Retorica, Bucureşti, Editura IRI, colecţia Cogito, ediţie bilingvă, traducere, studiu introductiv şi index de Maria-Cristina Andrieş, note şi comentarii de ŞtefanSebastian Maftei Bacry, Patrick 1992, Les figures de style et autres procédés stylistiques, Belin, Paris Benveniste, Émile 1974, Problèmes de rhétorique générale, II, Gallimard, Paris Cvasnîi-Cătănescu, Maria 2006, Etos şi patos în Didahiile lui Antim Ivireanul, in Gabriela Pană–Dindelegan (coord.), Limba română - aspecte sincronice şi diacronice, Bucureşti, 179 Editura Universităţii din Bucureşti, p. 593-601 Grigoraş, Costachi 2000, „...Propovăduiţi Evanghelia la toată făptura!...” Omiletică şi catehetică specială, Trinitas Editura Mitropoliei Moldovei şi Bucovinei, Iaşi Lo Cascio, Vincenzo 2002, Gramatica argumentării. Strategii şi structuri, traducere de Doina Condrea-Derer şi Alina-Gabriela Sauciuc, Bucureşti, Editura Meteora Press. Sălăvăstru, Constantin 2003, Teoria şi practica argumentării, Iaşi, Polirom Şaguna, Andrei, Mitropolit 2003, Cuvântări bisericeşti pentru Sărbătorile Domneşti, ClujNapoca, Presa Universitară Clujeană Toader, Ioan 2002, Retorica amvonului, Cluj-Napoca, Presa Universitară Clujeană Tuţescu, Mariana 2005, L'Argumentation. Introduction à l'étude du discours, deuxième édition revue, Editura Universităţii din Bucureşti Zafiu, Rodica 2013, „Ethos, Pathos şi Logos în textul predicii”, in Perspective asupra textului şi discursului religios, volum îngrijit de Ioan Milică, Emanuel Gafton şi Sorin Guia, Iaşi, Editura Universităţii „Alexandru Ioan Cuza”, p. 219-230 Sigles ŞA, C = ŞAGUNA, Andrei, Mitropolit 2003, Cuvântări bisericeşti pentru Sărbătorile Domneşti, Cluj-Napoca, Presa Universitară Clujeană 180 Despre omiletica lui Samuil Micu Vasile D. ÂRA Samuil Micu was not only the most erudite and prolific theologian in coala Ardeleană, but also an outstanding speaker who’s sermons were listened and highly appreciated by the contemporary society. Although he published only seven original, and two translated funeral discourses, in 1784, his homiletic heritage is much wider. His manuscripts contain over 130 sermons translated by him from patristic writings of Basil the Great, John Chrysostom, Ciril of Alexandria, John of the Ladder, Ephrem the Syrian, Gregory the Theologian, John of Damascus, Anastasius of Sinai, Theodore of Stoudios, etc. His sermons, written according to the literary language that characterised the religious texts printed after 1750, set a new type of religious discourse: based on vast patristic information, and constructed with a variety of rhetorical principles. These sermons develop themes and motives that were attentively selected from major homiletic works, and represent original conceptions of their author, in a manner that speaks about the intelligence and native talent of the orator. Keywords: sermon clerical, funerary discourse, homily, patristic, theology. Samuil Micu a fost unul dintre cei mai erudiți și, categoric, cel mai prolific dintre cărturarii români de pînă la începutul secolului al XIX-lea. Cele peste 60 de cărți și alte scrieri de mai mică întindere însumează aproximativ 22000 de pagini (14200 de pagini de traduceri și 7800 de pagini de lucrări originale), din care s-au tipărit numai vreo 4000 de pagini (v. Mladin, Vlad, Moisiu 1957: 75), restul păstrîndu-se în manuscrisele aflate acum în custodia Filialei din Cluj a Bibliotecii Academiei Române, după ce mai întîi aparținuseră Bibliotecii Episcopiei GrecoCatolice Române din Oradea (cf. Radu 1923; vezi și bibliografia integrală a scrierilor lui S. Micu, editate și în manuscris, la Chindriș, Iacob 2010: 14-19). Opera sa a marcat și, în cîteva domenii esențiale, a determinat schimbări radicale în evoluția culturii și a scrisului românesc. S. Micu a fost cel dintîi teolog și filolog român în deplinul înțeles al cuvîntului, dar a fost și primul istoric de sorginte cantemiriană și de tip iluminist, a fost pasionat de filozofie, de logică și de etică, fiind totodată și un foarte apreciat orator, profesor, călăuzitor și luptător pentru emanciparea socioculturală a românilor din Transilvania, traumatizați de înrobirea seculară și de prigoana la care erau supuși după răscoala lui Horia, întîmplată chiar în momentul de afirmare a învățatului blăjean. Elogiul făcut de 181 Lucian Blaga învățaților colii Ardelene se potrivește cu deosebire mentorului acestei mișcări iluministe din spațiul românesc: ei se simțeau „chemați să împlinească năvalnic ceea ce istoria neglijase vreme de o mie de ani. Ei aveau conștiința că pun pîrghia ca să înalțe la nivelul de lumină al secolului un masiv de munți cufundat în tenebre. O lume întreagă a spiritului trebuia clădită la repezeală, ca să răscumpere istoria pierdută” (Blaga 1966: 129). Operele și strădaniile corifeilor colii Ardelene au fost piatra de temelie a procesului de modernizare și de occidentalizare a limbii, a culturii și a științei umaniste românești, care a rodit și s-a impus într-un răstimp istoric foarte scurt, adică în mai puțin de un secol. Valoarea teologului, a cărturarului și a predicatorului S. Micu a fost apreciată nu numai de cei cu care acesta a colaborat, ci si de episcopul Ioan Bobb, adversarul înverșunat al învățaților colii Ardelene, care i-a îngăduit „să predice din amvonul catedralei episcopale din Blaj” (Chindriș, Iacob 2010: 8), precum și de autoritățile imperiale, care l-au numit cenzor al cărților românești editate în tipografia din Buda, demnitate acordată atunci numai cărturarului recunoscut a fi cel mai erudit învățat român din Transilvania. Posesor al unei imense culturi teologice, obținute prin parcurgerea și aprofundarea textelor fundamentale ale creștinismului și ale sfinților părinți din Apus și din Răsărit, pe care le-a citit în latină și în greacă, Samuil Micu a tradus, a prelucrat și a elaborat lucrări esențiale pentru teologia creștină, în total cîteva zeci de scrieri patristice, omiletice, de morală, de filozofie etc.1, între care se distinge mai cu seamă Biblia (Blaj, 1795), a doua traducere integrală a textului sacru în limba română, operă care, așa cum afirma Nicolae Iorga, este „în stare singură să dea un veșnic nume aceluia ce a săvârșit-o” (apud Mladin, Vlad, Moisiu 1957: 54). Iscusitul și admiratul orator Samuil Micu „a predicat nu numai în Catedrala din Blaj, ci și în diferite biserici unite și neunite [din Ardeal, n.n.], «cu timp și fără timp», răspîndind pretutindeni, într-o limbă simplă și înțeleasă, convingerile lui creștinești și însuflețirea sufletului său pentru o viață creștină superioară și pentru propășirea poporului” (Mladin, Vlad, Moisiu 1957: 70), dobîndind astfel respect și faimă între preoți și credincioși. Chiar dacă a publicat, „fiind cercat și îndemnat de mulți iubitori de D‹u›mnezeu creștini”, cum însuși mărturisește (Micu 1784: [IV]), doar o singură carte de predici, intitulată Propovedanie sau învățături la îngropăciunea oamenilor morți (Blaj, 1784), care conține șapte discursuri funebre originale și două traduceri, opera omiletică a lui S. Micu este mult mai vastă. În manuscris, s-au păstrat 15 predici pentru duminici, adunate într-un volum de 348 de pagini, intitulat Cuvîntări bisericești sau predice, pe care intenționa să-l dea la tipar în 1805, dar îi lipseau banii necesari pentru editare2, la care se adaugă 22 de 1 Din cea mai recentă și completă bibliografie a operei lui S. Micu (v. Chindriș, Iacob 2010: 1419), în care sînt incluse și lucrările de filologie, de logică, de istorie, creațiile literare etc., reiese că 12 au fost publicate antum, 17 au fost editate sau reeditate postum, iar 55 se păstrează în manuscris (între acestea sînt menționate și manuscrisele unor texte tipărite). 2 Într-o scrisoare adresată lui „Corneli (fost director al școalelor românești din eparhia unită Oradea), Samuil Micu Clain spune – între altele – că are gata de tipar Cuvîntările bisericești, dar n- 182 predici (598 de pagini) traduse din omiletica Sfîntului Vasile cel Mare, 88 de omilii ale Sfîntului Ioan Gură de Aur, grupate în trei volume (1735 de pagini), precum și unele dintre cuvîntările altor sfinți părinți: Chiril, arhiepiscopul Alexandriei, Ioan Scărarul, Efrem Sirul, Grigorie Teologul, Ioan Damaschin, Anastasie Sinaitul, Theodor Studitul, Pahomie ș.a., din ale căror opere Samuil Micu a tradus și alte scrieri teologice (cf. Mladin, Vlad, Moisiu 1957: 45-52)3. Înturcît spre sfîrșitul veacului al XVIII-lea se împlinea un secol de la apariția Sicriului de aur (Sas-Sebeș, 1683), cea dintîi carte românească de omiletică funebră, tipărită de clericul transilvănean Ioan Zoba din Vinț, și a Bibliei (București, 1688), prima traducere integrală în limba română a Sfintei Scripturi, timp în care nu s-au mai editat astfel de cărți la noi, iar româna a devenit limbă de cult în toate bisericile românești și s-a impus ca o variantă cultivată unitară în textele tipărite, mai cu seamă în cele religioase, vechile traduceri n-ar mai fi corespuns exigențelor de comunicare din vremea lui Samuil Micu. De altfel, teologul blăjean invocă tocmai acest motiv pentru noua traducere și editare a Bibliei (Blaj, 1795), atunci cînd spune că textul tipărit la 1688 a fost tălmăcit „cu foarte întunecată și încurcată așezare și întocmire a graiului românesc și mult osibit de vorba cea de acum obicinuită, și mai ales de graiul și de stilul cel din cărțile besericești, care în toate besearicile românești să cetesc…” ( Biblia 2000: 17). Este posibil ca și omiliile scrise și rostite de Samuil Micu să fi fost alcătuite din același motiv, dar și pentru că predicile lui Ioan Zoba deveniseră foarte rare la un secol de la tipărire, ca și Biblia de la București, iar numărul credincioșilor și al preoților români din Ardeal, uniți și neuniți, care aveau nevoie de carte românească, sporise considerabil după 1700, cînd româna s-a impus ca limbă de cult. În tălmăcirea Bibliei, Samuil Micu a urmat cu strictețe rigorile reproducerii exacte, conforme cu originalul, a textului sacru, cum însuși ține să precizeze: „singur bine socotindu-o și și cu bărbați învățați, cu amăruntul și – cum să zice – din fir în păr cercându-o și cernându-o și cu cea elinească a celor șeaptezeci de dascali și cu cea veachie românească alăturându-o, unde au trebuit o au îndreptat, ca întru toate să fie aseamenea și întocmai izvodului elinesc a celor șeaptezeci de dascali” (Biblia 2000: 17). Omiliile, fiind rostite liber, adică nefiind citite de către preot în biserică sau în afara ei, puteau fi alcătuite, cel puțin sub aspect lingvistic și stilistic, uneori, parțial, și în privința conținutului, mai variat de la predicator la predicator și de la o împrejurare concretă la alta. În această privință, discursurile are banii necesari. De aceea apelează să se facă abonamente printre preoți. ‹‹ Eu aș vrea să tipăresc aici (Buda) niște Conții, conciones, dar la acelea trebuie cheltuială și eu atîta n-am ›› (Mladin, Vlad, Moisiu 1957: 73). Pentru că le considera valoroase și necesare preoților, era convins că se vor vinde, părere confirmată și de Gheorghe Angyal din Zlatna, într-o scrisoare datată 25 septembrie 1805: „Căzaniile făcute de domnia ta nu te întreba vinde-se-vor sau afla-s-or preoți sau besearici ca să le cumpere, ci numai fă ca odată să se tipărească, că toți preoții din Ardeal, învățați și neînvățați, uniți și neuniți, în scurtă vreme toate le vor cumpăra, cît vor ști că sunt căzaniile lui Clain” (apud Mladin, Vlad, Moisiu 1957: 74). 3 Neavînd acces la manuscrisele cărturarului blăjean, ne vom limita observațiile doar la omiliile din volumul editat în 1784. 183 funebre au cea mai evidentă și chiar obligatorie libertate, pentru că se adresează, de regulă, unui public eterogen din punct de vedere sociocultural și se adaptează în funcție de situația persoanei și a familiei defunctului. Spre deosebire de Ioan Zoba din Vinț, care oferă modele de predică pentru 15 situații concrete, S. Micu alcătuiește șapte omilii funebre de tip universal, axate pe tema morții. În interiorul fiecărei omilii se indică locul în care preotul trebuie să integreze necrologul defunctului pentru care se rostește predica. În felul acesta, predicatorul devine părtaș la alcătuirea discursului funebru, întocmit pe baza omiliei tip. Conștient de importanța formei în care este expusă predica pentru atingerea efectului educativ și afectiv asupra auditoriului, Samuil Micu oferă un model de exprimare accesibil pentru toți ascultătorii. Adresîndu-se viitorului cititor al propovedaniilor sale, el își motivează astfel opțiunea: „te rog să ierți de te va sminti cumva curgerea graiului, că, fiindcă aceastea mai mulți proști decît învățați auzitori vor avea, nu să cădea să fie cu măestrie ritoricească, nici cu graiu de vorbă înaltă și adîncă, ci mai de jos și mai prost, ca și cei proști să înțăleagă și să se folosească, că acesta e scopul și cugetul mieu” (Micu 1784: [V]). Reținem de aici și faptul că învățatul blăjean făcea distincție între varianta cultivată și varianta populară a limbii române din vremea lui, în predicile sale utilizînd un aspect mai puțin elevat și prelucrat din punct de vedere retoric, dar corect în privința respectării normelor limbii române literare de la sfîrșitul secolului al XVIII-lea. Prin cele două predici traduse din omiletica sfinților părinți Vasile cel Mare și Chiril al Alexandriei, Samuil Micu oferă și un model superior de orație funebră, util preoților pentru alcătuirea unor discursuri funebre speciale sau mai variate din punct de vedere tematic ori stilistic. Credem însă că teologul blăjean le-a introdus în volumul său de propovedanii și fiindcă reprezentau o sursă bibliografică esențială, pe care a utilizat-o în textele sale, dar, probabil, și pentru că voia să stîrnească interesul românilor pentru viitoarele volume de omilii ale marilor oratori ecleziastici, la tălmăcirea cărora începuse deja să lucreze intens. O comparație, fie și sumară, ca cea pe care ne-am propus să o facem aici, între propovedaniile lui S. Micu și cele două predici ale sfinților părinți traduse și editate de învățatul blăjean ne îngăduie să identificăm unele asemănări și deosebiri semnificative. Astfel, din punct de vedere lingvistic, în toate cele nouă predici găsim aceeași variantă literară de tip sudic, generalizată în textele bisericești din a doua jumătate a secolului al XVIII-lea, în care însă cărturarul ardelean a păstrat și cîteva norme de tip nordic (ex.: forme precum mîne, pîne; păhar, rădica; încungiura; velarizarea sporadică a vocalelor anterioare după consoanele dure etc.) și a introdus unii termeni regionali (ex. aleșui „a pîndi”, copîrșeu „sicriu”, țiră „puțin” etc.) sau neologisme împrumutate din latină (ex. dogmă, unicorn etc.). Atît în propovedaniile originale, cît și în cele traduse, conținutul este, în esență, același. Predicile traduse, în special Cuvîntul de moarte al Sfîntului Vasile cel Mare, au caracter sintetic și cuprind, în ansamblu, toate temele abordate, de regulă, în discursurile funebre ale clericilor creștini: semnificația și importanța covîrșitoare a 184 morții în existența umană, moartea ca motiv de bucurie pentru muritorii virtuoși și de spaimă imensă pentru cei păcătoși, condamnarea omului la moarte din momentul nașterii și pregătirea lui de-a lungul întregii vieți pentru clipa morții și a judecății de apoi, enumerarea detaliată a faptelor bune, prin care omul dobîndește Împărăția Cerurilor, și a celor rele, care îl aruncă în chinurile iadului, obligația creștinului de a respecta întocmai poruncile și învățătura dumnezeiască, atitudinea celor vii la despărțirea de cel mort etc. Samuil Micu a selectat șapte teme fundamentale, pe care le-a dezvoltat în șapte predici adaptabile la șapte situații funebre diferite. Chiar dacă nu sînt relevate în titluri speciale, fiecare propovedanie intiutulîndu-se Învățătură la oameni morți, pericopa și conținutul permit identificarea lor. Respectînd limbajul autorului, acestea ar fi: 1. „De greutatea căii morții și merindea pe acea cale”; 2. „De neștirea morții”; 3. „De gătirea la moarte”, 4. „De deșărtăciune”; 5. „De întristarea pentru cei morți”; 6. „De nevoile vieții acesteia și de bunătățile morții cei creștinești”; 7. „De întristarea și neîntristarea pentru pruncii morți” ( Mladin, Vlad, Moiseiu 1957: 71). Diferențele față de predicile traduse și, implicit, originalitatea discursului funebru alcătuit de Samuil Micu în raport cu acestea, dar și față de cazaniile românești anterioare, sînt evidente la nivel structural, argumentativ și stilistic. Scriindu-și propovedaniile la 1500 de ani după sfinții părinți Vasile cel Mare și Chiril, Samuil Micu adaptează omilia antică la modelul predicii din secolul al XVIII-lea și la capacitatea de înțelegere și de simțire afectivă a credincioșilor din vremea sa. Totodată, fiind un teolog mai erudit decît sfinții părinți din secolul al IV-lea, cărturarul blăjean și-a putut susține și argumenta discursul apelînd adesea la înțelepciunea sfinților părinți și a oratorilor ecleziastici de mai tîrziu, pe care i-a citit în greacă și latină sau în una din limbile moderne pe care le cunoștea: italiana franceza și germana, pe care i-a citat cu acribie filologică în discursurile sale. Uneori evocă și ziceri ale unor filozofi antici (v. Micu 1784: 20). Structural, predicile lui Samuil Micu sînt întocmite conform unei scheme păstrate, în mare, pînă astăzi în omiletica românească. Astfel, pericopa, în traducerea sa nu a celor care au transpus în română textul biblic pînă la el, este explicată într-un cuvînt introductiv, la capătul căruia autorul anunță două subteme, pe care le dezvoltă în două cuvinte de învățătură cu conținut patristic, intitulate invariabil: „partea întîiu și „partea a doa”, în cea de a doua introducîndu-se și unele referințe la defunct. Încheierea conține o concluzie la întreaga învățătură ce se desprinde din predică și un îndemn la respectarea principiilor vieții creștine. La sfîrșitul volumului, Samuil Micu adaugă și o secțiune de Iertăciuni la oameni morți, similare cu cele pe care oamenii vii și le adresează înainte de a pleca într-o călătorie lungă. Această încheiere a slujbei de înmormîntare, prin care preotul se adresează, în numele defunctului, celor rămași în viață (soț, soție, tată, mamă, frate, soră, fiu, fiică, rude și prieteni), este uzuală numai în Transilvania (v. Gordon 2001: 185 128), unde s-ar fi putut impune prin propovedaniile lui Samuil Micu și ale lui Petru Maior4. În chip firesc, toate predicile clericului blăjean sînt lecții de etică și de morală creștină, menite să-i facă pe oameni conștienți de faptul că întreaga lor viață se află sub semnul morții, pentru care trebuie să se pregătească în fiecare moment al vieții lor pămîntene. Argumentele pe care S. Micu își întemeiază pledoariile sînt extrase din textul sacru, din învățăturile sfinților părinți, din filozofie, din istoria universală și din cea românească, din înțelepciunea populară și din propria sa experiență teologică și umană. Citatele din Biblie, mai puțin numeroase decît în textele sfinților părinți, care nu aveau decît această sursă documentară, nu sînt tălmăcite la fel în predicile traduse și în propovedaniile originale. De pildă, în predica Sfîntului Vasile cel Mare, citatul din Iov (cap. I, vers. 21), este tradus astfel: „Domnul i-au dat, Domnul i-au luat. Cum au plăcut Domnului, așa s-au și făcut” (Micu 1784: 109). În propovedania a VII-a a lui Samuil Micu, același verset este redat astfel: „Domnul l-au dat, Domnul l-au luat, fie binecuvîntat pentru aceasta” (ibidem: 80)5. La fel a procedat și în cazul pericopelor din predicile sale, care nu sînt reproduse după versiunile românești ale textelor sacre editate în 1648 și în 1688, ci sînt traduse de el, cu unele modificări. De pildă, în propovedania a IV-a, tălmăcirea pericopei „Deșertăciunea deșertăciunilor și toate sînt deșertăciune (Eclisiast, cap.I, stih 2)” (Micu 1784: 32) este sensibil diferită de textul similar din Biblia de la București: „Deșărtarea deșărtărilor , zis‹e› eclesiastul, deșărtarea deșărtărilor, toate-s deșărtare!” (Biblia 2002: 632)6, iar în propovedania a VI-a, textul din pericopa: „Adevăr, adevăr zic voao că cel ce ascultă cuvîntul Mieu și creade Celui ce M-au trimis pre Mine are viața veacilor (Ioan, cap. V, stih. 24)” (Micu 1784: 60) este tradus, în Noul Testament de la Bălgrad (1648), astfel: „Adevăr, adevăr zic voao, că cela ce va asculta cuvintele Meale și va creade întru Cela ce M-au trimes pre Mine are viiața de vecie și la păgubitură nu va mearge, ce treace den moarte în viiață” (N.T. 1988: 276), pe cînd în Biblia din 1688 apare sub forma: „Amin, amin zic voao că cela ce 4 În omiletica românească modernă, iertăciunile nu sînt recomandate, unii specialiști susținînd chiar eradicarea lor, pentru că acestea nu au decît rostul de a spori suferința psihică a celor cărora li se adresează și relevă incapacitatea preotului „de a redacta și rosti un necrolog autentic, ziditor, structurat pe învățăturile ortodoxe fundamentale” (Gordon 2001: 129). Totuși, părintele prof. univ. dr. Vasile Gordon consideră că „ele nu pot fi înlăturate ex abrupto, mai ales în satele ardelenești, unde curiosul obicei s-a împămîntenit adînc” (ibidem). 5 Este posibil ca în acest caz să avem a face cu o adaptare a textului biblic la conținutul predicii, pentru că în Biblia de la Blaj același verset este aproape identic cu cel din omilia tradusă: „Domnul au dat, Domnul au luat, cum au plăcut Domnului, așea s-au și făcut, fie numele Domnului binecuvîntat!” (Biblia 2000:915). În Biblia de la București (1688), găsim o traducere sensibil diferită: „Dumnezău au dat, Dumnezău au luat; în ce chipDomnului s-au părut, așa s-au și făcut, fie numele Domnului blagoslovit în veaci!” (Biblia 2002: 515) 6 În Biblia de la Blaj, versetul respectiv este tradus astfel: „Deșertăciunea deșertăciunilor, zis-au Eclisiastul, deșertăciunea deșertăciunilor, toate sînt deșertăciune” (Biblia 2000: 1119), variantă reprodusă aproape identic și în ediția jubiliara a Sfintei Scripturi (Biblia 2001: 849): „Deșertăciunea deșertăciunilor – a zis Ecclesiastul –, deșertăciunea deșertăciunilor, toate sunt deșertăciune”. 186 cuvîntul mieu aude și creade pre cela ce m-au trimis are viață veacinică și la judecată nu vine, ce s-au mutat den moarte în viață” (Biblia 2002: 1148)7. La fel procedează eruditul cleric român atît în cazul celorlalte pericope ce deschid predicile sale, cît și în privința altor citate din Sfînta Scriptură pe care le reproduce în propovedanii, ceea ce înseamnă că pe la 1784 își asumase deja rolul de revizor și înnoitor al traducerii românești a textului sacru, intenție mărturisită abia în prefața Bibliei de la 1795. Blîndul călugăr Samuil nu ia decît foarte puțin din expresia verbală a severului arhiepiscop Chiril, preferînd mai degrabă modelul retoric al Sfîntului Vasile cel Mare. Dar nici din omilia acestuia, reprodusă în Propovedanie, nu preia unele argumente care, probabil, i s-au părut greu de înțeles, dacă nu chiar inacceptabile, pentru credincioșii de rînd, care aveau o cultură teologică elementară. De pildă, Samuil Micu evită exemplul dat de Vasile cel Mare pentru argumentarea atotputerniciei morții, care va face să dispară și universul: „ Uită-te împrejur, în toată lumea în carea lăcuiești, și gîndește cum că toate ceale ce să văd sînt muritoare, toate sînt supuse stricăciunii. Caută la ceriu, că și acela oarecînd se va strica, caută la soare, că nici acesta nu va rămânea pururea; toate stealele, fierile ceale de pre pămînt și ceale din apă, podoaba pămîntului, și însuși pămîntul, toate sînt supuse stricăciunii, toate după puțin nu vor mai fi” (Micu 1784: 113). În propovedania a III-a, unde face un excurs riguros despre moarte, Samuil Micu definește acest moment inevitabil al existenței umane numai din perspectiva omului creștin, fără vreo trimitere la viziunea apocaliptică citată mai sus: „moartea iaste mai groaznică și mai amară decît toate nevoile și realele ce să pot întîmpla omului în viiață. Cum că aceasta iaste așa, lezne vom priceape de vom lua pre amăruntul aminte și vom socoti ce iaste moartea. Ce iaste, dară, moartea? Moartea, o, iubiților, iaste cumplită și cu mult necaz despărțire a sufletului din trup; moartea iaste despărțirea omului de lume, de părinți, de frați, de rudenii, de priiateni și de toți cunoscuții, de viiață și de toate lucrurile lumii aceștiia; moartea iaste groaznică treacere a sufletului dintru această lume trecătoare la lumea cea veacinică; moartea iaste cea mai mare și de pre urmă luptă a omului, cînd omul cu cunoștința sa, cu trupul și cu diavolul să luptă, ca, de va birui, fericire veacinică, au de să va birui, muncă veacinică să ia. Cu un cuvînt, moartea iaste cumpăna fericirii sau a osîndirei de veaci. Groaznică, cu adevărat, și înfricoșată iaste moartea, că după ia întoarcere nu mai iaste, ci urmează veciia” (Micu 1784: 23). De aceea, învățatul predicator, citîndu-l pe Seneca, consideră că omul „în toată viața trebuie a învăța a muri” (Micu 1784: 22), adică, așa cum se spune în Evanghelie, trebuie să se pregătească de moarte permanent pentru că aceasta vine pe neaștepate. Samuil Micu deschide drumul culturii românești moderne, introducînd spiritul științific creator în traducerea și exegeza teologică, în studiul și reformarea limbii române, în scrierea istoriei și, în general, în occidentalizarea culturii noastre prin 7 În ediția jubiliară, același text este redat astfel: „Adevăr, adevăr vă spun: Cel ce ascultă cuvântul Meu și crede în Cel care M-a trimis are viață veșnică și la judecată nu va veni, ci s-a mutat din moarte în viață” (Biblia 2001: 1561). 187 adoptarea modelului latino-romanic în știință și cultură. În traduceri, partea cea mai consistentă a operei sale, a adoptat o atitudine critică față de strădaniile înaintașilor, revizuind cu acribie vechile tălmăciri bisericești, iar în privința discursului religios, a impus o nouă abordare, în sensul că a trecut de la metoda mimetică a antecesorilor, la elaborarea predicii pe baza unei imense informații din domeniul patristicii, în aplicarea unor principii retorice mai variate, de tip oriental și occidental, prin selecția temelor și modelelor din operele majore ale omileticii creștine și, desigur, prin prelucrarea și alcătuirea originală a predicilor, potențată de inteligența superioară și de talentul înnăscut al oratorului și cărturarului blăjean. Bibliografie Biblia 2000: Biblia de la Blaj,1795. Ediție jubiliară. Cu binecuvântarea Î. P. S. Lucian Mureșan, mitropolitul Bisericii Române Unite, Roma Biblia 2001: Biblia sau Sfânta Scriptură, Ediție jubiliară a Sfântului Sinod, București, Editura Institutului Biblic și de Misiune al Bisericii Ortodoxe Române Biblia 2002: Biblia 1688, II, Text stabilit și îngrijire editorială de Vasile Arvinte și Ioan Caproșu. Volum întocmit de Vasile Arvinte, Ioan Caproșu, Alexandru Gafton, Laura Manea, N. A. Ursu, Iași, Editura Universității „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” Blaga, Lucian 1966, Gîndirea românească în Transilvania în secolul al XVIII-lea. Ediție îngrijită de George Ivașcu, București Chindriș, Ioan, Niculina Iacob 2010, Samuil Micu în mărturii antologice, [Târgu Lăpuș], Editura Galaxia Gutenberg Chindriș, Ioan, Niculina Iacob 2013, Secvențe iluministe, Cluj-Napoca, Editura Napoca Star Gordon, Vasile 2001, Predica ocazională (Pareneza). Considerații teoretice și exemplificări, București, Editura Institutului Biblic și de Misiune al Bisericii Ortodoxe Române Micu 1784: Propovedanie sau învățături la îngropăciunea oamenilor morți, acum de preotul Samoil Clain de Sad făcute […], Blaj Mladin, N., I. Vlad, Al. Moisiu 1957, Samuil Micu Clain – teologul. Viața, opera și concepția lui teologică, Sibiu N.T. 1988: Noul Testament, tipărit pentru prima dată în limba română la 1648, de către Simion tefan, mitropolitul Transilvaniei…, Alba Iulia, Editura Episcopiei Ortodoxe Române Radu, Iacob 1923, Manuscriptele bibliotecii Episcopiei Greco-Catolice Române din Oradea-Mare. Studiu bibliografic, București 188 Antim Ivireanul and the Unification of Old Romanian Literary Language Gheorghe CHIVU La Divine Liturgie (Dumnezăiasca Liturghie) imprimée par Antim Ivireanul à Râmnic, en 1706, en tant que partie d’un Euchologe, et réimprimée ensuite en tant que texte liturgique indépendant, en 1713, à Târgovişte, représente donc non seulement le livre par lequel a été officialisée la transformation de la langue roumaine en langue liturgique en Valachie, mais aussi le premier livre ecclésiastique imprimé à travers lequel a été promue, en Moldavie et au-delà des montagnes, la norme littéraire valaque. Mots-clés: Antim Ivireanul, Liturgikon, langage liturgique, vieille langue littéraire. 1. The end of the 17th century was marked in the Romanian space by an unprecedented come-back of the activity of translating, copying and printing of religious writings, an activity that emphasized not only the change in the attitude towards the form and the role of the church reading book and the book used in preaching sermons respectively, but also the level reached by Romanian literary language. As a consequence of the work done by outstanding intellectuals who belonged to all the Romanian provinces, such as Varlaam, Simion Ştefan, Nicolae Milescu, Dosoftei or Teodosie Veştemeanul, our cultural language had become both able to be used in the first integral printing of the Bible and to enter the Church as an official language of worship. This era saw the beginning of the activity of Antim Ivireanul, a previously unknown scholar who, after a surprisingly short and efficient acquisition of Romanian, brought exceptional cultural contributions. As a talented and persevering printer, intent not only on the on-going current printing activity, but also on the role played by printing in the dissemination of culture, he was instrumental in the appearance of Slavonic, Slav-Romanian or Greek books, imposed by the official orientation of the Court in the region of Muntenia, as well as several church printings written entirely in Romanian that were extremely useful at the time (among which we note Psaltire [=Psalter], Bucharest, 1694, Evangheliar [=Gospel], Snagov, 1697, Noul Testament [The New Testament], Bucharest, 1703, Antologhion [=Anthology], Râmnic, 1705, Octoih [Lectern Hymn Book], Târgovişte, 1712, Molitvenic [=Prayer Book], Târgovişte, 1713, Ceasoslov [Book of Hours], Târgovişte, 1714), or books that could be considered, in the cultural perspective of the era, as writings that had a philosophic 189 character (Carte sau lumină [=Book or Light], Snagov, 1699, Pilde filosofești [=Philosophical Parables], Târgovişte, 1713). He disseminated the religious book outside Wallachia and even outside our cultural space, ‘crossing out’ special letters and printing with them books for Georgians and for Orthodox believers of Arabic language. He also printed, and this is something rare for the border between the 17th and 18th centuries, lay books in the Romanian countries, where the printing houses functioned under the strict patronage of the Church, which is indicative for the cultural opening and for the curriculum originating from Iviria (Gramatica slavonească [=Slavonic Grammar] by Meletie Smotriţki, at Snagov, in 1697, which was useful for the still-active schools where Slavonic was being taught, Floarea darurilor [=The Gifts’ Flower] at Snagov too, three years later and, as some of his close contemporaries say, an Alexandria, probably printed in 1713). He was a translator and a specialist reviser for several of the books that were ‘translated for the first time’ precisely at that time or ‘printed in Romanian’ at that time, after the old translations had been resumed, on the basis of some Greek originals, in Snagov, Râmnic, Târgovişte or in Bucharest, with his role being considered as very important in this respect too. As a hieromonk of special merit who therefore enjoyed a rapid rise in the church hierarchy, he promoted through printing regulations that were useful for the reorganization of monastic life and for the social and cultural opening of the Church (among which we name Învă ătură pre scurt pentru taina pocăin ii [=Short Teaching For the Secret of Repentance], Râmnic, 1705, Învă ătură bisericească…pentru învățătura preo ilor[=Church Teaching… for the Learning of Priests], Târgovişte, 1710, Capete de poruncă la toată ceata bisericească [=Outstanding Injunctions for All the Church Groups], Bucharest, 1714). He especially emerged as an accomplished preacher who was equally well versed in the rules of church discourse and the rules necessary for the complete adaptation of the language and structure of his sermons depending on his interlocutor, irrespective of the latter’s culture, and this was first and foremost due to his Didahii, which quickly developed into patterns, but also to the letters of support that he sent to the country ruler in the year that proved to be crucial for the latter, more specifically 1712. 2. A lot of competent literature has been written on the topic of the canonical importance and literary value of Antim Ivireanu’s sermons. The metropolitan bishop’s exceptional oratorical talent has been underlined repeatedly and much has been made of the originality of the Didahii, as an answer to the hypothesis of its having been translated from the work of the great Byzantine preachers of the time. Very numerous elements of attitude and structure have been revealed in order to differentiate his texts from the homilies of his famous predecessors from the Romanian space, namely deacon Coresi and especially metropolitan bishop Varlaam. 190 But an analysis of the homilies by Antim at the beginning of the 18h century applied equally to the linguistic forms, stylistic registers and textual structures also emphasizes a hard-to surpass science of using the sacred text and of interpreting its letter for an efficient communication with the believers. This includes any believer who was present in the church, regardless of their rank and social standing, but obviously differentiated individually according to the culture and power of understanding the church text. A communication in which the religious quotation was explained almost didactically, in order to increase the listeners capacity of understanding the spirit of the holy books and thus compensate their frequently insufficient knowledge, or one in which the biblical quotation evolved into a means of structuring the text. A communication in which the appeal to the Romanian biblical tradition, which had already been constituted, in our view, towards the end of the 17th century and the application to the Greek-Byzantine rhetoric that had become constantly better known around the year of 1700 juxtaposed beneficially with the adequate utilization of certain elements that had doubtless originated in the culture or even the lay literary norm, in a symbiosis that was without precedent in old Romanian writing. The equally canonical and literary qualities of these Didahii proved beyond doubt an admirable rhetorical talent and linguistic intuition and brought them to the fore of public conscience, and numerous copies some of which were made before the 19th century even outside Wallachia ensured they played the role of a model that deserved to be followed in the process of renovating and unifying the old Romanian literary expression to a higher cultural elevation. 3. The exceptional role played by Antim Ivireanul in the printing of the book necessary for delivering the sermon in Romanian, a language that had thus become officially accepted for good, after a period of official vacillation between old church Slavonic and neo-Greek, as a language of worship and culture is well known. Following the activity that Antim pursued as a printer, a printing proofreader and later on as a metropolitan bishop conscious of the role and the importance of the church book, Wallachia became as early as the first decade of the 18th century the main producer and, in the conditions of the time, the great exporter of religious books. The intense work of the printing establishments in Snagov, Bucharest, Râmnic or Târgovişte prepared the ground not only for the diminution of the influence previously exerted by the Moldavian norm (the Bible from Bucharest is the main ‘witness’ of this influence, and Dimitrie Cantemir, who had deep and extensive knowledge about the writing of the time stated in Descriptio Moldaviae that the people in Wallachia had adopted the Moldavian language and orthography as a model), namely not only for the lessening of the Moldavian cultural influence, but also the placing of Wallachia in the forefront of the printing activity and through the role of the book, in the forefront of cultural activity. 191 (A reckoning apparently lacking any significance, done on the basis of the books that are recorded in Bibliografia românescă veche [=Old Romanian Bibliography], see Gheţie, Baza dialectală, p. 277 – shows that following this intensive development of printing in Wallachia from 1717 to 1750 84 titles were printed in Wallachia, while in Moldavia 30 such titles were printed and, in Transylvania, only 8.) However the lessening of the Moldavian influence saw a simultaneous increase of the role played by the religious book in Wallachia, which had thus become equally a printing model for printing (whose letter and even page type-setting were imitated) and a textual and linguistic model (the writings and basic norms of which will be reproduced with small modifications and hesitations) for the Moldavian and Transylvanian writings in the framework of the process of unifying the Romanian literary expression and of constituting the first unique super-dialectal norm, a process that was practically complete, as regards the book destined to the Church, by the middle of the 18th century. A proof of this role is the version of the Gospel printed by Antim in 1697 in Snagov. A resumption and re-interpretation through a more accurate ‘printing proofreading’ of the bilingual Greek-Romanian text, which had also been produced by Ivireanu in Bucharest in 1693 (on the basis of the Gospel from Wallachia published in 1682 under the patronage of Şerban Cantacuzino), the afore-said text will become a yardstick and a linguistic model for the majority of the editions of the Gospel that appeared after 1723. The same thing will happen with other books of church reading (which had reached a certain formal unity after the printing of the first integral Bible in Romanian and after the reproduction of some of the older versions of biblical books by appealing to the Greek originals, but this process will also be illustrated by some of the books used for sermons, despite the fact that in order to avoid the deviations from the Orthodox rite and some unwanted terminological slip-ups, this type of religious writings continued to be illustrated for a while by bilingual, SlavRomanian printings, or by Greek writings and only afterwards by books transposed into Romanian according to originals written in neo-Greek (a language of worship and culture agreed upon around 1700 by the Court in Wallachia). 4. A special place in this action of dissemination of the writings and norms in Wallachia that had a decisive role in the process of unification of old Romanian literary language in the book destined to for sermons but also of the constitution of our liturgical language was occupied by the printing and subsequently the reprinting and dissemination of the third Romanian version of the Missal, the third after the one printed by Coresi in Braşov in 1570 and after the one Dosoftei translated and printed „cu multă osârdie, să-nţăleagă toţi spăseniia lui Dumnedzău cu întreg înţăles” [= with a lot of diligence, so that everyone may understand God’s word to the full], in 1679, and resumed with the benevolence of the Patriarch of Alexandria in 1683, a version through which the Moldavian metropolitan bishop 192 was the first to try to make Romanian into a language of worship. (A manuscript version of the Missal, different from the one put under the printing press by the Moldavian metropolitan bishop, circulated in manuscript copies, in the closing decades of the 17th century and immediately after the year of 1700, throughout the Romanian territories from beyond the mountains.) In the last years of the 17th century, the Holy and the Godly Liturgy continued to be disseminated in Wallachia, as we mentioned previously, under a Slavonic form, with only the ritual and certain prayers being translated into Romanian, so that the manner of delivering the sermon could be respected by the priests who no longer knew (at times) the Slavonic language. (In the Missal printed in 1680 in Bucharest and resumed in 1702 in Buzău, we read lines that are significant as regards this aspect of the liturgical texts: „Aceasta dară văzând că necum lipseaşte în limba noastră de-a fi ca să înţeleagă nărodul, ce încă şi mulţi, de nu mai mulţi preoţi şi alalt cin beserecesc de a cunoaşte orânduiala şi ţeremoniile ei cum a să sluji trebuie”, 4v) [=So as he realized that the people had no way of comprehending him, and quite a lot of them, the other priests and the other priestly order too, did not know how to organize the service and its ceremonies]. „Slujba de toate zilele” [= The ‘day-to-day sermon’] was read, as it is written in the directory made up by Patriarch Dositei of Jerusalem together with metropolitan bishop Teodosie, in the ‘Slovenian or Greek language, and not in Romanian or in any other one tongue’, and this might have been conceived as a reaction of the ecclesiastical officials in Wallachia to the Calvin and Catholic propaganda. The Order of the Holy and Godly Liturgy, which Antim issued 300 years ago, in Târgovişte, which had both the ritual and the text of the sermon translated into Romanian, represented in this context an event whose significance was equally religious and cultural. Nevertheless, the 1713 printing from Târgovişte, which illustrated a cultural and religious direction that contradicted both the Greek and the traditionally Slavonic current dominant at the Princely court in Wallachia was not the first edition of the sermon book that had taken as a starting point Nikolae Glikis, Greek Evhologhion from 1691. The text was an extremely faithful re-printing of the greater part of the first volume of the Evhologhion, which had been issued by the same Antim in the year of 1706 at Râmnic. This was a resumption of the text that in the book from Râmnic started with the Rânduiala diaconiei [= Order of Deaconship] (on page 33) and ended (on page 190) with the last lines from the Văzglaşeniile în ziua Sfintelor Paşti [= Prayers on the Day of the Holy Easter]. (The prayers printed in the 1713 book on the pages from 205 to 210 are missing from the structure of the book that had appeared in 1706, but it is not out of the question that the unique copy from the Library of the Academy should be lacunose and the ending of the 1706 book should have coincided with that of the new printing.) This re-printing witnessed the respecting of the linguistic form, even the outlay of some extensive fragments and the same engravings were used (such as in the Închipuirea sfântului discos [=The 193 Imagining of the Holy Thaler], Însemnare pentru sfărâmarea sfântului agne [=Noting for the Destruction of the Holy Eucharist] or the portraits Sf. Ioan Zlatoust, Sf. Vasile and Sf. Grigorie). But the real name of the book was put on the title page. (In the 1706 printing the title page – Evhologhion, adecă Molitvenic, acum întâi într-acesta chip tipărit şi aşezat după rânduiala celui grecesc, … prin osteneala şi toată cheltuiala iubitoriului de Dumnezeu chir Antim Ivireanul, episcopul Râmnicului [=Evhologhion, meaning Prayer Book, now for the first time printed and type-set according to the Greek one, … due to the diligence and all the expenses paid by Antim Ivireanul, the bishop of Râmnic, who loves God], the verses at the coat of arms, the text signed by Mihai Iştvanovici, printed on the first 4 sheets and the contents were identical for the two volumes which, although they had their pages numbered differently, did not exhibit the formal necessary differentiation between the Missal and the Prayer Book.) The new printing from 1713 bore witness of small text modifications that were meant to avoid for instance the repetitions of some words: „iară aprinzătoriul de sfeaştnice aprinde sfeaştnicele şi pune sfeaştnicul cel mic înaintea dverii cei mari” [=and the one who lights the candlestick lights the candlesticks and puts the smaller candlestick before the big door] (1706, p. 1-2) becomes „iară aprinzătoriul de făclii aprinde sfeaştnicele şi pune sfeaştnicul cel mic înaintea dverii cei mari” [=and the one who lights torches lights the candlesticks and puts the smaller candlestick before the big door] (1706, p. 1-2) Or some explanatory passages that in the 1706 book were placed between brackets were eliminated: thus on page 3 of the 1713 book, the passage „Încă să să ştie că dveara cea mare niciodată nu să deşchide, ci numai la începutul vecerniilor la bdenie, când cădeaşte sângur preotul şi la toate vâhodurile vecerniilor şi la ale liturghiei şi la Cu frica lui Dumnezeu până la sfârşitul liturghiei” [=And let it be known that the big door must never be opened, but only at the beginning of the evening service, when the priest alone does the service and at all the beginnings of the evening service and the liturgy and With the fear of God] is absent, a passage that in the first volume of the 1706 book is found on the same page 3. 5. Rânduiala Sfintei şi Dumnezeieştii Liturghii [=The order of the holy and Godly liturgy], printed by Antim in 1706 and then resumed faithfully in 1713 was naturally disseminated in Wallachia, although several copies of the printing had arrived, in a period when the printing establishment from Blaj which printed for the churches in south-western Transylvania and in the region of Banat had stopped its activity in 1702, while the one in Iași printed religious books only sporadically and for churches in Moldavia, from Transylvania and Banat. (A series of copies of Antim’s Missal have been found in Braşov, Sibiu, Târgu-Mureş, Cluj, Satu-Mare, Timişoara, but also in Galaţi or Piatra Neamţ.) The book printed by Antim was thus known and of course used not only in churches in Wallachia (for which the text was reprinted six times until the middle 194 of the 18th century), but also in places of worship situated in the other Romanian provinces. This fact contributed to the transformation of the Missal of the metropolitan bishop from Wallachia, whether directly or through the repeated subsequent editions, into a source or model for the printings that appeared, for example, in Iaşi or in Blaj. Thus, a perusal of the text of the 1759 Missal from Iaşi, we observe that despite the notes that „Evlohie monah diortositoriul” [=Hermit Evlohie the printing proofreader] made at the end of the book, which might lead us to believe that we are confronted with a new translation of the text from Greek („vrând noi a tocmi într-însele cuvintele tocma deplin după izvodul ellinesc” [=as we meant to arrange the words exactly in the manner of the Hellenic source], f. 170v), some fragments have a form that is almost identical to the corresponding fragments in Antim’s printing, while the differences only pertain to the use of certain Slavonic terms and their being replaced by a corresponding Romanian word, a vacillation that was but natural at a time when attempts were made to stabilize the religious terminology. „Rugăciunea 4. Cela ce cu cântări fără de tăceare şi cu m riri fără de încetare de sfintele puteri eşti lăudat umple gura noastră de lauda ta, ca să dăm mărire numelui tău celui sfânt” (Liturghier, 1713, p. 14) [=Prayer 4. The One who by relentless chanting and ceaseless praise is glorified, fill our breath with Your praise, to praise Your Holy name] (Missal, 1713, p. 14), „Molitva a patra. Cela ce cu cântări fără de tăceare şi cu slavoslovii fără de încetare de sfintele puteri eşti lăudat umple gura noastră de lauda ta, ca să dăm mărire numelui tău celui sfânt” (Liturghier, 1759, f. 10v) [=Prayer 4. The One who by relentless chanting and ceaseless glorification is praised, fill our breath with your praise, to praise Your Holy name] (Missal, 1759, leaf 10v). „Mântuiaşte, Dumnezeule, norodul tău şi blagosloveşte moştenirea ta! Cercetează lumea ta cu milă şi cu îndurări! Înalţă cornul creştinilor pravoslavnici şi trimite preste noi milele tale ceale bogate!” (Liturghier, 1713, p. 23) [=Dear God, redeem Your people and bless Your inheritance! Regard your world with mercy and compassion! Raise the crescent of the Christian believers and send above us your richest compassions!] (Missal 1713, p. 23), „Mântuiaşte, Dumnez ule, norodul tău şi blagosloveşte moştenirea ta! Cercetează lumea ta cu milă şi cu îndurări! Înalţă cornul creştinilor pravoslavnici şi trimite preste noi milele tale ceale bogate!” (Liturghier, 1759, f. 17v) [= Dear God, redeem Your people and bless Your inheritance! Regard your world with mercy and compassion! Raise the crescent of the Christian believers and send above us your richest compassions!] (Missal 1713, leaf 17v). Similar findings may be reached by a parallel perusal of the text printed in Târgovişte in 1713 and the text that appeared „cu blagoslovenia prealuminatului şi preasfinţitului chiriu chir Petru Pavel Aaron, vlădicăi Făgăraşului, în mănăstirea Sfintei Troiţă la Blaj” [=with the blessing of the holiest and most sacred father 195 Petru Pavel Aaron, bishop of Făgăraş, in the monastery of the Holy Trinity in Blaj], in 1756: „Rânduiala bdeniei. După ce apune soarele, trecând puţintea vreame, toacă în toaca cea mare, iară aprinzătoriul de făclii aprinde şi pune sfeaştnicul cel mic înaintea dverii cei mari; iară preotul şi diaconul merg de iau blagoslovenie de la cel mai mare, de va fi acolea, iară de nu va fi acolea, fac metanie la locul lui şi merg de să închină înaintea icoanei lui Hristos de trei ori şi o sărută. Aşijdirea fac şi la icoana Preacistii, apoi să închină înaintea dverii cei mari o dată şi spre strane să pleacă câte o dată şi, întrând în oltariu, ia preotul epitrahilul pre sine şi svita şi, luund cadelniţa cu tămâie, stă înaintea prestolului şi zice rugăciunea de t mâie în taină.” (Liturghier 1713, p. 1-2) [=Order of the evening service. After the sun sets and a little while later, the big bell is being sounded to summon worshippers for the vespers, and the torch bearer lights and puts the small candlestick before the big church door; and the priest and the deacon go and take the blessing from the older priest if he is there or if he is not there, they use a rosary on his place and go to make the sign of the cross before the icon of Christ three times and kiss it. They do likewise in front of the icon of Blessed Mary, then they cross themselves before the big door once and towards the lectern they each bow once and, on entering the altar, the priest takes the stole and, taking the censer with the incense, he stands before the communion table and utters the incense prayer in a low voice.] (Missal 1713, p. 1-2), „Rânduiala bdeniei. După ce apune soarele, trecând puţintea vreame, toacă în toaca cea mare, iară aprinzătoriul de făclii aprinde luminile şi pune sfeaştnicul cel mic înaintea dverii ceii mari; iară preotul şi diaconul merg de iau blagoslovenie de la cel mai mare, de va fi acolea, iară de nu va fi acolea, fac metanie la locul lui şi merg de să închină înaintea icoanei lui Hristos de trei ori şi o sărută. Aşijderea fac şi la icoana Preacistei, apoi să închină înaintea dverii ceii mari o dată şi spre strane să pleacă câte o dată şi, întrând în oltariu, ia preotul epitrahirul pre sine şi svita şi, luând cadelniţa cu tămâie, stă înaintea preastolului şi zice rugăciunea t mâiei în taină.” (Liturghier, 1756, p. 1-2) [=Order of the evening service. After the sun sets and a little while later, the big bell is being sounded to summon worshippers for the vespers, and the torch bearer lights and puts the small candlestick before the big church door; and the priest and the deacon go and take the blessing from the older priest if he is there or if he is not there, they use a rosary on his place and go to make the sign of the cross before the icon of Christ three times and kiss it. They do likewise in front of the icon of Blessed Mary, then they cross themselves before the big door once and towards the lectern they each bow once and, on entering the altar, the priest takes the stole and, taking the censer with the incense, he stands before the communion table and utters the incense prayer in a low voice.] (Missal 1756, p. 1-2). It is simple to notice that the differences usually reside, like in the case of a comparison drawn to the Iaşi version of the Missal, in the different form, whether Romanian or Slavonic, of certain religious terms or names of prayers, where the norms from Muntenia are accepted: „Şi noi cântăm troparul Bce Dvo, zicându-l de trei ori, iară eclisiarhul puind mai nainte pre tetrapod 5 pâini din care mâncăm la masă împreună şi un vas cu vin şi altul cu unt de 196 lemn” (Liturghier 1713, p. 27) [=And we sing the hymn Mother of God, we chant it three times, and the ecclesiarch puts before that 5 loaves of bread onto the lectern for us to eat together and a vessel of wine and another vessel of oil] (Missal 1713, p. 27), „Şi noi cântăm troparul Născătoarei de Dumnezeu, zicându-l de trei ori, iară eclisiarhul puind mai nainte pre tetrapod 5 pâini din care mâncăm la masă împreună şi un vas cu vin şi altul cu unt de lemn” (Liturghier 1756, p. 32). [=And we sing the hymn Mother of God, we chant it three times, and the ecclesiarch puts before that 5 loaves of bread onto the lectern for us to eat together and a vessel of wine and another vessel of oil] (Missal 1756, p. 32). The maintaining or the reintroduction in certain contexts of the term or the Slavonic phrase was demanded, as specified by some translators or printing proofreaders of the time, by the ritual and the form that the terminology that was specific to a text of religious service had to have, which was naturally different in the writing of a church text from the usual vocabulary. Evlohie the hermit, the printing proofreader of the Missal printed in Iaşi in 1759, noted in this respect: „Une cuvinte, ce să află într-însele schimbate şi mai ales puse şi tocma pre limba slavenească, nu este altă pricină de mândrie, adecă cât să facem şi de la noi adăogire de schimbare, ci vrând noi a tocmi într-însele cuvinte tocma deplin după izvodul ellinesc (cum şi cel slavenesc urmează), nu s-au putut acele cuvinte nici într-un chip a să tălmăci tocma drept după puterea lor pre limba noastră, căci este puţină. La aceasta şi noi încă dară n-am vrut a micşora sfintele cuvinte ale Dumnezăieştii Liturghii după neputinţa limbii noastre, căci nu este cazanie sau istorie Sfânta Liturghie, ci tocma însuşi dumnezăieşti şi de Duhul Sfânt suflate cuvinte. Pentru aceaea şi noi le-am pus slaveneşte şi aşa fără de îndoire să le urmaţi a le zice, ca să fie în veci de tot şi întru toate deplin Dumnezăiasca Liturghie” (Liturghier, 1759, f. 170v) [=Some words, which are in themselves changed and more than anything are arranged identically in Slav language, are not another reason of pride, one caused by a mere change of meaning, but as we want to arrange the words according to the Hellenic source (as the Slav source shows), those words were impossible to be translated fully well into our language, since it is scarce. With this in mind, we did not want to lessen the holy words of the Godly Missal because of the little power of our language, because there is no homily or history in the Holy Liturgy, but only sacred words, inspired by the Holy Spirit. That is the very reason why we used the Slav form and as such you must say them, and let the Godly Liturgy forever and ever be fully inspired by the Holy Spirit] (Missal, 1759, leaf 170v). 6. The Godly Missal, printed by Antim Ivireanul at Râmnic in 1706 as part of an Evhologhion and then reprinted as an independent text of sermon in 1713 in Târgovişte is thus not only the book through which the transformation of Romanian language into a language of worship became official in Wallachia, but also the first book of sermon through which the literary norm from the region of Muntenia was promoted in Moldavia and beyond the mountains. 197 In the decades that followed the re-printing of Antim’s Missal, the Book of Hours issued by Antim in 1715 in Târgovişte, and afterwards the 1750 Iaşi edition of the writing, which ’corresponds page by page’ to the printing from Muntenia, used directly or through the agency of the (faithful) edition printed in Bucharest in 1748 (Gheţie- Chivu, Contribu ii, 100) will illustrate this process, which achieved the first unification of our old language of culture and laid the foundations of our current liturgical language. The same source from Muntenia would also be used by the printings from Blaj from 1751 and 1753, which also reflect the ’Books of Hours from Muntenia, placed in the tradition of of the Book of Hours from 1715 in Târgovişte’, but ’most likely received, through the 1724 and 1745 editions from Râmnic’ (Gheţie-Chivu, Contribu ii, 105). 7. The contribution brought by Antim Ivireanul to the development of Romanian printing, his activity of translating and disseminating the texts necessary for the sermon officiating in Romanian, his role in the emancipation and the renewal of the sermon and his contribution to the creation of the Romanian liturgical language, together with the constitution of the unique super-dialectal norm in old Romanian writing ensure a privileged place to the great scholar and metropolitan bishop in the history of our old culture. Less brilliant than Dosoftei, an author of church texts with a well-rounded personality, including from the perspective of writing fiction (Psaltirea în versuri [=Psalter in Verses] was the first instance of rendering in Romanian of the religious model in a wide-spanning poetical text), less scholarly impressive than Dimitrie Cantemir, a creator of both an original body of literature and of scientific works of great scientific standing, Antim Ivireanul was a man of culture and simultaneously, the writer (in the broader sense of the word) who was perfectly adapted both to the requirements and commandments of his era and to the level of development of the Romanian language, a language that sought a balance and at the same time the means to impose itself as the official language of the Church at a time that can best be described as a watershed moment, when an old language of culture, Slavonic, was vying with neo-Greek, a language of prestige that was used increasingly in the Romanian space around the year of 1700. Bibliography: Ioan Bălan, Limba căr ilor bisericeşti. Studiu istoric şi liturgic [=Language of Church Books. A Historical and Liturgical Study], Blaj, Tip. Seminarului Teologic GrecoCatolic, 1914 Ioan Bianu, Despre introducerea limbii româneşti în biserica românilor [=On the Introduction of Romanian in the Church of Romanians], Bucureşti, Institutul de Arts Grafice „Carol Göbl”, 1904 Ioan Bianu, Nerva Hodoş, Dan Simonescu, Bibliografia românească veche. 1508–1830 [=Old Romanian Bibliography], vol. I–IV, Bucureşti, Stabilimentul Grafic I.V. Socec, 1903–1944 198 Ion Gheţie, Baza dialectală a românei literare [=Dialectal Basis of Literary Romanian], Bucureşti, Editura Academiei Române, 1975 Ion Gheţie, Gh. Chivu (coord.), Contribu ii la studiul limbii române literare. Secolul al XVIII-lea (1688–1780) [=Contributions to the Study of Literary Romanian. The 18th Century (1688-1780)], Cluj-Napoca, Clusium, 2000 Nicolae Iorga, Istoria bisericii româneşti şi a vie ii religioase a românilor [=History of the Romanian Church and the Romanians’ Religious Life], I–II, Vălenii de Munte, Tipografia „Neamul Românesc”, 1908/1909 Eugen, Pavel, Arheologia textului [=Text Archeology] , Cluj-Napoca, Casa Cărţii de Ştiinţă, 2012 Gabriel Ştrempel, Antim Ivireanul, Bucureşti, Editura Academiei Române, 1997 Mircea Tomescu, Istoria căr ii româneşti de la începuturi până la 1918 [=History of the Romanian Book from the Beginnings until 1918], Bucureşti, Editura Ştiinţifică 199 Strategii descriptive în Didahiile lui Antim Ivireanul Maria C T NESCU Cet article propose une analyse rhétorique de la séquence descriptive dans les textes omilétiques (Didahii) d’Antim Ivireanul. On discute les (auto)portraits et surtout les descriptions explicatives (les définitions) des termes abstraits; leur traits essentiels d’ordre formel et fonctionnel sont significatifs pour le discours omilétique roumain médieval et pour la culture rhétorique et écclésiastique d’Antim Ivireanul. Mots-clés: analyse rhétorique, séquence descriptive, les Didahii d’Antim Ivireanul. Cercetările (relativ) recente de analiză textuală1 au deschis noi perspective de interpretare a textului artistic / nonartistic, stabilind totodată o relaţie de continuitate şi de complementaritate cu abordările stilistico-retorice clasice. Observaţiile de mai jos au ca punct de plecare o premisă majoră a analizei textuale: un text x, indiferent de apartenenţa sa funcţională sau tipologică, este o entitate cu organizare secven ială2: (a) simplă (textul este format dintr-o unică secvenţă, întrunind caracteristicile tipice pentru una dintre următoarele categorii: narativă, descriptivă, dialogată, explicativă, argumentativă) sau (b) complexă şi eterogenă (textul rezultă din asamblarea nepredictibilă şi, în principiu, irepetabilă a unui număr oarecare de secvenţe textuale; în astfel de situaţii, tipul de secvenţă dominantă cantitativ determină profilul structural al întregului text). 1. Studiul de caz pe care îl propunem vizează Didahiile lui Antim Ivireanul dintr-o perspectivă restrânsă: secven a descriptiv , cu principalele ei caracteristici de ordin tematic, formal, funcţional şi distribuţional. În predicile3 lui Antim, descrierile propriu-zise, dar şi cele narativizate, au pondere însemnată şi statut stilistico-retoric privilegiat; permanentele interferenţe şi fuzionări cu secvenţe explicative şi/sau argumentative nu le subminează poziţia forte pe care o ocupă în text. 1 Avem în vedere, îndeosebi, numeroasele lucrări ale autorilor de limbă franceză, dintre care: Adam, Petitjean (1989), Hamon (1993), Adam (1999), Gervais-Zaninger (2001), Adam (2005). 2 Vezi Adam (1999: 19-43) şi, mai ales, Adam (2005, 184-188). 3 Informaţii teoretice exhaustive privind textul / discursul omiletic, la Gordon (2000). 201 2.1. Pentru configuraţia compoziţională a Didahiilor prezintă importanţă două variante tematice: portretul/autoportretul şi, mai ales, descrierea abstractelor (însumând deopotrivă reacţii umane pozitive sau negative, reguli de conduită, precepte şi concepte creştine). Atenţia acordată celor două variante semantice este inegală, astfel încât observaţiile de retorică a (auto)portretului constituie un simplu termen de comparaţie4 pentru analiza, mai amplă, a descrierii (definirii) abstractelor. 2.1.1. Portretul şi autoportretul pun în evidenţă strategii descriptive şi particularităţi funcţionale net distincte. Portretele, centrate, de regulă, asupra unor personaje biblice exemplare (Iisus, Sfânta Maria,, Sfântul Nicolae, Sfântul Dumitru, apostolii Petru şi Pavel) sunt, fără excepţie, descrieri ample, ornamental-expresive5, idealizante şi euforice, eventual picturale, care aduc în atenţie exemple şi modele demne de veneraţie; abundenţa figurativă ( comparaţii, serii metaforice în climax, lanţuri de interogaţii retorice ), precum şi lexicul „nobil” susţin ceremonialul de laudatio şi pathosul omiletic. În consecinţă, secvenţele descriptive de acest tip dezvoltă constant o puternică funcţie argumentativă de inducere a unei opinii şi atitudini pozitive faţă de „obiectul” descris: „Aleasă iaste, că iaste izvor carele cu curgerile cereştilor bunătăţ adapă sfinta bisérică şi tot sufletul creştinesc. Aleasă iaste, că iaste chiparos carele cu nălţimea covîrşaşte ceriurile şi pentru mirosul cel din fire s-au arătat departe de toată stricăciunea. Aleasă iaste, că iaste crin, că măcar de au şi născut între mărăcinii nenorocirii ceii de obşte, iar nu ş-au pierdut niciodată podoaba albiciunii. Aleasă iaste că iaste nor carele n-au ispitit nici o greime a păcatului. Aleasă iaste, pentrucă iaste fecioară mai nainte de naştere, fecioară în naştere, fecioară şi după naştere şi iaste o adîncime neprecepută a bunătăţilor şi o icoană însufleţită a frumoseţilor celor cereşti” (p. 20)6. Acelaşi statut argumentativ-persuasiv îl au şi portretele de blamare, individuală (Lucifer, de ex.) sau colectiv-generică (mincinoşii, lacomii, ipocriţii, trufaşii ş.a.); indiferent de personajul-ţintă, care încalcă normele creştine, descrierile de discreditare, preponderent de tip „a face”, activează numeroase procedee, eficiente ca expresii ale negaţiei: termeni şi sintagme ofensatoare, verbe de acţiune cu formă şi semnificaţie negativă, antiteze agravante, apostrofe. Nu de puţine ori (inclusiv în secvenţele formulate la persoana I pl.), descrierea de blamare, in crescendo, atinge limita pamfletului: 4 Despre această variantă descriptivă, observaţii complementare la Cătănescu (2006: 598-599), Cătănescu (2010: 343-345). 5 Despre specificul descrierilor ornamentale şi expresive, vezi Adam, Petitjean (1989: 9-24). 6 Exemplele, extrase din Ivireanul (1972) sunt însoţite numai de indicarea paginii. Prin é se notează ea, „în cuvintele nediftongate astăzi”; vezi Ivireanul (1972: LXII). 202 „Şi la acea mincinoas ispovedanie, ce facem? Cercăm să aflăm duhovnic om prost, pentru ca să se teamă de noi şi să-i fie ruşine de féţele noastre şi ce vom zice noi aşa să fie, socotind în gîndurile noastre că, precum înşălăm pre dînsul, vom înşăla şi pre Dumnezeu. Dară Dumnezeu nu să înşală, ce ne înşălăm noi înşine, spre peirea noastră cea sufletească. Şi cînd mérgem să ne ispoveduim nu spunem duhovnicului că mîncăm carnea şi munca fratelui nostru, creştinului, şi-i bem sîngele şi sudoarea fé ei lui cu lăcomiile şi cu nesa iul ce avem, ci spunem cum c-am mîncat la masa domnească, miercurea şi vinerea, péşte şi în post raci şi untedelemn, şi am băut vin. Nu spunem că inem bălaurul cel cu 7 capete, zavistiia, încuibat în inimile noastre, de ne roade totdeauna fica ii, ca rugina pre fier şi ca cariul pre lemn, ce zicem că n-am făcut nimănui nici un rău. Nu spunem că crédem minciunile slugilor noastre mai vîrtos decît aedvărul celui ce să năpăstuiaşte, carele, de s-ar şi jura, nu-l crédem, nici îi facem dreptate, ci-l pedepsim cu atîta cruzime de inimă, cît de am putea l-am stinge şi de pre fa a pămîntului; ce zicem că fiind în valurile lumii nu putem să ne căutăm de suflet, / ci dăm cîte un sărindariu, iară din jafuri, iar din nedreaptă agoniseală. Nu spunem că pre carele îl vedem că jăfuiaşte şi pradă şi căznéşte pre săraci, îi lăudăm şi-i zicem că iaste om în elept, îi ajunge mintea la toate şi iaste vrédnic şi face dreptă i, iar pre carele îl vedem că nu să améstecă într-acélia îl facem blestemat, mojic şi nevrédnic şi cum că nu-i ajunge mintea să facă judecă i şi dreptate /.../” (p. 95-96). Autoportretul are trăsături distinctive proprii; de dimensiuni relativ reduse, plasat în deschiderea exordiului sau la limita dintre anumite unităţi compoziţionale ale didahiei, autoportretul este reductibil la o unică intenţie şi manevră discursivă – simularea modestiei şi a ignoranţei7. Această formă de diplomaţie verbală creează distan area solemn- admirativă şi reverenţioasă a oratorului faţă de personajele / istoriile evocate, dar şi apropierea afectivă de auditoriul eterogen a cărui atenţie trebuie câştigată. Numeroasele secvenţe de acest tip reprezintă expresia convenţională şi antifrastică a unui ethos discursiv care mizează pe efectul de benevolentiae al stratagemei de autoumilire, abil inserată în discurs: „Puţin ajutoriu va putea lua un bogat de la un sărac şi puţină laudă va auzi nu cinstit de la un neînvăţat. Drept acéia dară şi eu, ştiindu-mi sărăciia bunătă ilor şi slăbiciunea învă ăturii, stau de mă mir ce voiu face. Că de o parte uitându-mă măririlor preasfintei fecioarei Mariei a căreia intrarea cea cu pohfală în besérică astăz prăznuim; de altă parte, văzând atîîtea cinstite obraze, împodobite cu florile bunătăţilor şi cu înţelepciune, mă spăimântez şi nu cutez a grăi. Că ce tărie are ticăloasa mea limbă, a lăuda şi a cinsti cu vrednicie pre un ca aceasta, care iaste aleasă /... /? Sau ce putere are izvorul mieu cel cu o picătură de apă, să adape o grădină sufletească ca aceasta?” (p. 41). 7 Vezi Mortara Garavelli (1999: 264-265). 203 2.1.2. Raportată la (auto)portret, tema abstractelor plasează secvenţa descriptivă din Didahii în alt registru stilistic şi în alt regim funcţional. În acest sens, semnalăm câteva puncte de interes: (a) Lista pantonimelor, respectiv a termenilor „temă-titlu”8 care desemnează abstractul descris, realizând aşa-numita procedură de „ancoraj referenţial”9 este foarte bogată (v., de ex.: credin a, nădejdea, dragostea, postul, ispovedania, rugăciunea, milostenia, omenia, vitejia, în elepciunea, dreptatea, smerenia, cură enia, umilin a, păcatele, pocăin a, mărturisirea, botezul etc.); acest inventar „deschis” pune în evidenţă atât un eşantion din terminologia esenţială pentru limbajul omiletic medieval, cât şi necesitatea explicării descriptive a abstractelor introduse în predică. (b) Multitudinea termenilor „temă-titlu”, respectiv a conceptelor aduse în text, determină o particularitate distribuţională a descrierilor tematice pe care le anunţă; de regulă, ele nu apar izolat, ca insule textuale autonome, ci în serii enumerative (tenare sau mai ample), frecvent cu ramificări şi subtematizări10. În cazul subtematizării, unui termen „temă-titlu” dominant şi generic, i se subordonează alte abstracte-titlu: „/.../ sfinţii părinţii noştri au pus multi nevoinţă /.../ şi au ales ca nişte grâu curat din toate bunătăţile câte ar putea fi aceste trei bunătăţ mari: credin a, n déjdia şi dragostea /.../ Şi iaste n dejdia de 2 féliuri: una bună şi alta rea. /.../ Dragostea /.../ şi iaste şi aceaste de 3 feliuri: una dumnezeiască, alte firească, şi altă pătimitoare şi rea” (p. 23-24). Se înregistrează, de asemenea, subtematizări mai complicate, pe două şi trei nivele: „Pentru căci iaste omul făcut de Dumnezeu, îndoit, de suflet cuvîntătoriu şi de trup simţitoriu are şi bun t îndoite: sufleteşti şi trupeşti. Şi sînt bun t ile cele sufleteşti 4: vitejia, în elepciunea, dreptatea şi cură eniia. Bun t ile cele trupeşti înc sînt 4: tăria, întregimea, fromosé ia şi sănătatea. Şi dintr-acéste bun t ale sufletului şi ale trupului nasc alte 4 bun t de obşte: credin a, nădejdia, dragostea şi smereniia. [...] ” (p. 47). La Antim, astfel de modele taxonomice sunt forme esenţiale de organizare, de tip ştiinţific, a discursului omiletic. Indiferent de poziţia sa ierarhică, fiecare termen- titlu guvernează câte un paragraf descriptiv; în consecinţă, părţi extinse ale predicii devin macrosecvenţe descriptive complexe, constituite prin înlănţuirea şi imbricarea unor secvenţe textuale de mici dimensiuni, dar unitare tematic şi funcţional. 8 Vezi Adam (1989: 85). Id. ibid.; cf. şi reluarea discuţiei la Adam (2005: 147-148). 10 Vezi Adam (1989: 93-94) şi Adam (2005: 150-151). 9 204 (c) Analiza comparativă a macrosecvenţelor descriptive centrate asupra abstractelor permite izolarea principalelor trăsături specifice – facultative sau obligatorii; ele asigură, în grade diferite, omogenitatea retorică a descrierilor, fiind, totodată, semnificative pentru arta şi tehnica organizării predicii la Antim. Facultativ, dar frecvent, secvenţele descriptive în discuţie sunt prefaţate de ample adresări către auditoriu şi/sau de descrieri narativizate alegorice sau de reformulări ale unor parabole biblice. Acest ceremonial verbal, specific oratoriei de amvon asigură, în mare parte, atragerea publicului, prin implicarea sa raţională şi emoţională: „Pentru aceasta dară, vă pohtesc ca să vă deşchide i urechile inimilor voastre şi să asculta cuvintele ce voiu să grăesc, pentru ca să vă folosi i voi cu ascultarea şi eu cu zisele. Că zice Pavel apostolul: „Ferici i cei ce grăesc în urechile celor ce ascultă”; şi apoi trebue să face i roadă sufletească din céle ce ve auzi, pentru ca să nu vă fie ascultarea şi osteneala în deşărt, că arătându-vă ca pomii cei făr’de roadă şi ca vi ele céle stérpe, ce folos ve i avea de ascultarea voastră şi de osteneala ce a făcut? Iată că au sosit, cu ajutoriul lui Dumnezeu, să încépem de mîine călătoriia sfîntului post. Şi pentru căci avem a mérge la războiu asupra vrăjmaşului sufletelor noastre, trebue să ne gătim ca nişte ostaş vitéji ai lui Hristos, încingându-ne mijloacele noastre cu adevărul, după cum zice dumnezeescul Pavel şi să ne încăl ăm picioarele cu gătirea Evangheliei şi să ne îmbrăcăm cu zaoa dreptă ii şi să punem coiful mîntuirii pre capetele noastre şi să luom pavăza credin ii în mîinile noastre, cu carele vom putea stinge toate săge ile celui viclean, céle arzătoare şi sabiia duhului carele iaste graiul lui Dumnezeu .” (p. 98). În măsura în care susţin sau sugerează o anumită intenţie comunicativă, nu sunt lipsite de interes nici procedeele retorice cu apariţie izolată sau chiar singulară; de pildă, într-un context dat, elipsa descriptivă (declarată) poate indica - strategic şi neechivoc – o atitudine/ opinie / stare de fapt: „Iar pentru dragostea cea p timitoare şi rea, nu vom zice nimic, pentru căci fieştecare în elept şi temătoriu de Dumnezeu o cunoaşte că nu e bună; şi pentru ace’ia, lipsească vorba ei de la mijloc, ca să nu ne spurcăm auzul” (p. 24). Procedurile retorice obligatorii pentru descrierea abstractelor pot fi considerate, prin extensie, şi norme de construcţie a predicii la Antim Ivireanul. Astfel:  Recursul consecvent la epanodă determină stabilitate şi, în ultimă instanţă, stereotipia modelului de structurare a macrosecvenţei descriptive; figură retorică din clasa repetiţiei, epanoda presupune segmentarea unei enumerări în constituenţii săi, urmată de reluarea fiecărui constituent în regim de termen- titlu al unei microsecvenţe descriptive. Rezultatul este o descriere etajată, complicată progresiv prin ramificări şi înglobări succesive; descrierea iniţială, elementară, de tip „listă”, cu enumerare 205 nominală paratactică, este reformulată prin procedee descriptive mai elaborate, de factură şi cu efect de amplificatio.  Epanoda favorizează şi justifică următoarea strategie discursivă: definirea abstractelor. Predicile lui Antim Ivireanul sunt suprasaturate de definiţii în lanţ sau care decurg unele din altele, bazate, de regulă, pe parafraze sau citate biblice. Aceste forme particulare ale descrierii abstractelor sunt, fără excepţie, defini ii complexe, în care componenta strict normativă se împleteşte cu cea descriptivă11. Componenta normativă constă în echivalări de tipul: a este b / a, adecă b / a care se numeşte b : „Nădejdea iaste o îndrăzneală adevărată cătră Dumnezeu” (p. 23), „ /.../ iubirea de argint, carele s numeşte, a doua închinare de idoli” (p. 123), „ /.../ călcarea de lége, adec nebăgarea în seamă celor hotărâte şi aşăzate în legi şi în pravile.” (p. 123). Componenta descriptivă a definiţiei constă în reformularea şi amplificarea glosării perifrastice normative; astfel, definiţia normativă, concisă şi neutră, devine stimul şi punct de plecare al unei expansiuni descriptive savante, dar perfect adaptată la public şi obligatoriu în beneficiul acestuia; sunt relevante în acest sens interogaţiile de tip fatic orientate către auditoriu, precum şi digresiunile minimale prin care Antim justifică tendinţa de clarificare a conceptelor care constituie principalele nuclee de semnificaţie ale discursului. În general, la Antim Ivireanul, dezvoltarea descriptivă a definiţiei este un exerciţiu şi un exemplu de oratorie ecleziastică, susţinută de procedee dintre cele mai diverse, dar stabile şi omogene prin efecte cumulate, de ordin argumentativexplicativ, persuasiv, didactic, liturgic, estetic. Reproducem mai jos două exemple care, puse în paralel, pot evidenţia o sumă de particularităţi retorice prototipice: „Aţi înţeles şi puterea dragostii; să spuiu acum şi a smereniei. Smereniia încă iaste sfîrşitul, legătura şi pecétea tuturor bunătă ilor, c ci că de ar face neştine toate bunătăţile lumii şi smerenie să nu aibă, toate-s pierdute, toate-s stricate, toate-s de nimica şi osteneala lor iaste în deşărt, pentru c ci smereniia iaste maică tuturor bunătă ilor. Şi precum maica pune multă nevoin ă din fireasca dragoste ce are de hrănéşte pre copiii săi, ca să-i crească şi-i feréşte de toate ca să nu li să întîmple vreo primejdie şi-i va piiarde, aşa şi smereniia hrăniaşte bunătă ile de cresc şi le feréşte de toate primejdiile, ca să nu piară. Pentru c ci păcatul cel dintîi şi mai mare decît toate păcatele iaste mîndriia, caré o au izvodit şi au născut singur satana, carele era înger şi să numiia Luceafăr, pentru multa lumină ce avea; care mîndrie l-au surpat şi l-au pogorît, cu toată ceata lui, întru céle mai de jos prăpăstii ale iadului /.../. Şi cu acest păcat al mîndriei, pentru multa lui zavistie, au înşălat şi pe ticălosul Adam, de l-au surpat din cinstea lui şi l-au adus la moarte şi l-au pogorît şi pre dînsul în iad. Şi precum păcatul mîndriei au avut putére de au pogorît pre Luceafăr, pînă la céle mai de jos 11 Despre structura definiţiei, vezi Mortara Garavelli (1999: 92). 206 prăpăstii ale iadului, aşa şi bunătatea smereniei are mai multă putére decît mîndriia; c au făcut pre singur Dumnezeu, carele iaste făcătoriul Luceafărului şi s-au plecat atîta, cît au lăsat ceriurile şi toată slava şi lauda ce avea de toate puterile cereşti, de s-au pogorît pre pămînt şi s-au făcut om şi s-au smerit pînă la moarte, după cum zice fericitul Pavel, moarte de cruce; şi s-au pogorît şi pînă la iad de au scos pre Adam, cu tot neamul lui şi l-au suit împreună cu dînsul la ceriu, unde au fost şi mai înainte. Iară Luceafărul n-au putut să se mai sue, căci îl atîrnă păcatul în jos. C păcatul să asamînă pietrii şi-i caută să meargă la maica ei, în pămînt, de unde şi iaste. Iar bunătatea să aseamînă focului şi iaste să meargă sus, în văzduh, unde-i iaste matca, că Dumnezeu iaste foc mistuitoriu şi pară de foc supţire, precum l-au văzut prorocul Ilie. Şi precum un om are în casa lui aur, argint, scule şi alte haine şi cînd iase din casă pune lacăt şi încue, pentru ca să nu meargă vreun ho să i le fure, să se păgubească, aşa şi smereniia încue, ca un lacăt, toate bunătă ile, ca să nu meargă ho ul cel de obşte, diavolul, să le fure şi să va păgubi de osteneala ce-au făcut ” (p. 48-50). Şi „C precum nu iaste cu putin ă a trăi neştine pre pămînt fără de hrană trupească şi fără de îmbrăcăminte şi fără de somn, aşa nici fără de acéste trei bunătă carele sînt, precum am zis şi mai sus, credin a, nădéjdea şi dragostea./.../ Nădéjdea iaste o îndrăzneală adevărată cătră Dumnezeu, dată în inima omului, din dumnezeiasca strălucire, ca să nu să deznădăjduiască niciodată de darul lui Dumnezeu, ci să fie încredinţat cum că va lua, prin pocăinţă, ertăciune păcatelor şi verice altă cérere, sau trecătoare, sau vécinică. Şi iaste nădejdia de 2 féliuri: una bună şi alta rea. Bună iaste acéia cînd nădăjduiaşte cineva la Dumnezeu să se mîntuiască, sau alt bine ce va să petreacă, că nici ostenéşte, nici cheltuiaşte nimic, cum zice David, c : „Cel ce nădăjduiaşte spre Dumnezeu mila îl va încungiura”. Rea iaste acéia cînd nădăjduiaşte cineva la om să-i facă vreun bine, sau vreo îndemînă la lucrurile céste trecătoare ale lumii, care nădéjde iaste mincinoasă şi deşartă, cum zice iar ş David: „Nu vă năjduiţ pre boiari, pre fiii oamenilor, la / carii nu iaste mîntuire” aşijderea zice şi Solomon: „Blestemat să fie tot cel ce nădăjduiaşte spre om”. Dragostea încă iaste o unire a mul i într-una şi cale cătră Dumnezeu şi vîrf tuturor bunătă ilor, dup cum o adevereaz şi fericitul Pavel la 13 capete c tr corinthéni, zicînd: „Decît credinţa şi decît nădéjdia iaste mai mare dragostea”. Şi iaste şi aceasta de 3 féliuri: una dumnezeiască, alta firească şi alta pătimitoare şi rea. Dragostea cea dumnezeiască iaste acéia ce zice la A dooa lége, la 6 capete: „Să iubeşti pre domnul Dumnezeul tău i proci”; iar cea firească iaste céia ce iubesc părinţii pre fii şi fiii pre părinţi şi fieştecare pe ruda sa şi pe priiatenii săi /.../.” (p. 23-24). În citatele de mai sus, definirea abstractelor este susţinută de o acumulare de procedee retorice, dintre care amintim: - redefinirea negativă a termenului – ţintă printr-o correctio inversă, de tip blam, dar care pune în valoare şi întăreşte glosarea normativă iniţială (/.../ căci de 207 ar face neştine toate bunătăţile lumii şi smerenie s nu aib , toate-s pierdute, toate-s stricate, toate-s de nimica şi osteneala lor iaste în deşărt, pentru căci smerenia iaste maic tuturor bun t ilor”, p. 47); - recursul la serii de cauzale metadiscursive (marcate de că, căci, pentru căci), formând mici enclave explicative care presupun stimulul interogativ „de ce?”; - recursul la analogii „în cascadă” (urmând schema canonică: precum / cum / aşa cum ... aşa şi), ceea ce implică organizare descriptivă şi funcţie explicativă („Şi precum maica pune multă nevoin ă ... aşa şi smerenia hrăniaşte... ; „Şi precum păcatul mândriei au avut putere... aşa şi bunătatea smereniei are mai multă putére... „; Şi precum; un om are în casa lui aur, argint, scule ... cînd iase din casă pune lacăt şi încue ... aşa şi smerenia încue, cu un lacăt, toate bunătă ile...”, p. 4749). Invariabil concretizatoare, analogiile trimit la universul comun, laic, premiţând fie introducerea, fie reformularea unor concepte, în manieră explicită, didactic – moralizatoare. Frecvent, analogiile sunt anunţate de cauzele metadiscursive, ceea ce evidenţiază relaţia lor de solidaritate. - recursul la digresiuni narativ-descriptive, care, sub forma unor pilde, pot introduce abstractul antonimic – sursă a altui şir de definiţii, analogii şi, în ultimă instanţă, a unui discurs denigrator (v. de exemplu, antiteza smerenie / mândrie care anticipează blamarea lui Lucifer); - validarea definiţiilor prin argumente de autoritate, reprezentate de citate sau parafraze biblice, sursele predilecte fiind Iisus, David, Sfântul Petru şi Solomon. 3. În Didahiile lui Antim Ivireanul, secvenţele descriptive sunt notabile sub raport cantitativ, distribuţional, tematic, retorico- stilistic. Diversitatea şi subtilitatea tehnicilor de reprezentare este în concordanţă cu potenţialul multifuncţional al descrierii: formă de elogiere, de (auto)defăimare, de captare, de instruire şi de informare a auditoriului; descrierea, de tip epistemic12, devine o „secvenţă – pivot”, cu evidentă forţă persuasivă, punct de jonctură şi de intersecţie cu secvenţele explicative şi argumentative. Descrierile tematice – din clasa portretului şi, mai ales, a abstractelor – sunt ilustrative, în egală măsură, pentru omiletica medievală românească şi pentru înalta cultură retorică şi ecleziastică a lui Antim Ivireanul. Surse Antim Ivireanul, 1972, Opere, Ediţie critică şi studiu introductiv de Gabriel Ştrempel, Bucureşti, Editura Minerva Bibliografie Succinte precizări despre două maniere descriptive de bază: décrire perceptuel şi décrire épistémique, la Adam (2005: 151). 12 208 Adam, Jean-Michel, 1989, Les textes: types et prototypes. Récit, description, argumentation, explication et dialogue, Paris, Nathan Adam, Jean-Michel, 2005, La linguistique textuelle. Introduction à l’analyse textuelle des discours, Paris, Armand Colin Adam, Jean-Michel; Petitjean, André, 1989, Le texte descriptif, Paris, Nathan Cătănescu, Maria, 2006: Etos şi patos în „Didahiile” lui Antim Ivireanul, în „Limba română – Aspecte sincronice şi diacronice”, Actele celui de al 5-lea Colocviu al Catedrei de Limba Română (8-9 dec. 2005), coord. Gabriela Pană Dindelegan, Bucureşti, Editura Universităţii din Bucureşti, p. 593-601 Cătănescu, Maria, Imaginea auditoriului în „Didahiile” lui Antim Ivireanul, în „Limba română: Controverse, delimitări, noi ipoteze (I)”, Gramatică, lexic, semantică, terminologii, istoria limbii române şi filologie, Actele celui de al 9-lea Colocviu al Catedrei de Limba Română (Bucureşti, 4-5 decembrie 2009), Ed. Rodica Zafiu, Adina Dragomirescu, Alexandru Nicolae, Bucureşti, Editura Universităţii Bucureşti, p. 341346 Gervais – Zaninger, Marie – Annick, 2001, La description, Paris, Hachette Gordon, Vasile, 2000, Introducere în omiletică, Bucureşti, Editura Universităţii din Bucureşti Mortara Garavelli, Bice. 1999: Manuale di retorica, IV ed., Bompiani, Milano 209 Manipulation Strategies and Techniques in the Letters of Antim Ivireanul Ovidiu-Adrian ENACACHE J’ai voulais présenter dans cet article quelques-unes des techniques de manipulation les plus importantes qui Antim a utilisé dans les lettres adressée au Constantin Brancoveanu. J’ai identifié la présence des stratégies et des techniques suivantes pour la manipulation : la stratégie d’implorer la pitié, la stratégie d'identification, la stratégie de minimisant, la technique des attaques personnelles, la technique d'amélioration, la technique de reconnaissance des erreurs d'une importance inférieure et la technique d’inventer l’allié, puis j’ai les examiné brièvement dans cet ordre. Mots-clés: techniques de manipulation, sermon, rhétorique, style religieux. The volume of sermons entitled Didahii includes not only religious discourses delivered by Antim Ivireanul during various religious holidays of the year, but also two letters of exoneration that were addressed to Constantin Brâncoveanu, the king of Wallachia: Scrisoarea la leat 7220, în luna ghenarie, în 13 zile şi Duminică la fevruarie 3 zile, răspunsul ce am dat a doa oară. These two letters prove that there was a conflict between the metropolitan leader and the king of Wallachia. This conflict is one of the consequences of the military events that took place in Urlaţi. According to many historians, Antim assisted Toma Cantacuzino in his conspiracy against Constantin Brâncoveanu. Gabriel Ştrempel considers that, because of his involvement, Antim “was very close to lose the Metropolitan chair. But on the 13th of January and on the 3rd of February, he defended himself brilliantly and Constantin Brancoveanu forgave him”1. I identified, in these letters, many strategies of manipulation. In this article, I will analyze four of them: the strategy of supplication, the strategy of intensification, the strategy of minimization and the invention of an ally. The strategy of supplication Supplication is often mistaken with a request full of obedience in the attempt to obtain forgiveness. On the other hand, Pierre Fontanier observes that “rhetoricians Antim Ivireanul, Opere, Ediţie critică şi studiu introductiv de Gabriel Ştrempel, Editura Minerva, Bucureşti, 1972, p. XXII. 1 211 define it differently. They consider that it consists of a most passionate and persistent request in order to obtain what is desired, using the most appropriate words to soften, to persuade and to convince the audience”2. Considering it one of “the discursive figures of ideas or thoughts”3, Dimitrie Gusti defines it as “the figure that consists of prayers and tears. It could be easily used to acquire something in our or someone else’s favor”4. The researcher highlights its bipolar nature. According to his definition of the supplication, this strategy can be used both to support ones cause and to counteract all arguments that are adverse to the speaker’s cause. “The emotional effect”5 that results from its use in these two letters is helping Antim to manipulate the king. Extrapolating this feature of the prayer, the Metropolitan of Wallachia uses it in his letters: “numai mă rog măriei-tale să-ţ fie milă de bătrînéţele méle şi de néputinţele ce am”6 (Ivireanul, 1972: 233), “şi nu lăsa să es obedit şi cu lacrămile pe obraz” (Ivireanul, 1972: 233). The quotes that have just been presented help us extract a clear similarity between Antim’s letters and the religious discourse: the use of supplication. This strategy is one of the strategies that occur very often in sermons, including Antim’s sermons. It is not encountered only in sermons, but also in prayers. It is one of the main features of a prayer. The prayer is first of all an act of communication, a discourse through which people praise God or ask God fervently and gratefully for forgiveness of sins and salvation. The similarity between prayer and supplication is emphasized not only by the stylistic and poetic works, but also by the Romanian dictionaries. Through his touching words, Antim seeks to impress the king (as people do through prayer), to convince him that his removal from the leadership of the Orthodox Church would be a great mistake. This technique of manipulation, that can be easily described as the recourse to the king’s mercy: “să-ţ fie milă de bătrînéţele méle” (Ivireanul, 1972: 233), addresses only his emotional side, his soul, and it is a pure expression of pathos in speech. The strategy of intensification. The technique of “personal attack” The strategy of intensification has two main implications in the letters. Antim presents in an exaggerated manner both his enemies’ flaws (through direct personal attacks) and Constantin Brancoveanu’s qualities. Pierre Fontanier, Figurile limbajului, Traducere, prefaţă şi note de Antonia Constantinescu, Editura Univers, Bucureşti, 1997, p. 395. 3 D. Gusti, Retorică română pentru tinerime, în Retorică românească. Antologie, Ediţie îngrijită, prefaţă şi note de Mircea Frînculescu, Editura Minerva, Bucureşti, 1980, p. 157. 4 Ibidem. 5 Mărioara Petcu, Elemente de retorică juridică, în „Anuarul Institutului de Istorie «Goerge Bariţiu» din Cluj-Napoca”, tom VII, Series Humanistica, Editura Academiei Române, Bucureşti, 2009, p. 355. 6 Prin recurgerea la pathos, mitropolitul îl manipulează pe domnitor. 2 212 Without altering his dignity, the Metropolitan leader uses, in his letters, words that are characterized of an unmeasured vehemence towards his enemies (he calls them clevetitori): “nu lăsa să-ţi spurce unii şi alţii auzurile” (Ivireanul, 1972: 232), “obraze mari bisericeşti şi mireneşti, pline de zavistii şi de răutate” (Ivireanul, 1972: 226), lowering them in the king’s eyes. On the other hand, Antim Ivireanul uses words full of beauty, respect and loyalty when he talks about Constantin Brancoveanu, words that are in a clear contrast to those presented in the former paragraph: “prealuminatul domn” (Ivireanul, 1972: 226), “măriia-sa” (Ivireanul, 1972: 226), “domn milostiv şi iubitoriu de Hristos” (Ivireanul, 1972: 226), “făcătoriului mieu de bine” (Ivireanul, 1972: 227), şi “domn creştin” (Ivireanul, 1972: 230). Antim uses only words that are sweet like honey, words that have no other purpose than to manipulate the ruler, to obtain his forgiveness. This technique of manipulation based on personal attacks is a technique “de discreditare foarte la îndemână – date personale, amănunte reale sau inventate, descrieri şi caracterizări ale persoanei -, lăsând în plan secund sau abandonând pur şi simplu mesajul lansat”7. At the discursive level, this technique can be easily identified, since it consists of imprecations, ironies, and antithesis. The author of the letters is extremely ironic8 in the letter entitled Duminică la fevruarie 3 zile, răspunsul ce am dat a doa oară when he speaks about the clergy led by Mitrofan de Nisa who blamed him of treason: „vei lăsa pre Irod (pre carele te indeamnă să face aceasta) ca pre un mincinos, că nu ştie a cînta alliluia”. We can extract from these words full the pathos Antim’s hatred and anger towards his opponents. His aversion towards Mitrofan de Nisa is so powerful that he compares him with one of the most negative characters in the history of Christianity: Herod. The quotation presented in the previous paragraph proves that this technique of manipulation from the Metropolitan’s letters borrows some of the features of other manipulation techniques that are specific to the political discourse: the technique of demonizing one’s opponents. The manipulation technique of personal attacks goes hand in hand with the rhetorical figure of antithesis. Antithesis can be defined as a contrast which has a hyperbolic effect, reinforcing therefore the perception of negativity implied to the characters denigrated by Antim in his letters. That is to say that the words that are meant to convince the king of Antim’s innocence can achieve this goal more easily when are closely accompanied by gentle words addressed to Constantin Brâncoveanu. Furthermore, this alternation of words, of praise addressed to the ruler and of hatred addressed to those who blamed Antim, gives the letters a fast rhythm, the king’s attention and goodwill (captatio benevolentiae) being certainly attained from 7 Ştefan Stănciugelu, Logica manipulării: 33 de tehnici de manipulare politică românească, Editura C.H. Beck, Bucureşti, 2010, p. 179. 8 Acest tumult şi sarcasmul apar preponderent în cea de-a doua scrisoare, în prima scrisoare Antim adoptând un ton mai temperat. 213 the first lines of the letters. The dramatic and pathetic tone reaches very high levels in these two letters not only because of the vocabulary that shocks the reader: complaints and praises, but also because of the rapid alternation between them. The antithesis is not the only central figure of our technique, but also the irony. Therefore, the technique of personal attacks is of great complexity in Antim’s letters. All in all, Antim used this technique skillfully in his letters, being fully aware that he is in the middle of a discursive confrontation with those people who accused him of “vorbe otrăvicioase”. His fate9 depended entirely on his letters’ success. The strategy of minimization. The technique of acknowledging mistakes of little importance The strategy of minimization is one of the most effective persuasive strategy that can be, other times, one of the most effective strategy of manipulation (depending on the type of discourse). In Antim Ivireanul’s letters it takes the form of admitting mistakes that are of little importance. This manipulation technique “se bazează pe crearea unei aparenţe de normalitate”10. The mistakes (or sins in religious terms), are characteristic to people, in general. A basic rule of Christianity says that all humans are subject to errors and that there is not a single man/ woman in the whole world without a sin, God being the only exception. Antim accepts this characteristic of humanity. The author of the letters humbly states that he made mistakes when he was the leader of the Orthodox Church: “ai aflat chiverniseala acelor trei pungi (precum mi-au zis Nisis) să afli şi celorlalte 4 şi să-mi iai zapisele de la datornici să mi le dai în mîna mea” (Ivireanul, 1972: 233). The quote that has just been presented belongs to Antim’s latter letter Duminecă la 3 fevruarie 3 zile, răspunsul ce am dat a doa oară. Antim talks about this debt also when he denies with arguments the eleventh accusation of a total of twelve, all mentioned in his first letter: “pre măriia-ta te auz totdeauna zicînd cum că iaste datoare ţara cu doao sute şi mai multe de pungi; oare acea datorie măriia-ta o faci, au întîmplările vremii? Adevărat, întîmplările vremii. Şi acéstia au dus şi pre alţii şi pre mine la datorie” (Ivireanul, 1972: 231). The main purpose of this discursive technique is to prove the king that Antim admits his mistakes when he makes them. The technique that is subject to our analysis must be correlated with another technique of manipulation, that of false allegations (Antim denied his involvement in Toma Cantacuzino’s plot) because it helps the latter one to achieve its goal. These two techniques are closely related, “ni-au zis au să fac paretesis de bună voia mea, şi să-mi las scaunul, să es, au să mă scoaţă măriia-sa cu sila şi să scrie la arigrad să mă catherisească” în Scrisoarea la leat 7220, în luna ghenarie, în 13 zile din lucrarea Opere de Antim Ivireanul, Ediţie critică şi studiu introductiv de Gabriel Ştrempel, Editura Minerva, Bucureşti, 1972, p. 226. 10 Bogdan Ficeac, Tehnici de manipulare, Editura Nemira, Bucureşti, 1997, p. 113. 9 214 thus helping to create cohesive texts11. If the Metropolitan leader admits a couple of mistakes, why wouldn’t he admit that he helped Toma Cantacuzino in his acts of betrayal? In other words, if he had lied when he said he did not betray the king, why wouldn’t he have lied now? I will try to give reasonable answers to these questions. I think that it’s not a coincidence that Antim admitted a mistake that is less important than that of betrayal. The repercussions and the punishment of making a little mistake are not to be compared with those of betrayal, a mistake of greater importance, as a universal law states that the punishment is proportional to the intensity and severity of the mistake. Therefore, a small mistake will be punished less severely than a big mistake. Following the logic of those just exposed, by admitting some mistakes of little importance, Antim is to be punished less severely than if he admitted plotting against the king. On the other hand, the admittance of mistakes has the immediate effect of gaining the trust of the audience, the king in this case. Therefore, the author of the letters manages to manipulate not only with the help of techniques and strategies, but also with the help of the correlations established between them. Another point of interest for us is represented by the understanding of how Antim explains his mistakes. Talking about guilt and its consequences, Bogdan Ficeac states that “vinovăţia poate fi de mai multe feluri. Astfel, vina istorică este cea prin care se creează culpabilizarea general”12. This is exactly how Antim explains his mistakes: “adevărat, întîmplările vremii”. “The historical guilt is based on inducing a sense of complicity”13 between him, Antim, and the accuser, the king Constantin Brâncoveanu. The accuser and the accused are now accomplices, Antim taking advantage of the fact that there has been created a strong connection between them. When he tries to explain his mistakes, he doesn’t exonerate only himself, but also the king, since they both are to be blamed for similar mistakes: „datorie măriia-ta o faci, au întîmplările vremii? Adevărat, întîmplările vremii”. In conclusion, the psychological effect that emerges from this technique is essentially manipulative, since the common fault is known to create a strong connection between the psychological accomplices. The invention of an ally This technique occurs only in the first letter written by Antim: Scrisoarea la leat 7220, în luna ghenarie, în 14 zile. Ştefan Stănciugelu considers that this technique " este obişnuită în construcţia imaginii unui personaj politic"14. 11 Despre coeziunea şi coerenţa textelor vorbeşte pe larg Carmen Vlad în Sensul, dimensiunea esen ială a textului, Editura „Dacia”, Cluj-Napoca, 1994, p. 116-120. 12 Bogdan Ficeac, Tehnici de manipulare, Editura Nemira, Bucureşti, 1997, p. 83. 13 Ibidem. 14 Ştefan Stănciugelu, Logica manipulării: 33 de tehnici de manipulare politică românească, Editura C.H. Beck, Bucureşti, 2010, p. 196. 215 Through their speeches, the politicians’ aim is to create an alliance between them and the audience, often speaking on their behalf. This alliance is created exclusively at the discursive level, between the politicians and the audience. It can be identified with ease because it comes along with some syntactic features. One of them is represented by the subjects of the sentences. The great majority of them in the political speeches are not the first person singular, I, but in the first person plural, we. The orator assumes the role of spokesman for the audience, speaking therefore on behalf of all those who are present at the place where the speech is being delivered, thus creating a strong alliance with them. This feature typical to the political discourse is encountered in other types of oratorical speeches, for example in Antim’s sermons. This technique of manipulation is known as the invention of an ally. It has a couple of interesting features in Antim 's first letter that was sent to Constantin Brâncoveanu. Antim Ivireanul finds an ally in God, claiming God’s will for his actions. As a consequence, he is not to be blamed for his actions since he only put into practice God’s will. Antim states that clearly in his first letter to the king: Iar de vréme ce Dumnezeu, cel ce pe toate le orînduieşte spre mai bine, aşa au vrut, să rădice din pămînt sărac şi din gunoiu să înalţe méser, pentru a-l aşeza pe el cu boierii poporului său, eu ce puteam face? M-am supus Domnului şi l-am rugat pe el” (Ivireanul, 1972: 227, 228). Antim makes use of this technique also in the fifth paragraph of his first letter: „Mitropoliia n-am luat-o cu sila, nici cu mite, nici cu rugăciuni. Facă-mi Dumnezeu răsplătire de va fi urmat vreuna din acéstia, ci aşa au fost plăcut înaintea stăpînului Dumnezeu” (Ivireanul, 1972: 228). In conclusion, Scrisoarea la leat 7220, în luna ghenarie, în 14 zile includes in its structure the manipulation technique of the invention of an ally. Its purpose is to exonerate him from all the accusations. Bibliography Vlad, Carmen, Sensul, dimensiunea esen ială a textului, Editura „Dacia”, Cluj-Napoca, 1994 Ficeac, Bogdan, Tehnici de manipulare, Editura Nemira, Bucureşti, 1997 Stănciugelu, Ştefan, Logica manipulării: 33 de tehnici de manipulare politică românească, Editura C.H. Beck, Bucureşti, 2010 Ivireanul, Antim, Opere, ediţie critică şi studiu introductiv de Gabriel Ştrempel, Editura Minerva, Bucureşti, 1972 Fontanier, Pierre, Figurile limbajului, Traducere, prefaţă şi note de Antonia Constantinescu, Editura Univers, Bucureşti, 1997 Gusti, D., Ritorică română pentru tinerime, în “Retorică românească. Antologie”, ediţie îngrijită, prefaţă şi note de Mircea Frînculescu, Editura Minerva, Bucureşti, 1980 Petcu, Mărioara, Elemente de retorică juridică, în „Anuarul Institutului de Istorie «Goerge Bariţiu» din Cluj-Napoca”, tom VII, Series Humanistica, Editura Academiei Române, Bucureşti, 2009 216 Romanian Hieratikons printed by St. Antim Ivireanul: in 2013, 300 years from the printing of the Romanian Hieratikon at Târgovişte Policarp CHI ULESCU Die Einführung der rumänischen Sprache in die liturgischen Texte, vor allem aber in die Göttliche Liturgie, wird dem heiligen Anthim zugeschrieben. Nachdem er mehrere liturghische Bücher ins Rumänische übersetzt und veröffentlicht hatte und Mitropolit der Walachei geworden war, ließ er im jahre 1713, in Tergowisch das Hieratikon, als eine gesondertes Buch drucken. Der Grundtext für die rumänische Übersetzung war aus dem griechischen Euchologion aus Venedig, 1691 (N. Glykis) übernommen. Der heilige Anthim hat auch Bezug auf frühere Ausgaben und auf slawo-rumänische Ausgaben genommen, hat allerdings den Verdienst, die Liturgie vollständig ins Rumänische übersetzt zu haben und das Hieratikon auf eine praktische Art und Weis strukturiert zu haben, welche man bis heute beibehalten hat. Mit einer sehr angenehmen rumänischen Sprache, welche die liturgische Sprache festigt. Das Hieratikon des Anthim von 1713 wird bis heute benutzt, um den Gläubigen die göttliche Botschaft von der Menschwerdung des Wortes Gottes zu vermitteln. Schlüsselwörter: Liturgie, Anthim, liturgische Sprache. Next year will be the anniversary of 300 years from the printing of the Hieratikon by Saint Antim, at Târgovişte. The issue of this important book that serves at the Incarnation of the Word of God in the Eucharist invites some new considerations, moreover so because the book is in use up to this day, in the form the martyr hierarch thought and exposed. The translation of the holy texts in the Romanian language and its introduction in the religious service – a few milestones Romanians have used the spoken Romanian language long before the introduction of the printing press on their territory, but the situation of the internal politics and the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchy over the Romanian Church delayed the introduction of the national language in the public religious service. The first attempts took place during the 16th century in Transylvania, in the printings of the deacon Coresi, but they did not bring about the expected results. The few items of the coresian volumes that were preserved (whose circulation was reduced to the Transylvania area) show a courageous inception, but 217 they were far from inspiring the trust of the hierarchs and clerics of those times, mostly because of the contamination of these books with protestant ideas. Among the Romanian printings that appeared through the efforts of Coresi we can mention the Psalter (Braşov, 1570). The preparation for the introduction of the Romanian language in the public religious service began with the printing of ethical, exegetical and judiciary texts, that could be used in churches and schools: The Law Collection from Govora1640, The Gospel for Study, Bălgrad- 1641, Romanian Book for Study, Iaşi- 1641 and 1643, The Gospel with Teaching, Govora -1642, Teachings for All the Days, Câmpulung- 1642, The Gospel with Teaching, Dealu-1644, Seven Religious Mysteries, Iaşi-1644 etc; the first book in Romanian that could be used in the religious service, largely disseminated, is the New Testament from Bălgrad-1648, followed by a second book necessary to the religious service, the Psalter from Bălgrad- 1651; its second foreword is a true orthodox catechism1. The one that continued and courageously supported the translation and printing of texts in Romanian was the Metropolitan Ştefan of Wallachia (1648-1653; 1655-1668). His effort, both financial and intellectual, generated much resistance, as he himself confesses about those that „protested and found fault with their Shepherd” because of his courage of „changing a few of the norms and of proposing them in Romanian”2. He is the first one who prints or approves the issuing of a few Slavic rites, but with the rules and important directions in Romanian, to be used by priests in the churches: The Burial of Priests, Târgovişte - 1650, Mystirio or Sacrament, Târgovişte -1651, The Consecration of Churches, Târgovişte -1652. To all these can be added the voluminous Correction of the Law that was also issued at Târgovişte in 1652. Years later, in Moldavia, after the industrious Varlaam, another courageous one, the Metropolitan Dosoftei takes an even more daring step: the publication of the liturgies in Romanian. In 1679 was issued at Iaşi The Hieratikon translated from the Greek, as Dosoftei himself confesses in the foreword3. In order to justify his courageous act, Dosoftei cites the answer of the Patriarch of Antiochia, Teodor Balsamon, at the question of Marcu, the Patriarch of Alexandria, regarding the canonicity of the introduction of national languages in the religious service, that took place as early as the 12th century in Syria and other places in Asia and Africa, where the Greek language had been abandoned in favor of the local one. The second edition of the Liturgy, also issued at Iaşi, in 1683, contains a note (f.25v) that invokes for the canonical issue of that Romanian book the blessing 1 See our study Considerations about the importance of the Psalms Book from Bălgrad in 1651, in the vol. Polychronion for the professor Nicolae - Şerban Tanaşoca at 70 years, Bucharest, 2012, p. 135-142. 2 Foreword at Mystirio or Sacrament, Târgovişte, 1651 (I. Bianu and N. Hodoş, Bibliografia Românească Veche, Vol. I p.182), he also is the first one to say the Creed in Romanian for the first time in the church. cf. Liana Tugearu, Miniatura şi ornamentul manuscriselor din colec ia de artă medievală românească a Muzeului Na ional de Artă al României, vol. II, Bucureşti, 2006, p. 292. 3 The Godly liturgy, Iaşi 1679 ff.1-2. 218 of Patriarch Partenie of Alexandria, who was stationed in Moldavia at the time4. The Liturgy of Dosoftei contained, apart from some prayers and preaching, rules that were serviced only by the bishop, like, for example, the service for the consecration of the antimysion, for lack of a proper Archieraticon. After the gift offered to the Romanian language5 by the Metropolitan Dosoftei, the efforts for the translation of the holy texts continued at Bucharest. In the printing press established by Varlaam the Metropolitan of Hungarowallachia, the Hieratikon appeared in 1680 under the supervision of Teodosie, the Metropolitan of Hungarowallachia, but only with the Romanian cultic rules, because, as the Metropolitan confesses: „and I neither wanted nor dared to put the whole liturgy in our language and to move it thus... for a lot of other reasons that pushed me through”6. However, the old Metropolitan was the first to print in 1682, entirely in Romanian, to be read in churches, The Gospel, with the pericopas ordered according to Greek practice, after the three great periods of the liturgical year: Pentecostarion, Octoechos, Lenten Triodion, and in 1683 there appeared, also in Bucharest, the Apostolos, also entirely translated into Romanian, with its contents ordered according to the liturgical year. Further on, at Bălgrad, The Book of Hours was printed in 1687 (and the Euchologion in 1689), and at Bucharest were printed: the monumental Bible (1688), The Greek-Romanian Gospel (Bucharest, 1693), The Psalter (1694) then, at Snagov, the Romanian Gospel (1697). Another great tireless printer of holy books in the language of the people was the Bishop Mitrofan of Buzău (a former apprentice of the Metropolitan Dosoftei). His most important work consists of the Menaia from 1698 with the proverbs, synaxaria and typikon in Romanian. The option for the Slavic-Romanian variant (a transition toward the full Romanization of the religious services) was adopted also for his next books that were printed at Buzău: The Euchologion (1699; 1701), The Octoechos and The Lenten Triodion (1700), The Pentecostarion (1701), The Psalter (1701) and The Hieratikon (1702). These were soon followed by the New Testament at Bucharest (1703), printed by St. Antim Ivireanul. Another great teacher of the introduction of the national language in the divine service, somehow foreshadowed in history, was the Bishop Damaschin that followed Mitrofan at Buzău (+1703). He made extensive translations of the holy texts into Romanian, but they were published much later, after his death. However, he only managed to print at Buzău the second edition of the Apostolos (1704). The one that consecrated the introduction of the Romanian language in the cultic service of our Church was the St. Hierarch Antim Ivireanul. He is the real creator of the Romanian liturgical language that is still used in liturgical books today. After the New Testament of 1703, he printed more liturgical books, but they 4 The Metropolitan Dosoftei published at Iaşi, right after the Liturgy of 1679, more books in Romanian: Psalter for understanding (1680), Euchologion for understanding (1681), Lives of saints (begun in 1682 and finished to print in 1686). 5 The Godly liturgy, Iaşi, 1679, the first folio of the Foreword. 6 The holy and godly liturgy, Bucharest, 1680, f.5v. 219 were Slavic-Romanian (The Antologion and The Little Octoechos issued at Râmnic in 1705). In 1706, St. Antim printed in Romanian, for the first time in Wallachia, also at Râmnic, the most needed liturgical books: The Hieratikon and The Euchologion, bound together under the Greek name of Euchologion. This new initiative was the definitive step toward the consolidation of the presence of the Romanian language in the cultic service of our Church. The rapid dissemination of these two books in all the Romanian Countries was due to its reception amid the priests and it hastened a second edition, with the Hieratikon and the Euchologion printed as separate volumes at Târgovişte, in 1713. We must not forget that St. Antim had published first the liturgy in Greek even as early as 1697 in the Snagov Antologion, a text that was later reprinted in the beautiful and elegant Greek-Arab volume also at Snagov, in 1701, and in 1709 the Greek liturgy was included in the Church service printed at Târgovişte. We mention the fact that of the Greek liturgies here reffered to, only the Greek-Arab Hieratikon contains typikonal indications. Because the Romanian Hieratikon appeared as a self standing book only in 1713, at Târgovişte, it was believed to be the first Romanian Liturgy printed by St. Antim7. Knowing that the Hieratikon from Râmnic (1706) opened the way to the Hieratikon from Târgovişte (1713), we will present in detail the context of the publication of this prototype in 1706 and the ones who toiled for it. The Euchologion of 1706 After only one year as Bishop at Râmnic, St. Antim published the Euchologion that is M(o)l(i)tv(e)n(i)c now first printed in this way, and laid down after the rules of the Greek one. Even from the first reading, the title indicates the fact that this is the first time a volume of such structure is published, based on the Greek one. That means that for the first time the Hieratikon was being published together with the Molitvenic in a single volume, under the old name of Euchologion. The term of Euchologion meant an anthology of all the prayers needed for the consecration (the deification) of man, including the Mystery of the Eucharist (the liturgy). Later on, the term of Euchologion was used (especially by the Romanians) for what is today understood by Molitfelnic, that is all the Holy Mysteries and other prayers beside the liturgy. At the end of the Râmnic Euchologion we find specified the Greek edition that the editors, supervised by the sire Antim, have used. At page 453 we can read the following: „But you also must know this that if you will examine in detail the rules and the translation of this M[o]l[i]tv[e]n[i]c, and if you will match them with some lettered sources, see where they be printed, and there be no match, do not hasten to defame, because we have followed the Greek M(o)l(i)tv(e)n(i)c that was printed by Nicolae Glyki[s] in the year from Christ 1691. And as much as we could, both for Pr. N. Şerbănescu, Antim Ivireanul tipograf in Biserica Ortodoxă Română, LXXIV (1956) nr. 89, p. 741. 7 220 meaning and rules we have added here and there a translation for the shortening of the Romanian language and also for the teachings and rules for ordinary priests, and in order to help them. And those that were completely omitted were such because they are for bishops and others because they are not used in service here”. By examining the Greek Euchologion we reach some conclusions that remove a lot of former doubts and assumptions. The Greek edition from 1691 printed in Venice, at the Editorial house of Nicolae Glykis, was at the moment among the newest and most accessible Greek editions of the Euchologion, probably also the most trustworthy, as long as St. Antim uses it, but we believe that he chose this one also for the fact that it had corrections from Ioan Avramie, who became a most devoted friend to him. (Greek editions previous to the one of 1691 existed, and even one issued one year after Glykis’s edition, in 1692). Anyway, among the few books kept in St.Antim’s personal library there are eight Greek Menaia (bound two by two), printed by the same N.Glykis, between 1678- 1685, to them can be added a Gospel, printed in the same venetian printing press in the year 1686 that the hierarch signs in Greek: „Anthimu, episkopu Râmniku”8. The resort to Greek books instead of the Slavic ones is not a matter of surprise, they are written in the original language of the liturgical texts, and the relationship with the „Great Church” and to „Sveta Gora” (as it appears in the title of the Rules of the liturgy even as early as the editions prior to 1706 and 1713) becomes absolutely natural. Antim’s studies, even in his youth, in the Greek environment at Constantinople, the influence of the circle of Greek scholars at the court of the voivode Brâncoveanu and his distrust for the Slavic books, generated by the numerous Western influences noticed in the books of the Metropolitan Petru Movilă, partly taken on by the liturgical reform of the Patriarch Nicon, made orthodox people’s eyes to look constantly to the two great milestones of Orthodoxy: the Ecumenical Patriarchy and Mount Athos. The Greek name of the printing from Râmnic in 1706, that is the Euchologion followed by its Slavic variant, Molitvenic, confused researchers, inducing them to not see the Hieratikon from this volume or to believe that the Molitvenic is a more complete issue although, in this case, the two works formed together a single volume. In the old Church tradition, the Euchologion comprised the liturgies also. The oldest known Euchologions (IVth, VIIIth century)9 confirm the presence in a single book, both of the rules for the Eucharist (the liturgy) and for the other Holy Sacraments, the liturgy itself being in fact the Sacrament of the Holy Communion. 8 Arhim. Policarp Chiţulescu, Căr i din bibliotecile medievale româneşti păstrate în Biblioteca Sfântului Sinod, Bucureşti, 2011, p. 22-26. Why didn’t St. Antim use the Greek edition of the Euchologion of 1692 printed at the publishing house of Andrea Iuliano? Maybe because Iuliano had published in 1687 a Greek-Latin liturgy destined for the Unitarians? Mistrust can appear easily, the moments 1699 and 1701 were not at all far in time. Also after the edition of 1691 of the Euchologion, St. Antim took on the Greek text introduced in the Greek-Arab Hieratikon, published at Snagov in 1701. 9 Translated and printed in Romanian by the deacon Ioan I. Ică in the vol. Canonul Ortodoxiei I, Canonul apostolic al primelor secole, Sibiu, 2008. 221 The Euchologion from Râmnic has the following structure: the title page + 6 folios not numbered (comprising the note about the use of national languages in the cultic service, the editor’s foreword and the contents)+ 12 numbered pages (Rules for deacons) + 190 numbered pages (The Hieratikon) and after that 453 numbered pages (The Molitvenic)10. The direct research of several copies from this printing shows us the way it was in fact printes and disseminated. From the printing press, the Euchologion came out as a rather inconvenient book, voluminous, with a title that comprised the Hieratikon and the Molitvenic together, like the Greek edition of 1691 (but the two had their own page numbering, with a common title page). This direct take on is justified by the editors in the note at page 453, reproduced by us earlier. Because it is a book of extensive use, the possessors-users (the priests) preferred to separate the Hieratikon from the Molitvenic out of practical reasons for handling and in order to protect them from wearing out. What could have been the use of the Molitvenic also staying on the holy table while the priest oficiated the liturgy? What could have been the use for the priest to take with him at a sick man’s bed the Hieratikon also, while he only needed the Molitvenic? In this way, every priest broke them apart and bound them in consequence. The least numerous copies of the 1706 Euchologion are the complete ones, that have bound together the Hieratikon and the Molitvenic, but most of the copies circulated separately as Hieratikon and as Molitvenic, only a few of these having a title page. The Holy Synod Library in Bucharest owns a complete copy of the Hieratikon and the Molitvenic that circulated in Transylvania11. Besides this one, the synod Library owns three more Hieratikons and one Molitvenic that once were part of a Euchologion from Râmnic from 170612. They were by no means printed 10 The Bishop Damaschin (Dimitrie) Coravu also believed that the volumes were bound and distributed separately, as two distinct works. Although he described with many corrections the Euchologion from Râmnic in 1706, he erroneousely adds to the Molitvenic in this volume a foreword (7 unumbered folios) although there are only 453 pages. The 7 unnumbered folios (in fact, the title page+ 6 folios) were placed only at the beginning of the Euchologion consisting of the Hieratikon and the Molitvenic. This error occurred because the author did not encounter a complete Euchologion (Râmnic, 1706), in which the Hieratikon and the Molitvenic are bound together, that is why he states that: „the two were probably, projected to be a single volume.” Also see Precizări şi contribu ii la Bibliografia Românească Veche, in Mitropolia Olteniei, XVIII (1968) nr. 9-10, p. 729. 11 Purchased by the Romanian Patriarchy in 1961 from the heirs of Pr. dr. Gh. Ciuhandu. 12 According to marginal notes, all the copies of the synod Library circulated in Ardeal and Banat. The Academy Library in Bucharest owns under the shelfmark I 150A, 8 Hieratikons and Molitvenics, most of them from Ardeal. The Central University Library in Bucharest also owns a copy of the Molitvenic originated from Ardeal cf. Cartea veche românească în colec iile Bibliotecii Centrale Universitare din Bucureşti, Bucureşti, 1972, p. 52; for Banat we also find mentioned a copy cf. I. B. Mureşianu, Cartea veche bisericească din Banat, Timişoara, 1985, p. 88; in Şcheii Braşovului is kept a complete copy of the Euchologion that circulated in Ardeal cf. V. Oltean, Catalog de carte veche din Şcheii Braşovului, vol. II, Iaşi, 2009, p. 19; the Central University Library in Cluj owns two copies of the 1706 Molitvenic that also circulated in Ardeal. The research of the circulation of the copies will continue. 222 separately13, with their own title page, but their separation happened after they began circulating. The 3 Hieratikons taken out of the Euchologion from Râmnic, owned by the synod Library, have no title page. The copy of the separate Molitvenic has both a title page and the folios with the Pinax (contents) in which the content of the Hieratikon is to be found, even if it was removed and bound separately. Moreover, at page 190, the last page of the Hieratikon, (in all its variants, separate or not from the Molitvenic) there is the word „Rându[ială]”(Rules) that announces the title of the following page, and indeed, the Molitvenic begins with the Rules at the first day after the woman has given birth. So there is no ground for the idea that the binding together of the works was given up in the workshop and that each one received a title page and a table of contents (that would not even have corresponded to reality). This shows once more that the Hieratikon from Râmnic in 1706 was only printed and bound with the Molitvenic, after the Greek model we cited. As we have indicated, the Euchologion printed at Râmnic in 1706 constituted the final step for imparting a Romanian character of the holy service in the church, by circulating the most important and utilized liturgical texts in Romanian: the Holy Liturgy and the other six Holy Sacraments, besides the services for consecrations, synaxarion etc. This undertaking came after the complete translation in Romanian and introduction in the cultic service by St. Antim of the Gospel printed in two editions in 1693 and 1697 (Greek-Romanian), of the New Testament in 1703, followed by other cultic books. Being aware of this crucial moment, the editor placed on the first folio after the title page like the Metropolitan Dosoftei in 1679 a canonical and scriptic argument that allowed and justified the translation of the sacred texts in the national language. At St. Antim, the argument is presented completely in Romanian and it clearly reproduces a verse from the The First Epistle to the Corinthians chapter XIV, 6, and a text cited from Balsamon that uses the Epistle to the Romans chapter XXX, 29. The argument was reproduced in the Euchologion (the Molitvenic) in 1713 from Târgovişte, but not in the Hieratikon from the same year. The foreword of the Euchologion from Râmnic (1706) is addressed to Antim, the Bishop of Râmnic, being signed by his apprentice Mihail Iştvanovici. He offers us in his foreword precious information about the hierarch’s contribution at the rendering of the holy texts in Romanian, but also in other languages besides the Greek, like Arabic: „everywhere (even in the whole world) are known your efforts 13 As was assumed by I. Bianu and N. Hodoş, Bibliografia Românească Veche, vol. I, Bucureşti, 1903 pp. 541- 543, vol. IV, Bucureşti, 1944, p. 220; Pr. N. Şerbănescu, Antim Ivireanul tipograf, in: Biserica Ortodoxă Română, LXXIV (1956), nr. 7-8, p.731-732 and in Mitropolitul Antim Ivireanul 1716-1966, in: Mitropolia Olteniei, XVIII (1966), nr. 9- 10, p. 782-784; Virgil Molin, Antim Ivireanul – editor şi tipograf la Râmnic, in: Mitropolia Olteniei, XVIII (1966), nr. 9- 10, p. 832; Daniela Poenaru in Contribu ii la Bibliografia Românească Veche, Târgovişte, 1973 p. 180 (takes on uncertain data from D. Coravu op. cit.). ş.a. 223 and well crafted books and the spiritual gains that you gathered for us of the Holy Scripture both by your big spending of money and with your love for God”. Many of the books were printed with the financial support of the hierarch, and the Euchologion from 1706 was published also at Antim’s initiative: „by godly effort you made commitment that this useful for the soul book also that is called Molitvenic, to bring it to light in our Romanian language for the use of the many. Considering your love for God because all the other that were published in Romanian until now to be used by the priests and the people, were indeed very useful, and moreover this also more useful you considered to be […] which is the way I say it considering with the whole your spending of your love for God”. The same co-editor makes a point of highlighting the fact that Antim made the selection of the contents of the volume in question, and that he then supervised, translated and personally corrected the text from Greek to Romanian (the underlining is ours): „and even with the correction of the words from Greek in our language you strived, and you made a great effort of establishing it, and even all those that were not to be found in Romanian before you translated, and the way it can be seen to be made and I said it before spending all that was necessary, you ordered your undeserving apprentice, to print”. As we can understand, older texts, already translated, were also used: rendered in Romanian before. It is clear that St. Antim began the work for the translation of the Hieratikon and the Molitvenic before he was the Bishop of Râmnic, given the big volume of texts. He and his helpers probably used existent Romanian manuscripts, but he certainly used Slavic-Romanian and Greek printings of the day. By comparing the previous editions of the liturgy with the one from 1706, we can see that the variant of the Euchologion from Râmnic reproduces the Romanian typikon from the edition printed at Bucharest in 1680, then at Buzău in 1702, but in some places, in 1706 some directions develop and become clearer, apart from the fact that all the prayers are rendered entirely in Romanian14. It is certain that Antim and his helpers also had at hand the Slavic text that they compared with the Greek one, when they translated it in Romanian. On the other hand, the contents of the following editions of the Hieratikons of 1706 and 1713 was diversified, being amplified in the editions from the 19th century and preserved until today. We must highlight again the fact that the Euchologion from 1706 enjoyed a very special reception from the Romanian priests. The copies that survive (see note 12) indicate a large scale presence and use in Transylvania and Banat, and the worn aspect of the folios confirms this yet again. 14 The typikon and the rules of the service in itself actually constitutes Diataxis tis ierodiakonias and Diataxis tis Theia Litourgeias in the phrasing of the Patriarch of Constantinople, Filotei Kokkinos (1351-1376) they were extended in the whole Orthodoxy through Greek printings from Venice. The same rules were adopted in the Slavic Orthodoxy by Petru Movilă through his Liturgies, but with explicative amplifyings of the typikon that unfortunately show Western influences which make liturgical manuscripts inspired from his printings easy to identify. 224 The Hieratikon from 1713 When he became, in 1708, the Metropolitan of Wallachia, St. Antim Ivireanul continued and amplified the effort of imposing the Romanian language in the cultic service of the Church. In order to do this, he transffered the printing press from Râmnic to Târgovişte with the printing plates and the rest of the equipment and he already printed in 1709 the first book, the monumental Church service. Of the 21 works that were published in the interval 1709-1715 from the Târgovişte printing presses, 14 were printed entirely in Romanian15. It is certain that the quick sale of the 1706 edition of the Hieratikon made the Metropolitan want to reprint it in a more practical, self sufficient book. The text of this hieratikon was improved for a larger part and remained in this last form given by Antim until nowadays. The context of the publication of the 1713 Hieratikon was not an easy one, because in 1712, when the work was being corrected, the Metropolitan faced a difficult crisis: the conflict with the voivode Constantin Brâncoveanu, because of which he almost lost the Metropolitan seat. After the difficult and dangerous clearing of the situation, the volume was printed in an elegant form, followed during the same year by the Molitvenic (also as a separate volume) and by 3 other works. The Hieratikon of 1713 is in the 4º format (20 X 15 cm), printed in two colours, red and black, it has 2 unnumbered pages+ 210 pages16. The title page has the following content: The Godly and most holy LITURGIES of our saintly Fathers John Chrysostom, of Basil the Great, and of Grigorie the Dialogist (the Prejdeshtenia), now printed for the first time..In the 25th year of the exalted Reign of the most Enlightened protector of all Wallachia, Ioánn Co[n]standín B[râncoveanu] Basaráb Voevod, With all the expense of the most holy Metropolitan of Hungarowallachia, kir Antim Ivireanul. In the holy Metropolitan seat of Târgóvişte. In the year from Christ 1713. [By Gheórghie Rádovici]. On the back of the title page the usual verses for the coat of arms are rendered: About the seal, political verses, /Of Wallachia for happiness. At right and left of the coat of 15 Doru Bădără, Tiparul românesc la sfârşitul secolului al XVII- lea şi începutul secolului al XVIII- lea, Brăila, 1998, p. 82- 83. 16 We are using the copies of the LHieratikon that are kept in the collections of the Holy Synod Library. The first copy that we studied has the following page numbering errors: page 13 has the number 2, exactly as in 1706 where the numbering is different, maybe in 1713 they used the plate from 1706 without having changed the number on the page!? However, the pages that follow are correctly numbered. Between page 45 and 46 an unnumbered page was inserted, that contains an engraving with Deisis signed Ursul, although all the other pages with engravings were taken into consideration at page numbering, for instance the engraving with St. Basil can be found between pages 118 and 120, so it has the number 119. (in the copies II and III consulted by us, we can find the errors from pages 13 and 45-46, but the engraving with St. Basil is not numbered, but it is inserted between pages 118 and 119). Further on, copy nr. I has at page 121 the number 120, 122 is written as 121, there follows correctly 123, then page 124 has the wrong number 123, page 125 is written as 124 and the numbering follows in the wrong way. Copies nr II and III do not have the mistakes from page 121. In fact, the hieratikon should have 213 pages. In 1706 there are no such numbering errors. 225 arms, there are the initials: I[oan] C[onstantin] B[râncoveanu] V[oievod] D[omn] O[blăduitor] [ării] R[omâneşti](Lord Protector of Wallachia). Under the coat of arms, there are the verses: This sign of the cross that the raven shows/ Christ prepares it for the Lord Constandín / To protect him in good faith,/ And to give him a long reign. The verses can be found for the first time in the Akathist printed at Snagov in 1698, and later in two printings from Târgovişte, the Octoechos (1712) and the Euchologion (1713). Without having a foreword and the argument for the canonicity of the rendering of sacred texts in the national language, the volume begins directly with Pínax, that is Note of what can be found in this liturgy,  Teaching, about the way the deacon or priest should officiate at the Great Vespers, at Matins and at the liturgy.  The Vespers prayers.  The rules for the Matins.  The rules of the Godly liturgy of Chrisostom.  The Godly liturgy of our saintly Father John with the golden utterance.  The Godly liturgy of the Great Basil.  The teaching of the godly liturgy of Grigory the Dialogist with the service of Vespers during the great and holy Lent.  The godly liturgy of Grigory the Dialogist.  The blessing ending the Great Feasts.  The blessing that ends the service on weekdays.  The ending to the litanies of the Canon in the day of the holy Easter.  The prayer of the Kollyvas.  The prayer of the willow tree.  The prayer for the blessing of the meat.  The prayer for the tasting of the grapes.  And the litanies for the deceased. The title mentions now printed for the first time, which we believe refers to the fact that at Târgovişte, under the care of the Metropolitan Antim, the liturgies were printed for the first time in a separate volume17. This fact is in favor of the idea that in 1706, at Râmnic, the hieratikon did not leave the printing press separated from the molitvenic. The contents of the 1713 Hieratikon corresponds precisely to the 1706 one, except for the „litanies to be chanted for the dead” which in 1706 were included in the memorial service from the Molitvenic miscellany. The order of the religious services is taken on directly from the Euchologion edited by Nicolae Glykis in 1691 at Venice, but the services that only the Bishop can officiate are omitted, and also other prayers that were not usually said in our places (for instance: the prayer 17 But on the title page of the Euchologion (the Molitvenic) from Târgovişte - 1713 it is written „now printed for the second time after the rules of the Greek one”, its first printing being the one from Râmnic-1706, together with the Hieratikon. 226 for the consecration when different ranks in the ecumenical Patriarchy were offered). In order to show the evolution of the Hieratikon that was published in 1713, from the one from Râmnic in 1706, we will note some improvements/differences that appeared between the two editions18; thus, we have chosen for comparison a few texts. From the start, we highlight the fact that the typikon written in red, that is the movements after which the holy service takes place, corresponds for the most part to the one in the Greek Euchologion, Venice - 1691. But we will show that its translation and also the translation of the prayers was improved/ developed from one edition to another, even small mistakes in the contents being corrected19. We mustn’t forget that by the adoption of the lexical solutions, St. Antim had to take into consideration that part of the text was chanted (exclamations or the end of a litany- with voice) and because of that, a certain cadence was necessary. St. Antim took on identically most of the texts from the edition of Glykis, a fact that is visible even in the preservation of the typikonal references that are specific for the service in cathedrals/monasteries: „And if the time comes (the priest) should go to receive blessing from the greater one” (the igumen or the bishop) (p.46); in the same cathedral service, more sumptuous, there is the antiphonal chanting, with two kliros, which is not mentioned in 1680 or 1702, but only in 1706 and 1713 (pp. 183-184), which was difficult to undertake at a parish church, but which was in use at monasteries (and the Episcopal or Metropolitan cathedrals were monasteries). At the Little Entrance, the deacon is urged to go to the bishop or the igumen to give to them the Gospel in order to be kissed, if they are present. Still, we have noticed that Glykis’s edition mentions only the igumen, while the Hieratikon of 1646 mentions the archimandrite or the igumen, those of 1680 and 1702 also mention the bishop (as in Movilă 1639), and the one of 1713 takes on completely after 1680! These directions that are specific to monks are not useless, taking into consideration the fact that monasteries and sketes were numerous even in those times. At the threefold litany, in 1691, the reference is to the brothers of this holy 18 The orthodox Hieratikon printed by Petru Movilă at Kiev in 1639 will be cited as „Movilă 1639. we want to thank especially the teachers Cătălina Velculescu and Zamfira Mihail who donated to the Holy Synod Library an excellent facsimile of the precious Hieratikon of 1639 from Kiev, without which we couldn’t have made this analysis and we must add that also these two erudite researchers have the merit of having highlighted lately the influence of the Hieratikon of Petru Movilă on our hieratikons; the Hieratikon from Dealu - 1646 will be mentioned as 1646, the one from Bucharest- 1680 will be cited as 1680, the Greek Euchologion from Venice in 1691 will be written simply 1691, the one from Buzău- 1702 will be rendered as 1702, the one from Râmnic printed in 1706 together with the Molitvenic under the name of Euchologion will be mentioned as 1706, and the Hieratikon from Târgovişte in 1713 will be written simply: 1713, we mentioned simply Antim when the notes on the text are available for both the antimian editions: 1706 şi 1713. 19 In many copies of the Liturgy from Râmnic 1706, at p. 81 at the Epiclesis, in the typikon written in red, the deacon is mentioned as blessing the holies, which is an error. Because this was noticed at the printing press only after the printing, a correction strand of paper was applied on the wrong words. This error was made right in 1713 (p.95-96). 227 monastery and Antim rendered it by „ the brothers of this holy abode (as if it was a monks’ community). We shall cast here a short and direct comparative view on the liturgical texts from the editions of 1706 and 171320, although the reference to the two works is inevitable during the whole study. Even the title that opens the series of directions on the service of the holy liturgy underwent some changes. If in 1706 it was: Rules for the holy and godlie liturgy that is like this in the Great Church, and at S[ve]ta Gora” (p. 33), it was paraphrased in 1713: Rules for the holy and godly liturgy that is done like this in the Great Church, and at S[ve]ta Gora (p. 46). The line of the Beginning prayers opens in 1706 with Heavenly Emperor and it continues with Holy God: Heavenly Emperor, the Helper, true spirit […] Holy Lord, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal[...](p. 34). In 1713 the prayers are as follows: Heavenly Emperor, the Helper, the Spirit of truth […] Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal [...] (p.47). The second variant is in use up to this day. The preparation of the priests for the godly service opened in 1706 with the advice: „The priest that is about to service the godly liturgy…should have no hate toward nobody” (.p.33), and in 1713, the incentive became clearer: „The priest that is about to service the godly liturgy […] should have nothing against nobody [...]” (p.46). When putting on the poias (the girdle), the verse of the XVIIth psalm, 35 „they put on my innocent way” in 1706 was modified in 1713, with „ without guilt my way”. The Great Blessing that marks the beginning of the Holy Liturgy uses in 1706 the possessive-genetival article for all the three Persons of the Most Holy Trinity, while in 1713 it was eliminated before „Tatălui” (of the Father), the new form being „Blessed is the Kingdom of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost” (“Blagoslovită e împără ia Tatălui şi a Fiului şi a Sfântului Duh”). At the Great Litany:  At the third request, the Greek term evsthatias was rendered in 1706 with „the good undertaking of the holy churches of God” and in 1713 with „the good state”, with the meaning of constancy, for this term was the option in the 2012 Hieratikon also.  At the fourth request, the Greek term evlavías was translated differently: „[…]for those that with faith and with respect (1706)/ good faith (1713) […]enter herein […]”. Today it is rendered with evlavie.  At the eleventh request, the Greek word tlipseos was translated in 1706 with „scârba” [disgust] and in 1713 with „necazul” [trouble], and it remained like this up to this day. Some expressions were left in the Slavic, as for instance „Premudrost prostí!, (Stand up straight, Wisdom!), or the priest is being told what to do when the Ninea, 20 For the Greek terms, we take into account the Euchologion from Venice-1691, a copy of this being recently identified on the occasion of this study in the Holy Synod Library also. 228 that is, the verse that began with Glory to the Father…; The Beatitudes are rendered with the name „Blajenii”, and some hymns have their Greek title, for example when the text of the typikon is about Holy God, it is called Agios („and singing the Agios, the priest reads the prayer”.) Sometimes, the same words have several graphic renditions, which is natural, taking into account the uncertainty of the Romanian theological/church language, because this was the moment it began to be established. After the prayer of the Three times holy hymn, in 1713 the typikon shows that: „and if this prayer endeth […]”(să sfârşaşte) and several lines further, „and after Agios endes [...]”(să fărşaşte), in 1706 they used „săvârşaşte”, then „sfârşaşte”. Even inside the same edition, the 1713 one, a typikonal indication that is common to the liturgies of St. John and St. Basil can be rendered with synonimes: „[...]and they go behind (din dosul (p.70) /pre dinapoia (p.123) the holy table”. The same situation occurs at the prayer of the Threefold Hymn: „Holy God that giveth rest to the saints (pre sfinţi)” (the Liturgy of St. John, p.72)/”that giveth rest unto the saints (întru sfinţi)” (the Liturgy of St. Basil, p.125). At the Cherubic Hymn of the Liturgy of St. John, in 1706 we have pohte (cravings), and in 1713 pofte, but even in 1713 the word pofte was replaced in the Liturgy of St. Basil with its old and beautiful Romanian form: pohte (p.134). The word order was improved here and there: in 1706 we have at Vespers the exclamation that ends the Litany of the requests: „That good and loving of humans Thou art God [...]”, in 1713 it was rephrased as "That God good and loving Thou art [...]”, and it is interesting that in 2012 a variant closer to 1706 was used. In the 1713 edition, some words have a double form, but the usage is not accidental; for instance, when referring to the stelu ă (little star) as a liturgical object that is positioned over the saint diskos, 1713 says zveazdă. When they render the verse from the Gospel according to Matthew, II, 9 they say:” [...] and the star (steaua) coming, they stood above where the Infant was” (p.60). For the st. diskos, 1713 took on in Romanian, like in the Slavic, the Greek word discos. Somewhere else, 1713 uses together Greek and Slavic forms in order to name the same object: „And the priest using the aer (Văzduhul or aerul) [...]” (p. 61), but it also utilizes the word acoperământ (cover) in the prayer: „Cover us with the cover of Your wings […]” (p.61). Somewhere else, we have The Air or the Procovăţ (at the Holy Communion). Also alternatively they use the form glory (slavă) or praise (mărire).21 When the service begins, one says: „Blessed (blagoslovit) is our God” but they also use the form to bless (a binecuvânta) when they cite the Psalm 133, 2:” Raise your hands to the holy ones and bless the Lord”. The meaning of these verbs is clearer in the Pulpit Prayer: „The One that bless (bl[a]g[oslo]veşti) the ones that bless Thou Lord (bine te cuvintează)[...]”. The same object may have several names; we can consider this a consequence of the uncertainty of the liturgical language during its formation process or as a 21 A controversial use in Romanian liturgical texts. See the study of pr. Paraschiv Angelescu Slavă şi Mărire, Bucharest, 1939. 229 desire to diversify it. When the reference is to the imperial doors, in 1706 and 1713 we find: the holy doors (fintele uşi), the great dveras (dverile cele mari), the great dvera (dvera cea mare), the holy dvera (sfânta dveră), the holy door (sfânta uşă0, the imperial door (uşa cea împărătească), the holy dveras (sfintele dveri). When mentioning those that give answer in the church, Antim calls them: the kliros, the singers, the reader, the choir, those outside. Whatever the motivation for the use of these forms, the language becomes fresher and avoids the routine that sometimes a typikon inspires. The exclamation that closes the Great Litany in the Liturgy of St. John: „That to Thee is due (se cuvine) all the praise [...]” is rendered at the end of the first Prayer for the believers in the same liturgy through: „That to Thee is due (se cade) all the praise [...]” The Liturgy of St Basil closes the Great Litany by: „That to Thee is due (se cade) all the praise […]”. The incentive that announces the reading of the Gospel in 1706 sounds thus: „With righteous exalted wisdom (preaînţelepciune) [...]” but it was rephrased in 1713 by: „With righteous wisdom [...]”. At the Cherubic Hymn Prayer, in 1706 the verbal form: „[...]and to work (să lucrez) in holiness your saintly and most pure body[...]” was replaced in 1713 with a clearer one in meaning:” [...]and to sacrifice (să jărtvesc) your saintly and most pure body”. We wish to highlight Antim’s fidelity toward the Athonite typikon that is in service until nowadays at the Holy Mountain, while it was altered in our parts. For example, the incense burning before reading the Gospel is placed correctly after the Apostolos, not during its reading, when the tingling of the bells can cover the voice of the reader. Moreover, this incense burning took place only in the altar. And also, the dialogue between the priest and the deacon in which the deacon asks for the blessing for reading the Gospel took place secretely in the altar. Some sentences have been taken on elliptically, like in Greek, without a predicate. At the litany for the called ones we have: „All of you that are called, come out, so that no one of the called ones (should not remain). All of you believers […]”. After the consecration of the gifts (Epiclesis), in 1706 we have the prayer: „And we pray, mention O Lord all the archierarchy of the orthodox that with righteousness make straight the word of truth”, and in 1713: „[...] to those that in righteousness teach the word of truth [...]” form that was preserved until nowadays. We reproduce a fragment from the troparion of St. John Chrisostom, the way it was rendered in 1706, at the end of the liturgy of this saint, because this is the place it first appears in Romanian in the hieratikon: „Your utterance as some gold shined a gift of light for the whole world, because you did not earn for the world a treasure of money, but with wisdom in humility you showed us those that are high and you taught us with your words[…]”. The edition of 1713 brings an obvious improvement to this beautiful troparion, a variant close to the current one: „From your mouth like a flame of fire the gift shined, illuminating the world, not earning 230 the treasure of wordly love for money, the height of the humble thought you have shown to us, by teaching us with your words[…]”. The few examples (and the list can continue) highlight an improvement of the text of the Hieratikon, with a tendency for diversifying and clarifying the language. Moreover, it is obvious that if 1713 takes on the typikon of 1680, already translated in Romanian, and it discreetly develops it with supplementary explanations, the merit of the 1713 liturgy is to have translated again all the prayers in Romanian, a difficult and risky undertaking, taking into account the situation of the Metropolitan Dosoftei, whose language has only poetic value and did not become functional in the Romanian liturgical language. What does Antim’s Hieratikon of 1713 bring new compared to previous editions22? The structure of Antim’s Hieratikon is different from the previous editions. While in the editions of 1646, 1679, 1680 and 1702 the text begins with the liturgies and ends with the Praises, Antim puts the services in their natural cultic order: first the Praises, then the liturgies. The variant of Antim (taken from the Greek/ athonite one) can also be found in Movilă 1639; this one is maintained until this day in the Hieratikon. At the end of the Matins service, Antim positioned the beginning of the sticherons that must be sung at the kliros and he renders the complete form of two troparions for the Resurrection that are sung when it is the turn of voices 1, 2, 4 şi 8 or 3, 5, 6 şi 7. This fact cannot be found in the 1691 edition, nor can it be found in the variants printed before Antim. Also the indication that after the Matins there follows the reading of Hour I (p. 45), cannot be found in the Greek edition, nor is it in the Slavic-Romanian editions. At the Proskomedia service, Antim positioned „The image of the holy diskos” but the placement of the mirida on the holy diskos is different from the graphical directions in the other Romanian editions. The mirida of the Theotokos, although correctly translated from Greek the placement on the diskos „at the right side of the agnet”, in the drawing the mirida appears at the right side of the priest, not of the agnet, as it is correctly positioned in the 1646, 1680, 1702 editions. Because the right side of the agnet was mistaken for the right side of the priest, under the mirida of the Theotokos we find the mirida of the nine groups of saints. It is interesting that Movilă 1639 also places the miridas in reverse, so at the right side of the agnet appear the miridas of the Theotokos and of the nine groups of saints, but they should be placed to both sides of the agnet. This strange fact in the Movilă edition was corrected by the editions printed in our country (1646, 1680, 1702) so they did 22 In the comparative analysis we have made, we referred mainly to the editions in Wallachia, that is why we won’t include the editions of Dosoftei, Iaşi 1679 and 1683; it seems that apart from the argument for the religious service in the national language, St. Antim did not take into account at all this edition for the text or the liturgical language, as is also the case with the Rules for Deacons printed at Bălgrad in 1687. 231 not reproduce the Slavic variant without a minimal processing, not even 1646. We can assume that this was not necessarily a mistake at Movilă and Antim, the grouping of the saints’ mirida, because the mirida of the Theotokos can be placed together with the nine groups of saints, because she is the most holy of the humans that were sanctified. When he mentions what prosphora is taken and how many miridas are taken from it, Antim is more explicit, while the editions of 1680 and 1702 show gaps. At the fourth mirida, the list of martyrs that are mentioned is longer than in 1691. Antim added near St. Teodor Tiron, St. Teodor Stratilat, taking on from 1680 and 1702. Movilă 1639 doesn’t mention him, but it has long lists of local Slavic saints. Why was this second Teodor, a military saint, inserted only in the Romanian editions? Is it a local tradition/piety? This remains to be seen23. There are more mentionings at the Great Entrance in 1713 than in 1691, but much fewer than in Movilă 1639. The sfita24 (phelonion) of the priest used to be lifted at the front and it was fixed with two small buttons in order not to hinder his hands, especially at the Proskomedia and at the Great Entrance; the Greeks keep this custom up to this day. The testimony of faith or the Creed is printed in a new translation through the Hieratikon of Antim, a variant that is used in the Church up to this day. The answer to the incentive „Let us give thanks to the Lord” is in the Liturgy of St. John: „With striving and in righteousness”, a short form used by the Greeks up to nowadays, but only in the Liturgy of St. Basil we find an amplified form of the hymn, that exists nowadays in both liturgies. The central moment of the holy liturgy is the Anaphora, which culminates with the consecration of the bread and wine as the Body and Blood of Christ by invoking the Holy Spirit (Epiclesis). There were different disputations between easterners and westerners regarding this holy moment. The westerners contended that the bread and the wine are consecrated at the words: „Partake, eat […] drink from this you all […]” while the easterners said that for the consecration, invoking the Holy Spirit is necessary. The catholic approach tot his moment made its way in some orthodox hieratikons, also. In Movilă 1639 we find the indication that the priest should make the sign of blessing with his right hand and show the bread and wine while saying: „Partake, eat[…] Drink from this you all[…]”, then there was the summon of the Holy Spirit. It seems to us that the Metropolitan Petru Movilă’s desire was to compromise the different sides…. This mistake was later taken on in the Orthodox hieratikon of the Metropolitan Ştefan of Hungarowallachia25. As 23 We notice that at the end of the nine groups of saints, in the edition from Buzău in 1702 a printed dyptich appears for the first time in Romanian liturgies. It is the Dyptich of the Great cup bearer Şerban, the founder that made […] the liturgies. In the liturgy of St. Basil, the same dyptich is placed after the Epiclesis. The custom is to be found frequently in Slavic books, at the litanies for rulers where all the members of the ruling family are mentioned, whether living or dead. 24 Some researchers read here sfânta (holy) instead of sfita, but sfita is a liturgical name for phelonion. 25 Ms. rom. 1790, Biblioteca Academiei Române, f. 29v. 232 already stated, the Romanians knew and took on the texts from Movilă 1639, but they corrected the mistakes26. The Hieratikons partially inspired by the Epiclesis of Movilă 1639 are: Dealu 1646 and Bucharest 1680 (the direction to hold the hand with the blessing sign only appears at Partake, eat…but not at Drink of this you all..). The Hieratikon from Buzău 1702 and then Râmnic 1706 and Târgovişte 1713 carefully avoided catholic influences. The movilian variant is present in the Greekcatholic liturgy, so the same indication from Movilă 1639 regarding the blessing of the gifts is to be gound later in the Greek edition from Venice 1687. The Greek Euchologions do not contain the indication mentioned by us, from Movilă 1639. Regarding the Note for the crumbling of the Holy Agnet (p.104) we have to say that Antim follows the tradition of Romanian hieratikons, but he develops it with suplimentary explanations, that are very good for the service in the church. We first mention the fact that we haven’t found the text of 1691 and neither the specific drawing „for the way and with what parts of the Holy Agnet must the priest receive communion”. The text is to be found in Movilă 1639, then in 1646, 1680 and 1702. On the other hand, the drawing is present only in 1680 and 170227 and at Antim (not in Movilă 1639). In this way, after the consecration of the gifts at Epiclesis, the priest is no longer allowed to pour wine into the chalice, but only a little lukewarm water. The interdiction is expressed by 1680 (f. 39v) and 1702 (f. 41v) as follows:”and after that do not pour (in the chalice) nothing at all [...]”, but St. Antim feels the need of saying this clearer and definitely: „That after the holy services are done, you are not allowed, don’t even dare to pour more wine in the holy chalice […]”. If Movilă 1639 instructs the priest to taste only once from the chalice when he receives communion, (in the same way taken on by the Orthodox hieratikon of the Metropolitan Ştefan, f. 40), the Slavic-Romanian liturgies also conform, like Antim, to the Greek typikon that establishes that the priest should taste three times from the chalice. The piety, the caretaking and the efforts of St. Antim for the Holy Communion (the Blood and Body of our Saviour Jesus Christ) made him add some interesting practical advice regarding the way a priest must commune the Christians and the way he should be helped by the deacons or the chanters of the church. In this way, when he would come out „before the imperial door” only with the chalice, two helpers had to keep straight under the chalice „ the Air or the big Procovet [the towel] unless by mistake something should chance to fall, and the servicing priest holds the holy Chalice with another Procovet above the Air that is spread… and he gives them the communion telling everyone: The servant of God is receiving communion ” (in 1706 the phrase is:” Joining the servant of God [...]”) after this, 26 The conception of the Metropolitan Petru Movilă regarding the Epiclesis (as reflected in the Orthodox hieratikons he printed and expressed also in the Orthodox confession) was corrected by the Iaşi Synod (1642), see pr.prof. Mircea Păcurariu, Cultura teologică românească, Bucharest, 2011, p.111. 27 In 1702 this teaching is somewhere else, compared to the place given to it by Antim. 233 „the appointed” priest gave immediately antidoron to those that had received communion. It is hard to believe that in the rural area, there were several priests in service at a church, but this was possible at cathedrals and monasteries. In the Hieratikon of 1713 (and obviously in the 1706 one), St. Antim gave up (as in Bucharest, 1680) the three prayers placed in the liturgy before the priest’s communion; they were placed there in order to be read by him, in case he couldn’t fulfill his rules of communion. These three prayers are present in Movilă 1639 and from here they were taken on: 1646 and 1702. The Greek rules do not impose these prayers. Also interesting is a remnant of Episcopal rule, when after the communion, the priest blesses the people with the chalice and the people answer: For many years hence Lord! In 1691, there is no such greeting, it only appears in Slavic hieratikons: in Greek with Cyrillic characters in Movilă 1639 and in 1646, while in 1680 and 1702 the greeting is rendered in Slavic, wherefrom Antim probably took it and translated it in Romanian. And then, before the great blessing at the end of the liturgy, we find at Antim also the rules that are applied nowadays at Athos (rendered in Movilă 1639, then in 1680 and in 1702): the priest would go in the middle of the church and handed out the antidoron, after which he blessed the people, did the end of the service and the kliros would sing the Polychronion. We think that the above mentioned greeting („For many years hence Lord!”) as well as the chanting of the Polychronion used to be a tradition already established in our parts. The Polychronion was chanted after the ending of the liturgy (rendered by Antim with the Slavic „Mnoga leata) for the Lord and for the Bishop. This Polychronion can be found in Movilă 1639 and after it in all the editions of the hieratikons until Antim. The Liturgy of Grigory the Dialogist has some particular traits at Antim. It opens with Teaching for the Godly Liturgy of Grigory the Dialogist that can be found both in the Slavic and the Greek tradition, taken on by Slavic and SlavicRomanian hieratikons. The final part of this text, regarding the Great Entrance, was moved by Antim (as well as 1680 and 1702) in the liturgy text itself, at the moment of the Great Entrance, which did not happen in 1691 (the Greek translation avoided many of the explanations in the text, placing them at the beginning of the liturgy). Moreover, Antim puts, in the explanations at the beginning of the liturgy, a graphic sign so that the moment should be identified easily. In Movilă 1639, the typikon is much more detailed. Further on, Antim has an initiative that shows the typographer and the translator that he is, with a perfect knowledge of reality (the difficulty of the lack of books in churches, especially Romanian books): he took on from 1691 the sticherons and translated them in Romanian, so they were chanted in this liturgy after „Lord I have cried”; the sticherons are rendered here for the case in which „there will be no Lenten Triodion, and so you be compelled to say these sticherons that I have put here, also reading the reading matter”. The order of the seven sticherons is not the same as in 1691, where they are more, anyhow. Antim placed fewer of them because he points also at the Menaion, where from some 234 more had to be chanted. These sticherons are not found in Movilă 1639 and in none of the hieratikons before Antim. We add the fact that the Greek liturgy of 1691 has no litanies with the request for the Voivode, its presence in our liturgies being an adaptation of Romanian reality (under the influence of the Slavic one). We have noticed so far that St. Antim took seriously into consideration the Hieratikon of 1680 published by the Metropolitan Teodosie, his spiritual father. This fact is also visible because he didn’t take on in his editions the text of the teaching: About the proskomedia for deacons that is included in Movilă 1639, 1646 and 1702, but not in 1680. The Hieratikon of Antim and the following editions of the Hieratikon The moral authority and the intellectual profile of the martyred Metropolitan Antim, as well as the quality of the translations he made, printed under his direct guidance and initiative, made the next hierarchs at Râmnic and Bucureşti to resume the printing of the Hieratikon from Târgovişte in its entirety, so at the initiative of the Metropolitan Daniil of Hungarowallachia, the Hieratikon is printed at Bucharest in 1728 in two editions (the second one having also the Service of the Holy Communion), a third edition being printed the next year, in 1729. Only a few small typographical ornaments make the editions that do not contain the Service of the Holy Communion be different from the edition of 171328. Even the page numbering is the same as that of the Antim’s Hieratikon. We believe that the antimian typographic material was used because we can notice a certain wear due to the heavy use of the xylographic plates. Here are, in the order of their printing, the other editions that took on the text and the graphics of the Hieratikon from Târgovişte (with differences almost impossible to spot): Bucharest -1741 and 1746, Râmnic -1747. Most of the following editions took on the text of the Hieratikon that St. Antim translated, but in some of them some other prayers were added, especially the Rules for Communion, the Synaxarion and the Special requests for the Holy Proskomedia, all of them at the end of the volume. We mention the editions: Iaşi-1759, 1794, Buzău-1769, Blaj-1775, Bucharest-1780, Râmnic-1787, Sibiu-1798. During the next centuries, (especially the XXth), the antimian text constituted the base for the processing and the improvements of the translation of the liturgies. A fact is certain, in the 2012 Hieratikon, Antim’s text can be found in great proportion and it is used in church service until nowadays. * The numerous copies that are kept up to this day on the entire Romanian territory are the best proof of the favourable reception of the Hieratikon from 28 We draw the attention to the fact that a Hieratikon from 1728 without a title page may be mistaken for one of 1713, if not properly studied. It is the case of doublet 4 from the Academy Library in Bucharest. So that library has 4 copies of 1713, not 5. We found this situation in several depositories where we searched. 235 Târgovişte, as well as its prototype in the Euchologion from Râmnic (1706). Although these books are heavily used in church, the quality material that the whole print run of 1713 was made of and the care of the priests for this precious printing in their maternal language led to the present conservation of a few dozen copies29. Metropolitan Antim’s courageous efforts were propagated in several areas of Romanian spirituality and culture, culminating with: the victory of the introduction of the Romanian language in religious service (making the evangely message accessible to all), the creation of the liturgical/literary Romanian language, by establishing the meaning of words, the introduction of new words, and the good character of his initiative consists of the fact that up to this day, the liturgy text published by Antim is in use in the churches, Sunday after Sunday and religious holiday after religious holiday. We highlight the fact that, apart from the indisputable merits of the Romanian edition of Dosoftei liturgy, the pioneer for the introduction of the Romanian language in the religious service and the poet that created a beautiful Romanian language, we see that the editions from Iaşi of 1679 and 1681 have not been taken on by other translators, because Dosoftei’s language has a strong Moldavian dialectal character30. And so, the first act of courage having been already made, St. Antim’s merit consists of having perfected the hopeful undertaking of the Moldavian hierarch. The Ornamentics of the Hieratikon from Târgovişte – 1713 The Hieratikon of 1713 has a rich and elegant ornamentics that was executed in a refined manner probably by St. Antim himself and the master engravers Dimitrios and Ioanichie Bakov that were also active at the printing presses from Snagov. The letter is finely executed and is easily recognizable. In the volume, there are 4 engravings in pleine page: Deisis (inserted between pages 45-46, signed Ursul), St. John Chrysostom (p. 65, not signed), St. Basil the Great (p. 119 signed Dimitrios, 1698) and St. Gregory (the Dialogist) (signed Ioanikii, p. 178). It is probable that one of the signatories also realized the engraving with St. John Chrysostom, maybe St. Antim even. A bigger engraving is the image of the position of the chalice and the diskos at the proskomedia, and also the correct arrangement of the mirida on the diskos (p. 55). At page 105, we find the directions for the positioning of the Holy Agnet broken on the diskos, after the consecration, information that is enclosed by a double border formed by small stylized modules. Dr. Gabriela Niţulescu signaled in 2009 (Cartea tipărită la Târgovişte şi Renaşterea românească, Târgovişte, pp.60-62) the existence of 50 copies, of which the most (8 copies) at Arhiepiscopia Alba- Iuliei, and the rest in parish churches, county churches and so on. Most of them are located in Transylvania and Banat. In Wallachia we have 2 copies at the National Library of Romania (one has circulated in Ardeal), 2 copies at the County Museum for History and ArcheologyPrahova, 4 copies at the Romanian Academy Library and another 4 copies at the Holy Synod Library, all of them from Ardeal. We must research the depositories from Oltenia, Argeş, Dobrogea but also those from Moldavia! 30 Dosoftei, Dumnezăiasca liturghie, 1679 critical edition by N.A.Ursu, Iaşi, 1980, p. XLIX. 29 236 In the Hieratikon of 1706, instead of the Deisis image, we find the scene of the Lord’s Crucifixion (signed Ioanikii and dated 1706), enclosed by 16 cassettes that contain the symbols of the saints evangelists and motives related to the Crucifixion (the instruments of torture). The image of the Crucifixion is related to the engraving of the antimension of the Metropolitan Teodosie of Hungarowallachia that was also realized by Ioanikii, or at least it served as a model. The antimension was taken on by St. Antim also, then by a long line of Wallachian hierarchs. The engravings in pleine page were published for the first time in the GreekArab Hieratikon printed in 1701 at Snagov. The faces of the liturgy „author” saints, together with the Deisis signed Ursul, also appear in the Hieratikon from Buzău, in 1702. Several typographical ornaments that end a text (they make any antimian printing recognizable), taken on in almost all the antimian printings, appear in line even in the Antologion of 1697 and they are gathered in the beautiful Akathist printed in 1698. In this printing there appear for the first time engravings of the Annunciation, Deisis (not the one signed by Ursul), of which some were taken on in the Kyriakodromion from Bălgrad (1699) and then at Târgovişte, in the small Slavic-Romanian Horologion (1714). The fact that many of these typographical ornaments are neither to be found in Incentive chapters (1691), nor in the Gospel of 1693 or in other books from Bucharest, but they appear for the first time in the printings from the printing press at Snagov, indicates that they were produced there. One of the inspiration sources for the graphics of the antimian printing consists of the the Greek books printed at Venice by Nicolae Glykis, also used by St. Antim for the translation of some texts in Romanian. The xylographic plates were moved from Snagov to Alba Iulia and Buzău, then to Râmnic and Târgovişte, and later to Bucharest. With unavoidable differences, the Hieratikon of 1713 is ornamented like its variant from 1706 printed at Râmnic, together with the Molitvenic. The title page of the Hieratikon of 1713 has the text enclosed in a double border formed by modules with stylized vegetal elements; over the title there is a vegetal frontispiece with a waterlily in its centre. The coat of arms with the dedicatory verses is to be found at its place, on the verso of the title page. It is composed of an oval shield in which the heraldic cruciary bird was placed, in the pose of an eagle. It has the head turned in dextra and the flight downwards, being accompanied in dextra by the sun and in senestra by the new moon. At the base there is a tree. The shield, stamped with a royal crown, accompanied by the symbols of the voivodal power, the spade in dextra and the mace in senestra, are enclosed by a rich ornamental border, with vegetal elements, kept by two pages that are blowing trumpets up front. In the fruit that emerges from the stem placed at the bottom, in the right hand part of the border, one can see two small letters: IK, probably Ioanikie31. This coat 31 The fact that this engraver signs at first with the name Ivan Bakov (The Key of understanding, Bucharest, 1678) and later on with Ioanikii Bakov, makes us think that he joined the monastic order. The name Ioanichie appears even before 1680, if we consider that the coat of arms was signed. 237 of arms appears for the first time with some slight differences in the Hieratikon from Bucharest (1680). It was taken on in many later printings: The Orthodox confession, Buzău - 1691, Psalter, Bucureşti - 1694, Akathist, Snagov - 1698, Euchologion, Buzău - 1699, Euchologion, Râmnic - 1706, Euchologion, Târgovişte - 1713. The most important titles of the Hieratikon are preceded by frontispieces. At page 12 we find a beautiful border with Jesus Christ our Saviour with the Gospel in His left hand and blessing with the right hand, a bust in a central medallion; two stems come out from under it, having at the end a sunflower each. At page 46, the frontispiece has in its upper part a frieze with a waterlily in its center, and in the border there are three medallions with the Theotokos, Christ the Saviour giving blessing with both hands and St. John the Baptist. At pages 66, 120, 179 at the beginning of each liturgy, there is a border with three medallions that contain the faces of the three liturgy „authors”, saints Basil, John and Gregory. Sometimes, the beginning of the page is marked with a simple stylized line (p. 205). The text ends with several types of ornaments: stylized black cross enclosed by six smaller red crosses (p. 11), ornaments formed of stylized stems (p. 45, 104), geometrical ornaments (p. 54, 117, 210), head of an angel with stems (the verso of the contents page). The texts of some prayers are separated by lines composed of small stylized vegetal modules (p. 170, 174, 199, 203, 206, 207, 208). The initials are mostly red but also black, and at the beginning of important chapters there are lettrines enclosed by stems, and the phrases in the text begin with larger letters, but without ornaments. Conclusions We have shown in this study that the Hieratikon from Târgovişte of 1713 is an improved variant of the one from 1706 of Râmnic. We have continuously compared the antimian text with the Greek one, of the Glykis edition (Venice, 1691), but also with the Slavic texts from the Orthodox liturgy of Petru Movilă (Kiev, 1639), Dealu-1646, and with the text of the Slavic-Romanian editions (Bucharest-1680 and Buzău-1702). We have tried to understand how faithfully did St. Antim follow the Greek text, that constitutes the byzantine tradition, how influenced he was by the Slavic and the Slavic-Romanian editions (that also spring from the byzantine tradition, but with certain Slavic nuances) and how much of the structure and the text of the Hieratikon represent his initiative. Obviously, when we use the term “initiative”, we do not mean the text of the prayers that are everywhere the same, but the way of organizing the religious service (the typikon), amplified and stated wherever St. Antim considered it necessary, according to the needs he noticed in the Romanian realities. We have analyzed both the typikon and the prayers, and also the language of the text, without resorting to strict philology and linguistic formulas and analysis (we leave this to specialists in those areas). In order to prove St. Antim’s success at the establishment of the rules and the language of the holy liturgy in Romanian, and 238 the actuality of his undertaking, we have adjoined passages from his hieratikons: Dosoftei, Antim and the edition of 2012 (much improved compared to the 2008 one, being closer to the Athonite byzantine tradition, as it used to be in the past). Moreover, the goal of this study was also the one of analyzing an essential printing for the Romanian liturgical life, that hasn’t enjoyed until now a historical-liturgical analysis and description that other less significant books have received. Annex In order to reflect the evolution of the language (of the translation of texts into Romanian) from Dosoftei and Antim until today, we will render in parallel some texts from the Romanian editions of the Hieratikon: Dosoftei- 1679, the editions Antim 1706 and 1713 and the last Romanian edition, published this year 2012. Prayer at the putting on of the sticharion My soul shall rejoice in the Lord, because He clothed me with a garment of humility, and with a garb of joy He vested me, as unto the groom He put a crown on me and like unto a bride He put jewels on me. 1679: Bucura-să-va sufletul mieu de D[o]mnul că mă-mbrăcă cu veşmânt de spăsenie, şi cu îmbrăcământ de veselie mă-nvăscu, ca mirelui mi-au pusu-mi mitră şi ca miresei mă-mpodobi podoabă (Isaia, LXI, 10). 1706: Bucura-să-va sufletul mieu întru D[o]mnul că m-au îmbrăcat în veşmântul mântuirii, şi cu haina veseliei m-au îmbrăcat. Ca unui mire mi-au pus mie cunună: şi ca pre o mireasă m-au înfrumseţat cu frumseţe. 1713: Bucura-să-va sufletul mieu întru D[o]mnul că m-au îmbrăcat în veşmântul mântuirii, şi cu haina veseliei m-au îmbrăcat. Ca unui mire mi-au pus mie cunună: şi ca pre o mireasă m-au împodobit cu podoabă. 2012: Bucura-se-va sufletul meu întru Domnul că m-a îmbrăcat în veşmântul mântuirii, şi cu haina veseliei m-a împodobit. Ca unui mire mi-a pus cunună: şi ca pe o mireasă m-a împodobit cu podoabă. The prayer of incense Christ our Lord, to Thee we are bringing incense, with a good spiritual smell, that Thou receive in Thy most high heavenly altar, send us Thy godly grace and the gift of Thy most holy Spirit. 1679: Tămâie -aducem Hristoase Dumnezău, în miros de bună mireazmă sufletească, carea priimindu-o suprăcerescul Tău jărtăvnic, împotrivă trimite-ne dumnezăiescul har şi darul Preasvântului Tău Duh. 1706: Tămâe Îţ aducem Hristoase Dumnezeule, întru miros de bună mireasmă sufletească pre carea primindu-o întru preacerescul Tău jărtăvnic, ne trimite noao darul Preasfântului Tău Duh. 239 1713: Tămâe Îţ aducem Hristoase Dumnezeule, întru miros de bună mireasmă duhovnicească pre carea primindu-o întru cel mai presus de ceriuri al Tău jărtăvnic, trimite-ne noao darul Preasfântului Tău Duh. 2012: Tămâie Îţi aducem ie Hristoase Dumnezeule, întru miros de bună mireasmă duhovnicească pe care primind-o întru jertfelnicul Tău cel mai presus de ceruri, trimite-ne nouă harul Preasfântului Tău Duh. The Great Blessing Blessed is the kingdom of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, now and forever and in eternity. 1679: Blagoslovită-i împărăţâia Tatălui ş-a Fiiului şi a Svântului Duh, acmu şi pururi şi-n vecii de veci. 1706: Blagoslovită e împărăţia a Tatălui, şi a Fiiului, şi a Sfântului Duh acum şi pururea şi în vecii vecilor. 1713: Blagoslovită e împărăţia Tatălui, şi a Fiiului, şi a Sfântului Duh acum şi pururea şi în vecii vecilor. 2012: Binecuvântată este împărăţia Tatălui, şi a Fiului, şi a Sfântului Duh acum şi pururea şi în vecii vecilor. Our Father Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name, Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven, give us day by day our daily bread and forgive us our sins, for we also forgive who is indebted to us. And do not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one. For Thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory, of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, now and forever and in eternity. 1679: Tatăl nostru, carele eşti în ceriuri, svinţască-se numele Tău, să vie împărăţâia Ta, să fie voia Ta, cumu-i în ceri aşe şi pre pământ. Pâinea noastră cea de saţâu dă-ne astăz şi ne iartă datoriile noastre, cum şi noi iertăm datorilor noştri. Şi nu ne băga la iscuşenie, ce ne izbăveşte de vicleanul. Că a Ta este împărăţâia şi puterea şi slava, a Tatălui ş-a Fiiului ş-a Svântului Duh, acmu şi pururea şi- vecii de veci. 1706: Tatăl nostru, carele eşti în ceriuri, sfinţească-se numele Tău. Vie împărăţia Ta, Fie voia Ta, precum în ceriu şi pre pământ. Pâinea noastră cea de pururea dă-ne- o noao astăz şi ne iartă noao greşalele noastre, precum şi noi ertăm greşiţilor noştri. Şi nu ne duce pre noi întru ispită, ci ne izbăveşte de cel rău. Că a Ta este împărăţia şi puterea şi mărirea, a Tatălui şi a Fiiului şi a Sfântului Duh, acum şi pururea şi în vecii vecilor. 240 1713: Tatăl nostru, carele eşti în ceriuri, sfinţească-se numele Tău. Vie împărăţia Ta, Fie voia Ta, precum în ceriu şi pre pământ. Pâinea noastră cea de pururea dă-ne- o noao astăz şi ne iartă greşalele noastre, precum şi noi ertăm greşiţilor noştri. Şi nu ne duce pre noi întru ispită, ci ne izbăveşte de cel rău. Că a Ta este împărăţia şi puterea şi mărirea, a Tatălui şi a Fiiului şi a Sfântului Duh, acum şi pururea şi în vecii vecilor. 2012: Tatăl nostru, Care eşti în ceruri, sfinţească-se numele Tău, vie împărăţia Ta, facă-se voia Ta, precum în cer, aşa şi pe pământ. Pâinea noastră cea spre fiinţă dă-ne-o nouă astăzi. Şi ne iartă nouă greşelile noastre, precum şi noi iertăm greşiţilor noştri, şi nu ne duce pe noi în ispită, ci ne izbăveşte de cel viclean. Că a Ta este împărăţia şi puterea şi slava, a Tatălui şi a Fiului şi a Sfântului Duh, acum şi pururea şi în vecii vecilor. Bibliografie selectiv Bădără, D., Tiparul românesc la sfârşitul secolului al XVII- lea şi începutul secolului al XVIII-lea, Brăila, 1998 Chiţulescu, P., Căr i din bibliotecile medievale româneşti păstrate în Biblioteca Sfântului Sinod, Bucureşti, 2011 Mureşianu, I. B., Cartea veche bisericească din Banat, Timişoara, 1985 Şerbănescu, N., Antim Ivireanul tipograf, in: Biserica Ortodoxă Română, LXXIV (1956), nr. 7-8 241 The Muteness of a Prophet Ioana COSTA Der Prophet Ezechiel bekommt sein himmlisches Gebot in Umständen, die nicht nur erschreckend, sondern auch verwirrend sind. Von der Vision des Tetramorphs erschüttert, hört er widersprüchliche Befehle, die wir im Rahmen seiner prophetischen Aufgabe nur schwer verstehen können. Nedergeworfen auf seinem Gesicht, wird er streng gemahnt, aufzustehen, kaum ist er aufgestanden, wird es ihm befohlen, sich auf dem Weg zu machen, um vor dem Volk zu prophezeien; es wird von ihm verlangt, in die Ebene hinauszugehen und doch im Haus zu bleiben, unbeweglich zu sein und doch zu handeln. Der Bibelvers 3.26 erfasst eine Situation, die Ezechiels himmlischem Auftrag zu widersprechen scheint: er wird verstummt – diese Lage wird nur im letzten Drittel des Buches in 33.21. ff. aufgehoben. Der Text der Septuaginta verwendet in 3.26 das Wort kophós, dessen Bedeutungen die Stummheit des Propheten nuancieren können. Schlüsselwörter: Septuaginta, Ezekiel, Investiture, Prophet, Stummheit. The etymology of word “prophet” (Greek prophétes) is undoubtedly connected to the verbal radical phemí, “to declare, to say”. The common interpretation, based on the historical usage, predominantly biblical, is “person speaking on God’s behalf, interpreting the divine will for the human beings”. Gregory the Great, the author of the most extended patristic commentary on the book of Ezekiel, opens the series of the homilies devoted to this prophet with a preamble (1.1.1) offering a personal interpretation of the terms prophetia, prophetes: among the three distinctive segments of a prophesy (past, present and future), two of them do not strictly correspond to the genuine meaning, as – in Gregory the Great’s approach of etymological evaluation – a prophesy is the verbalised proclamation of something that is to happen in the future (prophetia dicta sit quod futura praedicat). Accordingly, whenever regarding something belonging to the past or present, prophesy do not fully covers its own term, being actually the evocation of a completed act or the hint for a simultaneous event. The comprehensive significance of the term “prophesy” is consequently engorged, namely it embraces the exposure of something hidden for the mortal eyes and the human capability of understanding (1.1.25: quia prodit occulta); nevertheless, prophesy regarding present time, might imply a fact that is not deliberately concealed, but is simply secluded. For the specific case of Ezekiel, the etymology needs some further nuances, as the verbalised expression of tha divine message is hardly certain. The entire 243 prophetic mission of Ezekiel is marked by contradictory orders: his response offers a probable (though hardly intelligible) inner coherence, whose visible materialization is a series of mysterious acts. He only has one moment of hesitation, rendered into a quasi refuse to a divine command (4.12-15); horrified of baking the barley cakes in man’s dung, he says “Not so, Lord God of Israel: surely my soul has not been defiled with uncleanness” and God allows him: “Behold, I have given thee dung of oxen instead of man’s dung, and thou shalt prepare thy loaves upon it”. The string of acts endowed with prophetic significance is opened by Ezekiel’s physical response to the overwhelming experience of encountering the Tetramorph – the terrifying vision of divine glory, embodied in one unique creature with four visages, with wings and intricate wheels, that moved forward and in all the other directions in the same time. Struck by fear and astonishment, he fell facedown and his gesture generates both his prophetic mission and an avalanche of presumably discordant instructions: lying prostrated, he is ordered to hold firm on his feet; standing, he is ordered to proceed; he has to close himself in the house and to go outside, in the field – seemingly in the same time; he has to remain immobile and, simultaneously, to accomplish precise acts; most of all, he is ordered to be mute and to preach in the name of God. The pericope 3.22-27 is hardly intelligible in human (rational) perspective. The Greek term attested by Septuagint is kophós, whose meaning extends from “deaf” to “deaf-mute”, and simply “mute”: the Ezekiel occurrences are currently interpreted in the latter sense. Subsequently there appears a tension between v. 2426, where the muteness is imposed to the prophet (and, nevertheless, the motionless), and v. 27, where he is ordered to accomplish the divine mission, to prophesise, id est to verbalise for humans the divine message. Seeming to be affected, from the first moment of his prophetic investment, by aphasia and catatonia, Ezekiel regains his speaking ability, as promised, in v. 33.21 sq. The two moments are logically acceptable if the enouncement in v. 3.26 (“I will bind thy tongue, and thou shalt be dumb”) is accomplished only previous to 33.22 (“the hand of Lord […] opened my mouth […] and my mouth was open, it was no longer kept closed”), though there are no textual arguments to consider it. Otherwise it is hardly admissible that all along the chapters 4 to 33 Ezekiel is a prophet that cannot open his mouth, a silent prophet, totally mute. The development is consistent with the contrast between the acts he ordered to accomplish and 3.25, announcing him the immobility (“bonds are prepared for thee, and they shall bind thee with them”). Numerous elucidations have been proposed to meet this incongruity, plausible both as clarifying nuances and approximations. The muteness of the prophet might be not complete: his silence covers only the non-prophecy, meaning that the human Ezekiel is dumb, though the prophet Ezekiel is eloquent; or, in a different perspective of the relative muteness, he no longer speaks in public, remaining a voice inside his own dwelling, where people came to listen to him. His muteness might be selective: he no longer acts as a prophet urging people to repent, but is 244 prophesying the end of sinful humans. His muteness might be one-sided: he gives people the word of God, but is no longer speaking to God in the name of his people, abandoning a potential reconciliation. Finally, the editorial approach transfers the incongruity to the continuous alteration of manuscripts during the text transmission (the alleged muteness might be a simple error of a copyist). The specific premises of Ezekiel’s endowment with the capability of transmitting the divine will to the people display some similarities with other biblical pericopes. He being handed the word of God in form of a written scroll that is to be swallowed ought to be compared, for the most part, with Jer. 1.9., where the hand of God touches the lips of Jeremiah. On the other side, Moses being invested by the words “I will be in your mouth” (Exodus 4.12) does not include a visible gesture, remaining within the boundaries of verbalising the divine message. The peculiar trait of Isaiah (6.6 sq.) growing to be a prophet is probably closer: his lips are being touched by a seraphim, “having in his hand a burning coal that he had taken with tongs from the altar”; transferring the word of God to Isaiah is preceded by a fire cleansing of his lips (on the contrary, vide 3 Kings 22.22: “I will go out and be a lying spirit in the mouths of all his prophets”) In the book of Ezekiel, the messenger’s assignment to transmit the divine words to people around him is implied by a memorable image, accomplished in two tempos: he is being handed a scroll (2.9, Greek kefalís biblíou) inscribed with the divine message, expressed in three components – “lamentation and mourning and woe” (2.10, thrénos kaí mélos kaí ouaí); he is subsequently asked to swallow the scroll. Beyond the oddity of the scene, the episode includes some actual details that are striking. The term kefalís (a diminutive of kefalé) is attested with the same meaning in 2Ezdra 6.2 (despite the usual sense, vide Exodus 26.24,32,37 e.a., as “edge”, “capital or plynth of a pillar”). The text written on both sides of the scroll – a papyrus scroll, probably – is uncommon in the documents offered by archaeology, due both to the fragile nature of the material (vide Pliny, Naturalis historia, 13.68-89) and the reading habits, implying successive revolving and rolling, with destructive effects on the outer side. Ezekiel’s mission is symbolically depicted by swallowing the scroll inscribed with the divine message. Strictly formal, the episode parallels the story of the Golem, as it is present in the Jewish folklore: like Adam, golems are created from mud – a golem could be animated and gain ability to speak when inserted a piece of paper in his mouth. The command to swallow the scroll equals assimilating it, receiving it as a constituent that defines Ezekiel for the duration of his mission (and/or the rest of his life). The episode of swallowing the words of God is to be found also in Jeremiah 15.16: just like Ezekiel, the prophet discovers the sweet taste of the divine words. Gregory the Great reads the pericope as a tension between word and silence: if Ezekiel had not obeyed the request to intermediate the divine word, he would have irritate God with his silence (de suo silentio exasperasset), because, just as the villains annoy God speaking or doing evil, the good ones sometimes exasperate 245 him being silent when they are supposed to speak (quia reticent bona). The scroll Ezekiel receives from the hand of God is the Scripture itself: it is rolled up (liber autem inuolutus est), meaning it contains the enclosed text of the holy scripts, that common knowledge can hardly comprehend (ut non facile sensu omnium penetretur), but evolves under his eyes, for the reason that the obscure texts become clear and comprehensible for the preachers. The scroll written on both sides suggests, in the interpretation of Gregory the Great, an allegorical content doubled by the human history. The text hidden on the inner side brought the promises of the concealed future, while the text on the outer side of the scroll was the visible world that became steady established throughout precepts. The inner part was a promise regarding the heavenly life, while the outer one was teaching about the mortal goods. The text written there was a chant of joy or a chant of sorrow. Bible habitually places the chant in the frame of joy: when God took his people over the Red See, Moses and the sons of Israel rejoiced and sang for the glory of God (Exodus 15.1); after defeating his enemies, David sang for God (2Kings 22.1). Gregory the Great understands carmen (Greek mélos) here in its positive meaning: quia igitur pene semper in bono carmen ponere Scriptura sacra consueuit, ita a nobis etiam in hoc loco debet intellegi. The lamentation (lamentationes), chant (carmen) şi woe (uae) are part of the scroll received by the prophet: lamentations and repentance for the sins people committed, chant for the joys that are to come for the good ones, woe for convicting the villains. The word of God coming to Ezekiel is an emblematical image of this prophetic book. In its written form, might be found in several other pericopes of this book, such as the “sign” (Greek semeíon, 9.4) the divine messenger is to place on the foreheads of some men; this sign seems to be the Hebrew taw, the final letter of the alphabet, that used to have, in Ezekiel’s times, more or less the shape of X. The words of God are just as honey, vide Psalms 118.103: honey is mostly defined by its gustatory trait, as this text explicitly states: “full of sweetness”. The Greek term (glukázon) is a hapax, being attested only in the book of Ezekiel, in this unequivocal episode. On the other side, honey seems to offer perfectly harmonized chromatics with some other pericopes of the book. The first of them is immediately preceding the handing over of the scroll: the vision Ezekiel had near the Chobar river is clearly dominated by the electrum (Greek élektron), a term that has a double meaning both in Greek and Latin (which directly adopted from Greek, with no formal or semantic development), denoting either amber or an alloy of gold and silver (vide Pliny the Elder, Naturalis historia, 33.81). The Lust lexicon (2003) favours the later sense, here and in the other two pericopes where it is attested (1.27 and 8.2). The Hebrew corresponding term, hašmal, is not supported by some other occurrences, and the Accadian elmešu is also used to describe a bright vision manifestation of God. The patristic readings of the periscope clearly understand here an alloy of gold and silver. In the Homily 1.2 of Gregory the Great (chapter 14), the brilliant vision in the middle of the fire, species electri, is Christus Iesus 246 Mediator Dei et hominum, Christ that intercedes with God on behalf of the humans; his human nature merges with his divine nature, the human part emerges to the divine glory, the divine part fades its golden brightness to be contemplated by mortal eyes. The metallic shine has already been part of the description Ezekiel offered for the four creatures in his vision (1.7): “their legs were straight legs, and the sole of their feet was like the sole of a calf's foot, and they sparkled like burnished bronze”. Gregory the Great (1.4.5) interprets the bronze here as referring to the voice of the preacher: the image of the burning bronze (lat. aspectus aeris candentis) alludes to the preachers, whose voices and sayings unite sound and fire. The bronze sparks (lat. scintillae) are the words, delicate and minute, as the preachers can only put in their words an infinitesimal part of the fire burning in them. Electrum, bronze, honey: they have in common the gentle brightness that gradually undergoes into words. The divine word, becoming inner part of the prophet, does not need to be spoken: it is spread beyond the human words, allowing Ezekiel to be a prophet eloquent in his muteness. Bibliography Biggs, Charles R., 1996: The Book of Ezekiel, London, Epwoorth Press Goshen Gottstein, Moshe H., TALMON, Shemaryahu (ed.), 2004: The Book of Ezekiel, Ierusalim, The Hebrew University Magnes Press Gregoire LE Grand, 1986, 1990: Homélies sur Ézéchiel, Charles Morel (ed.), Paris, Cerf MCKeating, Henry, 1993: Ezekiel, Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press Lust, Johan, Eynikel, Erik, Hauspie, Katrin (ed.), 2003: Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint, Stuttgart, Deutsche Bibelgeselschaft Origene, 1989: Homélies sur Ézéchiel, Marcel Borret (ed.), Paris, Cerf Rahlfs, Alfred (ed.), 1979: Septuaginta, duo uolumina in uno, Stuttgart, Deutsche Bibelgeselschaft Septuaginta, 2008: Septuaginta, vol. 6/II. (Iezechiel, traducere din limba greacă, introducere, note, note complementare de Ioana Costa, p. 11-287), volum coordonat de C. Bădiliţă, F. Băltăceanu, M. Broşteanu, în colaborare cu pr. Ioan-Florin Florescu, Bucureşti-Iaşi, Colegiul Noua Europă-Polirom Wevers, John W., 1969: Ezekiel, Londra, Nelson Zimmerli, Walther, 1969: Ezechiel, Neukirchen-Vluyn, Neukirchener Verlag des Erziehungsvere 247 Rugăciunea Tatăl nostru, revelator al latinității limbii române Ileana OANCEA The focus of the paper is to outline The Lord’s Prayer as one of the fundamental texts that bring forth the Latin origin of the Romanian language. The author makes an etymological analysis of text and shows that Our Father is the first Romanian text that attracted the foreign scholars’s attention towards the Romanic character of Romanian. The presentation is mainly founded on findings of Eugenio Coseriu’s book, Limba română în fața Occidentului [The Romanian language in the eyes of the Western World, 1994]. Keywords: The Lord’s Prayer, Romanian language, Romance languages. 1. În 11-14 septembrie 2002 avea loc la Palazzo Florio, Universitatea din Udine, Italia, Il Convegno Internazionale di Studi „Romania e Románia: lingua e cultura romena di fronte all´Occidente”, sub egida cărții marelui savant român Eugeniu Coșeriu, Limba română în fața Occidentului. De la Genebrardus la Hervás. Contribuții la cunoașterea limbii române în Europa occidentală1. Congresul trebuia să debuteze cu expunerea marelui lingvist român, Româna în perspectiva lingvisticii generale. Comunicarea trebuia să dezvolte liniile esențiale ale abordării romanității orientale, Eugeniu Coșeriu urmînd să primească titlul de Doctor honoris causa al Universității udineze, cu care acesta a avut relații importante de colaborare, Italia fiind, de altfel, patria de adopție a lui Coșeriu din anii tinereții sale. Congresul, așteptat ca un eveniment științific deosebit de important, omagierea fiind pusă sub semnul relației dintre românistică și romanistică, în care marele savant a adus contribuții esențiale, s-a transformat însă, neașteptat, într-o omagiere post-mortem, genialul savant stingîndu-se cu puțin timp înainte, în Germania, la Tübingen, unde a fost profesor timp de 40 de ani. A fost, desigur, o mare absență, compensată, în parte, prin nivelul științific deosebit al manifestării2. 1 Tradusă în limba română de Andrei Avram și publicată la Cluj-Napoca, Editura Dacia, în 1994. În traducerea din limba germană, apărută la Günter Narr Verlag, Tübingen, 1980, nu apare titlul Limba română în fața Occidentului, ci doar De la Genebrardus la Hervás. Contribuții la cunoașterea limbii române în Europa occidentală. 2 Actele Congresului au apărut sub denumirea Romania e Románia: lingua e cultura romena di fronte all´Occidente. A cura di Teresa Ferro, Udine, Forum, 2003. 249 Congresul a fost gîndit și organizat exemplar de profesoara Teresa Ferro, eminentă lingvistă și coordonatoarea Catedrei de limba română a Universității din Udine, atît de legată de România și, aș spune, în primul rînd de Universitatea din Timișoara, o ferventă admiratoare a marelui cărturar român. Ea însăși foarte bună cunoscătoare a limbajului religios în spațiul de interferență culturală și lingvistică româno-italian, Teresa Ferro a publicat o carte foarte importantă, cu multe elemente de noutate științifică, I missionari cattolici in Moldavia. Studi storici e linguistici (2005), în care sa ocupat de „il contributo dei cattolici alla cultura dei Paesi Romeni” (Ferro, 2005: 25). Celebra carte a savantului român pe care ea l-a cunoscut foarte bine, Limba română în fața Occidentului, are ca problematică un loc cu totul aparte în preocupările științifice ale lui Eugeniu Coșeriu. Acesta s-a interesat de limbajul religios și, în cadrul lui, de difuziunea în Romania occidentală a rugăciunii Tatăl nostru, ca element cu mare forță demonstrativă în cadrul lungului drum de afirmare a latinității românei în conștiința Occidentului. El duce, astfel, mai departe procupări în acest sens din lingvistica europeană, ca și din cea românească, de exemplu la Lazăr ăineanu, Istoria filologiei române, cu o privire retrospectivă asupra ultimelor decenii (1870-1895): Studii critice (1895) sau la Adolf Armbruster, Istoria românilor. Romanitatea unei idei (1972). Studiul coșerian este emblematic pentru revelarea locului special al românei în istoria lingvisticii europene și pentru conturarea unui climat lingvistic „precomparatist” efervescent, dar ignorat aproape în cercetările de istorie a lingvisticii. Cartea, cu un titlu atît de semnificativ, fiind vorba de o „limbă aflată în fața Occidentului”, prin romanitatea ei pregnantă, ca descendentă a latinei, născîndu-se chiar în centrul primei unități lingvistice și culturale europene, cea a Antichității latine, a reprezentat o preocupare desfășurată pe o perioadă mai lungă, în cadrul operei atît de complexe a acestui excepțional om de știință, interesat cu precădere de problemele teoretice ale lingvisticii (cf. Oancea, Obrocea, 2013). De altfel, formula lui Coșeriu sintetizează nu numai o problemă de natură lingvistică, ci și istorică și culturală, relația cu Occidentul fiind firul roșu care a jalonat structurarea polivalentă a spațiului românesc. 2. Provenind din cea mai marginală și mereu periclitată arie a Romániei, mai exact din obscura localitate basarabeană Mihăileni, după un an ca student la Litere în Iași, a părăsit România, după cedarea Basarabiei, pentru a ajunge cu o bursă în Italia, unde își va lua două doctorate, în Litere și Filosofie. O adevărată fugă cu elemente aproape romanești pe care avea să le evoce el însuși. În centrul strălucitor al Romániei, Italia, Coșeriu și-a realizat o formație complexă, studiind cu pasiune și, în același timp, muncind cu înverșunare pentru a face față nevoilor existențiale, ca jurnalist și chiar ca muncitor (Caragiu Marioțeanu, 2001-2002: 8). Ajunge apoi într-o altă zonă marginală, de data aceasta, a unei Románii extraeuropene, la Montevideo, Uruguay, de unde va revoluționa lingvistica postsaussuriană, deschizînd un nou timp istoric în lingvistica mondială, cel al integralismului lingvistic creat de el (v., în special, Borcilă, 2001). Va poposi apoi, în perioada 1962-2002, la Tübingen, în Germania marii lingvistici. 250 Într-o concepție atît de complex și riguros articulată, ca cea coșeriană, există zone de inserție a unei impresionante erudiții empirice, realizate, aparent paradox, pe fundalul orientării general antipozitiviste a gîndirii lui (cf. Coșeriu, 2000: 40-41). O structurare a filonului romanic unește investigațiile de amănunt în spiritul romanisticii tradiționale, chiar factologice, cu cele care „răspund” problemelor teoretice impuse de cîteva trichotomii fundamentale elaborate de el: sistem, normă și vorbire, sincronie, diacronie și istorie. Savantul aulic, cu alură aristocratică, ascundea un substrat existențial care răzbate în mărturisiri emoționante în cîteva interviuri ale sale (cf. Coșeriu, 2003). Ele evocă aceeași patetică relație cu „acasă”, pe care o regăsim în diverse etape ale biografiei lui Eugen Ionescu, Mircea Eliade și chiar Emil Cioran, ca și în cazul altor reprezentanți importanți ai diasporei românești. 3. Cartea la care ne-am referit răspundea preocupărilor ca romanist ale lui Coșeriu, dar și unui impuls interior de asumare lingvistică, într-un mediu alogen, al lui „acasă”, dacă ne gîndim la spusele tulburătoare ale poetului: „Limba română este patria mea”. Ceea ce Teresa Ferro a intuit foarte bine, cînd a pus acest titlu, „Limba română în fața Occidentului”, pe frontispiciul Colocviului de la Udine, din 2002, anul morții lui Coșeriu. Cartea urmărește impunerea romanității orientale în conștiința europeană, adică diacronia unui fenomen istoric și cultural: recunoașterea românei pe diverse spații ale Romániei occidentale. Cea care impune latinitatea românei cu deosebită fervoare este rugăciunea Tatăl nostru, constituită aproape în întregime din elemente de origine latină3. Nu întîmplător rugăciunea a devenit o adevărată invariantă de cercetare pentru poligloții Evului Mediu în special, fascinați de diversitatea lingvistică a Europei. Paradigma romanică în studiul limbii române, prin prisma latinității, revelată lumii occidentale în îndelungata etapă precomparatistă de către cărturarii unei epoci în care Europa romanică își afirma cu o anumită insistență glorioasa ei origine latină, inserează româna, numită și valahica, într-o dezbatere complexă panromanică și europeană. 3 Pentru locul special al lexicului din rugăciunea Tatăl nostru, în interiorul vocabularului reprezentativ al limbii române, cf. Vocabularul reprezentativ al limbilor romanice, coordonator: Marius Sala, București, Editura tiințifică și Enciclopedică, 1988. Redăm structura, din punct de vedere etimologic, a rugăciunii Tatăl nostru (cf. MDA, DEX): TÁT , tați, s. m. Lat. tata; NÓSTRU, NOÁSTR , noștri, noastre, pron. pos., adj. pos. Lat. noster, nostra; CER, ceruri, s. n. Lat. caelum; NÚME, nume, s. n. Lat. nomen; VENÍ, vin, vb. IV. Intranz. Lat. venire; ÎMP R ÍE, împărății, s. f. Împărat + suf. -ie.; ÎMP RÁT, împărați, s. m. Lat. imperator; FÁCE, fac, vb. III. A. Tranz. Lat. facere; P MẤNT, pământuri, s. n. Lat. pavimentum; FIÍN , ființe, s. f. Fi + suf. -ință; FI, sunt,vb. IV. Intranz. Lat. sum, *fui, *fire (= fieri); ÁST ZI adv. Lat. ista die (sau astă + zi); IERTÁ, iert, vb. I. Tranz. Lat. libertare; DÚCE, duc, vb. III. I. Tranz. Lat. ducere; R U, REA, răi, rele, adj., s. n., adv. Lat. reus „acuzat, vinovat”; VICLEÁN, - , vicleni,-e, adj. (Adesea substantivat). Din magh. hitlen; SFIN Í, sfințesc, vb. IV. Din sl. sventiti; VÓIE, voi, s. f. Din sl. volja; GRE EÁL , greșeli, s. f. greși + suf.-eală; GRE Í, greșesc, vb. IV. 1. Intranz. Din sl. grĕšiti; ISPÍT , ispite, s. f. Din ispiti (derivat regresiv); IZB VÍ, izbăvesc, vb. IV. Tranz. și refl. Din sl. izbaviti; SLÁV , slăvi, s. f. Din sl. slava; VEÁC, veacuri, s. n. Din sl. vĕkŭ. 251 Ea provoacă interesul pasionat al acestor erudiți, în această primă acțiune de circumscriere a moștenirii latine, pe baza unui text cu o bogată încărcătură religiossimbolică, Tatăl nostru, trimițînd spre un orizont cultural în care creștinismul era elementul coagulant esențial (cf. Paul, 1996). Denumirea de valahica, pe care Eugeniu Coșeriu o urmărește cu toată atenția, se păstrează, de altfel, și în prima gramatică a limbilor romanice, Grammatik der Romanischen Sprachen, 1836-1838, a lui Friedrich Diez, ca și la Samuil Micu și Gheorghe incai, Elementa linguae daco-romanae sive valachicae, 1780. Limba română în fața Occidentului oferă o cercetare minuțioasă, dificil de realizat, dată fiind documentarea complicată în mari biblioteci ale Europei, în căutarea de ediții rare, dar oferind descoperiri dintre cele mai incitante. Studiile au fost publicate în reviste și volume omagiale (Macrea, Graur, Găzdaru, Bonfante etc.). Ele scot în evidență și o relație, „firavă” atunci, între Coșeriu și cultura română, care se lasă, totuși, descoperită. Româna s-a arătat în fața Occidentului, în Evul Mediu, grație spațiului autarhic, lingvistic și cultural, oferit de rugăciunea Tatăl nostru, studiat de-a lungul cîtorva secole în Occident, într-un intens dialog subtextual interromanic. Prezentîndu-se în haine grafice latine și în ambianța de profundă spiritualitate creștină, Tatăl nostru românesc pune probleme dintre cele mai importante pentru românistică și romanistică, sesizate, atunci, într-o primă interpretare. Subiectul a fost studiat în timp de către Coșeriu, el demonstrînd, desigur, aici și o puternică învestire cu substrat „personal”. 4. Problema străbate cîteva secole (din secolul al XV-lea pînă în secolul al XVIIIlea) și ea determină pe cărturarii poligloți să contureze, în cele din urmă, un domeniu al unei lingvistici comparativ-istorice incipiente. Aceasta are, cum se vede, o diacronie. Ceea ce este important de relevat este faptul că această chestiune, a latinității limbii române, se grefează pe cîteva nuclee de investigație care dau o anumită consistență acestei etape. Studioșii erau poligloți care constituiau o adevărată rețea, învederînd existența unei tradiții de interogații și de soluții, pe care Coșeriu le scoate foarte bine în evidență, datorită numeroaselor detalii. În centrul eforturilor acestor cărturari se aflau probleme legate de originea limbilor – e vorba în special de limbile romanice – și, mai ales, de clasificarea acestora, avînd la bază cu precădere materialul lingvistic oferit de textul religios în discuție. Lectura cărții lui Coșeriu, prin bogăția și complexitatea datelor oferite, reconstituie convingător acest traseu, care este un traseu cu adevărat european, unind țări ca Franța, Italia, Spania, Germania, Olanda, ca și îndepărtata Suedie, dar și spațiile românești, unii autori călătorind în teritorii europene largi, este și cazul românului Nicolae Milescu. Ei duc cu ei acest interes, înmulțind datele care circulă de la unii la alți, uneori fiind completate pe care orală de diverși informatori. Felul cum limba română este recunoscută, nu întotdeauna de la început și uneori cu dificultate, ca o ramură a limbilor romanice, uneori după clasificări cu totul bizare (de exemplu, controversata ei afiliere ca limbă chineză), demonstrează acumularea cunoștințelor și tot mai puternica revelație a latinității ei, puse în evidență cu claritate de rugăciunea Tatăl nostru, cu multiplele ei variante, care demonstrează treptat, în 252 context plurilingvistic romanic și nu numai, o descendență comună pentru toate limbile neolatine. Structura cărții jalonează etapele acestui proces interpretativ: Despre cunoașterea limbii române în Europa occidentală în secolul al XVI-lea (Genebrard și Andrés de Poza); Limba română la Hieronymus Megiser (1603); Stiernhielm, limba română și ciudatul destin al unui Tatăl nostru. Un capitol din istoria cunoașterii (și necunoașterii) românei în Europa occidentală; Andreas Müller și latinitatea românei; Griselini, româna și latina vulgară; Româna în „Vocabolario” de Lorenzo Hervás; Românesc și romanic la Hervás y Panduro). Încercînd să sintetizăm acest drum de la Genebrard la Hervás, sinuos și foarte interesant, reținem cîteva aspecte importante, pe care Coșeriu le evidențiază pe parcursul studiului său. Latinitatea românei a fost recunoscută foarte de timpuriu, mai ales de către umaniștii italieni, dar a existat și o tendință de a nu o enumera printre limbile romanice, corectată în mod strălucit de primul „romanist”, spaniolul Hervás, care a considerat limba română ca o limbă romanică aparte, fiind cel mai evoluat din acest punct de vedere. În Saggio Pratico delle Lingue, 1787, sunt prezentate șapte versiuni ale rugăciunii Tatăl nostru românesc. La transcrierea cuvintelor românești, folosește ortografia italiană, nu maghiară sau poloneză. Hervás, de altfel, vorbește de coloniștii aduși de Traian în Dacia, din care provin românii. În diferitele culegeri de Tatăl nostru în care sunt înregistrate rugăciuni românești atestate ca atare, adică în mod normal ca „valahe”, nu sunt recunoscute adesea ca romanice, de exemplu Tatăl nostru la Megiser apare la limbile neclasificabile genealogic. În secțiunile romanice ale unor culegeri sunt prezentate și versiuni neromanice ale rugăciunii Tatăl nostru, de exemplu la Andreas Müller apare și o versiune bască. Abia Hervás este acela la care textele înregistrate apar la secțiunea romanică, secțiune care cuprinde numai versiuni romanice. Avem aici o clasificare ireproșabilă. Toate versiunile romanice ale rugăciunii Tatăl nostru, apărute în secolele XVII-lea și al XVIII-lea, în culegerile occidentale de Tatăl nostru, inclusiv unele ale lui Hervás, îl au la origine fie pe Megiser, fie pe Stiernhielm, dar sursa lui Megiser nu a putut fi descoperită. De asemenea, de unde deținea Stiernhielm, în îndepărtata Suedie, date despre latinitatea românei? Nicolae Milescu a locuit un timp la Stockholm și ar fi avut, astfel, posibilitatea să-i comunice „părintelui poeziei suedeze” acest Tatăl nostru românesc. De altfel, Nicolae Milescu avea cunoștințe lingvistice pe care le putea transmite lui Stierhielm. În acest sens, el face o precizare etimologică exactă privind termenul Dumnezeu (în rugăciunea românească Tatăl nostru): „Par exemple, il notait l´origine latine de la langue roumaine dans le texte de son Livre avec beaucoup de questions dans les termes suivantes: «Dieu est appelé en langue grecque theos et en langue latine deus, alors qu´en roumain il est nommé Dumnezeu, nom qui est pris du latin, de même que plus de la moitié de la langue roumaine est empruntée des Latins»” (Mihail, 2009: 55). 253 Textul lui Milescu-Stiernhielm, dacă îl comparăm cu cel al lui Luca Stroici, pare să sugereze o tradiție, fie și firavă, a scrisului cu litere latine (cf. Coșeriu, 1994: 53). Este o problemă importantă. Cu alfabet latin scriau și misionarii catolici în Moldova, studiați de Teresa Ferro, o oază în scrierea veche românească cu alfabet chirilic, un fel de timpurie occidentalizare romanică (cf. Ferro, 2005). Foarte important în acest context este și Andreas Müller care a publicat în 1680 o culegere de Tatăl nostru. Este primul în Europa, după aprecierea lui Coșeriu (cf. 1994: 64), care înregistrează Tatăl nostru românesc printre versiunile romanice și care clasifică româna ca limbă romanică, el identificînd, înaintea lui Hervás, româna ca limbă romanică, recunoscînd în mod limpede latinitatea acesteia, pe baza textului amintit. În încheierea acestor concluzii, reținem o afirmație a cărturarului spaniol, foarte revelatoare pentru spațiul ideatic ce se contura tot mai pregnant în jurul rugăciunii Tatăl nostru: „La lingua Latina divenne comune, e volgare nella Spagna, nella Francia, nell´Italia, e nella Valakia a´tempi, in cui incominciò a languire la letteratura; ed ecco, che ne´dialetti Spagnuoli, Francese, e Valako sparirono certe perfezioni accidentali dell´idioma Latino” (apud Coșeriu, 1994: 127). 5. Se ivește aici o problemă care ar putea deveni relevantă și pentru cercetarea istoriei lingvisticii, tocmai prin luarea în considerare a nucleului de probleme pe care studiul rugăciunii Tatăl nostru, din perspectiva latinității și a romanității, le poate aduce ca argumente pentru existența unei invariante bine conturate de natură comparativistorică. Există, astfel, un profil epistemologic dual al acestei epoci precomparatiste. Aceasta prezintă mai întîi un interes fundamental pentru literarizarea vernacularelor romanice, ceea ce Sylvain Auroux, în Histoire des idées linguistiques (1989) numește fenomenul de gramatizare, pe un fundal constituit de permanența gîndirii clasice despre limbă, în momentul în care fenomenul dominant pentru cultura europeană era standardizarea limbilor romanice, în calitate de limbi literare. Gheorghe Ivănescu numește această lingvistică lingvistica limbilor literare (cf. Ivănescu, 1972; Oancea, 1993), dezvoltată în mod unitar după un corpus de principii de natură gramaticală și retorică venind din Antichitate și fiind dirijată de Academiile romanice create special în acest scop. Eugeniu Coșeriu nu distinge o asemenea direcție. El identifică, de fapt, premisele lingvisticii comparativ-istorice pe care această epocă le evidențiază cu o anumită vigoare. Aici ar putea intra și cortegiul de probleme pe care le ridică cercetarea rugăciunii Tatăl nostru. Ea ar putea fi inclusă, avînd o valoare demonstrativă ce nu a fost speculată la acest capitol, fiind vorba aici de probleme ca originea limbilor, clasificarea lor etc., o lingvistică incipient istorică și chiar comparativ-istorică, dar fără instrumentele pe care le va oferi abia lingvistica secolului al XIX-lea. Constituind o adevărată tradiție de cercetare, celebra rugăciune a creștinismului european, Tatăl nostru, revelatoare a unei eredități lingvistice și spirituale latine, îndreptățește această dualitate a gîndirii lingvistice în Evul Mediu și Renaștere. Avem, astfel, o tradiție foarte puternică, legată de cel mai important eveniment al acestei etape, 254 și anume apariția limbilor literare romanice, care aveau alte obiective, fiind vorba de realizarea idealului clasic de exemplaritate lingvistică, în sensul Antichității, o paradigmă centrală și cuprinzînd limbile vernaculare aspirînd la „universalitatea” latinei, preocupate de realizarea unui dicționar, a unei gramatici, a unei ortografii unitare, ca și unei estetici a exprimării. Această tradiție atît de masivă nu este însă unică. Iată cum interesul pentru relația dintre limbile romanice și latină, pe care Tatăl nostru o ilustrează, alături de alte preocupări de acest fel, face să se contureze, poate într-o măsură mai puțin pregnantă și cu o deschidere științifică mult mai limitată o altă invariantă care va dobîndi forță începînd cu sfîrșitul secolului al XVIII-lea și mai ales în secolul al XIX-lea. Există, astfel, o relație interesantă între o paradigmă dominantă (cea filologică și retorică, cum o denumește Eugeniu Coșeriu, fără a-i conferi statutul de paradigmă, o paradigmă care reflectă relația dintre literarizare și epistema clasică) (cf. Ivănescu, 1972; Oancea, 1993) și o alta, marginală, dar reliefînd un puternic efort cognitiv și o anumită fervoare a cunoașterii, direcție care devine apoi cea care va provoca în mod decisiv revoluția științifică a lingvisticii indo-europene, de sorginte germană. O privire istorică realizează Eugeniu Coșeriu pe fondul preocupărilor lui pentru gîndirea lingvistică în diacronie, într-o prelegere ținută la Iași, în 1994, Istoria și fazele istorice ale lingvisticii romanice, care rezumă viziunea din cursurile ținute la Tübingen, de istorie a lingvisticii romanice și pe care am sintetizat-o anterior. De asemenea, și în Lecții de lingvistică generală (2000), Coșeriu nu distinge existența marii direcții reprezentate de apariția și dezvoltarea limbilor literare cu toate problemele și soluțiile pe care aceasta le implică, clasificarea lui avînd alte elemente de coerență. În prima perioadă a unei istorii a lingvisticii romanice, Coșeriu desprinde o motivație filologică, fiind vorba de gramatici provensale (1994: 106), avînd aceeași motivare filologică pe care îl are studiul limbii și al gramaticii în Grecia. Sunt, în același timp, un fel de retorici pentru interpretarea literaturii, numai în al doilea rînd în aceste gramatici apar elemente de gramatică istorică, de pildă declinarea cu două cazuri în provensală. La Dante găsim, de asemenea, o posibilă lingvistică romanică comparată, dar și problemele limbii literare, fiind vorba de elocvența limbii vulgare, a limbii literare. Recunoașterea acestor preocupări care, sunt însă cu mult mai numeroase și supuse principiului gramatizării, cu totul diferit de obiectivele „istoriste”, în sensul primar al termenului, adică lipsite de o viziune științifică autentică și fără concepte clare, nu duce la o individualizare a marii direcții numite de Gheorghe Ivănescu lingvistica limbilor literare. Pe de altă parte, nu se poate absolutiza nici epistema clasică și fenomenul literarizării. Ceea ce am dorit să subliniez este faptul cum problemele legate de latinitatea limbilor romanice și, în special, a românei, generate de studierea unui text important pentru cultura europeană, pot permite descoperirea filonului comparativ-istoric dinainte de epoca gramaticii comparativ-istorice. În felul acesta, cercetarea cîmpului de probleme ridicate de textul fundamental al credinței creștine întărește existența unui asemenea filon, fără însă a oblitera cealaltă direcție, a unei lingvistici a limbilor literare, 255 care este extrem de puternică și cu valoare de mare generalitate și de eficacitate istorică. Semnificația rugăciunii Tatăl nostru pentru spațiul cultural european, care a fost dominat de o viziune creștină în Evul Mediu, scoate în evidență relația dintre latinitate, ca element de expresie a unui univers spiritual caracteristic lumii creștine și lumea de sensuri pe care le transmite și care învestesc substanța lingvistică a textului investigat cu atîta consecvență cu adînci semnificații de natură teologică. Astfel, cuvîntul Tatăl nu evocă sensurile curente din dicționare, ci are cea mai înaltă semnificație, trimițînd la creatorul lumii și la oblăduitorul ființei umane: Dumnezeu. Putem conchide că Tatăl nostru vehiculează lexeme cu valoare conceptuală, învestind termenii latini cu o aură semantică de intensă spiritualitate. Este o lume în care latinitatea și spiritualitatea creștină, cea mai adîncă, fuzionează iar lexemele dobîndesc valoare terminologică în cîmp general romanic și în tot creștinismul. 6. În acest sens putem face din nou apel la o altă contribuție extrem de importantă a lui Eugeniu Coșeriu: Orationis fundamenta: Rugăciunea ca text, ultima conferință ținută în 24-30 iunie, Aquila, Italia, publicată în limba română la Iași, în 20104. Rugăciunea este tratată ca specie a genului orațiilor religioase, din punctul de vedere al lingvisticii textuale, și ca univers al discursului, din perspectivă coșeriană mai amplă. Savantul român delimitează patru universuri ale discursului, pentru că patru sunt modurile fundamentale ale cunoașterii umane: universul experienței curente, universul științei și al tehnicii cu fundament științific, universul fanteziei și al artei, universul credinței. De asemenea, el delimitează trei lumi: lumea necesității și a cauzalității, în sens kantian (lumea experienței sensibile), lumea libertății și a finalității, în sens kantian (lumea creațiilor umanității, lumea fanteziei și a artei) și lumea credinței. Manifestarea credinței, modelul suprem și absolut al rugăciunii ideale este Tatăl nostru. În lumea credinței, avem rugăciunea și teologia. Credința are valoare fondatoare, absolută, nu admite ipoteze care să fie verificate, intersubiectivitatea umană fondată pe credință poate fi redusă la solidaritatea din interiorul unei comunități. Rugăciunea este un text mai mult sau mai puțin fix în care se recunoaște omnipotența lui Dumnezeu. Ea reprezintă un moment crucial pentru istoria spirituală a umanității. Rugăciunea Tatăl nostru are două părți. Prima parte construiește o stare lăuntrică de elevație a spiritului, redînd comuniunea profundă cu Dumnezeu-Tatăl Ceresc. Faptul că 4 Redăm cele două versiuni „clasice”, analizate de Eugeniu Coșeriu în conferința amintită: „Deci voi aşa să vă rugaţi: Tatăl nostru, Care eşti în ceruri, sfinţească-se numele Tău; Vie împărăţia Ta; facă-se voia Ta, precum în cer şi pe pământ. Pâinea noastră cea spre fiinţă dă-ne-o nouă astăzi; Şi ne iartă nouă greşealele noastre, precum şi noi iertăm greşiţilor noştri; Şi nu ne duce pe noi în ispită, ci ne izbăveşte de cel rău. Că a Ta este împărăţia şi puterea şi slava în veci. Amin!” (Matei 6, 9-13); „Şi le-a zis: Când vă rugaţi, ziceţi: Tatăl nostru, Care eşti în ceruri, sfinţească-se numele Tău. Vie împărăţia Ta. Facă-se voia Ta, precum în cer aşa şi pe pământ. Pâinea noastră cea spre fiinţă, dă-ne-o nouă în fiecare zi. Şi ne iartă nouă păcatele noastre, căci şi noi înşine iertăm tuturor celor ce ne greşesc nouă. Şi nu ne duce pe noi în ispită, ci ne izbăveşte de cel rău” (Luca 11, 2-4). 256 este în ceruri se referă la aspectul transcendent al lui Dumnezeu. A se sfinți numele lui Dumnezeu înseamnă sacralizare prin rostirea numelui. A se face voia lui Dumnezeu înseamnă acceptarea ordinii superioare a lumii, o lume transfigurată, sacră, iar starea de unitate a lumii, recreată în conștiința celui care se roagă reprezintă rezultatul comuniunii totale dintre om și Dumnezeu-Tatăl (precum în cer așa și pe pămînt). Partea întîi a rugăciunii Îl pune pe Dumnezeu pe primul loc, omul se înnobilează prin rugăciune. Partea a doua conține cererile propriu-zise. Este vorba de trei tipuri de hrană, pentru corp, minte și suflet. Iertarea greșelilor, căința, este principalul mijloc de transfigurare în creștinism. Avem o rugăciune totală, aproape unică, pe care ne-a lăsato Iisus. Nadia Obrocea, în lucrarea Elementul latin în limbajul religios românesc (2013: 147), precizează că rugăciunea reprezintă un act de trăire absolută. Avem o experiență eclezială, biblică și mistică, dogmatică, liturgică și sacramentală. În această perspectivă, rugăciunea este o rugăciune individuală, dar și comunitară, interiorizată, dar și liturgică, rugăciunea este un act sau eveniment ontologic, un dialog divino-uman infinit (Sf. Teofan Zăvorîtul, 1937). 7. Spațiul, atît lingvistic, cît și mistic, oferit de rugăciunea absolută Tatăl nostru, vorbește, din faldurile istoriei, de romanitate, românitate și spiritualitatea creștină, care nu pot fi disociate. Am încercat să desprind, prin această analiză, acele perspective coșeriene care se deschid dintr-o investigație, care și în planul cercetării empirice, oferite de lucrarea Limba română în fața Occidentului. De la Genebrardus la Hervás. Contribuții la cunoașterea limbii române în Europa occidentală, poate da seama de profunzimea spiritului coșerian. Bibliografie Armbruster, A., 1972, Istoria românilor. Romanitatea unei idei, București, Editura Academiei Auroux, S., 1989, Histoire des idées linguistiques, Paris, Editions Mardaga Borcilă, M., 2001, Început de drum în studiile integraliste, în „Studia Universitatis BabeșBolyai”, Seria Philologia, nr. 4, p. 3-14 Caragiu Marioțeanu, M., 2001-2002, Eugeniu Coșeriu – savatul și omul, în In memoriam Eugeniu Coșeriu, Extras din „Fonetică și Dialectologie, XX-XXI, București, Editura Academiei Române, p. 7-14 Coseriu, E., 2010, Orationis Fundamenta. Rugăciunea ca text, traducere de Andreea Grinea, în „Transilvania”, nr. 7-8, p. 1-12 Coșeriu, E., 1994, Limba română în fața Occidentului. De la Genebrardus la Hervás. Contribuții la cunoașterea limbii române în Europa occidentală. În românește de Andrei Avram, Cluj-Napoca, Editura Dacia Coșeriu, E., 1994, Istoria și fazele istorice ale lingvisticii romanice, în Prelegeri și conferințe (1992-1993), Iași, Tipografia Universității „Al. I. Cuza”, p. 101-117 Coșeriu, E., 2000, Lecții de lingvistică generală. Traducere din spaniolă de Eugenia Bojoga. Cuvînt înainte de Mircea Borcilă, Chișinău, Editura ARC Coșeriu, E., 2003, „Destinul Basarabiei îl văd cu speranță și cu mare teamă... Trăiesc intens acest destin și mă doare în mod constant”, în „Contrafort”, Supliment, nr. 10-11 (108-109), 257 octombrie-noiembrie. Disponibil online la http://www.contrafort.md/old/2003/108109/621.html Ferro, T., 2005, I missionari cattolici in Moldavia. Studi storici e linguistici, Cluj-Napoca, Clusium Ferro, T. (ed.), 2003, Romania e Románia: lingua e cultura romena di fronte all´Occidente, Udine, Forum Ivănescu, G., 1972, Storia delle parlate poplari e storia delle lingue letterarie, în „Philologica”, II, Craiova, p. 5-25 Oancea, I., 1993, Romanitate și istorie. Epistemă clasică și literarizare, Timișoara, Editura de Vest Oancea, I., Obrocea, N., 2013, Reflexe ale lingvisticii romanice în câmpul teoretic al integralismului lingvistic, în Actele Colocviului Internațional „Comunicare și cultură în Romania europeană”. Ediția a II-a, Szeged, JATEPress Obrocea, N., 2013, Elementul latin în limbajul religios românesc, Szeged, JATEPress Micu, S., incai, Gh., 1780, Elementa linguae daco-romanae sive valachicae, Viena Mihail, Z., 2009, Nicolae le spathaire Milescu à travers ses manuscrits, București, Editura Academiei Paul, J., 1996, Biserica și cultura în Occident. Traducere de Elena-Liliana Ionescu, București, Meridiane Sala, M. (coord.), 1988, Vocabularul reprezentativ al limbilor romanice, București, Editura tiințifică și Enciclopedică ăineanu, L., 1895, Istoria filologiei române, cu o privire retrospectivă asupra ultimelor decenii (1870-1895): Studii critice, ediția a 2-a, București, Editura Librăriei Socec & Co. Teofan Zăvorîtul, Sfîntul, 1937, Rugăciunea domnească ticluită de Sfinții Părinți. Traducere de Boris Buzilă, Editura Anasatasia 258 Les figures de style et leur relevance dans le décodage sémiotique d’un texte : la comparaison dans le texte moderne des Psaumes Dana-Lumini a TELEOAC In our approach, we started up from the premise of subordinating “the stylistic” over “the semiotic”, fact that presupposes the analysis of the stylistic structures (the comparative ones, in particular), as elements with relevance at a deeper level (which articulates basic significant values), that is, the semiotic value. By means of this approach, the stylistic phenomena become landmarks of a spatial, temporal and cultural specific reality, in other words, the witnesses of a certain mental universe, as long as these phenomena synthesize „the semiotic treasure” of a community. The uniquely particular feature of the core comprised by the very object of knowledge specific to the sacred context, that is, the transcendent, requires special strategies and rules of approach, even at the aesthetic level. Following these ideas, the so-called stylistic alternative of approaching the divine has been brought in, where the analogy is perceived as a theological method according to which knowing God is expressed by comparisons and metaphors. Starting from these premises, our study aims to outline the main comparative structures (conceptual ones), the way they are enhanced in value in a biblical version of the orthodox cult: common comparisons, universally used; relevant structures for an archaic country civilization; cultural paradigms: bookish comparisons (proper bookish comparisons: zoological comparative structures, religious comparative structures; commonly used bookish comparisons); comparative structures which remind of the oriental space. Key words: significant elementary values, semiotic treasure, gnoseological stylistic alternative, universal comparative structures, cultural paradigms. 1. Remarques préliminaires Conformément au point de vue assumé dans la bibliographie de spécialité (voir, par exemple, Borţun-Săvulescu 2005), les aspects figuratif et thématique sont susceptibles d’être valorisés comme les repères d’une analyse discursive, qui est en dernière instance une étude sémiotique. La remarque formulée équivaut à reconnaître une subordination spécifique de l’aspect stylistique au niveau sémiotique ; dans ce contexte, l’analyse des diverses structures stylistiques démontrera sa pertinence à un niveau plus profond, à savoir celui des valeurs élémentaires (élémentaires étant à interpréter ici avec son acception ‘essentielles’) de signification, ce qui correspond en fait au champ de recherche de la sémiotique. À travers une pareille démarche, les 259 phénomènes stylistiques deviennent des indices d’une réalité spatio-temporelle et culturelle spécifique : ceux-ci constituent, au cours du temps, les témoins d’un certain univers mental, dans la mesure où ces phénomènes synthétisent « le trésor sémiotique d’une communauté » (Bardin 1991). La nature sui generis de la substance qui fait l’objet de la connaissance spécifique au texte religieux, à savoir l’élément transcendantal, réclame – comme nous le remarquions dans nos études antérieures1 – des lois et des stratégies particulières, y compris au niveau esthétique. Dans cet ordre d’idées, nous avons théorisé (voir Teleoacă, Tropii) à propos de la soi-disant alternative stylistique de l’approche du divin, un contexte dans lequel l’analogie constitue la méthode théologique conformément à laquelle la connaissance de Dieu devient possible grâce aux comparaisons et aux métaphores. En fait, dans les limites d’un pareil cadre discursif, la démarche dans la perspective figurative correspond parfaitement à la nature sémantique indéfinie du texte sacré – un texte considéré par certains auteurs (voir, par exemple, Gordon 2008), comme étant représentatif de l’espace littéraire de la philosophie ; il en résulte que ce type d’approche représente une manière adéquate pour l’institution du dialogue avec le Sacré. L’affirmation de l’analogie comme une prémisse et comme une méthode gnoséologique correspond en réalité à la fonction que possède la croyance dans le processus de la réception cognitive de l’élément transcendantal. La foi se définit, par conséquent, comme un état affectif par excellence religieux, mais également esthétique et cognitif ; la poésie naît d’une émotion à part, que nous pouvons désigner comme l’émotion de la foi ou l’émotion religieuse. 2. La comparaison – classification et description sémantico-conceptuelle2 2.1. Comparaisons habituelles ayant très probablement une aire de circulation universelle Le caractère universel des représentations incluses dans cette catégorie est prouvé, en quelque sorte, voire par leur noyau sémantique, qui relève d’une perspective axiologique élémentaire, même réductionniste, sur le monde et implicitement de l’ancienneté notable de pareils modèles associatifs. Dans ce contexte, la définition de l’être humain se réalise prioritairement dans les limites de son microcosme domestique et, à un moindre degré, par rapport au macrocosme. Les exemples que nous énumérons ci-dessous sont illustratifs quant à l’association prévisible entre le verbe et la structure nominale correspondante, qui inclut la comparaison : a flămânzi ca un câine ‘souffrir de faim comme un chien’ (58:7; 58:17); a se topi ca ceara ‘se fondre comme de la cire’ (21:15) ; a păzi ca pe lumina ochilor ‘protéger qqn. comme la prunelle de ses yeux’ (16:8); a se înmul i (mai mult) ca perii capului/ mai mult decât nisipul ‘se multiplier plus vite que les cheveux de la tête/ que les grains de sable’ (39:17; 138:18); a se stinge ca fumul ‘s’éteindre comme une chandelle/ de la fumée’ (101:4); a mânca cum mănâncă pâinea ‘manger comme du 1 Voir, par exemple, Teleoacă 2012, 76. Nous précisons que les exemples de notre recherche ont été fournis par une version biblique moderne, parue dans le milieu confessionnel orthodoxe (voir la Bibliographie). 2 260 pain’ (52:5); a dispărea ca apa care trece ‘disparaître comme de l’eau qui coule/ comme de l’eau courante’ (57:7); a tăia ca în codru ‘couper comme du bois forestier’ (73:7); a răsări ca iarba ‘pousser/surgir comme de l’herbe’ (91:7), etc. Cependant, il faut remarquer que, dans toute une série de contextes, le degré de prédictibilité des associations est beaucoup moindre, si nous envisageons la relation associative établie entre le terme comparé, d’une part, et le comparant, d’autre part. C’est un aspect qui sans doute vient en appui à la poéticité du texte psalmique, puisque, grâce à cette transgression des limites du monde phénoménal3, les incompatibilités sémantiques existantes entre des éléments appartenant à des sphères ontologiques distinctes (même antithétiques) se neutralisent, ce qui permet la réalisation de la soidisant conjonction. De cette façon, la structure prosaïque est occultée, par exemple grâce à l’assimilation abstrait – concret : le cœur [= l’âme] est pareil à la cire qui se fond (voir le Psaume 21:15). Absolument remarquables du point de vue esthétique sont les images valorisées dans le psaume 103, où des structures comparatives habituelles (voir a se îmbrăca (cu ceva) ca şi cu o haină ‘vêtir (quelque chose) comme un vêtement’ ou a întinde (ceva) ca un cort ‘étendre (quelque chose) comme une tente’) parviennent à actualiser des sens dans l’aire abyssale de signification, tout en prenant en considération les métaphores associées. Autrement dit, dans pareils cas, la signification de la construction comparative s’actualise par le décryptage simultané de la métaphore occurrente dans le même contexte. L’aspect mentionné est susceptible d’être vu comme une preuve de l’organicité du poème psalmique, mais également comme un témoignage de sa modernité : habituellement, dans ce type de contextes, l’interprétation n’est pas univoque, celle-ci impliquant en fait plusieurs modalités de décodage. Par exemple, le verset „Cel ce Te îmbraci cu lumina ca şi cu o haină” (103:2) renvoie, selon toute probabilité, à l’acte cosmogonique, mais en même temps il n’est pas exclu que celui-ci évoque la brillance/la luminosité absolue, en tant que trait essentiel de la Divinité, une entité vue par opposition à la condition humaine, cette dernière suggérée par un nom concret, à savoir haină ‘vêtement’. 2.2. Structures qui relèvent d’une civilisation archaïque, rustique 2.2.1. L’univers rural-domestique Dans tels cas, le comparant est circonscrit à l’univers matériel, concret : „Ca tina uli elor îi voi zdrobi pe ei” (17:46); „Îi vei pune pe ei [pe vrăjmaşi, n.n.] ca un cuptor de foc în vremea arătării Tale” (20:9); „Că m-am făcut ca un foale4 la fum…” (118:83), etc. 2.2.2. La mesure du temps Les vieux Juifs ont emprunté aux Romains la coutume de partager la nuit (entre le coucher et le lever du soleil) en quatre veilles, chacune d’elles ayant trois heures. Cette habitude est évoquée dans le texte des psaumes par le syntagme straja nop ii ‘la veille 3 Dumitru Irimia (1999, 44) parle en ce sens d’une soi-disant „dezmărginire a lumii fenomenale”. Le nom est utilisé dans le texte des Psaumes avec l’acception ‘sac primitif confectionné en peaux d’animaux ; soufflet’. 4 261 de la nuit’ : „Că o mie de ani înaintea ochilor Tăi sunt ca ziua de ieri care a trecut şi ca straja nop ii” (89:4), etc. 2.2.3. Métiers primitifs La poterie5. Les images fournies par ce milieu occupationnel sont souvent valorisées dans le but de mettre en évidence l’idée de l’obéissance humaine à la Divinité, un contexte dans lequel l’être humain est assimilé au pot maîtrisé et modelé inexorablement par le potier : „Le vei paşte pe ele [= neamurile, n.n.] cu toiag de fier; ca pe vasul olarului le vei zdrobi” (2:9). Dans d’autres poèmes, le pot (le roum. vasul de lut) devient un terme de comparaison dans le cadre discursif institué par le lamento du sujet lyrique ; l’association ‘abstrait – concret’ se réalise au profit de l’achèvement lyrique du poème : „Uscatu-s-a ca un vas de lut tăria mea, şi limba mea s-a lipit de cerul gurii mele [...]” (21:16). La purification par le feu. Il s’agit d’une technique primitive de la métallurgie. Dans ce contexte, une représentation mentale, selon toute probabilité très familière à l’époque antique, doit avoir résidé, d’une part, dans l’association des mots divins avec l’argent purifié, d’autre part, dans l’assimilation de la propreté corporelle et spirituelle de l’humain au processus métallurgique primitif, désigné, dans la version biblique roumaine, par le syntagme lămurire în foc: „Că ne-ai cercetat pe noi, Dumnezeule, cu foc ne-ai lămurit pe noi, precum se lămureşte argintul” (65:9; 67:31) et autres. L’image sera aussi cultivée dans les écrits bibliques néotestamentaires (voir, à cet égard, par exemple, Întâia Epistolă Sobornicească a Sfântului Apostol Petru, 1:7) et également dans d’autres types de textes ecclésiastiques (à titre d’exemple, nous mentionnons le livre de rituel orthodoxe, le soi-disant molitvelnic [voir MO 1992: 198] ou le texte de la prière chrétienne [voir Rug. 2004: 74]). L’élevage ovin Le soufflet. La référence à l’acte cosmogonique par la valorisation d’une figure de style circonscrite du point de vue conceptuel au milieu pastoral est symptomatique d’un modus vivendi spécifique, particulièrement celui d’une communauté éminemment pastorale : „Adunat-a (Dumnezeu, n.n.) ca într-un burduf apele mării, pus-a în vistierii adâncurile” (32:7). Toutefois, le décodage au niveau de la signification cosmogonique doit être corroboré avec le scénario intérieur, construit à l’aide de la métaphore des profondeurs (le roum. adâncurile), une structure figurative qui renvoie au mystère divin de même qu’aux éléments imprégnés par le divin. La brebis. Il paraît que la brebis représente l’animal qui est le plus fréquemment mentionné dans la Bible. En outre, l’image du berger enregistre une centaine de références. C’est une réalité qui s’explique bien si l’on tient compte de deux aspects : a) l’aspect économique – voir notamment l’importance de l’élevage des moutons pour la 5 Chez les Juifs de l’Antiquité, la différenciation des plats préparés à base de viande par rapport à ceux dérivés des produits laitiers se réalisait d’une manière stricte, dans le sens qu’à chaque type de ces aliments correspondait une vaisselle tout à fait particulière. C’est sans doute l’un des aspects qui relèvent de l’importance que la poterie détenait au sein des communautés juives de l’Antiquité (pour plus de détails, voir Citadela de la Qumran – DSS – 2 Paleografia lui Theophyle, apud <paleografia.wordpress.com > Arheologie Biblica). 262 survie des Juifs lors de leur vie nomade et agricole et b) l’aspect religieux – à savoir que les moutons et les bergers sont devenus des sources idéales pour véhiculer la métaphore spirituelle, grâce aux qualités qui sont propres à ceux-ci. Pour ce qui est du deuxième aspect, il faut dire que les acceptions spirituelles du nom berger, de même que les acceptions des autres termes appartenant au champ pastoral, doivent être déchiffrées par la prise en compte des conditions particulières liées à l’élevage ovin dans la Palestine antique, une région où cette profession se distinguait radicalement de la plupart des pratiques modernes dans le domaine. Ainsi, les moutons n’étaient ni fermés dans un enclos, ni abandonnés tout seuls, car les troupeaux étaient totalement dépendants de leurs bergers. En fait, c’est cet aspect-ci qui peut fournir une explication valable relative aux actions et aux qualités d’un bon berger, qui était en même temps une figure de l’autorité6. Dans le texte des psaumes, oaie ‘brebis’ apparaît souvent à l’intérieur des structures comparatives, représentant le symbole d’un animal de sacrifice, plus précisément d’une offrande faite à la Divinité7: „Datu-ne-ai pe noi ca oi de mâncare şi întru neamuri ne-ai risipit” (43:13); „[...] socotiţi am fost ca nişte oi de junghiere” (43:24), etc. Il faut signaler aussi les contextes dans lesquels oaie ‘brebis’ lexicalise la signification spirituelle ‘croyant’, une métaphore qui sera d’ailleurs omniprésente dans le futur univers chrétien : „Povăţuit-ai ca pe nişte oi pe poporul Tău” (76:19); „Ridicat-a ca pe nişte oi pe poporul Său [...]” (77:57); „Dar pe sărac l-a izbăvit de sărăcie şi i-a pus pe ei ca pe nişte oi de moştenire”8 (106:41), etc. Les confrontations guerrières. Les images circonscrites à cette aire sémantique sont extrêmement fréquentes, étant susceptibles d’être caractérisées comme symptomatiques de l’époque présentée: le Vieux Testament, qui inclut également une histoire des vieux Hébreux (un peuple qui désignait la Divinité par le terme Tsebaoth ‘le Dieu des armées’), abonde en guerres (des préoccupations véritables pour les communautés de l’époque en question), menées par les Israélites contre les peuples voisins. Dans le texte des psaumes, ce champ est évoqué dans son hypostase positive (les armes en tant qu’instruments bénéfiques, à savoir comme une métaphore de la providence divine : „ca o armă te va înconjura adevărul Lui”, 90:4), mais surtout sous son aspect négatif, destructif (voir, par exemple, le psaume 63 :3)9. 6 Pour plus d’informations à ce sujet, voir <statu.wordpress.com/.../oaia-realitate-si-simbol-biblic>. Cette hypostase de la brebis constituera un cadre adéquat pour l’affirmation de la religion chrétienne : Jésus viendra sur terre afin de sauver le monde „ca un miel spre junghiere şi ca o oaie fără de glas” [« comme un agneau mené à la boucherie, comme une brebis muette devant celui qui la tond, il n’ouvre point la bouche »] (Isaïe 53 :7). 8 Nous identifions ici une remarquable préfiguration de l’image néotestamentaire telle qu’elle apparaît dans l’Évangile de Matthieu ; dans ce contexte, la pauvreté matérielle est compensée par la richesse spirituelle, cette dernière étant suggérée par le syntagme Împără ia cerurilor: „Fericiţi cei săraci cu duhul, căci a lor este Împărţia cerurilor, căci ei vor moşteni pământul” (Matthieu 5 :3). 9 Pour plus d’exemples à cet égard, de même que pour l’analyse de l’aspect mentionné, voir Teleoacă 2013, 199. 7 263 2.3. Paradigmes culturels : les comparaisons livresques On admet généralement que les paradigmes culturels sont influencés tant par le passé culturel que par le contexte historique à un moment donné et – nous pourrions ajouter – par les valeurs appartenant à une étape ultérieure (voir nos remarques infra)10. Dans le contexte de la présente discussion, l’aspect culturel s’actualise en tant qu’élément religieux et, plus précisément, comme un cadre discursif qui a pu assimiler, dans des circonstances spécifiques, des éléments circonscrits au niveau mythologique ou ésotérique, ainsi que des aspectes subordonnés à un univers religieux primaire, mais dont on n’exclut pas qu’il soit contemporaine de l’univers religieux secondaire. Il s’ensuit que les valeurs culturelles (religieuses) véhiculées par ce type de paradigmes peuvent être définies comme des valeurs complexes : un décodage adéquat de ces valeurs implique la prise en compte du texte sacré hébraïque (où celles-ci apparaissent), de même que d’un substrat culturel (mythologique, ésotérique) antérieur/contemporaine du premier et également d’un substrat (religieux) ultérieur, tel qu’il est illustré par les écrits bibliques néotestamentaires (dans cette perspective, un nombre important des structures figuratives identifiables dans le texte des Psaumes pourraient être désignées comme révélatrices et messianiques). Dans de tels cas, il ne serait pas surprenant de théoriser une esthétique conditionnée… culturellement, à savoir une esthétique née grâce à l’interférence de plusieurs unités culturelles interactionnelles. À la lumière des remarques formulées ci-dessus nous considérons qu’un pareil discours ne peut pas être un discours pur, mais un discours articulé en vertu de la correspondance entre plusieurs séquences discursives, qui se réalise dans les limites d’un type particulier d’intertextualité. 2.3.1. Comparaisons livresques à proprement parler a. Structures comparatives zoologiques et phytonimiques La licorne. Cette créature fantastique, mythologique, représente dans certaines traductions de la Bible le premier animal qu’Adam aurait nommé. Dans l’iconographie et dans la littérature chrétienne, la licorne a de profondes connotations spirituelles, elle représentant la Vierge sur laquelle descend l’Esprit Saint. Pendant le Moyen Âge, la licorne devient le symbole de l’incarnation du verbe divin au sein de la Vierge Marie11. Le texte des psaumes évoque la licorne comme un symbole absolu de la force intérieure, spirituelle, une qualité qui se distingue dans la perspective de l’histoire mythologique et religieuse tissée autour de cette créature: „Şi se va înălţa puterea mea ca a inorogului...” (91:10). Dans le psaume 28, cet animal suggère l’invincibilité ; tandis que l’omnipotence divine domine la nature, pouvant l’écraser et la détruire à travers un spectacle grandiose, cel iubit (l’homme au coeur pur et fidèle) est pardonné comme le poulet d’un animal sauvage : „El îi va mărunţi ca pe juncul Libanului,/ Iar cel iubit, ca puiul inorogilor” (28:6). La licorne devient, dans d’autres contextes, le symbole de la soi-disant monotropie, un concept défini dans les études théologiques en 10 Dans cette perspective, une condition sine qua non pour accepter un paradigme culturel consiste dans ce que les valeurs en question aient dépassé les limites strictes de l’œuvre qui les a véhiculées pour la première fois, autrement dit qu’elles soient devenues des faits culturels. 11 Pour plus de détails à cet égard, voir <www.inorogul.ro/pagini/legenda_ro.php>. 264 tant qu’aspiration exclusive de l’Église vers Dieu et implicitement comme une expression de la constance : „şi Şi-a zidit locaşul Său cel sfânt ca pe al unui inorog, în veac l-a întemeiat pe pământ” (77:69)12. Le pélican. Cet oiseau est par excellence un symbole des passions, du sacrifice de soi-même : c’est la créature vis-à-vis de laquelle, à l’époque antique, on éprouvait la conviction qu’elle se déplumait, afin de nourrir ses poulets avec son propre sang. En fait, c’est l’une des histoires qui figurent dans le Phisiologue, comme on le sait, une oeuvre anonyme qui provient très probablement des milieux ascétiques égyptiens des premiers siècles chrétiens. Conformément aux informations incluses dans le texte du Phisiologue, le pélican (l’un des plus anciens symboles de l’humanité) incarne, dans une acception mystique, le Christ : cet oiseau vit en solitaire à l’instar de Jésus – l’unique né d’une vierge ; il déplume sa poitrine pour nourrir ses progénitures, tout comme Jésus a reçu volontiers le sacrifice d’expiation. Par conséquent, le pélican offre l’exemple d’un double symbolisme : d’une part, il signifie la mort, d’autre part – l’illumination, l’éveil à la vie selon le modèle christique. Dans le texte des psaumes, le mythe du pélican relève de l’état d’esprit dramatique du poète-prophète, le cri de douleur de l’être humain accablé par la souffrance. Le psaume 101 (intitulé, dans la version roumaine de la Bible, rugăciunea unui necăjit ‘la prière d’un malheureux’) représente l’un des plus tristes poèmes parmi les sept psaumes pénitentiels. Les accents messianiques sont évidents : „De glasul suspinului meu, osul meu s-a lipit de carnea mea;/ Asemănatu-m-am cu pelicanul din pustiu” (101:6-7)13. L’aigle. L’aigle évoque le symbolisme de l’oiseau Phénix, à savoir l’oiseau mythologique qui renaît de ses cendres : dans la loi chrétienne, l’aigle se renouvelait soi-même tous les dix ans s’élevant trois fois vers le soleil et puis descendant dans la mer. Mais ce symbolisme est encore plus vieux, comme le montre entre autres le texte des psaumes : „Înnoise-vor ca ale vulturului tinereţile mele” (102:5). L’image de l’aigle, en tant que symbole de la force et de la jeunesse, apparaît aussi dans d’autres livres vétérotestamentaires, par exemple dans le livre d’Isaïe 40:31, un contexte dans lequel le fruit de la foi en Dieu consiste justement dans un processus de rajeunissement pareil à celui de l’aigle : „Dar cei ce nădăjduiesc întru Domnul vor înnoi puterea lor, le vor creşte aripi ca ale vulturului; vor alerga şi nu-şi vor slei puterea, vor merge şi nu se vor obosi”. Malgré cela, au cours du temps, d’autres interprétations aussi furent proposées pour le verset 5 du psaume 102 ; celles-ci concernent le détail concret de la perte des plumes 12 Voir le point de vue exprimé par Cassiodor, in Ioan Sorin Usca, Comentarii la Psalmi – 77 (apud <oanuscateol.wordpress.com/.../comentarii-la-psalmi-7>). 13 Le pélican du désert préfigure également le cadre discursif néotestamentaire, celui dans lequel JeanBaptiste crie comme un lion dans le désert : „Glasul celui ce strigă în pustie: ‘Gătiţi calea Domnului, drepte faceţi cărările Lui’./ Ioan boteza în pustie, propovăduind botezul pocăinţei întru iertarea păcatelor” (Marc 1 :3-4). 265 des aigles et du remplacement de leur plumage, une réalité valorisée à l’époque antique comme un symbole du rajeunissement14. La vigne. Dans une plus grande mesure que le blé, la vigne a été longtemps considérée comme une plante messianique : la consommation du vin (une boisson comparée au sang de Dionysos et, plus tard, au sang de Jésus-Christ) était vue comme un moyen de connaissance et de consécration. À la fois, le vin générait la fécondité universelle, végétale, animale, voire humaine15 ; dans ce contexte la métaphore de la femme comme une vigne fertile se justifie pleinement : „Femeia ta ca o vie roditoare, în laturile casei tale” (127:3). L’image apparaît également dans d’autres textes du Vieux Testament, où la métaphore de la fécondité féminine est associée à la métaphore nationale (voir Ézéchiel 19:10). Plus tard, dans la littérature religieuse chrétienne, Marie sera décrite souvent comme une vigne féconde dans la vigne du Seigneur (voir, par exemple, Acatistul Sf. Ier. Mc. Teodosie de la Mănăstirea Brazi - Mar, 16 Noi, apud <www.doxologia.ro/.../acatistul-sf-ier-mc-teodosie-de-l>). b. Structures comparatives d’origine religieuse Quelques constructions de ce type évoquent des images poétiques inédites, générées, par exemple, dans le cadre de l’assimilation et de la valorisation du milieu domestique (familial) au prisme de l’univers sacré : „Aceasta [coexistenţa paşnică a fraţilor, n.n.] este ca mirul pe cap, care se coboară pe barbă, pe barba lui Aaron, care se coboară pe marginea veşmintelor lui”16 (132:2) ou „… fiicele lor înfrumuseţate şi împodobite ca chipurile templului” (143:12). D’autres images sont circonscrites à proprement parler au milieu ecclésiastique, un contexte dans lequel celles-ci représentent des lieux communs17 : „Să se îndrepteze rugăciunea mea ca tămâia înaintea Ta” (140:2) et autres. La poéticité remarquable de quelques structures comparatives est due au fait que ces constructions incluent une métaphore : „Şi voi pune în veacul veacului seminţia lui [a lui David, n.n.] şi scaunul lui ca zilele cerului” (88:29). En réalité, le verset cité obéit au principe du parallélisme syntaxique synonymique ; de cette manière, la structure comparative qui inclut la métaphore zilele cerului ‘les jours du ciel’ (une métaphore de l’éternité) renforce le concept lexicalisé, dans la première partie du verset, par le syntagme în veacul veacului ‘pour les siècles des siècles’. Toutes les deux structures (ca zilele cerului et în veacul veacului) évoquent la soi-disant promesse davidique, conformément à laquelle le Messie serait issu de la lignée de David. 2.3.2. Comparaisons livresques entrées dans l’usage commun 14 Voir, dans le même sens, la métaphore du serpent, un animal qui, grâce au fait qu’il change de peau, était considéré comme un symbole de la jeunesse éternelle et de la santé (pour plus de détails, voir Alexandru Mihăilă, Vulturul şi tinere ea. Despre Psalmul 102:5, in „Lumina”, janvier 2010, apud <www.ziarullumina.ro/.../vulturul-si-tineretea-despre-ps.>). Voir aussi infra, 2.3.2., Le serpent. 15 Pour plus d’informations, voir www.scritube.com/.../LUMEASIMBOLURILOR1344231314.php. 16 L’image renvoie à un rituel concret, identifiable dans le monde sacerdotal des anciens Hébreux : Aaron, en sa qualité de grand-prêtre, utilisait cet huile parfumé et sanctifié, qui lui donnait une allure gracieuse et attrayante (Saint Jean Bouche D’Or, Tâlcuire la Psalmul 132, Traduction par Cristina Tofan, apud <www.biblesos.org/.../Aceasta-este-ca-mirul-pe-cap-car...>). 17 Ce sont des images qui seront reprises dans la littérature chrétienne. 266 La colombe. La colombe, un symbole de l’amour dans la mythologie grecque, devient, dans le cadre discursif sacré, le messager de la paix (Genèse 8) ou l’expression de la pureté (Matthieu 10:16). Cette créature représente en même temps l’une des formes corporelles que le Saint Esprit a empruntées, au moment de Sa descente du ciel18. Dans le texte des psaumes, aripile ca de porumbel/ca ale porumbi ei ‘les ailes pareilles à celles de la colombe’ évoquent l’aspiration humaine à la pureté, à la liberté et à la fidélité : „Cine-mi va da mie aripi ca de porumbel, ca să zbor şi să mă odihnesc?” (54:6); „Dacă veţi dormi în mijlocul moştenirilor voastre, aripile voastre argintate vor fi ca ale porumbi ei şi spatele vostru va străluci ca aurul” (67:14). Les significations mythiques et religieuses de cet oiseau sont devenues populaires grâce à leur transfiguration au niveau de la langue commune/profane, où a trăi/ a se iubi ca porumbeii/ca doi porumbei ‘vivre/s’aimer comme les/ deux pigeons’ signifie ‘vivre dans l’amour et dans la paix’. Le serpent. Conformément à la valorisation mythologique, ce reptile, qui changeait régulièrement de peau, était un symbole du renouvellement, du rajeunissement et voire de l’immortalité. Associé à la sagesse („Fiţi în elep i ca şerpii şi nevinovaţi ca porumbeii”, Matthieu 10:16), le serpent est à la fois un symbole du mal, du danger ou de la tentation (comme on sait, dans le texte de l’Écriture, le diable même prend la forme d’un serpent afin de faire succomber à la tentation Eve). Ce sont des connotations négatives que nous pouvons identifier également dans les psaumes, un cadre discursif dans lequel limba ascu ită ‘la langue aiguë’ et mânia ‘la colère’ sont souvent évoquées par l’assimilation au serpent : „Mânia lor după asemănarea şarpelui, ca a unei vipere surde, care-şi astupă urechile ei” (57:4); „Ascuţit-au limba lor ca a şarpelui; venin de aspidă sub buzele lor” (139:3), etc. Les significations archétypales négatives de ce reptile furent aussi transposées dans le registre linguistique commun/populaire, où, par une utilisation figurée, le serpent désigne ‘une personne malhonnête, hypocrite’. Le lion. Cet animal a été constamment vu comme un symbole de la force et de la royauté, il représentant, par exemple, le signe de la Tribu de Juda19. Le lion est en même temps un fort symbole chrétien. Dans ce contexte, il est significatif, par exemple, le fait que le symbole de l’Évangile de Marc est justement représenté par le lion ; l’aspect s’explique très probablement prenant en considération que ce texte commence par l’homélie de Saint-Jean le Baptiste, qui crie comme un lion dans le désert. Le lion de Juda, mentionné tout au long de l’Écriture (voir à cet égard, par exemple, L’Apocalypse 5:5), est représenté dans la personne de Christ, étant l’expression accomplie du courage, de la force et de la férocité de la tribu de Juda. Tous ces attributs positifs furent valorisés au niveau courant de la langue, comme le montrent, entre autres, des expressions telles que curajos/ puternic/ mândru ca un leu « courageux/ puissant/ orgueilleux comme un lion ». Toutefois, au-delà de la noblesse de sa force, le lion représente également le dépositaire des instincts et des désirs incontrôlables ou de la furie intérieure ; dans le 18 19 Cf. <ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animale_(mitologie)>. Voir Dic ionar biblic (apud <dictionarbiblic.blogspot.com/2012/.../leul-lui-iuda.htm..>). 267 limites du texte sacré, le lion devient le symbole de l’Antéchrist : Satan attaque les saints comme un lion (1 Pierre 5:8). L’hypostase négative de cet animal est illustrée aussi par le texte des psaumes, où le lion est présenté par l’assimilation aux ennemis du poète-prophète David : „Ca nu cumva să răpească [prigonitorii, n.n.] sufletul meu ca un leu, [...]” (7:2); Deschis-au [vrăjmaşii, n.n.] asupra mea gura lor, ca un leu ce răpeşte şi răcneşte” (21:13), etc. Ce sont également des traits valorisés au niveau de la langue commune ; voir en ce sens des structures telles que feroce ca un leu « féroce comme un lion », ca un leu care rage « comme un lion qui rage », etc. 2.4. Structures comparatives qui évoquent l’espace oriental Les remarques de Du Marsais 1981 ([1730] : 114) portant sur un fond figuratif spécifique à chaque langue considérée séparément peuvent constituer un préambule à la discussion qui suit. À la lumière des commentaires formulés par l’auteur cité, la substitution de certains termes par des structures appartenant à d’autres langues est susceptible de générer le ridicule20. Cette idée mérite d’être retenue premièrement parce qu’elle souligne une vérité qui, dans les études de spécialité modernes, porte sur la relevance des structures stylistiques vis-à-vis du trésor sémiotique propre à une certaine communauté (voir aussi supra, 1.). Les structures que nous nous proposons de discuter par la suite (à savoir, les termes circonscrits du point de vue notionnel aux domaines de la flore et de la faune) apparaissent comme inédites, particulièrement sous l’angle de la réception d’un espace géographique et confessionnel distinct de celui mis en scène par le texte des psaumes (par exemple, dans la perspective d’un récepteur chrétien européen). Mais ce qui est le plus important à remarquer est que, au-delà du côté concret, géographique, national, nous entrevoyons souvent le message spirituel, universel et implicitement la poéticité de cette création vétérotestamentaire. La gazelle. Dans le texte des psaumes, la gazelle – un animal reconnu pour son extraordinaire agilité d’esprit21 – est présentée dans des contextes qui semblent évoquer la conception animiste d’une communauté archétypale : „El [Yahve, n.n.] face să sară Libanul ca un viţel; iar Ermonul ca un pui de gazelă” (28:6), etc. L’arbre. L’olivier, le cèdre et le dattier apparaissent fréquemment dans la littérature biblique, ils ayant – en tant qu’arbres cosmiques – des significations positives, spirituelles. L’apparition des bourgeons, le fleurissement ou la fructification sont des métaphores de l’ascension verticale et implicitement de l’aspiration vers l’absolu : „Dar eu, ca un măslin roditor în casa lui Dumnezeu, am nădăjduit în mila lui Dumnezeu,...” (51:7); „Dreptul ca finicul va înflori şi ca cedrul cel din Liban se va 20 La non-concordance vient du fait que des langues distinctes organisent différemment le même contenu. Cet aspect est signalé et discuté par Coşeriu 2011, y compris concernant le compartiment grammatical, un niveau pour lequel le linguiste cité met en évidence « la diversité de l’organisation du signifié grammatical dans les différentes langues » (Coşeriu 2001 : 167 s.q.). Dans ce contexte, c’est justement le procédé de la traduction littérale qui serait le test idéal qu’on peut utiliser afin de vérifier la structure grammaticale propre à chaque langue. 21 Cf. <valmars.fateback.com/A/animale.htm.>. 268 înmulţi” (91:12); „fiii tăi ca nişte vlăstare tinere de măslin, împrejurul mesei tale” (127:3), etc. La montagne. Cette forme de relief – la source d’un autre substitut figuratif du centre de l’univers – se définit, dans les limites du cadre discursif sacré, comme un réceptacle de l’inspiration divine ; l’épisode biblique, qui présente Moïse recevant les Tables de la Loi (la Torah) au mont Sinaï, est essentiellement illustratif en ce sens. Que la dénomination géographique particulière (le plus souvent, des oronymes tels que Selmon, Ermon et Sion) apparaisse toute seule ou non, donc associée au terme générique, le repère spatial est constamment transgressé, étant valorisé en tant que système de référence spirituel. Dans cet ordre d’idée, la rosée devient, par exemple, une métaphore de la rencontre aurorale du Créateur et de sa création, dans l’espace d’un monde adamique, qui n’est pas encore tombé sous l’esclavage du péché, tandis que la neige réunit les vertus d’une vie édifiée sous le signe de la fidélité envers les valeurs traditionnelles : „Aceasta [convieţuirea paşnică a fraţilor, n.n.] este ca roua Ermonului, ce se coboară pe mun ii Sionului,...” (132:3); „Când Împăratul Cel ceresc va împrăştia pe regi în ţara Sa, ei vor fi albi ca zăpada pe Selmon” (67:15), etc. 3. Considérations finales Comme nous avons eu l’occasion de constater, un nombre important de constructions comparatives met en scène le profil d’une civilisation archaïque, rustique, monothéiste. C’est en fait la communauté de l’époque de la réorganisation du culte en Israël, une collectivité qui éprouvait la croyance en Yahvé et pour laquelle la poterie, la soi-disant purification dans le feu, l’élevage ovin ou les confrontations guerrières représentaient des préoccupations essentielles. Cet aspect-ci résulte aussi de la manière de présenter les actes du macrocosme, à savoir en étroite relation avec les évènements de l’univers domestique. Il n’est pas difficile à deviner la position hiérarchique qu’occupe une certaine profession, au sein d’une communauté, puisque celle-ci est parvenue à fournir le terme de comparaison au niveau de la vie spirituelle ou voire un éventuel appellatif à la Divinité. C’est justement à partir de pareilles réalités qu’on pourra expliquer toute une série d’images : la force intérieure de quelqu’un sèche pareil au pot d’argile tout comme l’acte métallurgique primitif résonne à l’acte de sanctification sur le plan humain. L’identification des soi-disant paradigmes culturels, dans les limites de ce cadre discursif, pourrait représenter un argument en faveur du caractère élitiste de la littérature des Psaumes. Cependant, le texte des psaumes est loin de satisfaire aux exigences d’un texte hermétique proprement dit : en tant que message venu de la part du transcendent, il est exclu que le texte sacré soit un texte ésotérique car cela entrerait en contradiction avec son objectif principal, à savoir celui de mettre en relation les mortels avec leur Divinité. Dans ce contexte, nous pouvons parler plutôt d’une écriture au caractère relativement accessible; il s’agit plus précisément d’un texte qu’on peut décoder en faisant appel aux instruments de connaissance spécifiquement humains, 269 acquis et perfectionnés par l’exercice intérieur constant ou/et par la grâce : la foi, la sagesse, l’émotion religieuse, etc. Bibliographie Sources Biblia sau Sfânta Scriptură (tipărită sub îndrumarea şi cu purtarea de grijă a Prea Fericitului Părinte Teoctist, Patriarhul B.O.R., cu aprobarea Sf. Sinod), Bucureşti: Editura Institutului Biblic şi de Misiune al B.O.R., 1988 Molitfelnic (Tipărit cu aprobarea Sfântului Sinod şi cu binecuvântarea Prea Fericitului Teoctist, patriarhul B.O.R.) (Ediţia a cincea), Bucureşti: Editura Institutului Biblic şi de Misiune al B.O.R., 1992 [MO 1992] Carte de rugăciuni pentru trebuin ele şi folosul creştinului ortodox, Tipărită cu binecuvântarea Prea Fericitului Părinte Teoctist, Patriarhul B.O.R., Bucureşti: Editura Institutului Biblic şi de Misiune al B.O.R., 2004 [Rug. 2004] Ouvrages de référence Bardin, Laurence 1991 : L’analyse de contenu, Paris, PUF Bell, Roger T. 2000: Teoria şi practica traducerii (Traducere de Cătălina Gazi, Collegium, Litere), Iaşi, Polirom Borţun, Dumitru, Săvulescu, Silvia 2005: Analiza discursului public, Şcoala Naţională de studii politice şi administrative Facultatea de comunicare şi relaţii publice „David Ogilvy”. Online: http://www.ro.scribd.com/doc/12412595/analiza-discursului-public (site visité durant les mois janvier – avril 2012) Coseriu, Eugenio 2001 : Principes de syntaxe fonctionnelle, in Eugenio Coseriu, « L’homme et son langage », Virginia, Éditions Peeters, Louvain-Paris-Sterling, p. 165-211 Du Marsais, César-Chesneau 1981 : Despre tropi sau despre diferitele sensuri în care poate fi luat un acelaşi cuvânt într-o aceeaşi limbă (Traducere, studiu introductiv şi aparat critic de Maria Carpov), Bucureşti, Editura Univers [Ière édition: 1730] Gordon, Octavian 2008 : Traducere sau parafrază? Probleme de transpunere a în elesurilor din limba sursă (e.g. latina) în limba intă (e.g. româna), conférence présentée au Colloque Scientifique International „Filologia modernă. Realizări şi perspective în context european”, Academia de Ştiinţe a Moldovei, Chişinău, 7-9 mai 2008 Irimia, Dumitru 1999: Introducere în stilistică, Iaşi, Polirom Popescu, Iulian 1991: Stil şi mentalită i (eseu), Constanţa, Editura Pontica Teleoacă, Dana-Luminiţa 2012 : Conservatisme et expressivité dans la littérature religieuse. Quelques repères dans la définition d’un style scientifique (didactique) au niveau religieux, in « Biblicum Jassyense », vol. 3, Iaşi, p. 55-80 Teleoacă, Dana-Luminiţa 2013 : Stratégies discursives dans le texte des Psaumes, in « Revue roumaine de linguistique », Tome LVIII, n. 2, p. 189-203 Teleoacă, Dana-Luminiţa, Tropii în economia textului religios catihetic. Precizări teoretice, in Teleoacă, Semiotica [Tropii] Teleoacă, Dana-Luminiţa, Semiotica discursului religios. Probleme de poetică, stilistică şi retorică (ouvrage en cours d’élaboration) 270 Recurrence and Religious Structures in Paremiology: Protection Doina BUTIURCA Concept extrêmement complexe, « la protection » connaît une grande variété de valeurs lexicales et sémantiques, terminologiques, connotatives, dénominatives, etc. Toutes ces valeurs ne sont pourtant pas en mesure de donner une représentation de la dimension trans-sociale de la protection divine. L’hypothèse de cette étude est que la plupart des proverbes du monde représentent une façon d’exploration textuelle des différents textes religieux, organisés en trois catégories distinctes: l’imitation, l’opposition et l’allusion. La définition biblique de la protection, la protection divine conditionnée, les variations dans le mental collectif, la typologie de l’allusion biblique etc. sont quelques aspects que nous nous proposons de traiter dans une perspective intertextuelle. Les conclusions visent à montrer comment les allusions à la protection divine mettent en valeur deux thèmes dans le « texte » des mentalités, ayant des fondements solides dans l’Écriture Sainte: la vulnérabilité de l’être humain, d’une part, et la compassion du pouvoir souverain envers la condition humaine, d’autre part. Mots-clés: intertextualité, parémiologie, texte religieux, protection. 1. Theoretical and methodological foundations In Ferdinand de Saussure’s conception, linguistic signs not only have the characteristic of being arbitrary (the relationship between signifier and signified is conventional), but also that of being relational. The situations in which the sign refers to an extra-linguistic referent, belonging to the material world – well defined in terms of ontological components –, are infinitely less if compared to infinite situations where the linguistic sign refers to other signs. Researching the literary text, in analogy with the way of thinking of structuralist linguistics, many exegetes have observed the “tied” character of the text, deliberately or not, diachronic and/or synchronic, by other texts (Julia Kristeva, R. Barthes, G. Genette). The text refers to “the intertextual encyclopedia of an age” (Eco 2007), to the matrix forms and to conventions of its own field, of literature, to a greater extent than that which would establish direct “relations” with the world. From the genetic point of view, the concept of intertextuality has its roots in the Russian formalism. Analyzing the polyphonic character of Dostoyevsky’s novel, M. Bahtin discussed the possibility to interpret the text in several “keys”. 271 Julia Kristeva defined intertextuality as the index of the way in which a text reads history and is inserted in it (Kristeva 1980, 266). This definition could be applied in a narrow, more specialized sense, to paremiology, in its acception of general field of interaction of some indices of the way in which phraseologisms “read” several codes and, more or less metaphorically speaking, “are inserted” in the “text” of a mindset. The arguments are brought indirectly by one of R. Barthes’ observations: the entire language – old and contemporary – enters a text not through a detectable filiation, a deliberate imitation, but through dissemination – an image which ensures the text not the status of a reproduction, but that of productivity (Barthes 1968, 179). Paremiology is generally developed by transforming some heterogeneous codes that are no longer dissociated by the contemporary speaker. During a careful analysis of Romanian paremiology, for example, we identify the crossing of some indices of the archaic civilization, of the traditional and the modern culture, of religion, with specific signifiers and formulae, at the level of which formal structural relations are established. The biblical teaching, the archaic wisdom, the Latin way of thinking about the world, the elements of oriental, Byzantine philosophy, etc. are self-dissolved in the field of paremiology, that we must not confuse with the mindset of a nation: the latter is a set of material, spiritual, linguistic culture, while the proverb, in its text-sentence meaning, resides exclusively in the language. It is proper in this context to specify that intertextuality should not be reduced to a simple problem of resources, of “influences”. As mentioned before, the concept of influence is a consecrated one, but it has a much too general and vague status in comparison with that of intertextuality. At most, in a certain sense, one could speak about an element of adaptability to the line of time, of paremilogy, which brings with itself a renewal of the vocabulary and through this a constant redefinition of mentalities, etc. The scholarly literature designates several types of intertextual relations such as relations of co-presence, relations of inclusion, of the derivation of one text from another. In Gerard Genette’s conception (Genette 1982), the “relationship of copresence” has several forms between two or more texts: the “quotation” (used in the journalistic language, especially in the title of the articles), “plagiarism” (a “less explicit and less canonical” form in the French author’s conception) and “allusion”, a theorized intertextual category, with the meaning of “statement the full understanding of which requires the perception of a relationship between it and another, to which its several inflections, otherwise inaccessible, refer necessarily” (Genette 1982, 8). The study of the interaction of different codes in paremiology determines and justifies the adoption of common research methods for all types of indices, the comparison of the results being interesting and useful, etc. Extending the current research of phraseologisms beyond the realm of mentalities, into the literary text, in the “repeated discourse” (E. Coșeriu), attracts, in different forms and to different degrees, the deepening of the relation of co-presence between texts. What we are 272 interested in – from the methodological and conceptual perspective –, in the strict study of paremiology, is the third “nucleus” of intertextuality, allusion. It is one of the leading figures of thought, differently defined, under the aspect of functionality: for G. Genette, it is “a punctual figure”, and for Allan H. Pasco (Pasco 1995) it becomes one of the fundamental forms of intertextuality, through its ability to be extended to the dimensions of a whole work. A large part of the world’s proverbs are a form of textual exploitation of various religious texts, organized in three distinct categories: imitation, opposition and allusion. The religious allusion (“graft” – in the terms of Allan H. Pasco) and the text of paremiologic statements (“the plant and the implant” – in the same scholar’s concepts) are united at the level of the mind, in an always new type of creation, in a “different way from any of the textual components” (Pasco, 1995, 6), different from which would be the text-sentence of proverbs, lacking the external, religious material. 2. Canonical divine protection. Hebrew merism What is the biblical definition of protection? Let us stop at the classical answer, given by the Psalms of David: protection means hiding in “the shadow of God’s wings” (Ps. 17:8; Ps. 57:1), in His hut “in that evil day” (Ps. 27:5), and “in the lee of God’s face” (Ps. 31:20). The image of God as “helper”, who “will not let your foot slip”, in His role of the “guardian” of people (“your shade on your right hand”, “the Sun will not smite you by day, nor the Moon by night”) is omnipresent. God “will keep you from anything bad; He will keep your soul.” The divine protection in the Holy Scripture is given through a figure which the rhetoric calls merism: it is the combination of two contrasting words, used to suggest the unity of the whole. Hebrew merism names the extremes (“coincidentia oppsitorum” in Mircea Eliade’s vision), suggesting all the elements between them: God “will keep you at going and arriving, now and forevermore!” God is the one whom the protection acts are attributed in the collective mindset as well, regardless of religion: “God gave disease, but also gave cures”// “Allah tried people not only by misfortune, but also by giving them riches unexpectedly.”// “God makes nests for the blind stork.” This proverb is one of many classical examples of protection depicted as shelter. The allusion with a biblical source is based on suggestion and subtlety in paremiology, but mostly on not declaring the sources, being foreign to what the rhetoric of the Middle Ages called “imitatio”. The identification of sources lies on the cultural / informational competences of the receiver. The modalities to realize a figure of thought based on analogy, such as allusion, differs from one thematic typology to another. Here are some patterns: 2.1. Built based on and in the spirit of the canons, the biblical allusion can be expressed through a fragment of a statement, through which a situational parallelism is realized with the “facts” from the Psalms (“To sit at the right hand of the Father”), or with the characters having a significance in the old Jewish model, 273 in the New Testament, etc. In “living as in Abraham’s bosom”, by the allusion “Abraham’s bosom” the collective archaic mind avoids the vulgar character (or even obscene, in some instances of actual communication) of the paremiologic statement. In The Old Testament, the image of protection, of a safe place appears both in Numbers (11:12), in Ruth (“Then Naomi took the child in her arms and cared for him...” 4:16), in Isaiah (40:11). As noted in Dic ionar de imagini şi simboluri biblice 2011, the expression “Abraham’s bosom” appears only twice in the Holy Scriptures. Abraham was the father of the Jews, and to live “in the bosom of Abraham” is an allusion to a safe place, of high honor. In Jesus’ parable about the rich man clothed in purple and fine linen, we read: “the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom” (Luke 16:22). Another sense of the “Abraham’s bosom” allusion is that of “a place of honour” offered to a guest at the table, sitting next to the host – which is found in John: “No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.” (John 1:18)// “Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved.” (John 13:23). In the Hebrew and Christian tradition, “God’s hand” is another construction that signifies the canonical protection, used to express the relationships of the ordinary mortals with the Supreme One (Dumistrăcel 2001, 130). In addition to several other witnesses to invoke the sacred, “God’s hand” is a universal, supra-individual representation, being related in every situation to the divine protection of being, may it be the Islam or the Christian religion: in Maghreb it has the name of “Fatima’s hand” (the daughter of the Prophet and the mother of all believers), or even of Keff Maryam (Mary’s hand); in the Christian religion the image is associated with other symbols of anthropological character: “this was God’s hand”, “he saw God”, “he grabbed God’s foot”, “he holds God by His hair”, “he stands in the face of God”, “he keeps God at his bosom”, etc. 2.2. The religious allusion is generally expressed by a single word which suggests variants of the thematic strands of the idea of protection. Thus, not only a situational parallelism is realized, but also a sapiential connection and/or a concretizing of abstractions. Without being built solely upon biblical canons, religious allusions have the highest degree of universality, with deep roots in the anthropology of the human being. Since ancient times, man has sensed being part of a cosmic unity which exceeds man, shared through a network of correspondences, a common destiny with the world of vegetation, of the animal and the invisible world: “Nothing is random, everything is connected, everything resonates” (Le Breton 2009, 66). Any aspect of manifestation can become – regardless of the geographical position, of occupation, of the type of religious community – the sign of the Creator’s care for the beings of His own creation: God finds a lower branch for the bird which cannot fly. From the examples considered above, one can notice that the allusions regarding divine protection highlight two issues in the “text” of the mindsets, with 274 solid foundations in the Holy Scriptures: the vulnerability of the human being, on the one hand, and the compassion of the sovereign power towards the condition of the creatures of the universe. Armor, castle, fortress, stronghold, divine warrior, refuge, weakness, walls – all these are recurrent images that suggest sovereign power and the tendency of a compassionate Creator to offer protection. 3. Conditional divine protection and the patristic discourse The variations of the theme are extremely subtle in relation to the gender and species cultivated in the text of the Scripture (Gospels, Psalms, Proverbs, etc.) and/or in relation to the sermon/homilies. Rediscovering the divine power, the human being ensures a permanent access to the dimension of the intelligible and explainable. Both canonical texts – constructed on prescriptions –, as well as the patristic teaching have generated another “variant” of the topic in question – on the level of the mindsets – by connecting it to the psychology of the being. We discuss the type of divine protection which is conditioned by human action (earnest in prayer, in work, in wisdom, humility, etc.): “Preserve me, O God: for in thee do I put my trust.” (Ps. 16:1). In Matthew we read: “And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive.” We will stop at a few discourse models of the patristic literature: Saint John Chrysostom frequently used in his sermons the idea that “God loves the ones who persevere.” Saint Cyprian: “Those can receive what they ask from God whom he sees guarding in prayer”. Saint Philip Neri: “Hold me, God, from my ears, because otherwise I will sell you just like Judas did”. A comfortable existence under the protection of the Father can be given only to the entrepreneurial spirits, this being one of the “assertions” of conditional divine protection we find in the mindsets of several nations and people: “God feeds the flapping birds”, says a Danish proverb, while in the English language we find the following variant: “God gave us hands, but he does not build bridges with them.” The Czechs and the Slovaks correlate the divine care with human involvement in the manifest, in the action: “He whom God has revealed a treasure must remove it himself”, a teaching we also find in the mentality of the Romanians: “God gives, but he does not put it in the bag”// “God gives, but he does not carry it home”, etc. 4. Allusion and typology in context Sometimes, close to literary periphrasis and having an evocative function, the allusion to divine protection knows several contextual patterns: a) it can be studied in combination with other figures of speech, including what the scholarly literature calls antomasia: “sitting at the feet of the Lord”, where Lord has become the common name through which a protecting God is appointed. The common name becomes thus generic. Unlike the lyrical text, where allusion/antonomasia individualizes the biblical vocabula in the context – the procedure having a certain recurrence („Pentru-al lui cap ai înfruntat revolte./ i astăzi simți că strîngi la piept pe-o Iudă” [For his head you faced rebellion/And today you feel you hold a Judas 275 to your chest], M. Eminescu), in paremiology the phenomenon does not have the same frequency/intensity of individualization: “Do not get mad at God for having created the tiger, thank Him that He did not gave it wings”1; b). the allusion to the biblical “narration” can have a parody dimension: “for you, old Adam, we ate spikes in slaps”; or: allusions to relationships between different types of religion can have a euphemistic side: “Adam and Eve declared their love in Persian, but the angel who cast them away, spoke Turkish” (Iraqui proverb); c) the allusion is realized as a generalizing figure in paremiology: “When God is not at home, the Saints have a blast”; d) there are several cases where the allusion to protection has a gnomic value: “Protect yourself if you want God to protect you”. Resources Biblia sau Sfânta Scriptură, edited by Bartolomeu Valeriu Anania, printed with the blessing Biblia sau Sfânta Scriptur , Ediţie Jubiliară a Sfântului Sinod (…), redactată şi adnotată de Bartolomeu Valeriu Anania, Editura Institutului Biblic şi de Misiune al Bisericii Ortodoxe Române Dic ionar de imagini şi simboluri biblice, eds. Leland Ryken, James C. Wilhoit, Tremper Longman III, Oradea, Casa Cărţii, 2001 Dic ionar de știin e ale limbii. Coord.: Angela Bidu-Vrânceanu et al., București, Editura Nemira Proverbe româneşti. Prefață, glosar și indice de George Munteanu, București, Editura Pentru Literatură, 1965 Bibliography Barthes, R., 1968, Texte (Théorie du), Enciclopedia Universalis, vol. 15, București, Editura Univers Breton, David le, 2009, Antropologia corpului şi modernitatea, Chişinău, Editura Cartier Coșeriu, E., 1996, Lingvistica integrală, interviu de Nicolae Saramandu, București, Editura Fundaţiei Culturale Române Dumistrăcel, S., 2001, Până-n pânzele albe, Iaşi, Institutul European Eco, Umberto, 2007, Limitele interpretării, Iaşi, Editura Polirom Eliade, Mircea 1994, Imagini şi simboluri. Eseu despre simbolismul magico-religios. Prefață de George Dumezil, București, Editura Humanitas Genette, G., 1982, Palimpsestes ou la littérature au second degré, Paris, Du Seuil Kristeva, Julia 1960, Problemele structurării textului in vol. Pentru o teorie a textului, București, Editura Univers Pasco, Alan H. 1995, Allusion. A Literary Graft, University of Kentucky Press Saussure, Ferdinand de, 1998, Curs de lingvistică generală, Iaşi, Editura Polirom 1 African proverb, la http://ecitate.ro/citeste/1124. 276 Human Nature and “Theognosia” according to St. Gregory of Nyssa Christina Andreea MI ARIU Auteur de plusieurs ouvrages théologiques d'une grande profondeur, Saint Grégoire fut principalement étudié au cours des dernières décennies et il est considéré comme l'un des plus grands penseurs chrétiens de langue grecque. Dans son ouvrage, on retrouve l'éloquence et la précision de la langue de Platon et Plotin, les idées d'Origène et de son école d'Alexandrie, sur le mystère du Logos chrétien et de la vie mystique. Au-delà des responsabilités, de sa haute vocation et des dons extraordinaires, le Saint montre que la vocation humaine définitoire est la communion authentique et la vie éternelle avec Dieu, Celui qui nous a créés à son image et à sa ressemblance. Saint Grégoire se détache de tous les systèmes mystiques païens, en particulier du platonisme et du néo -platonisme, par le fait que, dans sa conception, l'amour ne se manifeste jamais d'une manière inconsciente extatique. La notion de « theognosia » est comprise par Saint Grégoire comme une relation d'amour . Dieu demeure pour l’âme un permanent mystère dans Son être et se révèle autant qu'Il croit que l'âme peut recevoir . Mots-clés: le Logos chrétien, theognosia, theoria, la littérature patristique. St. Gregory of Nyssa, recognized today as a pillar of Orthodoxy, is the first Holy Father who, due to his concerns on the human condition, has left us an anthropology treatise. Author of several theological works of great depth, St. Gregory has been studied mainly in recent decades, and is considered one of the greatest Greek language Christian thinkers. He embodies the eloquence and precision of Plato and Plotinus’ language with the ideas of Origen and his Alexandria school on the Christian Logos mystery and mystical life. Beyond his responsibilities, high calling and extraordinary gifts, the Saint shows that the defining human vocation is the authentic communion and eternal living with God, who created us in His image and likeness. His entire work is a response and a call to his contemporaries, but especially to posterity, to the call that the Savior Himself addressed us, namely to choose the Way, the Truth and the Life. Guided by the Holy Spirit, St. Gregory of Nyssa was able to approach Scripture, to penetrate and reveal it to others through theological developments taken over under various forms by patristic literature. 277 His concern for the human condition somewhat anticipates the “struggles” of the disillusioned human being, relentlessly and continuously searching for an identity in the modern and postmodern era. The Saint starts at the core of Christianity, from love, showing that God Himself became what He loves, meaning Man. However, modern man was not willing to show filial love anymore, but hastened to state that, to him, “God is dead”. Moreover, man foolishly aspired to occupy himself the “vacant seat” becoming his own god. Only this way can the man stripped of the celestial Providence protection silence his life’s source, annihilating his spirit and reducing himself to a simple animated flesh1. St. Gregory of Nyssa shows why our bodies and souls need God in order to live fully the condition, a truth reveled by our very soul if we are willing to listen. The Life and Work of St. Gregory of Nyssa St. Gregory of Nyssa was born in 335 in Caesarea of Cappadocia in an exemplary Christian family. Three of the ten brothers (Basil, Gregory and Peter) became bishops, and a sister, Macrina, was a model of virtuous life. As a younger brother of St. Basil the Great, St. Gregory was trained intellectually and spiritually under his authority, calling him his “father and teacher”. Although at first he had decided to enter the clergy, receiving the appointment of “reader”, later he felt interest and attraction to non-Christian philosophical writings, thinking of becoming “a rhetorician rather than a Christian”. But both his brother Basil and his sister Macrina led him to discover his true purpose, that of minister of the Church. Gregory of Nyssa’s period of alienation to the Church has been called by some patristic authors as “a crisis of conscience”. Others argue that this transient errancy is not meaningless but, as in the case of St. Paul or St. Augustine, the alienation does nothing but provide a clear perspective on the phenomenon, subsequently leading to overcoming the alienation and acquiring high emotions. Even if in his youth the Saint was married to a devout Christian, Theosevia, it seems that the couple had parted long before 385 (the year Theosevia passed away), in good understanding, both embracing monastic life. St. Gregory spent this time at the Iris monastery in Pontus, where, towards the end of 371, St. Basil called him to Caesarea, asking him to accept the high priesthood. Humbly, he initially refused this high ecclesiastical honor, but, at the insistence of his brother, he accepted the seat of bishop of Nyssa, a small town not far from Caesarea, where Basil was archbishop. As bishop, he fulfilled his pastoral and missionary duties with great honor, in a time when the Church was disturbed by the Arian bishops’ hostile actions, supported by the political authorities of the empire. The life and work of the Saint were put in the service of love and kindness, even though he quite often faced the opposite from his contemporaries. For example, at one time he was denounced by the governor, and a council of bishops, held at Nyssa in his absence, deposed him of his Bishop seat, although the community of 1 P. Evdokimov, Taina iubirii – Sfin enia iubirii conjugale în lumina tradi iei ortodoxe, Asociaţia medicală creştină Christiana, Bucureşti, 1944, p. 66. 278 believers remained faithful to him. After the death of Aryan Emperor Valens (364378), St. Gregory returned to his hometown, the faithful receiving him triumphantly. As an active participant in the life of the Church, St. Gregory of Nyssa has helped to crystallize the teachings of faith. Thus, in October 379, he took part in a synod in Antioch, which mainly dealt with the Apollinarist heresy. With a decree of the council, he made a canonical visit to the dioceses of Pontus, on which occasion, in April 380, he presided over the election of the metropolitan for the city of Sebasteia in Armenia Minor. To his surprise, the bishops appointed himself as metropolitan, and, despite his protests, he had to remain in that diocese for several months, after which he returned to Nyssa. His talent, erudition and reputation also recommended him as a participant at the Second Ecumenical Synod held in Constantinople in 381, where he stood out among high authoritative theologians. Emperor Theodosius (379-395) praised him so much that, on July 30, 381, he ordered by decree that all the bishops of the dioceses of Pontus who were not in communion with the bishop Gregory of Nyssa to be expelled2. He would return to Constantinople only about 4 to 5 years after, in July 385 or 386, when he held two funeral sermons at the death of Princess Pulcheria, the only daughter, aged 6, of the Emperor Theodosius, and at the death of her mother, Empress Flacilla. In the year 394, he participated in a synod held once again in Constantinople, after which his name is no longer mentioned in the historical sources, which probably indicates that he passed away that very year, in 394. Being a hesychast, inclined more towards prayer and theological reflection rather than practical activities and the organization of ecclesial life, St. Gregory of Nyssa stood out especially in the study and spiritual interpretation of the Scripture through theological works of a certain value to defend the true faith, whose depth of thought places him among the great Fathers and ecclesiastical writers of the patristic history. His abundant work as a writer includes exegetical works and homilies, dogmatic writings, ascetic writings, speeches and letters. But almost all his writings have a pronounced ascetic and spiritual character because he does not simply make an exegesis of books or some places in the Scripture, nor just a purely theoretical exposure of dogmatic teachings, but explaining the texts in Scripture always gives him the opportunity to describe the conditions and the manners in which believers can advance in spiritual life, and dogmatic exposures are presented as grounds for this kind of Christian living. Of the treaties or homilies which deal, for dogmatic or spiritual purposes, with the texts of Scripture, we would like to mention: On human creation, An Apology for the Hexaemeron, The life of Moses, Homilies on the Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs, Spiritual interpretation of the Benedictions and On the Prayer. The most important dogmatic writings are: Against Eunomius (here he refutes the erroneous teachings of the Arian bishop who denied the divinity of the Son), Against 2 I. Buga, Preliminarii la teologia Sf. Grigorie de Nyssa, în Despre via a lui Moise, Editura Sf. Gheorghe-Vechi, 1995, p. 6. 279 Apollinaris (to the Bishop Theophilus of Alexandria), On the Holy Spirit, The Catechetical Lectures. Of the writings containing an actual ascetic or spiritual content, we would like to mention: On Virginity, On what it means to call oneself a Christian, On Christian perfection, The life of St. Macrina, and The life of St. Gregory the Wonderworker. Also outstanding in content are St. Gregory’s speeches uttered either occasionally, or at Great Feasts or celebrations of Saints: On the love of the poor, Against those who postpone baptism, We should not mourn for those who have fallen asleep in faith, On the deity of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, On the day of lights or at Baptism of Christ, At Easter or At the resurrection of Christ, At the Ascension of Christ, On the Holy Spirit or the Pentecost, At the birth of Christ, On the protomartyr Stephen, At the 40 martyrs, At the Holy Martyr Theodore, and In honor of Saint Basil the Great. His entire work echoes with the immense love he has towards God and His most important creature – man, hence the constant concern for the fears, aspirations, and chances of man for salvation. In appreciation for his valuable theological activity, the Seventh Ecumenical Synod named him “Father of Fathers”, and modern theologians recognize him as “the greatest patristic mind of the East”3. The purpose of man as a dual being candidate for deification In the Saint’s vision, man must free himself of all that is wrong by asceticism and rediscover the unity with God which “is one, uncompounded and faceless, and humanity will escape through this work of reconciliation of this composition of two, and will come again fully to good, simplicity and lack of image [...] so that the seen part be the same as the hidden one, and hidden to be the same as the seen one” when he becomes “on his own, a son of God”.4 The first experience of the soul in knowing the divine is that of the essential inaccessibility and infinity of God. His being is transcendent and therefore “passeth all comprehensive understanding, unable to approach or be reached by thoughts based on assumptions”5. To know God the unknowable, we have but on one way: faith6. Moreover, because faith is manifested through love, knowledge becomes love. St. Gregory breaks away from all pagan mystical systems, especially from Platonism and neo-Platonism, by the fact that, in his conception, love is never manifested in the unconscious ecstatic form. “Theologisation” is understood by Gregory as a relation of love. God remains for the soul a constant mystery in His Ierom. Corbu Ag., Sfânta Scriptură şi tâlcuirea ei în opera Sfântului Grigorie de Nyssa, Editura Teofania, Sibiu, 2002, p. 14. 4 Despre Fericiri, traducere de Preot Prof. Dumitru Stăniloae, în PSB, vol. 29, p. 394. 5 Ibidem, p. 380. 6 Despre Via a lui Moise, traducere de Pr. Ioan Buga, PSB vol. 29, p. 74-75. 3 280 being and reveals Himself as much as He believes that the soul can receive. Therefore, the movement of the soul toward God is not seen as a movement toward the light, but for the darkness, the unknown; the soul “enters” the cloud, like Moses, and sees only the “back of God”. Consequently, the ideal is theoria, vision of God, or more than that, theognosia, the knowledge and contemplation of God as the Unknown, the marital union of the soul with God, allegorically described in the Song of Songs7. The difference between created and uncreated is so great at St. Gregory, that there is no way for the soul to overcome it, there is no rapture in which the soul leaves the being created and enters the uncreated. The mystic effort is likened to a man who tries to climb the mountain, but slips because of sand, and makes no real progress. The image of St. Gregory on the endless spiritual progress is rooted in the apophatic theology developed by Dionysius the Areopagite. The teaching on epektasis (based on the text of Philippians 3.13-14) is that the end or purpose of Christian life, here and hereafter, does not exist as a place or time, but resides in an endless progress of the soul in (mis)understand and (non)communion of the divine being. This theme, preferred in The life of Moses, is also repeated in the Homilies on the Song of Songs, where the meeting of the soul with the One sought is never satisfactory and complete: “[The bride] after sharing the goodness as much as she could, is again attracted by a new beginning, as if she would have never shared the goodness, so, as she advances towards that which appears before her, her desire also increases, and, because of the overwhelming majesty of the goodness which are always above, she seems to start the ascent for the first time”8. The soul is conscious that all its quest is to admit failure “to be understood and that understanding Him becomes an obstacle in finding Him for those who seek Him”9. The experience of the soul manifests itself in three forms: the mirror of the soul, the spiritual senses and the Logos that dwells. In the 6th Homily to Beatitudes, St. Gregory emphasizes that knowing God means to have Him, and not be informed about Him, because God does not say “[...] Blessed are those who know something about God, but those who have God in themselves”.10 Moreover, to have Him means to transmit Him, i.e. to reflect the image of God in the soul. Hence the importance of the purity of the soul, which, without it, would be unable to properly play this perfect image. 7 J. Danielou, Platonisme et Théologie Mystique, Paris, 1953, p. 199-208. Tâlcuire amănun ită la Cântarea Cântărilor, traducere de Pr. Dumitru Stăniloae, PSB, vol. 29, p. 185. 9 Ibidem, p. 196. 10 Despre Fericiri…, p. 378-379. 8 281 Basically, the progress of the soul resembles Christ’s progress as man, in wisdom and grace. He comes to some people’s soul as a child, to others as a teen, and to others in full maturity11. Finally, his conception of knowledge is experiential: although he uses the specific technical language of Platonism and Origen, St. Gregory excludes without reservation intellectualism from the soul’s search for God. If there is true experience, it is only in love, in which the soul seeks God and rises to what might be considered impossible: the union with God the unknown. Search and desire are alike, satisfied and never satisfied, because the satisfaction of one desire leads to a greater desire. The experience of the soul in the night of ignorance is not and cannot be only theoria, but feeling and its acceptance by the soul “wounded by love!”12. In order to define the essence of man, St. Gregory starts from God as prototype. As a being both sensible and intelligible, man has a special place in creation, a place called by Gregory – border – between the spirituality of God and the materiality of the world. As a border reality between the two worlds ontologically separate, man represents the place of communication and interpenetration of the sensible and the intelligible. Therein lies, in the Saints’ opinion, man’s responsibility, but also his greatness, who can either spiritualize his body, or just reduce it to the material dimension. Thus man appears as a collaborator of God, a “co-creator” of his destiny. In the work On human creation, the bishop of Nyssa describes human constitution, saying that man is in solidarity with animals by the material which makes them all up, but, as the image of God, man has gained dominion over the creatures of heaven, sea and earth. In Chapter IV of the work, he addresses the problem of double creation, and stresses that man was created to participate simultaneously in both natures, the divine and the material. St. Gregory is a supporter of the idea that Genesis I, 27 does not report the creation of man – the prototype, but the pleroma of human nature. Thus the quality of the image of God belongs to any man, whether he lived during the first creation of the world or he lives now13. Man is seen in constant synergy. Even ancient philosophers saw him in constant motion, in constant transformation. The natural sense of human movement is towards God, but it can be perverted. By this change of original direction, man loses the correct path, and, moreover, can turn to God’s adversary14. 11 Tîlcuire amănun ită la Cîntarea Cîntărilor, traducere de Pr. Dumitru Stăniloae, PSB, vol. 29, p. 156. 12 Ibidem, p. 291. Despre facerea omului XVI, 44, 185 D; S.C. 6, 161, apud Preot Vasile Răducă, Antropologia Sfântului Grigorie de Nyssa, IBMOR; Bucureşti, 1996, p. 76. 14 Sf. Grigorie de Nyssa, Marele cuvânt catehetic, trad. Rom. Grigorie Teodorescu, Ed. Sophia, Bucureşti, 1998, p. 48. 13 282 As the image of God, man is a rational being, free and able to enjoy the goodness of God. The bishop of Nyssa does not define the image of God starting from man, as these qualities of the image are only externalizations, and not the image itself. In a logical sense, to say what the image is involves knowing the prototype, i. e. God. The likeness to God can grow through the practice of virtues. Depending on the choices that man makes fully free, the “mirror” takes the form of the prototype. By the imprinting of His image, “God dwells in man through a personal communion from God to which man responds freely”15. By the indwelling of God in the soul of man, St. Gregory does not confuse, as Plato had, human kinship with God by identifying the nature of the human soul with the divine nature. In the work On the distinction between essence and hypostasis, long attributed to St. Basil the Great, and later discovered to belong to St. Gregory of Nyssa, he deals with the theme of mirroring to show how the person of the Son can be the image of the Father’s person: “Just as when we look in a clean mirror, to the form that took shape in the reflection in the mirror, and we have a precise knowledge of the image reproduced here, similarly, if you know the Son, your heart receives the expression of the Father’s person by knowing the Son. Indeed, all that is contemplated in the Father will be contemplated in the Son, and everything belonging to the Son belongs to the Father, for the Son remains whole in the Father, and, in turn, He has the Father whole in Himself”16. The Saint prefers the theme of mirroring, which he resumes in different contexts, marking the reduction of the infinite in the finite or of the immaterial in the material: “... as often in a small piece of glass, after sunshine falls over it, there will be a mirror of the disk of the sun (of course, not in its true size, but as far as the image fits the smallness of the piece of glass), so in the lower limits of human nature there shine the ineffable properties of divinity, so that reason, being led by it and cleaned in its approach to examine the properties of the flesh, does not fall from the understanding of the nature of the soul, or the small and easily corruptible nature does not act as it would be equal to the unsullied nature, but to have an idea about the intelligible nature and, of course, not say that the image is the same as the archetype”17. It is not the biological existence as body that defines human being, but its theocentric constitution and the attraction for the One whose image it resembles. Because of the Saint’s high education, he was able to synthesize his illustrious forebears’ views on the relationship between the soul and the body, including that of Plato who saw the body as a prison of the soul. The Saint argued that “the union 15 Preot Dr. Nicolae Moşoiu, Taina prezen ei lui Dumnezeu în via a umană, Ed. Paralela 45, 2000, p. 158. 16 Cf. C. Schönborn, Icoana lui Hristos, trad. rom. Pr. Dr. Vasile Răducă, Ed. Anastasia, 1996, p. 22; 30-31. 17 De anima et resurrectione, 46, 42 CD. 283 of the soul and the bodily nature is an ineffable connection beyond thinking”18, without this union involving the incarceration of the soul in the body or the soul violating the body. Both the body and the soul are parts of a whole that are interrelated. The Holy Father believes that, being related to God, and with all creation, the soul is not in contrast with the body. These two elements, though different, are not antithetic, as they share the One who created them. Both the body and all matter are composed of a series of spiritual qualities existing and structured by the will of God, and the purpose of both natures is to evolve to perfection without losing identity. St. Gregory of Nyssa tries to determine man to ponder with spiritual maturity on the model of reporting to divinity proposed by Moses. The Holy Father stresses the importance of assuming this goal, using the full liberty enjoyed by man a priori. Therefore, he notes that Moses met God only after his own will decided he wanted this meeting. Therefore, it is about choice: of good at the expense of evil, of freedom against slavery, and of knowledge in contrast to ignorance. This choice proves the quality of freedom, born of the determination to be with God and to be God’s19. Choosing to follow the path of perfection belongs exclusively to man, who is free to use all the gifts with which God has endowed him. St. Gregory of Nyssa put high value on human freedom, considering that “if he is free, man affirms his dignity and specificity to God and to the sensible world, of which he is a part”. In his conception, freedom cannot be confused with free will, but it represents the manner of acting untrammeled of harm or passion, the effusion moving towards the Good, without limitations, complaints or questions. “The freedom in which man is equal to God is not suffering, i.e. the condition of the man free from all sin and stranger to any experience of evil.“ Conclusion Freedom of man will remains alive even after the fall, manifesting itself in the possibility of seeking and loving God or not. It is true that the corruption of the image altered the weakening of the will, but it did not lead to its total loss. Free human will enables knowledge and freedom, and thereby its cultivation is a condition of the actual returning to God. In the Saint’s vision, St. Moses is that exemplary hero who embodies the mystic, the one initiated that passes the primary stage of knowing God to living with Him, directly communicating, and even having the opportunity to serve Him. These steps should be the marks of a life dedicated to deification, responsibly employed in the climb on that ladder that the Saint sees as not supported from the ground – so from the material world – but 18 Sf. Grigorie de Nyssa, Despre Facerea omului, P.G.; XV, 44, 177 OC, apud. Pr. Dr. Vasile Răducă, op. cit., p. 90. 19 V. Răducă, Voin a şi libertatea în gândirea Sf. Grigorie de Nyssai, Studii Teologice, nr. 1-2, 1983, p. 57. 284 from above, in the purely spiritual and transcendental dimension – the Kingdom of Heaven. References Sf. Grigorie de Nyssa 1998: Marele cuvânt catehetic, trad. rom. G. Teodorescu, Bucureşti, Editura Sophia Despre facerea omului XVI, 44, 185 D; S.C. 6, 161, apud Preot Vasile Răducă, Antropologia Sfântului Grigorie de Nyssa: 1996, Bucureşti, IBMOR Despre Via a lui Moise, traducere de Pr. Ioan Buga, PSB vol. 29 Tâlcuire amănun ită la Cântarea Cântărilor, traducere de Pr. D. Stăniloae, PSB, vol 29 Buga, I. 1995: Preliminarii la teologia Sf. Grigorie de Nyssa, in Despre via a lui Moise, Ed. Sf. Gheorghe-Vechi Corbu, Ag. 2002: Sfânta Scriptură şi tâlcuirea ei în opera Sfântului Grigorie de Nyssa, Sibiu, Ed. Teofania Danielou, J. 1953: Platonisme et Théologie Mystique, Paris Evdokimov, P. 1944: Taina iubirii – Sfin enia iubirii conjugale în lumina tradi iei ortodoxe, Bucureşti, Ed. Asociaţia medicală creştină Christiana Mosoiu, N. 2000 : Taina prezen ei lui Dumnezeu în via a umană, Pitești, Editura Paralela 45 Raduca, V. 1983: Voin a şi libertatea în gândirea Sf. Grigorie de Nyssa, in Studii Teologice, nr. 1-2 Schönborn, C. 1996: Icoana lui Hristos, trad. rom. Pr. Dr. Vasile Răducă, București, Editura Anastasia Voinea, D. 2009: Omul în învă ătura Sfântului Grigorie de Nyssa, Brăila; http://www.bibliotecadigitala.ro/ 285 Αρε η / Αηαρ ια Dans Le Discours Περι Φιζοπ ωχια de Saint Grégoire de Nazianze, une étude d’archéologie linguistique Maria-Cristina TRU C The direct approach to the original text of the moral sermon On the Love for the Poor, of Saint Gregory of Nazianzus, by virtue of our position as a translator, occasioned us an analysis of its axiological vocabulary. In this context we have described the structural configuration of lexical fields formed around two archilexems / hyperonyms: virtue and sin from a diachronical point of view. The research's purposes are to identify and analyse the hyponyms components, reffering to the connotation, denotation, lexical family, synonymy, antonymy. We followed the evolution of concepts virtue / sin in different periods of hellenic thought, in the same time with the process of lexicalization and crystallization of their lexical fields. As a priority we intended to prove the significance of the classical languages as a revealing tool, in biblical or patristic hermeneutics. Key-words: Saint Gregory of Nazianzus, axiological vocabulary, lexical-semantic field, virtue, sin. Lʹinterprétation de tout texte patristique ne peut être quʹun défi de taille, un test d'initiation, souvent exposé au risque pour le profane qui s'y aventure poussé par une témérité irréfléchie. Le katabasis du traducteur dans les profondeurs des sens possède dʹauthentiques valeurs mystagogiques, tant que le raprochement du texte / de lʹauteur en devient révélateur. Dans ce cas, on peut parler de la révélation du Verbe de SaintGrégoire, celui à qui on a attribué à vrai dire, issue dʹune reconnaissance respectueuse, pleine de toute la piété, le surnom de Théologien. Ce nʹest pas un hasard, puisque l'exégèse patristique consacre l'évêque de Nazianze comme l'un des plus grands orateurs du quatrième siècle (Coman 1956: 179). Comme aspect particulier, dans le catalogue des hommes illustres, Saint-Jérôme, en parlant de Saint-Grégoire, son contemporain, il n'hésite pas à lʹappelé „homme de grand talent dans le discours”1. La traduction2 du discours Π φ π ωχ α , est ainsi un prétexte pour l'identification des 1 De viris illustribus, trad. Dan Negrescu, Bucureşti, Editura Paideia, 1997, p. 74. Sfântul Grigorie Teologul, Despre iubirea pentru cei săraci, trad. Maria-Cristina Truşcă, Craiova, Editura Mitropolia Olteniei, 2007. 2 287 (res)sources de son verbe, parfait, théophore, appelé dans le language liturgique, verbe doué dʹ une grande puissance. Sur le plan thématique, le discours Sur l'amour pour les pauvres a été placé dans la série des discours moraux, la compassion envers les opprimés étant une préoccupation que Saint Grégoire partageait avec les autres Pères de Cappadoce, Basile le Grand et Grégoire de Nysse. Le thème du discours est soutenu du point de vue lexical par l'occurrence de termes axiologiques, aspect qui a attiré notre attention et quʹon a mis en valeur dans cette étude dʹarchéologie linguistique, en essayant d'appliquer l'un des concepts de base de la sémantique structurale, qui est le champ lexico-sémantique. En effet, on a eu lʹintention d'identifier les paradigmes constitués par certaines unités lexicales de lʹansemble lexical de la langue hellénique qui partagent des zones sémnatiques homogènes, ayant comme valeur commune, comme dénominateur sémnatique commun, les archilexèmes ρε / ηαρ α, vertu / péché qui pourraient être envisager comme concepts - étiquettes de champs sémantiques formés autour de ces termes, dans un domaine de recherche relativement limité - voir le discours mentionné ci-dessus. Comme archilexème du premier champ lexical lʹhyperonyme ρε - vertu, terme non marqué, vaste (Lyons 1995: 96-97) en raison de la généralité et de lʹextension de sa valeur sémantique attestée du point de vue lexicographique, désignait en principe, la valeur, l'excellence dans un domaine particulier. En grec archaïque, chez Homer, ρε serait lʹéquivalent dʹune certaine supériorité que le héros épique s'efforcait de sʹassumer, y compris le sens physique, concret, aspect argumenté du point de vue étymologique par le rapprochement du superlatif ρι ομ - le meilleur. Le concept de vertu comme une qualité idéale de l'existence, devient extrêmement important pour l'esprit classique, toute en bénéficiant d'une longue évolution dans la culture grecque, avant d'être inseré dans la problematique philosophique. Si les presocratiques préoccupés de φ ιμ n'ont pas manifesté leur intérêt à ce sujet, avec Socrate, ρε profite d'une veritable attention philosophique (Peters 1993: 46). Avec Platon ρε est inséré dans un systeme philosophique et morale solide, ses dialogues étant centrés sur la recherche des différentes facettes de la vertu. La perspective philosophique fait place à la prolifération sémantique, ρε dépassant les valeurs concrètes, physique, mises à jour en grecque archaïque, afin de renforcer l'abstrait. En Laches (199 – d), Platon met ρε entre ΰαγ μ et εαε μ, en délimitant son large champ conceptuel pour l'adapter ensuite dans la République (442 b - d) par les quatre vertus cardinales souhaitables dans l'état idéal: θ ρε α, οφ α, ωφρο θη, ιεαιο θη. Platon ouvre donc la voie de fixer ρε comme terme technique du lexique axiologique, étant par la suite repris sémantisé à nouveau et converti par le paradigme moral chrétien. Dans le dictionnaire patristique (Lampe 1961: 271) ρε est enregistré avec la valeur sémantique de morale par excellence, douée dʹune large palette dʹhypostases. Des lʹexordium du sermon Π φ π ωχ α construit autour d'un point culminant ascendant, tributaire à lʹintertexte biblique du Nouveau Testament3, on peut saisir la 3 v. 2 Petru 1, 3-5. 288 manière dont captatio benevolentiae sʹarticule autour de lʹarchilexéme ρε par les individualisations et les extensions de sa valeur sémantique. „ ι η θ ο θ ο π θυ ι ιοθ θ ρε θ θ θιε αθ ε ρεῖθ εα α ο θαι πρε ίεῖα εα θιεη ρια. Καζ θ φιζοιεθ α...εαζ θ φιζα εζφ α...εαζ θ φιζαθγρωπ α...εαζ θ π ιμ...εαζ θ πρα ημ...εαζ θ α ζομ...εαζ θ ποπια η μ ηα ομ... εαζ θ ΰθε α εα παργεθ α...εαζ θ ΰερ ει... εῖ πρ ηθ θ θ οζ θ θ ΰ πηθ ποζαηί θειθ, α ημ ερ ι οθ ε ρ εω φιζοπ ωχ αθ εα θ περ υΰΰεθ μ ε πζαΰχθ αθ ε εα υηπ γειαθ”4. Dans ce contexte on peut identifier cinq lexèmes ( ΰ πη, ΰθε α, π ιμ, α ζομ, ΰερ εια) comme des éléments virtuels d'un système homogène organisé autour de hyperonyme vertu, en essayant d'établir leur interaction, mais aussi les oppositions a fonction distinctive, différentielle. Lʹanalyse sémique permet la délimitation des semes communs: [+ qualité morale] [+ divine], [+ humain], [+ abstrait], [+concret] des sèmes variables dont la combinaison conduit à la configuration de la signification de chaque lexème, mais aussi à lʹemphase des oppositions graduelles à lʹintérieur du champ sémantique. Par exemple, le trait sémique [+ divine] est marqué dans la série des cinq lexèmes, par ΰ πη et π ιμ. Ce n'est pas par hasard, étant donné qu'elles font partie de lʹinventaire des vertus chrétiennes théologiques. ΰ πη nom dérivé inverse du verbe ΰαπ ω / ΰαπ αω chez Homer, apparaît peu avant l'ère chrétienne, ce qui signifie d'abord amour désexualisé, l'affection se manifestant envers un enfant ou un invité (Chantraine 1977: 7). Lʹadjectif verbal ΰαπη μ - cher en grec koinè est utilisé comme un terme de politesse. Dans le discours chrétien biblique ou patristique, la connotation spirituelle [+ divine] est prioritaire, ”denoting especially God's or Christ's love for man, man's love for God and fraternal charity of Christians” (Lampe 1961: 55). Au contraire φιζ α implique uniquement la relation de l'amour fraternel. Saint-Grégoire met à jour le traite sèmique [+ humain], les occurrences de ΰ πη dans Π φ π ωχ α , étant en concordance avec le texte biblique5. Lʹamour, vu comme αρε η par excellence se manifeste dans la relation avec les autres à travers une série d'éléments concrets: φιζοπ ωχ α - lʹamour pour les pauvres, ε πζαΰχθ α – la pitié, υηπ γεια – la compassion. Il est intéressant que pour exprimer l'amour de Dieu envers les gens, Saint-Grégoire préfère un terme plus nuancé créé par composition en contexte chrétien - φιζαθγρωπ α / φιζ θγρωπομ attestée biblique FA 28.2, et dans Tite 3.4: „Μ ε ο ο οθ ρυφ ωηεθ ὥ ε εα μ ο γεο φιζαθγρωπ αμ εα αφρ θειθ”6 . Le dictionnaire patristique (Lampe 1961: 1476) identifie la présence constante de φιζαθγρωπ α / φιζ θγρωπομ comme „Nu-i deloc la îndemână şi nici uşor nu este s-o găseşti pe aceea dintre virtuţi care pe toate le întrece, să-i dai întâietate şi s-o încununezi cu laurii victoriei [...]. Bună este credinţa[...] bună este iubirea[...]bună primirea străinilor[...] bună iubirea frăţească[...] bună iubirea de oameni[...] bună râvna pentru Dumnezeu[...] bune sunt curăţia şi fecioria[...] bună înfrânarea[...]. Dacă trebuie să socotim iubirea ca fiind cea dintâi dintre porunci, găsesc că miezul ei este iubirea de săraci, că esenţa ei este milostivirea şi compasiunea pentru aceştia” în Περ φιζοπ ωχ αμ (Ι), P.G., 35. 5 v. 1Cor. 13, 1-14. 6 „Să nu ajungem să dispreţuim iubirea lui Dumnezeu pentru noi…” în Περι φιζοπ ωχιαμ (ΙΙΙ), P.G.,35. 4 289 l'appellation de la divinité dans la discours patristique et aussi liturgique " ι ΰαγ μ εα φιζ θγρωπομ γε μ π ρχειμ".7 Π ιμ, derivé du verbe πε γοηαι, être convaincu, obeir a quelquʹun entre dans la structure des syntagmes π ιθ χειθ ιθ - faire confiance à quelqu'un, ayant un sens commercial en grec classique [+concret] crédit, garantie et par extension, engagement ou pacte (Liddell-Scott 1996 :1408). Le discours patristique récupère la prolifération sémantique abstraite, de sorte que π ιμ, équivalent du latin fides, définit la relation humaine et divine comme étant plurivoque: confiance / foi non seulement de lʹhomme en Dieu [+ humain], mais aussi de Dieu envers l'homme [+ divine] (Lampe 1961:1130). La signification primaire du terme est annulée dans le discours de SaintGrégoire, étant dépourvue de tout support dogmatique aspect relevé par la préférence de l'auteur pour les individualisations de π ιμ comme ε ίεια: „πζου οθ η περιου αθ η θοθ, ζζ εα ε ίειαθ” 8. Même si de point de vue lexical, ε ίεια est un équivalent de fides (Lampe 1961: 575), étymologiquement, le dérivé de ίοηαι, montrent une sémantique variées, dénotant le respect, la vénération de la divinité (voire les déverbatifs εί ομ / εία ηι μ / εία ι ημ couramment utilisés dans le titre impérial byzantin). Un evolution similaire connaît ΰθε α, terme qui rend active la fonction sémique [+concret]. Dérivé de l'adjectif ΰθ μ, en concurrence avec ΰιομ, il désigne des le grec archaïque une qualite des divinités païens [+ divine], en particulier Artémis, Perséphone, Déméter et Zeus (Chantraine 1977: 25). Après Homer, ΰθε α/ ΰθ μ acquiert le sens de la pureté/ pur, souvent associé à εαγαρ μ [+concret], la signification initiale étant non tachè de sang: ΰθαγ ηα α – sacrifices nonsanglants. Dans les inscriptions ultérieures, ΰθε α redevient abstraite désignant la probité et la rectitude des magistrats et des fonctionnaires publics. Le contexte chrétien met en valeur les significations concrètes/abstraites applicables à la sphère strictement humain: ”concerning both soul and body” (Lampe 1961: 67), ce qui signifie la pureté, la pureté de l'esprit et du corps considéré comme abstinence sexuelle. Saint- Grégoire réduit la surface sémantique de ΰθε α employé dans le contexte de la chasteté physique comme un synonyme de παργεθ α - virginité : „εαζ θ ΰθε α εαι παργεθ α”9. Toute aussi relevantes sont les occurrences de εαγαρ μ qui, sous l'influence du Nouveau Testament sʹélargit considérablement la signification abstraite: „εαγαρ μ εα π ρ που παθ εζ μ ο ε μ, ο ε ο θ θ ΰεθη φ ει, ὥ περ εο αηεθ”10. La pureté physique est secondaire, εαγαρ μ désignant notamment la nature divine non-mélangé avec la matière [+ divine] (Lampe 1961: 684) et donc la pureté de l'âme [+ humain]. 7 „ Că bun şi iubitor de oameni, Dumnezeu eşti…” în ΜΙΚΡΟΝ Ι ΡΑΣΙΚΟΝ / Η Θ ΙΑ Λ ΙΣΟΤΡΓΙΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΟΤ ΣΟΤ ΥΡΤ΢Ο΢ΣΟΜΟΤ, πο οζιε ιαεοθ α μ εεζη αμ μ ζζ ομ, γ θα, 2004 . 8 „Nu bunurile materiale te îmbogăţesc, ci credin a” în Περι φιζοπ ωχιαμ (ΥΥVII), P.G., 35. 9 „Bună este curăţia şi fecioria” în Περι φιζοπ ωχιαμ (III), P.G., 35. 10 „Nu-i nimeni dintre muritori pe de-a-ntregul curat, aşa cum am auzit” în Περι φιζοπ ωχιαμ (ΥΥX), P.G., 35. 290 ΰερα ε α entre en relation de synonymie partielle avec ΰθε α-παργεθ α-εαγαρ μ et désigne lʹabstinence physique, l'abstinence. Dérivé de ερ ομ, il signifiait à l'origine la force physique, v. lʹadjectif ΰερα μ - fort, vigoureux [+concret], qui a connu ensuite un processus d'abstraction des la période classique ayant la signification de maîtrise de soi-meme sous l'influence du dénominatif ερα ω: sʹemparer de quelque chose / de quelquʹun. Le discours biblique - patristique le met en valeur en l'utilisant exclusivement dans le contexte des qualités morales, en reprenant la signification abstraite, celle de modération, qui oriente vers la signification concrète d'abstinence ce qui signifie la mortification ascétique du corps perçu comme ποπια η μ ηα ομ. Il est intéressant à observer que ces termes ont eu une signification concrète en grec classique lʹont conservée également dans un contexte chrétien, même si lʹon assiste à un processus de conversion. α ζομ apparemment incompatible avec l'idée de qualité morale, occupe une place singulière dans la classe des cinq lexèmes qui font lʹobjet de lʹanalyse. α ζομ est un lexème négatif marqué dans le lexique du grec classique, ce qui signifie ardeur, vu comme rivalité, jalousie ou envie, associé à φγ θομ désignant la jalousie des dieux envers les hommes. Les occurrences biblique-patristiques confirment la reprise et la conversion de la signification de certains lexèmes qui, à la suite dʹune nouvelle sémantisation, acquièrent des conotations positive, αη ζομ signifiant ardeur nondestructive mais qui a le sens de zèle, de ferveur positive dans le contexte du désir ardent de l'homme de réaliser le bien [+ humain] de rapprochement ou de service officié à la divinité. Le dictionnaire patristique atteste comme relique de la valeur négative, le sentiment d'indignation de Dieu contre le pécheur: ”indignation of God against sinner” (Lampe 1961: 591), en confirmant sa polarisation sémantique. La complexité de cette structure paradigme large, ouverte, articulée de façon arborescente est clairement énoncé dans le contexte des lexèmes analysés comme un macrochamp à lʹintérieur duquel se développe une série de microchamps, le plus homogène étant celui de l'amour. Dʹailleurs, à l'échelle de lʹexcellence morale de lʹexordium, Saint Gregoire place ΰ πη sur la plus haute marche, en la singularisant comme: φιζαθγρωπ α, φιζοιεθ α, φιζα εζφ α, φιζοπ ωχ α, ε πζαΰχθ αθ, υηπ γεια, ζεομ parmi ceux-ci, φιζαθγρωπ α ayant le plus grand nombre d'occurrences. La préférence de l'auteur pour la composition lexicale comme un processus de création de mots, dʹailleurs très actif dans le grec ancien, nous permet d'obtenir des unités lexicales ayant de nouvelles valeurs désignatives. Il est à remarquer la fréquence de lʹélément de composition φ ζο prolifique tant en grec classique quʹen grec koinè qui a joué un rôle important avec toute sa famille lexicale dans la configuration du lexique chrétien. Le champ lexico-sémantique du péché/ ηαρ α connaît une représentation discrète dans la sermon de Saint-Grégoire, en sʹarticulant symétriquement à celui de la vertu. ηαρ α est en conjonction avec ρε , en élargissant de façon antinomique les relations paradigmatiques que lʹarchilexème vertu réalise avec d'autres termes. Le mal ne peut pas avoire de consistance ontologique, il n'est que l'absence de bien. Il est à remarquer la fréquence des paires de lexèmes au sens opposés, la présence d'un 291 lexème signifiant l'exclusion de l'autre: παθγρωπ α/ φιζαθγρωπ α,ηιεροζοΰ α/ φιζοπ ωχ α, θαζΰι α/ υηπ γεια, πζεοθει α/ εΰερα ε α. À partir de la corrélation langage - culture, E. Coşeriu lance le concept de linguistique eschéologique visant „la contribution de la connaissance des choses (des idées, des croyances, des concepts, des idéologies) à la configuration et au fonctionnement de la langue. La connaissance du monde détermine dans une certaine mesure lʹexpression linguistique”. En outre, „les changements sont conditionnés par les changemet de la civilisation et de la culture”11. À la lumière de ces considérations théoriques, on peut dire quʹon assiste à un processus dʹune nouvelle sémantisation de la langue hellénique. Le grec ancien comme langue principale du christianisme acquiert de nouvelles connotations comme un environnement favorable à l'expression de concepts chrétiens, ce qui reflète les mutations fondamentales de la société grecque postclassique sur le plan des mentalités. Une autre conclusion est que l'analyse des champs sémantiques a un caractère pratique au sein des préoccupations de traduire des textes de la littérature chrétienne grecque antique, la lutte du traducteur, par exemple, étant donné aux niveau des traites minimaux, au niveaux des sèmes spécifique, lʹidentification des oppositions à fonction différentielle en étant bien salutaire. Références bibliographiques Chantraine, P. 1968: Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque, Paris, Editions Klincksieck Coman, I. G.1956: Patrologie, Bucureşti, Editura Institului Biblic al B.O.R. Coşeriu, E., Socio- şi Etnolingvistica. Bazele şi sarcinile lor, in „Anuar de lingvistică şi istorie literară”, MCMXCIII, tomul XXXIII, p. 13-27 Grigorie Teologul 2007: Despre iubirea pentru cei săraci, traducere de Maria-Cristina Truşcă, Craiova, Editura Mitropolia Olteniei Grigorie Teologul 1886: Opera omnia, P.G., ed. J-P Migne, vol. 35-38, Paris Ieronim 1997: De viris illustribus, în traducerea lui Dan Negrescu, Bucureşti, Editura Paideia Lampe, D.D. 1961: A Patristic Greek Lexicon, Oxford, Clarendon Press Liddell, H. G., Scott, R. 1996: Greek – English Lexicon, Oxford, Clarendon Press Lyons, J. 1995: Introducere în lingvistica teoretică, Bucureşti, Editura Ştiinţifică Peters, f.E. 1993: Termenii filosofiei greceşti, Bucureşti, Editura Humanitas Platon 1975: Opere, Bucureşti, Editura Ştiinţifică şi Enciclopedică, vol. I 1983: Opere, Bucureşti, Editura Ştiinţifică şi Enciclopedică, vol. IV ΜΙΚΡΟΝ Ι ΡΑΣΙΚΟΝ / Η Θ ΙΑ Λ ΙΣΟΤΡΓΙΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΟΤ ΣΟΤ ΥΡΤ΢Ο΢ΣΟΜΟΤ, πο οζιε ιαεοθ α μ εεζη αμ μ ζζ ομ, γ θα, 2004 11 Anuar de lingvistică şi istorie literară, Ed. Academiei, Bucureşti, 1992-1993, p. 13 – 27. 292 Aspects du sacré dans les cités grecques du Pont Gauche Remus Mihai FERARU The present paper focuses on several aspects concerning the sacred, as contained in the inscriptions found in the Greek cities’ sites on the left shore of the Blak Sea (the Left Pont). The sacred impregnates all the oficial and private aspects of life in the Greek cities of the Left Pont. It developes two different (yet not antagonical) directions: on one hand, there is the “territoryzation” of the sacred – well attested by the Callatis inscriptions; they call the temple devoted to Dionysos, by the end of the 3rd century B.C. naos, then hieron (sanctuary), during the emperor Tiberius’ epoch, when the temple was surrounded with an enclosure; on the other hand, one can see that the calendar of the Greek cities is saturated with the sacred. Initially, the calendar is an ensemble of ritualic dates. The religious holidays honouring the divinities are fundamental landmarks in how the calendars are organized. The three seasons of the Greek year (winter, spring and summer) are marked by three important holidays: the Pyanepsy-es, the Anthestery-es and the Thargely-es. The center of the propitiatory rituals is ocupied by food gifts and bloody sacrificies. In fact, the bloody sacrifice ilustrates the strong bondage of the sacred and the profane in the Greek cities on the left shore of the Blak Sea. The sacrificial ceremony ends with a sacred banquet, which becomes an ocasion to celebrate the good relationship of men and gods – as depicted by a Callatis inscription. Keywords: sacred, feast, sacrifice, ritual, contamination, purification. Dans sa tentative de définir le sacré, le célèbre sociologue des religions Roger Caillois part de l’idée que « orice concepţie religioasă implică distincţia dintre sacru şi profan »1. Dans sa vision, toute définition de la religion « înglobează opoziţia dintre sacru şi profan »2. Quel que soit le point de vue adopté dans l étude du sacré, la notion en soi évoque l’idée d’une relation, d’une communication entre la sphère du divin et celle de l’humain3. En d’autres termes, la vie religieuse n’est que la somme des rapports que l’homme entretient avec le sacré. Ces rapports sont exposés et garantis par 1 Roger Caillois, Omul și sacrul, traduit du français par Dan Petrescu, Ed. Nemira, București, 1997, p. 19. 2 Ibidem. 3 André Motte, « L’expression du sacré dans la religion grecque », in Julien Ries (éd.), L’expression du sacré dans les grandes religions, III, Centre d’histoire des religions (Collection Homo religiosus, 3), Louvain-la-Neuve, 1986, p. 112. 293 les croyances de l homme, mises en pratique par l intermédiaire des rituels. C’est le sacré qui impose au croyant une certaine attitude et défend sa foi contre la dissolution4. Ces affirmations sont parfaitement valables aussi pour la religion grecque classique, qui nous apparaît comme étroitement liée au groupe social. La religion est l’élément psychologique essentiel qui assure la cohésion des communautés ainsi que leur survivance. Dès la fondation des cités grecques (poleis), la religion pénètre dans toutes les formes de manifestation de la vie officielle et privée. Cette situation est généralement valable tant pour les cités de la Grèce continentale et de la côte ouest de l’Asie Mineure, que pour leurs colonies répandues dans tous les coins du monde grec. Les sources littéraires sont fondamentales pour la religion grecque. Surtout les poètes grecs, commençant par Homère et Hésiode, ont parlé de la genèse du sacré et des relations entre hommes et dieux. Ces récits, dans la mesure où on peut les corréler et comparer, nous fournissent un panorama complet sur les modalités de percevoir le sacré en Grèce et de vivre avec lui au jour le jour. À part les récits littéraires, les inscriptions constituent une source d’informations très riche et variée pour l’étude du sacré dans la religion grecque. Les textes gravés sur pierre nous dévoilent des aspects de la religion grecque que les écrivains ne mentionnent pas ou dont ils nous offrent, dans le meilleur des cas, des informations bien lacunaires. Notre étude a pour objet l’analyse de quelques aspects du sacré dans les inscriptions découvertes dans les cités grecques du littoral ouest de la Mer Noire, connu dans les sources littéraires grecques sous le nom de Pont Gauche (t¦ ¢rister¦ toà PÒntou). Il s’agit, en allant du Nord vers le Sud, des cités suivantes: Istros, Tomis, Callatis, Bizone, Dionysopolis, Odessos, Mesambria et Apollonia Pontica. Nous avons intégré aussi, parmi les cités du Pont Gauche, deux fondations milésiennes, Olbia et Tyras, situées au Nord et respectivement au Nord-Ouest de la Mer Noire. Quelle que soit la réalité géographique, notre option repose sur les affinités évidentes, les rapports et les similitudes, dans le domaine des cultes et de la vie religieuse, entre les fondations milésiennes du Pont Gauche et leurs cités-sœurs Olbia et Tyras. La plupart des colonies grecques du Pont Gauche – Olbia, Istros, Tomis, Bizone, Dionysopolis, Odessos și Apollonia Pontica – ont été fondées par Milet. Callatis (aujourd hui Mangalia) fut fondée par Héraclée du Pont, une colonie mégarienne, tandis que Mesambria (aujourd’hui Nésébâr) est fondée par des colons de Chalcédoine et de Mégare. Notre recherche est basée sur les catégories suivantes d’inscriptions : décrets officiels des cités grecques, règlements sacrés et inscriptions à caractère votif. 1. Le cadre méthodologique: phénoménologie du sacré dans la Grèce antique L’expérience grecque du sacré en général a pris naissance probablement en même temps que le sentiment de la présence d’un pouvoir surnaturel dans des endroits mystérieux (forêts, sources, grottes, montagnes), dans des phénomènes naturels énigmatiques et effrayants (tonnerre, orage), dans les moments fondamentaux de la vie 4 R. Caillois, op. cit., p. 20. 294 (naissance, mort)5. Le terme même qui définit le sacré en grec, ƒerÒj, vient, probablement, d’une racine indo-européenne qui signifie fort/puissant. Les dernières recherches confirment l’origine préhellénique de ce mot et renvoient au sanscrit isirah – fort, qui engendre la vie6. L’expérience primaire du sacré s’est développée ensuite dans deux directions différentes: « D un côté, le sacré s est territorialisé, se trouvant ainsi associé aux lieux forts, déterminés par de frontières précises, de la manifestation du surnaturel: ces lieux, désormais consacrés au culte des puissances qui y séjournent, se transforment progressivement en sanctuaires (téména), lesquels peuvent abriter des temples dédiés à ces mêmes divinités ou bien délimiter d autres espaces de dévotion (par exemple les nymphes des sources ou bien les tombes des héros […] comme la légendaire tombe dʼŒdipe dans le faubourg athénien de Colone »7. Même si à l’origine le terme tšmenoj désigne une portion de terrain réservée aux dirigeants ou plus précisément un apanage, il a fini par recevoir une connotation strictement religieuse. Le mot téménos est arrivé à désigner une portion dʼespace délimité et consacré à une divinité, plus exactement, un espace sacrée qui peut contenir un ou plusieurs monuments cultuels, mais ne se confond pas avec eux ni ne les implique obligatoirement, d’où les sens de sanctuaire et même de temple, sens qu’il a habituellement. La notion de téménos impliquait l’idée d’une clôture, de la délimitation d’une portion de territoire de l espace profane environnant, pour accentuer son caractère sacré d’endroit réservé à la divinité8. Également, les tombeaux des héros, étant devenus de vrais talismans pour la communauté, servent comme lieux de culte consacrés à des personnages légendaires, de vrais ancêtres mythiques de la cité dont les membres des familles et des clans revendiquent leur origine9. Dans certains cas, la délimitation du territoire sacré de l’espace environnant était marquée par une borne ou 5 Mario Vegetti, « L’homme et les dieux », in Jean-Pierre Vernant (coord.), L’homme grec, Éditions du Seuil, Paris, 1993, p. 382; François Chamoux, Civilizația greacă în epocile arhaică și clasică, vol. I, traduction et avant-propos par Mihai Gramatopol, Éds. Meridiane, București, 1985, pp. 195-196. 6 Pierre Chantraine, Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque. Histoire de mots, Tome II (E-K), ouvrage publié avec le concours du Centre de la Recherche Scientifique, Éds. Klincksieck, Paris, 1970, p. 458 (s. v. ƒerÒj); Julien Ries, Sacrul în istoria religioasă a omenirii, traduit de l’italien par Roxana Utale, Éds. Polirom, Iași, 2000, p. 118. 7 M. Vegetti, art. cit., p. 383. 8 Le mot tšmenoj dérive de tšmnw dont le sens principal est « couper, enlever en coupant », voir Michel Casevitz, « Temples et sanctuaires, ce qu on apprend la lexicologie », in G. Roux (éd.), Temples et sanctuaires. Séminaires de recherche de Lyon, 1981/1983, Lyon, 1984, p. 85-87; P. Chantraine, op. cit., Tome IV/1, (1977), p. 1104 (s. v. tšmnw); Jean Casabona, Recherche sur le vocabulaire des sacrifices en grec, des origines à la fin de lʼépoque classique (Publications des Annales de la Faculté de Lettre, N. S. n° 56), Éds. Ophrys, Aix-en-Provence, 1966, p. 211-219. 9 Jean-Pierre Vernant, Mit și religie în Grecia antică, traduction et avant-propos par Mihai Gramatopol, București, Éds. Meridiane, 1995, p. 50-51. 295 un mur qui entourait le sanctuaire10. Par extension, « on va considérer comme sacré tout ce qui se trouve à l’intérieur de l’enceinte du lieu du culte ou bien, tout ce qui y est consacré, comme les victimes sacrificielles, les formes traditionnelles du rite et leurs officiants »11. D’autre part, les Grecs anciens qualifient comme sacré tout ce qui émane des pouvoirs surnaturels et, de manière spécifique, des volontés divines. « On désignera donc comme sacrés l ordre de la nature, l alternance des saisons, des récoltes, du jour et de la nuit, et, de même, l ordre immuable de la vie sociale, la succession régulière des générations garantie par le mariage, par les naissances, par les rites de sépulture et de vénération des défunts, ainsi que la permanence des communautés politiques et du système des pouvoirs »12. Donc, dans les deux acceptions mentionnées là-dessus, l’expérience du sacré est en tout premier lieu celle d’un pouvoir ou d’un ensemble de pouvoirs qui interviennent dans les processus de la nature et de la vie et dont l’intervention peut être soit bienveillante, principe d’ordre et d’harmonie naturelle et sociale, soit perturbatrice, violente et destructive, comme c est le cas pour la tempête, la maladie et la mort. Par conséquent, l’attitude envers pouvoirs surnaturels consistera à gagner leur bienveillance divine et à éloigner, voir même éliminer leur violence négative13. Le rite pour acquérir la bienveillance et la protection de la divinité consiste d’abord à faire des offrandes votives, accompagnées d’invocation et de prière. Pour les Grecs, celles-ci supposent le don de richesses, les libations, la consécration de certains édifices de culte. Au centre des rites propitiatoires se trouvaient les offrandes alimentaires et les sacrifices sanglants d’animaux et d’oiseaux14. Selon Platon, « sacrifier signifie faire un don aux dieux »15. Le sacrifice exprime que la communauté renonce à une portion de ses ressources alimentaires les plus précieuses qu elle offre aux dieux, lesquelles devraient, en revanche, montrer leur bienveillance à l égard des hommes. La cérémonie rituelle se terminait avec un banquet sacré qui était une occasion de célébrer le bon état des rapports entre les hommes et les dieux. Et pour que les rituels soient efficaces, il 10 Anna Ferrari, Dicționar de mitologie greacă și romană, traduction par Dragoș Cojocaru, Emanuela Stoleriu, Dana Zămosteanu, Éds. Polirom, Iași, 2003, p. 814-815 (s. v. tšmenoj, -eoj, ouj . Une inscription de Paros, datant du Ve siècle av. J. C. avait le rôle de borne. Elle délimitait le domaine sacré de Zeus Hypatos de l espace profane environnant. L inscription interdisait l accès aux non-initiés et aux femmes dans le sanctuaire de Zeus Hypatos, voir IG XII, 5, 183: Ór oj `Yp£to: ¢[te ‐/ l šstoi oÙ qšm-/ i j gunai-/ k …, apud Dobrinka Chiekova, Cultes et vie religieuse des cités grecques du Pont Gauche (VIIe – I-er siècles avant J.-C.), Bern, Peter Lang, 2008, p. 103, la note 127. 11 M. Vegetti, art. cit., p. 383; voir aussi, J. P. Vernant, op. cit., p. 59-60. 12 Ibidem, 383-384. 13 Ibidem, p. 383. 14 Anna Ferrari, op. cit., p. 731-732 (s. v. sacrifice). 15 Platon, Euthyphron 14 c: tÕ qÚein dwre‹sqa… ™stin to‹j qeo‹j, apud Alexandru Avram, « Un règlement sacré de Callatis », in BCH 119, 1995, p. 249. 296 fallait absolument qu’ils soient accomplis selon des procédés et à des moments établis par la tradition16. 2. Le sacré dans les calendriers des cités ouest-pontiques milésiennes Le moment de l’accomplissement des rituels est indiqué avec précision par les calendriers des cités grecques, lesquels, à l’origine étaient un ensemble de dates rituelles. Par conséquent, le calendrier grec porte en soi le sacré. Les fêtes religieuses consacrées aux divinités vénérées dans les cités grecques représentaient des repères fondamentaux pour l’organisation de leurs calendriers. Dans la Grèce antique, la plupart des fêtes était toujours liée aux traditions de la société agricole. Les noms des fêtes renvoient souvent aux rites agraires très anciens, destinés soit à assurer la fertilité des champs, soit à invoquer la protection divine pour protéger les fruits de la récolte17. À peu d’exceptions près, les noms de mois du calendrier grec dérivent incontestablement de dénominations de fêtes religieuses homonymes. Dès le début du VIIIe siècle av. J.-C., la relation entre l héortologie et les noms de mois est evidente. Le poème d'Hésiode, Travaux et Jours, nous fournit la première attestation documentaire d un nom de mois du calendrier grec; il s'agit du mois Lénaiôn qui tire son nom des Lénaia, une fête très archaïque, célébrée en l honneur de Dionysos dans les cités ioniennes18. Donc, à l origine, les Grecs dénommaient leurs mois d après les fêtes principales et chaque mois comprend l accomplissement d'une fête homonyme19. Les colonies milésiennes du Pont Gauche (Olbia, Tyras, Istros, Tomis, Bizone, Dionysopolis, Odessos) ont hérité le calendrier de leur métropole, Milet; le calendrier milésien était un calendrier de type ionien. Six noms de mois du calendrier athénien se retrouvent dans le calendrier de Milet et d autres cités pontiques milésiennes; il s agit de Thargéliôn, Métageitniôn, Boédromiôn, Pyanopsiôn, Posidéôn, Anthestériôn20. 16 M. Vegetti, art. cit., p. 385; Anna Ferrari, op. cit., p. 730-731, 733 (s. v. sacrifice). Montserrat Camps-Gasset, L'Année des Grecs. La Fête et Le Mythe, Annales Littéraires de l'Université de Besançon, 530, 1994, p. 20, 41; Michel Casevitz, « Le vocabulaire agricole dans le calendrier grec », dans Rites et rythmes agraires, séminaire de recherche sous la direction de MarieClaire Cauvin (collection de Travaux de la Maison de l'Orient n° 20), GDR Maison de l'Orient Méditerranéen, Lyon, 1991, p. 110. 18 Hésiode, Travaux et Jours, 504-506 (texte établi et traduit par Paul Mazon, Paris, Les Belles Lettres, 1993): MÁna dš Lhnaiîna k£k' ½mata boudÒra p£nta / toàton ¢leÚasqai kaˆ phg£daj a† t' ™pˆ ga‹an / pneÚsantoj Boršao dushlegšej telšqousin… (« Quand vient le mois Lénéon avec ses jours mauvais, dont chacun / voit périr quelques-uns de nos bœufs, méfiez-vous de lui et de / ses fâcheuses gelées, qui apparaissent sur le sol au souffle de Borée… »). 19 Catherine Trümpy, « Les fondements religieux des calendriers grecs » in Vinciane PirenneDelforge, Öhnan Tunca (éds.) Représentations du temps dans les religions, Actes du Colloque organisé par le Centre d'Histoire des Religions de l'Université de Liège, 2003, p. 222 et la note 8, 223. 20 Catherine Trümpy, Untersuchungen zu den altgriechischen Monatsnamen und Monatsfolgen, Heidelberg, 1997, p. 93; F. Bilabel, Die ionische Kolonisation. Untersuchungen über die Gründungen der Ioner, deren staatliche und kultliche Organisation und Beziehungen zu den Mutterstädten, Philologus, Suppl. 14, 1, Leipzig, 1920, p. 70-71. 17 297 Dès l’époque archaïque, l’année du calendrier commençait dans les cités milésiennes du Pont Gauche par le mois Taureèn (avril), à l’équinoxe de printemps21, ce qui est confirmé avec certitude par un graffito découvert à Olbia où Tauréôn apparaît en premier dans la liste des mois olbiens22. Le graffito découvert à Olbia assure la succession exacte des mois dans les calendriers de Milet et de ses colonies pontiques. Il convient de préciser que la succession des mois Lénaiôn – Anthésteriôn – Artémisiôn se retrouve non seulement dans les calendriers de la plupart des cités ioniennes (Ephèse, Milet et ses colonies pontiques, Paros, Thasos, Ténos, Chalcis)23, mais aussi à Athènes24. On peut donc supposer que cette séquence des trois mois mentionnés plus haut doit forcément remonter au calendrier ionien commun, antérieur à la migration des Ioniens vers l Asie Mineure25. Le dernier mois du calendrier des cités ouest-pontiques milésiennes est celui d’Artémisiôn; il est mentionné en dernier sur le graffito découvert à Olbia26. (Tableau I) Les fêtes religieuses marquaient des moments importants dans la succession des saisons et des travaux agricoles. Les rapports établis, d un côté, entre les fêtes et la succession des saisons, de l autre côté, entre les fêtes et les travaux agricoles, mettent en évidence la fonction fondamentale de la fête pour rythmer l année. Dans le calendrier grec, les jours sont nommés souvent en fonction de leur position avant ou après une certaine fête qui acquiert donc un rôle précis dans la délimitation du temps27. Le cycle des fêtes grecques de caractère agraire reproduit, dans le rituel, ce que la tradition a fixé par le moyen du mythe, c'est-à-dire la disparition et l'apparition de Perséphone – la fille de Déméter – et son séjour partagé entre le monde des morts et Le premier jour de l’année milésienne – neomhn…h tý mhnÕj tý Taureînoj – est mentionné dans une loi sacrée pour le culte de Poséidon Hélicônios: [taàta], dὲ Àn dÒxei tîi d»mwi [¢nagr/£yai] ™st»lhn tÕj newp[o…aj ™wj] tÁj neomhn…hj tý mhn[Õj tý] Taureînoj kaˆ qe‹nai [tý tem]/[š]neoj, I. Milet III, p. 128-129, n° 1218, l. 27-32 (437/436 av. J.-C.); C. Trümpy, op. cit., p. 93; IGDOP, p. 163 et la note 152; Norbert Ehrhardt, Milet und seine Kolonien. Vergleichende Untersuchung der kultischen und politischen Einrichtungen I, deuxième édition, Frankfurt am Main, Bern, New-York, 1988, p. 120-121, 125; II, p. 415416, la note 277 ; F. Bilabel, op. cit., p. 69, 80. 22 IGDOP, n° 99, p. 160-161; N. Ehrhardt, op. cit. I, p. 118; II, p. 413, la note 247; SEG XXX 977 c. 23 On peut également supposer la sequence des trois mois (Lénaiôn – Anthésteriôn – Artémisiôn) dans les calendriers de Phocée, Lampsaque, Colophon et Chios, voir F. Salviat, « Sur la religion de Marseille grecque » in: Bats M. et al. (éds.), Marseille grecque et la Gaule. Études Massaliètes 3, Aixen-Provence, 1992, p. 144; Denis Knoepfler, « Le calendrier des Chalcidiens de Thrace. Essai de mise au point sur la liste et l'ordre des mois eubéens », in Journal de savants, n° 1-2, 1989, p. 43 et la note 81. 24 L'équivalence de mois athénien Gaméliôn avec le mois milésien Lénaiôn est assurée par le fait qu'à Athènes, les Lénéennes, qui ont fourni le nom de mois Lénaiôn, se déroulaient en Gaméliôn; on peut également accepter l'équivalence de mois athénien d'Élaphébolion (nom tiré d'une épiclèse d'Artémis) avec le mois milésien d'Artémisiôn (le mois nommé d'après la fête des Artémisia célébrée en l'honneur d'Artémis), voir Catherine Trümpy, op. cit., p. 16; D. Knoepfler, JS, n° 1-2, 1989, p. 43. 25 Catherine Trümpy, art. cit., (« Les fondements religieux…»), p. 225; Eadem, op. cit., p. 13-14; D. Knoepfler, JS, n° 1-2, 1989, p. 43. 26 Ibidem. 27 Anna Ferrari, op. cit., p. 162, 742 (s.v. calendrier, fête); Montserrat Camps-Gasset, op. cit., p. 93, 105. 21 298 celui des vivants, six mois de l'année aux Enfers et six mois sur la Terre. Les deux périodes délimitées par le mythe de Déméter et de Perséphone correspondraient aux deux saisons de l'année grecque: l'hiver et l'été. Bien que, à l'origine, les Grecs distinguent la mauvaise saison (ceimèn – l' hiver) de la saison agréable et féconde (qšroj – l'été)28, les mythes et les rituels attestent la division de l'année en trois saisons: printemps (œar), été (qšroj ou Ñpèra) et hiver (ceimèn). Dans les poèmes homériques aucune saison n est strictement limitée. Le printemps se confond avec l été. Le mot Ñpèra s’applique à une partie de l été. Il est synonyme avec qšroj. Plus exactement, le Ñpèra sert à designer l été – les mois de juillet, août et septembre – en tant que pleins de fruits; il s agit précisément du fruit des arbres et des vendanges. On peut remarquer que l automne manque de la liste des saisons, non en tant qu époque de l année, mais plutôt en tant qu interlude entre l été et l hiver. En fait, il se trouve inséré dans le couple theros-opora. Eschyle et Aristophane confondent l été et l automne pour en faire une saison unique à laquelle ils la donnent le printemps comme prélude et l hiver comme conclusion29. Pour les Grecs, l automne n implique pas l idée de décadence de la nature puisque « le grain meurt, mais dans cette mort il y a, tout en même temps, la condition de la naissance. Ce qui se succède, donc, ce sont la récolte et la semence, sans décrépitude ni décadence. […]. Une fois la récolte finie – toutes les récoltes – le cycle végétal est, lui aussi, terminé, et le cycle recommence lorsque le grain est enterré et meurt pour germer. L été (= fruit) est suivi de l hiver (=semence) »30. Il paraît, donc, que, dès l'époque archaïque, le monde grec connaissait les trois saisons31. Cependant, la tradition mythologique et religieuse des trois saisons coexiste, dans la vie grecque, avec la division scientifique de l'année en quatre saisons, marquées par les solstices et les équinoxes. Ce n'est qu'après la conquête romaine que se répand définitivement la division en quatre saisons: printemps (œar), été (qšroj), automne (metÒpwroj) et hiver (ceimèn)32. Une inscription découverte à Byzance, datée de IIe – IIIe siècles apr. J.-C., atteste la connaissance des quatre saisons par les Grecs du Pont Euxin: 'Agaqîi Da…moni / 'AgaqÁi TÚcÁi / Kalîi Kairîi / ”Ombroij 'Anšmoij / ”Eari Qšrei / MetopèrJ / Ceimîni, (« Au gentil Daimon / au gentil destin / au bon temps / aux pluies, aux vents / au printemps, à l’été / à l’automne / à l’hiver [dédicace] »)33. Un cadran solaire découvert à Istros (daté vers la fin du IVe siècle ou au plus tard, au début du IIIe siècle 28 Martin P. Nilsson, Die Entstehung und religiöse Bedeutung des griechischen Kalenders, CWK Gleerup, Lund, 1962, p. 24-25; J. A. Hild, s.v. « Horai », dans DAGR, III/1, (1900), p. 252. 29 Montserrat Camps-Gasset, op. cit., p. 22. 30 Ibidem, p. 23. 31 Montserrat Camps-Gasset, op. cit., p. 21, 24; J. A. Hild, s.v. « Horai », in DAGR, III/1, (1900), p. 253. 32 Ibidem, p. 20-21 ; Anna Ferrari, op. cit., p. 77 (s. v. saisons). 33 Adam Lajtar, Die Inschriften von Byzantion. Inschriften Griechischer Städte aus Kleinasien, Band 58, Teil I, Dr. Rudolph Habelt GMBH, Bonn, 2000, nº 13, p. 42-43. 299 av. J.-C.) était utilisé comme un instrument astronomique, en indiquant les solstices, la position du soleil par rapport aux constellations, le début des mois et des saisons, ce qui prouve, directement, la connaissance et l’identification des saisons de l’année par les Istriens, par l’intermédiaire des observations astronomiques34. La division de l'année en trois saisons ne tient pas comte du cours du soleil, mais de la succession et du moment du déroulement des travaux agricoles. Par conséquent, chaque saison ne peut pas se réduire à un nombre de mois bien déterminé. La limite entre une saison et l'autre est souvent dessinée de manière imprécise35. En même temps, cette triple division de l'année trouvait un parallèle dans le domaine du mythe. Les trois saisons étaient personnifiées par les trois Heures. Auxô incarne le temps de la germination du grain et correspond à l'hiver. Thallô est la floraison; elle symbolise le printemps, tandis que Karpô personnifie l'été riche en fruits36. D'après cette perspective agraire, l'hiver commençait au mois de novembre et se termine les premiers jours de mars. Il est une saison désagréable et inhospitalière. D'après le mythe, dans cette période Perséphone vit en compagnie d'Hadès et Déméter pleure son absence. Pendant toute la période de l'hiver, les défunts règnent sur les vivants. C'est le temps de labourer les champs et de semer, un temps de travail et d'attente, où le monde des morts reçoit des honneurs de la part des vivants. En Grèce, l hiver est marqué par une série de fêtes consacrées aux semences, au monde des morts et à la germination des champs. Les rituels de ces fêtes assurent la fertilité des champs et des semences37. Le printemps commençait au mois de mars et durait jusqu'en mai. C'est la saison où tout fleurit et la nature se réveille à la vie. Perséphone revient sur la terre et on prévoit une saison de récolte. Les fêtes de printemps étaient dominées des rituels de purification collective, de préparation pour la moisson et d'offrande de prémices. Elles anticipaient la récolte. L'offrande des prémices constitue le centre de ces fêtes. Elle consiste au premier épi ou fruit cueilli qui était consacré à la divinité. Cette offrande est une des formes les plus simples du sacrifice et un propitiation de la divinité pour protéger la récolte, pour la rendre prospère et éviter sa perte. La caractéristique essentielle de l'offrande des prémices était: offrir aux dieux la première et la meilleure partie de la récolte pour préserver le reste du mal38. L'été s'étendait du mois de juin jusqu'en octobre. Il est la saison de la chaleur et de la récolte, soit qu'il s'agit de la moisson, du fruit des arbres ou de la vendange39. Les fêtes d été concernaient surtout la récolte. Elles se célébraient à l'occasion de la récolte, étant dominées des rituels de purification collective et d'offrande de prémices 34 Remus Mihai Feraru, « Nouvelles contributions à l'étude des cadrans solaires découverts dans les cités grecques de Dobroudja », in Dialogues d'histoire ancienne, 34/2, 2008, p. 76. 35 Montserrat Camps-Gasset, op. cit., p. 23. 36 Ibidem, 24. 37 Ibidem, p. 20, 23, 28, 41, 42. 38 Ibidem, p. 23, 41, 53-54. 39 Ibidem, p. 22, 23, 300 consacrées aux divinités en signe de remerciement pour la richesse et l'abondance de fruits40. (Tableau II) Les moments qui divisent les trois saisons de l'année grecque sont les grands moments de la vie des champs, marqués d'une façon particulière par les rituels qui ont lieu au début ou à la fin d'une saison. C'est le cas des fêtes des Pyanepsies, des Anthestéries et des Thargélies célébrées dans les cités grecques milésiennes du Pont Gauche ainsi qu à Athènes. Les colonies ouest-pontiques de Milet ont adopté le cycle de fêtes établi par la tradition milésienne, donnant sans doute la primauté au culte d Apollon qui était par excellence le patron des fondations pontiques de Milet. Les sources épigraphiques prouvent que le culte d’Apollon a joué un rôle particulièrement important dans l’établissement du calendrier de Milet et de ses colonies du Pont Gauche. Par ailleurs, les Pyanepsies et les Thargélies étaient consacrées à Apollon. Les Anthésteries étaient célébrées en l honneur de Dionysos. Elles sont la plus ancienne des fêtes dionysiaques. Thucydide les fait remonter à une époque antérieure à la fondation par Athènes des cités d Ionie41. C est pourquoi les Anthestéries étaient considérées comme la «fête nationale» de l Attique et de l Ionie42. Malheureusement, les rituels des trois fêtes mentionnées là-dessus ne sont attestés, d une manière satisfaisante, qu à Athènes. Les trois saisons de l année grecque sont marquées dans les cités milésiennes du Pont Gauche, ainsi qu à Athènes, par trois fêtes très importantes dans le calendrier civique: les Pyanepsies célébrées au début de notre mois de novembre (qui correspondrait au mois de Pyanépsiôn du calendrier grec), les Anthestéries au début de mars (Anthestériôn dans le calendrier grec) et les Thargélies au début de mai (Thargéliôn dans le calendrier grec). (Tableau II) L’existence des Pyanepsies aux colonies ouest-pontiques milésiennes est suggérée par celle du mois Pyanépsiôn. Les Pyanepsia (« où l’on faisait la cuisson des fèves ») étaient célébrées également à Athènes le 7 du mois de Pyanépsiôn (octobre/novembre) en l honneur d Apollon. On peut supposer que la fête des Pyanepsies était célébrée à Olbia, en se fondant sur l’attestation épigraphique du mois Pyanépsiôn, qui se retrouve avec la variante Kuaneyièn, dans le calendrier olbien43. Laurent Dubois affirme qu’il est vraisemblable que la forme Kyanépsiôn – documentée à Olbia – soit fondée sur le 40 Ibidem, p. 23, 28, 41-42, 53, 59-60. Thucydide II, 15 (texte établi et traduit par Jacqueline de Romilly, Paris, Les Belles Lettres, 1991), p. 14: kaˆ tÕ ™n L…mnaij DionÚsou, ú t¦ ¢rcaiÒtata DionÚsia tÍ dwdek£tV poie‹tai ™n mhnˆ 'Anqesthriîni ésper kaˆ oƒ ¢p' 'Aqhna…wn ”Iwnej œti kaˆ nàn nom…zousin (« [le sanctuaire] de Dionysos de Limnai, en l'honneur de qui sont instituées les plus anciennes fêtes de Dionysos, qui se font dans le mois d'Anthestérion, le douzième jour, comme c'est l'usage également, encore aujourd'hui, chez les Ioniens d'origine athénienne »). 42 Jules Girard, s.v. « Dionysia », in DAGR, II/1, Paris, 1892, p. 239. 43 IGDOP, n° 99, p. 160-161; N. Ehrhardt, op. cit. I, p. 118; II, p. 413, la note 247 = SEG XXX 977 c); voir aussi IOSPE I2 43, l. 3; IOlb 42, l. 2; 75, l. 1 = SEG XLII, 708 : [… mhnÕj K]uaneyiînoj. Le mois Puaneyièn apparaît avec la forme Kuaneyièn à Cyzique et Céos, P. Chantraine, op. cit. II, p. 593 (s. v. kÚamoj . 41 301 terme *kÚanoj, probablement une variante de pÚanoj (neutre pÚanon). La forme pÚanoj est rendu par les lexicographes comme synonyme de kÚamoj, (fève)44. Le nom du mois olbien Kuaneyièn – qui dérive du nom de fête Puanšyia / PuanÒyia (« cuisson des fèves »)45 – indique donc l’existence d’un couple de termes kÚanoj / pÚanoj à Milet46, vers 650 av. J.-C., dont le premier s’est imposé dans la colonie Olbia47. À l occasion des Pyanepsies, on offrait à Apollon un met composé à base de fèves (pÚanoi), d autres légumes et du miel. Il s agit d une offrande rituelle que les Grecs nommaient une panspermia dont la fève constituait l ingrédient principal48. Les Pyanepsies tiraient leur nom d un élément caractéristique du rituel principal de la fête: « la cuisson des fèves »49. C est dans un épisode du mythe de Thésée qu'il faut trouver l origine des Pyanepsies dont l initiateur est considéré comme le héros même. Après achèvement de l’expédition contre le Minotaure de Crète, Thésée prépara un banquet à l occasion duquel, lui et ses camarades (les jeunes gens que Thésée avait sauvé de la mort, en tuant le Minotaure), mangèrent une bouillie de fèves vouée à Apollon, auquel le héros avait promis d’être reconnaissant s’il rentrait sain et sauf de sa difficile mission50. Un second élément important de cette fête était le rite de e„resiènh. Le terme désignait un branche de laurier ou d olivier chargée de fruits et entourée de laine qu on portait de maison en maison par un chœur d enfants qui quêtaient des friandises en échange de bénédictions et de souhaits favorables à la maison. Puis chaque enfant de chœur prenait une eirésioné chargée des fruits de sa propre récolte et la suspendait à la porte de sa maison où elle restait jusqu à l année suivante51. 44 Pollux VI, 61: kÚamoi oƒ kaˆ pÚanoi, ¢f' ïn kaˆ t¦ puanšyia ¹ ˜ort», IGDOP, p. 164, la note 153; Hésychius a la glose pÚanoi: kÚamoi kaˆ p©n Ôsprion, voir, Pierre Chantraine, op. cit. II, p. 593, (s. v. kÚamoj); Montserrat Camps-Gaset, op. cit., p. 95; Michel Casevitz, art. cit., p. 111. 45 P. Chantraine, op. cit. II, p. 593 (s. v. kÚamoj). 46 Les inscriptions milésiennes fournissent trois attestations du mois de Pyanépsiôn; voir I. Milet VI 1, 147 A, l. 11: ƒstamšnou toà Puaneyiînoj; I. Milet VI 1, 148, l. 90: k aˆ mÁna Puanoyiîna; I. : ... sa mhn Õj Puaneyiînoj. Milet VI , 47 IGDOP, p. 164; cf. F. Bilabel, op. cit., p. 70, n. 3: « Ich schreibe so, nicht Pyanepsion, da die Kolonien diese Form als die ältere (auch in anderen ionischen Städten benützt!) nahelegen. Bezeugt ist in hellenistischer Zeit Pyanepsion und Pyanopsion; möglicherweise liegt attischer Einflub vor »; voir et N. Ehrhardt, op. cit. II, p. 399-400, la note 147. 48 Athénée 648 b: ™stˆ dš tÕ pu£nion, æj fhsi Sws…bioj, pansperm…a ™n gluke‹ ¹yhmšnh. 49 Plutarque, Thésée 22, 4-5 (Paris, Les Belles Lettres, 1993), p. 30-31: ›yhsij tîn Ñspr…wn; Ludwig Deubner, Attische Feste, Hildesheim, Berlin, 1966, p. 198-199. 50 Anna Ferrari, op. cit., p. 666 (s. v. « Pianepsia »); on trouve l’explication du mythe relatif aux Puanšyia chez Plutarque, Thésée 22, 4-5 (Paris, Les Belles Lettres, 1993), p. 30-31; voir aussi Claude Calame, Thésée ou l’imaginaire athénien: légende et culte en Grèce antique, préface de Pierre VidalNaquet, 2e édition revue et corrigée, Laussanne, Payot, 1996. 51 Salomon Reinach, s.v. « Eirésioné », dans DAGR, II/1, p. 497; Anna Ferrari, op. cit., p. 309 (s. v. « Eirésioné »). 302 Les Anthestéries ('Anqest»ria – « fêtes des fleurs »)52 étaient célébrées à Athènes et dans le monde ionien en l honneur de Dionysos et des morts. Les Anthestéries ont fourni le nom du mois 'Anqesthrièn, qui apparaît très souvent dans le domaine ionien53. On peut déduire la célébration des Anthestéries à Olbia, Istros, Odessos, Apollonia Pontica et Sinope à partir de l’attestation du mois 'Anqesthrièn (février/mars) dans les calendriers de ces cités54. La plus vieille attestation de la fête des Anthestéries se trouve à Olbia, avant même le début de l’époque hellénistique (première moitié du Ve siècle av. J. C.)55. Un graffiti découvert à Olbia nous fournit une attestation directe de la « fête des marmites » (CÚtrai), célébrée le troisième jour des Anthestéries56. À Cyzique (colonie milésienne de Propontide) la fête des Anthestéries avait lieu aux 12e et 13e jours du mois d Anthestériôn57. On peut affirmer sûrement qu à Milet – par analogie avec les dates de déroulement de la fête dans sa colonie, Cyzique – les Anthestéries étaient de même célébrées le 12 et 13 du mois d Anthestériôn58. Les Anthestéries de Cyzique – et donc celles de Milet – avaient lieu comme à Athènes du 11 au 13 Anthestériôn, ce qui confirme le témoignage de Thucydide sur le caractère panionien de cette fête59. En ce qui concerne la date de déroulement des Anthestéries, les sources épigraphiques permettent d’établir une correspondance entre Milet et ses colonies de la côte ouest du Pont Euxin. Les Anthestéries étaient célébrées le 12 et 13 du mois d Anthestériôn à Milet et probablement à Istros; dans cette dernière cité, le premier jour des Anthestéries coïncidait avec la célébration du jour éponyme (¹mšra ™pènumoj), faveur que les tribus histriennes avait accordée à leur bienfaiteur 52 Le nom des Anthestéries viendrait de la couronne de fleurs que portaient alors les enfants, comme on voit sur certains vases de la fin du Ve siècle av. J.-C.; c est le mot ¥nqoj, fleur et le verbe ¢nqe‹n, fleurir, qui expliqueraient le nom des Anthestéries, par référence à la renaissance du monde végétal qui se produit au début du printemps. On a supposé également que le nom des Anthestéries pourrait provenir des cérémonies en l'honneur des morts, voir Anna Ferrari, op. cit., p. 78 (s.v. « Anthesteria »); M. Casevitz, art. cit., p. 110; Madeleine Jost, Aspects de la vie religieuse en Grèce du début du Ve siècle à la fin du IIIe siècle avant J.-C., Sedes, Paris, 1992, p. 167. 53 Denis Knoepfler, JS, n° 1-2, 1989, p. 33-34 et la note 47; Martin P. Nilsson, Griechische Feste von religiöser Bedeutung mit Ausschluss der attischen, Leipzig, 1906, p. 267. 54 IOSPE I2, 33, l. 2 (Olbia); ISM I, 58, l. 16 (Istros); IGB I2, 182, l. 1 (Odessos); IGB I2, 407, l. 1, (Apollonia); SEG XLVIII, 1097, l. 12-15 (Sinope). 55 Voir IGDOP, n° 99 ; p. 161 ; IOSPE I2, 33, l. 2. 56 N Ehrhardt, op. cit. I, p. 170 ; II, p. 471, la note 848: OI CUTROI. 57 Michel Sève, « Un décret de consolation à Cyzique » in BCH 103, 1, 1979, p. 329 : toÝj dš prut£neij toÝj prutaneÚontaj tÕn mÁna tÕn Anqesthriîna / stefanoàn aÙt¾n ¢n¦ p©n œ[to]j ™n to‹j 'Anqesthr…oij tÍ dwdek£tV / kaˆ tÍ triska[id]ek£tV crÚsù stef£nJ…, (« les prytanes qui seront en charge au mois d'Anthestérion la couronneront d'une couronne d'or chaque année aux Anthésteries, le 12 et 13… »). 58 Une inscription découverte à Didymes indique que la fête des Anthestéries durait au moins deux jours, voir A. Rehm, Didyma II. Die Inschriften, hrsg. von Richard Harder Berlin, 1958, 258, l. 11-13 à propos d'un prophète pepoihkëj, dš kaˆ qewr…a[j] / ™n to‹j 'Anqesthr…oij ™pˆ dÚo ¹mšraj. 59 Thucydide, II, 15 (Paris, Les Belles Lettres, 1991), p. 14. 303 Meniskos60. L’assemblée des tribus histriennes avait décidé que le 12 du mois d Anthestériôn soit consacré chaque année en l’honneur de Meniskos qui avait manifesté sans cesse sa générosité envers les citoyens: « dedÒcqai ta‹j fula‹j … ¥ge[in] d[š] aÙtoà kaˆ ¹mšran kaq' ›kas[t]o[n] ™nia[u]tÒ[n] mhnÕj 'Anqesthriînoj [d]wdek£[t]h[n] », (« plaise aux tribus de lui consacrer chaque année le douzième jour du mois d’Anthestériôn »)61. On ne peut savoir exactement si les Anthésteries duraient plusieurs jours dans les cités ouest-pontiques, comme la fête attique; mais la place proéminente que Dionysos occupe dans leurs panthéons peut autoriser cette hypothèse62. « Les fêtes des fleurs » se déroulaient à Athènes du 11 au 13 du mois d Anthestériôn63. Elles étaient en même temps une fête de la nature renaissante et du vin fermenté en jarres. Le premier jour, il y a avait une cérémonie « de l’ouverture des jarres » (piqoig…a) dans lesquels on gardait le vin qui devrait être offert à Dionysos. Madeleine Jost met en évidence très bien la signification « de l ouverture des pithoi » : « Les jarres (pithoi) contenant le vin de l automne précédent sont ouvertes et l on boit après avoir versé des libations à Dionysos. Le rite vise à la désacralisation du vin: on lève l interdit qui pèse sur le produit de la récolte jusqu à l accomplissement d une consommation rituelle »64. Le deuxième jour, appelé « le jour des cruches » (Cošj) symbolisait l’entrée solennelle de Dionysos dans la cité; ce moment était marquée à Athènes par deux cérémonies: le concours des Choés et la célébration du mariage sacré (ƒerÒj g£moj) entre Dionysos et la femme de l’archonte-roi (bas…linna) qui personnifiait la cité. Un concours de beuverie avait lieu au cours duquel les fêtards buvaient le nouveau vin. « L hiérogamie des Anthestéries a sûrement pour objectif de concourir à la fertilité et à la fécondité humaine dont Dionysos est un des garants; il signifie en même temps l acceptation et l intégration du dieu dans la cité »65. Le troisième jour se déroulait « la fête des marmites » (CÚtrai) appelée de cette façon à cause des marmites en terre cuite utilisées pour la préparation des légumes qui devaient être apportés en offrande à Hermès Chthonien et à Dionysos. Ce dernier jour avait un caractère funèbre et les rites effectués étaient en liaison avec le culte des morts. Des offrandes de blé et de graines bouillies (panspermia) en grandes marmites étaient apportées à Hermès, vénéré en tant que «psychopompe», et aux âmes des morts66. Hermès était le dieu médiateur entre le monde des vivants et celui de défunts. Son rapport avec le monde des morts remonte à la plus haute époque67. 60 ISM I, 58, l. 5-6, (II-ème siècle av. J.-C.). ISM I, 58, l. 15-17 ; N. Ehrhardt, op. cit. I, p. 123. 62 Chiekova Dobrinka, op. cit., p. 71-114. 63 Catherine Trümpy, ZPE 121, 1998, p. 111. 64 Madeleine Jost, op. cit., p. 167-168; voir et Daniel Noel, « Les Anthestéries et le vin », in Kernos, 12, 1999, p. 129-135. 65 Ibidem, p. 168-170; D. Noel, art. cit., p. 135; voir et J. Girard, s.v. « Dionysia », in DAGR II/1, Paris, 1892, p. 238. 66 D. Noel, art. cit., p. 147-149. 67 Xavier De Chutter, « La marmite et la panspermie des morts», in Kernos, 9, 1996, p. 340. 61 304 On offrait de nombreux sacrifices, puis avaient lieu des concours entre les acteurs comiques. Les vainqueurs avaient le droit de participer aux représentations dramatiques organisées à l’occasion des Grandes Dionysies68. Les Thargélies sont une fête typiquement ionienne célébrée à Athènes ainsi que dans plusieurs cités d Ionie. Pendant le mois de Thargéliôn (qui correspondrait à mimai – mi-juin), à Milet et dans ses colonies ouest-pontiques, étaient célébrés les Thargélies (Qarg»lia) consacrés à Apollon Thargèlios. Les Thargélia sont attestées dans le règlement de culte des Molpes de Milet: ™j molpîn ¹ pÒlij dido‹ Targhl…oisin ƒer(Ái)on tšleion69. Sur un vase de type attique découvert à Olbia, – daté du deuxième quart du Ve siècle av. J.-C – donné en offrande à Appolon, le nom du dieu est accompagné par quatre épiclèses qui représentent « les différentes facettes de la personnalité divine d Apollon à Olbia »70. L épiclèse Qarg»lioj est ici attestée pour la première fois; c est elle qui indique tout particulièrement le dieu honoré lors des Targélies. Sur ce même vase sont également gravées les quatre lettres A Z M Q, qui ont été interprétées par les premiers éditeurs de l’inscription comme une abréviation de la formule (™n tÍ) a (kaˆ) z m(hnÕj) Q(arghliînoj), « le premier et le septième jour du mois de Thargéliôn »71; cela signifie que le premier et le septième jour du mois Thargéliôn auraient été les dates où se déroulaient les Thargélies à Olbia ; c’est à cette occasion que le vase a été donné en offrande à Apollon72. On peut supposer également la célébration des Thargélies à Olbia en se fondant sur l’attestation épigraphique du mois Thargéliôn dans la liste des mois du calendrier olbien73. Ainsi, à Olbia on trouve 68 J. Girard, s.v. « Dionysia », in DAGR II/1, Paris, 1892, p. 239. I. Milet I, p. 168, nº 133 = Fr. Sokolowski, Lois sacrées de l'Asie Mineure I, Paris, 1955, 50, l. 20 = A. Rehm, Inschriften von Milet, Bd.1, Heft 3: Das Delphinion in Milet, Berlin, G. Reimer, Walter de Gruyter, 1914, 3, 133, l. 20. Le collège religieux des Molpes administrait le culte d Apollon Delphinios à Milet et très probablement à Olbia, voir Stella Georgoudi, « La procession chantante des Molpes de Milet », in Pierre Brulé et Christophe Vendries (éds.), Chanter les dieux: musique et religions dans l'Antiquité grecque et romaine, Actes de colloque du 16, 17 et 18 decembre, 1999, Rennes et Lorient, Rennes, PUR, 2001, p. 158-159; E. Graf, « Das Kollegium der Molpoi von Olbia », in Museum Helveticum 31, 1974, p. 209-215; pour les Thargélies à Milet, voir et M. P. Nilsson, op. cit., (Griechische Feste...), p. 109-110 et la note 3. 70 SEG XXX, 977 a): 'ApÒll(wni) Dhlfin…(wi), (sic) 'Iatro‹ Qarghl…(wi), Luke…(wi) 'AndÒkidoj (sic); IGDOP n° 99, p. 161-162. 71 IGDOP n° 99, p. 161-162 = SEG XXX, 977 a). 72 C'est à l'appui de cette interprétation qu'on peut offrir deux exemples semblables, bien qu'assez tardifs; ainsi, sur un bol mégarien découvert à Milet et datant de basse époque hellénistique figurent les lettres MHQA qui abrégeraient la formule mh(nÕj) Qa(rghliînoj); de même à Milet, à l'époque flavienne, on rencontre la formule : mh(nÕj) Ti(ber…ou) l; cf. Mădălina Dana, Culture et mobilité dans le Pont-Euxin. Approche régionale de la vie culturelle des cités grecques, Scripta Antiqua 37, Ausonius, Bordeaux, 2011, p. 75; cf. Laurent Dubois, Inscriptions grecques dialectales d’Olbia du Pont, Librairie Droz, Genève, 1996, p. 163, qui affirme: « ces abréviations de date sont pourtant trop tardives pour être alléguées comme explications pour les quatre lettres A Z M Q de la vieille dédicace d'Olbia »; N. Ehrhardt, op. cit., II, p. 399, note 142 et p. 418, note 309. 73 IGDOP, nº 99, p. 160-161; N. Ehrhardt, op. cit. I, p. 118 et 413, note 147; SEG XXX 977, c). 69 305 l ensemble mois (Qarghlièn) – fête (Qarg»lia) – épiclèse (Qarg»lioj) rattachés au culte d'Apollon Thargélios. Quant à Istros, le document de référence pour la fête des Thargèlia a une probable origine histrienne, mais encore incertaine. Il s’agit d’un décret honorifique pour un architecte de Byzance honoré d’une couronne d’or dans le théâtre d’Istros pendant la fête des Thargèlia: „stef[a]nîsai aÙtÕn crusîi stef£nwi to[‹j] Qarghl…oij ™n tîi qe£trwi”74. On apprend également que le bénéficiaire du décret était invité à participer au rituel des xšnia qui s'accomplissait dans le temple d’Apollon pour les étrangers honorés par la cité75. Dans une autre inscription, le nom de la fête n’est que le résultat d’une conjecture76. Les documents épigraphiques nous fournissent les renseignements les plus nombreuses sur l’accomplissement des Thargélies dans la cité d’Athènes. Les Thargélies athéniennes se déroulaient en deux jours, le 6 et le 7 du mois Thargèliôn et étaient dédiées à Apollon et Artémis77. Elles avaient un caractère purificateur et de célébration des premières récoltes dont les prémices étaient offerts à Apollon, divinité centrale de la fête. Le premier jour de la fête était consacré à la purification de la cité par le rituel cathartique dit des farmako… (« remèdes »). À cette occasion, à Éphèse, Athènes et, très probablement, dans les cités ionniennes du Pont Gauche, deux personnes – représentant les hommes et les femmes de la cité – l’une portant un collier de figues noires et l’autre, un collier de figues blanches, étaient chassées de la cité, après qu’elles avaient été, au préalable, poussées et frappées avec des plantes sacrées (branches de figuier et glanes d’oignon) lors d’une procession rituelle autour de la ville78. Dans ce cas, les deux personnes jouaient le rôle de pharmakoi. Elles étaient censées prendre sur elles toutes les souillures de la cité à mesure qu'elles la traversaient. On les bannissait ensuite de la cité pour éloigner de façon définitive les impuretés dont elles étaient chargées, devenant ainsi des boucs émissaires. D’habitude comme 74 ISM I 65, l. 28-30. ISM I 65, l. 42-43: kalšsai dš aÙtÕn kaˆ ™pˆ xšn[ia] / [e„j] tÕ ƒerÕn toà 'ApÒllwnoj; Dobrinka Chiekova, op. cit., p. 44-45. 76 ISM I 25, l. 2-5 : [----- ™painšsai] aÙtÕ[n] / [™pˆ toÚtoij kaˆ stefanîs]ai crusî[i] / [stef£nwi to‹j Qarghl…oij (?) ™]n tîi qe/[£trwi--------]; la restitution de cette inscription a été faite d’après ISM I 65, l. 29-30. 77 Dans la Grèce de l'epoque historique, le sixième jour de chaque mois était consacré à Artémis, alors que le septième était régulierement dédié à Apollon. Hérodote, Histoires VI, 57 (trad. par Ph.E.-Legrand Paris, Les Belles Lettres, 1992), affirme que, à Sparte, le premier et le septième jour du mois sont consacrés à Apollon; Catherine Trümpy, ZPE, 121, 1998, p. 109, 112; L. Deubner, op. cit., p. 179. 78 Chez les Grecs, le figuier représentait l’arbre sacré d’Hermès et surtout, de Dionysos, auquel on attribuait le mérite de l’avoir donné aux gens. Le figuier était le symbole de la fertilité. En même temps, il avait un caractère purificateur. D’habitude, les cités touchées par des épidémies apportaient en offrande des figues pour obtenir la guérison. De même, l’oignon favorisait la fertilité. Anna Ferrari, op. cit., p. 185, 776 (s. v. oignon, figuier). 75 306 pharmakoi on choisissait deux hommes disgraciés, plutôt laids et pauvres ou coupables de crimes, ces disgrâces ou fautes rendant le rite plus efficace79. Le rituel du pharmakos, ce bouc émissaire qui s’assumait toutes les impuretés et les coulpes de la cité, occupait une place centrale au cadre des rituels célébrés le premier jour de la fête. Le rituel avait un double but. D’une part, il faisait s’éloigner la contamination et les dangers de toutes sortes qui auraient pu menacer le cité et les champs, d’autre part, il se constituait en véritable offrande, nécessaire symboliquement pour attirer la grâce divine en vue d’obtenir une bonne et riche moisson80. Le deuxième jour des Thargeliés – le 7 du Thargèliôn – était destiné au thargélos offert à Apollon. Ce jour là on faisait l offrande du thargélos (les prémices des fruits que donne la terre et surtout des pains faits d’épis pas encore mûrs) en l honneur d'Apollon, destiné à assurer une bonne récolte et la protection du dieu pour la maturation de produits cultivés81. On cuisait ensemble dans une même marmite les prémices de toutes les céréales qui commençaient à mûrir. Par ailleurs, les Thargélies prennent le nom du rite dit du q£rghloj, le mot qui désigne à la fois le pain fait d’épis pas encore mûrs ou une marmite remplie de fruits ou de graines, symbole de fertilité 82. Les cérémonies du 7 Thargéliôn comportaient une procession religieuse et un agôn organisés à Athènes par le premier archonte. Il y avait des concours à caractère musical auxquels participaient des chœurs d’hommes et d’enfants aux frais des chorèges83. Par comparaison avec Athènes, le caractère musical des manifestations organisées à cette occasion peut être supposé à Istros; il est possible que les hymnodes, qui étaient actifs dans le sanctuaire d’Apollon et qui exerçaient leur art en son honneur, aient participé aux concours musicaux84. C’est à cette occasion qu’avait lieu au théâtre la proclamation des décrets honorifiques en l’honneur des bienfaiteurs de la cité, comme le prouvent les inscriptions d’Istros85. Malgré la diversité apparente de leurs rituels, les trois fêtes mentionnées là-dessus présentent des points communs et des traits qui les rapprochent étroitement. Les Pyanepsies marquent la fin de l'été et le début de l'hiver. Les Anthestéries soulignent la fin de l'hiver et le début du printemps, tandis que les Thargélies annoncent l'arrivée de 79 Montserrat Camps-Gasset, op. cit., p. 54-55; 60-61; Madeleine Jost, op. cit., p. 164-165; L. Deubner, op. cit., p. 179-180. À ma connaissance, le rite du pharmakos est attesté seulement à Massalia (Marseille, au sud de France), voir F. Salviat, art. cit., (« Sur la religion de Marseille grecque »), p. 145; M. P. Nilsson, op. cit., (Griechische Feste...), p. 109, les notes 1 et 2. 80 Ibidem, p. 55-56. 81 Ibidem, p. 60-61; Madeleine Jost, op. cit., p. 165; Anna Ferrari, op. cit., p. 800 (s. v. «Targelia»). 82 Pierre Chantraine, op. cit., II (1970), p. 423, (s. v. « Qarg»lia »). 83 Emil Cahen, s. v. « Thargelia », in DAGR, V/1, p. 176-177; Madeleine Jost, op. cit., p. 164-165; Anna Ferrari, op. cit., p. 801 (s. v. « Targelia »). 84 Une confraternité d'hymnodes associée au culte d'Apollon (Molpo…), est attestée à Milet et à Olbia; Stella Georgoudi, « La procession chantante des Molpes de Milet », in Pierre Brulé et Christophe Vendries (éds.), Chanter les dieux: musique et religions dans l'Antiquité grecque et romaine, Actes de colloque du 16, 17 et 18 decembre, 1999, Rennes et Lorient, Rennes, PUR, 2001, p. 178-179; IGDOP, n° 2, p. 6-7. 85 ISM I, 25, 65. 307 l'été, après le saison printanière. Donc, les trois fêtes ont un caractère de limite entre deux saisons. Partant de l'idée que les rapports entre de l'homme et du sacré sont exposés et garanties par les croyances de l'homme et que ces croyances sont mises en pratique par l'entremise des rituels, je me propose d'examiner les rituels des trois fêtes que je viens d'évoquer, mettant en évidence leurs ressemblances et réitérations qui permettent de les mettre en rapport et d'établir leur caractère de charnière entre les trois saisons de l'année. La panspermia désigne l'offrande rituelle consacrée à Apollon, à l'occasion des Pyanepsies, dont les fèves constituaient les ingrédients principaux. Dans le monde grec, la fève avait une double connotation. D une part, elle se rapportait au monde des morts, d’autre part, aux rituels qui assuraient la fertilité de la terre. Les fèves étaient considérées comme une nourriture propre aux morts. Selon J. Lydus, « des fèves étaient jetées sur les tombeaux pour le salut des hommes »86. L'offrande de panspermie était un vieux rite de fertilité adressée aux morts. L offrande d une panspermie lors des fêtes des Pyanepsies, a pour fonction le lent mûrissement des fruits de la terre. Xavier de Chutter expose clairement la signification de l'offrande de panspermie offerte à Apollon, à l'occasion des Pyanepsies: « Les morts ont le pouvoir de favoriser la fertilité du sol: enfouis sur la terre, ils participent à la vie de la terre. En leur offrant les produits de la céréaliculture sous la forme primitive d'une panspermie, les vivants attendent d'eux qu'ils leur retournent en abondance ces mêmes produits »87. Donc, les défunts qui sont confies au sein de la terre contribuent, à leur tour, à la vie et à la reproduction des fruits de la terre, en assurant ainsi l'alimentation des êtres vivants. La terre des morts devient également source de vie. D'ailleurs, Hippocrate affirme dans son traité Des songes que « des morts viennent les nourritures, les croissances, et les germes »88. Cicéron raconte que, d'après une tradition ancienne, les Athéniens semaient des céréales sur la tombe où ils venaient d'ensevelir un mort89. Donc, les défunts sont ceux qui garantissent l'abondance de la moisson. Ils doivent veiller au succès de la prochaine récolte90. Par sa signification de fête des morts, Les Pyanepsies s'enchaînent avec les Anthestéries, où les défunts ont également un rôle très important. « La fête des marmites » qui avait lieu le troisième jour des Anthestéries (le 13 du mois Anthestérion), était précisément consacrée aux défunts. Elle tire son nom des Chytrai, 86 Montserrat Camps-Gasset, op. cit., p. 96; Xavier De Chutter, art. cit., p. 343 et la note 62. Xavier De Chutter, art. cit., p. 344. 88 Hippocrate, Des songes, VI, 658: ¢pÕ g¦r tîn ¢poqanÒntwn aƒ trofaˆ kaˆ aÙx»seij kaˆ spšrmata g…gnontai. http://remacle.org/bloodwolf/erudits/Hippocrate/songes.htm, consulté le 22 août 2014). 89 Cicéron, Lois II, 63, apud, Xavier De Chutter, art. cit., p. 344 et la note 66. 90 Montserrat Camps-Gasset, op. cit., p. 97. 87 308 dans lesquels était cuite une bouillie de céréales offerte aux ancêtres. Selon Théopompe, le jour des marmites commémorait l'époque mythique où les hommes rescapés du déluge avaient fondés ce rite en honneur des disparus. Les survivants honoraient leurs morts en sacrifiant à Hermès Chthonien une marmite de toutes sortes de graines (cÚtran pansperm…aj…)91. En ce cas, « on a donc affaire à une offrande propitiatoire adressée à Hermès Chthonien en faveur des défunts »92. Pendant le troisième jour d'Anthestéries – Chytres – les esprits des morts revenaient sur la terre et il fallait prendre des mesures pour s’en protéger. Le jour des Chytres était déclaré miar¦ ¹mšra (jour impur). Les temples restaient fermés pendant toute la journée puisque les esprits des morts (Keres) circulaient dans la cité d après ce qu on peut déduire du cri rituel final: QÚraze KÁrej oÙkšt 'Anqest»ria, (« Dehors les Kères, les Anthestéries sont finies »)93. On leur offrait une offrande de la panspermia qui a une signification semblable à celle des Pyanepsies. Le cri rituel qui proclame la fin de la fête d'Anthestéries « ne se rapporte pas seulement au jour concret des Chytres, mais elle s'étend, plus largement, à une période qui a commencé avec la panspermie des Pyanepsies. Les Pyanepsies et les Anthestéries, l'une au début, l'autre à la fin de l'hiver, signifient, donc le souvenir et les honneurs dus aux morts qui deviennent les garants de la vie »94. Par leur liaison avec le monde des morts, les Anthestéries signifient le point final de l'hiver. En même temps, elles représentent le début du printemps, puisqu'elles introduisent quelques éléments qui seront repris lors des fêtes des Thargélies. Si le troisième jour des Anthestéries était consacré aux défunts, les deux premiers étaient consacrés à une célébration rituelle du printemps, à l'ouverture des jarres contenant le vin nouveau et à l'arrivée de Dionysos dans la cité. Le deuxième jour des Anthestéries, celui de Choès, on goûte au vin nouveau. Mais, ce jour n'a rien en commun avec l'usage habituel de la célébration du vin nouveau. « La fête des Choès » se déroulait dans une ambiance d’angoisse et de deuil et non dans une atmosphère de joie. On célébrait un banquet où les convives buvaient en silence et isolément. Le jour était qualifié miar¦ ¹mšra (jour impur). Un légende étiologique expliquait cette pratique: « Quand Oreste, taché du sang de sa mère, courait sur toute la terre poursuivi par les Érinyes, Athènes ne pouvait pas lui refuser l'accueil, de peur de commettre une grave faute de manque d'hospitalité, mais l'étranger, un meurtrier, ne pouvait pas s'asseoir à la table de ses hôtes et partager leur nourriture, parce qu'ils auraient également partagé son meurtre. Les Athéniens trouvent une solution: ils offrent leur hospitalité à Oreste, mais les citoyens s'enferment chez eux et refusent de partager le repas avec lui »95. 91 D. Noel, art. cit., p. 147-148. Xavier de Chutter, art. cit., p. 340. 93 L. Deubner, op. cit., p. 113; D. Noel, art. cit., p. 150. 94 Montserrat Camps-Gasset, op. cit., p. 99-100. 95 Euripide, Iphigénie en Tauride, v. 947-960, apud, Montserrat Camps-Gasset, op. cit., p. 100 et la note 46. 92 309 L'état de souillure criminelle d'Oreste contamine toute la cité. Le jour des Choes est néfaste. Les sanctuaires sont fermés. Le banquet des Athéniens était perçu comme la négation même du symposion. En plus du silence imposé aux convives, le vin n'est pas tiré d'un cratère commun, de sorte que chacun de convives est assuré de ne pas boire le même vin qu'Oreste96. C'est pendant ce banquet que le vin nouveau est goûté par les convives. En ce sens, on peut dire que les Anthestéries ont un certain caractère de fêtes de prémices du vin fermenté. Elles avaient lieu au début du printemps parce que, à la différence du blé ou des autres fruits qui peuvent être consommés ou transformés dès leur cueillette, le vin a besoin d'un procès d'élaboration plus long. L'ouverture des pithoi du premier jour des Anthestéries concerne le vin produit par la vendange de l'automne précédent. C'est donc pour cela que le vin a une fête différente des fêtes des vendanges qui sont des fêtes de récolte et non du vin fermenté97. Donc, l'impureté du jour des Choès se rapporte aux fêtes de prémices et de récolte. Dans les rituels au sujet de la récolte, c'est la purification collective qui est caractéristique. Le rituel du pharmakos, qui occupait un place centrale dans le cadre des Thargélies, assurait la purification collective de la cité. La souillure (miasma) qui domine la cité pendant le jour des Choès représente l'impureté que les Thargélies auront à purifier par le rituel cathartique du pharmakos. Tandis que les Anthestéries marquent la souillure et l'impureté qui s'étendent sur la cité, les Thargélies marquent la pureté collective. Après sa purification, la cité était prêt à recevoir les moissons. Donc, les Anthestéries représentent le passage d'une saison à l'autre. Elles s'enchaînent tant avec les Pyanepsies, par l'offrande aux défunts, qu'avec les Thargélies, par l'impureté qui sera purifiée98. Les Thargélies marquent le début de l'été. Les premiers fruits de la terre étaient offerts à Apollon pour désacraliser – comme dans tout rituel de prémices – la récolte et en assurer l'abondance. Le deuxième jour des Thargélies on faisait l'offrande du thargélos qui était une sorte de panspermie propre aux Pyanepsies. L'offrande du thargélos lors des fêtes apolliniennes des Thargélies a pour fonction de favoriser le lent mûrissement des fruits de la terre99. En conclusion, à partir des ressemblances constatés, les saisons se relient, rituellement, par ces trois fêtes, à double penchant, qui prennent leur pleine valeur lorsqu'elles sont compris globalement et non pas de manière individuelle et isolée. Le rituel de panspermie et celui du thargélos célébrés lors des Pyanepsies et des Thargélies sont très archaïques. Ils ont également de bonnes chances d'avoir déjà existé en tout cas à l'époque mycénienne. L'ancienneté de ces fêtes est aussi suggérée par le fait qu'on les célébrait partout en Grèce. Toujours, à titre d'exemple de fêtes présentant un aspect très archaïque, mentionnons les Pyanopsies à l'occasion desquelles on 96 Scholie à Aristophane, Acharniens, v. 961, apud, D. Noel, art. cit., p. 136-137 et la note 68. Montserrat Camps-Gasset, op. cit., p. 101. 98 Ibidem, p. 102. 99 Ibidem, p. 103. 97 310 mangeait une bouillie de fèves. Il est évident que cette sorte de bouillie devait constituer la nourriture quotidienne d'un grand nombre de Grecs. On pourrait dire que les Pyanopsies semblent commémorer un état de culture primitive précédant les sacrifices sanglants. 3. Le sacré dans la religion dionysiaque de Callatis Le culte de Dionysos occupait une place prépondérante dans le panthéon de Callatis. La plupart des documents qui atteste le culte dionysiaque à Callatis, émanent d'une association de culte très active, désignée comme bakcikòj q…asoj 100. Le thiase callatien a promulgué plusieurs décrets, s'échelonnant du IVe siècle av. J.- C. au Ier siècle ap. J.- C., qui mettent en évidence la célébration des mystères dionysiaques. Mais, à la différence des thiases « traditionnels » ou d autres sortes de thiases « privés » de l époque hellénistique, le thiase callatien a un caractère publique101. Les inscriptions callatiennes nous fournissent des renseignements sur les édifices de culte consacrés à Dionysos. Un règlement sacré datant du IIe siècle av. J. C. atteste le Dasullie‹on, le sanctuaire du Dionysios DassÚlioj situé très probablement en dehors de la ville102. Le sanctuaire tire son nom de DassÚlioj (« le poilu ») l épiclèse d origine mégaro-béotiennne de Dionysos103. Vers la fin du IIIe siècle av. J. C., le thiase a érigé un nouveau temple à Dionysos (n£oj), à la suite de l'organisation d'une souscription104. À l'époque de Tibère, le naos a été muni d'une enceinte à l'entrée monumentale. Un fois pourvu d'un enclos, l'ancien temple devient donc, un sanctuaire (ƒerÒn) qui est mentionné comme l'endroit par excellence pour l'exposition des décrets du thiase callatien105. Dans un autre décret émanant du thiase callatien, le même temple est désigné par le terme mucÒj (grotte)106. Certainement, il n'est pas question d'une grotte naturelle aménagée afin d'abriter des cérémonies bachiques. Il est plus que probable que le temple du dieu extatique imitait la grotte dionysiaque prête à abriter des cérémonies accompagnées de mystères107. 100 ISM III, 45, l. 3-4. ISM III, (Étude introductive), p. 98. 102 ISM III, 47, l. 6-8; Alexandru Avram, BCH 119, 1995, p. 252. 103 Alexandru Avram, BCH 119, 1995, p. 244-246. 104 ISM III, 35, l. 4-5. 105 ISM III, 46, l. 5-8; l. 17-18. 106 ISM III, 44, l. 42. 107 ISM III, (Introduction), p. 100; 122-123; Dobrinka Chiekova, op. cit., p. 99-100. Dans son mémoire, «L'antre dans les mystères de Dionysos », in Rediconti della Pontificia Academia di Archeologia, 33, 1960, p. 107-127, Pierre Boyancé lançait l'idée que l'antre n'était pas seul lieu de refuge pour certaines cérémonies bachiques, mais le sanctuaire même. L'accomplissement des rites dans une sanctuairegrotte est un élément intrinsèque des mystères bachiques, apud, ISM III, 44 (commentaire Alexandru Avram), p. 327-328; en ce sens, voir et Anne-Françoise Jaccottet, Choisir Dionysos. Les associations dionysiaques ou la face cachée du dionysisme, I, Zurich, 2003, p. 151-155; D. M. Pippidi, «Nouveaux documents sur le culte de Dionysos à Callatis», in Scythica Minora. Recherches sur les colonies grecques du littoral roumain de la mer Noire, Éds. Academiei – Adolf M. Hakkert B. V., București, Amsterdam, 1975, p. 142-149. 101 311 L'existence, à Callatis, d'un culte public du dieu de la vigne n'est pas douteuse non plus. Les documents épigraphiques attestent la célébration d'une fête publique consacrée à Dionysos. Il s'agit des t¦ DionÚsia t¦ xenik¦ qui étaient célébrées au mois Lykeios. Le nom de la fête avait été interprété comme « fête en l'honneur de Dionysos, spécialement réservée aux étrangers »108 ou comme « die fremden Dionysien in Kallatis »109. D. M. Pippidi a démontré qu'il s'agissait d'une fête dont la particularité consistait en rituels qui célébraient l'invitation du dieu à un banquet sacré (xenismÒj)110. Les inscriptions attestent dans nombreux endroits du monde grec les fêtes au cours de lesquels les divinités étaient conviées aux banquets sacrés organisés en leur honneur. Ces fêtes s appellent Qeoxšnia 111. Le banquet auquel on les invite exige en effet, chez les divinités invitées, une bienveillance particulière: on suppose leur acceptation et leur présence même parmi les convives; on sollicite leur épiphanie. C'est dans la mesure où les dieux veulent bien admettre cette sorte de communion qu'on les vénère112. À l'occasion de ces fêtes, « des tables étaient dressées, où les mets étaient offerts de la même manière qu'aux banquets des humains, quand ils n'étaient pas brûlés en l'honneur de l'hôte invisible (n.n. du dieu) non sans abandonner aux croyants de quoi se repaître après que les immortels eussent pris leur part »113. De telles fêtes périodiques sont attestées à Paros, à Tenos et à Akragas. Une fête semblable à celle de Callatis était célébrée en l'honneur de Dionysos dans l'île d'Andros, où – d'après Pausanias et Pline l'Ancien – à l'époque de la visite de dieu une certaine source proche du temple répandait de l'eau au goût de vin114. Pour les Grecs, au cœur des rites propitiatoires demeure toujours le sacrifice sanglant, la thusia (qus…a). Il consiste en la consécration d'une victime animale aux dieux dans divers buts: cathartiques, prophylactiques ou de remerciement. Le sacrifice comporte la mise à mort d'une victime, généralement animale, par des rites précis, suivie d'un partage entre destinataires divins et destinateurs humains. Cet acte est central dans la vie des Grecs car il organise les rapports entre les hommes et les dieux dans la cité115. 108 Andrei Aricescu, « Notă asupra unui decret elenistic inedit din Muzeul regional de arheologie Dobrogea », in Studii Clasice, V, 1963, p. 315-317. 109 M. P. Nilsson, Geschichte der griechischen Religion. Die Hellenistische und Römische Zeit, II, deuxième édition, C. H. Beck’ sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, München, 1960, p. 358, la note 5. 110 D. M. Pippidi, art. cit., p. 139-140; cf. A. J. Festugière, Grèce. Religion, in Maxime Gorce et Pierre Mortier, (éds.), Histoire générale des religions, II, Paris, 1944, p. 400, la note 44. 111 Hesychios, s.v. Qeoxšnia: koin¾ ˜ort¾ p©si to‹j qeo‹j apud D. M. Pippidi, art. cit. p. 140, la note 12. 112 François Salviat, « Une nouvelle loi thasienne: institutions judiciaires et fêtes religieuses à la fin du IVe siècle av. J.-C. » in BCH 82, 1958, p. 256. 113 D. M. Pippidi, art. cit. p. 140. 114 Ibidem, p. 141 et la note 22. 115 Jean-Pierre Vernant, op. cit., p. 60-62 ; 64-65 (Mit și religie în Grecia antică). 312 Pour mettre en évidence l'importance du sacrifice dans le cadre des rites grecs, je me propose d'analyser un règlement sacré découvert à Callatis (IIe siècle av. J.-C.) et gravé sur une plaque de marbre. Le document nous fournit des renseignements précieux sur les sacrifices offerts à Dionysos et le partage des victimes immolées à l'occasion des différentes fêtes célébrées par le thiase bachique de Callatis. Ainsi, le douzième jour du mois Dionysios, on sacrifiait à Dionysos une chèvre dont la peau, la tête et les jambes étaient déposées dans le sanctuaire nommé Dasyllieion. L’une des cuisses de la chèvre était déposée sur la table (sacrée), tandis que la viande était distribuée à la cité: Dionus…ou duwdek£t[ai: DionÚswi a ga ? tÕ mšn] / skšloj ™pˆ tr£pezan [parat…qhsi e.g. Ð ƒareÚj ™k toà] / purÕj t¦ d' ¥lla krša t[©j pÒlioj: toà dš a„gÕj ? dšr]/ma sÝn t©i kefal©i kaˆ t[o‹j posˆn ……….] / ™n tîi Dasullie…wi: (« Le 12e jour du mois Dionysios : on sacrifie à Dionysos une chèvre (?). Le prêtre (?) dépose la cuisse sortie du feu sur la table (sacrée), les autres viandes (sont distribuées) à la cité. La peau de la chèvre (?) avec la tête et les jambes (sont déposées ?) dans le Dasylliée ».)116. Les offrandes déposées sur la table sacrée revenaient au dieu qui devait être présent lors des rituels. Le dieu était « invité » aux sacrifices qui avaient lieu devant la statue qui le représentait (¥galma)117. C’est seulement à une époque moins reculée que cet usage aurait été abandonné en faveur d’une « invitation » du prêtre au repas sacré. Les offrandes destinées à la table sacrée – qui étaient donc, « la portion du dieu » – revenaient toujours au prêtre qui a présidé à la cérémonie118. La viande de la victime sacrifiée était distribuée aux citoyens. Généralement, la part non comestible des victimes, composée d’os et de graisse, était accordée aux dieux, tandis que les viandes grillées revenaient aux hommes. « Ce partage inégal de la victime immolée apparaît comme l’expression de la distance entre les hommes et les dieux. Ceux-ci cautionnent cette fête de la consommation carnée dans la mesure où les hommes, en mangeant les morceaux comestibles, reconnaissent leur infériorité de mortels et confirment leur soumission à leur égard. Le sacrifice apparaît comme un échange, une communication entre ces deux catégories »119. Le règlement prévoit la déposition de la peau, de la tête et des jambes de l animal immolé dans le sanctuaire du Dionysos (Dasyllieion). Cette prescription fait allusion aux anciens rites de chasse, destinés à assurer le succès des chasseurs et l abondance du 116 ISM III, 47, l. 2-6 (la traduction de l’inscription appartient à Alexandru Avram). Le agalma est par excellence la statue divine antropomorphe par opposition avec la représentation d’un être humain (eikon), voir Gaëlle Deschodt, « Modes de figuration des dieux en Grèce ancienne. Le cas du sacrifice », in Images Re-vues [En ligne], 8, 2011, p. 2-3, consulté le 22 août 2014 ; URL: http://imagesrevues.revues.org/502. 118 Alexandru Avram, BCH 119, 1995, p. 249; voir et J. P. Vernant, op. cit., p. 61 (Mit și religie în Grecia antică). 119 Jean-Pierre Vernant, « À la table des hommes. Mythe de fondation du sacrifice chez Hésiode », in Marcel Detienne et Jean-Pierre Vernant et alii, La Cuisine du Sacrifice en Pays Grec, Paris, 1979, p. 38-44, apud Gaëlle Deschodt, Images Re-vues [En ligne], 8, 2011, p. 2, la note 5. 117 313 gibier. Il s agit d un rituel dont le but consistait dans la « recomposition » de l’animal sacrifié sur le fond d une soi-disant « comédie de l’innocence » pendant laquelle, l homme qui a sacrifié l’animal s’efforçait à redonner à sa victime un aspect semblable à celui que l’animal aurait connu de son vivant et à l’offrir sous cette forme aux dieux120. On peut comprendre que, lors du sacrifice offert à Dionysos, l accès au Dasyllieion, le sanctuaire du dieu, était réservé à des initiés (neÒbakcoi et mÚstai); lex sacra interdit aux femmes des thiasites, à leurs enfants, ainsi qu aux autres non-initiés à prendre part au sacrifice: tîn [dš parÒntwn qiaseit©n ? oÜ]/te neÒbakcoj oÜte Öj m[Ústaj e.g. ™ën telesqeˆj Ð]/doipore‹ e‹j tÕ Dasullie[‹on……]ite[………]:/ ta‹j gunaixˆ t[a‹j aÙtîn qšmij oÙk œ]sti oÙd[š to‹j] / [te ˜autîn paisˆ ? kaˆ to‹j ¥lloi]j ¢telšs[toij]:, (« Aucun des thiasites ici présents (?), qu il soit néophyte ou bien adorateur déjà initié (?) qui se dirige vers le Dasylliée ne… (L accès ?) est interdit à leurs femmes, ainsi qu à leurs enfants et aux autres non-initiés »)121. On peut constater que le thiase bachique à Callatis était fermé aux femmes, à la différence de nombreux thiases du monde grec où les femmes avaient le droit d initier et comptaient parmi les degrés supérieurs des thiasites122. Dans certains cas les femmes pouvaient assister aux sacrifices; elles accomplissaient parfois des sacrifices sanglants. Le règlement callatien prévoit l exclusion des femmes du sacrifice et de la distribution de la viande. Bien que le sacrifice sanglant était en Grèce ancienne, en règle générale, une affaire d hommes, l exclusion des femmes du sacrifice, stipulée par certaines lois sacrées, devrait mettre en relation avec le caractère exclusif du culte en question et avec le type du groupe des gens qui le pratique123. Le même règlement sacré stipulait le sacrifice d’un bouc en l’honneur de Dionysos et à une date non-précisée, mais ultérieure au douzième jour du mois Dionysios: [mensis dies DionÚswi t]r£gon pr[at»]/[nion: ........]n kaˆ diair[e‹...] (« Le … du mois … : on sacrifie à Dionysos un bouc non âgé….et on partage…»)124. Selon Alexandru Avram, il est possible que le sacrifice du bouc ait eu lieu à l’occasion des fêtes locales Agrionia125. Conclusions Les documents épigraphiques analysés prouvent que le sacré imprègne toutes les formes de la vie officielle et privée des cités grecques du Pont Gauche. Dans les cités ouest-pontiques, le sacré s articule en deux directions divergentes, quoique non opposées. D un côté, les inscriptions de Callatis attestent la « territorialisation » du sacré. Les inscriptions du thiase callatien appellent n£oj (naos) le temple consacré à Dionysos 120 ISM III, (Étude Introductive), p. 99; Alexandru Avram, BCH 119, 1995, p. 250-251. ISM III, 47, l. 6-10 (la traduction de l’inscription appartient à Alexandru Avram). 122 Par exemple à Tomis est attesté « le thiase sacré de Pasô », ISM II, 120. 123 Chiekova Dobrinka, op. cit., p. 102-103. 124 ISM III, 47, l. 11-12 (la traduction de l’inscription appartient à Alexandru Avram). 125 Alexandru Avram, BCH 119, 1995, p. 247-248. 121 314 vers la fin du IIIe siècle av. J.- C., ensuite ƒerÒn (hieron - sanctuaire), dès qu il est pourvu d un enclos à entrée monumentale. D un autre côté, les calendriers des cités grecques du Pont Gauche portent en soi le sacré. Les fêtes religieuses consacrées aux divinités vénérées dans les cités grecques représentaient des repères fondamentaux pour l’organisation de leurs calendriers. Les fêtes publiques et privées qui ont comme des éléments essentiels les offrandes alimentaires et les rites sacrificiels, assurent donc la bonne marche des relations entre les hommes et le sacré. Ces relations peuvent aussi être altérées et perturbés, dès que les hommes envahissent l espace du sacré, violent ses privilèges ou enfreignent les normes divines qui règlent l ordre social. L expérience grecque du sacré oscille entre « contamination » (miasma) et «purification» (katharsis). Celui qui subit une contamination ne peut avoir accès au sacré dans les pratiques rituelles, et doit être banni de sa communauté, qui autrement risquerait d être contaminée. On trouve un rappel de cette situation dans le rituel très ancien du pharmakos, propre aux fêtes des Thargélies célébrées dans les cités ouest-pontiques ioniennes et à Athènes. Ce rituel assurait la purification collective de la cité. La souillure (miasma) qui dominait la cité pendant le deuxième jour des Anthestéries représentait l'impureté que les Thargélies auront à purifier par le rituel cathartique du pharmakos. Les trois saisons (l hiver, le printemps et l été) se relient, rituellement, par les trois fêtes importantes de l année grecque: les Pyanopsies, les Targélies et les Anthestéries. En cas de ces fêtes c’est un élément caractéristique du rituel de la fête qui est responsable de son nom. Tel est le cas des Pyanopsia, où l’on faisait la cuisson des fèves (pÚanoi), des Anthestéries, (la fête des fleurs et des réjouissances générales et en même temps la fête du vin) et des Thargélia qui prennent le nom du rite dit du thargélos. Donc, la plupart des fêtes célébrées dans les colonies pontiques milésiennes sont liées aux travaux agricoles. Le sacrifice sanglant constitue la pièce centrale du culte et l élément dont la présence est indispensable à tous les niveaux de la vie collective de la cité grecque. Cette réalité est prouvée par les inscriptions de Callatis qui nous fournissent des renseignements sur les sacrifices offerts à Dionysos et le partage des victimes immolées à l'occasion des différentes fêtes célébrées par le thiase dionysiaque callatien. Le thysia illustre l étroit imbrication du sacré et du profane dans les cités grecques du Pont Gauche. Un trait fondamental du sacrifice c est qu il est indissociablement pour les dieux une pieuse offrande, et pour les hommes, un repas de fête. Le cérémonial sacrificiel se terminait avec un banquet sacré qui était une occasion de célébrer le bon état des rapports entre les hommes et les dieux, ce qui indique une inscription de Callatis. En sacrifiant une victime, l homme grec institue et maintient avec la divinité un contact sans lequel son existence, abandonnée à elle-même, s effondrerait, vide de sens. Ce contact n est pas un communion entre l homme et le dieu mais exprime plutôt la distance immense qui sépare mortels et immortels. On ne mange pas le dieu, même sous forme symbolique, pour s identifier à lui et participer à sa force, mais les hommes consomment seulement une victime animale qui est adressée aux dieux. 315 Le Pont-Euxin a constitué une région mythique, un creuset dans lequel se sont mêlés différents cultes et croyances religieuses. Notre étude offre une perspective fascinante sur la religion dans cette région périphérique du monde grec. Liste des abréviations BCH Bulletin de correspondance hellénique, Paris, 1877CIG Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum, I-IV, Berlin, 1828-1877 CIRB V.V. Struve, Corpus Inscriptionum Regni Bosporani (Korpus Bosporskikh nadpisej), MoscouLeningrad, 1965 DAGR Dictionnaire des Antiquités grecques et romaines, sous la direction de Charles Daremberg et Edmond Saglio, Paris, 1877-1929 IGB I2 G. Mihailov, Inscriptiones Graecae in Bulgaria repertae, I², Sofia, 1970 IGDOP Laurent Dubois, Inscriptions grecques dialectales d’Olbia du Pont, 1996 I. Milet P. Herrmann, Milet VI. Inschriften von Milet, I, Berlin-New York, 1997; P. Herrmann, Milet VI. Inschriften von Milet, II, Berlin-New York, 1998; P. Herrmann, W. Günther, N. Ehrhardt, Milet VI. Inschriften von Milet, III, Berlin-New York, 2006 IOlb T. N. Knipovič, E. I. Levi, Inscriptiones Olbiae, (Nadpisii Ol'vii), 1917–1965, Leningrad, 1968 IOSPE I2 B. Latyschev, Inscriptiones antiquae orae septentrionalis Ponti Euxini Graecae et latinae, I2 : Inscriptiones Tyrae, Olbiae, Chersonesi Tauricae, Saint Pétersbourg, 1914, (réimpr. Hildesheim, 1965) I. Sinope I David H. French, The Inscriptions of Sinope I, Bonn, 2004 (IK 64) ISM Inscriptiones Scythiae Minoris, [D. M. Pippidi I: Histria și împrejurimile (Istros et les alentours), Bucarest, 1983 ; I. Stoian II: Tomis și teritoriul său (Tomi et son territoire), Bucarest, 1987; A. Avram III: Callatis et son territoire, Bucarest-Paris, 1999] JS Journal de savants, Paris, 1900RE Real-Encyclopädie der klassischen Altertumwissenschaft, ed. A Pauly, G. Wissowa, W. Kroll, K. Ziegler, Stuttgart REG Revue des Études Grecques, Paris, 1888SEG Supplementum epigraphicum Graecum, Leyde (puis Amsterdam), 1923Syll.3 Sylloge inscriptionum Graecarum, éd. W. Dittenberger, nouvelle éd. par F. Hiller von Gaertringen, Leipzig, 1915-19203 ZPE Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik, Köln, 1967Bibliographie Sources littéraires Hérodote, Histoires VI, trad. par Ph.-E.-Legrand Paris, Les Belles Lettres, 1992 Hésiode, Travaux et Jours, texte établi et traduit par Paul Mazon, Paris, Les Belles Lettres, 1993 Hippocrate, Du regime. Livre quatrième ou Des songes, in http://remacle.org/bloodwolf/erudits/Hippocrate/songes.htm Plutarque, Thésée-Romulus – Lycurgue-Numa, texte établi et traduit par Robert Flacelière, Emile Chambry et Marcel Juneaux, Paris, Les Belles Lettres, 1993 Thucydide, La guerre du Péloponnese, livre II, texte établi et traduit par Jacqueline de Romilly, Paris, Les Belles Lettres, 1991 316 Sources épigraphiques Lajtar, Adam, Die Inschriften von Byzantion. Inschriften Griechischer Städte aus Kleinasien, Band 58, Teil I, Dr. Rudolph Habelt GMBH, Bonn, 2000 Rehm, A., Inschriften von Milet, Bd.1, Heft 3: Das Delphinion in Milet, Berlin, G. Reimer, Walter de Gruyter, 1914 Rehm, A., Didyma II. Die Inschriften, hrsg. von Richard Harder Berlin, 1958 Sokolowski, Fr., Lois sacrées de l'Asie Mineure I, Paris, 1955 Ouvrages, études et articles Aricescu, Andrei, « Notă asupra unui decret elenistic inedit din Muzeul regional de arheologie Dobrogea », in Studii Clasice, V, 1963, p. 315-317 Avram, Alexandru, « Un règlement sacré de Callatis », in Bulletin de correspondance hellénique 119, 1995, p. 235-252 Bilabel, F., Die ionische Kolonisation. Untersuchungen über die Gründungen der Ioner, deren staatliche und kultliche Organisation und Beziehungen zu den Mutterstädten, Philologus, Suppl. 14, 1, Leipzig, 1920 Boyancé, Pierre, « L’antre dans les mystères de Dionysos », in Rediconti della Pontificia Academia di Archeologia, 33, 1960, p. 107-127 Caillois, Roger, Omul și sacrul, traduit du français par Dan Petrescu, Éds. Nemira, București, 1997 Calame, Claude, Thésée ou l’imaginaire athénien: légende et culte en Grèce antique, préface de Pierre Vidal-Naquet, 2e édition revue et corrigée, Laussanne, Payot, 1996 Camps-Gasset, Montserrat, L'Année des Grecs. La Fête et Le Mythe, Annales Littéraires de l'Université de Besançon, 530, 1994 Casabona, Jean, Recherche sur le vocabulaire des sacrifices en grec, des origines à la fin de lʼépoque classique (Publications des Annales de la Faculté de Lettre, N. S. n° 56), Éds. Ophrys, Aix-en-Provence, 1966 Casevitz, Michel, « Temples et sanctuaires, ce qu on apprend la lexicologie », in G. Roux (éd.), Temples et sanctuaires. Séminaires de recherche de Lyon, 1981/1983, Lyon, 1984, p. 85-87 Casevitz, Michel, « Le vocabulaire agricole dans le calendrier grec », dans Rites et rythmes agraires, séminaire de recherche sous la direction de Marie-Claire Cauvin (collection de Travaux de la Maison de l'Orient n° 20), GDR Maison de l'Orient Méditerranéen, Lyon, 1991, p. 109-112 Chamoux, François, Civilizația greacă în epocile arhaică și clasică, vol. I, traduction et avant-propos par Mihai Gramatopol, Éds. Meridiane, București, 1985 Chantraine, Pierre, Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque. Histoire de mots, I-IV, ouvrage publié avec le concours du Centre de la Recherche Scientifique, Éds. Klincksieck, Paris, 1968, 1970, 1974, 1977, 1979 Chiekova, Dobrinka, Cultes et vie religieuse des cités grecques du Pont Gauche (VIIe – Ier siècles avant J.-C.), Bern, Peter Lang, 2008 Dana, Mădălina, Culture et mobilité dans le Pont-Euxin. Approche régionale de la vie culturelle des cités grecques, Scripta Antiqua 37, Ausonius, Bordeaux, 2011 317 De Chutter, Xavier, « La marmite et la panspermie des morts», dans Kernos, 9, 1996, p. 333-345 Deschodt, Gaëlle, « Modes de figuration des dieux en Grèce ancienne. Le cas du sacrifice », in Images Re-vues [En ligne], 8, 2011, p. 1-21 Deubner, Ludwig, Attische Feste, Hildesheim, Berlin, 1966 Ehrhardt, Norbert, Milet und seine Kolonien. Vergleichende Untersuchung der kultischen und politischen Einrichtungen I-II, deuxième édition, Frankfurt am Main, Bern, New-York, 1988 Festugière, A. J., Grèce. Religion, in Maxime Gorce et Pierre Mortier, (éds.), Histoire générale des religions, II, Paris, 1944 Feraru, Remus Mihai, « Nouvelles contributions à l'étude des cadrans solaires découverts dans les cités grecques de Dobroudja », in Dialogues d'histoire ancienne, 34/2, 2008, p. 65-80 Ferrari, Anna, Dicționar de mitologie greacă și romană, traduction par Dragoș Cojocaru, Emanuela Stoleriu, Dana Zămosteanu, Éds. Polirom, Iași, 2003 Georgoudi, Stella, « La procession chantante des Molpes de Milet », in Pierre Brulé et Christophe Vendries (éds.), Chanter les dieux: musique et religions dans l'Antiquité grecque et romaine, Actes de colloque du 16, 17 et 18 decembre, 1999, Rennes et Lorient, Rennes, PUR, 2001, p. 150-175 Graf, E. « Das Kollegium der Molpoi von Olbia », in Museum Helveticum 31, 1974, p. 209-215 Knoepfler, Denis, « Le calendrier des Chalcidiens de Thrace. Essai de mise au point sur la liste et l'ordre des mois eubéens », in Journal de savants, n° 1-2, 1989, p. 23-59 Jost, Madeleine, Aspects de la vie religieuse en Grèce du début du Ve siècle à la fin du IIIe siècle avant J.-C., Sedes, Paris, 1992 Motte, André, « L’expression du sacré dans la religion grecque », in Julien Ries (éd.), L’expression du sacré dans les grandes religions, III, Centre d’histoire des religions (Collection Homo religiosus, 3), Louvain-la-Neuve, 1986, p. 109-256 Nilsson, Martin P., Griechische Feste von religiöser Bedeutung mit Ausschluss der attischen, Leipzig, 1906 Nilsson, Martin P., Geschichte der griechischen Religion. Die Hellenistische und Römische Zeit, II, deuxième édition, C. H. Beck’ sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, München, 1960 Nilsson, Martin P., Die Entstehung und religiöse Bedeutung des griechischen Kalenders, CWK Gleerup, Lund, 1962 Noel, Daniel, « Les Anthestéries et le vin », in Kernos, 12, 1999, p. 125-152 Pippidi, D. M., Scythica Minora. Recherches sur les colonies grecques du littoral roumain de la mer Noire, Éds. Academiei – Adolf M. Hakkert B. V., București, Amsterdam, 1975 Ries, Julien, Sacrul în istoria religioasă a omenirii, traduit de l’italien par Roxana Utale, Éds. Polirom, Iași, 2000 Salviat, François, « Une nouvelle loi thasienne: institutions judiciaires et fêtes religieuses à la fin du IVe siècle av. J.-C. » in Bulletin de correspondance hellénique 82, 1958, p. 193-267 Salviat, François, « Sur la religion de Marseille grecque » in: Bats Michel et alii (éds.), Marseille grecque et la Gaule. Études Massaliètes 3, Aix-en-Provence, 1992, p. 142-150 Sève, Michel, « Un décret de consolation à Cyzique » in Bulletin de correspondance hellénique, 103, 1, 1979, p. 327-359 318 Trümpy, Catherine, Untersuchungen zu den altgriechischen Monatsnamen und Monatsfolgen, Heidelberg, 1997 Trümpy, Catherine, « Les fondements religieux des calendriers grecs » in Vinciane Pirenne-Delforge, Öhnan Tunca (éds.) Représentations du temps dans les religions, Actes du Colloque organisé par le Centre d'Histoire des Religions de l'Université de Liège, 2003, p. 221-233 Vernant, Jean-Pierre, « À la table des hommes. Mythe de fondation du sacrifice chez Hésiode », in Marcel Detienne et Jean-Pierre Vernant et alii (éds.), La Cuisine du Sacrifice en Pays Grec, Paris, 1979, p. 38-44 Vernant, Jean-Pierre, (coord.), L’homme grec, Éditions du Seuil, Paris, 1993 Vernant, Jean-Pierre, Mit și religie în Grecia antică, traduction et avant-propos par Mihai Gramatopol, București, Ed. Meridiane, 1995 Tableau I: Calendriers des cités milésiennes du Pont Gauche, d Athènes et calendrier actuel Calendrier des cités milésiennes du Pont Gauche Calendrier d'Athènes Calendrier actuel Tauréôn Mounichiôn avril - mai Thargéliôn Thargéliôn mai - juin Kalamaiôn Panémos Métageitniôn Boédromiôn Skirophoriôn juin - juillet Hékatombaiôn juillet - août Métageitniôn août - septembre Boédromiôn septembre- octobre Pyanépsiôn Pyanépsiôn octobre- novembre Apaturéôn Maimaktériôn novembre-décembre Poseidéôn Posidéôn décembre-janvier Lénaiôn Gaméliôn janvier-février Anthestériôn Anthestériôn février - mars Artémisiôn Élaphéboliôn mars - avril 319 Tableau II : La succession des mois et fêtes en fonction des saisons de l année grecque Saisons Calendrier des cités milésiennes du Pont Gauche 7. Pyanépsiôn 8. Apaturéôn Hiver 9. Poseidéôn 10. Lénaiôn 11. Anthestériôn Printemps 12. Artémisiôn 1. Tauréôn 2. Thargéliôn Été (Theros) 3. Kalamaiôn 4. Panémos Été 5. Métageitniôn (Opora) 6. Boédromiôn Calendrier Fêtes Fêtes attestés d'Athènes athéniennes dans les cités milésiennes du Pont Gauche Pyanepsia 4. Pyanépsiôn Pyanepsia 7 du Pyanépsiôn (Puanšyia) 7 du Pyanépsiôn Apatouria 5. Maimakteria Maimaktériôn ('ApatoÚria) Calendrier actuel Posidéia (Poside…a) 6. Posidéôn Posidéia 8 du Posidéôn décembrejanvier Lénaia 12-19 du Gaméliôn Anthestéria 11-13 du Anthestériôn janvierfévrier Lénaia (L»naia) 7. Gaméliôn Anthestéria 8. ('Anqest»ria) Anthestériôn 12-13 du Anthestériôn Dionysia ta Megala 9. Élaphéboliôn Tauréa (TaÚrea) 10. 12-20 du Tauréôn Mounichiôn Thargélia 11. Thargéliôn (Qarg»lia) 1 et 7 du Thargéliôn Kalamaia 12. Skirophoriôn (Kalama‹a) octobrenovembre novembredécembre février mars Dionysia ta mars - avril Megala 8/10 - 13/16 du Élaphéboliôn Mounichia avril - mai Thargélia 6-7 du Thargéliôn Skirophoria juin - juillet 1. Hékatombaiôn 2. Métageitniôn Hékatombaia juillet - août Métageitnia août – sept. 3. Boédromiôn Boédromia (BohdrÒmia) 6 du Boédromiôn Boédromia 6 du Boédromiôn septembreoctobre Métageitnia (Metage…tnia) 320 mai - juin Father Arsenie Boca – Paradigm for acquiring Eternity Carmen Maria BOLOCAN Notre étude essaie de mettre en évidence les qualités particulières d’un moine et d'un père spirituel appelé Arsenie Boca, qui a vécu aux Monastères Brancoveanu et Prislop, en Transylvanie, pendant le regime communiste. Il a écrit aussi une oeuvre d'une réelle valeure théologique et culturelle. « Le chemin du Royaume » est son chef-d'oeuvre. C’est un ouvrage qui découvre le dialogue mystique entre le père Asenie et ses disciples; c’est une synthèse de l'enseignement des Pères de l'Eglise Orthodoxe. Mots-clés: le paradigme, le moine, l’acquisition de l’éternité, le père spirituel, la famille. Introduction Dubbed the Saint of Ardeal for his outstanding qualities of monk and confessor of Brâncoveanu and Prislop Monasteries, Father Arsenie Boca also left poesteriority a written work of true theological and cultural value. Among his writings, Cărarea Împără iei (The Kingdom’s Path) occupies the first place, being an original theological masterpiece and profoundly creative. His eminence Bishop Timotei shows in a Foreward to the book its the rich and revealing character: “The book showed indeed how many paths there are, the models, the problems, the solutions and the things of the Christian life in seven directions, a symbolic number for every holy thing, from which even the most humble believer can find as suitable at least one little way towards redemption”1. We thus understand the universal character of the Cărarea Împără iei (The Kingdom’s Path), not half explored until now by the Romanian theologians. What is, in its essence, Cărarea Împără iei (The Kingdom’s Path)?! It is the secret dialogue of Father Arsenie and his spiritual sons; we refer both to the houndreds that filled the precints of the Brâncoveanu Monastery at the beginning of the past century and to those who take the effort of listening in fact his spiritual teachings. The undeniable oneness of the work Cărarea Împără iei (The Kingdom’s Path) consists of the complex and prophetical argumentation that Father Arsenie offers to a society which finds itself at a crossroad on its way to redemption, in a permanent 1 Rev. Arsenie Boca, Cărarea Împără iei (The Kingdom’s Path), The Publishing House of the Holy Romanian Orthodox Bishopric of Arad, 2006, p. 5. 321 scission due to the sins and human passions. Each main idea of the text contains quotes from the Holy Bible, the Old and New Testament, the Holy Tradition and the Holy Fathers, from the Curch’s teachings of faith, theologians as well as from the works of Romanian and foreign highly cultivated men, scientists, mainly doctors. This is not an unusual fact taking into account that Father Arsenie graduated from the Theological Institute in Sibiu in 1933 and from the Belle-Arts Institute in 1938, where he took classes of drawing, modelling, principles of architecture, history of arts and, last but not least, anatomy2. From a spiritual point of view, Cărarea Împără iei (The Kingdom’s Path) is a synthesis of the philocalic teaching in the Orthodox Church, which is obvious through the numerous quotes from the Holy Fathers present almost on every page. The book itself, as printing, also speaks about the value of its spiritual and theological content, but also of its aesthetic content (we also find inserted in the volume two icons painted by Father Arsenie, that come to complete the unifying message of the book, regarding its cultural features). The content of the work Cărarea Împărăţiei (The Kingdom’s Path) As a highly intelectual and moral personality, Father Arsenie embraced rather the field of sciences, of medicine and theology, as opposed to Reverend Dumitru Stăniloae whose work is characterized by solid philological and philosophical knowledge. The title Cărarea Împără iei (The Kingdom’s Path) is tightly linked to one of the Saviour’s teachings from Matthew 7:14 where it is said that: “small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it”, which originates Father Arsenie’s preoccupation to express in a nowadays language this path or narrow road, without which we cannot reach God: “We come from God, we spend a while on earth and we go back to God. Blessed is the man who goes back Home completing the circle. This is the way. But some never go back…”3. Father Arsenie foreshadows here the profoundly creative character of our life, starting from the fundamental principle that God is Creator in an absolute meaning, and we, as His image, must try to achieve His likeness. Everything that he suggests within his work is linked to this structure of the creative man, who listens to God, who is faithful to the divine Providence but also to his own good. The printed book presents us a Foreword by Father Arsenie in which we can identify the origin of his work – the confession, his disciples’ tears, but also the knowledge and experience belonging to the greatest confessor we think we ever had. Thus, Cărarea Împără iei (The Kingdom’s Path) becomes a synthesis between the divine revelation from the Bible regarding redemption and the Father’s 2 Părintele Arsenie Boca – o via ă închinată schimbării vie ii noastre (Father Arsenie Boca – a Life dedicated to changing our Life), Edition cordinated by Natalia Corlean, Agaton Publishing House, Făgăraş, 2012, p. 5. 3 Rev. Arsenie Boca, Cărarea Împără iei (The Kingdom’s Path), p. 15. 322 experience as great confessor, through which he guarantees the expressed personal truth. The road to eternal life means, in order to be crossed, a profound living of the Orthodox teaching of faith. Thus, our redemption is only possible through God’s Son, Jesus Christ, “the One with Cross”, as Father Arsenie names Him, Who raised from the dead and founded His Church. Father Arsenie’s mission was that to strengthen the Christian conception regarding the redemption of the human soul which he loved; he achieved this starting from each person’s existential problem, in his relationship of communion with God. In order to summarize efficiently the ideas comprised in the seven parts of the book, which is rather exhustive, we have grouped them into three sections: Man’s preoccupation for perfection; The family and the hereditary problems; The Church’s call to Resurrection. Thus, we entitled the first fundamental theme extracted from the book’s chapters Man’s preoccupation for perfection, and it goes form the fisrt to the fourth part. Then, there is the theme The family and the hereditary problems, which we have decided to study separated from the rest, since it is comprised only in the fifth chapter due to the readers’ difficulty in understanding it. The last theme is The Church’s call to Resurrection, containing chapetrs six and seven, for the distributors of the misteries, meaning the priests, are those who are aware of the fighting Church’s call to Resurrection, and man’s complete responsibility within Church takes place when the Church from Heaven strengthens its call, through a tender but ascetical love for man all the way to the spirit’s chastity. Man’s preoccupation for perfection The likeness with God that we must achieve by the end of our life is, in fact, the goal of perfection, that man can accomplish through virtue, meaning through a cultural activity. Man can achieve perfection precisely because he he has features from God, that can also be found in the divine image from within, and he also has a goal to accomplish, which is to become in God’s likeness. These two guide marks can help man a lot to organize his activity towards the already knoen direction. This is the reason why Father Arsenie starts everything from the value of the minde and reason given by God as “the helm which shows us the way we have to take and where we have to arrive”4. Then, as a confirmation of the enunciation of this value, we are presented the Parable of the Good Samaritan, in which the good Samaritan is Jesus Christ, who entrusted us to His Holy Church to be redeemed from “the 4 Rev. Arsenie Boca, op. cit., p. 13. 323 torrents of the fall”5, prefigured by the flood in the Old Testament, and the devils are named the “thieves of the thought”. Realising the danger of the disequilibrium in man, in the moment in which he already performed this change within the soul, Father Arsenie counter-balances the effect of the doubt through the example of Saint Paul, but also through rich advice of encouragement about God’s Kindness for the sinners who repent, trying, in fact, to show that what really counts in God’s eyes is man’s attitude directed towards knowledge, will and love6. Then, the Teaching about Church is presented through criteria of reliability and authenticity, which can be verified anytime – the Unity, Holiness, Catholicity (Universality) and Apostolicity. To these we may add its necessity and its indispensability for redemption. Finally, the defining criteria, for which we are recommended “not to straggle from Church”7 is Christ’s Spirit, who lives within it, or the grace. In his perseverance to see us on our way to redemption, Father Arsenie does not forget to present man with God’s gracious invitation to fight and not with the terror of the hell’s tortures “worthy of getting us started”. Entering the land of Ascetics and Mystics, he then presents us the enemies of our redemption (the world, the body and the devil) and the weapons with which we can defeat them in order to go further on the kingdom’s path (patience, forgiveness and prayer). Also, here occurs the image of the body as a “graceful enemy – sly friend”8 which in fact means “do not destroy me”, but this actually means the man’s fall into pleasures. The sufferance humiliation is the one that finally defeats this “friend”. Moreover, Father Arsenie presents a moral pseudovalue, the love for oneself, naming it “the unclean baby”9 for it has a demonical origin. Its opposite, the selfdenial, is a priceless value from the Holy Bible (Luke 9:23) and from the works of the Holy Fathers unlike the chaos generated by the psychological theories that promote the selfish and sly love for oneself. The Orthodox Christianity, as it has been observed along the years, “exercises upon culture an action of “stimulation” and “discipline”, of “selection” and “stylization”10. Through this, a framing into the Christian finality is aimed. Father Arsenie demonstrates by inserting in the text scientific results, that Orthodoxy never opposes the truth, no matter the direction it may be coming from, and this can be found throughout the entire work. 5 Ibidem, p. 14. Ibidem, p. 16. 7 Ibidem, p. 17. 8 Ibidem, p. 21. 9 Ibidem, p. 22. 10 Constantin C. Pavel, Tragedia omului în cultura modernă (Man’s Tragedy in the Modern Culture), Anastasia Publishing House, 1997, p. 53. 6 324 The social dimension of the Christian culture includes as Model, Prototype of human behaviour, the Person of Jesus Christ11. In the same time, the social face of our redemption is revealed to us, which can be achieved through the love for people, not through the isolated acts that belong to one’s self, a reason for which the fight against temptations must be a long one, thus demonstrating, in essence, the stability of our love for God. The cross must symbolize for every Christian the absolute love or receiving the pain with a strong will, until complete sacrifice. Thus, it already receives the perfume of resurrection, which the hell cannot stand, and this is why it throuws it out together with the soul that bears the cross12. And, in order for us not to think that this goal is too high, we are immediately presented a unique portraiture by Saint Paul the Disciple “man with heavy sins, weakly, …, proved to be above the fall for pleasures or pain, in which human life usually turns to irrationality”13. From here, Father Arsenie draws the natural conclusion that the human nature recreated through Christ’s embodiment, makes Him first to bear His cross misteriously among us: “He walks before us, making Himself pathway from man to God”14. The sight of the True Forerunner, also showed to us by Saint John the Baptist, unties man from all conservative self-love, and throws him through every temptation or trial into the ever open arms of perfection. Consequently, this is the Kingdom’s Path, Christ Himself! The second part – The Kings’ Teacahings – is focused mainly on the moral values. It consists of exmples from the Old Testament in which we may observe that no matter how strong the calling from God is and no matter the place is occupies in society, one can only walk on the path to redemption by listening to one’s confessor, hence the confessor’s special value. King David is presented as a model of repention and morality (Psalm 101:10), since he would rather leave his throne than kill out of pride, among those of the same people, meaning to commit his previous sin. The third part – The seven Fifes – presents to our mind and heart the seven calls of God along the years, in order to get to know and follow Him. This aspect is uniquely stated in theology, although of major importance, if we think that we can suffer without understanding why and we may not have a reward for our sufferance. The seven fifes are: the inner call though the voice of the conscience, the outer call through word, the call through life’s sorrows, the call through death’s sorrows, the call through troubles which are above nature, the call through the passions of the end from Antichrist and the call to the universal judgement. The fourth part – The Unseen War – comprises chapters of profound moral analysis on the true nature of the created man, which work according to the divine 11 Rev. Arsenie Boca, op. cit., p. 33. Ibidem, p. 33. 13 Ibidem, p. 35. 14 Ibidem. 12 325 law. Father Arsenie studies here thoroughly a chapter from the Moral Theology, regarding the way in which great sins are born and their consequences on man. It is a unique lesson of Christian moral, but which also offers to this devastation of the human nature, the hope of its restoration in Jesus Christ through detailed arguments from the Holy Fathers and psychology. Explanations are offered concerning the instinctual manifestation, conscience, mental equilibrium, egocentrism and will. The sin is defined as “the moral defeat of the conscience by satan, through the temptations that entered the conscience uncensored”15. He speaks here about the importance of the alive religious conscience, as a barrier against temptations. Also, some psychiatric terms are brought to our attention, such as schizophrenia and acute paranoia, and the danger of their appearance, then he presents arguments belonging to the scientist Maurice Blondel which are meant to emphasize the lights of the faith, when we are facing man’s fight against polipsychism or the multitude of divergent psychic phenomena. Father Arsenie makes here a comparison with Saint Maximus the Confessor, and he himself penetrates into the depths of the psychological process through which man’s inferior purposes resist to achieving the supreme purpose. The solution offered to the contemporaries in such moments of crisis is drastic and firm – “we will not achieve spiritual values by going easy on ourselves… If you have decided to do something, do it, and you will discover in yourself unsuspected possibilities to work…”16. We can also find here a plea for the religious culture: “Faith is a risk of the reason; but it is not its annihilation, on the contrary, it is its illumination”. We always confront with the fact that we need to be aware that on the way from commandments to knowledge, from ascetics to mystics, we travel with God in ourselves, thus becoming in a certain way contemporary with Christ. The Saviour thus participates to all pur sufferances and edeavours with us in all the fights we fight for redemption. All these are solid motivations of our efforts. In the end, Father Arsenie concludes with the same lyrism from the beginning of his work: “All this great way is under the advice of the Church, as the one who has born us from above for the second time, and none of those who return Home go astray…”17. The family and the hereditary problems “I look for the roots of the pain…” these are the words with which Reverend Arsenie Boca starts this part, suggesting the fact that his calling of priest and confessor required first of all knowing the roots from which so much sufferance and pain pierces through to people. 15 Ibidem, p. 154. Rev. Nicolae Streza, Recenzie, rezumat şi comentar la „Cărarea Împără iei” (Review, Abstract and comment on The Kingdom’s Path), Credinţa Strămoşească Publishing House, 2007, p. 159. 17 Rev. Arsenie Boca, op. cit., p. 206. 16 326 The chapter Heredity and spirit which forms this central theme, regarding family and heredity is the most difficult part to understand from “The Kingdom’s Path”, but also the most important, misterious and in the same time challenging. Since the most ardent wish of Father Arsenie is to regenerate man in his Chritianity, he starts his intercession from the disequilibrium of man’s mental and physical health, proposing ways of renewal and return of the man to the initial joy or the natural state given to man by his Creator. To this respect, the author starts from religious ideas, based on the divine revelation, supporting his presentations with the conclusions of the researches from modern sciences – biology, medicine and psychology, all filtered through his religious moral spirit. Father Arsenie presents in this chapter scientifical schemes and theories, with a multitude of terms from the filed of biology and medicine, difficult to understand or even forgotten, but through an intellectual effort accompanied perseverently by the wish for knowledge that originates from faith, everything becomes clear for each person’s capacity, to an extent that fulfills and unties misteries of the soul. Through Heredity, in man, we understand his property to convey to his descendants morphologic features, regarding the exterior shape and the internal structure, and physiologic features, regarding the functions of the body. The word Spirit, as it appears within the revelation and the Holy Scripture, represents the spirit of life, the soul united with the matter or with the body into a single entity. Since it is of a spiritual, insubstantial nature the soul makes the body live through it. The true spirit of man is gifted with features which are superior to those of the animals, that psychology names psychical processes such as: conscience, intellection, imagination, doubt, astonishment, will, which are all mentioned by the Holy Scripture. Man, unlike animals, has the moral faculty of distinguishing between right and wrong and the power to rise to the idea of God. However, Father Arsenie uses the word spirit for the unseen essence of the spiritual life. Moreover, Reverend Boca tells us that through heredity we enharit not only physical features but also spiritual features achieved by oru ancestors. These represent the spiritual heritage with which we are born. In Heredity and spirit, the author uses demonstrations and scientifical terms in a very fluent manner, which is proof of a previous solid training and of a rare intelligence. However, he does not leave the shyness of the decency as he himself confesses within the text, naming the children, for whom his heart burns and for whom he has written this chapter, “baby human in baby sky”18. Despite the scientific sobriety of the style Father Arsenie uses, he does not forget to comfort us, sometimes, with the lyrism characteristic to the Bible. Starting from the idea that the spiritual features must be in complete accord, Father Arsenie suggests the same thing for the knowledge from different fields 18 Rev. Arsenie Boca, op. cit., p. 269. 327 through the dictum: “A lot of knowledge brings man closer to God, little knowledge draws man away both from knowledge and from God”19. It is the reason why great scholars, and authentic scientists, have recognized and proclaimed God’s existence. Great mthematicians such as Euler, Cauchy, and later on the conteporary Hawking, physicists such as Ampere and Max Planck (from quantum physics), chemists such as Lavoisier and Berzelius, to which we may add musicians such as Bach and Beethoven, and many others, have come to Father Arsenie’s conclusion that the truth of things goes beyond science because “all sciences must come to what God revealed”20. Repeating the same parable from the New Testament, Father Arsenie reinterprets the parable of the Good Samaritan, this time from a genetical point of view. The argument is offered by Psalm 50:6: “Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me”, and deeper into the history of our redemption, at its very beginnings, Genesis 3:16: “To the woman he said: I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children”, as a consequence of the attack of the robbers, meaning the fall of the human nature from completion. Based on information from the Person’s Psychology (N. Mărgineanu), Father Arsenie shows us what are the consequences for the descendants of parents with different types of genes, depending on their predominance. To this respect the terms of dominant and recessive genes are introduced, for the gene represents the final element on which heredity depends, an infinitely small part from the nucleus of the germinal cell. The dominance of the genes would be the feature of certain characters to defeat others, and to cast shadow upon them for a while, while recessiveness means remaining in a state of latency of other characters. Depending on the origin of these characters from the field of good or of its debasemant, due to the human fall, we may deduct that there are, as Father Arsenie confirms, billions of types of possible characters, and what is most important is that God is the one Who decides what type of dominant genes a person receives at birth, depending on the parents’ sins and on the divine grace. Heredity is in a miterious way “the parent’s repetition in his sons”, but with “a certain degree of approximation” due to the uniqueness of each person and to the importance of each person for God. Within this text, we come upon severoal terms of statistics and calculus of probability, of biology, chemistry, psychology, an entire symphony of sciences at man’s service. The main conclusion of the chapter favours the tormented man disadvanteged by the genetical heritage, meaning that every dominant tendency of a man, enharited genetically, which inclines to a life outside the divne law and outside the communion with God while in contact with the environment, can be transformed, with the help of the divine grace, by obeying the commandments of the Scripture and through the Holy Misteries within Church, meaning thorugh a life of true 19 20 Ibidem, p. 210. Ibidem. 328 repentance, into a recessive or latent tendency, through a genetical mutation that only God can perform, a real miracle, taking into account the tyranny with which the sinfulness enherited genetically can act upon man. The transposition of this status into physical features leads to monstrous faces who no longer remind us of God’s image. For all these genetical heritages, Father Arsenie states firmly that there is no fault for none of the children, but the parents are guilty of the fact that the child continues to be a sinner, for they do not guide him in any way, and for this they will answer on the Judgement Day. This is also stated by Saint John Chrysostom in his works on family. As a subtle sociologist of our days, Father Arsenie observed that in these children’s families, usually there is the tendency to hide by lying the parents’ responsibility for the children’s state, and we may say, crying to heaven, to leave them compassionately, as a shady concealment in the subconscious of the feeling of guilt. The Church’s call to Resurrection In this part we are presented the graceful dimension of the redemption, first of all with the help of the fighting Church, and then with that of the defeating Church, as this final call is the most impressive, but also the most efficient for man. Saint Paul was the first to state that: “This, then, is how you ought to regard us: as servants of Christ and as those entrusted with the mysteries God has revealed” (1 Corinthians 4:1). We can easily understand that the Disciples, the bishops, the priests and the deacons are those entrusted with the misteries God has revealed that Saint Paul speaks about. The mistery of the Christian faith comprises: the misteries of the faith as divine gift, the misteries of the Gospel, the eschatological misteries, the mistery of the Holy Trinity, misteries of wisdom and knowledge, and other misteries preached by the clergy through the Seven Misteries of the Church. Each man must walk towards these in order for him to be righteous, and here we find within the text at the Sight through veil another one of the pleas for culture of Father Arsenie: “Let us not be narrow-minded that the righteous occurs only within religion”21. The Church’s call for those who are unrighteous, but for those who “can no longer be won through the liberty they no longer have”22, remains only the sword or the punishment. The way to God opens with the help of the priest’s intercession during the Holy Liturgy, for the unbloody sacrifice of the Eucharist represents a permanent renewalof this intercession, which is vital for our spiritual growth. In the last part, The Love’s Kingdoms, Father Arsenie’s fight for the soul is crucial, and this is why he makes an impression on us through the images of hell, in order to make us accountable from a moral point of voew, but he also comforts us through lyrical passages such as: “We are God’s breath of love. This is why, 21 22 Ibidem, p. 281. Ibidem, p. 283. 329 physically we are a dewdrop, compared to an endless universe, which can, however, be comprised entirely by our conscience”23. Father Arsenie’s monastic preparation urges him to “console” us from time to time with his severe humour: “what they do not know because they are dominated by a biological laziness, seems like it does not exist to them and they sleep like a top their time on earth”24. Even in the last part, several notions of psychology are introduced, which are linked to the subconscious and the infinite ramifications of the self-love, the root of the human nature’s fall: “I run away from all existential knowledge until the day I die”25. As a consequence, the only way to make the stubborn man accountable is to take him through the Aerial Toll-Houses, a moment where all liberty which helped him previously to reject the truth is cancelled. He is thus obliged to admit everything he has ever done in his life. In the end of the work The Kingdom’s Path there are two ideas which I find remarkable and unique: the fact that the prayers and charities performed by the fighting Church for those who are dead are perceived by God as an act of human love that passes beyond the border of death, which is why, similar to the paralyzed man from the Gospel, God forgives to those who passed away in an incomplete repentance the rest of their debt “for as nothing unclean enters God’s Kingdom, the same way, nothing good, no matter how little, does not stay in hell forever, and through this good we may understand the Church’s prayers as well”. The second idea refers to the Judgement’s Day from Matthew, chapter 25. father Arsenie shows us here how the misteries answer the peoples’ natural questions. One of the questions is current even for us: “for so little guilt, … in a short life, is it possible that God mortifies you forever and ever?”. The answer needs no other comment: “If during our lifetime, … we do not return to the spiritual and eternal features, then Jesus Christ is within us: hungry and thirsty, naked, a stranger and sick of the pain of our haze, and besides this, in a prison in which the worms of temptations and the snakes of evil fornicate”26. This condition never ends for the one who refuses to receive the “truth preached, showed and proved”27, committing a sin against the Holy Spirit, that is never forgiven, and cannot be repaired. It is the reason why the divine pedagogy speaks in such a beautiful manner through Christ, in the end of the work, a moment in which Father Arsenie “steps aside” for the King of glory to enter, the One Who speaks misteriously and humble: “Those who will hear will rise to live”… 23 Ibidem, p. 308. Ibidem. 25 Ibidem. 26 Ibidem, p. 325. 27 Ibidem, p. 318. 24 330 Conclusions Named by Reverend Arsenie Boca himself “a Christian answer to the time’s uncertainties”, The Kingdom’s Path represents according to Bishop Daniil Stoenescu “a true pan-Orthodox fact, exceeding and going a lot beyond the borders of a simple publishing or cultural-religious event”28. The book represents a real treatise of neopatristic theology, both in letter and in spirit, written in a clear Romanian language, of a rare theological and literary beauty. A complete description of his style belongs to Rev. Nicolae Streza: “The literary, theological, dogmatical and sometimes mystical style resembles the prophetical and lyrical style of the Bible”29. It was only natural to find everywhere within The Kingdom’s Path quotes from the Bible, which is a Book of spiritual medicine, quotes regarding the spiritual illnesses and the method through which man can find a cure. However, the eschatological sense of this book signed by Father Arsenie, uncovered only in the end, directs our thoughts also to the mystical life that he had, the result of a theology of sanctum which he had practiced for a long time, in terms of which he had become a rare spiritual flower of the Romanian people, a “sweet woodruff” who was never able to see his love and beauty, “the shortest and above all ways to perfection”30, as he himself confessed. Regarding the teachings of faith, only Father Serafim Rose uses such a rich scientific argumentation, put in God’s service, and in the field of genetics, we find such features in the volume “The Parents’ Sins and the Children’s Illnesses” by K. V. Zorin. The anthropolgical problem of today’s man, together with the problems and solutions offered by Father Arsenie, combine magisterially the biblical conception with spirituality and scinetifical researches31. A history professor from Hunedoara said that: “Reverend Arsenie Boca was, is and always will be a model of man of culture, holiness and patience, a model of Christian behaviour”32. Following Tudor Vianu’s feelings for God, we dare to think ardently to the existence of a God Who “through a supreme act of choice from an infinite number of possibilities”33 chose Father Arsenie to be our guide to Christ, loving him and loving us ceaseless as well on the Kingdom’s Path! 28 Bishop Daniil Stoenescu, Arhanghelul de la Prislop (The Archangel from Prislop), Vîrşeţ, 2010, p. 272. 29 Rev. Nicoale Streza, Recenzie, rezumat şi comentar la „Cărarea Împără iei” (Review, Abstract and comment on The Kingdom’s Path), Credinţa Strămoşească Publishing House, 2007, p. 373. 30 Rev. Arsenie Boca, op. cit., p. 314. 31 Rev. Nicoale Streza, Mărturii despre Părintele Arsenie (Testimonies about Father Arsenie), Credinţa Strămoşească Publishing House, 2007, p. 270. 32 Father Arsenie Boca, The Saint of Ardeal, Volume coordinated by Romeo Patraşciuc, Agnos Publishing House, Sibiu, 2012, p. 178. 33 Rev. Arsenie Boca, The Kingdom’s Path, p. 233. 331 Bibliography Boca, Arsenie, The Kingdom’s Path, The Publishing House of the Holy Romanian Orthodox Bishopry of Arad, 2006 Father Arsenie Boca – a Life dedicated to changing our Life, Edition coordinated by Natalia Corlean, Agaton Publishing House, Făgăraş, 2012 Father Arsenie Boca, The Saint of Ardeal, volume coordinated by Romeo Patraşciuc, Agnos Publishing House, Sibiu, 2012 Pavel, Constantin C., Man’s Tragedy in the Modern Culture, Anastasia Publishing House, 1997 Stoenescu, Daniil, The Archangel from Prislop, Vârşeţ, 2010 Streza, Nicolae, Review, Abstract and comment on The Kingdom’s Path, Credinţa Strămoşească Publishing House, 2007 Streza, Nicolae, Testimonies about Father Arsenie, Credinţa Strămoşească Publishing House, 2007 332 Marriage in the Old Testament. A Social Reality and a Theological Metaphor Reflected in the Biblical Rhetoric C t lin VATAMANU Die Bibeltexte fokussieren sich auf die Entscheidung zur Ehe und auf die Bedingungen, unter denen sie gemacht werden sollte, aber sie geben uns nur wenige Informationen über das Ritual selber. Jeremiah (3, 6-8; 7, 9), Jesaja (1, 21; 23, 4, 7, 37; 54, 6), Ezekiel (16, 32.38; 23, 37) und insbesondere Hosea (Kapitel 1-3) sind diejenigen, deren prophetischen Stimmen gegen die Verletzung des Bundes zwischen Gott und die "Hure" Israel klangen, ein Bund den am Anfang wie eine Ehe gegründet wurde. Die Rhetorik mehrerer anderen hebräischen Texten bringt uns zum Verständnis der Ehe im Alten Testaments als KaufVerkauf Transaktion. Ausgehend von einer Keywords-Analyse schlägt diese Studie die Entdeckung der verschiedenen gesellschaftlicher Aspekte, der theologischen Werte, die metaphorisch ausgedrückt wird, und der spezifischen Themen, die durch die biblische Rhetorik über die Ehe im Alten Testament ausgedrückt werden. Schlüsselwörter: Die Bibel, Verständnis der Ehe im Alten Testaments, Keywords-Analyse. 1. Terminological delimitations of marriage in Old Testament Marriage was founded in Paradise by God through the words contained in Gen. 1, 27-28; 2, 23-24 and confirmed by Christ the Saviour in Matthew 19, 5-6 and Marcus 10, 7-9. The union of man and woman for life was protected by clear laws in the Israelite society. The most used verb that denominates the act of marriage is the Hebrew laqah “to take”, which in nifal is translated by „to take into marriage”. In specific situations, laqah is used as “to take into possession”, “to choose”, “to accept”, which shows that in the patriarchal Israelite society, the man was the one who had the initiative in marriage, the woman being often its object. The Hebrew term chatunnah, referring to the marriage ritual, is met only in the Solomon’s Song of Songs 3, 11. Another word, used equally seldom, is onah (probably deriving from the verb anah, “to answer”, as well as “to certify”), which expresses the idea of cohabitation (Exodus 21, 10). In the New Testament, the Greek noun , that seems to derive from the old verb α , “to bind”, “to unite”, and the newer α ω, “to get married”, “to take a wife”, has a complex meaning, reaching the essence of things. This means wedding ceremony or, by extension, “wedding house” (Matthew 22, 10). In Hebrews 13, 4, 333 is used for the institution of marriage which has to be “honoured by all”. “The Lamb’s wedding” in Rev. 19, 7 has a messianic meaning. It is the mysterious union between Christ and the Church, a time of blessing for those who have come to “the Lamb’s wedding dinner” (Rev 19, 9). 2. Principles of family life in the Old Testament In Antiquity, children were advised to marry while very young for reasons of a good functioning of a family. The young Egyptian, for instance, should marry early, have children, especially boys, and educate them: „Take a wife when you are young so that she makes you a son. You must raise him as long as you are young and must live until he will reach the age of manhood. Blessed is the man, who has many children, he is honoured for his sons.” (Ani’s Wisdom). According to the Judaic law, the minimum age of those willing to get married was 13 for boys and 12 for girls, but the domestic reality brings to the foreground the marriage practice at 16-24, consequently after puberty. Nevertheless, the chronological factor was not the only one establishing the maturity of a boy or of a girl. The physical changes that take place inside the body and which differ from one person to another are viewed as having legal implications before and after the age of religious maturity. It was believed that a nine year old boy could marry, even if the signs of puberty might appear later (Kiddushin, 29b, 30a). Marriages were often arranged by parents (Judg. 21, 21). Prov. 31, 10-31, a text which is nowadays read at Hebrew weddings, presents the image of an ideal woman, candidate to being the king’s future wife, who will give birth to the future heir of the throne: she is full of virtue who presents assurance to her husband because she makes only good during her whole life. Her chores are various: she works with wool and hemp (v. 13.19.22.24), cooks and feeds the ones in the household (v. 14.15), manages the house activities when the husband is not present (v. 15), she even takes care of small business (v. 16.24), works the land (v. 16), and speaks wisely (v. 26). All this bring her husband and sons’ praise (v. 28), as well as the community leaders’ appreciation (v. 23.31). To take such a woman into marriage meant, in the Judaic society, “to find the good” and getting a “favour (grace) from God” (Prov 18, 22). Fertility, industriousness, and morality were the basis criteria in choosing a wife and, implicitly, the most praised virtues of a woman in sapiential writings. Cf. Exodus 21, 10, the man’s duty was that of making sure that his wife would always have food, clothing, and security. The Babylonian treatise Avot (5, 21) presents the Israelite’s obligations, among which: “marriage at 18, heirs at 20”. So, the main and immediate responsibility of the family was that of giving birth to as many children as possible (Gen. 24, 60; 30, 1; Ruth 4, 11.14). God says: “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him” (Gen. 2, 18), this does not mean that the purpose of marriage is giving the man a companion to cheer him up, to give him her love, support and care. The Scripture of the Old Testament insists on the fact that the woman was created by God for procreation. 334 3. The marriage ritual in Old Israel The biblical texts insist on the decision of marriage and the conditions in which it as to be made, but they give too little information on the ritual in itself. The mother could choose the wife for her son (Gen. 21, 21) or at least she was involved in this process (Gen. 27, 46; 28, 7; Judg. 14, 2-3). Song of Songs (3, 11) shows that the mother placed a wreath on her son’s head in the wedding day. The groom as well as the bride had groups of followers (Judg. 14, 11), among which one is special (Judg. 14, 20; 15.2) and is called in John 3, 29 “the groom’s friend”. It is not clear whether the wedding took place at the bride’s house (Gen. 29, 22; Tobit 8, 19; Matt 25) or at the groom’s house (Matt 22, 1-14; John 2, 9-10). The wedding ceremonies were long and full of fast (Judg. 14, 10-12, Jer. 7, 34; I Macc. 9, 39; Tobit 8, 19; John 2), but they seem to be exclusively laic as long as there is no mention of any religious authority participating in them with this status Some moments of the wedding festivity are presented in the New Testament in parables, as that of the king’s son’s wedding (Matt 22, 2-14) or that of the ten virgins (Matt 25, 1-13). The story of the people who are waiting the master’s return from the wedding (Luke 12, 36-38) and that of taking seats at the wedding feast (Luke 14, 8-10) bring forth other details about how such an event was organized in the Judaic society of the New Testament. 4. Mohar – “the price” of the Israelite wife? The Israelite wedding was preceded by the engagement ritual, which consisted of choosing and “paying” for the wife. The use of the noun mohar in the Hebrew texts shows that taking a wife into marriage was viewed as the purchase of a property. Gesenius says that the translation of the noun mohar is “the price paid for a wife by her parents”, bringing the texts from Gen. 34, 12; Exodus 22, 16; I Sam 18, 25 as arguments. Other uses of the term are different. In Arabic it means the groom’s gift for his future wife and in Latin, dos, a gift given by the parents to their daughter who is to be married. Mohar derives from the verb mahar, “to buy”, “especially a wife” (Gesenius), for whom the parents will offer mohar (Gen. 22, 15). Consequently, mohar seems to be the price paid by a man to the parents for his “acquisition”, in other words, a “property” bought with money, which he van use as he pleases. This interpretation was authorized by W. Robertson Smith who states: “Marriage by buying can be identified in the whole Semitic space; each time when the husband is a Ba’al or master for is wife. The Arabic term mahr is the same with the Hebrew mohar (...), and their etymological meaning is simple: «price»”. However, etymology is not so simple and that is why many Bible scholars were not satisfied with translations like „Kaufpreis”, „Brautgeld” sau „prix d'achat”. All the arguments for such translations are inadequate and it is sure that mohar was only a price paid for the future child (Lev 25, 45-46) of the future spouses. 335 Some Hebrew texts bring big question marks regarding the understanding of the Old Testament marriage as a selling-buying transaction. Deuteronomy 21, 10-14 states that no one could sell his wife, even if she was captured in the war because he would thus make her a slave and humiliate her. Also, a master “who chose a woman” was not allowed to re-sell her to another family if the woman “is not to his liking” (Exodus 21, 8). Furthermore, there is no clear evidence of a marriage made like a transaction in the whole Old Testament. The texts that is most often invoked in supporting the thesis of marriage as transaction is Gen. 31, 14-15: “And Rachel and Leah answered and said unto him, Is there yet any portion or inheritance for us in our father's house? Are we not counted of him strangers? for he hath sold us, and hath quite devoured also our money.”. Laban’s daughters complain for having been sold, but this can be an exception and it cannot prove the existence of a custom. Quite the opposite, it is the very text that shows that Laban has broken the law by selling his daughters as if they were goods Booz’ taking Ruth as his wife, in Ruth 4, 10, is often quoted as proof of the fact that a wife was bought: “And I bought Ruth, the Moabite, Mahlon’s wife, for me to have as a wife”. But the verb used in this text is qana, “to get”, “to create”, but also “to buy”, from which qoneh “buyer”, “owner”. The verb qana means generally “to acquire” and does not necessarily imply paying a price. Even though, when marriage or engagement are discussed in corroboration with sellable objects, biblical Hebrew uses terms that mean “to get”, as it is the case in Ruth 4, 10. Very important is the fact that the Hebrew term mohar appears only three times in the Old Testament: in Gen. 34, 12, for Dina; in Exodus 22, 16-17, in the case of a raped virgin; in I Sam. 18.25, David’s bravery for Micol). Also, the verb mahar, “to acquire by paying a price”, “to give dowry”, “to marry someone for someone else”, is met only in Ps. 16, 4 (in Qal, Perfect) and in Exodus 22, 15. It is obvious that the texts, limited in number, do not use usual terms, even more, they can be seen as exceptions from the rule. Consequently, the researchers are looking for the “emergency” solution, that of arguing the thesis of marriage as selling of materials similar to Arabia Mesopotamia, and Ugarit, which cannot have a decisional weight for the precise social meaning of the term wedding/engagement in the Old Testament. Recent anthropological research on the ancient or primitive peoples reject the idea of a connection between payment with money or offering gifts and the mere buying of the bride in the seller-money-buyer system. It is rather a system of compensation that strengthens the relations between families and encourages or confirms the marriage. The text from Hosea 2, 21-22 confirms that this was the truth in the Israelite culture in this respect. In this text, marriage is used as an image of the covenant made (in v. 20) between Yahweh and Israel (as in Ezek. 16, 8 and Mal. 2, 14). Yahweh will make Israel His fiancé. But what is mohar in this context? Roger Daniels Dwight considers that mohar is a “compensation gift”, an 336 engagement gift that was usually offered by the bride’s father to the groom as “dowry” and possibly also the other way around, by the groom to the bride’s father (I Sam. 18, 25-27; II Sam. 3, 14). As soon as the “gift” is given to the groom, the woman becomes the groom’s legal wife (Deut. 22, 23-24), even though the marital physical relation has not been consumed (Deut. 20, 7; 28.30). The marital relation could be consumed in a “bargain (Tobit 7, 13), maybe a marriage contract (chetuva), that was rather a promise, in front of God, of keeping the covenant between the two (Gen. 2, 18; Prov. 2, 17; Ezek. 16, 8; Mal. 2, 14). 5. Property and authority in the husband-wife relationship In the Judaic antiquity, a man was called baal, “master”, or “owner”. This meaning of the term in the context of marriage has been contested by many Bible scholars. For example, Johannes Pedersen sustained that baal must be understood in the context of the interpersonal relation in a marriage; it does not denote a unilateral sovereignty (for which Hebrew used the term adon). Also, Neufeld makes a distinction between property and authority, showing that it is difficult to understand how the husband came to be called baal; how the idea of a servitude relation between woman and man came to be used. Understood in a Isaiah key, the word baal stresses more on the man’s capacity of procreation. This fits very well the above mentioned thesis, that what a husband owned was not his wife’s person, but her sexuality. In marriage, a man did not have a property right over his wife, but exclusive rights over her sexuality and fertility, by extension, over the children resulted from the fruitfulness of their marriage. In this context, the use of baal meant, undoubtedly, the expression of the husband’s authority, the idea of his property over his wife’s sexuality and fertility. It follows that the concept of legitimate property is applied to a woman only before marriage, when she is the property of her father who is responsible for it. In other words, the only meaning in which the woman could be described as “property” would her status as a daughter, not as a wife. The man’s property was the children, received as wedding gift from God through his wife. Leah, Jacob’s first wife, sees her six sons as a wedding gift given to her by God: “God hath endued me with a good dowry; now will my husband dwell with me, because I have born him six sons” (Gen. 30, 20). Other biblical paragraphs indicate that the parents who give birth to children receive them as a “fruit”, as a gift from God (Gen. 30, 22; I Sam. 1, 11.19). To be fertile as a fruitful land, to have many children means being blessed by God. That is why the Psalmist says “the sons are God’s legacy” (Ps. 126, 3). Having numerous heirs is very often associated with owning properties and receives Yahweh’s blessing. Children are a crowning and a meaning of life because they bestow security and strength to the whole family (Prov. 17, 6; Ps. 127, 3-5; 128, 3; Job. 5, 25; Sir. 25, 10). The Judaic family has been viewed as a social unity – man, woman, children and other generations – in which the law of complementarity functions. Within the 337 family, the man and the woman are “one flesh” (Gen. 2, 24), and the superiorityinferiority relations are only formal. The mere statement that a wife was legally her man’s property is unjustified and definitely wrong. The social and juridical status of the woman in the Old Testament is far from being characterized by such primary sentences. As the didactic and poetical writings of the Hebrew culture show, the social situation of the woman in family and society cannot be captured in fixed formulas as it is indefinable. It was not constant; it varied according to the socio-cultural and historical-economical circumstances of society. In particular, the woman’s status was determined by the husband’s character and the role that he played within the community. Establishing a family has never depended only on the husband’s status, but on the familial cohesion of both spouses, by their moral and religious integrity, on their ability of getting along in society, on the fulfilment of their dignity as sons of God, on the way they manifested among peoples as “chosen priesthood and kingly people”. In this ancient Judaic mentality, the idea of property can be applied only to God Yahweh, The Maker of all, the Gift Giver, and the Providence of history and the people within it. The whole creation is His property and man, His highest creation, is not amorphous; it was made in His Liking, it is not irrational, it was created after the Divine reason, it is not inert, it was its own free will towards the sainthood of God the Saint, the “Father in heaven”. 6. Polygamy in Israel. Forbidden marriages Although Gen. 4, 19 refers to Lameh’s two women, the practice of polygamy, the first breaking of the unity in two in marriage, was not at all generalized. Sexual relation outside marriage often had a “utilitarian” function, that of procreation (see the examples of Abraham’s accepting Agar the servant, Jacob’s marriages out of which his twelve sons, lords of the people, resulted). Of course, there are also relations with many women especially on the case of persons with authority (David, in I Sam. 18, 27; Solomon, in I Kings 11, 1-3). Because Moses tried to put the polygamous relations to index unsuccessfully, the Law imposed categorical delimitations regarding a man’s marriage to two sisters (Lev. 18, 18), the king’s marriage with more women (Deut. 17, 17), increased rights for the servant who marries the master’s son (Exodus 21, 8). Monogamous marriage is an ideal (Mal. 2, 14-16), a reflection of the relation existing between God and His chosen people (Hosea 2, 19). In the Old Israel, maybe for keeping the property inside the family, cousins could marry among them (Isaac and Rebecca, in Gen. 24, 15; Jacob with Lea and Rachel, in Gen. 28.2; Esau and Basmati, in Gen. 36.3). However, the 18th chapter of Leviticus imposes categorical interdictions for sexual relations between relatives. A man could not marry blood relatives, widows that were blood relatives, a woman who did not divorce her husband effectively, with the daughter or niece of a former wife, with the former wife’s sister during the former’s life. 338 The children resulted from incest or from a forbidden marriage are called mamzerim and are under many restrictions. Those born of a married father and an unmarried mother are not mamzerim, whereas the babies born of a married woman’s relation with a man, who is not her husband, are mamzerim. The priest could not marry a divorced or promiscuous woman, or one that was the fruit of an illegitimate marriage, nor a widow with children. 7. The levirate marriage The law of the levirate marriage is stipulated in Deut. 25, 5-10. It said that a brother of a widow’s husband who did not have children had to marry the widow and the sons resulted from the levirate marriage were considered sons of the dead one (Gen. 38). Ruth 4, 7 describes the juridical procedure of renouncing the levirate for someone else. Another case of levirate is presented in Matt. 22, 23-30. 8. Israel – Yahweh’s virgin bride Jeremiah (3, 6-8; 7, 9), Isaiah (1.21; 23.4.7.37; 546), Ezekiel (16, 32.38; 23, 37) and especially Hosea (chap. 1-3) are those whose prophetic voices raise against breaking the covenant, established like a marriage, between God and Israel the “debauched”. Prophet Hosea, cheated on by the wife who committed adultery, makes a theological example for Israel out of this experience because by accepting the worshiping of the gods of foreign people, Israel gets out of the covenant relation with God (Hos. 2, 18; 3, 1-5). In Hosea, the punishment of the unfaithful wife becomes a clear symbol of the punishment form the apostate people. (Hos. 2, 4-15). In fact, the book of Hosea is a parable of the permanent divine love of God for a sinful people. The idea of Yahweh’s providence over Israel “the virgin” can be found in many texts of the Old testament Scripture, but Jer. 31, 3-4 is special because it speaks about a new custom, a new covenant between the “partners”: “The LORD hath appeared of old unto me, saying, Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love: therefore with loving kindness have I drawn thee. Again I will build thee, and thou shalt be built, O virgin of Israel»”. It is not by hazard that Jeremiah introduces the idea of distance in this text. The virgin of Israel, by disobedience and by breaking the covenant, “has fallen and will not rise again, she is on the ground and there is nobody to get her up!” (Am. 5, 2), she became estranged from God. Isn’t the cry “My Father, you were the Friend of my youth!” Israel’s “coming to senses”? Then God shows Himself “from the distances”, confessing His eternal love and promising the reestablishment of the natural state to the “virgin of Israel”. But it is not the state before her sins; it is a renewed state. 9. The Church, the New Israel – Christ’s virgin bride Tertullian († 230) is one of the first Church writers who spoke about the mystical marriage between virgins and Christ, who highlighted the eschatological value of virginity, its ecclesiological dimension. Methodius from Olympus († 311) 339 develops these ideas and sees virginity as an expression of the Church sainthood. The woman who appears in the sky clothed in the sun (Rev. 12, 1-6) is “our Mother”, the one that the prophets called “Jerusalem”, “Mount Zion”, “tent and Temple of God” and “Bride”, Methodius says, adding: “This is the Church; her sons, born through baptism, will run towards her from all the corners of the world, after resurrection. Receiving the eternal light, clothed in the brightness of the Word, she is full of great joy. Because what greater adornment if not the light could the empress wear in order to present to God as a Bride?” Commenting on Ps. 44, 11-12: “The empress sat on Your right, dressed in golden clothed and beautifully adorned. Listen daughter and see and lend your ear and forget thy people and thy father’s house”, Saint John Chrysostom, in Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians, sees in this text the act of God’s sending His servants “to engage His Son with the Church among peoples” and the prophet David as the one sanctifying this engagement. Paul himself compares the Church in Corinth with a virgin who comes forth to Christ the Groom (II Cor. 11, 2): “For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.”. Paying attention to the theological content of the Pauline philology, Saint John Chrysostom states in his commentary to this text: „«For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy». He does not say: «I love you», but says exactly what is much more passionate: «I am jealous over you» (as in Jer 13.3: «I loved you with eternal love», m.n.). Thus are the passionate souls of those in love (…). Then he shows the cause that made him feel this: «for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin ». So it is not to me, but to Whom I want, to Whom I engaged you. That the present time is engagement time, and the time when they will say: «the Groom has arrived» is different. O, what new and wonderful things! In the world, the virgins keep their state until marriage and after that they are not virgins any more. But here it is not like this; even if they have not been virgin before this marriage, they become virgin after the wedding Thus the entire Church is virgin.” The state of virginity of the Church is a great gift of Christ the Groom for us, a calling towards its keeping and a responsibility of interiorizing Ecclesiae Magna in our life, in ecclesia domestica. Bibliography Burrows, M. 1970, The Basis of Israelite Marriage, Kraus Reprint, New York De Vaux, Roland 1997, Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions, translated by John McHugh, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans Dwight, Roger Daniels 1990, Hosea and salvation history: the early traditions of Israel in the prophecy of Hosea, W. de Gruyter, Berlin, New York Instone-Brewer, David 2002, Divorce and Remarriage in the Bible: The Social and Literary Context, Grand Rapids, Cambridge 340 Köstenberger, Andreas J.; Jones, David W. 2010, God, Marriage, and Family: Rebuilding the Biblical Foundation, 2d. rev. edition, Crossway Books, Wheaton Mayer, Günter 1987, Die jüdische Frau in der hellenistisch-römischen Antike, Kohlhammer, Stuttgart Metodiu din Olimp 1984, Banchetul sau Despre castitate, in Sfântul Grigorie Taumaturgul, Metodiu din Olimp, Scrieri, in col. PSB, 10, EIBMBOR Neufeld, Ephraim 1944, Ancient Hebrew Marriage Laws, Longmans, London Pedersen, Johannes 1926, Israel. Its Life and Culture, vol. I, London-Copenhagen Plautz, W. 1964, Die Form der Eheschliessung im Alten Testament, in “Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft”, nr. 76, de Gruyter, Berlin Scharbert, J. 1977, Ehe und Eheschliessung in der Rechtssprache des Pentateuch und beim Chronisten, in Braulik Georg (Hg.), Studien zum Pentateuch, Festschrift für Walter Kornfeld zum 60. Geburtstag, Freiburg, Basel, Wien Semen, Petre 1995, Familia şi importan a ei în Vechiul Testament, in Familia creştină azi, Editura Trinitas, Iaşi Smith, W. Robertson 1885, Kinship and Marriage in Early Arabia, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Vatamanu, Cătălin, Diac. dr., 2011, «Un bărbat și-a luat femeie... » (Deut 22,13). Semnificații teologice ale metaforei femeii ca proprietate, in Pr. prof. dr. Viorel Sava, Pr. lect. dr. Ilie Melniciuc-Puică (coord.), Familia în societatea contemporană, col. „Episteme”, Editura Doxologia, Iași Weisberg, Dvora E. 2009, Levirate Marriage and the Family in Ancient Judaism, Brandeis University Press, Waltham Wright, J.S., Thompson, J.A. 1995, „Căsătorie”, in Douglas, J.D. (coord.), Dic ionar Biblic, translated by Liviu Pup and John Tipei, Editura Cartea Creştină, Oradea 341 Literatura şi sacrul Un ouvrage méconnu de nos jours : Catihismul omului creștin, moral și soțial. Pentru trebuința tinerilor din școalele începătoare de Florian Aron 1* Maria ALDEA, Monica VLASE Florian Aron’s Catihismul omului creștin, moral și soțial. Pentru trebuința tinerilor din școalele începătoare [The Catechism of a Good, Moral, and Social Christian. For Primary Schools] remains unknown to today’s generation, despite having seen more than 20 editions in the space of just five decades of the 19th century. This is the reason why we have carried out a concise analysis of Florian Aron’s work, with a focus on those elements that made it an authentic Christian, moral, and social behavioural guidebook, influencing and shaping the thinking of the 1848 generation and of the ones that followed. Keywords: Florian Aron, catechism, Romanian education in the 19th century. 1. Florian Aron2, un « oublié » de l’histoire Tout comme d’autres intellectuels roumains célèbres tels que Nicolae Bălcescu ou George Barițiu, Florian Aron appartient à une génération de savants qui s’étaient activement impliqués à la préparation de la Révolution roumaine de 1848. Toutefois, au-delà de cette reconnaissance historique et politique de sa valeur, le nom de Florian Aron reste à jamais gravé dans la mémoire collective pour avoir été « l’un des plus importants auteurs d’ouvrages didactiques de la Valachie d’avant 1848 »3. Né en 1805 à Rod, dans le département de Sibiu et mort en 1887 à Bucarest, Florian Aron fait des études primaires à Blaj, études qu’il poursuit par une formation universitaire à Budapest4. Très concerné par le * Maria Aldea remercie « Babeș-Bolyai » Université de Cluj-Napoca pour le soutien financier. 1 Le catéchisme du bon chrétien, moral et social. Pour les écoles élémentaires, de Florian Aron. Pour la rédaction de cette étude nous nous sommes servie des exemplaires disponibles à la Bibliothèque universitaire centrale « Lucian Blaga » de Cluj-Napoca, recensés sous les cotes 341891 et 213602. 2 Son nom de famille véritable était Florian et non pas Aron (ou Aaron) comme on le croit de nos jours encore. Voir, dans ce sens, V. Popa, « Aron Florian (1805-1887) », in Buletinul Universității « V. Babeş » şi « Bolyai ». Seria « tiințe sociale », I (1956), nos 1-2, p. 225. 3 O. Ghibu, Din istoria literaturii didactice româneşti, Ediție îngrijită de Octav Păun, Tabel cronologic, studiu introductiv, note şi comentarii V. Popeangă, Bucureşti, Editura Didactică şi Pedagogică, 1975, p. 264 : « unul dintre cei mai valoroși autori de cărți didactice din ara Românească, înainte de 1848 ». 4 Voir V. Popa, art. cit., p. 225-230. 345 développement du système éducatif de son époque, il enseigne dans plusieurs écoles roumaines, tout d’abord « dans le village de Golești, dans le département de Muscel »5, ensuite à l’École centrale de Craiova6, à Sibiu et, enfin, au Collège de Saint Sava et à l’Université de Bucarest. Même s’il avait déjà publié de nombreux articles dans les revues de l’époque7, Florian Aron s’est rendu célèbre grâce surtout à la publication, en 1840, d’un Dictionnaire français – roumain (rédigé en collaboration avec Petrache Poenaru et Gheorghe Hill) et de plusieurs traités de nature didactique et formative8 consacrés à des matières couramment enseignées dans les écoles roumaines des premières décennies du XIXe siècle, à savoir l’histoire9, la géographie10, l’histoire de l’Église11 ou l’histoire de la catéchèse. G. Călinescu, Istoria literaturii române de la origini până în prezent, Ediția a II-a revăzută şi adăugită, Ediție şi prefață de Al. Piru, Bucureşti, Editura Minerva, 1988, p. 82. À consulter également G. Fotino, « coala din Goleşti (1826) », in Din istoria pedagogiei româneşti. Culegere de studii, t. II, sub redacția prof. Ilie Popescu Teiuşan, Bucureşti, Editura Didactică şi Pedagogică, 1966, p. 214243 ; idem, « Un document inedit privitor la şcoala din Goleşti întemeiată în 1826 », in Revista de Pedagogie, XVII (1968), no 6, p. 93-97 ; Gh. Pîrnuță, « Contribuții la cunoaşterea începuturilor învățământului sătesc din ara Românească (secolele XVII-XIX) », in Din istoria pedagogiei româneşti. Culegere de studii, t. II, sub redacția prof. Ilie Popescu Teiuşan, Bucureşti, Editura Didactică şi Pedagogică, 1966, p. 100-102. 6 Voir I. Popescu Teiuşan, « Învățământul în Oltenia (secolul al XVIII-lea şi începutul secolului al XIX-lea) », in Din istoria pedagogiei româneşti. Culegere de studii, t. II, sub redacția prof. Ilie Popescu Teiuşan, Bucureşti, Editura Didactică şi Pedagogică, 1966, pp. 106-122 ; idem, « Dezvoltarea învățământului în secolul al XVIII-lea şi începutul secolului al XIX-lea în ara Românească, Moldova şi Transilvania », in Istoria învățământului din România. Compendiu, Colectiv de redacție: Const. C. Giurescu, Igor Ivanov, Nicolae Mihăileanu, Dinu Moroianu, Ilie Popescu Teiuşan, Ion Stanciu, Dumitru Todericiu, Bucureşti, Editura Didactică şi Pedagogică, 1971, p. 64-79. 7 Voir D. t. Petruțiu, « Aron Florian şi orientarea literară a Telegrafului Român », in Gând românesc, anul I (1933), p. 17-22. 8 Un inventaire des œuvres de Florian Aaron est à retrouver dans le volume dirigé par G. Ştrempel, Bibliografia românească modernă (1831-1918), t. I (A-C), prefaţă de Gabriel Ştrempel, Bucureşti, Editura Ştiinţifică şi Enciclopedică / Societatea de Ştiinţe Filologice din R.S. România, 1984, entrée « Aaron Florian ». Voir aussi l’article d’O. Marcu, « Aaron Florian şi contribuţia sa la dezvoltarea literaturii didactice româneşti », in Transilvania, nos 5-6, 2012, p. 122-127, et les annexes de l’ouvrage de Mirela-Luminiţa Murgescu, Între „bunul creştin” şi „bravul român”. Rolul şcolii primare în construirea identită ii na ionale româneşti (1831-1878), Iaşi, Editura A' 92, 1999, p. 235248. 9 Ces informations ont été puisées dans l’ouvrage de G. Ştrempel, op. cit., entrée Aaron Florian : Idee repede de istoria Prin ipatului ării Rumâne ti, tomes I-III, Bucureşti, 1835, 1837, 1838 ; Manual de istoria principatului Romaniei. De la cele dintâi vremi istorice până în zilele de acum, Bucureşti, 1839 (1843); Elemente de istoria lumii, Bucureşti, 1845 (1846, 1847); Mihai II Bravul, biografia si caracteristica lui. Trase din Istoria ării Româneşti, Bucureşti, 1858. 10 Ces informations ont été puisées dans l’ouvrage de G. Ştrempel, op. cit., entrée Aaron Florian : Elementuri de gheografie pentru trebuin a tinerilor începători, Bucureşti, 1834 (1839) ; Manual de geografia cea mică primită de Comisia profesorală pentru trebuința tinerilor începători, Bucureşti, 1839. 5 346 C’est ce sujet de la catéchèse que va nous retenir dans ce qui suit. La présente étude est donc consacrée à l’analyse du Catihismul omului creștin, moral și soțial12 signé par Florian Aron, un ouvrage qui avait joui d’un succès considérable à l’époque, à s’en rapporter à ses nombreuses rééditions, tout en sombrant dans l’oubli un siècle plus tard. 2. Les enjeux du Catéchisme du bon chrétien, moral et social C’est un lieu commun que de rappeler qu’au XIXe siècle, la religion occupait une place de choix parmi les disciplines enseignées dans les écoles roumaines. Le principal enjeu de cet enseignement religieux résidait dans l’éveil d’une conscience à la fois théologique et morale chez un public majoritairement jeune. C’est dans ce contexte qu’on voit se développer une tradition des catéchismes à valeur didactique et formative, promouvant « une édification chrétienne continue, des exercices spirituels et des contenus pédagogiques »13 tout en mettant à la disposition des jeunes collégiens un guide de comportement exemplaire pour la vision qu’on se faisait alors du « bon citoyen ». Grâce au rôle éducatif d’une école « fondée sur des principes religieux et moraux »14, c’est à ces jeunes collégiens que revient le devoir de devenir des modèles de moralité et de contribuer, par la suite, à l’essor et au bien-être de leur pays : « L’École était censée former de bons citoyens. Tout élève devait être, tout d’abord, un bon chrétien et, ensuite, un citoyen correct, c’est-à-dire un personnage remplissant avec assiduité, conviction et attachement ses obligations envers son pays, envers les autorités et envers sa famille. Dans une hiérarchie de ces attachements, la religion conservait toujours sa position privilégiée, les autres éléments étant interchangeables »15. 11 Voir G. trempel, op. cit., entrée Aaron Florian: Elementuri de Istoria Sfântă a legi[!] vechi şi a celii nuoă, trasă din Biblie şi Evanghelie ; sau Prescurtare de Testamentul cel vechiu şi cel nuou, Bucureşti, 1835; Elementuri de Istoria Sfântă sau Prescurtare de Testamentul cel vechiu şi cel nou, Bucureşti, 1841 ; Istoria sacră sau biblică a Vechiului şi Noului Testament, Bucureşti, 1873 (1876, 1877, 1878, 1879, 1881, 1883, 1883) ; Elemente de istoria sacră sau biblică a Vechiului şi Noului Testament, Bucureşti, 1867 (deux éditions en 1869, 1871, 1872) ; Istoria sfântă elementară, sau Prescurtare de Testamentul Vechiu şi Nuou, Bucureşti, 1851 (1852, 1854, 1855, 1856, 1858, 1859). 12 Désormais en français : Le Catéchisme du bon chrétien, moral et social. 13 D. Radosav, Sentimentul religios la români: o perspectivă istorică (sec. XVII-XX), ClujNapoca, Dacia, 1997, p. 18 : « care înseamnă edificare creştină continuă, exerciţii ale cunoaşterii şi pietăţii religioase ». 14 Mirela-Luminiţa Murgescu, op. cit., p. 48 : « să aibă ca fundament principiile religiei și ale moralei ». 15 Ibidem, pp. 49-50 : « coala avea menirea să formeze din fiecare elev un cetățean. Acesta trebuia să fie în primul rând un bun creștin și apoi un bun mădular al societății, adică un personaj ceși îndeplinește cu asiduitate, convingere și atașament datoriile față de patrie, autorități și familie. Întro ierarhie a acestor atașamente, religia își păstrează întotdeauna primul loc, celelalte elemente fiind interșanjabile ». 347 Ainsi le régime obligatoire de l’étude catéchétique avait-il comme but non seulement l’assimilation des concepts chrétiens et des mystères de la foi mais aussi la formation éthique, morale et religieuse de l’individu. En d’autres termes, le rôle de l’éducation religieuse était de former à la fois « de bons chrétiens » et « de braves Roumains » qui allaient contribuer au progrès de la société. Tout ce projet culturel et éducatif s’inscrivait dans le cadre réformateur imposé par les directives du Règlement organique concernant le développement du système éducatif, en particulier du réseau scolaire et des manuels nécessaires pour la bonne éducation des jeunes Roumains16. C’est ainsi que Florian Aron fait paraître en 1834, aux presses d’Eliad, son Catéchisme du bon chrétien, moral et social. Rédigé en roumain avec des caractères cyrilliques, l’ouvrage a connu deux éditions successives, en 1834 et en 1853. Une variante condensée de cet ouvrage sera publiée sous deux titres légèrement différents (Manual de catehismul cel mic al omului creștin, moral şi soțial / Le petit catéchisme ou manuel de catéchisme du bon chrétien, moral et social – avec douze rééditions entre 1839 et 1860 et, respectivement, Micul catehismu sau datoriile omului creștin, moral și social / Le petit catéchisme ou les devoirs du bon chrétien moral et social – une variante qui a connu, à son tour, douze rééditions entre 1869 et 1889)17. Les deux éditions parues sous le même titre ne comportent pas de différences au niveau du contenu. Seule la finalité de l’ouvrage sera différente, la première édition étant destinée « à l’usage des jeunes gens » tandis que la seconde se voulait être un manuel « utile » censé « éclairer les esprits des jeunes gens ». Conçu comme un dialogue progressant par un jeu de questions et de réponses, comme la définition18 même du terme l’implique d’ailleurs, le texte de Florian Aron pose un enjeu important, celui de convaincre le jeune élève « des écoles élémentaires » – à qui ce catéchisme est destiné – de devenir à la fois un bon citoyen et une personne morale. Organisés selon un scénario très rigoureux19, les thèmes de l’ouvrage prêtent à la discussion voire au débat. Florian Aron se penche sur des questions qui, à cette 16 Ibidem, p. 33. Cf. G. trempel (dir.), op. cit., entrée « Aaron Florian » ; Cf. Mirela-Luminiţa Murgescu, op. cit., note 47, pp. 104-105. Voir aussi O. Marcu, art. cit., p. 124. 18 « 1. Exposition, par demandes et réponses, des principes de la foi chrétienne ; […] ouvrage contenant cette exposition » (« 1. Expunere a principiilor religiei creștine, sub formă de întrebări și răspunsuri; catihis; carte care cuprinde această expunere ».), DEX. Dicționarul explicativ al limbii române, deuxième édition, Bucureşti, Univers enciclopedic, 1998, entrée « catehism ». 19 En 1833 la direction des écoles roumaines lance une compétition pour la rédaction des manuels de catéchèse, manuels qui devaient traiter d’une manière obligatoire trois aspects, à savoir « 1. les devoirs de l’homme en tant que chrétien ; 2. les devoirs de l’homme en tant qu’être social et 3. les devoirs de l’homme en tant qu’être raisonnable et moral. » (« 1) datoriile omului ca creștin; 2) ca mădular al societății; 3) ca ființă cugetătoare și cunoscătoare de fapte moralicești ») Voir V. A. Urechia, Istoria şcoalelor..., I, p. 250, apud Mirela-Luminița Murgescu, op. cit., p. 104. 17 348 époque-là comme de nos jours, étaient à la fois provocatrices et controversées. Sa rhétorique souple mais bien fondée cherche à convaincre son public à travers une démarche inductive qui mue l’inconnu en connu et l’abstrait en concret, tout en dépassant le stade rationnel du discours grâce à l’éveil des émotions dans l’âme du lecteur. Divisé en trois grands volets consacrés à des problématiques découlant logiquement l’une de l’autre (Datoriile omului către Dumnezeu / Les devoirs de l’homme envers Dieu, Datoriile omului către sine / Les devoirs de l’homme envers lui-même et Datoriile omului către ceilalți oameni / Les devoirs de l’homme envers son prochain, à ce troisième volet étant annexée une série de Datorii deosebite ale oamenilor / Devoirs particuliers des êtres humains), l’ouvrage débute par un Avant-propos / Întroducere. Essayant d’inciter son jeune lecteur à se poser des questions sur sa place dans le monde et sur la nature de sa condition, Florian Aron commence par lui expliquer la nature de l’homme comme celle de « la créature la plus accomplie de tous les êtres créés par Dieu sur la terre »20. Cette noblesse de l’homme est une conséquence de son don de « l’esprit, de l’entendement, du jugement et de sa volonté libre d’agir »21. Quant au sens de l’être humain dans le monde, la pensée de Florian Aron est à la fois succincte et efficace : l’homme est né pour être heureux. La « recette » du bonheur proposée par le Professeur est extrêmement simple, ne nécessitant que deux ingrédients, à savoir « le repos » et « la paix de l’esprit », engendrés par une conscience innocente soutenue par l’espoir que « plus ou moins tôt, ici-bas ou là-haut Dieu va lui donner la juste récompense » 22. Il n’est pas rare que, pour des raisons pédagogiques et argumentatives, Florian Aron reprenne certaines idées qu’il juge essentielles. C’est le cas, entre autres, de l’idée mentionnée ci-dessus concernant la « recette » du bonheur : au fil des pages, l’auteur reviendra à cette vision conformément à laquelle l’homme ne pourra acquérir son repos qu’en évitant « le mal » et en faisant « ce qui est bien ». Voilà les tâches à remplir afin de sentir « la paix et le repos descendre dans son âme » et de pouvoir « espérer recevoir de la main du Seigneur la récompense pour ses bonnes actions »23. Bref, cette quête du bonheur et du repos de l’esprit exige, pour autant, « certains devoir à remplir »24. Le paradigme des devoirs se déploie sur trois grands axes : un premier axe, spirituel, est représenté par les « devoirs envers Dieu », un deuxième axe, individuel, est formé par les devoirs envers « soi-même » tandis qu’un 20 F. Aron, op. cit., p. 3: « făptura cea mai desăvârşită dintre toate făpturile câte a făcut Dumnezeu pe pământ ». 21 Ibidem, p. 3 : « minte, înţelegere, judecată şi voie slobodă de a lucra ». 22 Ibidem, p. 4 : « Dumnezeu ori mai în grabă ori mai târziu, sau în viaţa aceasta sau în ceealaltă o să-i dea răsplătirea cea cuviincioasă ». 23 Ibidem, p. 4 : « a se feri de rău şi a face bine, [...] simţi linişte şi odihnă în sufletul său că au făcut aşa, şi [...] nădăjdui de la Dumnezeu răsplătire după faptele sale cele bune ». 24 Ibidem, p. 5 : « să să se silească a împlini nişte datorii ». 349 troisième axe, plus social, est celui de l’altérité supposant les devoirs envers « ses semblables ». Exigés seulement par les œuvres fondamentales de la religion chrétienne (à savoir « les Saintes Écritures ou la Bible, les quatre Évangiles, les actes et les épîtres des Apôtres, les décisions des conciles et les ouvrages des Pères de l’Église »25), tous ces devoirs contribuent à la transformation du jeune homme dans un « chrétien véritable » et « un bon Roumain ». Le voyage initiatique du jeune étudiant ne commence qu’après l’assimilation des préceptes chrétiens et des vertus cardinales ou théologales : la Foi (bonne connaissance de la profession de la foi chrétienne), la Charité (actualisée par l’obéissance aux commandements divins) et l’Espérance (apprentissage de la prière Notre Père). On a là le fondement de tout enseignement théologique et moral. La première partie du Catéchisme, intitulée Datoriile omului către Dumnezeu / Les devoirs de l’homme envers Dieu, se propose de développer dans la conscience de l’élève la sensibilité à la dimension spirituelle de l’être humain. Il découle de cet objectif que l’un des premiers sujets soumis au débat est le mystère de la nature de Dieu. On y avance plusieurs arguments en faveur de la nécessité de connaître Dieu, de l’aimer, de l’adorer, de Lui obéir et de se fier à Lui26, en rapport avec la félicité suprême que l’homme va connaître dans le Royaume des Cieux. Il est intéressant de souligner que le discours de Florian Aron ne cherche jamais à provoquer la peur, à faire trembler les fidèles ou, par contre, à jouer sur les effets psychologiques d’une moralisation excessive. Partout dans ce discours on laisse à l’homme la possibilité de choisir librement entre le bien et le mal. Par exemple, en parlant de la nécessité d’honorer le Seigneur27, Aron déconstruit l’acte d’adoration dans toutes ses composantes en insistant sur l’obligation de les respecter dans leur ensemble : « Tout fidèle doit honorer la Religion sacrée et croire à tous ses enseignements sans douter de leur vérité. Il doit respecter ces enseignements, adorer Dieu en toute humilité et le reconnaître comme le Créateur du ciel et de la terre. Il doit louer la Sainte Trinité c’est-àdire le Père Créateur, le Fils Sauveur et l’Esprit Saint Consolateur. Il doit adorer le Père qui a créé de rien le ciel, la terre et tout ce qu’ils renferment ; il doit adorer aussi Jésus-Christ, c’est-à-dire le Fils qui, de par sa grande miséricorde, est descendu du ciel sur la terre et a pris chair pour sauver les hommes par Ses enseignements et Ses actions divines, le Fils qui a souffert pour les hommes, a été crucifié, est mort et a été enseveli mais qui est ressuscité des morts comme un Dieu tout-puissant et est monté aux cieux ; il doit adorer, enfin, 25 Ibidem, p. 6 : « Sfânta Scriptură sau Biblia, cele 4. Evanghelii, cărţile Apostolilor, cărţile soboarălor şi alte cărţi ale Sfinţilor Părinţi ». 26 Ibidem, p. 10. 27 Ibidem, p. 19 : « Le chrétien doit honorer Dieu en faisant preuve d’une piété à la fois intérieure et extérieure, c’est-à-dire en L’aimant de tout son cœur, de toute sa pensée et par tout ce qu’il fait. Une telle piété est bien supérieure à tous les biens de ce monde. » (« Omul creştin trebuie să cinstească pe Dumnezeu şi din lăuntru şi din afară, adică şi cu inima şi cu gândul şi cu fapta mai presus decât orice lucru din lume. »). 350 l’Esprit Saint qui a inspiré les prophètes, les Apôtres et tous les Pères de l’Église pour annoncer aux hommes l’œuvre du salut et la voie de la sanctification chrétienne. Il doit vénérer la Vierge Marie, la Mère du Christ et tous les saints qui sont comme des amis ou des bien-aimés de Dieu ; il doit vénérer la Croix qui est le signe de la chrétienté par ce que c’est sur la Croix que le Christ, le fondateur de la religion chrétienne a été crucifié. Il doit vénérer les sept sacrements ou mystères, c’est-à-dire le Baptême, l’onction avec le Saint Chrême, la Confession, l’Eucharistie, l’Ordination, le Mariage et l’Onction des malades ; il doit vénérer toutes les choses sacrées qui sont destinées à sa sanctification comme les icônes et les autres objets du culte ; il doit, enfin, respecter les livres sacrés, lire souvent les textes saints et professer couramment le Symbole de la foi, c’est-à-dire le Crédo puisqu’on y trouve, condensés, tous les mystères de la foi chrétienne »28. Après avoir recensé les composantes de l’acte d’adoration et des actes de vénération, Aron met en garde son lecteur contre les pièges qu’il doit contourner afin d’adorer Dieu en esprit et en vérité : « Tout chrétien qui veut adorer Dieu doit se protéger contre l’incrédulité, l’idolâtrie et l’hypocrisie ou le pharisaïsme ; il doit se garder de proférer des jurons, des charmes et des incantations parce que tous ces actes sont contraires à la piété véritable »29. Et Aron de continuer par un bref exposé des éléments qui déshonorent Dieu par leur manque de piété : « Lorsqu’une personne ne croit pas aux enseignements de la Religion et qu’elle les refuse ou bien elle ne les croit pas dans leur intégrité, ou bien elle ne les respecte pas, cette personne-là déshonore Dieu qui a révélé la Religion aux hommes pour qu’ils puissent être heureux. Une telle personne n’a aucun espoir de salut éternel. D’ailleurs, dans cette vie même, le mécréant est la plus vile créature. Il n’a aucune idée de son origine, de sa place dans le monde et de son avenir ; il mène ici-bas une existence troublée et accablée de tristes 28 Ibidem, p. 20-21 : « trebuie să cinstească sfânta Religie, şi toate îmvăţăturile ei să le crează fără îndoială, să le asculte şi să le păzească pă deplin; să se închine lui Dumnezeu cu smerenie şi cu umilinţă ca Celuia ce a făcut cerul şi pământul; să slăvească pe prea sfânta Troiţă adică pe Tatăl făcătorul, pe Fiul răscumpărătorul şi pe Duhul sfânt mângâitorul; să slăvească pe Tatăl ca pe Cel Ce a făcut lumea, adică cerul şi pământul şi toate câte sânt din nimica; să slăvească pe Fiul, adică pe Hristos, Care din milostivirea Sa s-a pogorât pe pământ şi a luat trup de om numai ca să mântuiască pe oameni cu învăţăturile şi faptele sale cele Dumnezeieşti; a pătimit pentru oameni răstignire, a murit şi s-a îngropat şi a înviiat ca un Dumnezeu puternic şi s-a suit iarăşi la ceruri; să slăvească pe Duhul sfânt carele a însuflat pe prooroci, pe Apostoli şi pe toţi sfinţi părinţi ca să vestească lumii şi să împrăştie învăţăturile cele trebuincioase pentru mântuinţă, care toate sânt orânduite spre mântuirea şi sfinţirea creştinilor; să cinstească pe Maria fecioara maica lui Hristos şi pe toţi sfinţii cari sânt ca nişte prieteni iubiţi ai lui Dumnezeu; să cinstească pe sfânta Cruce care este semnul creştinătăţii pentru că pe ea s-a răstignit Hristos însemnătorul Religii creştineşti; să cinstească cele 7 Sfinte taine, adică Botezul, Mirul, Ispovedania, Cumenecătura, Preoţia, Nunta şi Maslul; să cinstească toate lucrurile cele sfinte care sânt spre sfinţirea şi podoaba creştinilor, precum sânt icoanele şi altele ca aceste; în sfârşit să cinstească cărţile sfintei religii, să le citească adeseaori, şi să zică adeseori simbolul credinţi adică Crezul, pentru că în el se coprinde pe scurt toată Religia creştinească ». 29 Ibidem, p. 22 : « Tot omul creştin care cinsteşte pe Dumnezeu trebuie să se ferească de necredinţă, de idololatrie şi înjurături, de descântece şi vrăjitorii şi de ipocrisie sau fariseism, pentru că toate aceste vatămă cinstirea lui Dumnezeu ». 351 pensées ; il est opprimé par les autres et chassé par toute la société humaine ; enfin, il meurt sans espoir et sans aucune consolation »30. L’accomplissement de cette première étape du cheminement spirituel conduit nécessairement à la deuxième, celle de la formation individuelle. Dans la deuxième partie de l’ouvrage, réunissant les Datoriile omului către sine / Devoirs de l’homme envers lui-même, Aron recense les obligations de l’homme à l’égard de « son corps et de sa santé, de son âme, de ses biens matériels et de ses richesses, de sa dignité et du repos de son existence »31. Les affirmations de Florian Aron revêtent parfois la valeur d’une maxime comme dans la séquence où il parle de l’attention prêtée aux besoins corporels : « Tout homme est obligé de veiller à ce que son corps soit intègre et que tous ses organes – les yeux, les mains, les pieds, les oreilles et le corps tout entier – soient en bonne santé. La santé est le bien le plus précieux de l’homme. Sans elle, l’homme ne peut s’acquitter de ses devoirs. Sans elle, la vie n’est qu’une longue punition et aucune richesse ne vaut grand-chose sans la santé »32. Aron insiste également sur les choses à éviter afin de rester en bonne santé, à savoir « la gourmandise, la saleté, la paresse, la luxure »33, bref, tout ce qui a un rapport avec une vie désordonnée. L’auteur du Catéchisme prescrit même une diète dans ce sens : « On doit mener une vie équilibrée et sobre, travailler et se reposer selon un programme bien établi et qui ne soit pas surchargé et ne choisir que des divertissements convenables »34. Ainsi, la santé est « affectée » quand : « on ne lave pas son visage ou son corps et quand on ne porte pas de vêtements propres [...] un film est formé sur le corps, qui bouche les pores et empêche l’homme de bien respirer et de transpirer, ce qui est la cause de maintes maladies. L’air vicié qui n’est pas éliminé par 30 Ibidem, p. 22-23 : « Când cineva nu crede cele ce îmvaţă Religia, sau nu le crede după cum îmvaţă ea, sau nu face nici păzeşte cele ce îmvaţă şi cele ce porunceşte ea, acela necinsteşte pe Dumnezeu care a dat oamenilor Religia ca să se facă fericiţi, şi un asfel de om nu poate avea nicio nădejde de mântuirea sufletului după moarte; dar şi în viiaţa aceasta omul necredincios este cel mai ticălos; el nu ştie de unde este, unde se află şi ce o să fie; trăieşte în lume turburat şi mâhnit cu gândurile sale; este oropsit de lume şi gonit din soţietatea omenească, şi moare desnădăjduit şi fără nici o mângâiere. ». 31 Ibidem, p. 33 : « pentru trupul său şi sănătatea sa, pentru sufletul său, pentru avere sau bogăţie, pentru cinste şi pentru neturburarea vieţii sale ». 32 Ibidem, p. 33-34 : « Orice om e dator să îngrijască ca trupul său să fie întreg, sdravăn şi sănătos în toate mădulările, precum ochii, mâinile, picioarele, gura, urechile şi tot trupul, pentru că nimic nu este omului mai scump decât sănătatea; fără sănătate nu poate omul să-şi împlinească datoriile; fără sănătate via a este numai o pedeapsă, şi orice fericire din lume fără sănătate nu plăteşte nimic. ». 33 Ibidem, p. 34 : « De lăcomie, de necurăţenie, de lene, de desfrânări şi de orice lucruri fără orânduială ». 34 Ibidem, p. 35 : « Să fie îmfrânat şi cumpătat, să fie curat, să muncească cu orânduială şi să se odihnească cu măsură petrecându-şi cu plăceri nevătămătoare ». 352 l’ouverture constante des portes et des fenêtres et le manque de nettoyage sont également des sources de saleté. Une personne sale est impure ; elle est rejetée par les autres avec dégoût et n’est aimée par aucune créature. On évite toujours sa compagnie, on ne l’invite jamais à des fêtes et à des réunions. On la condamne souvent comme une personne incapable de prendre soin de son bien-être. […] Si quelqu’un mène une vie désordonnée et passe souvent les nuits dans des clubs et à des bals, à jouer aux jeux et à se livrer à toutes sortes de débauches, il est impossible qu’il ne maigrisse pas et ne devienne pas malade. C’est aussi le cas des personnes qui courent trop, qui sautent d’une manière exagérée ou qui lèvent des objets trop lourds : elles risquent souvent de nuire à leur corps et à leur santé. C’est chose connue qu’un tel train de vie a rendu malades bien des jeunes gens et qu’il a causé parfois même leur mort, quelque jeunes qu’ils fussent »35. Le contre-modèle à rejeter est balancé par un modèle de régime de vie qu’Aron expose dans tous ses détails : « Quand on lave souvent son visage et son corps et quand on porte des vêtements propres, pas nécessairement chers car la propreté est accessible à tous, lorsqu’on aime nettoyer sa maison et on laisse l’air frais entrer par les portes et par les fenêtres, alors on se sent même mieux qu’avant. L’hygiène est si nécessaire à l’être humain qu’on peut dire qu’elle est la seconde santé de l’homme. Une personne propre est aimée de tous. […] Il faut faire attention qu’après avoir effectué un travail pénible on cherche à se reposer car il n’y a rien de plus agréable que de se reposer après avoir travaillé. Ainsi, on peut faire une courte randonnée ou s’amuser entre amis en toute innocence. Une telle personne qui parsème ses efforts de repos et d’amusements innocents travaille avec plaisir et elle est toujours en bonne santé »36. Ibidem, p. 36, 38 : « Când cineva nu-şi spală obrazul şi trupul, şi nu poartă haine curate, atunci pe trupul aceluia se face un noroiu care astupă pori[i] trupului, şi omul neputând să răsufle şi să asudeze, se-bolnăveşte adeseori. Asemenea este necurăţenie şi când cineva în casa unde petrece nu-i deschide uşile şi ferestrile adeseori ca să se-aerisească casa, şi nu îngrijaşte ca să fie curat în casă, căci şi atunci aerul acela din casă se face puturos şi otrăveşte sănătatea omului. Omul care e necurat este greţos şi scârbos la orice om, nimini nu-l iubeşte, toţi se-feresc să nu se-atingă de dânsul; nu este priimit în adunări şi soţietăţi, şi sufere adeseori ruşini mari, căci nu e vrednic să îngrijască de trupul său. [...] Când cineva petrece fără orânduială şi peste măsură nopţi întregi la clupuri, baluri, jocuri şi alte desfrânări, daca aceasta o va face des, e peste putinţă să nu slăbească şi să nu se bolnăvească omul acela. Asemenea şi când aleargă cineva prea mult, când sare prea mult, când rădică prea mult, şi atunci încă îşi vatămă trupul şi sănătatea. Apoi şi toată lumea ştie că asfel de lucruri şi altele ca acestea fără orânduială şi desfrânate, nu numai c-au bolnăvit, ci au şi îngropat pe mulţi tineri în floarea tinereţilor ». 36 Ibidem, pp. 36-37, 38-39 : « Când cineva îşi spală faţa şi trupul adeseori, şi poartă haine curate, nu scumpe căci ori ce om poate fi curat; când îngrijaşte ca casa unde lăcuieşte să fie curată, şi când deschide uşile şi ferestrile adeseori ca să intre aer curat, atunci se-simte ca când ar fi mai sănătos de cât mai înainte. Curăţenia aceasta este atât de trebuincioasă oricăruia om, încât ea să zice că este a doa sănătate. Către aceasta un om curat este şi drag şi plăcut la toţi. [...] omul e dator după lucru când şi când să se-odihnească, fiindcă nimic nu este mai dulce ca odihna după muncă. Odihna aceasta poate s-o facă plimbându-se puţintel, sau petrecând în adunări şi soţietăţi de prieteni cu vorbă, cu joc, cu glume cu alte lucruri nesupărătoare. Omul care face aşa, care îşi îndulceşte munca şi osteneala cu 35 353 Assez souvent, le discours de l’auteur prend la forme d’un conseil voire d’un avertissement ou d’un signal d’alarme. Dans le paragraphe consacré aux Datoriile omului pentru avere / Devoirs de l’homme à l’égard de ses biens matériels, Aron affirme : « Si l’on a des enfants il n’est pas condamnable d’accumuler des richesses et des biens pour les léguer ensuite à ses enfants après sa mort ; pour autant, ce n’est pas une raison de mener la vie d’un pauvre ou d’un mendiant. De plus, il faut garder à l’esprit que bien souvent les enfants qui espèrent recevoir un héritage de la part de leurs parents refusent d’apprendre quelque chose ou de pratiquer un métier ; et, après avoir dissipé la fortune de leurs parents, ils n’ont plus de quoi manger et deviennent méchants et maudits. C’est pourquoi il vaut mieux que les parents prennent soin de l’éducation de leurs enfants et qu’ils leur fassent apprendre un métier, ce qui est préférable à toute fortune fragile et incertaine. Une bonne éducation et un bon métier, voilà ce qui rend les futurs adultes bons, honnêtes et heureux. »37. Intitulée Datoriile către ceilal i oameni / Les devoirs de l’homme envers son prochain, la troisième partie de l’ouvrage évalue le positionnement de l’individu au sein de la communauté. L’homme doit respecter toutes les autres personnes de « n’importe quelle nationalité et de n’importe quelle religion »38, conformément au principe biblique d’« aimer son prochain comme soi-même ». Ainsi, tout homme doit être responsable « de la vie de son prochain, de son bien-être et de ses biens matériels. On doit veiller à ne jamais troubler la vie de qui que ce soit. – De plus, l’homme doit s’acquitter de ses devoirs envers les morts et à l’égard des animaux. – Il y a aussi des devoirs particuliers comme ceux des fonctionnaires à l’égard des autorités, des enfants à l’égard de leurs parents, de leurs frères, de leurs sœurs et de leurs amis, des apprentis à l’égard de leurs maîtres, des personnes riches à l’égard des pauvres et, enfin, de tout homme envers sa patrie. »39. odihnă potrivită şi cu oarecare plăceri nevătămătoare, se-apucă de lucru totdauna cu plăcere şi este totdauna sănătos. ». 37 Ibidem, p. 49 : « Daca un om are copii poate strânge bogăţii şi averi ca să le lase după moartea sa; numai să bage de seamă ca din pricina aceasta el să nu trăiască ca un calic şi sărac. Către aceasta trebuie să ia în băgare de seamă că de multe ori copii[i] cari au nădejde c-o să le rămâie bani şi averi de la părinţi şi rude, nu îmvaţă nimic şi nu ştiu nici o meserie, şi aşa după ce cheltuiesc averea părinţilor, rămân muritori de foame şi se fac răi şi blestemaţi; d-aceia mai bine este ca părinţii să dea copiilor lor o creştere bună şi să-i îmveţe o meserie, decât să le lase bani, bogăţii şi averi pentru că acestea se-prăpădesc în grab, iar creşterea bună, îmvăţătura şi meseria face pe copii oameni buni, cinstiţi şi fericiţi. ». 38 Ibidem, p. 69 : « de ce naţie vor fi sau de orice religie vor fi ». 39 Ibidem, p. 69 : « pentru viaţa fieşcăruia om, pentru sănătatea trupului fieştecăruia om, pentru averea fieştecăruia om, şi pentru neturburarea vieţii fieştecăruia om. – După aceasta are omul nişte datorii şi către cei morţi şi către dobitoacele cu care se-slujaşte în lume. – Pe lângă aceste, sânt nişte 354 Il faut chercher toujours à remercier ceux qui nous ont fait du bien puisque « le mécontentement est un péché très grave qui attriste la vie de notre bienfaiteur. On doit éviter de tomber dans un tel péché car on risque, sinon, qu’à un moment donné, lorsqu’on cherche du secours, personne ne vienne à notre aide. Chacun d’entre nous doit se montrer reconnaissant envers ses bienfaiteurs : ce faisant, tous nous aimeront et tous courront à notre aide lorsque nous en aurons besoin. »40. La lecture du Catéchisme nous permet également d’avancer quelques remarques sur la rhétorique de Florian Aron. Son discours transparent est simple et aisément compréhensible. Tout en évitant l’ironie et le recours au langage figuré, Aron n’hésite pas à faire appel à des métaphores identificatrice à valeur persuasive. La structure du discours obéit à une logique claire et rigoureuse, centrée sur la conscience morale du jeune élève et opposant les vertus aux défauts. Aron ne cherche jamais à imposer ses idées, misant sur le libre arbitre et sur les capacités de discernement de son lecteur. C’est dans ce crédit accordé au public que réside la force énonciative et l’actualité de son argumentation. 3. En guise de conclusion Sans aucun doute, on a affaire, dans le cas du catéchisme rédigé par Florian Aron, à un ouvrage à double finalité : didactique et formative. Ses objectifs sont, d’ailleurs, clairement exposés : il s’agirait de contribuer, grâce à une éducation morale et chrétienne, au développement harmonieux du comportement moral et religieux des élèves roumains. À travers les trois axes selon lesquels se développe l’approche de l’auteur, l’ouvrage se veut un guide de comportement en vue de la construction spirituelle et sociale du « citoyen modèle ». Dans cette vision qui est celle d’Aron, une bonne éducation religieuse est censée modeler des comportements sociaux et éthiques appropriés. Le schéma argumentatif adopté par l’auteur et l’exposition des idées jouant sur une alternance dialogique des arguments et des contre-arguments révèlent la formation d’un pédagogue exemplaire qui sait trier et ordonner les arguments convenables pour son public et l’aider à assimiler les concepts proposés. À part sa finalité ouvertement didactique de véhiculer des contenus religieux, l’ouvrage de Florian Aron cherche à convaincre son lecteur de la vérité des idées énoncées et à le déterminer à choisir datorii deosebite, precum: ale supuşilor către Stăpânire, ale copiilor către părinţi, ale fraţilor către fraţi şi către surori, ale ucenicilor către îmvăţătorii, îngrijitorii şi mai-marii lor, ale bogaţilor către săraci, ale prietinilor către prietini, şi în sfârşit ale fieştecăruia om către patria sa ». 40 Ibidem, p. 85 : « Nemulţumirea aceasta este un păcat foarte mare prin care se mâhneşte şi se amărăşte viaţa făcătorului de bine; fieştece om e dator a se-feri de dânsa pentru că într-alt chip dă drept tutulor oamenilor ca la orice trebuinţă a sa să nu-i dea nimini nimic; şi fieştecare e dator a searăta totdauna recunoscător şi mulţumitor către făcătorii săi de bine, pentru că atunci toţi îl iubesc şi la orice păs al său toţi aleargă ca să-i facă bine şi să-l ajute ». 355 librement les éléments positifs qui l’aideraient à devenir un « bon chrétien » et « un brave Roumain » : « C’est pendant son enfance que l’homme doit acquérir toutes les connaissances nécessaires dans sa vie, quelle que soit sa condition sociale. Ainsi, il doit apprendre à lire, à écrire et à compter ; de même, il doit posséder quelques notions de religion. Une fois assimilées ces connaissances, tout homme a le devoir d’apprendre et d’exercer un métier honnête afin de gagner sa vie. Et s’il y a quelqu’un qui veut apprendre davantage et qu’il dispose des moyens pour le faire, ou s’il en a besoin comme c’est le cas des prêtres, des fonctionnaires de l’État et des enseignants, il est recommandable qu’il le fasse et qu’il assimile des idées et des connaissances plus avancées, pourvu que celles-ci soient utiles dans sa vie et qu’elles le rendent meilleur »41. Bibliographie Aron, F. 1834 : Catihismul omului creștin, moran și soțial. Pentru trebuința tinerilor din școalele începătoare, București, Tipografia lui Eliad Călinescu, G. 1988 : Istoria literaturii române de la origini până în prezent, Ediția a II-a revăzută și adăugită, Ediție și prefață de Al. Piru, București, Editura Minerva DEX 1998 : DEX. Dicționarul explicativ al limbii române, ediția a II-a, București, Univers enciclopedic Fotino, George 1966 : coala din Golești (1826), in Din istoria pedagogiei românești. Culegere de studii, t. II, sub redacția prof. Ilie Popescu Teiușan, București, Editura Didactică și Pedagogică, p. 214-243 Fotino, George 1966 : « Un document inedit privitor la școala din Golești întemeiată în 1826 », in Revista de Pedagogie, 1968, 17, no 6, p. 93-97 Ghibu, Onisifor 1975 : Din istoria literaturii didactice românești, Ediție îngrijită de Octav Păun, Tabel cronologic, studiu introductiv, note și comentarii V. Popeangă, București, Editura Didactică și Pedagogică Marcu, Octavian 2012 : « Aaron Florian și contribuția sa la dezvoltarea literaturii didactice românești », in Transilvania, nos 5-6, p. 122-127 Murgescu, Mirela-Luminița 1999 : Între „bunul creștin” și „bravul român”. Rolul școlii primare în construirea identității naționale românești (1831-1878), Iași, Editura A’ 92. Petruțiu, D. t. 1933 : « Aron Florian și orientarea literară a Telegrafului Român », in Gând românesc, anul I, p. 17-22 41 Ibidem, p. 40-41 : « În anii cei dintâiu ai copilării tot omul trebuie să-şi agonisească cunoştinţele cele ce sânt neapărat trebuincioase pentru orice om, fie de ce stare va fi. Aceste cunoştinţe sânt: a citi, a scri, a socoti şi religia. După aceste dintâiu cunoştinţe, orice om e dator să seapuce să îmveţe bine o meserie cinstită cu care să-şi câştige cele trebuincioase pentru viaţă. Iar daca cineva are poftă să îmveţe mai mult, şi are şi mijloace, şi daca este şi trebuinţă d-a ști mai multe precum este pentru Preoţi şi pentru dregătorii şi slujbaşii Statului şi pentru îmvăţători, atunci să îmveţe şi să-şi câştige şi alte idei şi cunoştinţe mai înalte; numai toate să fie folositoare pentru viaţa omenească şi pentru fericire, şi să facă pe om mai bun de cum a fost mai înainte ». 356 Pîrnuță, Gh. 1966 : « Contribuții la cunoașterea începuturilor învățământului sătesc din ara Românească (secolele XVII-XIX) », in Din istoria pedagogiei românești. Culegere de studii, t. II, sub redacția prof. Ilie Popescu Teiușan, București, Editura Didactică și Pedagogică, p. 75-105 Popa, Victor 1956 : « Aron Florian (1805-1887) », in Buletinul Universității « V. Babeș » și « Bolyai ». Seria « tiințe sociale », I, nos 1-2, p. 225-240 Popescu Teiușan, I. 1966 : « Învățământul în Oltenia (secolul al XVIII-lea și începutul secolului al XIX-lea) », in Din istoria pedagogiei românești. Culegere de studii, t. II, sub redacția prof. Ilie Popescu Teiușan, București, Editura Didactică și Pedagogică, p. 106-122 Popescu Teuișan, I. 1971 : « Dezvoltarea învățământului în secolul al XVIII-lea și începutul secolului al XIX-lea în ara Românească, Moldova și Transilvania », in Istoria învățământului din România. Compendiu, Colectiv de redacție: Const. C. Giurescu, Igor Ivanov, Nicolae Mihăileanu, Dinu Moroianu, Ilie Popescu Teiușan, Ion Stanciu, Dumitru Todericiu, București, Editura Didactică și Pedagogică, p. 64-79 Radosav, Doru 1997 : Sentimentul religios la români: o perspectivă istorică (sec. XVII-XX), Cluj-Napoca, Dacia trempel, Gabriel 1984 : Bibliografia românească modernă (1831-1918), t. I (A-C), prefață de Gabriel Ştrempel, Bucureşti, Editura Ştiinţifică şi Enciclopedică / Societatea de tiințe Filologice din R.S. România 357 Sur les origines de la création d’un symbole régional des Roumains de Transylvanie : les églises en bois Valentin TRIFESCO In this article we will look at the manner in which the wooden churches belonging to the Romanians in Transylvania have been transformed into a fully fledged regional and national brand. Following the creation of Greater Romania, the Romanians from Transylvania felt the need to create a well defined artistic identity, both in relation to the other ethnic groups in Transylvania as well as in relation to the Romanians from Moldova and Wallachia. Coriolan Petranu was the one who discovered the artistic value and the identity-building potential of the Romanian wooden churches in Transylvania. Keywords: historiography of art history, regionalism, nationalism, Coriolan Petranu. Pour Georgiana Medrea Estienne En 1934, après avoir publié ses principales monographies consacrées aux églises en bois des Roumains des départements d’Arad1 et de Bihor2, Coriolan Petranu (1893-1945) s’enorgueillissait de son rôle novateur dans la recherche et la mise en valeur du potentiel artistique des églises en bois des territoires habités par les Roumains sous l’ancienne administration hongroise : « Avant la parution de mes travaux, les églises en bois n’avaient été ni étudiées ni appréciées dans notre pays ; il n’y avait pas de publication roumaine à ce sujet ; j’ai été le premier Roumain à avoir découvert leur valeur exceptionnelle, à m’être consacré à leur étude. A l’exception de six courts articles en revue, la classe dominante hongroise ne leur avait pas prêté davantage l’attention méritée »3. Tout cela a été souligné dans un volume bilingue, roumain-allemand. Les hommages à l’auteur y jouxtent un maximum d’appréciations étrangères favorables Coriolan Petranu, Bisericile de lemn din jude ul Arad, Tipografia şi Institutul de arte grafice Ios. Drotleff, Sibiu, 1927. 2 Idem, Monumentele istorice ale jude ului Bihor, vol. I, Bisericile de lemn, Tiparul Tipografiei Krafft & Drotleff, Sibiu, 1931. 3 Idem, Bisericile de lemn ale românilor ardeleni în lumina aprecierilor străine recente / Die Holzkirchen der Siebenbürger Rumänen im Lichte der neuesten fremden Würdigungen, Tiparul Krafft & Drotleff, Sibiu, 1934, p. 36. 1 359 à ses recherches, ou bien au sujet des églises en bois roumaines. On peut supposer que cette publication visait implicitement la reconnaissance scientifique de l’importance artistique des églises en bois des Roumains de Transylvanie et du Partium, aussi bien en Roumanie qu’à l’étranger. Ces églises étaient donc appréciées à la fois par les chercheurs saxons et ceux étrangers. Cela renforçait le plaidoyer de Coriolan Petranu en faveur de ce domaine artistique et de ses connotations nationales, tout en soutenant sa polémique avec les chercheurs hongrois. Il semblerait en même temps que notre historien de l’art de Cluj se prémunît de l’exemple des ouvrages produits par les experts occidentaux et saxons pour changer la perception négative que les Roumains mêmes avaient, à l’époque, des églises en bois, considérées comme passées de mode, comme des créations artistiques mineures qui ne requéraient pas de véritable importance4. En d’autres termes, d’après Coriolan Petranu : « [...] Finalement, ces comptes rendus feront disparaître peut-être le défaut d’appréciation et les ironies que nous trouvons de nos jours même chez certains intellectuels roumains vis-à-vis de l’art des églises en bois et de ceux qui s’occupent de telles recherches. De plus, on se convaincra que, grâce à elles, le génie artistique roumain a cueilli des lauriers et un titre de gloire bien mérité »5. L’interprétation de l’histoire de l’art proposée par Coriolan Petranu et celle de l’art paysan plus spécifiquement servait à solutionner le problème délicat du comparatisme, dans l’histoire de l’art créé et/ou patronné par les ethnies de Transylvanie. Dans ce sens, Vlad oca observait : « [...] Une autre idée importante que Coriolan Petranu utilisera lui aussi, sera celle de Stilfragen sur la continuité des styles dans l’histoire. Riegel repousse l’idée des cycles innovants tels qu’envisagés par la vieille histoire de l’art. En échange, il voit les périodes décadentes comme porteuses de changement, comme points de naissance d’une nouvelle intentionnalité artistique et d’une nouvelle vérité. Par conséquent, toute comparaison, toute évaluation des œuvres d’époques historiques différentes ou de zones géographiques différentes est tendancieuse et creuse. Donc, toutes les œuvres artistiques sont d’importance égale et on ne peut faire de distinction qualitative entre les œuvres d’art et les œuvres d’art populaire, ou encore celles relevant des arts appliqués, parce que la relation entre ces formes d’art ne peut être étendue au-delà de la manière dont elles réagissent les unes aux autres, selon les conditions locales ou les traditions artistiques » 6. Pour approfondir l’idée que l’architecture religieuse en bois n’a rien à envier à l’architecture religieuse en pierre, Coriolan Petranu reprend les arguments de Josef 4 Ibidem, p. 11-12, 37. Ibidem, p. 3. 6 Vlad oca, Reperele metodologice ale operei lui Coriolan Petranu, in „Istoria artei la Universitatea din Cluj”, vol. I, „(1919-1987)”, Nicolae Sabău, Corina Simon, Vlad oca, Presa Universitară Clujeană, Cluj, 2010, p. 345. 5 360 Strzygowski (1862-1941), professeur à l’université de Vienne, au sujet des églises en bois de Croatie. Ainsi, l’accent est mis sur l’idée artistique, sur l’impression engendrée dans le regard, et non plus sur les dimensions proprement-dites des monuments architecturaux, ni sur la qualité physique et symbolique des matériaux de construction. Quant à la valeur et au milieu artistique ambiant des églises en bois du Partium et de la Transylvanie historique, abordées dans les deux synthèses consacrées aux églises des départements d’Arad et de Bihor, Coriolan Petranu précise : « Ajoutons à tout cela les écrits récents de Strzygowski au sujet des églises en bois croates ; elles sont monumentales, tout en étant quand même de dimensions réduites. Parce que ce ne sont pas les proportions, ni le mètre qui comptent, mais l’idée architecturale qui est décisive, et c’est aussi valable pour ce qui est des églises en bois de l’Est européen » 7. L’historien de l’art Vlad oca remarquait bien que pour identifier les origines intellectuelles d’une méthode de travail, ainsi que pour le choix de ses sujets de recherche, Coriolan Petranu s’était fidèlement inspiré de son professeur viennois. Ce filon interprétatif des origines préchrétiennes de l’architecture dans l’Europe Centrale était vivement contesté à l’époque dans les milieux scientifiques. Néanmoins, Coriolan Petranu adapta ces idées à l’espace transylvain, en saisissant ainsi l’occasion de poser scientifiquement l’ancienneté de l’architecture roumaine en bois, en comparaison avec celle en pierre réalisée par les autres ethnies de Transylvanie (en réalité, il s’agissait des Hongrois). Le premier historien de l’art roumain déployait ainsi en même temps les arguments artistiques qui prouvaient la continuité des Roumains dans l’arc carpatique8. En fait, par les ouvrages consacrés aux églises en bois de Transylvanie et du Partium, Coriolan Petranu souhaitait établir un/des archétype(s) caractéristique(s) du style architectural roumain des églises en bois, afin de l’inclure, en tant que branche bien distincte, dans la famille européenne de l’architecture d’églises en bois, où différents styles nationaux se remarquaient déjà, celui norvégien ou slave notamment9. D’une publication à une autre, Coriolan Petranu nuance son opinion sur la spécificité nationale des églises en bois des Roumains de Transylvanie et du Partium, ainsi que sur les influences artistiques étrangères. A un ensemble d’idées constantes, qui constituent la structure de base de ses théories, certains compléments s’ajoutent qui apportent des perspectives nouvelles, en achevant de distinguer les bémols de la question controversée des influences étrangères sur l’art des Roumains transylvains. 7 Coriolan Petranu, Monumentele istorice..., p. 33. Vlad oca, Reperele metodologice..., p. 347. 9 Olimpiu Boitoş, recenzie la Coriolan Petranu: Bisericile de lemn din jude ul Arad, Sibiu, Drotleff, 1927. Coriolan Petranu: Die Kunstdenkmöler der Siebenbürgen Rumänen, Cluj, Carte Românească, 1927, in „Societatea de Mâine”, IV, 20-21, Cluj, 1927, p. 271-272. 8 361 Dans une première étape, dans le volume sur les églises en bois du département d’Arad, Coriolan Petranu relie le style et l’originalité des églises en bois roumaines à la résolution artistique du problème soulevé par les limites morphologiques et esthétiques des matériaux de construction. De cette manière, il montre que les influences occidentales se sont manifestées dans l’architecture vernaculaire religieuse des Roumains transylvains et des territoires hongrois seulement au niveau des tours-clochers et des peintures plus récentes. En même temps, il souligne que les églises en bois roumaines représentent dans l’ensemble une création originale du génie des paysans roumains : « Le style des églises en bois roumaines du département d’Arad est conditionné, en essence, uniquement par le matériau ; il n’est pas la transposition en bois des styles historiques occidentaux, les influences de ceux-ci se faisant sentir seulement au niveau de la tour et dans la peinture plus récente. Nous avons à faire à une architecture et à une peinture populaire, à un produit du génie roumain » 10. Quelques années plus tard, dans le volume consacré aux églises en bois roumaines du département de Bihor, Coriolan Petranu insère quelques précisions significatives relatives à la question des influences étrangères exercées sur l’architecture vernaculaire religieuse des Roumains de l’intérieur de l’arc carpatique et des territoires de l’Ouest de la Roumanie de l’époque. Tant l’énumération des styles de l’art occidental que l’élargissement des domaines artistiques dans lesquels ceux-ci s’étaient manifestés s’avèrent importants : « Il faut rappeler ici que nous constatons l’influence de l’art occidental dans plusieurs endroits : dans l’architecture à la tour ouest proprement-dite, aux flèches gothiques, baroques et post-baroques et à un certain type de portes qui finissent dans une sorte d’arc en accolade ; dans l’art industriel, les éléments baroques et post-baroques apparaissent à l’iconostase et surtout aux portes impériales, à certaines charpentes et armoires ; l’influence du style Empire est visible à quelques candélabres en bois et à certains meubles visibles sur les peintures ; quelques costumes sont hongrois ; dans l’architecture peinte et dans la composition des scènes il ne manque pas les influences occidentales. On peut s’en convaincre en regardant les illustrations annexées»11. Dans ces conditions, les églises en bois roumaines deviennent de véritables représentations de l’art occidental, tout l’ensemble étant constitué d’éléments artistiques qui trahissent le modèle d’inspiration initial. Toute la synthèse originale manifestée dans l’architecture religieuse en bois des Roumains de Transylvanie et du Partium s’est donc formée par l’intégration des éléments stylistiques spécifiques à l’art gothique, baroque, post-baroque ou classique. Selon lui, au-delà de la manière de leur assimilation, ainsi que des moyens mis en œuvre, les églises roumaines en bois laissent l’impression d’avoir été visuellement marquées par l’héritage de l’art occidental, tant à l’intérieur qu’à l’extérieur. 10 11 Coriolan Petranu, Bisericile de lemn din jude ul Arad..., p. 40. Idem, Monumentele istorice..., p. 26. 362 En 1927, Coriolan Petranu commence par cantonner les influences étrangères au niveau des tours-clochers et des peintures plus récentes. Plus tard, en 1931, l’historien de l’art de Cluj apporte des précisions et des détails extrêmement importants. En fait, toutes ces présences étrangères de l’art occidental ont bien été identifiées, depuis la forme du flèche et l’aspect général des tours-clochers jusqu’aux encadrements des portes, aux meubles intérieurs et aux peintures murales. Autrement dit, les influences étrangères avaient marqué l’aspect esthétique des églises en bois roumaines de Transylvanie et du Partium, tant à l’extérieur qu’à l’intérieur de celles-ci, mais tout cela avait été assimilé et intégré harmonieusement par le génie créateur des paysans roumains. Inévitablement, le problème s’est posé de la datation de ces monuments architecturaux. La réponse à la question de l’ancienneté des églises en bois roumaines de Transylvanie et du Partium constitue une clé qui résout le problème de l’influence étrangère sur l’art des Roumains qui vivaient sur les anciens territoires de la Hongrie. Plus concrètement, il s’agissait d’argumenter et de justifier le caractère national et l’originalité artistique de l’architecture vernaculaire roumaine, en invoquant l’ancienneté des modèles architecturaux (surtout) et picturaux utilisés par les Roumains transylvains. Pour cela, Coriolan Petranu étoffe l’opinion relative à l’ancienneté des églises en bois roumaines de Transylvanie et du Partium exposée dans les deux publications analysées plus haut12. Dans le volume de 1931, l’auteur avait synthétisé ce sujet comme il suit : « La datation précise des églises en bois se heurte à des difficultés, du fait que trop peu d’inscriptions ont été gardées, et même celles-ci se rapportent en leur majeure partie à la peinture. A travers celles-ci, néanmoins, on peut avoir une date approximative de la construction de ces églises. Encore faut-il prendre en compte les restaurations, les reconstructions, surtout au niveau de la tour et du toit, ceux-ci ne remontant pas à plus de 30 à 50 ans. Et il est certain que les monuments conservés ne remontent, eux, pas plus loin que le dixseptième siècle, la majorité datant de la deuxième moitié du dix-huitième siècle et du dix-neuvième siècle. Ils reprennent, pourtant, un type d’église plus ancien. La création du type est beaucoup plus ancienne que la date de l’érection des églises elles-mêmes. Schulcz croit, par exemple, que la création du type d’églises en bois de Satmar, qui sont apparentées aux nôtres, date du milieu du quatorzième siècle. Les éléments gothiques de la tour, la flèche très haut et svelte datent probablement de cette époque-là, la construction intégrale représente la dernière étape d’une évolution immémoriale qui a à la base non pas l’influence des styles historiques, mais le matériau : le bois [...] »13. Comme nous le verrons à une autre occasion, Coriolan Petranu place à des moments historiques différents le modèle archétypal des églises en bois roumaines, 12 13 Idem, Bisericile de lemn din jude ul Arad..., p. 6-7; Idem, Monumentele istorice..., p. 26-27. Idem, Monumentele istorice..., p. 26-27. 363 selon les besoins provoqués par sa polémique enflammée avec les historiens de l’art hongrois sur la question de l’ancienneté des églises en bois des Roumains et des Hongrois de Transylvanie. A cet égard, l’historien de l’art roumain ne s’épargne pas les contradictions. A un moment donné, il place l’ancienneté et les origines des églises en bois roumaines dans l’Antiquité, à l’époque des Daces, en identifiant au besoin sur la colonne de Trajan des constructions en bois qui puissent être comparées aux églises roumaines conservées jusqu’au vingtième siècle14. Coriolan Petranu poursuit les théories de son professeur viennois relatives à la liaison déterministe entre les matériaux de construction et l’aspect final des monuments architecturaux. Il croit ainsi à l’existence et à la résistance dans le temps de ce qu’Henri Focillon nommera plus tard (1934) « la vie des formes » ; la nature du matériau utilisé dans la création artistique conditionne ainsi la forme des œuvres d’art15. Coriolan Petranu partage aussi la conviction de Josef Strzygowski conformément à laquelle l’évolution des formes artistiques est conditionnée également par les facteurs politiques, religieux, sociaux et surtout raciaux16. Donc, c’est à cause de la périssabilité du bois comme matériau de construction que les églises des Roumains de Transylvanie et du Partium ne remontent qu’au XVIIe siècle. Cette circonstance n’empêche pas Coriolan Petranu de lancer la théorie d’après laquelle les églises en bois, en dépit de leur résistance moyenne dans le temps, répètent des modèles / des prototypes plus anciens qui remontent jusqu’à l’époque médiévale (et comme nous le disions, même jusque dans l’Antiquité). L’héritage des formes gothiques est le mieux repérable au niveau du flèche svelte (avec ou sans quatre tourelles latérales) qui orne les tours-clochers. Mais, pour Coriolan Petranu, l’abondance du bois en Transylvanie avait déterminé non seulement l’aspect des églises roumaines mais aussi l’ancienneté de celles-ci. Grâce aux conditions de l’environnement, l’architecture en bois est devenue une unité de mesure de l’ancienneté et du caractère autochtone national dans l’espace intracarpatique ; dans l’opinion de l’auteur, le bois est utilisé dans les constructions roumaines depuis des temps immémoriaux. Dans ces conditions, l’historien d’art souligne qu’il est faux de voir dans les églises roumaines de Transylvanie et du Partium la transposition en bois du style gothique. En effet, elles sont considérées un chapitre distinct de l’histoire de l’art, leur aspect étant déterminé autant par le matériau employé, que par le génie national roumain et le spécifique confessionnel, définition qu’on doit prendre en 14 Ibidem, p. 43-44. Henri Focillon, Via a formelor şi Elogiul mâinii, ediţia a 2-a, trad. de Laura Irodoiu Aslan, Editura Meridiane, Bucureşti, 1995, p. 54-55 16 Rémi Labrusse, Délires anthropologiques : Josef Strzygowski face à Alois Riegl, in „Histoire de l’art et anthropologie”, Paris, coédition INHA / Musée du Quai Branly (« Les actes »), 2009, [En ligne], mis en ligne le 28 juillet 2009, consulté le 29 juillet 2013, http://actesbranly.revues.org/268, alineatul 5, p. 3. 15 364 considération : « Le style des églises est imprimé par le matériau, par les aptitudes du peuple ainsi que par les demandes du culte »17. Au-delà des quelques détails gothiques empruntés aux églises en pierre des Saxons de Transylvanie, les églises en bois des Roumains de Transylvanie et du Partium participent selon lui à un certain « independent wood style »18. Une fois de plus, la distinction majeure est faite entre l’art gothique et les églises en bois ; ces dernières ne peuvent donc être classées comme du gothique transposé en bois. En plus de cette séparation stylistique majeure, Coriolan Petranu ressent le besoin de faire une distinction supplémentaire, selon le critère de la contribution du spécifique national à l’œuvre d’art. Autour d’un premier cercle des délimitations artistiques selon les matériaux de construction des églises en bois, un deuxième cercle de démarcation s’ajoute, déterminé par les manifestations de l’esprit national dans la production artistique. Dans un texte publié en anglais, Coriolan Petranu précise la représentation des églises en bois pour la définition de l’art des Roumains transylvains, avec des détails circonstanciés et caractéristiques : « Here, as everywhere in Transylvania, the wooden churches are the emanation of the mass-personality, of the folk-soul. Their builders are simple peasants who are often unable to write; they are not city artisans. What they have created is the more remarkable. All who have seen the Romanian wooden churches have admired the fully developed art, the silhouette, the proportions, the solidity of the artistic detail, the harmonious fusion with environment, the gravity, mystery, power and grace of the whole. All those qualities caused Schulcz to assert that these churches far surpass the famous Norwegian buildings. The elucidation of the art of wood building in Transylvania signifies not only an enrichment of our knowledge of this history of art, but also the revelation of the Romanian folk-soul and of its artistic products »19. De cette manière, l’historien de l’art de Cluj intègre l’art des Roumains transylvains dans le monde du village : cet art est synonyme d’art paysan, fondamentalement différent de l’art des villes auxquelles les Roumains transylvains n’avaient pas eu accès, ce qui les avait empêché de créer une classe d’architectes, de peintres ou d’artisans qui puissent mettre les bases d’un art roumain20. Selon lui, toutes ces différences de nature stylistique et nationale ont seulement un rôle complémentaire. Partant du matériau de construction, Coriolan Petranu réalise la distinction majeure entre art des Roumains et art des autres 17 Coriolan Petranu, Arta românească din Transilvania, Tipografia „Cartea Românească din Cluj”, Sibiu, 1943, p. 11. 18 Idem, New Researches in the Art of Woodbuilding in Transylvania, in Idem, „Ars Transsilvaniae. Studien zur Kunstgeschichte Siebenbürgens. Études d’histoire de l’art transylvain”, Tiparul Krafft & Drotleff, Sibiu, 1944, p. 437. 19 Ibidem, p. 439. 20 Idem, L’art roumain de Transylvanie, in „La Transylvanie”, L’Institut d’Histoire Nationale de Cluj, Bucarest, 1938, p. 473. 365 ethnies qui co-habitaient dans les anciennes provinces de la Hongrie qui avaient intégré la Grande Roumanie à partir de 1918. Autrement dit, l’historien de l’art de Cluj attribue l’architecture en bois aux Roumains transylvains (au sens large), en la présentant comme étant le domaine artistique le plus représentatif où ceux-ci avaient excellé21. En revanche, il « concède » l’architecture en pierre aux Saxons et aux Hongrois. Dans ce sens, Petranu s’exprime on ne peut plus clairement: « Pour ce qui est de l’architecture ancienne des Roumains de Transylvanie, du Banat, de Crişana et du Maramureş, ce n’est pas l’architecture en pierre ou en brique qui est caractéristique, mais celle en bois. Jusqu’au dix-huitième siècle, les bâtiments faits dans un autre matériau font exception, alors que le dix-neuvième et le vingtième siècles voient se multiplier ceux en briques ou en pierre [...]. Les Hongrois et les Saxons de Transylvanie n’ont pas d’églises en bois »22. De cette façon, il accomplit un phénomène de nationalisation roumaine de l’architecture en bois. Plus généralement, une répartition en découle des domaines d’expression artistique de Transylvanie, du Banat et des territoires hongrois, par ethnies, selon les compatibilités esthétiques et créatives entre l’origine nationale et les matériaux de construction. Ainsi, le bois est-il devenu un matériau-symbole national, fétichisé au niveau de l’expression architecturale, tandis que la pierre illustre au niveau esthétique et visuel la culture et la civilisation des Saxons et des Hongrois. En même temps, une délimitation spatiale d’expression artistique s’est opérée, comme nous l’avons vu ci-dessus : les Roumains réalisent un art éminemment rural, tandis que les Saxons et les Hongrois un art citadin, défini par les styles historiques venus de l’Ouest. Outre ces arguments d’ordre esthétique, Coriolan Petranu avait tenu à mettre en évidence l’argument numérique aussi, en précisant que les monuments religieux en bois des Roumains de Transylvanie et des territoires de frontière qui ont fait partie à un moment donné de la Hongrie sont extrêmement nombreux et s’imposent de cette manière sur une position européenne de premier plan23. Evidemment, les églises en bois ne sont pas les seules églises que les Roumains de Transylvanie, du Banat et du Partium aient jamais eues. En ce qui concerne l’architecture des églises de maçonnerie, l’historien de l’art de Cluj l’analyse premièrement en étroite relation avec l’architecture de maçonnerie des Roumains qui vivaient au-delà des Carpates et, deuxièmement, en comparaison avec l’architecture des autres ethnies (au sens large) qui cohabitaient en Transylvanie. Coriolan Petranu attribue une valeur exceptionnelle aux églises en bois roumaines de l’intérieur des Carpates, alors que les églises de maçonnerie sont 21 Olimpiu Boitoş, Coriolan Petranu..., p. 272. Coriolan Petranu, Bisericile de lemn din jude ul Arad..., p. 33-34. 23 Idem, L’art roumain de Transylvanie…, p. 484; Idem, Arta românească din Transilvania..., p. 22 10. 366 perçues comme ayant une valeur artistique inférieure par rapport aux églises de maçonnerie des Roumains de Moldavie et du Pays Roumain/de Valachie. Malgré tout, il reconnaît aux églises de maçonnerie de Transylvanie, du Banat et du Partium une certaine valeur esthétique et un cachet propre, ce qui fait la différence avec les églises de maçonnerie des Saxons et des Hongrois. Dans l’opinion du savant roumain, ces dernières sont « totalement occidentales »24. Dans le cas des églises en bois, les influences occidentales / étrangères sont identifiées seulement au niveau de la tour-clocher, le reste de l’ensemble architectural étant considéré comme un style à part (imprégné du génie créateur national roumain) en rapport avec les styles historiques. En revanche, les églises de maçonnerie des Roumains transylvains ont adopté selon lui un style éclectique, de transition, qui avait assimilé en proportions différentes les présences et les influences artistiques byzantines et /ou occidentales. Dans ce sens, Coriolan Petranu exprime les idées suivantes : « Parmi les monuments de l’architecture religieuse, nous devons établir une distinction entre les églises de bois, et les églises de briques ou de pierre. Les premières, à l’exception de la tour, n’ont rien de commun avec les styles historiques. Elles représentent quelques chose d’indépendant : le style du bois, et en même temps quelque chose de national. Les églises de pierre sont d’une architecture éclectique, intermédiaire entre le style byzantin et le style occidental. Les monuments peuvent être divisés en 3 groupes : I. purement byzantino-roumains ; II. Intermédiaires entre le style byzantin et les styles occidentaux, et III. Purement occidentaux. Les influences occidentaux sont venues avant tout des Saxons qui joué un rôle principal dans le progrès de l’art des villes en Transylvanie »25. Pour Coriolan Petranu, l’identité esthétique des Roumains de Transylvanie, du Banat et du Partium a été donnée surtout par les églises en bois. Celles-ci ont représenté, dans son opinion, la vraie manifestation visuelle du goût pour le beau de la nation roumaine qui vivait sur les territoires ayant appartenu à l’ancienne Couronne hongroise. A la manière de l’historien et critique littéraire Ion Chinezu (1894-1966), qui a plaidé pour l’intégration des Roumains transylvains dans la Grande Roumanie avec leur propre échelle de valeurs et avec leur propre comportement spécifique (différents de ceux des Roumains d’au-delà des Carpates)26, Coriolan Petranu s’est engagé, lui aussi, pour mettre en valeur tout l’héritage artistique transylvain matérialisé au niveau des églises en bois. L’historien de l’art de Cluj percevait cet héritage comme une partie vive de l’identité des Roumains transylvains, qui se devait d’être gardée, cultivée et 24 Idem, Arta românească din Transilvania..., p. 9. Idem, L’art roumain de Transylvanie…, p. 474-475. 26 Valentin Trifesco, Ion Chinezu et le transylvanisme. Une première approche, in „Austrian Influences and Regional Identities in Transylvania”, edited by François Bréda, Valentin Trifesco, Luminiţa Ignat-Coman, Giordano Altarozzi, Editions AB-ART – Grenzenlose Literatur, Bratislava – Frauenkirchen, 2012, p. 160-161. 25 367 entretenue, même dans le contexte des nouvelles frontières politiques et administratives d’après 1918. En outre, par la mise en évidence du modèle des églises en bois à l’intérieur de l’arc carpatique, Coriolan Petranu a astucieusement marqué une forme de résistance régionale devant les tendances d’homogénéisation esthétique survenues après l’Union par la dispersion dans les nouvelles provinces roumaines du modèle architectural spécifique à l’Est moldave et surtout au Sud roumain, où le style architectural byzantin s’est imposé définitivement27. Par conséquent, d’après Petranu, les modèles transylvains devaient être exploités par les artistes et les artisans y compris dans la création contemporaine, afin de perpétuer naturellement et organiquement une longue tradition artistique qui avait représenté un élément essentiel de l’identité des Roumains de Transylvanie, du Banat et du Partium. Dans ce sens, l’historien d’art roumain précise dans les années trente : « Depuis l’Union, des églises en bois ont disparu sans qu’il nous en reste quelque esquisse, photographie ou description. Conserver et publier les monuments immeubles dans des albums, concentrer les meubles dans les musées religieux, c’est prolonger le fil de la tradition qui continuerait ainsi à vivre dans notre âme et se développerait en inspirant nos artistes et nos artisans à réaliser de nouvelles créations »28. Quoique Coriolan Petranu n’ait pas exprimé explicitement jusqu’au bout ses convictions au sujet de la résistance des traditions artistiques roumaines de Transylvanie, du Banat et du Partium soumises au nivellement esthétique promu par Bucarest et manifesté avec succès dans le domaine de l’architecture religieuse, il a tout de même reproduit, à une autre occasion, les pensées d’un savant saxon sur cette question extrêmement délicate. Ainsi, Petranu cite-t-il Fritz Holzträger (1888-1970), qui, parlant des églises en bois roumaines de Transylvanie, avait formulé les idées suivantes : « Avant tout, j’ai l’impression qu’il y a un domaine qui doit être sauvé immédiatement : les églises en bois. Premièrement, à cause de la création de la Grande Roumanie qui fera disparaître cette espèce et, d’autre part, parce que ce chapitre de l’histoire de l’art transylvain-roumain est le plus intéressant non seulement du point de vue de l’histoire de l’art mais aussi ethnographiquement et esthétiquement »29. De cette façon, Coriolan Petranu avait adhéré à l’idée que l’intégration de la Transylvanie et des autres provinces occidentales dans la Grande Roumanie équivalait à une sorte d’attentat à l’être esthétique et ethnographique autour duquel s’était tissée l’identité des Roumains qui vivaient dans les anciens territoires administrés par les Hongrois. Les églises en bois étaient considérées de 27 Voir le répertoire d’images de Raluca Diana (Băneasă) Jula, Arhitectura religioasă a românilor din Transilvania în perioada interbelică, Presa Universitară Clujeană, Cluj, 2010, passim. 28 Coriolan Petranu, Bisericile de lemn din jude ul Arad..., p. 4. 29 Prof. dr. Fr. Holzträger, in Korrespondenzblatt, 1927, L, 12, p. 181, apud Coriolan Petranu, Bisericile de lemn ale românilor ardeleni în lumina..., p. 12. 368 véritables « œuvres totales » ayant synthétisé, au niveau visuel, le spécifique identitaire des Roumains de Transylvanie, du Banat et du Partium30. Bibliographie Băneasă Jula, Raluca Diana, 2010, Arhitectura religioasă a românilor din Transilvania în perioada interbelică, Presa Universitară Clujeană, Cluj Boitoş, Olimpiu, 1927, recenzie la Coriolan Petranu: Bisericile de lemn din jude ul Arad, Sibiu, Drotleff, 1927. Coriolan Petranu: Die Kunstdenkmöler der Siebenbürgen Rumänen, Cluj, Carte Românească, 1927, in „Societatea de Mâine”, IV, 20-21, Cluj, p. 271-272 Focillon, Henri, 1995, Via a formelor şi Elogiul mâinii, ediţia a 2-a, trad. de Laura Irodoiu Aslan, Editura Meridiane, Bucureşti Petranu, Coriolanu, 1938, L’art roumain de Transylvanie, in „La Transylvanie”, L’Institut d’Histoire Nationale de Cluj, Bucarest, p. 469-562 Petranu, Coriolanu, 1943, Arta românească din Transilvania, Tipografia „Cartea Românească din Cluj”, Sibiu Petranu, Coriolanu, 1934, Bisericile de lemn ale românilor ardeleni în lumina aprecierilor străine recente / Die Holzkirchen der Siebenbürger Rumänen im Lichte der neuesten fremden Würdigungen, Tiparul Krafft & Drotleff, Sibiu Petranu, Coriolanu, 1927, Bisericile de lemn din jude ul Arad, Tipografia şi Institutul de arte grafice Ios. Drotleff, Sibiu Petranu, Coriolanu, 1944, New Researches in the Art of Woodbuilding in Transylvania, in „Ars Transsilvaniae. Studien zur Kunstgeschichte Siebenbürgens. Etudes d’histoire de l’art transylvain”, Tiparul Krafft & Drotleff, Sibiu, p. 433-439 Petranu, Coriolanu, 1931, Monumentele istorice ale jude ului Bihor, vol. I, Bisericile de lemn, Tiparul Tipografiei Krafft & Drotleff, Sibiu Labrusse, Rémi, 2009, Délires anthropologiques : Josef Strzygowski face à Alois Riegl, in „Histoire de l’art et anthropologie”, Paris, coédition INHA / Musée du Quai Branly (« Les actes »), [En ligne], mis en ligne le 28 juillet 2009, consulté le 29 juillet 2013, http://actesbranly.revues.org/268 Trifesco, Valentin, 2012, Ion Chinezu et le transylvanisme. Une première approche, in „Austrian Influences and Regional Identities in Transylvania”, edited by François Bréda, Valentin Trifesco, Luminiţa Ignat-Coman, Giordano Altarozzi, Editura AB-ART – Grenzenlose Literatur, Bratislava – Frauenkirchen, p. 159-167 oca, Vlad, 2010, Reperele metodologice ale operei lui Coriolan Petranu, in „Istoria artei la Universitatea din Cluj”, vol. I, „(1919-1987)”, Sabău, Nicolae; Simon, Corina, oca, Vlad, Presa Universitară Clujeană, Cluj, p. 333-352 30 This work was supported by the strategic grant POSDRU/159/1.5/S/140863, Project ID 140863 (2014), co-financed by the European Social Fund within the Sectorial Operational Program Human Resources Development 2007 – 2013. 369 Contribuţia bisericii ortodoxe la afirmarea spiritualităţii româneşti în nordul Bucovinei (sec. XVIII-XIX) Lora BOSTAN High and educated clergy, which Nicolae Iorga had spoken about, largely succeeded in consolidating Romanian intellectuals from Northern Bukovyna, thus becoming their leaders “on the road of powerful culture” (G. Calinescu). The writers and enthusiastic educators, who made use of faith, culture and science to bring light to their countrymen’s hearts, were gradually getting more numerous. Along with Silvestru Morariu-Andrievich, Iraclie Porumbescu (1823-1896), the priest serving in Boian area and other regions, deploys his literary career as one of the first poets and writers of this land. The outstanding anthropologist and folklorist, academician Simion Florea Marian (1847-1907), who, as a priest to many Bukovynian villages (including Voloca near Chernivtsi), had the opportunity to become closely acquainted with folk traditions and described our rich and diverse ageold customs in his writings and anthologies. In addition to these, let us remember the names of the other defenders of the faith, language and national culture in Bukovyna: Constantin Morariu (1854-1927), the priest to Toporeutsi area of Chernivtsi district, about whom one of his biographers (C. Loghin) wrote that “wherever his foot would step, he left light infinite, and his writings are great” (he was a poet, translator, and essay writer); Dimitrie Dan (1856-1927), the Consistory advisor and the member of the Romanian Academy, the author of works on the history of church in Bukovyna and ethno-folk sketches of great documentary value; Zaharie Voronca (1851-1920), the priest in the village of Mihalchea near Chernivtsi, the writer and the fighter (under the society «Arboroasa») for political and cultural rights of the Bukovynian Romanians, and others. Orthodox Church, due to its activity (religious books publishing), also played a very important role in the formation of the Romanian literary language in Bukovyna. Since it was the only stable force independent of social factors, it contributed to the strengthening of the nation and the preservation of spirituality for centuries. Keywords: clergy, romanian intellectuals, Silvestru Morariu-Andrievich, Constantin Morariu, Orthodox Church, Candela. În Bucovina „era un cler înalt şi cult” (N. Iorga) care a contribuit în mod decisiv la dezvoltarea culturii, literaturii şi artei. Încă pe la mijlocul secolului al XVIII-lea, la tipografia din Rădăuţi se editau multe cărţi bisericeşti pentru ţinuturile Cernăuţilor, Sucevei, Hotinului. Erau întocmite (copiate, compilate) de către preoţi şi dascăli români manuscrise printre care Codicele lui Constantin Popovici „cliric 371 din clasul al triile”, cu pasaje din vieţile sfinţilor, un Octoichos, editat ulterior (1823), în care descoperim încercări de transpunere a textului slavon în grai românesc şi chiar de a tâlcui versuri româneşti în maniera marelui înaintaş, mitropolitul Dosoftei. Bunăoară, pe versoul foii de titlu a Octoichosului publicat în 1823, sub semnul crucii citim versurile: „Crucea lumii păzitoare/ Şi arma străjuitoare/ Cristos care birueşte/ Sus pe cruce pătimeşte”1. Sub auspiciile bisericii ortodoxe române, în 1811 începe să apară Calendarul de casă (seria fiind suspendată în 1820 şi reluată apoi în 1841, apărând astfel până în 1944). Primele numere ale Calendarului au fost redactate de către Vasile intilă, absolvent al seminarului clerical din Cernăuţi şi cântăreţ de biserică în satul natal Tereblecea din Nordul Bucovinei. În 1814 acest harnic cărturar şi bun creştin publică un Calendar pentru 100 de ani, în care „se află toate sărbătorile cele mai mari ale bisericii răsăritului, alcătuit cu ajutorul lui Damaschin de un iubitor de această ştiinţă, de la început până la sfârşitul lumii...”. Între 1841 şi 1848 Calendarul este redactat de către preotul Porfiriu Dimitrovici, – unul dintre primii autori de „acrostihuri” în Nordul Bucovinei. În suplimentul literar al Calendarului pe 1841 sunt publicate două poezii ale lui Porfiriu Dimitrovici un Cernău ean. Una dintre ele este o imitaţie după Noima sfântului Ioan Hrisostom, dar cu implicaţii satirice proprii ce denotă marea grijă a autorului de purificarea sufletelor compatrioţilor săi: „Patriei, zicem, să serbim, iar puţin de ea grijim/ Vr-un folos de-l câştigăm, lanteresu nostru-i dăm”2. La începutul anilor ’40 în coloanele calendarului religios apar poeziile lui Teoctist Blajevici, ulterior mitropolit al Bucovinei (1877-1879). Cea mai importantă operă artistică a acestui cărturar (în timpul vicariatului lui Teoctist a luat fiinţă institutul teologic al Eparhiei, devenind apoi facultatea teologică de renume european la Universitatea din Cernăuţi) a fost poemul Iordania 1841 la Cernău i, în care, cu lux de amănunte, este descris acest mare serviciu divin. În comparaţie cu versurile anterioare, cele ale lui Blajevici sunt lipsite de străinisme, autorul încercând să se apropie de graiul viu al poporului, care, în pofida vicisitudinilor istoriei, a păstrat comorile noastre folclorice şi lingvistice. La începutul anului 1847, în Cernăuţi este înfiinţată o Societate literară în eparhia Bucovinei cu scopul de „a ridica aici în ţară mult decăzuta limbă naţională”, îndeosebi „spre prosperarea culturii naţionale abia răsărite”, după cum se sublinia în apelul iniţiatorilor adresat populaţiei. Scopul principal al Societăţii – publicarea manuscrisului dicţionarului lui V. Cantemir - n-a fost însă realizat, probabil, din cauza unor controverse în rândurile celor 29 de membri ai ei (avândul drept prşedinte pe rectorul Institutului Teologic din Cernăuţi, Teofil Bendela). Drept mărturie a unei străvechi prezenţe româneşti, precum şi a unei febrile vieţi spirituale naţionale în Nordul Bucovinei la mijlocul secolului al XIX-lea, ne serveşte activitatea cărturarului iluminist Silvestru Morariu-Andrievici (1818 – S. Fl. Marian, Inscrip iuni de pe manuscrise şi căr i vechi din Bucovina, Partea I, Suceava, 1900, p. 34 2 Nistor, I., Istoria Bisericii din Bucovina, Bucureşti, 1916, p. 145 1 372 1895), preot la Ceahor (în apropiere de Cernăuţi), apoi mitropolit al Bucovinei (din 1880 până la sfârşitul vieţii). Fiind conştient de necesitatea ocrotirii şi cultivării graiului matern în Bucovina, ameninţat de pericolul asimilării, Silvestru Morariu, încă de pe băncile seminarului clerical din Cernăuţi, încerca să modeleze cuvintele româneşti după tiparele poeziei populare şi ale celei culte. Începând cu anul 1843, susţine timp de un deceniu suplimentul beletristic al Calendarului cu fabule (Cucoşul curcănit, Luna şi stelele ş.a.), poezii patriotice şi didactico-moralizatoare, printre care se distinge oda De ziua fiului meu. Timp de mulţi ani preotul Silvestru Morariu Andrievici a fost redactorul Calendarului bucovinean, unde a publicat diverse articole de actualitate în problemele bisericii ortodoxe din Bucovina. Foarte amplă şi cu o mare rezonanţă în popor a fost activitatea didacticopedagogică a marelui cărturar. Lui îi revine meritul de a fi primul autor de manuale şcolare româneşti în Bucovina. Om de o vastă cultură generală şi teologică, preotul şi apoi mitropolitul Silvestru, ca şi marii săi predecesori Varlaam şi Dosoftei, „şi-a dat seama că biserica, pentru a-şi putea atinge înaltele sale scopuri aici pe pământ, trebuie să reprezinte un neam, să împărtăşească toate necazurile şi bucuriile lui”3. Cele 15 manuale şi lucrări de religie şi morală populară ale cărturarului au servit nu numai drept călăuze pe calea adevărului divin şi de credinţă, ci şi, în bună parte (pentru românii bucovineni), drept modele de limbă maternă cultivată cu osârdie (deşi cu unele dificultăţi inerente epocii respective). inând cont de necesităţile şcolii elementare, el a elaborat o Carte de cetire românească-nem ească, numită Micul Comenius (Viena, 1851, 1854); un Elementariu spre întrebuin area în şcolile poporane (Viena, 1851, 1858, 1868) şi un Legendariu în patru căr i pentru cele patru clase primare al şcolilor poporane (Viena, 1852-1856, cu multiple reeditări până în 1869) ş.a. După cum se menţionează în Revista de pedagogie, editată la Cernăuţi în anii ’30 (1937-1938) acestea precum şi alte lucrări didactice ale lui Silvestru Morariu au constituit o întreagă epocă în istoria învăţământului şi şcolii din Bucovina. El poate fi considerat drept unul dintre pedagogii de frunte din acest ţinut. Silvestru Morariu, ca şi ilustrul său contemporan, enciclopedistul G. Asachi - în Moldova, a adus o contribuţie mare în domeniul instruirii şi educaţiei poporului în spiritul tradiţiilor culturale naţionale, introducând limba maternă în şcoala de toate gradele (primară, secundară – la liceul din Suceava, fiind aici primul dascăl de limba română şi de religie; superioară – la Institutul teologic din Cernăuţi, unde a predat un curs de teologie morală). De fapt rostul lor dublu este uneori subliniat de către autor şi în titlul cărţii Psaltirea bisericească română aşezată în note muzicale, Cernăuţi 1879 Istoria sfântă a Testamentului vechi şi nou pentru clasa II a şcolilor poporane (cu litere latine), Viena, 1886 ş. a. Urcat pe scaunul mitropolitan, Silvestru Morariu nu s-a îndepărtat de popor. Mai mult decât atât, autoritatea de care se bucura ca deputat al parlamentului din Viena, ca „unul dintre bărbaţii cei mai de caracter şi mai învăţaţi dintre românii din Austro-Ungaria” (M. Eminescu), îi dă posibilitatea de a întreprinde unele acţiuni 3 Ibidem. 373 energice pentru a apăra autonomia bisericii ortodoxe bucovinene şi a culturii naţionale ca sprijin al ortodoxiei. El înfiinţează în 1883 tipografia arhiepiscopală chiar în incinta reşedinţei mitropolitane din Cernăuţi (şi-a mai schimbat apoi numele în Societatea tipografică bucovineană) care, pe parcursul a peste 60 de ani (până în 1944), a editat zeci de cărţi valoroase în domeniul teologiei, istoriei şi literaturii româneşti. Fondează revista Candela, sprijină Societatea pentru cultură şi literatură română în Bucovina precum şi Societatea de cântare Armonia (înfiinţată în 1881). Din îndemnul şi iniţiativa mitropolitului Silvestru au fost reproduse pentru bisericile din Bucovina multe icoane, printre care, şi tabloul marelui pictor bucovinean Epaminonda Bucevschi Isus Hristos şi Maica Domnului (în 10 000 exemplare), s-au zidit mai multe biserici în satele din împrejurimile Cernăuţiului. Clerul înalt şi cult despre care vorbea Nicolae Iorga a reuşit în mare măsură să grupeze şi să călăuzească forţele intelectuale româneşti din Nordul Bucovinei „pe făgaşul unei puternice culturalităţi” (G Călinescu). Rândurile cărturarilor şi ale scriitorilor patrioţi care aprind lumina în inimile conaţionalilor prin credinţă, cultură şi ştiinţă se completează treptat. Alături de Silvestru Morariu-Andrievici îşi desfăşoară activitatea literară preotul din vechea comună românească Boian (şi alte localităţi bucovinene) Iraclie Porumbescu (1823 – 1896) – unul dintre primii poeţi şi prozatori ai acestui ţinut, marele etnograf şi folclorist, academicianul Simion Florea Marian (1847 – 1907), care fiind paroh în mai multe sate din Bucovina (printre care şi Voloca de lângă Cernăuţi) a avut prilejul să cunoască îndeaproape tradiţiile populare şi să releve în studiile şi antologiile sale marea bogăţie şi varietatea datinilor noastre pe parcurs de secole, care îşi păstrează valoarea ştiinţifică şi literară până în zilele noastre. Cele mai evidente amprente ale manierei individuale a lui S. Fl. Marian le poartă legendele, tradiţiile şi basmele populare bucovinene publicate de el în periodice şi în volume4. În afară de aceştia vom mai aminti şi numele altor apărători ai credinţei, limbii şi culturii strămoşeşti în Bucovina: Constantin Morariu (1854 – 1927, preot în comuna Toporăuţi şi la biserica Sf. Paraschiva din Cernăuţi, despre care un biograf al său (C. Loghin) scrie că „ori şi unde a călcat piciorul lui, a lăsat în urmă o largă dâră de lumină, iar activitatea sa scriitoricească este foarte bogată” (a fost poet, traducător, publicist). Datorită osârdiei sale a apărut la Cernăuţi ziarul Deşteptarea. Constantin Morariu este autorul unor versuri patriotice şi moralizatoare, cu un „pronunţat caracter conceptual şi discursiv” (Stănuţa Creţu), cultivând adeseori subiecte biblice. S-a remarcat, mai cu seamă, prin traduceri fidele din poezia germană (Goethe, Schiller, Heine ş.a), pe care le-a publicat în revistele Candela, Familia, Aurora română, Convoriri literare, Via a românească ş.a. În 1924 apare la Cernăuţi volumul său de Versuri originale şi traduse. A mai scris Păr i din istoria românilor bucovineni (Cernăuţi, 1926), multe alte lucrări cu 4 Grigore C. Bostan, Lora Bostan, Patrimoniu cultural-literar românesc (actuala regiune Cernău i), Cluj-Napoca, Presa Universitară Clujeană, 2011, p. 45-49. 374 caracter teologic şi instructiv5. Un alt reprezentant al clerului bucovinean, Dimitrie Dan (1856 – 1927), consilier consistorial şi membru al Academiei Române este autor de lucrări în domeniul istoriei bisericii în Bucovina, precum şi de schiţe etnografico-folclorice de o mare valoare documentară; Zaharia Voronca (18511920) preot în comuna Mihalcea de lângă Cernăuţi, publicist şi militant (în cadrul Societăţii „Arboroasa”) pentru drepturile politice şi culturale ale românilor bucovineni ş.a. Prin activitatea sa cărturărească (editarea de cărţi religioase) biserica ortodoxă a jucat un rol foarte important şi în formarea limbii române literare în Bucovina. Aceasta se explică prin faptul că ea a fost unica forţă stabilă, independentă de factorii sociali, care a contribuit la consolidarea neamului şi la păstrarea spiritualităţii lui de-a lungul secolelor. Contribuţia bisericii ortodoxe la formarea şi menţinerea spiritualităţii neamului românesc în Nordul Bucovinei s-a manifestat prin literatura creata în mare parte de unii dintre cei mai distinşi şi vrednici slujitori ai bisericii care au avut grijă să-şi ferească neamul şi credinţa de pericolul înstrăinării, prin limba primelor traduceri de texte religioase ca expresie a spiritualităţii naţionale în această parte a ţării (în limbile română şi ucraineană). Bibliografie S. Fl. Marian, Inscrip iuni de pe manuscrise şi căr i vechi din Bucovina, Partea I, Suceava, 1900 Nistor, I., Istoria Bisericii din Bucovina, Bucureşti, 1916 Bostan, Grigore C., Lora Bostan, Patrimoniu cultural-literar românesc (actuala regiune Cernău i), Cluj-Napoca, Presa Universitară Clujeană, 2011 Morariu, Constantin, Cursul vie ii mele. Memorii. Ediţie îngrijit, prefaţată, microbiografii, glosar şi note de prof. univ. dr. Mihai Iacobescu , Suceava, Editura Hurmuzachi, 1998 Constantin Morariu, Cursul vie ii mele. Memorii. Ediţie îngrijit, prefaţată, microbiografii, glosar şi note de prof. univ. dr. Mihai Iacobescu , Suceava, Editura Hurmuzachi, 1998. 5 375 Le discours religieux et l’index des livres interdits durant l’Inquisition Mihai FLOROAIA Every era has lived and understood its past in a perspective which was closer to its present aspirations, needs and beliefs. During the Renaissance the image that frequently appeared was that of “a dark middle ages”. The romanticism had its own image about middle ages as a time of minstrels and seraphic women. Objectively speaking, we are not interested only in the facts, but in their significance, too, and also in their consequences over a certain era. Medieval Christian Western society was dominated by religion. Only thinking about the acquisition of salvation, no matter by what means, could not be talking about freedom of conscience. After the 12th century, Europe has been crossed by a stream of ideas. For example, in Spain the Christians had gained from the Muslim culture, even if it entered into polemics with Christianity. Today, after two thousand years of history, killing people because of their ideas is something unacceptable. In the following, I propose an analysis of religious speech in a period in which the Inquisition as a well organized institution of the Western Church, acting both on the spoken and written religious message. The Inquisition acted on the books (as well as on some editions or translations of the Holy Scriptures). The index of banned books included provisions for both authors and their books, and for publishers and printers of such works. Some banned books could receive consent for publication, if they were corrected according to the indications provided by the specially accredited persons. Thus, the final works were be reviewed by a Commission of the Index. Each censored paper should be analysed by a specialist. If there were still doubts about the works, they were also analysed by other consultants of the Congregation. Medieval Catholicism has kept the human soul on the heights of spirituality and horror. Educating and concentrating human spiritual forces, it subordinated them to a centre which contained the entire culture. Keywords: discourse, sermon, Inquisition, Index, censorship. Chaque époque a vécu et compris son passé dans une perspective plus proche de ses aspirations, besoins et convictions présentes. Durant la Renaissance, a apparu l’image de cette „barbarie obscure” du Moyen Age. Le romantisme avait forgé un Moyen Age des troubadours et des femmes séraphiques. Dans une analyse objective, nous sommes intéressés non seulement par les faits en soi, mais surtout par leur signification, par la 377 physionomie qu’ils ont imprimée à certaines époques et les conclusions que nous en tirons pour comprendre le passé. La société du Moyen Age chrétien occidental était dominée par la religion. En pensant seulement à obtenir le salut rédemption, par n’importe quels moyens, on ne pouvait pas parler de la liberté de la pensée. Après le XIIe siècle, l’Europe a été parcourue d’un flux des idées. Par exemple, seulement en Espagne les chrétiens ont pu gagner de la culture musulmane, même si celle-ci est entrée en polémiques avec le christianisme. De nos jours, après deux mille ans d’histoire, tuer des gens à cause des idées nous semble, à juste titre, inconcevable. En ce qui suit, nous nous sommes proposé une analyse du discours religieux, à une époque où l’Inquisition, comme institution bien organisée de l’Eglise occidentale, agissait tant sur le message religieux transmis par voie orale, mais aussi sur celui répandu par écrit. Pour comprendre les causes qui ont déterminé l’apparition de l’Inquisition et ses actions, il est nécessaire d’analyser la société telle qu’elle se présentait durant la période médiévale. Si aujourd’hui les chrétiens appartiennent à des églises plus ou moins nationales, ceux qui vivaient au Moyen Age appartenaient à une seule communauté qui a commencé à se superposer à l’ancien Empire Romain. La croyance ne représentait pas seulement une forme de vie intérieure, mais elle commandait les actes de la vie quotidienne; elle n’appartenait pas seulement à la vie privée, mais se manifestait dans des collectivités (par exemple, par des pèlerinages, la construction des cathédrales etc.). Les lois s’appliquaient plus dans les communautés urbaines, tandis que, à la campagne, beaucoup essayaient de gouverner par d’autres moyens que les légaux. Dans une telle Europe morcelée et diversifiée, l’Eglise Catholique a réussi à contrecarrer une brutalité sauvage. Bien sûr, la participation active, substantielle du catholicisme à la culture européenne est incontestable. Le catholicisme a vécu consciemment l’histoire comme une dimension intérieure, en introduisant le politique dans sa substance spirituelle même, en se structurant du point de vue dogmatique et organisationnel pour l’action historique, pour la victoire des buts qui nécessitaient cette action. Une grande partie de ce qui défendait la loi se trouvait dans les mains des prêtres: héritages, finances, discipline, affaires temporaires, les prêtres étant les seuls instruits. Le statut social du prêtre faisait de lui un homme à part et, même s’il était coupable de certaines infractions, il ne pouvait être accusé ou puni par aucune autorité. Le clergé détenait aussi une grande superficie des terres fertiles de l’Europe. D’autre part, on doit mentionner le fait que, pour devenir prêtre, il e fallait passer aucun examen préalable qui atteste des qualités et de la vocation d’une telle mission, aucune préparation ou stage spécifique. Aux débuts du Moyen Age, dans la plupart des cas, le clergé recevait une formation sommaire d’autres prêtres, mais les écoles annexées aux cathédrales et aux abbayes ont apparu relativement tard, là s’est formée une grande partie du clergé. Le synode d’Aachen de 809 exigeait la connaissance des prières de Notre Père, Le Credo, des livres liturgiques et des sermons patristique. Il paraît que la formation ascétique manquait. Le moine bénédictin Rabanus Maurus 378 (780-856), en De institutione clericorum (819) offre un „programme” de la formation du clergé exigeant la connaissance des Ecrits Saints1. Les réformateurs du XIe siècllee se sont evertués à promouvoir la vie monacale, mais le clergé diecezain restait avec beaucoup de manques (privations). En Europe de ce siècle-là, il y avait peu de centres urbains, faiblement développés, raison pour laquelle l’enseignement s’est développé dans des abbayes et monastères2. Les universités n’étaient pas exigentes par rapport au niveau de préparation des candidats, et, d’autre part, n’offraient pas les conditions adaptées à la formation sacerdotale. Les dispositions des synodes Lateran III (1179) et Lateran IV (1215), qui imposaient qu’on institue près de chaque cathédrale une école gratuite pour le clergé, étaient rarement appliquées. Dans un tel contexte, des centaines de personnes sont entrées assez facilement dans le clergé, seulement pour profiter des bénéfices apportés par un tel statut. Les mœurs des prêtres laissaient à désirer, fait qui diminuait leur autorité morale devant les croyants. Les moines avaient un régime de vie basé sur la pauvreté et la chasteté, tandis que les prêtres des paroisses étaient accusés de mener une vie luxueuse, qu’ils pratiquaient la bigamie, en s’adonnant aux jeux de hasard, ils ne se confessaient pas et protégeaient les personnes excommuniées par l’Eglise3. La pratique du commerce avec les indulgences et avec les soi-disant „reliques des saints”4 par le clergé était à l’ordre du jour. Certains moines étaient considérés, le plus souvent, superstitieux ou vagabonds. Le clergé s’éloignait ainsi du message de Rome, en perdant ainsi l’autorité et le pouvoir sur le peuple. Même les bons servants souffraient à cause des méchants. Quoiqu’on ait essayé de réformer les évêchés, les monastères et le clergé, on n’a pas enregistré de grands succès. Voilà comment décrivait Nicolas de Clamanges, en 1564, la situation du clergé médiéval: „Personne ne pouvait devenir prêtre qu’en moyennant de l’argent, et les mains de ceux qui cherchent la pitié des saints ne peuvent se joindre qu’après avoir payé d’abord …Beaucoup d’évêques ne sont jamais entrés dans leurs villes, n’ont jamais vu les églises et n’ont jamais visité leurs diocèses …Les papes se sont élevés au-dessus des évêques par désir de domination… Qaunt aux cardinaux … ils persécutent les évêques comme leurs inférieurs, en se croyant els égaux des rois”5. Après la fondation des deux 1 Thomas J. Shahan, Rabani Mauri De institutione clericorum libri tres, in «The American Journal of Theology», Vol. 6, No. 1, (ianuarie, 1902), p. 149-150. 2 Mariateresa Fumagalli Beonio Brocchieri, Intelectualul, în Jacques Le Goff (coord), Omul medieval, trad. Ingrid Ilinca şi Dragoş Cojocaru, Editura Polirom, Iaşi, 1999, p. 169. 3 A. Lecler, Constitutionis synodales de 1295, în Anciens statuts du diocèse de Limoges, BSAHL XL, 1892, p. 146 şi p. 149-150, apud Sara Louis, Les relations de Bernard Gui avec le limousin, în Bernard Gui et son monde, Cahiers de Franjeaux, vol. XVI, Édouard Privat, Éditeur, Toulouse, 1981, p. 43-44. 4 Este vorba despre acele pseudorelicve pe care clerul le purta în pelerinaje sau le vindea din dorinţa de a-şi spori veniturile. Vezi Ioan Rămureanu, Istoria Bisericească Universală, vol. II, Editura Institutului Biblic şi de Misiune Ordoxă al B.O.R., Bucureşti, 1993, p. 200-204. 5 Nicolas de Clamanges, Le traité de la ruine de l’Église, trad. A. Coville, Librairie E. Droz, Paris, 1936, p. 160-161. 379 ordres monacaux, des Franciscains6 et des Dominicains7, l’Eglise de l’Occident européen a commencé à se débarrasser de tous ces inconvenables. Malgré cela, le catholicisme a fait de son mieux pour donner à ses serviteurs l’impression d’une distinction sociale et spirituelle capable de les obliger au respect de soi. L’univers où vivait le catholique a été dynamique, orienté vers quelque chose de précis historiquement. La nouvelle organisation des Franciscains s’est vite répandue, comme celle des Dominicains, de sorte qu’en 1221 elle comptait entre 30-35.000 membres8, et en 1256, ils avaient pénétré jusqu’aux zones les plus éloignées du monde civilisé9. Les deux organisations menaient une vie propre, avec les seul but de prêcher l’Evangile et le salut de l’âme, en luttant contre les abus et la corruption10. Prêcher la pauvreté évangélique était un thème commun. Le manque de la formation intellectuelle et du support spirituel se sentaient en spécial dans le milieu urbain, où les laïques éduqués prêchaient pendant les messes. Les humanistes étaient intéressés en spécial par l’étude des écrits antiques de Grèce et de Rome, tout comme par les éditions de la Bible, comparées à son texte original. Puisque les membres de l’ordre dominicain pouvaient prêchaient partout, Étienne de Bourbon11 est devenu prédicateur général, étant autorisé par le prêtre principal de son monastère à se déplacer librement et à prêcher dans tous les lieux. En parcourant toutes les régions lyonnaises et bourguignonnes, il a prêché contre l’hérésie des Albigeois en 1226 à Vézelay. Il a fait des incursions au nord et au nord-est à Besançon, il a assisté à Reims en 1223 ou en 1226 au sacre du roi de France, Louis VIII. Il a participé en 1239 au procès des hérétiques du Mont-Aimé et il a traversé le diocèse Toul en Lorraine. Il a interrogé divers hérétiques à la sollicitation de l’évêque Clermont Hugues de Tours. Dans le sud, il a prêché dans les diocèses de Valence et Elne, et dans le sud-est, il a traversé la Savoie au Piémont. Il a recueilli divers écrits, tels : la légende 6 Ordinul franciscanilor sau al fraţilor minori a fost fondat în anul 1208 de către Francisc de Assisi şi aprobat în data de 29 noiembrie 1223 de către papa Honorius al III-lea. Cf. Magnum Bullarium Romanum. Bullarum privilegiorum ac diplomatum Romanorum Pontificum amplissima collectio, tomus tertius, pars prima, Honorius Tertius, Romae, MDCCXL, reimprimat la Akademische Druck – U. Verlagsanstalt, Graz, 1964, p. 229-232. 7 Ordinul dominicanilor sau al Fraţilor Predicatori a fost înfiinţat de preotul spaniol Dominic de Guzmán şi aprobat de către papa Honorius al III-lea pe 22 decembrie 1216. Cf. Magnum Bullarium…, tomus tertius, pars prima, Honorius Tertius, II, Roma, MDCCXL, reimprimat la Graz, 1964, p. 178-179. 8 Cf. Annales Minorum prussicorum et le commentaire du P.L. Lemmens, în Archivum franciscanum historicum, t. VI, 1913, p. 702-704. 9 Vezi Gratien de Paris, Histoire de la fondation et de l’Évolution de l’Ordre des Frères Mineurs au XIIIe siècle, Société et Librairie S. François d’Assise, Paris, 1928, p. 513-529. 10 Cf. Regula major, cap. II, IV, VII, VIII. PP. Théophile Desbonnets et Damien Vorreux O.F.M., Saint François d’Assise. Documents..., p. 54-62 şi p. 68-72; http: //franciscani.Ix.ro/pagini/regula (2009). 11 Jacques Berlioz, Étienne de Bourbon, l’inquisiteur exemplaire, în Jacques Berlioz, (coord.), Moines et religieux au Moyen Âge”, Éditions du Seuil, Paris, 1994, p. 273-284. 380 sur la chute du Mont Granier (1248), l’une des plus grandes catastrophes du Moyen Age occidental12. En analysant le discours religieux de la période médievale, on observe un fait assez intéressant: d’une part, le message des sermons avait comme but l’inoculation de la peur des éternelles punitions de l’enfer, comme conséquence des péchés faits, d’autre part, le disocurs officiel visait, entre autres, la censure des livres par leur vérificationpar une commission spéciale du Saint Office. Ainsi, l’Inquisition a eu un double but: un pastorale par le fait qu’elle a prêché le doctrine de la foi catholique chez la majorité des peuples et un judiciaire par les tribunaux créés au but d’éliminer tout ce qui apparaissait étranger au catholicisme. Si elle a commencé par la poursuite des hérétiques par les évêques de la région, elle a fini par l’hystérie générale dans laquelle quiconque pouvait être poursuivant ou poursuivi. Arrivé dans la localité, l’inquisiteur tenait une messe (d’habitude le dimanche ou un jour de fête) à laquelle était convoquée toute la population de la zone, en insistant sur les problèmes de foi. „Par notre ordre, appelez un par un, sous peine de mort, à être présent un certain jour, dans un certain endroit, celui qui rendra compte de sa foi, ou sur sa faute, ou recevra la punition ou la pénitence pour les faits commis; ou celui qui défendra son parent mort ou celui qui écoutera la sentence par rapport à lui ou son défunt dont il est l’héritier”13. On présentait le but de la mission de la délégation dans la zone respective. La communication était faite dans une langue populaire, accessible à tous, „exponendo materna lingua”14, pour être comprise par tous les participants et pour éliminer les éventuelles confusions15. Etaient déclarés hérétiques tous ceux qui prêchaient sans l’autorisation du Pape Saint Ofice ou des évêques et tous ceux dont la foi et les faits n’étaient pas en conformité à la loi romaine16. Dans certaines sentences de condamnation des hérétiques, les formules sont plus indulgentes, dans d’autres elles sont purement juridiques. L’insertion de la pénitence dans une procédure apparaît comme une idée d’homme de l’Eglise, les simples croyants étant impressionnés par les gestes et les actes de l’inquisiteur quand celui-ci prononçait la sentence. Des documents il ressort le fait que les personnes condamnées à la prison par l’inquisiteur Bernard Gui ne sont pas de celles à avoir abjuré17. 12 Idem, L’effondrement du mont Granier en Savoie (fin 1248). Production, transmission et réception des récits historique et légendaires (XIIIème-XVIIème siècles), în Le Monde alpin et rhodanien, nr. 1-2, 1987, p. 7-68. 13 Ms 53 din Biblioteca Universităţii din Madrid, reprodus de E. Vacandard, L’Inquisition. Étude historique et critique sur le pouvoir coercitif de l’Église, Paris, 1912, Appendices, p. 316-317. 14 Serge Lisignan, Parler vulgairement. Les intellectuels et la langue française aux XIIIe et XIVe siècles, Librairie philosophique J. Vrin, Paris, 1986, p. 67. 15 Vezi Bernard Gui, Manuel de ľinquisiteur, édité et traduit par G. Mollat, professeur a la Faculté de Théologie Catholique de Strasbourg, avec la collaboration de G. Drioux, tome II, deuxieme tirage, Société d’Édition Les Belles Letres, Paris, 1964, p. 124-126. 16 *** Décrétales de Grégoire IX, Livre V, Titre 7, canon 9, le 4 novembre 1184, Edition E. Friedberg, Leipzig, 1881. 17 Jacques Paul, stud. cit., p. 308. 381 En connaissant très bien le texte de 1270, dans le „Prologue” de la IVe partie, on présente une synthèse des discours historiques de l’Eglise à l’époque des hérésies. Influencé par le système juridique et théologique de la monarchie pontificale, Bernard Gui aborde principalement les décrets et les lois, en empruntant de ses prédécesseurs l’appellation des diverses catégories d’hérétiques: les parfaits, les relaps, les Juifs, etc. Ceux-ci peuvent être détruits par deux voies: la conversion à la foi catholique, ou rendus au brûlés vifs18. Sur la contrainte de ceux tombés dans l’hérésie et leur privation des biens matériels, il nous parle longuement, en montrant que ces moyens peuvent déterminer le retour de celui en cause à la vraie foi. En analysant les travaux, on observe qu’il y a beaucoup de ressemblances entre la Practica officii Inquisitionis haereticae pravitatis19 de Bernard Gui et le mansucrit anonyme de 1270. Vers la fin du Moyen Age, l’Eglise Occidentale détenait un pouvoir énorme tant sur le plan politique que culturel. Elle avait réussi à convaincre les princes chrétiens à participer aux croisades (1095 – 1272), à les mobiliser dans la lutte contre les hérésies (la croisade contre les Albigeois (1202 – 1229), avait inspiré la reconqista espagnole contre les maures. Dans son intérieur, il y avait des ordres religieux militaires et chevaleresques, mais aussi les grands ordres de moines mendiants, les franciscains (1209), les carmélites (1209), les dominicains (1215), qui, au nom de la pauvreté évangélique renonçaient aux biens matériels, en se dédiant à l’apprentissage et à prêcher le message divin. Index des livres interdits – manière d’enchaîner la liberté de penser et d’expression On a observé dans les chapitres antérieurs que l’Inquisition a agi aussi sur les livres, quel qu’en soit le spécifique. L’index des livres interdits contenait tant des mentions pour les auteurs et leurs livres20, mais aussi pour leurs éditeurs et imprimeurs21. Certains livres interdits dans un premier temps pouvaient recevoir l’acceptation pour la publication, quoiqu’ils fussent corrigés en conformité avec les indications offertes par les personnes spécialement accréditées. Ainsi, les ouvrages en forme finale étient revérifiés par une commission de l’Index22. L’interdiction du mot écrit et de ses auteurs a apparu en Occident après le Concile de Trident (1545-1563). Après le Concile, il a résulté deux listes d’ouvrages interdits: une de livres et d’auteurs (Index librorum prohibitorum) publiée par l’Inquisition en 1559, sous le Pape Paul IV et la deuxième contenait les titres des livres qui pouvaient 18 *** Practica Inquisitionis heretice pravitatis, auctore Bernardo Guidonis O.F.P., publié pour la première foi par C. Douais, Paris, 1886, p. 217-218. 19 Vezi Bernard Gui, Manuel de ľinquisiteur, (Colection Les classiques de l’histoire de France au Moyen Âge), édité et traduit par G. Mollat, Paris, 1926-1927, p. XI–XV. 20 *** Index Librorum Prohibitorum cum regulis confectis per patres à Trid. Synodo delectos, auctoritate Pii IV, primum editus et nunc Demum SDN Clementis Papae VIII, Chez J. Antonium Remondium, Bassani, 1724, p. 15-17. 21 Ibidem, p. 19-21. 22 Ibidem, p. 17-19, în mod special § 5, p. 19. 382 être lus après la censure de ces chapitres (fragments) considérés inacceptables: hérésie, immoralité, sexualité explicite, incorrection politique, etc. (Index expurgatorius)23. Les personnes qui lisaient, détenaient ou répandaient de tels livres étaient excommuniées. Chaque bon chrétien avait l’obligation de dénoncer aux autorités ecclésiastiques ou laïques toute situation où on enfreignait cette décision papale. Après le Concile Vatican II (1966) a été suspendue la parution de l’Index. Penadnt la durée des deux Index, pendant presque 500 ans, le catalogue a connu 32 éditions. Dans ce qui suit, on voudrait faire une analyse succincte des deux Constitutions papales rendues relativement tard, au XVIIIe – XIXe siècles, ce qui définit les critères selon lesquels une œuvre recevait ou non l’acceptation de l’église pour être publiée et lue par le grand public. La Constitution „Problèmes et solutions” donnée par le pape Benedict XIV (1740 – 1758) le 9 juillet 175324 mentionnait la méthodologie utilisée dans l’examen et la proscription des livres, par les 27 articles. Dans l’introduction, est présentée le „soin” pris en permanence par les pontifes romains prédécesseurs, pour „garder inaltérée” la foi catholique: „Problèmes et solutions”, par le souci des pontifes romains, nos prédécesseurs, s’est efforcée d’abattre ceux qui croyaient en Jésus de la lecture de ces livres dont les naïfs pouvaient souffrir et, imbus d’opinions et de théories, pourraient s’opposer aux dogmes de la religion catholique. Il ne faut pas omettre le très ancien décret de sa Sainteté Gelasius I et ce qui a été décidé longtemps avant Grégoire IX et d’autres pontifes par rapport à ces problèmes; on considère que personne ne sait ce qui a été établi très soigneusement par nos prédécesseurs, Pius IV, Sa Sainteté Pius V et Clément VIII, pour approfondir par décrets et règles très sages une œuvre très saine, assumée par les Parents du Saint Synode Tridentin, conçue à temps et menée presqu’à la fin, en formant un Index sur la lecture des livres interdits et en le diffusant. Cette activité est poursuivie continuellement par Saint Siège et est promue par les deux Congrégations des Cardinaux de la Sainte Eglise Romane à laquelle est revenue la tâche de découvrir les livres mauvais et nuisibles (pravi et noxi), de les corriger et, selon le cas, les proscrire. Confiée par Paul IV à la Congrégation romane de la Censure universelle, cette tâche continue à être pratiquée depuis, quand il s’agit de juger certains types de livres”25. Sont mentionnés la manière de convocation et els activités de la Congrégation de l’Index: „Une assemblée de ce type devra être convoquée une fois par mois, ou plus souvent s’il le faut, par le secrétaire de la Congrégation, ou dans sa résidence, ou dans un endroit plus convenable, dans un monastère. Participeront toujours Magister sacri palatii avec six autres consultants élus par le secrétaire, et le secrétaire aura le devoir de consigner dans le registre les avis des consultants, qu’il enverra ensuite à la 23 http://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_librorum_prohibitorum. ***Index Librorum Prohibitorum. Leonis XIII Sum. Pont. Auctoritate recognitus SS. D. N. PII P. X IUSSU Editus, praemittuntur Constitutiones Apostolicae de examine et prohibitione librorum, Typis Vaticanis, Romae, 1904, p. 34. 25 Benedicti Papae XIV Constitutio qua methodus praescribitur in examine et proscriptione librorum servanda, p. 19-20. 24 383 Congrégation des Cardinaux, avec le rapport du censeur. Dans cette réunion, on devra respecter tout ce qui a été établi ci-dessus concernant la Congrégation du Saint Office concernant l’examen des livres”26. Chaque ouvrage doit être soumis à la censure, doit être analysée avec luxe de détails par un spécialiste: „Le livre est donné d’abord à un des qualificateurs ou consultants, désignés par la Congrégation, qui le lise attentivement et le pèse avec soin; puis, consigner par écrit sa recension, étant indiqués les endroits et les pages où il y a les problèmes incriminés. Puis, que le livre avec les observations du réviseur soit envoyé à chaque consultant, qui dise son opinion sur le livre et sa recension dans l’assemblée qui se tient d’habitude dans le bâtiment du Saint Office. Ensuite, la recension avec le livre et les opinions des consultants sont envoyés aux Cardinaux, qui se réunissent d’habitude le quatrième dimanche au monastère des Frères Prédicateurs, appelé Sainte Marie. Après, tous les documents sont apportés par l’assesseur chez le Pontife, selon l’appréciation duquel on va rendre définitive l’évaluation” 27. Au cas où il y aurait des doutes sur les ouvrages, on doit les donner pour l’analyse à d’autres consultants de la Congrégation: „Selon une ancienne coutume, qui dit que l’ouvrage d’un auteur catholique ne soit pas soumise à la recension d’une seule personne, par le décret de juillet 1750, nous avons décidé de garder cette pratique ; de sorte que, si le premier censeur considère que le travail doit être proscrit, même si les consultants arrivent à la même conclusion, le livre et sa recension doivent être confiées à un autre réviseur élu par la même Congrégation. On rend secret le nom du premier censeur, pour que le deuxième exprime librement son opinion. Si le deuxième censeur est du même avis que le premier, alors les observations des deux sont envoyées aux cardinaux pour qu’ils décident sur le livre; mais si le deuxième a une autre opinion, on élit un troisième censeur qui fasse l’analyse, après que le nom des deux a été rendu secret. Mais si son opinion ne cadre pas avec celle des deux premiers, le livre est envoyé aux Cardinaux. Ceux-ci, après avoir pesé les avis des consultants, après une mûre réflexion, doivent se prononcer. Mais le Pontife, soit à cause de la gravité du problème dont on parle dans le livre, soit parce qu’il a considéré ainsi, a décidé que le jugement du livre se fasse en assemblée devant soi, le quatrième dimanche, chose que j’ai souvent faite et je pense qu’il faut le faire chaque fois qu’on en a besoin. Autrefois, il suffira que l’on fasse appel au jugement du Pontife et des Cardinaux, comme des consultants, en renonçant à l’examiner en réunion du quatrième dimanche”28. En d’autres termes, le pape était celui qui décidait, finalement, du sort des choses. Le document finit par la formule typiquement rencontrée dans les époques antérieures aussi, par l’avertissement de garder et respecter les décisions prises: „Je décide que, dorénavant, ce qu’on a établi jusqu’à présent, en accord avec les décrets de mes prédécesseurs, avec les lois de nos Congrégations et confirmées par la pratique, soient respectées sous l’autorité apostolique; j’ordonne à tous et à chacun de ceux qui ont une place dans les Congrégations de ne pas oser donner de verdict, à 26 Benedicti Papae XIV Constitutio..., § 8, p. 24-25. Benedicti Papae XIV Constitutio..., § 4, p. 21-22. 28 Benedicti Papae XIV Constitutio..., § 5, p. 22-23. 27 384 changer quelque chose, à prendre une décision sans ma permission ou celle des Pontifes qui vont me suivre”29. Le document suivant attire beaucoup plus notre attention, non seulement grâce à son contenu et aux objectifs suivis, mais pour la période relativement tardive où il a été émis. Il s’agit de la Constitution du Pape Léon XIII (1878–1903) sur l’interdiction et la censure des livres, intitulée „Tâches et devoirs ”, donnée à Rome le 8 février 1896 30. Le texte comprend 49 articles structurés en 5 chapitres et attire l’attention sur le danger de l’imprimerie sur les mœurs de la société, au cas où on publierait n’importe quels livres: „Mais au XVe siècle, étant découvert le nouvel art de l’écriture, on a pris soin non seulement aux mauvais livres qui avaient paru, mais aussi sur les parutions ultérieures de ce types de livres. Dans cette période, on imposait cette stipulation pour la défense de la moralité et pour la sauvegarde de l’honneur; cela, parce que certains ont vite changé cet art, très bon en soi, dans un grand instrument de perte. Le grand préjudice apporté par les écrits pouvait se répandre maintenant plus vite et leur effet était plus rapide. Ainsi, Alexandre VI et Léon X, nos prédécesseurs, ont donné des lois expresses, qui visaient ceux qui imprimaient des livres. Le danger étant de plus en plus grand, il a été nécessaire qu’on arrête avec beaucoup plus de vigilance la contagion des livres hérétiques. C’est pourquoi Léon X et, ensuite, Clément VII ont affirmé fermement que, pour le malheur de ce temps, la boue sale des livres dangereux avait pris tous les endroits (impura colluvies), il paraissait qu’on avait besoin d’un remède plus sérieux et plus prompt”31. Les décrets de cette Constitution sont structurés en deux parties: Sur l’interdiction des livres (10 chapitres avec un total de 29 articles)32 et Sur la censure des livres (en 5 chapitres qui contiennent 20 articles)33. Les quatre premiers articles du chapitre I définissent clairement les catégories des livres qui sont et qui restent sous l’interdiction de l’église: „1. Tous les livres qui ont été condamnés, avant 1600, les hauts Pontifes ou les Conseils œcuméniques et qui ne sont pas présents dans le nouvel Index sont considérés condamné de la même sorte comme s’ils avaient été jadis condamnés; exception font ceux permis par ces Décrets généraux. 2. On interdit complètement les livres des apostats, des hérétiques, des schismatiques et de tout écrivain qui défend l’hérésie ou le schisme, qui détruit les bases mêmes de la religion. 3. On interdit les livres contre les catholiques, qui se réfèrent à des problèmes religieux, si on ne constate qu’il n’y a rien contre la foi catholique. 4. Que les livres des mêmes auteurs, qui ne traitent pas des problèmes religieux, mais qui touchent à des problèmes relatifs à la foi, ne soient pas considérés interdits 29 Benedicti Papae XIV Constitutio..., § 25, p. 34. Librorum Prohibitorum. Leonis XIII Sum. Pont. Auctoritate recognitus..., p. 17. 31 Leonis Papae XIII Constitutio de prohibitione et censura librorum, p. 4. 32 Leonis Papae XIII Constitutio..., p. 7-12. 33 Leonis Papae XIII Constitutio..., p. 13-17. 30 385 conformément à la loi ecclésiastique, tant qu’ils n’ont pas été proscrits par un décret spécial”34. Les éditions du Saint Evangile n’ont échappées, elles non plus, à être attentivement contrôlées: „On permet les éditions du texte original et des anciennes versions catholiques du saint Evangile, même celles de l’Eglise Orientale, éditées par les catholiques, à condition qu’elles soient correctes, seulement pour ceux qui s’occupent à l’étude théologique biblique, pourvu qu’elles ne contreviennent aux dogmes de la foi chrétienne”35, et les traductions dans la langue de chaque peuple ont été interdites: „Toutes les versions en langue d’origine, même celles réalisées par les catholiques, sont interdites, si elles n’ont pas été approuvées par Siège apostolique ou éditées sous la direction des évêques avec les observations assumées par les Saints Parents et les sages catholiques”36. Ces ouvrages qui reçoivent l’acceptation d’être publiés, doivent contenir la mention qu’ils peuvent être donnés au peuple pour la lecture: „Après la fin de l’examen, si rien ne semble s’opposer à la publication du livre, le Consistoire doit accorder la permission en vue de la publication, qui soit imprimée à la fin ou au début du livre.” (37) Les éditeurs et les imprimeurs devaient se soumettre à certaines règles d’impression et d’édition des ouvrages: „Qu’aucun livre soumis à la censure ecclésiastique ne soit édité s’il n’a pas, au début, le nom et le prénom de l’auteur et de l’éditeur, au-dessus, le lieu et l’année de l’impression et de l’édition. Et si, dans une certaine situation, pour des raisons justifiées, il semble que le nom de l’auteur doit être mis sous silence, cela doit être permis par le Consistoire”38. Ce n’est pas par hasard que nous avons choisi ces fragments des deux Constitutions, d’autant plus qu’elles illustrent la manière dont procédait la Congrégation concernant la vérification des contenus des livres. L’idée de la papauté était de détruire les livres qui pouvaient corrompre les croyants. Les listes des livres étaient concentrées surtout sur les titres nouvellement parus. Ainsi on organisait-on des perquisitions aléatoires dans les librairies, imprimeries et dépôts de livres, bon nombre en étant fermés, et le personnel employé étant menacé, amendé ou arrêté. On mérite souligner le fait que l’Inquisition a usé des normatifs des pontifes romains jusqu’à nos jours. Un exemple classique est représenté par l’œuvre du philosophe italien Benedetto Croce (1866 – 1952)39 qui a été mise à l’Index en 1932, respectivement 193440. 34 Leonis Papae XIII Constitutio..., p. 7. Leonis Papae XIII Constitutio..., cap. II, art. 5, p. 8. 36 Leonis Papae XIII Constitutio..., cap. III, art. 7, p. 8. 37 Leonis Papae XIII Constitutio..., titulus II, caput II, art. 40, p. 14. 38 Leonis Papae XIII Constitutio..., titulus II, caput IV, art. 43, p. 15. 39 Sa philosophie a été influencée par Heghel. Il a rempli les fonctions de ministre et sénateur de la République Italienne. 40 Son ouvrage Storia d’Europa nel secolo decimonono, Bari, 1932 a été condamné par le Décret du Saint Office du 13 juillet 1932, et Opera omnia par le Décret du Saint Office du 20 juin 1934. Cf. *** Index Librorum Prohibitorum (1600 – 1966), par J.M.De Bujanda (Index des livres interdits), tom XI, Centre d’Études de la Renaissance, Université de Sherbrooke et Librairie Droz, 2002, p. 255. 35 386 Si prêcher l’Evangile constitue un acte désintéressé de la conviction, au moment où elle est mêlée à des dénonciations de „suspects”, enquêtes, arrestations, etc., elle devient une action coercitive qui lèse la dignité et la liberté humaine. On a démontré que la réalisation de l’Empire de Dieu par des moyens coercitifs est impossible. La fin du Moyen Age a enregistré dans l’Occident une vraie explosion des superstitions, d’aberrations religieuses et de pratiques de sorcières. On rencontrait partout le fantastique: des sculptures religieuses jusqu’aux miniatures des manuscrits. La magie et la sorcellerie, à côté des punitions de l’enfer, constituaient des thèmes abordés par les grands prêcheurs de l’époque. L’église a essayé diverses manières de combattre ces mensonges. Le Tribunal inquisitorial, constitué initialement pour lutter contre les hérésies, a maintenant un nouvel objectif: détruire les sorcières et leurs pratiques. D’une part, dans le contexte de l’élargissement du champ des hérésies et des pratiques magiques, l’Eglise Occidentale a essayé aussi une réforme intérieure qui s’était avérée nécessaire. Bibliographie ***Annales Minorum prussicorum et le commentaire du P.L. Lemmens, in «Archivum franciscanum historicum», tome VI, 1913, p. 702-704 Berlioz, Jacques, 1994: Étienne de Bourbon, l’inquisiteur exemplaire, in Jacques Berlioz, (coord.), «Moines et religieux au Moyen Âge», Paris, Éditions du Seuil, p. 273-284 Berlioz, Jacques, 1987: L’effondrement du mont Granier en Savoie (fin 1248). Production, transmission et réception des récits historique et légendaires (XIIIème-XVIIème siècles), in «Le Monde alpin et rhodanien», no. 1-2, p. 7-68 De Clamanges, Nicolas, 1936: Le traité de la ruine de l’Église, traduit A. Coville, Paris, Librairie E. Droz ***Décrétales de Grégoire IX, Livre V, Titre 7, canon 9, le 4 novembre 1184, Edition E. Friedberg, Leipzig, 1881 De Paris, Gratien, 1928: Histoire de la fondation et de l’Évolution de l’Ordre des Frères Mineurs au XIIIe siècle, Paris, Société et Librairie S. François d’Assise Florescu, Radu, 2002: Istoria civiliza iei creştine, ediţia a III-a, Bucureşti, Editura Oscar Print Gui, Bernard, 1964: Manuel de ľinquisiteur, édité et traduit par G. Mollat, professeur a la Faculté de Théologie Catholique de Strasbourg, avec la collaboration de G. Drioux, tome Ier, II, deuxieme tirage, Paris, Société d’Édition Les Belles Letres Gui, Bernard, 1886: Practica Inquisitionis heretice pravitatis, auctore Bernardo Guidonis O.F.P., Paris, publié pour la première foi par C. Douais ***Index Librorum Prohibitorum. Leonis XIII Sum. Pont. Auctoritate recognitus SS. D. N. PII P. X IUSSU Editus, praemittuntur Constitutiones Apostolicae de examine et prohibitione librorum, Romae, Typis Vaticanis, 1904 ***Index Librorum Prohibitorum (1600 – 1966), par J.M. De Bujanda (Index des livres interdits), tom XI, Centre d’Études de la Renaissance, Université de Sherbrooke et Librairie Droz, 2002 387 ***Index Librorum Prohibitorum cum regulis confectis per patres à Trid. Synodo delectos, auctoritate Pii IV, primum editus et nunc Demum SDN Clementis Papae VIII, Chez J. Antonium Remondium, Bassani, 1724 Lea, Henri-Charles, 1903: Histoire de l’Inquisition au Moyen Âge, trad. Salomon Reinach, tome I. Origines et procédure de l’Inquisition, Paris, Société Nouvelle de Librairie et d’Édition Leclercq, Jean, 1962: La spiritualité du Moyen Age (Histoire de la spiritualité chrétienne), tome II, Paris, Édition Aubier Le Goff, Jacques (coord.), 1999: Omul medieval, traducere de Ingrid Ilinca şi Dragoş Cojocaru, Iaşi, Editura Polirom Lisignan, Serge, 1986: Parler vulgairement. Les intellectuels et la langue française aux XIIIe et XIVe siècles, Paris, Librairie philosophique J. Vrin Louis, Sara, 1981: Les relations de Bernard Gui avec le limousin, in «Bernard Gui et son monde», Cahiers de Franjeaux, vol. XVI, Toulouse, Édouard Privat, Éditeur, p. 41-53 ***Magnum Bullarium Romanum. Bullarum privilegiorum ac diplomatum Romanorum Pontificum amplissima collectio, tomus tertius (a Lucio III ad Clementem IV), Romae, MDCCXL, reimprimat la Akademische Druck – U. Verlagsanstalt, Graz, 1964 Pales-Gobilliard, Annette, 2002: Le livre des sentences de l’inquisiteur Bernard Gui, 13081323, éd. Annette Pales-Gobilliard, Paris, CNRS (Sources d’histoire médiévale publiées par l’IRHT, 30), 2 volumes Paul, Jacques, 1981: La mentalité de l’inquisiteur chez Bernard Gui, in «Bernard Gui et son monde», Cahiers de Franjeaux, vol. XVI, Toulouse, Édouard Privat, Éditeur, p. 291-309 P. P. Desbonnets, Théophile et Vorreux, Damien O.F.M., 2002: Saint François d’Assise. Documents, Paris, Les Éditions du Cerf Rǎmureanu, Ioan, 1993: Istoria Bisericească Universală, vol. II, Bucureşti, Editura Institutului Biblic şi de Misiune Ordoxă al Bisericii Ortodoxe Române Shahan, Thomas J., Rabani Mauri, De institutione clericorum libri tres, in «The American Journal of Theology», Vol. 6, No. 1, (ianuarie, 1902), p. 149-150 Vacandard, Elphège, 1912: L’Inquisition. Étude historique et critique sur le pouvoir coercitif de l’Église, Paris, Bloud et Cie http://franciscani.Ix.ro/pagini/regula http://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_librorum_prohibitorum 388 L’écrivain et le sacré. Les fictions biographiques Alina BAKO The last cultural period devote an extended space to so called "biographical fictions" who aimed reassessing the role of the writer and his inclusion in a literary generation, but also in one of the biography. These texts reveal a dissipated self who contain some structure of ancient mythologies and personal myths. The present writer – Mircea Eliade – redefines its own place in the society through a reformulation of its own sacred view. This paper proposes is to clarifying these directions through an applicative study. Keywords: fiction, biography, sacred, journal, myth, writer. La littérature d’aujourd’hui se dirige vers la composante de confession qui se retrouve dans les textes qui visent l’événement vécu. Il s’agit d’une sorte de rapport que l’écrivain établie avec la réalité, qui renvoie à la présence continue de l’auteur dans le texte. Le théoricien qui a introduit le syntagme de « pacte autobiographique », Philippe Lejeune écrit sur la différence entre la biographie et l’autobiographie : „Par opposition à toutes les formes de fiction, la biographie et l’autobiographie sont des textes référentiels : exactement comme le discours scientifique ou historique, ils prétendent apporter une information sur une « réalité » extérieure au texte, et donc se soumettre à une épreuve de vérification”1. Cette épreuve de vérification devient une manière par laquelle l’écrivain cherche une libération, une écriture qui amène la vie réelle et qui n’impose d’un tel dramatisme les lois de la fiction. De ce point de vue, le lecteur aussi montre une curiosité insatiable pour la vie, pour les faits qui puissent être vérifié par la réalité. Une fois la société scindée, la réalité devient une panacée capable d’offrir des délices compensatoires. La fiction ne contient plus la dose nécessaire pour s’abstraire du réel, mais seulement un surrogat, un substitut dont le lecteur moderne se moque. La définition classique du pacte autobiographique que l’auteur fait avec le lecteur est: „Récit rétrospectif en prose qu'une personne réelle fait de sa propre existence lorsqu'elle met l'accent sur sa vie individuelle, en particulier sur l'histoire de sa personnalité”2. Ce genre de littérature subjective est mis en valeur par le besoin insatiable du nouveau lecteur pour la nouveauté et le concrète. Le critique G. Gusdorf parlait, en étudiant l’autobiographie, du fait que, à partir du XVIIIème siècle il y a une 1 2 Philippe Lejeune, Le Pacte autobiographique, Paris, Seuil, 1975, p. 36. Ibidem, p.14. 389 sorte de laïcisation, une renonciation au sacré et à la référence à Dieu. À partir de l’époque moderne, le lecteur attend des sujets réels, des documents biographiques, des fragments de la vie qu’ils connaissaient aussi. La fiction, l’invention ne sont plus importantes, ce qu’il compte le plus c’est le contact avec les circonstances actuelles, sociales, économiques, politiques. Il s’agit d’un vrai besoin d’authenticité, manifesté à travers une époque très concrète, ou le document, l’information proprement dite devient la source primaire de l’écriture. L’artifice ne trouve plus son point de départ, il est seulement une manière désuète de la littérature, à l’ancienne. Preuve sont la pluralité des écritures qui mettent l’accent sur des divers genres biographiques comme: la biographie, l’autobiographie, les mémoires, le journal. Il s’agit d’une littérature des confessions, ou, le plus important est le temps vécu et le temps de la confession. L’accent se déplace de l’imaginaire vers l’expérience et de littérarité vers l’authenticité”. L’entreprise biographique prétend naturellement à l’objectivité puisqu’elle s’attache à retracer une existence historiquement attestée; à l’exhaustivité puisqu’elle tente de restituer l’ensemble de cette vie, à la fidélité, enfin, puisqu’elle se voudrait miroir réfléchissant de la réalité vivante”3. Cette réalité vivante c’est le désir à accomplir par les écrivains de XXème siècle. Une fois les frontières de la réalité affranchies, les textes deviennent source inépuisable de vérité. Michel Foucault trouve plusieurs formes de l’héros des fictions biographiques. ”La précaire et pourtant ineffable unité [entre l’homme et l’œuvre], ouvre, du fond d’elle-même, la possibilité de toutes les dissociations : [...] le “héros égaré”, que sa vie et ses passions contestent toujours à son œuvre (c’est Filippo Lippi travaillé par la chair et qui peignait une femme quand, pour n’avoir pu la posséder, il lui fallait “éteindre son ardeur”) ; le “héros aliéné” dans son œuvre, s’oubliant en elle et l’oubliant elle-même [...] ; le “héros méconnu” et rejeté par ses pairs”4. Pour lui, le “héros égaré”, le “héros aliéné” et le “héros méconnu” sont des hypostases du moi biographique, qui est transposé dans le texte par le parcours eidétique surgi, inévitablement de la réalité. Le pacte avec soi même Eugen Simion trouvait, au cas du lieu du créateur dans l’histoire, deux variations sur la résistance de l’écrivain par la culture: la première c’est le pacte autobiographique et l’autre c’est le pacte historique5. Le cas de Mircea Eliade et son journal de Portugal6 renvoie à un mélange des deux structures. D’habitude, il s’agit d’une analyse complète vers le modèle de l’écriture biographique : „[...] On dispose d'un critère textuel général, l'identité du nom (auteur-narrateur-personnage). Le pacte autobiographique, c'est l'affirmation dans le texte de cette identité, renvoyant en dernier ressort au nom de l'auteur sur la couverture. Les formes du pacte autobiographique sont très diverses mais toutes, elles manifestent l'intention d'honorer sa signature. Le lecteur pourra chicaner 3 Agnès Lhermitte, La Biographie, Anthologie. Paris, Editions Flammarion, Collection « Etonnants Classiques », 2002, p. 153. 4 Michel Foucault, “Le ‘non’ du père.” Dits et écrits I, 1962, p. 222-223. 5 Eugen Simion, Genurile biograficului, Bucuresti, Editura Univers Enciclopedic, 2002. 6 Mircea Eliade, Jurnalul portughez și alte scrieri, Bucureşti, 2006. 390 sur la ressemblance, mais jamais sur l'identité”7. écrivait Philippe Lejeune dans un essai d’affirmer la relation entre le lecteur et l’auteur. Il ordonne le monde autour de soi et il devient, finalement son centre gravitationnel. Le moi biographique devient en même temps sujet et objet de la narration. Mircea Eliade notait dans le début de son Journal de Portugal : „Depuis le 10 février je suis à Lisbonne, et il y a des mois depuis je n'ai rien écrit, ni même des lettres intelligentes. Mon journal intime je l’ai interrompu à mon départ du pays – le 19 avril 1940. (…) J’essayer rafraîchir les données pour moi, pour pouvoir écrire mes mémoires, une fois étant en Angleterre. Mais aujourd'hui, je commence je journal de toutes autres raisons. Nina est allée à Bucarest depuis quelques jours. Je suis seul pendant quatre ou cinq semaines. La suspension de tout travail responsable pour quelques mois, la pression de la politique que je vis, la paresse mentale, l’abandon de mes manuscrits à Oxford, la pauvreté intellectuelle de Lisbonne — tout cela menacent avec ma lente dégradation. Je ressens le besoin de me retrouver, de me recueillir”8. On voit l’image d’un Eliade qui souffre à cause de son départ, qui ne retrouve plus dans la capitale lusitaine la source de ses énergies créatrices. Il s’agit finalement, d’une sorte d’exhibition de ses sentiments par le journal, de la quête d’un palliatif qui puisse amener le calme dans l’existence tumultueuse. Cette confession personnelle est souvent doublée par l’hypostase d’écrivain, car les outils du créateur ne peuvent pas être oubliés. D’ici les doutes concernant le texte biographique : d’une part la littérarité du texte qui accomplit des fonctions littéraires, mais aussi non-littéraires, et aussi l’authenticité du texte, qui étant le fruit d’un écrivain peut introduire des détails fictionnels : „Le 3 septembre. Les notes sur le Portugal je les rassemble dans un autre cahier. Maintenant je regrette, car ce journal pourrait perdre sa part la plus intéressante. Mais j'ai voulu faire un livre de ces fragments, et toutefois, je ne voulais pas avoir le sentiment de publier des parties du journal”9. La conscience de l’auteur envers l’acte d’écriture est brise par l’incertitude des visions sur l’appartenance des textes à la fiction ou à la réalité. La sincérité est une notion relative, car on ne peut parler d’une confession absolue. Parfois, il s’agit d’une sorte de fictionalisation intentionnelle qui puisse déterminer la mesure et la direction fondamentale du texte écrit. 7 Philippe Lejeune, op.cit., p. 89. ,,Sunt de la 10 februarie la Lisabona. i sunt luni de când n-am mai scris nimic, nici măcar scrisori inteligente. Jurnalul meu intim l-am ȋntrerupt la plecarea mea din ţară – 19 aprilie 1940. (…) Încerc să-mi ȋmprospătez datele, pentru a putea redacta cândva memoriile mele din Anglia. Azi ȋnsă ȋncep acest jurnal din cu totul alte motive. Nina a plecat la București de câteva zile. Sunt singur pentru patru sau cinci săptamâni. Suspendarea oricărei munci responsabile de câteva luni, presiunea politicii – sub care trăiesc –, lenea mentală, abandonarea manuscriselor mele la Oxford, săracia intelectuală a Lisabonei – toate acestea ameninţă cu degradarea mea lentă. Simt nevoia să mă regăsesc, să mă adun.’’, Mircea Eliade, op.cit., p. 95. 9 3 septembrie ,,Notele despre Portugalia le adun ȋntr-un alt carnet. Acum ȋmi pare rău, căci jurnalul acesta ȋși pierde poate parte cea mai interesantă. Dar voiam să fac o carte din asemenea fragmente, și totuși nu voiam să am sentimentul că-mi public părţi din jurnal.”, Mircea Eliade, op.cit., p. 106. 8 391 Eugen Simion parlait sur la différence entre „Le moi profond (l'homme qui écrit) n’a plus honte et il ne cache plus aux yeux du monde son frère, biographique, le moi superficiel (l'homme qui vit dans l'ombre de l’œuvre)”10. Cette dichotomie est décelable par le ressort de la mémoire qui n’est pas toujours fidèle comme la photographie, mais qui ouvre la voie de la fictionalisation. „Je n'écris presque jamais dans mes moments « vrais ». Par conséquent, ni dans le journal ni dans les livres ne se reflète que la partie neutre de mon être – la partie de l’équilibre ou de compromis, que j’acquis en refusant de prendre conscience de moi-même, de réalité”11. Cet essai de fictionalisation de la biographie ne se fait pas au sens de l’idéalisation, mais par l’admittance des certains aspects qui montrent le rôle du narrateur comme instance valorisante. Le texte écrit permet au lecteur de reconstituer la personnalité de celui qui a écrit par le mélange insaisissable de lucidité, d’analyse, de sincérité et fiction. Mircea Eliade proposait dans son journal cette composante biographique, plus intéressante envers l’œuvre fictionnel : „A quel point imparfaite et fragmentaire, je trouve mon œuvre publié. Beaucoup de choses inintéressants du point de vue de la « doctrine », tellement sensationnelle en perspective biographique. J’essai quelque chose de grandiose : une nouvelle synthèse de la culture universelle. Je me compte aujourd'hui parmi les rares qui ont accès aux mythes et symboles sombres, aux sens spirituels de la vie beaucoup dépassés dans l'évolution mentale de l'humanité”12. L’être biographique présente cette liaison évidente avec l’univers du mythe et des symboles. La conscience tourmentée par la nécessité de la vérité construit l’image d’un homme qui refait son parcours journalier. Le journal – une pièce sans metteur en scène Le journal garde dans ses feuilles de papier la conscience et le corps de l’auteur. Il contient en même temps la vérité et la fiction, sans que le lecteur puisse établir la limite entre les deux. „Quelqu'un qui me connaisse bien et même en lisant ce journal ne pourrait pas s’imaginer l’intensité de mon drame. Plusieurs fois par jour je dois me battre avec une crise si grave – soit le désespoir ou la neurasthénie, qui je pense que pourrait abattre les plus forts. Personne ne peut soupçonner la quantité de génie, de la volonté et d'énergie physique simple dépensée jour après jour dans la lutte avec moi10 „eul profund (omul care scrie) nu se mai ruşinează şi nu-l mai ascunde de ochii lumii pe fratele său, eul biografic, eul superficial (omul care trăieşte în umbra operei)”, Eugen Simion, Fic iunea jurnalului intim, vol. II, Ediţia a II-a revăzută şi adăugită, Editura Univers Enciclopedic, Bucureşti, 2005, p. 56. 11 ,,Eu nu scriu aproape niciodată ȋn momentele mele „adevărate”. De aceea, nici ȋn jurnal, nici ȋn cărţi nu se oglindește decat partea neutralizată a fiinţeii mele-partea de echilibru sau compromise, pe care o dobândesc refuzând să iau cunoștiinţă de mine ȋnsumi, de realitate.”, Mircea Eliade, op.cit., p. 113. 12 „Cât de imperfectă și fragmentară mi se pare opera mea publicată. Foarte multe lucruri neinteresante din punctual de vedere al «doctrinei», deci senzaţionale din punct de vedere biografic. Eu ȋncerc un lucru grandios: o nouă sinteză a culturii universale. Mă număr astăzi printre puţinii care au acces la miturile și simbolurile ȋntunecate, la sensurile spirituale ale vieţii de mult depășite ȋn evoluţia mentală a omenirii.”, Mircea Eliade, op.cit., p. 140. 392 même et mon destin”13. Le journal peut être l’espace littéraire qui aide l’auteur de libérer ses démons intérieur, une sorte d’exorcisation par mettre sur le tapis l’ensemble des états psychologiques, physiques qui tourmentent le corp et le mental. L’écrivain Mircea Eliade confesse la guerre permanente avec soi-même et le destin – les données sociales, historiques et politiques qui conditionnaient son existence à ce moment-là. Il y a aussi une sorte de lamentation dans son discours de journal, une plainte contre la vie en général, contre sa situation, contre Portugal (ou n’importe quel endroit au dehors son pays natale) : „Je ne déteste rien de plus dans ce Portugal que les cris des vendeurs de journaux dans l’après-midi. Quelle catastrophe ils annoncent encore ? Je me demande. On ne peut pas échapper à ces vendeurs qui hurlent les trois journaux avec la même chanson (comme annoncée, mélodieusement toute marchandise au Portugal). Ils viennent en tramway, dans le train à Estoril, dans les cafés, à la plage. Je pense que s’il avait des messes à cette heure-ci, ils iraient aussi dans les églises”14. Cette observation directe du fait divers et des bruits qui brisent le silence absolu de sa vie contribuent à la construction d’un univers bouleversant. La menace absolue vient de l’insécurité de la guerre. Le journal portugais parle sur une période très difficile de l’histoire de l’Europe, les années 1941-1945, et Eliade ressentit vivement l’esprit trouble du siècle, même dans un pays si éloigné comme Portugal. Pour lui, le pacte autobiographique fonctionne seulement d’une partie assez réduite : „Le journal est un contrat avec l'auteur lui-même, un contrat ou un Pacte de confidentialité qui, si elle n'est pas détruit au temps, il devient public et en forçant les portes de la littérature”15, écrivait Eugen Simion dans la Fiction du journal intime, en mettant l’accent sur une sorte de littérarité du texte écrite, même au niveau d’une réalité cruelle. Ces portes de la littérature s’ouvrent surtout pour les auteurs qui s’approchent de la vie dans tous ces états. La peur et la terreur envers l’histoire et la vie sont accablantes: ,,Je souhaiterais que je puisse écrire une fois cette chose incroyable, la terreur de l'histoire, la terreur de l'homme envers l'homme. Il n'est pas vrai que l'homme ne craindrait pas la Nature, les dieux : cette peur est minime par rapport à l'horreur qu'il ait subie, pendant des millénaires, au milieu de l'histoire. Notre époque est par excellence une époque terrorisée. Les futures chefs-d'œuvre de la littérature universelle seront créé à partir de ,,Nimeni, cunoscându-mă bine, și chiar citind acest Jurnal nu-și poate ȋnchipui intensitatea dramei mele. De mai multe ori pe zi trebuie să lupt cu o criză atât de gravă – fie ea de desperare, fie de neurestenie – care cred că ar doborȋ chiar pe cei mai tari. Nimeni nu poate bănui cantitatea de geniu, de voinţă și de simpla energie fizică cheltuită zi de zi în lupta cu mine ȋnsumi și cu destinul meu”, Mircea Eliade, op.cit., p. 199. 14 ,,Nu urăsc nimic mai mult ȋn acestă Portugalie decât strigătele vânzătorilor de ziare de dupăamiază. Ce catastrofă o mai fi anunţând?! mă ȋntreb. Nu scapi nicăieri de acești vânzători care-și urlă cele trei ziare cu aceeiași melodie (așa cum e anunţată, melodios orice marfă in Portugalia). Vin ȋn tramvaie, ȋn trenul spre Estoril, ȋn cafenele, pe plajă. Cred că dacă ar fi slujbe la aceste ore, ar intra și ȋn biserici”, Mircea Eliade, op.cit., p. 209. 15 „Jurnalul este un contract al autorului cu sine însuşi, un contract sau un pact de confidenţialitate care, dacă nu este distrus la timp, devine public şi forţează porţile literaturiii”, Eugen Simion, Fic iunea jurnalului intim, vol. I, Ediţia a II-a revăzută şi adăugită, Editura Univers Enciclopedic, Bucureşti, 2005, p.35. 13 393 cette expérience terrifiante”16. Le philosophe Lyotard établi comme direction fondamentale de l’histoire la terreur. Cette-ci est « une manière de prendre en compte l’indétermination de ce qui se passe. Les déterminants de l’histoire – dit Lyotard – sont obéissants à une idée qui suit l’annulation de toute différence et l’extinction de toute singularité : „Nous avons assez payé la nostalgie du tout et de l’un, de la réconciliation du concept et du sensible, de l’expérience transparente et communicable. Sous la demande générale de relâchement et d’apaisement, nous entendons marmonner le désir de recommencer la terreur, d’accomplir le fantasme d’étreindre la réalité. La réponse est : guerre au tout, témoignons de l’imprésentable, activons les différends, sauvons l’honneur du nom”17. Cette déclaration de guerre repose sur une situation de milieu de siècle qui fait naitre la terreur aux âmes des êtres humains, soumises à la pression exceptionnelle de l’esprit belligérant de l’époque. Le journal devient l’endroit où l’écrivain peut manifester totalement sa sincérité. Mais comme le mental souffre une transformation visible chaque fois que la vérité est issu de l’imaginaire, il ne faut pas oublier que la sincérité est toujours relative. Cette cruauté envers son propre être rend l’esprit lucide. Eliade promet d’avouer un secret terrible, mais c’est comme une promesse jamais achevée: „le 7 janvier. Je suis prêt à écrire tout dans ce journal, que je recherche avec soif, que je garde toujours à la portée. Mais est-ce que je vais avoir le courage d'avouer mon terrible secret ? Je pense que je pourrais survivre à cette confession. Je ne le pourrais faire que au moment ou je saurais que, toutefois, je pourrais être pardonné et sauvé”18. Les fragments choisis de son journal montre un Eliade tourmenté par la partie épicuréique de la vie, de la tentation du plaisir en défaveur de l’ascèse créatrice. A partit de l’écriture de Jean Jacques Rousseau, la sincérité a été comprise d’une certaine manière comme une confession de l’intimité biologique. L’authenticité de l’être est dévoile par la vérité fruste, le défi de tout convention et la libération des préjugés. A la différence de cette impudeur manifestée par Gide, Simone de Beauvoir, Queneau ou autres, Eliade porte plainte contre les cotés érotiques de la vie qui puissent l’empêcher de créer, de se fondre dans le processus si difficile et dur de la création. „Le 9 janvier, Je n’ai jamais réalisé le mal immense que moi et mon œuvre ont subi de la part de l’érotique, de la chaire, avec tous leurs invitations à scepticisme, à épicuréisme et jem’en-fichisme. L'attraction pour une vie de plaisirs, une vie d'aventures érotiques, m’ont harcelé continûment et très bon nombre de mes tensions les plus nobles ont été 16 ,,Aș vrea să pot scrie o dată acest lucru grozav: teroare istoriei, teroarea omului faţă de om. Nu este adevărat că omului nu ȋi este frică de Natură, de zei: frica aceasta e minimă, faţă de groaza pe care a ȋndurat-o el, de milenii, ȋn mijlocul istoriei. Epoca nostră este prin excelenţă o epocă terorizată. Viitoarele capodopere ale literaturii universale se vor crea pornind de la această terifiantă experienţă”, Mircea Eliade, op.cit., p. 202. 17 J.F. Lyotard, Le postmoderne expliqué aux enfants: correspondance 1982-1985, Paris, EditionsGalilée, 1986, p. 32. 18 ,,7 ianuarie Sunt dispus să scriu totul ȋn acest jurnal, pe care-l caut cu sete, pe care-l păstrez ȋntordeauna la ȋndemână. Dar voi avea oare curajul să mărturisesc și teribilul meu secret? Cred că naș putea supravieţui mărturisirii. N-aș putea-o face decât ȋn clipa când știu că, totuși, aș putea fi iertat și mântuit.”, Mircea Eliade, op.cit., p. 287. 394 annulées par le retour au même leitmotiv ridicule: a quoi bon ? Tu es encore jeune, tires parti maintenant, pour que tu ne le regrettes plus tard, etc. Ce mélange de pathétique et banale, d’extases et carnaval superficiel, d’éternel et « bois ! bois ! Ne regardes pas ! » – il était une véritable malédiction pour moi et surtout pour mon travail”19. La vie est appréciée et mesurée par des unités différentes, même par le même auteur, la subjectivité devenant la preuve du fait vécu. Chaque auteur crée une sorte de modèle psychique fondamentale, issu d’une part des aventures de l’être humain – des actions intentionnés et d’autres des censurés que la conscience humaines impose – les actions non-intentionnées. La confession de Mircea Eliade sur l’importance et le but du journal est suggestive. „Le 2 février. Pour que ce journal puisse me servir, pour le transformer dans un outil défensif contre le néant qui me menace de toutes les parts, je devrais méditer avec lui à côté, de retourner les pages sans cesse, à noter, se rappeler ici certains évènements au-dessus desquels je suis passé généralement trop sommaire ou que j’ai ni même marqué (...). Pourquoi devrais-je me concentre uniquement sur moimême, seulement sur ma vie, ma santé et mon sauvetage, ce qui rendra ce journal ma vrai œuvre ? Pire encore, si personne ne le lira pas. Moi, en tout cas, je n’aurai que gagner”20. Contre le néant il nous reste seulement l’acte d’écrire, le seul capable nous offrir la vie dans son état le plus pure. Les fictions biographiques partent de la vérité, mais ils cachent toujours une histoire de la conscience, une implication nécessaire dans la subjectivité essentielle de l’auteur. Bibliographie Adam, Jean-Michel, Les textes : types et prototypes. Récit, description, argumentation, explication et dialogue, Paris, Nathan, 1992 Adam, Jean-Michel, Le texte narratif. Traité d’analyse pragmatique et textuelle, Paris, Nathan, 1994 Adam, Jean-Michel, Petitjean, André, Le texte descriptif. Poétique historique et linguistique textuelle, Paris, Nathan, 1989 19 ,,9 ianuarie Niciodată nu mi-am dat seama de imensul rău pe care mi l-au făcut și mie si operei mele, erosul, carnea, cu toate invitaţiile lor la scepticism, la epicureism și jemenfichism. Atracţia pentru o viaţă de plăcere, o viaţă de aventuri erotice, m-a macerat ȋncontinuu, și foarte multe dintre tensiunile mele cele mai nobile au fost anulate de revenirea aceluiași ridicol leitmotiv: la ce bun? ești ȋncă tânăr, profită acum, ca să nu regreţi mai târziu etc. Amestecul acesta de patetic și banal, de extaze și ieftin carnival, de etern și «bea! bea! nu te uita!» – a fost un adevărat blestem pentru mine și mai ales pentru opera mea (…)”, Mircea Eliade, op.cit., p. 292. 20 ,,2 februarie Ca acest jurnal să-mi fie de folos, ca să-l transform ȋntr-un instrument de apărare ȋmpotriva neantului care mă ameninţă din toate părţile, ar trebui să meditez cu el alături, să revin neȋncetat asupra paginilor scrise, să le adnotez, să-mi amintesc aici anumite evenimente asupra cărora am trecut de obicei prea sumar sau pe care nici nu le-am ȋnsemnat (…). De ce să mă concentrez numai asupra mea ȋnsumi, numai asupra vieţii, mântuirii și sănătăţii mele, făcând din acest jurnal adevărata mea opera? Cu atât mai rău dacă nu-l va citi nimeni. Eu, ȋn orice caz, nu voi avea decât de câștigat”, Mircea Eliade, op.cit., p. 313. 395 Adam, Jean-Michel, Revaz, Françoise, Analiza povestirii, Iaşi, Institutul european, 1999. Amiel, Henri-Frédéric, Du journal intime, édition établie et préfacée par Roland Jaccard, Éditions Complexe, 1987 Austin, J. L., Quand dire, c’est faire, Paris, Seuil, 1970 Cauquelin, Anne, L’Exposition de soi. Du journal intime aux webcams, Paris, Eshel, 2003. Chapelan, Maurice, Anthologie du journal intime, avec une introduction et des notices par M. Chapelan, Paris, Laffont, 1947 Cohn, Dorrit, Le Propre de la fiction, Paris, Seuil, 2001 Combe, Dominique, Les Genres littéraires, Paris, Hachette, 1992 Degott, Bertrand, Miguel-Ollagnier, Marie (dir.), Écriture de soi : secrets et réticences, Paris, L’Harmattan, 2001 Didier, Béatrice, Le journal intime, 3-ème édition, Paris, PUF, 2002 Didier, Béatrice, „Le lecteur du journal intime” in Michel Picard (dir.), La lecture littéraire, Paris, Clancier-Guénaud, 1988 Dion, Robert, Une Année amoureuse de Virginia Woolf, ou la fiction biographique multipliée, Littérature,2001 Genette, Gérard, Fiction et Diction, Paris, Seuil, 1991 Gusdorf, G., Lignes de vie. I. Les Écritures du moi, Paris, Odile Jacob, 1991 Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine, Les Actes de langage dans le discours, Paris, Nathan, 2001 Lejeune, Philippe, Le Pacte autobiographique, Paris, Seuil,1995 Lyotard, J.F., Le postmoderne expliqué aux enfants : correspondance 1982-1985, Paris, Editions Galilée, 1986 Reboul, Anne, Rhétorique et Stylistique de la fiction, Nancy, Presses universitaires de Nancy, 1992 Roulet, Eddy et al., L’Articulation du discours en français contemporain, Berne, Peter Lang, 1991 Schabert, Ina, « Fictional Biography, Factual Biography, and their Contaminations », Biography, 1982 Schaeffer, Jean-Marie, Qu’est-ce qu’un genre littéraire ?, Paris, Seuil, 1985 Searle, John, Sens et Expression, Paris, Minuit, 1982. Searle, John, Daniel Vanderveken, Foundations of Illocutionary Logic, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1985 Simion, Eugen, Sfidarea retoricii. Jurnal german, Bucureşti, Editura Cartea Româneascǎ, 1985 Simion, Eugen, Scriitori români de azi, IV, Bucureşti, Editura Cartea Româneascǎ, 1989 Simion, Eugen, Fic iunea jurnalului intim, vol. I, Existǎ o poeticǎ a jurnalului?; vol. II, Intimismul european, vol. III, Diarismul românesc, Bucureşti, Editura Univers Enciclopedic, 2001 Simion, Eugen, Genurile biograficului, Bucureşti, Editura Univers Enciclopedic, 2002 Simonet-Tenant, Françoise, Le journal intime. Genre littéraire et écriture ordinaire, rééd. avec un avant-propos de Philippe Lejeune, Paris, Téraèdre, 2004 Vanderveken, Daniel, « La Logique illocutoire et l’analyse du discours », in D. Luzzati et als (éds), Le Dialogique, Berne, Peter Lang, 1997 396 Cioran despre credință și religie Iosif CHEIE-PANTEA The author of the paper comments on Cioran’s views on religion and hypothesizes that the thinker’s perspective could be related to the ideology of such Romantic writers and philosophers as Novalis and Schlegel. For Cioran, the essence of religion encompasses a lot more than faith as it is believed to lie at the heart of the human conscience. Keywords: Cioran, religion, existentialism. În cele trei zile de convorbiri cu Cioran la Paris, din 1990, Gabriel Liiceanu îi solicită ilustrului său interlocutor clarificări în legătură cu tentația constantă a credinței, în ciuda momentelor de refuz sau chiar a unor excese blasfematorii. Cioran admite că a existat întotdeauna în el un „apel religios”, că s-a „mișcat tot timpul între nevoia de credință și imposibilitatea de a crede”1. Am spune că e vorba de argheziana pendulare între credință și tăgadă, dacă n-am ști că autorul Psalmilor tînjește după revelația care să-l scape de povara îndoielii („Mai scapă-mă, Părinte, măcar de îndoială”) și să-i potolească foamea și setea de mîntuire: „Mi-e silă de toate, / De rău și de bine. / Mi-e foame și sete de tine.” (Mi-e sete). Prin urmare, neliniștea metafizică a psalmistului se naște din refuzul divinului de-a se manifesta, așadar o cauză transcendentă, în vreme ce tentația credinței la Cioran se frînge din pricina propriei neputințe, a temperamentului său care „este de așa natură încît negația în mine a fost întotdeauna mai mare decît afirmația. Latura mea demonică, dacă vreți. Din cauza asta nu am putut niciodată să cred profund în ceva. Aș fi vrut, dar nu s-a putut. i totuși ...”2. Să reținem acest „ i totuși ...”, care lasă unele porți deschise pentru explorări și nuanțări viitoare. Cu cîteva decenii mai înainte, Cioran abordase problema în corespondența sa cu muzicologul George Bălan care, la îndemnul lui Gabriel Liiceanu, s-a decis să publice acele scrisori, unele semnificative pentru dezbaterea de față. Bunăoară, în scrisoarea din 6 decembrie 1967, Cioran afirmă că „toată viața mea a fost o căutare frenetică dublată de o teamă de a găsi (subl. aut.). Această anomalie răbufnește mai ales în domeniul religios. Sînt sigur că l-am căutat pe Dumnezeu, dar sînt și mai 1 G. Liiceanu, Apocalipsa după Cioran, Humanitas, București, 1995, p. 115. Ibidem. 2 397 sigur că am făcut totul pentru a nu-l întîlni”3. Așadar, din nou natura sa paradoxală este invocată ca argument în justificarea incapacității de a crede. Cu toate acestea, „teologul ateu”, cum se autoproclamă uneori, admite că „nu poți trăi nici cu Dumnezeu, nici fără Dumnezeu”4, ateismul agresiv socotindu-l „la fel de odios ca și intoleranța religioasă. De altfel nici e altceva decît o religie de-a-ndoaselea”5. i, parcă spre a adînci și mai mult deruta cititorului și a-și motiva emblema de „teolog ateu”, Cioran se autocaracterizează ca „o natură profund necredincioasă și profund religioasă...”6. Care ar fi suportul, ideea susceptibilă să ne dezvăluie „rațiunea” contradicțiilor paradoxale ce-l proiectează pe cititor într-o stare de uimire și perplexitate? Cum e posibilă înțelegerea logică a religiozității unui necredincios? Unii exegeți, precum, bunăoară, Nicolae Turcan, într-o contribuție relativ recentă, identifică rădăcinile fenomenului în exces, în temperamentul excesiv al gînditorului7. Desigur, o astfel de perspectivă e pe deplin legitimă, validată de însuși Cioran în numeroasele lui confesiuni, dar ne putem întreba, împreună cu Liviu Antonesei, prefațatorul cărții, dacă nu cumva categoria excesului ar trebui integrată într-o viziune mai largă, pentru a nu fi apreciată doar ca un caz mai mult sau mai puțin izolat, fie el și manifestarea unui individ excepțional. E drept că autorul integrează pînă la urmă excesul în tradiția filosofică a hybrisului, dar, pentru o mai profundă și mai cuprinzătoare înțelegere a dimensiunii religiosului în meditația cioraniană, a raporturilor cu Divinitatea, apropierea de Weltanschauungul romantic se impune categoric. Rațiunea unui asemenea demers se bazează nu doar pe întîmplătoare coincidențe sau asemănări, ci pe înrudiri spirituale atît de adînci încît Cioran nu pregetă să recunoască în mai multe rînduri, explicit, acest adevăr:„Judecînd bine, sensibilitatea mea se înrudește cu cea a romanticilor”8. Sau: „La mine, filonul cel mai «autentic» e filonul romantic. Mi-am greșit epoca - și, aș adăuga, istoria, lumea, universul, ființa (subl. aut.)”9. De precizat că Cioran are în vedere exclusiv romantismul german pe care îl califică drept „auto-extazul spiritului în finit”10 sau „vremea în care nemții cunoșteau genialitatea sinuciderii...”11. Altă dată, citind o carte despre romantismul german, constată că, deși s-a demodat din punct de vedere literar, rămîne însă valabil și actual prin ideile sale, între care, desigur, și cea despre religie. Pentru Cioran esența religioasă are o sferă de manifestare mult peste cea îndeobște recunoscută, adică legată exclusiv de credință; religiosul – scrie el în Amurgul gîndurilor – „nu-i chestiune de conținut, ci de intensitate (subl. aut.)”12 i, 3 G. Bălan, În dialog cu Emil Cioran, Cartea Românească, București, 1996, p. 25. E. Cioran, Caiete III, trad. de Emanoil Marcu, Vlad Russo, Humanitas, București, 1999, p. 157. 5 E. Cioran, Caiete III, p. 30. 6 Ibidem, p. 7. 7 Vezi Nicolae Turcan, Cioran sau excesul ca filosofie, Ed. Limes, Cluj, 2008. 8 Cioran, Caiete I, p. 110. 9 Cioran, Caiete III, p. 124. 10 Cioran, E., Schimbarea la față a României, Ed. Humanitas, București, 1990, p. 93. 11 Cioran, E., Amurgul gîndurilor, Ed. Humanitas, București, 1991, p. 127. 12 Cioran, Amurgul gîndurilor, p. 14. 4 398 mai departe, precizează că fenomenul se naște din lipsa de măsură a individului, din abolirea limitelor în exercițiul experienței: „Cînd n-ai măsură în nimic, te măsori cu Dumnezeu. Orice exces ni-l apropie. Căci El nu-i decît incapacitatea noastră de a ne opri undeva. Tot ce n-are margine – iubirea, nebunia, ura – e de esență religioasă”13. Afirmațiile acestea se integrează perfect în viziunea romanticilor precum Novalis, bunăoară, pentru care „Orice sentiment absolut este religios” („Alle absolute Empfindung ist religiös”)14 sau Schlegel care decretează că „Religia nu este doar o parte, un membru din alcătuirea omului, ci centrul tuturor celorlalte, pretutindeni este cea dintîi și cea mai înaltă, este de-a dreptul originarul.” („Die Religion ist nicht bloß ein Teil der Bildung, ein Glied der Menschheit, sondern das Zentrum aller übrigen, überall das Erste und Höchste, das schlechthin Ursprüngliche.”)15. Cioran este mai categoric și mai nuanțat în exprimarea acestui gînd care l-a obsedat toată viața, convingerea că „religia merge mult mai în adîncime decît orice altă reflecție a spiritului uman și că adevărata viziune a vieții este religioasă. Omul care n-a trecut prin religie și care nu a cunoscut tentația religioasă este un om vid. (subl. aut.)”16. Cu alte cuvinte, prezența în spiritul nostru a unui fond religios garantează profunzimea autentică a trăirii sentimentelor și ideilor, căci „tot ce-i religios într-un fel sau altul participă la o anumită profunzime ...”17 iar „Lucrul cel mai profund din noi este neliniștea religioasă (subl. aut.). Cînd pune stăpînire pe noi, parcă am coborî la înseși izvoarele ființei noastre”18. De aici disprețul pentru atei, căci atunci „cînd omul devine areligios prin voința sa, se sterilizează pe sine, este respingător prin aroganța sa excesivă. Sînt indivizi goi pe dinăuntru”19. Dar ce se întîmplă cu cel care scrie, fără să fie religios, aspirînd, totuși, la profunzimea mesajului său? Cioran răspunde că, deși fiu de preot ortodox, „N-am devenit religios, nici nu sînt religios, dar prezența religiei în mine este permanentă...”20. i cum se explică fenomenul? Prin faptul că a citit o literatură întreagă despre religie și prin fascinația pe care o are pentru mistici. Or, conclude el, „Tot ce vine dinspre religie și mistică e copleșitor de profund”21 Semnificativă este motivația interesului special pentru literatura misticilor, deoarece „Intensitatea trăirii interioare la mistici e mai puternică decît la sfinți. Latura strict intelectuală este mai puțin importantă”22. 13 Ibidem, p. 130. Novalis, Werke und Briefe, Winkler-Verlag, München, 1968, p. 434. 15 Friedrich Schlegel, Werke in zwei Bänden, Erster Band, Aufbau-Verlag, Berlin und Weimar, 1980, p. 264. 16 Convorbiri cu Cioran, Ed. Humanitas, București, 1993, p. 234. 17 Cioran, Caiete II, p. 334. 18 Ibidem, p. 166. 19 Convorbiri cu Cioran, p. 262. 20 Ibidem, p. 271. 21 Ibidem, p. 271-272. 22 Ibidem, p. 272. 14 399 Prin urmare, nu atît ideea în sine, conținutul strict intelectual contează într-un mesaj, cît vibrația gîndului, intensitatea trăirii lui. În dialogul de care vorbeam la început, Gabriel Liiceanu îl întreabă provocator pe Cioran: „Care considerați că e noutatea cu care veniți?” Aceasta deoarece „reluați teme vechi de cînd lumea și [...] repetați cu un talent excepțional tot ce s-a spus de la Eclesiast încoace”23. Răspunsul lui Cioran este edificator pentru întreaga sa gîndire metafizică: „Nu există noutate în materie de viziune a vieții [...] Nou e pînă la urmă timbrul, tonul, nota, ceea ce fiecare aduce pornind de la intensitatea experienței sale”24. De aceea la părerea lui Eugen Ionescu pentru care monologul lui Hamlet n-ar conține decît banalități, Cioran apreciază că, dimpotrivă, „aceste banalități epuizează esența întrebărilor noastre. – Lucrurile profunde se dispensează de originalitate”25. „Nu nil putem imagina – adaugă el în altă parte – pe un Pascal vrînd să fie «original». Căutarea originalității e mai întotdeauna semnul unui spirit de mîna a doua”26. În esență, postulatul fundamental al unui gînditor, nu filosof, este, după Cioran, trăirea ideilor, căci „Nu atît ideile cît trăirile mă interesează la un gînditor: nu ce-a gîndit, ci ce a suferit”27. Încă în Pe culmile disperării autorul și-a exprimat această convingere: „Eu nu am idei, ci obsesii... Idei poate avea oricine. Nimeni nu s-a prăbușit din cauza ideilor”28. Exemplele de acest fel ar putea continua, validînd concepția autorului că „Doar o inteligență urmărită de același cerc de idei e capabilă să realizeze ceva. Trebuie să știi să te repeți în profunzime (subl. aut.)”29. Afirmația, dimpreună cu cele de mai sus, îl acreditează pe Cioran scriitorul, nu pe filosoful care, de altminteri, și-a negat deseori această calitate: „N-am nici o aptitudine pentru filozofie: nu mă interesează decît atitudinile și aspectul patetic al ideilor...”30. În consecință, majoritatea interpreților îl receptează ca poet sau, în general, ca mare scriitor, „un cercetător abisal al omului, mai apropiat de Dostoievski decît de Kierkegaard”, cum scrie Marin Sorescu într-un admirabil eseu31. i francezul Stéphane Barsacq pornește în cartea sa de la premisa că „Cioran gîndește ca un artist” deoarece „el nu ne propune idei. El vizează o experiență și ne-o împărtășește pe a lui, cu o frenezie inepuizabilă. Cu greu găsești scrieri mai puțin intelectuale decît cele ale lui Cioran, căci, peste tot, el nu face altceva decît să traseze harta dispozițiilor și dorințelor sale. Se contrazice el vreodată? Nicicînd”32. Este adevărat, dacă ținem seama de teoria lui Cioran însuși, care încă în Pe culmile disperării sublinia că „Numai contradicțiile mari și 23 Gabriel Liiceanu, Apocalipsa după Cioran, p. 81. Ibidem. 25 Cioran, Caiete I, p. 323. 26 Ibidem, p. 150. 27 Cioran, Caiete III, p. 296. 28 Cioran, E., Pe culmile disperării, Ed. Humanitas, București, 1990, p. 176. 29 Cioran, Caiete I, p. 253. 30 Ibidem, p. 56. 31 M. Sorescu, în vol. Pro și contra lui Emil Cioran, Antologie de Marin Diaconu, Ed. Humanitas, București, 1998, p. 311. 32 Stéphane Barsacq, Cioran. Ejaculări mistice, Ed. Philobia, București, 2011, p. 25. 24 400 periculoase, antinomiile interioare irezolvabile dovedesc o viață spirituală fecundă, deoarece numai în ele fluxul și abundența lăuntrică își pot găsi moduri de realizare”33. În schimb, își continuă Cioran raționamentul, „Tot ceea ce este formă, sistem, categorie, cadru sau schemă [...] rezultă dintr-un minus de conținuturi și productivitate, dintr-o deficiență de energie lăuntrică, dintr-o sterilitate a vieții spirituale.”34 Am făcut această paranteză despre natura poetică a scrisului cioranean deoarece, dincolo de estetica ei intrinsecă, opera ne oferă și calea înțelegerii contradicțiilor, inconsecvențelor, paradoxurilor și îndoielilor ce marchează aventura cunoașterii lui Cioran în sfera fenomenului religios. Cioran a respins categoric eticheta de nihilist, pe care unii critici i-au aplicat-o în pripă, el însuși considerîndu-se un sceptic. Or, „Scepticul, atîta timp cît este un sceptic serios – scrie marele teolog Paul Tillich -, nu este lipsit de credință, chiar dacă aceasta nu are un conținut concret”35. Cioran rezonează perfect cu această idee, atunci cînd, în jurnalul său, scrie că „Îndoiala are rădăcini tot atît de adînci ca rugăciunea”36. Pentru ca, în altă parte, să decidă: „Disperarea are un singur remediu: rugăciunea – rugăciunea care poate orice, care-l poate crea chiar și pe Dumnezeu ...”37. Bibliografie Cioran, E., Schimbarea la față a României, Humanitas, București, 1990 Cioran, E., Pe culmile disperării, Humanitas, București, 1990 Cioran, E., Amurgul gândurilor, Humanitas, București, 1991 Cioran, E., Caiete, vol. I, II, III, trad. Emanoil Marcu și Vlad Russo, Humanitas, București, 1999-2000 Convorbiri cu Cioran, Humanitas, București, 1993 Pro și contra Emil Cioran, Antologie de Marin Diaconu, Humanitas, București, 1998 Barsacq, St., Cioran. Ejaculări mistice, Philobia, București, 2011 Bălan, G., În dialog cu Emil Cioran, Cartea Românească, București, 1996 Liiceanu, G., Apocalipsa după Cioran, Humanitas, București, 1995 Novalis, Werke und Briefe, Winkler-Verlag, München, 1968 Schlegel, Fr., Werke in zwei Bänden, Erster Band, Aufbau-Verlag, Berlin und Weimar, 1980 Tillich, P., Dinamica credinței, Herald, București, 2007 Turcan, N., Cioran sau excesul ca filosofie, Limes, Cluj, 2008 33 Cioran, Pe culmile disperării, p. 62. Ibidem, p. 63. 35 Tillich, P., Dinamica credinței, Ed. Herald, București, 2007, p. 42. 36 Cioran, Caiete II, p. 344. 37 Cioran, Caiete I, p. 259. 34 401 Sacrul în viziunea lui Nicolae Steinhardt Nicolae MORAR The paper reviews several frameworks of the sacred in order to approach the perspective assumed by the Romanian writer and mystic Nicolae Steinhardt. Steinhardt’s capital work, Jurnalul fericirii [The Diary of Bliss], is infused with numerous comments and observations on the Sacred. In order to highlight Steinhardt’s perspective, the author of the present paper endeavours to suggest a systematic description of Steinhardt’s theology. Keywords: the Sacred, Nicolae Steinhardt, theology. Revenit între preocupările omului contemporan, sacrul constituie un important obiect de ştiinţă. Sacrul este privit fie ca prezență a Inefabilului, fie ca manifestare a Lui, fie ca o expresie specială a conștiinței umane1. Interpretat variat – apologetic sau iconoclast –, sacrul nu dă semne, cu alte cuvinte, că s-ar retrage din lumea noastră babilonizată. Dimpotrivă incită și generează prolemici; ne provocă, luminînd şi fascinînd. I. Teze despre sacru în exegezele cercet torilor moderni şi contemporani În secolul XIX-lea, Max Müller, întemeietorul ştiinţei moderne a religiilor, aprecia că universul sacru este o construcţie imaginară, o reprezentare deformată a fenomenelor spectaculoase sau stihiale din natură. Cuvîntul dyaus = strălucitor, din vocabularul ind, a fost indicat ca suport al etimoanelor deva, deus, theos – nume ce indica divinitatea în religiile antichităţii precreştine –, lexeme ce nu au nimic în comun cu revelaţia sau cu ideea de instinct religios special2. Un secol mai tîrziu, Nathan Söderblom, episcop creștin, aprecia că sacrul este o putere sau o entitate misterioasă, legată de anumite fiinţe, lucruri, evenimente sau acţiuni; că sacrul e reacţia spiritului în faţa a ceea ce este surprinzător, nou, terifiant. El distingea între sacrul pozitiv şi negativ, mana, din religia populaţiilor cu o cultură orală, reprezintînd sacrul pozitiv, în timp ce tabuul, sacrul negativ – ideea de pericol, de interdicţie, de prohibiţie. Prin teoretizările sale, Sőderblom a depăşit tezele etno-sociologice despre stadiul magic, anterior stadiului religios 1 2 G. Mensching, Histoire de la science des religions, Paris, 1955, p. 40-41. M. Müller, Essai de mythologie comparée, Paris, 1859, p. 47-100. 403 arătînd că la baza credinţei şi a cultului stă sacrul, surprins de către conştiinţa omului religios3. Cam tot pe atunci, profesorul Rudolf Otto afirma că sacrul e sfera în care se înscriu toate componentele faptului religios. Asociind sacrul cu numinosul, nucleul vital al oricărei religii, conţinutul profund al fenomenului religios, Otto declara că sacrul provoacă în sufletul omenesc o stare asemănătoare lui, starea numinoasă, o stare în care fiinţa umană descoperă impozanţa numinosului (maiestas), dorinţa de a-l cuceri (tremendum), aspectul misterios al lui (mysterium) şi starea indusă de el (fascinas), stare din care decurg dragostea, mila, bunătatea şi evlavia. Pe baza facultăţii de cunoaştere, ființa umană sesizează fenomenul revelator în istorie sub chipul unor semne, simboluri menite să trezească, să impulsioneze solicitudinea, respectiv întîlnirea spiritului cu sacrul. În plus, cunoaşterea deține un dat anterior oricărei percepţii şi independent de orice reflecţie mentală, un apriori religios, care e receptorul revelaţiei, a ideii de Absolut, de Perfecţiune. Gnoza în discuţie nu este unilaterală. Lumea fenomenală are şi ea un rol fecund. Încercuită de percepţie, lumea mijloceşte accesul la spiritualul ascuns sub aparenţe temporale. Astfel, prin intermediul ei, subiectul (uman) descoperă, pe de o parte, istoria spirituală a omenirii, iar pe de altă parte, diferenţa dintre convenţionalul ideatic şi ideile pure, distincţia dintre realitatea temporală şi Sacru4. La rîndul său, Mircea Eliade, eminentul nostru religiolog, considera că sacrul este o realitate absolută, care transcende această lume; este o realitate misterioasă, e o ordine, alta decît cea naturală5. Deşi nu aparţine mundanului, el apare în fiinţe, mituri, simboluri şi obiecte, care, sub auspiciile lui, devin altceva. Fiinţele – sacerdotul, şamanul, preotul – şi obiectele – naturale ori cultuale –, în urma contactului cu sacrul primesc o energie deosebită de cea naturală. Irupţia Divinului transformă în mediator fiinţa sau lucrul; le desprind din lumea profană, dat fiind faptul că în ele se întrupează acel „cu totul altfel”6. Cercetătorul nostru aprecia că manifestarea sacrului în afară constituie marele mister. Prin revelarea sa, sacrul renunţă să mai fie Totul, să mai fie Absolut şi se limitează7. În contact cu sacrul, spaţiul se deschide spre transcendenţă, iar timpul spre eternitate. Spaţiul e locul de întîlnire al omului cu Dumnezeu. Este un axis mundi, un loc central, un cadru în care se revelează şi se teoretizează substratul ontologic al celor ce sînt, iar timpul este intervalul în care se descifrează cifrul lumii. Astfel spus, sacrul se îmbie spre a fi receptat și trăit, se lasă descris ca o realitate profund diferită de profan. 3 Nathan Söderblom în interpretările lui J. Ries şi J. M. Velasco – J. Ries, Sacrul în istoria religioasă a omenirii, Ed. Polirom, Iaşi, 2000, p. 31-32. J. M. Velasco, Introducere în fenomenologia religiei, Ed. Polirom, Iaşi, 1997, p. 56. 4 R. Otto, Sacrul. Despre elementul ira ional din ideea divinului şi despre rela ia lui cu ra ionalul, Ed. Dacia, Cluj-Napoca, 1992. 5 M. Eliade, Sacrul şi profanul, Ed. Humanitas, Bucureşti, 1992, p. 13. 6 M. Eliade, Mituri vise şi mistere, în Eseuri, Ed. Ştiinţifică, Bucureşti, 1991, p. 221. 7 Ibidem, p. 220. 404 Referindu-se la opiniile unor cercetători conform cărora progresele înregistrate de cercetarea ştiinţifică fac realitatea tot mai controlabilă, fapt ce duce la dezvrăjirea lumii, la pierderea semnificaţiei sociale a gîndirii, practicii şi instituţiilor religioase8, Eliade opina că desacralizarea totală a lumii nu este posibilă, deoarece sacrul se camuflează continuu în profan, de unde şi confundarea lui de către omul modern cu profanul9. Drept argument, conaţionalul nostru arăta că, în mod paradoxal, contestarea abuzivă a atitudinii şi comportamentului religios nu face decît să favorizeze apariţia unor noi modalităţi de manifestare a sacrului. Prin urmare, faptul că structura şi manifestarea sacrului sînt mereu aceleaşi arată că viaţa religioasă are aceleaşi caracteristici de bază în spaţiu şi timp. În sfîrșit, profesorul Jean-Jacques Wunenburger defineşte sacrul drept ansamblul de comportamente individuale şi colective care urcă pînă în timpurile imemoriale10. Sacrul implică stări interioare specifice şi se obiectivează în fenomene culturale. Experienţa sacrului se prezintă ca o percepţie diferenţiată a lumii, prin care oamenii îşi prezentifică Absolutul11. Wunenburger asociază sacrul cu jocul, considerînd că, în societăţile tradiţionale, jocul şi sacrul au avut un scop comun: sondarea adîncimii invizibile a lumii. Ca bază pentru teoretizările sale este luat scenariul occidental al sărbătorii, care, deşi se distanţează de semnificaţiile festinurilor din societăţile arhaice, continuă să promoveze pan-ludismul, jocul fiind receptat ca un factor subtil, care poate face din viaţă o sărbătoare permanentă12. Acest aspect este, în opinia sa, cea mai bună dovadă a irupţiei sacrului în profan, dar şi a conectării continue a profanului la sacru. Pornind de la interesul crescînd pentru ceea ce s-a numit „întoarcerea religiosului”, „moartea şi renaşterea utopiei” sau „revenirea sacrului”, Jean-Jacques Wunenburger urmăreşte să pună în evidenţă experienţele trăite de către omul contemporan ca forme ale unei alternative sacre. El vorbeşte despre recîştigarea interesului pentru esoteric şi ştiinţele oculte, despre adeziunea la diverse domenii, precum ecologia, erotismul, spectacolul festin, cultul vedetelor etc., dar şi despre o sacralitate conturată în jurul unor fenomene profane şi funcţionale, cum ar fi noile tehnologii. Impresia care se desprinde de aici este aceea că, în ciuda profeţiilor pozitiviste şi a lecturilor raţionaliste ale modernităţii, experienţa sacrului nu a dispărut, ci mai degrabă a fost deplasată înspre locuri şi obiecte noi13. II. Sacrul şi sacralitatea în viziunea lui Nicolae Steinhardt Aşa cum se poate constata din cele arătate mai sus, modul de abordare a sacrului şi sacralităţii oscilează între opinii pozitivist-raţionaliste şi mistic8 M. Gauchet, Dezvrăjirea lumii. O istorie politică a religiei, Ed. Ştiinţifică, Bucureşti, 1995, pp. 8-30. M. Weber, Sociologia religiei. Tipuri de organizări comunitare religioase, Ed. Teora, Bucureşti, 1998, p. 10-18. 9 M. Eliade, Încercarea labirintului, Ed. Dacia, Cluj-Napoca, 1990, p. 130. 10 J. J. Wunenburger, Sacrul, Ed. Dacia, Cluj-Napoca, 2000, p. 42. 11 Ibidem, p. 49. 12 Ibidem, p. 56-59. 13 Ibidem, p. 112-116. 405 teologice: dacă pentru o parte dintre cercetători, sacrul este expresia elocventă a deficitului de cunoaştere în care s-a aflat umanitatea vreme de multe milenii, pentru alţi cercetători, sacrul constituie un indiciu dintre cele mai subtile în favoarea specificului excelsic al spiritului uman. Atenţi la ambele discursuri teoretice, în cele ce urmează vom încerca să prezentăm cîteva aspecte referitoare la teologia sacrului din perspectiva religiei creştine asumată de monahul de la Rohia. Semnificaţia sacrului în creştinism se află în strînsă legătură cu cele relatate în Noul Testament şi în tradi ia creştină. În sens neotestamentar, hagios indică natura lui Dumnezeu, puterea şi eternitatea Lui14, iar hagiasmos desemnează procesul de transfigurare a omului, prin viaţa în Hristos. Hagios se prezintă ca temelie a sfinţeniei, sugerînd unitatea dintre Tatăl şi Fiul, dar desemnează şi originea divină a lui Iisus, filiaţia divină a Acestuia, „sfîntul lui Dumnezeu”15, care se înomeneşte pentru a îndeplini în lume o misiune sacră: sfinţirea creaţiei. Iisus este Unul sfînt, Cel care Şi-a jertfit viaţa pentru consacrarea definitivă a neamului omenesc: „Pentru ei Eu mă sfin esc (jertfesc) pe Mine însumi, ca şi ei să fie sfin i i întru adevăr”16. O dată cu Înălţarea lui Hristos la cer, începe lucrarea Duhului Sfînt, pe care Iisus îl transmite discipolilor Săi, aşa cum Tatăl L-a trimis pe El. În altă ordine de idei, din perspectiva teologiei creştine, sacrul îşi are izvorul în tripersonalitatea lui Dumnezeu, în relaţia desăvîrşită a Persoanelor divine, relaţie în care Duhul, ca Duh al Tatălui şi al Fiului, ca acelaşi Duh în amîndoi, exprimă fidelitatea desăvîrşită sau sfinţenia. Perfecţiunea acestei fidelităţi şi atenţii reciproce intertrinitare, realizată prin Duhul Sfînt, nu este confiscată de către Persoanele divine. Ea iradiază în umanitate, în toţi cei ce sînt într-un Duh cu Tatăl şi cu Fiul17. În teologhisirea lui Nicolae Steinhardt dogma Sfintei Treimi exprimă sinteza contrariilor, Taina Tainelor, Izvorul sfințeniei18. Tatăl este Părintele universului. Este nenăscut şi nu are nici un nume pozitiv. Acordarea unui nume oarecare implică pe cineva care dă nume. Noţiunile de „Părinte”, „Dumnezeu”, „Ziditor”, „Domn” şi „Stăpîn” nu sînt propriu-zis nume, ci numai moduri de adresare. Ele provin de pe urma binefacerilor şi lucrărilor Lui. Dumnezeu este o idee înnăscută în firea oamenilor, dar inexplicabilă. Dumnezeu diferă de lucrurile schimbătoare şi nestatornice. El este Altceva, complet diferit de realităţile create. Posedă rațiunea de a fi a celor ce fac parte din lumea sensibilă. În calitatea Sa de „arche”, Dumnezeu este Tată, întrucît a dat naştere Fiului, Logosului şi a purces pe Duhul Sfînt. El este Ipostasul generator de Ipostase. 14 Apocalipsa, 4, 3-8. Marcu, 1, 24. Luca, 4, 3-4. Ioan, 6, 69 şi 10, 30. 16 Ioan, 17. 19. 17 D. Stăniloae, Teologia Dogmatică Ortodoxă, vol. I, Ed. Institutului Biblic şi de Misiune al Bisericii Ortodoxe Române, Bucureşti, 1978, p. 272. 18 N. Steinhardt, Primejdia mărturisirii. Convorbiri cu Ioan Pintea, Ed. Dacia, Cluj-Napoca, 1993, p. 221. 15 406 Acţiunea de ipostaziere este fără început şi fără sfîrşit: Tatăl naşte continuu pe Fiul şi purcede veşnic pe Duhul Sfînt. Părintelui ceresc nu îi lipseşte nimic în ce priveşte bunătatea, înţelepciunea şi puterea. După scriitorul teolog, Părintele ceresc, Dumnezeu Tatăl, se implică în universul pe care l-a creat, deşi e distinct de lume. El nu se confundă cu lumea, iubeşte creaţia şi făpturile cărora le-a dat viaţă. Dumnezeu cheamă pe toţi oamenii la mîntuire; „pe nici unul pe care se apropie nu-l respinge, nu îngăduie nici unui păcat să biruie dragostea Sa de oameni; pururea le ascultă rugăciunea, (...) se mulţumeşte cu foarte puţin” şi „e foarte sensibil la chiar verbele muritorilor”19. Divinitatea lucrează amănunţit şi cu pricepere, şi cînd răsplăteşte şi cînd pedepseşte. „Dă sau bate cu nespus de migălit rafinament. De unde rezultă că Dumnezeu nu e numai bun, drept, atotputernic etc.; e şi foarte deştept”20. Dumnezeu Fiul, al doilea ipostas al Treimii, e viaţă din viaţa Tatălui: „Dumnezeu adevărat din Dumnezeu adevărat”. Este locul în care se face dăruirea vieţii, Cel ce a condus Viaţa pînă la cei vii. Hristos este Salvatorul omului, trimisul Tatălui pentru restaurarea naturii umane. După Steinhardt, Iisus nu a venit în lume să întemeieze o nouă religie, încă o religie; Domnul a venit să descopere umanităţii un nou mod de viaţă, cu totul original, suprapămîntesc. Iisus a venit pentru fiecare om, îndemnîndu-l: „să ieşi din tine însuţi şi să te priveşti cu atenţie, neamăgire şi asprime, întocmai ca pe un altul”!21. Hristos este actual pentru că este actualitatea însăşi. Îşi iconografiază neîntrerupt chipul în umanitate, asemănîndu-se cu oamenii în măsura în care faptele acestora au aureola sfinţeniei. „Hristos e contradictoriu orînduirii cosmice. Hristos, în cosmos e un scandal”22. Afirmaţia monahului este corectă. Aparţinînd sferei metafizice, în mod firesc, Iisus ar trebui să rămînă o realitate nevăzută şi incognoscibilă. Acest mod de a gîndi ocupa un loc important în filosofia precreştină: Principiul era incomunicabil, detaşat, rece23. Noutatea pe care religia creştină o aduce constă tocmai în faptul că Fiul lui Dumnezeu intră în ordinea dată a lumii create, se întrupează. Intră în orizontul unei realităţi căreia i-a dat sens şi în care se regăseşte ca factor constitutiv. Hristos confirmă faptul că pot fi văzute cele nevăzute şi te poţi încrede în ele. Prin prezenţa lui Iisus în ordinea lumii, se deschide perspectiva unei legături raţional-logice între credincios şi Dumnezeu-Tatăl. Prin El, Biblia se restaurează. Nu se schimbă radical, nu înspăimîntă gîndul. Clarifică nelămuririle şi dă noi conţinuturi cunoaşterii. Reduce la minimum distanţa dintre semnificant şi semnifiat. Moartea pe cruce a lui Hristos arată o modalitate de a lucra a lui Dumnezeu. Deşi, în aparenţă, Iisus a fost părăsit de Dumnezeu, El nu a încetat să fie 19 Ibidem, pp. 218-219. N. Steinhardt, Jurnalul fericirii, Ed. Dacia, Cluj Napoca, 1991, p. 18. N. Steinhardt, Primejdia..., p. 219. 22 Ibidem, p. 72-73. 23 F. E. Peters, Termenii filozofiei greceşti, traducere de Drăgan Stoianovici, Ed. Humanitas, Bucureşti, 1993, p. 44-45. 20 407 Dumnezeu. Momentul răstignirii trebuie privit ca un fundament al credinţei creştine. Apostolii care se aflau în jurul crucii puteau opta, în deplină libertate, pentru credinţa în dumnezeirea Învăţătorului lor sau în specificul pur omenesc al Acestuia. Teama şi fuga de la locul execuţiei demonstrează caracterul îndoielnic al credinţei lor: n-au ştiut să acumuleze piedicile şi să găsească argumentele necesare pentru a preface starea trăită în imposibilitate posibilă. Hristos, precizează călugărul cărturar, n-a coborît de pe cruce şi nu a încercat să demonstreze atotputernicia Sa, întrucît nu a vrut să-l convertească pe om prin constrîngere. Ceea ce a oferit El omului, prin actul tragic al jertfei, este libertatea de a crede: „Dacă sar fi coborît de pe cruce nu mai era nevoie să se creadă, ar fi avut loc doar recunoaşterea unui fapt”24. „Mortul” de pe crucea Golgotei îmbie pe cei ce au privit sau încearcă să privească spre El să scruteze sensul tainic al raportului omDumnezeu, să acorde încredere unui ne-fapt. Învierea Sa este un mister care depăşeşte şi sfarmă înţelegerea omenească. Resurecţia Domnului presupune o credinţă în stare să treacă dincolo de limitele minţii omeneşti: „În ziua Învierii, în Prima zi de Paşti, creştinul are parte de o părtăşanie cu ceea ce se află dincolo de fruntariile înţelegerii omeneşti. Pentru oarecare vreme, izbuteşte a nu mai fi nici el din lumea aceasta”25. Învierea arată că credinţa stă dincolo de limitele minţii omeneşti şi implică o încredere totală a omului în cele ce crede. De această lipsă de încredere, totală, ilogică, nepăsătoare de evidenţe (ori şi potrivnică lor) au dat dovadă Apostolii. Domnul însă le face pe voie, lui Toma şi celorlalţi ucenici ai Lui. Le dovedeşte învierea Sa pe cale materială, aşa precum a voit Toma. Li se supune, le aduce probe pur empirice: mănîncă, le arată mîinile şi picioarele Sale, îi pofteşte să-L pipăie, să-şi pună mîna în coasta Lui. Duhul Sfînt, al treilea ipostas din Treime, este consubstanţial cu Tatăl şi cu Fiul. El nu este ceva străin, introdus din afară în Dumnezeu. Duhul are o existentă proprie, voinţă liberă şi este activ şi atotputernic. El însoţeşte Logosul şi face cunoscută activitatea Lui. Duhul are un ipostas propriu care purcede de la Tată şi se odihneşte în Fiul. Este viu, liber, de sine mişcător, activ. În orice acţiune a Lui puterea coincide cu voinţa; este fără de început şi fără de sfîrşit. Duhul este forţa generatoare şi suportul întregii creaţii. În spiritul revelaţiei divine, Duhul este energia care stă la baza lumii sensibile: „Trimite-vei Duhul Tău şi se vor zidi”26 şi forţa care susţine viaţa oamenilor: „Duhul cel dumnezeiesc – observă Iov – m-a făcut; iar suflarea Celui atotputernic este cea care mă ţine”27. Duhul Sfînt este Cel ce întreţine misterul în creaţie şi facilitează sfinţirea universului. Prin Duhul întregul cosmos se regăseşte ca imagine a gîndului divin; Duhul Sfînt e puntea de legătură între vizibil şi invizibil, finit şi infinit, creat şi 24 N. Steinhardt, Jurnalul…, p. 63. N. Steinhardt, Dăruind vei dobîndi, ediţia a II-a, îngrijită, revăzută şi adăugită de Ioan Pintea, Ed. Dacia, Cluj-Napoca, 1997, p. 101. 26 Psalmul 103, 31 27 Iov, 33, 4. 25 408 necreat, între sacru şi profan28. Duhul Sfînt este cel ce dezvăluie taina lumii create. El relevă faptul că cosmosul este dublu (material şi spiritual), e paradoxal, cuprinzînd în sine lucruri potrivnice: „Universul creştin e dialectic: viază între spiritual şi material, între sacru şi profan, sinteza urmînd a se realiza prin întrepătrunderea celor două elemente. Universul creştin este permeabil Divinităţii, e pasibil de îndumnezeire, posedă vocaţie supranaturală”29. Duhul este cel ce dă omului caracterul de persoană. El imprimă în natura umană chipul lui Dumnezeu şi mobilitatea necesară pentru parcurgerea traseului de la tip la prototip, de la chip la asemănarea cu Dumnezeu. Tot Duhului îi aparţine imprimarea şi actualizarea, sub forma noutăţii, a raţiunilor divine, a fragmentelor de gînd divin, în lumea sensibilă. El este factorul progresului spiritual şi al elanului vital în creaţie, factorul maternal care insuflă viaţa şi fecundează materia. Duhul este cel ce apropie lumea de condiţia eschatologică, de sfințenie. În regim ontologic sfinţenia deplină s-a realizat în Hristos, Persoana care S-a dăruit total lui Dumnezeu, prin viaţa Sa de ascultare fără compromis şi prin jertfa Sa de pe cruce. Ca om, Hristos s-a aşezat în aceeaşi transparenţă şi fidelitate faţă de Dumnezeu şi faţă de umanitate, în care este ca Dumnezeu – o transparenţă deplin accesibilă omului. Fiind sfinţenia supremă în forma umană, Hristos e şi omul pentru oameni în gradul suprem şi exemplar. Hristos e omul suprem, omul care-i ajută pe oameni să dobîndească sfinţenia sau fidelitatea activă faţă de Dumnezeu şi faţă de semeni. El este omul prin care sfinţenia, ca supremă transparenţă reciprocă a Persoanelor Sfintei Treimi, se comunică umanităţii ca sensibilitate desăvîrşită, pentru ca sfinţenia Lui să se facă văzută şi respectată peste tot, împingînd existenţa spre un cer nou şi un pămînt nou, în care să locuiască sfinţenia, prin extensiunea ei din Sfînta Treime. În contrast cu vechile hierofanii, Iisus Hristos este cel care îi conduce pe oameni către sfinţenie. O astfel de experienţă nu se produce oricum: ea implică credinţa, omul credincios fiind cel prin care se manifestă credincioşia totală faţă de Dumnezeu şi calitatea omului de delegat de Dumnezeu cu administrarea lucrurilor spre lauda Lui şi spre mîntuirea semenilor. Căci cel total fidel lui Dumnezeu devine total fidel şi semenilor, încadrînd fidelitatea sa faţă de semeni în fidelitatea sa faţă de Dumnezeu, cum a făcut Hristos însuşi30. Oamenii au „ceasul” lor. Ei trebuie să vadă cu ochii, să audă cu urechile şi să înţeleagă cu inima. A săvîrşi toate acestea, înseamnă a sesiza că „Domnul e flămînd, însetat, străin, bolnav sau în temniţă” ca să poată fi hrănit, hidratat, primit la cel ce îl aşteaptă. Faptele milei creştine apar ca lucruri fireşti: „dacă nu-ţi astupi urechile şi nu-ţi acoperi ochii dinadins”31. Actele caritabile faţă de alții sînt daruri 28 N. Steinhardt, Primejdia…, p. 82. Ibidem, p. 220. 30 Ibidem, p. 272. 31 N. Steinhardt, Jurnalul…, p. 52. 29 409 elementare, pe care le avem din fire şi „zac în sufletul, inima, rărunchii, mintea, bojocii, măruntaiele, troposinele şi sinapsiile oricui”32. Anihilarea, mortificarea trupului nu e acceptată ca o soluţie eficientă în lupta cu răul. Confruntarea cu tenebrele trebuie să se facă atît la nivelul psihiei, cît şi al faptelor. Purificarea minţii, învingerea voinţei şi curăţirea de patimi sînt acţiunile prin care sufletul poate fi primenit. Purificarea minţii începe cu evitarea amintirilor negative şi a gîndurilor rele. Acest efort implică ocolirea oricărei conversaţii cu ele. Paza inimii, păzirea minţii, paza celor dinăuntru presupune vigilenţă, adică atenţie şi împotrivirea în cuvînt. O performanţă care se realizează prin „înţelegerea duhovnicească”, prin asistenţa Duhului Sfînt. Nici observaţiile particulare nu sînt neglijate. Pentru a descoperi gîndurile, trebuie să examinăm ce anume se petrece în suflet. Nu este vorba doar de o simplă întoarcere în sine, ci de un examen practic, constînd în consemnarea gîndurilor şi greşelilor din fiecare zi. Învingerea voinţei şi predarea ei lui Dumnezeu se realizează prin renunţarea la pasiunile generate de simţuri, la materie, la contingenţele multiple ale realităţii. Purificarea voinţei reprezintă detaşarea de orice sentiment, de orice pasiune sau afecţiune faţă de lume. E renunţarea la tot, pentru a duce totul lui Dumnezeu, pentru a fi plin de Dumnezeu. Golul realizat de om este umplut de Dumnezeu cu lumina Lui. Purificarea voinţei reprezintă un proces de „supranaturalizare” a fiinţei omeneşti. Curăţirea de patimi corespunde cu readucerea sufletului la starea de „chip” a lui Dumnezeu. Afectele sînt „puterile” introduse de Dumnezeu în sufletul omului şi destinate să-i servească „drept instrumente şi unelte” în viață. Preluînd o idee a lui J. P. Sartre, călugărul literat consideră că în procesul mîntuirii „Important nu este să spui: Iată ce au făcut din mine, ci: Iată ce am făcut eu din ceea ce au făcut din mine33”. Orice fapt e anti-destin. Orice operă e anti-naturală. Orice hotărîre e antineant. Sfințenia presupune o angajare totală, un efort dus pînă la sacrificiul de sine. Ea trebuie privită prin ochii lui Hristos, prin gîndul Lui, prin voinţa Lui şi prin sentimentele Lui. Sfințenia, mîntuirea este oglindirea omului în Dumnezeu. Acesta este motivul pentru care restaurarea personală nu poate fi negociată: „Vin unii şi spun: aş duce o viaţă creştină dacă aş putea…dacă aş avea condiţii, dacă ar fi… dar aşa e imposibil… Şi le răspund: Asta e viaţa de care ai parte, ăsta-i lozul pe care lai tras; acum trebuie să fii creştin; dacă aştepţi să ai confort şi timp liber şi să fie iar linişte şi bună stare şi să se ducă jupîneasa la piaţă şi să găseşti brînză în toate băcăniile ai putea pierde prilejul de a fi ceea ce spui că doreşti să fii. Trebuie să te poţi mărturisi creştin oriunde, în tren, în subsol, printre dobitoci, într-un spaţiu locativ comun, pe cruce, într-o cameră de trecere, la coadă”34. Nici citirea, nici simpla exegeză a textului sacru nu numai că nu aduc mîntuirea, ci prind omul în chingile propriei logici; îl face să creadă că-L aude, că vorbeşte în 32 Ibidem. N. Steinhardt, Jurnalul…, p. 222. 34 Ibidem, p. 234. 33 410 numele lui Dumnezeu, cînd de fapt îşi exprimă opiniile proprii. A declara, pe ton protocolar, că ceilalţi creştini, ca toţi ceilalţi oameni trecuţi, prezenţi şi viitori sînt ineluctabili sortiţi osîndei veşnice, e o dovadă de exaltare. O astfel de atitudine substituie pe cel ce o vehiculează lui Hristos, îmbrîncindu-L şi făcîndu-I vînt de pe tronul Său de judecător. Cine se mîntuieşte şi cine nu, sînt lucruri pe care numai Dumnezeu le cunoaşte. În plus, nu avem dreptul să-l jignim pe aproapele nostru, să-l îndepărtăm din cercul năzuitorilor la mîntuire. Mîntuirea subiectivă e o taină a cărei dezlegare se află exclusiv în mîinile lui Iisus35. Excluderile mutuale, intoleranţa şi răutatea faţă de convivii noştri Steinhardt consideră că provoacă „dezgustul, suspinul şi rîsul” Domnului. Ambiţia de a stăpîni monopolul mîntuirii este simptom de infantilism intelectual, de totală îndepărtare de la ideea chenozei şi de transformare a spiritualismului propriu credinţei în fundamentalism religios. Respectul pentru celălalt, dragostea de aproapele, sila pentru violenţe verbale, respingerea agresivităţii totale sînt condiţiile esenţiale pentru realizarea mîntuirii individuale. Restaurarea hristică nu este un „dat”. Ea se află într-un proces de devenire: totul este sacru, pe măsură ce totul este sfinţit. E adevărat că un studiu semiologic al formelor de consacrare relevă ca bază a sfinţeniei Taina Euharistiei, ca bază a sacrului substanţial. Euharistiei i se adaugă însă şi celelalte Sfinte Taine: Botezul, Mirungerea, Nunta, Maslul, Mărturisirea, Hirotonia, care, asumate în mod responsabil, introduc natura umană în ordinea mesianică, dezvoltînd în omul credincios sfinţenia însăşi. Experiatorul tenace al sfinţeniei este sfîntul. Sfîntul nu este o abstracţie umană, ci o persoană obişnuită, într-un mediu puţin obişnuit cu exemplaritatea umană. Sfîntul e un înainte-mergător şi un ajutător al celorlalţi oameni în drumul spre viitorul desăvîrşirii eschatologice. Biruind timpul printr-o vigilenţă sporită asupra curgerii lui, sfîntul ajunge la o maximă asemănare cu Dumnezeu. Avînd pe Dumnezeu în sine, cu bunătate şi cu iubirea Lui de oameni, sfîntul ajunge la deplinătatea esenţei umane, la identitatea esenţei umane cu existenţa. Acest model nu este fictiv. Este real, atît de real încît pare să deranjeze cu prezenţa sa. El se regăseşte în jertfa curată a Fiului lui Dumnezeu, care aflîndu-Se în totală puritate, S-a jertfit Tatălui pentru salvarea umanităţii pentru adevăr. Descoperind valorile spirituale, sfîntul, deschis exerciţiului iniţiatic, aşeza în faţa oricărui experiator, orizontul sacru al lumii şi al eternităţii, al unei tradiţii inefabile, catalogată astăzi fie din ignoranţă, fie din raţiuni polemice iraţională, demonică, delirantă. Așadar în viziunea steinhardtiană, sacrul e un atribut divin, iar sfinţii sînt acei oameni care au conştientizat harul sacramental, devenind mari oameni de acţiune. Faptele lor răstoarnă măsura actelor pur umane: sînt acţiuni cu putere, acţiuni pnevmatice, acţiuni îndumnezeite. Ei se încadrează în duhul comunitar, în slujba iubirii, slujind trupului lui Hristos ca întreg (Biserica). Sfinţii au descoperit că 35 N. Steinhardt, Dăruind…, p. 271. 411 numai păcătoşii pot gusta creştinismul, deoarece, în ciuda nevredniciei omeneşti – pe a lor punînd-o totdeauna înaintea nevredniciei semenilor –, nici un păcat nu poate birui dragostea lui Dumnezeu de oameni, care transfigurează orice făptură încercată de nostalgia eternităţii36. Bibliografie Eliade, M. , Eseuri, Editura Ştiinţifică, Bucureşti, 1991 Eliade, M. , Încercarea labirintului, Editura Dacia, Cluj-Napoca, 1990 Eliade, M., Sacrul şi profanul, Editura Humanitas, Bucureşti, 1992 Gauchet, M., Dezvrăjirea lumii. O istorie politică a religiei, Editura Ştiinţifică, Bucureşti, 1995 Mensching, G., Histoire de la science des religions, Paris, 1955 Müller, M., Essai de mythologie comparée, Paris, 1859 Otto, R. , Sacrul. Despre elementul ira ional din ideea divinului şi despre rela ia lui cu ra ionalul, Editura Dacia, Cluj-Napoca, 1992 Peters, F. E. , Termenii filozofiei greceşti, traducere de Drăgan Stoianovici, Editura Humanitas, Bucureşti, 1993 Ries, J., Sacrul în istoria religioasă a omenirii, Editura Polirom, Iaşi, 2000 Stăniloae, D., Teologia Dogmatică Ortodoxă, vol. I, Editura Institutului Biblic şi de Misiune al Bisericii Ortodoxe Române, Bucureşti, 1978 Steinhardt, N., Dăruind vei dobândi, ediţia a II-a, îngrijită, revăzută şi adăugită de Ioan Pintea, Editura Dacia, Cluj-Napoca, 1997 Steinhardt, N., Jurnalul fericirii, Editura Dacia, Cluj Napoca, 1991 Steinhardt, N., Primejdia mărturisirii. Convorbiri cu Ioan Pintea, Editura Dacia, ClujNapoca, 1993 Velasco, J. M., Introducere în fenomenologia religiei, Ed. Polirom, Iaşi, 1997 Weber, M., Sociologia religiei. Tipuri de organizări comunitare religioase, Editura Teora, Bucureşti, 1998 Wunenburger, J. J. , Sacrul, Editura Dacia, Cluj-Napoca, 2000 36 N. Steinhardt, Jurnalul..., p. 125. 412 M. Eminescu’s Vision on Human – God Relation Carmina COJOCARU Cet ouvrage essaye de démontrer que la vision du poète Eminescu sur la relation de l’homme avec Dieu découle de la perception anthropogonique qui se trouve à la base de l’œuvre de cet écrivain. Dès l’étape de son adolescence le poète se pose des questions sur le sens de l’existence et de la Divinité, en marquant ainsi, dès sa jeunesse, l’objectif de sa création qui a comme fondement la définition de l’homme et de son rôle sur la terre, d’ « apprendre à mourir », comme expérience fondamentale de l’âme dans le corps. En réalisant une création d’une si vaste complexité, Eminescu esquisse une vision intégrale, où il inclut tous les éléments de la vie, en étudiant l’essence humaine dans son parcours depuis la naissance jusqu’à la mort, rapportée toujours au cosmos et à la société. Dans ce sens, on fait référence au caractère dual de l’être humaine. L’homme est matière, limité par le temps, par l’espace, par causalité, soumise aux peines existentielles. Mais, il est aussi esprit, lié à l’absolu par l’amour, capable d’enlever les limites de son être. Par conséquent, il y a ce besoin de l’homme de comprendre le sens réel de la vie et de la mort et de comprendre qui les dirige et qui le dirige. Mots-clés: M. Eminescu , littérature roumaine, l'homme - Dieu relation, anthropogonie. One of M. Eminescu's manuscripts, the one under number 2286, contains the following note: „Nicio plăsmuire nu a trebuit să permită atâtea explicaţii ca omul. Egiptenii au numit omul animal vorbitor; Moise îl numeşte chipul lui Dumnezeu; Eschil, o făptură a zilei; Sofocle, o imagine; Socrate, un mic zeu; Pindar, visul unei umbre; Homer şi Ossian, o frunză de copac ce cade; Shakespeare, umbra unui vis; Job, fiul pulberii, Philemon, pricina nenorocirii; Herodot, nenorocirea însăşi; Schleiermacher, spiritul pământului; Jean Paul, un semizeu; Schiller, stăpânul naturii; Goethe – unicul zeu al lumii; Seume, contradicţia în marele cerc; Cicero, animal raţional; Platon, unealta care ajută divinitatea; Paracelsus, modelul a tot ce e mai frumos, Darwin...”1 1 Engl.: “No fudge had to allow so many explanations as human did. Egyptians called human speaking animal; Moses called him the image of God; Aeschylus, creature of the day; Sophocles, an image; Socrates, a small god; Pindar, the dream of a shade; Homer and Ossian, a falling leaf of a tree; Shakespeare, the shade of a dream; Job, the son of dust, Philemon, the reason of disaster, Herodotus, the disaster itself; Schleiermacher, the spirit of the earth; Jean Paul, demigod; Schiller, 413 And in this point, the series of enumeration suddenly breaks up. George Munteanu, in “România literară” (1991), stated: „Raţiunea mai simplă a scrutării atributelor de «poet antropogonic» ale lui Eminescu o determină realitatea operei, evidenţele acesteia.”2, and promissed, at the end, that he would the develop the foreshadowed theory. But things had been meant to happen another way, as after 10 years of research, I was in a position to say: „Sensul cel mai adânc şi mai statornic al existenţei şi creaţiei eminesciene, aşa cum se exprimă el în întreaga desfăşurare a operei marelui poet, este omul şi tot ce înseamnă sau ce devine el, de când a pornit să parcurgă traseul dintre naştere şi moarte, singularitatea relaţiilor sale cu lumea, cu universul. Creaţia eminesciană are la bază o complexă, obsesivă viziune artistică despre om, cu tot ceea ce înseamnă el, material şi spiritual, un şir neîntrerupt de întrebări, despre ceea ce este el sub timp”3. The antropogony in Eminescu’s vision had been brought to light by Călinescu, who talked about “the secret source” hidden in “the forest of his subconsciousness”, in, I would add, the supraconsciousness of Eminescu, connected through genius to the effluvia of the absolute. Eminescu's interest in the human-being (as researchers such as Rosa del Conte, Constantin Noica, Svetlana Paleologu-Matta, George Munteanu, Theodor Codreanu, George Gană called it) and in his/her purpose and destiny developed out of an early inward ebullition to discover the truth beyond material. Even from the early stages of his creation (1865-1869), the poet had been wondering about the meaning of the existence and of the Deity, thus outlining the object of its creation which had, as fundament, the defining of the human-being and his/her meaning on earth – “to learn out dying“. Stating from the very beginning his artistic grievance „Azi să ghicesc ce-i moartea?... Iată ce-mi rămâne” and adding, in Amicului F.I.: „Ce este omul? Ce-i omenirea? Ce-i adevărul? Dumnezeirea?”, Eminescu was going to accomplish a very complex creation, to outline a holistic vision that includes all the fundamental components of life, having in view the essence of human from birth to death, continuously cosmically and socially reported, in another words, to materialize an antropogonic vision from the perspective of which would have outlined what critics such as G. Călinescu and Tudor Vianu called cosmogony and sociogony. master of the nature; Goethe – the only god of the world; Seume, the contradiction in the large circle; Cicero, rational animal; Plato, the tool that helps the deity; Paracelsus, the pattern of everything beautiful, Darwin...” (t.n., C.C.). 2 Engl: “The simpler ration of scanning the attributes of «antropogonic poet» of Eminescu is determined by the reality of his work, its evidence” (idem). 3 Carmina Cojocaru, Antropogonia eminesciană, Iași, Editura Junimea, 2012, p. 19. Engl: “The deepest and stable meaning of the existence and creation of Eminescu, as it appears in the entire literary work of the poet, is human and everything that he has become, since he began to travel through birth to death, the singularity of his relations with the world, with the universe. The creation has as basis a complex, obsessive artistic vision about human, with everything he means or what he is going to be, material and spiritual, a continuous row of questions, about what he is under time.” 414 Even if, at first, he puts the human-being under the sign of deity – „În tine vede-se că e în ceriuri/ Un Dumnezeu” - sub-ms. Elena – , at the end of Mortua est!, the poet affirms that: „Pe palida-ţi frunte nu-i scris Dumnezeu”, compressing in this line the formula of the despiritualized human, a form that, without breath, remains “nothing but a form through which passes the dust”. Eminescu considers that this point represemts the beginning of the attempt to understand the mystery of the human-being, to test the spiritual capacity of the human in order to recognize his/her origin, to know that the human-being is a being that is being throughout Being. Who are you? – the question at the end of the poem Memento mori!, addressed to that YOU (TU) the source of all the things on earth: “Tu, ce din câmpii de chaos semeni stele – sfânt şi mare,/ Din ruinele gândiri-mi, o, răsari, clar ca un soare,/ Rupe vălur’le d-imagini ce te-ascund ca pe-un fantom;/ Tu, ce scrii mai dinainte a istoriei gândire,/ Ce ţii bolţile tăriei să nu cadă-n risipire,/ Cine eşti?... Să pot pricepe şi icoana ta... pe om”, is the confessed ontological question determined by the apparently shadowed antropogonic interogation regarding who am I – the human?. Human is likely the sacred image of the whole-conceiving principle, conditioned in “thinking himself by thinking the other one”. This “antropogonic thrill, always insinuating itself by interstices”, gives a superior “vibration” to Eminescu’s texts.4 The poet’s thought perceives the human in a continuous formation. He/she is not under the sign of disappearance, since in this way his/her existence would be meaningless. He/she is, first of all, an essence from two contradictory substances: material and spirit, ontical and antropological. Getting the consciousness of his infinity, the human-being in Eminescu's vision comprehends that, even if he/she has to face his/her own tragic fate, “the antithesises are life”, in other words, the contrasts, the oppositions: the two fundamental opposite experiences, birth and death, mean life, that is being into being, and that he/she has the eternity printed in his/her fate, not in the common-human meaning, but as it is proper for “a partition” of “a whole”. By this essential quality of partition of a whole, the human-being could “ordain himself/herself his/her way”, as Pico della Mirandola writes in Despre demnitatea omului, enhancing the human duality: „Te-am pus în centrul lumii pentru a privi cu uşurinţă în jurul tău şi pentru a înţelege ce se petrece în ea. Nu te-am făcut nici ceresc, nici pământesc, nici muritor, nici nemuritor, pentru ca să poţi deveni, cu deplină libertate şi cinste, propriul sculptor şi poet al formei pe 4 George Munteanu, Eminescu şi antinomiile posterită ii, Bucureşti, Editura Albatros, 1998, p. 26-30. 415 care ai vrea să ţi-o dai. Ai putea degenera în rândul fiinţelor inferioare şi brute sau poţi să te înalţi în lumea superioară, după singura hotărâre a spiritului tău”5. In other words, by getting conscious of his/her antropological side – that he/she is alive, sensitive, subjective – and of his/her ontical side, he/she could relate, although in flesh, to the ethereal substances. As long as he/she lives, the human-being is related to the ethereal, to the energy of his/her guardian star, with whom he/she forms an indestructible unit (Ms. 2257); thus, the human-being, although mortal, is eternal. Without resigning to the laws of formation, and by rejecting the continuous fear of perisability and death, he/she will see himself/herself in relation to what Heidegger called “Being”. To those, even few and rare „Dumnezeu în lume le ţine loc de tată/ Şi pune pe-a lor frunte gândirea lui bogată”,or, as the young prince is told in Povestea magului călător în stele: „A pus în tine Domnul nemargini de gândire”. Why the specification even few and rare, since the human-being is a partition of a whole? Because the antropological, that is the material, generates the will of living, not of being. This is proved by the epic unfolding in Luceafărul. Although, at the beginning, the very beautiful daughter of the emperor breaks the limits of her being, and her immagination – related to the ethereal – lets her imerge into a superior comprehension, eventually she slips back into incomprehension, not because she is anchored to the limitation, but because she is afraid of the infinity. This duality is compressed in her personality. She is the only daughter of her parents – „una la părinţi”, she has noble relatives – „din rude mari împărăteşti”, as the Virgin Mother among saints – „Cum e Fecioara între sfinţi”, as the moon among the stars – „ i luna între stele”. Everything places her outside “the narrow circle”! There is no hint here, at the beginning, of the future Cătălina. What she is going to be is simply her election. Out of the infinit universe, taken out of the chaotic condition of sead and put in the nestle of death, she could have get the absolute which had been printed printed in her own datum at the beginning of the universe, by love. Posessing, by its substance, a high form of comprehension, love breaks out the limits of being, pushing her – against the genetic, the neurophysiological limits – towards the absolute, towards the unseen, towards the pure substance, outside the form, showing her what a human-being could and is supposed to be. The last stanza of the poem reveals what the superior human-being understands: that the ordinary human-being is powerless in front of the data of his/her condition: 5 Pico della Mirandola, Despre demnitatea omului, în Ovidiu Drimba, Istoria literaturii universale, I, București, Editura Saeculum I.O. și Vestala, 2001, p. 209 (Engl: “I put you in the center of the world to easily look all around you and to understand what is inside it. I have made you neither terrestrial nor mortal or immortal, in order to become in complete freedom and honesty, your own sculpture and poet of the form that you would like to give to yourself. You could degenerate into inferior being or beast or you could raise up to the superior world, following the only decision of your spirit.”, t.n., C.C.). 416 time, space, causality. As a matter of fact, from this perspective, it should be considered the final declaration. Analyzing „Trăind în cercul vostru strâmt/ Norocul vă petrece./ Ci eu în lumea mea mă simt/ Nemuritor și rece” in relation with these three concepts – time, space, causality, dimensions of our conscious oneself – we will find the following: the first two lines are grouped exclusively according to their human meaning, that is in the time of “living” (în timp-ul lui „trăind”), synonym with being, in the space restrained to “the narrow circle”, being aware of the dimension of the real, of the material, and in causality, according to its moving („vă petrece norocul”). In the next two, the three dimensions – time, space, causality – are perceived through the consciousness of being, by the ontical. The space of the circle becomes infinit, being “world”, in the meaning of an hyperionic hero, the temporal perspective moves from the concrete sense of “living” („trăind”) of beings with few days and so many faults („mici de zile, mari de patimi”), on “I feel myself” („mă simt”), that is on a continuous sight inside oneself and towards the thinking of oneself, Luceafărul posing himself outside his antithessis, by mentioning „I feel myself” („mă simt”). From here, it also results the comprehension of the fact that without being determined in a sensorial way, Luceafărul does not feel, but feels himself , thus love is not lived, but overlived into being. In other words, perceived as an experience beyond the sensorial dimension, outside the material, love, as a superior expression of life, could become seed itself passed through all the beings up to Archaeus, as an unseen thread of connection, as a bridge that connects being to being. We could say that love means immortality. This is the idea of the opposition of the two groups of lines in the final stanza. In the concentration of humans in two temporal aspects: one of living, of being, and another one in of feeling oneself inward oneself, while, under the empire of a comprehension like this, everything expands, gets infinity, “the narrow circle” becoming “my world”, and the result of the report time – space becomes null. This is not the case for Luceafărul. Marked by immortality and objectivity, he becomes infinity into infinity, boundless energy created by That One Untouchable (“Cel nepătruns”), by The Unlimited One (Nelimită). The suggested conclusion? Even subdued to “The First One” („Celui dintâi”), to the “Holly Father” („Tatălui”), by will and devine decision, this kind of “partition” could get, as an assembly, the main trait of the “whole” - eternity. That is why we consider that the poetry of love is the poetry of “thinking death”, of the relation with the transcendent and with “the remembering” that life is the nestle of death, death is the seed of the new life” („viaţa-i cuibul morţii, moartea e sămânţa vieţii noi”). In the vision of Eminescu, love and the insinuated death as a cold thrill open the windows of thought towards the meaning of life – and, thus, to the revelation of the infinity from the limitation. * 417 This is the foremost target which the whole lyric, epic and dramatic, even journalistic unfolding goes to: of “guessing what death is”. This is an interior goal that guides Eminescu in his complex research and studies up to the last moment, when, “learning to die”, he gets access to the most-wanted “eternal peace”. We see, in his whole work, many interpretations that bring to light a long-lasting and deep meditation of what it is the other essence of “the antithesis”, death. To an assertion made when he was 18: “Life is the nestle of death – death is the seed of a new life” („Viaţa-i cuibul morţii – moartea e sămânţa vieţei nouă”) another one, with the same meaning is added, discovered some pages further of the project Genaia „Doamnă a vremurilor lunge – a Veciei împărăteasă Moarte!” (Ms.2257, f. 188), and one more is added, as well, in the notes of the courses in Berlin from the period 1872-1873: „Căci Moartea-i laboratorul unei vieţi eterne” (Ms. 2276, f. 63). In Epigonii, life and death are arranged cyclically: „Moartea succede vieţii, viaţa succede la moarte/Alt sens n-are lumea asta, n-are alt scop, alte soarte.”, and in Decebal, Dochia utters, in the moment of the final breakdown of Dacia, a thought proper to the vision of Eminescu: „Umbre ce sunt: viaţa şi nemurirea”, and in another utterance: „Umbre ce sunt: moartea şi nemurirea”, with the idea that „Timpul e moarte –spaţiul e luptă”. We should stop only at these examples in order to search the meaning of the “voluptuousness” of death. As life, in the vision of Eminescu, does not mean only the pulse of the heart, but should also be considered the essence of being, death does not mean getting out of the limit. That is why we are not, as we could show, in front of an universe half-circled, having birth and death as the only two possible horizons, as Călinescu thought, but in front of a continuous circle, of “a curve into the infinity of the universe”, as Eminescu says. Another variant of Luceafărul brings into discussion the spiral forming: „Pentru că ei sunt trecători/ Sunt toate trecătoare –/ Au nu sunt toate-nvelitori/ Fiinţei ce nu moare?”. At the end of the sequence we find: „Să piară timpul înnecat/ În văi de întuneric/ El s-ar renaşte luminat/ Ca să se-nvârtă sferic.” Thus, life, at Eminescu, is „onticul actualizat întrun tărâm al său ori în altul, intrând, pentru durate anumite, în starea cosmotică, datorită energiilor complementar-antinomice care i-s inerente; moartea e onticul rămas în unele zone de-ale lui şi pentru răstimpuri variabile în starea de nediferenţiere, haotică, aceea în care materia şi energiile-i inalienabile sunt în detentă”6. As a result, for Eminescu death is out of its general acceptated meanings, becoming a return to the real being: „Din a morţii sfântă mare curg izvoarele vieţii/ Spre-a se-ntoarce iar într-însa.” 6 George Munteanu, Istoria literaturii române, Epoca marilor clasici, Galaţi, Editura Porto-Franco, 1994, p. 207 (Engl.: “the ontical actualized from one land to another, entering for certain durations in a cosmotical state, due to the complementary - antinomical energies that are inherent; death is the ontical that remained in some areas and for variant duration in the state of undifferentiality, chaotic, that where the material and the inalienable energies are in expansion”, t.n., C.C.). 418 Without being a physiological process, thinking of death becomes a way of comprehending life, its most complete experience. This is the deepest meaning of human existence and the comprehension of all “uncomprehendable” depends on the fulfillment of its meaning. Having such a perspective, Eminescu gets to the highest level of comprehending life as an essence from a long row of essences, making, in Odă (în metru antic), the most complex confession: „Nu credeam să-nvăţ a muri vreodată”. Learning to die unavoidable includes the idea of learning to live; learning to die means being in the hypostasis of consciousness pulled out of the Great Universal Consciousness, of terrestrial part torn of the eternal whole, that one has already chosen the way of being, that one has already understood that he is being in a body and beyond! We consider that this is the clue for getting the idea of the poet's utterances, that hence on the underground sources of the thought of Eminescu towards the ocean of his hidden being reveal. "The heart rending pain" („Suferinţa”, „dureros de dulce”), synonym to the asceticism, with the torment of the human sins, the salvation of the mental from the contingent creates the suitable inward combustion as in a living fire of the thought. The embodiment of death in living the spirit generates an internal revolution and such a complex change of the perspectives as it overpasses all the other experiences. Only then the being is prepared for the resurection towards the light of the beginnings. Looking for the meaning of the world and time, birth and death, Eminescu also tries, in the fever of “the antropogonic obsession”, to find out who stands behind “the closed door" („poarta închisă”) where „deasupra ei, în triunghi, era un ochi de foc, deasupra ochiului un proverb cu litere strâmbe ale întunecatei Arabii” (Sărmanul Dionis); „Oare viaţa omenirei nu te caută pe tine?” (Andrei Mureșan). Even if he thinks that „în van se luptă firea-mi să-nţeleagă a ta fire”, in the manuscript number 2267, we find an answer to the question: „Cine eşti?... Dumnezeu. El are predicabiile câtor trele categorii ale gândirii noastre. El e pretutindeni – are spaţiul; el e etern – are timpul; el e atotputernic, dispune de întreaga energie a Universului. Omul e după asemănarea lui; Omul reflectă în mintea lui – in ortum – câteşitrele calităţile lui. De aceea la-nceput era Verbul şi Verbul era la Dumnezeu, şi Dumnezeu era Verbul”7. And in Rugăciune, Răsai asupra mea, Învierea the attention is focused on the moment when Jesus Christ raise from the dead: 7 Engl.: “Who are you? … God. He is the predictables of our thought. He is everywhere. He has the space; He is eternal. He has the time; He is almighty, He has all the energy of the universe at His disposal. Human is His resemblance; Human reflects in His mind – in ortum – all His numberless qualities. That is why at the beginning there was the Verb and the Verb was kept by God, and the Verb was God” (t.n., C.C.). 419 „Un clopot lung de glasurivui de bucurie.../ Colo-n altar se uită şi preoţi şi popor,/ Cum din mormânt răsare Christos învingător,/Iar inimile toate s-unesc în armonie:// (…)// Christos a înviat din morţi,/ Cu cetele sfinte,/ Cu moarteapre moarte călcând-o,/ Lumina ducând-o/ Celor din morminte!”. The same idea appears in an article written with the same occasion: „...credem că a înviat pentru cei drepţi şi buni, al căror număr mic este; dar pentru acea neagră mulţime, cu pretexte mari şi scopuri mici, cu cuvânt dulce pe gură şi cu ură în inimă el nu a înviat niciodată”. There is here the same high conception of the divine sacrifice that transfigures death into life. There is the confession that human, created according to the image and resemblance of God, apparently situated between two unknown entities, could finally step on death by death, that by this triumph confesses himself as a partition of a whole. And in order to reach time without moments (vremea fără timp) the human should pass over the border of moments without time (timpului fără vreme). Bibliography Eminescu, Mihai Opere. Volumul I, 1939, Bucureşti, Editura Fundaţiei pentru Literatură şi Artă Regele Carol; II, 1939; III, 1944; IV-VI, 1952-1963;VII-XVI, 1977-1989, Bucureşti, Editura Academiei Călinescu, G. 1934-1936. Opera lui Eminescu, I-V, Bucureşti, Editura Fundaţiei pentru Literatură şi Artă „Regele Carol II” Munteanu, G. 1973, Hyperion. Via a lui Eminescu, Bucureşti, Editura Minerva Munteanu, George 1994, Istoria literaturii române. Epoca marilor clasici, Galaţi, Editura Porto-Franco Cojocaru, Carmina 2012, Antropogonia eminesciană, Iași, Editura Junimea 420 Elements sémantiques et stylistiques du texte poétique d'Arghezi. La dénomination de la divinité Simona CONSTANTINOVICI The present paper focuses on the various stylistic and semantic ways through which Tudor Arghezi – a non-conformist poet – relates to the divinity, and, subsequently, to the whole religious vocabulary. Depending on the context, the divinity is: God, The Lord, He, TheOne-from-Above, His-Holiness, Surrounded by Stars, He-Who-Knows, Father, Whoknows, Someone, The One Who, The One Who Has Made the World, The One Who Hides, The Mighty One Who Lights the Stars, etc. Considering these names and the contexts in which they occur, our investigation marks out two phenomena: the semantic polarization and poetic metaphorization through religious terms that form a dominant lexical field in Tudor Arghezi’s poetry. Keywords: text, poetry, God, religion, semantics, stylistics. Introduction La dénomination de la divinité devient, dès les plus ancestraux temps, depuis l’entrée dans l'ère du christianisme ou, par extension, depuis la parution du langage conscientisé, un problème réel. Les hommes d’église, les philosophes, les linguistes, les écrivains et les gens ordinaires s’y sont confrontés. La liaison avec la divinité, le rapport à Dieu, mène implicitement vers l’affirmation d’un discours sur cette réalité que l’on ne peut pas définir, correctement, nettement et concrètement, en faisant appel aux incursions habituelles dans le plan du mental personnel et collectif. On a à notre disposition, sur la voie de la tradition, de l'héritage culturel, seulement un set limité de notions par lesquelles on pourrait tenter la définition partielle, jamais absolue, d’une réalité différemment conçue par rapport aux êtres et aux choses de notre immédiate proximité. La terminologie religieuse montre souvent ses faiblesses devant cette situation, elle se montre incapable de résoudre les questions posées par la vaste sémantique du nom divin. A par cela, nous nous confrontons avec une dimension supplémentaire, qui intervient au moment où on essaie de définir l’Inconnu Muet, Le Grand Illuminateur de Flammes : la perplexité, semblable à l’état d’incertitude et de d’inconfort intérieur, qui nous envahit lorsque l’on pense à la mort, lorsque l’on pense à un Au-Delà impossible à 421 forer avec les pouvoirs de la pensée. Il y a, à vrai dire, un point de tangence, un espace où le discours sur la mort rencontre inévitablement le discours sur Dieu. ”On dit que, dans l'histoire de la théologie, le problème des Noms divins (Summa theologiae, I a, q. 13) appartenant à Toma d'Aquino représente la première exposition systématique sur les conditions de l'existence d'un discours sur Dieu. […] En plus, Toma d'Aquino a eu le mérite de montrer la continuité analogique entre le langage simple humain et le Mot de Dieu. Tout en utilisant analogia entis, il met en évidence les aptitudes sémantiques du langage humain habitué à nommer ce qui le dépasse, à désigner ce qui échappe à la conceptualisation. Toute la théologie des noms divins tend à montrer la possibilité et la légitimation d'un discours ”significatif” sur Dieu, pas seulement lorsque ce discours ne peut pas être vérifié de façon empirique (ce qui est évident), mais aussi lorsque celui-ci ne fournit pas de représentations conceptuelles adéquates. Cette différence entre la signification et la représentation est une pièce essentielle dans la théorie des noms divins”1. La dénomination de la divinité La dimension du religieux génère un espace lexical et sémantique important, généreux, que l’on ne peut pas ignorer dans la poésie d'Arghezi. La dénomination de la divinité comporte, si l'on s’appuie seulement sur cet aspect de son lexique, presque trente formes lexicales inventoriées par nous, des mots simples, composés ou des périphrases. Dispersés dans toute sa lyrique, pas seulement dans les psaumes, les théonimes christiques s’inscrivent, du point de vue sémantique, dans la logique jamais estompée de la quête des réponses, des fondements existentiaux. Sans entrer en détails, on peut les considérés également comme une sorte de réminiscence du fait que Arghezi, au cours de son existence, a choisi d’aller, à un moment donné, au monastère Cernica. La lecture et la compréhension du livre saint, de la Bible, la prière, la liturgie, la familiarisation avec tous les rituels spécifiques à une journée passée au sein de l’esprit monastique, mais aussi la rupture catégorique avec les normes instituées par la religion, ne pouvaient pas laisser le mental de l’auteur sans traces, intact. Dans le contexte de la poésie, leur ”traduction” se fait souvent par le biais d’un langage éminemment métaphorique, avec des nuances bien délimitées, qui trouvent leur point de départ dans les sémantismes bien connus et pourraient atteindre, à la limite, les zones des antinomies contextuelles, la dimension des paradoxes ou des dissociations frappantes à l’égard de l’être divin. Dans l’un des sou-chapitres de son livre, La lexicologie biblique roumaine, intitulé Les Chants de Moise. Problèmes de la traduction, Eugen Munteanu met en discussion le problème des théonimes chrétiens fondamentaux, rencontrés, constamment, dans les ouvrages à caractère religieux : ”2.1.5.4. Les versets 10-15 contiennent quelques-uns des théonimes 1 Claude Geffré, Creștinismul: a spune ”Dumnezeu” în istorie, în (coord.) Jacques Bersani, Enciclopedia religiilor, traducere de Nicolae Constantinescu, București, Pro Editură și Tipografie, 2005, p. 277-278. 422 chrétiens fondamentaux: Împărat ceresc (gr. α ), Dumnezeu ceresc (gr. π υ ), Părinte Atotputernic (gr. πα άρ παυ οερΪ ωρ), Sfântul Duh (gr. Ϊΰιοθ πθετηα), Mielul lui Dumnezeu (gr. ), Fiu al Tatălui (gr. υ πα ). Le syntagme Unul-Născut (gr. υ , lat. unigenitus), l’attribut suprême de Jésus Christ, a été précédé dans les anciens textes de l’église (Varlaam, Dosoftei ș.a.) par la formule Seul-Né (Singur-Născut)”2. Quelques-uns de ces théonimes apparaissent aussi dans le texte poétique d'Arghezi, en compagnie des autres, inventés par l’écrivain, qui vont s’inscrire dans la catégorie des créations lexicales inédites, métaphoriques. La dénomination de la divinité suppose ou offre l'occasion, chez un poète nonconformiste comme Tudor Arghezi, à un vrai régal linguistique et stylistique. L'ordination de ces noms impliqués dans le discours poétique d’Arghezi pourrait être réalisée en fonction de leur capacité de générer des sémantismes multiples, liés à l’espace mystico-religieux, c’est-à-dire un champ sémantique dominant. L'archilexème, le nom autour duquel va se tisser tout le paradigme, sans aucun doute, sera Dieu. En subsidiaire, on va tenir compte du fait que ce nom est trivalent, dans la religion chrétienne, du point de vue sémantique. On va retrouver en lui les trois hypostases de la Sainte Trinité : le Père, le Fils et le Saint Esprit. Ainsi, les trois noms inclus, tissus dans le sémantisme générique (celui proclamé par le lexème Dieu), présents ensemble dans l’espace sacramental, au moment de la prière Notre Seigneur (Tatăl nostru), par exemple, vont être ordonnés tout à la proximité de celui-ci. La prééminence de cet archilexème est assurée, d’une part, par le nombre des occurrences et, d’autre part, par sa capacité évidente d’engendrer une multitude de structures phraséologiques, presque toutes activées par le locuteur de langue roumaine dans des différentes circonstances de sa vie (bătut de Dumnezeu, cum dă Dumnezeu, Dumnezeule!, Dumnezeu să mă ierte!, pe ce pune (el) mâna, pune și Dumnezeu mila, a se uita la cineva ca la Dumnezeu, a nu avea niciun Dumnezeu, a da cu barda în Dumnezeu, a fi omul lui Dumnezeu, a fi pâinea lui Dumnezeu etc.)3. Son apparition dans 72 contextes le légitime et l’encadre dans le lexique dominant d’origine latine de cet auteur. ”Les symboles de la Trinité chrétienne (un seul Dieu en trois Personnes, qui ne se distinguent entre elles que comme des relations opposées, et non par leur existence, ni par leur essence, et auxquelles sont attribuées respectivement les opérations de puissance, le Père, d'intelligence, le Verbe, et d'amour, le SaintEsprit) sont le triangle équilatéral; le trefle à trois feuilles; un ensemble comportant un trȏne (puissance), un livre (intelligence), une colombe (amour); un croix, avec le Père au sommet, le Fils au milieu, la colombe du Saint-Esprit à la base ; trois 2 Eugen Munteanu, Lexicologie biblică românească, București, Editura Humanitas, 2008, p. 169. Vezi Cătălina Mărănduc, Dicționar de expresii, locuțiuni și sintagme ale limbii române, București, Editura Corint, 2010, p. 118-119. 3 423 cercles enlacés, signifiant leur commune infinité ; un groupe de trois anges, de mȇme taille, rappelant l'apparition à Abraham, sous le chȇne de Mambré”4. On fera, dès le début de cet ouvrage, la distinction entre les deux types de théonimes : les théonimes chrétiens fondamentaux, qui font partie de la ”connaissance thésaurisée (la culture)”5, avec une sémantique bien délimitée et connue par ceux qui les utilisent et les théonimes poétiques (pas seulement ceux qui sont propres à la lyrique d'Arghezi), qui font la distinction entre le langage de la poésie et celui de la religion. ”Dans un sens plus élargi, la théonimie désigne une branche de l’onomastique qui étudie tous les noms attribués à la divinité dans la culture universelle.”6 La dénomination de la divinité, autrement dit la théonimie, entre dans un champ plus large d’investigation, constitue l’objet d’étude par excellence de l’onomastique, qui, dans ce contexte, ne peut pas du tout faire abstraction des instruments de travail théologiques. On suppose que les hommes d’église soient des personnes compétentes, habituées à déchiffrer ces mots et les contextes afférents. En parlant d’un texte poétique, les ramifications conceptuelsémantiques vont tenir compte (ou pas) de la logique, de la raison et finalement du dogmatisme propre à la religion en général. Les théonimes d’Arghezi s’inscrivent dans le territoire situé à la limite entre le dogmatisme de la religion orthodoxe et l’esprit libre, désinhibé, du discours lyrique. Dieu ”Au sein du langage religieux, «Dieu» est un concept sur lequel se dresse tous les autres concepts, en offrant, ainsi, une unité indestructible de tout le système conceptuel afférent à la religion. Nous considérons qu’aucune autre terminologie ne se caractérise par une si grande cohérence et, dans cet ordre d’idées, peut-on considérer la terminologie religieuse – s'il nous est permis de faire une métaphore, mutatis mutandis – comme une rêverie fort dynamique, ou le point central, qui focalise tout ce qui part et tout ce qui vient, est sans doute le concept de «Dieu»”7. Tous les théonimes repérés dans la poésie de cet auteur et discutés dans cet ouvrage, se subordonnent à l'archilexème Dieu, autrement dit, dérivent du sémantisme du concept fondamental de la religion chrétienne. Ce mot qui inscrit le discours lyrique dans la zone du sacré ne peut pas être substitué, n’a pas de synonymes parfaits, il est, à vrai dire, égal a lui-même. Il connaît aussi des formes avec un déterminant proclitique ou enclitique, tels que : Dumnezeu mare, singurul Dumnezeu, Dumnezeu de piatră, prea-bunul Dumnezeu, Dumnezeu ce vede toate, 4 Jean Chevalier, Alain Gheerbrant, Treime, triadă, în Dicționar de simboluri. Mituri, vise, obiceiuri, gesturi, forme, figuri, culori, numere, Iași, Editura Polirom, 2009, p. 949. Voir aussi l'édition française : Jean Chevalier, Alain Gheerbrant, Trinité, in Dictionnaire des symboles. Mythes, rȇves, coutumes, gestes, formes, figures, couleurs, nombres, Paris, Editions Robert Laffont, 1990, p. 971-972. 5 Paul Cornea, Interpretare și raționalitate, Iași, Editura Polirom, 2006, p. 262. 6 Vezi Ana-Maria Gînsac, Teonimie românească, Iași, Editura Universității Alexandru Ioan Cuza, 2013. (http://www.editura.uaic.ro/fisa-carte.php?ctg=in_pregatire&id_c=1182) 7 Nadia Obrocea, Elementul latin în limbajul religios românesc, Szeged, JATEPress, 2013, p. 53. 424 Dumnezeu cel viu etc. Le déterminant renvoie, tout le temps, vers un autre attribut de la divinité. Le régime appositif ou attributif fixe mieux, par itération de traits sémantiques, le sens du déterminé. Le dictionnaire des symboles définit la divinité, au cours de l’article Dieu, ainsi : ”La divinité est et symbolise l’Un, vers lequel renvoient toutes les manifestations, la Vie, dans laquelle s’accomplit toute vie”8. Le couple le Père/ Parent apparaît avec des termes qui ne peuvent pas être substitués dans le contexte poétique envisagé. Le Père (Tatăl) e unique, il envoie seulement à une incarnation, toujours masculine. Parent (Părinte) est ambivalent, fonctionne avec double valence, il envoie soit à la mère, soit au père, soit au féminin, soit au masculin. Parent, présent dans des syntagmes nominaux, Saints Parents, parent spirituel, restreint l’aire sémantique à des personnes de sexe masculin. En ordre théologique, Parent, écrit avec majuscule, est plutôt lié au terrestre, à la hiérarchisation cléricale, n'importe quel prêtre pouvant être appelé avec ce nom. Le prêtre, le clerc, est celui qui transmet le sens divin, il est l’instrument par lequel Dieu se laisse déchiffré d’une façon humanisant. Peu d’entre eux arriveront à être sanctifiés, à s’inscrire dans le filon des saints. D’ici, de cette permanente relation, apparaît aussi le transfert du nom Parent (Părinte) sur un autre niveau de sémantisation. L’axe sémantique peut être tracée, dans le cas de ce vocable, verticalement, à partir du plus haut point, celui de la divinité suprême, intangible et immuable (Dieu, c’est-à-dire le Parent) vers le plus bas point, intimement lié au chtonien, au périssable, au tangible et au beaucoup plus fugitif. Dieu se construit toujours sur la voie d’une sémantique positive et indivisible sous le rapport de l’ultime compréhension. A l’autre pôle, Quelqu’un (Careva) suit le fil d’une sémantique négative et divisible, toujours incertain. ”Pour éviter le nom propre, on utilise un quantificateur indéfini avec le trait sémantique intrinsèque [+ Spécifique], invariablement un tel (un tel est venu; un tel a lu). Un tel entre dans l’opposition + / – Spécifique avec quelqu'un, respectivement quelque chose.”9 ”Le Père acquiert une grandeur culturelle dans les mythes sur les origines ; sa symbolistique se confond alors avec celle du ciel et trahit le sentiment d’une absence, d’une ellipse, d’une perte, d’un vide qui pourrait être rempli seulement par celui qui nous a donné vie”10. Quand il s’agit de la dialectique de l’idée de Dieu, la religion, la philosophie et la linguistique se mettent très rarement d’accord. Si l’on pense à la religion et à la philosophie, elles opèrent, jusqu’à un certain point, avec des termes communs, tels que: être (a fi, ființă, ființare), devenir (a deveni, devenire), mort, vie etc. Toutefois, leurs terminologies, globalement, tracent des sémantismes différents, ont 8 Jean Chevalier, Alain Gheerbrant, Dicționar de simboluri. Mituri, vise, obiceiuri, gesturi, forme, figuri, culori, numere, Iași, Editura Polirom, 2009, p. 361. 9 Vezi Andra Vasilescu, Pronumele, în Gramatica limbii române. I. Cuvântul, București, Editura Academiei Române, 2005, p. 259. 10 Jean Chevalier, Alain Gheerbrant, Dicționar de simboluri. Mituri, vise, obiceiuri, gesturi, forme, figuri, culori, numere, Iași, Editura Polirom, 2009, p. 920. 425 des finalités distinctes, quoique certains termes semblent répondre aux mêmes questions ou se cantonner dans le même horizon de la connaissance. ”Le mot ”Dieu” désigne une réalité mystérieuse, dont les êtres humains cherche depuis les origines à tâtons. L'histoire des religions peut permettre le repérage des conditions concrètes qui ont favorisé cette fonction théogénique, dont l’origine renvoie à l'homme-même et à son énigme.”11 On va regarder, dans la poésie d’Arghezi, le long trajet sémantique de ce lexème. Dans un sens démonstratif ou argumentatif, on va reproduire, par la suite, l'un des articles de notre dictionnaire intimement lié à notre thème de discussion12 : DIEU13 (72), (rarement) des dieux, s.m. Lat. dom(i)ne deus. 1. Etre suprême, dans les religions monothéistes, créateur et gouverneur du monde, principes fondamental de l’existence et de l’ordre universel. * Expr. A porni (sau a merge etc.) cu Dumnezeu: a porni (sau a merge etc.) în pace, cu bine, sănătos. 2. Divinité. Variante phonétique: Dumnezău. Au niveau de la structure d’un titre de poème: Vaca lui Dumnezeu (II, 19). Mot fondamental, irremplaçable, du lexique poétique d’Arghezi. Am luat ocara, şi torcând uşure/ Am pus-o când să-mbie, când să-njure./ Şi am făcut-o Dumnezeu de piatră. (I, 10); Cercasem eu, cu arcul meu,/ Să te răstorn pe tine, Dumnezeu!/ Tâlhar de ceruri, îmi făcui solia/ Să-ţi jefuiesc cu vulturii Tăria. (I, 25); Ce poţi avea, sufletul meu,/ Când soarele ne pune-n ramuri iară/ Ori un inel de foc, ori o brăţară,/ Cu mâna caldă a lui Dumnezeu? (I, 53); O! cucuvaia lui Dumnezeu,/ Gândesc c-ai fi sufletul meu! (I, 84); Eu mă fălesc că nu vând ca atâţia/ Tezaurele mele. Nici nu ştiu/ Dacă pe piaţă Dumnezeu cel viu/ S-a ieftenit mai mult decât tărâţea. (I, 134); Scama tristeţilor mele/ Se-ncurcă noaptea cu ele,/ Genele lui Dumnezeu/ Cad în călimărul meu. (I, 193); Îmi caut leacul/ Şi la Dumnezeu şi la Dracul,/ Degeaba./ Văzduhul mă ustură ca leuşteanul şi ceapa. (I, 204); La patul vecinului meu/ A venit az-noapte Dumnezeu./ Cu toiag, cu îngeri şi sfinţi. (I, 223); Seara stau cu Dumnezeu/ De vorbă-n pridvorul meu. (II, 30); Dau adăpost subt un acoperiş cu mine/ Lui Dumnezeu şi marilor minuni,/ Cum aş putea să nu mă-nfricoşez? (II, 71); Făcându-se pentru mine pitic,/ M-a bătut pe umeri Dumnezeu/ Cu mâna lui femeiască. (II, 74); Domnul, Dumnezeul mare/ Mi-a umplut două pahare/ Din cerescul lui rachiu/ Scos din lună cu burghiu. (II, 117); Nu eşti al singurului Dumnezeu,/ Ca luna, ca o stea, ca o pustie,/ Eşti şi al semenului meu. (II, 121); Atâta cer pentru atâta sat!/ Atâta Dumnezeu la un crâmpei!/ Un greiere de om stă-ngenunchiat/ Cu cobza-n rugăciunea ei. (II, 150); Ai văzut cum Dumnezeu ne păcăleşte,/ De ne trec lucrurile printre deşte?/ Ce şiret! Ce calic! Ce tertipar!/ Pune un lucru tot într-alt tipar. (II, 208); Cine apasă omul pe 11 Claude Geffré, Creștinismul: a spune ”Dumnezeu” în istorie, în (coord.) Jacques Bersani, Enciclopedia religiilor, traducere de Nicolae Constantinescu, București, Pro Editură și Tipografie, 2005, p. 268. 12 Simona Constantinovici, Dicționar de termeni arghezieni, volumul I (A-F), Timișoara, Editura Universității de Vest, 2004, p. 364-365. 13 Vezi Nadia Obrocea, Elementul latin în limbajul religios românesc, Szeged, JATEPress, 2013, p. 67. 426 Dumnezeu apasă,/ Căci amândoi sunt unul şi au aceeaş casă. (II, 219); Te vei lupta prin timpuri cu zeci de dumnezei,/ Îngrămădiţi pe tine şi poruncindu-ţi: «Crede!»,/ Să-ţi fure giuvaerul ascuns, ce nu se vede. (III, 71); Bisericuţa-i martor, să vamintiţi mereu/ Ciocoii că-s tovarăşi, de brâu cu Dumnezeu. (III, 119); Şi oamenii s-au dus şi dus mereu,/ Cum zic, cu Dumnezeu. (III, 185); Aş vrea să fi rămas ceam fost./ La peştera cu turle de piscuri, mut şi prost,/ Într-un tărâm pustiu, cu Dumnezeu,/ Noi singuri între vulturi şi zimbri, el şi eu. (III, 273); Dar Dumnezeu sa pus/ Să lucreze colo, sus. / A luat o foarfecă odată/ Şi hârtie neliniată. (IV, 97); Bun!... Bun de tot!.../ Uite-l că vine şi Dumnezeu înnot/ Prin norii albi de trandafiri,/ Dimprejurul Sfintei Sale mânăstiri. (IV, 102); Câtu-i Dumnezeu de mare/ N-avea trei clase primare./ La citit se-mpiedică,/ Nu ştie-aritmetică. (IV, 109); Dumnezeu cel nepătruns,/ Dându-i tron înnalt, l-a uns. (IV, 190); Urându-i-se singur în stihii,/ A vrut şi Dumnezeu să aibă-n cer copii/ Şi s-a gândit din ce să-i facă,/ Din borangic, argint sau promoroacă,/ Frumoşi, cinstiţi, nevinovaţi. (IV, 215); El, Dumnezeu, venind în rotogoale,/ În supărarea Prea Sfinţiei Sale/ I-a luat de scurt, poruncile ştiute/ Cum le-au călcat aşa de iute. (IV, 220); Pe strune cântă şi el, pe strune cânt şi eu./ Eu cânt, aşa-ntr-o doară, ca pentru Dumnezeu. (IV, 245); Cum de-ţi uiţi în ceasul rău,/ Omule-al lui Dumnezău,/ Cu năravuri boiereşti/ Turma dată s-o păzeşti? (IV, 253). La représentation anthropomorphique de la divinité Après avoir parcouru tous ces exemples, une question s’impose : De quelle manière est représentée la divinité dans la poésie d’Arghezi ? Les modèles sont empruntés à la panoplie des traits anatomiques propres à l’être humain. On a, sans doute, une représentation anthropomorphique. Les vers : ”Seara stau cu Dumnezeu/ De vorbă-n pridvorul meu.” (II, 30) nous certifie une présence chaleureuse, amicale, un égal à nous et un très bon écouteur. De cette vision d’égalité et de solidarité on arrive, dans d’autres poèmes, à une sorte de dégradation de l’être divin, toujours par le biais d’un anthropomorphisme générique : ”Câtu-i Dumnezeu de mare/ N-avea trei clase primare./ La citit se-mpiedică,/ Nu ştie-aritmetică.” (IV, 109) Et voilà, par la suite, un autre renvoi au caractère humain, dans d'autres vers : ”Ai văzut cum Dumnezeu ne păcăleşte,/ De ne trec lucrurile printre deşte?/ Ce şiret! Ce calic! Ce tertipar!/ Pune un lucru tot într-alt tipar.” (II, 208), où des termes tout comme malin, miteux, jongleur construisent une triade nominale douée d’un sémantisme négatif, repérable à une certaine catégorie d’êtres humains, jamais au niveau de la définition donnée unanimement à cette instance sacrée. La chute de la divinité à l’échelle de l'humain estompe les distances entre le haut et le bas et fait possible la communication. Par cette technique de l'inversement des deux pôles sur le table de l’existent, on n’assiste plus à l’instauration d’une divergence frappante entre Lui et le poète. Les choses vont s’ordonner d’une toute autre manière cette fois-ci. La métaphore-personnification est l’une des figures par laquelle l’accès à la signification du nom sacré pourrait être facilité: ”mâna caldă a lui Dumnezeu” (I, 427 53); ”M-a bătut pe umeri Dumnezeu/ Cu mâna lui femeiască.” (II, 74) L’approche de l'humain se produit par l'indice stylistique d’un trait anatomique: la main (chaude, féminine). Par l’intermédiaire de cet organe, on fait habituellement le signe de la croix, essentiel dans la religion chrétienne. Dieu ou Jésus Christ est représenté, d'habitude, avec la main levée au niveau de la poitrine. L’envoi à l’organe de la perception visuelle se fait, dans le poème Incertitude, par appel à une autre figure de style, la synecdoque: ”Genele lui Dumnezeu/ Cad în călimărul meu.” Dans toutes les représentations (peinture, sculpture etc.), les éléments stylistiques sur lesquels se fixe l’interprétation seront la main et l'œil (le regard). Si l’on essaie d’amplifier la discussion sur l'iconographie roumaine, on constate qu’il y a un moment dans son histoire où le regard14 du chrétien rencontre, par la voie de la prière fervente, l'œil de la figure sainte (voir, en ce sens, l’iconographie consacrée, par exemple, à la Vierge). Il en résulte, de cette sorte de relation, la naissance des icônes sacrées, qui peuvent guérir. Dans ces exemples, le poète manifeste son amour envers Dieu et il agit à la manière d’un véritable chrétien. Il voit Dieu en chair et en os et très actif. La main divine est fertile, elle donne de l’amour et beaucoup de sens sacré. Dans d’autres poèmes, on assiste à la pétrification de la divinité, à l’annihilation de ses pouvoirs, à sa négation, en d’autres termes. La métaphore ”Dumnezeu de piatră” (I, 10), réductible au registre négatif de la réprimande ou de la colère, destructif et incapable d’englober le sémantisme de l’amour, nous montre une autre sorte de divinité, muette et extrêmement non-participative. On apprend des vers suivants combien la relation avec Dieu peut devenir incommode et instable dans la poésie analysée: ”Îmi caut leacul/ Şi la Dumnezeu şi la Dracul./ Degeaba./ Văzduhul mă ustură ca leuşteanul şi ceapa.” (Streche), ou la distance entre le bien et le mal, entre le positif et le négatif, la connaissance et l’ignorance, la prière et la malédiction se réduit sensiblement, tout en créant dans le texte un état générique, de tension prégnante, affichée tranchement, de rencontre à la limite entre les contraires, de cumul sémantique divergent, de polarisation sémantique. La Sainte Trinité ou, tout simplement, la Trinité, inclue les trois hypostases : le Père (Tatăl), le Fils (Fiul) et le Saint-Esprit (Sfântul Duh). Saint Augustin est parmi ceux qui ont théorisé ce concept. ”Ses écrits sur la Trinité et sur le sens divin vont inspirer toute la tradition théologique du catholicisme romain”15. (Le) Père ”Săpând s-a rupt lopata. Cel ce-o ştirbise, iată-l,/ Cu moaştele-i de piatră, fusese însuşi Tatăl.” (Între două nop i); ”Nemaiputând să-ţi rabde nici tăcerea,/ Nici Daniel Barbu, Scrisoare pe nisip. Timpul și privirea în civilizația românească a secolului al XVIII-lea, București, Editura Antet, 1996. 15 Claude Geffré, Creștinismul: a spune ”Dumnezeu” în istorie, în (coord.) Jacques Bersani, Enciclopedia religiilor, traducere de Nicolae Constantinescu, București, Pro Editură și Tipografie, 2005, p. 270. 14 428 depărtarea, nici puterea,/ Şi în nestare a trăi uitată,/ Mâhnita lume te alese tată.” (Tu) La définition poétique se fait, dans le poème Toi, par l’intermédiaire de la triade lexicale silence, distance, puissance, trois attributs incontestables de la divinité. Dans un autre poème, Entre deux nuits, le poète objectualise la divinité, le syntagme ”Cu moaștele-i de piatră” étant, d’une certaine manière, synonyme avec ”Dumnezeu de piatră”, syntagme présente dans le texte ci-dessus. Le Fils On a trouvé le mot fils sept fois dans l’édition consultée. Au niveau de l'œuvre poétique de cet auteur, ce lexème renvoie une seul fois à la signification religieuse: ” i un coșciug spânzură-n văzduh: Al Tatălui, al Fiului și-al Sfântului Duh. (II, 231). Le Fils apparaît, dans ce contexte, dans la compagnie des deux autres mots qui définissent l’être divin ou la sémantique de la Sainte Trinité. (Le) Saint-Esprit Arghezi ne cultive pas beaucoup ce mot composé dans ses poèmes. Le syntagme roumain Sfântul Duh a comme correspondant, dans la langue française, la structure lexicale le Saint-Esprit. ”L’explication de la vitalité de ce mot est simple. Equivalent de l'ebr. ruah, gr. π α, lat. spiritus, le concept biblique a perdu son sens biblique originaire, celui de ”souffle”, ”souffle vital”, acquérissant dans l’ère chrétienne, dès les premiers siècles, la valeur sémantique d'”esprit divin”, consacrée dans le dogme centrale de la Trinité, comme désignation de l'une des ”personnes” ou des ”hypostases” consubstantielles à la divinite unique de la formule sacramentelle ”În numele Tatălui, a Fiului și a Sfântului Duh !” (”Au nom du Père, du Fils et du SaintEsprit !”). Avec cette valeur conceptuelle et de désignation extrêmement précise et ”technicisée”, le terme duh s’est imposé dans l’usage de l’église roumaine à partir des siècles XVème – XVIIème, conquérant ainsi tout au long de cette période une place stabile dans la terminologie de l’église”16. Dans la section Guide biblique17 apparaît un inventaire pertinent des occcurences de la séquence lexicale Saint-Esprit (Duhul Sfânt), focalisé sur le texte du Nouveau Testament. Notre intention n'est pas de les reprendre et de les rediscuter à ce point de notre ouvrage. On va signaler quelques occurrences de ce syntagme au niveau du texte poétique pris en considération : DUH (ESPRIT) (17), duhuri (esprits), s.n. Din sl. duhu. 1. (Au niveau des superstitions) Etre surnaturelle, imatérielle; fantȏme, revenant,. * Sfântul Duh (Saint-Esprit): l'une des trois hypostases sous lesquelles est présentée la trinité divine dans le christianisme. * Esprit maléfique; diable. 2. Âme, esprit (d'un ȇtre humain). 3. Capacité intellectuelle; pensée, intelligence; humour, esprit. Terme 16 Eugen Munteanu, Lexicologie biblică românească, București, Editura Humanitas, 2008, p. 475. ***, Noul Testament cu Psalmii, București, Editura Institutului Biblic și de Misiune al Bisericii Ortodoxe Române, 2002, p. 788. 17 429 religieux, appartient au lexique fondamental d'Arghezi. Iar Sfântul Duh, închis în colivie,/ Făcutu-s-a pui mic de pitpalac. (I, 73); Tu eşti clopoţelul Sfântului Duh/ Şi treci lung prin văzduh/ Şi suni lepădarea de sine/ Şi-mpărăţia nopţii ce vine. (I, 83); Singure vin lucrurile din trecut,/ Duhul lucrurilor fără fiinţă, fără umbră. (II, 75); Că duhurile rele, a ocară,/ Mânjesc catapeteasma cu aripa murdară? (II, 107); Sunt greu cum era grea Fecioara,/ Din Duhul Sfânt, şi-s chinuit şi trist./ Mă doare gândul, doare subsuoara./ Se zvârcoleşte parcă-n mine Crist. (II, 207); Până la ceruri, lucrul puturos/ Ajunge duh şi fum cu bun miros. (III, 194); Un cumpăt şi-o măsură sunt chiar şi la nebuni./ Ce duh spurcat te-mbie cu atâtea spurcăciuni? (III, 215); Ce duh ai şi ce putere/ Să-mpleteşti ceară cu miere,/ De la floarea din grădină,/ Ostenită de albină? (IV, 175); Ca pe un nefericit,/ Duhu Rău l-a ispitit/ Şia pierdut prin frunză, bietul,/ Astupuşul şi biletul, (IV, 186)18. ”Il est intéressant de constater aussi le fait que la formule Sfântul Duh (SaintEsprit) représente l’un des segments ”œcuméniques” du roumain contemporain, étant acceptée et utilisée à la fois par les orthodoxes, les catholiques et les néoprotestants en tant que terme biblique, liturgique et théologique”19. On remarque le caractère prédominant du sémantisme du terme Dieu (Dumnezeu) par rapport aux autres termes, le Père, le Fils et le Saint-Esprit. Les études axées sur les textes religieux ont toujours convenu que ceux-ci représentent en fait la substance divine, sa signification immuable. L’exclusion de l’un de ces termes conduirait à l’annulation du pouvoir divin, de son unité, de son caractère invincible. (Le) Seigneur DOMN (SEIGNEUR20) (149), domni (seigneurs), s.m. Lat. dom(i)nus. La fréquence de ce nom traduit aussi les autres sens possible à être repérés dans le contexte, pas seulement celui qui renvoie à la divinité, c’est-à-dire Dieu, Jésus Christ. Forme grammaticale de vocatif: Domnul(e), Doamne. Il fait partie du registre lexical dominant d’Arghezi. Il est aussi la formule par laquelle on introduit, dans le discours religieux, le mot Dieu, signe évident de l’accentuation de son pouvoir sémantique: Domnul, Dumnezeul meu (nostru)! La prière profonde, l’acte de supplication, de l’imploration humble et itérée de la divinité, se produit, d’habitude, avec l’activation des deux théonimes, tout comme dans l’exemple : ”Domnul, Dumnezeul mare/ Mi-a umplut două pahare/ Din cerescul lui rachiu/ Scos din lună cu burghiu” (II, 117). Nadia Obrocea, dans le livre L’élément latin dans le langage religieux roumain, note à cet egard: ”DOMN, s.m. Titre qui est donné aux trois personnes de Dieu : 18 Simona Constantinovici, Dicționar de termeni arghezieni, volumul I (A-F), Timișoara, Editura Universității de Vest, 2004, p. 359-360. 19 Eugen Munteanu, Lexicologie biblică românească, București, Editura Humanitas, 2008, p. 475476. 20 Simona Constantinovici, Dicționar de termeni arghezieni, volumul I (A-F), Timișoara, Editura Universității de Vest, 2004, p. 345-346. 430 Dieu-Le Père, Dieu-Le Fils et Le Saint Esprit. Ar. domnu, donu, megl. domnu, dom, istr. domnu. Lat. domnus, -um [lat. clas. dominus] (Diez, I, 157, apud CDER 3018; Tiktin 561-562; Cihac 80; Pușcariu 541; CDDE 505; REW 2741; CDER 3018). Ret. dom, it. donno, fr. dom, sp. don, dueño, port. dom”21. ”Robul a scris-o, Domnul o citeşte,/ Făr-a cunoaşte că-n adâncul ei/ Zace mânia bunilor mei.” (Testament); ”Doamne, fă-i bordei în soare,”; ”Şi mai dă-i, Doamne, vopsele” (Cântec de adormit Mitzura); ”Tare sunt singur, Doamne, şi pieziş!”; ”Şi te slujesc; dar, Doamne, până când?”; ”Trimite, Doamne, semnul depărtării,/ Din când în când, câte un pui de înger,” (Psalm, I, 24-25); ”Ruga mea e fără cuvinte,/ Şi cântul, Doamne, mi-e fără glas.”; ”Sunt, Doamne, prejmuit ca o grădină,/ În care paşte-un mânz.” (Psalm, I, 34); ”Doar mie, Domnul, veşnicul şi bunul,/ Nu mi-a trimis, de când mă rog, nici-unul...” (Psalm, I, 40); ”Şi toate frunzele te cer/ Să-ţi legene lin somnul,/ Ştiind că leagănă spre cer,/ În sânul tău, pre Domnul.” (Pu in); ”Poetul, [...]/ Visează pentru Domnul cu dulce în zadar/ Şi se hrăneşte zilnic cu ceai şi două cornuri.” (Din nou); ”Şi fostul meu vecin de ţărm se ţine/ Vecin de-o vreme, Doamne, şi cu tine.”; ”Doamne, aşa obişnuit eşti, biet,/ Să risipeşti făptura ta încet.” (Psalm, I, 91); ”În fiecare urzică/ A pus Domnul o mărgică/ Şi-a croit tulpini şi floare/ După soiuri de tipare” (Buruiană, nu ştiu care); ”Doamne, vreau să-ţi mulţumesc...” (Colind); ”Şi, dimineaţa, proaspăta scânteie/ O ia din pâlnii de zorea/ Şi-i scrie Domnului cu ea.” (Om de pământ); ”Domnul tace./ Glasul nu-şi trimite-ncoace./ Domnul face.” (Denie); ”Domnul, Dumnezeul mare/ Mi-a umplut două pahare/ Din cerescul lui rachiu/ Scos din lună cu burghiu./ Şi-n fiecare pahar/ A lăsat şi-un drob de har.// Amândouă-s ale tale,/ Zise Domnul, ia-le, bea-le.” (Cântec de boală); ”Mergându-şi Domnul drumurile sfinte,/ Doi orbi ieşiră Domnului nainte.” (Cei doi orbi); ”Mă cunoşti, Doamne, din vie,/ Din lume, din farmece, din schit?” (O sarică); ”Peştele din apă, parcă,/ Era, Doamne! cât o barcă/ Şi ieşea din râu la soare.” ( ara piticilor); ”Ion îşi zise: «Doamne, cel din cer,/ De spaimă-mi vine iar să zbier.»” (Flautul descântat); ”Atât îţi cer, Doamne, niţică răcoare.” (S-a culcat o fiară); ”Mi-e frică, Doamne, şovăi în contraste,/ Între fericire şi năpaste,”; ”Năpârleşte-mă, Doamne, de tuleie,/ Fă-mă femeie/ Sau fă-mă iar băiat.” (Mâhniri de tânăr cărturar); ”Eu, Doamne, le-am primit şi mă supun,/ Stăpâne drag, gingaş ca un lăstun./ Vreau să te-ntreb: când m-ai ales, ai fost nebun?” (De când mă ştii); ”Păi, atuncea, Doamne iartă,/ Nu se mulţumesc cuatât:/ Dau urciorul tot pe gât.” (Noapte de an. Colinde ); ”Credeau că Domnul e culcat/ Şi n-o să ştie ce s-a întâmplat,” (Pedeapsa); ”Când îi trimise Domnul, pesemne n-au aflat/ Că unul e femeie, şi celălalt bărbat.” (Solie pierdută); ”Am fost să văd pe Domnul bătut de viu pe cruce/ Singur în câmp cu corbii şi-a cerului răşină” (Psalm, II, 283); ”Domnul mi-a pus alăturea o ceaţă,/ Şi-un puţ adânc, răzbit într-alt tărâm,/ Să sec izvorul, ceaţa s-o dărâm;”; ”Domnul gingaşul şi milosul foarte/ Avea de dat porunci şi-ntr-altă parte,”; ”Precum a fost porunca şi fuse legământul,/ Cine şi-l calcă, Domnul, sau robul lui, cuvântul?”; ”Tu, suflet, 21 Nadia Obrocea, Elementul latin în limbajul religios românesc, Szeged, JATEPress, 2013, p. 86. 431 nu-ntreba, nemântuit,/ Care din cei doi semeni te-a minţit,/ Domnul din ceruri, bun, sau Necuratul./ Că-ţi mai sporeşti osânda şi păcatul.” (Haruri); ”Eşti al pământului tu, Doamne, dintre lunci,/ Ori ai rămas în ceruri ostatec de atunci?” ( ie); ”Te recunosc din gloată. Scriptura veche zice/ Că-n umbra lui, cu Domnul, zmulgeai, de foame, spice.” (Tainul meu); ”Începe, Doamne, iar să-ţi pară rău/ Că m-ai ales un timp să-ţi fiu al tău?” (Răzvrătire); ”Cu ochii, Doamne,-n turla-ţi milostivă,/ Dau tot ocol stâncoasei catedrale.”; ”Dar, Doamne, încă nu a izbutit/ Să-mi încolţească boaba de cerneală.”; ”Uită-te, Doamne, jos detot, în jos,/ Se roagă către tine cel îngenunchiat.” (Psalm de tinere e) Ta Sainteté (Sfin ia-Ta) ”Nu zic, şi eu sunt tot o haimana,/ Dar drag îmi eşti, Sfin ia-Ta,” (Îmi pare rău) Celui qui est entouré d’astres (Împresuratul de astre) Ce syntagme nominale de nature métaphorique est renforcée ou substituée, souvent, dans le texte poétique, par la forme pronominale personnelle toi : ”Tu, în hotarul marilor mistere,/ Eşti ca un semn de-a pururea putere,/ Al vieţii noastre cea fără de leac,/ Împresuratule de astre!” (Muntele Măslinilor); ”De când s-a întocmit Sfânta Scriptură/ Tu n-ai mai pus picioru-n bătătură” (Psalm, I, 39); ”Tu eşti şi-ai fost mai mult decât în fire/ Era să fii, să stai, să vieţuieşti.” (Psalm, I, 50); ”Tu, care ştii deschide şi descuia cu-o şoaptă,/ Eşti mai presus de mine, de meşter şi de faptă.” (Inscrip ie pe o poartă de conac); ”Tu ai rămas de-a pururi, şi viaţa noastră piere.” (Rugăciune); ”Tu taci, tu te-ai ascuns, tu pieri/ Cu sculele şi farmecele tale.” (Tu taci); ”Tu n-ai făcut pământul din milă şi iubire./ Îţi trebuia loc slobod, întins, de cimitire” (Psalm, II, 360). Dans les Psaumes, où Arghezi essaie de s’approcher d’une façon atypique de la divinité, la présence de la forme pronominale toi devient une constante. Il est à remarquer le fait que celle-ci apparaît seulement au début des vers, chaque fois sous accent. Le Grand illuminateur d’étoiles (Mare-aprinz torul de stele) Il s’agit d’un syntagme synonyme, dans le texte poétique de l’auteur investigué, avec celui qui est entouré d’astres (împresuratul de astre). Le Grand illuminateur d’étoiles (mare-aprinzătorul de stele) est un syntagme présente dans le poème Bien et mal : ”Dar, mare-aprinzătorule de stele,/ Cum de-ai făcut şi-atâtea lucruri rele?” (Bine şi rău). La dénomination multiple, par des formes expressives, souvent métaphoriques, certifie, d’une certaine manière, le besoin de l’être humain de nous montrer qu’il est libre et capable à affronter l’inconnu, car : ”[…] les valeurs qui confèrent sens a la vie ne peuvent pas être conceptualisées ou fondées théoriquement (seulement suggérées, donc communiquées indirectement, par les 432 arts et la littérature).”22 Le modèle de cette construction lexicale atypique existe aussi dans la Bible : Luminătorul de făclii. Lui ”El23, Dumnezeu, venind în rotogoale,/ În supărarea Prea Sfinţiei Sale/ I-a luat de scurt, poruncile ştiute/ Cum le-au călcat aşa de iute. (IV, 220); ”De altfel, dogma-nvaţă pe mişel/ Că orice stăpânire-i de la El,” (Viii şi mor ii) La dénomination de la divinité chrétienne se réalise, dans ce contexte, sous l’apparence du pronom personnel de IIIème personne du singulier, Lui, graphié avec majuscule, doublé, dans le premier exemple, par Dieu, situé dans sa proximité, dans un régime appositionnel. Les études consacrées à l'histoire des religions parlent de Lui comme d’une autre forme d’Elohim : ”On rencontre dans la Bible deux experiences du divin qui correpondent aux deux noms: celui de El (une autre forme : Elohim) et celui de Yahve, par lequel Dieu est nommé. El (le pluriel d'Elohim) désigne la divinité dans presque tout le monde sémitique et suggère, donc, la continuité entre le ”Dieu des nations” et le Dieu d'Israël. Mais, lorsque Dieu dévoile son nom à Moïse, ce nom de Yahvé n'aura pas un sens que pour Israël, qui fait ainsi l'expérience de la proximité et de la présence active de Dieu”24. Parmi les 26125 occurrences dans le texte des particules demonstratives celui, celle, ceux, celles on va inclure aussi les formations lexicales composées qui renvoient à la divinite : L'Intangible (Cel-de-Sus), Celui qui a fait le monde (Cel ce făcuse lumea), Celui-qui-se-cache (Cel-ce-se-ascunde), Celui-qui-sait (Cel-ceștie), Celui qui va venir (Cel ce va să vie), Le Grand et le Saint (Cel Înnalt și Sfânt). Elles sont formées selon le modèle institué dans le texte biblique par le syntagme autodéfinitionnelle Cel ce sunt, appelation suprȇme de Dieu. ”Les symboles de la Divinité sont principalement ceux du père, du juge, du tout-puissant, du souverain. Parce que l'étude de Dieu (théologie) est liée à celle de l'ȇtre (ontologie), ces deux termes ont été souvent confondus et chacun d'eux pris pour le symbole de l'autre, en ce sens qu'ils se renvoient l'un à l'autre dans la connaissance imparfaite que nous pouvons en obtenir. Le nom de Dieu ne serait qu'un symbole pour recouvrir l'inconnu de l'ȇtre, tandis que l'ȇtre ne serait qu'un autre symbole pour renvoyer au Dieu inconnu. Il n'est pas d'autre nom de Dieu que celui qui se donna lui-mȇme : «Je suis celui qui est.»” (Ieșirea, 3, 14).”26 Paul Cornea, Interpretare și raționalitate, Iași, Editura Polirom, 2006, p. 565-566. Simona Constantinovici, Dicționar de termeni arghezieni, volumul I (A-F), Timișoara, Editura Universității de Vest, 2004, p. 373-374. 24 Claude Geffré, Creștinismul: a spune ”Dumnezeu” în istorie, în (coord.) Jacques Bersani, Enciclopedia religiilor, traducere de Nicolae Constantinescu, București, Pro Editură și Tipografie, 2005, p. 273. 25 Ibidem, p. 192-193. 26 Jean Chevalier, Alain Gheerbrant, Dicționar de simboluri. Mituri, vise, obiceiuri, gesturi, forme, figuri, culori, numere, Iași, Editura Polirom, 2009, p. 361. Voir aussi l'édition française : Jean 22 23 433 L'Intangible (Cel-de-Sus) ”Păduchii încă, omul, fricos, nu i-a răpus,/ Şi-s mulţi, şi de tot neamul, trăzni-iar Cel-de-Sus.” (Cerbul şi ân arii) Celui qui a fait le monde (Cel ce f cuse lumea) ”Cel ce făcuse lumea, Iehova sau Satan,/ Nu prevăzuse mintea şi-n minte un duşman.” (La stele) Celui-qui-se-cache (Cel-ce-se-ascunde) ”Iată-l că intră-n ape Cel-ce-se-ascunde/ Scrutărilor şi gândurilor mele” (Lasămă, noapte...). Celui-qui-se-cache est une forme lexicale construite selon la logique et la sémantique du Livre Saint, selon le modèle biblique de l'évangile de saint Matthieu, 6, 18: ”Ca să nu te arăți oamenilor că postești, ci Tatălui tău, Care este în ascuns, și Tatăl tău, Care vede în ascuns, îți va răsplăti ție”27. Celui-qui-sait (Cel-ce- tie ou Acel-ce-ştie) ”Că Cel-ce-ştie, însă nu cunoaşte,/ Varsă-ntuneric alb cu mâna mea.” (I, 195) ; ”Acel-ce-ştie, însă nu cunoaşte,/ Varsă-ntuneric alb cu mâna mea” (Epigraf). Celui qui va venir (Cel ce va s vie) ”N-ar fi putut din şale nicicum să se-ncovoaie,/ Ca să dezlege, – zice Iordanul din pustie, –/ Curelele opincii Celui ce va să vie.” (III, 102) Le Grand et le Saint (Cel Înnalt i Sfânt) ”Coliba de pe pământ/ A Celui Înnalt şi Sfânt (IV, 110) Dieu le Mystérieux, le Supposé, l'Invisible (Dumnezeu cel nep truns, Nep truns, Presupus, nez rit) ”Dumnezeu cel nepătruns,/ Dându-i tron înalt, l-a uns.” ( ara piticilor); ”Cine eşti tu, acel de care gândul/ Se-apropie necunoscându-l?/ Cui cere milă, sprijin şi putere/ Neştiutor nici cum, nici cui le cere?/ De-ajuns a fost ca, nezărit,/ Să te gândesc şi-am tresărit.” (Psalm, I, 366); ”Spre ideal,/ Te-mping spre beznele profunde,/ Greoaie, ca un şal/ De bronz, subt care doarme dus/ Alt Nepătruns, alt Presupus. –” (Pe ploaie) (Le) Parent ”PARENT, s.m. 1. Titre donné à Dieu-Le Père. 2. Titre de révérence pour les clerics. Ar. p(ă)rinte. Lat. parens, -entem (Tiktin 1125; Cihac 194; Pușcariu 1271; Chevalier, Alain Gheerbrant, Trinité, in Dictionnaire des symboles. Mythes, rȇves, coutumes, gestes, formes, figures, couleurs, nombres, Paris, Editions Robert Laffont, 1990, p. 355. 27 ***, Noul Testament cu Psalmii, București, Editura Institutului Biblic și de Misiune al Bisericii Ortodoxe Române, 2002, p. 14. 434 CDDE 1388; REW 6233 ; CDER 6155 ; MDA). Cf. it. parente, ret. paraint, sard. parente, prov. paren, fr. parent, sp. pariente, port. parente.”28 ”Pentru ce, Părinte,-aş da şi pentru cine/ Sunetul de-ospeţe-al bronzului lovit?” (Psalm, I, 13); ”Cu mine omenurea, Părinte, se va stinge?/ Dă-mi pacea şi răbdarea s-o caut şi s-o cânt.” (Rugă de vecernie); ”Stă singuratec câinele. De pază/ [...]/ Dar ochii lui, într-un maidan, Părinte,/ Dau mărturia lucrurilor sfinte.” (Stă singuratec); ”Dar sufletul se roagă-n genunchi pe piatra goală:/ «Mai scapă-mă, Părinte, măcar de îndoială»./ Te-am dus de-a lungul vremii, în mine, ca un semn,/ Şi, făr-a te cunoaşte, mi-ai fost imbold şi-ndemn.”; ”Mă-mbraci în strălucite odăjdii şi veştminte/ şi mă-ncununi cu lauri. La ce folos, Părinte?” (Psalmistul); ”Oh de câte ori, Părinte, trecătorul te-a-ntrecut!” (Cela ce zidi statuia) Qui-sait-qui, Quisait, Quelqu'un (Cine-ştie-Cine, Cineştie, Careva) Ces mots composés apparaissent dans quelques contextes poétiques, tels que : ”S-ar putea să fie Cine-ştie-Cine.../ Care n-a mai fost şi care vine/ Şi se uită prin întuneric la mine/ Şi-mi vede cugetele toate.” (Duhovnivească); ”Semeni leit, şi team văzut cândva,/ Cu Cineştie sau cu Careva.” (Mi se pare...) Le syntagme dubitatif Qui-sait-qui (Cine-ştie-Cine) peut représenter aussi bien le mal, le diable ou, si l'on tient compte de la fonction euphémistique du langage, présente dans la langue roumaine, aghiu ă, mititelul, cornilă etc. Il s'agit d'une polarisation sémantique implicite. La grammaire de la langue roumaine discute ces formes pronominales d'une manière qui doit ȇtre prise en considération: ”L'element de composition -va marque l'opposition lexicale entre les pronoms interrogatifs/ relatifs et les pronoms indéfinis. Les quantificateurs de la série quelqu'un (careva, cineva), quelque chose (ceva), quelque (câtva) sont les correspondents nonséparatifs du quantificatuer séparatif l'un (unul)”29. Celui-là et Celui Qui (Acela i Acela Carele)30 ”Turmele şi carele,/ Vremea, vântul trec şi pier./ Ea stă singură la cer,/ Cu Acela Carele...” (Crucea veche, II, 101); ”Nici oasele nu i s-au pomenit/ Ale aceluia ce-n zmalț te-a-ncremenit/ i, frământând, ți-a dat obârșii noi.” (II, 120); ”– Nu v-ați gândit cu spaimă și groază la Acela/ Care le vede toate? Nu v-ați cutremurat?” (III, 234). Le-Tout-Puissant (A-toate-f c tor31) 28 Nadia Obrocea, Elementul latin în limbajul religios românesc, Szeged, JATEPress, 2013, p. 90. Vezi Andra Vasilescu, Pronumele, în Gramatica limbii române. I. Cuvântul, București, Editura Academiei Române, 2005, p. 258. 30 Simona Constantinovici, Dicționar de termeni arghezieni, volumul I (A-F), Timișoara, Editura Universității de Vest, 2004, p. 15. 31 Ibidem, p. 77. 29 435 Il s’agit d’un mot réalisé, probablement, par Arghezi à l’aide du mécanisme bien connu de la composition : le + tout + puissant. ”A-toate-făcătorul de râpi şi de izvoare/ În temniţa fiinţei te-a-nchis între zăvoare.” (La stele) (Le) Voisin ”Nu te-am văzut la faţă, dar, vecine,/ Te simt mereu alături, lângă mine./ Nu te aud când intri, ci, desluşit în şoapte,/ Te-ntrezăresc de cum se face noapte.// Aş iscodi cuvântul în zadar/ Să te numesc: duh, înger, fum sau har.” (Ghiersul îngânat). On assiste à une communion evidente entre le poète et la divinité, traduite par la graphie avec majuscule du nom voisin, forme de vocatif, pas du tout usuelle parmi les théonimes chrétiens. Dans le dernier vers, on remarque une definition poétique, métaphorique, du terme voisin, le sens religieux étant activé contextuellement (Celălalt, Semenul meu, Aproapele): ”Să te numesc: duh, înger, fum sau har.” Les deux premiers termes, esprit et ange font partie du vocabulaire afférent au lexique religieux chrétien. Fumée et sens divin (har) s'éloignent ou s'approchent sémantiquement d'eux par la capacité intrinsèque d'osciller entre plusieurs dimensions stylistiques, par leur capacité de transgresser le langage commun, d'ȇtre actifs à la fois dans le langage poétique et dans le langage religieux. Voilà un exemple similaire, excerpté de l'évangile du saint Jean 1, 16, 17 : ” i din plinătatea Lui noi toți am luat, și har peste har.”/ ”Pentru că Legea prin Moise s-a dat, iar harul și adevărul au venit prin Iisus Hristos.”32 ou, un autre exemple, de Filipeni 1, 7: ”Precum este cu dreptate să gândesc astfel despre voi toți; căci vă port în inima mea, și în lanțurile mele, și în apărarea și în întărirea Evangheliei, fiindcă voi toți sunteți părtași la același har cu mine.”33 Jésus Christ Eugen Munteanu conquit, dans le chapitre Inconséquence orthographique avec motivation confessionnelle ? : I(i)sus H(ch)ristos34, relatif à la fluctuation de la graphie du nom : ”Le théonime chrétien le plus important, le nom mȇme du Messie, ne bénéficie pas encore, dans l'ortographie roumaine actuelle, d'une forme normée, stable et unique. L'absence des indications expresses en ce qui concerne ce nom dans les ouvrages au caractère normatif atteste, d'une part, l'absence d'une norme ortographique unique et contribue, d'autre part, à la perpétuation de cette situation”35. Arghezi le nom tout le temps autrement, comme si l’un et le même soient multiples. La plupart du temps, la dénomination met en évidence les qualités fondamentales de la divinité : l’omniprésence, la connaissance totale, le mystère, la 32 ***, Noul Testament cu Psalmii, București, Editura Institutului Biblic și de Misiune al Bisericii Ortodoxe Române, 2002, p. 211. 33 Ibidem, p. 456. 34 Vezi Eugen Munteanu, Lexicologie biblică românească, București, Editura Humanitas, 2008, p. 487-505. 35 Ibidem, p. 487. 436 capacité de création etc. On a repéré 26 occurrences dans l’édition consultée, sous trois formes, dont une composée : Jésus, Christ, Jésus Christ. On n’a pas remarqué des oscillations au niveau de la graphie. Un inventaire des occurrences du nom Iisus Hristos, graphié seulement sous cette forme dans le Nouveau Testament (voir les éditions de 2002), on trouvera, tel que l’on a pu constater tout au long de cet ouvrage, dans la section Guide biblique36. Les prières propres à la religion orthodoxe, les diverses formules d'acathistes proposent une rhétorique emphatique, répétitive, redondante, du nom de cette hypostase. CHRIST37 (9), Jesus. Din gr. hristos ”uns, trimis”. Correspond au nom hebreu mesia. Le Fils de Dieu. Întemeietorul creștinismului. E trist diaconul Iakint/ i temerile lui nu mint./ Fur și tâlhar întru Hristos,/ El printre frați trecu sfiios. (I, 22); Cunoaște toate domnișoarele mititele/ Care poartă pe Hristos între mărgele,/ i pe cele care s-au măritat,/ Cu diplomă și certificat. (I, 70); Crucea veche de la drum/ Este cum s-a pomenit,/ Cu Hristos cel răstignit,/ Zugrăvit cu terci de fum. (II, 100); i s-a făcut puterea de prisos/ Slujind Erodiadei și lui Isus Hristos. (II, 224); Sărac la-nfățișare și aspru-ntru Hristos,/ Pe dinlăuntru miezul e fraged și gustos. (III, 224); Că focul, sângele și fierul/ I le-a trimis spre pocăință cerul,/ În numele săracului Hristos,/ i că s-a-nvrednicit de ele cu prisos (IV, 227); i cum fuge și se duce,/ De subt barbă-i saltă-o cruce,/ Pe un lanț de aur gros,/ Ca să-i placă lui Hristos. (IV, 252). JESUS38 (17), s.m. V. Christ. Dar la fereastra staulului, sus,/ De câte ori oprindu-ne, din grabă,/ Nu am zărit lumina lui Isus/ i-am auzit că vocea lui nentreabă? (I, 73); S-a ridicat la geamuri pământul până sus./ Cât lumea-i era piscul, și-n pisc plângea Isus. (I, 103); Pot eu, Isuse, răbda/ Să văd deasupra sfintelor odoare/ Crucea ta,/ Semn de vânzare? (I, 181); E jocul Sfintelor Scripturi./ Așa s-a jucat și domnul nostru Isus Hristos/ i alții, prinși de friguri și de călduri,/ Care din câteva sfinte tremurături/ Au isprăvit jocul, frumos. (I, 190); Baciul Isus șiapostolii ciobani,/ Scârbiți de slava ce-o dau vieții vecii,/ Au pogorât, ca-ntr-alte mii de ani,/ Să pască oile, măgarii și berbecii. (II, 148); Isusul meu nu-i cel adevărat,/ i eu nu-l pot nici duce, nici cunoaște. (II, 207); i-ntr-un ungher, vom face din covoare/ Un pat adânc, cu perinile moi,/ Dacă Isus, voind să mai scoboare,/ Flămând și gol, va trece pe la noi. (III, 10); Isus mi se-arătase la lună, prin livede./ Parc-ar fi spus în șoaptă: «Nu cerceta, ci crede». (III, 298); Sendoiește, ca Isus/ Să mai facă vreo minune,/ Ca în timpurile bune,/ i grăbește a-și ascunde/ Bine părțile rotunde. (IV, 252). 36 ***, Noul Testament cu Psalmii, București, Editura Institutului Biblic și de Misiune al Bisericii Ortodoxe Române, 2002, p. 790. 37 Simona Constantinovici, Dicționar de termeni arghezieni, volumul II (G-O), Timișoara, Editura Universității de Vest, 2008, p. 62-63. 38 Simona Constantinovici, Dicționar de termeni arghezieni, volumul II (G-O), Timișoara, Editura Universității de Vest, 2008, p. 87. 437 Les psaumes et la dénomination de la divinité Au niveau des psaumes, comme on le pense, naturellement, la divinité est constamment nommée Dieu (Dumnezeu), Seigneur (Domn) ou Père (Părinte). Cette superposition ou communion parfaite des trois termes impose un sémantisme absolu. Le texte se couvre d’une aura qui le fait souvent inaccessible, impénétrable. Sous l’aile protectrice du vocatif Doamne tout semble possible. On suppose la présence, dans tous les poèmes, de la peur générique de l’approche, même si cela se fait par le pouvoir de la pensée. On devine, aussi, le sentiment d’une admiration à peine dissimulée, la question hésitante, le timide amour. L’intimité entre le poète et la divinité nous fait croire que l’une de ses principales facettes a été dévoilée : l'humour. Au niveau de la prose, la dénomination de la divinité se fait de façons différentes, la plus fréquente restant Dieu (Dumnezeu). On va sélecter trois occurrences : ”Omul are simţul juridic dezvoltat, şi ceea ce-l deosibeşte de animalele lipsite de suflet este, pe lângă cunoaşterea de Dumnezeu, semnul întrebării.”39 ou ”Nu mai plânge, Miţule! S-a dus acolo unde se duc toate baloanele, la Dumnezeu...”40 ou ”Dar Moş Crăciun este Dumnezeu. El a făcut toate jucăriile, şi le face în fiecare an, cu mare punctualitate, pe zăpadă. Nimeni nu scoate pomi iarna, decât el.”41 La polarisation sémantique suppose l’existence de deux pôles sémantiques divergents. Par exemple, dans le contexte de la dénomination du divin, on aura Dieu, le pȏle centrale et, à l’autre extrémité de l’axe sémantique, des mots tels que Quelqu'un, Quisait, Qui-sait-qui etc. On remarque que la triade ultime se situe en régime d’incertitude, de même que le modèle existent dans les paradigmes nominaux indéfinis. Un autre cas de polarisation sémantique explicite se trouve dans l'exemple : ”Cel ce făcuse lumea, Iehova sau Satan,/ Nu prevăzuse mintea şi-n minte un duşman.” (La stele), où le segment périphrastique Cel ce făcuse lumea est ”explicité” par une apposition nominale, composée de deux termes qui se trouvent en régime de coordination disjonctive, Yahvé ou Satan. L’ambiguïté est repérable, la distance sémantique entre les deux noms étant absolue. Ainsi, Celui qui a fait le monde (Cel ce făcuse lumea), c’est-à-dire, dans la vision habituel, chrétienne, théologique, Dieu (Dumnezeu), soit mis sous le signe du doute ou de la question inquiétante. Dans les psaumes de ce poète, le nom de la divinité est intimement lié à la sémantique du religieux. 39 Tudor Arghezi, Cartea cu jucării. Amărăciuni, în Scrieri, 7, Proze, Editura pentru Literatură, 1965, p. 21. 40 Idem, Cartea cu jucării. Balonul spart, în Scrieri, 7, Proze, Editura pentru Literatură, 1965, p. 63. 41 Idem, Cartea cu jucării. Calendarul copiilor, în Scrieri, 7, Proze, Editura pentru Literatură, 1965, p. 102. 438 Le poète a eu depuis toujours, au niveau de la poésie, la force de se placer dans l’immédiate voisinage du divin, du sacré, avec toutes ses formes et à des moments différents de son existence. Les modalités par lequel il entre en relation avec la divinité, parfois sarcastique, parfois ironique ou duale, perturbe le dialogue naturel entre le chrétien et l’instance divine. Le poète met constamment, d’une façon ou d’une autre, une frontière entre soi-même et celui qui l'a créé, même s’il s’efforce à le considéré son semblable, son Frère. Bibliographie *** 2002: Noul Testament cu Psalmii, București, Editura Institutului Biblic și de Misiune al Bisericii Ortodoxe Române *** 2005: Gramatica limbii române. I. Cuvântul, București, Editura Academiei Române Barbu, Daniel 1996, Scrisoare pe nisip. Timpul și privirea în civilizația românească a secolului al XVIII-lea, București, Editura Antet Constantinovici, Simona 2004, Dicționar de termeni arghezieni, volumul II (A-F), Timișoara, Editura Universității de Vest Constantinovici, Simona 2008, Dicționar de termeni arghezieni, volumul II (G-O), Timișoara, Editura Universității de Vest Constantinovici, Simona 2005, Palimpseste argheziene, Timișoara, Editura Politehnica. Cornea, Paul 2006, Interpretare și raționalitate, Iași, Editura Polirom Dorcescu, Eugen 2006, Poezia mistico-religioasă. Structură și interpretare, în „Orient latin”, an XIII, nr. 2-3, p. 29-31 Eliade, Mircea 1994: Nostalgia originilor. Istorie și semnificație în religie, traducere de Cezar Baltag, București, Editura Humanitas Chevalier, Jean, Alain Gheerbrant 1990, Dictionnaire des symboles. Mythes, rȇves, coutumes, gestes, formes, figures, couleurs, nombres, Paris, Editions Robert Laffont Chevalier, Jean, Alain Gheerbrant 2013, Dicționar de simboluri. Mituri, vise, obiceiuri, gesturi, forme, figuri, culori, numere, Iași, Editura Polirom Geffré, Claude 2005, Creștinismul: a spune „Dumnezeu” în istorie, în (coord.) Jacques Bersani, Enciclopedia religiilor, traducere de Nicolae Constantinescu, București, Pro Editură și Tipografie Gînsac, Ana-Maria 2013, Teonimie românească, Iași, Editura Universității Alexandru Ioan Cuza Jinga, Constantin 2000, Fişe de ini iere în lectura Vechiului Testament, Timişoara, Editura Marineasa Jinga, Constantin 2001, Biblia şi sacrul în literatură, Cuvânt însoţitor de Theodor Baconsky, Timișoara, Editura Universităţii de Vest Mărănduc, Cătălina 2010, Dicționar de expresii, locuțiuni și sintagme ale limbii române, București, Editura Corint Munteanu, Eugen 2008, Lexicologie biblică românească, București, Editura Humanitas. Obrocea, Nadia 2013, Elementul latin în limbajul religios românesc, Szeged, JATEPress 439 Inflexiuni biblice în lirica interbelică. Cântecele pescarului Seled de Alexandru Leontescu Amalia DR GUL NESCU The interwar writing Seled / The Songs of Seled, the Fisherman is represented by the paradigm of wisdom to live and understand love, from Cântarea Cântărilor / The Song of Songs and Persian authors, changed into lyrics by the fisherman-poet, he himself a symbol of the creator. Using the pretext of assigning this poem full of pathos to an Aramaic old man, translated by someone in Jerusalem, the writer outlines in two lyrical sequences (Miriam sau iubirea trupului/ Miriam, or the Love of the Body and Gomera sau iubirea sufletului/ Gomera, or the Love of the Soul) the initiation story of a young man in love, who does not reach the conciliation between mind and heart. However, the obsession of the unfulfilled love still remains, oscillating between amor concupiscentiae and am r, suffering for a long time in the Communist prisons, together with N. Steinhardt, finds the compensatory solution of writing love lyrics of a great sensibility. The primary source of inspiration of the macro-poem Cântecele pescarului or benevolentiae, is also present in Alexandru Leontescu’s other writings. Hence, we analyze in what way some lyrical influences not only from The Song of Songs, but also from other representative universal lyrical works are to be found in this poem. Keywords: Biblical intertextuality, Interwar Romanian literature, Alexandru Leontescu. Alexandru Leontescu, acest scriitor interbelic, care a suferit vreme îndelungată în închisorile comuniste, alături de Nicolae Steinhardt și alții, a găsit o soluție compensatorie la suferință, aceea de a scrie versuri de dragoste de o mare sensibilitate. Asupra vieții sale, mai precis asupra cîtorva date biografice, planează încă misterul, așa cum, din poemele sale, se desprinde o atmosferă de taină. Dintr-o fișă matricolă penală, de la penitenciarul Jilava, aflăm că a fost întemnițat la data de 17 decembrie 1958; la ,,durata și felul pedepsei” este trecut ,,20 de ani de temniță grea” (1958 – 1978). A fost închis pentru ,,uneltire”, dar și pentru că părinții săi, Natalia și Alexandru Leontescu, erau considerați chiaburi. Deși a fost grațiat în anul 1964, el este practic absent din viața literară, ca mulți alți foști deținuți politici, ceea ce explică puținătatea referințelor critice (pînă în 1990). Scriitorul, născut la 19 februarie 1896, în comuna Vlăsinești, județul Botoșani (fostul raion Dorohoi), este originar, într-adevăr, dintr-o veche familie răzeșească din Dersca. O străbunică pe linie maternă se înrudea cu Neculce, 441 cronicarul, iar mama însăși era nepoata unor cărturari de seamă ca Filaret Scriban, rectorul Universității ieșene la 1861, și Neofit Scriban, președintele unioniștilor din capitala Moldovei. Avînd astfel de ,,însemne” literare și intelectuale, Alexandru Leontescu a fost atras de viața literară încă de pe cînd era elev al Liceului ,,A. T. Laurian” din Botoșani. În acea vreme a cules și folclor, snoave, cimilituri și cîntece populare, fragmente pe care le publică în revista ,,Ion Creangă” din Bîrlad, revistă condusă de renumitul folclorist Tudor Pamfile. Debutul său literar a avut loc în săptămînalul craiovean ,,Drum drept”, editat de Nicolae Iorga, unde a publicat, în 1915, două nuvele, Vanușa și Boarul Baltă, precum și cîteva poezii în ,,Tribuna” lui Onisifor Ghibu și I.U.Soricu, cînd a fost mobilizat și trimis pe frontul din Moldova. Comandant de pluton, Alexandru Leontescu a fost rănit în luptele de pe Măgura Cașinului. Multe din paginile volumului său de nuvele Valetul de pică descriu aceste experiențe de război, mottoul volumului fiind următorul: ,,Amintirile de război nu se uită. Au rădăcinile udate în sînge și de aceea nu au moarte”. În preajma declanșării celui de-al doilea război mondial, ajunge prim-redactor al cotidianului ,,Seara” din București (1943). Publicațiile interbelice l-au avut destul de frecvent printre colaboratori, unde a contribuit cu proză scurtă, versuri originale, eseuri, recenzii, foiletoane de înaltă ținută (eseistică), semnînd astfel în peste douăzeci și cinci de ziare și reviste literare - ,,Ramuri”, ,,Cuvîntul”, ,,Facla”, ,,Viața literară”, ,,Azi”, ,,Dimineața”, ,,Pagini basarabene”, ,,Timpul”, ,,Relief dunărean”, ,,Universul literar”, ,,Gîndul nostru”, ,,Convorbiri literare”, ,,Cuvîntul liber”, ,,Viața românească”, ,,Gazeta literară”, ,,România literară”, ,,Tinerețea”, ,, ara noasră”, ,,Luceafărul”, ,,Ordinea”, ,,Steaua”, ,,Clipa”, ,,Familia”, ,,Tribuna” ș.a. Însuși Lucian Blaga i-a apreciat elogios, în 1937, eseul La porțile Răsăritului, fragment dintr-un studiu mai extins de filosofie a culturii, în care, consecvent afinităților sale pentru dimensiunea orientală, în sensul larg al cuvîntului, Al. Leontescu face analiza scrierilor lui Liviu Rebreanu, Gib Mihăescu și Lucian Blaga, considerîndu-le reprezentative în acest sens. Conform opiniilor prezentate, specificul național în literatură este unul răsăritean – latin ortodox, ceea ce înseamnă o anumită detașare de spiritul occidental, cerebral și neurastenizat, și o mai mare apropiere de celălalt versant, într-un fel dostoievskian, al unei literaturi plasate sub semnul anistoricului. Aducînd argumente pătrunzătoare din opera lui Rudolf Steiner, Henri Massis, Giovanni Papini, Nikolai Berdiaev, eseistul crede că trăsăturile caracteristice prozei lui L. Rebreanu sînt, în același timp, obiectivitatea și instinctualul, iar în cazul poemelor blagiene, găsește formula miracolului răsăritean, ca modalitate de exprimare predilectă. Cît despre romanele lui Gib Mihăescu, supranumit ,,profet al cărnei”, Al. Leontescu imprimă o notă discordantă față de alți exegeți, deoarece subliniază că, la acest autor, influența ,,rusească” este minimă, și că de fapt prozele sale sînt supuse unui tip de creație intuitiv-organic, mai degrabă decît logic-naturalist. Cu alte cuvinte, se afirmă că subconștientul nu reprezintă un haos, un subsol din care își trage uneori sevele literatura, ci mai ales un micro-cosmos, în care se află germenii unei scriituri de calitate. Prin urmare, 442 cosmosul subconștient semnifică sursa primordială a literaturii autorului Rusoaicei, sursa literaturii prin excelență. (La porțile Răsăritului. În memoria lui Gib Mihăescu, ,,Pagini basarabene”, 1936, nr. 9, p. 3). Acest cosmos subconștient îl caracterizează, de altfel, chiar pe creatorul Cîntecelor pescarului Seled, Alexandru Leontescu, pe care l-au apreciat critici precum Vladimir Streinu, Zaharia Stancu, erban Cioculescu. Se pare că exageratele sale scrupule artistice, precum și ocultarea istorică dată de perioada concentraționară în care s-a aflat, și despre care am amintit, l-au împiedicat să-și adune scrierile la timp, de prin periodicele în care se găseau (aflîndu-se astfel în situația prietenului său Ion Vinea, care și-a strîns versurile în volum, Ora fîntînilor, în preajma vîrstei de șaptezeci de ani). Unele dintre poemele și baladele orientale numite Cîntecele pescarului Seled, la care ne referim, în principal, fuseseră publicate anterior în revistele literare ale vremii (la fel și poemele Sonata lunii, Sephora, Căderea regelui Ahaàv etc.). Explicația care precedă cîntecele propriu-zise este, de fapt, o descifrare lirică și un subterfugiu artistic: - ,,Am tălmăcit din vechea limbă arameică – nu singur – cîntecele pescarului Seled, scrise în cetatea Sionului, pe vremea înțeleptului rege Solomon, cel care a umplut de miresme Cîntarea Cîntărilor. Mă aflam la Ierusalim. Eram hotărît să văd Zidul Plîngerii, tot ce a mai rămas din fostul lăcaș reclădit de Zorobabel, căci pe locul faimoasei clădiri nu se mai afla decît monumentala moschee a lui Omar. În drum, m-am abătut pe la un anticar. Aici am dat peste un bătrîn cu barbă albă, potrivit de statură, cu o tichie neagră în cap. tia românește (...) A scos o cutie în formă de sarcofag, lucrată din aramă, înverzită de vreme. -Acest mic sarcofag, îmi spuse el, are o vechime de aproape trei mii de ani. În el se află niște suluri făcute din piele de vițel, pe care sînt scrise versete în arameica veche de către un tînăr pescar pe care-l cheamă Seled. Sînt foarte frumoase. Le vînd cu sarcofag cu tot. i nu costă scump. -De unde știi că sînt frumoase ? l-am întrebat. tii arameica veche ? - tiu, dar nu prea bine. Am însă un prieten care știe foarte bine. El s-ar încumeta să traducă versetele în românește, ca să poată fi scrise pe hîrtie... Am privit atent micul sarcofag, care era măiestrit lucrat și purta patina vremii, a cîtorva milenii. Am desfăcut sulurile din piele de vițel și le-am admirat. Se păstrau foarte bine. La fel de bine se păstrau și literele scrisului. -Sînt întregi și sulurile și literele – spuse bătrînul – căci au stat închise în acest sarcofag, ca niște mumii egipțiene. Sarcofagul a fost descoperit într-o grădină, îngropat la adîncime de un metru, în urmă cu vreo cincizeci de ani. Cînd veți cunoaște cele scrise, veți afla și povestea sarcofagului, și povestea versetelor. Am spus că le cumpăr, sarcofagul și sulurile, dacă nu sînt prea scumpe și dacă mă recomandă tălmăcitorului. Nefiind prea scumpe, le-am cumpărat și, cu recomandația anticarului, m-am dus la bătrînul Aminadav, căci așa îl chema (...). I-am dat recomandația de la anticar. 443 Mi-a tălmăcit cîntecele pescarului Seled pînă către seară și eu le-am scris pe hîrtie așa cum mi le-a dictat el. Sînt simple, naive uneori, iar comparațiile, metaforele și alegoriile poartă pecetea timpului foarte îndepărtat în care au fost scrise. Sentimentale și romantice, ele au ceva din stilul Cîntării Cîntărilor. i-apoi, nu trebuie să se uite că sînt scrise de un biet pescar. Soarele cobora spre asfințit, cînd m-am despărțit de bătrînul Aminadav. Pentru osteneala lui n-a vrut să primească nicio plată. S-a sculat în picioare și m-a petrecut pînă la portiță. Cînd mi-a întins mîna, mi-a spus: -Dacă le vei tipări cîndva, să nu uiți să pomenești și numele meu. Aceasta să fie plata pentru osteneala mea. M-am ținut de cuvînt. În primăvara anului 1925, în luna aprilie, timp de două săptămîni, am șlefuit cîntecele pescarului seled după tălmăcirea făcută, în vis, de bătrînul Aminadav” (fragment din ,,prefața” la Cîntecele pescarului Seled, apărute în 1972). Aceste interesante elemente de paratext predispun, încă de la început, către o meditație asemănătoare celei din Cîntarea Cîntărilor, în sensul că, probabil, nu se va ști niciodată care este doza de verosimil, cîtă autenticitate există în poemul biblic și, de asemenea, în cel interbelic, însă tocmai aici stă măsura artisticității. În Prefața la Cîntecele pescarului Seled, la pagina 8, erban Cioculescu afirmă – ,,Poemele lui Seled sînt o replică în stil antic a Cîntării Cîntărilor, același văl somptuos al versului liber, încărcat de miresmele mirodeniilor și florilor rare ale Orientului apropiat, ele ne acoperă și ne descoperă, rînd pe rînd, oamenii împătimiți de absolut, neliniștiți, aprinși pînă la mistuire de vîlvătăile dragostei. Limbajul voit simplu al lui Seled este acela al esențelor, al sentimentelor și gîndurilor fundamentale. Încărcătura lui poetică se transpune în mileniul legendelor biblice, cu aroma lor îmbătătoare”. Desigur, nu vom realiza aici o paralelă directă între Shir ha Shirim, cum se numește în ebraică vechiul poem (sau Canticum Canticorum, în latină), și versurile lui Alexandru Leontescu, subliniind însă că există o anumită ambivalență a tiparelor artistice invocate de către acest scriitor, în sensul că arhetipalul ia, la un moment dat, întorsătura anarhetipalului, adică a ceea ce se desprinde din original, se pulverizează, se decantează la rîndul său în mod original, și primește amprenta specifică stilului leontescian. Cea mai importantă trăsătură deosebitoare a celor două scrieri este faptul că cea dintîi este mai încărcată, aparține cu preponderență stilului baroc (de tip alexandrin), pe cînd ,,baladele” orientale menționate, deși sînt pătrunse de aceeași incandescență pasională, păstrează mai degrabă cadența metrului clasic. După cum se știe, interpretarea alegorică a Cîntării Cîntărilor din tradiția iudaică și din tradiția creștină subliniază că acele cuvinte, care aparent dau seamă de iubirea dintre Mire și Mireasă, îndrumă cititorul către sensurile tainice ale unirii dintre Iahve și neamul său, pe de o parte (viziune caracteristică încă de pe vremea profeților Osea și Isaia), și, în același timp și oarecum surprinzător, către legătura 444 dintre Hristos și Biserică, pe de altă parte. În Zohar se afirmă că acest capitol al Bibliei ebraice, aflat poate nu întîmplător în ultima secțiune a acesteia, Ketuvim, este de fapt rezumatul întregii cărți, întregii creații, deoarece poporul lui Israel este desemnat ca ,,logodnică”, pînă cînd intră în Canaan, în pămîntul făgăduinței, însă este numit ,,mireasă” din momentul cînd primește cu adevărat acest teritoriu sacru. Problema canonicității Cîntării Cîntărilor s-a pus la sinodul de la Jabneh, în jurul anului 90 d. Hr., hotîrîndu-se atunci că este canonică și utilizarea ei ritualică, alături de Cartea lui Ruth, Plîngerile lui Ieremia, Ecclesiastul și Cartea Estherei, alcătuind astfel cele cinci suluri citite la anumite sărbători, mai ales la ,,Pessah”, Paștele iudaic. De altfel, rabinii nu permiteau citirea poemului în sinagogă decît celor trecuți de o anumită vîrstă (se pare treizeci de ani), condiție socotită necesară pentru înțelegerea corectă a sensului său. Cîntarea cîntărilor, deși se exprimă într-un limbaj prea îndrăzneț, pentru gustul larg occidental, oferă un bun echilibru între extremele exceselor sezuale și negarea ascetică a binelui esențial al dragostei fizice. De aici pornesc și Cîntecele pescarului Seled care descriu, mai întîi de toate, o ,,dragoste trupească, povestea inițierii erotice a unui tînăr cuminte, care n-a cunoscut femeia înaintea vîrstei de 22 de ani...” Iată primul poem elocvent din suita respectivă – Noapte - ,,Arome calde vin dinspre Galaàd,/ Ca o răsuflare fierbinte de femeie.../ Apele Iordanului au jocuri de sidef/ i singurătatea mă apasă pe suflet./ i nu se aude nimic/ i nu se vede nimeni.../ Somnul coboară nevăzut/ i s-anină de pleoapele mele./ Un șacal s-a auzit în pustiu/ i inima mea și inima nopții/ Au zvîcnit de spaimă./ Dar luna a zîmbit, departe,/ În semn de împăcare și liniște,/ Deasupra munților Galaad.../ Somnul s-anină pe furiș, de genele mele,/ Ca peștele de undiță...// i nu se aude nimic/ i nu se vede nimeni...” Elemente anticipative, momente de suspans, analogii, reprezentări in absentia, în sfîrșit un echilibru armonios între mysterium tremendum și mysterium fascinans, la nivel artistic, toate acestea îmbinate cu aspecte reale (Galaàd, numit și ,,muntele mărturisirii”, este un ținut de la est de rîul Jordan, avînd în extremitatea sudică lacul Genizareth și la nord, Marea Moartă), sînt cîteva coordonate ale poeticii lui Alexandru Leontescu, unele aparținînd chiar paradigmelor biblice, preluate în mod creator. Aceasta este atmosfera în care începe povestea de dragoste, și fiecare poem își găsește în mod firesc locul potrivit, precum mătăniile într-un șirag. În parafraza pe care ne-o oferă Radu Cîrneci la Cîntarea cîntărilor, ,,parafrază” în sensul larg al cuvîntului, adică replică sintetică dată tuturor traducerilor românești din acest poem, așadar ,,metafrazelor” anterioare, cea dintîi secvență este Lumina mea, adiemă curînd, în care glăsuiește tot mirele - ,,De timp, aștept săruturile tale/ și dezmierdări aștept, minunea mea,/ precum un călător pe aspră cale/ visează oaza însetat, să bea.// Un foc e-n mine, fără-asemănare,/ în sînge dănțuind și-n duh ceresc:/ sosește-mi dară, ploaie-alinătoare - / o, cîntecele-păsări te zoresc !// Se îmbrățișează cerul cu pămîntul/ și zarea se acoperă de gînd - / sosește-mi iar cu zările și vîntul,/ lumina mea, adie-mă curînd”. În acest context, trebuie să 445 reamintim considerațiile lui R. Cîrneci de la paginile IX-XIII cu privire la sursa principală a inspirației sale, și anume reeditarea monumentalei Biblii de la București (numită și Biblia lui erban Cantacuzino) din care, ,,am avut, în sfîrșit, prilejul fast de-a citi Cîntarea Cîntărilor și în această carte a cărților românești. Ce bucurie a ochiului, ce sărbătoare a sufletului nostru! Fiindcă, ne-am convins că la acea dată, 1688 – scrisă cu semne roșii în calendarul ființei românești ! – limba noastră era deja o limbă de sine stătătoare, matură, cu o extraordinară forță de expresie a celor mai neașteptate stări de spirit. Ediția de față a acestei parafraze a fost revăzută, urmărind și aprofundînd textul cantacuzin, îmbogățindu-se în unele cînturi cu binecuvîntate miresme din acest miraculos op”. În seria de poeme ale lui Alexandru Leontescu asistăm, de asemenea, la o simplicitate absolută, la scuturarea de podoabe, de data aceasta în opoziție cu stilul Cîntării Cîntărilor, care totuși face deliciul întregului macro-poem, așa după cum putem afla în următoarele secțiuni – Coșurile - ,,Coșurile mele erau goale/ i numai într-unul singur/ Am găsit o știucă mare, argintie./ Care se zbătea în închisoarea de lozii”; Drahma - ,,Cer de la tata o drahmă/ i mă duc la neguțători/ Ca să cumpăr vase cu miere adusă din Egipt/ (...)/ Cine e mai dulce: mierea sau femeia ?...” Simbolistica la vedere, pînă la un punct, stilul aforistic sînt cîteva trăsături pe care le găsim în ambele creații. În versurile ulterioare, din Necunoscutul și Culegătorul de rouă, observăm din nou trimiteri culturale biblice (la Ieremia cap. 8, versetul 22), cu referire la balsamul de Galaàd - ,,Poți să-mi aduci roua dimineții/ Ce cade în zori, pe balsámii din Galaàd”; iar în Culegătorul de rouă - ,,Învață-mă să scriu și să citesc/ i spune-mi pentru ce-ți trebuie rouă de Galaàd?// Elihoref mi-a răspuns: ,,Pentru o femeie!”. Iubirea prin ,,contagiune” este un alt motiv al acestui poem extins, precum în Taina - ,,Elihoref iubește pe Tafat,/ Femeia lui Ben-Abinadab”, iar în Cărturarul, în care se spune ,,Sînt pescar, culegător de rouă și cărturar”, aflăm un triptic cvasi-metaforic, cele trei nume pentru ,,creator” în genere, care poate fi desigur și îndrăgostitul, cel ce își plăsmuiește propria creație, avînd drept conotații principale ,,căutarea”, ,,inefabilul” și ,,învățătura” ori, în alți termeni, experiența existențială. Iarăși, în secțiuni precum Papirusul, regăsim considerații aforistice - ,,Iubiți femeia și prețuiți iubirea,/ Dacă vreți să fiți înțelepți/ i să biruiți moartea!...” // i eu am douăzeci și două de primăveri/ i nu știu ce e femeia/ i nu știu ce e iubirea...”. Senzualismul dus aproape de extrem este ilustrat astfel în poemul Vinul - ,,Într-o noapte, am rămas la Ierusalim/ i am băut vin, într-o crîșmă,/ Cu Manahat, prietenul meu./ Un cîntăreț purta mîinile pe coarde,/ i o femeie goală, în văluri străvezii/ Juca pe lespezi.// Vinul era aromat și dulce/ i pe ochii mei se țeseau fire de păianjen. Era tîrziu, poate prea tîrziu.../ Melodia coardelor era tristă/ i femeia dansa.../ Cu părul negru revărsat pe spate.../ Pulpele ei erau ca fildeșul/ i sînii – rotunzi -/ Ca două piepturi de porumbel...// Vinul era aromat și dulce/ i ochii mei aveau perdele de ceață.// Manahat a plecat, eu am rămas// i în noaptea aceea am cunoscut femeia/.../ Era mai dulce ca mierea, mai îmbătătoare ca vinul...”; apoi, în Femeia: ,,La ea am dormit noaptea/ i ea m-a trezit din beția 446 vinului/ i m-a îmbătat cu vinul voluptății”. În această porțiune, anumite inflexiuni lirice, și asemănarea cu tiparele inițiale devin evidente - ,,Sărută-mă cu sărutările gurii tale, că sărutările tale sînt mai bune ca vinul”, grăiește mireasa, Sulamita, către mirele ei; și mai departe: ,,Miresmele tale sînt balsam mirositor, mir vărsat este numele tău; de aceea fecioarele te iubesc!”, în primele versete din Asma Asmaton, cum se mai numește Cîntarea Cîntărilor în greacă. În prima parte, Miriam sau iubirea trupului, se revine la nivel stilistic, la paralelismele ideatice, redate adesea prin structuri repetitive (,,Prietene Manahat, ce zici?/ E frumoasă Miriam,/ Căci în papirus scrie,/ Că toate curtezanele sînt sînt frumoase?...), care construiesc o alegorie purificată de încărcătura biblică de tip baroc, aceasta fiind amprenta specifică poemelor lui Leontescu, iar Iubirea este descrisă astfel - ,,De ce iubirea lunecă printre sufletele noastre,/ Cum lunecă peștele printre degete,/ Cînd vrea să-l prind din apele Iordanului?”. Deși există o desfășurare epică subiacentă, ea răspunde doar necesității de a potența intensitatea sentimentelor surprinse, palierele liric – epic – dramatic rămînînd în final într-un echilibru aproape sigur. Între ,,personajele” cu nume exotice: Seled, Miriam, Gomera, Manahat, Elihoref, Ben-Abinadab ș. a. se insinuează și unul in absentia, însăși iubirea, nenumită, de fapt necunoscută (,,De ce iubirea lunecă pe lîngă sufletele noastre,/ Cum lunecă peștele printre degete ?”). De altminteri, pescarul este o altă efigie pentru creator, în genere, nuanțele simbolice accentuînd, ca în textele veterotestamentare, relațiile dintre imanent și inefabilul transcendent, sau, în alți termeni, dintre iubirea captativă și iubirea oblativă. Coordonatele esențiale ale cărții sînt, așadar, exaltarea senzuală și delirul imaginativ, trecute prin gingășia și simplitatea sufletească a poetului-pescar. Definiția femeii Morgana ar fi următoarea - ,,O femeie - / Nu-i nici blîndă și nici vicleană ca o pisică/ și nici rea și crudă ca o tigroaică;/ Dar are gheare de pisică și ochi de tigru”; Elihoref: ,,Ei, tinere, acum nu mă mai întrebi/ Pentru ce-mi trebuie rouă de Galaàd?...”. În locul bucuriei din Cîntarea cîntărilor însă, predomină nuanțat sentimentele de melancolie, tristețe și nostalgie, ca în Beție: ,,Melodia coardelor e tristă/ i o altă femeie joacă în locul Miriamei”; Schimb de vorbe - ,,Miriam, tu nu mă mai iubești,/ Căci ieri noapte un altul/ A strivit crinii din așternutul tău!”; Plecarea - ,,Viața are zîmbetul sfinxului de la Gizeh/ i noi numai pe astăzi, / Dar numai pe astăzi, sîntem stăpîni!”/ Auzi, Seled?... Numai pe astăzi!... Iartă-mă și uită-mă!...”; Lacrimile: ,,Unde te-ai dus și pentru cine te-ai dus?...”; Singur - ,,Amintirile îmi răscolesc carnea/ i sîngele meu de amant o cheamă/ Cu glas de pasăre desperecheată...”; Uitare - ,,Am douăzeci și patru de primăveri/ i la vîrsta mea – spune un papirus -/ Rănile dragostei se vindecă lesne...”. Din celălalt poem, Gomera sau Iubirea sufletului, cam melodramatic, reținem versuri din poemul Fericirea: ,,Pentru întîia dată astăzi,/ Ochii ei/ Se vor apleca peste papirusul/ Peste care s-au aplecat și ochii mei...// Poate fi altă fericire?...”. Rămîne astfel obsesia iubirii neîmplinite, suspendată între amor concupiscentiae și amor benevolentiae, regăsită și în celelalte scrieri ale autorului. 447 La acest scriitor, irizările simple ale limbajului poetic se întrepătrund cu aspectele dionisiace ale unui erotism excesiv. Dincolo de un anume extremism de tipul celui din urmă, se întrezărește, pînă la final, paradigma dominantă a iubirii, comună cu cea din Cîntarea Cîntărilor. Dacă nu am istorisit, concret, firul epic al acestui poem inițiatic, n-am făcut-o deoarece am urmărit o intenție anastatică asupra poemelor pescarului Seled, și, profitînd, într-o anumită măsură de alianța Hermes-Eros, care e la modă în ultimul timp, am dorit să aruncăm o nadă de semnificații cititorului care, cu siguranță, va fi subjugat de sacralitatea erosului de aici. Bibliografie [Alexandru Leontescu], ,,România liberă”, 1978, nr. 10.435 Cîrneci, Radu, ,,Cîntarea cîntărilor” (antologie cuprinzînd 16 variante în limba română, 1688-2008), cuvînt înainte Bartolomeu Anania, Editura Hasefer, București, 2009 Dascal, Mihai, „Cîntecele pescarului Seled”, ,,România literară”, 1972, nr. 20 Leontescu, Alexandru, Cîntecele pescarului Seled, pref. erban Cioculescu, Editura Cartea Românească, București, 1972 Leontescu, Alexandru, Între Orient și Occident, ,,Cuvântul”, 1934 , nr. 1559; nr. 1560; nr. 1562 Leontescu, Alexandru, La porțile Răsăritului, ,,Pagini basarabene”, 1936, nr. 1, 2, 3, 9 Lucian Predescu, Enciclopedia ,,Cugetarea”, Editura Cugetarea, București, 1940 Scarlat, Teodor, ,,La porțile Răsăritului”, ,,Românul”, 1936, nr. 156 Steinhardt, N., Jurnalul fericirii, Editura Dacia, Cluj-Napoca, 1991 448 Religious Imaginary in the Poetry of Ion Barbu Carmen-Mihaela POTLOG Cette étude présente certains aspects de l’imagination poétique religieuse dans la perception de Ion Barbu et se base sur le fait que le poète va proposer dans ses théories de critique littéraire (et il va atteindre son but, finalement) une poésie intellectuellement composée, une poésie dans laquelle prédominent les essences poétiques, une poésie qui porte une bataille soutenue contre les charges verbales. C’est pourquoi, les mots, d’origine divine, sont utilisés modérément dans la poésie. Mots-clés : poétique, poète, divine, l’imagination, bataille Ion Barbu’s reputation as a difficult poet, although not groundless, is disproportionate. The reception of his poetry requires a dual initiation: on the one hand, in the language of modern poetry and in particular (a direction which the author himself pointed out repeatedly) in the elliptical structures and the ambiguous syntax relationships of the texts; on the other hand, an initiation, at least as necessary, in a symbolic and archetypal background, from which springs that substance and depth hermeticism which G. Calinescu (and only he) distinguished from the other “hermeticism”, of the surface, only “philological”1. The fact is that Ion Barbu is one of our greatest poets, substantial and very musical, and the genuine understanding of his poetry rewards the effort that is required of his reader. Ion Barbu minimized to a certain extent the first stage of his creation, characterized by Tudor Vianu as Parnassian in form2, but with a Dionysian, Nietzschean energetic quality and vitality. Without being of equal value to the other two stages of Barbu’s creation, the earlier stage is clearly distinguishable in the context of time and even in relation to what had been published in Romanian poetry by Macedonski, Duiliu Zamfirescu and several others in the Parnassian line. Most “Parnassian” poems (Copacul [The Tree], Banchizele [The Floes], Mun ii [The Mountains], Arca [The Ark]) would likely remain simple and poor allegories (e.g. The Tree: an allegory of the dual condition of the human being, with “roots” 1 George Călinescu, Istoria literaturii române de la origini până în prezent [The History of the Romanian Literature from Its Origins Until The Present], București, Fundaţia regală pentru literatură și artă, 1941, p. 162-165. 2 Tudor Vianu, Istoria literaturii române moderne [The History of Modern Romanian Literature], București, Editura Academiei, 1944, p. 42. 449 in tellurium, but with aspirations of spiritualization, of ascension to “heaven”) had allegories at the beginning not been loaded with the effect of muzicalization, which blurs the allegory, and if, at the same time, a certain complexity did not occur due to a sliding effect, from allegory towards symbol (as , for instance, in The Ark, where “the multitude” of thoughts, carried on «the ark» of the mind, of the inquiring spirit, face «the transcendent censorship» depicted in the poem by the «the bars» of the rain He had sent, but different from a new flood, because, beyond the anxiety, the confusion, and the wandering of this «ark», a revelation, an enlightenment is expected, the ek-stasis of “the rainbows”, which will rise over “the seas in the soul”, a moment and a sign of trans-intellectual, revelatory communication with the transcendental, with Him, with Jehovah. Several other poems from the same phase of creation (Elan [Impetus], Panteism [Pantheism], Pentru marile Eleusinii [For the Great Eleusinii]) have another form, complementary with the “allegorical” poems, based on marginalizations (the multifaceted chain of Being from Impetus, the mineral and cosmic eros in Pantheism), their ceremonial and hymnal form. Overall, it is worth noting that, since its beginnings, Ion Barbu’s poetry tended towards the impersonal (it is not a self-centred poetry, a display of the self), towards a lyricism of the eternal and unimpersonal essences, through allegory and symbol, as well as that of verbal music, all in a solemn, grave tone, loaded with Dionysian accents, with a wild vitality, while also marked by a strong nostalgia for transcendence, the revelation of the Spirit. The other two phases of Barbu’s creation, the “balladic and oriental” and the Hermetic, can be seen as complementary: the colour, the picturesque, the sensuality of “the description” from the Isarlâk cycle and from the poems related to it (După melci [The Snail Hunt], In memoriam, Selim), cannot prevent us from also perceiving the serious meanings of the Balkan and oriental poetic imaginary from this cycle: a representative action, with emblematic value, is the symbolic gesture from Nastratin Hogea la Isarlâk [Nastratin Hogea at Isarlâk] “sfânt trup și hrană sieși, hagi rupea din el” (“holy body and food to himself, the palmer tore himself off”). What stands out in most poems from the Isarlâk cycle or at least aesthetically related to those set in this imaginary and symbolic space is the synthesis of picturesque and narrative, the outpouring of colour, the infusion of the grotesque, “the tangible” which is the object of a narrative that bears, more often than not, symbolic meanings. These dominant features reveal an inner reaction of the poet Ion Barbu to the aesthetic danger he had glimpsed in the dominant fashion that had characterized the previous phase of his creation: the risk of conceptual, ideational dryness which “the veiling” of allegorical representations could not remove. Suddenly, all these Balkan, balladic and oriental poems show a great abundance of sensorial notations, pictorial phrases, drawing, colour, abundance of motion and gesture, all aspects designed to overcome the tendency to conceptualize. 450 In the poems actually belonging to the Isarlâk cycle, the picturesque, the plasticity of description can still deceive, if the reception of these poems remains only on the surface, focused on the abundance of colour, the opulence and the variety of the descriptions full of enumerations, with their accumulation of a bazaar “show” of the material. The poet’s subtlety consists in including in his descriptions, when they are not related only with the nostalgic sentimental memory of “the world” of an bygone age (childhood) as, for example, in Selim, a deep need that materiality itself suggests, of the necessary, with the complementary exaltation in spirit. This is the system of suggested meanings into which is “woven” the image of the city, of the crowd on the shore and of those who lure the ascetic Nastratin with the, temporarily, tempting attractions of the pleasures: their silhouettes, their inviting gestures, the colours of the show made up by the particoloured crowds over the backdrop of a heated Levant is set in contrast, as well as complementary, to Hogea’s intransigence and his gesture of symbolic self-consumption, in a battle that of the ascetic spirit against the flesh, ruined by lust. Moreover, in this key text, Nastratin Hogea at Isarlâk, is the essence of the symbolic meaning given by the poet to such an imaginary space (Isarlâk), a place of confrontation between the passivity and the vulnerability of the body, driven by desires, pleasures and lust and thus, unwittingly, pushed towards death, towards nothingness, and, on the other hand, the concentration in the spirit, the pursuit of salvation, of a release from the prison of materiality and of the body. Some of the ballad poems stand out, above all, because of the poet’s extraordinary ability to invest them with complex meanings and grand narrative and symbolic developments endowed with an almost childlike tenderness and innocence. This is particularly the case of the poem The Snail Hunt which Vladimir Streinu rightly saw as an innocent “cosmic lamentation”3. The child, innocent and reckless, in his incantation (“melc, melc codobelc” [“snail, snail, show me your trail]) makes the snail come out of its shell, exposing itself to “the Lent winds” thus explains, in its way, a great symbolic paradigm: that of vulnerable innocence in the context of a world full of pitfalls and dangers. Remarkable is the art of the poet, his special aptitude for styling both on the playful patterns of the childish incantation (the “spell” phrase), as well as in shifting the image of the forest as the symbol inner fear with which it is read in “the Lent winds” as the process of a disfiguring metamorphosis which shifts the accents and flips and mixes the appearances, pushing them towards the grotesque. The same effect is achieved with great artistic in Domnișoara Hus (Miss Hus), a poem in which the sequences depicting the crazy old woman, overwhelmed by her own physical and mental misery, who had become the object of collective derision, while others bring back her image as an young courtesan, at the height of her bright charm (the image of the dancer in front of whom the pride of “princes” breaks), and, finally, with the deliriousness poetical quality of her spell (“Buhuhu la luna șuie...” [“Tu-whit-whoo to the mad moon”]), 3 Vladimir Streinu, Pagini de critică literară [Pages of Literary Criticism], vol. I-IV, București, Editura Pentru Literatură, 1968, p. 63. 451 a phrase designed to magically facilitate the communication with the lover lost in death, crossing over the “barrier” between the two realms, of life and death. A unique beauty, strange and disturbing, somewhere akin at its roots with Baudelaire’s the famous idea of “the aesthetics of ugliness”4, appears in such Barbian stylizations in which the grotesque of senility, the echoes of youth full of grace and charm, now obsolete, and a suggestion of existential failure (which explains both the high estimation given by poet to Matei’s work (Mateiu Caragiale) blend in the thrill of a contradictory and vulnerable beauty. There are, of course, poems where a certain ingenuity comes to the forefront of reporting to the moral commandments and constraints, such as the exemplary In memoriam, and others (Cântec de rușine [Song of Shame] and Răsturnica [Tumblelina]) in which Barbu’s lyricism is quite close to Arghezi’s lyricism in Flori de mucigai (Flowers of Mold), but if we try to define what gives, beyond such differences, to Barbu’s balladic poetry a certain type of depth, which we discover in this particular aesthetic synthesis of ideation (symbols) and “story” (the ballad as narrative). In this light, an illustrative example is the ballad Riga Crypto și lapona Enigel (Crypto the King and Enigel the Lapp), a “story” with allegoricsymbolic meaning, uttered, not by chance, at the end of a “wedding”. The comparison usually made, based on the author’s own statement, between Crypto the King and Enigel the Lapp and Eminescu’s Luceafărul (Morning Star) must still be protected from the schematic approaches too often adopted, especially since Barbu’s ballad has nothing to do with the issue of the genius, the dominant theme in Eminescu’s poem.5 Here, as in The Morning Star, there are two ontological orbits, incompatible with each other, two existential conditions that can not harmonize: one is Crypto the King, a hypostasis whose condition is associated with a realm of the hidden, of moisture and darkness, the other, Enigel the Lapp, who is coming from a land of ice and snow, of blinding cold light and is heading south, towards the lands of the sun, of the heat, and of the fatal Crypto the King. The vitality of the Nordic Enigel has (within the system of the dominant symbolic significance in Ion Barbu’s poetry) the option that overcomes the cold light of the knowledge of the brain (“the wheel” of Mercury, the head), as well as the stage of the unconscious and sensuality (“the wheel” of Venus) towards an ideal superior synthesis of vitality and spirit, of total fulfilment, symbolized by the supreme “wheel” of the Sun. Thus, “the temptation” of King Crypto, through love, by Enigel the Lapp proves not only the limits King Crypto’s ontic condition, who falls victim to his aspiration to another condition or is not limited to suggestions of cruelty and risk involved by love and the attempts at transgressing, under its spell (of love), the limits of one’s own condition, but, in this allegoric-symbolic story, it warns the wedding guests from “the frame” of the poem about the complex 4 Estetica urîtului [The aesthetics of ugliness]. George Călinescu, Istoria literaturii române de la origini până în prezent [The History of the Romanian Literature from Its Origins Until The Present], București, Fundaţia regală pentru literatură și artă, 1941. 5 452 synthesis of instinctual vitality, an aspiration that aims at uplifting the spirit and, at the same time, the awareness of death, a synthesis that involves genuine love, the ceremony of “the wedding” as a fusion of all these components in a ritualistic and transformative act. The last stage of creation of the poet Ion Barbu, the hermetic state, is dominated by a poetics of compression (Barbu’s ideal of the poem as “august text, inscription”), through a special syntax that eliminates copulas, fosters ellipses, the relations within the text become relative, while the author returns to his older interest in musicality and solemnity of the verse, the poetic utterance, but now, unlike in the Parnassian beginnings, the verbal harmonies have something mysterious in them, an initiatic language, secret in its allusiveness. This new ideal of poetry is formulated in several programmatic texts, that opened the cycle Joc secund (Second Game), particularly in the symbolic valences of “the mirror” metaphor in Din ceas, dedus (From Time, Abstracted). The deep, the echo over time to the Platonic idea of art – copy of a copy6 (therefore, situated at opposite of the perfect essences that were, in Plato, eidoi) the echo according to which, the art process is actually a returning to the essence, through dematerialization, through projection in spirit (“mirror”) to the things of the world. In the same text, the author’s ideal of poetry is worded in terms that escape the conflictual and the temporal as the ephemeral present (From Time, Abstracted) aiming at a symmetry which is only accessible to the spirit, of “the deep” and “the high” (“the deep of this calm crest”), reflecting the zenith in a “latent Nadir”, doubly spiritualized, essence separated from materiality, like those “water groups” with “the second game, more pure”, towards the impure “rustic herds”. The condition of fulfilling such aspirations, towards a poetry of the eternal and imperishable essences, the poet must overshadow his own will to gain access to that potentially cosmic, universal, impersonal song which he has a mission to disavow, to condense it in the poem: “Poetul ridică însumarea/ De harfe răsfirate ce-n zbor invers le pierzi/ i cântec istovește, ascuns cum numai marea/ Meduzele când plimbă sub clopotele verzi.”7 The ideal of such a poem is timeless and trans-subjective8, overcoming the ego of the poet towards a broader, impersonal, cosmic poetry. In addition to these programmatic meanings, the other poetic art in the hermetic cycle Second Game, entitled Timbru (Timbre), opposes an easy and too easily approachable art (whose synecdoche is “the bagpipe” and “the whistle”, associated to spaces that are too open, too accessible to everybody: “the meadow”, “the road”, “the eternal bagpipes”), to a higher form of art, able to rise above the limitations of 6 Ioana Em. Petrescu, Ion Barbu și poetica postmodernismului [Ion Barbu and the Poetics of Postmodernism], București, Editura Cartea Românească, 1993, p. 60. 7 “The poet elevates the summation / Of scattered harps you lose in a reverted flight / And painfully distils a song: hidden, as only the sea / Sways the jellyfish under the green bells.” 8 Mircea Scarlat, Ion Barbu. Poezie și deziderat [Ion Barbu. Poetry and Aspiration], București, Editura Albatros, 1981, p. 67. 453 the biography and the accidental, as well as the humble (“pain divided”) acceding to what is universal and everlasting9, essentially: the prayer states (“piatra-n rugăciune” [“the rock in prayer”]), excruciating pain (“a humei despuiare” [“the stripping of the clay”]) and the mystical betrothal (“unda logodită sub cer” [“the wave betrothed in the sky”]), rising to the ideal stage (or at least aspiring to it) of that ultimate song, dreamed as “capacious”, that is ample, depersonalized, of a great horizontal, as well as vertical opening of the deep: “ar trebui un cântec încăpător precum / foșnirea mătăsoasă a mărilor cu sare” [“there should be a capacious song, like / the silky rustle of the salty seas”], lyrics in which the metaphor of the ideal perfection is one of the areas that are only accessible to the imagination, with the secret music of their depths, and the second metaphor of the same ultimate song should be temporal, with reference to the mythical, auroral of the birth of beauty (“Eve, still between flesh and fantasy”) and the response of beauty to beauty, of the choir of angels to the making of Eve, “Ori lauda grădinii de îngeri, când răsare / Din coasta bărbătească al Evei trunchi de fum” [“or the praise of angel garden, when / From the male rib, Eve’s body of smoke rises”]. Ion Barbu achieved his dream of such a poem of the universal and eternal essences, incompatible as expression (“august text, inscription”) and surpassing the romantic poetics limited to “exhibiting the self”10 (a perspective that rejected the formulas of elegy and romance in his polemical texts Poezia leneșă (Lazy Poetry) and Poetica d-lui Arghezi (The Poetics of Mr. Arghezi) in quite a few of the poems in the hermetic cycle Second Game, as, for example, in Grup (Group), an image of the human aspiration, generically universal, to overcome what is carnal and perishable (“temniţa în ars, nedemn pământ” [“prison in burnt, unworthy clay”]) towards a world of spirit, but also put into question (“Dar capetele noastre, dacă sunt, / Ovaluri stau, de var, ca o greșală” [“But our heads, if any, stand out, / Lime ovals, like a mistake”]) with the thrilled accent of the wonder of the human spirit before the proliferation of mysteries (“clăile de fire stângi” [“the haystacks of left straws”]) whose origin is the transcendent, the divine “ochi în virgin triunghi tăiat spre lume” [“eye in virgin triangle cut to the world”] or in poems such as Poartă (Gate) or Statură (Stature), designed to capture the state of a musicalization of the finish by eros and love (“Suflete-n pătratul zilei se conjugă / Pașii lor sunt muzici, imnurile - rugă” [“Souls are conjugated in the quarter of the day / Their steps are music, the hymns - prayer”] in the poem Gate) or the passing of childish innocence: “shy, her infancy passed” towards the flicker of those “daily, heavy suns” that “burned under the line”11 in the poem Stature. What the author promised through the quote, chosen as the motto, from a text by Mallarme (“De n-ar fi decât sa vă dau ideea” [“If I were to give you only the idea”]) crystallized an aspiration which the poet of Second Game, which he 9 Ibidem, p. 70. Dinu Pillat, Ion Barbu, București, 1969, p. 39-41. 11 “Sfiit pruncia ei trecea. / Sori zilnici, grei, ardeau sub dungă”. 10 454 actually fulfilled in his Hermetic creation,12 dense, substantially, but not at all “charadesque”: Ion Barbu is a great poet, not only in the Romanian literary horizon, but also that in the history of European and world poetry. Bibliography Barbu, Ion 1975, Poezii [Poems], București, Editura Albatros Călinescu, George 1941, Istoria literaturii române de la origini până în prezent [The History of the Romanian Literature from Its Origins Until The Present], București, Fundaţia Regală pentru Literatură și Artă Mincu, Marian 1981, Ion Barbu. Eseu despre textualitatea poetică [Ion Barbu. Essay on Poetic Textuality], București, Fundaţia Regală pentru Literatură și Artă Petrescu, Ioana Em. 1993, Ion Barbu și poetica postmodernismului [Ion Barbu and the Poetics of Postmodernism], București, Cartea Românească Pillat, Dinu 1969, Ion Barbu, București Scarlat, Mircea 1981, Ion Barbu. Poezie și deziderat [Ion Barbu. Poetry and Aspiration], București, Editura Albatros Streinu, Vladimir 1968, Pagini de critică literară [Pages of Literary Criticism], vol. I-IV, București, Editura Pentru Literatură Vianu, Tudor 1944, Istoria literaturii române moderne [The History of Modern Romanian Literature], (with erban Cioculescu and Vladimir Streinu), București, Editura Academiei 12 Tudor Vianu, Istoria literaturii române moderne [The History of Modern Romanian Literature], (with erban Cioculescu and Vladimir Streinu), București, Editura Academiei, 1944, p. 65. 455 The Road as a Metaphor of the Sacred Grammar in the Autobiography of Paisius Velichkovsky Nicoleta-Ginevra BACIU Paisius Velichkovsky è uno dei piú grandi nomi della cultura monastica del XVIIIesimo secolo. Nato a Poltava, nel Impero Russo, sceglie una vita di monaco da giovane. Il suo percorso biografico è poi, un vero, infaticabile e coraggioso pellegrinaggio, che lo porta sul territorio russo, greco e romeno e lo fa diventare uno dei piú famosi abati, eruditi e traduttori. Al monastero di Neamts, organizza una comunitá multinazionale e poliglotta di 800 monaci, per quali scrive la sua Autobiografia. Questo manoscritto, tanto controverso quanto importante, ha un valore storico, letterario e pedagogico incontestabile, che lo iscrive fra le grandi opere dedicate ai giovani dei tutti tempi. Parole- chiave: Paisius, Velichkovsky, Neamts, Autobiografia, cultura monastica. Paisius Velichkovsky is a name of huge importance for the history of Church as well as for the history of culture. In spite of his tormented life, that has been an endless pilgrimage on the Russian, Greek and Romanian land, under the troubled circumstances of the numerous XVIIIth century RussianTurkish wars, he managed to fulfil an overwhelming mission as a monk, a priest, an abbot, a self-made scholar and a refined translator, a capable teacher and an extremely efficient organizer of school. His life and work gave a start to a whole religious and cultural rebirth on the national territories of the Eastern Church, known in history by the name of the Philokalic Awakening, a spiritual wave that has reached by its radiant influence even most famous names of thinkers and creators of the XIXth century, such as Tolstoy and Dostoevsky. At more than two centuries after his death, the paisian legacy is still a treasure to be discovered by all the believers, translators and teachers around the world. A pilgrims’ destiny Born in 1722, in Poltava, on the territory of a Ukraine split at that time between the Russian Empire and Poland and thus, between the Eastern Russian Church and the Catholic Polish one, Paisius Velichkovsky is the eleventh child of a Ukrainian family with a long tradition in Orthodox priesthood. The family is devastated by numerous child deaths that come one after another, leaving him as unique survivor and inheritor of the priesthood legacy that the 457 Velichkovsky name holds in the sacred Cathedral of Poltava. For this reason, in 1734, at the age of twelve, he finds himself as a pupil studying theology in the Academy of Kiev. After years of numerous readings and hard work, Paisius comes to the conclusion that the Academy has by far abandoned the true spirit of the Orthodox Church, the sense of authentic living in Christ , placing in the foreground of the curriculum the philosophycal and rationalistic values, rather specific to the Western Church. Thus, in 1739, at the age of seventeen, he simply flees from the Academy and starts a life of pilgrimage , finding refuge in the monasteries on both shores of Dnipro river: Liubetski, Medvedovski, Lavra Pecerska. Many of the sacred Ukrainian Orthodox monasteries close down under the order of the Polish Catholic authorities, so young brother Paisius finds neither the peace of mind and soul, nor the spiritual master he is looking for, and that gets him to the decision of leaving his fatherland and own people for good. In 1742, at the age of twenty, he becomes a refugee again by crossing, in secrecy, the border towards Romanian horizons. Here, he will live the most peaceful four years of his live, in the region of Vrancea-Buzău1, between walls of mountain and monastery, at Dălhăutsi, Trăisteni and Cîrnu. In these Romanian sacred places, he will soon very well learn Romanian and get acquainted with the basic values and techniques of hesychasm. It is also here, that he will learn about the Sacred Mount Athos and all the valuable manuscripts held in the monastic libraries there. It is perhaps, for this very reason that he feels irresistibly attracted to the sacred places of Athos, for which he sets off in 1746, at the age of twenty-four. The next seventeen years of his life he will be spending living in different hermitages of the Sacred Greek Mount and leading a personal quest for selfrefinement in spirit, as well as in erudition. In time he becomes a monk, then a priest and an abbot for a community of sixty-eight monks, he learns Greek and keeps searching for the Byzantine original manuscripts of the patristic Orthodox tradition. Due to the huge taxes imposed on all the monastic communities of Athos by the Turkish authorities, abbot Paisius thinks of departing once more, this time together with all his monks and all the manuscripts he could find, towards the only place that has ever offered him the peace he had always searched for: the Romanian Countries. The last thirty-one years of his life, he spends in Moldova, in the holy monasteries of Dragomirna, Secu and finally, Neamts. At Neamts, beginning with 1779, he organizes a multinational and polyglot monastic community of over 800 monks, including Romanians, Russians, Ukrainians, Bulgarians, Serbians, Greeks, Albanese and even, baptized Jews. With their help, he founds 1 The Romanian mountainous region of Vrancea-Buzău holds a hesychastic tradition that goes back to the XIVth century and continues uninterrupted until mid XVIIIth century, when young Paisius gets there. For more details, see the study of D. Stăniloae, Din istoria isihasmului în ortodoxia română, in Filocalia,tome VIII, p. 553-588, IBM, București, 1979. 458 a School for Translators that he runs himself, with the purpose of translating the Byzantine manuscripts brought from Athos, from Greek into both Slavonic and Romanian, of making handwritten copies of the translations and of spreading them all over the national territories of the Eastern Church, especially over Romanian and Russian lands. This happens indeed, during the last fifteen years of Paisius’ life (1779-1794) and it is exactly this unique School for translators and its outcome that makes out of Neamts monastery, the acknowledged radiating center of spirituality for the whole Orthodox Church towards late XVIIIth century. The most impressive and massive translation ever realized in this school is the Slavonic version of Philokalia ( the basic collection of patristic learnings of the Eastern Church) that abbot Paisius himself keeps working on and manages in the end, to see it done and even printed in Sankt Petersburg, in 1793, just one year before his death. Towards the end of his life, the abbot of Neamts, surrounded by his beloved disciples and books, decides to write his Autobiography, with the declared purpose of giving an authentic testimony about the events of his life and of offering a long-lasting support and counsel for his spiritual sons and followers. The text was to become one of the most controversial manuscripts ever offered by the monastic culture, in this part of the world. A controversial manuscript As we have mentioned before, the manuscript of the Autobiography,signed by the famous abbot of Neamts, is a subject of debate and controverse in the world of scientists and that happens on more than one topic. First, the location of the original manuscript is a very problematic issue. The Russsian scientists claim to hold, in the library of Sankt Petersburg Academy of Sciences, the only copy written and corrected by the hand of Paisius himself , while the Romanian scholars, especially the ones belonging to the clergy, assume that the authentic autograph paisian manuscript can be found in the library of Secu monastery, in Moldova, where Paisius has lived as an abbot, for only four years, between 1775 and 1779. Both parts have their own arguments to support their version, but the fact is, that until present day, there is no undeniable indication of where exactly the original manuscript might be. The absence of a catalogue, with the exact location in the world, of the fourty-four autograph paisian manuscripts, known to have existed at Neamts at the moment of his death, makes only things worse. Second, experts in the study of Paisius’ life and work cannot agree upon the extent to which this work has been truly accomplished. The text of the Autobiography stipulates at the very beginning that it is going to tell the full story of Paisius’ life, since the moment of his birth, until the years of constituting and organizing the huge and well-known monastic community in Neamts. In spite of this declared in advance story trajectory, the narration of the events stops at the moment when, after a first year of living in the Romanian 459 monasteries of Vrancea-Buzău, during his first four years stay in the Romanian Countries, as a young apprentice aspiring to a monk’s life, he decides to move again from one hermitage to another. The text stops in a very abrupt manner, with the words „So, I left...”, while the destination of this new departure is neither stated, nor inferable in any way. It is a paradoxical stop that resulted in a new dilemma for the world of scholars. The question that split them again into two separate teams, with contradictory opinions is: should such a text be considered an unfinished work, that got simply interrupted by the prolonged illness and death of its author, or is it a split manuscript of which second part got lost or misplaced in a different library, or a different collection of other manuscripts? The supporters of this second position are still looking for the missing part of the paisian Autobiography, especially within the monastic collections of manuscripts held in Romanian and Russian libraries, but the sad fact is that even if such a second part might have existed, it could have very probably dissapeared in the huge fire that happened in Neamts monastery, in 1862, destroying two thirds of the monastic library there. An inventory of what had existed there before the great fire did not exist, and that made it impossible to list what has been lost with the fire. What we are left with is a text of 113 leaves, written on both pages and having known translations and modern editions in four different languages: Romanian, Italian, French and English.2 Their historical, documentary, cultural and literary value is probably, the only aspect of this work that can neither be put to question, nor become subject of any controverse. The road as a metaphor of the sacred grammar Another puzzling issue about this famous text is its atypical tone and structure. When hearing about the memories of a person who lived for over fifty years a monk’s life in different monasteries and hermitages, one would expect to deal with a text written on a very neutral tone, rather austere, of the kind we can find everywhere in the Lives of Saints. Instead of this, the text surprises us displaying a vast repertoire of literary species, varying from lyrical descriptions of profound sensitiveness and authentic poems in prose, to 2 The bibliographycal index for these editions is as it follows: (Romanian) Paisie Velicikovski, Autobiografia unui stareț, traducere Elena Lința, Ed. Deisis, Sibiu, 1996 și Autobiografia și viețile unui stareț, traducere Elena Lința, Ed. Deisis, Sibiu, 2002; (Italian) Paisij Veličkovskij, Autobiografia di uno starets. Presentazione di T.Špidlik. Introduzione, traduzione e note a cura della comunitá dei Fratelli Contemplativi di Gesù, Edizioni Scritti Monastici, Abbazia di Praglia, 1988; (French) Paisiy Velichkovskij, Autobiographie d’un starets, présentation de T.Špidlik, „Spiritualité orientale”, tome 54, Abbaye de Bellefontaine, 1991, and (English) The life of Paisyi Veličkovsky, translated by J.M.E. Featherstone, with an introduction by A.-E. N. Tachiaos ( Harvard Library of Early Ukrainian Literature, English Translations, tom IV), Cambridge MA, 1989. 460 unexpected scenes, seeming as if depicted from a novel of adventures or even a thriller. The whole text structure is built around the motif of pilgrimage, the theme of the road representing thus, the architectonic principle of the plot texture. The space is that of pilgrimage, the time is that of crisis and these two combine themselves in a recurrent pattern that represents the dynamic factor of the text and its advancing scheme: the teenager facing the world is confrunted with a crisis, he thinks of a solution that he soon after that turns into reality, there is an interval of calm and quiet following, but sooner or later the solution is invariably invalidated by external factors, the crisis shows up again, resulting in the necessity for a new solution. The different stages of this narrative pattern are linked together by the theme of the road, that assures the coherence of the text and its unity at the level of signification. Within the imagological universe of the text, there are different images of roads that have to be followed by the young pilgrim: the snowy road, the road at day time, at night time, the road through dark frozen fearful woods, the road on water, on wild rivers threatening the lives of the travellers. Numerous roads spreading out towards horizon, all of them being friends or enemies of the main character, becoming themselves characters and building up the semantic and symbolic space of the text. First, the road appears in the text as the place of separation, of parting from the beloved ones, but also as a dimension of identity distinction. It is on the road towards Kiev, close to the small town of Reshetilovka, that young Paisius last sees his mother and bids her a sorrowful and secret farewell. The mother doesn’t know she will never see him again, thinking it will be just another ordinary schoolterm. But he knows he decided to flee from school and get lost into remote forsaken hermitages and be dead for the wordly ways of life. It is also on the road towards Kiev that he last waves good-bye to his best friend, the playmate of his childhood. His friend promisses to catch up with the young fugitive pilgrim later and set off for the unknown with him, but the promised reunion of the two friends will never happen and Paisius knows it from the moment of saying good-bye. His last recollections of his beloved mother and of his dear friend from his hometown are images of two people who loved him and stood waving in the middle of the road, shedding tears and foreseeing a departure with no return. The road is here not only a place of parting from the dear ones, not only a dimension of estrangement from family, friends, hometown and fatherland, but also a space that materializes a decision, a choice that builds up an identity and personalizes a destiny voluntarily assumed. Further on, the road appears as a place of martyrdom. From a story told by a host of the pilgrims, of the story within a story kind, we find out about the martyrdom of a deacon serving in an Orthodox village church, in the parts of Ukraine occupied by the Polish army. Although compelled by the Polish authorities of the county to recite during Sunday Mass the Credo according to 461 Catholic rules, he would fearlessly refuse it and tell the Credo respecting the old Orthodox tradition of the Eastern Church. For this, he would be literally dragged out of church, out on the road, and be beaten to death by Polish soldiers, under the eyes of the terrified villagers and of his own mother. The road is here a place of testimony and martyrdom and the feeling that spaces out its dimensions is fear. The young pilgrim is afraid, hesitates, regrets the decisions he has made, wondering if they were the correct ones, but he still clings to the idea of finding his way in the world and discovering the path towards an authentic living in the truth of Christ. During his journey, the main character, young Paisius, called in his youth by his wordly name, Petru, and then by his first monastic name, brother Platon, comes to know many different sacred places, huge cathedrals ( as the main church of the Lavra Pecerska) or very small hermitages (as the one in Kitaev or the Romanian ones in Vrancea-Buzău : Dălhăutsi, Trăisteni, Cîrnu). He describes them all, in the pages of his Autobiography, with the sharp sense of a keen observer, who understands and feels that such buildings are witnesses of faith and history and keepers of the archives of time. The text becomes here a valuable document for comparing the Ukrainian monasticism (of the Russian type) practiced on the Dnipro’ shores, in the XVIIIth century, with the Romanian type of monk’s life, taking place at the same time, at the foot of the Carpathians. The differences are big and relevant: while the Ukrainian monasticism of the Slavic kind is very severe and austere, the Slav monks having a pronouced tendency towards mortification and asceticism, the Romanian monasticism appears in the pages of the Autobiography, to be rather more luminous and contemplative, based on the values of Athonite hesychasm and the practice of The Prayer of the Heart (or the Jesus Prayer). All these aspects reveal themselves to the apprentice-traveller during the different stages of his journey, while the road becomes a keeper of the archives of history and civilization. The road here spaces out dimension while condensing time in stone archives. His role is to give testimony of the hundreds of years of Orthodox Christian monastic tradition, both Slavic and Romanian. Among the images of the text’s world, the road is the most persistent one, stretching out towards unknown horizons as a succession of signs and symbols, linearly displayed in space and time; a configuration that reminds us the linear chain of the linguistic signs that constitute the object of grammar. Thus, in the elaboration of the text, the road suggests us , by analogy, the notion of a sacred grammar, that is to be learned, acquainted with, just as a grammar of a historical language, step by step, with the purpose of communicating with the Sacred, the Divine realm, with God, and through Him, with the others around us and with our own self. The Sacred Grammar would therefore be a system of signs and symbols, a code of communication with the Sacred, a code that is accessible to the pilgrim by gradually assimilating the alphabet and the grammar of the Spiritual, a code 462 and a guide that will eventually help him cross the distance between the earthly Jerusalem (identifyable with every religious Mass, wherever It might take place) and the Heavenly Jerusalem, the ultimate destination of every earthly individual pilgrimage. It is a reading system of the paisian manuscript towards which, the text literally pushes us, taking into account that the vocabulary used to narrate all the adventurous events of the story and to describe the wonderful scenes of nature, is often relying on whole syntagms taken from the text of the Orthodox Christian Mass. It is as if the whole text of the Autobiography would be but a palimpsest on the original text of the Holy Mass ( another truly surprising feature of this work). The Autobiography of Paisius Velichkovsky is rather a forgotten book. Abbot Paisius, sanctified by the church of Mount Athos in 1983, by the Russian Orthodox Church in 1988 and by the Romanian Orthodox Church in 1992, has remained in history with the name of Saint Paisius of Neamts and is remembered for his huge cultural work, as the translator of Philokalia and an organizer of school. He is also worshipped for his profound spiritual life and his endless love for people. Very little or almost nothing is said though, about his literary talent, that was undeniable, glamorous, brilliant and without which his translations could no have been so perfect. This huge literary talent is radiating in the pages of the Autobiography at its best and gives a most memorable shape, to a work of tremendous historical, documentary, pedogogical and literary value. A work offered as a gift by Paisius Velichkovsky to his disciples, to the generations to come after him, but also to each and every person looking for God, in this ever tormented world. Bibliography Primary sources: Drăgoi, E., Viața Cuviosului Paisie de la Neamț. Manuscris românesc inedit, Editura Partener, Galați, 2002 Isaac, călugărul, Viața Cuviosului Paisie de la Neamț, Editura Trinitas, Iași, 1997 Velicikovski, P., Autobiografia și viețile unui stareț, Traducere din limba slavonă de Elena Lința și Ioan I. Ică, Editura Deisis, Sibiu, 2002 Velicikovski, P., Cuvinte și scrisori duhovnicești, Traducere din limba slavonă de Valentina Pelin, Editura Doxologia, Iași, 2010 Secondary bibliography: Baciu, N.-G., Autobiografia lui Paisie Velicikovski, o poetică a devenirii, Editura PIM, Iași, 2012 Bălan, I., Repere din viața și opera Cuviosului Părinte Paisie de la Neamț, în revista „Teologie și Viață”, vol. IV, nr. 11-12,Editura Trinitas, Iași, 1994 Cetverikov, S., Paisie. Starețul Mănăstirii Neamțul din Moldova, traducere din limba rusă de Nicodim Munteanu, Editura Nemira, București, 2010 463 Sibiescu, V., Paisie Velicikovski, viețuitor la schitul Cârnu între anii 1744-1746, în volumul Spiritualitate și Istorie la Întorsura Carpaților, vol.I, Buzău,1983 Stăniloae, D., Din istoria isihasmului în ortodoxia română,în Filocalia, tom VIII, p. 553-588, traducere, introduceri și note de D. Stăniloae, IBM, București, 1979 Ursu, N. A., coala de traducători români din obștea Starețului Paisie de la mănăstirile Dragomirna, Secu și Neamț, în revista „Teologie și Viață”, vol. IV, 11-12, Editura Trinitas, Iași Cercetările implicate de realizarea acestui articol au fost finanțate din Fondul Social European de către Autoritatea de Management pentru Programul Operațional Sectorial Dezvoltarea Resurselor Umane 2007-2013 [proiect POSDRU/CPP 107/DMI 1.5/S/78342]. 464 La relación entre lo sacro y lo profano en la poesía lírica de Juan Rodríguez del Padrón Elisa MORIANO MORALES, Lumini a VLEJA Between the most encountered topics and motives of the Spanish lyricism in the first half of the 15th century, which inherits, directly or indirectly, the conception of the Provencal poets from the ending of the 11th century and beginning of the 12th century, love is included. The usage of religious language with the purpose of expressing the profane love is not new in cancioneros, but it acquires a larger variety and boldness in these collections of poems. This way, the poet shows his compassion towards the inability of the angels to enjoy the feminine presence; he associates his own suffering with the one of Christ; he confesses that he can die of love like a true martyr. We try to analyze, in the following, the ways in which the religious language adapts in the lyrical poetry of Juan Rodriguez del Padrón. Keywords: religious language, Spanish literature, Juan Rodríguez del Padrón. Entre los poetas cortesanos y eclesiásticos de la literatura española del siglo XV caracterizados por un marcado interés por temas de índole moral y religiosa están los poetas del Cancionero de Baena, la primera antología de poetas castellanos del siglo XV que nos ofrece un panorama de la trayectoria literaria seguida por la poesía desde sus primeras composiciones, escritas en galaico-portugués, hasta las escritas ya en castellano. La compilación del Cancionero de Baena se realizó entre 1445 y 1454, pero en esta antología se halla representada la producción poética de los setenta u ochenta años anteriores (Deyermond 1991: 236). El amor es el motivo más frecuente en la lírica castellana del Cuatrocientos, que hereda, de forma más o menos indirecta, la concepción desarrollada por los poetas provenzales a finales del siglo XI y comienzos del XII1. La utilización del lenguaje religioso para expresar el amor profano no es nueva en la lírica de los cancioneros, pero adquiere en ella un mayor atrevimiento y una mayor variedad. (Gerli 1981: 65-86). 1 Otis H. Green, “Courtly love in the Spanish cancioneros”, PMLA, LXIV, 1949, págs. 247-301. Puede verse una adaptación en su libro España y la tradición occidental. El espíritu castellano en la literatura desde “El Cid” hasta Calderón, I, Madrid, Gredos, 1969, págs. 94 y ss., donde presta menos atención a la lírica cuatrocentista. 465 El poeta adora a la dama; compadece a los ángeles que no pueden gozar de su presencia; relaciona su propio sufrimiento con la Pasión de Cristo; o describe la muerte de amor como un verdadero martirio. A esas expresiones más o menos impías habrá que añadir las misas, los decálogos o los siete gozos de amor. Entre los poetas más jóvenes que incluye el Cancionero de Baena destaca Juan Rodríguez de Padrón2, que compuso poemas de amor cortés (Deyermond 1991: 321). Sus Siete gozos de amor3 son una parodia sacro-profana que adapta a la expresión amorosa el lenguaje y las ceremonias de la Iglesia. Esta composición parte de un tipo de poesía sacra, la que canta los gozos y los dolores de la Virgen María en relación con el nacimiento y la pasión de Cristo. La rúbrica de BM14 dice que esta obra iba dedicada “a la princessa dona María, Reina de Castilla”, o sea, María de Aragón, hija de Fernando de Antequera y esposa de Juan II de Castilla y relaciona esta composición con la leyenda de unos amores imposibles que habrían llevado al autor a la desesperación. Los Siete gozos de amor es su poema más ambicioso. Es una alegoría y parodia de los Siete Gozos de la Virgen, que es una devoción franciscana parecida al rosario. Se remonta al siglo XV y está en el origen de la corona de siete misterios que muchos franciscanos llevan colgada en el cordón. Es una oración sencilla, para los que quieren honrar a la Virgen María, reviviendo con ella algunos misterios de la vida de Jesucristo. La Virgen experimentó siete alegrías a lo largo de los 72 años. Según Pierre Le Gentil, el título puede referirse a los dolores de la Virgen. Esta composición de Padrón es además una parodia de las cuatro etapas del amor cortés provenzal y una parodia del tratado escolástico formal. Como en un argumento escolástico5, el poeta tratará de convencer a su dama de que se apiade de él. Si los argumentos no convencen, solo habrá un remedio: la muerte. 2 Sobre Juan Rodríguez del Padrón (1395?-1452?) no se sabe mucho. Era de una familia noble y se creó una leyenda personal, mezclando hechos de su vida con los vividos por sus personajes de El siervo libre de amor, prosa de ficción sentimental. Escribió también El triunfo de las donas, pero es más conocido por sus poesías de arte menor. 3 Según Dorothy Sherman Severin, “Juan Rodríguez del Padrón, Parodist: Los siete gozos de Amor”, son conocidos 15 manuscritos del poema. Este se encuentra en el Cancionero General de Hernando del Castillo. 4 Biblioteca de l'Abadia de Montserrat, ms. 992. Cançoner del Marqués de Barberà. BM1 o S1. Siglo XV. Cancionero bilingüe, contiene poesías y prosas de Diego de Castre, Carles de Viana, Joan de Mena, Joan Rodríguez de Padrón, Pere Torrella o Torrelles, Francisco Vidal de Voyo, Joan de Sencliment, Joan Roís de Corella, Pere Martines y Pere Pou, entre otros. 5 Jacques Le Goff explica las concepciones y actitudes similares de aquella época de este modo: “Cu siguranţă, la sfârşitul Evului Mediu, cultul sfinţilor se integrase atât de profund în viaţa socială, încât devenise unul dintre elementele sale esenţiale, cu riscul de a se banaliza. Dar oare nu tocmai îmbinarea inextricabilă de sacru şi profan, politic şi religios în cadrul religiei confraterne şi civice i-a permis să se menţină şi să se dezvolte de-a lungul mai multor veacuri în Italia, Franţa, precum şi în Peninsula Iberică?....Şi dacă unii sfinţi din Evul Mediu au continuat – cîteodată pînă în zilele noastre – să fie veneraţi sau invocaţi, acest lucru se datorează faptului că generaţiile următoare au recunoscut că predecesorii lor au pus în devoţiune ceea ce era mai bun în ei înşişi şi au exprimat astfel concepţiile succesive asupra desăvîrşirii omeneşti.” (Le Goff 1999: 313-314) 466 Todos los gozos son irónicos, el amante no consigue ni uno y si consigue algo, ya no resulta apetecible. El poeta se queja al dios de amor lamentándose de que ha servido a su dama como buen vasallo, pero aún no ha recibido ninguno de los placeres o “gozos” del amor y por eso, está dispuesto a morir. La dama no concede ni el más mínimo favor. Él ha servido a su dama sin esperanza de galardón, merece una satisfacción del dios de amor; si no el galardón, algo equivalente (fama sempiterna). Rodríguez del Padrón ha perdido su fe en la religión de amor (Gilderman 1971). Centrándonos en “El seteno gozo”, el gozo del amor satisfecho, podemos señalar que lo componen tres estrofas con el siguiente esquema métrico: 8a 8b 8b 8a 8c 8d 8c 8c 8d y forma parte de todo un decir6. En la primera estrofa el poeta se dirige a su amada como un último intento ya de ser aceptado, de ser correspondido en su amor por ello. Muestra su perseverancia amorosa en “Sin poder mi gran firmeza” para acceder a la dama, que aparece como un ser superior, inalcanzable en su indiferencia o su crueldad (“la sobra de tu crueza/vencer”). El amor es visto como un combate en el que el objetivo es vencer esta crueldad de la amada y para ello el poeta se servirá de las armas alegóricas del amor que sean necesarias. Y es que en esta estrofa se observa de forma clara cómo el amante busca la correspondencia amorosa: “solo fin de mis dolores, /es amar e ser amado/el amante en igual grado, /que es la gloria de amadores”. Pero su persistencia amorosa (“solo fin de mis dolores”) no le lleva a la satisfacción, ya que, aun pidiéndolo implícitamente, no es aceptado por la amada. Juan Rodríguez del Padrón en la primera estrofa de este gozo nos introduce un ejemplo de lenguaje religioso, que además es una de las claves del mismo: “que es la gloria de amadores”. Es decir, la correspondencia amorosa llevará al poeta al amor satisfecho. En la segunda estrofa continuamos con la presencia de lenguaje religioso, recurre aquí a la Biblia, y es que el poeta lo utiliza a modo de consejo y en un tono serio: “Pues obra de caridad/as amar al enemigo, /conviene que al amigo ames de necesidad”. También observamos nuevamente la persistencia amorosa del amante en su deseo de ser amado. A continuación, el poeta sigue en la misma línea de consejo y ahora lleva a la dama a reflexionar sobre el hecho de que el amor ejemplar es una virtud y, por tanto, deberá verse forzada por ello a atender a las suplicas del galán. Eso sí, es un amor tópico, ideal y el amante la ama sin pensamientos indecorosos: “virtud la debe forçar/ a amar tu leal serviente/ en el grado tranzendente/ que te ama sin mal pensar”. Podemos comentar “tu leal serviente” y también “si voluntad no consiente” como ejemplos de que la recompensa que el enamorado espera por sus servicios es la de ser aceptado por la amada y, por eso, el poeta es un absoluto sumiso y sus cualidades son la lealtad inalterable, la timidez, la obediencia, la humildad ante la dama. Finalmente, la tercera estrofa comienza con el tópico del “morir de amores” (“La muerte siento venir”). El galán, condenado a un amor sin correspondencia, vive en una 6 El decir es una serie más o menos larga de coplas octosílabas de arte menor, reales, castellanas o mixtas con un esquema acentual fijo. Los ascendentes más importantes de los decires los constituyen los dits franceses. El Roman de la Rose fue uno de los poemas de mayor influjo de la Europa medieval. 467 tristeza y en un sufrimiento del que espera obtener una satisfacción paradójica, ya que una vida sin amor no merece la pena vivirse. La antítesis será entonces la forma ideal de expresar un sentimiento que, por su misma naturaleza, es placer y pesar, alegría y dolor. Juan Rodríguez del Padrón será en sus “gozos” brillante en el conceptismo, tendencia a la expresión condensada e ingeniosa. (Whinnom 1981: 47-62) La antítesis se acomoda perfectamente al carácter contradictorio de la pasión, tal y como la entiende la lírica cortesana. El poeta enfrenta el placer y el dolor, la razón y la pasión, la vida y la muerte, y sobre esas antítesis básicas realiza una serie de variaciones en las que despliega todo su virtuosismo: la muerte es preferible a la vida del enamorado, pero impediría seguir sirviendo a la dama. Por otra parte, ¿cómo podría morir quien vive sin vida, porque el sufrimiento se la ha quitado?; y ¿cómo no llevar luto por el galán, que vive ya como muerto? La poesía de los cancioneros es, por tanto, una poesía intelectual.7 El poeta concluye “el seteno gozo” con la muerte inminente del amante y responsabilizando a la amada de ella. La indiferencia de la dama ante los gozos que el poeta le ha cantado lleva a éste a intentarlo con sus cinco sufrimientos y para ello utiliza el imperativo como muestra de una clara desesperación: “muévante las cinco plagas, / (celos, amar e partir, / bien amar sin atender, / amar siendo desamado, / y desamar no poder).” Lo que define la poesía de esta época, en la que lo sacro y lo profano compiten por la supremacía en el interior del ser humano, es precisamente esta puesta en relación del poeta con la divinidad. La orientación hacia lo sacro actúa como una oportunidad para superar la crisis y anular la dimensión trágica de su destino por el sacrificio. Paul Zumthor sabía que esta poesía pertenecía ya a un universo ajeno a los lectores modernos (Zumthor 1983: 41). Al estudiar la voz y la lengua poéticas medievales el filólogo suizo recomendaba el estudio de la textualidad de la poesía de los trovadores no por los condicionamientos externos o la genealogía arquetipal, ni por la historia literaria o la crítica, sino por la poética. Las famosas obras de Zumthor (Histoire littéraire de la France médiévale, Essai de poétique médiévale, Langue, texte, énigme, Le masque et la lumière: la poétique des grands rhétoriqueurs, Parler du Moyen Âge, La poésie et la voix dans la civilisation médiévale, La lettre et la voix. De la «littérature» mediévale, La mesure du monde. Représentation de l'espace au Moyen Âge) se adentran en el terreno de las manifestaciones de la poesía medieval y siguen marcando profundas huellas e irradiaciones en la investigación literaria actual. Por ejemplo, en el capítulo Chestiuni de metodă de su libro Teme Nicolae Manolescu entra en diálogo de ideas con el conocido medievalista. El reputado crítico rumano compara dos libros importantes, pero muy distintos por su metodología, ambos traducidos al 7 La obra de Juan Rodríguez del Padrón coincide con el fin del Medioevo español, así que nos parece interesante la observación de Jacques Le Goff: “Adesea, în ochii noştri, ai modernilor, figura intelectualului medieval apare întunecată şi estompată din cauza raportului său cu aşa-numitele auctoritates. Însă trebuie să ţinem seama că sensul de superioritate şi constrângere al termenului «autoritate» s-a ivit în lumea modernă: auctoritates erau pentru medievali autorii, biblioteca, textele cu care lucrau. O bibliotecă dublă: cea a sfinţilor şi cea a filosofilor.” (Le Goff 1999: 190). 468 rumano hace mucho tiempo: el libro de Paul Zumthor, Încercare de poetică medievală, y el de H.I. Marrou, Trubadurii. Al hablar del origen de la aplicación del lenguaje religioso propio de la liturgia a la expresión del amor profano, Le Gentil indica posibles influencias goliárdicas y francesas, pero como él mismo advirtió y también Michael Gerli, las parodias litúrgicas de los goliardos8 tienen un carácter cómico que falta en los textos españoles del Cuatrocientos (Le Gentil 1949: 203). Los Siete gozos de amor de Juan Rodríguez del Padrón son un ejemplo de la utilización de los materiales religiosos como una simple estructura plástica y concreta que permite dar cuerpo e imaginería al análisis del sentimiento amoroso que realiza el poeta. Se puede comparar el texto con una versión tópica de los gozos en la poesía medieval castellana, como la presente en el Libro de Buen Amor en el segundo de sus “Gozos de Santa María” (coplas 33-43).9 El séptimo gozo dedicado a la Asunción de María a la Gloria será dedicado por Juan Rodríguez del Padrón a contar la gloria del amor. Al comparar ambos textos podemos observar que la estructura de significado se ha trasladado de la composición devocional a la composición amorosa gracias al nuevo significado alegórico que adquiere en su nuevo contexto. El poeta usa la literalidad de la oración como marco simbólico de su sentimiento. En Rodríguez del Padrón la alegoría está muy alejada de la burla o de la expresión sacrílega. El poeta ha elegido el símbolo religioso, porque el grado sublime que quiere dar a la expresión de su sentimiento le lleva al terreno religioso a encontrar la imaginería más apropiada para el análisis de su experiencia amorosa. En su decir, los Siete gozos de amor, el poeta demuestra que los desarrollos alegóricos permiten expresar los sentimientos mediante una estructura analítica matizada y flexible. Es un poema calcado sobre la tradición popular de las siete alegrías de la Virgen que aparecen en los evangelios apócrifos. Rodríguez del Padrón luchaba con la ironía, las imágenes plásticas y el doble sentido. La intención del género de no incurrir en lo sacrílego está presente en la escasez de menciones directas de la liturgia y en el irónico moralismo del final. Por ello, el marco 8 Parece ser que su origen se sitúa en la corte de Carlomagno y que se esparcieron por Europa durante el siglo X, en la época del emperador Otto el grande, alcanzando en el siglo XII su máximo apogeo con Federico Barbarroja. Los goliardos eran clérigos que buscaban en la poesía juglaresca un medio de vida, que entendemos no encontraban en el seno de la Iglesia, y en ocasiones, una forma de pagar sus estudios, que realizaban a salto de mata hasta que en el siglo XIII al organizarse las universidades sacaron de la calle a estas figuras. En rumano: goliard ‘poet medieval de limbă latină, rătăcitor, care cânta bucuria de a trăi.’ (DEX) Sobre la poesía medieval en rumano, sus modelos de pensamiento, su clasificación, sus funciones, sus maneras de representar lo sacro y lo profano, etc. véase Negrici 1966 y 2004. Acerca del libro de Eugen Negrici, Poezia medievală în limba română véase también Marius Chivu 2004. 9 Sobre los gozos v. los artículos de M. Morreale, Los “Gozos” de la Virgen en el Libro de Juan Ruiz, en “Revista de Filología Española”, LXIII, 1983, págs. 223-290, y LXIV, 1984, págs. 1-69. 469 litúrgico se ha utilizado por conceptismo expresivo10, porque sirve como imagen concreta e ingeniosa, sutil y perceptible, del proceso amoroso. Fuentes Padrón, Juan Rodríguez del, en línea: http://www.los-poetas.com/k/padron.htm Referencias bibliográficas Azaceta, José M. (ed.) 1966: Cancionero de Baena, 3 vols., Madrid, CH Alonso, Álvaro 1986: Poesía de cancionero, Madrid, Cátedra Beltrán, V. 1990: El estilo de la lírica cortés. Para una metodología del análisis literario, Barcelona, PPU Beltrán, V. 2002: Poesía española. 2. Edad Media: Lírica y cancionero, Barcelona, Crítica. Casas Rigall, J. 1995: Agudeza y retórica en la poesía amorosa de cancionero, Santiago de Compostela, Universidad de Santiago de Compostela Chivu, Marius 2004: O sistematică a poeziei medievale, in “România literară” n0 45 Deyermond, A.D. 1991: Historia de la literatura española, 1, Edad Media, Barcelona, Ariel Gerli, E. Michael 1981: “La «religión de amor» y el antifeminismo en las letras castellanas del siglo XV”, HR, 49, p. 65-86 Grande Quejigo, Francisco J. 2002: Religión de amores en algunos ejemplos del cancionero, en “Il Confronto Letterario”, Úniversidad de Pavia, Ed. Mauro Baroni, no 38 Lapesa, Rafael 1991: Historia de la lengua española, Madrid, Gredos Le Gentil, Pierre, 1949: La Poésie lyrique espagnole et portugaise à la fin du Moyen Âge, I: Les thèmes et les genres, Rennes, Plihon Le Goff, Jacques (coord.) 1999:Omul medieval, Iaşi, Polirom Manolescu, Nicolae 2011: Teme, ed. a III-a revăzută, Iaşi, Polirom, www.cartearomaneasca.ro Martin S., Gilderman 1971: Juan Rodríguez del Padrón: profeta-mártir del amor cortés, in “AIH, Actas IV” Morreale, M., Los “Gozos” de la Virgen en el Libro de Juan Ruiz, en “Revista de Filología Española”, LXIII, 1983, págs. 223-290, y LXIV, 1984, p. 1-69. Negrici, Eugen 1996: Poezia medievală în limba română, Craiova, Editura Vlad & Vlad, ediția a II-a revăzută 2004: Iaşi, Polirom Pedraza Jiménez, Felipe B., Rodríguez Cáceres, Milagros 2001: Manual de literatura española, I, Edad Media, Pamplona, Cénlit Ediciones Rey Hazas, Antonio, Marín, Juan María 2006: Antología de la literatura española hasta el siglo XIX, Madrid, SGEL Viña Liste, José María 1991: Cronología de la literatura española, I, Edad Media, Madrid, Cátedra Whinnom, Keith 1981: La poesía amatoria en la época de los Reyes Católicos, University of Durham, p. 47-62 Zumthor, Paul 1983: Încercare de poetică medievală, Bucureşti, Editura Univers 10 Sobre el conceptismo expresivo y las tendencias estilísticas de la poesía cancioneril véase V. Beltrán, El estilo de la lírica cortés. Para una metodología del análisis literario, Barcelona, PPU, 1990; y J. Casas Rigall, Agudeza y retórica en la poesía amorosa de cancionero, Santiago de Compostela, Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, 1995. 470 con doble sentido siento: quanto más mi muerte pido, se dobla más mi sentido. Apéndice I SIETE GOZOS DE AMOR Segundo gozo Comienzan las obras de Juan Rodríguez del Padrón y esta primera es una que hizo llamada Siete gozos de amor. El primer gozo fenesce sin fenescer dessear: el segundo es de cantar, la contra de él no fallesce. Ante las puertas del templo do recibe el sacrificio Amor, en cuyo servicio noches y días contemplo, de tu caridad demando obedescida, Señor, aquesta ciego amador, el qual te dirá cantando, si d[e]él te mueve dolor, los siete gozos d[e]amor. El qual, según la fe nuestra, en que soy el más costante, es aquel primer semblante que la señora demuestra al siervo dende adelante. Solo yo, triste, diré deste plazer no gozando, que nuestra ley, más amando de lo que manda, passé. Primer gozo El primer gozo se cante: causar la primera vista, que la señora bien quista comiença se del amante, quando a la ley verdadera fe muestra de bien amar, le plaze de se tornar ciego de ombre que era ha creer y afirmar o morir o defensar. Amador que tanto amasse no digan que ser pudiesse; yo sólo dirán que fuesse aquel que la ley passasse de amar y amor venciesse. En boz más triste que leda el segundo ya canté; si de él por ti no gozé, por falta de amor no queda. Yo sólo dirán que fue el ciego contemplador que cegó tu resplandor la ora que te miré. El que ha de aver victoria, sin tu bondad ofender en amar yo he de ser de quantos posseen la gloria o passar o fenescer.. El sol no pudo causar con toda su claridad lo que tu sola beldad; mas no es de maravillar; ¡O si tanta o la meitad fuesse la tu piedad! Tercer gozo El tercero gozo es el amante ser oido, recontando los trabajos que después de su vista le an venido, deseando. De moverte a compasión no te deves retraer yo ver bien y conoscer, aunque ciego, mi passión. El qual tiene por sentir, quien hasta aquí, el huego do suele arder quiso a todo encobrir, La pena del pensamiento y deseo no cumplido aunque el sentido he perdido, 471 y más a ti, por más gloria merescer. Conoscan ser tu loança más devida las altas de gran poder, pues la bien aventurança de esta vida es virtudes posseer. Si fue de mí ofendido amor y sus servidores algún día, fue por no ser entendido que en bivo fuego de amores yo ardía, ni tu merced entendiese la tal flama yo sentir y padescer, con temor que no ardiesse la tu fama por causa de me valer. Como sea manifiesto tú vencer las virtudes en bondad por ventura desonesto mi querer juzgará tu voluntad; mas porque veas el fin desseando de virtud no desviar, mi mote del seraphín inflamado te plega de blasonar. Lo que el seso resistiendo, tú ni otro pudo oir jamás de mí, ya biva muerte muriendo, con desseo de morir, te descobrí; Quinto gozo como el que es puesto a tormento, que por fuerça su mal viene a confesar y tornando al sentimiento, más se esfuerça, de lo encobrir o negar. El quarto gozo finando sin fin aver mis cuidados, mas siempre multiplicando, el quinto ya discordando, mis sentidos trabajados en sus males contemplando, es poder en la señora el servidor entender sus servicios qualquier ora, ofresciéndole plazer. Quarto gozo El canto va fenesciendo del tercero mas no plañir y llorar, menos caridad sintiendo que primero, del quarto gozo a tractar. Pues mi servicio no vees contrastar a las virtudes manifiestas que posees, ni demanda, según crees, que tu buen deseo mudes, ni lo contrario desees, no te sea cosa fuerte en grado lo recibir de quien piedad o muerte no cesa de te pedir. El qual es, pues que dezir mees forçado, donde el fuego concebí discreta señora serví en estado y virtud mayor de sí. Si la tu gran discrección, una virtud posseyendo, ya posee quantas son, sin aver contradición, una sola fallesciendo, y las otras por tal son para ser más virtuosa gloria que tanto deseas, El primero movimiento al segundo nunca pudo contrastar, avido conoscimiento en el mundo tú ser la más singular. 472 conviene que piadosa contra mí, forçado, seas. conviene que al amigo ames de necesidad. Si voluntad no consiente, virtud la deve forçar amar tu leal sirviente en el grado trascendente que te ama sin mal pensar. Sesto gozo Del quinto me despidiendo, sin dar fin al triste canto, el sesto en voz de planto por orden vo prosiguiendo. El qual es, si la tardança por tí cessa, de largo me ofrescer la verdadera esperança o promessa del deseado plazer. La muerte siento venir, del cuerpo no sé que hagas; muévante las cinco plagas, celos, amar y partir, bien amar sin atender amar siendo desamado, y desamar no poder, pues no te pueden mover los gozos que te he contado. Quantos aman atendiendo desaman desesperando, y yo menos esperando, más en el fuego m[e]enciendo. La voluntad no movible, desseosa, ¿quién la puede constreñir? Cabo Si te plaze que mis días yo fenezca mal logrado tan en breve plégate que con Macías1 ser meresca sepultado; y dezir deve do la sepultura sea: Una tierra los crió, una muerte los levó, una gloria los possea. Quando a Dios es imposible la tal cosa, yo no puedo resistir. Esperança y desseo son en tan gran división que según la perfectión de la tu bondad, yo creo, aunque Dios te perdonasse, y la gente no lo pudiese creer, que tu merced no pecasse, solamente por tu virtud mantener. (Juán Rodríguez del Padrón, en línea: http://www.los-poetas.com/k/padron.htm) 1 Seteno gozo Macías (aprox. 1340–1370) fue un trovador gallego del siglo XIV, conocido bajo el nombre de «El Enamorado», que tuvo un destino trágico y cuya aventura inspiró a varios escritores, entre los cuales Lope, Bances, Larra. Pertenece a la escuela galaico-castellana y sus obras están incluidas en el Cancionero de Baena: “…Macías, cuya atractiva poesía amorosa se vio eclipsada por la leyenda urdida en torno a su figura (se cuenta, en efecto, que Macías enloqueció a causa de un desesperado arrebato amoroso, que le llevo a la muerte; los poetas del siglo XV y aun los más posteriores vieron en él ante todo el prototipo del amante desdichado). (Deyermond 1991: 317-318) Del sesto me delibrando, sin poder mi gran firmeza la sobra de tu crueza vencer, mas acrescentando, el final gozo nombrado, solo fin de mis dolores, es amar y ser amado el amante en igual grado, que es la gloria de amadores. Pues la obra de caridad es amar al enemigo, 473