Journal index

„Aki nem Romániában szerkeszt lapot, annak valóban még csak megközelítőleg sem lehet fogalma arról, hogy mit csinál ma itt a cenzúra!” – írta Nagy Ferenc püspökhelyettes. A Református Szemle hasábjain immár két éve elkezdett1 sorozatunkban rámutattunk arra, hogy milyen indokok és célok álltak a román kormánynak a bécsi döntés után alkalmazott kisebbségpolitikája mögött. Jelen tanulmány célja rámutatni arra, hogy a kölcsönösségi alapú nemzetiségi politika, és a magyarsággal szemben alkalmazott diszkriminatív kormányzati intézkedések közül a tendenciózus módon alkalmazott cenzúra miképpen bénította meg a korabeli református egyházi sajtó működését Romániában.

„Minden református pap gyanús, aki csak él – érezte lelkipásztor seregünk, és csendesen, szótlanul tűrte a szidalmat, fenyegetést, támadást” – írja Nagy Ferenc 1943-ban. Jelen tanulmányunk célja bemutatni a dél-erdélyi (nem csak) református lelkészek elleni hatósági túlkapásokat. A lelkészek ebben az időben a magyar közösség exponált személyiségei voltak, némelyik településen szinte az egyetlen magyar értelmiséginek és vezetőnek számítottak. Ez a státusuk számtalan szenvedést és meghurcoltatást eredményezett számukra, mely a zaklatásoktól a hadbírósági perekig különböző formában nyilvánult meg.

A Református Szemle korábbi számaiban közölt tanulmányainkban rámutattunk arra, hogy milyen indokok és célok álltak a román kormánynak a bécsi döntés után alkalmazott kisebbségpolitikája mögött.[1, 2, 3] Elmondtuk, hogy ez a politika a délerdélyi magyarságra és implicite a református egyházra a szenvedések sokaságát zúdította, majd részletesen, csoportosítva ismertettük mindazokat az atrocitásokat, melyek ebben az időszakban református lelkészeket, tanítókat vagy a híveket, illetve a templomokat, iskolákat, egyházi épületeket érték. Jelen tanulmányunk célja rámutatni arra, hogy a kölcsönösségen alapuló nemzetiségi politika, és a magyarsággal szemben alkalmazott diszkriminatív kormányzati intézkedések miként akadályozták az Erdélyi Református Egyházkerület Romániában maradt részének mindennapi életét. Bemutatjuk a második világháború évei alatt folyamatosan érvényben levő ostromállapot-törvényeket, valamint ezek rendelkezéseinek (a gyülekezési tilalomnak, az utazási és nyelvhasználati korlátozásnak) az egyház életére gyakorolt bénító hatását.

Tavaszy Sándor szellemi öröksége a maga teljes jelentőségében akkor áll előttünk, ha megvizsgáljuk az ő szellemi fejlődését és meglátjuk, honnan indult ki és hová érkezett meg. Az életrajzi adatát csak keretül említjük.

Community, Ecclesiastical and Political Circumstances between 1940–1945 . The study presents the relationship between the Romanian government and the Hungarian minority of Romania, especially the Hungarian Reformed Church between 1940 and 45. In August 1940 the Second Vienna Award tore Transylvania in two parts. Northern Transylvania became part of the Hungarian Kingdom, and Southern Transylvania remained under Romanian rule. About 500 000 ethnic Hungarians remained under Romanian rule and 200 000 of them were Calvinist Protestants. The relationship of these Hungarians with the Romanian majority was characterized by the wrath of the Romanians felt for the loss of considerable territories.

The First Two Months of Existence of the Southern Transylvanian Reformed Church District (September–October 1940) The study presents the first two months of the existence of the Southern Transylvanian Reformed Church District. This church district is not a historical part of the Hungarian Reformed Church, it was created after the Second Dictate of Vienna, which inorganically tore Transylvania in two. Northern Transylvania has become again part of Hungary, while Southern Transylvania remained under Romanian rule. Together with the country, the Reformed Church in Transylvania also tore in two: the northern part, with Kolozsvár, the center, became part of the Hungarian Reformed Church, but the southern part was left in Romania, without a center, a bishop or a theological institute. Chaos was to be expected in this area of the Reformed Church. Most of the pastors would have taken refuge in North, several congregations would have ceased to exist, schools and churches would have to be closed. Bishop János Vásárhelyi did not want this to happen. Therefore, to maintain the continuity in the southern part of the Transylvanian Reformed Church, he decided to create a provisory committee, with the duty of leading this part of the church. The Committee had its center in Nagyenyed, and the dean of the Gyulafehérvár Diocese, Ferenc Nagy has been appointed vice bishop. The duty of this committee was to keep contact with the Romanian authorities, to supervise the religious and educational activities of the church, and to preserve the Reformed Church with all the means. Creating this provisory committee was the best choice the bishop could made. As it later turned out, the committee had to lead the southern part until April 1945, when the Transylvanian Church has been reunited. The provisory status of the committee had been preserved until 1945, because the Romanian authorities did not allow the creation of a new Church District, and no bishop has been elected. The existence of the committee was crucial in preserving the Reformed Calvinist communities in Southern Transylvania. The following study has three parts. The first part deals with the circumstances of the Second Dictate of Vienna, the second part presents the consequences of the Dictate on the life of the Transylvanian Reformed Church, and the circumstances of the creation of the provisory committee, and the third part is a historical source, the first report of vice bishop Ferenc Nagy to bishop János Vásárhelyi. This source is very important, because it is a true testimony of the struggle that was awaiting the Reformed followers in Southern Transylvania during WW2.

Short History of the Lutheran Church District in Transylvania.The Hungarian Lutheran church in Transylvania has a unique history. At the beginning of it existence in the 16 century the Hungarian Lutherans joined the German Lutheran Church and have organized themselves as a deanery. They kept this structural form up till the end of the 19th century when they decided to split and have started to set up their own independent church district. As a first step they have formed a separate deanery which incorporated several Hungarian Lutheran local churches around Brassó, then mainly after the 20-es of the 20th century, they have restructured the local churches in the South-Western part of Romania and this is how three more deaneries came into being. This was enough to begin thinking on how these all could come together as a basic structure of a church district, which can be further broaden by incorporating more and more reorganized deaneries. The foundation of the new church district finally was set in their general assembly held in 1920 in the city of Arad. They also put a name of the new church formation: The Lutheran Church District in Transylvania and Banat region set up on the Augustana Confession.

The Missiological [re]Interpretation of Abraham’s Offering, As a Potential Paradigm-Shift in [post]Modern Philosophical and Theological Reasoning. Consideration has to be taken in new view of the striking and in many ways mysterious and scandalous narrative of Abraham’s offering his son, Isaac on the mountain of Moriah. It was with Kierkegaard that this Old Testament story came to the forefront of philosophical investigations. The Danish philosopher marvelled on the obedience of the Patriarch in not even wavering (although certainly accepting the deadly burden of the angst which entails this action) to act without really understanding why Yahweh has asked for such a terrible sacrifice. Abraham is eulogized as the ‘knight of faith’, but Levinas has a different view of the story, more closely of the ‘Kierkegaardian Abraham,’ and as such opts more for a kind of ‘knight of action’ in a responsible undertaking of compassion and empathy toward the Other human being, and of the act of looking into the God-given image of the Other One. Thus he seems to put the emphasis on the second part of the narrative when God’s Angel intervenes and Levinas marvels (and opts) for this second kind of obedience based on a second Word coming from the same Yahweh, which, curiously enough, could not take Abraham by surprise, despite the seemingly contradictory demand of the God of Israel this time. In Levinas we face the embodiment of concern and responsibility as the ultimate ethical demand, when the father looks into the face of his son, and the face of the Other, as that of Abel and tells him: “Thou shalt not kill!” This inherent ‘categoricus imperativus’ reflecting on the human face of the Other is the ethical stage, and Levinas criticised Kierkegaard for replacing this ethical stage illegitimately by the religious one. The uncritically embraced neo-Kantian patterns are still lurking with both philosophers, despite the post-modern claims made especially by Levinas. The story still serves as a paradigm-shift taking place at the borderline of modernity and postmodernity, which of course will survive for long concomitantly in contemporary reasoning and in ongoing moral debates both locally (I am critically evaluating to some extent in this study Tavaszy’s philosophy as well on the matter as it emerged locally), as well as globally. Yet, the interpretation of the ‘akkedah’ of Abraham seems not to be near of completion neither with neo-Kantians and existentialists, nor with theological hermeneutics listed above. The narratives of the Moriah event, as well as the whole Genesis context of it, and beyond, the whole Old Testament-context of the Abrahamic Covenant serves us with a new missiological challenge, as Abraham and successively Israel, and finally the Messiah-Seed plays the role of a ‘missionary priesthood’ in order to bring all the nations under the blessings of salvation promised to Abraham exclusively and fulfilled through him inclusively in the whole world. After twenty centuries of Systematic theology engaging itself exclusively in a dialogue only with Western philosophy, the post-modern age might be in due time kept opened up at last to a different kind of dialogue, such as with missiology. The challenge of a new paradigm-shift emerging out of this dialogue is expected to determine the theology of mission in order to become the very mission of theology itself. That impulse would bring Christian theology and theistic ethics back again to its real and primordial state.