Following the referendum that was organized in Romania to define marriage in the Constitution as union between a man and a woman only, His Grace Bishop Ignatie of Huși expressed his point of view in an article entitled Church, Referendum, Reset.
Church, Referendum, Reset: full text
Victorious or defeated
The referendum has passed. It was voided due to a lack of a quorum.
Some have begun talking about the triggering of a spiritual apocalypse over Romania. That overnight we became a minority.
That Christian values have been irremediably swallowed by secularist ideologies of post-Christian society.
That we are witnessing an insurmountable hiatus between the tradition and the citizens of Romania.
Some others, the active triumphalist, strongly believe that they are morally legitimate to assert as self-evident that the Church suffered a colossal defeat, that its prestige was affected and that its right to be present in the public space was amputated.
Or that the supporters of Neo-Marxist ideology would be a majority.
Therefore, officially, they would have the right to massively colonize the spiritual territory of this country.
This means they would sit at desks or hit buttons and dictate the totalitarian doctrine of the progressive-liberal ideology.
They assign themselves the competence and civic entitlement to occupy the centre, while the others who voted Yes are invited to withdraw to the periphery reconciling themselves and being humiliated.
It is euphorically proclaimed that some are intrinsically Western-centred and progressive, while others are medieval and retrograde.
Personally, I think all these tirades are verbal accessories. Truth is always elsewhere, it is related to essence.
Propaganda
First of all, the referendum was voided because the progressive propaganda machine was much more able and efficient.
Unfortunately, or even fortunately, the Church does not have a reflex in managing correctly and in real time all the lies, distortions and the rude slanders that have been poured out in the past weeks upon public debates.
By far, the key to ‘success’ was the ideological annexation of the referendum to politics, to one of the current parties, as well as to the illusory fear that other articles of the Constitution would be amended by voting, which led to the formation of a contingent of undecided or determined not to vote.
In other words, hate for a political party was more intense than the love for the family, for traditional values.
The paradox is that even Christian conservatives, simple people or intellectuals have fallen prey to this ideological maneuver.
For intellectuals, and perhaps not only for them, the referendum seemed useless and without any concrete legal effects, as long as article 259, par. 1, of the Civil Code stipulates, in black on white, what the word ‘spouses’ means.
Therefore, slander, malefic ideologization and disinformation were stronger than common sense and the ability to discern between the wheat of truth and the weeds of lie.
This was professional manipulation, by the book.
Was the Church defeated?
Secondly, the Church did not suffer a defeat.
Why? By logical and personally acknowledged deduction, a big (or sufficient) percentage of those who did not vote, excluding some of the undemocratic #boycott or #Istayathome camp (because they opposed a popular consultation), are attached to and believe in the Judaeo-Christian values and the natural family.
I can assure you that this observation does not fit into the logic of one who was defeated and wants to be victorious at all costs.
What’s the use of self-indulging with a void victory? I would also turn my beliefs into ideology. Fortunately, I run away from ideology like the devil runs away from incense. Any ideology kills.
Proximity, frontal pastoral ministry
Through this referendum, the Church received a strong signal that it should focus on a type of proximity, frontal pastoral ministry, on the establishment of as many confessional kindergartens and schools, Christian catechism centres as they are in the West to offer an alternative to the wave of no-Marxist ideology of gender theories that intend to corrupt, with insensitivity and demonic persuasion, the pure minds and hearts of children.
I have this conviction that the Church will intelligently and discreetly restart pastoral strategies towards its own faithful, because it has the resources.
I believe that no responsible shepherd will affirm from now on that the Church can be quantified according to the number of walls built, but according to which extent he finds himself in the Church and if the people recognizes us as shepherds. So, there is a little good in all evil.
Church was extremely European
In addition, in this whole Odyssey regarding the referendum, the Church accompanied by the few intellectuals who have publicly assumed the right-wing values (Adrian Papahagi, Mihail Neamtu, Teodor Baconschi) proved balance and civility in supporting a profoundly Christian cause.
Unfortunately, this civility ‘has cost’ us: little participation for such a big cause. The Church has only behaved extremely European: it has supported what is constitutive to Europe, its Christian roots.
LGBT lack of tolerance
The lack of tolerance we have been accused of is a false and invented one, even though there have been voices of clergy who have transformed Christian apologetics into a non-Christian fear-theque.
If you have the curiosity to look at the Facebook accounts of the LGBT supporters, you will be invaded by an unexplained wave of hate and bullied by the high-decibel volume and the visceral rhythm of Christian phobia.
It is sad that the number of those who offended the honest supporters and lovers of Christian values is a majority, not an isolated case.
Philanthropy
One last thing. Regarding the hypocritical hysteria of the money spent on the referendum, I would provoke the progressive USR members, the lighted LGBT people to try to become philanthropists in concrete terms, to assume the social agenda by which they motivate propagandistically their anti-church attitude, since they claimed on social media, at various TV shows, that the money had to be spent for charitable purposes, for orphanages, for children in foster care homes, for poor families, because the care of whom they cannot sleep at night, and help us in Vaslui (and in any other part) to complete this philanthropic work initiated and discreetly supported by the Church and the local authorities. This would prove them to be not just propaganda ministers.
Conclusion
As a conclusion, the Church should not blame anyone for voiding the referendum, not even the people they are shepherding. Generalized demonization does no good to anyone. Even less to the Church, who is wise and has not fallen into this pastoral counterproductive trap.
As a fine intellectual of our country said on his Facebook personal account, ‘I consider this referendum as a welcome process: it reset some coordinates, it developed the current radiography of Romania, and waked us up out of civic sleepiness, that is, from stagnating in too many collective illusions’ (Teodor Baconschi).
Bishop Ignatie of Huși
