The Romanian Orthodox Diaspora in

Italy: Eastern Orthodoxy in a Western

European Country Marco Guglielmi
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/the-romanian-orthodox-diaspora-in-italy-eastern-ortho
doxy-in-a-western-european-country-marco-guglielmi/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

The European VC-Funded Startup Guide: Create and Manage

a Startup in Eastern Europe Ivan Voras

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-european-vc-funded-startup-
guide-create-and-manage-a-startup-in-eastern-europe-ivan-voras/

The Rise And Fall Of Communist Parties In France And

Italy: Entangled Historical Approaches 1st Edition
Edition Marco Di Maggio

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-rise-and-fall-of-communist-
parties-in-france-and-italy-entangled-historical-approaches-1st-
edition-edition-marco-di-maggio/

The Informal Powers of Western European Presidents: A

Way out of Weakness Selena Grimaldi

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-informal-powers-of-western-
european-presidents-a-way-out-of-weakness-selena-grimaldi/

John Owen : trajectories in Reformed Orthodox theology

Mcgraw

https://ebookmass.com/product/john-owen-trajectories-in-reformed-
orthodox-theology-mcgraw/
Home in the Country (A Clementine Creek Novel Book 3)
Alexandra Hale

https://ebookmass.com/product/home-in-the-country-a-clementine-
creek-novel-book-3-alexandra-hale/

An American Dreamer: Life in a Divided Country David

Finkel

https://ebookmass.com/product/an-american-dreamer-life-in-a-
divided-country-david-finkel/

Orthodox Radicals: Baptist Identity in the English

Revolution Matthew C. Bingham

https://ebookmass.com/product/orthodox-radicals-baptist-identity-
in-the-english-revolution-matthew-c-bingham/

Orthodox Christians and the Rights Revolution in

America. 1st Edition Roeber

https://ebookmass.com/product/orthodox-christians-and-the-rights-
revolution-in-america-1st-edition-roeber/

The Oxford handbook of the Bible in Orthodox

Christianity Eugen J. Pentiuc

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-oxford-handbook-of-the-bible-
in-orthodox-christianity-eugen-j-pentiuc/
The Romanian Orthodox
Diaspora in Italy
Eastern Orthodoxy
in a Western
European Country

Marco Guglielmi
 Religion and Global Migrations

Series Editors
Elena Fiddian-Qasmiyeh
Oxford Department of International Development
Oxford, UK

Jennifer B Saunders
Stamford, CT, USA

Susanna Snyder
Ripon College Cuddesdon
Oxford, UK
As the first series of its kind, Religion and Global Migrations will examine
the phenomenon of religion and migration from multiple disciplinary per-
spectives (e.g., historical, anthropological, sociological, ethical, and theo-
logical), in various global locations (including the Americas, Europe, and
Asia), and from a range of religious traditions. Monographs and edited
volumes in the series explore the intersections of religion and migration
from a variety of approaches, including studies of shifting religious prac-
tices and ideas in sending and receiving communities, among migrants
and also among those who interact with migrants in places of origin and
destination; public responses to migration such as religiously informed
debates, policies, and activism among migrants and nonmigrants alike;
gender dynamics including shifts in gender roles and access to power in
sending and receiving sites; identity in relation to religion and migration
that include constructive, as well as descriptive, scholarship; empire, from
the ancient Mediterranean through the height of European colonization
to contemporary relationships between the developing and developed
world, and the way it has profoundly affected the movement of people and
development of religions; and other topics connecting to the theme of
religion and global migrations.
 Marco Guglielmi

The Romanian
Orthodox Diaspora
in Italy
Eastern Orthodoxy in a Western European Country
Marco Guglielmi
Dipartimento di Filosofia, Sociologia Pedagogia, Psicologia Applicata (FISPPA)
Università degli Studi di Padova
Padova, Italy

ISSN 2945-6398     ISSN 2945-6401 (electronic)

Religion and Global Migrations
ISBN 978-3-031-07101-0    ISBN 978-3-031-07102-7 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-07102-7

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the
Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of
translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on
microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval,
electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now
known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information
in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the
publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to
the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The
publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature
Switzerland AG.
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
 Preface

In 2016, the Romanian Orthodox church in Padua had at least a thousand

parishioners. When I arrived there by car on the night of 30 April, I found
a column of automobiles, and with some difficulty I eventually found a
parking space, even though the church is located near the industrial area
of the city. In less than no time, I was ‘catapulted’ into an Orthodox parish
in Romania during the Easter celebration. A week later, I discovered that
on the same evening in the province of Padua, four other Romanian
Orthodox communities had celebrated Easter, and at the celebration
which I had attended, only the faithful who lived near the city center were
present. This moment occurred about six months after I had begun my
doctoral research, on which this book is based, and it was my first ethno-
graphic observation in the field.
The research analysis in this book dwells on the growing establishment
of Orthodox Christian diasporas in Western Europe, which are developing
into a significant religious minority and often constitute the second-largest
Christian religion in those countries. Against this backdrop, I focus on the
case of Italy, which resembles an ‘Orthodox Christian stronghold’ in
Western Europe. In this local scenario, some patterns and issues relating
to the settlement of Eastern Orthodoxy in the aforementioned European
region appear to be more noticeable. In particular, I argue that the immi-
grant condition and religious minority status of some Orthodox diaspo-
ras in Italy reshape their more customary defensive attitudes toward

v
vi Preface

societal issues and protective stances on contemporary challenges. In their

establishment, these diaspora religions show significant institutional dyna-
mism, and they develop new practices which are only partially recognized
by the overall Orthodox Christian milieu. On the other hand, my study
intends to contribute to some recent debates on the main religious trans-
formations taking place in Western European countries. The chapters
adopt these broad research paths as the sociological framework for a case
study on the religious dimension of an immigrant group that has found a
‘privileged’ host country in the Italian Peninsula. Indeed, in less than two
decades, the massive influx of Romanian immigrants into Italy has given
rise to the largest Romanian diaspora in the world.
Approaching the exceptional case of Romanian migration in Italy, I
would like to refer to a prominent figure in the history of the Romanian
Orthodox Church, the theologian Fr. Dumitru Stăniloae (1903-1993).
Already in the 1920s, he described Romania as a meeting place between
the Greek and Slav worlds, emphasizing its special position as the only
predominantly Orthodox country with a Latin character (Turcescu 2002a,
p. 7). This statement seems to be suitable as a general label with which to
approach Romanian Orthodoxy, and I shall use it in this book. On the
other hand, this same label had been historically adopted by the Romanian
Orthodox Church in the construction of its identity. Thus, the book will
examine some impacts of this (predominant) Latin character in the large
Romanian Orthodox settlement in a Latin country like Italy.
Turning to the central hypothesis of my work, I presume that an explo-
ration of the settlement of Eastern Orthodoxy in Italy, and particularly of
the Romanian Orthodox Church, may suggest some crucial trends and
challenges experienced by Orthodox Christian diasporas in Western
Europe. In particular, the ‘Orthodox Christian stronghold’ in Italy
emphasizes how the more customary social traditionalism of this religion
is currently being reshaped through a broad and fragmented process. Of
course, this composite process is being differently modeled by various
contextual factors, as well as by the diverse identities and heritages of the
Orthodox churches in diaspora.
In this regard, I believe that the framework of religious glocalization
can shed light on the transnational spread of Orthodox diasporas and their
sociocultural and religious encounters with host contexts. It can do so
especially through bottom-up views within and/or at the margins of the
 Preface  vii

religious institutions. This framework also appears fruitful for countering

the persisting vague perception among some scholars that Eastern
Orthodoxy is a monolithic religious system. On the contrary, this book
will show that Romanian Orthodox parishes are flexible agents (or as will
be seen religious glocalities) able to merge the traits of local particularism
with those of religious universalism.

Padova, Italy Marco Guglielmi

 Acknowledgments

The research reported in this book was conceived within the international
joint PhD program titled Human Rights, Society, and Multi-level
Governance of the University of Padua. I would like to thank its then direc-
tor Giuseppe Giordan and Olga Breskaya for their valuable help with the
framing of the research design. I also thank Siniša Zrinščak for his fruitful
suggestions and assistance during my stay at the University of Zagreb.
Moreover, I wish to express my gratitude to Father Costantin Preda for
arranging my study period at the University of Bucharest and for intro-
ducing me to the mysteries of Eastern Orthodoxy. Thereafter, my research
continued at the Center for Religious Studies of the Bruno Kessler
Foundation in Trento. I would like to thank its then director Marco
Ventura and Lucia Galvagni for their support in the final stages of the
project.
During my research, I benefited from discussion and feedback at the
conferences of the Society for the Scientific Study of Religion (SSSR),
International Society for the Sociology of Religion (ISSR), and European
Academy of Religion (EuARe). Particularly, I wish to thank the SSSR,
which awarded me a Student Travel Grant in 2018 and the Jack Shand
International Travel Grant in 2020. I want also to thank the Dominican
friars for their hospitality during my stay at the Ecumenical Center in
Athens and the Dominican Study Institute (Dost-I) in Istanbul.

ix
x ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Finally, I am grateful to the publisher and the editors for their careful
supervision of this book’s publication. In this regard, I extend my grati-
tude to all the people who have contributed in various ways to this book.
I am referring to the academics, university staff and students, as well as the
faithful and clerics from diverse Christian traditions, who expressed their
enthusiasm for the project. My heartfelt thanks go to all of them for their
confidence in my work.
Praise for The Romanian Orthodox Diaspora in Italy

“A close analysis of the growing number of Orthodox (very largely Romanian)

churches in Italy lies at the heart of this account. That however is simply the start-
ing point. How do Orthodox congregations embed themselves in an overwhelm-
ingly Catholic country? And what effect do these diasporic churches have on the
sending country? In five fascinating chapters Marco Guglielmi unpacks these
questions.”
—Grace Davie, University of Exeter, United Kingdom

“A fascinating study which advances knowledge on the changing nature of Eastern

Orthodox communities in Eastern and Western European societies. Drawing on a
wide range of quantitative data, in-depth interviews, ethnographic observations in
Italy and Romania, this outstanding monograph offers a unique insight into the
ways in which institutional structures and religious activism shape contemporary
Eastern Orthodox Christianity.”
—Lucian N. Leustean, author of Orthodoxy and the Cold War:
Religion and Political Power in Romania, 1947–65

“Drawing on the enhanced presence of Orthodox Romanians in Italy currently,

Guglielmi offers a fascinating, theoretically grounded, and in-depth analysis of the
multifaceted refashioning of Eastern Orthodoxy within a Western context. This
book has tremendous implications for understanding the processes of Orthodox
migration, glocalisation, and transnationalism, contrary to still widespread stereo-
types portraying this Christian Church as monolithic, inflexible, anti-modern and
backward.”
—Vasilios N. Makrides, University of Erfurt, Germany

“This book is the first original study on Orthodox churches in a country with a
Catholic majority like Italy. It helps to understand the long-lasting effects of
migrations under the ‘sacred vaults’ of religion. Guglielmi shows us that this
change also affects the Orthodox churches of migrants, countering the widespread
stereotype of an immobile system incapable of innovation.”
—Enzo Pace, University of Padua, Italy
“This is a well-crafted and theoretically-informed empirical work that applies con-
cretely the notions of glocalization and transnationalism into a relatively under-
studied case of Orthodox migration into Western Europe. It is an important
contribution to the literature on Orthodox Christianity in Italy and more broadly,
Western Europe.”
—Victor Roudometof, University of Nicosia, Cyprus

“The massive Romanian migration to Italy has turned the Orthodox Church into
the second largest denomination in that country. In his sociological analysis,
Guglielmi shows that the Orthodox diaspora church has adopted new practices
and rituals to respond to its new minority status in a predominantly Roman
Catholic space and to address the daily concerns of the Romanian migrants it
serves. Based on interviews with Orthodox clergy, Guglielmi’s book points to the
challenges religious glocalization poses to both host and original countries.”
—Lavinia Stan, St. Francis Xavier University, Canada

“Orthodox Christianity as lived tradition outside its homelands and in a minority

position: this condition of precariousness and opportunity is analyzed masterly in
this book by Marco Guglielmi, who approaches his subject with rich empirical
detail and sophisticated, historically informed insight.”
—Kristina Stoeckl, University of Innsbruck, Austria
 Contents

1 Introduction  1

2 The Dis/Continuity of the Orthodox-Scape in Italy 39

3 T
 he Settlement of an (Eastern) Latin Church in a
(Western) Latin Country 75

4 E
 ntanglement and Forms of Orthodox Transnationalism
in Italy and Beyond111

5 E
 pilogue: The ‘Living Tradition’ of Eastern Orthodoxy
in Italy143

References149

Index167

xiii
 List of Tables

Table 2.1 Religious affiliations of immigrants in Italy (2020) 47

Table 2.2 Main religious affiliations of immigrants in Italy from 2001
to 2020 48
Table 2.3 Main religious affiliations of immigrants in Italy (2020) 49
Table 2.4 Orthodox Christian jurisdictions in Italy
(2011, 2016, and 2021) 51
Table 2.5 Romanian immigrants in Italy 57
Table 3.1 Number of sacraments (baptisms, marriages, and funerals) 83

xv
 CHAPTER 1

Introduction

Abstract The chapter introduces the sociological background in which to

study Orthodox Christianity and to outline the main transformations of its
diasporas in Western Europe. Starting from glocalization theory, it exam-
ines the transnational diffusion of religions through globalization. It then
elaborates the framework of diaspora religions as glocal religions in order
to shed light on the blending processes involved in their settlement. It
defines a sociological approach in regard to Eastern Orthodoxy which
addresses the main societal trends historically developed by Orthodox
churches around the theological notion of Holy Tradition. In short, the
chapter propounds the hypothesis that will be developed throughout the
book: as the Orthodox Christian diasporas in Italy tackle new challenges
and practical issues, they reshape the more customary social traditionalism
of their churches.

Keywords Orthodox diaspora(s) • Orthodoxy and contemporary

challenges • Glocal religions • Glocalization theory • Social
traditionalism

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature 1

Switzerland AG 2022
M. Guglielmi, The Romanian Orthodox Diaspora in Italy, Religion
and Global Migrations,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-07102-7_1
2 M. GUGLIELMI

Orthodoxy, however, needs the Christian West, its demanding and

exacting strictness and its experience of the modern world to overcome
the historical sins of the East and to become fully aware of its message
and service. In return, it has some treasures that may be shared. Not
having experienced the internal conflicts and controversies of Western
Christianity, it may in fact have a beneficial role—moreover in a
manner that is both selfless and self-purifying—in that «ecumenism in
time» (Georgij Florovsky) which should allow Christians to discover,
from this side of the schisms, their common biblical and ecclesial roots.
(…) Nonetheless—and we should insist on this point—today the
Orthodox churches of the Eastern countries are experiencing, in a
manner not entirely unlike the evolution of Islam, a violent crisis of
integralism. (…) As may be seen, the whole problem lies in the
relationship between Orthodoxy and modernity—and post-modernity.
The responsibility of members of the Orthodox Church in the diaspora is
thus even greater. In fact they are often able to use the heritage of
wisdom and beauty of the Tradition to engage in the quests of our time.
—Olivier Clément (2005, pp. 137, 139) (My translation from Italian
to English).

Summary
Olivier Clément (1921-2009) was probably the best-known lay Orthodox
theologian in Western Europe. He was noted for his contribution to the
life of the Orthodox churches in France and to ecumenical dialogue. In his
book The Orthodox Church, originally published in 1961 and now avail-
able in various editions and translations (2005), he described some possi-
ble convergences between Eastern Orthodoxy and the other Christian
churches in the West (Catholic and Reformed). He claimed that the
Eastern Christian milieu needed the Western Christian milieu, and vice
versa. Among the reasons for the East’s need for the West, he stressed the
necessity to engage with the contemporary world. He argued that since
the fifteenth century there had been a lack of a real cultural and intellec-
tual space within Eastern Orthodoxy, so that its “integral knowledge of an
intelligent heart” was not transmitted solely in the dim light of the iconos-
tasis (Clément, 2011, p. 110). To better grasp this expression, it is useful
to mention that the iconostasis is the wall of icons and religious paintings
used in Eastern churches to separate the nave from the sanctuary, which is
the area around the altar. Clément’s statement encapsulates a crucial aspect
of the sociological foci of this introductory chapter: the Orthodox
Christian diasporas in Western Europe are rooted in countries with a
 1 INTRODUCTION 3

Catholic or Protestant majority, where they are facing new practical issues
and challenges.1 In this context, the “quests of our time” (or the new
forms of religious life in the contemporary world) and the “beauty of the
Tradition” (or the ancient Orthodox rites and teachings) referred to at the
end of the above long quotation may not express two opposing categories
or settings. On the contrary, apparently possible is their merging—maybe
more markedly than in other situations—within the Orthodox diaspora
settlements in Western Europe, particularly as a fragmented mix of socio-
cultural and religious encounters and identity’s resistances.
In accordance with this premise, the first section of this chapter devel-
ops a glocal perspective on the topic of religion and globalization. In this
regard, it adopts a glocal religious lens through which to examine both the
transnational spread of religious communities through globalization pro-
cesses and the increasing bonds between religion and culture at different
levels. The second section develops the research framework, which consid-
ers diaspora religions as glocal religions (Guglielmi, 2020a). Adopting the
broad model of four paths of religious glocalization—indigenization, ver-
nacularization, nationalization, and transnationalization—(Roudometof,
2013, 2014a), the section attempts to analyze diaspora religions as cul-
tural hybrids. Hence, it tries to connect the more usual opposing catego-
ries in migration research (such as motherland vs. host country, national
vs. transnational, immigrant vs. native, local vs. global) and emphasize the
complexity deriving from their intersections.
The third section briefly introduces the subject of Orthodox Christianity.
It defines a sociological approach to the study of this Christian tradition by
both outlining its key features and describing the main societal trends that
have historically developed around its theological teachings on the Holy
Tradition. The fourth section addresses the topic of the Orthodox
Christian diaspora(s) from both canonical and sociological perspectives. It
describes the two main Orthodox panoramas in North America and in
Western, Central, and Northern Europe in order to better contextualize
the case of Eastern Orthodoxy in Italy. The last two sections illustrate the
research design and the methodology used to collect the data. More spe-
cifically, the fifth section outlines the research questions centered on the
sociological study of Eastern Orthodoxy and relates them to three recent

1
Adopted throughout the book is an inclusive geographical outlook which generally refers
to Western Europe as including also the Central and Northern European countries. The
Orthodox panorama in this broad European region will be outlined in detail in the fourth
section of this chapter.
4 M. GUGLIELMI

debates on current religious transformations in Western Europe. In this

regard, it also introduces some theoretical and empirical landmarks that
will emerge throughout the book.
Finally, a summary of contents will be provided in every chapter in
order to gradually sum up the crucial assumptions of the research reported
in the book: the case study of the Romanian Orthodox Church (Biserica
Ortodoxă Română, henceforth BOR) appears to powerfully reveal some
notable hybridization occurring within the broad establishment of Eastern
Orthodoxy in Italy, as a result of which some nuances of its more custom-
ary social traditionalism are being reshaped.

Framing Religious Glocalization

Among the many theories on globalization, adopted in what follows is the
perspective developed by Roland Robertson (1992) in order to approach
the current situations and fresh forms of religions in the contemporary
world. Basically, Robertson defined globalization as “the compression of
the world and the intensification of consciousness of the world as a whole”
(1992, p. 8). With the term “compression”, he referred to the accelerated
pace of contact among cultures, peoples, and civilizations. The confronta-
tion of different worldviews, in fact, means that globalization involves a
“comparative interaction of different forms of life” (Robertson, 1992,
p. 27), or the sense that the world is a single dimension. As a process that
stimulates an awareness of connection, globalization dissolves the auton-
omy of institutions and practices at local and global levels. In this process,
“all units engaged in globalization are constrained to assume a position
and define an identity” (1992, p. 29), especially with respect to their man-
ifold interactions. On the other hand, this consciousness of the world as a
whole has proceeded and developed through centuries-long sociocultural
processes. Thus, its development should not be understood as having
been completed solely in the more recent phase of world history.2

2
In his theory, as would later be shown in the model developed by Roudometof (2014a),
Robertson emphasised the capacity of the historical perspective to ‘release’ globalization
from the dominant narrative, which frames it as a recent phenomenon. Although this study
does not emphasize the historical approach, the temporal aspect is considered as well.
Chapter 2 will focus on the ancient settlement of Eastern Orthodoxy in the Italian Peninsula
from an historical perspective. It will avoid both a research approach concentrated only on
the past three decades, and a sociological reading of the Orthodox presence in Italy as a
recent phenomenon generated by globalization.
 1 INTRODUCTION 5

In accordance with the above framework, this study does not consider
cultures to be fixed entities or exclusive units. Rather, it focuses on how
they interrelate through glocalization. This latter notion derives from the
Japanese term dochakuka and means ‘global localization’. Since the late
1990s, in fact, glocal theories have directed attention to the fact that glo-
balization interacts with local cultures, structures, and traditional settings
in multiple ways.3 Robertson elaborated this notion in order to emphasize
the duality of global processes: global forces cannot be conceived as exist-
ing in opposition to, or isolated from, the local realm, since they simulta-
neously reshape societies. In this sense, glocal processes give rise to more
or less nuanced and marked hybridization among realms. This book pre-
fers to maintain a comprehensive view of glocalization as multifaceted
transformation (Morawska, 2014). It will refer to all processes of trans-
forming or being transformed, which involve a change in the structure,
appearance, or other facets of a societal item.
Focusing on the study of religion, Peter Beyer (2006) argues that the
main idea of religion, as it has been commonly construed, is the product
of long-term processes of intercultural interaction. On this view, also reli-
gions that are not conventionally considered to be global are in any case
influenced by both global and local processes. Beyer maintains that

the study of a modern religion must be initially grounded in a theory of

“global society”: religion, far from remaining more or less constant during
these transformations and thereby suffering or at least being challenged to
reassert itself, has actually been a critical carrier and example of the entire
process. Religion, like capitalism, the nation-state or modern science, has
been a carrier of modernisation and globalisation, not a barrier or a victim
(Beyer, 2006, p. 300).

Adopting this perspective, and as theorized by Csordas (2007) and

then by Obadia (2010), the paths and developments of religions in the
contemporary world can be understood as characterized by a dual process.
On the one hand, religions change when they address processes and issues
linked to globalization; on the other hand, religions become globalized by
spreading outside their more traditional territories. In the former case
(globalization and religion), the dynamics of globalization may favor the

3
Besides Robertson, glocalization has been analyzed by many other scholars, such as
Ritzer (2003), Roudometof (2016), and Tomlinson (1999). Moreover, for an overview on
glocalization with respect to several fields and topics, see Roudometof and Dessì (2022).
6 M. GUGLIELMI

change of religions within their historical territories as they are challenged

by novel phenomena and an unprecedented sociocultural and religious
diversity. In the latter case (globalization of religion), the spread of reli-
gions and their settlement outside their traditional territories may foster
changes as well as certain innovations. In this respect, as will be shown in
this book, the establishment of religions abroad occurs mainly through
their contacts with the sociocultural environment and the dominant reli-
gion of the host country. In short, in both the above cases, the bonds
between religion and culture appear to (re)fashion the religious land-
scapes, within a framework that recognizes that the global and local levels
are interdependent.
Accordingly, the notion of glocal religion centers on the meeting point
between cultures, and it emphasizes the interaction occurring between the
global and local levels (Beyer, 2006, 2007). As suggested by Robertson
(1992), glocalization provides a means to gain understanding of the
hybridity and fragmentation of religious traditions within the frame of
global/local relations. In their localization, religions thus appear to shape
cultural hybrids that blend religious universalism with local particularism.
In this regard, global and local processes also promote(d) multiple reli-
gious glocalizations, that is, cases of world religions thematized alongside
local particularities (Beyer, 2007). Again, these processes should not be
seen as linked solely to more recent historical periods, but rather as syn-
chronously interacting in the various eras of world history. For instance,
historic study of the multiple glocalizations of Christianity in Europe may
“offer a conceptual map that accounts for religious change and fragmenta-
tions both in Western and Eastern Europe” (Roudometof, 2014b, p. 76).
In order to be more detailed and to establish this diachronic and sys-
temic approach (Dessì, 2018, p. 478), one may further concentrate on the
notion of glocality (Roudometof, 2015a). The latter seems more analyti-
cally autonomous from the concept of globalization than the previous
more broader conception. According to the focus of this study, the fore-
going definition indicates that religious communities can develop and
grow as a multitude of glocalities.

Subsequently, the end condition produced by glocalisation or to be accu-

rate, by multiple glocalisations, is glocality, or again, to be accurate, it is a
multitude of glocalities. Just like glocalisation, glocality is an abstraction; it
exists in multitudes produced empirically in various contexts through local-­
global interaction. Although glocalisation designates a process of refraction
 1 INTRODUCTION 7

through the local, glocality designates a condition whereby the end state of
glocalisation is glocally experienced (Roudometof, 2015a, p. 399).

In other words, this perspective emphasizes the particular experiences

of each religious community (abroad). Religions (in the diaspora) can thus
be examined as a multitude of religious glocalities that may develop a
diverse pathway of glocalization for each community, congregation, par-
ish, or faith-group. They are more independent from each other than
envisaged by a more general glocal religious theory.

Exploring Diaspora Religions as Glocal Religions

Some social scientists have addressed the topic of migration by underlin-
ing both its historical continuity and its multiple cultural aspects. In this
endeavor, some of them have adopted glocalization as a theoretical frame-
work in which to develop diverse analytical categories with which to exam-
ine the “progressive ‘diasporization’ of the planet” (Bauman, 2013, p. 2)
from a sociocultural perspective (Bauman, 2013; Giulianotti & Robertson,
2006, 2007; Morawska, 2014). In other words, through glocalization,
they have focused on the encounter between the receiving culture and the
sending one, as well as on the interaction between the native societal
groups and those in the diaspora.
As stated in the Preface to this book, the expression that it adopts to
denote the relationship between religion and migration is religion in dias-
pora or diaspora religion (Cohen, 2008, p. 152). In this regard, Hinnells
defines a diaspora religion as “the religion of any people who have a sense
of living away from the land of the religion, or away from ‘the old coun-
try’” (1997, p. 686). Moreover, Ter Haar (1998) connects religion and
diaspora through the assumption that the concept of migration contains
that of diaspora, and ‘as a rule’ migrants belong to and practice a religion.4
Against this background, a further theoretical step requires identifying
an approach with which to explore religions in diaspora from a glocal per-
spective. In this regard, in his studies on Orthodox Christianity and

4
Some scholars have pointed out controversial aspects to linking the concepts of diaspora
and religion. For instance, Cohen (2008, pp. 150-154) takes a critical position by emphasiz-
ing that a religion may involve various national communities; a national community abroad
may be characterised by the presence of various faiths; a religion may be spread around the
globe, and not have a homeland to which it wants to return. For further sociological analysis
on the subject, see Vertovec (2000).
8 M. GUGLIELMI

globalization, Victor Roudometof (2013, 2014a) hypothesizes a model

comprising four paths of religious glocalization: vernacularization, indi-
genization, nationalization, and transnationalization. These paths seem to
show concrete historical examples of fusion between religious universalism
and local particularism, since each of them highlights a blend between a
religion and a particular human setting (such as empire, ethnicity, and
nation-state). This book considers them as key dimensions with which to
examine the sociocultural and religious traits of a religion in diaspora.
These crucial dimensions appear to shed light on the main aspects and
processes that may generate noticeable hybridization within the establish-
ment of a diaspora religion in the host country. Put differently, each of
these key dimensions offers a fruitful basis on which to order global/local
relationships within settlement of a diaspora religion through a focus on
its vis-à-vis two or more cultures.
- Vernacularization or vernacular dimension: This blends religious uni-
versalism with a vernacular language. It is certainly far more common in
premodern cultures, in which access to sacred texts was limited and reli-
gious efficacy could be linked to a certain language. Perhaps the most
prominent example of vernacularization is found in the Islamic world.
Indeed, Arabic serves as the religion’s sacred language even in cultural
contexts outside the Arabian countries. On the other hand, still today the
sociolinguistic study of a diaspora, or the analysis of its vernacular dimen-
sion, may furnish a distinctive perspective on its sociocultural organization
(Reiter & Rojo, 2015). Moreover, it can stress the extent of the global/
local nexus within an immigrant community, since the linguistically medi-
ated social experiences which define the local context are related to global
structures and relationships (Slembrouck, 2011). According to the
research approach reported in this book, the adoption of the host coun-
try’s language by a diaspora religion is one of the main aspects of intergen-
erational tensions besides hybridization with the new sociocultural context
(Ebaugh & Chafetz, 2000). Finally, the use of this language in religious
services—the so-called liturgical language—is a significant sign of the
depth of a diaspora religion’s glocalization.
- Indigenization or indigenous dimension: This blends religious univer-
salism with a specific ethnicity, thereby generating rituals and symbols
which shape the religious group’s identity. In many cases, in fact, a sense
of distinctiveness results from the blending of religious and ethnic traits
within a national community. The premodern kingdoms and principalities
made regular use of these processes in order to bolster their rulers’
 1 INTRODUCTION 9

legitimacy. On the other hand, legacies of these latter endured or resisted

far beyond premodern regimes and are still influential today. In the study
of diaspora religions, this key dimension shows how ethnic traits favor or
restrain the glocalization of an immigrant community in a host country
(Lindley, 2002). Furthermore, the terms indigenous or indigenization
may assume two different meanings: the former concerns the ethnic iden-
tity of a diaspora religion, which is linked to its national heritage; the latter
meaning instead relates to the process whereby a diaspora religion becomes
an indigenous religion through the completion of its hybridization in the
host context. In the sociological study of Eastern Orthodoxy, this path
means that a diaspora religion becomes a local Orthodox church marked
by canonical autonomy (or struggling for it) and completely merged with
the new sociocultural environment (Roudometof, 2014a, pp. 119-136).
- Nationalization or national dimension: The principal difference
between nationalization and the previous dimension discussed is that the
nation serves as a foundation for the religious institution’s claim to legiti-
macy. Nationalization stems from the use of religion as a potential source
for the formation of nations or the intertwining of religious and national
markers. Generally, nationalization operates through the construction and
reproduction of a close relationship between confessional membership
and modern national identity. The boundaries that separate the national
from the indigenous dimension are established in part by the civic nature
of the nation. In accordance with the research approach adopted here, to
be stressed is that the nationality of an immigrant group may favor or dis-
courage its religious glocalization in a given host country. This key dimen-
sion related to religious glocalization seems more influential in the
diasporas of national churches where national, ethnic, and religious identi-
ties appear to intersect with each other (Turcotte, 2012). For instance,
cases of xenophobic propaganda by political parties against a certain immi-
grant community may make the religious glocalization of its main diaspora
religion more controversial;
- Transnationalization or transnational dimension: The global con-
struction of the modern state and the nationalization of its citizens have
necessarily empowered this dimension. Broadly speaking, the notion of
transnationalism refers “to multiple ties and interactions linking people or
institutions across the borders of nation-states” (Vertovec, 2009). In this
context, migrants reconstitute their bonds simultaneously with their host
and home countries and engage in a creative process of blending aspects
from both realms. As will be shown in Chap. 4, which comprises a
10 M. GUGLIELMI

theoretical section on the subject, transnationalism is not only a crucial

dimension for observing the glocalization of a diaspora religion, but also
a prime feature of the latter. However, it may assume diverse intensities
and follow diverse trajectories, as well as exerting diverse impacts on both
the diaspora and the church of origin.
In conclusion, these key dimensions furnish a nuanced description of
the establishment of religion in diaspora through cultural emphasis on
multiple layers. Hence, hybridization will be detected mainly by looking at
the sociocultural and religious encounters of diaspora religion with the
host country, as well as at its engagements with native social groups and
fresh challenges.

A Sociological Approach to Orthodox Christianity

Orthodox Christianity or Eastern Orthodoxy is the second-largest branch
of Christianity, with approximately more than 250 million adherents. It
operates as a communion of 14 autocephalous churches, each governed by
its hierarchy, and by some autonomous metropolises and archdioceses
under the jurisdiction of these independent churches. This Christian tradi-
tion does not have a central ecclesiastic authority, unlike the power
assigned to the bishop of Rome (the Pope) in Catholicism. However, the
Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople (henceforth EP) is recognized as
primus inter pares, or ‘first among equals’, by the Orthodox churches (as
will be explained more thoroughly in the next section). The Eastern
Orthodox Church was in communion with the Roman Catholic Church
until the East-West Schism in 1054, which disputed in particular the
authority of the bishop of Rome.
The term Eastern has been adopted to differentiate this church from
the Western one during and after the religious split. Historically, the pres-
ence of the Orthodox faith was rooted in the Eastern part of Christendom,
that is, in the current countries located in Southeast and Eastern Europe,
the Caucasus region, and in the whole Russian area. The term Orthodox
derives from the Greek words orthos, which means ‘right’, and doxa, which
means ‘belief’. Thus, the word Orthodox means ‘correct belief’ or ‘right
thinking’. In fact, Orthodoxy claims to practice the original Christian faith
as transmitted by the true tradition established by Jesus Christ. In this
regard, the double meaning of the Greek word doxa, which also means
‘glory’ or ‘glorification’, reveals the belief of Orthodoxy that it practices
 1 INTRODUCTION 11

the original forms of Christian worship, as well as underlining its attention

to the liturgical dimension of the church’s life.
Following this overview, a first sociological reflection on Eastern
Orthodoxy must dwell on the sociocultural trends that have historically
developed around its theological teachings on the Tradition. As men-
tioned earlier, Orthodox churches stress their fidelity to the apostolic tra-
dition and the ecclesial patterns of Early Christianity, referring to the
scriptures, the ecumenical councils, the ancient canons, and the writings of
Church Fathers. Generally, they refer to this body of norms, rules, and
forms as the Holy Tradition. The latter may be considered the crucial fea-
ture of Eastern Orthodoxy with respect to Catholic and Protestant
churches. In this regard, the theologian Fr. John Anthony McGuckin,
who belongs as a cleric to the jurisdiction of the Romanian Orthodox
Church in the United States (the USA), writes as follows.

One of the most commonly used phrases in the theological vocabulary of

the Orthodox is ‘The Holy Tradition’. In former times this notion had some
resonance with Western Catholics, but perhaps a little less in the present era
of extensive theological and cultural changes affecting Roman Catholicism.
For Protestants, the term usually brought to mind many of the reasons for
which they had originally challenged Latin Catholicism in the Reformation
era, accusing it in several instances with corrupting the biblical tradition of
Christianity in favour of its own ‘customs and traditions’ (McGuckin, 2008,
pp. 90-91).

As McGuckin claims, the conception of Holy Tradition concerns

Orthodoxy’s distinctiveness within the Christian milieu, which shapes the
essence of its basic theological vision. On the other hand, as noted by
McGuckin, “it may be the case that some of the less educated Orthodox
equate the tradition with everything that happens in church as they cur-
rently experience it (for better or worse, good practice or bad)” (2008,
p. 90). It thus becomes essential to establish its theological definition.
According to McGuckin, “Orthodoxy understands the Holy Tradition to
be the essence of the life-saving Gospel of Christ brought to the world
through the church by the power of the Holy Spirit of God. The tradition
is, theologically speaking, how the Spirit is experienced within the Church
of Christ as the charism of Truth” (2008, p. 90). Prior to McGuckin,
among the many Orthodox conceptions formulated on the Tradition, the
well-known Russian theologian Fr. Sergius Bulgakov (1871-1944) offered
this nuanced perspective:
12 M. GUGLIELMI

Tradition is not a sort of archaeology, which by its shadows connects the

present with the past, not a law, it is the fact that the life of the Church
remains always identical with itself. Tradition receives a ‘normative’ value
precisely because of this identity. And as the same spirit dwells in each man
living the life of the Church, he is not limited to touching the surface of
Tradition, but, in so far as he is filled with the spirit of the church, he enters
into it (1935, p. 26).

In McGuckin and Bulgakov’ statements, it seems that the work of soci-

ologists may resemble the vision of the “less educated Orthodox” who frame
the church’s tradition by focusing on symbols, rituals, and customs, that is,
“touching the surface of Tradition”. Dealing with this pertinent issue, to be
mentioned is the more inclusive notion which was developed for the first
time in the 1930s by a group of Russian theologian émigrés in France as the
title of a collection of articles, that is, ‘Living Tradition’ (YMCA, 1930).5
Forty years later, Fr. John Meyendorff (1978) adopted the same title for his
notable book, which surveyed the Orthodox understanding of Tradition by
setting it in relation to modern society and contemporary challenges. Not by
chance, Meyendorff was a theologian of the Orthodox diaspora in the USA
and a cleric belonging to the Orthodox Church in America (i.e. the indige-
nous North American Orthodox church—see the next section).
Meyendorff concluded his book by arguing that Christian solutions to
social challenges can never be absolute or perfect; rather, they should use as
their starting point and criterion the mysterious and transcendent commu-
nion that lived within the church (Meyendorff, 1978, p. 201). However,
he noted that “historically Orthodox Christians frequently looked for sub-
stitutes for this initial and basic criterion. The Byzantine Empire provided
one; nationalism later presented another” (1978, pp. 201-202). In short,
this view appears to invite sociologists to focus on the above “substitutes”
in order to explore the aspects and dynamics developed by Orthodox
churches in their sociocultural ‘living’ of the Tradition.
Sociologists are also required to detect the impacts of the “normative
value” of the Tradition’s identity that Bulgakov described, through which (to
a certain extent) “the life of the Church remains always identical with itself”.
According to Max Weber’s theory (1978), indeed, Orthodoxy’s traditional
approach has been enhanced particularly by the predominant liturgical and
sacramental dimension that it has maintained along the centuries, as well as by

5
Also Fr. Bulgakov was a Russian emigrant in Paris.
 1 INTRODUCTION 13

its elaboration of a ‘cosmic’ Christian vision. More specifically, Weber (1973,

pp. 144–145) argued that within Orthodoxy seems to persist a specific mysti-
cism linked to the typical beliefs of the East, which shows itself as a knowledge
of the meanings of the world through a relationship with God.
In order to approach the societal and cultural trends experienced by
Orthodoxy around the sociological core of Tradition, it seems suitable to
start from a general historical consideration. Throughout their histories, in
fact, the territories with an Orthodox majority did not experience the
ensemble of sociocultural, economic, and scientific factors that arose in the
wake of the Renaissance in the fifteenth century, and of the Enlightenment
in the eighteenth century. Mainly for historical reasons of a geographical
and political nature, there were a few actual encounters between Eastern
Christian churches and the main model of modernity developed in Western
Europe (Makrides, 2012a, 2012b; Preda, 2013).6 In this circumstance, the
crucial feature of Orthodoxy (i.e., its fidelity to the Holy Tradition) appeared
to play a central role in shaping a social traditionalism within Orthodox
churches. By offering multiple forms of conservative reference and self-pro-
tection, it seemed to influence Orthodoxy’s interactions with sociocultural
domains as well as its stances on modern and contemporary challenges.

[For Orthodox churches,] the purpose of this continuous quoting [of past
sources] was to justify traditionalist policies and orientations and to con-
demn various attempted changes or innovations. Characteristically enough,
we are not talking here about religious and theological contexts alone. The
same holds true for secular contexts as well, which were equally influenced
by this kind of Orthodox traditionalism. The question is whether there is an
intrinsic connection between the Orthodox and social traditionalism or if
these are simply parallel and coincidental phenomena. The Orthodox usu-
ally try to find pertinent answers or solutions with reference to a normative
and binding past, which is somehow regarded as a panacea beyond time and
space. It appears, however, that there was indeed a strong interplay between
Orthodox and social traditionalism in certain historical periods, although

6
The sociological debate on the topic of religion and modernity is characterized by mani-
fold positions (Pollack & Rosta, 2018). In recent decades, several scholars (Asad, 1993;
Casanova, 1994; Eisenstadt, 2003; Said, 1978; Turner, 1994) have maintained that some
social theories deemed to be universal are adequate only for analysis of Western socioreligious
contexts. Until the end of the last century, in fact, many sociologists adopted the historical and
societal experiences of Protestantism and Catholicism in the West as their sole points of refer-
ence. They thus neglected religious experiences in other world areas, such as those of Eastern
Christianity (Hann, 2011). This book does not enter directly into this debate. However, it
adopts an extended and inclusive notion of modernity, referring to it as the main model of
modernity developed in Western Europe, or as the broad Western modernity project.
14 M. GUGLIELMI

always in relation to the overall conditions of the time and numerous other
factors (Makrides, 2012b, p. 21).

As underlined by Makrides, the bonds between Orthodoxy and social

traditionalism are not obvious; nor are their historical paths and intersec-
tions. However, the societal dimension of Orthodoxy’s traditionalism may
be primarily related to its elaboration of critical and/or conflicting teach-
ings with respect to the broad Western modernity project. This general
stance emphasizes a defensive symbolic character of the Holy Tradition, as
well as suspicion of sociocultural and religious encounters with other
domains (Agadjanian, 2003, 2010).7 Thus, the category of the West has
functioned as a marker of difference from what is considered to be the
essence of Orthodoxy, and ironically it has become a constitutive aspect of
the Eastern Orthodox imagination (Demacopoulos & Papanikolaou,
2013). Recently, this controversial attitude has become more evident in
the tensions that arise in the engagement of Orthodox churches with
some contemporary challenges, such as gender-sensitive issues, LGBTQI
movements, scientific advances, and human rights.
From the historical point of view, other differences of Eastern
Orthodoxy with respect to Catholicism and Protestantism in addressing
certain complex processes should be considered, since they have favored
progressive ‘demarcations’ of their positions. For example, one should
consider the historical ways in which Orthodox churches have faced the
modern formation of the nation-states. Following again Max Weber’s per-
spective (Kalberg, 2012), the traditional and identitarian character of
Orthodoxy has been enhanced by a “unique religious universe” centered
on the pathways of monasticism and asceticism, which appeared to have
given rise to a conservatism merged with ethnic and national traits. In fact,
Orthodox churches have sought to be the monopolist mark of the cultural
and religious identity of their country. This overlapping of national and
religious identities has generated minor paths of religious nationalism
(Leustean, 2014), increasing the establishment of contentious facets of a
widespread Orthodox traditionalism.
Furthermore, it should be also emphasized that the latter has been
enhanced by the lack of civil and social capital as well as the economic dif-
ficulties experienced by countries with an Orthodox majority under

7
For two leading views of Orthodox churches on this subject, one should consider the
documents The Basis of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church (Osnovy, 2000)
and For the life of the world of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese in America (GOARCH, 2020)
 1 INTRODUCTION 15

communist regimes (Djankov & Nikolova, 2018).8 As became more evi-

dent in the postcommunist period, the conservative stances of Orthodox
churches were also affected by the harsh legacies of the previous political
period. As Prodromou (2004) stated, the memories of the communist
regime are still alive within Orthodox churches, causing an Orthodox
deficit in the fresh resources necessary to deal with some contemporary
challenges. Whilst during the second half of the last century the other two
Christian traditions—Catholicism and Protestantism—adopted religious
reforms and innovations with respect to changes occurring in modern
society, the Orthodox churches seemingly remained anchored to the
points of reference of an “imaginary idyllic past” (Ramet, 2006, p. 150).
In this regard, it is important to emphasize the plurality of moderniza-
tion processes experienced by the countries with an Orthodox majority, as
well as their diverse historical encounters with certain Western European
processes (Guglielmi, 2022). Referring to this societal diversity of the
Orthodox countries, the fall of the Berlin Wall and the new international
period since the 1990s have favored new encounters of Orthodox churches
with other sociocultural, religious, and political domains. This trend is
substantially apparent for the Orthodox-majority countries both internal
to the European Union (EU) (such as Romania, Greece, and Bulgaria)
and external to it as neighbor or candidate countries (such as Russia,
Ukraine, Serbia, and Macedonia). Particularly, the processes of European
integration have been a testing ground for the Orthodox churches. They
have shaped the diverse Orthodox responses to some EU reforms con-
cerning church-state relations and human rights (Guglielmi, 2021;
Leustean, 2018a; Payne, 2003; Stoeckl, 2014).
On the other hand, in some cases Orthodox churches are appearing to
deal more flexibly with some contemporary issues. This more accommo-
dating approach appears to change its features and intensity according to
the jurisdiction and the sociocultural context concerned. Among the
clearest examples is the recent decision by the Ecumenical Patriarchate—
criticized among Orthodox churches—to allow its clerics to marry a sec-
ond time in certain circumstances (Maragós, 2018). This religious reform
addresses the current social crisis of the institution of the family, even in
the private lives of priests, thus facing an issue that, today, more frequently
affects the church’s mission. This change has been followed by other

8
This is only a brief sketch of a complicated subject. For a nuanced historical description
of religion under socialism in Romania, which sheds light on the contextual Orthodox
dynamics, see Stan and Turcescu (2007) and Leustean (2009).
16 M. GUGLIELMI

adaptations negotiated by this Orthodox church with respect to some

contemporary challenges. They may concern, for instance, a more inclu-
sive approach to administration of the Holy Eucharist to the faithful, the
systematic formulation of ecological and social teachings, and the develop-
ment of a dominant interreligious and ecumenical agenda.
In short, despite the widespread traditionalism described in this sec-
tion, a research perspective should dismiss a vague depiction of Orthodoxy
as an inflexible religious system or as an inert religion. Rather, scholars
should pay attention to the manifold elements that constitute Orthodox
conservatism, which, on the contrary, appears to be very dynamic and not
lacking in practical compromises. I would stress this assumption, since
during my fieldwork the Orthodox churches in Italy appeared to combine
both defensive and engaging positions, proving able to address the mul-
tiple challenges raised by migration. Especially the BOR seemed able to
handle its new condition as a religious minority (abroad) by adopting fresh
practices and flexible routines which reshaped Orthodoxy’s more custom-
ary social traditionalism.

The Eastern Orthodox Diaspora(s)

The question of the Orthodox diaspora has long been debated by schol-
ars, as well as being at the center of ecclesial conflicts within the Orthodox
Eastern Communion. Generally, the discussions are marked by a canonical
perspective focused on the normative or legal condition of the Orthodox
diaspora in Western countries. In this regard, the theological and public
debates on the subject appear dominated by the issue of multiple jurisdic-
tions (Hämmerli, 2010).9 From the canonical perspective, the declaration
by the Orthodox churches that the jurisdiction of the bishop of Rome is
uncanonical created an ecclesiastical void in the traditionally non-Ortho-
dox territories. Thus, especially in recent centuries, the question of

9
Hämmerli (2010) presents a list of five issues based on the canonical tradition and the
ecclesiology of Orthodoxy, which concern the broad question of Orthodox diaspora: viola-
tion of the principle of territoriality; disrespect for the traditional boundaries of dioceses;
ethnophyletism (see the next note for an overview); diminution of the universality of the
Orthodox Church; power conflicts related to the issue of the diaspora’s canonical status. This
section focuses only on the first and last issues, which are the ones most closely connected to
the sociological analysis conducted in this book.
 1 INTRODUCTION 17

primacy over these territories has been a cause of tensions among Orthodox
churches.10
Lately, two main and opposite positions have emerged in the debate.
The Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople claims jurisdiction over all
the territories in the world that are not already part of the canonically
delimited territories of another Orthodox church. It invokes Canon 28 of
the Fourth Ecumenical Council held at Chalcedon in 451 AD, which
granted this Orthodox church a primacy of honor after the bishop of
Rome and over the ‘barbarian’ dioceses (i.e., the historical non-Orthodox
countries and territories). On the other hand, some autocephalous
churches, starting from the Patriarchate of Moscow, contest this right of
world jurisdiction. They warn of the danger of generating a primacy of
authority similar to that of the Catholic pope, and they press for the afore-
mentioned honor to be considered symbolic and honorific.
During the Pan-Orthodox Council of Crete in June 2016, a provisional
solution to the question of Orthodox diaspora was approved (Council,
2016). It acknowledged the decision which had been already taken during
the Fourth Pre-Conciliar Pan-Orthodox Conference at the Orthodox
Centre of Chambésy in June 2009. This solution divided the Orthodox
diaspora in the world into 13 regions, in which Episcopal Assemblies,
composed of bishops and representatives of the diaspora of each territory,
were created. The assembly is presided over by the oldest bishop of the EP
in the region. Despite the fact that this document on the Orthodox dias-
pora had already been discussed and approved, its official approval in June
2016 gave rise to further discussions within the Council.11
In this last respect, as stressed by some scholars (Giordan, 2016;
Ladouceur, 2016; Leustean, 2018b), the conflicts and tensions that devel-
oped around the Pan-Orthodox Council—such as the nonparticipation by
the Moscow Patriarchate, and also by the Georgian, Bulgarian, and

10
Here, it seems important to address the issue of ethnophyletism, which means the prin-
ciple of nationalities applied in the ecclesiastical field, that is, the idea that a local autocepha-
lous church should be based not on a local ecclesial criterion but on a national one. After
some controversial episodes, it was condemned as a modern ecclesial heresy, like religious
nationalism, by the Pan-Orthodox Synod in Constantinople on 10 September 1872. More
recently, this notion has often been used by Orthodox churches in disputes regarding the
condition of both multiple jurisdictions in the diaspora and parallel jurisdictions in some
countries with an Orthodox majority (such as Moldova and Estonia).
11
This information emerged from an in-depth interview with a delegate of the Romanian
Patriarchate at the Pan-Orthodox Council of Crete (Bucharest, June 2017).
18 M. GUGLIELMI

Antioch churches—reveal that more complex power relations lie hidden

beneath disputes in the theological sphere. As suggested by these ecclesial
disputes, beyond the canonical debate on the Orthodox diaspora, the soci-
ological equilibrium and trends of the Orthodox communities in the
Western countries influence the relations among Orthodox churches and
the geopolitics of their respective countries. Hence, while the previous
canonical view focused on the legal aspect of the Orthodox diaspora, the
sociological view concentrates on the sociocultural reality of the Orthodox
diasporas.
This twofold understanding comprises a significant distinction: while
from the canonical perspective, the topic of the Orthodox diaspora should
be declined in the singular (the Orthodox diaspora), from the sociological
perspective, the diasporic phenomenon of the Orthodox churches should
be declined in the plural (Orthodox diasporas). In fact, the sociological
term diaspora religion refers to an Orthodox church and to a respective
community of immigrants settled in a foreign territory, and not to all the
diasporas of a church or a religious tradition. Therefore, the sociological
perspective focuses on the (potential) multiple settlements of Orthodox
diasporas in a targeted host country, paying attention to their shaping of a
religioscape (Hayden & Walker, 2013; McAlister, 2005; Turner, 2008), as
will be shown in detail in Chap. 2.
The two main religious panoramas of the Orthodox diasporas across
the world are in North America and in Western, Central, and Northern
Europe (following the view expressed by Roudometof (2015b)).12 From
the historical perspective, Orthodox Christians have actively spread the
influence of their churches outside their traditional territories. During the
first three centuries, Orthodox missionaries evangelized lands to the East,
generally through the establishment of a monastic community. Over the
centuries, this model of evangelization became the pattern for the Russian
Orthodox missionaries, who established a network of missions across
Siberia and along the entire Pacific Rim. As regards the Orthodox pan-
orama in North America, the eight Orthodox monks who arrived in Alaska
in 1794 formed part of this centuries-old missionary heritage of the
Russian Orthodox Church (ROC). After more than 200 years, according
to Krindatch (2021), the estimated number of Orthodox Christians in the
USA in 2020 amounted to a total of 675,765 in 2014 parishes. In Canada,

12
As already stated, this book generally refers to the above vast European area as
Western Europe.
 1 INTRODUCTION 19

where Orthodox immigration began in 1920, according to statistics com-

piled in 2001, the Orthodox population exceeded 400,000, with a Greek,
Ukrainian, and Serbian majority (Wigglesworth, 2010). Johnson and
Grim (2014)13 projected that there were approximately 1,000,000
Orthodox faithful in Canada in 2015, but counting both Eastern and
Oriental Orthodox churches together.14 In short, present in the USA and
Canada are Orthodox jurisdictions largely composed by immigrants and
linked to the churches in their motherland, such as those in Russia, Greece,
Romania, Serbia, Bulgaria, Syria, and Albania. Among the long-standing
Orthodox jurisdictions, the most well-established appear to be those of
the Greek Orthodox Archdioceses of both America and Canada.
Some Orthodox jurisdictions in the diaspora have foundations related
not only to migration but also to political issues, as in the case of the
Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia (ROCOR)—united with the
Moscow Patriarchate since 2007. At the time of the newly constituted
Soviet regime, the Russian Orthodox bishops in exile asked the synod in
the homeland to maintain a certain independence from the communist
government. This dissent induced Patriarch Tikhon (Bellavin) (1866-1925)
to authorize Russian bishops in the diaspora to create independent orga-
nizations if it became impossible to maintain normal relations with the
Patriarchate. By means of the decree of 20 November 1920, the Patriarch
Tikhon gave the go-ahead for the development of this Russian jurisdic-
tion. Secondly, one should cite the peculiar establishment of the Orthodox
Church in America (OCA). Also this was a Metropolia of the Russian
Orthodox Church in the USA until 1970. In that year, after disputes
related to political issues, it was granted a tomos of autocephaly (currently
not recognized by the Ecumenical Patriarchate). Unlike the other
Orthodox communities, it did not receive large influxes of immigrants
after the 1960s, and currently its members are primarily second- and

13
Concerning this long-term research project on global religious demography, the most
recent data do not furnish specific estimates on Orthodoxy (Grim et al., 2018).
14
Oriental Orthodoxy is the second biggest tradition of Eastern Christianity. It operates as
a communion of six autocephalous churches, in which the Coptic Orthodox Church of
Alexandria holds the role of primus inter pares or ‘first among equals’. Broadly speaking, the
communion has recognized the first three ecumenical councils (those of Nicaea (325),
Ephesus (341), and Constantinople (381)), but it rejects the position of the Council of
Chalcedon (451), which states that Jesus Christ “has two natures in one person, being God
and Man”. Historically, these churches have separated from the rest of the Christianity
because they do not accept this theological view, and they are called non-Chalcedonian.
20 M. GUGLIELMI

third-­generation immigrant citizens and converts. This is the only jurisdic-

tion that uses solely English as a liturgical language, and the only local
Orthodox church in the United States. According to the framework of
this study, the OCA is the most important case of an Orthodox church in
the diaspora utterly merged into the new sociocultural environment, and
which has become an indigenized church or indigenous religion through
the completion of its hybridization.
On the other side of the Atlantic, that is, in Western, Central, and
Northern Europe, it is more difficult to estimate the number of followers
of Orthodox churches. The first group of immigrants started to arrive in
these European areas at the beginning of the eighteenth century, and their
number has grown exponentially during the European integration pro-
cess. Currently, Orthodox communities are mainly composed of immi-
grants from Eastern Europe and the former Soviet countries, especially
from Romania, Moldavia, Ukraine, Russia, Serbia, and Bulgaria. They
have established themselves in all EU countries, occasionally with histori-
cal and/or cultural dynamics influencing their domestic migratory flows.
For instance, the settlement of the Greek community in the United
Kingdom is historically deep-rooted, and so too is that of Cypriot immi-
grants, while the number of Romanian immigrants is very high in Spain.
Again according to Johnson and Grim (2014), they projected approxi-
mately 1,400,000 adherents of Eastern Orthodoxy in Germany in 2015.
Italy seems to have the highest Orthodox presence in Western Europe—
close to about 1,600,000 faithful—due to the presence of the largest
Romanian diaspora in the world (Giordan & Guglielmi, 2018; Guglielmi,
2020b). Finally, Orthodox communities are historically rooted in France
especially because of the presence of the Russian diaspora following the
Bolshevik Revolution. They have grown significantly over the past 25
years due to transnational migration, reaching around 750,000 faithful in
2015 (Johnson & Grim, 2014).
There are also small Orthodox communities, again due to more recent
migration flows, in Switzerland, Austria (186,000 Orthodox faithful pro-
jected in 2015), Belgium (64,000 Orthodox faithful projected in 2015),
Denmark (13,000 Orthodox faithful projected in 2015), and a small
Orthodox group exists in Norway (Johnson & Grim, 2014). With regard
to Northern Europe, to be noted is the case of the Finnish Orthodox
Church, which embodies the features of both an indigenous religion and
a diaspora religion (Martikainen, 2013). On the one hand, this church is
legally recognized as a national church by the Finnish state, along with the
 1 INTRODUCTION 21

Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland. On the other hand, it has its

roots in the medieval Novgorodian missionary work undertaken in the
Karelia area from the twelfth-century onward, and it was part of the ROC
until 1923.15 Finally, another particular case is that of the Archdiocese of
the Russian Orthodox churches in Western Europe, which has its head-
quarters in Paris. This church stems from a rift among the ROCOR par-
ishes in Western Europe that occurred in 1931 due to conflicts related to
political issues; in the same year, it was received as an Exarchate by the
Ecumenical Patriarchate.16 After the decision of the EP to dissolve this
exarchate in 2018, a year later the Archdiocese was received by the Russian
Orthodox Church, while a minority of its parishes joined the EP, the
Romanian Orthodox Church, and the Bulgarian Orthodox Church.
On comparing these two religious panoramas, one can recognize a
greater canonical independence of some Orthodox diasporas in North
America compared with those in Western, Central, and Northern Europe.
In this regard, it seems that the older establishment of some Orthodox
communities in the USA may have fostered the autonomous development
of these diaspora religions with respect to their church of origin. Probably,
it may also have promoted significant sociocultural and religious encoun-
ters with the host contexts. First evidence of this trend in the North
American panorama is provided by the consolidated presence of an indig-
enous Orthodox church (the OCA), the recent pressures for greater local
autonomy within the Greek Orthodox diaspora in the USA (the
GOARCH) (Roudometof, 2014a), and the canonical status of Archdiocese
recently granted to the diasporas of the Church of Antioch and of the
Romanian Orthodox Church. As will be shown in more detail in Chap. 4,
this different scenario of the Orthodox diasporas in North America should
be seen as an expression of the multiple religious glocalizations of Eastern
Orthodoxy, which shape its different settlements around the globe.

15
Formally, it is an autonomous archdiocese within the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical
Patriarchate of Constantinople.
16
On the historical divisions of the Russian Orthodox diasporas in Western Europe, see
Rimestad (2015). Considering the controversial developments of these three Russian
Orthodox jurisdictions abroad, to be stressed is the key role played in their division by the
transnational entanglement between the church and the state (i.e., a topic that will be dis-
cussed in Chap. 4). In fact, “the fragmentation of the Russian Orthodox diaspora in three
different jurisdictions was the result of the crystallization of three different approaches to the
church and its relationship with the state” (Pnevmatikakis, 2013, p. 5).
22 M. GUGLIELMI

Research Design and Book Contents

According to sociological studies, the scenario of Orthodox communities
in Western Europe solely engaged in the assistance of their immigrant
populations has been superseded by others (Giordan & Guglielmi, 2018;
Giordan & Zrinščak, 2020; Hämmerli & Mayer, 2014; Ihlamur-Öner,
2009; Rimestad, 2020; Roudometof, 2015c; Roudometof et al., 2005).
In the past two decades, the Orthodox diasporas in this European region
seem to have been marked by more significant engagements with host
contexts and adaptations. Against this background, the inquiry in this
book focuses on the case of the Orthodox Christian diasporas in Italy,
which appears to resemble a ‘stronghold’ in Western Europe. In this local
scenario, according to the debate shaped by the aforementioned studies,
some paths and challenges relating to the establishment of Eastern
Orthodoxy in Western Europe are more apparent. This book refers to
many (potential and actual) issues, such as the reproduction by Orthodox
diasporas of their identities abroad, the range of their stances toward the
foreign society and natives (starting from the ‘specter’ of nationalism and
the option of self-ghettoization), or their practical approaches to helping
their fellow countrymen abroad or to carry out youth ministry for trans-
mitting the Orthodox faith to the second generation of immigrants grow-
ing in increasing secularized contexts. Also considered is the challenge to
Orthodox diasporas of maintaining their emphasis on, and care for, the
liturgical and sacramental dimension in precarious material situations and
plural societal environments, the possible innovative scope of their eccle-
sial organization abroad (for instance through a remarkable laity involve-
ment), and the question of their positioning as religious minorities within
interreligious relations.
As will be seen throughout this book, the ‘potentiality’ of the Italian
case, which makes it referable to as a ‘Orthodox Christian stronghold’, is
shaped by four main features: (i) the presence of the largest Orthodox
community in Western Europe and the biggest Romanian Orthodox dias-
pora in the world (Giordan & Guglielmi, 2018); (ii) the virtual monopoly
of the Catholic Church in the sociocultural context, and the particular
religious diversity more framed and centered on Christianity in the Italian
Peninsula (Pace, 2011, 2013); (iii) the settlement of several Orthodox
Christian jurisdictions and bishops in the country, which generates a frag-
mented and heterogeneous landscape in which the number of canonical
jurisdictions is equal to that of noncanonical ones (Guglielmi, 2020b); (iv)
 1 INTRODUCTION 23

according to the latest estimate, a significant number of Italian convert to

Eastern Orthodoxy, amounting around to 355,000 people (CESNUR,
2020).
This book considers the case of Orthodox Christian diasporas in Italy
and focuses on the Romanian Orthodox diaspora in the country.
Considering primarily (but not only) the evidence provided by its quanti-
tative size, the study of the latter religion in diaspora is able to highlight
ongoing processes and trends which are affecting (albeit with different
intensities, in diverse forms and with various outcomes) the Orthodox
communities in Italy and more broadly those ones in Western Europe (as
reported by the studies on the subject cited at the beginning of this sec-
tion). Thus, the book explores Orthodox diasporas by enhancing the
more recent sociological research approach to religion and migration in
Western Europe, which is less consolidated than that developed in and on
the USA (Ambrosini et al., 2021; Becci et al., 2017; Koenig et al., 2016;
Koopmans, 2015). In other words, the book’s intention is to furnish soci-
ological insights into the Orthodox diasporas which are refashioning the
Western religious field of the Old Continent. This evidence will make it
possible to debunk the vague persisting image among some scholars of
Eastern Orthodoxy as a monolithic religious system composed of passive
or backward religious institutions. Rather, the analysis will center on the
cultural hybrids that frame the Romanian Orthodox diaspora as a multi-
tude of religious glocalities.
In the research, it will be hypothesized that the Romanian Orthodox
Church in Italy is a prime example of a glocal religion. On the one hand,
the sociocultural and religious features of the Italian context provide the
basis for describing a kind of ‘workshop’ for the Orthodox communities
abroad. On the other hand, some of the BOR’s features—such as those
within its vernacular and indigenous dimensions—powerfully foster pro-
cesses ‘cultivating’ some novel facets of this Orthodox church (Giordan &
Guglielmi, 2018; Guglielmi, 2020b). In particular, through its diasporic
condition and as a religious minority, the Romanian Orthodox diaspora in
Italy seems to reshape Orthodoxy’s more customary social traditionalism
and its defensive stances toward contemporary challenges. According to
the findings set out in this book, the development of these nuanced stances
and practices is grounded on manifold hybridization experienced by
Romanian faithful and, likewise, on unprecedented habits embraced by
Romanian clerics. However, it seems that this significant institutional
24 M. GUGLIELMI

dynamism and religious vitality is only partially absorbed by the church in

the homeland and recognized by the Orthodox milieu (Rimestad, 2020).
This chapter stresses the importance of the cultural aspect in approach-
ing the current situations and fresh forms of religions shaped by their
transnational diffusion. Within the framework of religious glocalization,
the case study is gradually focused on Eastern Orthodoxy in Italy and
particularly on the Romanian Orthodox Church, the general purpose
being to bring attention to the broad establishment of the Orthodox dia-
sporas in Western Europe. To outline the structure of the book, each of
the next three chapters addresses a sociological debate associated with the
main recent religious transformations in Western European countries,
seeking broad common processes or trends recognized by scholars in the
religious field. Therefore, the case study should be understood in light of
these three main sociological debates, which extend further than the top-
ics more usually considered by the debates on Orthodox Christianity but
which have powerfully influenced its establishment in Italy and beyond.
On the other hand, Orthodox diasporas are not passive agents with respect
to sociocultural and religious changes, since they nimbly move through
the processes outlined by the discussions in each chapter. To be noted in
this regard is a reciprocal reshaping between the Orthodox diasporas in
Italy and the aforementioned leading religious trends in Western Europe.
In fact, it appears that the reform of Orthodox traditionalism is in some of
its parts wanted by diaspora religions, while the remodeling of some of its
other aspects is not envisaged or planned. As said, some features of the
BOR and of the Italian context have made this reciprocal reshaping even
more fruitful, thus favoring a powerful glocalization of the former in the
Italian Peninsula.
The second chapter initially furnishes a historical overview of Eastern
Orthodoxy in Italy. It then provides a sociological description of the over-
all Orthodox community and a map of its jurisdictions in the Italian
regions. In other words, it outlines the social discontinuity within the
ancient Orthodox presence in Italy due to transnational migration. This
situation appears to be ‘echoed’ in the sociological debate on the growing
religious diversity in Western Europe (Davie, 2000, 2006; Furseth, 2018;
Giordan & Pace, 2014; Körs et al., 2020; Monnot & Stolz, 2018). In the
concluding analysis of a recent volume on the subject (Monnot & Stolz,
2018), Chaves (2018) maintains that the most prominent similarity
among European countries is the increasing religious diversity caused
mainly by immigration—in the sense of both a greater diversity among
 1 INTRODUCTION 25

religious traditions and a greater diversity within those major religious

traditions. In this regard, “each country has its own unique pattern of
immigration and diversity, and Christianity remains by far the predomi-
nant religion in each place” (Chaves, 2018, p. 213). Chapter 2 describes
some aspects of this twofold pattern in Italy, also examining the predomi-
nantly Latin character of the Romanian population and of the BOR, which
encountered manifold aspects of the Italian religious and sociocultural
realm. Moreover, the chapter concentrates on two specific points in the
broad sociological discussion on religious diversity and migration. Firstly,
it adopts the notion of religioscape in order to depict the multifaceted
nature of the Orthodox presence in Italy. Secondly, in exploring the
Orthodox-scape, it focuses on the glocal traits associated to the BOR’s
places of worship in Italy. This second point relates in particular to the
discussion on the modes of place-making of religious minorities and dias-
pora religions in Western European cities.
The third chapter analyzes various aspects of the settlement of the
Romanian Orthodox Church in Italy. It studies both the religious activi-
ties and the social activities of this church in diaspora, starting with exami-
nation of the Romanian Orthodox clerics serving in the Italian Peninsula.
In other words, the chapter explores the BOR’s rooting in Italian society
by outlining its main pattern of religious glocalization. In that respect, this
central (but not the only) part of the BOR’s broad glocalization may enter
into the well-established debate on the reframing of immigrant religious
organizations (summarized by Kivisto, 2014, pp. 62-94). Among the
many theories and approaches on the topic, the relevant one by Fenggang
Yang and Helen Rose Ebaugh (2001) assumes some crucial transforma-
tions in the rooting of diaspora religions in the USA and beyond: (i) adop-
tion of the congregational form in their organizational structure, (ii) a
return to their theological foundations, and (iii) extension beyond their
traditional national and religious boundaries to include other peoples. To
better grasp this approach, it is suitable recall that its first assumption refers
to an earlier theory developed by Warner (1993, 2000) through empirical
study of the USA and called de facto congregationalism. The chapter
adopts this theory only critically and partially, arguing that it is inattentive
to both the dynamics of power within religious communities and the insti-
tutional differentiation of religious groups (Vásquez, 2005, pp. 229-233).
However, the general approach of Yang and Ebaugh (2001) outlines some
analytical features within the broad glocalization of Romanian Orthodoxy
in Italy, showing the main pattern of the latter. Although it has been rarely
26 M. GUGLIELMI

applied to Western European contexts, it may help to discern the cultural

hybrids engendered by the Romanian Orthodox parishes. In this respect,
a notable feature that will be evidenced by the case study is how the BOR’s
leadership in Italy has fostered sociocultural encounters.
The fourth chapter concentrates on the multiple bonds between Italy
and Romania. In particular, it studies the institutional forms of transnation-
alism of Romanian Orthodox diasporas and the transnational forms of reli-
gious practice of Romanian immigrants. It examines the role of religious
transnationalism in shaping the establishment of the BOR in Italy and
influencing its stances toward certain challenges. Generally speaking, the
transnational scenario that will emerge reveals an enhancement by the BOR
of the multiple glocalizations of its diasporas in Europe. In this respect, the
transnational dimension of the BOR seems to find a suitable place within
the fresh debate on transnational social protection (TSP), which is a new
perspective within transnational studies (Levitt et al., 2017). This new
approach appears to frame and clarify the recent transnationalization pro-
cesses of the BOR in Western Europe, as well as its increasing involvement
in the social assistance of Romanian immigrants. An important aspect to be
noted in fact is that Romania may be structurally recognized as a ‘diaspora
country’, that is, one with a very high percentage of citizens resident
abroad. This condition has encouraged the BOR to develop connections
with its churches in diaspora, thanks to the political and economic assis-
tance provided by the Romanian state. This transnational entanglement
between church and state (Gray & Levitt, 2020) is closely bound up with
Romania’s entry into the European Union, which has been a real water-
shed in the history of the Romanian Orthodox Church (Turcescu & Stan,
2010). Accordingly, the book concludes by exploring the BOR’s dynamics
in shaping a broad European Orthodox identity and the positioning of the
Romanian Orthodox diasporas within the transnational EU project.

Methodology
This book may be seen as a sociological study of religion. Following the
definition of the disciplinary field proposed by Davie (2013), it falls within
the theoretical perspective exploring the construct(s) of modernity/ies
and the contemporary world, and within the two substantive issues con-
cerning globalization and the study of religion: religious diversity, plural-
ism and new minorities. In some specific points, however, it takes some
theological works as key references. I argue in fact that theology may assist
 1 INTRODUCTION 27

the sociologist of religion in developing a more comprehensive qualitative

approach. In particular, it may be adopted as a critical source for detecting
the historical background and symbolic imagination of a religious tradition.
The chapters that follow present data collected mainly by means of
qualitative methods. Chapter 2 maps the Orthodox Christian jurisdictions
and parishes by adopting the methodology of previous research on Eastern
Orthodoxy in Italy (Giordan, 2013; Giordan & Guglielmi, 2018).
Specifically, the data were collected firstly by referring to the liturgical
calendars annually issued by certain jurisdictions. Given that such calen-
dars are published only by the most highly represented jurisdictions in
Italy, the inquiry involved online research integrated with personal meet-
ings and/or telephone interviews. In the second, third, and fourth chap-
ters, considerable use is made of qualitative material collected by means of
in-depth interviews and ethnographic observations in Italy and in
Romania. Moreover, quantitative data about the activities of the Romanian
Orthodox Church in Italy were collected through fruitful collaboration
with the aforementioned institution. Finally, various types of editorial
material on Romanian Orthodoxy were collected from Internet sources.17
In his book Tricks of the Trade (1998), sociologist Howard S. Becker
warns social scientists about the challenges of qualitative research meth-
ods. Highlighting critical aspects of social research, he directs attention to
the a priori images sometimes constructed by social scientists on a topic,
and then superimposed on their research subject. These images may influ-
ence the definition of research methodology and the collection and inter-
pretation of data. Accordingly, the investigation reported in this book
began the collection of data after a period of study/exploration, and then
attempted to construct, step by step, the sample structure and an ‘image’
of the research. This certainly does not eliminate the drawbacks and dan-
gers highlighted by Becker, especially when a study intends to furnish an
organic view of the settlement of a diaspora religion in an entire country.
On the other hand, as noted by Becker, it is “better than nothing”
(1998, p. 26).

17
In particular, from the following web portals: Lumina, a hard-copy and online newspa-
per of the Romanian Patriarchate; the website Basilica.ro, the official news agency of the
Patriarchate; several web sites of the Romanian Orthodox Church (that of the Patriarchate
and those of its parishes; the website of the Romanian Orthodox diocese in Italy and those
of its communities); Facebook profiles of the Romanian Orthodox parishes in Italy; the
online Vatican archives. Throughout the book, the material from these sources will be
quoted only when it reveals an item of information or a thought associated with a person.
28 M. GUGLIELMI

While collecting data for the research presented in this book, I followed
the notion of “gradual selection as a general principle in qualitative
research” (Flick, 2009, p. 120). As stated by Flick (2009, pp. 125-126),
sampling decisions are often taken during and as a result of data collection
and analysis. Consequently, they are frequently based on a substantial and
concrete level rather than on an abstract and formal one. Therefore, I
adopted this approach to study a diaspora religion settled throughout the
Italian Peninsula. However, it was not possible to examine all the parishes
of the Romanian Orthodox diocese in Italy. Consequently, I collected data
through research encounters with both the leadership of the diaspora reli-
gion at its headquarters in Rome, and some selected parishes in various
Italian regions. Regarding the latter, I was not able to adopt a well-­
established methodology for their selection, so that I instead followed the
standard of relevant cases selection. Finally, I tried to achieve data satura-
tion in the research before stopping their collection and establishing the
key results.
I divided the collection of qualitative data into three main phases and
three related fields. During my doctoral studies, I was able to undertake a
period of research in Romania and gather qualitative material (from March
to June 2017). In particular, I interviewed priests working at the Romanian
Patriarchate in Bucharest and who, in their mission, for various reasons
were called upon to address issues relating to the Orthodox diaspora (8
interviews). Moreover, I interviewed priests and deacons who had partici-
pated in the life of the Romanian Orthodox parishes in Italy (5 inter-
views), and students of the Faculty of Orthodox Theology of the University
of Bucharest, some of whom had taken part in the Orthodox diaspora in
Western Europe (6 interviews). I also interviewed some Romanian priests
working at the Romanian Orthodox Metropolis of Western and Southern
Europe (Mitropolia Ortodoxă Română in Europei Occidentale şi
Meridionale) based in Paris, and at the World Council of Churches (WCC)
in Geneva (2 interviews). Finally, I carried out some interviews and col-
lected ethnographic material at the university chapel and parish of Santa
Caterina in Bucharest (Parohiei Sfânta Ecaterina—Paraclis universitar)
(3 interviews).
I gathered qualitative material in Italy in two periods (from November
2015 to October 2018, and less intensively during 2020-2021). I carried
out interviews (in 2015, 2017, and 2021) with the two bishops of the
Romanian Orthodox Diocese in Italy (Episcopia Ortodoxă Română in
Italiei) and with priests and deacons of the BOR’s parishes in Italian cities
 1 INTRODUCTION 29

(13 interviews). In addition, I studied the case of the Romanian Orthodox

parish in Padua (Parohia Ortodoxă Română Sfinţii Apostoli Petru şi Pavel
din Padova) (from January to June 2018), where I administered a list of
questions to the parishioners and was able to collect ethnographic data
(15 interviews). Finally, in my ongoing research project aimed at mapping
all the Orthodox Christian jurisdictions and parishes in Italy (from
November 2015 to now), I have interviewed some priests of the
Ecumenical Patriarchate (Holy Orthodox Archdiocese of Italy and
Malta—Ὀρθόδοξος Ἱερά Μητρόπολις Ἰταλίας καί Μελίτης), of the Russian
Orthodox Church (parishes of the Patriarchate of Moscow in Italy—
Приходов Московского Патриархата в Италии), and of other noncanonical
churches (12 interviews). In the past six years of research, I have carried
out approximately 65 in-depth interviews in Italy and Romania.

Conclusion: Orthodox Diasporas

as Glocal Religions

This chapter has defined the theoretical frame and the objectives of the
research. The first section developed a glocal religious framework in order
to approach the current situations and fresh forms of religions influenced
by their global spread. Adopted for this purpose was the notion of glocal
religion, which focuses on the meeting point of cultures and to valorize
the interactions among different levels. This notion furnishes understand-
ing of the hybridity and fragmentation of religions within the frame of
global-local relations by considering religions as cultural hybrids that
blend religious universalism with local particularism.
The second section specified the research approach that treats diaspora
religions as glocal religions in order to describe their settlement. In this
respect, Roudometof’s model of glocalization (vernacularization, indi-
genization, nationalization, and transnationalization) stresses different
paths of blending with respect to historical and present processes of (dias-
pora) religions and particular human settings. In this framework, they are
considered to be key dimensions with which to shed light on the main
aspects that may generate notable hybridization in a diaspora religion.
These crucial views on glocalization furnish a nuanced picture of the lat-
ter’s sociocultural and religious encounters with the host environment, as
well as of its engagements with new challenges.
30 M. GUGLIELMI

The third section introduced the subject of study, that is, Orthodox
Christianity. Developed in this regard was a broad sociological approach
to this Christian tradition, which addressed the societal trends histori-
cally formed around its theological teachings on the Holy Tradition. In
other words, the section considered the challenge faced by sociologists
in determining social impacts and cultural tendencies engendered by
the crucial role of the Tradition within Orthodox Christianity. In this
sense, the defensive and conservative character associated with the apos-
tolic fidelity to Early Christianity fostered the growth of a social tradi-
tionalism within Eastern Orthodoxy. The latter was exacerbated by
distinctive historical paths followed by the countries with an Orthodox
majority, starting from those of the communist dictatorships. In short,
this combination of factors and trends determined the controversial
engagement of Orthodox churches with other realms and contempo-
rary challenges.
The fourth section outlined the Orthodox Christian diaspora(s) in
Western countries, examining the two main panoramas, namely that in
North America and in Western, Central, and Northern Europe.
Moreover, it focused on the sociological perspective rather than the
canonical one relative to the topic of Orthodox diaspora, evidencing the
recent developments of the Orthodox jurisdictions in the aforemen-
tioned world areas. This section helped better to ground and to locate
within a global context the ‘Orthodox Christian stronghold’ that is Italy.
The fifth section defined the objectives of the research, while the last
section explained the methodology adopted. In this regard, the former
introduced some features of the Italian context and some ones of the
BOR, as well as the sociological debates that will be addressed in each
chapter. The case study appears to comprise the context suitable for
more vividly showing certain issues and tendencies tackled by Orthodox
diasporas in Western Europe. In particular, because of its diasporic
nature and as a religious minority, Romanian Orthodoxy in Italy seems
to reshape Orthodoxy’s more customary social traditionalism and its
defensive stances toward contemporary challenges. Thus, the BOR may
be deemed a paradigmatic case of a glocal religion in which significant
hybridization is shaping its settlement in Italy.
 1 INTRODUCTION 31

References
Agadjanian, A. (2003). Breakthrough to Modernity, Apologia for Traditionalism:
The Russian Orthodox View of Society and Culture in Comparative Perspective.
Religion, State and Society, 31(4), 327–346.
Agadjanian, A. (2010). Liberal Individual and Christian Culture: Russian
Orthodox Teaching on Human Rights in Social Theory Perspective. Religion,
State and Society, 38(2), 97–113.
Ambrosini, M., Bonizzoni, P., & Molli, S. D. (2021). How Religion Shapes
Immigrants’ Integration: The Case of Christian Migrant Churches in Italy.
Current Sociology, 69(6), 823–842.
Asad, T. (1993). Genealogies of Religion: Discipline and Reasons of Power in
Christianity and Islam. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Bauman, Z. (2013). Glocalization and Hybridity. Glocalism, 1, 1–5.
Becci, I., Burchardt, M., & Giorda, M. (2017). Religious Super-diversity and
Spatial Strategies in Two European Cities. Current Sociology, 65(1), 73–91.
Becker, H. S. (1998). Tricks of the Trade: How to Think about Your Research While
You’re Doing It. University of Chicago Press.
Beyer, P. (2006). Religions in Global Society. Routledge.
Beyer, P. (2007). Globalization and Glocalization. In J. A. Beckford &
N. J. Demerath III (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of the Sociology of Religion
(pp. 98–117). Sage.
Bulgakov, S. (1935). The Orthodox Church. Centenary Press; reprinted by St.
Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1988.
Casanova, J. (1994). Public Religions in the Modern World. University of
Chicago Press.
CESNUR. (2020). Le Dimensioni del Pluralismo Religioso in Italia. Centro Studi
sulle Nuove Religioni. https://cesnur.com/dimensioni-­del-­pluralismo-
­religioso-­in-­italia/
Chaves, M. (2018). Congregations in Europe and the United States: Surprising
Similarities and Common Priorities for Future Research. In C. Monnot &
J. Stolz (Eds.), Congregations in Europe (pp. 209–219). Springer.
Clément, O. (2005). La Chiesa Ortodossa. Queriniana.
Clément, O. (2011). Il Respiro dell’Oriente: Il Volto dell’Ortodossia nella
Storia. Qiqajon.
Cohen, R. (2008). Global Diasporas: An Introduction. Routledge.
Council. (2016). The Orthodox Diaspora. Official Documents of the Holy and
Great Council of the Orthodox Church. https://www.holycouncil.
org/-­/diaspora
Csordas, T. J. (2007). Introduction: Modalities of Transnational Transcendence.
Anthropological Theory, 7(3), 259–272.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
The Project Gutenberg eBook of La biche écrasée
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States
and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
ebook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
you are located before using this eBook.

Title: La biche écrasée

Author: Pierre Mille

Release date: May 15, 2022 [eBook #68086]

Language: French

Original publication: France: Calmann Lévy, 1909

Credits: Laurent Vogel, Chuck Greif and the Online Distributed

Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This book was
produced from images made available by the HathiTrust
Digital Library.)

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LA BICHE

ÉCRASÉE ***
 LA BICHE ÉCRASÉE
CALMANN-LÉVY, ÉDITEURS

DU MÊME AUTEUR

Format in-18
SUR LA VASTE TERRE 1 vol.
BARNAVAUX ET QUELQUES FEMMES 1 vol.
Droits de reproduction et de traduction réservés pour tous les pays
y compris la Hollande
 PIERRE MILLE

LA

BICHE ÉCRASÉE

PARIS
CALMANN-LÉVY, ÉDITEURS
3, RUE AUBER, 3

TABLE
 LA BICHE ÉCRASÉE
Après avoir dîné à Brantes, aux Deux Couronnes, les trois hommes
s’apprêtaient à remonter dans leur automobile. Une petite bonne apparut
tout à coup: Béville avait oublié son appareil photographique dans la salle à
manger; elle le lui tendit sans un mot, et disparut.
—Pas causeuse, celle-là! fit-il.
—Ah! dit le valet du garage, c’est la Bretonne. Il n’y a que deux jours
qu’elle est arrivée de son pays, et elle ne sait pas encore un mot de français.
—La Bretonne? demanda Béville.
—Comment, monsieur ne sait pas, dit le goujat avec un gros rire: dans
les hôtels comme ici, les hôtels de petite ville, on fait toujours venir une
Bretonne. C’est pour les voyageurs, en cas...
Les trois hommes avaient ri. L’automobile s’ébranla. Quelques secondes
plus tard, elle était lancée dans la pleine campagne.
—Tu sens l’odeur qui vient, maintenant, la bonne odeur, dit Béville à
son compagnon.
—Oui, répondit Bottiaux. C’est parce qu’il vient de pleuvoir, et la terre
est encore chaude, et l’auto va très vite. Alors les parfums...
Béville s’allongea, presque pâmé, ivre un peu des quelques verres de
champagne qu’il avait bus à son dîner, ivre surtout de la vitesse et de cet air
vivant, tiède, nocturne, qui le baignait, le fouettait, le violait, le rendait
câlin, languide et voluptueux. Il n’était plus sur terre, il planait, il étendait
parfois les bras, comme pour enlacer un plaisir.
—... Dommage qu’il n’y ait pas de femmes, fit-il. Hé, Jalin?
Mais Jalin, le propriétaire de l’auto, qui conduisait, ne tourna pas la tête.
Sur la route dévorée, blondie par la lumière des grands phares, la route où
les arbres alignés faisaient comme deux murs opaques, tant on allait vite, il
avait bien assez de guider la formidable machine.
Il grogna seulement.
—Des femmes? Ah, non!
Toute sa virilité, toute sa vigueur, toute sa force de mâle et d’athlète
intelligent n’étaient plus que dans sa tête et dans ses mains. Mais comme les
autres il ouvrait les narines pour boire les odeurs de la nuit d’été, celle des
tilleuls, celle des sorbes, celle des milliers de petites herbes dont on ne sait
pas les noms, qui se sont fait féconder aux heures de soleil, et durant la nuit
savourent, dans leurs corolles refermées, les délices de cette fécondation.
Ça lui suffisait. Il murmura seulement:
—Hein, c’est beau, n’est-ce pas?
Des lapins, réveillés par le bruit, aveuglés par le feu des phares, fous
d’épouvante, sortaient des fossés, passaient comme des boulets noirs sur le
cailloutis lumineux. Mais tout à coup la route s’assombrit; les branchages,
au-dessus de leurs têtes, se tachetèrent de pans de ciel entrevus. Une
seconde auparavant, c’était la machine, le bolide, la chose furieuse et
précipitée, qui semblait être la seule source de lumière au monde; et
maintenant, elle n’était plus que le centre d’une noirceur, tandis que les
choses ressuscitaient dans une clarté diffuse. Ce fut brusque, prodigieux,
poignant. Jalin cria:
—Nom de Dieu! Les phares se sont éteints!
—Rallume-les, fit Bottiaux.
Jalin hausse les épaules.
—Ils sont encrassés. J’avais prévu ça. Rien à faire.
—Alors continue. Il reste les deux autres lampes.
—Des quinquets! dit Jalin.
—C’est assez pour les gendarmes. Continue! Nous allons à Paris. Je
veux coucher à Paris, moi.
Jalin hocha la tête. Une quatre-vingts chevaux «ne sait pas» ralentir, pas
plus qu’un cheval de course ou un torpilleur de haute mer. On a beau
vouloir la retenir, elle bondit, elle échappe à la volonté, elle la force. Et
courir, à près de cent kilomètres à l’heure, quand on a perdu ses yeux, qu’en
deux secondes on est sur l’obstacle aperçu à soixante pas? Il savait la folie
de l’acte, et pourtant consentit. Il était comme les deux autres: trop heureux,
trop fougueux, trop sorti de lui-même, tout emporté par ce mouvement dont
il se croyait le maître. C’est la même chose dans une charge de cavalerie: on
va vers la mort, et on ne veut pas s’empêcher d’y aller.
Les ombrages, au-dessus d’eux, et de chaque côté de la route, se firent
plus denses. On traversait un bois, une immensité obscure et confuse
d’arbres pressés, qui mêlaient leurs branches et leurs troncs. Il faisait si
sombre qu’on avait mal aux yeux, qu’on avait envie de se les couvrir avec
la main, pour les protéger d’un choc. Et, à ce moment-là, juste au plus épais
de cette horreur, Jalin crut pourtant distinguer quelque chose devant les
roues, une ombre plus noire que cette noirceur, et vivante, et terrifiée. Il
donna un tour de volant, stoppa... Ce coup sec de l’arrêt, cette déviation
brusque d’un projectile fait pour une trajectoire directe, tous ceux qui
connaissent les réactions du coursier moderne en ont éprouvé les
conséquences physiques; les viscères changent de place jusque dans les
profondeurs du corps, on a l’âcre avant-goût de ce qu’est l’agonie! Mais
l’auto était large et basse sur pattes. Elle ne se retourna pas, obéit comme
elle pût, monta sur le tas de cailloux, et se tint tranquille, malgré son
frissonnement.
—Qu’est-ce que c’est? fit Béville, tout pâle.
Bottiaux avait sauté à terre et rejoint Jalin, qui s’épongeait le front,
agenouillé devant une misérable masse qui s’agitait encore, étendue par
terre, et qu’une des lanternes de la voiture éclairait vaguement.
—C’est de la chance, dit Béville, descendu à son tour. Ce n’est qu’une
biche!
Tous trois respirèrent longuement, et leur voix, rassurée, retentit sous les
arbres. Dépouillés de leurs lourds manteaux, de leurs capes et de leurs
lunettes, ils se ressemblaient singulièrement: de beaux hommes, barbus tous
trois, l’air riche, vigoureux et fort.
—C’est de la chance! répéta Jalin.
Mais sa voix, qui riait avec celle des autres, s’arrêta tout à coup. Il venait
de voir les yeux de la biche: si tendres, malheureux et terrifiés, si pleins de
l’horreur de ne pas comprendre pourquoi elle était là, et ce qui l’avait
écrasée dans la nuit! Pauvre petite chose jolie! Pauvre petite bête des bois,
farouche et pure! Ils en avaient tué bien d’autres à la chasse: devant les
chiens et les chevaux, à l’affût, poussées par les rabatteurs. Mais comme ça!
Elle était broyée, déchiquetée, agonisante, avec des frissons si douloureux,
et toujours le regard désespéré de ses yeux souffrants.
—Il faut retourner à Brantes, dit Jalin. Je n’avance plus sans mes phares.
Nous coucherons à l’hôtel où nous avons dîné.
La machine fit volte-face et ils remontèrent vers Brantes, aussi lentement
qu’ils purent. Insensiblement le souvenir de cette bête massacrée s’effaçait
de leur esprit. Ils auraient pu écraser un homme, ils auraient pu se tuer, ils
avaient eu peur de mourir! Et ils vivaient, le même sang intact courait dans
leurs veines, des années, des années encore le monde serait à eux! Ils
apercevaient l’avenir comme une colonnade qu’on peut suivre sans en
distinguer jamais la fin, dans une fraîcheur délicieuse.
La porte de l’hôtel des Deux Couronnes était fermée. Tout le monde
dormait. Ils frappèrent longtemps, puis, il y eut de la lumière. Mais ils
durent attendre encore, parce que, dans les petites villes, on est prudent: on
veut savoir à qui l’on a affaire.
—Tiens, dit Bottiaux, quand la porte s’entr’ouvrit enfin, c’est la
Bretonne!
Elle tenait à la main une de ces lampes minuscules, à la mèche protégée
par un léger globe de verre, qui depuis vingt ans ont remplacé les veilleuses.
Cette faible lumière éclairait de rose un côté de sa figure très jeune, très
douce, peu jolie, et tout le reste, la camisole jetée à la hâte sur sa chemise
rude, le jupon de toile rouge, les pieds nus dans des savates, était perdu dans
l’ombre. On ne voyait que cette petite face frêle, suspendue en l’air comme
une âme sans poids.
—... Chambre? dit-elle d’une voix un peu rauque, inhabituée au français.
—Oui, coucher; des lits, hein! De bons lits! fit Bottiaux.
Elle leur alluma des bougies en souriant, leur montra leurs chambres, et
se retira.
Mais Béville, quand il fut couché, s’aperçut qu’il ne pouvait pas dormir.
Il se sentait bien trop fier, bien trop exalté par les parfums de la nuit, par la
rapidité de la course, par ce sentiment si fort de reconnaissance envers la
vie qui pénètre tous ceux qui viennent d’échapper à un danger. Alors il se
rappela les paroles du valet de garage, quelques heures auparavant: «La
Bretonne? elle est là pour ça!» Il sortit de sa chambre, pieds nus,
silencieusement.
Béville avait vu où dormait la Bretonne: dans une espèce de soupente, un
cabinet ménagé sur l’escalier, entre le rez-de-chaussée et le premier étage. Il
y alla tout droit, sa bougie à la main. Oui, c’était bien là: elle dormait, sur
un pauvre lit de fer, les cheveux défaits, une main sous sa tête pour la
relever un peu parce qu’elle n’avait pas d’oreiller. On ne voyait de sa chair
qu’une gorge bien remplie à partir du cou, et la rondeur délicate d’un sein
très jeune. Béville lui mit une main sur l’épaule et l’embrassa. Il avait
soufflé la bougie. La fille s’éveilla en sursaut, étendant les mains en avant,
d’un geste instinctif:
—Ma doué! fit-elle.
Mais Béville, déjà, la tenait dans ses bras, et elle sentit de nouveau sa
bouche sur la sienne. Ah! oui, c’est vrai, elle était la Bretonne, on l’avait
prise pour ça, payée pour ça: trente francs par mois, et les cadeaux des
voyageurs en sus. Et enfin, celui-là c’était un monsieur! Des siècles de
domination, presque d’esclavage, avaient enseigné à sa race qu’il faut
toujours, obéir aux «messieurs», aux chefs, aux maîtres: les hommes les
suivent à la guerre, les femmes au lit. C’était donc qu’il fallait se soumettre.
Sa pauvre petite âme asservie n’osait pas protester. Seul, son corps, parce
qu’il était encore pur, se refusait et avait horreur. Toute vierge se défend,
toute vierge a peur. C’est un instinct sans doute que la nature a mis en elle
afin qu’il lui faille du courage pour se donner, et qu’ainsi elle ne se donne
que par choix, et comme en sacrifice à celui qu’elle aime. L’humble
barbare, vendue comme aux temps antiques, mais plus bassement encore,
éprouvait cette horreur. Elle supplia, en mots confus et précipités, dans son
langage obscur, celui qu’on parle là-bas, sur les bords de la mer de l’ouest,
le seul qu’elle connût; et Béville ne comprit pas.
Il ne sut jamais pourquoi celle qui était là ne lui rendit aucun des baisers
qu’il lui donna, avant de l’avoir possédée. Jamais non plus lorsque, mâle
satisfait et pourtant tristement déçu, car tel est le châtiment des mâles
insoucieux et brutaux, il ne pensait qu’à laisser une offrande et fuir;—
jamais il ne sut pourquoi une bouche effleura, non pas ses lèvres, on n’eût
pas osé, mais sa joue et son front: caresse d’enfant timide qui aurait tant
voulu, tout de même, ah! oui, tant voulu s’inventer le souvenir d’une ombre
de tendresse véritable, après l’horreur du stupre. Il n’y eut rien! Il s’en alla.
C’est tout.
Le lendemain, dès l’aube, Jalin vint réveiller ses deux amis. Béville,
quand il descendit, avait presque oublié. Les hommes heureux n’ont pour
ainsi dire pas de souvenirs. Il vivent en avant, ils escomptent chaque jour
une volupté future. S’il avait songé à l’événement de cette nuit, il se fût
seulement trouvé un peu vil, et, comme il le savait, il s’arrangea pour
divertir sa pensée sur d’autres objets. Jalin avait d’ailleurs tout disposé déjà
pour le départ. La note était payée, le moteur embrayé. Il lança au vol à ses
deux compagnons leurs manteaux et leurs casquettes.
 —On part! Ouste!
Il prit du recul, dans la cour du garage, pour franchir le seuil et tourner
dans la rue. A ce moment apparut, au seuil de la même porte, l’esclave
broyée qui l’avait ouverte, tout à l’heure, dans la nuit. Elle venait de sortir
de sa chambre, sans doute après avoir longtemps veillé, solitaire et salie.
Elle portait le même costume humble jusqu’à l’abjection, la chemise rude,
la casaque sans grâce. Elle ne s’était pas coiffée, elle n’était pas belle, sa
jeunesse même avait quelque chose de terni, et, de ses yeux infortunés elle
regardait, regardait inutilement. Car la chose affreuse qui avait peut-être
laissé en elle de vivantes conséquences, elle s’était passée dans l’ombre
impénétrable, et de ces trois hommes, elle n’arrivait pas à savoir lequel
c’était. Elle ne le saurait jamais.

L’automobile vira, bien en main, et prit son élan. Bottiaux dit en rêvant:
—Les yeux de cette Bretonne... A quoi me font-ils penser? Ah! oui, juste
ceux de cette bête, la nuit. Vous avez vu?
—Non, dit Béville, je n’ai pas remarqué.
 LE MIRACLE DE TOLLENAËRE
Tollenaëre est, dans les Flandres, un tout petit village avec un grand
couvent. Les religieuses bernardines y vivent presque seules entre la mer et
une grande plaine plate, si basse qu’on la dirait plus basse que les vagues
mêmes. Presque toute l’année le vent souffle du même côté, venant du
nord-ouest, et les rares arbres qu’on voit dans la campagne semblent, sous
l’effort de ce souffle perpétuel, courber la tête tous ensemble, leurs feuilles
pendant comme des chevelures, leurs bras de branches tordus comme pour
prier que cela finisse, parce qu’ils sont trop malheureux.
Mais la terre les console, au printemps, avec des fleurs. Ce ne sont pas
des fleurs extraordinaires; les jardiniers des villes ne les traiteraient qu’avec
mépris. Excepté les roses, dont les pêcheurs et les paysans ont presque
toujours quelques pieds dans leurs jardins, il n’y a guère que des tournesols
avec leur cœur d’un jaune noirci et leurs pétales d’or vif, des joncs dont les
hampes de velours font penser à la lance qui porta aux lèvres de Notre
Seigneur le fiel et le vinaigre, des oreilles d’ours et des saxifrages. Elles
poussent toutes ensemble, avec une espèce d’orgueil sauvage, ingénu,
tendre, brûlant; par des milliers de canaux, l’eau qui les baigne exalte leur
éclat; puis cette eau va remplir les fossés de vieilles fermes rouges, où
vivent de lourds hommes pensifs.
C’est là que naquit d’une servante, sans qu’on sut qui était son père,
Angéline Verdonck qui fut en religion sœur Catherine; et elle prit ce nom
d’abord parce que le sien propre lui paraissait avoir un parfum de vertu et
de pureté qui pouvait faire croire à de l’orgueil, mais aussi parce que,
comme Catherine de Sienne, elle avait déclaré, dès son plus jeune âge,
vouloir être la fiancée du Christ.
Toutefois dès son entrée au couvent, où sa mère fut heureuse qu’on la fit
entrer toute petite, parce qu’elle avait trop grande peine à l’élever, il vint à
Catherine une autre vocation qui sembla merveilleuse, tant elle fut, du
premier coup, instinctive et parfaite. Dans le jardin même du couvent, et
quand on la faisait promener quelques heures, avec ses compagnes, sur les
routes de sable, elle s’arrêtait parfois, comme en extase. Et les mères de la
communauté crurent d’abord qu’elle était favorisée par des visitations de la
divine mère, ou de sa patronne Catherine: mais elle avoua avec simplicité
qu’elle ne voyait rien, sinon ce que tout le monde voyait, et qui est si beau.
Cela étonna. Les sœurs et les mères avaient coutume au contraire de dire
aux enfants qu’elles élevaient—et c’était vraiment la croyance intime de
leur âme—que vivre dans un pays si triste est un ennui qu’il faut accepter
dans un esprit de mortification. Catherine répondit, étonnée à son tour, que
tous les objets qui frappaient ses yeux, ces pauvres arbres et ces fleurs, ou
seulement la lumière et les nuées, les vaches et les taures, parfois un charroi
de foin sec qui passait au loin sur la route, ou une barque plate rampant sur
les canaux, et faisant lever des oiseaux sauvages, lui semblaient entourés
d’un éclat magnifique, et tels des apparitions.
Pour expliquer sa pensée, car elle était faible et courte en paroles, elle
prit les pinceaux et les couleurs qui servaient dans la communauté à
enluminer les images des missels, et l’on vit alors qu’elle avait reçu le don
de peindre.
A partir de ce moment sa vie devint une joie, en même temps que sa
piété grandissait. Elle était reconnaissante à Dieu d’avoir créé tant de
choses qui devenaient pour elle des objets de travail et d’amour. Et que ces
choses pussent être si diversement belles selon les heures du jour, sous le
soleil et la pluie, la caresse ou la morsure des saisons, lui paraissait une
bénédiction pour laquelle on ne pouvait assez remercier la volonté qui
préside aux conduites du monde. Un jour d’automne, un rustaud qui portait
au couvent le bois nécessaire au chauffage ôta sa souquenille pour
décharger ses souches plus à l’aise. Il avait la poitrine nue et retroussa les
manches de sa chemise jusqu’aux aisselles. Sœur Catherine devint toute
pâle.
—N’est-ce pas, dit une mère, que cela est choquant!
—Non, répondit Catherine.
Elle était seulement charmée, comme le jour épiphanique où les fleurs et
les arbres s’étaient manifestés à elle, dans leur grâce si sauvage et leur force
solitaire. Du coude à la main, chez l’homme, un muscle tournait, sombre ou
éclairé selon sa place, et les doigts vivaient comme des personnes qui se
mettent d’accord pour chanter.
Ce fut alors qu’elle regarda d’une autre manière les tableaux pendus aux
murailles de la chapelle et jusque dans le réfectoire: car elle ne les avait,
auparavant, considérés que d’une façon pour ainsi dire abstraite, afin de se
pénétrer des mystères d’adoration et de douleur qu’ils voulaient rappeler.
Elle fut stupéfaite de les trouver laids.
Et elle en conçut un immense chagrin, elle eut pour la première fois
l’impression d’être environnée de mensonges et de simulacres. Sa foi n’en
était point touchée; seulement elle souffrait que la foi n’eût pas atteint la
beauté, elle souhaitait de voir la réalité des formes.
Parfois, hors du couvent, lorsque les eaux, après une grande marée,
s’étaient étendues au loin sur la plage, elle apercevait des femmes qui
marchaient sur le sable, les jupes troussées jusqu’en haut des cuisses, et les
bras nus. Elles avaient la tête ovale, les yeux gris ou bleus, pareils au ciel,
aux nuées, à l’eau des étangs ou de la mer, les cheveux blonds tordus en
casque, et l’on voyait sous leur vêtement que leur gorge et leur ventre
étaient sains, jeunes et durs, ou bien amollis, mais encore attendrissants, à
cause du rude ouvrage ou de la maternité. Parfois leurs corps étaient aussi
comme illuminés d’une espèce d’enthousiasme dont Catherine ne
comprenait pas la cause amoureuse: mais elle en saisissait la somptuosité
vivante, et c’était ces femmes-là qu’elle admirait davantage. Rien de ses
impressions ne lui semblait péché, parce qu’elle ne pensait qu’à son art. Et
elle ne savait pas même que ce fût un art: elle n’agissait que par instinct.
L’inquiétude ne lui vint que le jour où elle eut la tentation de son corps,
et il était inévitable qu’elle s’intéressât à le regarder, pour l’ensemble tout
nu de cette harmonie qu’elle poursuivait jusque sous les haillons.
Elle s’admira en songeant: «Tout cela est beau! Cela est plus beau que ce
que j’ai fait jusqu’ici. Et si je le peignais, j’en ferais quelque chose de plus
beau encore: je ne montrerais que ce qu’il faut comprendre.»
Elle sentit pour la première fois à cet instant la tentation du diable: il y
avait donc des points sur lesquels on pouvait corriger la création? La beauté
c’était donc la vérité, moins quelque chose, moins les accidents, les excès,
les injures, qui sont pourtant l’œuvre de Dieu!
Elle alla s’en confesser. Mais c’était une âme nette, pure, vigoureuse, qui
ne se confessait que de ses décisions.
—Mon père, dit-elle, je ne peindrai plus.
Et quand elle eut exprimé sa résolution, elle en donna les motifs. Le
confesseur ne les saisit point, et il crut que la chair parlait en elle. C’est
pour cette cause qu’il répondit:
—Je vous comprends, ma sœur!
 A compter de ce jour, sœur Catherine mena une vie de suppliciée. Tout
ce qui lui avait été plaisir était devenu tentation. Elle agonisait sous son
vœu et bientôt ne fut plus qu’une ombre; elle ne mangeait ni ne dormait.
Son honnêteté lui disait en même temps que le regret est encore une des
formes de la faute et que les vrais sacrifices sont ceux qu’on accomplit
allègrement. C’est ainsi qu’elle en vint à se considérer comme une grande
pécheresse; elle s’imposa diverses pénitences, entre autres celle de
l’humiliation. Se croyant indigne de ses sœurs, elle obtint de n’assister aux
offices qu’en dehors de la nef, comme les pauvres veuves de pêcheurs ou
les catéchumènes de la primitive église. Agenouillée près du pilier qui
supportait la vasque d’eau bénite et la planche où l’on mettait, le dimanche,
le pain qu’on distribuait à ces femmes misérables, Catherine s’efforçait
d’attacher un sens à chacune des paroles latines qu’elle savait par cœur, et
son effroi grandissait à sentir qu’elle ne les prononçait plus que
machinalement. Elle crut avoir perdu la grâce; elle était comme traquée.
A la messe de minuit, le jour de Noël, sœur Catherine commença par
éprouver une grande faiblesse. Au lieu de l’autel et du prêtre, de toute la
communauté en prières elle ne distinguait plus qu’une sorte de grand
entonnoir tourbillonnant, ou plutôt un dôme de cathédrale, vu par l’intérieur
et fait d’une multitude de petits carrés alternativement sombres et brillants.
Ceux-là scintillaient comme des étoiles; et elle s’endormit, les yeux ouverts.
Personne ne put s’apercevoir qu’elle dormait. Ses sœurs, qui chantaient
dans la nef, avaient le dos tourné, et les pauvres femmes autour d’elle,
s’aperçurent seulement qu’elle avait le regard un peu fixe. Mais voilà que
tout à coup celles-ci la virent qui prenait dans la vasque d’eau bénite
l’humble pinceau qu’on y avait laissé: et, sur la planche destinée à l’aumône
du pain, elle commença de tracer des lignes; car sa main, guidée par une
puissance mystérieuse, reproduisait ce que sa vision lui révélait. Sœur
Catherine, en extase, croyait peindre.
Les pauvresses se dirent: «C’est de l’eau! C’est de l’eau avec quoi sœur
Catherine se figure qu’elle travaille!» Toutefois un sentiment si saint qu’il
leur semblait terrible les empêchait de regarder. Mais au moment de la
communion, pendant que le chœur chantait: Exsulta, filia Sion; lauda, filia
Jerusalem, ecce rex tuus venit! sœur Catherine laissa tomber son dérisoire
pinceau.
 Alors les femmes virent que la planche était couverte de couleurs
resplendissantes.
—Notre Jésus! crièrent-elles. Notre petit Jésus!
L’Enfant-Dieu était apparu sur la planchette inerte. Semblable au plus
beau des nouveau-nés des hommes, il était couché sur la paille; et derrière
lui, près d’une vieille ferme rouge, fleurissaient des tournesols, des fleurs de
jonc, des oreilles d’ours et des saxifrages.

Tel fut le miracle de Tollenaëre. Et c’est pourquoi on y voit aujourd’hui,

dans la chapelle des bernardines, l’image d’un enfant Jésus que les fidèles
entourent de vénération. Mais les artistes aussi l’admirent; on croirait
qu’elle a été peinte avec de la lumière et des fleurs. Les guides, qui
rapportent la légende sans y croire, ajoutent que ce tableau est d’un auteur
inconnu.
 LA FORCE DU MAL
«O grand Lucifer, redoutable archange! De par les dix noms puissants
inscrits dans ce cercle, par les prières de tous les saints, par la beauté
d’Adam, par le sacrifice d’Abel, par l’offrande d’Isaac, par l’humilité de
Job et les larmes de Jérémie; par les infernaux abîmes que Christ a
traversés, par la hauteur du ciel où il règne, je t’adjure, je te conjure, je te
somme de m’obéir sur-le-champ.»
—Bah! dis-je légèrement en me penchant vers mon voisin, ce n’est que
la conjuration d’Agrippa.
—Oui, murmura-t-il, d’une voix brûlante et basse, c’est la conjuration
d’Agrippa; le triple cercle, les deux cierges, les dix noms divins, El, On,
Tetragrammaton, Adonaï...
De l’évocateur on ne voyait que le dos, drapé dans une robe rouge, et
comme il était assis fort bas entre deux chandelles, son grimoire dans une
main, une épée nue dans l’autre, il avait l’air empêtré d’un président de cour
d’assises qu’on a transporté brusquement de son fauteuil à la sellette en lui
interdisant sous peine de mort de lâcher son code et son couteau à papier.
Mais cette affectation d’ironie facile, cuirasse de l’homme un peu faible qui
veut rester libre, je la sentais malgré moi se glacer et s’évanouir devant
l’étrangeté du lieu, sous les coups d’anxiété farouche qui passaient, en les
faisant craquer à travers le crâne des fidèles. Depuis des mois que je suivais,
en curieux désœuvré, les cérémonies de ces bizarres petites églises
démoniaques, semées maintenant dans Paris comme des taches indicatrices
d’une nouvelle maladie, la monotone absurdité des rites était parvenue à
m’ennuyer jusqu’à l’écœurement: mais il y avait ces figures bouleversées,
mâchurées, torturées, laides au delà de l’ignominie et suprême misère,
ridicules! Pourtant, seul un innocent enfant eût pu rire à leur face: chez un
esprit déjà vieux, troublé par la réflexion et la curiosité, elles devaient
fatalement exciter la sympathie d’abord, puis la volonté violente de la
possession de leur mystère, enfin une sorte d’inavouable amour, tant elles
semblaient ravagées, ravinées, érodées d’inscriptions, peut-être
déchiffrables, pareilles à celles qu’on lit sur ces murs de prisons où sont
venues s’abattre, en vagues mêlées, des générations de criminels et de
malheureux.
 Certes, je pouvais, je devais me tromper. Dans ce public, je distinguais
des têtes connues d’écrivains en quête de sujets, assez méprisables
marchands de curiosités littéraires inédites; le gros du troupeau se
composait clairement de pauvres demi-fous, vulgaires victimes d’une
névrose religieuse que le hasard seul de leurs lectures, ou l’irrégularité de
leur vie, de leurs amitiés et de leurs amours avait jetés là au lieu de le
conduire au dieu officiel; et pour les autres même, ceux qui ne rentraient
point dans ces catégories de négociants malins, de naïfs malades, et de fils
de mères pieuses destinés à rentrer dans les voies maternelles, la raison
obligeait d’admettre que la banale débauche des grandes villes, la
morphine, l’opium, et tous nos autres innombrables poisons modernes, sont
d’assez vigoureux sculpteurs pour repétrir ainsi la matière humaine et
creuser les plis tragiques de ces masques humains. Oui, tout cela était vrai,
mais combien incomplet et peu satisfaisant! Quel événement, quel jeu des
choses extérieures, avait mené jusque-là ces dévoyés, au lieu de les laisser
doucement rouler sur les grandes routes de la corruption du siècle ou de la
foi chrétienne! C’est le fait particulier qui seul intéresse, et d’ailleurs rien ne
prouve d’avance qu’il ne se trouve pas des âmes intelligentes, mais folles de
vices, ou croyantes et rongées par la douloureuse maladie du scrupule, pour
qui ce serait une joie ivre et sincère, logique et délirante, de savoir, savoir à
ne pas douter, qu’il existe un être supérieur, adversaire de Dieu, qui se
nourrit du mal fait par elles ou dont elles souffrent, qui en rit, qui en jouit,
qui en garde de l’obligation et de la reconnaissance: enfin il entrerait du
repos dans la certitude de la damnation.
Ces figures, ce soir-là dans cette cave de la rue du Cloître-Saint-Merri,—
car les caves étant consacrées à Saturne sont particulièrement favorables
aux évocations,—je les pressentais près de moi dans une obscurité rayée
d’éclairs fumeux, à l’une des extrémités de la crypte voûtée. A l’autre
siégeait le Mage qui tournait le dos aux fidèles, faisant face au triangle où
l’apparition devait entrer. Outre les deux cierges, la lumière ne venait que
d’un trépied sur lequel brûlaient dans un confus mariage des plantes
parfumées et des plantes infectes; l’air humide sentait la moisissure, la
verveine, l’encens, l’assa-fœtida, et ces odeurs étouffées faisaient haleter les
poitrines et battre les cœurs plus vite. On ne voyait que des lambeaux de
choses, les fourrures de femmes frissonnaient sous les soupirs, des
mâchoires claquaient; c’était tout, et le triangle, à force d’être seul éclairé,
seul regardé, paraissait immense, et restait vide.