Back to Istituto Romeno’s Publications

p. 429

Paolo Sardi and the conflict between the Italian and the Hungarian missionaries in Moldavia

Rafael–Dorian Chelaru,

National Archives of Romania at Bucharest

The relevant historiography concerning the problem of the conflicts between the Italian and Hungarian missionaries is very poor. Beside Franciscan Pietro Tocanel’s extensive analysis and commentaries[1], the study written by the Italian philologist Teresa Ferro[2], and also the study of the historian Marius Diaconescu, recently published[3], I could not find any other article or study referring precisely to this controversial problem. Some information and short comments can be found also in the work of the Catholic priest Iosif Petru M. Pal[4] and in the synthesis realized by Emil Dumea concerning the Moldavian Catholicism in the 18^th century[5]. The Hungarian historiography is at this moment inaccessible for me because of the linguistic barrier[6]. I could consult only the work of the Hungarian ethnographer Ferenc Pozsony, which is written in Romanian[7].

p. 430

Pietro Tocanel realized the most extensive presentation of the so-called questione ungherese starting from the middle of the 18^th century, and dedicated a special chapter to Sardi’s activity within this context[8]. His conclusions, however, bear a certain “nationalistic” pattern and prove a strong subjective approach, as he openly approved Sardi’s position and criticized the Hungarian “interferences” into the affairs of the Moldavian mission. While appreciating the preference of the Italian Conventuals for Romanian language (although this was just a natural consequence of the fact that Romanian is very similar to Italian, therefore much easier to be learned than the Hungarian), Tocanel strongly disapproved the efforts carried by the Hungarian Catholic Church for the preservation of the Hungarian language within the Catholic communities dominated by native Hungarians. This is very interesting as the Franciscan historian recognized the existence of large Hungarian Catholic communities in Moldavia.

The philologist Teresa Ferro has a different perspective over the problem. The main task of her study is to demonstrate the existence of the bilingualism within the Moldavian Catholic communities as it can be seen from the correspondence carried by the Conventuals from Moldavia with the Sacred Congregation. She discussed the significance of the term Hungarian (Ungaro, Ungherese) as it was used in these documents in comparison with the Romanian terms unguri or unguresc. The conclusion is clear: in Moldavia between 1623-1745 both Romanian and Hungarian were practiced in the every day communication. A precise proportion of their usage within various communities, however, could not be established, but the author insisted on the fact that the spreading of the Hungarian entitled most of the Italian missionaries to affirm the necessity of its assimilation.

The young historian Marius Diaconescu presented the contribution of the Szekler priest Péter Zöld in the process of discovering the Csángos (the ancient Hungarian Catholics from Moldavia) by the Hungarian Catholic Church. Within this context, he discussed the relations between the Italian Conventuals from Moldavia and the Hungarian Catholic Church, without reaching a clear expressed conclusion. The author, however, stressed the fact that the Italian missionaries, although aware of the necessity of the Hungarian language in the mission, rejected the collaboration with the Hungarian Conventuals from political reasons.

The conflict between the Hungarian and the Italian Conventuals from Moldavia has its beginnings back from the year 1644, when the Hungarian Jesuit Paul Beke occupied the Catholic parish church from Iaşi, previously held by the Italian Conventuals since 1632. Supported by the majority of the Catholics from Iaşi, mostly Hungarian natives, the penetration of the Hungarian Jesuits in Moldavia succeeded in establishing a firm bridgehead for the Society of Jesus in this region and produced a severe breach in the monopoly of the Franciscan Conventuals over the Catholic church in Moldavia[9].

p. 431

The second phase of the conflict began in 1743, when the Hungarian Jesuits from the College of Cluj, Andreas Pátai and György Szégedi, tried to carry missionary activity in Moldavia provided with prince Constantin Mavrocordat’s approval. The strong resistance of the Italian vice-prefect Giovanni Ausilia, however, caused the failure of their initiative. Ausilia simply did no recognize their right to provide spiritual assistance for the Hungarian speaking Catholics from Moldavia, threatening them with excommunication if they broke his firm interdiction. The Italian vice-prefect persisted in his attitude even after the two Jesuits were granted the papal approval. His arguments were two-folded: the first argument was that the Jesuits were not allowed to provide spiritual assistance in Moldavia, as this activity was conceived as an exclusive privilege of the Italian Conventuals[10]. The other argument referred to the presence of the Hungarian speaking Catholics from Moldavia. Ausilia rejected Jesuits’ affirmations, according to which the number of the Hungarian speaking Catholics from Moldavia was significant. In his report sent to the Sacred Congregation of the Propagation of Faith in 1745, Ausilia considered that all the Catholics from Moldavia spoke fluently the Romanian language, therefore concluding that the presence of the Hungarian priests (including here also the Jesuits or other regular clergy) was not necessary in Moldavia. Ausilia strongly affirmed that the missionary activity carried out by the Italian Conventuals successfully complied with the spiritual needs of the Moldavian Catholics, while the presence of the Hungarian missionaries in Moldavia was considered to be only a disturbing factor for the mission, as Ausilia clearly expressed in his report: “[…] per tanto se s’havesse a permettere che i P. P. Ungari entrassero in questa Provincia sarebbe l’istesso che stabilire un seminario di scandali a motivo de rancori e contrasti che succederebbero; né meno la Sacra Congregazione de Propaganda Fide havrebbe quiete per li continovi ricorsi che li uni contro l’altri farebbero, si come pur anche i P.P. Ungari essendo privi della lingua Moldava non potrebbero a pieno esercitare il Ministero di Missionario; la onde deggio [sic!] conchiudere non esser in questa Provincia la lingua Ungara necessaria”[11].

The third phase began with the Péter Zöld episode. Péter Zöld was a Hungarian Catholic priest who activated in the Szeklers’ region, in eastern Transylvania. He came in Moldavia in the year 1764 after the repression of the Szeklers’ uprising against the Habsburg authorities, which planned to carry forced recruitment for the border regiments in the region. Zöld came within a large immigration wave from Eastern Transylvania to Moldavia, which counted thousands of Catholic Szekler families. This unexpected phenomenon strengthened the Hungarian component of the Catholic population in Moldavia and opened the road for a more consistent penetration of the Hungarian missionaries in this region, especially in the villages surrounding the town of Bacău[12]. The Italian Conventuals realized that the increasing of the number of the Moldavian Catholics with Hungarian speaking Szekler families exceeded the possibilities of the apostolic mission.

p. 432

There was not only a need for more missionaries: there was a clear need for Hungarian speaking missionaries, as most of the Italian Conventuals did not speak Hungarian. The importance of Péter Zöld’s activity from this perspective lays in the fact that he was the first Hungarian priest able to provide the newcomers with the necessary spiritual assistance.

Within these circumstances, the reaction of the Italian prefect of the mission, Giuseppe Oviller, who decided to strictly forbid any activity of the Szekler priest, seems quite paradoxical. Oviller’s reaction was based on the same argument as in the case of his predecessor, Giovanni Ausilia: the monopolistic jurisdiction of the Conventuals over the mission. He was forced, however, to withdraw his decision, as Zöld got the necessary approvals from prince Grigore III Ghica, from Stanislas Jezierski, the Polish bishop of Bacău, and even from pope Clement XIII[13]. The problem of the necessary language(s) in the Moldavian mission, however, turned to be the main issue that generated and maintained the tension between the Italian and the Hungarian minorities.

Péter Zöld episode was followed by the initiative carried out by Romanus Jakabfálvi, the Provincial of the Hungarian Conventuals, who proposed in 1776 to the General Minister of the Conventuals the replacement of the Italian missionaries with Hungarian Conventuals. He argued that the Italian monks were unable to provide proper spiritual assistance to the Hungarian speaking Catholics from Moldavia, as they could not speak the Hungarian language[14]. The letter was sent by the General Minister to the vice-prefect of the Moldavian mission, Giuseppe Martinotti, who replied on March, 17^th 1776 by rejecting Jakabfálvi’s assertions concerning the predominance of the Hungarian speaking Catholics: “una simpliciter loquela est necessaria in Moldavia, scilicet patria, sine qua nemo licite exercere valet ministerium apostolicum in Moldavia, cum plures sint pagi in quibus hungarica lingua penitus ignoratur”[15].

The same proposal was made by Ignácz Batthyáni, the bishop of Transylvania, in a letter sent on October the 6^th 1787 to pope Pius VI: “revocentur omnes Minores Conventuales itali, illiusque regimen ad Transilvaniae Episcopum transferatur”[16]. Batthyáni suggested also that the bishop of Transylvania should be appointed also as apostolic vicar in order to be able to send in Moldavia Hungarian priests. Batthyáni stressed the idea that those priests should speak both Hungarian and Romanian, thus recognizing the existence of a certain bilingual phenomenon within many Catholic communities from Moldavia. On January the 7^th 1788 the pope rejected Batthyáni’s proposals, claiming that the situation of the Moldavian mission did not impose such a radical solution, suggesting that the Transylvanian bishop might have been misinformed in this matter[17].

In fact, pope Pius VI could not accept the solution proposed by Batthyáni due to several reasons. Firstly, recalling all the Italian missionaries from Moldavia and transferring the control of the Catholics from this region to the Transylvanian bishopric

p. 433

would have clearly led to the dissolution of the Moldavian mission. The Sacred Congregation could not accept this, considering those Hungarian Conventuals selected from the alumni of the Italian colleges sufficient to cover the needs of the Hungarian speaking parishioners from Moldavia[18]. The second reason was that appointing the bishop of Transylvania as apostolic vicar of Moldavia would have infringed some of the main attributes of the bishop of Bacău, who was the only authority to appoint secular priests in Moldavia. Thirdly, the pope himself was Italian; therefore he was rather unwilling to accept that the Italian missionaries were not able to preach the Gospel to the Hungarian speaking Catholics, as much as the Romanian, and not the Hungarian, was the official language of the Moldavia. That is why the Catholic Roman authorities could eventually accept the existence of bi- or multilingual communities, but not the existence of large Hungarian speaking Catholic communities in a country, where the dominant language was other than Hungarian. The case of the Hungarian priest, István Botskor, who tried to find his place in the Catholic parishes from South-Western Moldavia at the beginning of the 19^th century, although he was contested even by some members of the Hungarian Catholic hierarchy due to his poor morality, compromised for a long term the position of the Hungarian priests in Moldavia[19].

Another reason for which the Hungarian missionaries were contested by the Italian Conventuals was their secular intellectual formation. Unlike the Italian missionaries, all of them alumni of the Italian Catholic colleges (such as the colleges from Fermo or Rome), the majority of the Hungarian Franciscans were alumni of the public universities from the Austrian Empire (e.g. the universities of Vienna, Budapest etc.)[20]. Perhaps, this aspect explains a certain “preference” of the Italians in accusing the Hungarians of poor morality and of neglecting the Order’s regular discipline.

On the one hand, as the number of the parishes increased due to the re-organization of the mission carried by the new apostolic visitor, Giovanni Filippo Paroni (1818-1826) the need for new missionaries became more pressing. The General Minister of the Conventual Order, however, had limited possibilities to send new missionaries from Italy to Moldavia. On the other hand, Paroni was not willing to bring in Moldavia secular priests, Conventuals educated in other institutions than the colleges of the Propaganda, or monks from other orders (such as the Jesuits from Russia). In this context, a compromise was nevertheless required. Therefore, taking also into account the need for missionaries who could speak Hungarian, Paroni decided to appeal to the Hungarian Province of the Franciscan Conventuals. His decision was influenced by the diplomatic agent of the Austrian monarchy at Iaşi, Lippa, who convinced the apostolic visitor that he could find valuable

p. 434

missionaries among the Franciscans from Transylvania. On July the 25^th 1825, Paroni met with the Provincial Minister of the Hungarian Conventuals, Rudolf Studer, at Cluj and concluded a verbal agreement, which stipulated that the apostolic mission from Moldavia was entitled to receive six Hungarian Conventuals for whom it had to pay an yearly stipend of 100 scuds. The main obligation of the Provincial Minister was to replace those missionaries, who would have been considered by the apostolic visitor, or by the Propaganda itself as non suitable for the apostolic work. Moreover, the Provincial Minister promised that he would increase the number of the Hungarian Conventuals to be sent to Moldavia, if that was required by the mission; in exchange, the apostolic visitor would have to pay the adequate sum of money. This agreement was considered as a provisory solution of the problem. It actually did not oblige the Moldavian mission: ceasing to pay the due money would determine the recalling of all the Hungarian missionaries from Moldavia. Although Paroni had not the authorization of the Sacred Congregation to conclude the contract, the Propaganda approved the agreement, reserving the right of annulment, if it proved to be inefficient[21].

The annual report sent to the Propaganda by the apostolic prefect, Carlo Magni, on March the 8^th 1833, mentioned six Hungarian missionaries: Filusztek (Iaşi), Finta (Călugăra), Hideg (Pustiana), Fortunátus Pápp (Trotuş), Heja (Grozeşti), Lukotya (Fărăoani). The other missionaries, Italians and Polish, were eight in number (six Italians and two Polish). Therefore, the proportion of the Hungarian and Italian missionaries was equal. In the same report, Magni complained about the fact that the agreement from 1825 was very onerous for the Moldavian mission: “Perché pagare? Forse perché i missionari ungheresi sono più belli dei missionari delle altre nazioni? Forse perché mentre stanno in missione, la loro Provincia non ha il peso di mantenerli? Forse perché la missione somministra loro il comodo di fare denari? È un giogo del quale la missione deve liberarsi. Se al Provinciale non piace, ritiri i suoi missionari”[22]. The reason for such an aggressive reaction was that the Hungarian Province requested the payment due for the last three years. At that time, Magni did not dispose this money – 300 scuds – therefore he tried to impose to the Sacred Congregation the annulment of the contract. This seemed a very simple solution, but only at the first sight. On the one hand, the Sacred Congregation did not have the necessary resources to replace the Hungarian missionaries from Moldavia. On the other hand, the Hungarian Province obviously needed the money, which the Moldavian mission had to pay and was rather reluctant to break the agreement, even if the payment did not come in due time. Therefore, the Propaganda decided to pay itself the stipend owned by the Moldavian mission[23]. Magni’s arguments supporting the necessity of breaking the agreement from 1825 lay especially in the fact that the Hungarian language was not necessary for the missionaries to deliver the spiritual assistance to the Catholics from Moldavia. For Magni, the Romanian language was more appropriate to be used in this mission, as it was the official language of the country, spoken by the majority of the

p. 435

Catholics. Moreover, keeping the Holy Mass in Romanian could entice the Orthodox Romanians to the Catholicism. Magni claimed that Hungarian missionaries intended to replace the Romanian, the “official” language of the mission, with the Hungarian language, and, therefore, to turn the Italian mission into a Hungarian mission by driving away the Italian missionaries using the language criterion.

These were serious affirmations and, in the same time, grave accusations against the Hungarian missionaries. Even Magni later recognized that he might have been too severe in his appreciation[24]. The Hungarian missionaries answered Magni’s accusations referring to the importance of the confessional language in the life of the Catholic communities. For them, using the Romanian language instead of Hungarian, in all religious services (e.g. the Holy Mass, the confession, the common prayers, the religious chants, the catechism etc.) would have led to the “wallachization” (by this term the Hungarians meant “the orthodoxization”) of the Hungarian speaking Catholics. They pleaded for the preservation of the Hungarian language as a guarantee against this serious danger, but they tried not to push the dispute too far, as their position in the mission was weak and unstable.

Further conflicts between the Hungarian and the Italian missionaries arose during Pietro Raffaele Arduini’s mandate as apostolic visitor (1838-1843). In 1838, two Hungarian missionaries, Könya and Lukotya, strongly accused Carlo Magni, who was at that time parish priest in Săbăoani, of trying to replace the Hungarian with Romanian language in the spiritual assistance delivered to his parishioners, most of them Hungarian natives. Arduini imposed a compromise: each language was to be used by the missionaries according to the local circumstances. Könya and Lukotya, however, were asked to return to their regular province[25].

In the report of his visitation from 1838, Arduini proposed to the Sacred Congregation to send in Moldavia more Italian and Hungarian missionaries, as those 15 missionaries that activated at that time were insufficient to cover the spiritual needs of the 57.000 Moldavian Catholics. Consequently, the Congregation asked the papal nuncio from Vienna to replace the two Hungarian missionaries, Könya and Lukotya, with other missionaries more willing to collaborate with the Italian Conventuals. But the strong opposition of the Provincial Minister of the Hungarian Conventuals delayed the application of the Congregation’s order. Later, Lukotya was forcefully sent to Constantinople.

The conflict was determined mainly by the lack of communication between the two parts. The two Hungarian missionaries considered that they could convince the Italians to recognize a certain predominance of the Hungarian language in the mission, at least in some of the major parishes such as Săbăoani. Neither Magni nor Arduini were, however, willing to accept more than the existence of the bilingualism within some Catholic communities, especially those from the vicinity of the western borderlands. This bilingualism did not exclude whatsoever the predominance of the Romanian language.

p. 436

Also, the Sacred Congregation did not perceive the linguistic argument of the Hungarian missionaries as a truly essential issue, although the “red cardinals” were aware of the necessity of sending Hungarian speaking missionaries in Moldavia since the beginning of the 18^th century. The reason of this attitude lays in the fact that the phenomenon of bilingualism was considered to be an advantage for the Romanian language as the official language of the country. Therefore, the Italian argument that considered the use of Romanian sufficient for the missionary activity in this region was perceived as more convincing.

The visitor Arduini, however, tried to avoid an extended conflict with the Hungarian Province of the Conventuals and made several concessions. He allowed the divine service to be held only in Hungarian in those parishes dominated by Hungarian speaking Catholics and conceded also the function of general vicar to the Hungarian Conventuals[26]. But he did not accept to call back Könya and Lukotya. This attitude stimulated the strong criticism of the Hungarian missionaries, who continued to call him “summus osor Hungarorum”[27]. Eventually, Könya was maintained in the mission and in 1840 Arduini accepted a Hungarian Observant, Cosma Funták, who was appointed for the parish of Focşani[28].

In the same year, the Provincial Minister of the Hungarian Conventuals complained to the secretary of the Sacred Congregation that the Moldavian mission ceased to pay the due money for the three missionaries he had sent in 1839. In reply to the exhortations of the secretary of the Congregation to pay his duty, Arduini accused the fact that those missionaries had not been idonei for the mission. He recalled the stipulations of the agreement from 1825 according to which the Provincial Minister was obliged to send in Moldavia six well-prepared missionaries, able to cope with the difficulties and problems of the mission. If this obligation failed to be accomplished – as it was considered to be the case concerning the three missionaries sent in 1839 – the mission would not be obliged to pay any money to the Hungarian Province. Moreover, Arduini insisted that, for the moment, most of the financial resources of the mission were used for building new parish churches. He considered that the most appropriate solution for the problem was the annulment of the agreement. Arduini wrote a letter to the Hungarian Provincial reiterating this proposal. Meanwhile, the Sacred Congregation urged the Provincial to follow the stipulation of the agreement sending in Moldavia only capable missionaries[29].

The Provincial, however, was rather unwilling to accept Arduini’s proposal, as he really needed the yearly stipend from Moldavia. He knew that the mission lacked a sufficient number of missionaries, because the Propaganda ceased to send new Conventuals from Italy or from elsewhere. Moreover, Cardinal József Kopácsy, the archbishop primate of the Hungarian Catholic Church, insisted that more Hungarian

p. 437

missionaries should be sent in Moldavia in order to assist those Hungarian speaking missionaries who already activated there. The high prelate prepared also a secret plan meant to ensure a more stable presence of the Hungarian Church in Moldavia. This plan was supposed to begin with an extensive gathering of relevant information such as the exact number of the Hungarian speaking Catholics and their material status. The secrecy of this plan was determined by the eventual suspicions of the Moldavian authorities and of the Imperial Court of Vienna[30]. Several Hungarian journals published articles presenting the situation of the Hungarian speaking Catholics from Moldavia as being in danger to lose their religion due to the ignorance of the Italian missionaries in Hungarian language[31]. Arduini replied sending a letter to the Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation where he accused Kopácsy of interference in the affairs of the mission. In order to prevent further anti-Italian initiatives of the Hungarian Church, he tried to support the religious assistance of the Hungarian Catholics by printing a bilingual Catechism. He printed also primers, glossaries and grammar books in Hungarian, destined for the Catholic children[32].

Paolo Sardi, elected as visitor general of the Moldavian mission on April the 7^th 1843 after the renunciation of Arduini[33], approached “the Hungarian question” (according to Tocanel’s expression)[34] as soon as he arrived in Vienna in his route to Moldavia. He argued that the Hungarian question could not be solved unless the Prefect of the Sacred Congregation decided to expel all the Hungarian missionaries from Moldavia. For Sardi, the main reason of the annulment was the breaking of the agreement by the Hungarian Provincial of the Conventuals because there were sent in Moldavia non idonei missionaries[35].

p. 438

As soon as Sardi arrived in Moldavia, he reminded the Sacred Congregation the necessity of replacing all the Hungarian missionaries with Italian missionaries or with indigenous priests. In his letter from June the 28^th 1843 Sardi noted:

“[…] In tale stato di tregua, che io non vorrei chiamare apparente, sarei di parere d’approfittarsene colla spedizione di altri missionari […] perché il fuoco ungaro s’accinderebbe, per cui diede di trattenere farli imparare la lingua ungara, affinché all’uopo siano pronti per occupare qualche parrocchia ungara, e cosi a grado a grado ci disfaremo degli ungari con loro sequele, noti che si fanno anche lecito di riscaldare la testa della popolazione dicendoli che parlandogli noi in lingua moldava li facciamo diventare scismatici [emphasis mine]. Per tanto io prego codesta Sagra Congregazione che mi permetta di fabbricare in questa residenza altre tre camere, giacché siamo ancora nella buona stagione. Queste tre camere serviranno per i religiosi che dovranno qui istruirli. […] prima che termine la fabbrica delle suddette camere, questa sarebbe la mia idea onde liberari con bella maniera dagli ungari, preparare gli italiani per la lingua ungara, altrimenti sarebbe sempre da capo, il Provinciale dell’Ungaria ci mandarà sempre gli scarti [emphasis mine], e noi dovremo soffrire gli scandali e pagare li cento annui scudi. Si compiaccia la Sagra Congregazione di darmi di Lei ordine a tale proposito”[36].

It is very interesting the fact that Sardi’s complaint about the Hungarian missionaries did not refer to the language problem. Sardi’s intention to build a three room seminary at his residence from Iaşi was nonetheless meant to ensure the instruction of several Italian missionaries in the Hungarian language and reflected Sardi’s main goal, the replacing of all the Hungarian Conventuals, considered the “scarti” of their regular province. The apostolic visitor, however, was not really in the position to expel all the Hungarian missionaries from Moldavia, simply because he had no available Italian missionaries to appoint in their place. His frustration clearly emerges from the fact that he had no replacement even for the Observant Cosma Funták[37]. The Sacred Congregation was, therefore, insistently urged to get involved in solving the problem. Sardi also asked for the support of the papal nuncio from Vienna, hoping that the prelate would determine the Provincial of the Hungarian Conventuals to accept the annulment of the contract. But he was soon disappointed as it can be seen from his letter sent to the Prefect of the Congregation on July the 28^th 1843:

p. 439

“Dal tenore d’una lettera ultimamente ricevuta dalla Nunziatura Pontificia di Vienna mi sembra che codesta Sagra Congregazione abbia dato degli ordini precisi e definitivi concernenti la questione del Padre Provinciale di Ungheria con queste missione. La Nunziatura m’affretta di dare una relazione esatta e reale di quei religiosi ungaresi, che hanno prestato per un dato tempo il loro servizio a questa missione, che mi riconosca proporzionatamente debitore, affinché la Nunziatura possa venire ad una transazione; quei religiosi che non mi piacciono che si dichiari al Provinciale concui debba mettermi in corrispondenza e presto altrimente avrà sempre diritto al famoso contratto, e che io finalmente esamini con occhio prudentissimo tutte le conseguenze se io posso far ameno d’avere dei religiosi ungaresi, in tale caso la Nunziatura ammetterà il contratto, giacché non è che provvisorio [emphasis mine]. Dal qui esposto pare che tutte le ragioni addotte da miei antecessori, che hanno fatto sospendere i pagamenti al Provinciale per lo spazio di sei anni non siano più valevole, e quello che non si è deciso in 6 anni si debba giudicare e decidere subito e presto [Sardi’s emphasis]. Non saprei che meglio di Monsignor Ardoini avrebbe potuto dare relazione del servizio prestato dai religiosi ungaresi in questa missione, ed in quel modo mi rincresce di dover amareggiare il cuore dell’Eminenza Vostra Reverendissima col rinnovare la dolorosa narrazione degli accaduti scandali cagionati dai padri pii Lukotya e Konya, di questo ne parlerò dopo, il primo non esiste più in questa missione, il secondo disgraziatamente ancora esiste e continua a minacciare di farsi scismatico e già me l’ha scritto ironicamente, se io tentassi di rimandarlo alla sua Provincia. La Sagra Congregazione non ignorerà quali siano stati i soggetti mandati dal Provinciale in questa missione dopo la detestabile condotta dei due summentovati religiosi. […] non parlo d’altri soggetti di simil tempra perché mi fa pena, e poi non esistono più. Ora io dedico, se dopo orrendi fatti per riparare a tanto male ha mandato soggetti se non peggiori dei primi, ma ugualmente perniciosi, e di danno alla religione ed alle anime che v’è di sperare di buono in avvenire! E quel Provinciale scrive che vuole gli arretratati per poter educare la gioventù religiosa onde provvedere questa missione! Anzi io prego codesta Sagra Congregazione d’intimare a quel Provinciale che non s’incomodi più, perché non ho bisogno di simile gioventù; e quel Provinciale scrive alla Nunziatura che in forza del contratto fatto con Monsignor Paroni stipulato e riconosciuto da codesta Sagra Congregazione ha sempre diritto alle sue pretensioni? Ed è perciò che io con questo mio avanti a codesta Sagra Congregazione come mio giudice superiore, e tribunale competente con tutte quelle formalità richieste dalle leggi in simili circostanze di resilire dal contratto in questione, e di disobbligare questa missione da ogni pretensione che in avvenire aver potesse il Provinciale di Ungheria su questa missione. […] Che se poi la missione sarà obbligata a pagare gli arretratati per il padre Finta e per il padre Filusztek […] Ora se per averli tollerati non come degni al ministero apostolico, ma più per carità, ed affinché non commettessero maggiori scandali, e pubblicità, la missione sarà per queste obbligata a pagare gli arretrati, Vostra Eminenza faccia pure decidere, che io m’abbandono intieramente nelle braccia dell’Eminenza Vostra e di buon grado m’assoggetterò a qualonque siasi determinazione. Non posso io mettermi in corrispondenza col Provinciale e dichiarargli la condotta scandalosa di suoi religiosi, quali mi fanno resilire dal contratto, perché essendo quel Provinciale più che imprudente, mi comprometterebbe manifestando a questi suoi religiosi le mie lettere come fece lo stesso a miei antecessori, checché ne sia poi accaduto da queste due imprudenze è noto essendo ancora questi religiosi non solo imprudenti, ma pericolosi, ma irruenti, ma vindicativi non posso io coporre la mia vita a pericolo, a veleno, a insidia, nella visita apostolica, né concorrere a farli diventare

p. 440

scismatici per imprudenza del Provinciale di Ungheria. […] Ho bisogno che l’Eminenza Vostra m’insegni quale modo io debbo tenere per disfarmi insensibilmente degli ungari senza che accadono pubblicità, perché prevedo che se i religiosi ungari misero a subordonare che si tenta di rimandarli in provincia, temo che non mi mettano il popolo in rivoluzione è da notarsi che in sole tre parrocchie è necessaria la lingua ungara, insinuendo al popolo che confessandolo e predicandogli in lingua moldava lo facciamo diventare scismatico. [Sardi harshly criticizes Könya] Questi sono i soggetti che il Provinciale manda in questa missione: oh povere anime più che tradite! Questi sono quelli che hanno prestato il loro servizio? Per questi il Provinciale vuole gli arretratati! E queste perché si dovranno tollerare onde evitare gli scandali avvinculeranno la missione in forza del famoso contratto? Che io chiamarei vincolo d’ingiustizia, di tradimento, d’iniquità, di malizia […]. Io rimetto il tutto all’assennato giudizio di codesta Sagra Congregazione. Nulladimeno il cose non è disperato perché mi si mandino tre buoni soggetti, che l’inizierò nella lingua ungara nel prossimo inverno, alla Pasqua gl’installerò parrocchi in quelle parrocchie stesse degli ungari, e queste fino a questo tempo o se ne saranno andati, o se ne anderanno da loro stessi senza violenza diretta, ma indiretta perché vedranno occupate le loro parrocchie da religiosi più morigerati”[38].

Sardi, actually, repeated the arguments of his predecessor, the visitor Arduini, concerning the poor quality of all the Hungarian missionaries, with the notable exception of Innocenzo Petràs. The tone of his letter is very indignant especially towards the accusations of the Hungarian missionaries (such as Könya or Finta), who claimed that the ignorance of the Italian missionaries in the Hungarian language and the use of Romanian could determine many Catholics to become Orthodox. Sardi himself was aware of the necessity of the Hungarian language in some parishes from Moldavia, but he informed the Sacred Congregation that these parishes were only three in number. He did no refer to those parishes, where there was a bilingual (or even multilingual) population[39]. In those cases the Italian missionaries either used the Romanian as lingua franca – and this was the most common situation – or tried to learn the languages used by the Catholics.

The need of Hungarian speaking missionaries determined Sardi to propose the foundation of a small seminary, which would solve this problem. The Roman cardinals, however, showed reluctant to this initiative, as it can be seen from Sardi’s letter written on July the 21^st 1844:

“La saggia determinazione di non ammettere missionarii indigeni non solo l’apprezzo, ma la venero. Intanto qual consiglio, quale aiuto è venuto in mio soccorso per non servirmi degl’indigeni? Quale determinazione si è presa fino al presente per allontanare dalla missione il più pericoloso, senon indigeno, ma quasi indigeno: per tale oggetto io aveva più volte implorato il consiglio di codesta Sagra Congregazione per rimandare in provincia il padre

p. 441

Konya, ma la sullodata Sagra Congregazione quasi nauseata del nome del detto soggetto mi rimetteva a Monsignor Nunzio di Vienna”[40].

Sardi’s efforts for the expulsion of all the Hungarian missionaries from Moldavia, however, benefited the support of the Austrian diplomatic agent, the count Eisenbach, and of the Moldavian authorities. This support was determined by the unexpected scandal caused by the initiative of a Hungarian archaeologist, János Jerney, to publish in some Hungarian newspapers an appeal addressed to the Hungarian landowners in order to help the Catholic Hungarians from Moldavia[41]. This incident is presented to the prefect of the Congregation by Sardi in a letter sent on April 30^th 1845:

“[…] Erano circa otto mesi che vagabondava in questo Principato un ungaro esploratore col pretesto d’investigare le antichità. Le sue imprudenti investigazioni di fanatismo ungaro, la sua temerità nel mentire, la sua sfacciataggine nello scrivere nei pubblici fogli delle cose spettanti alla religione cattolica in questo principato e delle cose appartenente ai cosi detti ungari cattolici ho cagionato negli animi prevenuti delle suscettibilità compromettendo in qualche modo la mia persona, li sacerdoti ed in conseguenza la nostra religione. Non ha guari che mi è stata comunicata da questo Signor Agente Imperiale una nota confidenziale ricevuta dalla Cancelleria di questo principato nella quale s’intiene l’espulsione dei sacerdoti ungari dimoranti in questa missione perché disturbatori della pace, perché sussorroni e sovvertitori della pubblica tranquillità e di sostituire agli ungari altrettanti sacerdoti italiani a cui il governo locale ha maggior stima e confidenza. A tale innovazione cagionata dall’imprudenza del mentovato esploratore Giovanni Iernes ho fatto le mie osservazioni di comune accordo con questo Signor Imperiale Agente perché ha dell’insinuazione e dell’assolutismo ruteno, perché tale principio, abbenché sembra lusinghevole in apparenza, offende l’autorità ecclesiastica, a cui appartiene indipendentemente il provvedere i suoi popoli nei bisogni spirituali, nelle libere elezione dei propri pastori, senza mai avvincolarsi nei propri diritti. Piacquero al Signor Agente tali miei rimarchi di un ben presto ne fece uso con tutto lo zelo onde rinpedire ogni reazione nel mio esercizio del ministero vescovile presto nel principe regnante, che si compiacque d’aggradire a condizione però che il vescovo debbe essere risponsabile tenendo al dovere li religiosi dissidenti dissipando ogni spirito di partito. Non si manca tempo debito d’avvisarne dell’accaduto il principe Metternik il quale ha ben voluto commendare il modo tenuto in eccezione dal nota rimembrata. […] Se non avesse dato sospetto di materia politica avrebbe rovesciato anche l’ordine ecclesiastico, e già vi aveva tentato. In avvenire impererà a rispettare i diritti nei paesi forestieri e non arrogarsi delle attribuzioni che non gli appartengono. Questo Signor Agente mi ha fatto confidenza

p. 442

che l’allontanamento del soggetto da questa missione essere stata opera dal suo rispettivo governo”[42].

It is interesting the fact that Sardi’s reaction towards the intention of the Moldavian authorities to expel the Hungarian priests replacing them with Italians strictly followed the juridical principles of the Catholic Church, who did not allow any interference of the secular authority over its own internal affairs. The apostolic visitor succeeded in convincing the Moldavian chancellery to renounce its intention, although it might have been considered at that moment “lusinghevole”. The apostolic visitor had to find another solution to solve the Hungarian question. While Sardi was still confronting with the effects of Jerney incident, his correspondence with Cardinal József Kopácsy debated again the controversial language problem. In a letter sent on August the 1^st 1845 to Sardi, Kopácsy praised his good will toward the Hungarian language in the Moldavian mission. The archbishop pleaded for the necessity of cultivating the Hungarian language in the Hungarian speaking communities from Moldavia:

“[…] ob pericula defectionis a fide catholica et transitus ad schisma Graecorum, quibus Hungari hi, linguae suae cognitione exuendi, certioribus exponerentur, cum constat omnibus, idipsum etiam Illustrissimae Dominationi Vostrae persuasum esse videatur, Hungaros in Moldavia degentes, quo in gradu linguae hungaricae expertes fuerint, eodem etiam ad amplectendum schisma proniores facilioresque fore. Quare, ut conservatio linguae nativae apud Hungaros moldavienses certior, ex hoc modo fides catholica etiam firmior sit.”[43] Therefore, the Archbishop urged the apostolic visitor “dignetur in directione Missionis sapienti moderationi suae concredita id prae oculis habere ut nativa lingua hungarica apud catholicos in Moldavia degentes, non tantum conservetur, sed, quantum fieri potest, firmetur etiam et propagetur”[44].

Kopácsy’s argument was not new to Sardi: this idea was heavily supported by the Hungarian missionaries as a response to his attempts of expelling them from Moldavia. In his letters the Archbishop referred also to the problem of the Hungarian missionaries. In a letter sent on October the 3^rd, 1845, Kopácsy promised to Sardi that he was going to increase their number up to 9 or 10 and that he would send only capable Franciscans. However, he warned Sardi “ne in hac Missione discordiae illis similes quae in Bosnia catholicam rem adfligunt, irrepant”[45]. Sardi’s reply did not delay. In the letter sent on October the 24^th 1845 from Iaşi, the apostolic visitor informed the archbishop about the Jerney incident: “Postquam enim ex illis [hungaris sacerdotibus] nonnuli, caeco nationalitatis fanatismo abrepti, una cum quodam domino Jerni, qui ex Hungaria, antiquitatum conquirendarum praetextu, ad discordias disseminandas huc venerat, causam

p. 443

communem fecerunt, omnes hungaricos locali gubernio eiusque protectoribus suspectos reddiderunt atque odiosos. Quapropter decretum erat constitutum, quo omnes supradicti sacerdotes e Moldavia pellebantur.”[46] Sardi indirectly accused the Hungarian missionaries of mixing the ecclesiastical duties with nationalistic issues. He emphasized its own merit in stopping the publishing of the expulsion decree. Moreover, Sardi stressed the fact that, for him, the only authority, whom he paid obedience, was the prefect of the Sacred Congregation. He affirmed in the same letter that “Ego debeo animarum mihi commissarum reddere rationem, non hungarico Minoritarum provinciali”.

In reply, Kopácsy explained his intervention in favor of the Hungarian language as a result of the fact that he was asked by several bishops of the Hungarian church and by several officials of some Hungarian districts. He claimed that he did not intend to usurp Sardi’s attributions by appealing to the Provincial of the Hungarian Conventuals: he just took into consideration the “national norm”, which is followed by the Propaganda and by the Catholic bishops from America. Kopácsy denied all connections with János Jerney: “Si dominus Jerney negotio huic se miscuit, mihi nihil commune est cum illo.” He, however, warned Sardi that “Est autem summae considerationis res propensum Hungarorum (inter quos octo milliones catholicorum censentur) in Sedem Apostolicam animum commovere, ab ea avertere et alienum reddere, quod tamen ex his quae in respectu Hungarorum ab Illustritate Vestra fiunt indubie sequetur”[47].

Kopácsy’s insinuations were severely rejected by Sardi, who preferred to write directly to Rome. In appreciating the affirmations of the Hungarian Primate, the apostolic visitor did not hesitate to use harsh expressions such as “un amalgama di fanatismo e di contradizioni siffate […]”, “un’ affare di mala fede”. Sardi considered especially scandalous those allegations referring to the importance of the Hungarian language for the Catholics from Moldavia: “Eppure Monsignor primate vorebbe far credere che la fede cattolica è attaccatta alla lingua ungara! Nè intendo io con ciò dire che i missionarii italiani non debbano apprendere una lingua necessarissima in questa missione, ma solo intendo significare non esistere nella lingua moldavana ab antiquo usata in questa Missione, quell’imminente pericolo di sovversione ch’egli sogna”[48].

Kopácsy’s position, however, did not influence to a significant degree the evolution of the Hungarian question at that moment. The archbishop himself could not do more than sending mémoires to the Roman Church or to the Austrian authorities in order to draw their attention over the problem of the Hungarian Catholic communities from Moldavia. The Provincial of the Hungarian Conventuals, Roman Szabó, exerced a greater influence as he coordinated the appointments of the Hungarian priests in Moldavia.

Thus, the disputes between Sardi and Szabó determined the evolution of the relations between the Italian and the Hungarian Conventuals for the control of the Moldavian mission. At the beginning of Sardi’s mandate as apostolic visitor, the papal nuncio from Vienna, Cardinal Altieri, had succeeded in concluding a compromise between

p. 444

the two parties according to which the Moldavian mission had to pay the owned money to the Hungarian Province, while Szabó was obliged to announce Sardi the names of the missionaries before sending them to Moldavia. This compromise was mentioned by Sardi in a letter from October the 17^th 1845:

“[…] Al mio arrivo in Moldavia trovai su ciò [the contract from 1825] un intera confusione per dare un termine alla quale colla volevolissima intercessione di Sua Eminenza il Signor Cardinale Altieri allora nunzio in Vienna, si concluse che pagando io e il corrente e l’arretrato della somma convenuta mandarebbe il Provinciale d’Ungheria li mancanti soggetti a condizione però che per meglio evitare gli scandali accaduti dovesse egli prima significarmi i nomi dei religiosi per la missione destinati e darmi tempo necessario onde potessi io bene informarmi delle qualità dei candidati. Cosi andarono le cose nel tempo che l’Eminentissimo Altieri fu nunzio a Vienna. Ora però l’Ungarico Provinciale ritornato alle sue cabale ha rotto ogni patto [emphasis mine]. Non è molto tempo dacché gli scrissi, onde ricordargli che erano mancanti due soggetti dei quali io abbisognava. Per evitare ogni ritardo gli suggerii i nomi di alcuni quali sarebbero stati da me graditi. Egli però mi rispose che ne mandarebbe ma non quelli da me proposti. Intanto vennero due religiosi, furono da me accettati e provvisti di parrocchie. Dunque tutto fatto: ma no, ora vedo arrivarmi inaspettatamente da Galazzo altro religioso ungaro insieme con una giovine donna, quale egli ora nipote, ora sorella dice essere; munito di patente dal suo Provinciale per questa missione; e sento che altri tre sacerdoti ungaresi sono già in viaggio per la Moldavia. Tutto ciò si opera dal Provinciale ungaro spontaneamente e senza mia saputa. E siccome il nominato Provinciale si servi sempre della Moldavia onde purgare dai cattivi soggetti la sua Provincia, credo che anche adesso pensi tentare un simile spediente.

Ho scritto quindi al Provinciale suddetto che io né posso ricevere i religiosi in modo bizzarro qua diretti ed ho ordinato ad un mio vicario, ancora la di cui residenza è vicina al confine, di respingere il già costi arrivata e tanti quanti ne giungessero”[49].

It is difficult to establish whether Sardi was really concerned about the fact that the Hungarian Provincial did not follow the compromise set by Cardinal Altieri, sending missionaries in Moldavia without his consent, or he used this as a pretext to draw the attention of the Congregation over the necessity of revising the implication of the Hungarian province of the Conventuals in the affairs of the Moldavian mission. It is significant that the apostolic visitor informed the prefect about that “incident”, before exhausting all the possibilities to solve the problem with Szabó: it proves a certain discomfort for Sardi in collaborating with the Hungarian Conventuals.The apostolic visitor was, however, reasonable enough to recognize the absolute necessity of Hungarian speaking missionaries in Moldavia. He realized that the Italian Conventuals could hardly provide the religious assistance to the Catholics from the mountainous region from Western Moldavia, where native Hungarians were predominant. He shared this conclusion to the prefect of the Congregation, when criticizing the Italian Conventuals Agostino Melis and Antonio de Stefano of being hostile to their Hungarian colleagues:

p. 445

“Si mormora, si grida sfacciatamente dal padre Melis, a cui s’unisce per connivenza il padre de Stefano, contro la lingua ungara e contro li sacerdoti ungari e li vorrebbero fuori dalla missione, ancor’io lo vorrei perché cercano più il nazionalismo, che il bene reale delle anime, ma le presente circostanze eligano prudenza e moderazione, l’Ungaria è allarmata, è prevenuta percui in Vienna non lascia via intruttata onde l’ottenere l’intento, e non vorrei che la Sagra Congregazione venisse obbligata a fare qualche sagrificio maggiore [emphasis mine]. E poi i miei antecessori hanno tollerato li sacerdoti ungari appunto allora per il bisogno ed ora bisogna fare lo stesso per le presente circostanze, saper dissimulare, attendere dal tempo altra opportunità, tanto più che le parrocchie occupate degli Ungari nei monti Carpati non possano amministrarsi degl’Italiani che ignorano affatto la lingua ungara [emphasis mine], e oltrecchè fanno il proprio comodo nelle parrocchie più agiate, oltrecchè accumulano denaro perché troppo impinguati ricalcitrano e mormorano”[50].

Sardi’s prudent attitude toward the Hungarian missionaries from Moldova seems to have been caused by some interventions from Vienna. The apostolic visitor maight have been warned that it was not really the proper moment to stir up a conflict with the Hungarians due to political reasons. On the other hand, Rome had no resources to help Sardi in replacing the Hungarian missionaries. Sardi was more willing to collaborate with the indigenous Hungarians, who could replace the mission in assisting the Catholics from Moldavia. He was informed about the general instruction issued by pope Gregory XVI on November the 23^rd 1845, which stated the urgent necessity of the formation of an indigenous clergy, and drew the attention of the Congregation over the possibility of recruiting the future Moldavian Catholic clergy among the Moldavian Hungarians: “Ne io saprei come meglio governare questa missione, obbedire alla Sagra Congregazione secondo l’instruzione dei 23 novembre prossima passata, che è giustissime lodevalissima ed in pari tempo contentare l’Ordine, che non vuole né sacerdoti indigeni, né polacchi, né ungari, per cui molto si è detto scritto a carico del padre Cagno […]. Intanto io convengo coll’istruzione emanate, ma per formare il clero indigeno bisogna estrarlo degli Ungari nati in Moldavia [emphasis mine], perché questi più timorati di Dio, più riducibili nei poveri agriculturi”[51].

Although Sardi seems to have adopted a more conciliatory attitude toward the Hungarian missionaries, he ceased again to pay the due money to Roman Szabó for two years, 1845 and 1846. Thus, in 1847 the Moldavian mission owned to the Hungarian Province 200 scuds plus 100 scuds for the current year. Alexander Kampus, the Hungarian poenitentiarius from St. Peter’s Cathedral in Rome in a letter sent on March 1847, informed the Propaganda about this situation:

“Frater Alexander Kampus ad Sanctum Petrum Poenitentiarius humillime exponit E. E. V. V. vehementem dolorem patris Romani Szabo, Provinciae Hungariae Ordinis minorum conventualium Provincialis, propter retardatam solutionem duobus annis a missione Moldaviae quotannis in scudi 100 Provinciae praestandam; quin haec sex individuis illam

p. 446

coadjuvare sese obligavit, statque fideliter promissis. […] In hac benevolentia Suae Eminentiae requierit Provincialis quotidie solicitior recipiendarum pecuniarum, unde miserias et afflictiones fratrum ob nimiam caristiam in conventibus superioris Hungariae degentium sublevaret. Sed nusquam solamen juvamen et consolationem accipiendo, novissime ad me utpote assistentem generalem Provinciarum ultramontes die 2^da junii scribente evocavit me, ut ex officio medelam procurarem in bonum meae Provinciae enarratque tristissimam et luctuosissimam faciem terrae in parte superiore regni Hungariae, quam ego E. E. V. V. audeo synoptice in praesentiarum referre sequentibus: “In quibusdam pagis sclavicis famelici homines jam omnes canes, et feles absumserunt; multi afflictam vitam sustentant pane – si panis dicendus est – e scobe runcinae sectarum tabularum et corticibus arborum et plurimi jam prae fame mortui sunt: ast majora adhuc timenda sunt mala his in partibus autumnales etenim segetes via redditurae sunt semen; sata vero vernalia ob diuturnam siccitatem penitus exaruere; pomma terrestria et legumina potissimum sunt in statu eodem quo terrae mandata fuerunt seu nec nata etc, etc., etc”[52].

The Hungarian Provincial himself sent a letter on March the 17^th 1847 to the cardinals of the Congregation concerning the same problem:

“Stipulatam anno 1825^o et ab eo anno titulo educandi cleri nostri junioris religiosi currentem centum scutatorum summam Ilustrissimus Dominus Episcopus Sanctae Missionis Moldaviae Praefectus anno 1845^o quidem pro annis 843^o et 44^o persolvit fideliter; ast ab illo tempore saepius licet rogatus nihil pendit, imo nec responsum quidem ad iteratas interpellationes meas dare dignatus est; ubi tamen ob communem hic praesertim in superiore Hungaria caristiam imo egestatem fato subsidio misera haec provincia 17 iuvenes studentes et novitios vestiens ac intertenens ideo nullis debitis gravata maxime indigeret. Suplex proinde de genui oro Sacram supra titulatam Congregationem ut cordi sumendo tristem hujus meo Provinciae Hungaricae sortem, velut alias benignissime facere dignata est, etiam modo restantem pro annis 1845⁰et 46 supra memoratam ratam per concernentem gratiosissime persolvi curare dignetur eo a fortiore; quod modo in Moldavia non tantum sex sacerdotes hungari in vinea Domini fideliter operentur verum septem contra quorum seu moralitatem sive functionem tres per annos nulla querela ad me delata est […]”[53].

To the interpellations of the Congregation, Sardi replied that he already sent 100 scuds through the guardian of the Franciscan convent from Canta (Eastern Transylvania)[54] and reiterated the accusations against the fact that Szabó continued to send poor quality missionaries, such as Gottfried Rosen, whom he had to expel from Moldavia:

“Nell’accusare all’Eminenza Vostra il ricevimento della di Lei veneratissima sotto la data dei 30 aprile scorso, che concerne li reclami del Padre Provinciale dei Conventuali della Provincia d’Ungheria, mi arreco a gradita premura di significare all’Eminenza Vostra che

p. 447

fino dal principio dell’anno presente aveva ordinato al mio vicario del Distretto di Totrus di far tenere al suddetto Provinciale la somma di scudi imperiali 100 per mezzo del guardiano del Convento di Kanta dell’istesso ordine siccome mi scriveva il Provinciale il ricordato mio vicario mi scrisse d’aver avvisato il predetto padre guardiano di tale mia disposizione, ma che ancora non s’era effettuata per mancanza di sicura occasione; nulla dimeno mi giova sperare che presto si eseguirà, come rilevo da ultima lettera di recente ricevuta da quel vicario farò poi tenere al Provinciale il rimanente del suo credito purché mi conceda per unico titolo di giustizia la somma di scudi 40 di cui ho speso nel mese di novembre del 1845 per rimandare in Provincia il padre Rosen spedito da esso Provinciale arbitrariamente in questa missione senza essere stato di me richiesto, religioso indegno del carattere sacerdotale, che con accortezza e pecuniarii sacrificii mi riusci d’eliminare da questa missione onde salvarla da orrendo sfregio. Ho ribrezzo di richiamare alle memoria dei racconti a tale riguardo e poi non voglio amareggiare il paterno cuore dell’Eminenza Vostra. Pregherei pertanto l’Eminenza Vostra d’ordinare a quel Provinciale di non più infestare questa missione colla spedizione di simili soggetti che sono di rovine al bene che per la Dio grazia si va facendo. Che s’attenga all’ultima mia proposta e determinazione cioè che occorrendomi sacerdoti ungari ne attendasse la mia richiesta, mi scrivesse prima nome, cognome dei soggetti che si proponeva di mandarmi, che mi dasse tempo d’informarmi e poi ricevutane la mia conferma ed assenso ne facesse le spedizione”[55].

On August the 23^rd 1847 Sardi sent a new letter to the prefect Franzoni concerning the problem of the payment for the Hungarian Province, where he insisted that he had already discharged this obligation:

“[…] mi faccio un preciso dovere di significare all’Eminenza Vostra essere già stati consegnati al padre guardiano di Kanta la somma di scudi 100; come apparisce da analoga ricevuta dei 14 giugno prossimo passato, la quale presso di me rimane, siccome ancora non ha guari ho ordinato a quel mio vicario di Totrus di far nuovamente passare al indicato padre guardiano altri 100 scudi, e fra poco mi giove sperare d’ottenerne analoga ricevuta, questo quanto ho l’onore d’umiliare all’Eminenza Vostra in esecuzione degli ordini di Lui veneratissimi. Da ciò quel Provinciale potrà facilmente dedurre che invece di trattarlo con durezza prendo piuttosto parte alla di lui descritto miseria, e tanto più potrà persuadersi, se per un momento vorrà anche riflettere che io appena qui giunto al regime di questa missione, che al certo non era in quel tempo in miglior condizione di quella Provincia, gli ho soddisfatto 6 anni arretratati dal mio antecessore. Che se poi quel guardiano di Kanta trattiane presso di se il denaro da me ricevuto, come sento indirettamente fino all’elezione del nuovo Provinciale, che avrà luogo fra giorni, la colpa non è mia, ma è di quel Provinciale che mi ha indicato

p. 448

quel padre guardiano, e questa forse sarà la cagione di suoi reclami, delle sue miserie descritte con tanto impegno a codesta Sagra Congregazione”[56].

In 1848, the last year of Sardi’s mandate, the problem seems to have been solved as the apostolic visitor announced Cardinal Franzoni that: “Avendo spedito l’ultimo arretrato al Padre Provinciale dei Conventuali d’Ungheria ed essendo munito d’analoghe ricevuta, ora mi faccio un piacere di notificarlo all’Eminenza Vostra essere questa missione con quel Provinciale affatto al corrente in genere d’interesse […]”[57]. The evolution of the “Hungarian affair” during Paolo Sardi’s mandate as apostolic visitor of the Moldavian mission, unlike in the cases of most of Sardi’s predecessors, did not include the language issue. Sardi did not try to “evacuate” the Hungarian language from the Conventual mission, as he was fully aware that there was a real necessity of practising this language in several parishes from Moldavia. His efforts focused on the quality of the Hungarian missionaries: within this context Sardi followed his predecessors in accusing missionaries such as Könya of mixing nationalistic issues within their ecclesiastic duties. He also, like his predecessors, tried to determine the annulment of the agreement from 1825 on the basis of the same argument: the poor quality of the Hungarian missionaries sent by their Provincial. The real reason was mainly the lack of money, as Sardi saved most of the revenues of the mission for building a Catholic seminary at Iaşi. It is significant the fact that Pietro Tocanel considered that the Hungarian affair was solved when Sardi had paid the last instalment of his debt to the Provincial[58]. The lack of communication between missionaries must be taken also into account, but this is not a specific phenomenon appeared only between the Hungarians and the Italians, but also between the Italians themselves (it is sufficient to recall Sardi’s harsh accusations against Melis). Sardi’s efforts, however, were thwarted by the ambiguous position of the Sacred Congregation and of the General Minister of the Conventuals, who did not dispose the necessary human resources in order to replace the Hungarian missionaries. Sardi was supported only by the Austrian diplomacy, which was not very happy with the nationalistic trends present in the public debate on the problem of the Hungarian Csángos.

Other articles published in our periodicals by Rafael-Dorian Chelaru:

Documents concerning the Activity of the Italian Bishop Paolo Sardi in Moldavia (1843-1848)

The Italian Catholic Bishop Antonio de Stefano and the Emancipation of the Catholic Communities from Moldavia (1849-1859)

For this material, permission is granted for electronic copying, distribution in print form for educational purposes and personal use.

Whether you intend to utilize it in scientific purposes, indicate the source: either this web address or the Annuario. Istituto Romeno di cultura e ricerca umanistica 6-7 (2004-2005), edited by Ioan-Aurel Pop, Cristian Luca, Florina Ciure, Corina Gabriela Bădeliţă, Venice-Bucharest 2005.

No permission is granted for commercial use.

© Şerban Marin, October 2005, Bucharest, Romania

Last Updated: July 2006

serban_marin@rdslink.ro

Back to Geocities

Back to Yahoo

Back to Homepage Annuario 2004-2005

Go to Annuario 2000

Go to Annuario 2001

Go to Annuario 2002

Go to Annuario 2003

Go to Quaderni 2001

Go to Quaderni 2002

Go to Quaderni 2004

Back to Istituto Romeno’s Publications

[1] Pietro Tocanel O. F. M., Storia della Chiesa cattolica in Romania, vol. III, Il vicariato apostolico e le missioni dei frati minori conventuali in Moldavia, Padova 1960-1965, pp. 18-22, pp. 54-58, pp. 66-76, pp. 82-93, pp. 261-264, pp. 290-297, pp. 331-347; Idem, Franciscanii minori conventuali şi limba română, in “Bună vestire”, no. 3, 1972, pp. 9-43.

[2] Teresa Ferro, Ungherese e romeno nella Moldavia dei seccoli XVII-XVIII sulla base dei documenti della “Propaganda Fide”, in Italia e Romania. Due popoli e due storie a confronto (secc. XIV-XVIII), edited by Sante Graciotti, Florence 1998, pp. 291-318.

[3] Marius Diaconescu, Péter Zöld şi “descoperirea” ceangăilor din Moldova în a doua jumătate a secolului XVIII, în “Anuarul Institutului de Istorie «A. D. Xenopol»”, XXXIX-XL, 2002-2003, pp. 247-292.

[4] Iosif M. Petru Pal, Originea catolicilor din Moldova şi franciscanii, păstorii lor de veacuri, Săbăoani–Roman 1942, pp. 152-155, pp. 193-206.

[5] Emil Dumea, Catolicismul în Moldova în secolul al XVIII-lea, Iaşi 2003, pp. 77-78, pp. 138-140, pp. 151-153.

[6] The problem of the conflicts between the Italian and Hungarian missionaries from Moldavia is analysed generally as subsequent to the problem of Csángos in both historiographies, Romanian and Hungarian. Therefore, I consider useful for those readers particularly interested in this problem to point out the most recent Romanian-Hungarian bibliography on the Csángos problem: Halász Péter, A moldvai magyarság bibliográfiája, [Budapest] 1996, apud M. Diaconescu, op. cit., p. 248, footnote no. 12.

[7] Ferenc Pozsony, Ceangăii din Moldova, Cluj-Napoca 2002, pp. 55-85 (the chapter entitled “Viaţa religioasă a comunităţilor maghiare din Moldova”, which was published in English under the title “The religious life of the Hungarian Csángos from Moldavia” in Hungarian Csángos in Moldavia. Essays on the past and present of the Hungarian Csángos in Moldavia, edited by Diószegi László, Budapest 2002, pp. 83-116).

[8] P. Tocanel, Storia della Chiesa cattolica …, pp. 275-331.

[9] For the conflict between the Conventuals and Jesuits from Moldavia, whose evolution lasted from 1644 until 1773 see the study of Francisc Pall, Le controversie tra i Minori conventuali e i Gesuiti nelle missioni di Moldavia (Romania), in “Diplomatarium Italicum”, IV, 1939, pp. 136-357.

[11] Gh. Călinescu, Alcuni missionari cattolici italiani nella Moldavia nei secoli XVII e XVIII, in “Diplomatarium Italicum”, I, 1925, p. 184.

[12] See for more details M. Diaconescu, op. cit., pp. 249-251.

[15] P. Tocanel, Storia della Chiesa cattolica …, p. 18.

[18] In a particular meeting held on April the 20^th 1744, the Sacred Congregation appointed for the Moldavian mission two Hungarian Conventuals, Basilius Frenk and Urbán Baczoni. The Congregation decided also to reserve two places for the Hungarian Conventuals in the College of Assisi, the alumni being prepared for Moldavia; see E. Dumea, op. cit., p. 110.

[19] See the Botskor case in P. Tocanel, Storia della Chiesa cattolica …, pp. 54-58, pp. 66-76, pp. 82-93.

[28] Ibidem, p. 306; Arduini was obliged to accept Funtak, as the mission lacked new Italian Conventuals for several years.

[31] It is the case of the Hungarian journal Szion, which published on November the 23^rd 1838 an extensive article concerning the severe poverty which affected the Catholic communities from Moldavia, accusing in the same time the attitude of the Italian missionaries, which neglected the real spiritual needs of these communities; see Ibidem, p. 290.

[33] Some information on Sardi’s activity can be found also in Guilielmus Schmidt, Romano-catholici per Moldaviam episcopatus et rei romano-catholicae res gestae, Budapest 1887, pp. 149-150; Bonaventura Morariu O. F. M., Series chronologica episcoporum ac praefectorum apostolicorum missionis fratrum minorum conventualium in Moldavia (Romania) durante saeculo XIX, in “Commentarium Ordinis Fratrum Minorum Sancti Francisci Conventualium”, XXXVIII, no. 12, 1941 and XXXIX, no. 2, 3, 8, 9, 1942, pp. 10-11; I. M. Petru Pal, op. cit., p. 154; Anton Despinescu, Scurt istoric al bisericii catolice din Moldova, Iaşi 1995, pp. 44-45; Iosif Gabor, Dicţionarul comunităţilor catolice din Moldova, Bacău 1995, p. 22, p. 48, pp. 95-96, p. 103, pp. 110-111, p. 151, p. 225, p. 292; Iosif Simon, Franciscanii minori conventuali. Provincia Sf. Iosif din Moldova, Bacău 1998, pp. 291-297, p. 300; Fabian Doboş, Săbăoani, file de istorie, Iaşi 2002, p. 85; F. Pozsony, op. cit., p. 39, pp. 76-77.

[34] In the correspondence carried by the papal nuncio from Vienna and by Giacinto Gualerni, the Minister General of the Conventuals, it is used the expression “l’affare d’Ungheria”.

[35] P. Tocanel, Storia della Chiesa cattolica …, p. 333.

[36] See Rafael–Dorian Chelaru, Documents concerning the activity of the Italian bishop Paolo Sardi in Moldavia (1843-1848), in “Annuario dell’Istituto Romeno di Cultura e Ricerca Umanistica di Venezia”, V, no. 5, 2003, pp. 137-138, re-published in Idem, Documente privind activitatea episcopului Paolo Sardi şi catolicismul în Moldova, in “Arhiva istorică a României”, new series, I, no. 1, 2004, p. 120; furthermore, I shall cite only the first publication.

[37] In the same letter Sardi noted: “in Foxian vi è per parocco un ex minor osservante espulso dalla sua Provincia di Ungaria. Questi è un lupo che distrugge e disperde il gregge di Gesù Cristo, bisogna espellerlo il più presto che sia possibile, ma che sostituire a suo luogo?” , cfr. Ibidem.

[39] In a letter sent on February the 7^th 1846, Sardi mentioned the Catholic community from Galaţi as a multiethnic and multilinguistic milieu: “Nella detta città oltre la lingua italiana si parlano ancora le lingue tedesca, francese, polacca, la moldovana, greca ed ungara” – Ibidem, p. 164.

[41] János Jerney was contacted by the Catholics from the village Luizi–Călugăra, who accused the local landlord of usurping their properties. Jerney would ask the Hungarian landlords for land donations to those Catholics; F. Pozsony, op. cit., p. 39. In other articles, Jerney presented the miserable state of all the Hungarian Catholics from Moldova (whom he called Csángos) – Ibidem, p. 76.

[42] R.–D. Chelaru, Documents …, pp. 149-150.

[43] Nicolae Iorga, Studii şi documente privitoare la istoria românilor, vol. II, Acte relative la istoria cultului catolic în Principate, Bucharest 1901, p. 221.

[50] The letter was sent on February the 7^th 1846 – Ibidem, p. 166.

[52] See Idem, Documente privind activitatea episcopului Paolo Sardi …, p. 155.

[55] Sardi’s letter was sent on June the 7^th 1847 – Idem, Documents …, p. 175. It is interesting the fact that in the same letter Sardi showed satisfied with the activity of the Hungarian missionaries. On the contrary, he heavily criticized the Italians: “[…] padri pii ungari che ora servano la missione attendano con esattezza all’adempimento dei loro doveri, e mi fanno godere da parte loro perfetta pace, m’augurerei altrettanto da alcuni padri pii italiani che tanto mi affliggano. […] non si può fare dalli scarti, che dell’Italia si inauda in questa missione, a cui sono più di aggravio che di utilità”, Sardi referred especially to the missionary Agostino Melis.

[57] The letter was sent on July the 18^th 1848 – Ibidem, p. 182.

[58] P. Tocanel, Storia della Chiesa cattolica …, pp. 347-348.