Talk:Arsenie Boca

Paintings
What people testified about Boca could be truths, false memories, or outright lies. But his paintings are real and there is no denial that these are painted in a Blavatskyan Theosophic or Anthroposophic style. So, yeah, what people told about his allegiance to that spiritual movement could be stories, but his art says it is a hard fact. I mean painting an Eastern Orthodox church like that is heresy. If the Romanian Orthodox Church declares that he is a saint, that means that the Church has legitimized Anthroposophic paintings as theologically orthodox. In this respect, the Church leadership is now in a position of "damned if I do, damned if I don't". He already is a saint of the people (folk saint), but his sanctification by the Church isn't a foregone conclusion. Tgeorgescu (talk) 01:27, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Tatiana Niculescu could be wrong about many things about Boca, however the inference about his paintings is straightforward and undeniable. Only a madman would deny that these are painted in a Blavatskyan Theosophic or Anthroposophic style. The testimony of people or of the Securitate files could be unreliable, but this time his paintings can testify against him. tgeorgescu (talk) 23:04, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Others blame him for painting among the saints Francis of Assisi (who was Catholic) and Ulfilas (who was Arian). This is especially contentious since he painted this way Eastern Orthodox churches, if it just were his hobby outside of the Church, nobody would have cared about that. tgeorgescu (talk) 06:41, 26 August 2022 (UTC)