Raskol se zahuktava

[Bokisd]

пре 15 часа, MKD13 рече

Kad se to vratio? Kazi jedan Carigradski Patrijarh koji je rukopolozijo Oh.Arhiepiskopa? Nema. Ohridski Arhiepiskopi su rukopolagani svojim Sinodom. To i Blazeni Teofilakt pishe, nije valjda da nije i on znao, ko ga rukopolozio?! 

I ovaj Nil koji se pominje, 12.vek dokument, kaze da nikim se nije Ohrid potcinavo, i da je bio autokefalan i da su arhiepiskopi rukopolagani sami od svog sinoda, slicno kao Kipar.

Bugarska Crkva je dobila jos pre nezavisnost od Carigrada i kako se sticajom okolnosti, usled ratova, menjala i Stolica bugarske drzave, i na kraj se ucvrstila u Ohridu, tako se i centar bugarske Crkve u Ohridu prebacila. Vasilije Bugaroubijec to i potvrguje u svoje povelje, i nigde nema to shto ti kazes...

Naravno, da nije na vselenski sabor utvrgena autokefalija, vec usled kompromisa Carigrad je dao neovisnost. Kasnije da bi grci Ohridsku crkvu @malo@ prisvojili, poistovetili su je sa Justinijanom, kao da je dobila svoju prvu autokefalnost od cara Justinijana. I to podvrguje da ipak grci u srednjem veku priznavali su autokefalnost Oxridske Arhiepiskopije. Ohridski Arhiepiskop cak je imao mesto cak ispred Kiparskog.

Da nije imala isti status sa Kiprom, nebi ni ih uporeguvali... 

 

Pa, arh. Ohridski su dolazili iz klira Carigrada (bese Velike crkve) i rukopolagani i odlazili u Ohrid da tamo sluze,.... tako je sv.Teofilakt Ohridski bio klirik Saborne crkve i rukopolozen je u episkopa i poslan u Ohrid i to protiv njegove volje i zelje jer kao zapazen ucenjak i intelektualac i tumac i bogoslov crkve, nije zeleo da ide u te krajeve jer kao,...."Човек огромне учености, светске и богословске, утанчаног византијског укуса, меланхоличан и осетљив, Теофилакт се осећао међу Словенима у Охриду као изгнаник међу варварима "....

Tako da arhiep. Ohridski je biran i rukopolagan u Carigradu, i mogao je dalje da rukopolaze episkope u svojoj arhiepiskopiji,....tako je rukopolagan i episkop Raske oblasti, tako je Homatijan pisao da je hteo da rukopolozi i naseg sv.Savu za episkopa odredjene oblasti (ne da mu daje autokefaliju koju je Sava trazio od cara i patrujarha).

Tako da, i ovo sto se tice dobijanja samostalnosti Bugarske crkve od Carigrada (to verovatno mislis na davanje autokefalije od strane sv.Fotija u 9.veku), to se nije odnosilo na Ohrid, nego na teritorije Bugarske crkve u tom 9.veku,.... sad, ako je Bugarska sticajem okolnosti i vojno i ratovima prosirivala svoje teritorije i ako je i prenela svoju crkvenu stolicu u Ohrid, to ne znaci da je Ohrid tim cinom postao autokefalan, to niko nije priznavao Bugarskoj, narocito Carigrad - koji je kada se Ohrid oslobodio od vlasti Bugarske, i kada je ponovo zadobio vlast nad svojom predjasnjom kanonskom i crkvenom teritorijom u Ohridu upravo je rukopolagao arhiep. za Ohrid iz svog klira, sa time da je Ohrid imao odredjenu autonomiju da rukopolaze svoje episkope (osim arhiepiskopa).

Da je vazilo to Bugarsko crkveno prisvajanje Ohrida kao toboz da je autokefalna oblast i crkva, pa prvi bi se na to pozivao arh. Homatijan koji je osporavao davanje autokefalnosti sv.Savi od strane Carigrada,.... jer se ipak Homatijan pozivao na tu Justinijana prima, kao da je on neki naslednik te crkve i njihovih episkopa na tim prostorima na kojima je i on sam stolovao u Ohridu.

Tako da, ostaje samo kao neka vrlo mala mogucnost da arhiep. Ohrida budu neki naslednici episkopa Justinijane, sto ne znam koliko ima neka verovatnoca,....nisam upoznat sa istorijom Justinijane i njene crkvene istorije, ali, nisam dosad procitao da je negde data neka istorijska i crkvena podloga za mogucnost da Ohrid bude naslednik Justinijane.

I, koliko znam, Grci i Carigrad nisu nikad priznavali autokefalnost Ohrida, ....kazem, pitajte Vartolomeja (ako se ukljuci) da li ce da vam pise neki Tomos o autokefalnosti ili nece,....(mislim da bez Tomosa nece da moze kod Vartolomeja...)

[The Godfather]

US INVOLVEMENT SOC US MONTENEGRO REPEATS ITSELF Editors Note.. The following commentary, is the first summarization, of the status quo, of present and existing issues confronting the SPC, Serbian Orthodox Church in the United States. A Quit Claim Deed (2017) is attached with reference to Saint Sava Monastery Libertyville Illinois. Articles of Incorporation are in the possession of the Holy Synod. This is not Montenegro. This is Cleveland, Joliet, St Louis, San Marcos, Chicago, Lake Forest, Merrillville, Detroit, New York, Boston, Philly, Clearwater, Scottsdale, Las Vegas, Texas, Milwaukee, and so on and so on. This is the annihilation of an entire culture, ethnic and religious identity. By Whom?? Many are involved, from governments, conspirators, co-conspirators, traitors, Religious Heretics etc. Originally published in borbazaveru.info January 23, 2020 Stefan Karganović Dr. Viseslav Simic Mica Radenkovic Milos Milenkovic Your Holiness, Blessed members of the Holy Synod! It is clear to anyone who is able to interpret the signs of the times objectively that there is a new schism in the American dispersal on the horizon. Preparations have already been extensively done, initial attempts have been made, it remains to be seen whether effective countermeasures will be taken in a timely manner to prevent the coup in the scattering of the Serbian Orthodox Church. All Orthodox Serbs in the United States have a vivid memory of the painful experience of division in our Church caused by Udba in 1963 through its agents. At the time of Blessed Patriarch Paul, we reconciled and united. We vowed that a similarly terrible division, which tore not only parishes but also homes, and which turned gods and friends of yesterday into enemies, would never happen again in our midst. That is why we were shocked when a document disclosed recently in the office of the Secretary of State of Illinois, Jesse White, about the formation of one of the recently discreetly existing non-profit church corporations in 2017 was disclosed . The emergence of this new legal entity, under the official nameSerbian Orthodox Dioceses in the United States of America, to us as believers of the Serbian Orthodox Church in the United States have never been officiallyannounced or explained. Its purpose and composition, in parallel with the existing three SPC dioceses in the United States, are enigmatic, unexplained and unknown to us. But in light of the initiatives launched at this year's Assembly of Three Serbian Dioceses in the United States at the New Gracanica Monastery, this mysterious legal move, pulled two years ahead, seems neither naive nor innocuous. In parallel with our address to you, as the archbishop responsible for the management of our Church, a petition is being prepared for you, the Holy Synod of Bishops in Belgrade, for which angry believers from the Serbian Orthodox Church from all over the United States are collecting signatures. This petition is very seriously argued and please read it carefully. At the heart of our deep concern is that a series of steps taken and undertaken by Bishops Longin, Maxim and Irinej indisputably suggest that systematic preparations are being made for the separation of the three dioceses of the Serbian Orthodox Church in the United States from the Mother Church based in Belgrade and their annexation another jurisdiction - apparently the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Istanbul - which is not only obviously not Serbian, or Svetosavska, but, worst of all, we suspect that it is probably not Orthodox anymore. To the best of our knowledge, at the epicenter of these changes, which are introduced without counseling and behind the back of the people, which they will say without complicity, is the newly formed legal entity Serbian Orthodox Dioceses in the United States of America , translated "Serbian Orthodox Diocese in the United States of America" . As believers of the Serbian Orthodox Church and members of various Serbian Orthodox parishes throughout the United States, we seek answers to a number of key questions. First of all, who are the signatories, on whose behalf and finally, with whose blessing it was formed and misledthis act registering a new ecclesiastical entity, apparently in front of the Serbian Orthodox Church? According to the name given to that legal entity, it would be concluded that it should represent a body that would be above individual dioceses of our Church in the USA. Consequently, what are the goals and scope of this newly formed corporation? (For clarification, in the US, "corporations" are not exclusively business entities ; this is a generic term for various types of legal entities, which may also be non-profit, humanitarian, religious, etc.) As is well known, the Serbian Church, composed of three dioceses, has existed in the usa sincebefore 2017, when this new legal entity was registered, with a name like this one that claims to be a superior. In our understanding of how our Church is governed, the superior ecclesiastical organs of our dioceses in the United States are the Holy Council of Bishops and the Synod. Is that still the case? What is the reason for suddenly, without consultation and knowledge of the general public, to form a new ecclesiastical legal entity above the already existing dioceses and with a vague position between them and the legitimate governing bodies of our Church in the Fatherland? Why and for what purpose? Are all three existing dioceses (already individually incorporated already) merging into this new legal entity? Who is listed as the governing body of the new corporation? These are all questions that we need answers to, which we do not receive from our bishops here. Attached to this letter, we bring to your attention two documents that we have obtained from the office of the Secretary of State of Illinois. The 2019 Annual Report submitted to the said office shows that they are the "directors" of the religious corporation " Serbian Orthodox Dioceses in the United States of America""Said bishops Maximus, Longinus and Irenaeus. In the US system, the list of directors corresponds to the composition of the “board of directors” in Serbian. The document makes no mention of the Serbian Orthodox Church and its organs in Belgrade, nor does it state that a religious entity registered by three bishops and whose directors is an integral part of the Serbian Patriarchate and is canonically subordinate to that Patriarchate. Further, in the “Statement of Decision to Adopt a General Law on Nonprofit Corporations,” or “ Statement of Election to Accept the General Not For Profit Corporation Act, ”Filed June 6, 2017, also lists the names of the same three bishops as directors. In addition, it is significant to point out that the religious entity of the "Serbian Orthodox Diocese in the United States of America" is a closed-end corporation and has no voting rights (paragraphs 8 and 10). In the American legal system, this means that directors, or the Board of Directors, reserve the absolute and unlimited right to dispose of all tangible and intangible assets of the legal person they manage. In particular, the bishops-directors would thus potentially gain absolute control over the assets of their current dioceses, which they would be able to transfer to the name of a religious corporation they formed in 2017, all without paying the highest ecclesiastical authority. Using the above legal instruments, Bishops Maxim, Longin and Irinej could place their religious corporation formed in 2017 under the jurisdiction of any other church without the permission of the Serbian Patriarchate and without the obligation to obtain its consent in advance. From a material point of view, the key point is that under such a scenario, all parishes and property of three existing SPC dioceses in the United States, which, along with their private religious entity, are now in the lead, could be legally withdrawn, hand to translate under the authority of their new religious organization. One thing that comes to your attention is the fact that the act of establishing a new ecclesiastical legal entity was formalized inaudibly in 2017, and it will be said for a full two years before an attempt to introduce a series of new ones was made in 2019 in Nova Gračanica. and unusual, delegates of previously unannounced solutions in the same spirit. It is important for you to know that, from that moment, an internal church crisis of serious proportions erupted in a Serbian church in the United States . The confusion and discontent among the congregation grows every day, and few who turn up for vain phrasing from the occasional announcements of our bishops here. Sequence of events in the period 2017 - 2019, taken as a whole, convincingly indicates long-term planning and forethought on their part. The ties of some of the bishops in the United States, specifically East American Irinej Dobrijevic, with the distinctly non-Church factors - as revealed in the WikiLeaks documents - reinforce this suspicion and raise additional concern that this is a calculated blow to the unity and spiritual integrity of our holy Church. It seems that some other institutions have now come to the place of what used to be an evil religious commission, while everything else remains essentially the same. Particularly worrying is the slow and hesitant response of church authorities from the Fatherland to the open challenges that bishops of America are throwing at their faces. We are forced to note that these same church instances over the past few years have, over a relatively rapid process, overthrown and replaced several bishops, not only in Serbia. This happened for the canonical and other wrongs attributed to them, but which , even if they were well founded, are of a much easier nature than the situation before us now. In this case, we are faced with a potentially extremely serious misdemeanor Church: preparing m ground for secession, or ecclesiastical language - schism. The broad strata of the American Serbs, believers of the Serbian Orthodox Church, do not at all realize the marked difference between the arshins used in these cases. Teached by the experience of the church division that began in the 1960s, we must ask you - with all due respect - the question: Why have not the bishops of America been called to account and disciplined as canonically prescribed?the way? Because it is crystal clear that they have been behind the back of their congregation for at least two years, and we want to believe also behind your back, they are taking action that could only be interpreted as preparing the legal basis for causing a split in our Church, with the potential intent of disowning canonical hierarchy and annexation to another, why are they not already deprived of the illusion of a formal right to speak on behalf of the SOC in America? (It is recalled that the Holy Council of Bishops already has extensive experience in replacing bishops, both in the country and in dispersal, often motivated by non-transparent and extremely unconvincing reasons, for which the case of Bishop of Rasko-Prizren, Mr. Artemi, serves as an exemplary example.) Thus, we fear that without the lightning and appropriate reaction of the higher ecclesiastical authorities, and this will tell you, these three bishops may still appear under US law under the cloak of legitimacy and, most importantly, the hypothetical epilogue before the US court, of legality. Since we are on this issue consulted legal experts, we can transfer it, b hether the late cancellation of a highly dubious constitutional solutions of three bishops in the United States, as long as they recognize the right of the lawful exercise of their episcopal duties they can not continue to pull newharmful moves. Considering the principles of the Anglo-Saxon legal system, as time goes on, without the adequate and natural reaction of the Patriarchate whose canonical powers and authority in the United States are already seriously threatened, in the event of a church dispute (reruns of the 1960s and 1970s), the moves of the local bishops are getting all greater legal weight. In such a dispute, the Serbian Patriarchate would still have strong legal arguments. But the question still arises, since the vital interests of our holy Church in the United States are already being jeopardized, why should she hesitate to withdraw natural and effective moves that would minimize the legal potential of the opposite party? A timely failure to keep pests out of the way of carrying out our plans will cost our holy Church expensive, both materially and morally. An eventual litigation, similar to that of the 1960s and 1970s, which could have arisen from this, like the earlier one, would be time consuming and expensive. Let us leave aside the important question right now, whether the American Serbs are ready to bear such great material sacrifices again. And to take into account just what inappropriate facts would come to light on such an occasion would seriously hurt the Church in America. To better explain our concerns, here are some specific reasons why we may feel it. The new "constitution" and some of its main features At the New Gracanica assembly, a new constitution for three dioceses in the United States was presented . The indiscriminate manner in which the proponents of this document sought to obtain its adoption by the delegates present has already been commented on and substantially confirmed by the testimonies of the many participants present. It is symptomatic that Mr. Dobrijevic tried to present the new constitution to the participants in Parliament as a slightly modified version of the old one. However, without delving into the matter and no comparative analysis of texts, vision and are at first glance that this can not be true, because the new constitution almost twice longer than the old one. Even with a cursory review of the new constitution, several things fall into sight. Article 7 states that a church in the United States is defined as "hierarchical." In the US legal context, this claim is potentially very significant because it openly contradicts the current practice of registering as a separate legal entity, in a federal state where it is located, a distinct legal entity, with clearly defined collective decision-making rights and inviolable ownership of local community property. So, to change the status of the parish, in terms of affiliation with a higher church body or change of jurisdiction, members in each of the parishes individually, across the United States, in the same way as shareholders of every other U.S. corporation, wouldthey should adopt and vote. The status of a church school (parish) cannot be changed by a decree from above, if the majority of the members of the municipality would oppose such a decree. This will be a problem for the initiators of confusion in the dioceses of the Serbian Orthodox Church in the United States. At the same time, it is still legally and practically an opportunity for the ecclesiastical authority in Belgrade to suspend and eventually dismiss three bishops in the United States effectively to break the SPC and separate the dioceses in the United States before the process becomes irreversible. But it is also important to note that the definition of the Serbian Church in the US, in the new version of the constitution, is predominantly "hierarchical" at odds with the facts (and this was one of the major contentious issues in the church dispute of the 1960s and 1970s). The Serbian Church in the US was actually constituted as "hierarchy jsco-congregational, "i.e. vertical-horizontal. All these fundamental issues have been thoroughly considered by the US courts in judgments delivered during an earlier church dispute. Bypassing or otherwise neutralizing this legal condition is an essential prerequisite for imposing any organizational or jurisdictional solution. which would be contrary to the consciousness of the faithful Serbian people in the USA that they belong to the indivisible Serbian Orthodox Church, based in Belgrade. We reasonably doubt that the attempt to circumvent the legal obstacles is the secret of an otherwise inexplicable and, in fact, the unexplained incorporation of the said new legal entity in 2017. We reasonably doubt that the three bishops will at some point attempt to translate all, or the vast majority, of church congregations in the US with some trickunder the jurisdiction of that new legal entity they created and control. The newly created entity "Serbian Orthodox Diocese in the United States" ( Serbian Orthodox Dioceses in the United States of Americ a) in this operation has undoubtedly given a key role. Exactly what strategic idea behind it lies, we can only grasp with a careful observation of the further development of the situation. For a better understanding of the emerging legal situation, please, gentlemen of the Bishops, take a look at the schematic of the newly registered legal entities at all levels and their relationship. This will undoubtedly help you to realistically assess the legal situation that was silently established in the first half of 2017: Serbian Orthodox Dioceses in the United States of America (The umbrella church organization formed in the USA) Date of registration: 6/6/2017 SERBIAN ORTHODOX SERBIAN ORTHODOX DIOCESE OF WESTERN DIOCESE OF EASTERN AMERICA AMERICA, INC Date of registration: Date of registration: 12/4/2017 18/7/2017 SERBIAN ORTHODOX DIOCESE OF NEW GRACANICA -MIDWESTERN AMERICA Registration date: 24/2/2017 SERBIAN ORTHODOX MONASTERY OF SAINT SAVA MONASTERY OF THE Join Date: PROTECTION OF THE MOTHER 21/4/2017 OF GOD-NEW LIMIT Registration date: 11/4/2017 Evidence of the re-registration of these legal entities during the first six months of 2017, for which there was no apparent necessity, and notwithstanding the fact that all three dioceses and both monasteries existed and were before the authorities of their respective federal states as before registered, we deliver to you specifically within this address. The only exception is ex nihiloregistration of the so-called "Serbian Orthodox Dioceses in the United States of America," or "Serbian Orthodox Dioceses in the United States of America," whose purpose is unknown to us. Considering this scheme as a whole and linking it to the insistence of the three Bishops to adopt a new system without too much consideration of the details in our church in the USA, we can only interpret this as establishing the legal infrastructure for the implementation of an unspoken plan for some of us believers. Whether such a plan exists and what nature it is, we invite you as competent bishops to examine and determine. Dilemmas about the new constitution With regard to the concerns we have raised, we draw your attention, gentlemen, bishops, and to the mysterious formulation in Article 7, paragraph 4 of the proposed new constitution. There, the supreme ecclesiastical organs are referred to as "the holy bishops' council," and immediately after it "the holy synod." However, it does not specify which church jurisdictions. It does not explicitly state that these are the governing bodies of the SPC, based in Belgrade. So, in light of the concerns raised above, we reasonably doubt that it is a matter of incorporating a mechanism that would allow US bishops at any given time to be governed by another bishops' council and another synod. Do you accept such an ambiguous formulation and do you not see the danger to the unity of our Church that lies in it? We also need to look at Article 11 of the new constitution, which defines the status of church-based municipalities, or parishes. This, as we have already stated, does not begin with the actual status of such municipalities in certain US states as virtually independent legal entities, which exist and function as such in accordance with secular US law. Instead, ecclesiastical municipalities are treated as informal associations of believers, without any special powers other than being allowed to dissolve themselves by a two-thirds vote. Under the new organization, they would have roughly the same powers as the "community of Serbian municipalities" in Kosovo and Metohija. But it is important to know, regardless of the status of analogue bodies in Serbia, that in legal terms in America, the real state of affairs issubstantially different. Although not a true reflection of the factual situation on the ground, this view from the new constitution is nevertheless of great importance in that it is an indication of the true goals and aspirations of the creators and proponents of the document. If the ultimate goal is to separate the Serbian Orthodox Church institutions from the canonical composition in the United States, then the attempt to downplay the status of the parishioners and the attempt to circumvent them as a key legal obstacle to planned manipulations in the field are understandable.. However, the fact remains - and this is something you need to know without making any unfounded analogies to the situation you know in the Fatherland - that every Serbian church-going municipality in the US, as a secular entity, is equal to the diocese before US law as a secular entity. Under secular US law, members of each parish, or church congregation, have the right to decide where they will belong, what they will do and whom they will listen to. This is at this point the way Serbian Orthodox Church-based municipalities are constituted in the United States. Believers of the Serbian Orthodox Church in the US respect the canonical order and obey the traditional hierarchical structure of the Church, butvoluntarily. So, not because under US law, which the canons do not care about at all, except to the extent that they are embedded in a secular registration act, they must, but because as believers they choose to do so freely, and only as long as it is theirs the choice. We would like to remind you that all these issues were analyzed long before the American courts during the ecclesiastical dispute that broke out in the 1960s ( here and here ), and since the basic principle prevails in the local legal system, everything that was resolved then still stands, at least while it would not be abolished or modified in any upcoming litigation . Bishops, we advise you, since the action of the three bishops in the United States has already emerged from the ecclesiastical canon and has largely moved into secular legal terrain, to consult with US legal experts and to reconcile your responses to the challenges you are facing with the principles of US legal regulations are in force. Your Holiness, gentlemen of the Bishops! The situation in the Serbian Orthodox Church in the United States of America is extremely serious and difficult. If the raiding operation in this country succeeds, and if there is no adequate response from the higher ecclesiastical authorities, there is a real possibility that this will happen, the way the successful secession of parts of the SOC in the USA was carried out will be used as a model for separating its parts in other countries, regions and countries. the continents. Along with the already extensive political fragmentation of Serbia, spiritual fragmentation will be achieved, which will result in the disintegration of our Church and the complete religious and national alienation of numerous Serbian scattered throughout the world. The responsibility that rests on your shoulders does not come down to relatively simple matters of an administrative or material nature. It is much broader and deeper, and it relates, to the highest degree, to the moral responsibility that you bear to guard one of the most important fronts in the fight for the survival of the Serbian people, and that front is spiritual. Safeguarding that front has been entrusted to you and you will all be held accountable in the Last Judgment for its successful defense. That is why we urge you to begin without delay the effective resolution of this serious issue, whose spontaneous development would undoubtedly have incomprehensible and in every respect bad consequences to the congregation entrusted to you. In the meantime, as believers of the Serbian Orthodox Church in the United States of America, we will keep you informed during the development of the church situation in the country we live in, first of all, to have an objective source of information, and, more importantly, not to have any doubts about it. , that you were informed in a timely manner. Remaining faithful and loyal sons and daughters of our Church of the Sava River, we warmly welcome you and ask for the archipastral blessing. Stefan Karganović Dr. Viseslav Simic Mica Radenkovic Milos Milenkovic Last Updated (Thursday, 23 January 2020 content://media/external/file/10749 .

M.FACEBOOK.COM

---

US INVOLVEMENT SOC US MONTENEGRO REPEATS ITSELF Editors Note.. The...

 

[Zoran Đurović]

пре 2 часа, logdanov рече

То је писао онај Роман са Крита што је прозивао и албанског Анастасија док му овај није одговорио. Човек или мисли да ће тако зарадити митру или је просто сумашедши.

Сумашедшиј...

[Ромејац]

пре 19 часа, Талични Том рече

Змијулас

[Bokisd]

пре 7 часа, Талични Том рече

 Бре, Боки, имаш око соколово.

(ko radar....)

[logdanov]

пре 2 часа, Zoran Đurović рече

Сумашедшиј...

Ма да. Пише се као Роман Воскресенский (на руском) и ватрено подржава пцу. Пише бљувотине од чланака. Мало су га примирили после Анастасијевог реаговања.

[The Godfather]

Greek Archbishop Elpidophoros visits Russian cathedral, venerates relics of St. John (Maximovitch)

ORTHOCHRISTIAN.COM

---

Archbishop Elpidophoros, the primate of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of...

 

[MKD13]

пре 16 часа, Bokisd рече

Pa, arh. Ohridski su dolazili iz klira Carigrada (bese Velike crkve) i rukopolagani i odlazili u Ohrid da tamo sluze,.... tako je sv.Teofilakt Ohridski bio klirik Saborne crkve i rukopolozen je u episkopa i poslan u Ohrid i to protiv njegove volje i zelje jer kao zapazen ucenjak i intelektualac i tumac i bogoslov crkve, nije zeleo da ide u te krajeve jer kao,...."Човек огромне учености, светске и богословске, утанчаног византијског укуса, меланхоличан и осетљив, Теофилакт се осећао међу Словенима у Охриду као изгнаник међу варварима "....

Tako da arhiep. Ohridski je biran i rukopolagan u Carigradu, i mogao je dalje da rukopolaze episkope u svojoj arhiepiskopiji,....tako je rukopolagan i episkop Raske oblasti, tako je Homatijan pisao da je hteo da rukopolozi i naseg sv.Savu za episkopa odredjene oblasti (ne da mu daje autokefaliju koju je Sava trazio od cara i patrujarha).

Tako da, i ovo sto se tice dobijanja samostalnosti Bugarske crkve od Carigrada (to verovatno mislis na davanje autokefalije od strane sv.Fotija u 9.veku), to se nije odnosilo na Ohrid, nego na teritorije Bugarske crkve u tom 9.veku,.... sad, ako je Bugarska sticajem okolnosti i vojno i ratovima prosirivala svoje teritorije i ako je i prenela svoju crkvenu stolicu u Ohrid, to ne znaci da je Ohrid tim cinom postao autokefalan, to niko nije priznavao Bugarskoj, narocito Carigrad - koji je kada se Ohrid oslobodio od vlasti Bugarske, i kada je ponovo zadobio vlast nad svojom predjasnjom kanonskom i crkvenom teritorijom u Ohridu upravo je rukopolagao arhiep. za Ohrid iz svog klira, sa time da je Ohrid imao odredjenu autonomiju da rukopolaze svoje episkope (osim arhiepiskopa).

Da je vazilo to Bugarsko crkveno prisvajanje Ohrida kao toboz da je autokefalna oblast i crkva, pa prvi bi se na to pozivao arh. Homatijan koji je osporavao davanje autokefalnosti sv.Savi od strane Carigrada,.... jer se ipak Homatijan pozivao na tu Justinijana prima, kao da je on neki naslednik te crkve i njihovih episkopa na tim prostorima na kojima je i on sam stolovao u Ohridu.

Tako da, ostaje samo kao neka vrlo mala mogucnost da arhiep. Ohrida budu neki naslednici episkopa Justinijane, sto ne znam koliko ima neka verovatnoca,....nisam upoznat sa istorijom Justinijane i njene crkvene istorije, ali, nisam dosad procitao da je negde data neka istorijska i crkvena podloga za mogucnost da Ohrid bude naslednik Justinijane.

I, koliko znam, Grci i Carigrad nisu nikad priznavali autokefalnost Ohrida, ....kazem, pitajte Vartolomeja (ako se ukljuci) da li ce da vam pise neki Tomos o autokefalnosti ili nece,....(mislim da bez Tomosa nece da moze kod Vartolomeja...)

Ne vredi s vama sporiti. Ja sam prvi put ovde na forumu cuo da neko osporava autokefalnost Ohridske Arhiepiskopije do 1767g.

Al slava Bogu, evo ima i srpskih istoricara, poput ove Komatine, koja vase interpretacije o potcinenosti Ohrida VPatrijarsijom, razbija...shto kazu rusi u "pruh i prah"... Ali dobro...

Interesantno shto ja nisam znao do sad shta je ona pisala, a ona pise sve ono shto na osnovu istoriskih izvora, verujem i ja, i to sam vam ovde odavno predocio. Za mene je stvar cista...e sad vi kako ocete

Evo i rusi https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9E%D1%85%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B4%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%85%D0%B8%D0%B5%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%8F mada znam da ne vredi

[The Godfather]

Macedonians can receive autocephaly from Serbian Church or pan-Orthodox council— Bulgarian Metropolitan of Lovech

ORTHOCHRISTIAN.COM

---

While the hierarchs of the schismatic “Macedonian Orthodox Church” (MOC)...

 

[logdanov]

пре 5 часа, MKD13 рече

Ne vredi s vama sporiti. Ja sam prvi put ovde na forumu cuo da neko osporava autokefalnost Ohridske Arhiepiskopije do 1767g.

Al slava Bogu, evo ima i srpskih istoricara, poput ove Komatine, koja vase interpretacije o potcinenosti Ohrida VPatrijarsijom, razbija...shto kazu rusi u "pruh i prah"... Ali dobro...

Interesantno shto ja nisam znao do sad shta je ona pisala, a ona pise sve ono shto na osnovu istoriskih izvora, verujem i ja, i to sam vam ovde odavno predocio. Za mene je stvar cista...e sad vi kako ocete

Evo i rusi https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9E%D1%85%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B4%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%85%D0%B8%D0%B5%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%8F mada znam da ne vredi

Брате, грешком сам ти дао срце, не замери, повлачим га. Не зато што си рекао нешто лоше, већ просто зато што није довољно добро да заслужује срце.

Да ли је Охридска архиепископија имала аутокефалност или аутономију подједнако је дискутабилно као и ново фанарско тумачење московске јурисдикције над Кијевом, или чак статуса Жичке архиепископије св. Саве. Можда може МПЦ да добије аутокефалност од Вартоломеја, али вероватно само као ОА. Не верујем да би та аутокефалија била убедљивија од аутономије коју сте морали да одбијете, судећи по томосу ПЦУ. Видећемо какав ће бити садржај тог евентуалног Томоса, ако га буде.

Македонском народу било би добро да не руши све везе са Србима са којима има, не само заједничку историју, већ и велики број родбинских веза и, рекао бих, интереса за будућност. Иако вас Американци гурају у ближи загрљај Бугарима, помисли само на шта би личио македонски идентитет у том страшном националистичком загрљају. О Грцима - лицем светци, срцем в'лци - сигурно имаш ружније мишљење него иједан Србин.

Него, реци ми, признајеш ли ти Онуфрија за митрополита кијевског? Ако не — зашто не? Ако да — докле?

[Bokisd]

пре 28 минута, logdanov рече

Брате, грешком сам ти дао срце, не замери, повлачим га. Не зато што си рекао нешто лоше, већ просто зато што није довољно добро да заслужује срце.

Nemoj Logi to da mi radis, ....srcka ce me strefi.... 

[Bokisd]

пре 6 часа, MKD13 рече

Ne vredi s vama sporiti. Ja sam prvi put ovde na forumu cuo da neko osporava autokefalnost Ohridske Arhiepiskopije do 1767g.

Al slava Bogu, evo ima i srpskih istoricara, poput ove Komatine, koja vase interpretacije o potcinenosti Ohrida VPatrijarsijom, razbija...shto kazu rusi u "pruh i prah"... Ali dobro...

Interesantno shto ja nisam znao do sad shta je ona pisala, a ona pise sve ono shto na osnovu istoriskih izvora, verujem i ja, i to sam vam ovde odavno predocio. Za mene je stvar cista...e sad vi kako ocete

Evo i rusi https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9E%D1%85%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B4%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%85%D0%B8%D0%B5%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%8F mada znam da ne vredi

Ima ovde dobro razjasnjeno i analizirano :

http://www.spc.rs/eng/autocephaly_serbian_church_1219_paradigm_canonical_acquisition_autocephaly

I, ovo je mozda jedno od glavnih pitanja :

"With all this in mind, the question of the autocephaly of the Serbian Church arises.  What does it mean to say that St. Sava gained the autocephaly of the Serbian Orthodox Church?  Could St. Sava have gained the autocephaly, or was he actually granted the autocephaly?  In trying to provide an answer to these questions, we must first take a close look at the question of who was the mother church in the early 13th century to that part of the Orthodox Church in what was then Serbia?  Was it the Archdiocese of Ohrid, or the Patriarchate of Constantinople?"

I, odgovor je :

"As Serbian lands were part of the Archdiocese of Ohrid, the question arose:  could she have given autocephaly to the Serbian Orthodox Church?  This was immediately answered in the negative.  The short answer is that the Archdiocese of Ohrid could not grant independence to the Serbian Church, because autocephaly can only be granted to one part of its territory by a completely independent, autocephalous mother church, and the Archdiocese of Ohrid  had never canonically obtained complete autocephaly.  Namely, the Archdiocese of Ohrid was created by an imperial decision, and imperial decisions in ecclesiastical matters were only relevant when they received consent from the Church.  Thus, after the death of Emperor Basil II, all acts and privileges he gave to the Archdiocese of Ohrid lost significance, because the dioceses numbered in the imperial documents belonged, at least formally, to the Patriarchate of Constantinople."

Itd, ima sve u tekstu.

[MKD13]

пре 47 минута, logdanov рече

Брате, грешком сам ти дао срце, не замери, повлачим га. Не зато што си рекао нешто лоше, већ просто зато што није довољно добро да заслужује срце.

Да ли је Охридска архиепископија имала аутокефалност или аутономију подједнако је дискутабилно као и ново фанарско тумачење московске јурисдикције над Кијевом, или чак статуса Жичке архиепископије св. Саве. Можда може МПЦ да добије аутокефалност од Вартоломеја, али вероватно само као ОА. Не верујем да би та аутокефалија била убедљивија од аутономије коју сте морали да одбијете, судећи по томосу ПЦУ. Видећемо какав ће бити садржај тог евентуалног Томоса, ако га буде.

Македонском народу било би добро да не руши све везе са Србима са којима има, не само заједничку историју, већ и велики број родбинских веза и, рекао бих, интереса за будућност. Иако вас Американци гурају у ближи загрљај Бугарима, помисли само на шта би личио македонски идентитет у том страшном националистичком загрљају. О Грцима - лицем светци, срцем в'лци - сигурно имаш ружније мишљење него иједан Србин.

Него, реци ми, признајеш ли ти Онуфрија за митрополита кијевског? Ако не — зашто не? Ако да — докле?

Pa ne amerikanci, vec vi nas gurate, u zagarljaj Vartolomeja. Sto se tice bugara oni su nam najblizi po krvi i rodu, mada danasnji makedonci vecinom simpatisu vise srbe negoli bugare. Al u poslednje vreme simpatije prema bugare u odnosu na srbe rastu na veliko.

Problem je shto vi nam nudite autonomiju u sklopu SPC, za nas bilo kakva Autokefalija (pa i onokva kakva je dana PCU) je prihvatljivija. Autonomija ne dolazi u obzir, nikad neceme se sloziti, sem kao promezutak, do Autokefalije. Vracanje na autonomiji je moguc samo pod obecanje SPC da ce proces dobijanje Autokefalije zapoceti odma i SPC ce ta bude ta koja ce "lobirati" za nas, da sto pre budeme priznati kao Autokefalni od strane pomesnih crkava.

Onda i mi bili bi prema vama i zahvalni i ljubav i simpitaje koje imamo jos vise bi ojacele. Sto ne znaci da sa bugarima necemo se priblizavati. Valjda svi mi treba da ostavimo proshlost u proslosti...

A ovako kako stoje stvari, samo nas vregate, i to iz vrha SPC, "neispiljeni skopljanci", "raskolnici"...i shta ne...autonomija i nista vise...

Normalno onda, mi i sa grcima i sa bugarima cemo sve vise i vise priblizivati. Pre ste govorili kao zbog grka da ne mozete da nas priznate, evo sad imamo pozitivne signale i od grka, bugari da ni su se bojali jos odavno bi nas priznali...

Na vas je dal ce te nas pribliziti k vama ili ce te nas izgubiti...mozda i zauvjek

[Vladan :::.]

пре 6 часа, The Godfather рече

Macedonians can receive autocephaly from Serbian Church or pan-Orthodox council— Bulgarian Metropolitan of Lovech

ORTHOCHRISTIAN.COM

---

While the hierarchs of the schismatic “Macedonian Orthodox Church” (MOC)...

Утешно је да се чују разумни и православни гласови осталих Цркава. Пре годину дана смо слушали од Украјинаца колико им значи када добију подршку осталих било кроз медијске изјаве било кроз служење код других било када им други дођу у госте.

Сада се ми, који имамо ситуације у Македонији, ЦГ и САД, налазимо у сличној позицији.

 

[Рисбо]

Утешно је да се чују разумни и православни гласови осталих Цркава. Пре годину дана смо слушали од Украјинаца колико им значи када добију подршку осталих било кроз медијске изјаве било кроз служење код других било када им други дођу у госте.
Сада се ми, који имамо ситуације у Македонији, ЦГ и САД, налазимо у сличној позицији.
 

Kako brzo Ukrajina dodje do nas. A neki su govorili sta se tamo mesamo podrzavajuci stradalnu Crkvu u Ukrajini, kao sada nasu u CG I Kosovu i Metohiji.

Послато са SM-A530W користећи Pouke.org мобилну апликацију