Macedonian Church Dispute in Australia

[aleksandrov]

...The defrocking of the Bishop was never ratified by the Synod, ...

On what do you base this claim, Prolet, given what the signed decision says?

[Prolet]

SOM, The Crkovni Kanoni

Aleksandrov, My understanding is that the Synod has to put in a secret vote in order to defrock a Bishop ( I could be wrong) but do you know how Vraniskovski was Defrocked?

Vangelovski, Bishop Petar has served 3 presidential terms i think its time a new Bishop comes in and takes his place, do you have a preference as to which Bishop you would like to see replace Petar? To me either Kiril,Agantangel (Who served in Australia before as a priest) and Metodija seem like reasonable bishops.

[aleksandrov]

... could it be that ArchBishop Gavril had a personal feud with Bishop Petar?

Prolet, I doubt that you will find one person who has stood or threatened to stand in the way of Petar's injustices without provoking a personal vendetta or blackmail by Petar. His vendettas or blackmail always rely on nasty personal accusations of some sort of immoral deed, like those against me and other Macedonian Australian community activists. The accusations of immoral conduct are quickly forgotten by him if you stop standing in his way.

Here are references to some of his serious accusations against the late Archbishop g.g. Gavril, his successor g.g. Mihail (Gogov) and g. Kiril. They are extracts from Petar's own book, Glas na Vistinata, published in 1990. The book consists of a foreword and speeches held by Petar, Zoran Vraniskovski (who was not yet a bishop then) and others, at a rally Petar staged in Bitola, in retaliation against his defrocking.

Petar on the then Archbishop g.g. Gavril, the then Bishop g. Mihail (Gogov), who later became Archbishop Mihail, and on g. Kiril:

http://img138.imageshack.us/f/petarbookpp389.jpg/

Petar on bishop Kiril:

http://img806.imageshack.us/f/petarbookpp367.jpg/

There is a section in the book where Petar insinuates that Archbishop g.g. Gavril had previously been a Nazi collaborator, but I haven't scanned that section yet. I'll try and post that and other key sections of the book later.

What is most important is that after Petar came out with these accusations, his defrocking was swept under the carpet and he was happy to forget the public accusations and sit in the same Synod with the persons he accused of highly immoral deeds without seeking to hold them to account. Other bishops in the MOC have also attracted accusations of similarly immoral behavior by attempting to hold him accountable for his deeds, and have backed off as a result.

Either Petar is happy to tolerate and cover up immoral behavior when it is in the interest of his own power and political agenda, or he is prepared to manufacture the most evil lies against persons who stand in the way of his grab for power and his political agenda. Either type of conduct is too immoral for him to be a true bishop and to demand the respect and trust he forcefully demands from the Macedonian people.

As far as the other bishops in the MOC are concerned, they are either keeping quiet about his many misdeeds over the years because they are scared that he will expose the skeletons in their own closets, or they are just too cowardly and too content with their own little kingdoms in Macedonia to stand up to him in the name of truth, justice, common decency and basic Christian values. Whatever the case may be, by tolerating him for this long, they too have proven that they do not deserve the respect and trust that would normally be afforded to a Synod of Macedonian Orthodox bishops.

For something a little more recent, here is a reference to Petar calling for criminal prosecution against Archbishop g.g. Stefan in 2006:

http://www.a1.com.mk/vesti/default.aspx?VestID=66300

This call for criminal investigations into the affairs of g.g. Stefan and his Skopje Diocese came during a period when a delegation of the Association of Macedonian Communities in Australia (including myself) was in Macedonia seeking a meeting with g.g. Stefan regarding the Australian situation. Stefan's office first avoided our requests for a meeting with excuses like "he will be watching the World Cup tonight", but after Petar's public attack on him, his office told me that g.g. Stefan would only meet with us if we could obtain written approval for such a meeting from Petar. I wrote to Petar asking him to agree to our delegation meeting with g.g. Stefan, and suggesting that Petar be present at the meeting as well. Petar's reply was that he and I should first meet alone and then we can meet with Stefan if we come to an agreement about the dispute in Australia. I met with Petar twice in Bitola and without going into the details on a public forum I will just say that Petar never allowed Stefan to meet with us. Archbishop Stefan obeyed. It was like going to the police to report a crime and being told that you can't make a report unless the accused person approves.

Suffice to say, after g.g. Stefan's appeasement of Petar's insistence that he should not meet with us, Petar appeared to forget about his calls for criminal investigations against Stefan regarding the Govrlevo affair.

Here are some extracts from a book by the late Macedonian journalist Milan Durlo, first published in 1992, and then again in 2002 (with English translations), which go a little further back in his history:

http://img3.imageshack.us/f/durloarticlefrombookp24.jpg/

http://img685.imageshack.us/i/durloarticlefrombookp24.jpg/

http://img517.imageshack.us/f/durloarticlefrombookp24.jpg/

So, Prolet, is Petar a man whose word you expect us to trust?

[aleksandrov]

SOM, The Crkovni Kanoni

Please cite something from the Canons that is relevant to Petar's grab for community money and power or to any other matters in this discussion.

Aleksandrov, My understanding is that the Synod has to put in a secret vote in order to defrock a Bishop ( I could be wrong)...

What is your understanding based on? How is it relevant to your disregard for the fact that g.g. Gavril signed the defrocking decision as a Synod decision?

[Prolet]

Aleksandrov, You fail to answer an important question here, how can a Bishop be defrocked? Whats the procedure?? Whats the church law.

I spoke to a person who was involved with the church for a long time, he told me that he was aware that Gospodin Gospodin Gavril had ordered the defrocking of Bishop Petar however his ill health was taken into account as he was very old at that stage and sick too. This is why the Synod never ratified the decision, otherwise he would have been defrocked.

Aleksandrov, The good news is that i found the 16 page discussion on Maknews, perhaps that could help this discussion??

http://www.maknews.com/forum/archive/macedonian-church-dispute-in-diaspora-t3553.html

[julie]

Prolet, he has already answered your question in detail with posted facts. Read them batko

[Prolet]

Julie, He doesnt explain the procedure as to how a Bishop is defrocked, i dont think an Arch Bishop can make the decision on his own, he must do it via the synod. I could be wrong though, it would be good if others can give their views on it.

[Vangelovski]

Julie, He doesnt explain the procedure as to how a Bishop is defrocked, i dont think an Arch Bishop can make the decision on his own, he must do it via the synod. I could be wrong though, it would be good if others can give their views on it.

Prolet, can you read Macedonian? If so, read the documentary evidence that Aleksandrov has already posted at post 71. However, I will have to repeat my initial warning:

Note: consumption of alcohol and substances with acidic properties may impair cognitive skills when reading the decision.

[Prolet]

Please cite something from the Canons that is relevant to Petar's grab for community money and power or to any other matters in this discussion.

How are the 30 plus churches registered in North America? Bishop Metodija seems to get along fine with the community leaders there. Those churches are under the jurisdiction of MPC which means the same thing must happen here.

Here are some articles i found:

Here is what Bishop Petar had to say through an interpreter in court.

"The people don't understand the church laws here ... and that is where the problem lies. Had they known the laws and lived according to the church laws they wouldn't be at this court.

"The entire property that serves for religious purposes belongs to the church.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/08/14/1029113957946.html

http://www.theleader.com.au/news/local/news/general/a-decadelong-dispute-simmers-at-st-petkas-macedonian-church/1474372.aspx

http://www.hcourt.gov.au/media/Macedonian_Orthodox_Reasons.pdf

[Vangelovski]

Prolet, what are these Church Laws?

Can you tell me what this says:

When one of you has a dispute with another believer, how dare you file a lawsuit and ask a secular court to decide the matter instead of taking it to other believers!

1 Corinthians 6:1

And further:

If you have legal disputes about such matters, why go to outside judges who are not respected by the church? I am saying this to shame you. Isn’t there anyone in all the church who is wise enough to decide these issues? But instead, one believer sues another—right in front of unbelievers!

1 Corinthians 6:4-6

[Prolet]

Vangelovski, I dont believe you can speak Macedonian and if you can it would be enough to understand. Its about time you stop with your gutter talk and personal attacks you are really not very funny with some of your ridiculous attacks.

That letter does not explain how a Bishop is defrocked, this is why i asked how Vraniskovski was defrocked i dont know the exact church laws to this. If all it took was one letter to defrock a Bishop then Petar wouldnt be a Bishop anymore would he?

I would prefer to see a two sided discussion instead of one thats totally one sided, there are two sides to every story.

[Vangelovski]

Vangelovski, I dont believe you can speak Macedonian and if you can it would be enough to understand. Its about time you stop with your gutter talk and personal attacks you are really not very funny with some of your ridiculous attacks.

That letter does not explain how a Bishop is defrocked, this is why i asked how Vraniskovski was defrocked i dont know the exact church laws to this. If all it took was one letter to defrock a Bishop then Petar wouldnt be a Bishop anymore would he?

I would prefer to see a two sided discussion instead of one thats totally one sided, there are two sides to every story.

Well, well, look at this...Prolet has sobered up! How quickly your focus and language can change.

You or your alter ego that has been snorting acid for far too long, repeadetly attempted to insinuate that the Synod had not approved of the decision to defrock Petar, yet the decision clearly states that it was the Synod that came to that decision. As Archbishop, Gavril signed on its behalf. This is what a number of members have repeadetly explained to you and repeadetly pointed you to.

[aleksandrov]

Aleksandrov, You fail to answer an important question here, how can a Bishop be defrocked? Whats the procedure?? Whats the church law.

I spoke to a person who was involved with the church for a long time, he told me that he was aware that Gospodin Gospodin Gavril had ordered the defrocking of Bishop Petar however his ill health was taken into account as he was very old at that stage and sick too. This is why the Synod never ratified the decision, otherwise he would have been defrocked.

Aleksandrov, The good news is that i found the 16 page discussion on Maknews, perhaps that could help this discussion??

Prolet, You are detracting attention from relevant facts with irrelevant hearsay.

I don't pretend to be a Canon Law expert. I am sure that g.g. Gavril understood Canon Law and the Constitution of the Macedonian Orthodox Church more than either of us. I have provided you with a written decision by the Synod, signed by g.g. Gavril. You have come back with nothing but speculative hearsay, baselessly insinuating that g.g. Gavril lied about the decision having been made by the Synod and that he breached some unknown law. So why is it that you think your question is an important one? Ask Petar to refer us to the relevant Canon Law and constitutional provisions for defrocking a bishop OR a priest and then come back to me with a more relevant question.

[aleksandrov]

How are the 30 plus churches registered in North America? Bishop Metodija seems to get along fine with the community leaders there. Those churches are under the jurisdiction of MPC which means the same thing must happen here....

Prolet, What is your real agenda here, if not to confuse people with nonsensical red herring?

Why don't YOU show us some evidence of how the churches in North America are registered? Or show us an example of at least one country in the world that has legislation similar to what Petar is attempting to have passed in NSW? If not that, show us at least one example of another Macedonian Orthodox Diocese in which the Bishop and his appointed priests are listed as legal owners on title deeds for church property?

[Prolet]

Aleksandrov, I guess none of us know the Church laws which is fine by me im no church expert either, i appreciate your honesty.

Let me just state one thing Aleksandrov, all churches need to be under the MPC Umbrella and Hierarchy i do respect that i just dont like the way Bishop Petar is doing it he should be uniting people not dividing them.

The Bishop has a responsibility and to be there for the people to preach the good news as Vangelovski says and he should be like a father to our community. This is why there should be a dialogue in both sides and MPC needs to take proper action and responsibility for all its actions.

This is why i believe we need to push for a solution and not blame eachother, who is the preferred Bishop you would like to see replace Petar?