Macedonian Church Dispute in Australia

[George S.]

I dont think the church dispute is as easy as people think to canada,like one side giving in or comprimising just for the sake of it is not on.The whole problem is also with the synod & the macedonian church in macedonia.The synod gives support to the vladika who is a problem as well & system of things. This is where it needs to change in the scheme of things.The system of church rule & obedience is not in keeping in 2010 its old & atiquated.You know people aren't like sheep to be herded along.
Also our recognition by australia has a long way to go as the greek lobby is stronger in melbourne with the 1million greek vote.Perhaps like other countries in future australia might bight the bullet & recognize us (when the guard is down)

[Prolet]

Gjorgjija, The latest news is that Fiji and New Zealand have recognized us, surly Australia will follow suit sooner or later.

Phoenix, Thats an interesting question, i cant say i know an aweful lot about the Macedonians in North America but it seems they are getting along very well with Bishop Metodija who is alot younger then Bishop Petar. I dont know how they can help us, from what i understand MPO has control of at least 20 churches in North America so does Bishop Metodija have any say or does somebody else look after these issues?? I also want to know if MPC is registered in anyway there and what are the laws in registering a church in North America. I dont expect you to answer these questions but it will be alot easier to answer your question if we knew a bit more about how things are run overthere.

Phoenix, As for Maknews i do recall him calling us wingnuts a few times, he loves Australia just dont say nothing bad about the UMD otherwise he'll give you the hair dryer treatment. LOL

[aleksandrov]

I dont know how they can help us, from what i understand MPO has control of at least 20 churches in North America so does Bishop Metodija have any say or does somebody else look after these issues?? ...

That's an important point that seems to have skipped Lubi's mind when he purported to patronize the Macedonian Australian community.

MPO are no greater enemies to the Macedonian cause of freedom and justice than Petar and his herd are. In fact, I would say that Petar and whoever is behind him financially are even more dangerous, as they attack the free will, right to self-determination and morale of the Macedonian people from the inside, while pharisaically pretending to be the ultimate Macedonian patriots and copyright holders of the name "Macedonian Orthodox Church". With the MPO's flaws, everybody knows what they are. The contentious MPO leaders openly deny the existence of an indigenous Macedonian identity and claim that Macedonians are of Bulgarian origin. So we all know what we are fighting against, which makes our resistance stronger. Petar & Co, on the other hand, pretend to be Macedonian patriots while at the same working to place us under the jurisdiction of a Serbian Patriarch and take the Macedonian identity away from our Church. They pretend to be defenders of the Macedonian Orthodox Church while at the same time working to defame, vilify and destroy the faith, free will and institutional power of the Macedonian Orthodox people that made and sustained the Macedonian Orthodox Church and state as independent, self-governing and self-empowered institutions of the Macedonian people. Deception has always been the ultimate way to divide and conquer.

If the Synod members, Macedonian state officials and whoever else is backing Petar in Australia were to send him on a similar mission to America and Canada, I don't think it will be very long before more Macedonian community churches there fall under MPO control and Bulgarian church jurisdiction. I am sure that many otherwise good Macedonians would join the MPO out of desperation, to save themselves from an extraordinarily ruthless and unscrupulous 'spiritual' tyrant. They would unwittingly fall into the Bulgarian Church's arms the way other Macedonians in the past did while trying to escape the oppressive clutches of Serbia and later Macedonian servants of Serbia in post-WWII Yugoslavia. In a way, the Macedonians in Canada and USA are lucky that Petar has Serbian tendencies, which also come with bulgarophobia. If the Bulgarian state could convince and help him to take the North American Diocese of the MOC, and embark on a similar campaign to that which he has conducted in Australia, it would probably stand the best chance of diluting that part of the Macedonian community in North America that is currently free of Bulgarian indoctrination.

[Prolet]

Aleksandrov, Meto told me that MPO has no church under its control but for some reason i dont believe it. I must admit that im not too familiar with how things are run over there. I remember Nikolce on the Maknews forum telling me a wealthy Macedonian Bussinessman sent ArchBishop Stefan a big Mercedes Benz in Stari Kraj, im still not sure why ArchBishop Stefan has not taken up any resposnibility for the Church dispute as the buck stops with him in the end. Bishop Timotej and Bishop Kiril are the only ones who have voiced their concerns about this issue.

When Meto was in Australia, he said he would look into the church dispute but we havnt heard anything so far. Realistically speaking im not sure how they can help out, it would be good if they can however they need to put all their cards on the table first.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Meto is nothing but a self-glorified receptionist for congress, sending out 'feel good' messages like the Macedonians in Australia were born yesterday. What follow up has he done at all in Australia since he visited? What have the UMD established or initiated here since then?

The UMD must despise all of us for bringing the true picture to light for other Macedonians, or they seriously thought we are as naive as they are cunning.

[aleksandrov]

Aleksandrov, Meto told me that MPO has no church under its control but for some reason i dont believe it. ...

My understanding is that the bugaromani from MPO go to churches that were established by Macedonians, but fell under control of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church due to the Bulgarian indoctrinations that have influenced the MPO's policies. Perhaps someone from the US or Canada can clarify this.

[aleksandrov]

Despite the ideological and policy differences between the bulk of Macedonian activists in Australia and those from the UMD, I still think it is in the interests of the Macedonian cause that we try to establish some common ground, as long as we have clear priorities and limits. How much we succeed in that does not depend only on us. If the UMD can establish some clear priorities and limits as to how far it is willing to go to try and keep USA state officials happy, we may have a clearer idea of what it is that we have in common, towards which we can work collectively, and what it is that sets us apart, towards which we can continue to work independently.

[Prolet]

Good point Aleksandrov

Buktop, Can you explain to us who runs the churches in North America and what kind of influence does MPO have in all of this? We know that MPO members attend our churches there but whats the situation like?

[Blagojce]

Pretty sure the female who is in charge of UMD LA, Sonja Magdevska, is married to Emilio Estavez, who is Charlie Sheen's brother, main actor from two and a half men.

Considering the popularity of Charlie, would be nice if Sonja could get him on our side, maybe show his face at an event or two.

[Vangelovski]

Despite the ideological and policy differences between the bulk of Macedonian activists in Australia and those from the UMD, I still think it is in the interests of the Macedonian cause that we try to establish some common ground, as long as we have clear priorities and limits. How much we succeed in that does not depend only on us. If the UMD can establish some clear priorities and limits as to how far it is willing to go to try and keep USA state officials happy, we may have a clearer idea of what it is that we have in common, towards which we can work collectively, and what it is that sets us apart, towards which we can continue to work independently.

At the risk of sounding too "negative", this is holding on to a false hope.

UMD has had years of internal and external pressure to clarify their policies and objectives and have failed to do so. The reason is that if they did, they would draw a clear delineation between themselves and the rest of the diaspora and the meagre support they currently hold.

In order to cooperate with them, they would have to completely change their key beliefs and I think this is highly unlikely.

[Buktop]

Good point Aleksandrov

Buktop, Can you explain to us who runs the churches in North America and what kind of influence does MPO have in all of this? We know that MPO members attend our churches there but whats the situation like?

I am not exactly an authority on church issues in the US, I know that the churches are run much the same as the ones in Australia, we have church committee's and we operate under the auspices of the American-Canadian MOC diocese under Metodij. I am not sure how the titles to the churches are drawn up, nor do I know much about their financial situation, but I would be happy to visit my local church and get some answers if you are interested.

As for the MPO, they are not present in NJ to my knowledge, if they are, they do not have much influence as I would have known. They are primarily located in Illinois, Ohio and Toronto areas in the midwestern-US. Someone like Nikolce over at MKMuzika would be more knowledgeable about their attendance.

This is a list of Churches under the Diocese, not sure how up to date it is, but I can verify that it is accurate concerning New Jersey.

http://faq.macedonia.org/religion/north.america.churches.html

official site of the American-Canadian Diocese

http://www.akmpe.org/

[Prolet]

but I would be happy to visit my local church and get some answers if you are interested.

Thanks for the advise Buktop, it would be good if you can find out more information in either the church or somebody who is well informed in this matter maybe a family friend.

Its good to see the Macedonians in North America get along so well with the Bishop representing them, i know Bishop Kiril was there earlier and the people were happy with him.

It would be good for the people of North America to share their experience and give advise from their experiences. Every Bishop is there to serve the people, to bless them and give them the good news.

[makedonche]

Alexandrov

I commend you for the volume of information you have provided and the integrity in which it has been provided. Anybody who has taken the time to read this thread in detail and indeed the detailed account you have provided, can make an objective assesment as to what the problem is, who caused it and what the ultimate solution is!
Many thanks for your tireless efforts!

[Mikail]

Alexandrov...... I have only two things to say......

Bloody Brilliant!

Petars day of reckoning will come.

[aleksandrov]

Power to place Macedonian Orthodox church properties in Australia under the jurisdiction of another denomination

4.1 If this Bill is passed, it will empower bishop Petar and other present or future like-minded bishops of the MOC-OA to place Macedonian Orthodox church properties in Australia under the jurisdiction of the Serbian Orthodox church or another denomination, contrary to the free will of Macedonian Orthodox Australians with whose contributions those properties were accumulated. There is nothing in this bill to protect the free will of Macedonian Orthodox Australians against such a decision being imposed by the unaccountable hierarchy of the MOC-OA in Macedonia.

4.2 The variation of trust provisions in Clause 14 of the Bill give the bishop and his appointees a discretionary power to declare that the trust property is subject to another trust. This will effectively allow the bishop to wilfully place Macedonian Orthodox Church properties in Australia on trust for the purposes of the Serbian Orthodox Church or some other purposes that are contrary to the intentions of the donors with whose contributions those properties were accumulated.

4.3 There is nothing in the Bill that would require the bishop to obtain the consent of the Archiepiscopal Church-people’s Assembly and Holy Synod of the MOC-OA before placing Macedonian Orthodox Church properties in Australia under another trust.

4.4 The provision in Clause 13 for arrangements for other churches to use trust property will allow the bishop and his appointees to use Macedonian Orthodox Church properties for services of the Serbian Orthodox Church or some other religion, contrary to the intentions of the donors with whose contributions those properties were accumulated.

4.5 There is nothing in the Bill that would require the bishop to obtain the consent of the Archiepiscopal Church-people’s Assembly and Holy Synod of the MOC-OA before using Macedonian Orthodox Church properties for the purposes of another denomination.

4.6 Bishop Petar has omitted to brief the Holy Synod of the MOC-OA on the existence of the powers he would hold under the operation of Clauses 13 & 14 of the Bill. There are no provisions in any constitutional document of the MOC-OA or its international affiliates that grant such extraordinary powers to a bishop or any trustee corporation.

Special powers and protections for trustees and reduced safeguards against neglect of implied intentions of donors

5.1 The Bill unjustifiably affords bishop Petar’s trustee corporation special powers or protections that are not generally afforded to trustees. Macedonian Orthodox Australians whose donations have been used to accumulate and maintain properties that would come under the new trustee corporation will not be entitled to the legal assurances that other donors to trusts can generally rely on.

5.2 We refer to the published submission to this inquiry by Mark Leeming SC, in which he suggests that Clause 13 has the potential to operate retrospectively. According to Mr Leeming, “A person who gave property to the predecessors of the Trust on terms that it be used for the purposes of the Church, but which terms did not expressly prevent its use by another denomination, would be affected by cl. 13 if the Trust entered into a scheme of co-operation with another denomination. Generally speaking, retrospective legislation should be avoided absent some special reasons.” We see no special reasons why this bishop and his trustee corporation should have the benefit of retrospective legislation, with disregard for the intentions of Macedonian Orthodox Australians who have contributed to the accumulation and maintenance of affected properties.

5.3 In relation to Clause 14, Mr Leeming suggests that it may impliedly repeal the Charitable Trusts Act 1993, ss6 and 12-16. There is no public interest to be served in allowing this bishop and his proposed trustee corporation to be exempt from the operation of any provisions of the Charitable Trust Act 1993. The potential exemption would be unfair to Macedonian Orthodox Australians who have voluntarily contributed to the accumulation and maintenance of affected properties without notice that such properties could be placed on trust for the Serbian Orthodox Church or some other denomination.

5.4 We also refer to Mr Leeming’s submission in relation to Clause 32, which entitles trustees and executors of trust property to be indemnified out of trust property for certain expenses and liabilities, in a way that is “typical of the protection afforded to statutory officeholders.” We object to the Bill making the liability of any trustee less strict than it would otherwise be pursuant to s. 85 of the Trustee Act.

5.5 Since 1996, the Macedonian Orthodox Church Community “St. Petka” Inc has been forced to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars and immeasurable human resources on defending legal proceedings by bishop Petar, in which he seeks to advantageously interpret and enforce the terms of the trust on which St. Petka’s property was originally acquired. A 2003 finding by Justice Hamilton of the Supreme Court of NSW that the association holds its property for the charitable purpose of using it to conduct services according to the Macedonian Orthodox religion, has been abused by the Bishop to keep the St. Petka church without a priest for seven years, while attempting to blackmail the association into relinquishing control of its property. Requests to the Attorney General’s office and other representatives of the Government for the introduction of legislation that would allow the Association to vary the terms of the trust declared by Justice Hamilton, on the basis that they have become impossible or inexpedient to carry out, have been refused. If the Parliament were to now pass a Bill which effectively allows bishop Karevski to vary the terms of the trust on which he currently holds property, it would be applying double standards, to the detriment of the Macedonian Orthodox Australian community. It would also exacerbate the disillusionment and revolt within the Macedonian Australian community over what is perceived as a flawed legal and political system that allows an imposter to unjustly usurp or destroy what our communities have built through years of hard voluntary work and donations.

Clause 19 and potential effect on community organisations whose properties are not listed in Clause 17 (2)

6.1 We dispute the claim that this Bill doesn’t affect Macedonian Orthodox communities that are opposed to it. We are aware that the Bill “does not effect any automatic vesting, mandatory or compulsory transfers of any properties to the trust” other than those listed in Clause 17 (2). However, Clause 19 provides a process for “vesting of other property held on trust for the Church”.

6.2 The ‘Church’ is defined in Clause 3 as the “Macedonian Orthodox Church, Diocese of Australia and New Zealand with its seat in Melbourne, being an integral part of the Macedonian Orthodox Church with its seat in Skopje, Macedonia, a hierarchical religious body whose leader, overseer and shepherd is the Archbishop of Ohrid and Macedonia.” Since 12 November 2009, the name of the Church in the Republic of Macedonia is “Macedonian Orthodox Church – Ohrid Archdiocese” (MOC-OA).

6.3 We reject as unsubstantiated and misleading the presumption that Macedonian Orthodox churches and related properties in Australia other than those listed in Clause 17 (2) are held on trust for the Diocese or for the MOC-OA. This claim is central to the hostile and unseemly attacks that bishop Petar and his advocates have conducted against Macedonian Orthodox communities in Australia since his arrival in 1996, in an unjust attempt to usurp their funds and assets against the free will of their members and donors.

6.4 In his Second Reading speech for this Bill, the Reverend Hon. Fred Nile claims that “since its establishment in Australia in the 1960s the church has accumulated significant landholdings – parish churches, church halls, manses and other residential properties, picnic and sports grounds and licensed reception centres for the use and benefit of local communities, a cathedral and monastery.” None of the Macedonian Orthodox churches and related properties that were acquired and developed in Australia between the 1960s until 1995 were accumulated by Bishop Petar’s Diocese, by the MOC-OA, or by any trustees acting on their behalf. All such properties were accumulated by self-governing Macedonian Australian communities.

6.5 Given that none of the properties listed in clause 17 (2) of the Bill were accumulated in the 1960s or at any time before 1995, Reverend Nile’s reference to landholdings accumulated since the 1960s indicates that this Bill is in fact primarily intended to affect existing Macedonian Orthodox communities whose properties are not specifically identified in the Bill.

6.6 Clause 19 provides for transfer to the new corporation of property “held on trust for the Church on or after the date of commencement by any person or persons”.

6.7 Our extensive experience with bishop Petar leads us to expect that if this Bill becomes legislation, he will use it to persuade representatives of churches other than those covered in Clause 17 (2) that the Parliament has determined that their properties are held in trust for the Diocese or the MOC-OA. He is likely to arbitrarily accuse them of breaches of trust and blackmail them into transferring their properties to the new trustee corporation with the threat of costly and exhausting legal proceedings for breach of trust.

6.8 If this Bill becomes legislation, bishop Petar is likely to attempt to coerce individual office-bearers of existing Macedonian Orthodox community associations in Australia into falsely declaring that their association holds its property on trust for the Diocese or the MOC-OA, and that it agrees to transfer its property to his new corporation. Previously demonstrated coercion methods include threats of laying an anathema, denial of Holy Communion, excommunication, stigmatization as a “non-believer” or “outcast” and enemy of the Macedonian state and Church, claims that dissenting churches are “not real churches”, barring or threatening to bar priests from serving in churches of dissenting communities, as well as harassment and threats of physical violence by persons whom the bishop continues to endorse as his ‘true believers’ despite their demonstrated resort to obscene harassment and threats of violence.

6.9 Some of the themes bishop Petar is likely to use to mislead or blackmail people into purporting to transfer community property to his trustee corporation were flagged when he promoted the Bill in his recent Macedonian language radio interview in Melbourne, on 15 August 2010, in which he said:

“… it has been claimed that the best forms of registration in Australia are the registration as a company or an incorporated association of the church properties, but that is in fact the greatest danger if the people of the incorporated associations and companies misappropriate the property….
These four properties will be the basis of the trustee of the Macedonian Orthodox Church with a law of the Parliament of Australia.
This will prove who loves the mother Church and how much.
Once all these matters are resolved and not everybody can represent themselves as Macedonian Orthodox Church, and once the propaganda stops, we will pay more attention to opening aged care centres, childcare centres, and other facilities for taking care of people dependant on drugs, alcohol, and we will take special care of them.
In relation to misappropriation of funds, in the past there were no strict measures taken to protect church property.
For property that belongs to the Macedonian Orthodox Church and those who want to give it for the Macedonian Orthodox Church (but not under duress), we will see who loves the Macedonian Orthodox Church and who wants to vest the property that is created for the Macedonian Church, so that it will be the property of the Macedonian Orthodox Church. And conversely, we will see who continues to use the property as ownership of a given organisation, company, incorporated association etc.
Let us again emphasize that our aim is to create once and for all a trustee of the property of the Macedonian Church in Australia according to the example of the first believers in the Church, as was the case with the believers recorded in the writings of the apostles. Back then the believers were selling their houses and farms and placed the money from their personal properties at the feet of the apostles, who placed the money in the church treasury and from there they gave it to the believers according to their needs.
That which belongs to the Church belongs to God and anybody who lays hands on what belongs to the Church will have to one day suffer punishment. The Church takes care of the property….
We are not registered as Macedonian Orthodox Church in Australia. This registration that we are talking about, this Law for a trustee means registration of the Macedonian Orthodox Church.
We must distinguish between registration of the Church as a religious institution and registration of the Church as a legal person. We are not registered as a legal person here in Australia.
Our believers must once and for all understand the seriousness of the problem of the Macedonian Orthodox Church in Australia.
The registration of our Church will happen when this Law for a trustee becomes operational. Until then we will not have a registered Macedonian Orthodox Church in Australia.
Our believers must understand that.
This propaganda against the registration of our Church as a legal person in Australia is to that end. Practically, somebody is working to stop it from ever being registered as a legal person….
If you do not have a registered Church, a Diocese as a legal person according to the Law for a trustee of that property, you do not have a Church.”

6.10 Bishop Petar’s propensity to engage in coercion was among the reasons for the Indictment against him by former Archbishop of the Macedonian Orthodox Church, Gavril, dated 9 June 1990, and the decision by the Synod to defrock him, dated 14 June 1990. In the Indictment, bishop Petar was, among other things, charged with forcing the clergy of his Bitola Diocese to sign declarations against bishop Kiril (the only signatory of the declaration of autocephaly of the Macedonian Orthodox Church who is still alive) and bishop Mihail (who subsequently became Archbishop and has since passed away), under a threat of being expelled from his Diocese. He was further charged with centralising power over his Diocese by “relocating, penalizing and suspending several priests in the absence of a final ruling by the Archiepiscopal Church Court” and by “unconstitutionally and unlawfully prosecuting and passing judgement in all conceivable instances, and thereby causing heavy and unacceptable tragedies for the families of the persecuted priests, in given instances, in the absence of wrongdoing or guilt.” Macedonian Orthodox priests in Australia have faced similar persecution for failing to follow his unjust directions.