Apel Arhiepiskopu Кonstantinopolja
- Novog Rima i vaseljenskom patrijarhu, Njegovoj Svetosti Vartolomeju I
piše
Slobodan Jovanović
Pravoslavlje se stoljećima borilo s različitim jeretičkim učenjima koja su iskrivljavala hršćansku istinu objavljenu od Boga i unosila nered u Crkvu. Poznato Vam je da Prvi vaseljenski sabor (325. g. ) u Nikeji osudio Arijai poveo borbu protiv naknadnog rivalstva između jeretika i hrišćana koji su prihvatili Nikejski Simbol Vjere. Drugi vaseljenski sabor, sazvan 381. g. u Carigradu, potvrdio je osudu arijanskog učenja i svih jeresi koje su nastale usled širenja arijanstva (makedonijanstva i savelijanstva).
Na Trećem Vaseljenskom saboru (431. g. ), koji je održan u Efesu, osuđen je Nestorije patrijarh carigradski (428 – 431. g. ), koji je odbacio božansku, i priznao da je u Hristu samo ljudska priroda. Četvrti Vaseljenski sabor održan je 451. godine u predgrađu Carigrada – Halkidonu, osudio je monofizitsku jeres arhimandrita Evtihija, njegovo pravoslavno učenje o odnosu dvaju priroda, božanske i čovječanske u Gospodu Isusu Hristu. Šesti vaseljenski sabor (680-681. g) osudio je monotelitsku jeres, koja se pojavila 40-ih godina VII stoljeća i anatemisao je, između ostalog, četiri carigradska patrijarha Sergija, Pavle, Pira i Timoteja, pristalice monotelitstva.
Sve ovo navodim ne da bih Vam docirao, već da naglasim da su se sveti oci u prošlosti bez kompromisa obračunavali sa jeretičkim učenjima koja su narušavala crkveno jedinstvo i univerzalni karakter crkve. A i da pitam koji su razlozi što primus inter pares u pravoslavnom svijetu ne čini ništa kako bi se stalo na put sve većem kršenju, u dužem vremenskom periodu, kanonskih načela i pojavi jeretičkih učenja i krivovjerja u pravoslavlju već duže vrijeme na prostoru Balkana. Posebno kad je u pitanju najmlađe od svih tih krivovjerja - etnofiletizam, osuđen na carigradskom saboru 10.09.1872. Siguran sam da Vam je poznata pojava na Balkanu vjerskog nacionalizma, u kojemu dolazi do izjednačavanja i poistovjećivanja vjere i nacije, Crkve i države. O tome govore i neke Vaše izjave.
Mitropolit halkidonski Emanuil Adamakis, Vaš blizak saradnik, etnofiletizam karakteriše kao „najveću prijetnju za jedinstvo Istočno-pravoslavne Crkve“. „Bez Vaseljenske Patrijaršije, pravoslavlje će pasti u vrtlog nacionalizama, hvalisanja prošlošću, zatvorenosti u samodovoljnost, prezira savremenoga svijeta”, njegove su riječi. Moram da izrazim sumnju u tačnost vizavi uloge Vaseljenske Patrijašije obzirom na okolnosti u kojima živimo.
Jasno je da vezivanje vjere i nacije logično povlači za sobom i to da se "nacionalna" crkva bavi politikom i svjetovnim stvarima, što je nešto što Isus i apostoli nikad nijesu naučavali. Vjera postaje puko obelježje bez ikakvog suštinskog značaja, instrument u političkim i ideološkim nacionalnim projektima, viđeli smo, čak sa krvavim posljedicama. Kad govorimo o Crkvi Srbije, koja je najočigledniji primjer sratstanja vjere i nacije, slobodno se može reći da u tome učestvuje njen čitav crkveni kler, naravno, obmanjujući vjernike da Bog blagosilja ovakve aktivnosti.
Nije nepoznato da je SPC snažno podržala krvavi režim i diktaturu kralja Aleksandra Karađorđevića, da je tokom Drugog svjetskog rata, sarađivala sa kvinslinzima i zločincima Draže Mihailovića,sa fašistima Dimitrija Ljotića, da je dolaskom na vlast 1987. Slobodana Miloševića došlo do revitalizacije snažne tradicionalne i višestruke povezanosti SPC i srpske države. Uvezao ih je zajednički cilj – ostvarenje političkog projekta „svi Srbi u jednoj državi“. Skoro plebiscitarno, uz ogromnu ulogu Crkve Srbije, svi Srbi usvojili su političko – istorijsku teoriju o odnarođivanju Srba. Po toj teoriji, prvo je došlo u prošlosti do pokatoličavanja i islamizacije velikih dijelova srpskog naroda, da bi u drugoj fazi na osnovu toga stvorene nove „vještačke“ nacije i jezici, i na kraju nove države tih naroda. Ova teorija je postala i vjersko uvjerenje, pretočeno u praktični vjerski život.
U članu 11. Zakona o crkvama i vjerskim zajednicama Srbije, u drugom paragrafu doslovno piše: „Srpska pravoslavna crkva ima izuzetnu istorijsku, državotvornu i civilizacijsku u oblikovanju, očuvanju i razvijanju identiteta srpskog naroda“. Crkveni kanoni apsolutno nigdje ne spominju nacionalne crkve, niti, daleko bilo, njihovu ulogu u „razvijanju identiteta“. Kompletno osnovno kanonsko pravo pravoslavne crkve poznaje isključivo crkvu kao svjetsku organizaciju, a unutar nje samoupravne arhiepiskopije-mitropolije, organizovane isključivo po teritorijalnom principu, obuhvaćajući sve vjernike na nekom području, bez obzira na njihovu naciju, jezik, rasu itd. Ovaj paragraf je time opasniji što Crkva Srbije prelazi granice drugih država, što je dobila zaslugom same Vaseljenske Patrijaršije prilikom formiranja Kraljevine Srba, Hrvata i Slovenaca 1918. godine i dobijenim tomosom 1922. godine.
To novostvorenoj crkvi na teritoriji čitave novostvoirene države, nekanonski je pridodata i Cetinjska mitropolija (Crna Gora), iako potpuno nezavisna i van jurisdikcije Vaseljenske Patrijaršije. Da farsa bude još veća to je učinjeno sa samo dva potpisa članova Sinoda, od sedam koliko ih je Sinod imao. Vjerujem da Vam je poznato da se takve odluke ne donose odlukama Sinoda, posebno ne dvojice od sedam članova, već crkvenim saborima. Dražava koja je stvorena 1918. godine, odavno ne postoji, pa je svrsishodno razmišljati o povratku statusa Cetinjske mitropolije, jer nijesu kanoni (17. kanon IV Vaseljenskog sabora i 38. pravilo Tulskog sabora) bez razloga propisali crkveno razređenje sa politčkim. Time se na najbolji način neutrališu zloupotrebe Crkve i njeno djelovanje u političko – ideološke svrhe i učestvovanje u teritorijalnim pretenzijama i asimilacionim procesima.
A ovo sve tim prije jer Crkva Srbije pravoslavnu eklisiologiju zamijenila svetosavskom ideologijom, koja u najboljem maniru odlikava klasično jeretičko krivotvorenje pravoslavne vjere. A evo i zašto. Sama ideologija svetosavlja nastala je u tridesetim godinama XX stoljeća kao doktrina ekspanzije i učvršćivanja organizacije Crkve Srbije na teritoriji cijele Jugoslavije. Svetosavlje nije teološka doktrina Sv. Save, već politički projekat. Njena ideološka podloga je zasnovana na izmišljenom nacionalizmu Sv. Save. U svom radu "Nacionalizam Svetog Save" vladika žički Crkve Srbije, Nikolaj Velimirović, tvrdi da je nacionalna crkva, tj. borba za nju, "osnov pravog, jevandeljskog i organskog nacionalizma" i da je takvu crkvu srpskom narodu stvorio Sveti Sava.
Na ime „svetosavlje“ vjerovatno je najviše uticao teolog Dimitrije Najdanovič tekstom „Svetosavska paralipomena“ iz 1932. godine, kada je ustanovio i istoimeni časopis. Najdanović objašnjava što je to nacija ovako: „… mi možemo sad i ovde dati sledeću odredbu: porodica je uvećani čovek, pleme uvećana zadruga, nacija (narod) uvećano pleme, makroantropos ... U ohristovljenom narodnom geniju Svetoga Save uspeo se srpski narod do prestola Hristovog i tako se u Hristu uprestolio. Tim uprestoljenjem srpska narodna duša, inače puna paganske sirovine, postala je nacija sa svim oznakama jedne velike nacije ... Tako postao i sam narod-crkva i, kao takav, saćelijnik Crkve kao mističkog tela Hristovog“.
„Svetosavlje prima, usvaja i ispoveda hristovski i ohristovljeni nacionalizam kao nacionalizam višega reda, kao nad-nacionalizam, nacionalizam uznesen i preuznesen u Hristovu „noosferu“, čisti i oplemenjeni svetosavski, svetolazarski i svetocrkveni nacionalizam...“, piše dalje Najdanović. Najdanović sam priznaje istovjetnost svog shvatanja nacije sa nacističkim i fašističkim: „Nacistički i fašistički totalitarizam dva ‘firera’ Nemačke i Italije novijih dana potvrđuju na klasičan način našu postavku o naciji kao etnobiološkom telu … U njemu vaskrsava drevni fenomen religiskoga kulta cezara.“
Najdanović se idejno formirao u sijenci žičkog vladike Nikolaja Velimirovića, po čijem je nagovoru pristupio 1934. godine fašističkom pokretu Zbor Dimitrija Ljotića. Mnogi ih smatraju ideolozima pokreta Dimitrija Ljotića. Po Najdanoviću cilj svetosavlja je da Srbi budu „sveti organizam, narod sveti. Njegovo polazište je da je srpski nacionalizam „hristonosni“, da je najstariji u Evropi, da je moguć i nasušan jedan svetosavski nacionalizam ... ohristovljeni nacionalizam kao nacionalizam višeg reda“.
Žički vladika, Nikolaj Velimirović, održao je predavanje na beogradskom Kolarcu 1935. godine pod naslovom „Nacionalizam Svetog Save“. Čuvena je njegova premisa da nacionalističke ideje Sv. Save, kako ih on „prepoznaje“, realizuje veliki vođa Adolf Hitler: „. I evo u XX veku on je došao na ideju Svetoga Save, i kao laik poduzeo je u svome narodu onaj najvažniji posao, koji priliči jedino svetitelju, geniju i heroju. A nama je taj posao svršio Sveti Sava, prvi među svetiteljima, prvi među genijima i prvi među herojima u našoj istoriji. Svršio ga je savršeno, svršio ga je bez borbe i bez krvi, i svršio ga je ne juče ili prekjuče nego pre 700 godina. Otuda je nacionalizam srpski, kao stvarnost, najstariji u Evropi.”
O samom svetosavlju i njegovoj ideološkoj podlozi moguće je još mnogo toga napisati, ali i ovo je dovoljno da se, poput prvobitnih vaseljenskih sabora, ili sabora u manjem obimu, postavi pitanje da li je svetosavlje u skladu sa pravoslavnom eklisiologijom i svetim kanonima, uključujući i kanonska načela o etnofiletizmu sa carigradskog sabora 10.09.1872. Podśetimo se i samih božjih zapovjesti, posebno prve i druge. U prvoj se kaže: „Ja sam Gospod Bog Tvoj, nemoj imati drugih bogova osim mene“, a u drugoj: „Ne pravi sebi idola niti kakva lika, nemoj im se klanjati niti im služiti“. Više je nego očigledno da svetosavlje krši obije božje zapovjesti uzdizanjem Sv. Save, na isti ili člak veći pijedestal od samog Isusa Hrista.
Da je svetosavlje ideološko – politički projekat pokazali su i ratovi devedesetih godina prošlog stoljeća, kada je Crkva Srbije imala istaknutu ulogu u promovisanju mržnje i nacionalnih antagonizama. Od tih vremena pa do danas ona je glavni nosila i promoter širenja srpske nacionalne ideje u regionu i zloupotrebe crkve u asimilaciji okolnih naroda sa idejom objedinjavanja svih Srba u jednu političko – identitetsku cjelinu.
Opšte je mjesto da je svetosavska crkva orgaizovala političke proteste i litije sa ciljem smjene vlasti u Crnoj Gori, što se i desilo zahvaljujući njima avgusta 2020. godine. Svetosavska crkva, Crkva Srbije, bila je glavni faktor u sastavljanju novih vlasti, izboru premijera, ministara. Danas je ona najvažniji politički faktor u Crnoj Gori od čije volje zavise mnogi politički subjekti, čime se direktno krše sva načela pravoslavne crkve i kanonskog principa da je bavljenje sekularnim stvarima u crkvi jeres. Nakon smrti blagopočivšeg mitropolita Amfilohija, na čelo eparhija u Crnoj Gori postavljani su ekstremni velikosrpski nacionalisti, bivši pripadnici specijalnih jedinica vojske Srbije, Cetinjska mitropolija je potpuno degradirana i svedena na nivo bilo koje eparhije Crkve Srbije, iako je imala vrlo posebnu istorijsku težinu, sve sa ciljem da to bude poslušnička ekspozitura u stvaranju ideje Velike Srbije. Ukinuta je i autonomija koja je postojala u vrijeme mitropolita Amfilohija, promjenjeno je i ime Pravoslavna crkva u Crnoj Gori, koje je bilo potpuno u skladu sa crkvenim kanonima koji prepoznaju pravoslavnu crkvu kao svjetsku organizaciju, a unutar nje arhiepiskopije (status koji je nakon smrti mitropolita Cetinjska mitropolija izgubila) i mitropolije kao pomjesne, ne nacionalne.
Ustvari, svi problemi sa svetosavskom crkvom Srbije nastali su što su Vaseljenska Patrijaršija i drugi sveti oci izbjegavali, iz najčistijeg oportunizma, rješavanje crkvenog pitanja nakon raspada bivše Jugoslavije, imajući u vidu način na koji je došlo do formiranja tzv. Novostvore srpske pravoslavne crkve 1920, kako su je nazivale svjetovne vlasti, odnosno Beogradske patrijaršije kako je postojala u nomenklaturi Vaseljenske Patrijašije od 1922. godine. U stvaranju te novokomponovane vjerske organizacija, koja je obuhvatila mnoge crkve nad kojima nije imala nikakvu jurisdikciju, crnogorsku autokefalnu crkvu, koja je bila potpuno samostalna u odnosu na sve druge crkve, ... u čijem stvaranju je bilo i simonije, ili kako Sinod Vaseljenske patrijašije sam piše da nije urađeno u skladu sa svetim kanonima, već više iz ekonomskih razloga (čitaj 1,5 miliona zlatnih franaka), sve su razlozi da se u pravoslavlje u zemaljama, nastalim raspadom bivše Jugoslavije, uvede red i na kanonski način razriješe stvoreni problemi. Nikako se ne smije smetnuti sa uma da su sveti oci bili veoma svjesni kakvi problemi mogu nastati i kako se crkva može poretvoriti u ideološko – politički subjekt ukoliko se ne poštuje pravilo o crkvenom i političkom razređenju ( 17. Kanon IV Vaseljenskog sabora i 38. pravilo Tulskog sabora).
Appeal to the Archbishop of Constantinople – New Rome and
the Ecumenical Patriarch, His Holiness Bartholomew I
Orthodoxy has fought for centuries against various heretical teachings that distorted the Christian truth revealed by God and caused disorder in the Church. You know that the First Ecumenical Council (325 A.D.) in Nicaea condemned Arius and initiated a struggle against the subsequent rivalry between heretics and Christians who accepted the Nicene Creed. The Second Ecumenical Council, convened in 381 A.D. in Constantinople, confirmed the condemnation of Arianism and all heresies that arose as a result of the spread of Arianism (Macedonianism and Sabellianism).
At the Third Ecumenical Council (431 A.D.), held in Ephesus, Nestorius, the Patriarch of Constantinople (428–431 A.D.), was condemned for rejecting the divine nature and recognizing only the human nature in Christ. The Fourth Ecumenical Council, held in 451 A.D. in the suburbs of Constantinople—Chalcedon, condemned the Monophysite heresy of Archimandrite Eutyches and his Orthodox teaching regarding the relationship between the two natures, divine and human, in the Lord Jesus Christ. The Sixth Ecumenical Council (680-681 A.D.) condemned the Monothelite heresy, which emerged in the 640s, and anathematized, among others, four Patriarchs of Constantinople—Sergius, Paul, Pyrrhus, and Timothy—who were supporters of Monothelitism.
I do not cite all of this to lecture you, but to emphasize that the holy fathers in the past uncompromisingly dealt with heretical teachings that disrupted church unity and the universal character of the church. And to ask, what are the reasons why the primus inter pares in the Orthodox world is doing nothing to curb the increasing violations, over a long period, of canonical principles and the rise of heretical teachings and false beliefs within Orthodoxy, particularly in the Balkans. Especially when it comes to the youngest of all these false beliefs—ethnophyletism, which was condemned at the Council of Constantinople on September 10, 1872. I am sure you are familiar with the rise of religious nationalism in the Balkans, where faith and nation, Church and state, are equated and identified. Some of your statements also touch on this issue.
Metropolitan Emmanuel Adamakis of Chalcedon, your close associate, characterizes ethnophyletism as “the greatest threat to the unity of the Eastern Orthodox Church.”“Without the Ecumenical Patriarchate, Orthodoxy will fall into the vortex of nationalisms, boasting of the past, isolation in self-sufficiency, and contempt for the modern world,” are his words. I must express doubt regarding the accuracy of this statement in relation to the role of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, considering the circumstances in which we live.
It is clear that tying religion to the nation logically leads to theengagementofthe“national” church in politics and secular matters, which is something that Jesus and the apostles never taught. Faith becomes merely a symbol without any substantive significance, an instrument in political and ideological national projects, which, as we have seen, even had bloody consequences. When we speak of the Church of Serbia, which is the most obvious example of the intertwining of faith and nation, it can be said that the entire church clergy participates in this, while, of course, deceiving believers into thinking that God blesses such activities.
It is not unknown that the Serbian Orthodox Church (SPC) strongly supported the bloody regime and dictatorship of King Aleksandar Karađorđević, that during World War II, it collaborated with the quisling and criminal followersof Draža Mihailović and the fascist Dimitrije Ljotić. With the rise to power of Slobodan Milošević in 1987, there was a revitalization of the strong traditional and multiple connections between the SPC and the Serbian state. They were united by a common goal—the realization of the political project “all Serbs in one state.” Almost plebiscitarily, with the enormous role of the Church of Serbia, all Serbs adopted the political-historical theory of the alienation of Serbs. According to this theory, there was first a process of Catholicization and Islamization of large parts of the Serbian people in the past, which, in the second phase, led to the creation of new “artificial” nations and languages, and eventually new states for these nations. This theory has also become a religious belief, translated into practical religious life.
Article 11 of the Law on Churches and Religious Communities of Serbia literally states: “The Serbian Orthodox Church has an exceptional historical, state-building, and civilizational role in shaping, preserving, and developing the identity of the Serbian people.” Church canons nowhere mention national churches, nor, far from it, their role in “developing identity.” The entire fundamental canonical law of the Orthodox Church recognizes exclusively the church as a universal organization, and within it self-governing archbishoprics-metropolises, organized solely on a territorial basis, encompassing all believers in a given area, regardless of their nation, language, race, etc. This paragraph is even more dangerous because the Church of Serbia crosses the borders of other states, which it obtained through the merits of the Ecumenical Patriarchate during the formation of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes in 1918 and the tomos received in 1922.
Therefore, the newly created church, within the entire newly formed state, illegally assigned the Cetinje Metropolitanate (Montenegro) even though it was completely independent and outside the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. To make the farce even greater, this was done with only two signatures of Synod members, out of seven that the Synod had. I believe you are aware that such decisions are not made by Synod decisions, especially not by two out of seven members, but by church councils. The state created in 1918 no longer exists, so it is reasonable to consider restoring the status of the Cetinje Metropolitanate, as the canons (Canon 17 of the IV Ecumenical Council and Rule 38 of the Tula Council) have not prescribed church separation from politics without reason. This is the best way to neutralize the abuse of the Church, its involvement in politicalandideological purposes, andits participation in territorial claims and assimilation processes.
This becomesparticularlyevident because the Church of Serbia has replaced Orthodox ecclesiology with the ideology of Saint Sava, which in the best manner reflects the classical heretical distortion of the Orthodox faith. And here's why. The ideology of Saint Sava emerged in the 1930s as a doctrine for the expansion and consolidation of the Church of Serbia across the territory of Yugoslavia. Saint Sava's ideology is not a theological doctrine of Saint Sava but a political project. Its ideological foundation is based on Saint Sava's fictitious nationalism. In his work “Nationalism of Saint Sava,” Bishop Nikolaj Velimirović of the Church of Serbia claims that the national church, i.e., the struggle for it, is “the basis of true, evangelical, and organic nationalism” and that such a church was created for the Serbian people by Saint Sava.
The name “Saint Sava's ideology” was most likely influenced by the theologian Dimitrije Najdanović through his text “Saint Sava's Paralipomena” from 1932, when he also established the eponymous journal. Najdanović explains what a nation is as follows: “...we can now and here provide the following definition: the family is an enlarged human being, the tribe is an enlarged household, the nation (people) is an enlarged tribe, macro-anthropos... In the Christened national genius of Saint Sava, the Serbian people succeeded in reaching the throne of Christ and thus were 'Christened.' Through this 'Christening,' the Serbian national soul, otherwise full of pagan rawness, became a nation with all the marks of a great nation... Thus, the nation itself became the church and, as such, a member of the Church as the mystical body of Christ.”
“Saint Sava’s ideology accepts, adopts, and professes Christian and Christened nationalism as a higher-order nationalism, as supra-nationalism, a nationalism elevated and transfigured into Christ’s 'noosphere,' pure and ennobled Saint Sava's, Saint Lazar's, and Saint Church’s nationalism...,” writes Najdanović. Najdanović himself acknowledges the similarity of his understanding of the nation to Nazi and fascist ideologies: “Nazi and fascist totalitarianism, the two 'Führers' of Germany and Italy in recent times, confirm in a classic way our position on the nation as an ethnobiological body... In it, the ancient phenomenon of the religious cult of the Caesar is resurrected.”
Najdanović was ideologically formed under the influence of Bishop Nikolaj Velimirović of Žiča, who encouraged him to join the fascist movement of Dimitrije Ljotić's Zbor in 1934. Many consider them to be the ideologists of Ljotić's movement. According to Najdanović, the goal of Saint Sava's ideology is for Serbs to be a “holy organism, a holy people.” His starting point is that Serbian nationalism is “Christ-bearing,” the oldest in Europe, and that a Saint Sava's nationalism is both possible and necessary... a Christened nationalism as a higher-order nationalism.
Bishop Nikolaj Velimirović of Žiča delivered a lecture at the Kolarac Hall in Belgrade in 1935 titled “Nationalism of Saint Sava.” His famous premise is that the nationalist ideas of Saint Sava, as he “recognizes” them, are realized by the great leader Adolf Hitler: “And here in the 20th century, he [Hitler] has come to the idea of Saint Sava, and as a layman, he undertook the most important task in his people, which is fitting only for a saint, a genius, and a hero. And that task was completed by Saint Sava, the first among saints, the first among geniuses, and the first among heroes in our history. He completed it perfectly, completed it without struggle and without bloodshed, and completed it not yesterday or the day before but 700 years ago. Hence, Serbian nationalism, as a reality, is the oldest in Europe.”
Much more could be written about Saint Sava's ideology and its basis, but even this is sufficient to, like the original ecumenical councils or councils on a smaller scale, raise the question of whether Saint Sava's ideology aligns with Orthodox ecclesiology and the holy canons, including the canonical principles on ethnophyletism from the Constantinople Council of September 10, 1872. Let us also recall the divine commandments themselves, especially the first and second. The first says: “I am the Lord your God; you shall have no other gods before Me,” and the second: “You shall not make for yourself a graven image, nor any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or on the earth below, or in the waters beneath the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them.” It is more than evident that Saint Sava's ideology violates both divine commandments by elevating Saint Sava to the same or even higher pedestal than Jesus Christ Himself.
That Saint Sava's ideology is an ideological-political project was demonstrated by the wars of the 1990s, when the Church of Serbia played a prominent role in promoting hatred and national antagonisms. From that time until today, it has been the main bearer and promoter of the expansion of the Serbian national idea in the region and the misuse of the church in the assimilation of neighboring peoples with the idea of uniting all Serbs into a single political and identity entity.
It is a well-known fact that the Saint Sava Church organized political protests and processions with the aim of changing the government in Montenegro, which indeed happened thanks to them in August 2020. The Saint Sava Church, the Church of Serbia, was the main factor in forming the new government, selecting the Prime Minister and ministers. Today, it is the most important political factor in Montenegro, upon whose will many political entities depend, which directly violates all principles of the Orthodox Church and the canonical principle that involvement in secular matters within the church is heresy. After the death of the late Metropolitan Amfilohije, extreme Greater Serbian nationalists and former members of special units of the Serbian army were appointed to head the dioceses in Montenegro; the Cetinje Metropolitanate has been completely degraded and reduced to the level of any diocese of the Church of Serbia, despite its very special historical significance, all with the aim of making it a submissive arm in the creation of the Greater Serbia idea. The autonomy that existed during Metropolitan Amfilohije's time has been abolished, and the name “Orthodox Church in Montenegro,” which was entirely in accordance with church canons recognizing the Orthodox Church as a universal organization and, within it, archbishoprics (a status that the Cetinje Metropolitanate lost after the death of the Metropolitan) and metropolises as local, not national, has been changed.
In fact, all the problems with the Saint Sava Church of Serbia arose because the Ecumenical Patriarchate and other holy fathers avoided, out of the purest opportunism, addressing the church issue after the dissolution of the former Yugoslavia, considering the manner in which the so-called Newly Created Serbian Orthodox Church was established in 1920, as the secular authorities called it, which also known as the Belgrade Patriarchate in the nomenclature of the Ecumenical Patriarchate from 1922. In the creation of this newly composed religious organization, which encompassed many churches over which it had no jurisdiction, including the Montenegrin autocephalous church, which was independent of all other churches, ...there was also simony, or as the Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate itself writes, it was not done in accordance with the holy canons but more for economic reasons (read 1.5 million gold francs). All these are reasons to bring order to Orthodoxy in the countries arising from the dissolution of the former Yugoslavia and to resolve the created problems in a canonical manner. One must never forget that the holy fathers were very aware of what problems could arise and how the church could be transformed into an ideological and political entity if the rule of church and political separation (Canon 17 of the IV Ecumenical Council and Rule 38 of the Tula Council) is not respected.
„ POSTOJAĆE CRNA GORA, DOK JE LOVĆENA I DURMITORA, DOK JE MORA POD BAROM I KOTOROM, DOK JE SUNCA I DOK JE GRAHOVCA. NE DAMO TE CRNA GORO! “
U ime Patriotskog pokreta otpora „Lovćenske straže 1990“
inž. Zoran Marka Rašović
Ulica Kralja Nikole 128, Podgorica
mob. tel. 067/ 353 291
e-mail: nvu.lovcenskestraze1990@gmail.
Podgorica,1.4. 2025.