The
row erupted after the two bodies signed an agreement on May
17, 2002, which abolished the Macedonian church's independent
autocephalous status - where it appointed its own head and
was not subject to the rule of an archbishop - and made it
an autonomous entity within the Serbian Orthodox Church.
The
Macedonian church declared autocephaly in 1967, a move strongly
encouraged by the communist hierarchy as part of a drive to
bolster Macedonia's national identity. But its Serbian counterpart,
which formerly controlled the Macedonian dioceses, resisted
the move and it was never recognised by orthodox churches
elsewhere.
However,
the Nis draft agreement between the bodies - confirmed on
the Serbian side on June 1 - has caused further fury within
Macedonia, where many see it as an act of surrender.
The
plan to accept autonomous status within the Serbian church
has divided Macedonian bishops into two camps.
Petar
of Australia and New Zealand, Timotej of Ohrid and Kicevo,
Naum of Strumica and Jovan of Povardarie support autonomy.
Kiril
of Polog and Kumanovo, Agatangel of Bregalnica and Gorazd
of Western Europe champion autocephaly. The head of the church,
Archbishop Stefan of Ohrid, has taken a neutral position.
The
two sides are so far apart that Agatangel of Bregalnica has
threatened schism if the document is adopted while Kiril of
Polog and Kumanovo is reported to have physically threatened
Jovan of Povardarie.
Autocephaly,
which is akin to ecclesiastical independence, has ramifications
that go way beyond the clergy and religious people. An independent
Macedonian church is seen as an emblem of the country's statehood
and nationhood.
The
struggle with the Serbian clergy began in 1944, when the Macedonian
church was first established. It functioned uneasily inside
the Serbian church until 1956, when the campaign for autocephalous
status began.
When
Serbia refused to agree to this change, the Macedonian clergy
- supported by the Communist Party at local and national level
- declared autocephalous status unilaterally.
The
Serbian clergy have never accepted the Macedonians' right
to independence, even though their control of the dioceses
only dated back to the Serbian conquest in the Balkan wars
of 1912-1913.
At
the end of the 1960s, the Serbs produced a compromise proposal
for temporary autonomy, which the Macedonian clergy turned
down. They did not gain the support of the other Orthodox
churches, which sided overwhelmingly with the Serbs. Since
1967, the Macedonian church has been treated as a schismatic
organisation.
Autocephaly
supporters see the latest agreement as little better than
treason.
"Macedonia
is a completely independent country and is entitled to autocephalous
status," said Jovan Belcovski, professor of church
history at the orthodox faculty of theology in Skopje.
"We
cannot go back. There is no known case of a church that has
declared autocephalous status later returning to a lower level."
The "no" camp has noted that the three bishops most
in favour of autonomy share a Greek or Serbian background.
Petar and Timotej were educated at the Belgrade Orthodox Faculty
of Theology, while Naum was a monk on Mount Athos and his
entire education has been under Greek influence.
The
autocephaly camp believes the Nis talks are part of a wider
Serbian plan to destabilise Macedonia and are particularly
angered by the fact that the agreement questions even the
name of its church.
The
Serbs recognise Stefan only as Archbishop of Ohrid, not as
head of a Macedonian Orthodox Church. Macedonian nationalists
see the hand of Athens in this, given Greece's historic opposition
to the use of the word Macedonia for anything other than the
Greek province of the same name.
Bishop
Timotej, a supporter of the draft agreement, was unrepentant.
In a statement he recently attacked those who "one-sidedly
declared autocephalous status in 1967".
The
statement infuriated Bishop Kiril, the last surviving cleric
to have signed the declaration of autocephalous status, who
has vowed to fight the Nis accord to the end.
It
remains unclear whether the Macedonian church will halt its
negotiations with the its Serb counterpart and cling to a
status that the rest of the orthodox community sees as schismatic,
or continue talks towards a compromise over the use of the
word Macedonia.
A
possible solution might involve a double name, satisfying
both Macedonian public opinion and the Greeks.
But
the clergy will have to be careful. The public expects its
orthodox church to win the right to be identified with the
Macedonian state and nation.
Zoran
Bojarovski
