Talk:Macedonian Orthodox Church

Controversial
Please discuss signifigant changes here and try to reach consensus before making them, in order to avoid continuing an edit war here. Triona 07:52, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

This paragraph about Archbishop Jovan of Ohrid seems to have been added on to the "Relations with the SOC" section as POV. Unless some reliable references are provided to back up this very serious accusation, the paragraph ought to be taken out. "Also, a much greater impact for the decision of Jovan's arrest made his financial malversations, that is, his inappropriate usage of the church fund.[citation needed] In September 2005 he was also accused of embezzlement of church funds at the time when he still was MOC clergyman." --A.Molnar (talk) 19:30, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

The added paragraph about Bulgarian Orthodox Church synod meeting and a resolution is not interpreted correctly. The BOC did not, in fact, declare itself as MOC's mother church, but the resolution is for the BOC to mediate and involve themselves more in the dialogue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.103.8.191 (talk) 08:41, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Recent anon contrib
This was the recent contrib by an anon user, reverted:

''The history of Christianity in Europe begins with Macedonia, as the first ever christian in Europe was Lidia of Macedonia that was christened by the Apostle Paul. However the first church organisation which was independent and covered the teritorry of Macedonia was created with the investiture of St. Clement of Ohrid for the first ever Slavic Bishop with deocese in the region of Ohrid (Kutmichevitsa) and the first Bishop, later Archibishop of the Ohrid Archibishophoric. During the following period up to the coronation of Samoil as Macedonian Emperor the Archibishophoric of Ohrid was enlarging its deocese and included at its peek Dubrovnik (todays Croatia), the whole of Zeta and Raska (todays Serbia and Montenegro), the deoceses of Albania, Sicily, Serdica (todays Sofia in Bulgaria) and the complete deocese of the ethnical Macedonian teritorry. It was during this period that the Archibishophoric of Ohrid was up-graded to Patriarhat.''

''Some century and a half later after the fall of the Empire of Samoil and his death, part of the deocese of the Macedonian church under the lead of St. Sava of the Serbs established the Pek Patriarhat, illegitimately, and with no recognition by the Ohrid Archibishop. This however, never lead to separation since during the rule of the Emperor Dushan of the Serbs who was crowned in Skopje, the capital of todays Macedonia, both churches co-existed harmoniously, when both archibishops participated in the ceremony of the coronation.''

''The fatal moment occures in 1762 when the Turkish Sultan adopted decree by the means of which the Ohrid Archipishophoric was abolished and the diocese was passed to the Patriarhate of Constantinopole. Latter in 20 century with the establishment of the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, when the teritorry of Macedonia was included under the teritorry of the Serbs, as Southern Banovina, the antique diocese of the Ohrid Archibishophoric was bought for money from the Patriarhate of Constantinopole and therefore the Serbian Orthodox Church considers to be the mother church of the Macedonian Orthodox Church, which having regard the spreads of christianity and slavic literacy is the mother church of all the Slavic Orthodox Churches.''

Now, I know it's full of PoVs, but I feel that we need some kind of similar info in the article. Even if MoC were formed in 1945, Orthodox Christianity in the area has a veery long history long time before that, and that history should be depicted in the article to provide an overview of historic conditions. Duja 20:48, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree. Info in second paragraph added is about Bulgarian church. But much of the things mentioned takes part in today's Macedonia terotory, so it should be mentioned, as rewritten. I would rewrite this info to POV, but I have fatal shortage of time. But if someone else doesn't beat me to this, I would probably do this.

Are you serious? Lydia of Macedonia IS NOT A MACEDONIAN SLAV!!! The slavs didint arrive until the sixth century. she could be a Roman for all we knowHeraklios 11:08, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Alot of this stuff is utter nonsense. Whether or not this is a political issue is irrelevant to the central questions about the legitimacy of the Macedonian Orthodox Church. By the 28th Canon of Chalcedon, which states [in part] "And for the future, all the (26) metropolitans of the three (civil) dioceses of Thrace, Asia, and Pontus are to be consecrated by the bishop of Constantinople--he is to be definitely their overlord. And likewise it is he who will consecrate the bishops of the churches among the barbarian peoples beyond the frontier."... Constantinople (new Rome)was the "overlord" over the region of today's Macedonia.

After the dissolution of the Ohrid Archbishopric, Constantinople entrusted the Serbian Orthodox Church dominion over the land of FYROM. Thus, Autocephaly could only be granted by the Serbian Orthodox Church. Failure to gain their permission, is de facto uncanonical.

Furthermore, this site should include a link the Nis agreement (copy here http://www.poa-info.org/cont.php?l=en&r=history&p=&d=schism/nisdok.html) which was signed by three promient Macedonian Bishops, (accepting autonomy under the Patriarch of Pec, Serbian Orthodox Church). From a Canonical perspective, this is a no-brainer and that is exactly why NO ORTHODOX CHURCH ON THE PLANET accepts the Macedonian Orthodox Church as Canonical.

In contrast, the newly formed Orthodox Ohrid Archbishopric is the ONLY Canonically recognized Orthodox Church in Macedonia.


 * except the Nis agreement was eventually rejected by the bishops of Macedonia, except for Jovan. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 18:07, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Macedonian Orthodox Church – Ohrid Archbishopric. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130409054555/http://www.census-campaign.org.au/?page_id=27 to http://www.census-campaign.org.au/?page_id=27

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:49, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Macedonian Orthodox Church – Ohrid Archbishopric. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://umdiaspora.org/content/view/671/1/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070202021009/http://www.mpc-evropa.de/ to http://www.mpc-evropa.de/
 * Added tag to http://www.koe.mk/index.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110301023654/http://www.mpc-dortmund.de/ to http://www.mpc-dortmund.de/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:01, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Macedonian Orthodox Church – Ohrid Archbishopric. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060325155601/http://www.christianity.com/partner/Article_Display_Page/0,,PTID17865%7CCHID118517%7CCIID2063006,00.html to http://www.christianity.com/partner/Article_Display_Page/0,,PTID17865%7CCHID118517%7CCIID2063006,00.html
 * Added tag to http://www.mpc-svetinaum.ch/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:45, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

maps of dioceses
the "organization" section has two maps, one showing 7 dioceses labeled "(1967-2013)", the other showing 8 dioceses labeled "(2013 to present)". The only difference is that in the first map, the Diocese of Tetovo and Gostivar is not labeled. But the accompanying text, indicating dioceses as of 1999, lists it. Was Tetovo-Gostivar empty before 2013? Or should it be labeled in the first map, which would then require the dates to be omitted?--Richardson mcphillips (talk) 15:34, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Seemingly full return to full communion with Ecuemnical Patriarchate?
On May 9th, 2022, the Phanar seemed to announce recognition of the Ohrid Archbishopric (without allowance for the title "Macedonian") under Archbishop Stephen. Article can be found here: https://orthodoxtimes.com/phanar-yes-to-the-recognition-no-to-macedonia-for-the-archdiocese-of-ohrid/

Your thoughts? I hesitate to make this visible on the front page because I have not seen the original Greek document which proclaims this. Before it's put on the Wikipedia, a few people should confirm, as I don't want such an article to cause confusion amongst faithful Orthodox. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DarnFineCoffee (talk • contribs) 15:55, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes this news has been spread in Bulgarian. Jingiby (talk) 17:14, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I cannot find the original Greek document on the official Ecumenical Patriarchate website. However, a Greek version can be found on this news agency website.
 * It is not a recognition of autocephaly, for those typically require a tomos. Rather, it is a recognition of the existence and legitimacy of the MOC without anymore classification or clarification.
 * pinging you as I feel this may be of interest to you. Veverve (talk) 21:43, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Here is the original Greek on the official EP website; here is the official English translation on the same website. Veverve (talk) 10:51, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Now that I think of it: each time the EP has recognised an autocephaly, it granted the Church tomos, but it was because the EP considered all those Churches to be under its jurisdiction and thus that it was its right by law to grant them autocephaly by an official document. In this case, the EP recognises the organisation but admits the Serbian Church has jurisdiction over it.
 * Does it mean this time the EP recognised an autocephalous Church without giving it a tomos, for the aforementioned reason? (ping due to ): what do you think?
 * I guess the situation will be clearer by Sunday once the diptychs are sung a the liturgy. Veverve (talk) 20:33, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
 * (pinging you due to ): what is your opinion on the matter related to what I wrote juste above (20:33, 12 May 2022)? Veverve (talk) 22:52, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
 * As I understand those sources, the Ecumenical Patriarch recognized the MOC as Orthohox (under the "Archbishopric of Ohrid" moniker), but not as autocepahlous. There is no source that calls it "autocephalous".  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:04, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

@Veverve PM Kovachevski recently sent a letter to the EP, thanking His Holiness for the recognition, and the recognition only: "We hope that in due course, by resolving other administrative problems, it will finally lead to the autocephaly of our Church, which we understand as unity with all local Orthodox Churches through obedience and respect for the First Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople." The MOC leadership might still claim independence from the Serb Patriarchate, possibly for internal consumption, but the Government seems ready to play by the rules.

ThanmadGR (talk) 08:59, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Now there is the SOC stating it accepts the MOC (original statement)... as an autonomous part within the SOC, with the same 1959 status it had! I have no idea what is happening, I really do not see the MOC renouncing its autocephaly. do you have any clue or way to explain what is the current situation and the goal the SOC and MOC are trying to achieve? Veverve (talk) 13:08, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
 * The Serbian and Macedonian churches were negotiating. The essence of these negotiations was that the Serbian Church agreed to grant canonical autocephaly to the Macedonian Orthodox Church. And when they had almost agreed, the Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate suddenly recognized "the church under Archbishop Stephen." But both the Serbian and Macedonian churches did not attach importance to this and continued negotiations. Finally, on May 16, their negotiations ended with the temporary transition of the Macedonian Orthodox Church to Serbian Orthodox Church according to the status of 1959. Now we must expect granting autocephaly. The Serbian Church, granting autocephaly, will not require either a change of name or the abandonment of dioceses in the diaspora. That's how I see this situation. ~ Чръный человек (talk) 20:48, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
 * There is actually no official stance from the MOC on the matter of reunification with the SOC. At this stage it’s a unilateral declaration by the SOC. I advise leaving the article as it was until we hear from the MOC. Kromid (talk) 22:41, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree with Kromid. This also applies to other articles on WP about the status of the MOC. Veverve (talk) 22:59, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
 * You were right Чръный человек, according to this article, the SOC and the EP both raced against each others to grant autocephaly first to the MOC. Veverve (talk) 14:47, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't think it indicates much of a race - I'd reckon this is just Orthodox Times being the usual sympathetic outlet for the EP, since the original article description said "In a move that... smells of Russian involvement and which further complicates things in Orthodoxy at a time when the war in Ukraine is raging from the Russian offensive, the Patriarchate of Serbia went ahead today."
 * If it weren't for the whole "only EP can grant autocephaly" line of thought that has been around for the past century or so, we likely wouldn't see this article written in this way.
 * I almost consider Orthodox Times for the Greeks like how Orthochristian/Pravoslavie.ru to the Russians, sympathetic to one particular side of the church to the general disregard of the rest. Vypr (talk) 12:56, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, OrthodoxTimes.com seems like weirdly trying to construct controversy when there may be none?
 * Ђидо (talk) 20:44, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * That's my thought anyway, since the EP basically told Serbia to deal with the administrative end of this stuff back when they restored the MOC to communion - this is their response.
 * The MOC even said they were going to communicate with the EP about getting their autocephaly recognized and having a tomos from the EP, which Orthodox Times reported on with great joy. Vypr (talk) 21:41, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 28 July 2022

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Moved  >>>  Ingenuity . talk ; 22:40, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Macedonian Orthodox Church – Archdiocese of Ohrid → Macedonian Orthodox Church – The official name of the church is the Macedonian Orthodox Church – Archdiocese of Ohrid. But the most commonly used name of the church is simply the Macedonian Orthodox Church. Therefore, I propose to move this article to the Macedonian Orthodox Church. Симит-погача (talk) 18:01, 28 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Could you provide some sources for this? Veverve (talk) 18:28, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I read a lot of sources about the Orthodox Church, and I see a short name much more often than the full official one. Google search is difficult to do, but for example, look at and . Симит-погача (talk) 18:40, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I symphathize with the move request, considering its length it is very unlikely that the current article title is used as a common name. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:29, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Support per WP:CONCISE and WP:COMMONNAME.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:09, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
 * -- Support, seems like common name. Ђидо (talk) 05:48, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Support per above. --Waltermaid (talk) 07:34, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.