Pillory

At the height of the ongoing debate on proposed constitutional changes, the senior clergy of the Macedonian Orthodox Church (MPC) have made themselves heard in a tone of voice likely to be judged as harsh to the liking of contemporary believers. Harsh, perhaps, yet obvious enough as far as those the message was addressed to are concerned

AIM Skopje, October 18, 2001

Skopje Utrinski Dnevnik, a local newspaper doing its best to maintain a reasonably balanced view of the current Macedonian crisis, recently carried the warning of the head of MPC, Gospodin Stefan, that "members of Parliament voting in favor of amending article 19 of the Constitution which, in effect, equates the MPC with the Islamic Community and the Catholic Church, will be put to the pillory." At home and throughout the diaspora, names of all who voted in favor of the amendment will be made public. They are to be publicly dishonored, stigmatized and singled out as "traitors of the Macedonian nation".

The proposed discrediting, according to Utrinski Dnevnik, is not to be interpreted as the willingness of the Holy Archbishops Synod of the MPC to pronounce an anathema on the sinners as of yet; rather, it should be viewed in light of bringing shame upon said individuals and their families, although not even the extreme measure of excommunication from the Orthodox religious community is to be ruled out altogether. As for MPC, it claims it resorted to such a radical step only after realizing that its stand regarding the constitutional position assigned to it by amendments to the highest law of the country were given no consideration whatsoever.

Up to the beginning of the political dialogue between the four major political parties in Macedonia staged in Ohrid at the beginning of this summer, political, scholar and clerical circles had no dilemma as to the exact role and constitutional positioning of each of the religious communities. In the first ever Constitution of the independent state of Macedonia, the issue of religious communities and religious freedoms is addressed through a single article, lately proving to be so highly controversial. So, for the sake of a better understanding of the recent tumult in the MPC, it deserves to be quoted in full: " The freedom of religious confession is guaranteed. The right to express one's faith freely and publicly, individually or otherwise, is guaranteed. The Macedonian Orthodox Church and other religious communities and groups are free to establish schools and other social and charitable institutions by way of a procedure regulated by law." The essence of the proposed constitutional change is that, alongside with the MPC, the Islamic Community and the Catholic Church in Macedonia are now cited in Article 19 by name.

Church dignitaries, members of parliament for the most part belonging to Prime Minister Georgievski's VMRO-DPMNE, the front-runner of endeavors that MPC be granted a special status, substantiate their argument by the role played by MPC in preserving the national identity, the fact that it is a national church, the sole with its seat on Macedonian soil and so forth. At one point, Speaker Stojan Andov who keeps trying to manipulate the parliamentary debate came up with the suggestion that the controversial amendment on religious communities be adopted under the condition that the international community procure the admission of MPC into "the family of orthodox churches" (which do not recognize the autocephalous MPC). It remains unclear whether Speaker Andov meant in earnest what he said at the time or if he simply could not think of anything better on the spur of the moment.

A few days ago, the MPC went public with a proposal of its own: instead of changing Article 19 as proposed, why not assign the Macedonian Orthodox Church a separate article within the constitutional text, with the role and position of other religious communities defined by some other article of the Constitution? If - the clergy left no room for doubt as to that - the status of MPC ends up defined as proposed by the amendments, then the church may well be left out of the text altogether...

In some political circles, the radical stand of MPC concerning the constitutional changes and, particularly, the warning that "traitors" will be put to the pillory, is being perceived as pressure exerted on MPs on the eve of the decisive parliamentary session. This prompted a local commentator to define the tone of the messages emanating from the MPC as "religious fundamentalism". The spokesman of the MPC Synod Gospodin Timotej claims "the church is not meddling in politics but is, rather, forced to defend its dignity, status, role and position defined by the Constitution, if necessary, even by means of publicly disclaiming and stigmatizing the traitors." This, the public was led to conclude, is but a forewarning. Let the MPs involved deduce for themselves what awaits them if they vote in favor of Article 19, knowing that a much more stern punishment in the form of an anathema is not to be ruled out as an extreme measure to be taken (meaning, among other things, the excommunicated will be denied all religious rites). True, the Holy Synod has not yet discussed the said possibility "which does not go to say such an alternative should be ruled out entirely". The MPC spokesman, it seems, believes all Macedonian MPs to be of Orthodox persuasion. If the obvious communist provenience of a number of those concerned is taken into account, Gospodin Timotej may prove to be hopelessly off the point.

Nevertheless, differences of opinion within the topmost clergy of MPC do exist. Thus, the Metropolitan of the Veles episcopate Gospodin Jovan believes it is not in the nature of the church to meddle in politics, meaning it has no right to influence MPs holding beliefs differing from the official stand of the church. As a result, Gospodin Jovan does not uphold the recent decision of the Holy Synod, judging it as being untenable. According to this particular MPC dignitary, it is utterly unacceptable to expose anyone to public dishonor and lynch just because the said individual holds a stand differing from the one taken by the church. "The fact that the church is now proposing public stigma for all disagreeing with its view amounts to making way for an outside interest to be effectuated through it. The eventual anathema would represent a serious mistake since an anathema is pronounced only in cases when canonical and dogmatic norms are violated which is clearly not the case in this instance", metropolitan Jovan explains.

MPC did not have the luck of enjoying unlimited public support. By chance or not, at the height of its wrath, the public was perturbed by the case of a 19 year old girl from Struma whose parents have unsuccessfully been trying to free her from the bond of a noviciate trial in an Orthodox monastery. The said case merely reminded the public of similar instances when the church, to put it mildly, did not handle matters too well. For years now, enraged relatives of future monks have been claiming that SOMEONE (?) from within the church has been taking their children away from them by force. Claims that novice are even being drugged in order to keep them in monasteries are to be heard and a book on the subject has been published. MPC's reaction to the latest case came in the form of an explanation that anyone of age has the right to chose his destiny on his own. In other words, "God's will". To the dissatisfaction of the media, the bishop whose name has for years been mentioned in connection with similar cases is nowhere to be found these days...

Not only because of the proposed amendment concerning religious communities, the parliamentary procedure for the adoption of constitutional changes has long since been blocked. At the moment, a possible way out of the situation does not seem to be in sight. For the first time in forty years since restoring its autocephality, the Macedonian Orthodox Church has resorted to "harsh language". The tone of voice chosen is a surprise to its believers and those who hold it in high esteem. Although harsh, the words used are undoubtedly quite clear to those these messages are addressing. Whether this will prove beneficial or detrimental to the Church remains to be seen.

ZELJKO BAJIC

(AIM)