837
edits
Changes
m
→About independence: + indent
Church of Serbia granted autonomy to three Dioceses in Macedonia. Holy Assembly of Bishops of Serbian Church never resiled from this desision. But autonomy is not autocephaly and Church of Serbia never gave autocephaly to Macedonians. Macedonians proclaimed their church autocephalous. This was uncanonical fact. Macedonians were asking autocephaly. They also were asking autocephaly from all churches and were rejected. They are asking recognition even from Turkish Parlaiment!!
: If the Church of Serbia granted autonomy to Macedonian dioceses, and have not resiled from that position, why did they set up a parallel jurisiction bearing the same name as one of the autonomous dioceses? Is that not defacto resiling from the earlier grant? chrisg 2007Apr12:1543EAST
:: The Serbian Church never issued a tomos to the MOC, so there was never such a "grant", thus there is no resilation either. However the Serbian Church issued a tomos for autonomy to the Orthodox Ohrid Archbishopric. [[User:K.panteleimon|K.panteleimon]] 20:19, June 1, 2009 (UTC)
== Confusion on added material ==
I'm a little confused about [[User:Ddpbf|Ddpbf]]'s [http://en.orthodoxwiki.org/index.php?title=Macedonian_Orthodox_Church&diff=48898&oldid=45271 edits], especially the sentence "But two of them soon consecrated new bishop who was without nide qalifications." which I changed to "But two of them soon consecrated new bishops who were without the proper qualifications." for legibility... but that change doesn't really clarify the "nide qalifications" of the original. Any ideas? —[[User:Magda|<b>magda</b>]] ([[User_talk:Magda|talk]]) 17:18, May 28, 2008 (UTC)
