|
Post by Marshall_Stanko on Dec 8, 2010 9:52:29 GMT -5
i think CiKoLa is a Croatian Orthodox.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall_Stanko on Dec 8, 2010 9:56:41 GMT -5
Stijepo Kobasica, 1882–1944, Serbian journalist, author and politician. Kobasica was born at Dubrovnik, in Dalmatia in 1882, at that time a part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. As a youth Kobasica did research on his forebears and determined that they sprang from Serbian Orthodox stock from Herzegovina who had migrated to the coastal area of the Župa (between Dubrovnik and Cavtat in Dalmatia) during the time of Turkish domination of the interior. Since his family had converted to Roman Catholicism generations before, the young man found himself firmly identifying with both his Serbian ethnic roots as well as his catholicity. It is important to understand this seeming contradiction to grasp the shape his career would take. Speakers of the serbo-croatian language are usually conveniently divided by their religion into Croats (catholic) and Serbs (orthodox), so the idea of a "Serbian Catholic" seems at first glance an oxymoron. But human history is rarely so tidy and especially in marginal areas like Dalmatia and Lika, due to prior conversion, there were many families who retained an ethnic identity at seeming odds with their religion. The area of Dubrovnik was an especially fruitful one with regard to this phenomenon. When in highschool in Dubrovnik, he submitted an article to a local paper that was strongly critical of the régime which was printed. He was promptly expelled and had to move to Kotor to continue his education. Unable to resist his drive to political activism, his further articles led to his expulsion there as well, and it was in Mostar in the Bosnian military protectorate that he was finally graduated. He pursued a philosophy degree at the University of Graz in Austria, and continued to write articles promoting the unification of the subjugated slavic populations there. Overhearing an insult to the Serbian King while at Graz, he challenged the man to a duel from which he received a wound to his left arm. Moving to Sarajevo in Bosnia, a Habsburg protectorate for several decades, he lent his considerable journalistic talents to the cause of its unification with Serbia in a greater southern-slav dominated state becoming the editor there of the Srpske Rieèi (The Serbian Word) newspaper. For this in November 1906, the Imperial authorities arrested him for sedition and he was escorted under guard to deportation and civic arrest in Dubrovnik, forbidden to leave the town. At the time of his arrest in Sarajevo, the Serbian Journalist Association staged a rally in Belgrade condemning the Bosnian (Habsburg) Government. In 1907 he then escaped to Belgrade where he met and married Pelagia Trifunoviæ, a natural daughter of the former King Milan IV Obrenoviæ by a Bulgarian opera singer, and they had a son together named after the child's royal grandfather Milan. From 1912-1913, Kobasica published the "Srpski Glasnik" the organ of the Serbian Radical Party in Croatia and Slavonia. He was also the author of three monographs entitled Srpsko-Bugarski Rat, "The Serbo-Bulgarian War", Sarajevo, 1913, Finale, and Stjepan Radiæ za vrijeme aneksione krize i svjetskoga rata "Stjepan Radiæ at the Time of the Annexation Crisis and the World War" (1924). At the outbreak of the First World War, Kobasica brought his family back to Dubrovnik for their safety, but was promptly arrested again by the Austrian authorities and imprisoned in the fortress of Arad (in modern Romania) for the duration of the war. After the war he returned briefly to Dubrovnik but found both his wife and son had died in his absence of tuberculosis. He then moved to Sarajevo and thence to Belgrade where he was one of the editors of "Samouprava" (Self-government) in 1926 and subsequently an Avala News Agency journalist. Stijepo Kobasica served as president of the Yugoslav Journalist Association Belgrade Section in 1925 and 1926. He also served the public, being elected for the county of Prnjavor to the Skupština (National Assembly) at Belgrade as a member of the Radical Party under the Pašic government. Kobasica married again, to Stojanka Nikoliæ and had a son, Aleksandar "Saša" with her but both predeceased him, his son, a medical student, dying of tuberculosis aged 21. His two brothers were also prominent in their areas, Josip "Pepo" becoming a Supreme Court Judge at Sarajevo, and Marin, "Rinko", Director of the Dubrovnik Commercial Maritime Academy.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall_Stanko on Dec 8, 2010 9:59:43 GMT -5
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medo_Puci%C4%87Very interesting, Puciæ was born on March 21, 1821(1821-03-21) in Dubrovnik, then in Austrian Empire. He was descended from the House of Puciæ, an old noble family of Republic of Ragusa. He attended the lyceum in Venice, where in 1841 he became acquainted with Jan Kollár[1]. Puciæ was impressed with his pan-Slavist ideas, and went on to join the Illyrian movement. From that impression of Pan-Slavism, came Puciæ's joining to the idea of Serb Catholics.
|
|
|
Post by andromeda on Dec 8, 2010 10:00:26 GMT -5
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illyrian_movementAnd , perhaps as anecdote, the first Serbian national movement rose in the same century. I don't understand why its important to emphasize either in relation to the topic though. Pardon me for introducing at least a little objectivity into this but advancement of a unified Serbo-Croat language was sought by both sides. Stokavian as both a south slavic idiom and a general slavic idiom isn't exclusively Serbian and never was. 'Sto' is common in other Slavic languages as well as Cha , Kej , etc. Dialects in Croatia differed not only on the 'what?' level but in many other aspects as well. Language was not determined by nationalism or even ethnicity because it predated both. It was determined by region and the interaction of the regions' peoples with others. The Stokavian dialect already had a rich literary tradition among Croatian academia ( and there really was no Serbian equivalent at the time) long before the emergence of Neo-Stokavian ( Serbo-Croatian). Also what does this have to do with the topic at hand anyway? Why does it have to degenerate into poorly constructed argument for the Serbian monopolization of Stokavian and , as an extension , of Stokavian speakers = Serbs? This argument was shown false and full of holes many times over and is only still seriously considered by the most eager of Serbian nationalists. Seriously I could delve into the entire history of the stokavsko dialect even beyond its Croatian and Serbian incarnations but I find it a bore to be honest. Perhaps but proceeding actions of the congress seem to suggest otherwise. The Croatian and Serbian dominate parties worked together all the way up to the end of WW1. At the time they still lived in AH and found it mutually beneficial to stress their similarities rather than differences in order to have a stronger voice in the Empire. After WW1 , the Serbians were no longer the minority and no longer needed any tactical alliances with any Croatian organizations since the whole of the land was annexed to the Kingdom of Serbia ( later Yugoslavia). It is simply a joke to suggest that Croatians were Illyrians. Croats are simply Slavs just like the rest of the Former Yugoslavs. Case CloseQuit making yourself look like an idiot. The 'Illyrian' movement had nothing with suggesting Croatians are Illyrians, it was very pan slavic actually. All you had to do was read just a little bit and you would understand that your 2 cents here makes you look really stupid. The 'Illyrian' name was used because France revived it when it briefly took over authority of Croatia and brought ideas of revolution. Actually Gaj was of Slovak descent but why is that even relevant? Actually two of the most recognized Croatian figures in the 19th century were not of Croat descent ( Strossmeyer being the other). But they were born and raised among Croats and found their place, what else would you expect? I find this fact interesting in a positive way rather than any kind of negative. Why would you guys find this negative? Little bit xenophobic maybe?
|
|
|
Post by andromeda on Dec 8, 2010 10:06:16 GMT -5
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medo_Puci%C4%87Very interesting, Puciæ was born on March 21, 1821(1821-03-21) in Dubrovnik, then in Austrian Empire. He was descended from the House of Puciæ, an old noble family of Republic of Ragusa. He attended the lyceum in Venice, where in 1841 he became acquainted with Jan Kollár[1]. Puciæ was impressed with his pan-Slavist ideas, and went on to join the Illyrian movement. From that impression of Pan-Slavism, came Puciæ's joining to the idea of Serb Catholics. Yes , Serb Catholics existed/exist in Croatia. This fact is almost self evident and there is nothing wrong with that. One only needs to be careful not to make broad generalizations like if Serb Catholics are noted in Croatia then all Catholics in Croatia must be Serb. Same thing with Orthodox and/or Eastern Rite Croats vs Orthodox Serbs. Personally I find it all a bit ridiculous though.
|
|
|
Post by andromeda on Dec 8, 2010 10:17:59 GMT -5
It's funny people find out I'm atheist and they automatically assume that I'm Yugoslav or Yugo-nostalgic or that my family were proud Yugoslavs. Truth is all of my family members are pretty ardent Croats and go to church regularly , even during Yugoslavia. I myself never really felt Yugoslav its just that I don't believe in god/gods.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall_Stanko on Dec 8, 2010 16:57:14 GMT -5
It's funny people find out I'm atheist and they automatically assume that I'm Yugoslav or Yugo-nostalgic or that my family were proud Yugoslavs. Truth is all of my family members are pretty ardent Croats and go to church regularly , even during Yugoslavia. I myself never really felt Yugoslav its just that I don't believe in god/gods. Didn't you say you were half Serb aswell??
|
|
|
Post by andromeda on Dec 8, 2010 17:04:20 GMT -5
It's funny people find out I'm atheist and they automatically assume that I'm Yugoslav or Yugo-nostalgic or that my family were proud Yugoslavs. Truth is all of my family members are pretty ardent Croats and go to church regularly , even during Yugoslavia. I myself never really felt Yugoslav its just that I don't believe in god/gods. Didn't you say you were half Serb aswell?? No , I'm full Croat. Must have been someone else.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall_Stanko on Dec 8, 2010 17:09:12 GMT -5
Didn't you say you were half Serb aswell?? No , I'm full Croat. Must have been someone else. Your one confused Croat.
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Dec 8, 2010 18:04:58 GMT -5
That's the point, it was pan-slavic. Not specifically "Croatian" at all. Because by then the Croats were an extinct people andromeda, they (Cakavians) all abondoned Croatia after Turkish conquest and pillaging, fleeing all around the globe (Burgenland, Italy, ect). This illyrian name was simply used because the Slovenians didn't want to use the Serbian name. (Sort of like the Macedonism of the early 20th century). Because we're talking about ethnic movements, not pan-slavism lol. I'm trying to answer your question as to why Croats never had and never can have a legitimate orthodox church. If the answer bothers you you shouldn't of asked.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall_Stanko on Dec 8, 2010 23:08:12 GMT -5
When i try to type in Croatian Orthodox or Croats of Orthodox Faith and i can get is "Croatian Orthodox Church" established by the Ustasha regime in 1941-1945 in an attempt of having the 1/3rd of Serbs convert to Croatian bare it Croatian Catholics or force the Serbs into converting to Croatian and keeping their religion but in communion with the Satanic Croatian Orthodox Church.
The only reason for the Croatian Orthodox Church is to wipe out the Serbian presents in Croatia and to rewrite the entire history of Croatia and all past history of any Orthodox Serbs that were present in Croatia and that made history in Croatia would be regarded as Croat Orthodox and therefore rewritting history by claiming Nikola Tesla was Croatian after all of Croatian Orthodox Faith.
There were talks after the Operation Storm in establishing such a church because many of Serbian Orthodox Churches and Monasteries were destroyed and the Serbian population has been completely wiped out of Croatia only to never return back to Croatia. This was an attempt in wiping out the Serbian history in Croatia and rewritting history.
This is why there will never be a Croatian Orthodox Church, let alone for the COC to even have any followers. Even the Montenegrin Orthodox Church disowned the Croatian Orthodox Church and denied any relations with the lobbyist of trying to establish the Satanic Church.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall_Stanko on Dec 8, 2010 23:10:35 GMT -5
In response to Andromeda and Krivosanin, Krivosanin is right about that and this so called Croatian national movement called the Illyrian movement had Serbs that participated in the movement aswell, so the Pan Slavic Movement under the banner of Illyrian is just about right and everything that Krivosanin has summed up.
This is my two cents.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall_Stanko on Dec 9, 2010 7:19:28 GMT -5
"Croatia tolerant toward own war crimes" 9 December 2010 | 11:57 | Source: Tanjug ZAGREB -- Croatia still lacks political will, adequate legal framework and efficient court procedures to deal with the war crimes committed in the 1990s.
This is according to Amnesty International (AI), whose report was carried by Croatian media.
The war crimes committed by Croatian armed forces, particularly those against Serbs, seem to be an issue which dropped off “the radar” of the international community since the official Zagreb in 2005 commenced the EU entry talks, but has remained an integral part of the EU negotiating demands, AI said.
In its November report on Croatia's progress, the European Commission included the issue of investigation and condemnation of war crimes as one of the conditions Zagreb has to fulfill if it wants to end the part of the negotiations which refers to judicial system and human rights.
The European Commission called for progress in this respect and urged war crimes court proceedings.
In its report AI calls on the Croatian authorities to speed up the prosecution of war crimes and make it their top priority.
The report recalls the fact that Croatia seceded from Yugoslavia in 1991, after which the Serb inhabitants proclaimed their own republic (Republic of Serb Krajina) on one part of the territory.
During the 1991-1995 war, both the Serbs and Croats committed atrocities against civilians, but many Croats still believe they were only defending their homes from "Serb aggressors", rather than committing war crimes.
More than 700 war crime cases have been registered with the Croatian state prosecutor's office, while only 18 are processed each year, which means it would take another 40 years to process all the crimes, said AI's expert on Croatia Marek Marczynski.
Sramota!!
|
|
|
Post by andromeda on Dec 9, 2010 15:14:18 GMT -5
That's the point, it was pan-slavic. Not specifically "Croatian" at all. Because by then the Croats were an extinct people andromeda, they (Cakavians) all abondoned Croatia after Turkish conquest and pillaging, fleeing all around the globe (Burgenland, Italy, ect). This illyrian name was simply used because the Slovenians didn't want to use the Serbian name. (Sort of like the Macedonism of the early 20th century).
Except that it was a Croatian national movement. There is nothing contradictory about wanting Croatian autonomy/independence and endorsing a pan slavic position. For example , the Illyrian movement didn't call for the autonomy/independence of other Slavic territories held by AH such as Slovakia, it was specifically for Croatia. And Extinction? On what grounds? It is true that many Croats fled Bosnia in particular during the Turkish conquest but hardly extinct. Again , regional speech and dialects cannot be grounded in ethnicity or nationalism since language itself predates both. Suggesting that dialect = ethnic affiliation is just plain ignorant or else we wouldn't even be Croats and Serbs , we would be also Ukrainians ( ikavica , sh-cha dialect) , Russians , etc, as well. The Illyrian movement had no distinct Serbian character to it aside from local Serbs that endorsed it. Serbia itself was against it for the most part since , to them , it under minded 'Greater Serbdom.'
Just because Illyrian leaders endorsed some kind of pan-slavism doesn't mean it lacked roots in the Croatian struggle. In fact it was spawned from the same struggle. And the reason Croatia doesn't have an official Orthodox church isn't because of ethnic make up ( its religious make up we're discussing anyway) its because of the Orthodox Patriarch Counsel. The Serbian Orthodox Church has recognized authority over the Orthodox peoples of the region regardless of their ethnicity ( i.e. they could be Saxon and still belong to the SOC plus this authority was further cemented by the Ottomans actually when Orthodox patriarchs became their vassals) and there isn't a competitor Orthodox church in the region.
Catholics are organized different , not by ethnicity or nationality , but purely by metropolitans and the regions they encompass.
|
|
|
Post by andromeda on Dec 9, 2010 15:22:10 GMT -5
In response to Andromeda and Krivosanin, Krivosanin is right about that and this so called Croatian national movement called the Illyrian movement had Serbs that participated in the movement aswell, so the Pan Slavic Movement under the banner of Illyrian is just about right and everything that Krivosanin has summed up. This is my two cents. No historian worth their degree would ever deny the Croatian character of the Illyrian movement and even the French , the people who inspired the name, recognized it as a Croatian phenomenon. Again , the movement focused on Croatia ( and later as an extension, Bosnia) and not Serbia , Slovakia , or any other territory under AH rule. Also , the movement was largely a response to Hungarian oppression in Croatia. The Illyrian leaders , overwhelmingly Croat and/or pro-Croat wanted a 'brotherly' relationship with the Serbs within Croatia and a friendly one with Serbs and particularly Slavs outside of Croatia. Also , explain why the chief platform of the movement was to reunite Dalmatia with Croatia-Slavonia and reintegrate the Krajina ( and later Bosnia)?
|
|
|
Post by andromeda on Dec 9, 2010 15:25:17 GMT -5
"Croatia tolerant toward own war crimes" 9 December 2010 | 11:57 | Source: Tanjug ZAGREB -- Croatia still lacks political will, adequate legal framework and efficient court procedures to deal with the war crimes committed in the 1990s. This is according to Amnesty International (AI), whose report was carried by Croatian media. The war crimes committed by Croatian armed forces, particularly those against Serbs, seem to be an issue which dropped off “the radar” of the international community since the official Zagreb in 2005 commenced the EU entry talks, but has remained an integral part of the EU negotiating demands, AI said. In its November report on Croatia's progress, the European Commission included the issue of investigation and condemnation of war crimes as one of the conditions Zagreb has to fulfill if it wants to end the part of the negotiations which refers to judicial system and human rights. The European Commission called for progress in this respect and urged war crimes court proceedings. In its report AI calls on the Croatian authorities to speed up the prosecution of war crimes and make it their top priority. The report recalls the fact that Croatia seceded from Yugoslavia in 1991, after which the Serb inhabitants proclaimed their own republic (Republic of Serb Krajina) on one part of the territory. During the 1991-1995 war, both the Serbs and Croats committed atrocities against civilians, but many Croats still believe they were only defending their homes from "Serb aggressors", rather than committing war crimes. More than 700 war crime cases have been registered with the Croatian state prosecutor's office, while only 18 are processed each year, which means it would take another 40 years to process all the crimes, said AI's expert on Croatia Marek Marczynski. Sramota!! Agreed , Sramota. But what does this have to do with the topic at hand and do you honestly think only Croats are guilty of defending or protecting indited criminals? Or is it only 'sramota' when Croats do it and maybe 'honorable' when maybe Serbs do it?
|
|