Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY
/
Socialists to confiscate church property in Montenegro
Socialists to confiscate church property in Montenegro
Mar 30, 2026 6:49 AM

Events in Montenegro underscore how property rights, parental rights, and religious liberty go together. That nation’s socialist leadership passed a law allowing the government to seize religious property, declare a monopoly over the education of the youngest children, and limit parents’ ability to raise their children in their faith.

On December 27, 2019, despite popular opposition, the Parliament of Montenegro passed the law on “freedom of religion or beliefs and legal status of munities.” Before the members of the ruling Democratic Party of Socialists and their coalition partners voted on the law, 18 Members of Parliament – who belong to the opposition Democratic Front – were arrested. The law passed in the dead of night and without a proper dialogue with the largest and oldest church in the country, the Serbian Orthodox Church, nor with other munities. Furthermore, it passed without popular support. This law and the process by which it was adopted speaks volumes about the government of Montenegro and about socialism’s disregard for religious and parental rights.

Since 1991, Montenegro has been ruled by Milo Đukanović, the president of the Democratic Party of Socialists. Previously, Đukanović served four terms as prime minister. President Đukanović is a former Communist, and his political party is the direct legal and ideological successor of the League of Communists of Montenegro. It could be said that Đukanović is the only Communist head of state who survived the fall of the Berlin Wall.

During this time, Đukanović has been accused of autocratic rule, corruption, censorship, discrimination against the Serbian munity, illicit trafficking of tobacco, and war crimes during the siege of Dubrovnik. Thanks to diplomatic immunity and the constant support of the West, which considers him as a loyal ally in the region, Đukanović has not faced legal repercussions.

In 2000, the Democratic Party of Socialists began agitating for the independence of Montenegro from the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, a campaign led by Đukanović. Montenegro won independence in a 2006 referendum to separate from Serbia, its key historical ally. For almost 14 years, President Đukanović and his political party have been working on nation-building. A crucial aspect of that process is the creation of a new national church.

In June 2019, at the convention of the Democratic Party of Socialists, President Đukanović repeated his call for the creation of the Montenegrin Orthodox Church. During his speech, he emphasized the importance of this church in strengthening the Montenegrin national identity. Metropolitan Amfilohije of Montenegro and the Littoral, the head of the Serbian Orthodox Church in Montenegro, said that “this would be the first time in history that a declared atheist is creating a church.”

Yet Đukanović sees the Serbian Orthodox Church in Montenegro as the biggest obstacle to creating his own national church. So, for years, Đukanović has been accusing the Serbian Church of undermining the sovereignty of Montenegro.

The Serbian Orthodox Church has been an integral part of Montenegro – under different names, due plex historical circumstances – since the thirteenth century. Since 1920, the Serbian Orthodox Church has been present in its current administrative capacity: a metropolitan who oversees three dioceses. The jurisdiction of the Serbian Orthodox Church over the territory of Montenegro is recognized by all canonical Orthodox churches, including the Russian Orthodox Church and the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople.

Contrary to the long tradition and history of the Serbian Church, a non-canonical Montenegrin Orthodox Church was founded in 1993 and officially registered as a munity in January 2000. The new church was founded in the town of Cetinje, the historical capital of Montenegro. Since 1997, Mihailo (born Miraš) Dedeić has been the leader of the non-canonical Montenegrin Orthodox Church. As a priest, Dedeić was municated by the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople, His All-Holiness Bartholomew I. The church he leads is not recognized by any canonical Orthodox body. Additionally, it is well known that the Montenegrin Orthodox Church has a very small membership. It is worth mentioning that in June 2018, the Montenegrin Orthodox Church went through a split, so currently the country has two non-canonical, unrecognized munities with the same name.

Since the Montenegrin Orthodox Church lacks a living tradition, historical connection with the people, significant church buildings, and a large number of adherents, the government of Montenegro decided to assist it in acquiring some of these things. The Democratic Party of Socialists proposed and adopted a law that would weaken the Serbian Orthodox Church in Montenegro. Article 62 of the law could transfer its property to the newly minted church. Specifically, the law states that “religious buildings or lands used by any munity in Montenegro – which were built by the state or financed by public revenues; or based on the joint investment of the citizens; or were owned by the state before December 1, 1918, without the proper evidence of ownership – shall constitute state property as the cultural heritage of Montenegro.”

Put simply, if a munity cannot provide evidence of private ownership, the government of Montenegro has the right to assert state ownership over the property, confiscate it, and redistribute the property to the state-supported Montenegrin Orthodox Church.

This article opens the door for massive corruption and backroom deals. The state also covets land owned by the Serbian Orthodox Church for the development of the hospitality industry. It seems fitting that the government of Montenegro is trying to confiscate church property, considering that the regime has not yet returned church property the Communist regime nationalized in the 1940s.

Besides confiscation of ecclesiastical property, the new law establishes an plicated and lengthy registration process for munities. The seat of the munity registered in the territory of Montenegro must be resident in Montenegro. This would have a major impact on the Serbian Orthodox Church, which will have to obtain special status in Montenegro to continue its activities.

Last but not least, state authorities shall decide the proper name of a munity. Politicians justified this under the guise of preventing confusion between churches. However, this provision could potentially strip the Serbian Orthodox Church of its name and transfer it to the leadership of the non-canonical Montenegrin Orthodox Church.

In addition to property rights and the registration process, the Democratic Party of Socialists, as the true successor of the Communist Party, decided in the new law to constrict religious education. Article 54 of the law prohibits munities from forming primary schools, creating an artificial state monopoly over the education of the youngest children. Articles 51 and 52 clearly limit parental rights to educate their children about their own religion. According to these two articles, parents do not have the right to teach their children over the age of 11 about religion without the children’s consent. Violators may be fined €2,000 ($2,200 U.S.). So, the socialist government wants to usurp parental rights over religious education until the children are 11, then transfer those rights directly to the children.

Along with opposition politicians, members of the Parliament, and citizens of Montenegro, the new law on “freedom of religion” has been criticized by all major Christian leaders, including Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I, Pope Francis, Russian Patriarch Kirill, and the Metropolitan of All America and Canada Tikhon of the Orthodox Church in America (OCA), among others. Patriarch Bartholomew I wrote a letter in which he explicitly said that the Ecumenical Patriarch recognizes the canonical jurisdiction of the Serbian Orthodox Church over Montenegro. In a subsequent interview, he said that he would never recognize the Montenegrin Orthodox Church as canonical.

Since the Parliament of Montenegro adopted the controversial law, protests have spread across the country. Tensions have risen in Montenegro after protesters clashed with police. There have been multiple reports of violence.

The Serbian Orthodox Church is calling for a structural change. President Đukanović and the socialist government refuse to abandon their positions and the creation of the Montenegrin Orthodox Church. Parliamentary elections are due to be held no later than October 2020. Will the new “religious freedom” law have an impact on the election’s e? Will the ruling Democratic Party of Socialists finally e the party of opposition? Is this the beginning of the end of Đukanović’s regime? What is the future of Montenegro? All supporters of religious liberty should follow this closely – and draw the appropriate conclusions.

Photo credit: Adam Jones, Ph.D. (CC BY-SA 3.0). Image cropped.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY
Henri Landwirth
Henri Landwirth (1927-2018) overcame a traumatic childhood during the Holocaust to e a great businessman and philanthropist for terminally ill children. Landwirth and his twin sister, Margot, were born in Antwerp, Belgium, in 1927 to clothing salesman Max Landwirth and his wife, Fanny. When Henri was 13, the Nazis forced his family into the Krakow ghetto, shot Max, then dispersed his surviving family to concentration camps. He would see his mother only once more before she and a thousand...
Editor's Note: Fall 2020
This issue goes to press as the presidential election is ending – both causes for rejoicing. But its theme remains relevant long after the votes are tallied, because politics represents a mere fraction of true citizenship. These stories trace the full arc of citizenship, showing how religion and liberty intertwine at each stage. Mark David Hall shares the founders’ views that religion sustains our republic. Hunter Baker writes that “citizenship in a free country” entails “the corresponding responsibility of...
What is a Christian’s duty as a U.S. citizen?
Saint Augustine famously wrote about the existence of two cities traveling together through time and space on earth. One is the city of man. The other is the city of God. The Christian must live in both and find a way to live faithfully amid the inevitable tension. Early Christians experienced this tension in dramatic fashion. We feel it today, too. Part of the church’s history has to do with periods of intense persecution and martyrdom. Steven D. Smith’s...
The constitutional way to defeat cancel culture
When writing about the deep divisions that beset America today, it is imperative to put things in context first. As hard as it may be to believe at times, we have been more divided at other times in our history. Think of the Civil War and the years leading up to it, filled with promises” that only created aggravation. Or consider Shays’ Rebellion, a Western Massachusetts insurrection that had national implications. There were many other times when we have...
Faithful citizenship: the founders on religion and the republic
Shortly before he left office, President George Washington published an monly referred to as his “Farewell Address.” In it, he observed that: Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indisputable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duty of men and citizens. … [L]et us with caution indulge the supposition, that...
Repairing the breach: bringing peace to politically fractured families and communities
The 2020 presidential election will be over shortly after this is written. Unfortunately, it will not end the political fevers that boiled over into violence this summer. On a smaller scale, friends and relatives have e estranged over politics. Bitterness has e ingrained in families as America has e more politicized, more secular, and less tolerant of philosophical diversity. People of all backgrounds could see themselves in the family conflict of Kellyanne Conway, who left her position as a...
Commonsense healthcare policies can solve our crisis of legitimacy
Every day that the partisan rancor over the 2020 presidential election drags on, it poses a challenge to our nation’s well-being. As the candidates and pundits escalate their rhetoric, more Americans lose faith in our political process. Many get angry. Others check out entirely. Even though 2021 is not an election year, it threatens to e the year more voters than ever e disappointed in their elected representatives and disenchanted with the political process. Unfortunately, our elected leaders’ legislative...
Brexit: Freedom beckons
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his chief Brexit negotiator, David Frost, achieved an extraordinary success in the negotiations to leave the European Union. At midnight (Brussels time, of course, or 11 p.m. GMT) on December 31, 2020, the United Kingdom exited the one-year transition period and finally escaped the clutches of the EU which, like the tentacles of an octopus, had suffocated the nation for some 50 years. Prime Minister Johnson plished this feat by not blinking at...
A revolution of decency
Orderly elections, the peaceful transfer of power from one administration to the next, and public confidence in the institutions responsible for ensuring that these things transpire are necessary for any free and just society. These are ponents of the rule of law, which minimizes the conflicts that may arise when the free actions of persons and institutions result peting interests. We have seen, tragically, in the past months just what happens when our nation’s institutions and leaders fail in...
The ‘Ecocide’ movement: a crime against humanity
Radical environmentalists plan to criminalize large-scale industrial enterprise. To be more precise, they plan to categorize wealth-producing and job-creating activities as a crime known as “ecocide,” a transgression that activists want legislated internationally as “the fifth international crime against peace.” Ecocide would equate large-scale development activities with genocide, ethnic cleansing, wars of aggression, and crimes against humanity – actions that could land their perpetrators in the dock at the International Criminal Court in The Hague. The “ecocide” movement pretends...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved