What you say is absolutley irrelevant, until you post some Calendar of Serbian Orthodox Church before 1999 which does not have Saint Jovan Vladimir. And I know you cant produce such calendar, at least not from 20th century.

principles of organisation, and most importnantly, legitimate interest. Why do you as non-Orthodox should bother how we are organised? Serbian Orthodox Church hae support of majority of Orthodox believers in Montnegro. So called “Montenegrin Orthhodox Church”  have hundreds (low thousands, at best) members, whos only “connection” with Orthodoxy is burning of Badnjak on town square in Cetinje. 

Well, few of so called priests of “Montenegrin Orthodox Church” are defroced for stealing of church money (Živorad Pavlović), sexual abusing of mentaly ill woman (Milutin Cvijić). They escaped in Montenegro.
Yes there are people doing immoral and terrible acts in Serbian Church. But once it got revealed, they are defrocked (like two I mentioned for example).
Church institutions (abstract term) could not be liar (first grammaticaly, they are plural, and second liar is, by definiton human person).

And what your OK should suppose to mean? No offense, but I passed exams from Canon law few years ago, and checked books I used for it when I was replying to you. I allready know I am right.

And? I was reading books from Medicine, and I dont think I understand it verry well.

And so what then? I told you your sentence was grammaticaly wrong. But anyway, you found link somewhere on internet, and you are now expert on canon law or what?

Wait, I dont get you. So you dont have elementary knowledge of canon law, but since you have basic understanding of ideas of law (in general)…,  Sorry, but basic understanding and elementary knowledge are pretty much same thing. Fact that you understand a bot of civil law, does not qualify you as you have same udnerstanding of Canon law. Espeacialy since you are not part of Orthodox Church (On other hand, you have first hand experience with civil law, as citizen of concrete state which has law system, Montenegro here).

Well, dont forget I am moderator here as well. Try be concrete when repliening. Otherwise, I could delete parts of message, or entire messages, I find as spam or trolling.

No it does not mean. It does mean, Serbian Orthodox Church does was not founded by Yugoslav state, and existance of Yugoslav stae has no relation whatsoever to existance of Serbian Orthodox Church. Hope you udnerstand it.

No, nothign is changed. Serbian Orthodox Church does recognise state of Montenegro from start. I believe you saw president of Montenegro and Mtropolitan of Montenegro and Litoral visiting each other, sending greetings to eachother with their official titles. But, apropo ethicity, well, Church could not recognise some ethnicity. Its simply not her bussiness. But, I guess you wanted to say, majority of clergy does not see Montenegrins as separate ethncity, in that part you are right.

Its ironic that there is no decision of anexation. There was 500 Serbian troops then in Montenegro. Logisiticaly impossible. Anyway, Montenegro, in end become part of Yugoslavia not of Serbia.

But Communists did not annuled anything about Podgorica Assembly. They accepted its legitimacy explicitly. Furthermore, Communist Yugoslavia was legaly continuation of Kingdom of Yugoslavia. Josip Broz Tito was first Prime Minister fo King Peter II. In end you have no arguement. 
And? He accepted Yugoslav citizenship. He was working in Ministry of Foreign affairs furthermore. In his person, heir of Montenegrin throne gave up, Montenegrin Crown  and state to Yugoslav King and Yugoslav state.

And what about them? Montenegrin state registered it as property of Serbian Orthodox Church.  So, basicaly whats problem, except of demagogy of Montenegrin ministers here and ther, who are frustrated because they cant control Serbian Orthodox Church.

Hm, what you want to tell me? Serbian Orthodox Church was not created 1921. It is the fact. Even between 1766, when Ottoman Sultan, abolished Patriarchate of Peć, there was Serbian Orthodox Church, ie bishoprics who refused to acknowledge its dissolutio. Of course, SOC did not exist in same territory as before 1766, but there she was. So, you are factualy wrong when you say, Serbian Orthodox Church was created 1921. Hope you understood now.

No, it does matter a lot. If you dont Know that Saint Petar of Cetinje and Petar I petrović Njegoš are same person, it matters a lot. It shows you are rather clueless what are you talking about.

Firts, there was no Metropolitan fo Karlovac. There was Metropolitan of Karlovci (Sremski Karlovci, across the Dunav, looking from Novi Sad). And, from point of Church hierarchy, person who is consecrating you holds primacy of jurisdiction over you. So, by accepting epicopal ordination from Metropolitan of Karlovci, Saint Peter recognised his jurisdiction. Metropolitans before Saint Peter were consecrated by Patriarch of Peć. When in 1766, Sultan abolished Patriarchate of Peć, bishops who were not under Ottoman rule refused to recognise dissolution. They gathered under authority of Metropolitan of Krušedol and Karlovci, second see by Authority in Serbian Orthodox Church.

Then why do you discuss in first place?