Talk:Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of Australia, New Zealand and the Philippines

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Sidebox)
m (Sidebox)
Line 30: Line 30:
 
Also, just because a parish listing does not state it, does not mean it isn't happening. Because of the promotion of both ethno-phyletism and ethno-exclusivity, at the same time, by one particular source in Australia, the Antiochian Orthodox Church is particularly careful not to expose its newly joining parishes and missions to the usual polemical invective many have suffered from that source over the last 30 years.  
 
Also, just because a parish listing does not state it, does not mean it isn't happening. Because of the promotion of both ethno-phyletism and ethno-exclusivity, at the same time, by one particular source in Australia, the Antiochian Orthodox Church is particularly careful not to expose its newly joining parishes and missions to the usual polemical invective many have suffered from that source over the last 30 years.  
  
Part of the problem is that the priests using these languages do so when needed, and in differing parishes.  For instance, Father John Vesic may serve in Serbian when he is attending Serbian churches, or when conducting weddings of Serbian-origin couples who request it.   
+
Part of the problem is that the priests using these languages do so when needed, and in differing parishes.  For instance, a priest may serve in Serbian when he is attending Serbian churches, or when conducting weddings of Serbian-origin couples who request it.   
  
Russian and Greek are used at the Bankstown church I serve at, plus Belarus is also used at that church on appropriate occasions.   
+
Russian and Greek are used at two of the churches I serve at, plus Belarus is also used at one of those churches on appropriate occasions.   
  
 
Because of the sensitivity some parishes feel towards the exceedingly negative comments made about them, for not using the "sacred language" exclusively, they may not want their use of other languages advertised under their particular parish listings.
 
Because of the sensitivity some parishes feel towards the exceedingly negative comments made about them, for not using the "sacred language" exclusively, they may not want their use of other languages advertised under their particular parish listings.

Revision as of 07:46, March 9, 2006

Parish Listing

I'm not entirely sure that a listing of parishes on this page is entirely appropriate. First, such a listing is already available on the antiochian.org.au (and antiochian.org.nz websites), and it seems unnecessary to have it here. Second, it doesn't seem to talk about the archdiocese, and seems big enough to have it's own article (perhaps at Antiochian parishes in Australasia or something similar) - one could not do a similar thing with the Greek archdiocese, nor (most likely) with the Serbian dioceses. Third, there is already a number of listings of parishes, albeit by state. Perhaps you'd be able to elucidate on what the parish listing contributes? cheers, --— by Pιsτévο talk complaints at 02:25, February 7, 2006 (CST)

His Eminence invited me to add it. I did. If you as editor don't want it, then I have no control over that. At least I can inform HE that I did as he asked, but was overruled. The other thing is, there is another jurisdiction which has an article on Orthodoxwiki discussing the Antiochian parishes in Australasia and severely understating the number. This listing gives the correct number and location in contravention to that erroneous listing. -- Chrisg 2006 Feb 07 19:50 EAST
Not that I am officially an editor, but in this area especially, I would be inclined to follow the person who has official standing in the archdiocese (ie, in this case, your self), particularly under an archepiscopal request.
Another concern (although mild, and none of my business) was that it would, if anything, show how small the jurisdiction was: previously, the only jurisdictions that have parish listings on their page are bishopless jurisdictions.
Regarding the other jurisdiction, I'm not sure where you're referring to, but I would be happy for you to fix it (and since it was quite possibly my fault anyway...). However, something to keep in mind: the census 2001 figures are quite handy to have, if only as a comparison (since, for example, I'm quite certain that there are far more than 300,000 Greeks in Australia). -- — by Pιsτévο talk complaints at 05:40, February 7, 2006 (CST)

Statistics

Thanks for fixing up the internal link to the new archdiocesan name.

I don't remember precisely where the false figures were. I think it was in the history of Orthodoxy in Australia. I'll look again when I get some more time.

Thanx again

Chris

I'm not sure, but you could have been referring to the statistics article - I tried to clear that one up, removing all confusion, but keeping all detail, hope it worked... -- — by Pιsτévο talk complaints at 15:43, February 7, 2006 (CST)

Sidebox

Regarding the sidebox - going through the parish listings, none of the churches use Belarus, Bulgarian, Greek (modern or Byzantine), Russian, Serbian or Ukrainian.

Also, what is the Eastern Hierarchs organisation alluded to in the article? Haven't heard of them. Are they a pseudo-SCCOCA group, or any eastern tradition (eg. Uniates and Oriental Orthodox)? Also, I tried to make the History sections link better; perhaps more can be fleshed out later. Thanks, — by Pιsτévο talk complaints at 04:42, March 9, 2006 (CST)

Dear Pistevo

I'm sorry. I would like to change the parish listings to reflect whatever you like. However, I do believe that some of the parish listings do state some of this or something similar.

Also, just because a parish listing does not state it, does not mean it isn't happening. Because of the promotion of both ethno-phyletism and ethno-exclusivity, at the same time, by one particular source in Australia, the Antiochian Orthodox Church is particularly careful not to expose its newly joining parishes and missions to the usual polemical invective many have suffered from that source over the last 30 years.

Part of the problem is that the priests using these languages do so when needed, and in differing parishes. For instance, a priest may serve in Serbian when he is attending Serbian churches, or when conducting weddings of Serbian-origin couples who request it.

Russian and Greek are used at two of the churches I serve at, plus Belarus is also used at one of those churches on appropriate occasions.

Because of the sensitivity some parishes feel towards the exceedingly negative comments made about them, for not using the "sacred language" exclusively, they may not want their use of other languages advertised under their particular parish listings.

The archdiocese, qua archdiocese, however, does want it known that it promotes the use of other liturgical languages as the need arises.

If people are going to use this compliance with the Evangelical Commandment against the Antiochian Orthodox, it is better for it to be dealt with at an archdiocesan level, than at a parish level.

You edited out our previous comments about SCCOCA and the reason why it does not work. The only relevant jurisdiction which does not belong to Eastern Hierarchs is the one that caused SCCOCA to fail in the first place, and probably condemned it to ineptitude from the start. Suggesting that Eastern Hierarchs, who are all about working together, and are not about regular dictatorial haranguings, is a pseudo-something, sounds rather like something being spewed about by some Imperial Ethnarch.

Eastern Hierarchs is about the Orthodox working together. They are not there for the self-aggrandisement of some wannabe Federal Minister for Deportations. Their presence is relatively quiet, because they are about being effective, not about being seen in the newspapers.

True Orthodoxy can be skewed by listening to one source alone.

Whether Eastern Hierarchs want a listing in OrthodoxWiki is a matter for them. At this stage they appear to want to work quietly and effectively, and without any fanfare.

Antiochian Orthodox Christianity is vitally interested in healing the wounds of division. The documents of Chabesy show how the Orthodox, both Byzantine and Pre-Chalcedonian, have agreed to work towards healing the wounds of division. It is a shame one jurisdiction in Australia chooses to ignore them and to ignore the rest of Orthodoxy.

For the clean-up of the history box and the other files, many thanks

chrisg 2006-03-10 0241 AEDT

Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
Navigation
interaction
Donate

Please consider supporting OrthodoxWiki. FAQs

Toolbox