Talk:Serbian Orthodox Metropolitanate of Australia and New Zealand

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Crossing of wires!)
Line 19: Line 19:
 
:Disregarding the history and justifications for a moment: according to the MCB, it is not the Church of Serbia which must be justified, but the part that broke away (again, justified or otherwise is not at issue).  The arguments of both sides should be placed in its own article, or at the least in the articles of [[Church of Serbia]] and the article for the New Gracanica Metropolitanate (whenever that may be written). {{User:Pistevo/sig}} 22:24, May 21, 2006 (CDT)
 
:Disregarding the history and justifications for a moment: according to the MCB, it is not the Church of Serbia which must be justified, but the part that broke away (again, justified or otherwise is not at issue).  The arguments of both sides should be placed in its own article, or at the least in the articles of [[Church of Serbia]] and the article for the New Gracanica Metropolitanate (whenever that may be written). {{User:Pistevo/sig}} 22:24, May 21, 2006 (CDT)
 
:: Clarified balance!!! - chrisg 2006-05-22-1418 EAST
 
:: Clarified balance!!! - chrisg 2006-05-22-1418 EAST
 +
 +
== Crossing of wires! ==
 +
 +
who added that the schismatics were in Elaine and the Mother Church was in Canberra? '''This is completely reversed!!!!'''

Revision as of 01:55, May 28, 2006

Raskolnic is an exceedingly insulting term. People get killed over it. It should never be used by truely Christ-like people.

chrisg 2006-04-29 : 0254 EAST

Changes

First off, the Patriarchal Diocese has the Serbian name 'EPARHIJA AUSTRALIJSKO-NOVOZELANDSKA', which translates as 'Diocese of Australia and New Zealand'. If it were 'in Australia and New Zealand', it would be 'EPARHIJA U AUSTRALIJI I NOVOM ZELANDU', which it isn't.

Furthermore, removal of Raskolnik and Schismatic serves to airbrush the facts: the 'free church' was a schismatic organisation created by a defrocked bishop. It WAS schismatic, and calling it something else merely legitimises it.

for further info on this, see the blog antiglupost [1]

Regarding the name for the patriarchal diocese - no arguments.
Regarding Free/Schismatic: I would think the term on this article should be to call it by its legal names, ie Free Serbian Orthodox..., perhaps with a small 'formerly schismatic' or something like that - raskolnic is improper simply because it's not an English word. The suitable place for discussing the merits and/or problems of the former diocese would be on its own article, which this article would link to, and would have (consistant with the whole idea of OW) both sides listed. An example of how this would work can be found on the SCCOCA article. — by Pιsτévο talk complaints at 23:18, May 20, 2006 (CDT)

Balance!! chrisg 2006-05-22-1304 EAST

!!! "godless collaborationists" as a balance to 'considered schismatic'?! The balance to this would be 'self-deifying' or something similar!
Disregarding the history and justifications for a moment: according to the MCB, it is not the Church of Serbia which must be justified, but the part that broke away (again, justified or otherwise is not at issue). The arguments of both sides should be placed in its own article, or at the least in the articles of Church of Serbia and the article for the New Gracanica Metropolitanate (whenever that may be written). — by Pιsτévο talk complaints at 22:24, May 21, 2006 (CDT)
Clarified balance!!! - chrisg 2006-05-22-1418 EAST

Crossing of wires!

who added that the schismatics were in Elaine and the Mother Church was in Canberra? This is completely reversed!!!!

Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
Navigation
interaction
Donate

Please consider supporting OrthodoxWiki. FAQs

Toolbox