72
edits
Changes
→Inconsistency...
To then go onto say, after having cast doubts on the veracity of the range of numbers to conclude: "Despite these sobering figures, however, the OCA's dioceses of the West and South, as well as many parishes in other dioceses, have reported steady growth." Two questions immediately come to mind - how are those diocesan numbers to be trusted, and does that supposed growth demonstrating parish population shift or members new to the OCA altogether?
Right now these numbers are so conflicted someone needs to do some more research...{{unsigned|ASimpleSinner}} : That is true. All we have on OrthodoxWiki are citations of numbers given elsewhere. We try to represent the range as much as possible from official and/or credible sources. Whether we can trust the official numbers or not is a difficult question. Since OrthodoxWiki is mainly an encyclopedia rather than a journal of original research, we generally rely on others' research. Perhaps you might like to research the question and publish the results, which could then be cited on OrthodoxWiki. —[[User:ASDamick|<font size="3.5" color="green" face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">Fr. Andrew</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ASDamick|<font color="red">talk</font>]]</sup> <small>[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|<font color="black">contribs</font>]]</small> 07:41, August 15, 2007 (PDT) ==Inconsistency...== I don't understand how the article can at once, in the beginning, objectively claim that the OCA is an autocephalous church, while in seeming contradiction a few sentences later recognize that most of the autocephalous churches of the Communion do not recognize the OCA's autocephaly. Isn't this a clear self-contradiction? If Orthodox Wiki is to represent the common view of the Church at broad, should not the first sentence about the OCA being autocephalous be removed?[[User:Deusveritasest|Deusveritasest]] 08:13, May 24, 2008 (UTC) :I see no inconsistentcy. There is a difference between being autocephalous and having that autocephaly universally recognized. Moreover, there is no "common view" of the Church around the world. The article on [[Responses to OCA autocephaly]] gives details as to those Churches that recognize the OCA's autocephaly (five autocephalous Churches), those who have not recognized but also have not objected (four auotepehlaous Churches), and those who object (five autocephalous Churches). (I am ''not'', BTW, a priest in the OCA.) --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 13:14, May 24, 2008 (UTC) ::I really don't understand. How can we on this objective level say that the OCA is autocephalous if the majority of the Orthodox churches do not recognize this statement? [[User:Deusveritasest|Deusveritasest]] 09:47, May 27, 2008 (UTC) :::Well, because they are autocephalous (i.e. elect own head of Church). The recognition of that is, really, neither here nor there: because they elect their own head, they are autocephalous. The recognition of their autocephaly is a separate matter. — by [[User:Pistevo|<font color="green">Pιs</font><font color="gold">τévο</font>]] <sup>''[[User talk:Pistevo|<font color="blue">talk</font>]]'' ''[[User talk:Pistevo/dev/null|<font color="red">complaints</font>]]''</sup> at 10:53, May 27, 2008 (UTC) ::::So then what does it even mean for a church to not recognize the autocephaly of the OCA? Does this actually indicate that they view the nature of the Church differently, for example viewing the OCA as an autonomous jurisdiction of the Russian Church? Or do these churches actually recognize that the OCA functions as an autocephalous body, and rather their unrecognition means something different? [[User:Deusveritasest|Deusveritasest]] 21:20, April 29, 2009 (UTC) As to the majority of Orthodox Churches not accepting, this is somewhat misleading. If one numerates the autocephalous Churches as individual bodies, five of them (35.7%) accept it, four of them (28.6%) take no position, and five of them (35.7%) reject it. In other words, an equal number of Churches have accepted it as have rejected it. We might also numerate the Churches by their respective memberships. Using membership figures from a Greek source, Bishop Kallistos Ware’s ''The Orthodox Church'', the Churches that formally accept the OCA’s autocephaly have a combined membership of between 63.85-98.85 million (either 60 or 70%); those that have neither accepted nor rejected, 25.96 million (25 o5 19%); and those that formally reject the OCA’s autocephaly, 15.86 million (either 15 or 11%). The variation depends upon whether one takes the smaller or larger figure for the Russian Church. --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 02:34, May 28, 2008 (UTC) == Name == I removed the paragraph devoted to the idiosyncratic view of one retired OCA bishop. --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 13:10, May 24, 2008 (UTC) I concur, Father Lev. the paragraph has bothered me for some time. [[User:Wsk|Wsk]] 14:20, May 24, 2008 (UTC) : Thanks. I think I was probably the one who originally put that bit in there, as it was causing a small bit of stir at the time (can't remember when that was), but of course has turned out to be pretty minor in retrospect. —[[User:ASDamick|<font size="3.5" color="green" face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">Fr. Andrew</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ASDamick|<font color="red">talk</font>]]</sup> <small>[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|<font color="black">contribs</font>]] <font face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')</font></small> 13:44, May 29, 2008 (UTC) == Metropolitan's style == I know that at some point the metropolitans of the OCA used the style "Metropolitan of North America and Canada" (which is of course something of a geographic oddity), since (I believe) it was complained about by people like Schmemann. Does anyone have a citation for this? It seems to have been revisioned (so to speak) from the official website. —[[User:ASDamick|<font size="3.5" color="green" face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">Fr. Andrew</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ASDamick|<font color="red">talk</font>]]</sup> <small>[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|<font color="black">contribs</font>]] <font face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')</font></small> 13:16, January 31, 2009 (UTC) : Addendum: I found one data point on this: In Serafim Surrency's ''The Quest for Orthodox Church Unity in America'' (p. 36), he lists the signature of Metr. Platon in 1927 on the document that established the [[American Orthodox Catholic Church]] as "Metropolitan of North America and Canada." : Anyone know at what point this style ceased to be used? —[[User:ASDamick|<font size="3.5" color="green" face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">Fr. Andrew</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ASDamick|<font color="red">talk</font>]]</sup> <small>[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|<font color="black">contribs</font>]] <font face="Adobe Garamond Pro, Garamond, Georgia, Times New Roman">('''[[User:ASDamick/Wiki-philosophy|THINK!]]''')</font></small> 14:09, January 31, 2009 (UTC) ::This doesn't answer your question, but it adds more information about the use in a title of the expression "North America and Canada". In OCA's book ''Orthodox America 1974 - 1976'' there is a copy in the appendix of the parish listing from the American Orthodox Messenger of 1918. The title of this listing is ''The Orthodox Diocese of North America and Canada''. So, the expression was in use at least as early as 1918. The parish listing shows His Grace, Evdokim as Archbishop of Aleutian Islands and North America. I could not find any other reference of the expression in the book.[[User:Wsk|Wsk]] 19:35, January 31, 2009 (UTC)
