This template was considered for deletion on 2018 September 4. The result of the discussion was "keep". |
Christianity: Eastern O. / Oriental O. Template‑class | |||||||||||||
|
Could someone elaborate on those asterisks? For instance, please point out, what other established Churches do not recognize the autonomy of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.
I realize that such info should be self-evident from the articles, but as the articles are currently so incomplete, we need to figure this out within the discussion of the template. TIA, -- Irpen 08:59, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Please do not confuse the lack of canonicity with the lack of recognition of the Autonomous (Autocephalous) status. For instance, no one doubts the canonical stabding of the UOC(MP) or OCA but some churches, mainly Constantinople, tend to not recognize autonomy or autocephaly of any church unless such status is received from Constantinople itself. As per this the UOC (or the OCA) remains a fully canonical church body but those that do not recognize their autonomous (Autocephalous) status, simply consider them part of ROC.
At the same time, the non-canonical churches, like UOC-KP, UAOC, Bessarabia, ROCOR (going to restore its status this May but not yet) cannot be universally called "Orthodox" no matter how they call themselves since lack of canonical standing is incompatible with the status of the body to call itself "the Orthodox church". This does not make them illegitimate since they are all properly registered with the civil authorities, but only bodies that can be unquestionably called "an Orthodox Church" can be listed in the {{ Orthodoxy}}. Others still deserve their articles and controversies can be mentioned to be sure. Whatever grievances there are against ROC, they also can be covered, but we cannot list those in the table because calling these churches "Orthodox" is a POV. To take this analogy one step further, if several of us organize the Ortodox Church of Wikipedians and register it a non-profit in Florida, the state of WMF, this would also be an organization with "orthodox" in the name. It would not qualify to be listed here even as "not universally recognized". -- Irpen 03:35, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that when alone at the bottom of an article, that is without any other footer, the Eastern Orthodox Church footer does not collapse when {{Eastern Orthodox Church footer|collapsed}} is used. Veverve ( talk) 07:50, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
This template was considered for deletion on 2018 September 4. The result of the discussion was "keep". |
Christianity: Eastern O. / Oriental O. Template‑class | |||||||||||||
|
Could someone elaborate on those asterisks? For instance, please point out, what other established Churches do not recognize the autonomy of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.
I realize that such info should be self-evident from the articles, but as the articles are currently so incomplete, we need to figure this out within the discussion of the template. TIA, -- Irpen 08:59, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Please do not confuse the lack of canonicity with the lack of recognition of the Autonomous (Autocephalous) status. For instance, no one doubts the canonical stabding of the UOC(MP) or OCA but some churches, mainly Constantinople, tend to not recognize autonomy or autocephaly of any church unless such status is received from Constantinople itself. As per this the UOC (or the OCA) remains a fully canonical church body but those that do not recognize their autonomous (Autocephalous) status, simply consider them part of ROC.
At the same time, the non-canonical churches, like UOC-KP, UAOC, Bessarabia, ROCOR (going to restore its status this May but not yet) cannot be universally called "Orthodox" no matter how they call themselves since lack of canonical standing is incompatible with the status of the body to call itself "the Orthodox church". This does not make them illegitimate since they are all properly registered with the civil authorities, but only bodies that can be unquestionably called "an Orthodox Church" can be listed in the {{ Orthodoxy}}. Others still deserve their articles and controversies can be mentioned to be sure. Whatever grievances there are against ROC, they also can be covered, but we cannot list those in the table because calling these churches "Orthodox" is a POV. To take this analogy one step further, if several of us organize the Ortodox Church of Wikipedians and register it a non-profit in Florida, the state of WMF, this would also be an organization with "orthodox" in the name. It would not qualify to be listed here even as "not universally recognized". -- Irpen 03:35, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that when alone at the bottom of an article, that is without any other footer, the Eastern Orthodox Church footer does not collapse when {{Eastern Orthodox Church footer|collapsed}} is used. Veverve ( talk) 07:50, 3 December 2019 (UTC)