WikiProject iconChristianity: Eastern O. Template‑class
WikiProject iconThis template is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
TemplateThis template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Taskforce icon
This template is supported by WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy.

Which image version to use?[edit]

This is an extremely minor issue, but what can I say, I'm a perfectionist, so I'm going to bring it up anyway...

So, first of all, I'm glad there is broad agreement that the Byzantine mosaic of Christ from the Deesis in Hagia Sophia should be used as the image for this sidebar. It really is the perfect choice. But there are several different pictures of it on Wikipedia. So, which one should we use? The one I originally picked for the sidebar is this one (let's call it "version 1"). Later, User:Greco22 replaced it with another one (let's call it "version 2"). On my screen, version 1 has much better colour contrast and is brighter as a thumbnail. On the other hand, version 2 has a much higher resolution, of course, but since we're using it as a thumbnail, I think colour brightness matters more than resolution. That is why I am inclined to go with version 1. @Greco22: what do you think? Ohff (talk) 08:37, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well maybe its a matter of different pc screens In my case the second appears clearer (higher resolution as you said), same when I had a look from my mobile. The first one in my case seemed a little blurred Greco22 (talk) 10:29, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. It probably is due to different screens. The first picture doesn't look blurred at all on my screen. Let's wait and see what other people say. Meanwhile, when I have the chance to use different computers, I'll have a look at the two versions to see how they show up... Ohff (talk) 00:44, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Canonicity of OCA[edit]

@Veverve:: Out of the 14 autocephalous churches, which does not recognize the OCA as canonical? Vypr (talk) 05:27, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Vypr: see Orthodox Church in America#Recognition of autocephaly Veverve (talk) 07:04, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Veverve: Canonicity and autocephaly recognition are two different things. No jurisdiction considers the OCA out of communion with them. No canonical jurisdiction considers the OCA to be schismatic. Vypr (talk) 16:05, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Vypr: I removed mentions of canonicity, because I feel it would lead to an endless debate between editors, i.e. not just a civil exchange like we have, but an infamous chaotic and unpleasant situation which would drag on for years. Veverve (talk) 17:06, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing Canonicity of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church[edit]

@Chad The Goatman wants proof that the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is considered canonical. No one has ceased recognizing the Ukrainian Orthodox Church over its declaration of independence from the Moscow Patriarchate. Meanwhile, I found some links proving that the UOC still concelebrates and maintains relations with all Orthodox churches that they were in communion with before the declaration of independence. The Ukrainian Orthodox Church is a canonical Orthodox church.

A few recent concelebrations:

Greetings on Metropolitan Onufriy's enthronement anniversary this year:


Czech Lands and Slovakia:







Various supportive letters and miscellaneous events:

Multiple hierarchs supporting Kyiv Pechersk Lavra UOC brotherhood:

Romanian Orthodox Church recognizes UOC jurisdiction over Romanian parishes in Ukraine:

UOC hierarch meeting Patriarch of Jerusalem:

Archbishop Anastasios of Albania sends letter of support to UOC hierarch convicted of a crime:

Archbishop Michael of Prague speaking out against UOC oppression:

Bulgarian hierarchs support Kyiv Pechersk Lavra UOC brotherhood:

Antiochian hierarch served in UOC parish in Germany:

Metropolitan Joanikije of Montenegro and the Littoral says they pray and worry for UOC:

Hierarch of the Jerusalem Patriarchate condemns systematic persecution of UOC:

TRe OCA receives a UOC community formed in the United States: Nepsis2 (talk) 08:08, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, while these sources are looked somewhat reaffirming of what you wrote. That's fine. But, there are a several problems that will does not change my point:
1. You still did not find any sources of the Ecumenical Patriarch, and the other two Greek Orthodox Churches, abandoning it's rival Church? To this Ukrainian Orthodox Church?
2. Russian Orthodox Church are may still treated them as other of their communion, as a 'self-governing'/autonomous church. Despite this Ukrainian Orthodox Church cutting ties with them, as a independent/separate/technically autocephalous church.
3. These sources by this church you are defending. Does seems to treating this church as canonical by the majority Orthodox Churches, including the ROC. But it does not means, they also recognizing this church' as spiritually independent from ROC as this time! Due of them, still wants to be good relations of ROC and EOC to a extant.
4. Only one Orthodox Church (Georgia) fully recognized this Ukrainian Orthodox Church, as canonically separate/independent (and technically autocephalous) from the Russian Orthodox Church. While the others churches, except the four Orthodox Churches, are still not recognized UOC as independent.
5. The sources you providing are all from the same website (aka this Ukrainian Orthodox Church), rather than from the other Orthodox Churches' websites to backup your claims, reciprocally?
6. It does not matter that whether or not, that this UOC did cut ties with ROC. Since last year. It still perceived as cowardice and weak by nearly all Native Ukrainians and its government. As, by declaring any other name that is not autocephalous or merged with their strongly contender Orthodox Church. They still give them penalties or so-called 'discriminated' by the native government they meant to give religious service to. All while due of sub-regional arm conflict is still happening in the secular (or secularly religious) reality.
7. Finally, you still accidentally proving my point, that the majorly of the Orthodox Churches are still treated as canonical, despite the top two serious Orthodox Churches says otherwise. So, I may no choice, but reverted back.
Note: The reason I did not reply you back, at that time. Due of I being continuing education, and somewhat confuse of your idea of how this is not against yourself? Chad The Goatman (talk) 02:38, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Chad, I used the UOC's website because the information is easiest to find. I collected those links as a courtesy, because the burden of proof is not on me. The burden of proof is on you to show where anyone in the Orthodox world specifically refuses to recognize the UOC as Orthodox after it declared independence from the Moscow Patriarchate. You will not find it because no one has made such a claim. Nepsis2 (talk) 09:02, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Easiest to find"? Are you trying to be sound like lazier, than I used to do in the past??? You can go to these Orthodox churches' official websites, here in Wikipedia?!? Or finding Eastern Orthodox websites, as means to further proving your point. Where I wanted to make sure, it is reciprocate secondary sources is reaffirming the UOC's claim canonicity. Despite over the past few years in this church's history.
Once again, my original problem with your reasoning was that four Orthodox churches, including the Ecumenical Patriarchate. Still no longer recognized this Ukrainian Orthodox Church as canonical, instead recognize the post-merged and EOC's approve one since the past five years. Whereas the other Orthodox churches, except Georgian Orthodox Church/Orthodox Church of Georgia are still recognized it as one of the ROC's self-governing/autonomous churches. Instead, implying by your own writing, that these four Orthodox churches are magically now recognized this church, and abandoning their post-merged one.
Also, stop reverting my edits. Regardless, if I did looking at few of the sources. Until this can be solve, eventually easy?!? Chad The Goatman (talk) 03:34, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'll stop reverting your edits when you stop making unfounded claims. You do not understand several key pieces of information about the Orthodox Church, including the fact that the Patriarch of Constantinople's unwillingness to recognize the jurisdiction of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in Ukraine does not mean he considers Metropolitan Onufriy et al. to be invalid clergy. Patriarch Bartholomew's opinion is not decisive over other churches.
I used the UOC's website because it is the most comprehensive collection of information about itself. Sometimes the relevant information isn't available on the website of the other church. Nepsis2 (talk) 20:27, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you of stop reverting my edits. Since I did remove the part that offends you and your religious team...
Claims? I just speculated from a non-(religiously) Eastern Orthodox POV, about any available updates or changes within your presumed affiliation to that Christian denomination. Heavily due of how this armed conflict is still affect with your faith, as of this time?
For the rest of your first paragraph. EOC and other three Orthodox Churches seems to have their holy right to declared that Ukrainian Orthodox Church's clergy as theologically invalid by recognizing their post-merged Ukrainian Orthodox Church, which is supported by the Ukrainian Orthodox population by this point, over the near majority recognized yet ambiguous 'spiritually independent' Ukrainian Orthodox Church.
The second paragraph still sounds unfortunately weak excuse of not doing research, as part of Wikipedia citation standards...
I really don't want to hate you like last time from three years ago. But, I just wanted to let you know, that this is a secular website, where religious biases is highly discouraged. Chad The Goatman (talk) 00:52, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 27 November 2023[edit]

The independent Western Orthodox Churches are Miaphysite, not Chalcedonian. They are not part of Eastern Orthodoxy, nor can be considered an independent movement. AntiVaticanII (talk) 02:10, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America[edit]

Shouldn't the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America be classified under semi-autonomous? Coquidragon (talk) 22:31, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spiritual independance[edit]

What is that? What does it mean spiritual independence? Does it mean that UOC was "spiritually dominated" by the Russian Church? What were the characteristics of such domination? Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 14:58, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]