Talk:Episcopal Vicariate of Great Britain and Ireland (Patriarchal Exarchate for Orthodox Parishes of Russian Tradition in Western Europe, Patriarchate of Constantinople)

Untitled
Dear Dcn Andrew, The title of this article is not adequate - there are potentially many 'episcopal vicariates' of the Exarchate. According to the Exarchate's own statutes, a particular episcopal vicariate is defined by 'geographical territory'. Since THIS episcopal vicariate is defined by 'Great Britain and Ireland', this geographical specification must be included in the title of the article. At present, the title is incomplete - it is like having an entry on 'the Russian Orthodox Diocese'. The title is incomplete and must be supplemented.

Also there are NO official documents of the Exarchate in which this vicariate is given the title 'Episcopal Vicariate of Orthodox Parishes of Russian Tradition in Western Europe'. So it is a completely unofficial title. It is a cumbersome shorthand which should not be the title of an encyclopedia article.

Best, M


 * *shrug* I agree that it's an inadequate descriptor.  It's also the only name I've seen used for this group.  Considering that the article was originally titled by its creator Diocese of Amphipolis, this would at least seem to be an improvement.  Perhaps when the Exarchate officially incorporates the group under some particular name, it can be updated.


 * Are there any other vicariates within the Exarchate? &mdash; A.S. Damick  talk contribs 14:36, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

To be honest, I don't know re other vicariates.

Within the Exarchate, it is the 'vicariate of Great Britain and Ireland'. But outside the exarchate, we need to add the exarchate's own tag. That would give us something like: Then we would have 'The Episcopal Vicariate of Great Britain and Ireland of Orthodox Parishes of Russian Tradition in Western Europe' - but that's so unwieldy it's almost as long as the article itself...

It's not even as if the vicariate is the 'vicariate of Amphipolis'... Perhaps their inability to give themselves a proper name may be taken as informal evidence against their 'local ecclesiology'? :-)

I agree re update.

Best, M


 * Give 'em time! :)  Unfortunately, there are a goodly number of established dioceses in the world whose names have nothing to do with their actual geographic locations.  I'm continually distressed by all the language of "local church" used to describe ecclesiastical organizations which really do not seem to have any boundaries at all.  &mdash; A.S. Damick  talk contribs 14:59, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Dear Dn. Damick,

I'm not sure of this latest change of title - the Exarchate is defined everywhere in its own literature as an exarchate of 'Russian tradition'. Similarly, whenever the title of the Vicariate is presented in full in its own literature, it is always presented as a 'vicariate of the exarchate of ... Russian tradition'. I cannot see any official document in which the Vicariate is ever introduced as simply 'the Episcopal Vicariate of Great Britain and Ireland'. (I also know that the bishops and archbishop of Thyateira would go mental if they found the Vicariate calling itself that without qualification.)

As ever, I appreciate how cumbersome the title of this article is - and I certainly don't advocate giving it the Vicariate's full title of 'vicariate ... of the exarchate of ...'. Can I suggest that you add '(Exarchate of Russian Tradition)' (or some similar locution) after 'Episcopal Vicariate of Great Britain and Ireland'? For, as it stands, the title of the article doesn't discriminate which 'episcopal vicariate of Great Britain and Ireland' is being talked about, &c.

Best, Maxim662

New long title for article
I'm not certain that the move, made today, to the new title for this article, is helpful. It's now the highly cumbersome "Episcopal Vicariate of Great Britain and Ireland (Patriarchal Exarchate for Orthodox Parishes of Russian Tradition in Western Europe, Patriarchate of Constantinople)". Is this really what we want to settle on? -Antonios aigyptos 20:15, 3 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree that it is long and cumbersome; and I'm certainly not dogmatic that it must be this long title. But what else is there?


 * The title of the article needs to be the formal title of the group. But 'Episcopal Vicaraite of Great Britain and Ireland' is essentially an abbreviation, and presumes the context of Russian Church jurisdictions in Britain. Also, it is not even this group's own preferred form of self-description. As such, I really don't think that that title is adequate for the article.


 * Somehow, I think, one needs to specify that it belongs to the Exarchate.


 * I think that part of the problem is that there just is no short formal way of saying this. (This is also, I think, a telling feature about the ecclesiological constitution of this group.)


 * One thing I would be in favour of would be merging the Paris Exarchate article with the Vicariate article. That is something the Vicariate's web-page suggests to me: when they are pushed for a short-title, they call themselves "exarchate-uk". Within an enlarged Exarchate article, a section on 'Episcopal Vicariate of Great Britain and Ireland' would be fine, since the context would make sense.


 * What do you think?


 * Best, Maxim662 11:20, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Possibly, yes. I take on board your comments on the long title. It might be an idea to move the whole entry on the vicariate into the article on the Exarchate, but let's give this some further thought before we do. Is this going to make the Exarchate article too nested? (i.e. we'll have the vicariate text as a subsection of that article, but the vicariate text itself has its own subsection, for its parish listing. Is this too many subsections-within-subsections?)

&mdash; Antonios Aigyptos talk  13:45, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't think there's a problem about nesting... there are other articles on, erm, similar topics that seem to have significantly more nesting than the Vicariate and Exarchate pages (even when combined). At the end of the day, the headings will only go down to level 2 or 3, which I don't think is a problem. Best, Maxim662 14:13, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


 * In that case, why don't we do it. The vicariate doesn't seem large enough to warrant a separate article, and combining the two would fill out the pretty scant contents of the exarchate article in its current form.


 * Unless you object, I'll consolodate them together this afternoon (I've already begun compiling them together on my machine), and then we (and others, of course) can fiddle about with the combined product.


 * &mdash; Antonios Aigyptos talk  14:18, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Merging with Exarchate article
Following our discussion above, I've merged this article's contents into the Patriarchal Exarchate for Orthodox Parishes of Russian Tradition in Western Europe article, as a subsection. The article in its new subsection form is essentially the same as the latest version here; only a few elements have been changed to account for its new location (i.e. links, wording in reference to Exarchate, which is now described on same page).

I'd suggest that any future edits be made to the entry in its new location, not on this article -- and we can use that talk page for discussion. Assuming there are no problems, we can turn this article into a redirect in a day or so. &mdash; Antonios Aigyptos talk  15:08, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Have spent some time on this today, and have taken care of sorting out various redirects across the system. I think it's safe to go ahead and turn this page into a redirect. &mdash; Antonios Aigyptos talk  21:21, 4 September 2006 (UTC)