Church/Diocese Database


I am currently working on a database for our church/diocese and was wondering if our ideas are already in place elsewhere. If you could answer any of the following questions, it would be greatly appreciated.

What does your church use as a database? 
Is it integrated on a diocese level? 
What features does it have? 
How long has it been in use?



    It is split up by country, but identifies the diocese that church is in. It has contact information for each church, and a map of its location. It's very under used, sadly.
  • I've seen coptic world and it seems great, but still under development. It's current features are not sufficient for us at this time...
  • Thanks for the referal @qawe. Does he have something in place? Or is it in referral to coptic world?
  • @ShareTheLord

    I'm not sure.  Nothing to do with CopticWorld.  But he runs the LACopts website so he seems to be very tech savvy, and they are a very advanced diocese so they are bound to have something like that.
  • This is probably not the right discussion for this question but maybe it is.  A young Russian Orthodox friend of mine recently told me that Copts are NOT Orthodox-that only EASTERN Orthodox can correctly use that title!  That seems absolutely ludicrous to me and I told her Copts ARE Orthodox-they are part of the Oriental branch and she is with the Eastern branch and they certainly are allowed to call themselves Orthodox.  Why did I try to disagree with a Russian!???  She became kind of rabid at that point and said "anyone is ALLOWED to CALL  themselves anything they want to , but the Eastern branch is the ONLY Orthodox church!"  ??????
  • @kassiane

    Well, it is true that we are not in communion, and communion is how unity is expressed.  So she does have the right to say that we are not one (yet).  According to the Creed, there is only One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic (Orthodox) Church.  So strictly speaking, she's right if she only wants to call her Church Orthodox.  (If we were already one, what would be the point of working so hard to restore communion?)

    The better question to your friend is - SHOULD the two Churches re-unite?  i.e. do they have the same faith?  The Joint Commissions decided this in the 1980s and 1990s, does she accept the results of the Joint Commissions, and why or why not?  If she doesn't accept the Joint Commissions, then that's also why she doesn't buy the "two branches of Orthodoxy" idea that was cemented by said commission.
  • I can tell you that young lady does NOT accept ANYTHING unless it is 100% ok'd by the Eastern branch of Orthodoxy!  I tried to explain to her that the "Core " beliefs are actually the same-it was a misunderstanding in the wording or phrasing (which happens to ME secularly on a regular basis for the last several years!  I used to think communication was my strong point, but I can say something and yet people get a totally different meaning from what I was trying to convey!)  Anyway, she said that"CHURCH  i.e. Russian/Greek branch does NOT make mistakes and if it truly WAS a misunderstanding then they would have long ago become one church and since they have NOT, the COPTS are automatically wrong because the Eastern Orthodox hierarchy NEVER makes a mistake!"   She reminds me of those evangelical protestant bumper stickers I used to see in the 80s that said "Jesus said it, I believe it, and THAT settles it!"  Substitute the words Eastern Orthodox for Jesus and you have her mindset.  All I know is when I started  accessing so many interesting "Orthodox" web sites and videos, I became aware that there apparently ARE different branches of the ORTHODOX church-at least that is the recognized terminology-Eastern and Oriental , with the Copts being part of the Oriental branch.  Maybe that is not what actual members of these faiths call themselves but it is apparently their public titles.  And from I can see the Copts go WAY back as in back to the real beginning so it would seem to me the term Orthodox would be correct.
  • I will reply, haven't forgotten.
  • edited January 2016

    Your friend is sadly the product of poorly educated and arrogant laypersons and clergy. They have been told things and take them as fact, without learning about the topic for themselves. And also something, as a convert, the Coptic church does is very, very poor of explaining and teaching to converts. That is why I have studied a lot on the topic because the same thing happened to me when I was ignorant of the differences between Eastern and Oriental Orthodox churches.

    That attitude is NOT the majority of Eastern Orthodox Christians, especially here in North America. Many Eastern Orthodox Christians, laypersons and clergy, have helped us with promoting funds for our new church.

    Here is a wonderful podcast thats about 7-8 years old from Ancient Faith Radio, which is an Eastern Orthodox media outlet. It's a great source for us as Oriental Orthodox to show to our Eastern Orthodox brothers and sisters that we are much closer than many ignorant members of Eastern Orthodoxy believe.

    You can search through podcasts for St. Vladimir's Seminary in New York, which caters to both Eastern and Oriental Orthodox christians. It's a great resource to use because it's largely Eastern Orthodox clergy who disagree with that, "Eastern Orthodox are without error" mindset that infiltrates so many converts to the Eastern Orthodox church.
  • Thanks.  I love Ancient Faith Radio and frequently listen to some of their pod casts  Sadly, this young lady is a Russian citizen married to an American.  She has been in the US for almost 10 years and is younger than my daughter.  I love her dearly, but she is the MOST rigid person I have EVER seen of ANY AGE! 
  • Italian_Copt, excellent response and good find with the podcast. I was not finished with my response but it follows the same line. 

    The EO church have a problem with the Estonian Orthodox are Orthodox? (There are actually 2 Estonian Orthodox Churches. One under Constantinople and one under Russia. Both don't recognize the other Estonian Orthodox Church). Then there is the Macedonian Orthodox Church which is officially not in communion with any EO but they interact much between Bulgarian Orthodox, Greek Orthodox, and others. Then there are Old Calenderists that claim all mainstream EO are heretics but the EO have not officially removed them. Then there is Jerusalem and Antioch who closed communication with each other over jurisdiction issues. The list goes on and on. There is no such thing as a monolithic EO body. They are 14 autocephalous churches (and one in question) who fight with each other, who have crossed their own boundaries and who disagree on theology. But all of this does not make them heterodox or unorthodox. If the EO can do this within their own body, it's not so far fetched that they can do this with the OO. This is why most EO do not consider OO as heretics or heterodox. We share so much common practices (liturgy, vestments, sacraments) and theology (anti-iconclasm, soteriology, eschatology) and even saints. The idea that we are different because of Chalcedon is just poor logic. 

    Then there are so many issues with Chalcedon that there isn't one EO response. So if your friend is coming with this "only 7 councils define Orthodoxy", she does not know what she is talking about. 

    If she gives you specific objections that make the OO heterodox and you want to discuss it here for a detailed answer, let us know.

    Finally, as you have stated multiple times that she is a rigid person, it is best not to waste your time with her theology. The Holy Spirit tells us in 2 Timothy 2:14-16, "Keep reminding God's people on these things. Warn them before God against quarreling with words; it is of no value, and only ruins those who listen....Avoid godless chatter because those who indulge in it become more and more ungodly." 
  • I would like to agree with all the responses here.  No more needs to be said.
  • I'm back.  Thanks for all the responses. 
Sign In or Register to comment.