==Responses to OCA
Autocephaly== ALEXIS I, Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia, signed a [[ tomos]] granting [[ autocephaly]] to the [[ Orthodox Church in America]] on [[ April 10]] , 1970.
The autocephalous Orthodox Churches that recognize the OCA as autocephalous are the [[Church of Russia]], which granted the tomos of autocephaly, the [[Church of Georgia]], the [[Church of Bulgaria]], the [[Church of Poland]], and the [[Church of the Czech Lands and Slovakia]].
Those autocephalous Churches that have not recognized the autocephaly but which have not opposed it are the [[Church of Antioch]], the [[Church of Serbia]], the [[Church of Romania]], and the [[Church of Albania]].
The autocephalous Churches who oppose the OCA’s autocephaly are the [[Church of Constantinople]], the [[Church of Alexandria]], the [[Church of Jerusalem]], the [[Church of Cyprus]], and the [[Church of Greece]]. However, these Churches recognize the OCA as a canonical Church and their representatives concelebrated at the Divine Liturgy for the enthronement of Metropolitan [[Herman (Swaiko) of Washington and New York|Herman]] as Primate of the OCA in 2002.
==Byzantine Responses==The '''Byzantine response to the [[autocephaly]] of the [[OCA]]''' consisted primarily in a number of letters and statements made in the early 1970s by the ancient autocephalous [[patriarchate]]s of the [[Orthodox Church]]—the Churches of [[Church of Constantinople |Constantinople]], [[Church of Alexandria|Alexandria ]], [[Church of Antioch|Antioch]], and [[Church of Jerusalem|Jerusalem]]—along with the [[Church of Greece ]]. Like most autocephalous Orthodox churches worldwide, the Byzantine churches rejected the grant of autocephaly by the [[Church of Russia]] to the American Metropolia (the former name of the OCA), and with the leadership of Patriarch [[Athenagoras I (Spyrou) of Constantinople]], issued various responses detailing canonical, historical and practical arguments against the grant. The primary documents detailing these churches' response were published initially in the ''Orthodox Observer'', the official publication of the [[Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America]], and published in 1972 in book form as ''Russian Autocephaly and Orthodoxy in America: An Appraisal with Decisions and Formal Opinions''. The book also includes an introductory essay by Archbishop [[Iakovos (Coucouzis) of America]], a ''Prolegomena'' Fr. Nicon D. Patrinacos, and an appendix by Metropolitan Emilianos, permanent representative of the [[Church of Constantinople|Ecumenical Patriarchate]] at the World Council of Churches. The authors of the responses of the Churches of Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem and Greece are Pope Nikolaos, Patr. Elias IV, Patr. Benedictos and Abp. Ieronymos, respectively, the [[primate]]s of their respective churches. (All page references below are from this volume.)
Most of the arguments detailed below are shared in the responses of all the churches and of the other essays included in the volume, but the Churches of Constantinople and Greece give the most detailed comments (pp. 30-44 and 53-67, respectively).
*Recognition of autocephaly normally takes time but eventually always comes.
*The OCA's autocephaly promotes Orthodox unity in America.
==Arguments against OCA autocephaly==
*Russian Orthodoxy remains disunified on American soil, remaining under three jurisdictions; the OCA's autocephaly failed to produce unity even for the Russians.
*The issue of unity in the [[diaspora]] had already been referred to the agenda of an upcoming Great and Holy Synod of the Orthodox Churches. Moscow's unilateral move was an affront to the community of the Church. "For this reason we are at a loss to explain the haste shown by the Russian Orthodox Church in announcing as Autocephalous a relatively small section of the Russian Orthodox Diaspora in America, and conferring upon this Church a title disproportionate with reality, after having only recently recognized her jurisdiction" (p. 43).
*The name "The Orthodox Church in America" is a misnomer, as the body only comprises a minority of Orthodox faithful in America and is not representative of Orthodox America, but mainly represents a certain subsection of Slavic Orthodoxy in America (particularly ex-Uniate, Russianized Carpatho-Russians).
*Moscow's act creates confusion regarding the true nature of canonicity.
*Moscow's act is an attempt to extend Soviet influence into America (p. 20).