The list is ok as a resource, but it would be wise to not pay too much attention to the ecclesiology expounded there. From the webpage given above:
Although not in itself in communion with most of the other Orthodox jurisdictions, the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia (ROCOR) is in communion with the Church of Serbia and Church of Jerusalem, both of which are in communion with the other autocephalous and autonomous Orthodox churches, thus giving it semi-legitimate status.
Given that belief, it turns out that many saints throughout our history were only "semi-canonical" and "semi-legitimate" (Sts. Gregory the Theologian, John Chrysostom, Photius, Mark of Ephesus, etc.)! And that's not the only example of questionable ecclesiology; there's also stuff like:
This is an excellent definition of "canonical" from the web site of a canonical Eastern Orthodox parish church: "Christ the Saviour Church is a member of the American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese, a canonical, autonomous jurisdiction of the Eastern Orthodox Church, headquartered in Johnstown, Pennsylvania, and under the protection of His All-Holiness, BARTHOLOMEW I, pictured here. As 'the Archbishop of Constantinople, New Rome, and Ecumenical Patriarch,' every canonical local or worldwide Orthodox Church is in full communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch." -Source
That is an error called neo-papal-patriarchalism
, and it has been trying to force it's way into Orthodox thought for over a thousand years. But the Orthodox Church has never taught that a Church has to be
in communion with the Ecumenical Patriarchate (or any other See or Bishop) to be Orthodox. Rather, the Orthodox belief is, as St. Justin Popovich said:
For the bishop and the faithful gathered around him are the expression and manifestation of the Church as the Body of Christ, especially in the Holy Liturgy: the Church is Apostolic and Catholic only by virtue of its bishops, insofar as they are the heads of true ecclesiastical units, the dioceses. At the same time, the other, historically later and variable forms of church organisation of the Orthodox Church: the metropolias, archdioceses, patriarchates, pentarchias, autocephalies, autonomies, etc., however many there may be or shall be, cannot have and do not have a determining and decisive significance in the conciliar system of the Orthodox Church. Furthermore, they may constitute an obstacle in the correct functioning of the conciliar principle if they obstruct and reject the episcopal character and structure of the Church and of the Churches. Here, undoubtedly, is to be found the primary difference between Orthodox and papal ecclesiology. - On the Summoning of the Great Council of the Orthodox Church
I apologize if this seems overly polemical. I can understand discussions of canonicity and validity, as for example between the OCA, MP, and ROCOR. But I think neo-papal-patriarchalism is a whole different creature.
EDITED the first sentence to sound less polemical.