Talk:Athanasius of Alexandria

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Quotes..[edit]

Sorry, I placed in the full quote of letters of Athanasius..... but was not signed in,,,, 79.**.** .*****........ MacOfJesus (talk) 19:00, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

The latest quote, I placed in from the Letters to Serapion of Thmuis [359-360 A.D.], contains Athanasius' words and refers to "The Catholic Church"....... This term referring to church of adherence to the Apostilic tradition was used in earliest times, even going back to the First Centre of Christianity at Antioch....... The head was referred to as "Patriarch".... This point may clear up confusion on the term/s used here and indeed in other Article Pages..... MacOfJesus (talk) 18:57, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

@Bernard Mc Nally: I removed excessive quotations. Wikipedia guidelines are against such a practice (see: WP:QUOTEFARM). We have a whole separate project, Wikiquote dedicated to such quotes. Vanjagenije (talk)

However, these few quotes only a few were added by me, are, I feel, essential for the visitor to the page to get a clear idea of what Athanasius was "on-about"....... I kept mine to a minimum.... MacOfJesus (talk) 15:14, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

If the objection is about excessive quotations, then, to remove all is surely depleting the page..... MacOfJesus (talk) 15:31, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Do keep in mind that Athanasius was a prolific writer of letters to the Emperors who would like to kill him, and to his Church at Alexandria and to the other Bishops in his area of North Africa..... to the Monks and to other Church leaders outlining his position..... So, these are as much part of the History of the man, as are the actual accounts of his activities in time...... He wrote in Coptic, Latin and Greek..... So the Article Page, now, is unfinished....... Hence, this is a discouragement to attempt again to put his writings in order..... Admittedly, there were many quotes..... but, then how can we, who take the time and research in his original languages, do the page justice.... ???? MacOfJesus (talk) 14:35, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Maybe it is time, therefore, to withdraw...... MacOfJesus (talk) 20:29, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

@Bernard Mc Nally: You have to understand that this is encyclopedic article. And we have certain rules for writing articles (like aformentioned WP:QUOTEFARM). Direct quoting should be used minimally, because it does not belong tho the encyclopedic writing style. Instead, you should retell his (relevant) views and opinions in your own words. Vanjagenije (talk) 14:27, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

I kept, strictly, to the exact referenced word that was verifiable by sources all researched and quoted...... keeping my opinion out of the writing..... as that would not be encyclopaedic or of the article page..... Athanasius' many writings would be difficult to set in the Article Page without giving my slant / account / view...... Hence, it would not be worthy of the Article Page under the heading Quotes.... MacOfJesus (talk) 18:31, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

His letter: "Festal Letters" to his Church is unique and reads as though it were written yesterday..... There are good Encyclopaedic accounts and there are very poor accounts.... the poor ones give personal opinion ....... Some years ago I found this Article Page in disarray and challenged it and eventually the well researched but sourced from less than benign reasons was removed and we began again.... It took a lot of research.... But if a section is going to be present entitled: Quotes..... then it should be that and not a personal summery.... If you look at the historical accounts I researched and entered, only the very best accounts and accurate I used..... MacOfJesus (talk) 20:19, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

@Bernard Mc Nally: No, we don't need a section titled "quotes", that would be against WP:QUOTEFARM. Quotes without explanation are useless for an encyclopedic article (see WP:QUOTEFARM: Consider minimizing the length of a quotation by paraphrasing). I am not talking about writing your own opinion. I'm talking about paraphrasing Athanasius' opinions and views in your own words, but wp:neutrally. Vanjagenije (talk) 21:47, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

I would agree....... but what title would you use for it??? ....... what heading...... ????? ...... I am discouraged from beginning again if it is going to be deleted or if others do not "like" it and the terms used...... MacOfJesus (talk) 16:56, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

@Bernard Mc Nally: I don't think we need a separate (new) section. The sections are already well structured. His views should be integrated into all sections, but not by excessive quoting, but by paraphrasing. Vanjagenije (talk) 18:05, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

I am trying to relate what you say to the page........ The sections that are there are to do with the history of events or of what supported him in his position at the time........ His writings cannot fit into any of these as they are unrelated.......... Hence, for instance at his 3rd Exile he may have written a letter to the Emperor or to the Church...... to synopsise them there would be un-related to that history for Athanasius just saw the need to write, then...... or took the opportunity, then, to write..... Relating them in the history would be strange ......The best thing would be a category entitled: "His Writings" . ( I would need this issue sorted out before beginning....). MacOfJesus (talk) 20:55, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

I would see this as a list of all his writings...... and their nature....... However, my other study is Philosophy and Psychology, [I wrote on Carl Gustaf Jung and his close friends, here] and I am very much aware of giving a bias in synopsis or an inference..... MacOfJesus (talk) 16:24, 27 October 2015 (UTC) However, the Page, the Article Page is not finished until this is done...... MacOfJesus (talk) 16:24, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Quotes removal from Article Page[edit]

The Section of Quotes is now completely removed. A student coming to the page to understand Athanasius and his stand in the 3-4 Century will find it hard to put in context.... Some of the quotes I placed in. The other deleted parts I did not write..... If the Article Page is to remain an A1 Page then it does need this section.... MacOfJesus (talk) 20:11, 7 October 2015 (UTC) [wrote earlier on my talk page...... MacOfJesus (talk) 16:38, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

I regret to say that I myself have no idea about how such sections are viewed according to current policies and guidelines. I have left messages on the talk pages of WikiProject Catholicism, WikiProject Christianity, and WikiProject Biography for the input of others there. John Carter (talk) 21:14, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, John Carter, no matter how we view it we differ on our notion of an Encyclopaedia.... Some well known ones I did not touch..... But in the case of Athanasius you either reflect his stand or lose the plot... for as the page said it was Athanasius contra Mundum.... now we are all of his opinion..... I am very much aware of being objective and as you know, the page some years ago was in disarray...... Thank you for your help..... MacOfJesus (talk) 15:50, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

His views would reasonably be included at considerable length in a separate Philosophy of Athanasius of Alexandria article, and I have seen enough independent discussion of some of his specific works, particularly the Life of Antony, to assume that they would qualify for separate articles also. Also, given the amount of material about this person that exists, it may well be that his biographical content could be split into separate articles if basic notability guidelines can be met. Maybe the best way to go in the short term is consult the longer reference type articles or discussions relating to this topic, see what they cover and to what length they cover it, and also look for separate subtopics which might meet standards for separate articles, and develop that content there, and later coming back here to put together summary sections of those other articles. I can and do understand that it is hard to understand some of the subject's actions without also understanding his positions on then-current controversies, but there may well be so much material on this subject that one article simply might not be enough. John Carter (talk) 17:44, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Un-sourced account in "Patriarch", Article Page in "Second Exile"[edit]

An account in the "Second Exile", second paragraph, states:


".....In 340, one hundred bishops met at Alexandria, declared in favor of Athanasius, and vigorously rejected the criticisms of the Eusebian faction at Tyre. Plus, Pope Julius I wrote to the supporters of Arius strongly urging Athanasius's reinstatement, but that effort proved in vain. Pope Julius II called a synod in Rome in 341 to address the matter, which found Athanasius was found to be innocent of all the charges raised against him........"

I was looking for a source for this historical account, but find nothing to collaborate with it..... I find they met in Rome, at that time. So something is wrong here, not 340.....

MacOfJesus (talk) 16:55, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

I corrected it using sources. Vanjagenije (talk) 19:38, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

I see the corrections, but however, it was only Pope Julius the 1st until April 352..... Hence there was no Julius the 2nd...... Historian Cornelius Clifford is very clear here as is T. Gilmartin Professor in Maynooth of History 1890...... can consult others here..... like; Butler, etc....

MacOfJesus (talk) 20:12, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

The wording, here, is very inadequate. All Historical Accounts are lengthy here as there is a lot missing in the paragraph..... All the top Historian Accounts with further references to the originals stress and elaborate the account here....... I have such in front of me.....

MacOfJesus (talk) 20:38, 16 December 2015 (UTC

Pope Julius II was Pope in a very different world..... See his page: [I Quote....].....

Pope Julius II (Latin: Iulius II; 5 December 1443 – 21 February 1513), nicknamed "The Fearsome Pope"[1] and "The Warrior Pope",[2] born Giuliano della Rovere, was Pope from 1 November 1503 to his death in 1513. His papacy was marked by an active foreign policy, ambitious building projects, and patronage for the arts—he commissioned the destruction and rebuilding of St. Peter's Basilica, plus Michelangelo's decoration of the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.

MacOfJesus (talk) 20:22, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Hence, this whole entry has to be re-researched and matched to reliable Historical Accounts........ MacOfJesus (talk) 14:18, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

This work here is currently in the public domain, meaning its content can be reproduced verbatim with proper attribution, and is still generally considered well regarded. We could always use what it says as a starting point. John Carter (talk) 18:16, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

That is, indeed what I am doing. I am cautious for it now appears that there are inaccuracies in many Encyclopaedia accounts. It vindicates my position of relying on accounts that in turn rely on original sources... MacOfJesus (talk) 22:30, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, John Carter, this account goes into detail of the time but from the point of view of accounts to and fro between the The Eusebian Party and Athanasius..... It speaks of Athanasius in Rome at the time in question.... The time before the beginning of the Council of Sardica.... MacOfJesus (talk) 22:50, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Hence, it may be true that Athanasius was not at the minor Council of Alexandria.... But it now leaves us with the problem of the error of including Pope Julius II... who clearly did not come for another 500 years...!!! MacOfJesus (talk) 23:07, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

If there is any way of checking the source cited, if there is one, and determining if it is accurate, or, alternately, to find a more recent reliable source which might say something different, it would certainly be possible to change the text. If it is in a quote, the original erroneous text can be included in a footnote with a "sic" if required to indicate the original error. John Carter (talk) 18:10, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

All accounts avoid the factual whereabouts of the Saint.... and concentrate on the words and declarations of the time...... It would appear that he was in exile, and if the times, then, did not know where he was.... we 1,500 years later are not to know..... So it appears that the whole paragraph is now under question.... To go forward, then, it appears that the best thing to do is to delete it and begin again....??? Otherwise we could be just "patch-work-quilting"..... MacOfJesus (talk) 20:12, 18 January 2016 (UTC) [Happy Anniversary...]..

It is so easy, indeed, to say it is Julius I....... but the sources may not say so...... in fact most historians avoid this factuality, here, completely as the Saint was in Exile or hiding and evidence of what happened is conflicting..... Hence, your sources need to be checked for if they say Julius II then I think the whole paragraph needs deleting..... MacOfJesus (talk) 20:31, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

@Bernard Mc Nally: The source says "Pope Julius" [1]. Vanjagenije (talk) 21:54, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for finding the source for this and correcting the error..... I do hope the page remains an A1 page...... MacOfJesus (talk) 14:44, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

12:14, 15 February 2016 (UTC)~~

To put things into prospectus....

Today is the remembrance of St Valentine.....

Pope Julian 1.....

Saint Valentine….

Eventually, St. Valentine was also arrested, condemned to death for his faith, beaten with clubs, and finally beheaded on February 14, AD 270. He was buried on the Flaminian Way. Later, Pope Julius I (333-356) built a basilica at the site which preserved St. Valentine’s tomb. Archeological digs in the 1500s and 1800s have found evidence of the tomb of St. Valentine. However, in the 13th century, his relics were transferred to the Church of Saint Praxedes near the Basilica of St. Mary Major, where they remain today.....


By: Fr. Saunders is pastor of Our Lady of Hope Parish in Potomac Falls and a professor of catechetics and theology at Notre Dame Graduate School in Alexandria.

We can see the character of Julian 1 in this account....... MacOfJesus (talk) 15:14, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

'Logos' in section "Opposition to Arianism"[edit]

I see that someone has removed the name: 'The Logos' in this section after 'The Son'.......

This is incorrect.....

'The Logos' is Greek and is correctly positioned here......

The dissenters of Athanasius would be only too aware of the significance of the term.... in this context....

The efforts in making this page as it now stands was immense......

Therefore, I think this omission should be reversed......

MacOfJesus (talk) 19:08, 18 April 2016 (UTC)


I have restored the term "Logos", here....... The term for Jesus was never in dispute...... It is spelled-out clearly in Saint John's Gospel......

It is the strongest stumbling-block for the Factions.....

MacOfJesus (talk) 17:22, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Arius did accept the notion but stopped short of accepting Jesus as the Son of God and "Divine"....

__________________

A Page on this exists, now, entitled: Logos (Christianity), for there is an Article Page entitled Logos, exploring it's use in pre-Christian days....

MacOfJesus (talk) 19:37, 23 August 2016 (UTC)


However, throughout John's Gospel the position of Jesus, The Logos, is further defined and the Gospel, taken as a whole, is unmistakable....

MacOfJesus (talk) 17:35, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Request for a smooth style throughout.....[edit]

The Article Page now has the heading:

"This article has an unclear citation style. (April 2012) This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. The specific problem is: For an article of relative importance, this needs much work. It lacks citations, and has sloppy, low-quality grammar and formatting (May 2016)"


On the Article Page I have concentrated on the History with particular importance in keeping accuracy in the Historical Accounts.... The original writers were many and to preserve accuracy we have to keep to the originals...... In all my work on the Page I have researched, I was anxious not to deviate to a change of style at the expense of the History. I have put in all the sources of my work and indeed of others....

This Page is now important for it brings together, accurately, the Historical life of the Saint..... This would be sacrificed if a uniform style was adapted throughout.... Quite a large section of the Page I did not write.....

MacOfJesus (talk) 20:06, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

With regard to inadequate Grammar: I have found others changing all cases of an apostrophe to an incorrect English, throughout.....

It would be helpful if a a clearer message be placed here as to what is meant.....

MacOfJesus (talk) 19:27, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

For example in the Section; Patrarch......

The travel of the Saint and Houis and the other Bishops is not elaborated....... yet at this I added; " a Mamoth task" for I know that the Councils were timed for the end of Autumn...... Athanasius travelled from "Belgium" to North Italy by foot...... In fact a tradition speaks of St Nicholas saving or helping people cross a difficult river..... The whole area of what the accusations were about, were not mentioned in many histories. But finding these sources and adding them, true to fourth Centuary sources, was difficult.........

Again it would help if you were to say what imbalance you are referring to......

MacOfJesus (talk) 22:14, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

@Bernard Mc Nally: If you think the issue is resolved, you are free to remove the tag from the top of the article. Or, you can call the user who placed that tag to review the article and remove it themselves. Vanjagenije (talk) 12:32, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, I am happy that the Page is worthy of the History of Saint Athanasius...... The original poster, if I may call the person such, must understand that the page is of a person who lived approx. 1,500 years ago and the Histories were written in different languages.... and arbitrarily change to a modern day styling would inevitably change the sense... For example for a person to be exiled to the margins of the Empire would be equivalent to being today deliberately being made homeless and confined to a deserted area... However changing to this notion throughout would be wrong for even though similar in concept, they remain only similar....

If Wikipedia is happy I could remove the top post, the tag......

MacOfJesus (talk) 13:47, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Character...[edit]

Under the heading "Character" is this opinion... [not written by me]... and un-referenced......

"Athanasius has always been a controversial, if not divisive, figure. While some scholars praise him as an orthodox saint with great character, others see him as a power-hungry politician who employed questionable ecclesiastical tactics......"

Considering that he went / dragged to a Council of the Church to answer these allegations in his lifetime and found totally innocent..... It should not be there...

Taking into account his life in exile, living in the desert, constantly on the run in fear of pagan and of the Emperor's men, it is very hard to imagine he was power-hungry and employed questionable tactics.... The Arian Faction accused him of these in the Council and he was declared innocent.... All referenced in the Historical Accounts on the Article Page....

As it is pure opinion and impossible to have references......... It should be removed.....

MacOfJesus (talk) 13:24, 30 June 2016 (UTC)


Removed this citation and brought up two others that best fit in this section....

MacOfJesus (talk) 12:49, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Style of writing[edit]

The latest corrections of style writing...... example: 6th day ....to 6.... may be what modern man might expect, but in studying Histories one adapts to the style of the original writer and in reporting the recorder often varies the style to help the reader. Texts that are too uniform throughout become boring to follow. Hence, I think these "corrections" to be un-necessary... Styles also become out-dated very quickly and in the old world we tend to vary our wording in text to help the listener....

MacOfJesus (talk) 21:12, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Eugene of Carthage...... [showing how Arianism was felt for years after St Athanasius...][edit]

Today we remember St Eugene of Carthage....

FEAST DAY: ST EUGENE, BISHOP OF CARTHAGE, Confessor......

Bishop of Carthage, North Africa in 481.

Exiled to the desert of Tripoli with many of his parishioners, some of them children, by Arian Vandals.

They were allowed to return in 488, but Eugene was exiled again in 496, and he eventually settled in Albi, Italy.

He died in 505 in Albi, Italy, of the mistreatment suffered in exile.

[I put in this quote from Historical Accounts to show how the wave of Arianism affected the world in those days.... ]

MacOfJesus (talk) 21:39, 13 July 2016 (UTC)


This Article Page is awaiting to be made......

MacOfJesus (talk) 14:29, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

The Article Page exists as: St Eugenius of Carthage..... MacOfJesus (talk) 21:56, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Removing the TopTag[edit]

Thank you, Vanjagenile, I am happy that the Article Page is worthy of the History and of the Saint....

MacOfJesus (talk) 14:22, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Transference of the remains of Athanasius to Venice in 1973...[edit]

Under the heading: Veneration....

"Athanasius was originally buried in Alexandria, Egypt, but his remains were later transferred to the Chiesa di San Zaccaria in Venice, Italy. During Pope Shenouda III's visit to Rome from 4 to 10 May 1973, Pope Paul VI gave the Coptic Patriarch a relic of Athanasius,[33] which he brought back to Egypt on 15 May.[34] The relic is currently preserved under the new Saint Mark's Coptic Orthodox Cathedral in Cairo, Egypt. However, the majority of Athanasius's corpse remains in the Venetian church.[35]....."

Someone, anonymously added to; "transferred"....the word; "Stolen".......

I reversed the entry for it was indeed vandalism.....

If the reader would only read the paragraph firstly before acting he would see it was done diplomatically to establish and preserve the Christian Church link between the Coptic Church and the Latin Church .....

This kind of vandalism can bring about discredit.... and hurt....

MacOfJesus (talk) 11:18, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Critics' opinions & Factions' accusations....[edit]

I did not study so much the Critics works on Athanasius. However, I am now doing so...... I have learned so much from the Critics as to the mind-set of the "Arians'. ... MacOfJesus (talk) 13:17, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Request for references for sections of the Article....[edit]

A request for clear references to Athanasius' education and in other early-life sections...

I was not involved with the writing of this / these section/s....

I concentrated on the purely Historical accounts....

There are other accounts of his life I did not put in as the sources are vague.

There is an account that St. Nicholas attended Nicae but employed himself in helping travellers to the Council cross a difficult river. One account states that he prevented Athanasius from drowning..

Others too commented that at the Council, St Nicholas clocked one of the Arian Bishops....

However, I did not put any of these in as the sources of History avoids mentioning them....

MacOfJesus (talk) 15:56, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Saint Nicholas of Myra: "..The Greek histories of his life agree that he suffered imprisonment for the faith, and made a glorious confession in the latter part of the persecution raised by Dioclesian; and that he was present at the great council of Nice, and there condemned Arianism. The silence of other authors make many justly suspect these circumstances." They suspect the stories / legends surrounding these proven historical events. Alban Butler in his Historical Accounts is clear that these Legends / Stories should not be in his accounts......

MacOfJesus (talk) 15:11, 20 September 2016 (UTC)


Someone suggested that not all Theologians think Athanasius was great or is great...... I am not surprised at that for those that lean towards the Arians, today, would love to demote him...

If you study the Critic's accounts and the opposition's accounts on the Article Page, you will see for yourself.....

The episode prompted Athanasius to say: " The floor of hell is paved with the skulls of Bishops ".

Whatever we say of Athanasius, he was single-minded in presenting and preserving the Apostolic Faith for no temporal gain to himself....

The best understanding of him is gained from his writings.

MacOfJesus (talk) 10:17, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

I have included a short extract from his Festal Letters written back to the people of the Church in Alexandria when he was in exile; this letter more than most others shows clearly what was happening " on the ground " and his stand of faith...

MacOfJesus (talk) 10:27, 9 September 2016 (UTC)


What I have noticed is that all Main-Line Christians hold for Athanasius for indeed the whole of Saint John's Gospel witnesses to that faith..... Also, the Council of Nicae fully aired and fully agreed to a formula of faith..... The Arians reneged and wanted something different... Concentrating on the History alone the way is clear..... Some of the sections I did not write for they come from a tradition I am unfamiliar with... but I have put in as many references as I could..... You will find it hard to get reputable Theologians to take an Arian stand, because indeed the "cards are stacked" against him/her..... Indeed, because a Gospel contradicts that stand....

MacOfJesus (talk) 20:05, 9 September 2016 (UTC)


I could indeed put in references to the short number of pieces / sentences that appear not to have references.... But, they would be from sources that would not sit comfortably with strict Scholarly Study.....

Do consider that the reference source is at the end of the paragraph if one source is used.. If there is more than one used then it would be mentioned at the end or in the paragraph itself. If there is an over-lap then they would appear at the end.... If there are two different and separate accounts in the same paragraph; then one is indicated in the paragraph itself, the other at the end if it is the primary source...

Hence, it may appear that some sentences are not sourced.... But they will be at the end....

MacOfJesus (talk) 12:47, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

MacOfJesus (talk) 13:01, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

If you are looking for a reference / s for a statement such as this:

".... In the Eastern Orthodox Church, he is labeled as the "Father of Orthodoxy". Some Protestants label him as "Father of the Canon". Athanasius is venerated as a Christian saint, whose feast day is 2 May in Western Christianity, 15 May in the Coptic Orthodox Church, and 18 January in the other Eastern Orthodox Churches. He is venerated by the Oriental and Eastern Orthodox Churches, the Roman Catholic Church, the Lutherans, and the Anglican Communion........"

Then, you could be missing the point.....

This is a statement of what is happening in the here & now.... instantly verifiable from their Church sources..... Hence, that sentence does not need a reference.... To a student of the Page that would be seen as instantly verifiable.....

There are other parallel situations in other disciplines and their Pages....

MacOfJesus (talk) 13:01, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

To put in a reference to the Calendar Directives of each Religion would demand a book to fill.... !!!!

I think of a parallel situation in Geology.... The Earth has been named as the Water-Planet.... Does that have to be "proved".... ??? Or taken for granted....

MacOfJesus (talk) 19:53, 14 September 2016 (UTC)