Talk:Athanasius of Alexandria/Archive 2

Character...
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
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)

Request for a smooth style throughout.....
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)
 * 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)

Removing the TopTag
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)

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

'Logos' in section "Opposition to Arianism"
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)

The use of this tool: [&lt;blockquote&gt;]
I tried to use this tool in key texts, but I found it does not help the page so reversed it......

MacOfJesus (talk) 09:48, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Transference of the remains of Athanasius to Venice in 1973...
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....
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....
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)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 one external links on Athanasius of Alexandria. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060517163828/http://www.elca.org/communication/creeds/athanasian.html to http://www.elca.org/communication/creeds/athanasian.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081224140543/http://www.fourthcentury.com:80/index.php/athanasius-werke-contents to http://www.fourthcentury.com/index.php/athanasius-werke-contents
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081228011941/http://www.fourthcentury.com:80/index.php/athanasius-chart to http://www.fourthcentury.com/index.php/athanasius-chart

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:40, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you....... These are sources and accounts I am unfamiliar with.... Hence, I am not the best judge of the changes..... Most main-line-Christian Churches have expressed in  their Liturgy a format of faith to express a faith in agreement with Athanasius......   For the Anglican: a Creed...... The Catholic Traditional Mass it was the Last Gospel:  the beginning of St John's Gospel.. [I put in on the page... ]. MacOfJesus (talk) 15:19, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

The Edits appear true..... MacOfJesus (talk) 15:23, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Significance of Saint Athanasius
At the end of the Article Page you can see just how important is Athanasius to all Christian Churches....

[show] v t e Popes of Alexandria and Patriarchs of the See of St. Mark [show] v t e Doctors of the Catholic Church [show] v t e Catholic saints [show] v t e Coptic saints [show] v t e

To be a "Doctor" of the Church as well as a Saint, means that your writings are of deep significance....

MacOfJesus (talk) 22:52, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

I put this in, as some are saying: He is only known in one Church or another....... He is now the "Bench-Mark" we all Christians and others refer to, to get the picture straight.... Those not of this faith still refer to him to be clear of the Principals and Principles....

MacOfJesus (talk) 13:59, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

After Sardica; 345 to 356
After the Council of Sardica, 345.... On the Page is this:

"......... After the death of the replacement bishop Gregory in 345, Constans used his influence to allow Athanasius to return to Alexandria in October 345, amidst the enthusiastic demonstrations of the populace.[24] This began a "golden decade" of peace and prosperity, during which time Athanasius assembled several documents relating to his exiles and returns from exile in the Apology Against the Arians. However, upon Constans's death in 350, another civil war broke out, which left pro-Arian Constantius as sole emperor. An Alexandria local council in 350 replaced (or reaffirmed) Athanasius in his see........."

The end statement is without references.....

The Historical accounts go into much detail, including differences between the brothers; Cnstantius & Constans..... This paragraph needs to be researched.... [I did not write it and it was there as long as I've been here].....

I am beginning to do this now...... Cornelius Clifford seems to be the best here.....

MacOfJesus (talk) 08:25, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

....Bishop Gregory of Cappadocia had died, probably of violence in June of 345. The emissary to the Emperor Constantius sent by the bishops of the Sardica Council to report the finding of the Council, met at first with most insulting treatment, now received a favourable hearing. Constantius was forced to reconsider his decision, owing to a threatening letter from his brother Constans and the uncertain conditions of affairs on the Persian border, and he accordingly made up his mind to yield. But three separate letters were needed to overcome the natural hesitation of Athanasius. He passed rapidlyfrom Aquileia to Treves, from Treves to Rome and from Rome by way of the northern route to Adrianople and Antioch, where he met Constantius. He was accorded a gracious interview by the Emperor, and sent back to his See in triumph, where he began his memorable ten years of peace, which lasted to the third exile, 356.....

This is a well researched account and almost the full account of Cornelius Clifford...... I feel it should replace the paragraph above..... MacOfJesus (talk) 11:10, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

I have replace the first paragraph with the account of Cornelius Clifford.... Again the travel must have been a fete in itself.... MacOfJesus (talk) 11:27, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

To travel from Sofia [Sardica] to Tier [Treves].... then to Rome and there to Ankara [Antioch].... and did so in haste.... is breath-taking.... MacOfJesus (talk) 19:29, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

I gather that he travelled from Sofia [Sardica] to Tier [Treves], now on the Mosel in Germany across the Alps where he had a "safe-house".... Back again to Rome and then on to Ankara, which was known as Antioch, not to be confused with the other Antioch at the river.... This was an Awa-inspiring journey..... This was what you needed to do to stay alive, being one step ahead on the Emperor...... Constantius would have killed him if he could, but Constans threatened his brother..... Later Constans died.... So Constantius was free to be the dictator.... We can indeed summarise how Constans died...... MacOfJesus (talk) 21:54, 3 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Not a bad idea. The empire went in a crisis for a while, with a series of civil conflicts and rapid political changes.


 * Constans had "a reputation for cruelty and misrule" and managed to alienate his own army. In 350, general Magnentius rose in revolt. Constans was abandoned by everyone beyond his immediate household and had to flee for his life. Supporters of Magnentius cornered him in the fortification Helena (Elne), where he was killed after seeking sanctuary in a temple.


 * Magnentius reigned as a usurper emperor from 350 to 353. He controlled Britannia, Gaul, Hispania, Italia, and Africa. Magnentius gained a reputation as a more tolerant ruler, tolerant to both Christians and Pagans. His war against Constantius II went poorly and Magnentius made his final stand in the Battle of Mons Seleucus. He survived the battle, but committed suicide shortly after. His Caesar, Decentius, also committed suicide.


 * The deaths left Constantius II as sole emperor, in control of the entire Roman Empire. In 354, Constantius executed his own Caesar, Constantius Gallus. In 355, Claudius Silvanus revolted against him, only to be assassinated. Later that year, Constantius appointed Julian as his new Caesar. In 360, Constantius summoned Julian and his Gallic legions to serve as reinforcements in another round of the Roman–Persian Wars. The Gallic legions revolted instead and declared Julian as the new Augustus.


 * In 361, Constantius campaigned towards the west, against his new rival. Constantius fell fatally ill before meeting Julian's forces and died in Mopsuestia. Constantius had himself officially baptized shortly before his death, by Euzoius, a Patriarch of Antioch. He had declared Julian as his rightful successor, so Julian became sole emperor. Dimadick (talk) 15:25, 4 December 2016 (UTC)


 * But what is so remarkable is the recorded journeys of Athanasius..... and how he kept one step ahead of danger..... The Emperor World was another mine-field... eventually one said as advice to his successor: "Keep your enemies close and your friends even closer...".....  Thank you for the insight of the life of the brothers...  MacOfJesus (talk) 21:21, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

The Termination of the Council...
The wording: :"The termination of the Council"..... even though strange in modern times, meant that the protocol was entered.... It meant that all the reports to the Emperors were made and delivered.... This, then, took time as the directives had to be implemented..... The Nicene Fathers had to report back to Rome and the Creed presented...... [This is the Creed that all the Main-line Christian Churchs hold today.]  The Historian was T. Gilmartin, published in 1890..... MacOfJesus (talk) 19:06, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

New addition to Athanasius' return...
The change to: ".....and sent back to his See to enthusiastic demonstrations of the populace,..." from Encyclopaedia Britannic in NOT a Neutral statement........ In fact it is quite patronising to the people of Alexandria..... It is suggesting that they are "Plebs"....

This confirms why I do not include desertions from the Encyclopaedia .....

Not it appears that that is a statement by Cornelius Clifford......

This Article Page took a lot of research and only the best / researched was used......

MacOfJesus (talk) 19:31, 22 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Well, in my opinion it's not in the least patronizing. It is well known that Athanasius was well-loved by the Christians there, and that his return was indeed acclaimed as a joyful event. I hope you're not suggesting that it's plebian to have admiration for someone else. The celebrating was a significant fact of church life at the time, in that it reflected the Alexandrians' rejection of Arianism, even over support of it coming from within the Roman capital. This whole issue has great religious importance, but it also had political implications, inasmuch as civil strife had broken out in many places, and governance was threatened, and Alexandria was one place that had suffered a good deal of that. So having some material to say what happened is not out of line; it had significance.


 * Encyclopedia Brittanica is not always a good source for information about the Orthodox Church. Like many western sources, all sincerely and honestly dedicated to getting things right, it still suffers from lack of familiarity with the Orthodox Church, what it is, what its religious beliefs and values are, how it worships, what its orientation is. That orientation is what is most difficult for westerners: too easily they think they get it, and too seldom realize they haven't. So I won't make exaggerated claims about EB. However, this is merely a recognition of a historical occurrence, and one that doesn't require much insight into the areas where EB falls short. It's right in line with reputable ancient historians also.


 * If you feel there's something misstated or skewed in the article's wording, you can make an edit, so long as its found in a source. If you wish to provide an alternate source, you can also do that. But this text was not a new entry. It was a restorative where it had been improperly removed a few days earlier. My argument is primarily that material needs to be included, not to say that the job of including it is yet perfect. Evensteven (talk) 21:23, 22 December 2016 (UTC)


 * I feel that at least brackets or indications of what is sourced from where should be used..... As it stands the reference is mid-paragraph..... Some have said, recently, that there are too many different styles of writings and questioned how references were working... [see this page]....


 * Hence, why did you remove the brackets....???   To seek a top rating for the Article Page, the references mid-pagagraph have to be clear......


 * MacOfJesus (talk) 00:09, 23 December 2016 (UTC)


 * If you look at the key paragraph just above it, I have used brackets mid-paragraph in indicating the different sources..... The research was immense and finding the best sourced took a lot of effort..... and was the reason why the page was cleared and we began again..... due to the opposing sources.... some true and some false.....


 * MacOfJesus (talk) 00:28, 23 December 2016 (UTC)


 * It is important to understand the conflicts and the stands of the different sides to appreciate Athanasius.....  Indeed some sources are false and it took historical research to " iron them out "...   ::Some sourced accounts use opinion, liberally.... Some refuse to mention the conflict details.....


 * It is important to avoid any unnecessary labels....


 * MacOfJesus (talk) 01:27, 23 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Well, the brackets struck me as questionable: that is, it made me wonder why they were there - the meaning was not clear to me. But, not everyone is going to look at it the same way. So I won't stand in your way if you want to put them back. It was just my opinion, and you've clearly been working on this in depth. Best of everything in your editing. Evensteven (talk) 05:06, 23 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you, I will restore them.... And I am looking forward to an A1 rating for this key page...... MacOfJesus (talk) 13:11, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
 * This would please me greatly, too. Thanks for your good work! Evensteven (talk) 16:57, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
 * FWIW, I think the addition in question might be reasonable included. From what I have myself read of the history of Alexandria regarding this time (which, admittedly, isn't that much), Athanasius was seen by the people of Alexandria as being a "defender of the truth" and such by the majority of the Christian population of Alexandria, and his return to Alexandria as an indication that the orthodox beliefs which the majority of them held and supported were going to be in some way restored, which that majority would welcome. That being the case, the enthusiastic reception of Alexandria to his return would be no more an indication of a group of people being "plebes" than would an enthusiastic reception of a successful presidential candidate, or other person newly placed or restored to a position of power, in that person's home town would be. John Carter (talk) 17:12, 23 December 2016 (UTC)


 * And too, there is no perfectly natural statement..... Also the Arian Bishop who came to Alexandria George of Cappadocia taking-over the See was killed, we believe.... So I'll restore Cornelius Clifford's words..... Thank you.......    The next thing that needs re-writing is the Article Page:  Council of Sardica, it contains just the discussion points.... MacOfJesus (talk) 17:22, 28 December 2016 (UTC)


 * I am very aware of neutrality in statement and I include the complete wording of Cornelius Clifford here in 1900 to 1907......


 * " He was accorded a gracious interview by the vacillating Emperor, and sent back to his see in triumph, where he began his memorable ten years' reign, which lasted down to the third exile, that of 356......" MacOfJesus (talk) 17:38, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

George of Cappadocia was reportedly killed by pagans. He had reportedly spend his term as Bishop of Alexandria persecuting the pagans. With Julian on the throne, the pagans retaliated. He was kicked to death by a mob of people. His corpse was first paraded throughout Alexandria, then it was cremated and the ashes were cast to the sea. Dimadick (talk) 14:05, 29 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes, everyone feared the Mobs..... But, Dimadick, if you have a source for this it could be added to the Article Page: George of Cappadocia..... MacOfJesus (talk) 18:57, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

It is already in that article, and it is citing Ammianus Marcellinus as the main source. Dimadick (talk) 10:03, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Well done! but some editing requested!
I don't have the time to do what I feel is needed, so I can only suggest. Great article, basically, I love the phrase "Athanasius contra mundum" and understand Athanius' situation only too well.

The Patriarch section, opening with "T. Gilmartin, (Professor of History, Maynooth, 1890), writes in Church History, Vol. 1, Ch XVII" jumped out as being much too long for a reference - surely it's possible to hide away most of it and just have something like "Gilmartin wrote in 1890..." And isn't it normal to put this long a quote in a separate indented paragraph?

From the Patriarch section on, I wonder if there is misspelled copying or archaic use of language (begging for indented paragraphs) - or if you sometimes have difficulty with spelling, grammar and syntax. In several places the text does not read smoothly, or the meaning is not quite clear. The subject matter is fine, it just seems to need a quantity of minor editing to clarify and correct. Good luck! Lucy Skywalker (talk) 19:10, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

17:35, 1 May 2017 (UTC)17:35, 1 May 2017 (UTC)17:35, 1 May 2017 (UTC)17:35, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you...... I do appreciate that the reference to T. Gilmartin may be a little long..... but, consider that 8 to 10 years ago we had to start again on the Page........ Reason: There are false historical accounts and accounts that are full of bias...... Some accounts were challenged, contradicted,  by the accounts of the Council of Sardica..... Athanasius was put on trial for murder at a full Council and acquitted... Yet the Faction's documents continued to oppose these.... The Historians that are trustworthy are those that are outlined.... Hence, I felt it necessary to hi light the importance of this trustworthy historian...... Do remember I challenged bad histories and the Page agreed with me..... I took on Professor Timothy Barns of Harvard, Professor of Greek and the Ancient Greek...... Hence I do think that T. Gilmartin's work, here, should have pride of place as he carefully researched the originals.... His work references clearly the originals.....

Hence, going back to a small reference in place, here, could see the Page reverting to the Faction's Accounts...... and their references..... So, you can see that the discipline of History of this period took us to the originals and The Councils of the Church and their reports...... In contrast we discovered a lot about the Factions' activities during that period....

I feel, therefore, it is necessary to show the work of the top Historians in the Page for their reports contradict the false....

I wish all a happy feast day tomorrow the 2nd of May, Athanasius' Day....

MacOfJesus (talk) 17:33, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

On referencing the work of the Historians in question I kept to their original wording, as my experience in doing so in my work shows that it is safer to adjust to style of language that was used originally..... I have given an example in the case of; "termination of The Council".....   We might say today implementing the finding / rulings of the Council..... However, that concept would be inaccurate.... What is meant is that the representatives went to the Emperor and were abused, who gave their report under opposition... .... Athanasius fled across the Alps....

So my aim was to be true to the Historical accounts..... In my studies of histories and writing on them, this accuracy was a must.... MacOfJesus (talk) 19:44, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

There is a difference between the USA members use of English and those of us who spend our lives in the UK and in the adjacent Islands..... For Historians working with historical accounts we tend to get into a use of language that we follow fully but is a little strange to the newcomer...... But it would be wrong to change to a modern language jargon, for the concepts are often false in the historical settings..... Example:  "Termination of the Council"...... versus:  "Implementing the findings of the Council"......    One cannot substitute for the other because the reporters from the Council had not the authority to implement.... They had to face an Emperor who could as quickly kill them.... So the language we use often takes on its own supplied meanings....   Witnessing to the travels of Saint Athanasius after one Council is breath-taking. He fled over the Alps..... MacOfJesus (talk) 09:59, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

I am surprised that the Article Page on the feast day of Saint Athanasius was not used as the front page of Wikipedia.... MacOfJesus (talk) 10:03, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

The use of paragraphs and splitting up existing paragraphs to smaller ones may not be a good idea...... The paragraphs I used followed the various accounts I was referring to..... A Paragraph should contain a central concept. Hence, the splitting up of existing paragraphs may lose the original reference and thought... MacOfJesus (talk) 10:32, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Do you understand the significance of the Homean Party and the Homoiousion Party and Jerome's words regarding the world groaning...???? History is a Science and to understand and appreciate it you have to transport yourself to that period of time. I do not think that you appreciate the efforts involved in getting the Article Page to a level where it is accurate and true, in the face of false and untrue accounts... MacOfJesus (talk) 19:20, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

The use of; 'following the Fathers of the Church'
In historical accounts the term; '..following.......' has a very definite meaning...

Following the Fathers of the Church, for instance, means that you are referring to a pattern in the life of Athanasius that is witnessed beforehand by Church Accounts or is accepted by previous Church Fathers... that Athanasius is, in this context, of the pattern of previous Church Fathers....

It is not used, here, in the sense of imitation or in the sense we use this term today....

MacOfJesus (talk) 19:13, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

The Language we use in particular disciplines....
In History Accounting we tend to use a language that follows-on from the original writers. They may not have used English.

If we suddenly use a modern English we find misunderstanding...

May I give an example..... ?

In the discipline of Science, all Science subjects, there are basic principles that we cannot deviate from, without destroying the subject itself....

That is:

Energy cannot be lost......

We use the verb "lost / lose" in the modern languages to mean "misplaced".... That is not the meaning here.....

MacOfJesus (talk) 08:45, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Is there more in other disciplines..??? Yes.......

Philosophy, Logic......

There are no innate ideas.....

see: innatism

MacOfJesus (talk) 17:29, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

MacOfJesus (talk) 17:24, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Jean-Paul Sartre, gave speeches (all in French) of studies in Philosophy and Psychology at conferences...... Indeed it was full of specialised wordings and phrases...... The Press were there who were not unfamiliar with the terminology....... The Newspapers were full of criticism...(some said all this specialised jargon was so so un-French...)... Next time the Conference Hall was packed..... (Press was there, too..... ).      John Paul Sartre stood up and said:   "  At the age of 40, a man is responsible for his own face... !!  "...   That was the complete lecture...... MacOfJesus (talk) 19:28, 25 June 2017 (UTC)...

The section 'Critics' versus the Historical Accounts
The account termed 'Critics' give mention of the differing faith accounts of the 'Arian Parties'.

The historical accounts on the Article Page go into detail on these differences. It mentions the Arian Party, the semi-Arian Party and how no final agreement could be reached at Council... It mentioned them not liking the popular term "Arian"....

The Greek terms are used to refer to their different belief systems in the historical accounts...

It shows some took their position very seriously.

Athanasius was put on trial at the full Council of Sardica and found innocent.

The Arian Party left and plotted to the Emperor to have him killed if he should return to his See.... !

Hence, the Critic Account is myopic in it's view. The 'Arians' left Councils when they think they could not get their way and plot killing Athanasius.

MacOfJesus (talk) 00:18, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Athanasius' study and learning
On the Article Page in beginning section on his study and learning, it is claimed that he could quote scripture and 'supposedly' show references to the Trinity....

Throughout Scripture there are clear foreshadowings of events of the Christ and of Jesus that in the Gospels Jesus is clearly referring to.....

A clear reference to the Trinity in the Book of Genesis....? Could that be possible....? See Chapter 18 of Genesis.... God appears to Abraham in the form of three men... Abraham recognises God..."My Lord..."

Scripture is full of foreshadowings even of things yet to come........

Hence, I feel that 'supposedly' is a bit strong, here.....

MacOfJesus (talk) 21:15, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Trinity is not mentioned anywhere in the Bible, thus all "references to the Trinity" are "supposed".  Vanjagenije  (talk)  21:47, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

"Divinity" is not mentioned at any stage including St John's Gospel, throughout...... This term was used, then, in different context..... Hence, it was avoided for in the early Church times it had a very different usage...

The term "Trinity" is not used...... However, the concept is.... particularly in the suggested reading above..... MacOfJesus (talk) 15:45, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

However, to go back to the subject at hand:  This section and indeed the paragraph above it and below it are without clear references..... Only one sentence claims to be a quote from Cornelius Clifford's work. I can check if it is true, but it still leaves the rest without references.... MacOfJesus (talk) 15:58, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

I have found the quote from Cornelius Clifford's work and quoted it fully.... However, I have located an account of the famous Cathectical School of Alexandria but the wording and claims of the involvement with Athanasius I cannot find. Hence, I cannot verify it's credibility..... Other accounts avoid this and show each wanted to quote Athanasius as supporting them.... Hence, I think that the statements in the Article Page: Athanasius, should stay: "Citation Needed"...   Reliable historical accounts have Athanasius studying at Rome..... MacOfJesus (talk) 06:05, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Athanasius of Alexandria. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071216133107/http://ecole.evansville.edu/arians/alex1.htm to http://ecole.evansville.edu/arians/alex1.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071216133117/http://ecole.evansville.edu/arians/arius1.htm to http://ecole.evansville.edu/arians/arius1.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://tera-3.ul.cs.cmu.edu/cgi-bin/getImage.pl?target=%2Fdata%2Fwww%2FNASD%2F4a7f1db4-5792-415c-be79-266f41eef20a%2F009%2F499%2FOTIFF%2F00000060.tif&rs=1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:47, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Pope versus Patriarch as his title...
In those days there were three Centers of the Church; namely Rome, Antioch and Alexandra in Egypt.......

One of the contended issues at the Councils was whether a minor Council ruling would be valid for all the Church. This concept is key in understanding the history of Athanasius. For the Councils originating in Antioch condemned Athanasius, whereas, the Councils of the full Church exonerated him...... So the issue was; can a minor Council rule for the whole Church....

The Pope was / is the Bishop of Rome.

Patriarch, was the title of the others.

Now, at the first image of Saint Athanasius in the Article Page, he is referred to as "Pope"..... This is inaccurate...... For though Athanasius was very liked and known by the populous of Alexandria and referred to as "Pope", it was not his correct title....... [The other, Arian Bishops, were not so kind in their bearing, and were killed ....]

This title in the Article Page gives rise, now, to a grey area.....

MacOfJesus (talk) 07:34, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

I have corrected this to read: Patriarch, Saint and Doctor of the Church...... "Confessor" here is included in the title: Saint....  It means some one who confessed Jesus as Lord....

MacOfJesus (talk) 18:12, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

MacOfJesus (talk) 12:07, 22 June 2017 (UTC)


 * There's a bit of jargon which doesn't do any damage. Saints that aren't martyrs are called Confessors.--2001:A61:260D:6E01:A865:1FCA:DA8A:D95E (talk) 20:28, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Not is said online about his Eschatology.
One PDF I read says he stopped just short of calling Constantius II the Antichrist. But another blog wants to cite him as Post-Millenial. I don't know how to sufficiently verify or refute any of these claims.--JaredMithrandir (talk) 21:19, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
 * To study and reference this you would have to be familiar with the writings of Athanasius... He wrote letters to the Emperor from exile... [some we have some we don't..] You would have to have before you his writings and harder still his letters.... However, in the meantime, be familiar with his documents.... MacOfJesus (talk) 20:40, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
 * However, to add something to the article you would need to find reliable sources that do that analysis. Reading Athanasius's writing and forming your own opinion would be original research. Indyguy (talk) 20:52, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

On the Article Page, I quoted a part of a letter he wrote to his Church in Alexandria from exile, in it you can witness very clearly Athanasius' eschatology.... In writing in the Article Page I was careful to let the quoted accounts speak for themselves..... MacOfJesus (talk) 21:04, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Last year there were a lot of quotes from Athanasius' work..... But, Wikipedia deleted them.... The only one left is the extract from his Festive Letter, which is the one I put in..... It, more than all else hi-lights Athanasius' position..... [I have kept a copy of the deleted texts...] Also, John Carter, User:John Carter, a Wikipedian, was working on the writings of Athanasius... He shared with me his work.. MacOfJesus (talk) 10:49, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

The documents of Athanasius are readily available..... But, the Article Page is as it should be terse without opinion.... There is a lot of Faction Accounts and False Accounts and the Page is now Historically correct and true.... Everything I placed in is fully accounted-for without my personal input..... MacOfJesus (talk) 11:07, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Ten to twelve years ago, the Page was full of a source that went back to 'the Arians'. I challenged these accounts and was asked to; 'Prove it'. I found the answer in the true account of the Council of Sardica.... I was able to refute the accounts in question by true Historical accounts.... Athanasius wrote directly to the Emperor, who would like to kill him.... You can imagine what 'the Arians ' would say of him, and these letters.... Hence, to know what is true versus what is untrue and false; true Historical accuracy is the best way to start....MacOfJesus (talk) 14:52, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Citation needed to 'Last Gospel' post on Article Page...
I placed in 'citation needed' to additions, I did not place in, to the post of The Last Gospel at Mass..... This is still used in the Extraordinary Form or Traditional Form of Mass.... This point is totally irrelevant to the original post. However, a clear reference should be given or the point removed.... MacOfJesus (talk) 19:33, 19 July 2018 (UTC) A different 'Last Gospel' is used on occasions when St John's Gospel is used, or it is stipulated in the Missal..... Generally it is of the beginning of St John's Gospel. This is the usage of today. Hence, the point made here is irrelevant and inaccurate.... MacOfJesus (talk) 20:47, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Precise date of his Birth and following dates in his life....
The year of his birth is uncertain. During his life this was an issue for he was appointed as Bishop before the stipulated age of 30. The Arians objected. Athanasius waited a year before taking office. Hence these years are given in a span of three years. All the historians follow this practice for him. Hence, changing to one year is inaccurate.... MacOfJesus (talk) 19:40, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

First Exile to Second Exile....
I agree, that these reports in the Article Page need attention....

I did not write these....

I removed the report of Athanasius going to Rome and put in a direct report of The Saint's activity there and the reason for his stay there from Clifford's account, 338,.....

Unfortunately we are still battling with Faction Accounts that are extremely Un-Historical....

MacOfJesus (talk) 10:52, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Heading; 'Supporters... '
I have removed a long and unnecessary account of Liturgical Reform..... 'The Last Gospel' is used today in the Traditional Form of Liturgy....

The point here is that 'Last Gospel' was used as it is the greatest declaration of the Divinity of Jesus, quietly, and from 1920 onwards publicly. The Liturgical position, today is not of interest to the point in question.....

The Divinity of Jesus was denied by the Arians and by the other Factional Groups, to a greater or lesser degree....

MacOfJesus (talk) 14:17, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Under the heading: Patriarch
Under the heading: Patriarch we find:

'..Athanasius' episcopate began on 9 May 328 as the Alexandrian Council elected Athanasius to succeed the aged Alexander. That council also denounced various heresies and schisms, many of which continued to preoccupy his 45-year-long episcopate (c. 8 June 328 – 2 May 373). Patriarch Athanasius spent over 17 years in five exiles ordered by four different Roman Emperors, not counting approximately six more incidents in which Athanasius fled Alexandria to escape people seeking to take his life. This gave rise to the expression "Athanasius contra mundum" or "Athanasius against the world".[12]

During his first years as bishop, Athanasius visited the churches of his territory, which at that time included all of Egypt and Libya. He established contacts with the hermits and monks of the desert, including Pachomius, which proved very valuable to him over the years. Shortly thereafter, Athanasius became occupied with the theological disputes against Arians within the Byzantine Empire that would occupy much of his life.[12].....'

All taken from the Encyclopaedia Britannica is poorly written history.....

1./ Alexander died before Athanasius was elected, but had to wait 1 to 2 years to take up office... It is reported here as the 'aged Alexander'.... And Athanasius was constrained to take-up office....

2./ It is a 'sweeping statement' to say that these events gave rise to the phrase; 'Athanasius contra mundum'....

3./ It is a further 'sweeping statement' saying "....became occupied with the theological disputes against Arians within the Byzantine Empire that would occupy much of his life.[12].....'

This is the reason why I did not use anything from this source..... These accounts are bordering on opinion rather than History....

I propose these to be removed and a more reliable source/s inserted here....

MacOfJesus (talk) 03:47, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

This now reads:

Athanasius' episcopate began on 9 May 328 as the Alexandrian Council elected Athanasius to succeed after the death of Alexander, "five months from the end of the Council of Nice. Athanasius was unanimously elected to fill the vacant see. He was most unwilling to accept the dignity, for he clearly foresaw the difficulties in which it would involve him. The clergy and people were determined to have him as their bishop, and refused to accept any excuse. At length consented to accept a responsibility that he sought in vain to escape; and was consecrated in A.D. 326." [5]. Patriarch Athanasius spent over 17 years in five exiles ordered by four different Roman Emperors, not counting approximately six more incidents in which Athanasius fled Alexandria to escape people seeking to take his life.[13]

During his first years as bishop, Athanasius visited the churches of his territory, which at that time included all of Egypt and Libya. He established contacts with the hermits and monks of the desert, including Pachomius, which proved very valuable to him over the years. [13]

"During the forty-eight years of is episcopate, his history is told in the history of the controversies in which he was constantly engaged with the Arians, and of the sufferings he had to endure in defence of the Nicene faith. We have seen that when Arius was allowed to return from exile in 328, Athanasius refused to remove the sentence of excommunication." [5]

It incorporates factual historical accounts.....  Athanasius waited two years from 326 when he was consecrated bishop to taking up the office; we believe that was because he had not reached the 30 years of age stipulated.....

MacOfJesus (talk) 16:09, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Spelling of places in Historical Texts
I noticed that the spelling of Nicea to Nice and other variants is common in Ancient Texts..... I followed the most reliable original texts... Hence to take a quoted text from a Historical Account and change the spelling of a named town is incorrect..... So too with Sardica..... That is the way it is quoted in the text..... The texts have ".." inverted commas, to indicated it is a direct quotation from Historical Accounts.... MacOfJesus (talk) 22:02, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Spelling of Sardica, the Council thereof
Please see the Article Page:

History of Sofia

Here it clearly states that the Name was changed later to Serdica.... but the Council is in all the Historical Accounts referred to as Sardica, as in the account here.....

Hence, it is an error to change the Council's Name to Serdica.....

All the History Accounts have: Sardica and it is clearly outlined in the Article....

MacOfJesus (talk) 18:29, 20 March 2019 (UTC)


 * The name of the Wikipedia article about the council is "Council of Serdica" (although there is also a redirect for "Council of Sardica"). For consistency within Wikipedia, we should use "Serdica" everywhere; it's especially confusing to have two spellings within one article, as is the case with this article. It may be that historical accounts use a different spelling, but spellings change over time. That's how languages evolve. Indyguy (talk) 19:46, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

I am thinking of Historical accuracy..... What I worry about is so many Professors in Universities will not allow any of their students to use Wikipedia..... And this Historical Inaccuracy if fuel for their fire..... Wikipedia should fit the Subject not the subject fit Wikipedia.... The name was changed later.... MacOfJesus (talk) 08:06, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

'peacock language'
I noticed that a quotation from Cornelius Clifford and others that took a lot of research to achieve accuracy of these differently reported events by different factions.... is changed unnecessarily and the original referred to as 'peacock language'..... In dealing with historical research keeping to the originals is necessary. I do not think you appreciate the research and sifting that took place to get the Page to this level...... MacOfJesus (talk) 18:35, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
 * None of the WP:peacock words were removed from "quotations", as you claim . In Wikpedia, we summarize sources in our own words, we do not directly copy-paste from sources. In doing so, we are expected to follow Wikipedia guidelines.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:40, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

I did not say anything was removed..... but wording was changed.....unnecessarily... As I said, I do not think you realise the continual effort it takes to keep historical accuracy..... MacOfJesus (talk) 07:43, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

To give an example of changing language / turn of phrase; After the Council was completed a team from the Council executed the decisions of the Council...... could not be changed to; executed the findings of the Council.....     The team had not the authority to execute.... but rater they spoke to the Emperor the findings of the Council. They reported to an Emperor who could cut their heads off, and wanted to... So they could not finalise anything.... MacOfJesus (talk) 21:22, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:37, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Athanasius of Alexandria.jpg