Jump to: navigation, search

OrthodoxWiki talk:Trapeza

2,243 bytes removed, 21:11, May 31, 2009
no edit summary
==Refectory instead of TrapezaNotice ==Does anyone really think this page should be named "refectory" instead? <small>—The preceding unsigned comment was added by [[User:FrJohn|FrJohn]] ([[User talk:FrJohn|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/FrJohn|contribs]]) {{{2|}}}.</small>
: WellI one of serial vandals, maybetrolls and sockpuppetters of Wikipedia. But most monastic trapezas Basically, I've been to have been decidedly short on vandalize in the chattiness. :) &mdash;[[User:ASDamick|<font color="blue"><b><i>Dcn. Andrew</i></b></font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ASDamick|<font color="red">talk</font>]]</sup> <sup>[[Special:Randompage|<font color="blue">random</font>]]</sup> <sup>[[Special:Contributions/ASDamick|<font color="black">contribs</font>]]</sup> 10:23French and a little in Russian section, August 16but unfortunately, 2006 (CDT) :Yepall my open proxies there are blocked, but therefore I still would say they do serve as the main social spots for monasteries, wouldn't you? Just maybe not during the actual mealtime. [[User:FrJohn|Frhave come here. John]] :trapeza is eastern, refectory is western; "Against your encyclopaedia I say potahtohave nothing, you say poteyto..." ==New discussion on the bottom==Most MediaWiki discussions get added to the bottom (like using the + tab on a talk page). I was going to create an "Add new topic" link to this project pageonly for, but my work is that wouldn't work well if we want new stuff at the top. Can we change the policy so we add stuff to the bottom? --[[User:RockOfVictoryI am your new vandal|J. J.]] 11:04, August 16, 2006 (CDT) :I think the reason you gave is enough to change things from how I first imagined them. — [[User:FrJohn|<b>FrJohn</b>]] ([ your new talk]) DONE. It's been changed. --[[User:RockOfVictory|J. J.vandal]] 0821:10, August 17, 2006 (CDT)  you could call it archondariki, nai? ==Athanasian Quicumque==On the discussion page of [[Athanasian Creed]] article I have added new material without response. Resumé from other discussion page on same thing: In the year 1644, Gerard Voss, in his "De Tribus Symbolis", gave weighty probability to the opinion that St. Athanasius was not its author. His reasons may be reduced to the two following: > >firstly, no early writer of authority speaks of it as the work of this doctor; and >secondly, its language and structure point to a Western, rather than to an Alexandrian11, origin."  Both points are answered by the hypothesis that St Athanasius wrote them in simple Latin (which he never fully masteredMay 31, and in which he dared no stylistic flourish) when he met the men of Augusta Treverorum 2009 (Trier, TrèvesUTC) who know no Greek, during his two year exile there. And that it was for that very reason preserved independently of the Greek tradition until very late.  Discussion welcomed at the article's discussion page.

Navigation menu