Changes

That On the contrary. Metropolitan [[Kallistos Ware]] wrote this in an article on St Nicodemus, and it is absurd. Not specialized scholarship? included in a book edited by Graham Speaks , who "studied classics at Trinity College, Cambridge, and was awarded a doctorate by the University of Oxford for a thesis on the Byzantine transmission of ancient Greek literature. He is the founder and Chairman of the Friends of Mount Athos and author of ''Mount Athos: Renewal in Paradise'' (2nd edn., 2014), for which he was awarded the Criticos Prize. He is also a Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries of London.' And his coeditor of his other book on Athos is Metropolitan [[Kallistos Ware]]. The other source was Christos Yannaras, the premier a leading theologian in the Church of Greece, snd it was from his book specifically addressed to the problem of Western influence on Orthodoxy. You need to do better than that to simply remove sourced material you don't agree with. --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] ([[User talk:Fr Lev|talk]]) 12:44, July 15, 2018 (UTC) Until you have demonstrable evidence that Speaker and Yanaras are factually incorrect, you ned to leave both sides in the article. I did not remove your claims to the contrary. --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] ([[User talk:Fr Lev|talk]]) 12:47, July 15, 2018 (UTC) I have ordered a copy of one of the books by Segneri, on which it is said the Exomologetarion is based. When it arrives and I compare the two, I will update this page. --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] ([[User talk:Fr Lev|talk]]) 13:49, July 16, 2018 (UTC) This is not a more neutral presentation. I've tried to balance both sides, but you seem keen to try to debunk the critics of St Nicodemus, and without providing documentation and deleting their problematic claims, such as Metallinos' claim that St Nicodemus had no access to Western sources. I'm inclined to reverse your edits unless they are better substantiated and more neutral. To simply say that Metallinos rejects the idea that Nicodemus doesn't have an Anselmian view of the Atonement isn't an argument, particularly when the only evidence adduced is Anselmian language about wrath that Metallinos says we should interpret differently but without evidence. --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] ([[User talk:Fr Lev|talk]]) 19:55, July 28, 2018 (UTC) In terms of Metallinos’ claim that the saint had no access to Western sources, you need to back that up more specifically: Was he referencing that particular work, or in all cases, and relative to not directly knowing their original text without translations/intermediaries? If you want to give a direct quote and contextualize, that would help. Re Anselmian view of atonement, there is a good recent study of how that was incorporated as one among a number of emphases by Orthodox writers, though not in any way exclusive, and that is how what you call Metallinos’ claim is contextualized. Relying heavily on Yannaras with language indicating his view is factual is problematic given that other Orthodox scholars have offered critiques of Yannaras’ methodology in approaching earlier texts as colored by (in their view) ultra-Orthodox academic theories. I’ve added in the narrative reference to Bishop Basil of Wichita’s teaching on the saint’s writing as well as a counter-balance. [[User:Kentigern|Kentigern]] ([[User talk:Kentigern|talk]]) 02:53, July 29, 2018 (UTC) The Metallinos quote is from his introduction to the ''Exomologetarion''. He continues the quote, "because at this stage (Nicodemus) operated freely within the parameters of hagiographical and Patristic language and tradition." This is rich. The Anselmian language isn't Patristic, and Metallinos' argument boils down to N uses Aneelmian language but he doesn't mean it. And where in "Patristic language and tradition" does one find the practice of indulgences that N engaged in? I'm the one who has been putting citations into this article. I'd like to see a citation for Larchet, for example. The only one is to an article about personhood and referring to texts by the Cappadocians and Maximus the Confessor -- his critique of Yannaraa' approach refers to patristic texts, not modern Catholic texts such as the ones Nicodemus used. This does nothing to explain away Nicodemus adoption of Aneelmian language (and theology). All in all, the article (miss the critical comments about Western influence) just read like a hagiographical puff piece, an not an encyclopedia article. --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] ([[User talk:Fr Lev|talk]]) 14:25, July 30, 2018 (UTC) I removed the Larchet article as I was able to obtain a copy and, as I suspected, it doesn't even mention Nicodemus. It has to do with Larchet's disagreements with how Yannaras, Zizioulas, and others handle deal with the Cappadocians and Maximus Confessor "on the relationship of personalism and existentialism." Yannaras is mentioned exactly twice in the article -- once in the opening paragraph and once in a footnote, both times along with Zizioulas. --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] ([[User talk:Fr Lev|talk]]) 16:09, August 1, 2018 (UTC)