Talk:Dioscorus of Alexandria
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] ANOTHER COPTIC POV
If you read carefully you will notice that this is not a scientific and impassionate article. It implies at many points how the Coptics are "orthodox" and they struggled to get rid of "alien" opression from the main-stream Chalcedonian Church, either Latin or Greek. Read it with this caveat in mind, or if someone objective could re-write it please.
Like it or not, Copts are Orthodox. Get over it.
[edit] Dioscorus, father of St Barbara / other ppl named Dioscorus
OK, here's a stumper- I've seen writers confuse him with Dioscurus, the father of Saint Barbara. We can't very well have a disambiguation page, since there's (obviously) no article about that Dioscurus; would it make any sense to have a sentence in this article saying that this isn't the father of someone, especially of an apocryphal someone who predated him? It seems stupid; maybe it's trivial enough to simply not be worth mentioning at all, but it's the kind of the we might disambiguate under other circumstances. -FZ 20:28, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Worth a phrase in the lead, and a paragraph in more detail (is there any basis for the confusion, or just because names are similar?) at the end. That's exactly the kind of confusion that a reference work should clear up; you can see OCD and EB articles doing that all the time, if you look closely. Stan 21:40, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
-
- This gets even more complicated than I thought- I did a Google search and discovered two more Dioscuruses (Dioscurii?) that I hadn't even known about... including another from Alexandria. argh. -FZ 16:45, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
This kind of confusion is best resolved by a disambiguation page; see Dioscorus. Gdr 17:40, 2005 Apr 18 (UTC)
[edit] Proposed move
- Unsure. Both post-Chalcedon traditions had a Dioscorus II, so (per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles)), the ordinal should be included; cf Elizabeth I of England. However, it could be argued that the form without the number is a "well established name in English", so the John Chrysostom rule would apply. –Hajor 14:26, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Move Although he is the first of two patriarchs in both orthodox beliefs, he is the established leader (the last) that both religions agree was the true Patriarch of Alexandria. Dioscorus of Alexandria is his established name in English and as far as I know, no one in the Coptic community ever refers to him as Dioscorus I in discussion. It is automatically assumed who is being refered to unless both are in the same conversation (I and II). -Markio 17:35, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Oppose. Hajor claims that there are two different Dioscorus II, one Coptic and one Eastern Orthodox. I don't think that's the case. The successions may be different, but (at least in the early years after the split) I believe that a number of the individuals were the same, including Dioscorus II. Gdr 15:19, 2005 Apr 18 (UTC)
-
- That's intriguing; do you know enough about it to write a Dioscorus II of Alexandria article? The two lists indicate identical dates for his patriarchate/papacy, which definitely supports the idea of the two being the same. –Hajor 16:48, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- No, sorry. I was relying on the Catholic Encyclopedia article on the Church of Alexandria [1] which says, "The possession of the See of Alexandria alternated between these parties [i.e. the monophysites and the orthodox] for a time; eventually each communion maintained a distinct and independent succession." Gdr 17:38, 2005 Apr 18 (UTC)
- I was unable to find out anything about him/them with a cursory glance at the web or in my books; a pity. Good work with the disambig page, though. –Hajor 18:13, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- That's intriguing; do you know enough about it to write a Dioscorus II of Alexandria article? The two lists indicate identical dates for his patriarchate/papacy, which definitely supports the idea of the two being the same. –Hajor 16:48, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it be moved. violet/riga (t) 16:49, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
[edit] NPOV
I don't think it's remotely appropriate for this article to refer to Dioscorus as a "saint". Not only is it inappropriate for a neutral encyclopedia, the majority of Christians condemn Dioscorus as a serious heretic. --Matrona 19:27, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
Was he sainted under any tradition? If so, it is appropriate to call him saint. If not, I would have to wonder why he was refered to as such to begin with. Thanatosimii 01:09, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- Saint is perfectly appropriate to use within this article, according to the conventions of Wikipedia (especially if, as it is here, it is set within the context of the tradition that considers him a saint). --Pastordavid 19:29, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Matrona's criticism lacks objectivity
Matrona's response shows some clear hypocritical bias. There is a wikepedia article for example on the arch-enemy of St Dioscorus - Leo of Rome, where he is referred to as "Pope Saint Leo the Great". Alot of Orthodox Christians (Syrian, Coptic, Armenian, Indian, Ethiopian, Eritrean), consider Leo of Rome to be a serious Nestorian heretic.
[edit] More Concise
As there has been an active talk page, I did not want to make any edits without talking it out here first. This article, seems laden with too much detail about the theological debates in of the age, extending well beyond their connection to the life of Dioscorus. It would be helpful if the article were more concise, with appropriate wikilinks where more background ifo is provided in other articles. If no one objects, I will try to do some trimming. --Pastordavid 19:31, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Categories: Start-Class Oriental Orthodoxy articles | Unknown-importance Oriental Orthodoxy articles | WikiProject Egypt articles | Start-Class Egypt articles | Mid-importance Egypt articles | Biography articles needing infoboxes | Start-Class biography articles | Saints articles needing infoboxes | Start-Class saints articles | Mid-importance saints articles | WikiProject Saints articles