# Talk:Gregory of Nyssa

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 04:04, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

these cats removed since the text of article discusses that this is in dispute. However a clear source ref might restore them? In ictu oculi (talk) 10:23, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Gregory of Nyssa/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Coemgenus (talk · contribs) 19:48, 3 February 2012 (UTC)


### Technical review
(Disambiguations):  no dabs found by the tools;
(Linkrot)  external links all report as working except one -- Relics of St. Gregory of Nyssa.  I'd trim back that external link section, too, if I were you, but it's not necessary.
 Done I've trimmed the external link section back. I don't have any problem accessing the photograph of his relics on http://www.oorthodoxphotos.com -  why does it report as dead ? --He to Hecuba (talk) 20:15, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Actually, it works for me, too.  Don't know why it came up as dead.  --Coemgenus (talk) 20:26, 3 February 2012 (UTC)


### Criteria
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS): 
Good, clear writing about complex concepts.
No MOS problems in the text. With the citations, the only things I'd fix are (1) in the bibliography -- some authors are listed last name first, others first name first; standardization would make it neater and easier to look through.  And (2) cite to the author's name, not the book names in the inline citation.  You seem to do both and it makes it hard to look up a reference.
 Question:   - in the citation style I'm using, how should I cite a work which has multiple authors. Should it be cited to the editor ? I thought it would be better to use the name of the book. I'll standardize the bibliography. --He to Hecuba (talk) 21:06, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
I'd use the editor(s), but I'm not sure that's the only right answer.  --Coemgenus (talk) 21:11, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Ok, I'll sort that now. Thanks for your time in reviewing this article - I'm pleased to have earned my first GA. --He to Hecuba (talk) 21:13, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
My pleasure!  Nice article, I'm glad to have read it.  --Coemgenus (talk) 21:20, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
Good references, as far as I can tell, and well-cited throughout.  Doesn't appear to have any original research.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
It covers the man, his ideas, and his legacy.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
a (fair representation):  b (all significant views): 
No POV action that I can see.
It is stable.
No edit wars etc.: 
No drama here.
It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
a (tagged and captioned):  b (Is illustrated with appropriate images):  c (non-free images have fair use rationales):  d public domain pictures appropriately demonstrate why they are public domain: 
Images are all centuries old.
So, once the cites are in order, I think this is good to go.  --Coemgenus (talk) 20:58, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
All done. --He to Hecuba (talk) 21:20, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

This section contains the apparently contradictory statements 'According to Gregory, the differences between the three persons of the Trinity reside in their relationships with each other' and 'he clearly believes that the identities of the Trinity are the three persons, not the relations between them.' Clivemacd (talk) 00:20, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Gregory of Nyssa. 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/20120604032048/http://www.stgregory.ca.goarch.org/ParishHistory.dsp to http://www.stgregory.ca.goarch.org/ParishHistory.dsp
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080513192134/http://www.sage.edu/faculty/salomd/nyssa/index.html to http://www.sage.edu/faculty/salomd/nyssa/index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:51, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

This interpretation of Gregory has been criticized recently, however.[59][60] Indeed, this interpretation is explicitly contradicted[citation needed] in the "Great Catechism" itself, for at the end of chapter XXXV Gregory declares that those who have not been purified by water through baptism will be purified by fire in the end, so that "their nature may be restored pure again to God". On the contrary, Saint Gregory also affirms that "without the laver of regeneration it is impossible for the man to be in the resurrection", meaning that the salvation won't be universal.[61] Furthermore, in the next chapter (ch. XXXVI), Gregory says that those who are purified from evil will be admitted into the "heavenly company"
In chapter XXXV it is said that "without the laver of regeneration it is impossible for the man to be in the resurrection". And this statement doesn't contribute to the theory of universale salvation. It is also true that neither the Hell neither the Paradise nor the Purgatory are ever mentioned there. It is a complex matter that needs to be better clarified, possibly with the additional exegesis of some bishops. The Holy Spirit God, who is exclusively taken by thesuccesors of the Twelve Apostles, is the main source of truth.
that applies regardles the personal academic authority of one or more persons. On the contrary, no episcopal authority is cited about this matter, although the exegesis of Christian authors is a their own duty.
It was also added an additional paper, sourced by JSTOR 10.5406/illiclasstud.33-34.0201. It is not free, but, at least, is freely readable for those who access JSTOR from an academic institution or another partner entity. And this would be a way not to make indirect profits through WP articles.
Said in brackets, the text reported by CCEL includes some errors like in the following sentence: "it is not, in fact, possible that that should take place". In this sense, it would be very helpful to have online a further edition, not copyrighted, with the Greek text and a critical comment. Maybe, there is something available in the Internet Archive. Hope that someone will help in this aspect.
I would like to apologize for the not idiomatic English. I am doing my best to improve it.  Regards, Theologian81sp

Hello Theologian81sp. Just be aware that Wikipedia relies on secondary sources, not primary ones. That is, when interpreting what the subject of an article (in this case, Gregory) has written, we look at what reliable authorities have written about the issue, and not what we as Wikipedia editors determine by reading the text in question. Likewise, whether a particular translation of Gregory's works is accurate has to be sourced back to a reliable secondary source. WP:RS explains this more fully. Indyguy (talk) 16:01, 25 July 2021 (UTC)