Talk:Claudius of Turin

message: This list doesn't belong in this article:
===Main views===
* He opposed worship of images, relics and crosses,
Already in the cited fact in the article.
* he forbade pilgrimages to Rome to obtain absolution,
Already in the cited fact in the article.
* he refused to accept the authority of the pope who wasn't apostolic in his way of life,
Already in the cited fact in the article.
* he denied infallibility of the Church,
If you are suggesting Papal infallibility, it was not dogmaticaly declared until the 19th century.  If you mean the Magistarium, please cite.
* he thought of the Eucharist as a symbol of Christ's body and blood,
The phrase transubstantiation was not current yet, not until centuries later.  Again, if this is fact, please cite needed.
* he teached that a man is saved by faith alone and must not rely on his works for his justification.
Indulgences were a product of Pope Urban II Crusade of 1095, Claudius predates the controversy by several centuries.  This wasn't a big issue until the time of Luther.  If this is so, please cite.
Also reverting (and why:)
Claudius was opposed by Dungal, Jonas of Orleans and Theodmir, but his authority seems to have been too well established and Claudius continued unharmed with his reforms and views until his death in 839. 
"seems to have been" Pointing out how something "seems" has nothing to do with what wikipedia is. If it is fact, state it and cite it.  If its speculation, cut it.
Some believe Louis the Pious considered him later a Heresiarch
You added "some".  This is wrong, "some" do not believe it.  The Oxford Dictionary of Christianity believes it and every reader can tell this because the fact is cited.  Adding "some" here only introduces weasel words.
Lastly:''
...(at a personal request of the emperor)
I have cited facts in this article that state the Emperor was trying to discredit Claudius.  Your introduction of weasel words above is to set up this parenthetical. Please cite it when you return it to the text and perhaps give some facts explaning why he the emperor would be double dealing with the bishop.
The article is just a stub, any cited facts would be welcome additions.
-- SECisek 14:12, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is some stuff I can add, but I have found contradictions between sources, since Claudius undoubtedly dedicated much of his work to the Emperor and was a member for a time of his court circle. The Emperor probably even requested some of his writings, but it has also been stated that the emperor requested Jonas and Dungal to write against him. Srnec 05:16, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Great work, Srnec! I'll see what else I can add. -- SECisek 04:45, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sending it for GA.  I think, given the limited subject matter,  this is as good as it is going to get. -- SECisek 10:00, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, though I think there is some information that could be used to augment the article. Srnec 03:45, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Redundant

message: * He opposed worship of images, relics and crosses,
Already in the cited fact in the article.
* he forbade pilgrimages to Rome to obtain absolution,
Already in the cited fact in the article.
* he refused to accept the authority of the pope who wasn't apostolic in his way of life,
Already in the cited fact in the article.
* he denied infallibility of the Church,
If you are suggesting Papal infallibility, it was not dogmaticaly declared until the 19th century.  If you mean the Magistarium, please cite.
* he thought of the Eucharist as a symbol of Christ's body and blood,
The phrase transubstantiation was not current yet, not until centuries later.  Again, if this is fact, please cite needed.
* he teached that a man is saved by faith alone and must not rely on his works for his justification.
Indulgences were a product of Pope Urban II Crusade of 1095, Claudius predates the controversy by several centuries.  This wasn't a big issue until the time of Luther.  If this is so, please cite.
Also reverting (and why:)
Claudius was opposed by Dungal, Jonas of Orleans and Theodmir, but his authority seems to have been too well established and Claudius continued unharmed with his reforms and views until his death in 839. 
"seems to have been" Pointing out how something "seems" has nothing to do with what wikipedia is. If it is fact, state it and cite it.  If its speculation, cut it.
Some believe Louis the Pious considered him later a Heresiarch
You added "some".  This is wrong, "some" do not believe it.  The Oxford Dictionary of Christianity believes it and every reader can tell this because the fact is cited.  Adding "some" here only introduces weasel words.
Lastly:''
...(at a personal request of the emperor)
I have cited facts in this article that state the Emperor was trying to discredit Claudius.  Your introduction of weasel words above is to set up this parenthetical. Please cite it when you return it to the text and perhaps give some facts explaning why he the emperor would be double dealing with the bishop.
The article is just a stub, any cited facts would be welcome additions.
-- SECisek 14:12, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is some stuff I can add, but I have found contradictions between sources, since Claudius undoubtedly dedicated much of his work to the Emperor and was a member for a time of his court circle. The Emperor probably even requested some of his writings, but it has also been stated that the emperor requested Jonas and Dungal to write against him. Srnec 05:16, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Great work, Srnec! I'll see what else I can add. -- SECisek 04:45, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sending it for GA.  I think, given the limited subject matter,  this is as good as it is going to get. -- SECisek 10:00, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, though I think there is some information that could be used to augment the article. Srnec 03:45, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Main views

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Claudius of Turin. 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/20070928062109/http://www.museudiocesaurgell.org/laseu/uk/sorigenv.htm to http://www.museudiocesaurgell.org/laseu/uk/sorigenv.htm
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) 03:41, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified