In response to you, Evan, the beauty for me of the Ecclesiastical-Italian and Nuntii Latini models is because they represent (I believe) fine old and established traditions that are more European than national, and they are alive! I have no difficulty in agreeing it's better to recommend the restored classical model because there are special present and future advantages in having a unified standard (quite apart from it's importance for classical studies). However, signing-up to a manifesto that condemned the alternative models as "in error" I couldn't do because that condemnation, to me, seems more greviously in error (ideologically and historically). That was what my beef was about. It's a matter of wording but words aren't trivial.
Evano responsum Adriani. (Just for practice. Happy for corrections.)
Admiror, Evane, modos latine loquendi ut Ecclesiasticum-Italum et quem "Nuntii Latini" voco, quod hi consuetudines vetustas atque probabiles (ut credo) demonstrant, coque sunt consuetudines vivae! Sunt etiam modi proprie europaei, non solum gentiles. Commoditatibus systematis unici praesentibus futurisque numeratis, modus classicus nove correctus satius esse libenter consentio (et disciplinis classicis non minor usus est quem habet, certe). Condicionem autem subscribere quae "errata" modorum aliorum condemnet -- id non possum! Sic facere gravius erratum futurum esse puto, --historice et ideologice dicens (ut mihi videtur). Ecce natura complorationis meae. Res dilectorum verborum est, sed verba pollentissima sunt.
)
Of course, I would have prefered to wear soleae, as well as a proper (woolen) toga of course, but that will be for a later time. 