Prove it.
Provide evidence that you have cause to believe that the translation is illegitimate.
Otherwise, you're just making accusations with ZERO evidence. In which case, the cited author's scholarly credentials outweigh your own, his translational authority may be presumed superior to your own, and your charge is dismissed as baseless and utterly unsubstantiated.
No way, Destro. I accept the translations of the Fathers when I read them in scholarly works unless I have evidence of mis-translation (which I have done in some cases; cf. Irenaeus on Domitian/Domitius) -- and in such cases, I research, collate, and produce the evidence to back up my charges.. If you want to impugn the authority of MY cited translations, produce evidence of your charge.... and no, if you want to indict a scholarly translation, it's not MY job to do YOUR homework.
So -- substantiate your charge. Otherwise, your post is irrelevant.
By the way, this is just more of the same dissimulation technique that's been foisted on me this whole thread. It won't wash, sorry.
I, in the spirit of argumentative charity, presume scholarly Honesty on the part of Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic authors, unless I have clear evidence of malfeasance.
You, OTOH, just unfairly presume scholarly Dishonesty on the part of Protestants, and that with ZERO evidence (in fact, with contravening evidence against you, such as the fact that Erigina's book denying the Carnal Presence in the Eucharist was burned -- if he was misquoted, why burn the book?).
Nice work if you can get it. "The greatest of these is charity", huh?