Talk:Feast of Corpus Christi

message: This feast is no longer called Corpus Christi.  It is currently called the Feast of the Body of Christ.
: I'm assuming this is only in English-speaking countries?  Have all denominations who celebrate this feast adopted this change, or does it only apply to Roman Catholicism?  Seeing as the Latin name was used for so long, and as how so many institutions (churches/schools/etc.) have accordingly taken Corpus Christi as their name, I think it makes more sense for WP to use the traditional name.  You could always set up a redirect.  --TurabianNights 20:23, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  If you want to get technical, then the day is called "The Feast of the Most Holy Body and Blood of Jesus Christ" by the Catholic Church, but most people still call it "Corpus Christi", even in English-speaking  countries.Will (talk) 20:24, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hint: The words "the Body of Christ" and Corpus Christi are identical.--93.135.33.195 (talk) 15:05, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name of feast 

message: I'm trying to remove links to the Corpus Christi disambiguation page, and I found a paragraph in the Spanish Inquisition article, which gives the following statement —
:The Conversos of Toledo, like those of Seville, conspired to prevent the self-styled Holy Office from entering its functions.  One plan was to seize the city gates and the tower of the Cathedral and to try to make a stand against the Crown; another was to attack the Inquisitors during the procession of Corpus Christi.  
Should I point this last link to this page? I'm not Christian, so I don't know... is there a procession or march of any kind as part of the celebrations? Regards, — riana_dzasta • t • c • e • 11:42, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They are in Bavaria (and Bavaria and Austria have most of their customs in common, actually). They are used for the decoration of the streets because, yes, a procession is included in the celebration, actually as its decisive point (though theologically, it's of course the Mass that is most important). Normally, the procession is throughout the city (centre) or village. --84.154.93.223 (talk) 15:30, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: procession?

message: According to the caption, the first photo in the article shows a procession in Germany; but according to the image page, and all appearances, it's in North Carolina. Am I missing something? --Javits2000 21:45, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Photo

message: I'm unable to figure out from this article just what Corpus Christi "is".Article says: "The feast is assigned to the Thursday following Trinity Sunday, mirroring Maundy Thursday, the Thursday of Holy Week on which Jesus Christ instituted the Sacrament of the Eucharist at the Last Supper."Sorry, what? Why is this day considered appropriate to observe with a feast? It presumably doesn't commemorate an occasion in the life of Jesus, as it occurs well after Easter. It seems to be somehow theologically (not just calendrically) related to Pentecost, but I can't figure out just how.Could someone please clarify this for those to whom it is not obvious? Thanks. -- Writtenonsand (talk) 20:14, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've tried to modify the lead to make it more clear, but essentially what it already said is true: that it honours the Eucharist. Has my change made it clearer for you? It seems that they just wanted to add a feast, and for whatever reason they chose this time of year to add it in. It being on Thursday is the only obviously important part to the timing. To my knowledge, there isn't a relation to Pentecost, except calendrically. But FWIW we do have feasts for events during Christ's life during Ordinary Time (ie the Transfiguration, 6 August). Regards, Carl.bunderson (talk) 20:41, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Somewhat, thanks. -- Writtenonsand (talk) 13:51, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

text: It's the first free Thursday after Eastertide. Carolynparrishfan (talk) 21:25, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry -- as I attempted to make clear, my question was not when is it?, but what is it? or why is it? -- Writtenonsand (talk) 13:51, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I understood, and I thought I answered that. Maundy Thursday (as we've established) isn't an appropriate time for such festivities, so it gets transferred to the next available Thursday - which just happens to be several weeks later. Carolynparrishfan (talk) 14:15, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

text: The 'what' and 'why' is honouring the Eucharist. It is meant for nothing but to show honour to Jesus in the Eucharist. How were our edits not clear about that? Carl.bunderson (talk) 02:08, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I had similar problems understanding what this feast is about. The theological explanation might be correct, but is not straight-forward. How would you explain this feast to Muslims, Hindus, or Jews?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.5.11.5 (talk) 07:14, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Sorry, but just what ''is'' it?

message: Here in Germany, this holiday is well-known and celebrated, but among the majority of lay and non-practicing Catholics (and atheists, and Evangelicals) it is considered just another day off work. So much so, that the German name has given rise to a pun which has found very common usage in the German language. The day is often called (tongue firmly in cheek) "Happy-Kadaver" (as in the English "Happy Cadaver") because the word "Fronleichnam" is pronounced like "frohe Leichnam", with Leichnam meaning corpse or cadaver and froh meaning joyous or happy.
While it's not hugely relevant to the Catholic interpretation of the holiday, I still see it as relevant, especially as the term is so popular and controversial at the same time. Jamyskis Whisper, Contribs 21:00, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Just thinking of it, I happen to be German and yes, there are non-practising Catholics (the construction lay and non-practising is incorrect), and there remains still something of a historical Protestant aversion against Corpus Christi, but "Frohen Leichnam" is not popular (not sure whether I've heard of it) and have quite sure never heard of "happy cadaver". Anyway, there is a big couple of other highly traditional names such as Pillory Day (Prangertag: the Holy-of-the-Holies is to be seen for everyone just as one who is punished in a pillory). However, I do not believe this is relevant to the English wikipedia, either. --84.154.93.223 (talk) 15:44, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Carl, have you ever driven past some of those open garages in which people keep all kinds of things for 30 years and never use them... They just trip over the junk all the time. This discussion is irrelevant and keeps in the way of relevant items. I suggest deleting it because it does not in any way educate about the feast, which is the encyclopedia's goal. Do you want to keep it for 30 years? Cheers History2007 (talk) 19:37, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The discussion is relevant. I often delete posts from talk pages which have nothing to do with improving articles. However, this thread does have to do with improving the article. Jamiskys made a suggestion about including something in the article. Granted, everyone else agrees it isn't a particularly good idea, but it is a suggestion about improving the article nonetheless. There is no basis for deleting it. We don't delete other persons' posts because we think they're useless. I, for one, am not nearly so elitist as that. carl bunderson (talk) (contributions) 20:17, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Have you set a date for my trial on charges of elitism? But more seriously, and frankly I see Wikipedia as a system that was "hungry for content" years ago when it was so lean and malnourished. Now it has the Henry the 8th obesity problem with all this junk floating around. I see this as junk (which is offensive anyway, but that is obviously not a problem in Wikipedia) and is not relevant because it teaches nothing about the feast, which is a religious topic. History2007 (talk) 20:56, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No user has the authority to delete posts which are related to improving articles. Period. I wholeheartedly agree that the information should not be in the article. But that doesn't mean we can delete the record of its suggestion. carl bunderson (talk) (contributions) 20:58, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed that the key item here is related to improving articles. In my view this does not pass the test. History2007 (talk) 21:03, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It is clear from the initial post, and from the anon's response to it, that it is related to improving the article. carl bunderson (talk) (contributions) 21:15, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

text: Maybe clear to you. But it is clear to me that it is not. History2007 (talk) 21:40, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Humorous name in Germany 

message: In the article it says Lutherans no longer celebrate this feast, but at my two former churches (WELS and LCMS), it was observed each year. (those churches are Messiah Lutheran Church (WELS) in Alpharetta, Georgia and Grace Lutheran Church (LCMS) in Midtown Atlanta). Should the sentence be re-written? Shark96z (talk) 21:41, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lutherans? 

message: I just finished reading an article that presents manuscript evidence questioning Thomas Aquinas's authorship of the Office: Thomas J. Matheisen, "The Office of the new feast of Corpus Christi in the Regimen animarum at Brigham Young University", The Journal of Musicology, vol. 2, no. 1, winter 1983, pp. 13-44. You might consider bracketing the assertion that he did write it. He never claimed to have written the Office. The attribution was first made in 1317 by Ptolemy of Lucca, Thomas's confessor, but is missing from earlier sources. I am unsure if this question is resolved, and whether Thomas wrote certain parts that are now part of the liturgy for the day. Joethoma —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joethoma (talk • contribs) 16:05, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin of the Office 

message: The most common term to express what is Western Catholic is Roman Catholic.  Later in the article the distinction can be made between the Latin rite and the other rites of the Catholic Church which does not observe this feast.  This is a WP:MOS issue for WP:UPE.
I will also have a look at each of the Eastern Catholic Churches to see if they have a feast of Corpus Christi or the equivalent. patsw (talk) 00:38, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarification in the lede 

message: The article says that the feast was first established for the Thursday after Pentecost. When did it get moved to a week later? Rwflammang (talk) 13:58, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: An interesting question.  As you can see from my latest edits, the feast was set, by decrees with little sticking power, for the Thursday after Trinity in Liège in 1246, for the Thursday after the Octave of Trinity (Trinity seems not to have had an octave everywhere) in quite a wide area (Germany, Dacia, Bohemia, Moravia) in 1252, for the Thursday after Pentecost everywhere in 1264.  Three different dates, therefore.  The Tridentine Calendar of 1570 has the feast at what you might now call its normal date of the Thursday after Trinity.  When was this date established?  My firm guess is that it must have been when the feast really became universal, not in 1264 but with the promulgation of the Clementines in 1317.  But I have, at least as yet, found no evidence for this.  Esoglou (talk) 16:17, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thursday after pentecost 

message: Despite what is now written in the article, Corpus Christi is NOT a public holiday in Italy. See, for instance, this page on Italian wikipedia (in Italian) :it:Giorno festivo 82.54.128.253 (talk) 07:45, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not public holiday in Italy 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Corpus Christi (feast). 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/20071106141504/http://www.haverford.edu/engl/engl301/corpuschristi/corpus_christi.html to http://www.haverford.edu/engl/engl301/corpuschristi/corpus_christi.html
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) 09:09, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The Latin name Dies Sanctissimi Corporis et Sanguinis Domini Iesu Christi is unreferenced in the WP article as well as elsewhere. The expression Die septima iunii festum sanctissimi Corporis et Sanguinis Christi recurred in the Pontifical Mass celebrated by Pope Benedict XVI for the 2012 Epiphany (sourced at p. 29). This can be used to correct and source the incipit of the WP article.
The Latin term "festum" is much less familiar to the Christian liturgy than the Latin word "Dies". 
According to this paper, freely available on DOAJ, "in the bull of the Pope Urban IV from 1264 it was described as memorials  sacramentum  in  cotidianis   missarum sollemnior, festum sanctissimi Corporis Domini nostri Jesu Christi." Probably the English word "memorials" it's a typo which really stands for the Latin memorialis. 
Similarly, in Acta Sanctae Sedis (06-1914) we read Festum pretiosissimi Sanguinis Domini nostri Jesu Christi. 
Accordint to the aforementioned paper, after the 1970 reformation of the Missale Romanum, the name become Sollemnitas  Sanctissimi  corporis  et  sanguinis  Christi I think we need an additional and more reliable source to cite it into the WP article, while the other sources -coming from the vatican.va  website- can be hopefully integrated.Ciccio81ge (talk) 13:33, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Just a correction — Acta Sanctae Sedis actually names it as Festum sanctissimi Corporis Christi (p. 10) or Corporis Domini (p. 504). Festum pretiosissimi Sanguinis Domini nostri Jesu Christi actually refers to the Feast of the Most Precious Blood, which is a different occasion. Epistulae ad Familiares (talk) 16:38, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incipit-original Latin name 

message: I don't think it's true that it is observed in most Anglican churches. I'm not sure whether 'some' or 'many' would be correct. Mdrb55 (talk) 17:45, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anglican churches 

message: I still wonder whether it is useful to point out that the Calvinists do not observe the Feast, as there are surely more communities and denominations which do not, such as the Amish, the Hutterites, the Latter Day Saints and so on. What is the point of mentioning a denomination or church in the feast's article, only because that?--Medusahead (talk) 08:39, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Calvinists