Talk:Epiphany (holiday)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Rewrite for clarity

Quote: Prior to 1970, the Roman Catholic Church (and prior to 1976, the Anglican churches) reckoned Epiphany as an eight-day feast, beginning on January 6 and continuing through the Octave of Epiphany, or January 13. Many traditionalist Catholics continue to use this calendar, and celebrate the feast of the Holy Family on the Sunday within the octave. More recently, most Roman Catholics in the United States mark Epiphany on the Sunday after the first Saturday in January (before this the Sunday between January 1 and January 6, in years when there was one, was designated the Feast of the Holy Name of Jesus), and most Catholics and Anglicans (along with many other Protestants) now formally end the Christmas season on the Sunday immediately following January 6, or, for American Catholics, the ensuing Monday in years when the Epiphany falls on January 7 or January 8. In either case, the feast of the Baptism of the Lord is observed on the latter day, after which the first installment of Ordinary Time begins. (But note that some Churches, such as the Anglican Catholic Church, and some groups of Roman Catholics, still use the pre-1970 calendar; for these bodies, Christmas still has twelve days and ends on January 5, and Epiphany is still celebrated on January 6 with an 8-day octave.)

Are you DELIBERATELY trying to be obtuse?
There must be a better way to organize this information...

- 128.107.253.41 03:06, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

I am adding back in the link to the traditional Catholic customs of Epiphany and Twelfhnight because I think they are complete guides to how the Feast and its eve are celebrated by traditional Catholics and that the information is useful to them and to others who are interested in present and historical Catholic customs. Malachias111 15:46, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

I guess what I don't understand is that there's a link to a generic Christian resource center, a link to "the Epiphany customs in Greece"--but there's nothing about how the Feast and its Eve are celebrated by Catholics (the biggest "denomination" in the Christian world) except for very basic stuff in the Christian resource center page. The Fisheater pages are much more complete and have readings, rites, customs, folklore, recipes, etc. (Actually, this can be said about all of the "Feast" pages--Advent, Lent, Christmas, Easter, Brigid of Ireland, Candlemas, Martha, Mary Magdalen, John the Baptist, etc. The Fisheaters pages are just so complete...)Malachias111 01:07, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

The article on the Epiphany is not very clear and needs some inprovement. You can hardly understand it and what it means please when you edit this please get your information from the correct sources.

Name

Might it not make more sense to have the disambiguation in parentheses be (feast) or (holiday)? Those strike me as much more natural and intuitive. --Gwern (contribs) 22:24, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi. The article states that tradition says that the wise men were called Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar. True, yes, but that is what you might call church tradition, not Biblical tradition. The Bible says that there were three gifts, but not three wise men. The Bible is silent on how many wise men there were. There may have been three, but there may have been four, or eight or ten. What the original Greek says in Matthew 2 in the New Testament is Magi. Could there have been wise women and men?? I don't know. Just speculating there. L. Thomas W. 11/28/06

Pictures

would you be interested in this pic? the divers are shown, the Cross is kissed by the one who found it, it's winter and there are many people and also there is an island Church in the background. Mykonos, Greece. i like the pic with the Cross in the air too. could we fit that pic somewhere too? a thumbnail maybe? good or bad?
CuteHappyBrute (talk) 05:38, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

The References and Category Lists are missing!

I moticed that the References and Category lists are missing! Can someone please restore them? --Angeldeb82 (talk) 22:32, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Hungarian translation

"Hungarians, in an apparent reference to baptism, refer to the January 6 celebration as Vízkereszt or "water cross"." The word "kereszt" means cross, but here it is probably shortened from "keresztelés" which means baptism (of course it does come from the word for cross). So the translation is probably more correct as "water baptism" and so the meaning is more apparent. It is curious though that Hungarians use the eastern meaning for this holiday, while otherwise following western christianity, but alas I'm no expert in this field. (But I know Hungary had lot of Bizantine influence early on). Hoemaco (talk) 20:59, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Discrimination against the Eastern Church

Why has the terminology of Rome been privileged? Theophany is equally valid as a name for the feast. Have made it so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.96.148.42 (talk) 04:17, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

---They are both valid terms, and in the article, when speaking of the holiday in terms of the eastern church, and countries where it is known as Theophany, Theophany is used, either both in conjuction with Epiphany, or on its own.

The thing is, we do happen to be writing in the English section of wikipedia. We are Enlgish speakers, and we live largely in western countries. The Enlgish word for the holiday, going back deep into the history of the language is Epiphany. In fact, we live in English speaking countries that majoritarily, have been historically shaped not by Rome, but Protestantism, which also uses the term Epiphany. Yes, both are acceptable terms, but Epiphany is the main term, in English wikipedia that is. Now, this would be an entirely different discussion in the Russian Wikipedia space.

The other thing I'd like to mention is that both Epiphany and Theophany are used in the eastern churches. Meanwhile outside of them, only Epiphany is used. Epiphany, being itself just about as eastern a church term as can be coming from the Greek, is used by all groups, while Theophany is not. It would seem that rather than eastern churches in reality being discriminated against in this article, you are asking for information relating to them to be priveleged above other information. If this is the case, you would do better just to ask for this openly. I would still advise against such a change to the article, because the topic includes a variety of religious observances, and information relating to the holiday that is cultural, historical, or festive (without necesarily relating to religion) in nature, and is intended for the Entire wikipedia readership, not simply those from a particular religious or national background. You could see what the consensus is though.---

Nomination

This article has been nominated to be checked for its neutrality. This lousy T-shirt (talk) 16:37, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Epiphany in Italy

In Italy, Epipany is NOT trasformed into Befana. Befana is the character who brings the gifts in the Epiphny's Night. I would edit the article, but my English in not good. Ask the autor to edit that section. --Diavolo Rosso (talk) 13:10, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

This is contradicted by the entry in the Treccani (see the dictionary entry at http://www.treccani.it) The entry states that “befana” is derived from Latin epiphania. As its first meaning it gives: “Nome popolare dell’Epifania” and as its second “Personificazione dell’Epifania”. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Campolongo (talk • contribs) 17:27, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Untitled

Date of Commemoration - April 2011 - Hi, I've just made an edit to this section. If someone feels the need to move this comment to another area of the talk page, please feel free. I changed a clause about the date of old-calendar Epiphany changing from January 19 to January 20th in 2100 to "today". Firstly, it doesn't seem that any more information is necesary. Secondy, the clause was very cumbersome, and confusing. This can be a confusing point - why Epiphany seemse to be celebrated on more than one day. However, the old-calendar/new calendar issue is covered more than once in the article. It is not the case that every time Epiphany being celebrated on Jan 19 is mentioned, the issue has to be explained again. It just adds to the confusion. Thirdly this section is under the heading of Western Churches. It's great for the information regarding the date of commemoration to be all together. It is also a very interesting piece of information, that due to the difference between the Julian and Gregorian calendars Epiphany in some Eastern Christian traditions has been celebrated on Jan 19 for 110 years, but will only continue to be for the next 90 years. I hope this can be included somewhere in the article. If someone would like to included it, would a possible solution of adding a "Date of Commemoration" section under the "Easter Churches" heading work? The nuances of different Eastern Calendars, including Gregorian, Julian, and revised Julian, are ultimately best organized under articles on these subjects, or briefly under the Eastern Churces section here on the Epiphany Article. If such a section is written up, another important piece of information to include might be that Eastern Catholic Rites celebrate Epiphany on Jan 6, but that the day commemorates the Baptism of Christ rather than the Adoration of the Magi. Finally, it seems that at one point, the "today" concluded the paragraph as it does now. It was removed - perhaps the editor thought it superfluous. Then later, the clause about the shifts in the Julian calender which are to take place in 2100 was inserted to clarify. May I make a suggestion to future copy editors? I would reccomend not removing the "today" without first discussing it here on the talk page. It is a bigger edit than he or she might consider it to be. Any edit here must clearly and briefly convey all that the "today" does in standing in for a longer clause on the Julian calendar. Enjoy! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MattDiClemente (talk • contribs) 05:42, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Why is there an illustration of Theophany and not Epiphany on this page?Guille 03:02, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Because no one has put one there yet. That's your job.  Sean Lotz  talk  03:26, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Never mind. It's your lucky day. I did it for you.  Sean Lotz  talk  03:43, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Ya gotta give a guy a chance I was getting there.

Well, as art, I like the one you changed it to better.  Sean Lotz  talk  07:59, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

An event in this article is a January 6 selected anniversary

From the 25th of December to the 6th of January is THIRTEEN days, not twelve. The twelfth day of Christmas is the 5th of January.

Not sure, but I think that counting may have had December 25 as the 0th day of Christmas, the 26th as the first day, etc. Liturgical day counting can be strange some times; East and West have different ways of coming up with 40 days of Lent, for instance, by counting weekends slightly differently or some such. Wesley 17:44, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)

"Epiphany was traditionally a Christian feast..." may need to be NPOV-ified, since it is still practiced in Orthodox Christianity (hence not past-tense).

Epiphany still is a Christian feast. The twelfth day of Christmas is 5 January, and its evening is Twelfth Night: Epiphany is not in Christmastide, but the start of a new season. The Revised Common Lectionary says that if Epiphany is celebrated on a Sunday it should be celebrated on the Second Sunday after Christmas: that is the Sunday before Epiphany, not after it. What is the evidence to support the observance of Epiphany Sunday after Epiphany? Gareth Hughes 14:00, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Does anyone fancy working on WikiProject Christian liturgical year? Gareth Hughes 10:55, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The article currently states:

"Thus in the Latin church, the feast of Christmas was established before that of Epiphany. Over time the western churches decided to celebrate Christmas on December 25. The eastern churches continued to treat January 6 as the day marking Jesus's birth. This has given rise in the west to the notion of a twelve-day festival, starting on December 25, and ending on January 6, called the twelve days of Christmas, although some Christian cultures — especially those of Latin America — extend it to forty days, ending on Candlemas, or February 2 (known as Candelaria in Spanish)."

The difference between January 6 and December 25 is not a liturgical distinction, but one of calendar. When the Julian calendar was replaced by the Gregorian calendar by the civil authorities in predominantly Orthodox countries, in many places the Orthodox church kept the Julian in effect for liturgical observances, creating a situation where two calendars are in effect. Right now, there are 13 days of difference between the two, placing Old Calendar Christmas right on top of New Calendar Epiphany.

The feast of Epiphany, however, has always been separate from the feast of Christmas, not only in substance but in date. The Annunciation has been celebrated on March 25 for over a millenium, which places Christmas squarely on December 25 regardless of what calendar is used to observe the feast.

The article is correct. The division between East and West over the Feats of the Nativity occurred in the third century. It seems that various churches began to suplant pagan winter solstice festivities with a celebration of the incarnation of Jesus. In Egypt and Syria, 6 January in the Julian calendar was considered to be the traditional date of the solstice. In Rome, 25 December was the traditional date of the solstice. Finally, there was compromise and both dates were accepted. However, the shift of the Roman Empire eastwards led to 25 December becoming the main feast of the two. As you have already pointed out, the issue is complicated by the Gregorian and Revised Julian calendars being now 13 days out of step with the Julian calendar. This gives us:

• 25 December — Gregorian and Revised Julian Christmas.
• 6 January — Gregorian and Revised Julian Epiphany.
• 7 January — Julian Christmas.
• 19 January — Julian Epiphany and Armenian Christmas.

Note the Armenian Apostolic Church has always considered Christmas to be on the 6 January Julian, and has never adopted 25 December. --Gareth Hughes 20:11, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

Poland

Are you kidding me with the article on Poland? I've lived in Warsaw all my life and there is no "grand parade". Some very small (hundreds, not even thousands of people) parades and celebrations exist, but the day was a working day till last year when it was declared a state holiday. This was after a great fight by the unions. And for most Poles it's just that - a day when the people working in supermarkets have a rare day off... (as in Poland commerce is not regulated really and stores are only closed for 12 - now with Epiphany 13 - days a year, not on all sundays like in Germany). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.255.44.254 (talk) 20:38, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

There are four references. Are you saying that they are not accurate or that they are out-of-date? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:45, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

The references are definitely inaccurate. While the traditions listed are Polish, they do not coincide with Epiphany, which as was pointed out above, was not even a recognized holiday until recently. - Acrichmond (talk) 13:07, 6 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.212.29.190 (talk)

Fahrenheit/Celcius

I made a slight edit to the Russia section of this article to bring the idea of Russians swimming in the Black Sea more within the comprehension of North-American English language readers. I will also double gloss any other Fahrenheit/Celcius references in the article for clarity in all English speaking countries. I hope this helps!MattDiClemente (talk) 07:00, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Since Fahrenheit measurement is by now officially confined practically to the United States (not even to the whole of North America) and United States territories, and since Wikipedia is international, not for the United States alone, please don't make the Fahrenheit measurement the principal one in articles about other countries, even if they are English-speaking. We are no longer in the 1960s. Esoglou (talk) 07:30, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Switzerland

Subsuming Switzerland under German Speaking Countries is simply wrong, because the Traditions are similar in French, Italian, German and Raeto-Romanic parts of Switzerland. The "Sternsinger" custom is not known in Switzerland. Furthermore the "3 Kings Cake" as we call it is not a "Buchtel" at all. It is a cake made of wheat, yeast, dried grapes, butter, milk a small amount of almond paste, a bit of sugar and decorated with some almonds or "Hagelzucker". The pastry is formed in form of small balls and put together so that the overall form is that of a flower. In one of the bread-balls a small figure in form of a king or a queen is hidden. The cake comes typically with a crown, which the person which finds the little figure receives and he or she will be called king or queen of the day. The custom here is that everyone sits together, you eat the cake (you make one or buy one with one ball per person) and the finder of the figure receives the crown. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.197.229.226 (talk) 10:08, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Revelation of the Magi

Greetings --- I strongly object to the topic "Revelation of the Magi" being referred to this page. That phrase rightfully, and precisely, refers to a totally different subject. It is the exact title of an apocryphal early Christian text. It certainly deserves a Wikipedia entry! The fact that there's not one is puzzling. But that is no reason for redirecting this title in a way which can only lead to confusion. Please, someone, correct this mistake, and delete that redirection! I'd do it myself, if I knew how, but I'm inexperienced in Wiki editing. Thanks, on behalf of all who are interested in the apocrypha... Joseph Rowe — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joseph Rowe (talk • contribs) 17:54, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

There's currently no topic like that. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:39, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello Walter --- sorry, but I didn't understand your comment. When you say "there's currently no topic like that" do you mean on the talk page? or on Wikipedia in general? In the latter case, I already pointed that out myself. I'm not prepared to write a Wikipedia topic myself, at the moment, though I might do so in the future, if no one else does. However, I'd be happy to spend some time getting rid of this confusing and unnecessary re-direction. Could you give me a link so I can do that? Thanks, Joseph RoweJoseph Rowe (talk) 15:35, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry. I didn't read your full message. I mean in that the term does not appear in the article. Feel free to write the article, but it would need a sufficient number of reliable sources. I'm not familiar with the term, but that's not unusual. It may make more sense to have the redirect point to Biblical Magi and add the content as a sub-section there instead. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:39, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified January 2016

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Epiphany (holiday). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20111127215401/http://www.catholicireland.net/liturgysacraments/liturgical-year/936-the-origins-and-spirituality-of-the-epiphany to http://www.catholicireland.net/liturgysacraments/liturgical-year/936-the-origins-and-spirituality-of-the-epiphany
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20111127222204/http://www.finnguide.fi/calendar/publicbankinfo.asp?month=1&p=3 to http://www.finnguide.fi/calendar/publicbankinfo.asp?month=1&p=3

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:07, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified February 2016

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Epiphany (holiday). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20151222105942/http://www.elca.org/Growing-In-Faith/Worship/Planning/Epiphany.aspx to http://www.elca.org/Growing-In-Faith/Worship/Planning/Epiphany.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:09, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

• https://web.archive.org/web/20130528061440/http://www.elca.org/Growing-In-Faith/Worship/Planning/Epiphany.aspx works though

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Epiphany (holiday). 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/19970816160612/http://www.britannia.com/wales/culture2.html to http://www.britannia.com/wales/culture2.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141029114558/http://www.cresourcei.org/cyepiph.html to http://www.cresourcei.org/cyepiph.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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) 03:30, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Neutrality

I was surprised that this article was nominated for a check of its neutrality. In fact, it is almost as neutral as it can be. It discusses the holiday from the perspective of a number of different religious groups, as well as describes customs associated the holiday that have nothing in particular to do with religion. I would grant, that the section on Westnern Christianity needs to talk about Epiphany within Protestantism, and that some of the information there may need to be moved (because it actually relates to Eastern Christianty) or slightly rephrased to explain that it shows a comparison between Eastern and Western practice.

Other than that though, I don't understand where this is coming from. Why don't you point out your particular objection to the neutrality of this article, LousyTshirt? Maybe it can be worked on then. MattDiClemente (talk) 23:50, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't have any objections to the neutrality of the article. I nominated it so that someone else (not me of course) would review it. Sometimes it's good for someone completely disinterested in the article to review it and I wouldn't consider MYSELF to be the ideal person to review the article for its neutrality because I'm a Christian.  :) This lousy T-shirt (talk) 01:07, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Time to withdraw the neutrality tag. No real problem with this article ProfGiles (talk) 16:36, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I disagree that this article is as neutral as it can be. Why the sentence "... that celebrates the revelation of God incarnate as Jesus Christ." If, as shown in the entomology, it basically means "appearance," why the necessity for the words "revelation" and "incarnate" in the same sentence? Obviously if God is incarnate, there he is. What those folks are celebrating is that God appeared as an Epiphany. Any revelation required to realize that the person walking around was an Epiphany is automatically included because of the fact they are celebrating it. The fact of God's visit is what is being celebrated, not the revelation of the fact.The age of fable (talk) 03:46, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

You realize that the neutrality tag was removed log ago. Your objection is noted, but you're not reading the sources in the article. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:58, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

I do object to the tag being removed. The non-neutrality struck me even as I clicked on the disambiguation page. I wondered why it said the celebration was about people having the revelation, and not about the actual event that I always thought was being celebrated (i.e. the Epiphany).The age of fable (talk) 04:04, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Okay I read the source in ref. number three ..."is a festival in commemoration of the manifestation of Jesus Christ to the world as the Son of God." It supports what I am saying. Manifestation is an actual physical fact, not a revelatory thought. Even this reference has a peculiar passive construction. Why not just say "is a festival commemorating the manifestation..." As I stated on the talk page for disambiguation, paraphrasing myself, you are going to have to wait 20 or 30 years to change the meaning of this word, until those who know the difference die off. The age of fable (talk) 04:21, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Epiphany (holiday). 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/20141219232247/http://idachurch.com/resources/times-and-seasons-of-the-church/ordinary-time-after-epiphany/ to http://idachurch.com/resources/times-and-seasons-of-the-church/ordinary-time-after-epiphany/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111223185245/http://www.colorado-for-free.com/FreeThingsToDoColorado/FruitcakeToss.htm to http://www.colorado-for-free.com/FreeThingsToDoColorado/FruitcakeToss.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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) 18:30, 20 December 2017 (UTC)