Talk:Crispin and Crispinian

Who demoted when (or did they)?

Hmmm... Is it reasonable or accurate to say that Vatican II removed them from the calendar? I would rather think the Bollandists should get more direct credit. This makes it sound like the council itself sat in judgment on each saint. --Sean Lotz 20:52, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I have removed the following false statements from the article:

"However, these saints were removed from the liturgical calendar (but not declared to be no longer saints) during the reform of the General Roman Calendar in 1969. ... The reasoning used by Vatican II for this decision was that there was insufficient evidence that the Saints Crispin and Crispinian actually existed.

The General Roman Calendars of the Roman Rite published from 1570 through 1962 (the last before the 1969/1970 reform) did not include an observance of Sts. Crispin and Crispinian on Oct. 25, so it was impossible for it to have been removed by the General Roman Calendar revision of 1969. And as is evident from the text of the Second Vatican Council that addresses liturgical reform, the Council does not mention Sts. Crispin and Crispinian (or any saints other than the Blessed Virgin Mary) by name when referring to reform of the liturgical calendar.

It would be a good idea to include a mention in the article about the accurate status of the feast past and present in the Roman Rite. Certainly, Sts. Crispin and Crispinian would have been listed in local liturgical calendars, as evidenced by their inclusion in the calendar of the (Anglican) 1662 Book of Common Prayer. Does any current particular Roman Rite calendars (ordinary or extraordinary form) include an observance of these saints? Or was the feast one of a handful suppressed by the 1961 decree which suppressed Philomena from all particular calendars? St. Crispin and St. Crispinian are listed in the pre-2000 editions of the Roman Martyrology, a liturgical text of the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church. The 2000 and 2004 editions of the Roman Martyrology should be consulted to confirm whether their listing has survived there. Echevalier (talk) 20:26, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Crispian

In the speech, Crispinian's name is spelled Crispian, perhaps reflecting London pronunciation in Shakespeare's time.

I'd love to see a source for this hypothesis about pronunciation. Having researched the subject of 16th-century pronunciation, I find the claim rather suspect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.223.132.75 (talk) 02:46, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Shakespeare passage

i really have to wonder about the relevance of the paragraph about popular references to the shakespeare quote. this is, imo, one step too far removed. the shakespeare is vaguely about the saints, but the following paragraph is about a shakespeare play. comments?Toyokuni3 (talk) 22:07, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

John Glasby

I'm not sure the passage about John Glasby should appear on this page. It reads:

The speech was recited practically flawlessly in a Year 7 History class by John Glasby, author of "The Hard Shoulder" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matt90266 (talk • contribs) 06:52, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Hilarious

Isn't it hilarious that these two are sometimes referred to as Crispinus and Crispianus?! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.111.8.102 (talk) 00:44, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

The "-us" ending is a Latin nominative masculine singular inflection (see Latin declension) which got dropped in French... AnonMoos (talk) 16:15, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Picasso

I have removed an erroneous reference to Picasso. The removed sentence said "The famous artist Pablo Picasso had both of their names as parts of his name". This is simply untrue. One of Picasso's given names was "Cipriano", which is unrelated to the name "Crispinian". FreddieRainbow (talk) 16:19, 11 October 2024 (UTC)