Talk:Lunette (container)

move to Lunette (holder)

based on latest changes Reing (talk) 15:25, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Well, no; and the changes mentioned are questionable (see below) Moonraker12 (talk) 13:26, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

@Moonraker12 Well, your revert of my edit is questionable, above all (see below). You simply deleted reliable source which contradicted your opinion. I do not know if it is more laziness or recklessness. I do not like reverts at all, except for vandalism, which is not what I did. I have only honestly corrected what I still believe (= not sure) is mismatched. I think in such cases when editors disagree it is better first discuss an then edit. Excuse me, I just realized the article is your "child". But based on your location you do not seem to be catholic. (on other hand my English is not very good, and I am barely able to write in English without translator, so be polite when something looks weird, is misspelled or is unclear) Reing (talk) 22:21, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

(I have replied to this below. Moonraker12 (talk) 13:18, 30 May 2024 (UTC))

Recent changes

The latest changes mentioned above was a single edit that a) added some detail alongside a source that says something different b) deleted other referenced material, and c) has an edit summary that claims "deleted dead links (which?), description as at catholic.org, partly using cs.wikipedia (where is the link?)" This is too muddled to simply fix, so I have reverted the lot, per BRD.
A lunette being a "crescent-shaped clip" may be (or may once have been) the case in Germany, but in the English-speaking world it is (as previously stated) a circular glass container: See here or here or here or even here (the OED definition that was co-opted to support the new description). The edit note also refers to a cs Wikipedia article, but the page has no link: where is it?
This is not an objection to adding information about another form of this item, if it is (or has been) in use somewhere, but that form is not the only, or even the primary expression, and should not (on the English language WP) be replacing what is most familiar form here. Moonraker12 (talk) 13:20, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

@Moonraker12 It is always much easier just to revert something than . Ofcourse I am not English speaking (and not German either) so maybe you are right, but lunula is a holder in at least 6 languages (the 4 on Wikipedia plus Czech and Latin). The catholic.org is US, not German, although it mentions German in: "lunette, known in Germany as the lunula and also as the melchisedech, is a crescent-shaped clip..." and this article says: "A lunette, or lunula, is...". Based on text in Monstrance: "In the center of the sunburst, the monstrance normally has a small round glass the size of a host, through which the Blessed Sacrament can be seen. Behind this glass is a round container made of glass and gilded metal, called a lunette, which holds the host securely in place. When not in the monstrance, the host in its luna (???)..." I believe that even in UK and US the lunette is a holder made of metal and sometimes but not necesarily glass. Go to some church and check it out please. Reing (talk) 01:16, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

@Moonraker12@Reing In Britannica lunette is a holder. 90.180.12.61 (talk) 13:09, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

@Moonraker12 So I summarize: Your opinion si based on the three sources in the article, of which none is freely available. Moreover you mentioned some other websites, about which we do not know whether they are true sources or just copied text from Wikipedia without mentionig it. Interestingly another page of Catholic Culture (one of the websites you mentioned above) contradicts your opinion, because there is clearly stated: "The Host itself is held in a lunette or crescent, also called melchisedech. This moves in a groove within the monstrance proper." On other hand there is Britannica (anonymous contribution above), Catholic Online - the source I added in my (now reverted by you) edit, and articles on 4 foreign Wikipedias. All of them contradict your opinion. The word is of latin origin, which is language of Catholic Church. It could be expected to have the same meaning in all languages. So the question is: If (!!) the meaning of the word in English changed, than when and why it happened? Maybe somebody made a mistake, then somebody included it in OED, and later in Wikipedia, then others started copy it. Maybe proper name for this article is Lunette container (without brackets). Maybe it is Luna. Maybe I am not as stupid as my English. Reing (talk) 21:36, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

@Reing: Thank you for replying:

I have already said why I edited the page in the way I did (You were bold, I reverted, now we are discussing it) so I have no interest in re-hashing that unless you want to. I also said I was not objecting to information about other forms of these things, only to the deletion of what was already here to accommodate it. And the different descriptions of these things this debate has turned up suggests to me only that they come in different forms (some more popular than others in different provinces, maybe, or at different periods of time). As for why there is a difference, I can only presume it is the Catholic tendency to elaborate that is responsible. I can well believe that in 1490 a gadget for holding up a host would be a simple clip (like a price tag in a florists, perhaps) but then became more elaborate as something more protective was desired (so, sandwiching it between two bits of glass).

A couple of points:

• I asked about a link to the article on the cs WP; do you have one ( I couldn’t find it)
• You implied that any source that says different to yours is copied from here; in fact when I searched google I specifically discounted mirror sites; see for yourself.
• You queried the statement "When not in the monstrance, the host in its luna" ; the article here went into that (though maybe it could say it better) – the way I understand it the luna is the circular container; when it is on display it is slotted into a monstrance: when it is being transported it is placed in a pyx/carrying case.
• You mentioned the other four articles (nl, de, es, fr, pl) as evidence that the lunette is a holder; in fact only the Dutch and German pages refer to a holder, and only the German and Polish pages describe it as crescent-shaped. The French page has "The lunula is generally made of two circular transparent glass covers, surrounded by metal and connected by a hinge. (La lunule est faite généralement de deux couvercles circulaires en verre transparent, cerclés de métal et reliés par une charnière.)" and the Spanish one say it is "A symbolic object .. that consists of a chamber, generally made of glass and round, (Un objeto simbólico ..que consiste de un habitáculo, generalmente de cristal y redondo,)": also, both pages pre-date this one here by quite a few years. On the iother hand three of them use "liturgy" as a disambiguator, and another "christendom"; if holder is inadequate as a disambiguator here, I’m inclined to think container is insufficient also; maybe (liturgy)? (Catholicism)?
• The word lunette is actually French in origin, and the Latin word luna simply means "moon", so it could equally apply to a crescent or a full disc, the language of the catholic church notwithstanding.
• As for going to some church and checking, my local keeps the hosts in a box in a side chapel; when it is brought out it is in something like this, or like these.
• Your faith in a website like Catholics Online, when compared to your dismissal of the OED as including someone’s mistake, is kind of standing WP:RS on its head a bit, don’t you think?

So (to move forward) do you want to add some detail about the clip form of lunette to the article, or do you wish to continue insisting that is the only form possible, and that everything that says different is wrong/mistaken/just an opinion/mirroring what's here? Moonraker12 (talk) 13:11, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

@Moonraker12 ad A couple of points:

• Pyxida
• first is Wikipedia, second contradicts your opinion: https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09435a.htm
• see Pyxida
• pictures are clear: there is a holder and then the holder is in a monstrance behind a glass
• lunula is Latin word
• inconclusive
• it is reverted, my faith is not in Catholics Online, but what lunula is, and it is supported by Britannica and Catholics Online and New Advent and...

Your response is too long, so I give up. Maybe in English lunette is not lunula (just another hypothese). Or you can translate from Czech:

Je to Váš článek a Vaše zodpovědnost. Udělal jsem editaci podle svého přesvědčení korektní. Svůj názor na Váš postup jsem uvedl minule. Oba tady vyslovujeme hypotézy a nikam to nevede.

Není to tak, že bych věřil Catholics Online, spíše věřím, že lunula je to, co popisuje Britannica a Catholics Online a New Advent, ale to je v rozporu s OED. Pro mě je Britannica důvěryhodnější zdroj než OED, zvláště pokud nevím, zda nebyl popis v OED v nedávné době změněn (a pokud se nemýlím, je na OED uvedeno, že heslo "lunette" nebylo zkontrolováno. Otázka zda, případně kdy a proč se význam slova lunula/lunette změnil (protože Britannica je starší než 100 let) není ve Vaší reakci řešena.

V češtině je lunula zmíněna v článku Pyxida, kde je uvedeno: "V pyxidě je hostie umístěna v lunule, což je svorka z ušlechtilého materiálu (často zlatá a zdobená) ve tvaru horizontálně položeného půlměsíce a slouží k uchycení hostie v monstranci." Tento popis odpovídá anglickému "When not in the monstrance, the host in its luna..."

Latinský původ má slovo "lunula", nikoli lunette, což je částečně moje chyba při překladu a tím pádem hlavní důvod, proč nemá smysl pokračovat v diskusi: moje angličtina je bídná a Vy česky nejspíš neumíte vůbec (možná "pivo"?).

Omlouvám se, francouzský text jsem nečetl, všimnul jsem si pouze, že na obrázku je tam držák (en: holder) bez skla a stejný držák je v monstranci (mezi skly, které jsou však součástí monstrance), obrázek tedy neodpovídá popisu.

Spousta webů používá informace z Wikipedie, jen je trochu přebásní, aby to nebylo tak nápadné. Člověk by musel být lepší než detektiv, aby mohl rozhodnout, který text je opravdu původní. Netýká se to jen tohoto tématu ale obecně čehokoli, co už se na Wikipedii objevilo. Reing (talk) 20:52, 30 May 2024 (UTC)