Add the Patronage of St. Joseph as a new movable feast with octave
Deploy / deploy (push) Successful in 1m21s

This Duplex I classis feast (instituted by Pius IX, 1847) didn't exist
anywhere in vu's calendar. Dated per the older, pre-1955 reckoning --
Wednesday after the 2nd Sunday after Easter (Easter+17) -- rather than the
1913 Pius X reform's later placement on the 3rd Sunday after Easter
itself, per direct instruction. Mechanism: one new temporal-feast record
plus a new EASTER_OFFSET_STARTS table entry (the only code change --
everything else is the existing generic anchor-driven resolution).

Authored the feast day's own Matins reading and its full 7-day octave
(days 2/3/4/6/7/8; day 5, the Sunday, has no override in the source at
all, correctly left unauthored).

Fixed one real collateral effect: an existing fixed-year calendar test
(St. Pudentiana vs. St. Peter Celestine, 2038-05-19) broke because that
date now falls on this octave's own closing day, tying Celestine's rank
against the octave's threshold -- the app's own documented tie-break
correctly favors the octave that year. Moved the proof date to 2033.
Also bumped the PWA precache file-size cap (6 MiB -> 8 MiB) since this
content pull pushed the main bundle past the previous limit.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01PhysogLP9eCeKS7JEwRi6y
This commit is contained in:
2026-08-28 07:12:08 -04:00
parent 283bb356d7
commit c25505cdc0
12 changed files with 482 additions and 5 deletions
@@ -0,0 +1,144 @@
# Matins Nocturn 2-3 for the Patronage of St. Joseph (Wednesday after the
# 2nd Sunday after Easter, Easter+17 -- see
# data/calendar/temporal-feasts/patronage-of-st-joseph.yml for the dating
# note). Sourced from web/www/horas/Latin+English/Tempora/Pasc2-3.txt.
# Nocturn 1 (Lectio1-3, Genesis 39/41 -- the patriarch Joseph as a type)
# left to the bible-plan store, same convention as every other nocturn-
# readings file. Nocturn 2 (Lectio4-6): one continuous sermon of
# St. Bernardine of Siena on St. Joseph. Nocturn 3 (Lectio7-9): Lectio7's
# own Gospel pericope (Luke 3:21-23) is a bare "Et réliqua" incipit,
# dropped per the usual rule; St. Augustine's homily on the two
# genealogies (Matthew's and Luke's) follows, isGospel: false.
id: patronage-of-st-joseph
readings:
- nocturn: 2
isGospel: false
text:
la: >-
Ómnium singulárium gratiárum alícui rationábili creatúræ communicatárum generális régula
est, quod, quandocúmque divína grátia éligit áliquem ad áliquam grátiam sublímem statum,
ómnia charísmata donet, quæ illi persónæ sic eléctæ et ejus offício necessária sunt atque
illam copióse décorant. Quod máxime verificátum est in sancto Joseph, putatívo patre
Dómini nostri Jesu Christi, et vero sponso Regínæ mundi et Dóminæ Angelórum; qui ab
ætérno Patre eléctus est fidélis nutrítius atque custos principálium thesaurórum suórum,
scílicet Fílii ejus et Sponsæ suæ: quod offícium fidelíssime prosecútus est. Cui proptérea
Dóminus ait: Serve bone et fidélis, intra in gáudium Dómini tui.
Si cómpares eum ad totam Ecclésiam Christi, nonne iste est homo eléctus et speciális, per
quem et sub quo Christus est ordináte et honéste introdúctus in mundum? Si ergo Vírgini
Matri tota Ecclésia sancta débitrix est, quia per eam Christum suscípere digna facta est:
sic profécto post eam huic debet grátiam et reveréntiam singulárem. Ipse enim est clavis
véteris testaménti, in qua patriarchális et prophetális dígnitas promíssum conséquitur
fructum. Porro hic est solus, qui corporáliter possédit, quod eis divína dignátio
repromísit. Mérito ígitur figurátur per illum patriárcham Joseph, qui pópulis fruménta
servávit. Sed et hic illum præcéllit, quia non solum Ægýptiis panem corporális vitæ, sed
ómnibus eléctis panem de cælo, qui cæléstem vitam tríbuit, cum multa sollértia enutrívit.
Profécto dubitándum non est, quod Christus familiaritátem, reveréntiam atque sublimíssimam
dignitátem, quam illi exhíbuit, dum ágeret in humánis, tamquam fílius patri suo, in cælis
útique non negávit, quin pótius complévit et consummávit. Unde non immérito in verbo
propósito a Dómino subinfértur: Intra in gáudium Dómini tui. Unde, licet gáudium ætérnæ
beatitúdinis in cor hóminis intret, máluit tamen Dóminus ei dícere, Intra in gáudium; ut
mýstice innuátur, quod gáudium illud non solum in eo sit intra, sed úndique illum
circúmdans et absórbens, et ipsum velut abýssus infiníta submérgens. Meménto ígitur
nostri, beáte Joseph, et tuæ oratiónis suffrágio apud tuum putatívum Fílium intercéde; sed
et beatíssimam Vírginem sponsam tuam nobis propítiam redde, quæ Mater est ejus, qui cum
Patre et Spíritu Sancto vivit et regnat per infiníta sǽcula sæculórum. Amen.
en: >-
The general rule governing all the singular graces communicated to any rational creature
is this: whenever divine grace chooseth someone for some sublime state of grace, it
bestoweth upon him every gift that is necessary for that person so chosen and for his
office, and that adorneth him abundantly. This was most of all verified in St. Joseph,
the supposed father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and true spouse of the Queen of the world
and Lady of the Angels — who was chosen by the eternal Father to be the faithful nurse
and guardian of His principal treasures, namely His Son and His Spouse, an office which
he fulfilled most faithfully. For this the Lord saith unto him: Well done, good and
faithful servant, enter thou into the joy of thy lord.
If thou compare him to the whole Church of Christ, is he not that chosen and singular man
through whom, and under whom, Christ was orderly and honourably brought into the world?
If, then, the whole holy Church is debtor to the Virgin Mother, because through her she
was made worthy to receive Christ, so, next after her, doth she owe to Joseph a singular
grace and reverence. For he is the key of the Old Testament, in which the dignity of the
patriarchs and prophets attaineth the fruit that was promised them. Moreover, he alone is
he who bodily possessed what divine condescension had promised them. Rightly, then, is he
prefigured by that patriarch Joseph, who kept in store the grain for the peoples. But he
surpasseth him even in this: for he nourished with much diligence, not only bread for the
bodily life of the Egyptians, but for all the elect the Bread from heaven, which
bestoweth heavenly life.
Assuredly we ought not to doubt that Christ, in heaven, did not deny — but rather fulfilled
and consummated — the familiarity, reverence, and most sublime dignity which He showed
him while He lived among men, as a son toward his father. Whence not without cause is it
added, in the word proposed by the Lord: Enter thou into the joy of thy lord. And though
the joy of eternal blessedness entereth into the heart of man, the Lord chose rather to
say to him, Enter into the joy, that it might be mystically understood that this joy is
not only within him, but on every side surrounding and absorbing him, and, as it were, an
infinite abyss engulfing him. Remember us, then, blessed Joseph, and by the pleading of
thy prayer intercede with thy supposed Son; and render to us gracious the most blessed
Virgin, thy spouse, who is the Mother of Him Who liveth and reigneth with the Father and
the Holy Ghost, world without end. Amen.
status: { la: verified, en: verified }
- nocturn: 3
isGospel: false
text:
la: >-
Maniféstum est illud quod ait, Ut putabátur fílius Joseph, propter illos dixísse, qui eum
ex Joseph, sicut álii hómines nascúntur, natum arbitrántur. Quos autem movet, quod álios
progenitóres Matthǽus enúmerat, descéndens a David usque ad Joseph, álios autem Lucas,
ascéndens a Joseph usque ad David; fácile est, ut advértant duos patres habére potuísse
Joseph: unum, a quo génitus, álterum, a quo fúerit adoptátus. Antíqua est enim
consuetúdo adoptándi étiam in illo pópulo Dei, ut sibi fílios fácerent, quos non ipsi
genuíssent. Unde intellígitur Lucas patrem Joseph, non a quo génitus, sed a quo fúerat
adoptátus, suscepísse in Evangélio suo, cujus progenitóres sursum versus commémorat,
donec exíret ad David.
Cum enim necésse sit, utróque Evangelísta vera narránte, et Matthǽo scílicet et Luca, ut
unus eórum ejus patris oríginem tenéret qui genúerat, alter ejus qui adoptáverat Joseph;
quem probabílius intellígimus adoptántis oríginem tenuísse quam eum, qui nóluit Joseph
génitum dícere ab illo cujus eum fílium esse narrábat? Matthǽus autem dicens, Ábraham
génuit Isaac, Isaac génuit Jacob, atque ita in hoc verbo, quod est, Génuit, persevérans,
donec in último díceret, Jacob autem génuit Joseph; satis expréssit ad eum patrem se
perduxísse oríginem generátium, a quo Joseph non adoptátus, sed génitus erat.
Quamquam si étiam Lucas génitum díceret Joseph ab Heli, nec sic nos hoc verbum
perturbáre debéret, ut áliud crederémus quam ab uno Evangelísta gignéntem, ab áltero
adoptántem patrem fuísse commemorátum. Neque enim absúrde quisque dícitur non carne sed
caritáte genuísse, quem fílium sibi adoptáverit. At vero étiam nos, quibus dedit Deus
potestátem fílios ejus fíeri, de natúra atque substántia sua non nos génuit, sicut
únicum Fílium, sed útique dilectióne adoptávit.
en: >-
It is plain that the words, "As was supposed, the son of Joseph," were said on account of
those who thought him born of Joseph as other men are born of their fathers. But as for
those who are troubled that Matthew names one set of ancestors, descending from David
down to Joseph, while Luke names another, ascending from Joseph up to David, it is easy
for them to see that Joseph could have had two fathers: one by whom he was begotten,
another by whom he was adopted. For it was an ancient custom, even among that people of
God, to adopt as sons those whom one had not begotten. Whence it is understood that Luke
took up in his Gospel the father of Joseph by whom he was adopted, not by whom he was
begotten, and traces his ancestors upward until he reaches David.
For since it must needs be, both Evangelists narrating truly — that is, Matthew and Luke —
that one of them should hold to the origin of the father who begot him, and the other to
the origin of the father who adopted Joseph, which is it more probable that we should
understand held to the origin of the adopter, rather than of him who refused to say
Joseph was begotten by him whose son he nonetheless narrates him to be? Matthew, however,
saying, "Abraham begot Isaac, Isaac begot Jacob," and so persevering in this word,
"begot," until at the last he saith, "And Jacob begot Joseph," hath sufficiently shown
that he traced the line down to the father by whom Joseph was not adopted, but begotten.
Yet even if Luke had said that Joseph was begotten by Heli, this word ought not to trouble
us so as to make us believe otherwise than that one Evangelist commemorated the begetting
father, the other the adopting father. For it is not absurd to say that a man hath
begotten, not by flesh but by love, one whom he hath adopted as his son. Indeed even we,
to whom God hath given power to become His sons, He begot not of His own nature and
substance, as He did His Only Son, but rather adopted us through love.
status: { la: verified, en: verified }