Reformed Christians generally do not like lectionaries. A lectionary is a schedule of scripture lessons to be read in the course of the liturgy over a period of one or more years. Its origins can be found already in rabbinic Judaism, which prescribes the public reading of the entire Torah in the course of the liturgical year.
Within Christianity the Eastern Orthodox churches follow a one-year lectionary that prescribes one lesson each from the New Testament epistles and gospels for each sunday. So much is this part of the Orthodox tradition that the liturgical year consists of so many sundays of Matthew, Luke and so forth. The western churches, including the Roman Catholic, Lutheran and Anglican, used to follow a similar one-year lectionary, whose origin appears to go back at least a millennium.
The problem is that, contrary to Judaism, which is easily able to cover the entire Torah in a single year, the complete Christian Bible, including Old and New Testaments (and sometimes what protestants term the Apocrypha), is far too long to cover in so short a time. Thus virtually any lectionary can consist of only snippets of scripture (or pericopes), the vast majority of which is bypassed in the liturgy. Conspicuous by its absence in many one-year lectionaries of both east and west is the Old Testament, except for the Psalms.
One of the things that the non-Lutheran reformers sought to do was to recover a positive place for the Old Testament in the life of the church. But rather than reforming the lectionary, they replaced it altogether with a lectio continua, which would see entire books of the Bible read and preached on over the course of many months. Thus it would be theoretically possible for a church congregation to hear the entire Bible over the duration of the pastor’s career. But it was up to the individual pastor to determine the content and order of the lectio continua, which would inevitably differ from one congregation to another.
Unfortunately, most Reformed churches, and, following them, the various baptistic and free churches, have all but abandoned the lectio continua for topical or thematic preaching. This means that the congregation still hears only snippets of scripture, but as determined by the idiosyncratic predilections of the individual pastor rather than by the church as a whole.
Perhaps now is the time for the Reformed churches either to adopt the ecumenical three-year lectionary, which, despite its flaws, includes generous portions of scripture from both testaments, or to recover the lectio continua. Either would be a considerable improvement over the topical preaching ubiquitous in so many contemporary churches.
March 22nd, 2010 | 8:20 pm | #1
The one problem I think that exists in the Orthodox Church is that very few people know little about the Old Testament (unless they undertake to study it in a Bible study or on their own). It is true that portions of the Old Testament are read during Lent and other special services during fasting seasons as well as during the Great Canon of St. Andrew (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Great_Canon). However, these services only occur during limited times of the year, and many people are not familiar with the readings and references to the Old Testament.
March 22nd, 2010 | 9:18 pm | #2
[...] (14)cynthia curran: Actually, its the far left that wants perfection not the right. The right… Lectionaries in the Reformed churches (1)Alison: The one problem I think that exists in the Orthodox Church is that… 10+ Books with [...]
March 22nd, 2010 | 11:03 pm | #3
I’m not sure what lectionary Anglicans use, but I think it’s a three-year cycle for the mass readings and a two-year cycle for the Daily Office. The mass reading binders are labeled as Year A, Year B, and Year C, and the Daily Office books are labeled as Year One and Year Two.
The lectionary readings are continuous, except that sometimes it marks certain verses as “optional” to read. Generally these are the more difficult verses, like the ones that point out that God hates wickedness and will punish sin. Our rector tells us lay readers to read everything. “It’s all God’s Word, so don’t skip any of it!” he says. So we read it all :)
Every Sunday, we have an Old Testament reading, a Psalm (or a portion of one), a New Testament reading (non-Gospel) and a Gospel reading. For weekday mass, we have a NT reading, a Psalm, and a Gospel reading.
As a result, we hear and read quite a lot of Scripture on a regular basis. For me, who had never read the Bible (at all) before I began my conversion, it has been a great way to be immersed in the Word, even before I felt confident enough to read past the Gospels on my own.
One of the things I like about the way my church handles Scripture — I don’t know if Protestant churches do this — is that every lesson is read aloud by a lay reader (except that the Gospel is read by the deacon or a priest, always). That means that whatever text the priest chooses to focus on in his sermon, we have just heard a few moments before.
I love being a lay reader. It is an incredible joy and privilege to read Holy Scripture aloud to my brothers and sisters in Christ!
March 23rd, 2010 | 5:59 am | #4
Thank you, Holly. I myself have followed the Daily Office Lectionary for thirty years, at least with respect to the Epistle and Gospel readings. However, the Old Testament I simply read in course, because the DOL does not take us through the whole thing. I’m in the Proverbs at the moment.
March 23rd, 2010 | 7:55 am | #5
David, do you use commentaries in your reading of the Old Testament (or the New Testament for that matter)? Before I converted to Orthodoxy, I read Scripture with no commentaries. Once I converted, I started to use commentaries. I have found them to be extremely helpful, especially with my understanding of the Old Testament. I would never have understood the Torah properly without any guidance, nor would I have had the stamina to continue with my reading of the Old Testament without any guidance.
March 23rd, 2010 | 8:05 am | #6
Alison, which commentaries do you use? Which have you found most helpful?
March 23rd, 2010 | 9:27 am | #7
Actually I am a fan of Father Reardon, whom you made reference to on one of your sites about the Psalms. I read the Psalms from my lectionary daily, but then once a week, I meditate on one Psalm using his book, Christ in the Psalms. I also use his daily meditations that are posted on the Mere Comments website. Because he is Orthodox, his meditations are slightly geared toward Orthodox Christians, but the meditations are meant for all Christians. (Look down the left side of the Mere Comments website to find his daily reflections.) Currently, he is going through Matthew, but last spring and summer he went through Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers. I also used his book on Genesis and his book on Chronicles to help me when I read through those books. In addition, he publishes a lectionary, which I use (the lectionary can be found on the Mere Comments website). I have found his commentaries to be incredibly helpful, and they have profoundly contributed to my knowledge of Scripture.
I have also used the New Interpreter’s Study Bible. It comes in different volumes for the different books of the Bible. I have not been as pleased with this because it is a bit liberal in its interpretation, but it does have some wisdom to offer. And then I do look online at the Church Fathers (http://www.ccel.org/fathers.html) from time to time, but I do not know Scripture well enough at this point to get the full value from the Fathers. (I am still working my way through the Old Testament and hope to be done by early next year; I am more confident of my knowledge of the New Testament because I hear it read in church each week and because I have read it several times.)
I know that Protestants have not mined the works of the Fathers as much as Orthodox Christians or Catholics, but I think people like Chrysostom or Augustine have something to offer us all. Christopher Hall, who is a Protestant and Christian scholar (I don’t remember his exact background), has written a series of books about the Fathers–and it starts with Reading Scripture with the Church Fathers.
And because you are in the Reformed Tradition, you might enjoy William Barclay’s commentaries though I have read that some of his insights are problematic though I have not read him that much–but for some reason I do think he is a Calvinist. The other person who is recommended is D.A. Carson, who wrote the Pillar series, but I don’t know much about him.
Overall, though, I would have to say that Father Reardon’s materials have been the most helpful to me. His knowledge is astounding.
March 23rd, 2010 | 10:18 am | #8
Alison, I have Reardon’s Christ in the Psalms, which I read through three years ago while praying through the psalter.
While you may be correct that “Protestants have not mined the works of the Fathers as much as Orthodox Christians or Catholics,” this was not true of the reformers themselves. I would also add that this is changing rapidly, at least partly through the efforts of Thomas Oden and others in publishing the Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture series through InterVarsity Press. Then there is Bryan Litfin’s Getting to Know the Church Fathers: An Evangelical Introduction. Litfin teaches at Moody Bible Institute in Chicago, not generally thought of as a bastion of interest in the patristic literature.
March 23rd, 2010 | 11:10 am | #9
Yes, you are right, David; I guess I should correct that to say that more modern Protestants (like twenty first century Christians are not as aware of the Fathers–and I would add evangelical Christians at the risk of offending some of them). From what little I know of Calvin (and I know so very little), Augustine was huge for him. And I don’t know much about Luther to be completely honest. And yes, that Ancient Christian commentary series was exactly what I was thinking of.
I cannot recommend Reardon’s works highly enough. He knows more about the Fathers than any priest or pastor I have come across. But I would also add that he knows Scripture as well.
March 23rd, 2010 | 2:37 pm | #10
I’m reading Athanasius right now. Amazing stuff.
March 23rd, 2010 | 4:13 pm | #11
The Anglican Lectionaries Alison references date from the second half of the twentieth century and later.
Before them, and presently in those parishes, Churches, and communions using them, the Holy Communion service of the Book of Common Prayer had an Epistle and Gospel reading appointed for each Sunday and other major Feasts (like Christmas) and Fasts (like Ash Wednesday). The Anglican missals of the early twentieth century appointed Minor Propers (Introit, Communion Verse, Gradual, Tract, etc.) for the Mass and an Epistle and Gospel for each day of Lent and for more Feasts than the Book of Common Prayer provided for. The Minor Propers are usually verses from the Psalms. “Epistle” here means the first Bible lesson read during the Mass, usually from an Epistle, but occasionally from an Old Testament Prophet or other book.
Anglicans got (and get) their Old Testament readings from the Daily Offices of Morning and Evening Prayer, which have an appointed Old Testament and New Testament reading for each day of the Church Year. The 1945 Lectionary for the American Book of Common Prayer hits the highlights, so to speak, of both Testaments, more of the New than the Old. It’s about a half a chapter of the Old Testament and half a chapter of the New each morning and evening.
There are two cycles for the Psalms as part of Morning and Evening Prayer. One goes straight through in 60 chunks each month. Psalm 119 is 7 chunks. The other matches a Psalm or two with the Lessons each morning and evening.
Earlier Anglican Lectionaries for both Holy Communion and the Daily Offices were similar.
March 23rd, 2010 | 5:58 pm | #12
Actually, RS, I don’t use an Anglican lectionary. I use a daily devotional guide penned by Father Reardon, an Orthodox priest. It is a lectionary in the sense that there is a reading from one chapter of the Old Testament each day, a reading from a portion of the Gospels, a reading from the rest of the New Testament, and two readings from the Psalter–for the morning and the evening. It is based on lectio continua (a reading of a given book of the Bible straight through from start to finish) and lectio selecta (particular readings for particular days or for specific reasons without intending to read a book of the Bible). Both methods were inherited from the Jews, and they have been used by Christians from earliest times.
March 23rd, 2010 | 6:25 pm | #13
Alison, I was unable to find Fr. Reardon’s lectionary on the Mere Comments website. Could you please provide a link? Thanks.
March 23rd, 2010 | 7:12 pm | #14
I guess I was not clear. You do have to purchase the guide, and Fr. Reardon posts additional commentary in the guide (in addition to what is found on the Mere Comments website). Here is the link to the guide: http://www.fsj.org/pages/devotionalguide.php. You can then link to the Daily Reflections blog where he provides additional insight. And I will add that the prayers that are provided are not all Orthodox.
March 23rd, 2010 | 7:24 pm | #15
PS Let me know if you cannot access any of this, David. And I will add that Fr. Reardon provides excellent introductions for each book of the Bible that is read, particularly the Old Testament books.
March 23rd, 2010 | 9:27 pm | #16
I can see that the Daily Office cycle doesn’t hit all the Old Testament, but one neat thing about having the bits that are included is that they get paired up with the New Testament in fruitful ways. For instance, right now we’re going through Exodus, leading up to Holy Week with readings about Moses leading the Israelites out of Egypt.
Having the OT and NT lessons side by side is helpful for me, because otherwise my tendency would have been to ignore the OT entirely (except maybe for the first bit of Genesis, and Psalms) and focus on the NT, and even then probably just on the Gospels.
Even having bits of the OT in the canticles in the Book of Common Prayer is helpful. After reading Canticle #10 (the Second Song of Isaiah, Isaiah 55:6-11) throughout Lent, it made me realize that I wanted to read the whole of Isaiah (I’ve tried before, but not gotten very far), so I’m starting to read through it continuously.
A useful book we use at my church is Daily Office Readings from the Early Church, by J. Robert Wright. It’s a set of excerpts from the early Church Fathers, with one reading for each day (according to the liturgical calendar).
March 24th, 2010 | 12:44 pm | #17
I think I confused Alison with Holly in referencing earlier comments. I apologize.
Isaiah is actually my favorite book of the Bible, so one of the things about the 1945 Lectionary that I must find a way to deal with individually is the way it assigns just bits and pieces of Isaiah, and at different times of the year. I am blessed in that my lifestyle gives me time for the Offices and for other Bible reading, such as Isaiah straight-through when I’m in the mood.
I also feel rushed by the Lectionary in reading Genesis 1 through Exodus 13 or so in the 9 or 10 weeks of Pre-Lent through Easter. I don’t have any suggestions for fixing this, however. I like reading all about Man’s Fall, the first expressions of God’s covenants with His chosen people and His plan of redemption, and the chosen people’s slavery and redemption, during this time of year. It’s just so very much to cover in so short a period of time! It’s a good thing we get to do it again every year!
March 24th, 2010 | 1:00 pm | #18
I’ve sometimes wondered whether there should be a six- or nine-year lectionary for the Old Testament while keeping with the three-year for the New. That would enable more of the former to be covered.
But really it’s a shame the biblical authors didn’t think about how their books would fit into future lectionaries when they wrote them! :-)
March 24th, 2010 | 1:30 pm | #19
Holly, RS, and David, one great thing about the Daily Devotional book I have is that readings are paired together as well. For instance, the parable of the wicked vinedressers who kill the owner’s Son is paired with the first part of Chapter 1 of Hebrews so that the reader can see the how the imagery of the Son (who is called the Heir in both books) is contrasted with all those who came before Him. During Holy Week next week, there are many supplemental readings–all of which fall in line with Christ’s Passion.
In the guide I use, we read Isaiah right before Christmas though there are portions of Isaiah for next week as well.
Like Holly, I don’t know if I would have read the Old Testament without some kind of guidance (I would not have had the confidence to do so). But I have been able to read the Torah and books like Chronicles as well Jeremiah. It has been very exciting and challenging for me to read this material for the first time.
March 24th, 2010 | 2:23 pm | #20
Even with its flaws, I find our Lectionary to be almost miraculous in the wisdom with which the Lessons are arranged together.
I think Jews study the Talmud in a 7-year cycle, but those who take part are fairly likely to do so for life. It’s a judgment of prudence beyond my youth and lay station to make, but with so much church hopping and generally shorter attention spans, longer lectionary cycles would likely result in people never getting the whole picture, either never being in the same church or denomination long enough to experience a whole cycle, or never grasping the big picture despite being in a single parish for decades. The members of my parish have a hard enough time remembering the Lessons from a year ago, or even 4 weeks ago. Can you imagine a Sunday school class on the Post-exilic Prophets in which members are asked to remember passages from the Major Prophets they last heard 2 years prior?
March 24th, 2010 | 2:33 pm | #21
Alas, RS, I’m afraid you are right in this. We do have short attention spans, and our constant mobility only exacerbates this.
As for the miracle of the lectionary, I have experienced this a number of times while using the Daily Office Lectionary in the American BCP and the Lutheran Book of Worship. It’s flawed in a number of ways that I need not get into here. But when I have gone through difficult circumstances, it is not infrequent that the lesson prescribed for that day spoke exactly what I had to hear at that point. This persuaded me that God is more than able to work through fallible instruments such as humanly-constructed lectionaries.
March 24th, 2010 | 2:42 pm | #22
Similarly 18 years ago I was consumed with anxiety, largely over finances, but three times that summer, on different occasions separated by several weeks and 800 kilometres, someone brought the word of God to me as contained in Matthew 6:25-34. One of these was in a Greek Orthodox church in Aurora, Illinois, where it was the appointed gospel lesson. Another came from popular Christian author Elisabeth Elliott speaking near Boston. Yet another came from my own elder during a church-related pastoral visit.
The coincidence of the three repetitions of this passage brought home to me its message more vividly than I had anticipated.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact