Ship of Fools: Best Criticism of RCL

Thread: Best Criticism of RCL Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=025022

Posted by Wyclif (# 5391) on :

I've been studying the RCL again (cards on table: our parish uses the original Lectionary bound with the 1928 American BCP, not even the 1943 revision).

It's very frustrating on a number of levels. One of the big ones IMO is the OT readings. Now, it's very revealing to me what the RCL committee chose to use and what to leave out in regard to texts— I think many of us, no matter where on the theological scale we fall, realise that academics have their fave OT texts but others are deeply unpopular and therefore not used.

Since many shipmates have lived in RCL-land for years, I thought here would be as good a place as any to ask the following question:

What is the best critical piece you've seen on the RCL? I'd prefer an academic treatment, but in lieu of that I'll read anything. Thanks in advance.

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

I am particularly interested in antisemitism around Lent and Easter and Frank Henderson has a practical paper here.

Posted by Oblatus (# 6278) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Wyclif:
What is the best critical piece you've seen on the RCL? I'd prefer an academic treatment, but in lieu of that I'll read anything. Thanks in advance.

Not academic, but thoughtful, is this piece by Fr. Stephen Gerth.

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

A bit dated - and he doesn't appreciate the importance of the OT in the liturgy so he doesn't like stories about King David sinning - this is the priest whose first task was to turf out a social action scheme on his premises at SMVTS in favour of a club for rich children.

Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :

[Everything I have to say is about the Roman Catholic Sunday mass lectionary, but I gather the RCL is almost the same]

I'm someone who's very appreciative of the lectionary. The more I study it (generally practically, through preparing to preach it), the more I see the thoughtfulness with which it was prepared. I'm slightly disappointed that the only good pieces of writing that tend to come out concerning it are critiques. Maybe I'll right the balance some day!

That said, I recognize there are some valid critiques that can be raised. In the 2nd readings, there's an over-emphasis on parenetic material over anything else. The way OT and Gospel readings are paired can sometimes be problematic. A helpful article on this is Do we Share a Book? by Michael Peppard.

Still sitting on my shelf unread is Fritz West's Scripture and Memory: The Ecumenical Hermeneutic of the Three-Year Lectionaries (Lit Press: Collegeville, 1997). At least if the blurb is to be believed, this is an exploration of the lectionaries as serious works of interpretation in their own right.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0