Gospel readings before ABC lectionary cycles

[bquinnan]

I was at an RCIA training event recently, and it was mentioned that the A, B and C lectionary cycles were introduced after Vatican II, and that prior to that, only the gospel of Matthew was read at Mass among the four gospels. Is this correct? I found this surprising.

 

[porthos11]

I was at an RCIA training event recently, and it was mentioned that the A, B and C lectionary cycles were introduced after Vatican II, and that prior to that, only the gospel of Matthew was read at Mass among the four gospels. Is this correct? I found this surprising.

No, it’s not, although Matthew did (does) constitute a large chunk of the one-year cycle in force in 1962. But there are readings from other Gospels too throughout the year.

 

[rfournier103]

I was at an RCIA training event recently, and it was mentioned that the A, B and C lectionary cycles were introduced after Vatican II, and that prior to that, only the gospel of Matthew was read at Mass among the four gospels. Is this correct? I found this surprising.

Very much incorrect.

Prior to the introduction of the new lectionary, there was ONE cycle of readings. The same readings for the same day - year after year. Sundays and weekdays.

extraordinaryform.org/properssundays.html

and

extraordinaryform.org/propersweekdays.html

Please feel free to look at any day you like. You will find a variety of readings in addition to the Gospel of Matthew. Please check out the daily propers for Holy Week. You will find Matthew’s and Luke’s account of the Passion of Christ in addition to the usual Passion from the Gospel of John we read every year in both the Extraordinary Form and Ordinary Forms of the Good Friday service.

When the change/revision was made, we now had a three year rotating cycle of readings for Sundays (A, B, and C) and a TWO year cycle of readings for weekdays (1 and 2). Currently, there are almost always only two readings for weekday Masses. It should be noted that FOR THE MOST PART the Gospel readings are the same for both years 1 and 2; and the first reading is what alternates.

I personally think that the “expanded” lectionary that was implemented subsequent to Vatican II was actually a change for the better. Vatican II, the Tridentine Mass, and the Novus Ordo can be hot-button topics for some people; but all in all I think that the great variety in readings (almost three times as many, now) is a huge boon for church-goers who attend every week but might not do any independent Bible-study. My wife and I do not attend daily Mass, but we read that days readings before bed. We find it quite rewarding.

 

[Usige]

I was at an RCIA training event recently, and it was mentioned that the A, B and C lectionary cycles were introduced after Vatican II, and that prior to that, only the gospel of Matthew was read at Mass among the four gospels. Is this correct? I found this surprising.

That is incorrect. While the 3 year Sunday cycle introduced expanded reading, all 4 Gospels are read in the 1 year cycle. I believe something like 30-35% of both the Gospels of Sts Matthew and John are read during Sundays and major feasts in the 1962 cycle. Readings from Luke is something like 1/8th of the Gospel and Mark only has a handful of verses from what I remember.

That shouldn’t be as surprising as one thinks. Since Matthew, Mark and Luke are the synoptic Gospels they share many of the same (or very similar) teachings and stories. Something like 40-45% of Luke and Matthew are shared with Mark. Since Mark is the shortest Gospel roughly 95% of Mark is contained in Matthew and somewhere around 2/3s of Luke is also contained in Matthew.

I have never gone through and looked at the 1 year cycle to validate the coverage of the synoptics, but I don’t think that huge swaths of the message from the Gospels are missing in matter even if they are not there in form.

Honestly, I think the greatest change in the 3 year Sunday cycle is the huge expansion of Old Testament readings, expanded readings from the Epistles and the addition of the book of Revelations.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

As the Council Fathers mandated in Sacrosanctum Concilium:

51. The treasures of the bible are to be opened up more lavishly, so that richer fare may be provided for the faithful at the table of God’s word. In this way a more representative portion of the holy scriptures will be read to the people in the course of a prescribed number of years.

 

[drforjc]

I wish that they had kept the traditional cycle as one of the three years, though.

 

[R_H_Benson]

… introduced after Vatican II, and that prior to that, only the gospel of Matthew was read at Mass among the four gospels…

Incorrect.

But the Gospel of John is read at (most) every Traditional Latin Mass…

 

[bquinnan]

Thanks for the clarification/correction. The first three Masses I looked at on rfournier103’s link included readings from Luke and John. I guess the person who said this was either misinformed or was exaggerating.

 

[exnihilo]

That shouldn’t be as surprising as one thinks. Since Matthew, Mark and Luke are the synoptic Gospels they share many of the same (or very similar) teachings and stories. Something like 40-45% of Luke and Matthew are shared with Mark. Since Mark is the shortest Gospel roughly 95% of Mark is contained in Matthew and somewhere around 2/3s of Luke is also contained in Matthew.

I’d also point out even among the synoptic Gospels there are different audiences, intentions and styles. Matthew seems to be more directed to a Jewish audience and explains well how Jesus fulfills prophecy. Luke says in the introduction to his Gospel that he set out to write a good, orderly account. He also indicates he investigated the accounts he gives. Mark tends to be very direct and state simply what happened. So Matthew and Luke can be somewhat richer in detail than Mark.

I wish that they had kept the traditional cycle as one of the three years, though.

The cycles are to best of my knowledge focused on one synoptic Gospel. One year is Matthew, one Mark, and one Luke. So I would think in order to maintain the traditional cycle you would need to have a fourth year.

 

[rfournier103]

The cycles are to best of my knowledge focused on one synoptic Gospel. One year is Matthew, one Mark, and one Luke. So I would think in order to maintain the traditional cycle you would need to have a fourth year.

Yes. Year A focuses on Matthew, B on Mark, and C on Luke. John is used quite liberally throughout all three cycles and very frequently is read on Holy Days.

The three year cycle of Sunday readings and two year cycle of weekday readings was a stroke of brilliance by the Church. I happen to prefer the Tridentine Mass to the Novus Ordo, but I wish that they would have:

~Adapted the new cycles of readings to the “old” Mass.

~Resolved to read the Scriptures in the vernacular and keep the rest of the Mass as it was. I don’t mind praying in Latin, but I do love to hear the readings in my native tongue.

In any event… As I said, the new lectionary was absolutely brilliant. So much so that MANY Protestants follow the same Sunday cycles.

 

[exnihilo]

In any event… As I said, the new lectionary was absolutely brilliant. So much so that MANY Protestants follow the same Sunday cycles.

Indeed. I’m a convert and the church I grew up in used the Revised Common Lectionary. Knowing it was inspired by the Catholic Lectionary was a small piece of information that was part of my conversion.

 

[rfournier103]

Indeed. I’m a convert and the church I grew up in used the Revised Common Lectionary. Knowing it was inspired by the Catholic Lectionary was a small piece of information that was part of my conversion.

I wonder how many converts would say the same thing. Very interesting.

PS: I love your signature.

 

[ProVobis]

Yes. Year A focuses on Matthew, B on Mark, and C on Luke. John is used quite liberally throughout all three cycles and very frequently is read on Holy Days.

The three year cycle of Sunday readings and two year cycle of weekday readings was a stroke of brilliance by the Church. I happen to prefer the Tridentine Mass to the Novus Ordo, but I wish that they would have:

~Adapted the new cycles of readings to the “old” Mass.

~Resolved to read the Scriptures in the vernacular and keep the rest of the Mass as it was. I don’t mind praying in Latin, but I do love to hear the readings in my native tongue.

In any event… As I said, the new lectionary was absolutely brilliant. So much so that MANY Protestants follow the same Sunday cycles.

The hope was that if one heard the same readings over and over again, one wouldn’t need translations.

Seriously, with all the English Bibles out there and so-called cycles, one may be facing an overload of banal information that does little to further interest in the Mass IMO.

 

[drforjc]

The cycles are to best of my knowledge focused on one synoptic Gospel. One year is Matthew, one Mark, and one Luke. So I would think in order to maintain the traditional cycle you would need to have a fourth year.

This begs the question of whether or not the schema of having a year focused on one Gospel was the best way to go about it.

Millennia worth of commentaries on the epistles and Gospels by saints and theologians down the tube.

 

[LordHaveMercy]

The hope was that if one heard the same readings over and over again, one wouldn’t need translations.

Seriously, with all the English Bibles out there and so-called cycles, one may be facing an overload of banal information that does little to further interest in the Mass IMO.

Yes, since coming to tradition I have loved the one year cycle. I didn’t think much of it until my second year attending the EF when a passage was read and I recalled where I was the year before when I heard this passage. I saw how beautiful it is that the 1 year “breathes” with us and helps us reflect on our spiritual progress over the years. I’m hooked!