Old Lectinary or New Lectionary

  • Thread starter Thread starter Neil_Anthony
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

Neil_Anthony

Guest
Which do you prefer, the 1962 lectionary or the lectionary used with the mass of Paul VI?
 
Oops I meant to click Paul VI but I clicked 1962 lectionary…
 
I would have preferred a Lectionary based on the 1962 one and supplemented. There are readings from the 1962 Missal that are no longer in the Lectionary.
 
Both have their benefits. I like the readings of the new Lectionary, but I prefer the names of the old. For example, 1st Sunday after Pentecost sounds better than the 1st Sunday in Ordinary Time.
 
I also like the names and more specific feast in the old lectionary. I’m a fan of the same reading on the same Sunday every year.

I think that kind of repetition is critical to achieveing catechesis through the Mass.

God Bless
 
I think it’s good to have such a large proportion of the Bible read as it is done in the new lectionary. And the fact that for example the gospel of Mark (or the whole OT, for that matter) is hardly read at all in the 1962 lectionary isn’t that good. And it’s great to have special readings assigned for every weekday also in the new lectionary.

However, with the three-year cycle the special theme of each Sunday, which also matches the propers, isn’t as clear in the new lectionary as in the old. Nowadays there is a different theme every year for each Sunday which is only expressed in the gospel and the OT reading and doesn’t necessarily match the propers at all. But of course, this also means that more themes are covered in total.
 
Ahlman said:
I think it’s good to have such a large proportion of the Bible read as it is done in the new lectionary. And the fact that for example the gospel of Mark (or the whole OT, for that matter) is hardly read at all in the 1962 lectionary isn’t that good. And it’s great to have special readings assigned for every weekday also in the new lectionary.

However, with the three-year cycle the special theme of each Sunday, which also matches the propers, isn’t as clear in the new lectionary as in the old. Nowadays there is a different theme every year for each Sunday which is only expressed in the gospel and the OT reading and doesn’t necessarily match the propers at all. But of course, this also means that more themes are covered in total.
Click to expand...
There’s an easy solution for that - longer readings at Mass. We should modify the current Lectionary so that we read at least as much as we do now, but in a one year cycle!
 
JMJ_coder said:
There’s an easy solution for that - longer readings at Mass. We should modify the current Lectionary so that we read at least as much as we do now, but in a one year cycle!
Click to expand...
I think that with too many readings you risk people tuning out.

I find myself that with two readings, a psalm (especially if it a lengthy sung version) and a Gospel, I can drift. If I don’t have a missalette it’s especially bad.

I think one reading and a Gospel is much more likely to hold the attention.

God Bless
 
I am no rad-trad. I like Latin and things to be the most beautiful as possible without going into the ridiculous. The V2 could not have been a total disaster because the Church can never fall into a total disaster. For the Church to stop doing something good is to die and the Church cannot die. If many misinterpreted or even wrote things in a way that it is vulnerable intentionally to misint.
that does not mean it was all terrible. The new lectionary has a richness that the Church has never manifested before in relation to the Liturgy of the Word. Years A, B and C plus year I and II means we will not see the same liturgy again for another 6 years, while in the old it was the same for the whole week.

Bad translations and sometimes tendencious chosing of the verses is another thing. But the general remodeling was excellent. Senza dubia the new one.
 
bilop said:
I think that with too many readings you risk people tuning out.

I find myself that with two readings, a psalm (especially if it a lengthy sung version) and a Gospel, I can drift. If I don’t have a missalette it’s especially bad.

I think one reading and a Gospel is much more likely to hold the attention.

God Bless
Click to expand...
I don’t like the attitude of trying to dumb down to people’s level. The Church should raise people up towards God.

I see this attitude with people who complain if Mass is 1 hour and 1 minute. It’s too long. But, ask them if the football game should be shortened to just 45 minutes and they’ll scream bloody murder!

While there is a place for being pastoral, I think that the Church needs to start raising the bar for people. Like the motto goes ‘Aim High!’.
 
Yeah but these generations (these means way before my time, people born in the 30’s) are too weak in nature to endure these things. It is another mentality and way of being that not even proper education and formation can overcome. Since the soul is reflected in the body and mind, and souls have been polluted with evil for so many years that now even when we are in our mother’s womb we are already influenced. A mass that is 3 hours long every Sunday is unbearable because of our ever decadent nature. Not even good-spirit could overcome such a thing.

Plus, the decadence in the clergy doesn’t help grabbing people’s attention, which still bearing in mind that it is not entertainment, but that there still has to be a degree of sensibility.

I personally used to like to have a mass with no sermon and music because I was better off.
 
JMJ_coder said:
I don’t like the attitude of trying to dumb down to people’s level. The Church should raise people up towards God.

I see this attitude with people who complain if Mass is 1 hour and 1 minute. It’s too long. But, ask them if the football game should be shortened to just 45 minutes and they’ll scream bloody murder!

While there is a place for being pastoral, I think that the Church needs to start raising the bar for people. Like the motto goes ‘Aim High!’.
Click to expand...
I don’t view it as “dumbing down”. Most Catholics only get Catechesis once a week at Mass. The goal is that they learn as much as possible about the truths of the Faith in that one hour.

I, personally, think that people are more likely to retain what they hear if it is the same every year, and the Sundays are memorable.

People should know, today is the Feast of the Holy Cross, the Gospel reading will be XXX, the Espistle YYY, and father will likely preach on ZZZ.

Right now, I have no idea what Gospel to expect on a given Sunday (with the exception of Christmas and Easter).

God Bless
 
I didn’t like how on the Marian feasts, the old lectionary had all of these readings about Mary that I had never heard of before.

It turned out those readings were taken from Judith. But if you never looked it up, it sounds like its talking about Mary. It seemed a bit fishy to me. :confused:
 
I prefer the new lectionary for its more extensive exploration of the Old Testament and its connection to the Gospel for the day.
We need to know the original prophecies of which Jesus is the fulfillment, and need to know our Jewish background.

I have great respect for traditionalists, but…
**Some **traditionalists complain that the revised lectionary was something new and unnecessary. Other trads. that the unvaried one-year reading cycle was better.
I think in addition to the improved exposure to the OT, there is also better coverage of all four Gospels in the new Lex.

Although it ought not be the only exposure to scripture for Catholics, I suspect it oftentimes is for many of those who regularly attend Sunday Mass. For this reason, I think new lex. is an improvement.
 
Neil_Anthony said:
I didn’t like how on the Marian feasts, the old lectionary had all of these readings about Mary that I had never heard of before. It turned out those readings were taken from Judith. But if you never looked it up, it sounds like its talking about Mary. It seemed a bit fishy to me.
Click to expand...
Because the Church sees in Judith a type or prefigurement of Mary.
 
Neil_Anthony said:
I didn’t like how on the Marian feasts, the old lectionary had all of these readings about Mary that I had never heard of before.

It turned out those readings were taken from Judith. But if you never looked it up, it sounds like its talking about Mary. It seemed a bit fishy to me. :confused:
Click to expand...
Even in the Liturgy of the Hours, the Lectionary for the Collection of Masses of the BVM and in various Propers, Judith is employed as the text for readings and antiphons. As japhy mentioned, because she is a “type” for Mary
 
bilop said:
I don’t view it as “dumbing down”. Most Catholics only get Catechesis once a week at Mass. The goal is that they learn as much as possible about the truths of the Faith in that one hour.
Click to expand...
Why limit it to one hour? If they are only given one chance to teach per week, why do we only have 3 minute homlets?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top