Omissions from the new Lectionary

  • Thread starter Thread starter KMG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
K

KMG

Guest
Much scholarly work has been done in recent years on the question of just what the new Lectionary omits.

It has generally been conceded that more Scripture is a good thing. Without debating that point, it is interesting in terms of the recent Communion for the divorced issue that one passage that was formerly read every year, more than once in the liturgy is now completed omitted from the Lectionary. Strange of course, when you consider that “more Scripture” should logically mean don’t cut the Scripture you already have.

The passage in question, which is nowhere to be found in the new Lectionary:

Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink of the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the Body and of the Blood of the Lord. But let a man prove himself; and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. For he that eatheth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the Body of the Lord. (1 Cor 11:27–29).
 
send Holy father Pope Francis an email amd give him a heads up
 
serious, with all the issues raised, on CAF , surely a few should be going through to the keeper,

we cant tell you what the relationship is between communion for the divorced and omitted passages. Thats a job for the Magestirium.
But I will ask you a question.
Are you inferring people who are divorced shouldnt be allowed Communion? Are you implying divorced people are unworthy to receive the Eucharist

If not , why not. A divorced person has been allowed Communion as long as I can remember.
 
Last edited:
KMG said:
The passage in question, which is nowhere to be found in the new Lectionary:
Click to expand...
Was it in the previous Lectionary? Is it coincidence that we seem to be hearing an echo of the Amoris Laetitia footnote?
 
The passage in question used to be read on Holy Thursday and Corpus Christi, as well as in the Votive Mass of the Blessed Sacrament. It is NOWHERE in the new, huge Lectionary. It also used to be read in the Office…but it is nowhere in the typical edition of the Liturgy of the Hours.
 
It’s just interesting…and curious…how in the dramatic increase in Scripture, no room was found for certain passages that had been in the liturgy for many centuries. Recent scholarly works have catalogued every one of these omissions…and curiously, the vast majority are what today we’d consider “hot button” topics.
 
KMG said:
…and curiously, the vast majority are what today we’d consider “hot button” topics.
Click to expand...
@KMG―A question of timing. The current USCCB Lectionary has been in use since 1998 (Sundays) and 2002 (weekdays), i.e. since the pontificate of St. John Paul II. Can it have been the intention, nearly twenty years ago, to omit the verses that seemed to warn divorced people not to receive Holy Communion?
 
couple of points:

We do not, nor have we ever, seen every verse of Scripture in the lectionary.

Where does 1 Cor 11:27-29 mandate what constitutes unworthiness to receive the body or blood of the Lord?

Seems to me, you are taking on the Protestant approach of interpreting independently the meaning of scripture.
 
BartholomewB said:
A question of timing. The current USCCB Lectionary has been in use since 1998 (Sundays) and 2002 (weekdays), i.e. since the pontificate of St. John Paul II. Can it have been the intention, nearly twenty years ago, to omit the verses that seemed to warn divorced people not to receive Holy Communion?
Click to expand...
My first thought also.
 
Hardly Protestant. Just noting that in all this praise of the new Lectionary for how much more Scripture it has, in some ways it has less…by omitting passages that used to be read on not one but multiple occasions. Strange that the huge new Lectionary has no room for them.
 
I didn’t know that. That is sad. Luckily we have one priest who often mentions this in his homily along with reminding people that all they need to do is repent and go to confession.
 
KMG said:
terms of the recent Communion for the divorced issue
Click to expand...
Well yes , I read your post quite carefully. And I quote what you wrote.
And my question still stands. I suggest you read what St John Paul and Pope Paul has written about those divorced attending Mass, engaging in Ministry and sharing in Communion.
 
Last edited:
I have read plenty of what has been written. My point on this thread stands about the timeliness of Augustine’s passage in the traditional liturgy (it has been cut, not surprisingly, from the Novus Ordo).
 
KMG said:
I have read plenty of what has been written. My point on this thread stands about the timeliness of Augustine’s passage in the traditional liturgy (it has been cut, not surprisingly, from the Novus Ordo).
Click to expand...
What exactly are you saying about divorced people sharing in the Eucharist. Are they unworthy? Should they say, oops no, can’t share in the Eucharist or Church Ministry because they are divorced?

You have several points, and this was one of them.
 
Last edited:
My post/thread simply draws attention to the curious deletion of this passage from the new Lectionary.
 
KMG said:
My post/thread simply draws attention to the curious deletion of this passage from the new Lectionary.
Click to expand...
You make comparison with a divorced person and then you make statements about the worthiness of people taking Communion.
So again, my question stands. What does this have to do with divorced people taking communion.
Are you insinuating divorced people by the act of civil divorce are in grave mortal sin.?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top