Issues with the Church Year are also tied up with the lectionary for me. I don’t like the lectionary that the UMC has available. Not sure what kind of lectionary I would like, to be honest.
Here’s what I hear: “the lectionary keeps me from preaching just what I like.” Ok, but is that really a problem for you? And so now, you are going to preach what some editorial board likes?
Or I hear, “the lectionary makes sure you stay balanced between the Old and New Testaments.” Actually not true, you have to make that commitment. And again, I wonder why you would not do so anyway?
These answers in favor of using the lectionary come so quickly that I suspect we haven’t really thought about them.
So I will ask the same question about the lectionary that I do about the Church Year: what are its liabilities and limitations?
Why are you asking the question seeking only the negative regarding the lectionary? (i.e. liabilities and limitations) Why not also seek strengths and benefits of the lectionary?
ReplyDeleteI preach from the lectionary because it follows the church calendar, and as I stated before I believe that the church calendar is a wonderful tool in that it leads the church through the many different ideas and teachings of scripture while being both methodical and intentional, without having to cook up artificial sermon series with goofy names.
I am looking for the negative to get a balanced view of it. I'm trying to push on the lectionary and Church Year so that we're not just drinking kool aid. People are pretty clear on its benefits, but not its liabilities. I won't feel comfortable giving the lectionary or the calendar much place in my work without a clear picture of them. It shouldn't be that hard. Again, people are clear on the benefits they perceive. So, what are the limits and liabilities?
ReplyDelete