Anyone up for a chat thread?

[Paidiske]

Ooh, interesting. I'd be curious to read it, or at least a summary of the key points, if you're willing to share.

 

[Deegie]

We are on the revised one year lectionary that was prepared in 1943, if memory serves, for the 1928 American Prayer Book. I am curious to know what some of our other posters will have in the readings for this Sunday.

We're on the RCL. So the epistle is 2 Tim. 4:6-8, 16-18. Gospel is Luke 18:9-14. As Paidiske mentioned, the OT reading is Joel (2:23-32) and I think it's a cool one to preach, especially following from Jeremiah 31 last week (which I preached on).

So your one year lectionary is really that? It repeats every 52 weeks?

I feel that I have some worthwhile things to say about the text. It is a text that I had to study in some depth for a NT course called "Studying and Teaching the Bible" that I did in my initial degree. That course required, as the major project, that a full set of lesson plans be prepared for the Philippian epistle. My major emphases are an interweaving of the idea of koinonia and intentional prayer.

Best of luck!

 

[Shane R]

So your one year lectionary is really that? It repeats every 52 weeks?

Yes, although there are a few extra propers, as the Trinity season is variable in length and obviously Septuagesima floats around a bit too.

There are 24 weeks of propers after Trinity (really 25 with 'The Sunday Next Before Advent') and 6 weeks of propers after Epiphany before one gets to Septuagesima. And there are propers for 19 fixed holy days as well as 'A Saint's Day,' Dedication of a Church, Rogation Days, Ember Days, Independence Day, Thanksgiving Day, Marriage, and Burial. As for the daily readings, some variation exists in practice as the more Protestant minded (my mentor for one) refuse to read OT lessons from the Apocrypha.

There is a small upswell of impetus for going to a three year series A,B,C type of lectionary but most of the Continuing bishops are hesitant or skeptical. It's not a feature of the old American prayer books or the 1662, so it's not traditional. The RCL will never gain support in the Continuum. I also don't think a more conservative three year like that used by the LCMS would either, because it omits Apocryphal readings. If the momentum for a three year ever gained take-off velocity, I suspect the resulting product would be proprietary or essentially the Roman three year. I personally would not object to substantially adopting the Roman three year.

 

[Shane R]

I forgot the ACNA had put out a proprietary lectionary earlier this year. That one might get a little traction in the Continuum, but anything ACNA does is look on with some reservation. The Roman three year would probably be preferred. I think the ACNA lectionary is acceptable: https://c119b78671d19b8aee34-1ab073...ay and Red-Letter Day Lectionary - 160329.pdf

 

[Feuerbach]

There has been some chatter among the ACC clergy in my part of the world about authorizing some or all of the ACNA liturgy - though I don't think anything will come of it.

I know in my own jurisdiction there are a couple of parishes that use one of the three-year lectionaries out there, but the majority don't. I'd say Shane's assessment of the Continuum is spot-on. Shane also mentioned the LCMS - I work at a Lutheran church and am exposed to and follow pretty closely what goes on in American Lutheranism and I think it's interesting that there is a budding movement within the LCMS to return to the historic (Lutheran) one-year lectionary. The LCMS Service Book has both a three-year and one-year cycle of readings for congregations to choose from.

My own personal preference is with the one-year Prayer Book lectionary, but unless some priest is just making stuff up without authorization from the bishop I don't think I'd worry about it that much.

 

[Paidiske]

Synod is sitting this week.

So exhausted, because of course nothing else stops over those four days!

 

[Shane R]

My own personal preference is with the one-year Prayer Book lectionary, but unless some priest is just making stuff up without authorization from the bishop I don't think I'd worry about it that much.

I have multiple feelings about the lectionary. If one has a parish where the Daily Office is a regular part of the schedule of services, I think the one year is quite adequate. In a parish that is primarily only able to conduct Sunday services, I would prefer a three year cycle. Our Abp. will authorize the readings to be done from the ESV or NKJV (I broached the RSVCE to him and got an emphatic 'No') but he has not warmed to the three year lectionary.

 

[Paidiske]

I don't really have strong feelings about the form of the lectionary. I think it's important that we have it, and that it be comprehensive (ie. that it not just cover our favourite or fashionable bits of Scripture but something close to all of it).

That said, I've only ever worked with the RCL (with some minor Australian adaptations, like readings for Australia day), and I'm quite comfortable with that. I enjoy the sense of ecumenical sharing in working our way through the Scriptures in common.

 

[Deegie]

I pretty much feel the same way as Paidiske. The RCL is far from perfect (primarily in how it cuts off or skips certain portions) but does have that nice ecumenical feel. Oh well, not like I get any choice anyway.

And Shane, thanks for your answers above.

 

[Feuerbach]

I have multiple feelings about the lectionary. If one has a parish where the Daily Office is a regular part of the schedule of services, I think the one year is quite adequate. In a parish that is primarily only able to conduct Sunday services, I would prefer a three year cycle. Our Abp. will authorize the readings to be done from the ESV or NKJV (I broached the RSVCE to him and got an emphatic 'No') but he has not warmed to the three year lectionary.

Was there a reason for saying no to the RSVCE? Just curious.

 

[Shane R]

Was there a reason for saying no to the RSVCE? Just curious.

He did not supply a reason and I did not press him.

 

[Paidiske]

One has to be brave to press one's bishop, in general, I think.

Sigh. Synod is over for this year, thank goodness. We passed some important legislation but I am exhausted!

I even found the nerve to address synod twice this year (once proposing an amendment to a bill, which was adopted without opposition, to my shock). After all, what's the point of having a participatory governance system, if one is not willing to participate?

 

[alexier]

Yes I'm also in the Church in Wales synod called 'Governing Body' - I do find it very interesting and speak occasionally..:0)

 

[Paidiske]

Nice profile picture, alexier. Always good to see a colleague around.

 

[alexier]

Nice profile picture, alexier. Always good to see a colleague around.

I know what you mean! :0) Colleagues from across the Oceans :0)

 

[Arcangl86]

So @Paidiske I had a rumination that occurred to me the other day. I realize that you are Melbourne, but do you know how women who are called to ministry from Sydney seek out ordination?

 

[Paidiske]

Usually, they move dioceses. I've met quite a few in Melbourne.

Some seek what ministry opportunities are open to them in Sydney. I have a friend working in lay ministry up there. But their options are limited.

 

[Arcangl86]

Usually, they move dioceses. I've met quite a few in Melbourne.

Some seek what ministry opportunities are open to them in Sydney. I have a friend working in lay ministry up there. But their options are limited.

I figured that would be the case, bur I assume that would require some sort of formal discernment process before hand and it's a bit rough to expect somebody to move before they are know if they can continue. Says somebody who was burned in a candidacy process after uprooting his life.

 

[Paidiske]

Yes, true. I've observed that people tend to come to Melbourne and start studying, undertaking the discernment process while studying. It's a huge and costly venture if they end up being told no. Some people do kind of diocese-shop until they find a bishop willing to lay hands on them (often going to a desperate rural diocese).

But I don't know how you fix that. You can't really give people gold-plated guarantees.

Do you mind if I ask which diocese you applied to? I understand if you'd rather not say.

 

[Shane R]

Some people do kind of diocese-shop until they find a bishop willing to lay hands on them (often going to a desperate rural diocese).

Jurisdiction shopping is a problem in the Continuing movement as well. I dare say, it is usually a question of under-qualified candidates in our case - either educationally or for various reasons of questionable morality. ACC won't ordain you? Try ACA. Still no luck? Try UECNA; and so on. If all else fails, buy a miter and crozier, get a picture of you having a conversation with some obscure Old Catholic or Church of the East Bishop, fabricate a line of apostolic succession, and set up your own jurisdiction.