by ToddPeperkorn ~ January 30th, 2009
Below you’ll find a couple excerpts from Burnell Eckardt’s blog, Gottesblog. In it he laments the changes made to the one year lectionary in LSB. You may read them as you see fit.
I wanted to make one comment, really. Okay, a question and a comment. First off, what changes are we talking about here? Are we talking about the translation? The Introits and graduals? Are we talking about the OT readings and the occasional Epistle? What precisely are we talking about?
Then on to the comment. I will say for myself that I have been very happy with the LSB one year lectionary. I’ve used it since it was in “field test” form, so about six years or so. Really my only complaint (and it is barely that) is that I would have preferred the NKJV over the ESV. My reason for that is that I prefer the Majority text to a critical edition, and I think that the NKJV retains the poetry of the language a little better. But I am also willing to give on that comment regard.
As to the readings themselves, I’ll say that I love them. I much prefer the narratives over the predictive prophecy in the OT readings. I’m sure Fritz will tell me why it’s bad, but I find it much more preachable.
So those are my Friday afternoon lectionary thoughts, as I muse on the Transfiguration.
So you one year folks, what do you think of the LSB lectionary? Good, bad, ugly? Why?
Crabby about Changes: by Burnell Eckardt
I tried to go with the plan, and agree to the slight compromise of accepting the one-year lectionary put forward by the LSB committee. It’s a compromise because, on the one hand, it’s mostly the same as the historic–in fact, the Gospels are all the same–and it would be good to foster some uniformity among followers of the one year series; but on the other hand there are a few changes, although the historic Epistle is always available, even if only on occasion as an alternate. The Old Testament readings are new, but then, Old Testament readings were never part of the historic lectionary in the first place.
So it was that the little group of us that met at my place in October of 2007, our liturgy seminar, to talk about what sort of one-year lectionary would be best, arrived at this compromise, and went with the LSB one-year lectionary, and in fact have posted it at this very Gottesdienst site, under Calendar and Archives. A number of Gottesdienst readers have followed suit, and routinely go to this calendar for their readings.
So off we went, for a couple of weeks into the new year. And dag nab it, I soon found myself missing the readings I had come to expect after years of having them. And I got to thinking, why did I change? To foster uniformity? But the decision to go with a local lectionary (local in a parochial sense, rather than in the geometric sense in which local lectionaries differed from one another in the regions of Germany after the Reformation, many of which also had their own lectionaries) is not going to foster any real catholic uniformity anyhow.
So I have reversed myself.
I’m back to the historic historic lectionary, in hopes of alleviating my crabbiness, and trusting my instincts. And as for possible charges that this will brand me as fickle, or hopelessly repristinating, or, worst of all, in disagreement with our own calendar, or whatever, I have to swallow and say, Damn the torpedoes. I’d rather be happy.”
(Via Gottesdienst Online.)