Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This article was downloaded by: [University of Colorado at Boulder Libraries]On: 20 December 2014, At: 01:57Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
LiturgyPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ultg20
The Liturgy of the WordJoyce Ann Zimmerman C.PP.S., Ph.D., S.T.D. aa Institute for Liturgical Ministry , Dayton, USAPublished online: 07 Apr 2011.
To cite this article: Joyce Ann Zimmerman C.PP.S., Ph.D., S.T.D. (2000) The Liturgy of the Word,Liturgy, 16:1, 19-33, DOI: 10.1080/0458063X.2000.10392491
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0458063X.2000.10392491
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
olor
ado
at B
ould
er L
ibra
ries
] at
01:
57 2
0 D
ecem
ber
2014
9 20 9
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
olor
ado
at B
ould
er L
ibra
ries
] at
01:
57 2
0 D
ecem
ber
2014
THE LITURGY OF THE WORD
Joyce Ann Zimmeman
Nothing short of a revolution happened in the last half of the twentieth century with respect to the liturgy of the word. Contribut- ing in no small way is the increased use of a lectionary by a larger and larger number of Christian communions. Both the Roman and Common lectionaries have already been revised, an accomplishment indicating a continually growing appreciation for the structure and rhythm of lectionary use. The shared schema of readings among Catholics and Protestants has promoted a new basis for ecumenical dialogue. Catholics have alerted some of their Protestant sisters and brothers to the rich benefits of using an assigned series of readings covering a reasonable quantity of the Bible proclaimed over a period of time. Protestants have advised their Catholic sisters and brothers about the richness of scripture scholarship and challenged them to renew their commitment to the First Testament. Both Catholics and Protestants have been challenged to understand better and deepen the proclarnatory nature of the liturgy of the word.
Yet in spite of so much convergence, all the liturgical traditions still face something of a genuine crisis with respect to the celebration of the liturgy of the word. Sunday after Sunday a reasonably size- able portion of North Americans worship. They hear the word proclaimed and explained, they confess, and they profess their faith; they pray for the needs of the churches, world, their own needs. Faithful so many of us are. Yet the newspaper headlines and nightly newscasts relentlessly bear the bad news of a society faced with myriad problems. This is our society. This is the world into which we take the word embedded in our hearts. Have we been remiss? Are we too small in numbers to make a difference? Is there still too much separation between church and everyday living? Why aren’t we making a bigger difference? These are tough questions, indeed. Surely all the problems of our world will not be solved simply by celebrating better on Sunday. Nevertheless, these questions bring us to reflect on how well the word is proclaimed and received on Sunday and during our own personal contemplation of God’s word in the sacred scriptures, how well God’s word challenges us to the
9 21 9
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
olor
ado
at B
ould
er L
ibra
ries
] at
01:
57 2
0 D
ecem
ber
2014
personal transformation that is prerequisite for any societal or systemic transformation.
This brief article on the liturgy of the word cannot address all the issues involved in celebrating it better and living it. A perusal of the religious and theological literature during the past few decades helps us narrow down our remarks because it shows that researchers into the liturgy of the word have been greatly concentrating on
lectionary use today that also touches on such ancillary ques- tions as the nature of the arocla- OUYCOnCern withproclamation Of
the wordis that it take root in mation of the word and &e nature of the sermon or homily.
both the proclaimer and hearers: A brief review of this literature and comments on where and
challenge them, encourage them, why scholars are directing their research comprises the first part change them-all this SO that the of article. The second addresses the present structures of the liturgy of the word as outlined in various service books of liturgical denominations that habitually use lectionaries and
suggests some revisions that might be helpful if worshipers are to grow in their appreciation of God's word and their living it in such a way as to make a difference in our world.
word can be lived in ordinary, dailg ci rcurnstances.
Lectionary use today Lectionaries are not a modern invention; they have been around
since at least the sixth-seventh centuries.' What is startlingly new about lectionary development is the comprehensive revision of the Roman lectionary undertaken after the Second Vatican Council.z Sacrosunctum Concilium (the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy) directed that "the treasures of the Bible are to be opened up more lavishly so that a richer fare may be provided for the faithful at the table of God's w ~ r d . " ~ For Roman Catholics, the 1969 Roman lectionary not only offered a "richer fare" of readings (now spread over a three-year cycle) but for the first time provided for a regular reading of selections from the First Testament. As with its earliest predecessors, this remarkable work is closely tied to the unfolding of the paschal mystery in the liturgical year.' Not only that, the lectionary is clearly intended to be used in eucharistic celebrations; the intended link between the table of the word and the table of the eucharist cannot be denied.5
To be sure, this Roman Lectionary is hardly a perfect book.6 For example, sometimes the relationship of the first reading and gospel is weak and some of the responsorial psalms are barely connected (only by means of a common word or phrase) to the first reading
4 22 9
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
olor
ado
at B
ould
er L
ibra
ries
] at
01:
57 2
0 D
ecem
ber
2014
and g o ~ p e l . ~ But this lectionary remains a landmark achievement after the council. Further, it was the “cornerstone of the Common Lectionary.”8
The Common Lectionary (1983) was the product of the North American Consultation on Common Texts. Its most noticeable dis- tinction from the Roman lectionary is the introduction of lectio continuua (semi-continuous readings) during the Sundays of Ordi- nary Time for the Old Testament reading9 But this is hardly the only distinction. This lectionary sought to redress the perceived domi- nance of the Second Testament over the First in the Roman Lectionary, the eucharistic liturgical context taking precedence over the canon of Scriptures, and its christological bias. But other differ- ences point to ancillary issues affecting the liturgy of the word that derive from the lectionary studies and controversies.1°
Catholic and Protestant traditions, drawing on his postcritical hermeneutical analysis of the lectionaries: ”In the Catholic liturgical paradigm the voice of Christ is heard in the gospel lection. This oral aspect of the Gospel originates in Christ’s own words and continues with their transmission.”” With respect to the Protestant liturgical paradigm he com- ments that the “printed book of the Bible structures the memory by which its story and message are interpreted and understood. . . . The Pro testan t lection liturgical complex is organized around two language events: (1) the public reading of the printed bibIica1 text and (2) the spoken sermon.”” He elabo- rates: “Holding lections to be speech, the Catholic liturgical paradigm understands ”the word” to denote God’s speaking; regarding readings as print, the Protestant litur- gical paradigm uses this same term and others (law, truth) to refer to that which is revealed through a text printed in the book of the Bible.”’? West is opening up a critical issue here that radi- cally affects the notion of the proclamation of the scriptures,
Fritz West succinctly articulates a major difference between the
’
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
olor
ado
at B
ould
er L
ibra
ries
] at
01:
57 2
0 D
ecem
ber
2014
the manner of interpreting the lections, and the task of sermon or homily. The limits of this article do not allow us to develop any of these areas extensively. Let a few comments suffice to awaken the reader to the enormity of what is at stake and the excitement of current research in this area.
First, proclamation. We are learning that the liturgy of the word involves far more than locution and auditory reception. To put it another way: reading and proclamation are not the same. Frank S ~ M writes, “in the Hebrew Scriptures word and action go together.”” Our concern with proclamation of the word is that it take root in both the proclaimer and hearers: challenge them, encourage them, change them-all this so that the word can be lived in ordinary, daily circumstances. The most perfect lectionary is just that-a perfect book-until it is proclaimed. Moreover, one cannot separate proclama- tion from God’s revelation or self-di~closure;’~ the word proclaimed is a word revealed in a dialogic event of divine initiative and human response.I6 The liturgy of the word implies a single word ment that is fruitful in the convergence of speaking, hearing and 1i~ing.l~
Second, interpretation. Scholars of biblical theology and scriptural exegesis have always guided us in understanding God’s word, whether through the Bible itself or proclaimed from a lectionary. Most lectors or readers and preachers consult one or more of the many fine biblical commentaries readily available. Recently, though, a different kind of lectionary scholarship began to emerge. Some- times by biblical scholars and sometimes by liturgists, these more recent interpretations are concerned not only with understanding each biblical passage in its biblical context but with examining the lections in relation to each other and within the context of the liturgical year.l8 Hear what Paul Janowiak has to say:
The sacramental quality of this interchange [of social energy between texts and events] argues implicitly for the integrity of the lectionary and the liturgical year. . . . [Tlhe proclamation of a biblical text is not just subsumed under a general rubric of a written word. . . .I9
Thus there are at least three venues for lectionary interpretation: the passage’s context in the Bible, the passage’s context in the lectionary, and the passage’s context in the liturgical year.20
Third, sermon or homily. There is probably no greater distin- guishing feature among the various Christian communions than their approach to sermon or homily. In some denomina tions-particularly those who rely almost solely on word services and rarely combine the word with the sacrament of holy communion-pastors or minis- ters are made or broken by their preaching skills. A congregation’s call to a pastor or minister to serve is based primarily on preaching. Congregations that have moved toward a lectionary-based liturgy of the word have added another dimension to the preaching task.
9 24 9
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
olor
ado
at B
ould
er L
ibra
ries
] at
01:
57 2
0 D
ecem
ber
2014
Rather than the pastor or minister’s choosing a Sunday’s text, the text is given. Now the demand is to preach on these texts that may stretch the traditional understanding. of a sermon in both Protestant and Catholic circles.21 What is at stake in the homily is remembering the Christian story in such a way that it shapes one’s identity.” Far more than storytelling, the homily is telling story. It confronts us with God’s living word as a prophetic challenge to the way we are, we think, and we live. Proclaimed lections and homily never leave us the same.
This brief overvdw of lectionary use only introduces the reader to a vast array of research and publications on the various new and revised lectionaries. Now, at the beginning of this new millennium, the discussion seems to be dying down. But research into lectionaries, improving them, and continuing ecumenical dialogue on the convergences and divergences continues, although at a much deeper level. Scholars will only take us deeper and deeper into plumbing the richness of lectionary use. Its implication for sermon or homily preparation is nothing short of revolutionary in all the Christian denominations. Its implication for renewed Christian living-the meaning of the word proclaimed and effective-is only beginning to be plumbed. The large number of Christian commun- ions that have taken up lectionary use attests to the vast importance of this milestone. It cannot be underestimated. It has revolutionized the liturgy of the word.
The structural elements of the liturgy of the word So far our discussion has focused on the proclamation of the
word and on the lectionary, that book from which that proclamation takes place. However, even a simple perusal of the structural ele- ments of the liturgy of the word signals that the liturgy of the word is more than this proclamation, important as it is. We turn now to some of the other elements that are included in the liturgy of the word: first, a review of present structures and, second, some com- ments on how these orders of service might be improved.
Present structures
Church but, in reality, it was an event for all Christian denomina- tions. Sacrosancturn Conciliurn‘s call to revise liturgical texts (see no. 50) so that the faithful could enter into worship with “full, conscious, and active participation”” was heard across the Christian spectrum. Not only Roman Catholics undertook the mammoth task of revising all liturgical texts (within a relatively short period of time), but other communions did the same. In the last third of the last century there was a flurry of publication of revised service books. It is no wonder that the work of revision is ongoing-ur liturgical texts are striving to keep up with our scholarly and historical insights.
The time was ripe. Vatican I1 was an event of the Roman Catholic
9 25 9
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
olor
ado
at B
ould
er L
ibra
ries
] at
01:
57 2
0 D
ecem
ber
2014
The truly extraordinary thing about these revisions with respect to the liturgy of the word is that, to borrow Frank Senn’s words, “The Liturgy of the Word is remarkably similar in all of these or- d e r ~ . ’ ’ ~ ~ Common to virtually all the of them are two lessons or readings, psalm, gospel, sermon or homily, creed, prayers-indeed, this is the “guts” of the liturgy of the word! Included as an option in all of them is time for silence after the lections and sermon or homily (we comment on this in the next section of the article). All the orders of service except the Roman Catholic one include a hymn which “allows also for a musical proclamation of the word.’’zS Non-Roman orders also generally include a confession of sin and absolution (if not already part of the introductory rites) and the passing of the peace.” The Roman Missal re-introduced common intercessory prayer (general intercessions or prayers of the faithful) following the creed and other services have revised them: “A litany form of the interces- sions and thanksgivings has replaced the old general or pastoral prayers in all of these traditions, which brings the people verbally into the prayers of the people. It is envisioned that the intercessions and thanksgivings will be related to both the lectionary and the specific concerns of the local
Other than the use of a hymn and choices about the optional silences, there are no differ- ences among these orders of service in the proclamation of the word part of the liturgy of the word. What might be termed the second part of the liturgy of the word-people’s response to the word-is where differences are noticeable. These we take up in the next section.
Ideas for revision
further research and reflection on the liturgy of the word would include the relationship of the table of the word to the table of the sacrament?” the oral aspect of God (Christ) speaking in the proclamation of the lessons (gospel) and the collec- tive memory of the community, the unity and dynamism of the structural elements of the liturgy of the word, and the
More general areas requiring
9 26 9
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
olor
ado
at B
ould
er L
ibra
ries
] at
01:
57 2
0 D
ecem
ber
2014
relationship of biblical canon to lectionary. It would take us too far afield to address these important issues here. Instead we take a practical, pastoral approach and consider some structural elements that pose problems or confusion and suggest ways to improve their use in the liturgy of the word. Our remarks are divided into ele- ments proper to the proclamation and elements proper to the assem- bly response.
First, elements proper to the proclamation of the Scriptures. The churches are clear, strong, and consistent in their order of service for the liturgy of the word taken as a whole. Two comments are in order. One, all the orders of service introduce silence after the lections as an option. A good question might be raised as to whether these silences ought to be obligatory, an essential structural element of the unfolding of the word. This suggestion comes out of an understanding of the proclamatory act as dialogical and requiring active listening. If the word is not internalized it falls on rocky ground only to wither and die. A brief period of silence engages each assembly member with the word, entices personalization, and challenges a response that is lived. Without this silence the word can quickly be forgotten.
Second, the debate about whether the lectionary and liturgical year take precedence over the integrity of the canon continues. If the principle of selection is employed, then the second reading is prob- lematic during Ordinary Time when a semicontinuous selection from the Second Testament letters, having nothing to do thematically with the first reading and gospel, is proclaimed. In the Revised Common Lectionary a set of first readings from the First Testament is given (which largely follows the Roman Lectionary) that is thematically related to the gospels, but if the semi-continuous set of first readings for Ordinary Time is chosen the issue is compounded. One question is, Can there be too much Scripture? Is it better to have a related sense of readings or to hear more from the Bible over a given period of time?B How does one preach when the readings are not related? A second question is, How does a lectionary compiled by the principle of selection respect the integrity of the biblical canon?% These are not easy questions and cannot be answered without fuller research. As this research develops there will probably be even more similarities among the lectionaries.
are at issue here: creed, prayers of the people, confession, and the exchange of peace.
It is probably not pastorally effective for congregations to recite an early doctrinal creed (e.g., the Nicene Creed) immediately after the proclamations; early doctrinal problems are not our problems and we might question whether this is the place for doctrinal statements. Many congregations use the Apostles' Creed which is at least closer to a compendium of belief that has not been motivated by
'
Second, elements proper to the assembly response. Four elements
4 27 4
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
olor
ado
at B
ould
er L
ibra
ries
] at
01:
57 2
0 D
ecem
ber
2014
christological or trinitarian heresies. The proclamations require wholehearted response, not unlike the function of an acclamation. Some denominations use the baptismal formula for the creed which has the clear advantage of being dialogic. Let's hold this reflection for a moment and return to it after some comments on the confession.
Practically all denominations include some kind of confession of sin in their eucharistic liturgy-some as part of the introductory rites and some before the exchange of the peace at the end of the liturgy
of the word. We rinhtfully have a sense
The proclamations take us on a very practical and real paschal mystery journey challenging in very concrete terms our everyday way of living and deputing us to roll up our sleeves, be disciples, and do as Christ did.
of our own sinfulnvess in lace of the awesome goodness and fidelity of the God whom we worship. If, however, this confession is for the purpose of "making us worthy" before we can celebrate or come to the Table, we are barking up the wrong tree! The issue isn't whether we are worthy; if, in fact, we can never be "worthy" in the sense of sinlessness or confessing enough. The issue is that God calls us into divine presence to offer our praise and thanks- giving in union with Christ, the Son of God, who offers the perfect sacrifice as our high priest. It is that call that makes us worthy.
So why confession? It always seems problematic during the introductory rites. This brief time before the liturgy of the word might best be used for hearing God's call to divine presence, surren- dering ourselves to God's transforming action during the rite, and readying ourselves to hear God's word and to be fed at God's lavish messianic table.31 So, if we take the confession out of the introduc- tory rites at the same time we admit the value of confession, where do we put it and what shape does this confession take?
One suggestion is that the confession might be combined with the creed. If we look at a traditional baptismal formula, we note a confession (rejection of evil) before profession. Having just heard the Scriptures proclaimed during the first part of the liturgy of the word-having just heard in one way or another of God's utter fidelity and Christ's astonishing compassion and forgiveness-we are humbled in our knowledge of how far we ourselves fall short of these divine initiatives on our behalf, how far we fall short of ex- tending the same fidelity, compassion, and forgiveness to ourselves and each other. In most cases it would be quite natural for the proclamation of the Scriptures to lead us to desire some time for mea culpa. Out of this confession comes our profession-a commitment to live the word as God's adopted children. Using the baptismal formula as a model, this personal response to the proclamation of the word might look something like this dialogic exchange:
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
olor
ado
at B
ould
er L
ibra
ries
] at
01:
57 2
0 D
ecem
ber
2014
Presider: Having just heard God’s word proclaimed, we respond in sorrow and faith.
Do you acknowledge your own sinfulness? R. I do.
Do you reject the allures of evil? R. I do.
Do you wish to strive to be more Godlike in your every- day living? R. I do.”
Having just confessed our sinfulness, we profess our faith, confident in God’s mercy, forgiveness, and help.
Do you believe in God the creator, who made us in the divine image, and calls us to be adopted daughters and sons? R. I do.
Do you believe in Jesus Christ our savior, who died and rose for our redemption and into whose mystery of dying and rising you were plunged at baptism? R. I do.
Do you believe in the Holy Spirit who confers gifts upon each of us, who guides the Church toward its consumma- tion at the end of the world, and who sustains us by grace? R. I do.
This is our faith. This is what we profess. This is what we are to live. R. So be it. Thanks be to God.
This confession/profession would lead naturally into the prayers of the people. Our sinfulness reminds us that there is much in this world that yet needs to be redeemed; our profession reminds us that we ourselves are the presence of the risen Christ and take up his work of forgiving and healing. As mentioned above, the language of the prayers would be drawn from the lections, giving us the impetus to live and redress in our everyday world what we hear proclaimed. The passing of the peace, following the prayers, is less connected to Mt 5:23-2433 than it is to this proposed dynamic flow of the liturgy of the word: proclamation, confession, profession, prayers, peace. Here the passing of the peace brings to a climax the whole liturgy of the word: hearing God’s word and living it leads through concern for and doing for othersM to peace that is the ultimate gift of the resur- rected Christ.
With the sincere offering of the peace of Christ’s resurrected life to each other we begin (after the offering and brief preparation) the liturgy of the eucharist during which we remember in narrative prayer-proclamation the mighty deeds of redemption and are then invited to the messianic table to partake of the bread and drink from heaven. In this way the promise of the fullness of salvation hinted at in the liturgy of the word is already brought to fulfillment in the liturgy of the eucharist.
9 29 9
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
olor
ado
at B
ould
er L
ibra
ries
] at
01:
57 2
0 D
ecem
ber
2014
The liturgy of the word unfolding as a dynamic-proclamation, confession, profession, prayers, peace-is no mere preamble to the reception of Christ's body and blood. It brings us to the very same place (resurrected life) as does the liturgy of the eucharist.35 The difference is that the proclamations take us on a very practical and real paschal-mystery journey challenging in concrete terms our everyday way of living and deput- ing us to roll up our sleeves, be dis- ciples, and do as Christ did: feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, wel- come the stranger, clothe the naked, take care of the infirm, visit the impris- oned (Mt 25:35-36). The liturgy of the word brings us to the brink of judgment (in this it is always prophetic) and the possibility of already hearing Christ's words: "Come, you that are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom pre-
pared for you from the foundation of the world" (Mt 25:34). But between the proclamations and the peace of the liturgy of the word come confession, profession, prayers. These assure us that the word doesn't just echo around a church chancel or nave but that God's mighty word is heard in such a way as to be lived.
Notes 1 .
2.
3.
4.
4 30 4
For a very fine brief history of the development of lectionaries see the first two chapters in Normand Bonneau's The Sirtiday Lrctiorinry: Ritirnl Word, Pasclinl Sliapc (Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1998). See also the chapter by Adrien Nocent, O.S.B., "The Roman Lectionary for Mass" in Anscar J. Chupungco, ed., Haiidbook for Lificrgical Stirdies, vol3: Thc €itdiarist (Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1999)177-88; the bibliography gives the reader access to some European authors. For a shorter treatment of the development of liturgical books see D.M. Hope [revised by G. Woolfenden], "Liturgical Books" in C. Jones, G. Wainwright, E. Yarnold, S.J., and P. Bradshaw, eds., The Stirdy of Litirrgy, rev. ed. (London: SPCK/ New York: Oxford University Press, 1992) 96-101, esp. p. 97. For a comprehensive bibliography see N. Bonneau, The Sunday Lrcfiorinry, pp. 167- 71; also, see chapter 18, "Liturgical Revision and Renewal," in Frank C. S ~ M , Christian Liturgy: Catholic and Eruiigdical (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1997): 637-92. No. 51. The translation used here is from Austin Flannery, O.P., gen. ed., Vaticnri Coirncil 11: The Concilinr arid Post Conciliar Docirmerits, rev. ed. (Northport, New York: Costello Publishing Company, 1962).
In the Roman Lectionary, during the festal seasons ( Advent-Christmas-Epiphany and Lent-Triduum-Easter) all three readings are related, with the second reading (usually from New Testament letters) often giving a theological, interpretive key for the day. Even during Ordinary Time, when the Sundays are dominical and not related to a specific salvific festival, the first reading is related to the gospel
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
olor
ado
at B
ould
er L
ibra
ries
] at
01:
57 2
0 D
ecem
ber
2014
selection (the second reading is not related but is a semicontinuous reading of one of the apostolic writings). See the General Znstruction of the Roman Missal, no. 8: “The Mass is made up as it were of the liturgy of the word and the liturgy of the eucharist, two parts so closely connected that they form but one single act of worship. For in the Mass the table of God’s word and of Christ’s body is laid for the people of God to receive from it instruction and food.” The second editio typica (typical edition) was promulgated in 1981, and the first volume of a greatly revised English translation of the Roman Lectionary for the United States (Sundays and solemnities) began to be used on the First Sunday of Advent, 1998. Ongoing revisions reflect more than translation details; more and alternative readings are included which shows that we are continually striving for an even better lectionary. Another problem for English-speaking Roman Catholics is the issue of translation and inclusive language which remains a difficult one. For a very fine commentary on the responsorial psalm in the Roman Lectionary see Irene Nowell, Sing a Nezu Song: The Psalnis in the Sunday Lectionary (Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1993). Normand Bonneau, “The Sunday Lectionary: Underlying Principles and Patterns,” Liturgical Ministry 5 (Spring 1996) 51. It should be noted that the Roman and Common Lectionaries are not the only two lectionaries; other communions have compiled lectionaries for their own purposes and use. It is beyond the scope of this article to make comparisons among all of them. The 1992 Revised Conimori Lectionary added alternative Old Testament readings during Ordinary Time that follow the principle of selection used in the Roman Lectionary. See Horace T. Allen, Jr., ”Lectionaries-Principles and Problems: Alternative Perspectives,” Studin Litirrgicn 22 (1992) 68-83 for a summary of some of the lectionary issues. Allen has written and taught extensively on the current lectionaries; for easy access see the bibliographic entries under his name in N. Bonneau, The Sunday Lectionary, 167. Fritz West, Scripture and Memory; The Ecirnienical Hernieneirtics ofthe Three-Year Lrctionaries (Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1997) 47. F. West. Scriptirre nnd Monory, 52. F. West, Scripture and Mrmory, 54.
Frank Senn, A Stewardship ofthe Mysteries (New York/Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1999) 11. In a different context but saying the same thing see the article by Thomas L. Leclerc in Lititrgical Ministry 9 (Fall 2000): 184-95 on biblical approaches to faith in action. For a description of proclamation from the viewpoint of performative theory see Joyce Ann Zimmerman, “Homily as Proclamation,” Litirrgical Ministry 1 (Winter 1992) 11-13. See Karl Rahner, Hearers ofthe Word, trans. Michael Richards (New York: Herder and Herder, 1969) 211. Charles N. Bent’s critique of Rahner is that he is too steeped in German ideal philosophy to leave room for later philosophical developments and their contributions, such as existentialism and linguistic analysis (see his chapter “Some Critical Reflections on Karl Rahner’s Thesis Concerning Man as a Hearer of the Word” in The Word i t i t/(e World: Essays in Honor of Frederick L. Moriarity, S.I.,” eds. Richard J. Clifford, S.J. and George W. MacRae, S.J. [Cambridge: Weston College Press, 19731 209-20). See K. Rahner, Hearers oftlit, Word, 217. On proclamation as dialogic event see also chapter three, “Word” in Kevin W. Irwin, Context arid f i x t : Mrthod i i i Litirrgical Tlieolo~y (Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1994) 86-90. Research in this area of a fruitful word using some of the postcritical methods such as performative theory is only beginning. There is much more work to be done here
d
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12. 13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
olor
ado
at B
ould
er L
ibra
ries
] at
01:
57 2
0 D
ecem
ber
2014
that can only lead to a greater understanding of the dynamism of God’s word and its demands on the receiving community.
18. F. West’s Scriptureand Memory is a ground-breaking work in that he brings a post- critical hermeneutic (drawing on Paul Ricoeur’s textual hermeneutics) to bear on his interpretation of the lectionary. N. Bonneau in chapters four to nine in his Sunday Lectionary interprets the lections within a paschal mystery context and pays close attention to the lections’ situation within the liturgical year. See his Preparing the Table ofthe Word, Preparing for Liturgy Series (Ottawa, Canada: NoValis/ Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1997) for an easily accessible and pastoral summary of Bonneau’s work on the 1ectiOMry. Dianne Bergant (with Richard N. Fragomeni) in her Preaching the New Lectionary (Collegeville: The Liturgical Press; Year B, 1999; Year C, 2000; Year A, 2001) offers a literary reading of the Roman Lectionary in what I term a “horizontal approach”: she not only points out the connections among the lections on a given Sunday or solemnity but also shows the connections among the sets of readings over a longer period, for example a season. For a perusal of the Common Lectionary see Peter C. Bower, Handbookfor the Common Lectionary (Philadelphia: The Geneva Press, 1987). In a more modest and pastoral vein this is what I and my colleagues (Thomas A. Greisen, Kathleen Harmon, and Thomas L. Leclerc) do in Living Liturgy: Spirituality, Celebration, and Catechesisfor Sundays and Solemnitres (Collegeville: The Liturgical Press; Year B, 1999; Year C, 2000, Year A, 2001).
19. Paul Janowiak, The Holy Preaching: The Sacramentnlity of the Word in the Liturgical Assembly (Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 2000) 90, n. 84.
20. ’ It would not be out of place to suggest a fourth venue: the sacramental context; ! thus a passage during eucharist or holy communion might be interpreted differ- ently from the same passage during a baptismal ritual. For more on context see K.W. Irwin, “Word” in Context and Text, 90-99. Or even a fifth venue: Christian living itself.
Homily to Sermon to Homily,” Liturgical Ministry 1 (Winter, 1992) 3-9. The article points to a fundamental difference between sermon and homily: a sermon may be on any subject, often addressing doctrinal or moral questions; a homily is always
/scripturally based, drawing on the lectionary selections for the day. On using the 1 lectionary as the basis for Sunday preaching see Perry H. Biddle, Jr., “Preaching the Lectionary“ in Peter E. Fink, S.J., ed., The New Dictionary ofSncramenta1 Worship
. (Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1990) 978-83. Bibliography on preaching is rather easy to come by and abounds. Each reader should consult works pertinent to his or her denominational approach to preaching.
22. Cf. P. Janowiak, Thp Holy Preaching, 114 23. Sacrosanctum Concilium, no. 14. Sacrosanctum Concilium mentions participation by
the faithful in numerous paragraphs; some of the most important ones are nos. 11, 14, and 19; see also Eucharisticum Mysterium (Rome: Sacred Congregation for Rites; 25 May 1967) no. 12. Although the history of eucharistic liturgy left Roman Catholics all but removed from the sacred action, at the time of the council many other Christian liturgical denominations were also seeking ways to involve their congregations more actively in worship and, especially, to connect worship to daily living. The liturgical movement was not the domain of only Roman Catholics.
24. See chapter 18, “Liturgical Revision and Renewal” in Senn’s Christian Liturgy: Catholic and Evangelical (pp. 646-47) for a comparative outline of five service books: Roman Missal (1969), Lutheran Book of Worship (1978), Book of Common Prayer (1977), The Methodist Hymnal (1989), and the Book of Common Worship (1993).
25. F. C. Senn, Christian Liturgy, 648. 26. The proposed U.S. revision of the Roman Sacramentary (but not yet approved)
allows for the option of exchanging the peace at the end of the liturgy of the word
21. For a very fine summary of the history of preaching see J. Kevin Coyle, “From
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
olor
ado
at B
ould
er L
ibra
ries
] at
01:
57 2
0 D
ecem
ber
2014
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
F. C. Senn, Christian Liturgy, 648. Liturgical Ministry 2 (Winter, 1993) had as its theme general intercessions; some of Senn’s points are addressed in the various articles of that issue. For a concrete example of prayers of the people drawing imagery from the Scripture lessons of the day see J. A. Zimmerman et. al., Living Liturgy and the model intercessions given for each Sunday or solemnity. For one approach to their relationship as a dialectic of Ideal Presence and Self Presence see Joyce Ann Zimmerman, Liturgy as Living Faith: A Liturgical Spirituality (Scranton: University of Scranton Press/London and Toronto: Associated University Presses, 1993) 110-12. The Sunday lectionary has only a limited number of readings. Even adding the Roman Catholic daily lectionary (arranged in a two-year cycle of first readings) doesn’t begin to cover all the Bible. See N. Bonneau, The Sunday Lectionary, for statistics relating total lectionary readings to total Bible. Writing as a Roman Catholic, I admit a bias toward the principle of selection. I would make the point that a lectionary is not the Bible, nor is it meant to take its place. Protestants have a much stronger tradition than Catholics (other than in monasticism) of lectio divina-“divine reading.” Roman Catholics are only beginning to catch up with this tradition. Good lectionary use calls for regular lectio divina, and lectionary use ought not replace it. Faithful reading of the Bible respects its canon and continually reinforces the biblical context of the lections proclaimed at liturgy. When both of these are in place-regular lectio divina and lectionary proclamation-and are understood to complement each other, then the issue of canon and lectionary is addressed and, hopefully, satisfactorily resolved. Some of these activities-hearing God’s call, surrendering, readying-would also be prepared before one ever actually comes to the service. The introductory rites could be a time to ritualize these activities within the context of the community gathered (i.e., church). These three formulary statements of confession might be changed periodically and even adjusted to draw on the language of a gospel or lection proclaimed on a particular Sunday. For example, if the gospel is about Jesus’ healing the sick, the third confession statement might be something like ”Do you wish to be more attentive to the sick and suffering, the dying and bereaved?” “So when you are offering your gift at the altar, if you remember that your brother or sister has something against you, leave your gift . . . [and] be reconciled . . . ” (NRSV). The implication of the prayers for the people is that we also do our part to make the prayers come true. Thus, if we pray for the poor to be fed we ourselves are required to help feed the poor in whatever way we can. Our prayers of need raised to God also spell out an agenda for a daily living out of concern and care for others. In this proposed schema there is a wonderful parallel between the liturgy of the word and the liturgy of the eucharist: just as the liturgy of the word rises in a crescendo to the sign of peace, so does the liturgy of the eucharist rise in a cre- scendo to communion.
Joyce Ann Zimmerman, C.PP.S., Ph.D., S.T.D., is a Sister of the Precious Blood from Dayton, Ohio.
She is the director of the Znstitutefor Liturgical Ministry in Dayton and the founding editor of Liturgical Ministry.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f C
olor
ado
at B
ould
er L
ibra
ries
] at
01:
57 2
0 D
ecem
ber
2014
