Ash Wednesday and Lent- Are Rituals Biologically Ingrained?

[beaglelady]

@Vinnie

I agree the lectionary is wonderful and useful and does not restrict the Holy Spirit. I personally wouldn’t claim preachers not following it are preaching “whatever they want”

I assume preachers not following a lectionary would choose the scriptures they wish to expound upon in their sermons

@Vinnie

but God did leave us a canon so I can see how a lectionary might open up new avenues and maybe prevent always focusing on Pauline grace and the new covenant 99% of the time.

Yes, and they might see that the Law of Moses is considered a very good thing, and that there is grace in the Hebrew scriptures and judgment in the New Testament. And so on.

[Vinnie]

@beaglelady

I assume preachers not following a lectionary would choose the scriptures they wish to expound upon in their sermons

I consider that a tad bit uncharitable in some cases. Are they choosing what they wish or those the Holy Spirit puts on their hearts based on the needs of the community?

[beaglelady]

@Vinnie

I consider that a tad but charitable in some cases. Are they choosing what they wish or those the Holy Spirit puts on their hearts based on the needs of the community?

It could go either way. Some preachers like to harp incessantly on their favorite themes.

[St.Roymond]

@beaglelady

The truth is, Christianity is centuries old, and encompasses many different traditions.

This is one of the reasons I sort of despise Rome: over centuries it deliberately erased other traditions and approaches to liturgy, learning, even architecture, stamping out some beautiful traditions. We would have been better off if the British Isles, France, Germany, and even Spain had gotten their own patriarchs to balance the papacy and its imperialistic ambitions.

@beaglelady

And look at Julian of Norwich. There is no one-size-fits-all.

I read an article where it was argued that if she had lived two hundred years later she would have been deemed a heretic by the Jesuits, who back then were fixated on making “one size” fit all.

[St.Roymond]

@gregoreite

I remember coming away from reflection about the life of the church, feeling that the church had alienated so many people by its rituals and all the culture which goes with them.

That’s one of my hesitancies in terms of Orthodoxy. While the services are musical throughout, the hymns are “built in” according to whichever saint’s day or festival falls on a particular Sunday, which to me loses the richness of other liturgical traditions where several hymns are sung every Sunday from a variety available. It was one of the shocks that hit me the first time I visited an Orthodox church – no hymnals anywhere!
Along with that is the idea that the liturgy itself is inspired, or at least established by the church and therefore set in stone. In my view imposing worship forms from some past period of history is sort of imperialistic because it prevents later generations from coming up with forms meaningful to them. I should note, though, that several Western liturgical forms have gotten approval from one or another Orthodox patriarch, including one Anglican form and one Lutheran form – after a few tweaks to adjust them to Orthodox practice – and I find that encouraging, in fact enough so that if there was an Orthodox church within an hour’s drive that used one of those I’d probably start attending there.

@GJDS

A question which justifiably arises, however, is whether this in fact is what fasting is all about. If Great Lent is a preparatory time within the Church’s liturgical year meant as a means for preparing the faithful to encounter the risen Christ on the day of Easter, how does such an understanding of fasting assist in this “spiritual” journey? Is this the true meaning of fasting? Or, have we reduced it merely to rules about what foods are permitted and what are not?"

I was listening to an Orthodox theologian who was talking about the Incarnation and somehow got onto the topic of fasting. He made the point that meticulously adhering to the rules doesn’t make one’s fast effective, and it would be better to ignore the rules and instead fast from things that have personal impact.

[St.Roymond]

@beaglelady

So what? There are three synoptic gospels. The readings from John are not any more bits and pieces than the other readings. They are solid passages.

There is a reason that there is no “year of John” in the lectionary: the Synoptics are about Jesus’ life and ministry while John is regarded as theology – it;s why St. John is often called “the Theologian”.

@beaglelady

Obviously you have only glanced at the lectionary.

And not heard much preaching based on it! I’ve heard a number of priests who endeavor to place the Gospel reading in its narrative context, not just preach on it in isolation.

@beaglelady

It’s Evangelical churches that tend to be racist.

When I lived in St. Louis one of the least racist churches around was a Lutheran congregation in the inner city; it had suffered somewhat from “white flight” but a sizable core had determined to stick it out where they were and reach out to the neighborhood. The largest portion of the congregation was black, whites were second, then Koreans.

@beaglelady

What sort of lectionary does the Eastern Orthodox church use?

In all my time looking at Orthodoxy I have never seen this question answered – now I’m curious!
What I do know is that some of the oldest New Testament manuscripts are actually pieces of ancient lectionaries rather than pieces of a full text.

@GJDS

The Greek Orthodox Lectionary (synaxis.info)

That link doesn’t work any more, darn it.

@Vinnie

I agree the lectionary is wonderful and useful and does not restrict the Holy Spirit. I personally wouldn’t claim preachers not following it are preaching “whatever they want”

A study in the 1980s found that sermons in churches with a lectionary cover more of the total of scripture than those without, with the exception of a few churches where sermons are based on reading right through the New Testament or the entire Bible.

[Vinnie]

@St.Roymond

A study in the 1980s found that sermons in churches with a lectionary cover more of the total of scripture than those without,

Is that a good thing? I think some parts of scripture are more important than others. Scripture and Jesus seem to both agree.

[gregoreite (γρηγορεῖτε)]

@beaglelady

Obviously you have only glanced at the lectionary.

I have been ordained for over 40 years and during that time I have preached yearly from the Revised Common Lectionary. I also have a post-graduate degree in theology. Arguments by insult do not make the grade in rational debate.

@St.Roymond

There is a reason that there is no “year of John” in the lectionary: the Synoptics are about Jesus’ life and ministry while John is regarded as theology – it;s why St. John is often called “the Theologian”.

John’s Gospel is often called the “spiritual Gospel”, but that doesn’t mean the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) are any less theological. If you read up on “redaction criticism” and use a Synoptic comparison of the Synoptic Gospels you will soon see how the arrangement and rearrangement of “pericopes” in the Synoptic Gospels expresses a theological mindset which is unique to each of the Synoptic Gospels and to which history is subservient.