Why the Lectionary?

As I was reviewing my blog, I saw that I had a presupposition when dealing with the lectionary. The question should be asked: "Why have a lectionary at all?"

Limitations of a lectionary (ones that I've heard from congregations not having a lectionary):
1. The Bible, in its entirety, is not preached on.
2. One does not have the ability to preach to the needs of the congregation.
3. There is a hermeneutic of any lectionary.

My responses:
1. It is impossible for a parson to preach on the entire bible. Even if one were to preach everyday, One could never exhaust the riches of the biblical text. The question is not whether a pastor preaches on every verse of the bible. The question is: How do these verses proclaim both law (our sin and inability to be righteous) and Gospel (In other words, Christ: Who is our Righteousness). Preaching is not a lecture on the more obscure Christian truths. Preaching is meant to kill the old Adam, and then raise Him to new life in Christ. This is also called, by my friend Rev. Dreyer, the Divine narrative. For more info, Read Walther's "The Proper Distinction between Law and Gospel."

2. This objection is usually used with the word "relevance." These preachers want to speak to today's world. The lectionary is old and dusty. What could it possibly answer for us today?

Well, we must come to the realization that the Word of God is not "relevant." Relevance comes and goes. Here is a quote that explains what I mean:

"We note . . .a certain detachment in Jesus' attitude toward contemporary events and the secular problems and policies of His day . . . We will do well, therefore, as disciples of Jesus, to imitate His attitude toward the external and contemporary and secular life of the world. We will not allow our minds to be too much occupied or enmeshed in the vexing questions of the day. We will keep ourselves informed concerning these, but we will not become so preoccupied with present-day problems which perplex, disturb, and harass the mind."-- From the Minister's Prayerbook

In other words, to use contemporary events (homosexuality, etc) as your lectionary is to be driven from below. We must be guided from above, with that "peace which passeth all understanding."

3. This point is valid, in many respects. A pastor must be careful of what the creators of the lectionary were thinking. What did the makers leave in, and what did they take out?

But, at the same time, this can be a very good thing too. If the hermeneutic is Christ and His work (divine narrative), then we can trust and appreciate this lectionary.


All in all, lectionaries are human traditions. They are not infallible or perfect. Different lectionaries have been used at different times for different purposes. I will continue with another post on the positives of the lectionary shortly.

The Lectionary Debate

There has been a lot of debate back and forth between those that support the one year lectionary and those that support the three year lectionary. The LSB has (wisely, in my humble opinion) included both. This is good, because neither the one year nor the three year are commanded or forbidden in scripture.

However, the question remains: which lectionary is more beneficial to the church?

As pastors, seminarians, and lay theologians (yes, every layperson is a theologian), we must examine the principles which led to the formulation of the three year lectionary, the committee's reasons for putting this lectionary forward, and then test this lectionary according to the Christological hermeneutic.

We will start our investigation with the three year lectionary and then move to the one year lectionary.