Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gutting the Gospels: The Sacrilegious Stripping of the Novus Ordo Lectionary
LumenGentleman Apologetics ^ | Jacob Michael

Posted on 04/18/2004 7:39:36 PM PDT by Land of the Irish

Introduction

When the Consilium ad exsequendam Constitutionem de Sacra Liturgica (Concilium for the Implementation of the Constitution on the Liturgy) released its new creation called the Novus Ordo Missae, very few people were aware that a full-scale liturgical revolution had been set in motion. This New Order of the Mass (hereafter, NOM) was not, as some claimed, merely a "restoration" of the Traditional Mass. Rather, it was a complete, wall-to-wall, top-to-bottom innovation - a brand new creation, conceived in the minds of the members of the Concilium. Far from an organic development of the Traditional Mass, this was a new entity altogether, an entity which borrowed here and there from the content of the Traditional Mass.

When one compares the two liturgies, the Traditional Mass (hereafter, TM) and the NOM, one finds striking differences in every single area of the liturgy. Dr. Thomas Droleskey has recently written a book on the changes in the rubrics; Kevin Tierney and I have been working on a manuscript that focuses on the changes to the propers of the Mass (the introits, collects, secrets, communion prayers, etc.); many other books have been written to describe the changes to the overall form of the Mass, including the commons (the Kyrie, the Gloria, the Credo, the Canon of the Mass, etc.).

What has not been discussed in great detail, and which I will cover in this manuscript, are the many changes that were made to the Lectionary of Readings (the weekly epistle and Gospel readings). I had stumbled upon these gross anomalies quite by accident whilst comparing the propers of the two liturgies one evening, and was immediately intrigued (and horrified) by what I found.

How many times have you heard it said that the New Lectionary of the NOM more fully opened up the treasures of Sacred Scripture for the faithful, allowing them (some say) to hear the entire bible read during the course of a three-year period? At first glance, this may seem true. The Lectionary was changed from a one-year cycle of readings to a three-year cycle; surely this would mean that more Scripture would be covered over the course of three years. In addition to the traditional epistle and Gospel reading, a reading from the Old Testament was added to the New Lectionary; this, too, adds to the illusion that more Scripture is being read to the faithful during the Mass.

As I began to examine the actual content of the readings, however, I discovered something shocking: the readings were not at all "seamless," as some had claimed. The Lectionary would, for example, take the faithful through St. Matthew chapter 3, verses 1-6 on one Sunday, skip verses 7-11, and continue on the next Sunday with verses 12-20. This example is fabricated the purposes of illustration, but you get the point: certain verses, sometimes entire sections of verses in fact, were just simply missing from the Lectionary. What purpose would this serve?

I began to investigate more closely, searching my bible and reading the verses that had been passed over in the NOM Lectionary to see what they said. Time after time, I found the exact same thing: the verses that had been excised from the Lectionary consistently dealt with the same subjects. In every case, the offending verses spoke of miracles that could not be otherwise explained by natural causes, of Our Lord’s continual confrontation with the Jews and the Jewish leaders, of the uselessness of material goods and worldly wealth, of the necessity of self-denial and bodily mortification, of sin and the possibility of damnation, of hell, of the role of women in the home and in the Church, and other such subjects that would normally be deemed "offensive" to modern ears.

The same patterns could be detected equally in the Gospels and epistles alike! In the process of giving the faithful a "more complete" bible, the revolutionaries had managed to complete strip the Sacred Scriptures of anything that offended Modern Man, of anything that was ... well, "too Catholic."

I firmly believe that, having examined the content of these readings several times, these clear patterns are in no way coincidental. The passages were (as it becomes clear upon close scrutiny and examining the Lectionary on the whole) very skillfully and deliberated edited in order to present a Christ and Christendom that in no way conflicts with Modern Man’s inclinations. The Christ of the New Lectionary is loving, joyful, peaceful, calling all men to life, inviting all men to participate in the resurrection, exhorting us to love each other and help the needy. In short, the New Christ is fully humanitarian, the quintessential member (and founder) of the Civilization of Love.

Now, it is true, Our Lord certainly was loving, joyful, concerned with the welfare of mankind, etc., but the Gospels also present us with a Christ who warns us of sin, hell, damnation, the dangers of money and worldly possessions. This side of Our Lord’s ministry has been carefully removed from the New Lectionary, effectively giving us the "Hippie Christ" of the 60s and 70s.

It is my hope that many will read the facts I am about to present, and carefully consider whether the NOM is not truly a wholesale revolution, calculated to de-Catholicize the Christian world through constant exposure to a lop-sided liturgy, and in particular, through an imbalanced presentation of the Gospels.

This work is prayerfully dedicated to St. Jerome, whose careful and constant labor produced for the Church the Latin Vulgate edition of Sacred Scripture.

St. Jerome, pray for us.

+JMJ+

March/April, 2004

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sample from Chapter 4, "Gagging the Gospel of St. John"

Author’s note: In this and each of the following chapters, the Gospel texts that were removed will be referenced, followed by a commentary on the content of those verses and the probable reasons why they were deleted from the New Lectionary. I repeat again for the sake of clarity: the verses referenced here are those have been removed in the New Lectionary version of the Gospels.

3:1-12

It is rather amazing that this text should be removed, for it contains Our Lord’s discourse with Nicodemus, one of the Jewish teachers. In this discourse, Our Lord utters the famous words, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God." This verse affirms the necessity of water baptism for salvation - not the something the modern church is keen on affirming.

This passage also highlights Our Lord’s confrontation with the Jewish leaders. He chastises Nicodemus - who, it must be pointed out again, was a Pharisee - and says, "Are you a teacher of Israel, and yet you do not understand this? Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know, and bear witness to what we have seen; but you do not receive our testimony." That last line, "you do not receive our testimony," is a condemnation of the Pharisees for rejecting the Messiah.

3:21-36

The New Lectionary does include the rather tame words of Our Lord in John 3:16, which affirms that "God so loved the world," but it cuts out these verses, which highlight the opposite side of the Gospel coin: "He who believes in the Son has eternal life; he who does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God rests upon him."

Again we see how the modern church carefully avoids any hint of damnation and the "wrath of God."

4:16-19a

The New Lectionary once again interrupts the flow of a discourse of Our Lord (this time, with the woman at the well) by making certain verses in the middle of the discourse optional. Which verses? We read: "Jesus said to her, ‘Go, call your husband, and come here.’ The woman answered him, ‘I have no husband.’ Jesus said to her, ‘You are right in saying, "I have no husband"; for you have had five husbands, and he whom you now have is not your husband; this you said truly.’"

I can only speculate that these verses might be deemed offensive because they highlight the immorality of, for lack of a better term, "shacking up" with someone who is not your spouse. Unfortunately, however, there are many "Novus Ordo Catholics" who are doing this very thing, and the liberal priests in those parishes are loath to say anything about it.

We will see this pattern of excising condemnations of immoral living become even clearer in the next volume, when we examine the New Lectionary’s version of St. Paul’s epistles.

5:1-47

There is little wonder why this entire chapter was removed. In it, we read of Our Lord healing the lame man who sat by the pool of Beth-zatha. Not only is this story another account of the miraculous and supernatural, but it contains yet another confrontation between Our Lord and the Pharisees, who were angry that Our Lord healed the man on the Sabbath. St. John tells us, "And this was why the Jews persecuted Jesus, because he did this on the sabbath."

St. John further tells us, "This was why the Jews sought all the more to kill him, because he not only broke the sabbath but also called God his Father, making himself equal with God."

Our Lord responds with very harsh words, words that still ring out as a condemnation of the Jews of our day who do not accept Christ: "He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him." He continues with such words as, "His voice you have never heard ... you do not have his word abiding in you, for you do not believe him whom he has sent. You search the scriptures, because you think that in them you have eternal life ... yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life ... I know that you have not the love of God within you. I have come in my Father's name, and you do not receive me ... Do not think that I shall accuse you to the Father; it is Moses who accuses you, on whom you set your hope. If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote of me."

Our Lord also speaks of the possibility of damnation: "the hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come forth, those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of judgment."

Miracles, anti-Semitism, and damnation: three very good reasons to remove this chapter in its entirety.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Contents

Chapter 1: Mangling St. Matthew Chapter 2: Messing with St. Mark Chapter 3: Laundering St. Luke Chapter 4: Gagging the Gospel of St. John


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic
KEYWORDS: novus

1 posted on 04/18/2004 7:39:37 PM PDT by Land of the Irish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Akron Al; Alberta's Child; Andrew65; AniGrrl; Antoninus; apologia_pro_vita_sua; attagirl; ...
Ping to an interesting analysis.
2 posted on 04/18/2004 7:41:39 PM PDT by Land of the Irish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Land of the Irish
Thanks for posting this. Interesting how the Church of today mimics the Pharisees of yesterday. They too rejected their own tradition.
3 posted on 04/18/2004 8:15:04 PM PDT by ultima ratio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Land of the Irish
What a silly argument.

The Tridentine Mass covers the same Scriptures, every year. The Novus Ordo covers six times the Scripture that the Tridentine does, over a three year cycle.

Quibbling over what is "left out" indicts the Tridentine six times over!

4 posted on 04/18/2004 8:47:57 PM PDT by sinkspur (Adopt a dog or a cat from an animal shelter! It will save one life, and may save two.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
I think you're missing the point. We're used to that however.
5 posted on 04/18/2004 9:02:11 PM PDT by AAABEST (<a href="http://www.angelqueen.org">Traditional Catholicism is Back and Growing</a>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: AAABEST
I think you're missing the point.

The author of this piece misses the point.

The Novus Ordo covers six times the quantity of Scripture that the Tridentine Mass covers.

Nit picking over what is left out and why obscures the fact that the Tridentine Mass just doesn't expose Catholics to much Scripture, at all.

6 posted on 04/18/2004 9:04:25 PM PDT by sinkspur (Adopt a dog or a cat from an animal shelter! It will save one life, and may save two.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur; Land of the Irish
As usual, our resident atheist liberal troll misses the point.

Everyone else, I'm sure, saw that the salient point is found in an examination of *which* scriptures were omitted, not in a brainless computation of volume.
7 posted on 04/18/2004 9:08:54 PM PDT by dsc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
What kind of nonsense is that, sinkspur? Really. Try to actually make a point.
8 posted on 04/19/2004 12:35:00 AM PDT by broadsword (The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for Democrats to get elected.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dsc; broadsword
Everyone else, I'm sure, saw that the salient point is found in an examination of *which* scriptures were omitted

You guys are hilarious!

Focusing on "which" scriptures are omitted indicts the Tridentine Mass, first and foremost, since the Novus Ordo delivers six times the number of Scripture readings that the Tridentine does.

9 posted on 04/19/2004 6:05:08 AM PDT by sinkspur (Adopt a dog or a cat from an animal shelter! It will save one life, and may save two.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Land of the Irish
You know what's funny, I did notice some of this a while back. It was more along the lines that we seem to get the same gospel readings, albeit in different forms, time after time. We all know the Prodigal Son by heart and a few others. On one level you know there is more there, and when reading through church documents, there's a lot of references we never hear in church.

Well, the passages are noted in the missals and missalettes, and they do indicate that there are verses missing. I guess we should get the bibles out.
10 posted on 04/19/2004 6:14:08 AM PDT by Desdemona (Proverbs 18:2 A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Land of the Irish
Bookmark
11 posted on 04/19/2004 1:43:39 PM PDT by ninenot (Minister of Membership, TomasTorquemadaGentlemen'sClub)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Land of the Irish
More evidence of the false prophets.
12 posted on 04/19/2004 2:20:20 PM PDT by Robert Drobot (God, family, country. All else is meaningless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Land of the Irish
Okay, I'm really confused.

The NO Gospel readings for this very week are from the 3rd chapter of John. The whole 3rd chapter. Every word. (According to the USCCB website and my parish bulletin.)

This article appears to say those readings are not in the lectionary.

What's up with that?
13 posted on 04/19/2004 2:30:10 PM PDT by siunevada
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Land of the Irish
#1 Sunday evening prayer 2 Psalm 110 verses 1-5, 7 are said but v.6 " He shall judge among the ruins: he shall crush heads in the land of the many.." (this from Douay and of course Liturgy of Hours uses a new Psalter forget its name) Funny that this verse about the Lord crushing the heads of heathen was omitted.

#2 Monday week 2 Sirach 36: 1-5, 10-13 (these verse listing is given but they do not correspond to Douay text)
what is omitted however is "Raise up indignation and pour out wrath. Take away the adversary and crush the enemy. Hasten the time and remember the end, that they may declare thy wonderful works. Let him that escapeth be consumed by the rage of the fire: and let them perish that oppress thy people. Crush the head of the princes of the enemy that say: There is no other beside us."

Then the Liturgy of the Hours picks up again with "Gather together all the tribes of Jacob..."

maybe that last verse was inspiration for that modern standard gathering hymn "gather us in"

Yet in fairness, one sees Psalm 149 in its entirety and the last verses are a blaze of righteousness "let the praise of God be on their lips and a two edged sword in their hand to deal out vengeance to the nations and punishment on all the peoples; to bind their kings in chains and nobles in fetters of iron..."

Coincidence? what did these texts look like in the old Liturgy of the Hours? I don't know.
14 posted on 04/19/2004 5:46:16 PM PDT by Piers-the-Ploughman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: siunevada
What has not been discussed in great detail, and which I will cover in this manuscript, are the many changes that were made to the Lectionary of Readings (the weekly epistle and Gospel readings).

The Lectionary would, for example, take the faithful through St. Matthew chapter 3, verses 1-6 on one Sunday, skip verses 7-11, and continue on the next Sunday with verses 12-20.

15 posted on 04/19/2004 6:52:32 PM PDT by Land of the Irish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur; dsc; Land of the Irish
A lot of the Gospel readings "left out" in the Tridentine are repetitive synoptic readings. Is it really necessary to hear the same parable from all three authors if the goal is to cover the lfie and teaching of Jesus in a concise and regular manner?

The VII mandated a restoration of the third reading from the Old Testament, which, had it been done with sensitivity to the old lectionary, could only have been a Good Thing. Unfortunately, like many Good Things in VII, it was both overdone (the whole lectionary revamped) and also ignored (important parts of scripture omitted or optionalized, existing Old Testament readings in Lent removed, etc.)

There is actually a fine example of this expansion that could have been used as an example or basis for a Catholic addition - the expanded lectionary from the Lutherans in use in the 1950's. The Lutherans and the Anglicans both used the traditional Catholic lectionary in their services prior to 1976 ever since their revolt from the Church. At some point before 1958, the Lutherans added an Old Testament reading to each Sunday of this lectionary. Bugnini and Antonelli *could* have done the same, but did not.
16 posted on 04/20/2004 6:34:52 AM PDT by Hermann the Cherusker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Desdemona
It would be interesting to compare the new lectionary to the old in terms of what verses are and are not heard. As I recall from an index in an old Missal, the old lectionary was fairly comprehensive.
17 posted on 04/20/2004 6:36:25 AM PDT by Hermann the Cherusker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: siunevada
They are probably looking at Sunday readings. Only 20% of practicing Catholics go to daily mass.
18 posted on 04/20/2004 6:37:04 AM PDT by Hermann the Cherusker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Hermann the Cherusker; Land of the Irish
The Lectionary would, for example, take the faithful through St. Matthew chapter 3, verses 1-6 on one Sunday, skip verses 7-11, and continue on the next Sunday with verses 12-20. This example is fabricated (for) the purposes of illustration

Yeeesh! A real example would be nice.

Okay, now I see that the author is talking about the weekly readings only.

19 posted on 04/20/2004 7:47:53 AM PDT by siunevada
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
OK, I must admit my ignorance here.

The Novus Order Mass had a rotation of three cycles for the scriptures read each Sunday. We call them A, B, and C (for lack of better terms).

What is the rotation of scriptures read at a Tridentine Mass?

I do find it alarming, however, if some of our basic beliefs and scriptures about Christ are (for lack of better words) being watered down and/or omitted.

"The truth shall set us free."
20 posted on 04/20/2004 7:54:59 AM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Desdemona; dsc
The 'excisions' from the Gospel (and St Paul's letters) are not real surprising.

And they are accompanied by extreme mis-translations of the Orations (the Opening Prayer and the Prayer after Communion) which are similarly motivated, I think.
21 posted on 04/20/2004 8:32:46 AM PDT by ninenot (Minister of Membership, TomasTorquemadaGentlemen'sClub)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Hermann the Cherusker
The VII mandated a restoration of the third reading from the Old Testament

If it's 'mandated' it would be a surprise to many in Europe, who never hear this OT reading.

Another "mandate" of VII which was actually a "mandate" from USCC?

22 posted on 04/20/2004 8:41:48 AM PDT by ninenot (Minister of Membership, TomasTorquemadaGentlemen'sClub)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
What is the rotation of scriptures read at a Tridentine Mass?

There is no rotation of Scriptures at a Tridentine Mass.

You will hear the same epistle and Gospel for the Third Sunday of Easter that you heard last year, and the year before that, and that you will hear next year.

There are many Tridentine Mass advocates who seem willing to admit that the cycle of A, B, and C readings, and the addition of a third reading, is an improvement, and they would even be willing to consider the adaptation of more Scripture.

But, they seem to be few in number.

23 posted on 04/20/2004 3:50:49 PM PDT by sinkspur (Adopt a dog or a cat from an animal shelter! It will save one life, and may save two.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Hermann the Cherusker
Hermann, your #16 on this thread is continuing proof of why I so value your presence on this forum.

The breadth of your knowledge, historical perspective and honesty is unparalleled. Not only Catholics, but all Christians, would benefit from reading your posts.

24 posted on 04/20/2004 3:55:21 PM PDT by sinkspur (Adopt a dog or a cat from an animal shelter! It will save one life, and may save two.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ninenot
If it's 'mandated' it would be a surprise to many in Europe, who never hear this OT reading.

'Splain. This is news to many, I'm sure.

25 posted on 04/20/2004 3:57:26 PM PDT by sinkspur (Adopt a dog or a cat from an animal shelter! It will save one life, and may save two.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
Happened to run across this little gem because I have purchased every offering of Chant from Solesmes.

In the "Gregorian Missal" (Novus Ordo edition)the ordo follows the old style: Epistle, Gradual, (Alleluia or Tract), Gospel. Hmmmmm. Same as the TridRite.

So I asked a priest-friend howcummizzat? And he replied that it was his observation that in Europe the OT reading is simply not used.

I realize that this is not a direct answer to your question, but I need another 30-60 minutes to go look up the specific citations re the OT reading. Can't do it right now.
26 posted on 04/20/2004 8:03:40 PM PDT by ninenot (Minister of Membership, TomasTorquemadaGentlemen'sClub)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: ninenot
So I asked a priest-friend howcummizzat? And he replied that it was his observation that in Europe the OT reading is simply not used.

Every Papal Mass that I've ever observed has two readings (with a Reponsorial) and the Gospel.

I'm going to the GIRM which, I suspect, requires the OT reading.

27 posted on 04/20/2004 8:07:48 PM PDT by sinkspur (Adopt a dog or a cat from an animal shelter! It will save one life, and may save two.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

Though I haven't done it recently, I was a sometimes lector at daily Mass. I remember checking out the reading beforehand once, for grammar and hard words, and one of the readings was the typical verse - skip a few - a few more verses - skip a few more. I remember looking up what was left out and wondered why that would be - they were meaningful verses, and if it was my choice I would include them. But some others were just extraneous, and didn't add or subtract anything.

Just for example I just checked out a reading for May 2: Rev 7:9, 14b -
17. Why would 10 - 14a be left out?
Revelation 7:
9After this I looked and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and in front of the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands.


left out


10And they cried out in a loud voice:
   "Salvation belongs to our God,
   who sits on the throne,
   and to the Lamb." 11All the angels were standing around the throne and around the elders and the four living creatures. They fell down on their faces before the throne and worshiped God, 12saying:    "Amen!
   Praise and glory
   and wisdom and thanks and honor
   and power and strength
   be to our God for ever and ever.
   Amen!"
13Then one of the elders asked me, "These in white robes--who are they, and where did they come from?"
14I answered, "Sir, you know."


15And he said, "These are they who have come out of the great tribulation; they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. Therefore,
   "they are before the throne of God and serve him day and night in his temple;    and he who sits on the throne will spread his tent over them.     16Never again will they hunger; never again will they thirst.

   The sun will not beat upon them, nor any scorching heat.
    17For the Lamb at the center of the throne will be their shepherd;
       he will lead them to springs of living water.    And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes."



If I were to make a guess it would be to erase the reference to:
"They fell down on their faces before the throne and worshiped God, 12saying:
   "Amen!
   Praise and glory"

That would't sit too well considering the Church is trying to get us to not even genuflect before The Most High. So maybe there is something to the charge.
28 posted on 04/23/2004 5:53:12 PM PDT by Arguss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson