New York is digging out from a big snowstorm, which means a quiet day at the office, allowing me to catch up on some of my reading, including Verbum Domini, the Apostolic Exhortation concerning scripture and interpretation put out by Pope Benedict last fall.
There’s lots of rich material about the important ways in which biblical interpretation needs to be integrated into a life of prayer and worship. But I’d like to flag a no doubt less important but more practical aspect of the document, which was crafted by Benedict as a summary and elaboration of themes raised at the Synod of Bishop that met in October 2008 to discuss the Word of God in the life and mission of the Church.
It concerns the way in which the Bible is read in church. Benedict reports that one “suggestion that emerged from the Synod was that the proclamation of the word of God, and the Gospel in particular, should be made more solemn” (para 67).
I’ll second that. Call me an insufficiently Catholicized Protestant, but I tend to cringe when I see people reading the assigned passages from the Old Testament and Epistles from loose sheets of paper—or whatever. Why is it that lectors in Catholic parishes always seem to be reading from a flimsy booklet or a bulky binder, as if the Word of God were a temporary memo fittingly reproduced in throwaway forms.
I’ve wondered sometimes: Is there something in canon law that prohibits the permanent presence of a big, fat Bible at the lectern? I doubt it. And so I find myself baffled. A hefty Bible conveys visually the fact that the Word of God contains weighty truths. So why neglect the symbolism?
Some might say that it’s awkward for the lectors to have to find the passages. All those minor prophets get confusing, and perhaps most Catholics don’t know where to find Ezra and Nehemiah. I don’t buy it, and in any event, I’ve always liked it when the lector has to flip a bunch of big pages to find the right place—it adds drama.
So, I have a suggestion that might add a bit of solemnity to the proclamation of the Word of God. Catholic Churches should put a royal folio-sized Bibles on their lecterns, the kind that makes a gratifyingly audible swishing noise when the pages arch and then cascade like a breaking wave when they are turned.
Oh, and will our dear bishops please release us from dreary New American Bible, a translation that goes out of its way to make the holy scriptures sound banal and stupid.
December 27th, 2010 | 12:58 pm
Dear Rusty,
Come to St Columbkille’s in Papillion for mass. The Gospels are processed with the deacon at the beginning and then around the alter after the first and second readings are read from a large lectionary at the ambo. We were recently in Arizona and experienced the same.
December 27th, 2010 | 1:07 pm
[...] Reading the Bible, and Dump the ‘New American Bible’ – R.R. Reno, First Thoughts [...]
December 27th, 2010 | 1:07 pm
A few years ago in a liturgy class I raised this issue. Why not use an actual Bible from which to proclaim the readings of the day? That was the practice in the Protestant church where I grew up. Many sacristans and presiders prefer the disposable lectionary with each calendar day clearly marked even though bound lectionaries are available that would offer almost as much convenience.
Liturgists often talk about the fulsomeness of symbols. I’m with you, a pulpit Bible would better symbolically communicate the gravity of the Word as well as the words proclaimed. And don’t get me started on the song books that we recyle at the end of the liturgical year.
December 27th, 2010 | 1:09 pm
Woops
I read the Gospel from the presentation on my iPad. But then I’m definitely unCatholicized.
(However, I did have the congregation stand. In my tradition, that’s approaching high church.)
One other thing: I’ve looked but reasonably priced pulpit Bibles in the translation my congregation uses aren’t available.
December 27th, 2010 | 3:05 pm
Hold on there. Symbols are complicated and convey a range of meanings. An ornate, heavy book does suggest weight, but it also suggests a religion that is out-of-date, tedious, and locked up in a box. Do not protest that it shouldn’t suggest that, because if people only knew and looked at things the right way, yada, yada… The point is that it does affect many people that way, and there is a cost as well as a benefit to every symbol. I you want to convey timelessness, you run the risk of appearing stuck in whatever era your “timeless” object comes from, whether that is the 19th C or the 9th.
I love the feeling and impression that comes from having an ancient book about – the idea of quiet, and study, and complexity, and tried wisdom, and ancient sages. But if all the folks like me chose the symbols, we would gradually winnow the churches to people like us and few others. Symbols of hipness can of course easily be shallow, but everyday modern world symbols are not automatically inferior.
December 27th, 2010 | 3:57 pm
I am aware of two good reasons why a Bible wouldn’t be appropriate for this use:
1) The readings heard at Mass (at least in the United States and Canada) are adapted from the NAB and NRSV respectively. They include introductory phrases (e.g. “And then Jesus said…”) which may not be present in the quoted scripture text but which are included to give those at Mass some context. Additionally some verses have been modified. The Gospel reading for the Feast of the Annunciation and the Immaculate Conception has Gabriel saying “Hail, full of grace!”, while the NAB reads “Hail, favored one!”
2) I’ve always seen it done that the Gospel is a separate volume from the lectionary. It is carried in in the procession and then carried to the ambo after the second reading. This might be a requirement (I have no idea), and so one Bible wouldn’t be enough.
December 27th, 2010 | 4:20 pm
As Mr. Jones mentioned above, some parishes do use a bound lectionary that looks like a Bible but is organized with the weekly passages and even supplemental material for the readers. Much better than the loose-leaf binder my current parish uses. And yes, I believe there is a specific requirement for a book of the Gospels to use in procession.
December 27th, 2010 | 4:40 pm
AVI, the problem is that the same people who would perceive the hidebound Bible as being, well, hidebound, are also pretty attuned to the fact that convenient disposable print-outs are, um, disposable, and suited to our convenience.
This being the case, it’s probably best to choose the symbolism that most nearly reflects what the scripture really is, (i.e., weighty, enduring, stable) and teach the people to value it (the actual scripture) as such. In this way, the symbol will also take on the right associations.
December 27th, 2010 | 5:00 pm
Fr.Neuhaus thought the RSV should be the text in use–ecumenical and beautiful–and I’ve never seen any reason to think he was wrong.
Perhaps if there’s ever a canonization process for RJN, we could all pray for the RSV to be used as the first miracle.
December 27th, 2010 | 7:41 pm
What David Deavel said. Beyond that — what Reno said re: the NAB. My gosh, it’s just…clunky. If we’re gonna do things in the vernacular, let’s at least employ a vernacular translation that’s consistent with itself and beautiful, echoing the best of English-language Bible translation. And that would mean the tradition leading up to the RSV. Personally, I think the RSV-Second Catholic Edition is just wonderful.
December 27th, 2010 | 10:54 pm
While we’re on the topic: I tried reading the Rheims/Douay, I really did. And I know it’s got a lot of tradition behind it. But it’s just bad. Close to lousy.
I guess this is just another vote for the RSV.
December 27th, 2010 | 11:52 pm
Lectionaries [specially bound volumes with the selected liturgical Scripture readings] as well as Books of the Gospels have been part of the Catholic tradition since the time of the Church Fathers [obviously different than the ones we have today, however serving the same purpose]
I totally agree with the banning of missalettes or ringed binders as actual liturgical books.
As to the ‘translation’ used. it is high time the American Bishops gave us the RSV [not the NRSV] as the approved translation for the Liturgy. It is the English translation used when translating anything from Scripture in Papal encyclicals etc. it has been approved by Rome so we do not need a ten year plus process again.
Of course, the American Bishops could begin a whole new process of translation but I just do not believe it to be necessary or that helpful.
December 28th, 2010 | 9:17 am
pentamom, good comment, yet I still disagree. You choose accurate descriptions of the scriptures, but they are not exhaustive. To verge into what the scriptures “really” are is to select from among the ones we like best. The scriptures are also personal and present, which would suggest an iPad. They are a collection of books, suggesting dozens of slim volumes. Many NT books are letters, and some sense of urgency and directness is gained by approximating that with individual unbound sheets, as I have seen done for effect. Others were originally in scroll form, suggesting an overarching narrative for each book. (Perhaps Kindle is a modern approximation of this.)
There is no escape. Books age, mould, and burn. An enormous book suggests medieval monastery and university learning to me, and those who read fantasy literature might get the same sense (Harry Potter fans would likely have a receptive approach to the symbol). But the only other place large volumes show up in current culture is little-used reference books – not really what we are going for. If we memorise the text and recite it, we convey God’s direct interaction with individuals, yet also convey an impermanence, dependent on human memory. People don’t notice symbolic aspects as they pass, yet are affected anyway.
December 28th, 2010 | 10:07 am
Bring your own Bible to Mass like many of my Protestant brethren do. Pick your own translation. (I still love the language of the King James Bible – to me it represents the flourishing of the modern English. Whenever I hear King James English, I think of the miracle of Creation with the beauty of this new language beginning to flourish.)
Have the lector read from the lectionary (a nice solid book) while those in the congregation could either listen attentively or look in their own Bibles to follow along.
Even if the passage read aloud had words that differed from the translation the parishoner was following, that would be fine. Indeed, it would be a vivid demonstration that the Word of God can scarcely be contained in words. It also shows that there are several ways to translate/interpret the Word. It directly puts us into the talmudic/hermeneutic tradition of grappling with the Word of God and finding out how to understand it.
December 28th, 2010 | 10:43 am
[...] I argued for a hefty Bible at the lectern. Weighty truths, its seems to me, are fittingly stored in weighty tomes. That doesn’t mean [...]
December 28th, 2010 | 2:57 pm
“Benedict reports that one “suggestion that emerged from the Synod was that the proclamation of the word of God, and the Gospel in particular, should be made more solemn” (para 67).”
Simple solution: the Gospel, the Epistle and all the other readings should be chanted, not recited. That the rubrics already assume they are being chanted makes this one a no-brainer. The Eastern Churches already chant all the readings, which eliminates a whole host of problems associated with recitation.
Of course, it may take some adjustment on the part of the Latin laity. I remember one time when an Eastern Catholic priest was invited to read the Gospel at a Roman Mass. As was his custom, he chanted the whole periscope–but at the end, the celebrant rushed up to the pulpit, and in a state of near panic informed the congregation that nothing was wrong, this was just the way they do things in the Eastern Churches. I thought the congregation was rather impressed with the chanting, myself.
December 28th, 2010 | 3:08 pm
“As Mr. Jones mentioned above, some parishes do use a bound lectionary that looks like a Bible but is organized with the weekly passages and even supplemental material for the readers. Much better than the loose-leaf binder my current parish uses. And yes, I believe there is a specific requirement for a book of the Gospels to use in procession.”
The Eastern Churches used separately bound Gospels and Apostols (Epistle books). Most Gospels are bound inside very elaborate gold or silver covers, with enameled icons of Christ (in the center) and the Evangelists (at each corner). Some of these weigh upwards of ten pounds (as an altar server, one of my job was to act as a human lectern, holding the book open before the priest or deacon, with the spine resting on my forehead).
The Gospel is laying on the Holy Table at the beginning of the Divine Liturgy. At what is called the Little Entrance, the celebrant hands the Gospel to the deacon, and he, the celebrant, candle-bearers, readers and subdeacons all process down the north aisle of the church, then up the center aisle. The deacon presents the Gospel to the celebrant, who kisses it reverently; the deacon then enters the sanctuary and places the Gospel back on the Holy Table.
Originally, this “Little Entrance” marked the entry of the bishop into the church, preceded by the Gospel; later, the action was internalized, and assigned a mystagogical significance: the triumphal entrance of Christ into Jerusalem upon Palm Sunday, marking the beginning of the actions leading to his sacrifice, death and resurrection, which are marked in the Great Entrance and the Liturgy of the Eucharist.
As for the Apostol, these are usually bound in black leather (they are the personal possession of the reader, in most cases), but some churches have similarly silver- or gold-mounted covers, albeit the dimensions of the Apostol are usually about 8″ x 10″.
As for the readings themselves, the Reader delivers the Apostol from the center of the church, facing the Royal Doors to the sanctuary. The Gospel is delivered from the solea (raised platform) directly before the Royal Doors, with the book either held by an Acolyte or placed on a small, portable lectern.
December 28th, 2010 | 11:55 pm
My church has the best of both worlds: a big fat bible and several, different-colored, silk page holder ribbons.
Solemnity *and* easy to find pages.
January 7th, 2011 | 10:59 am
Hi there,
I was browsing the bible subject and came across this article.
I had just written a piece on my page about my general confusion about the Bible, a book I believed and followed my whole life.
Maybe you can gave some thoughts about why so many books were omitted in it’s compilation and how truthful and believable that makes it?
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact