Censored Lectionary – Psalm 79
I wrote a post today for my wife’s devotional list that refers to the boundary line between the [tag]lectionary[/tag] reading, Psalm 79:1-9 and the rest of the Psalm.
I wrote a post today for my wife’s devotional list that refers to the boundary line between the [tag]lectionary[/tag] reading, Psalm 79:1-9 and the rest of the Psalm.
Attridge, Harold W. The Epistle to the Hebrews. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1989. 437 pages. This is the second of two commentaries I have been spending a great deal of time with. The library managed to get both of them to me on the same day, loaned from different libraries–a shocking event!–and thus I worked with…
It will generally surprise nobody that I am not a fan of penal substitutionary atonement, as I’ve written about it before. I do believe that PSA is one valid metaphor that helps us understand the greater truth that is the atonement. What I object to is making this particular metaphor the central fact of the…
First, two warnings. I’m not going to go into detail on the numerous translation difficulties in Psalm 22 and this post results from a book currently in the final stages of release from my company, Energion Publications. So if you want to avoid the potential commercial side, skip this one. On the other hand, that’s…
I’ve written a note on his resignation from RTS on my Threads blog.
I regard as a basic manual for true spiritual warfare. I believe that it is much better to hear the themes of spiritual conflict than it is to try to identify specific referents. Of course, finding referents contemporary to the author can help us understand the themes. So these approaches are not mutually exclusive. Previously,…
I noticed something in my reading time this morning that has presumably been staring me in the face through many readings of the passage. In fact, this is the 14th morning in a row that I’ve read this as part of this week’s lectionary, so I’ve had plenty of opportunity. The passage is Matthew 3:13-17,…
Comments are closed.
This kind of censorship is not new. I remember years ago that the Church of England Morning Prayer service included Psalm 95, the Venite – but in the copies of the service we used the part from the middle of verse 7 to the end (ironically the part quoted in Hebrews) was bracketed as “optional”, and this part was never sung in my church. I guess the vicar didn’t believe in God testing his people, nor perhaps his people hearing his voice, so we stuck to the comforting parts like “we are the people of his pasture, and the sheep of his hand”.
I’ve noticed this before as well. It also happens with Psalm 137. I’m not always opposed, though I find it interesting that there are parts of the Bible that we don’t feel comfortable reading in church. Of course, I could nominate a few passages myself!