I do not disagree (nor do I think most of us on CCT would disagree) with your homiletic approach in general.

But I might push back a bit to ask whether what the text itself says, or the whole of a particular text, always represents or should always represent the liturgical and pastoral focus for a particular congregation or a particular liturgical season.

In other words, is preaching ALWAYS about dealing with the difficulties of texts, which in a way might seem to privilege preaching (as explanation of a text) as the pre-eminent act of a given liturgical assembly, or are there also other factors that should be seen to influence what preaching does and how preaching proceeds?

During Eastertide especially, the intensification and more intentional implications of the celebration of the mystery of the resurrection (mystagogy) have, for centuries, been the first principle for the development of lectionaries for this season, just as during Lent the lectionaries have been developed, at least in the early centuries and as a result of the recovery of liturgical scholarship beginning in the late 19th century, in ways designed to support the culminating weeks of the catechumenate. In other words, in both of these instances (and in fact, in all the “non-ordinary” times), the church’s tradition has in fact to be to select texts to support a larger liturgical and missional purpose rather than to focus on the texts themselves, per se.

A gift of the Revised Common Lectionary in particular, and with it a revised calendar for ordinary time, has been to provide other opportunities throughout the liturgical year where the readings are chosen to be semi-continuous, rather than related to each other, the presumption being that congregations may read all of them but actually, in preaching and worship design, focus primarily, and deeply, on one “stream” of these texts at a time. (Indeed, it would be wise not to try to correlate these texts since they are not chosen to be correlated!). It is in those seasons particularly that dealing with the “difficulties” of a given text may be more to the point, rather than in the “axial” seasons which carry with them and through them their own seasonal, missional and ritual point.

Hope this helps!

Peace in Christ,

Taylor Burton-Edwards

That said, the way I was taught homiletics is pretty much totally in opposition to that kind of Bible reading. Who knows, maybe this is something the Consultation on Common Texts is tackling already. But all my professors said jump into the difficult texts. READ them. Preach them. Don’t jump over their difficulties, but embrace them for that is the challenge, the gift of the Bible.

So, given the gospel lesson for the day and the Rev text, all my profs would have said: don’t you dare miss out those parts from Rev. The task for preaching that day is to hold both the gospel and Rev at the same time, for that is the gospel. It’s not that John has the good news but Rev doesn’t; they both are good news.

Or maybe a better way to put it: the homiletical approach I employ is one that basks on the gray areas. If it’s a difficult text, I preach that. If it’s hard to see the good news in it, I preach that too. Sometimes the Lectionary seems to make things too black and white, and that just feels inauthentic.

Thanks so much for your response. I’m going to keep mulling it over. And many blessings on your work with the committee.

I’m glad you raised the question.

The body that developed and continues to “steward” the Revised Common Lectionary is the Consultation on Common Texts. I happen to be its Secretary at this time. I’m not proposing to provide an official answer from the Consultation to your post, but rather, perhaps, some insight into why some readings, including this one, appear as they do.

During Eastertide, all four of the lections are related to each other and specifically to the gospel lesson. The gospel lesson for Easter 7 in Year C is taken from the “high priestly prayer” of Jesus, as in fact it is in all three years. The focus of that prayer for this year is Christ’s desire that the glory he has given us, which he had received from the Father, may also make us fully one with each other as he and the Father are one. The whole tenor of this text, then, is about those who are invited, those who are Christ’s.

While throughout Eastertide in Year C, we also use texts from Revelation, we are not trying to offer here a “semi-continuous” reading of Revelation as such– but rather selecting from Revelation texts which closely illustrate or best accompany the focal gospel for each Sunday. The verses we include from Revelation 22 accompany the sense of the gospel reading for this Sunday very well. The verses we chose not to include really do not do that as well, and in fact could be seen to detract from the focus on Christ’s prayer for those of us whom join the cosmic call for the Bridegroom to come to the feast of joy.

So the issue here is not one of censoring out parts that are harsh, per se. This lectionary overall includes plenty of very harsh texts, far more than its predecessor or any previous lectionary, in fact. Just wait until you see the horrors we left IN from Amos this summer (though of course we left some out, too– because there’s just not time to read all of every text in worship in a three year cycle!).

Hope this helps.

Peace in Christ,

The Rev. Taylor Burton-Edwards
Secretary, The Consultation on Common Texts
Director of Worship Resources, The United Methodist Church

I’ve used this “editing” as a focal point for several sermons, with the problematic text serving as a linchpin for the message. If we can’t address difficult passages, then we can’t say we’re teaching the whole Bible.

“introducing it before the reading”

Actually, I’ve found it more effective with explanation following at least a part of the difficult text. I don’t want to tout it as shock value, but much of understanding comes from the humility of recognizing one’s own misinterpretation. I know I have felt that way, confronting my own preconceptions. The trick is in the presentation, respecting their intelligence with the knowledge you impart.