NLM: Useful study of creation of the Novus Ordo Lectionary
Have you followed the tennis match back and forth that has resulted since Card. Sarah’s suggestion in La Nef that the Extraordinary and the Ordinary Forms of Mass should have a coordinated Lectionary?
Some were cool about that suggestion and others were more enthusiastic. Those who were enthusiastic tend to argue that more pericopes (selections) of Scripture for Mass, as in the Novus Ordo v. the TLM, is better, mostly because there’s more. Those who are cool tend to argue that the introduction of more to the TLM isn’t automatically better and would, in fact, be disruptive in a harmful way.
You can follow this debate HERE.
Now I see that at NLM, Matthew Hazell has started a 3 part series about the creation of the Novus Ordo Lectionary. He has posted Part 1 and it is not to be missed.
Hazell holds that the integration of the Novus Ordo Lectionary into the older, traditional form of Mass would do irreparable damage to the traditional form. He is qualified to have a position about this question, inter alia he assembled the useful and instructive:
Index Lectionum: A Comparative Table of Readings for the Ordinary and Extraordinary Forms of the Roman Rite (Lectionary Study Aids) (Volume 1)
US HERE – UK HERE
Every priest, at least, should have this useful book. It compares, side by side, the use of Scripture selections in the Novus Ordo and the TLM, going through the Bible in order. So, if you want to find out on what days a specific verse of Scripture is used in the Novus Ordo and the TLM, this is your book.
[T]he integration of one lectionary into the other form is simply impossiblewithout irreparable damage is, in my opinion, quite correct. So, if some sort of “convergence” of the two lectionaries is to happen, it cannot be on done on