The Christian Century has a commentary by United Methodist pastor John Nash extolling the liberating benefits of going off the lectionary.
He starts by recounting a common argument on behalf of the lectionary.
Now I know that one of the arguments for why the lectionary should be used is that it forces us to have to cover texts we otherwise would not preach on. But, since there are always at least four selections, most of the time I could avoid some troublesome texts, and have found that most preachers do as well.
I’ve never liked the “forces you to preach hard texts” argument on behalf of the lectionary. Indeed, the lectionary is pretty good at skipping lots of the really hard texts and verses. Look at the places where the lectionary skips a verse or several. Often it is because the Bible is going places that a preacher might find tough to talk about.
So, I don’t particularly find that argument compelling. It certainly is not why I preach the lectionary.
Nash then touches on a big part of the reason I do preach the lectionary, although not intentionally.
In my newest church, I was told that past ministers have used the lectionary but the preference would be not to be glued to it, and so for the first time in my ministry I have gone “off lectionary.” I have to say it is completely refreshing and reinvigorating for me, and the congregation seems to be liking it as well. I am now into my second sermon series and it’s done a lot to allow me to sort of set down my own theology and thinking at the beginning of my ministry here.
Going off the lectionary has allowed him to set down his “own theology and thinking” at the start of his ministry.
On this point, I am still persuaded by people such as Will Willimon and Walter Brueggemann. The preaching act is not an opportunity for me to expound my theology and thinking. The preaching act is an opportunity for me and the congregation together to turn to the Word in search of God’s voice speaking to us all.
By submitting to the discipline of the lectionary, I am saying that the Word comes first. It speaks before any questions I may have or any agenda I may want to bring to it. What it has to say sets the agenda for what we will do and talk about in church this Sunday.
I don’t think the Revised Common Lectionary is the only way to submit to this discipline. Preaching through books of the Bible has the same discipline about it. There are likely other ways. I like the lectionary because the symbolic unity of the church that is involved in having churches across town and around the world reading the same texts on Sunday morning.
I certainly don’t fault preachers who ditch the lectionary. Two thousand United Methodists are gathered at Adam Hamilton‘s church this week to learn how to be better leaders. Hamilton is a big proponent of non-lectionary preaching and argues that such preaching is crucial to his ministry.
Hamilton argues that the Holy Spirit guides him in the choice of sermon topics. I suppose, in the end, I find the Holy Spirit confirming my submission to the lectionary. In either case, I hope neither of us is trying to expound our own theology, but God’s Word.
I am a part-time local pastor serving 
The doctrine of original sin is surely more humbling to man than the opposite: And I know not what honour we can pay to God, if we think man came out of His hands in the condition wherein he is now.
i agree on how use of the lectionary (rcl) is a venture into and symbolic act of ecumenism. while going off lectionary for a sermon series now and again (especially in the long after pentecost season) can have some advantages, the continual reading through large segments of the scriptures in those months give wonderful opportunity to share in a more holistic hearing of the word, including texts we might never choose on our own. it is a good discipline and i am really committed to the way it connects us, one to another, in communities across the globe.
I don’t know if this over-simplifies things, but I just come back again and again to the notion that each pastor as a preacher has different strengths. I think churches want excellent preaching. Some can do better preaching with the lectionary, for others it would be an impediment to doing their best. If it helps you be a better preacher, then use it, if not, then don’t. I wouldn’t want to subject my congregation to me preaching from the lectionary because I know it wouldn’t be my best. I am not at all “committed to the way it connects us, one to another, in communities across the globe.” I think there are more meaningful ways to connect to other believers around the globe.
As a pure theological point, I’m not sure God always insists we play to our strengths. Ask Moses.
But, I have no argument with preachers who don’t follow the lectionary. I just feel the need to defend the old girl when people start suggesting she is a straight jacket or cage.
The lectionary does give you a lot of ways to apply scripture, with old testament, new testament, and Psalms etc. It is also good to have some traditional aspect the lectionary gives us. Yes we should follow the leading of the Holy Spirit and this comes many different ways. Have you ever found yourself expounding on an aspect of the sermon, and just know the insight is from God. Also at the door as the congregation leaves you hear things like I really got it, especially the part about………This confirms why you were lead there in the first place.
The choice between using the lectionary or doing sermon series is a false one. There are plenty of opportunities for doing a sermon series using the lectionary readings, which often are sequential readings from the same book or on the same theme, with the added advantage of being related to the season of the church calendar (instead of the world’s calendar).
I quite agree. I am in the middle of an ongoing sermon series following Moses through Exodus, the OT reading in the lectionary right now.
I made friends with an Episcopal priest a number of years ago and learned of her dependence on preaching not only the RCL, but exclusively from the Gospel. I decided to focus on only the Gospels for a year, not telling anyone I was making this a personal discipline. The experience gave me an appreciation for the depth and richness that I have known was always there, but too easily missed on those Sundays when going elsewhere in the text would have simply kept me from deeper reflection.
I’ve been preaching the Gospel exclusively for six years now and find it so appropriate to current events, timely with what is going on in the local church and challenging to me as a pastor that I cannot imagine wanting or needing to focus elsewhere. I thought I would move to being a series preacher at some point, but there is too much still to be mined from the richness where I am to abandon it for other scriptures.
If the reason for a series is to connect with current events I’m doing that now. If the reason to go off topic is to find richness and depth in scripture, I’d be leaving much behind.
There are enough times when the Gospels are read in consecutive fashion that a series outline is obvious and ready made, not something I need to create.
Thank you for sharing your experiences. I agree with your observation about sermon series arising in the lectionary. The next three weeks, I’m putting together the Matthew 25 readings as a series called “Thy kingdom come: What we do while we wait for the return of Christ.”
I knew another pastor who preached only the gospel texts. Granted, in my opinion he was not a terrific preacher, but he loved his flock deeply. Still, to me the idea that this pastor was not sharing the richness to be found in the full scope of Scripture was really off-putting. Of course, I don’t follow the lectionary in the first place, but if I did I simply could not imagine doing this. Gospels for a season? Sure. Gospels only, 52 Sundays a year, year after year? Why? It might enrich me spiritually somehow but I fear it would impoverish the congregation. In one congregation in which I was the associate pastor, I specifically chose to preach from the OT whenever it was it my turn in the rotation to preach b/c the senior pastor largely ignored it, and I thought that it was too important to neglect.
When enterlng the pulpit before the sermon I invite the congregation to “stand as our Lord comes to us in the reading and hearing of the Gospel”. The physical act of respect for what our Lord said and says to us today brings the words a little bit closer.
Standing for the reading of the Gospel is followed by turning to face the cross and singing the Gloria Patri. This is the local tradition that was already in place when I began this appointment. I sat in the pews that first Sunday and entered the pulpit only for the sermon, so I could observe and experience the local pattern of worship. From that experience and my choice to continue their practice I think they got it right long before I arrived.