Same coding error - different example

Not two Old Testaments - the first is a Lesson the second a responsorial psalm (canticle). The titles are not the category of the text in the Scriptures - they are the category of the text in the liturgy.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

BillS

Hi MJ,

In the beta, I posted that the biggest hurdle to L4 acceptance is going to be getting us to turn L3 off. Lectionaries are one of the reasons I still find myself starting L3 if I'm going to try to work in L4. Without text, they aren't much better than paper, since the popup often doesn't contain the full text of the passage.

Errors in the categories further confuse us... :-)

I wondered what the categories are SUPPOSED to be, so I checked... Vanderbilt maintains the RCL, & here's what they say in their FAQ about its structure (http://lectionary.library.vanderbilt.edu/faq2.php):

How is the Revised Common Lectionary structured?

The RCL offers a three-year cycle with four readings for every Sunday in the Church Year. These readings are:

A Lesson from the Hebrew Scriptures (or Acts during the Season of Easter)
A Psalm
A Lesson from the Epistles or Acts
A Lesson from the Gospels

During Ordinary Time, there are two sets of Hebrew Bible readings. One set that progresses semi-contiuously through the Patriarchal/Exodus narratives (Year A), the Monarchial narratives (Year , and the Prophets (Year C). The other set of Hebrew Bible readings is related thematically to the gospel lections for those dates. Likewise, during Ordinary Time, there are two separate Psalm readings, one that corresponds to the semi-continuous Hebrew Bible lection and one that corresponds to the theme of the gospel lection. On the Vanderbilt Lectionary Site, the thematic Hebrew Bible lection and the thematic Psalm are in italics. The Hebrew Bible lections during the rest of the year are thematically related to the gospel lections, which are in turn connected to the seasons of the Church Year. Additional readings are provided for special feast days.

Looks like you're right, MJ.

Blessings!

Bill

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/47035#Comment_47035

I am both pleased and disappointed with the new implementation of lectionaries. It seems to me that the designers still don't have a gut understanding of how lectionaries work (or liturgical prayer books). They need to start with three basic principles:

Liturgical date i.e. cycle, season, day, service for general use
Calendar date i.e. month, day for the sanctoral cycle - all of which have a special name for the feast, memorial of the date
Liturgical function i.e. how the scripture is used

This requires as functionarlity:

the primary item for notes to be applied to is liturgical date or feast name
the secondary item for notes is calendar date ... or this might be omitted in favor of sermons (and potentially service planner as a freebie hung on the study template framework)
liturgical titles for the scriptural elements of a lectionary that correspond to the conventions of the lectionary
a search by liturgical date or feast name
a table aligning the differing terminology for the same liturgical date e.g. after Pentecost vs. ordinary time
for optional services, the ability to process reading sets not tied to either liturgical or sanctoral cycle dates ... simply liturgical name
for historical lectionaries, the ability to process lectionaries without calendar dates

The current implementation still gives the ordo (the book that ties the lectionary to a particular year) precedence over the lectionary (the reading sets independent of any secular calendar). But I am pushing Logos on two fronts - Scripture known by name rather than reference (Benedictus, Bread of Life Discourse ...) and on lectionaries. The former by entires in topics.logos wiki, the latter by loading lectionaries into spread sheets. We'll see how far I get but I genuinely believe that Logos understands why there is a need.

Bob Pritchett

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/47172#Comment_47172

We'll see how far I get but I genuinely believe that Logos understands why there is a need.

I appreciate all the info you're publishing on the lectionaries. I hope that we'll be able to revisit this early next year, at which point we'd like to consult with you in more detail to get things right.

Thanks!

-- Bob