Ken Smith wrote:

Over the weekend I took off my shelves Bruce Mtezger’s book “The Text of the New Testament” and started re-reading it. In chapter 1, “The Making of Ancient Books”, he talks about some of the available sources we have for getting back as close as possible to the original text of the New Testament.

One of these are the lectionaries used in services. Given the extremely conservative nature of services and the readings used, these can be a very useful resource.

But on page 33 Metzger writes “The Greek lectionary contains no lessons from the Book of Revelation”. This struck me as so odd that I looked at the critical apparatus in the 4th edition (1993) of the United Bible Societies Greek New testament, and sure enough, lectionaries don’e get a mention in Revelation. Turn back just one page to Jude and they are listed frequently. I have only checked a few other NT books, but those I checked also cited lectionaries.

I then went to the earliest Anglican Prayer Book, the first one published in 1549 under Edward VI. Early in this is a page headed “The Ordre howe the reste of Holy Scripture (beside the Psalter) is appoynted to bee redde” – yes, that’s the spelling they used in those days. Under the New Testament the wording runs, with spelling modernised:

The New Testament is appointed for the second Lessons, at Matins and Evensong, and shall be read over orderly every year thrice, beside the Epistles and Gospels: except the Apocalypse, out of which there be only certain lessons appointed upon diverse proper feasts.

Looking through the following Calendar, Revelation 1 is read on All Saints Day, and it and the final chapter 22 on the feast day of St John the Evangelist.

This raised the thought in my mind: Why is this book not read more often? In modern Anglican Prayer Books much of it is included, but evidence from early times seems to suggest that it was omitted.

Athanasius:

Why, for many reasons.

First, it was not accepted until very late and the lectionaries pre-date its approval, hence they contain readings from that which was known and approved.

Secondly: The Book of Revelation spoke of current events including current Roman Emperors (Nero) and spoke of pagan roman society in very unglowing ways (whore clothed in purple drunk with the blood of the martyrs) . Consequently public reading and public circulation of that Book would have added to the already woes of the early Christians dealings with Rome.

Third: The Book is not one which edifies by understanding (as Rowland posted recently…who can know it all?), but the promise for a blessing is made by God -just- for reading it, that is by reading it alone one receives a blessing from God, even without understanding the words (who can anyway/).

Fourth, the Book was discussed privately, for example during the vigil night of easter friday, the Coptic Orthodox Church reads the whole Book of Revelation chapter by chapter from about midnight to 4am. When the early liturgy commences. To my knowledge this is the only time that Book is read out loud in the Church, and even then it is in the middle of the night in the most holiest time of the Churches calendar at which time only Christians would have been present one can safely assume.

K:

Another question: Is it still omitted from modern Orthodox lectionaries? Athanasius?

A:

Answered above, we do not read from revelation publiocally in the Church from week to week. This is the ancient and received practice which we still keep.

K:

Incidentally, the 1549 Prayer Book also has somet5hing to say about which parts of the Old Testament are to be read:

The Old Testament is appointed for the first lessons, at Matins and Evensong, and shall be read through every year once, except certain books and Chapters, which be least edifying, and might best be spared, and therefore are left unread.

Remembering that at this time the reformation had only just got under way in England, and that the people still had memories of what they had been taught. And with the Catholic emphasis on virginity and celibacy, I suppose that it’s only to be expected that the Song of Songs would *not* be read.

A:

The Song of Songs has always been interpreted (to my knowledge) in a spiritual sense, I will give an example below. 🙂 Some will not like what I am about to do, especially those who revel in the carnal interpretation of the work.

K:

After all, with that background, hearing the Bible read in English for the first time, with words like “he shall lie all night between my breasts”

A:

The two breasts are the two testaments, the Old and the New testament, which spiritually feed us. 🙂

The virgin bride is the Church (or St Mary or both depending on which verse) for example…

My spouse is a fountain sealed up, a garden enclosed. (Ever Virgin)

My spouse is all pure/glorious within (Church/St mary)

The Virgins her companions accompany her..(St Mary/ Church/ Nuns).

Many verses in Songs may and are interpreted this way for a very long time amongst the Orthodox. I myself saw with my own eyes, an ancient icon (mid to late first millenium) painted on a church wall in Egypt four old testament prophets quoting very obscure verses relating to St Mary as Ever Virgin etc…for example..Ezekiel…”The Lord shall enter through the Eastern gate and the gate shall remain shut, for the Lord, the God of Israel has entered through it.”

The gate remaining shut and the Lord ‘entering’ through it is seen to be referring to the intact virginity of St Mary, that is Jesus passed through her hymen without damage as he passed through the midst of people who wanted to stone huim early in His ministry and again as He passed through the walls of the upper room.

Hence why Dolf with amazing accuracy sarcastically calls the orthodox “Hymenal Mysticism”, he has picked it somewhere, somehow.

K:

Sometime I might go through this Calendar carefully and see what Chapters are onmmitted as “least edifying”.

A:

I would rather think that they referred to other matters, Leviticus for example, although we have allegory for that as well. 🙂