Over the years I have discovered that the more ‘Bible-believing’ a non-liturgical church is, the less Scripture is likely to be read. Amazing as it may appear to my Anglican friends, I have known Baptist churches where the one Scripture reading is often limited to just three or four Bible verses. Indeed, at a recent service I attended in Chelmsford’s High Street on Good Friday, there was no Scripture whatsoever! Many years ago, when for one year I was at an international Baptist Seminary in Switzerland, I became so frustrated with the custom of reading only three or four verses at morning ‘chapel’, that when I was asked to take the morning chapel service, instead of reading just three or four verses and then preaching a sermon, I dispensed with the sermon and read the whole of Paul’s Letter to the Colossians. That caused a sensation, but as I pointed out, originally Paul’s shorter letters would most certainly have been read to a church in one sitting.
We need to take seriously the charge of the Apostle Paul to Timothy: “Give attention to the public reading of Scripture, to exhorting, to teaching” (1 Timothy 4.13)” is just one word. In the original Greek the phrase “the public reading of Scripture” (anagnosis) simply means ‘reading out loud. This was the word that was used in the courts of the reading ‘out loud’ of wills and petitions. It was also the word used in the Septuagint (the Greek version of the Old Testament) of the public reading of Scripture, as when the priests read from the Law in Ezra’s day (Nehemiah 8.8).
The question arises: what ‘scripture’ was Paul charging Timothy to read? In so far as early church worship drew to a large extent upon the worship of the synagogue, the scripture would have included readings from the Law and the Prophets. In addition to the Old Testament ‘Bible’, letters and writings were read at early Christian gatherings. Paul, for instance, wrote to the Thessalonians: “I solemnly command you by the Lord that the letter be read to all of them [literally, ‘all the brothers’] (1 Thessalonians 5.27). He gave similar instructions to the church in Colossae: “When this letter has been read among you, have it read also in the church in Laodicea, and see that you read also the letter from Laodicea” (Colossians 4.16: see also 2 Corinthians 4.7). Significantly the Book of Revelation opens with the words: “Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of the prophecy, and blessed are those who hear and who keep what is written in it” (Revelation 1.3: see also Revelation 22.18-19). As John Stott, the former Rector of All Souls, Langham Place (the BBC church) commented: “These are extraordinary instructions. They indicate that the apostles put their writings on a level with the Old Testament”. At the same time, there would have been the telling of stories of Jesus, which received written form around the time 1 Timothy was written.
By the time of Justin Martyr (AD 110-165) Christian worship always included two public scripture readings – one from the Old Testament, and one from the ‘memoirs of the apostles’. In the words of Justin Martyr:
On the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together in one place, and the memoirs of the apostles and the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the overseer verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things.
I would encourage churches to have at least three readings: one from the Old Testament, one Psalm; and one Gospel Reading – and in addition perhaps one from the New Testament letters. My father was a great believer in reading the Scriptures in a Sunday service. In his church in Cambridge he created quite a stir when over a series of six Sunday evenings, he read through all 48 chapters of Ezekiel! Later I remember his excitement when the New English Bible first came out, he would often read several chapters from a Gospel before preaching to the congregation.
The scripture readings are then followed by what Paul called ‘exhortation’ (NRSV) or ‘preaching’ (GNB/NIV) [the Greek word is paraklesis] and ‘teaching’ (didaskalia). We should not over-distinguish between the two activities. In the words of one New Testament scholar, Philip Towner, “it is hard to imagine teaching without leading the people to response, or preaching without providing a reasoned exposition of a text’s principles”. In one way or another God’s Word needs to be expounded and applied (see also 2 Timothy 3.16).
In Paul’s day, of course, most people could not read, nor could many afford to get hold of ‘books’ to read. This therefore made the “public reading of scripture” all the more important. Although we live in a day when general literacy can be taken for granted, and when the Bible can be bought relatively inexpensively, nevertheless we cannnot assume that most Christians are regularly engaged in personal Bible reading. A Bible Society survey of regular churchgoers found that only 16% read a passage from the Bible every day; a further 9% read a passage from the Bible once a week; and 9% read a passage from the Bible about once a month. In other words in any given month the majority of churchgoers never read their Bible. All the more reason, therefore, for ‘the public reading of Scripture’ to be part of Christian worship!
There is one important aspect for me:
that the texts are thematically connected and then the sermon provides in depth thinking. Very long passages of scripture which are not focussed on the topic of the sermon pass too fast. For me.
Before I can start to think about the text the next element comes along, requiring my attention.
Some time ago we had an “only reading session”. That was really close reading and attentive listening. But I am not sure whether it had a lasting impact.
Kind regards Harald
A much-needed corrective for the ‘non-liturgical’ churches. However, I take Harald’s point about overload, and so in services where I have more than one reading I have taken to alerting the congregation in advance as to which passage I am preaching from. (Other readings are still good for edification.)
That said, I have an issue with the way the Lectionary works in ‘liturgical’ churches. The compilers of the Lectionary manifestly did not work alongside biblical scholars, as they make regular injudicious decisions about the selection of verses in the readings. They utterly fail to keep to what I believe to be a good principle, namely that a reading should be a literary unit. (I think it was Greidanus in his book on preaching that emphasised this.) Many is the time when I have amended the Lectionary’s selection, usually by adding verses back in, to make sense of the passage.