Theological Censorship in the 1969 Lectionary (Part 2): Guest Article by Dr. Agnieszka Fromme

This is the second part of an article by Dr Agnieszka Fromme about the theological censorship of certain ideas in the lectionary of the post-Conciliar rite; the first part was published yesterday. Our thanks once again to Dr Fromme for sharing her interesting work with NLM.

4. Comparing the Lectionaries

The following analysis is part of a broader project in which I examine the differences between the traditional Latin Mass and the new form of the Eucharistic celebration. Here, the focus is on the theological implications of the new lectionary, which often subtly alters or shifts Catholic doctrine.

My lectionary analysis begins with the Missal of 1962 (which also serves as the basis for the following table) and compares it with the new lectionary to determine what happened to the originally included pericopes. The differences often concern the Epistle, which is especially theologically rich. Narrative texts from the Old Testament or Gospels, as well as parables of Jesus that do not pose potential theological tension, are usually omitted – unless particular verses were conspicuously redacted. My aim is not to produce a comprehensive comparison of the two lectionary systems, but to highlight theologically significant differences.

The readings in the Advent and Christmas seasons are largely similar or parallel, with some shifts. One example is the Epistle Titus 2:11–15, which is read in the old Missal on January 1, but appears in the new lectionary only in Year A on the Second Sunday of Advent. Therefore, the following table begins with the period that contains the most striking differences:

TABLE 1

Occasion	Missal 1962	New (1969) Lectionary	Comment
Septuagesima	Mt 20:1-16	Mt 20:1-16a (25th Sunday in Ordinary Time)	1. Verse 16 is shortened here by omitting the second half: “For many are called, but few are chosen” is missing.
Ash Wednesday	Mt 6:16-21	Mt 6:16-18	The Gospel was shortened. The emphasis on prayer and fasting in secret – which is often used as an argument against public worship – remains. However, the call to actively store up treasures in heaven has been omitted.
Second Sunday of Lent	1 Thess 4:1-7	omitted (included in the new lectionary, but only on a weekday)	A particularly striking omission from the Sunday readings—Paul clearly emphasizes in this pericope the Catholic teaching that sanctification is a lifelong process and requires striving for ever greater perfection, and that even Christians are at risk of succumbing to sinful desires. Overall, this presents a very strong counterpoint to the Protestant doctrines of “sola fide” and “once saved, always saved.”
S. Joseph Sponsi B.M.V.	Sir 45:1-6 Mt 1:18-21	2 Sam 7:4-5a.12-14a.16 Rom 4:13.16-18.22 Mt 1:16.18 – 21.24a	The new readings emphasize different aspects of the life of St. Joseph, yet the pericopes are noticeably censored: In 2 Samuel, God’s chastisement as a Father has been removed; in Romans, Abraham’s old age is omitted, reflecting modernist skepticism toward miracles.[Note 8]
Third Sunday of Lent	Eph 5:1-9; Lk 11:14-28	omitted, instead (depending on year): 1 Cor 10:1-6.10-12 or: Rom 5:1-2.5-8 (19. Sunday of Ordinary Time); Lk 11:14-23	The omitted verses from 1 Corinthians speak of fornication and its punishment, once again highlighting the danger that even those who have become Christians can fall back into sin. The older pericope from Ephesians 5 emphasizes this danger and the necessity of a holy way of life. The missing verses from Romans 5 underline that hope is not the finished product of a once-accomplished work of salvation, but is attained through tribulation, perseverance, and proven character. In Luke 11, verses 24-28 – which contain a warning about the renewed danger of unclean spirits – have been removed.
Fifth Sunday of Lent	Hebr 9:11-15	Appears as the second reading on Corpus Christi; replaced here by: Rom 8:8–11; Heb 5:7–9 or Phil 3:8–14	In the pericope from Hebrews 5, verse 10 is omitted – this verse speaks of Jesus as a priest according to the order of Melchizedek, which points to the sacrificial character of the Holy Mass. In Philippians 3, the statement against the law requires a distinction between ritual regulations and the Decalogue. It is worth noting positively that verse 12 is retained, in which Paul speaks of the perfection he still strives to attain.
Palm Sunday	Phil 2:5-11	Phil 2:6-11 (on 26. Sunday in Ordinary Time, vv1-11 are read)	On Palm Sunday verse 5 has been omitted: “Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus.” What remains is only the description of Christ’s kenosis, without the exhortation to imitate it.
Chrism Mass	Ja 5:13-16; Mk 6:7-13	Moved to 24. Sunday year B; here instead: Isa 61:1-3a.6a.8b-9 Rev 1:5-8 Lk 4:16-21	James here speaks of the Anointing of the Sick, while Isaiah focuses solely on Christ’s messianic mission. The pericope from Revelation emphasizes the universal priesthood. In Mark 6, we find the sending of the Twelve with the authority of Jesus (apostolic authority, ministerial priesthood), whereas Luke 4 essentially repeats the content from Isaiah. This very noticeable shift from the sacraments to the universal priesthood in the Chrism Mass is also reflected in the oration of that Mass. [Note 9]
Mass of the Lord’s Supper	1 Cor 11:20-32	Ex 12:1-8.11-14; 1 Cor 11:23-26	Another very striking and deeply troubling omission: In the pericope from 1 Corinthians, verses 27-32 – with its explicit warning against receiving the Eucharist unworthily – have been removed. This warning is not found anywhere in the entire new lectionary, not even on Corpus Christi.
Easter Sunday	1 Cor 5:7-8	Acts 10:34a-37-43; Col 3:1-4	The new readings contain only the joyful message of the Resurrection, whereas 1 Corinthians additionally emphasizes the necessity of a way of life that corresponds to this message.
Low Sunday	1 Jn 5:4-10	1 Jn 5:1-6; Rev 1:9-11a.12-13.17.19	In the pericope from Revelation, the two-edged sword was censored.
3rd Sunday after Easter [Note 10]	1 Pet 2:11-19	1 Pet 2:20b-25; Rev 7:9.14b-17	The omitted part of 1 Peter 2:20a refers to suffering that is self-inflicted and therefore not meritorious. In the pericope from Revelation, the description of the heavenly liturgy is missing.
4th Sunday after Easter	Ja 1:17-21; John 16:5-14	Rev 21:1-5a Ja 1:19-20.23-26 on 22. Sunday B Partially on Pentecost Monday	A repeated emphasis on the universal priesthood. James 1:21–22 has been omitted: “But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves…” Verses 8–11 are absent from the new lectionary; they speak of the Holy Spirit convicting the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment.
Sunday after the Ascension		Rev 22:12-14.16-17.20	The missing verses warn that sorcerers, fornicators, and others will not enter the heavenly Jerusalem, and that those who distort the word of God will be punished accordingly.
Corpus Christi	1 Cor 11:23-29		The institution narrative from 1 Corinthians 11 is completely missing from the new lectionary on Corpus Christi, and it is censored on Holy Thursday – the warning against unworthy reception (see above) is omitted.
2nd Sunday after Pentecost	1 Jn 3:13-18	omitted	The omission of verse 18 – “Let us not love in word or speech but in deed and in truth”- from the new lectionary is particularly troubling. Especially in the Protestant context, where speaking in tongues is often seen as a sign of spiritual perfection, 1 John 3:18 almost serves as a counter-program.
3rd Sunday after Pentecost	1 Pet 5:6-11	omitted	The warning about the devil as a roaring and prowling lion is missing from the new lectionary.
5th Sunday after Pentecost	1 Pet 3:8-15	omitted	The exhortation that Christians should avoid evil and be zealous for what is good is missing.
11th Sunday after Pentecost	1 Cor 15:1-10	partially on Easter Monday	On Easter Monday, this pericope does appear, but without verses 9–10. These verses emphasize that God's grace can remain ineffective without our effort.
21st Sunday after Pentecost	Eph 6:10-17	omitted	The spiritual battle and the “armor of God” are absent.

The following section highlights some pericopes that were added to the new lectionary in comparison to the old Missal, yet appear in a censored version:

TABLE 2

Occasion	Pericope	Comment
2nd Sunday in Ordinary Time (B)	1 Cor 6:13c-15a.17-20	The warning against sexual sin as a metaphor for spiritual adultery has been omitted.
22nd Sunday in Ordinary Time (B)	Mc 7:1-8.14-15.21-23	Some clarifying verses are missing, which make it clear that Jesus is drawing a distinct line between the commandments of God and human laws or ritual regulations – a very important distinction for properly understanding Pauline theology of law and grace in a Catholic sense.
22nd Sunday in Ordinary Time (C)	Sir 3:17-18.20.28-29	The omitted verses warn against false curiosity and the pursuit of hidden secrets – a valuable reminder in times of obsession with private revelations.
25th Sunday in Ordinary Time (A)	Phil 1:20c-24.27a	The first part of verse 20 is omitted. It contains the reminder that even a believer – Paul himself included – can be put to shame, and that there is a risk of failing to glorify Christ in every aspect of his life.

It is worth noting positively that some passages containing important Catholic teachings have been retained in the new lectionary – such as Galatians 5:16-6:10 (warning against temptations) – or even added, such as 2 Maccabees 12:43-45 (sacrifice for the dead), 1 John 5:2 and 1 John 2:3 (love expressed through keeping the commandments). Others have been moved e.g. from Ember Friday in Lent to a Sunday, Ezekiel 18:20–28 (rejection of “once saved, always saved”).

Summary

Numerous biblical texts have been altered in the new lectionary, revealing a clear trend toward a theology more aligned with Protestant and modernist interpretations. Particularly striking is the omission or shortening of many passages that emphasize key Catholic doctrines. A prime example is the removal of verses highlighting the necessity of active participation in sanctification and moral responsibility.

Important passages such as the warning against unworthy reception of the Eucharist or the teaching that sanctification is a lifelong process have either been entirely omitted or significantly weakened. Instead of emphasizing the sacrificial character of the Eucharist and the role of the sacraments, the focus is increasingly placed on a general priesthood—reflecting Protestant perspectives.

These changes in the new lectionary represent a shift toward a theology that emphasizes personal, subjective experience and a “simplified” understanding of grace, while the traditional Catholic teaching on the interplay of faith, works, and the sacramental order is increasingly diluted.

NOTES (numeration continued from part 1) 

[8] St. Pius X, Pascendi Dominici gregis: The Philosophy of the Modernists; Acta Apostolicae Sedis 1907, 59.

[9] 1962 Collect: “Lord God, who in the regenerating of Thy peoples makest use of the ministry of priests, grant us to serve with perseverance in Thy will, that by the gift of Thy grace, the people made holy unto Thee may be increased in our days both in merit and in number. Through (our) Lord (etc.)”; 1969 Collect: “O God, who anointed your Only Begotten Son with the Holy Spirit and appointed him Christ the Lord, graciously grant that, made partakers in his anointing, we may be found witnesses of redemption in the world. Through our Lord…”

[10] The alignment of the old Sundays after Easter or after Pentecost with the new Sundays in Ordinary Time varies from year to year depending on the date of Easter. The assignments in this table correspond to the calendar of 2025.

Theological Censorship in the 1969 Lectionary (Part 1): Guest Article by Dr. Agnieszka Fromme

Our thanks to Dr Agnieszka Fromme for sharing with us this interesting article about theological censorship in the post-Conciliar lectionary. It will be presented in two parts. 

Jefferson Bible (photo from Smithsonian)

Was a “Richer Table of the Word” Truly Set for Us in 1969?

A Comparison of the Tridentine Lectionary and the Ordo Lectionum Missae

Dr. Agnieszka Fromme

One of the aims of the liturgical reform following the Second Vatican Council was to “open up the treasures of the Bible more lavishly, so that a richer share in God’s word may be provided for the faithful” (Sacrosanctum Concilium 51). The introduction of the new Ordo Lectionum Missae in 1969 promised precisely that: a “richer table of the Word” – as the programmatic phrase in the official preface to the new Lectionary put it.

A three-year Sunday cycle and an expanded set of readings were meant to offer greater biblical variety, whereas the traditional Tridentine lectionary emphasized theologically dense repetition. But was this goal truly achieved?

Anyone who has ever held the modern Lectionary in hand will have stumbled upon its cryptic Scripture references – such as 1 Cor 6:13c-15a; 17-20 or Rev 1:9-11a, 12-13, 17, 19. Those who do not settle for vague piety but have the courage to look closely at these liturgical fragmentations are soon confronted with an uncomfortable question: Which parts of Holy Scripture have been deliberately omitted – and why? When verses appear to be systematically fragmented or trimmed in multiple places, it raises the suspicion that this may not simply be a matter of length or practicality – but at times a form of ideological filtering. Which leads to the underlying question: Was a truly “richer table of the Word” prepared for us in 1969 – or merely a pre-sorted, pre-portioned plate? This study thus approaches the question not only quantitatively, but above all qualitatively.

1. The History of the Lectionary

In the liturgy of the Catholic Church, the proclamation of Holy Scripture plays a central role. From the earliest centuries, biblical texts were read aloud during Christian assemblies – initially from the Apostolic letters, later including the Gospels. These readings were first selected relatively freely; over time, fixed orders developed, known as lectionaries.

By the 4th century, various regions – such as Rome, Jerusalem, and North Africa – had established lectionaries: collections of reading texts assigned to specific days and feasts. These orders varied regionally but generally followed the liturgical year with its major feasts like Easter, Pentecost, and Christmas. In Rome, a fixed set gradually emerged, providing for each day of the year a reading from the Epistles or Old Testament and a Gospel – often supplemented by a Gradual (intermediate chant).

Although the entire Catholic Church can be styled “Roman” in the sense that it is under the Pope in Rome, there obviously exists significant liturgical diversity within this one Church. This was evident, for example, during the recent papal election through the varied liturgical attire of cardinals from different traditions. The term “Roman” typically refers to the Roman Rite, the predominant liturgical form in the Western Church. However, it is only one of 24 rites within the Catholic Church. The following discussion pertains exclusively to the Roman Rite.

The Roman Mass, often referred to as “Tridentine,” does not, in its substance, originate from the Council of Trent itself. Instead, it has deep roots in the early Church. From this tradition, the Roman liturgy developed in the West, receiving its first comprehensive organization and stabilization under Pope Gregory the Great († 604). In subsequent centuries, the “Mass of the Roman Curia” became the predominant form in the papal environment. This local role might have continued till today – had the Reformation not intervened.

In response to the significant attacks on the Catholic understanding of the Eucharist, priesthood, and sacraments, the Council of Trent (1545-63) sought to clearly define Catholic doctrine and establish liturgical unity to protect the faithful. Pope St Pius V, therefore, published the Missale Romanum in 1570, standardizing the form of the Roman Curia Mass for the entire Church – except where another liturgical rite existed that was demonstrably older than 200 years, a regulation aimed to exclude all Protestant-influenced innovations. The Roman liturgy then remained largely unchanged for 400 years, shaping Catholic worship well into the 20th century.

With the promulgation of the Missale Romanum in 1570, the lectionary for the entire Roman Rite was also established. It followed a one-year cycle, as do all traditional rites. The so-called Tridentine lectionary is based on a much older liturgical tradition and contains, for each Sunday and feast day, an Epistle (usually from the Pauline letters) and a Gospel, carefully paired over centuries. Weekdays generally did not have their own pericopes but repeated readings from Sundays or saints’ feasts.

Although the volume of biblical text was quantitatively limited, the recurring readings fostered a mystagogical anchoring in the believers’ faith life. Regular Mass attendees encountered the same central Gospel passages repeatedly – leading to a deep familiarity with the mystery of salvation. The liturgy “imprints” rather than merely “informs” – serving as a spiritual practice. The combination of Epistle and Gospel was not merely thematic or chronological but theologically deliberate. Often, the Epistle elucidates the spiritual significance of the Gospel event. Many of these pericopes are strongly sacramental, ecclesial, and dogmatic – addressing grace, sin, redemption, and the holiness of the Church. The selection focused on particularly poignant and dense Scripture passages, resulting in a clear catechetical and apologetic effect. In confronting heresies or ideological challenges, the Tridentine lectionary was often perceived as theologically refined and incisive.

2. The Reform of 1969: Ordo Lectionum Missae

The Second Vatican Council (1962-65) called for a more intensive inclusion of Sacred Scripture in the liturgy. The result was the new Ordo Lectionum Missae (OLM) – the Order of Readings for the Mass – introduced in 1969 and slightly revised in 1981. This new lectionary brought about profound structural changes, both in its layout and in the amount of Scripture read:

Key features of the new order:

• Introduction of a three-year cycle for Sundays and feast days:
• Year A: Focus on the Gospel of Matthew
• Year B: Mark
• Year C: Luke
• The Gospel of John is included during Lent, Eastertide, and on solemnities
• Introduction of a two-year weekday cycle (Year I and Year II)
• Introduction of three readings on Sundays:
1. First Reading: usually from the Old Testament
2. Second Reading: usually from the Apostolic Letters
3. Gospel

The goal of this reform was to allow a much larger portion of the Bible to be heard over three years – approximately 70% of the New Testament and 13% of the Old Testament.

The order was promulgated by the Vatican’s Congregation for Divine Worship. The respective bishops’ conferences are responsible for translations and pastoral adaptations (e.g., to national feasts). The lectionary must be used for all public celebrations of Mass in the Pauline rite; exceptions are only permitted in certain pastoral contexts (e.g., children’s Masses, weddings, or funerals). [1]

In Roman Catholic liturgy, the Gospel is the preferred foundation for the homily, though all three readings may be incorporated. In contrast to the Protestant pericope system, the Catholic homily is not tied to a single fixed “preaching text”, allowing greater thematic freedom. This enables stronger connections between the Old and New Testaments – for example, typological interpretation (e.g., sacrifice – Eucharist – Paschal mystery).

Liturgically, this is properly referred to as the homily – an exposition of the day’s readings, especially the Gospel. It is an integral part of the Mass and obligatory on Sundays and holy days of obligation. The homily may only be given by a priest or deacon and aims to deepen faith through scriptural and mystagogical reflection.

The broader term sermon is also used outside the liturgy, often for Lenten preaching, catechesis, or missionary talks, which are not necessarily tied to the day’s readings and may be delivered by laypeople or religious.

3. Cornerstones of Catholic Dogmatics

In the following analysis, I highlight theological differences, omissions, and shifts in emphasis in the new lectionary (to be illustrated by tables in Part 2). These pertain to uncomfortable or “non-contemporary” topics – such as sin, judgment, and conversion – but also to a tendency toward Protestant theological perspectives, especially regarding grace, Scripture, and the Church.

To frame these observations theologically, this section outlines key cornerstones of Catholic dogma that define the Church’s understanding of grace, liturgy, Scripture, and ecclesiology. These serve as reference points for the comparative analysis that follows.

Faith and Works, Grace and Human Cooperation

The Catholic Church does not view grace as merely external divine favor but as an interior transformation and empowerment of the person to participate in the divine life. The human being is not passive but actively cooperates with grace once moved by it. This cooperation is itself a gift but an inseparable part of salvation. Correct interpretation of Paul’s rejection of “works of the law” (e.g., Rom. 3, 28; Gal. 2, 16) is essential. Paul refers here to ritual prescriptions such as circumcision or dietary laws – not works of love, moral commandments, or cooperation with grace. [2]

Sanctification as a Lifelong Process

God’s grace aims not just at legal acquittal but at the true transformation of the person. The Catholic Church stresses the need for continuous growth in holiness – through sacraments, works of love, prayer, and daily struggle against sin. The path to full communion with God is a lifelong process requiring fidelity, repentance, and perseverance to the end. This directly contradicts the notion of “once saved, always saved”. Catholic teaching opposes this idea, which appears in some Protestant traditions (especially Calvinist predestination), as it conflicts with the biblical exhortation to “work out your salvation with fear and trembling” (Phil 2, 12), and warnings against apostasy, lukewarmness, or moral laxity (cf. Heb 6, 4-6; Rev 3, 16). [3]

Unity of Scripture and Tradition

The Church teaches that divine revelation is transmitted not by Scripture alone, but by Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition together, both flowing from the same divine source. The interpretation of this revelation is entrusted to the Church’s Magisterium, guided by the Holy Spirit. [4]

The Church as Visible Sign of Salvation

The Church is not just a spiritual community but a visible and efficacious sacrament of salvation. Founded by Christ, she is both divine and human. Salvation is sacramentally mediated within her – especially through the Eucharist, which is the source and summit of ecclesial life. Liturgy is not merely religious expression but Christ’s action through his Church. In celebrating the seven sacraments, especially the Eucharist, the faithful truly participate in the mystery of redemption. [5]

The Sacramental Priesthood and the Sacrificial Nature of the Mass 

The Catholic Church affirms that the Eucharist is not merely a memorial meal but a true and proper sacrifice. In the Mass, Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross is made present in an unbloody, sacramental manner through the ministry of the ordained priest, who acts in persona Christi capitis – in the person of Christ the Head. The ministerial priesthood is essentially distinct from the common priesthood of all the faithful and is conferred by the sacrament of Holy Orders. The priest is not merely a presider but a sacramental instrument, through whom Christ himself offers the sacrifice. [6]

Real Presence and Transubstantiation

The Catholic Church teaches that Jesus Christ is truly, really, and substantially present in the Eucharist – body, blood, soul, and divinity. This presence comes about through the transformation of the substance of bread and wine into the substance of Christ’s body and blood: transubstantiation. The appearances (accidents) remain, but the inner reality is fully changed. A profound hint of this Eucharistic reality is found in the Lord’s Prayer: “τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον (= supersubstantialem) δὸς ἡμῖν σήμερον” (Mt 6, 11) – “Give us this day our supersubstantial bread.” [7]

In Part 2, we will present a table in which many examples are given of how readings in the new lectionary deliberately sidestep, by means of excluded verses, the dogmatic principles listed above.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Dr. Agnieszka Fromme holds degrees in German Studies, Theology, and Information Technology. She earned her doctorate in theology in 2012 in Poland, with a dissertation in catechetics focused on the RCIA and a large-scale study of young people's faith life. After her marriage, she moved to Germany, where she currently works as a programmer. Theology remains her deep passion, now pursued mainly alongside her profession. Under the pen name Pia Lamm, she has published several books, some of which are available also in English (see here).

NOTES

[1] In the nuptial Mass of the traditional Roman Rite, the Gospel is always Matthew 19 – on the indissolubility of marriage. Today, this passage is just one of ten optional readings – just as the indissolubility of marriage itself seems to have become one option. In funeral liturgies, on the other side, the famous Dies irae sequence has disappeared. German Wikipedia puts it with remarkable candor: “The Dies irae is no longer used in the liturgy of the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite according to the new Missal, due to the image of an angry God (‘Day of wrath…’) that the sequence conveys. It is, however, permitted at the grand Requiem on All Souls’ Day so that the treasure of Church music may be preserved.” In plain terms: it was removed because it no longer fits the times – but in order not to lose it musically, it may be performed once a year, on All Souls’ Day. That is, on a weekday when few people attend Mass, since most visits to the cemetery already take place on All Saints’ Day. But certainly not at ordinary funeral Masses – where there would be the risk of confronting lapsed or secular mourners with the idea of an “angry God.”

[2] References: Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) 1996–2001; Müller, G.L., Katholische Dogmatik: für Studium und Praxis der Theologie Herder 1995, pp. 800–805; Diekamp-Jüssen, Katholische Dogmatik, Alverna 2013, pp. 678–778; Denzinger, Kompendium der Glaubensbekenntnisse und kirchlichen Lehrentscheidungen, Herder 2017, nos. 1520–1534.

[3] References: CCC 2012–2016; Diekamp-Jüssen, pp. 784–799; DH 1535–1563.

[4] References: CCC 80–83, 95; Müller, pp. 53–94; Diekamp-Jüssen, pp. 42–85; DH 1501–1507, 4207–4214.

[5] References: CCC 748–780, 1113–1131; Müller, pp. 573–578; Diekamp-Jüssen, pp. 804–856, 1081–1084; DH 1601, 3011–3014, 4118.

[6] References: CCC 1362–1372, 1547; Müller, pp. 640, 705–706, 751–753; Diekamp-Jüssen, pp. 960–972, 1095; DH 1743–1750.

[7] References: CCC 1373–1381; Müller, pp. 710–711; Diekamp-Jüssen, pp. 912–948; DH 1636–1642.