Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

Trying to spin this in the conclusions section is not helping your case, sorry Father.

As much as I enjoy reading good scholarship, there is a lot of shoddy scholarship out there to wade through. This doesn't even reach that level, I feel like I pulled a drawer out of a card catalogue and am reading each individual card. And yes, I am that old.

"The previous missal assigned complete seasonal daily readings only to Lent. Early on, Study Group 11 wanted Lent to retain its proper daily readings 'by improving the current lectionary'... By the final draft, twenty-one readings remained in place, seventeen moved to other days."

Wait, what?

Ok, I have found a part of this book which is potentially useful, if still tedious.

I can't quite figure out if the headache is coming from the fact that this book is poorly organized or the fact that the events that he's describing are so random as to have no coherent line of reasoning behind them.

So the blurb says "In Words without Alloy, Paul Turner traces the history of the lectionary as if it were a person coming to full maturity." So far, the way he presents the development of the lectionary of 1970 looks more like a bunch of college students writing a screenplay under the influence. Influence of what, I'm not entirely sure.

I'm not sure how, but chapter one manages to have too much and not enough detail at the same time.