I once asked my Doktorvater George Lindbeck about the great theologian at the University of Chicago, David Tracy. His criticism went like this: he was a man who never said 'no.' By this he meant that everyone Tracy treated had a place in his system, was part of some larger dialogue, etc. Tracy was all both/ and and no either/ or, but ways on his own terms and part of his project, rather like some amoeba absorbing bits into himself. You have doubtless met folks like that in everyday life.
When it comes the Gospel, Paul tells us that in Jesus Christ it is always a 'Yes' from God (II Corinthians 1:19). And it is important that this be said first in all circumstances. But it then becomes clear that we can only grasp that yes, its import and implications, as we articulate what isn't being said. I am not talking about nay-saying grumpiness, but simply about clarity which requires differentiation. The theologian, Christopher Morse, at Union Seminary wrote a book called 'Not Every Spirit,' in which he claimed that Christian doctrine has in large part a 'fencing' function, as it disbars what we ought not to say.
In this regard I want to propose a way to read our propers. I have in mind first our preachers, but lay people as well. Ask yourself first, about each passage: how is this good news for me and us in Jesus Christ? But then ask: if this is true, what, as a result, isn't?
Let me give an example. In John 1:14 we read that the Word of God became flesh and tabernacled with us. It is not hard to hear a great 'Yes' in the divine condescension. But then we see in this decisive act the end of any claims to religious pluralism, to a parity among religions. And all versions of Gnosticism which denigrate the bodily creation are ruled out of court as well. These No's come in the wake of Yes.
A positive spirit is a good thing, but not at cost of the distinctiveness of Christ's person and work in what is called the 'scandal of particularity.' Hearing the 'No' that ensues actually helps us really hear the abiding 'Yes.'