Author Archives: Derek A. Olsen

Calendar Subcommittee Recommendations Up for Comment

The Standing Committee on Liturgy and Music (SCLM) is now making public an interim update on the Calendar. The proposal is located here. It recommends splitting the current material into two parts (whether physically located in two volumes or not—that’s still under discussion): “A Great Cloud of Witnesses” which is cast as a “family history” rather than a sanctoral calendar and “Weekday Eucharist Book” (which needs a better name) for collecting the material for weekday Eucharistic celebrations into meaningful groups.

This is the result of much consultation, much thought, and several contentious meetings. It’s not perfect, it still has some unknowns, and it has some weaknesses, but overall I think it’s a stronger way forward than Holy Women, Holy Men.  At this point, we’re essentially putting it up for public vote. While adding nuance might be nice, chances are this is going to be a up or down decision—HWHM or GCW—based on the feedback left on the blog.

I’m working on a post to provide some of the context for some of the choices that might seem odd. I thought I’d have it up by now, but life has intervened. Hopefully later today!

The Beauty of Holiness

I was struck again this morning with the strong sense of the inter-relation between beauty, truth, and holiness. Beauty is a pathway into the soul. We need to be more attentive regarding the ways that we can work this truth into our daily practices of faith and life…

 

On the Choice of Offices

A correspondent sent me a note over the weekend, noting (correctly) that if one wishes to undertake the discipline of the Office, it’s good to pick one primary form and stick with it. His question, then, was which one:

  • The BCP Offices,
  • The Roman Liturgy of the Hours,
  • The Anglican Breviary,
  • The Monastic Diurnal + Matins

Others could be added to these…

It’s a good question and one that I spent some time wrestling with a few years ago. I can’t tell him, or you, or anybody else what to do, of course, but here’s the answer that I’ve come to and that works well for me.

I’m a Prayer Book Catholic within the Episcopal Church. Now—as we’ve noted before, the term “Prayer Book Catholic” isn’t exactly the same in England as it is in America due to the differing situations of our respective prayer books. However, I take it to mean that I am obliged to the prayer book and its system of devotion as understood and supplemented by the riches of the Western liturgical heritage.

Thus, for me, I am obligated to the Morning and Evening Prayer Offices of our authorized Book of Common Prayer—that’s part and parcel of what it means to be an Episcopalian.

Now, the Offices contain a number of permissions—like the liberty of antiphons and hymns—that open the door to the riches of our heritage found in books like the Anglican Breviary, the Monastic Diurnal, the English Office,  the Brevarium RomanumA Monastic Breviary, and many others.  As a result, I have and use these other books to supplement my prayer book services both in terms of material and in terms of additional offices.

Indeed, this was part of the genesis of the St. Bede’s Breviary. I wanted to create something that was faithful to the rubrics of the prayer book, but that also could easily include the other items when I had the time and desire for them. As a result, I have my “House Use” that I use regularly and can choose from the other leaner versions as circumstances require. However, at the root is always the framework and content of the BCP Offices.

In Advent and Lent I like to add in the Little Hours and will often do so—or attempt to do so—from the Anglican Breviary or Monastic Diurnal or the Sarum Primer.  I say attempt because I don’t often succeed. My zeal for devotion frequently outstrips the time I have for it.

And that raises another important point. The BCP Offices are the least onerous of the list above. After all, it’s two Offices a day (only four if Noon and Compline are included). If I were to take the Anglican Breviary as a base office discipline,  I would be obligated to pray all of it. Even doing so in aggregation would be difficult, and at this season of my life I just can’t imagine being able to juggle it all consistently, day in and day out. I hope this will change some day—but can’t see it happening until the girls can drive themselves!

For me and the discipline I’ve chosen, the Anglican Breviary represents the best source for supplementary material. I want to be able to pull in its antiphons and hymns. More particularly, I’d love to be able to draw on its patristic readings to augment the Offices.

So, if some are you are wondering why I’m proposing the Anglican Breviary project while also talking about the importance of the prayer book, this is how it fits together. I know several people who faithfully pray the breviary and who have asked me to work with it; I’d also like to make it available to interweave with the prayer book itself.

At the end of the day, selecting an Office discipline is a balance of ecclesial identity, devotional continuity, and an honest appraisal of your own ability to stick with the choices you’ve made. The heart of the Office is the repetition of the Psalter. If you can’t consistently make it through the whole psalter in your chosen Office discipline, then you’ll want to reassess it and consider if you’ve bitten off more than you can chew, and what will work for you. It’s always easier to start with the shorter and more basic and graduate to more complex forms as you go.  But don’t be hasty about it either. Liturgical formation—like all other life-long habits—should be measured in months, seasons, and years rather than days and weeks.

Electronic Anglican Breviary Project on Kickstarter

Today I have officially launched a Kickstarter project to convert the Anglican Breviary to digital form and to make it available as a completely free web application.

For those not familiar with it, the Anglican Breviary is one of the great liturgical works that has come out of the Catholic movement in Anglicanism. 30 years in the making, it was produced in the year 1955 by the Frank Gavin Liturgical Foundation. Like all breviaries, it contains the traditional hours of prayers of the Western Church: the long early morning Matins office with its readings from the Church Fathers interspersed with psalms; the main offices for the hinges of the day, Lauds and Vespers; the daytime offices of Prime, Terce, Sext, None; the bedtime office of Compline; and the brief Capitular office that includes the martyrology recounting the saints to be remembered. Built on the structure of the Roman Catholic Divine Office according to the usage established by Pius X, it utilizes the Scriptures of the King James Bible and the Coverdale Psalms of the Book of Common Prayer to place these prayer hours within an Anglican idiom.

For more information on the Anglican Breviary itself, visit its home site at www.anglicanbreviary.net, owned and operated by Mr. Daniel Lula, the man responsible for keeping it in print. We have corresponded regarding this initiative, and I have his blessing to proceed.

Transcribing and coding this roughly 2,000 page volume will take a lot of time and energy, so I have split it into three manageable parts.

  • The first will see the transcription of the Commons, and the bulk of the behind-the-scenes programming that makes everything work. Additionally, I will be creating a wiki where the transcriptions will be housed in a plain-text form.
  • The second portion will include all of the material in the Proper of Seasons.
  • The third portion will include all of the material in the Proper of Saints.

Completing this work will accomplish some goals very near and dear to my heart. Obviously, it will preserve the Anglican Breviary for future generations and will introduce it to a far wider audience than it has had in the past. Beyond this clear win, it will accomplish these additional goals:

  • The transcription will provide a web-based source of material from the Church Fathers relating to both seasons and saints that can be incorporated into a host of possible future platforms. I plan on pulling it into the St. Bede’s Breviary myself.
  • The transcription will give us the opportunity to study lectionary inter-relations in a way not possible before.
  • Should we seek to create an updated Anglican Breviary that meshes with the current liturgical calendar used by Anglican churches worldwide (as well as the Roman Catholic Church), a hefty chunk of the necessary material will already be available in a clean, machine-readable form.

My experience with the St. Bede’s Breviary (SBB) has shown me the downside of trying to accomplish such an effort on a voluntary basis; for the sake of my family, my efforts have to be focused on those projects that contribute to our income. As a result, the SBB has often received the last and least of my energy, stolen away in bits of time on weekend mornings before the girls get up. As a Kickstarter funded project, I would be able to engage the Anglican Breviary wholeheartedly, knowing that it was helping me provide for them in a much more direct fashion than the SBB!

I’m hoping to receive pledges to meet my goal by February 5th. That’s not a lot of time, but is—I think—sufficient time provided there is enough energy and will to get this carried out. Please check out the link and consider what you can do to support this project and ensure the future and flourishing of this gem of catholic Anglicanism!

Honestly Be Who You Are

Two things have caught my eye over the past couple of days that are well worth underlining.

The first was a bit from The Lead on the Church of England’s growth study. Of the 8 things ennumerated as things linked to growth, one was: “Being intentional in chosen style of worship”

I thought this was fascinating in light of the whole “worship wars” context. Had this been five or ten years ago, I would heartily have expected to see “use [XX instrument] in worship” where the XX was either guitar/drums or else organ.

This is so much better—it’s about being clear about who you are (actually making a choice), and choosing to stick with it.

The second bit is from Robert Hendrickson and his presentation on ministering to young adults. Here’s a fragment:

This is the trap of many churches – we have a great story – but we don’t live into it in such a way that our essential qualities are readily apparent and evident.  Gen Y, hyper-marketed to and attuned to falsity, can sense intuitively when they are being sold a false bill of goods.

So how do we make sure that our congregations are places of powerful honesty?  We have to live it out.

Honest to our self:  Who is your parish?  What is it facing now that it is challenging with radical honesty?  Whatever your parish’s core identity is, there is nothing so precious, in terms of communication and evangelism, than living into it with integrity.  If you are an evangelical parish then live into it.  If you are an Anglo-Catholic parish, then live into it.  If you are a parish focused on social justice, then live into it.  Lean into your strengths and allow them not simply to be a story that you tell but a way of being that defines those who are part of your parish.

It’s not hard to connect the dots…

Honesty, integrity, and intentionality. These are key ways to live and proclaim the Gospel.

Theses on Spirituality

Here are a few thoughts that have been bouncing around my head around the topic of Christian Spirituality with an eye toward its Anglican expression.

1) Spirituality is the cultivation of the habits of living out the Gospel. “Cultivation” is a set of ideas, beliefs, doctrines, and practices oriented around forming habits. Thus, spirituality is not simply an “idea” thing or a head thing—it’s a “doing” thing with head components.

2) The core of the Gospel as far as spirituality is concerned is that God, in Jesus, is reconciling the whole world to himself. This is fundamentally what we’re aiming at. God is calling all things back to himself, to the original created goodness of everything, that is part and parcel of Christ’s victory over sin, hell, and the grave.

3) Our habits align with God’s purpose of reconciliation when we are participating in love of God and love of neighbor. God wills for us to live in union with him. However, living in union with God and his will is only possible when we are living in union with our neighbors–as well as the rest of the created order. (Cf. 1 John: how can we say we love the God whom we do not see, when we are not loving our brothers and sisters whom we do…)

4) A key part of an authentic spirituality is a ruthless quest for reality. In order to act with love towards God and neighbor, we have to understand the true nature of these relationships, where and how we compromise them, and be committed to engaging the ways that we compromise them. Real spirituality is not a form of spiritual escapism (although there are false forms that may be); real spirituality is not a flight from reality—it is a flight towards it.

5) As a result, an authentic spirituality has to take both sin and evil seriously as components of life that compromise our relationships with God and one another. Part of facing reality means acknowledging ways that personal sin, corporate sin, and societal sin hinder and sabotage our relationships with God and one another. A number of spiritualities floating around in the Church recently tend to downplay sin—particularly personal sin—preferring instead to rest on the strength of our original created goodness. In no way do I want to deny that we were created good and have the image of God within us. However, to suggest that our everyday ways of being and relating naturally reflect these doesn’t match reality.

6) Encountering reality is an unsettling experience. It’s easier to talk about reality than it is to face it, acknowledge it or experience it. Indeed, one of the many functions of human societies at all levels is to create insulators that conceal reality from us. And we collude with them in ignoring it. What exactly am I talking about when I say reality? Well—that’s a big topic that I’m not going to tackle now, but I’ll just give you two examples. First, American society works hard to insulate us from the reality of death. We buy meat from the supermarket in convenient packages. We have specific places—hospitals and hospices–where sick people go and where death is suppose to happen. Second, society works hard to keep us entertained. Between mass media, professional sports, games on our smarts phones, you name it—there is a tremendous industry around giving us diversions. But diversions from what? From silence? From being alone with ourselves and with each other? Why are these spaces and silences so threatening to us—and to the powers that be?

7) Insofar as spirituality involves moving past these insulators and encountering reality as it is, it must always contain counter-cultural elements. Because of the social character of these things that insulate us from reality, an authentic spirituality will have to have counter-cultural components precisely because it must lay bare that which society wants to hide.

8) Engaging reality requires disciplines of triangulation. Because of the variety of things that insulate us from reality—social constructs, our own personal habits of self-deception—we need habits and practices that will ground and re-orient us to what is really real and to what our purpose is. The reading of Scripture, praying the psalms, works of mercy and justice, sitting in silence, confessing our sins to God or to another—these things help us get the perspective necessary to apprehend that which is real and of value. Any one of these on their own can be subverted into just another form of pious insulators; they need to be used in combination.

Interview in The Living Church

I realized with the craziness of December, I never posted this on the blog. I know several people in the Facebook loop probably saw it, but—if you didn’t—here it is.

Richard Mammana, a friend of mine and one of the masterminds at Anglicans Online, is doing a set of interviews with some of the younger folks in the church. He asked me to do one with him which I was more than happy to do so.

Through a mix of chatting and email, we hammered this one out. It touches on a variety of things including where the name of the blog came from, how to pronounce it, and my hopes for the church

You can read it all here!

And, yes, I did finally get my hair cut shortly after that photo was taken…

A New Year…

Seems hard to believe the new year is already here!

Even though Epiphany hasn’t quite hit yet, I suppose my holiday hiatus is almost up.

Things are pretty busy on the SCLM front at the moment… We are proposing some changes to Holy Women, Holy Men, and the way we’re going to do it is to float it through a number of channels to see what kind of feedback we receive. If the response is positive, we’ll proceed in that direction. If it’s negative, we’ll regroup. I assume it’ll be mixed. That having been said, I think it’s probably the best solution that we can get most of the Church to agree with.

Apart from that, the Anglican Breviary project proposal should be going live in the next few days. More on that as it develops!

On the Canticles

I got an email from a reader asking about the canticles. I realized that there were some sections of my chapters on the Office that didn’t make it onto the blog, and the canticle section was one of them. So—here’s a bit on the canticles…

—————————

Following each biblical reading is a canticle. When I first experienced Episcopal Morning Prayer, I was completely baffled by the canticles. The priest leading the group would call out a number; she never had any hesitation about what to pick. Some were often said, but others were never said. Too, several of the other people in the group seemed to know in advance what she was going to say. I had a hard enough time just finding the right number, since the first canticle that I saw was numbered “8”! Eventually, I got it all figured out, but I’ve never forgotten my initial confusion.

What I didn’t know was that the canticles numbered 1 through 7 are located in Morning Prayer: Rite I. Canticles 8 through 21 are in Morning Prayer: Rite II. All of the canticles in Rite I appear in contemporary language in Rite II, but not vice-versa. Furthermore, there is no inherent or logical connection between the Rite I numbers and their Rite II counterparts! So—your first challenge in negotiating the canticles is navigating through them.

There is a basic principle at work here… In each block, the one in Rite I and in the one in Rite II, the canticles appear in canonical/chronological order. Thus, the Rite I block starts with material from the Apocrypha, goes through the canticles from Luke in canonical order, then moves to the two compositions from the Early Church. In a corresponding fashion, the Rite II block starts with the material from Exodus, then goes to the canticles from Isaiah before moving to the Apocrypha but adds an additional one in before moving to the Luke material, and items from Revelation, ending with the Early Church compositions.

As with the invitatory psalms, the names of the canticles are given both in English and in a classical language, usually Latin. People and reference works may use either name, so it never hurts to be familiar with both.

Canticles 1 and 12 are “A Song of Creation” (Benedicite, omnia opera Domini). The Benedicite comes from one of the additions to the book of Daniel that is found in the Greek Old Testament, but not in the Hebrew version. It’s best understood as an expansion of the content and theme of Psalm 148 where all creation is called upon to worship and give glory to God. In the narrative, this is a song put into the mouth of Daniel’s three companions which they sang in the midst of the fiery furnace. As a result, sometimes this will be referred to as “the song of the three young men.” In the former prayer books, this canticle was used as the first canticle during penitential seasons when the Te Deum was suppressed. That’s not because there’s anything penitential about it—it’s one of the most joyful canticles around! Rather it’s because this was the second canticle found in the pre-Reformation prymers and Books of Hours; if the Te Deum—which was the first canticle in them—was dropped, this one was next in line. Hence, the tradition grew that the Benedicite should replace the Te Deum, and it subsequently entered and formed the prayer book tradition.

Canticles 2 and 13 are “A Song of Praise” (Benedictus es, Domine). This song comes from the same place as the previous canticle and, actually, comes right before it in the text. While the first one calls all creation to bless God, this is an example of such a blessing. It praises God, envisioning him enthroned within a grand temple having aspects of the Temple in Jerusalem (dwelling “between the Cherubim” is a reference to the mercy seat on the Ark of the Covenant which was kept in the Holy of Holiest, the inmost part of the Jerusalem Temple”) but being located “in the firmament of heaven.”

Canticles 3 and 15 are “The Song of Mary” (Magnificat). This is one of the most beautiful songs in all of Scripture and is Mary’s response to the dual greeting from her cousin Elizabeth and the yet-unborn John the Baptist. Based in part on the Song of Hannah (1 Samuel 2:1-10) and with echoes of Psalm 138 and 146, it admirably anticipates Luke’s Beatitudes (Luke 6:20-26)—and, indeed, they are well worth studying together. In the pre-Reformation system, Evening Prayer (their Vespers) only had one canticle—and this was it. As a result, it became the standard third canticle, the one after the first reading of Evening Prayer. It still holds this first place in both Rite I and Rite II services of Evening Prayer.

Canticles 4 and 16 are “The Song of Zechariah” (Benedictus Dominus Deus). This song was sung by Zechariah, the husband of Elizabeth and father of John the Baptist, at the prophet’s birth. This was the standard second canticle of Morning Prayer and was the chief canticle of the pre-Reformation version. I’ve always found the second part of this song, in particular, especially meaningful. Through the voice of Zechariah, we who pray this are commissioned and reminded of our duty to spread the Gospel—and are given a convenient summary of it focusing on forgiveness, mercy, light, and walking in the paths of peace.

Canticles 5 and 17 are “The Song of Simeon” (Nunc dimittis). Simeon, having waited all his life to see the Messiah, holds the infant Jesus in his arms at the end of his days and sings this song. With its themes of ending and new beginning, a growing light and a coming peace, it was used in the pre-Reformation system at Compline, the Office just before sleep. Adapted into the prayer book system, it became the fixed fourth canticle, following the second reading of Evening Prayer.

Canticles 6 and 20 are the “Glory (be) to God” (Gloria in excelsis). While it begins with the song of the angels at the birth of Christ, the rest of the canticle is a composition from the Early Church. Familiar to most of the Western Church from its use at the beginning of the Eucharist, its appearance here is an Eastern element; this was the standard morning canticle for the Eastern Churches.

Canticles 7 and 21 are the “We Praise Thee/You” (Te Deum laudamus). Another composition of the Early Church, the Te Deum was sung at Matins on Sundays and festivals. At the Reformation, the prayer book appointed this as the first canticle of Morning Prayer every day of the year except for the 40 days of Lent. Its connection with festivals was strong enough that, by the early medieval period, the Te Deum was sometimes used with some additional suffrages as a celebratory liturgy.

Canticle 8—the first of the canticles only found in Rite II’s contemporary language—is “The Song of Moses” (Cantemus Domino). It is “especially suitable in Easter Season” because this is the song sung by Moses and the Israelites after their deliverance from Egypt through the Red Sea. The Red Sea passage has long been understood as a symbol of Baptism and resurrection, and this connection is stated explicitly in the Easter Vigil’s own victory song, the Exultet.

Canticle 9 is “The First Song of Isaiah” (Ecce, Deus). Coming from the prophet Isaiah, this song concludes his vision of the messianic age to come. This song is to be sung in celebration of the recognition of what God has accomplished and the salvation wrought through his messiah. For us, it ought to be a reminder that we stand in the midst of the “already/not yet”; God’s promises have been fulfilled in the person of Jesus, yet we do not always perceive the fulfilment of these promises. The use of this canticle is a sign of hope.

Canticle 10 is “The Second Song of Isaiah” (Quaerite Dominum). This song comes from a place towards the latter part of Isaiah. It closes out a section that encourages the people, exiled in Babylon, to return and rebuild Jerusalem again to its former glory. It urges them to seek the Lord and to trust in the fulfillment of the divine word at a point when many doubted that the city would ever be rebuilt and the land reclaimed. The language of repentance makes it particular suitable in penitential seasons.

Canticle 11 is “The Third Song of Isaiah” (Surge, Illuminare). This song from the end of Isaiah, also from the time at the end of the Exile (around 520 BC or so), exhorts the people with a vision of the rebuilt Jerusalem. This vision of a preternaturally brilliant city that calls the nations to it influenced Revelation’s vision of the New Jerusalem as the Bride of the Lamb and, subsequently, the theology of the Church as a New Jerusalem. The images of light connect it strongly to the themes of both Advent and Epiphany.

Canticle 14 is “A Song of Penitence” (Kyrie Pantokrator). This canticle comes from the brief apocryphal book, the Prayer of Manasseh. Manasseh was crowned as king of Judah at the age of twelve somewhere around 700 BC and reigned for 55 years. He has the dubious honor of being the most evil king to hold the throne of Judah. The narrative of his reign in 2 Kings 21 is a catalogue of idolatry and slaughter. The retelling of it in 2 Chronicles 33, however, includes a scene of his repentance and makes mention of a prayer where he humbled himself before God and received forgiveness of his sin. Although our composition is likely not this prayer itself, it certainly represents what the prayer could have been! It is, as the prayer book note suggests, the perfect canticle for Lent and for other penitential circumstances.

Canticle 18 is “A Song to the Lamb” (Dignus es). While the Book of Revelation is known for its apocalyptic imagery and its abuse by those who would read modern political events through it, it should be better known as the book of the New Testament that contains the most songs! This one comes from the description of the heavenly throne room. We are treated in Revelation 4 through 6 to a vision of the throne room of God, where a set of concentric circles of worshipers arrays the whole created order in a ceaseless song of praise to God and to the Lamb. This is the celebration of the saints and angels and all creation in thanksgiving for creation and redemption.

Canticle 19 is “The Song of the Redeemed” (Magna et mirabilia). In an interlude between acts of judgment and the seven last plagues, the seer John sees  the martyrs singing a song described as “the song of Moses, the servant of God and the song of the Lamb” (Rev 15:3). This canticle is that song. From the introduction, then, the author of Revelation intended this song to be in conscious continuity with our Canticle 8, the Song of Moses.

Alright… Now that we’ve gotten through all of these—how do we go about using them and what’s the best way to arrange them? What canticle should you use when—and why?

There are several ways of answering this question. Like so much about the prayer book, it depends on your tradition—and that, in turn, gives us the simplest answer. Does your parish pray the Office together? If so, it’s best to find out what pattern they go with and use it.

If not, there are a variety of choices. I’ll talk you through three of them.

The simplest is a traditional pattern that has the least amount of variation. As I mentioned in discussing the canticles, the prayer books up until the present one had a fairly fixed order. There were four readings, two at each Office, and a canticle after each reading. The first canticle was either the Te Deum or the Benedicite—depending on the season. The three Gospel Canticles, the Benedictus, the Magnificat, and the Nunc Dimittis were the second, third, and fourth canticles respectively. The reason why these canticles appear in these positions is based on how Cranmer consolidated the eight hours of prayer down into two: Morning Prayer received the Te Deum from Matins and the Benedictus from Lauds; Evening Prayer received the Magnificat from Vespers and the Nunc Dimittis from Compline. Thus, the simplest way to arrange the canticles is to use this basic pattern.

One of the more complex options is the way that the prayer book recommends. After the Offices themselves, a means of deploying all of the canticles appears on pages 144 and 145. We’ll start with the suggestions for Morning Prayer on page 144. The basic idea here is that the Old Testament lesson receives an Old Testament canticle, the New Testament lesson receives a New Testament/Early Church canticle.  Sunday and Feast days retain the traditional canticles, though not in the traditional order; Wednesday and Friday—the traditional fasting days—receive the more penitential materials, especially in Lent. Additionally, in Lent and Advent the Te Deum and Gloria are replaced by other options. The easiest way to use this chart is to write it in where you intend to use it. As a result, in several of my prayer books I’ve copied it into the blank space at the bottom of page 84, and have also written the appropriate days and seasons at the top of the canticles themselves. (Don’t be afraid of writing in your prayer book if it’ll help you use it!)

The suggestions for Evening Prayer on page 145 assume the use of two lessons at Evening Prayer. If you are only using one lesson, use the second column and alternate between the Magnificat and Nunc Dimittis. Otherwise, it alternates between the Magnificat and the Nunc Dimittis for the second canticle except on Sundays and Feast Days when both are used. On weekdays the first canticle rotates through a set of Old Testament options.

A third way to proceed is by a blend of these two. For those who want to retain the classical use of the Benedictus and the Magnificat but still experience the variety of new canticles that this prayer book offers, the Old Testament option for Morning Prayer can be followed with the Benedictus after the second lesson; the New Testament option for Morning Prayer can be used to follow the first lesson at Evening Prayer and the Magnificat used after the second lesson.

Out the Door

As the last post indicated, that was the final chunk of the Prayer Book Spirituality Project to be written. Late last night I got all of the pieces assembled and sent off to the good folks at Forward Movement. They’re glad to have it; I’m glad to be done with it for a while!

At points here people have suggested things that really needed to be added. Some of these I did add, others I’m on the fence about, others I said, “No, I really don’t have time or space to treat that…” Can I just tell you how hard that last response is for me to give?

As any project manager will tell you, one of the hardest impulses to reign in is “scope creep.” That’s the urge to add that one extra little feature…and the next one…and the next… Part of the discipline of a work like this—intended primarily as an introductory book for laity—is resisting the temptations to chase wild rabbits and, as most regular readers know, that’s really hard for me!

And, I must confess, even with the amount of saying no that I did, my resolve wasn’t quite as firm as it could have been… I originally pitched a paperback book that was about one hundred book pages (not MS Word pages, mind you). Your average regular book-shelf sized book page has roughly 350 words on it. The final tally for this stage was 82,222 words. If you do the math that’s right about 235 pages… Whoops!

As has been noted by Susan and others, though, I am not by nature a concise writer; there’s no telling how many words of solid content that actually represents! Oh well—we’ll see what the count is when the editors get done with it.