Tag Archives: Monasticism

Informal Monasticism

Posted on by
16

One occasionally finds unconventional monastic communities, some in mainstream Catholicism and others in a completely “independent” situation. I have even come across people living in some kind of religious life inspired by that of hermits, even though in some cases they are married or live in an ordinary suburban home or a farm out in the countryside.

In the Rule of St Benedict, we find:

It is well known that there are four kinds of Monks. The first are Cenobites, that is Monastic, living under a Rule or Abbot. The second are Anchorets or Hermits, who, not in the first fervour of conversion, but after long probation in the monastic life, have learnt to fight against the devil, and taught by the encouragement of others, are now able by God’s assistance to strive hand to hand against the flesh and evil thoughts, and so go forth well prepared, from the army of the Brotherhood, to the single combat of the wilderness. The third and worst kind of Monks are the Sarabites, who have never been tried under any Rule, nor by the experience of a master, as gold is tried in the furnace, but being soft as lead, and by their works still cleaving to the world, are known by their tonsure to lie to God.

These in twos or threes, or perhaps singly, and without a shepherd, are shut up, not in our Lord’s sheepfolds, but in their own: the pleasure of their desires is to them a law; and whatever they like or make choice of, they will have to be holy, but what they like not, that they consider unlawful.

The fourth kind of Monks are called “Gyrovagi,” or wanderers, who travel about all their lives through divers provinces, and stay for two or three days as guests, first in one monastery, then in another; they are always roving, and never settled, giving themselves up altogether to their own pleasures and to the enticements of gluttony, and are in all things worse that the Sarabites. Of their miserable way of life it is better to be silent than to speak. Therefore leaving these, let us, by God’s assistance, set down a Rule for Cenobites, or Conventuals, who are the most steadfast class of Monks.

Despite this piece of wisdom from the sixth century, there have always been new and innovative forms of contemplative life, as attested by the multiplicity of orders and congregations in the Church, between Benedictines, Cistercians, Franciscans, Jesuits and many others. One of our regular commenters informed us about other forms of eremitical and “informal” monastic life. We should certainly heed the words of St Benedict as he warns against unattached monks or those who live in a community with very little in the way of monastic formation or a coherent rule of life. The soundest form of monastic life is in a proper community under the authority of a Father Abbot and the Rule. But, it is not always possible to join a monastery or find the right kind of official framework for every single person who desires to explore a more interior and ordered spiritual life, especially those who are married.

A very few are called to solitary life, and others yet find themselves as isolated Christians in a world that has rejected Christianity. I can conceive of the idea of lay people and isolated priests living what amounts to a monastic life even though they are not formally monks – simply those who want a simple way of life, under the discipline of a rule of life and of a certain temperament. Many people live this state of life in ordinary homes, without any external sign, and even better still, without anyone else knowing.

I came across some kind of fraternity which is not in communion with Rome or part of the Anglican Continuum, but something about them rings true. Regardless of what some “vagante” bishop and his wife are doing in some far-flung and remote part of America, they came up with an idea that can inspire us all in some way. Anyone with this kind of vocation can adjust his or her way of life and construct a disciplined contemplative life. The website of the fraternity explains – Our community has no formal vows, but is based on the simple monastic form of the early desert fathers/mothers, and is primarily friendship based. Do I not detect a note of St Philip Neri and the Oratorians, though the Oratorians like Benedictine monks live in stable communities in a coenobitic life? The link between Christians is not a vow, whereby a person freely relinquishes his or her freedom (!), but friendship and loyalty between persons who practice Christian charity and platonic friendship with each other.

The spirituality of the desert isn’t given to everyone, but I think it can be lived in differing degrees. Few of us can get to a place that is really deserted, except perhaps the few churches in cities that remain open. My desert is the sea. Go out about a league from the coast and the silence (other than the gurgling of water around the hull of the boat and the wind) is amazing. But the real desert is our own inner selves, our souls and secret gardens. No one can violate that!

charles de foucauld Informal MonasticismWe may know the story of Fr. Charles de Foucauld, the French convert soldier who took to the most austere possible monastic life in the Sahara Desert. In those days (1907), he had to have permission from the Holy See to say Mass alone. Before obtaining this permission, he had gone for years without Mass and the Sacraments! His life was incredibly harsh, even for a former soldier, but his message was clear – his vocation was one of intercession and obtaining for others the grace of conversion by means of prayer and self-sacrifice. In 1916, he was assassinated by fanatical Muslims at the door of his hermitage! In the whole of his time in the desert as a priest and a monk, he made not one single convert, and not one single person came to join him in the monastic life.

The apostolate of Blessed Charles was unique and prophetic. He refused to preach the Gospel to a population who would have only a superficial interest in the Holy Scriptures. His way was a silent and hidden presence in infidel lands. "My life is not that of a missionary, but that of a hermit". Further on, he said: "I am a monk, not a missionary, made for silence and not for words". One might be tempted to think he was selfish and unconcerned for the people around him. Not at all. He gave everything for his dear nomads, without asking for anything in return, not even conversion to Christianity. He knew the limits of proselytism. He lived in a country of Islamic people, learned their language, made himself loved.

I would certainly recommend thinking about this idea, and how a spiritual leaven can help to renew Christianity and Catholicism at a time when parishes and dioceses agonise and face their inevitable demise. All are called to holiness, but differently. But, the constraints and conditions are remarkably similar. People can be really good and welcoming even if they belong to other religions or no religion at all. It is not for us to sell our Faith, but to wait for others to discover what effect it has in us. That is the lesson of Father de Foucauld.

Seeds need time to grow, but first of all, they need to be planted.

* * *

Be sure to follow our Moderator at Eccentric Bliss, his personal blog!

From the Inside or the Outside?

Posted on by
12

Going through some of the religious websites I look at once in a while, I occasionally find interesting reflections on Religioscope run by Dr Jean-François Mayer of the University of Fribourg. There are articles in English and French on this site. The tone is quiet and non-polemical, which makes me think that some of the reflections will be all the more credible for it. Now, I will touch on a real hot potato. That is the issue of trying to convert the world to Christianity by political means. I’ll point my finger to the Americans and the French, but there are culprits for other places too.

The particular article I find of interest is United States: sociologist finds Christian activism and politics ineffective and damaging. In other words, does throwing a hand grenade into an abortion clinic do something to promote the Gospel, any more than Guy Fawkes’ intention to destroy the English King and Government by blowing them up? Do violence and bitterness witness to the love of Christ?

I don’t know anything about the ideas or beliefs of this sociologist by the name of  James Davison Hunter, but the article rings a bell in my mind. Pope Leo XIII saw problems in American religion and came up with the concept of Americanism, denounced by Testem Benevolentiae Nostrae of 1898. Ironically, Americanism began, not in the United States, but in France when Leo XIII asked Catholics to accept the Republic and not to make too much use of activism and politics. We find something in common between France and the USA to explain the extreme polarisation and dialectic way of looking at things.

I have observed many fine ideas among intellectuals in both France and America promoting action in the cultural dimension and in politics. We often feel that we need to resort to such activism to combat the increasing secularism in issues like abortion, feminism and the gay agenda. However, the more Catholics and other Christians fight and show hostility, the more anti-clericalism grows among ordinary and otherwise fair-minded people.

As activists, we will certainly have less and less influence. When I saw the photo of a Catholic priest being dragged away from an American University, because President Obama had been invited to give a speech, it rather turned my stomach. The priest was looking for some kind of “martyrdom”, but did that piece of witness convert anyone to Christianity?

Something that has caught my attention here in France, a country where parish life in most places is nearly dead, is the fact that contemplative monasteries are full. And, not only the traditionalist communities using the Latin liturgy, but many other communities giving priority to contemplation and the other-worldly life. France is a country where there have been many innovations in religious life.

Some of us know the story of Blessed Charles de Foucauld, the French convert soldier who took to the most austere possible monastic life in the Sahara Desert. In those days (1907), he had to have permission from the Holy See to say Mass alone. Before obtaining this permission, he had gone for years without Mass and the Sacraments! His life was incredibly harsh, even for a former soldier, but his message was clear – his vocation was one of intercession and obtaining for others the grace of conversion by means of prayer and self-sacrifice. In 1916, he was assassinated by fanatical Muslims at the door of his hermitage! In the whole of his time in the desert as a priest and a monk, he made not one single convert, and not one single person came to join him in the monastic life.

The apostolate of Blessed Charles was unique and prophetic. He refused to preach the Gospel to a population who would have only a superficial interest in the Holy Scriptures. His way was a silent and hidden presence in infidel lands. "My life is not that of a missionary, but that of a hermit." Further on, he said: "I am a monk, not a missionary, made for silence and not for words." One might be tempted to think he was selfish and unconcerned for the people around him. Not at all. He gave everything for his dear nomads, without asking for anything in return, not even conversion to Christianity. He knew the limits of proselytism. He lived in a country of Islamic people, learned their language, made himself loved.

That priest lived his contemplative life in an absolutely hostile environment. What we need to live in our hostile environment (whether we are attacked or ignored) is a new form of contemplative life, open not only to monks and nuns, but also to secular priests and lay people. Of course, there have always been Third Orders in most religious communities for centuries. There used to be confraternities of penitents and all sorts of ways to help people structure a disciplined religious life. In some places these confraternities still exist and their members are very serious in their commitment.

Only a couple of days ago, Pope Benedict XVI had these profound words to say:

In terms of what we today can discover in this message, attacks against the Pope or the Church do not only come from outside; rather the sufferings of the Church come from within, from the sins that exist in the Church. This too has always been known, but today we see it in a really terrifying way: the greatest persecution of the Church does not come from enemies on the outside, but is born from the sin within the church, the Church therefore has a deep need to re-learn penance, to accept purification, to learn on one hand forgiveness but also the need for justice. Forgiveness is not a substitute for justice. In one word we have to re-learn these essentials: conversion, prayer, penance, and the theological virtues. That is how we respond, and we need to be realistic in expecting that evil will always attack, from within and from outside, but the forces of good are also always present, and finally the Lord is stronger than evil and the Virgin Mary is for us the visible maternal guarantee that the will of God is always the last word in history.

I am brought to think of the great Saint Benedict who civilised the world through monasteries and the contemplative life. We can retreat to the desert, the mountains or the sea – or we can go into the cities and identify with the poor, living according to the way of St Francis of Assisi. In all things, we need to rediscover simplicity and prayer.

Perhaps hard-selling as a method of evangelisation works in some places, but not here in Europe. People are cynical and case hardened. The more we push, the more they will kick against the pricks to borrow the expression of Acts ix.5.

I would say we Christians would have a greater chance of doing good through our “faithful presence” like Fr Charles of the Desert and seek the common good through our respective vocations. Sometimes, circumstances will allow us to establish schools, hospitals and businesses that put people and jobs before obscene wealth for the few. That is something contemplative Christians have always done when they got half a chance. The liturgy, a prayerful life and self-effacing service to humanity do more than anything else to propagate the Gospel and make Christ credible.

* * *

Be sure to follow our Moderator at Eccentric Bliss, his personal blog!

Nashdom Abbey

Posted on by
18

Mentioning Dom Gregory Dix (1901-1952) brought me to do some "googling" for Nashdom Abbey (Buckinghamshire, England), an Anglican Benedictine community of monks, which in the 1960's became liberal and dwindled to the point of closing. The building is now divided into apartments, but the crucifixes and monks' cemetery have been respected. Here is an interesting article on this "Anglo-Papalist Titanic".

Tightly disciplined monasticism was somehow suffused with the culture of a slightly racy country club, with occasional music around the piano from the London shows in the evenings. This was Barbara Pym’s world of cassocks on the lawn, priests who called people “my dear” with dry sherry in urbane huddles. Women’s ordination was as unthinkable as moon landings. Their defining Chicken Little Big Issue was the Church of South India.

A further cynical comment, seemingly resigned to the permanence of secularism and "progress", characterises this ghost from the past.

It’s hard to believe it now, but perfectly intelligent members of the English Upper Crust obsessed about Rome and measured their swelling triumph by the number of bishops they could get to wear copes and mitres! Somehow serious intellectual and pastoral work coexisted with the Wodehouse stuff. The community took as its special intention what was quaintly called “Corporate Reunion” — a top table institutional merger with Rome that would reunite the upper echelons of Christendom and, incidentally, dish the Nonconformists along the way. It all seems like a glint in the eye of John Betjeman’s teddy bear now. Like its secular counterpart over the road at Cliveden, the bottom fell out of this world in the 1960’s. Rising bills, the white heat of technology and Vatican II undermined the whole fantasy upon which it was predicated. All things must pass, and all that is left now are ghosts on the lawn.

dom gregory dix Nashdom AbbeyIt is sad to see a sincere attempt at monastic life trashed in such a trite fashion, as wrote Peter Anson in Building up the Waste Places. How interesting that this community was so interested in corporate reunion and this was the keynote of their contemplative life.

I don't know what lessons can be learned from such an experience. Monasticism is far from dead – far from it. The French Congregation of Solesmes is prospering and has a foundation at Clear Creek, Oklahoma in the States. Many of these monasteries have adopted the old liturgy. There are also religious houses of other Orders rediscovering the old liturgical traditions. The dispositions of John Paul II in Ecclesia Dei adflicta and Benedict XVI in Summorum Pontificum have done more than anything else to reboot traditional monastic life. Those communities are booming!

Perhaps it is the English thirst for moderation and baulking at asceticism. Our perpetual oscillating between white-hot fervour and fanaticism, on one hand, and via media lukewarmness, on the other, will always be a stumbling stone.

I do believe that attempts have been made to build up the monastic life in Continuing Anglicanism. I heard of some Oratorians of the Good Shepherd and some Augustinians in Canada. There is a significant convent of nuns in the TAC. I have even heard of married Dominicans – which seems right beyond the pale. I hardly see how a married man can be in monastic vows, though he can be a secular oblate.

Has anyone any comments of the present state of religious / monastic life in the TAC? And in Anglicanism in general?

* * *

Be sure to follow our Moderator at Eccentric Bliss, his personal blog!