Certainly we need to recover our sense of purpose and redouble our resolve to follow in the footsteps of Jesus undergirded by deep theological reflection and action. And we can learn best how to do this from monastics like Basil, Benedict, Aidan, Francis and Nilus.  However, I think we need to critically reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of the way these saints lived their lives – and embrace their mysticism but eschew their monasticism.

I believe we should resist the call to pursue renewal through monasticism for ten reasons:

1. It has no biblical basis
2. It encourages self-abnegation.
3. It requires subordination to a hierarchy.
4. It typically involves separation from the community.
5. It principally involves imposition on the community.
6. That imposition may involve exploitation of the community.
7. The ‘monastic cycle’ tends to move from devotion to decadence.
8. Monastic organization makes monastics susceptible to appropriation.
9. Monastic isolation makes monastics vulnerable in times of persecution.
10. Last but not least, monasticism is unnecessary as a means of renewal.

1. Monasticism Has No Biblical Basis

It is clear that when Jesus chose his path, he had four options – the ‘pietist’ Pharisee option, the ‘realist’ Sadducee option, the ‘activist’ Zealot option and the ‘monastic’ Essene option – and he specifically and repeatedly rejected each of these options – including the ‘monastic’ option. Christ did not call his disciples to form a special holy order based on a rule, circumscribed by regulations, characterized by a daily rhythm of religious rituals monitored, managed and controlled by spiritual hierarchs.

2. Monasticism Encourages Self-abnegation

Jesus encouraged his disciples to break with family bonds which domesticated them, and to be willing to lay down their lives for the sake of the gospel (Matthew 10.37-39). But Christ did not encourage ‘unnatural renunciation of pleasure’, ‘un-filial self-immolation’, or ‘anti-family celibacy’ like many monastics do. He said the greatest commandment was to love God with your whole heart and ‘to love your neighbour as yourself’. (Matthew 22.38)

3. Monasticism Requires Subordination To A Hierarchy.

Erasmus said ‘the first and only vow we take in baptism (is) not to man, but to Christ’. And Christ expected his disciples to follow his example – and to serve others as he did. (Matthew 20.28) He explicitly forbade his followers to use anyone else’s willingness to serve as an opportunity to exercise control over others – as monastics – old and new – typically do. (Matthew 20.25-27) Rather, Christ came to abolish all hierarchies – even his own – by transforming his relationship with his disciples from ‘servants’ into ‘friends’.(John 15.15)

4. Monasticism Typically Involves Separation From The Community.

One of the major reasons given by New Monastics for the emergence of their new orders is to promote and support ‘relocation to the abandoned places in the Empire’ like the Old Monastics did. Which is great. We could do with more people like Basil in ‘Cappadocia’. However, the very nature of monasticism separates monastics from the communities in which they relocate and works against the process of incarnation they are committed to. Monasticism creates high caliber cadres of mission ‘for the people’ – not ‘of the people’.

5. Monasticism Principally Involves Imposition On The Community.

Chanequa Walker-Barnes, in her article, My Struggle with the New Monasticism, says ‘There’s a certain multiple personality disorder in New Monasticism.  On the one hand, there is sincere valuation of racial reconciliation, commitment to diverse communities, and willingness to hear the voices of people of color (hence, the invitation extended to an outsider like me to participate in this conversation). On the other, when people of color are invited to be part of New Monastic communities, it’s on pre-established terms. That is, the communities in which you live are not of our making. People of color are not unaccustomed to living in multifamily households. For many of us, the idea of shared space is fraught with loaded memories, including traumatic ones. Consequently, many of us will never be attracted to the structural conditions’ of the New Monasticism.[i]

6. In Monasticism Imposition May Involve Exploitation Of Community.

Voltaire saw monastics as ‘parasites’ living off the industry of the lay populace.[ii] As we have noted in Nilus’ story, by the end of the fifteenth century, monasteries in Russia had become very large, powerful, social institutions. The political power of the feudal state both supported and was buttressed by the church hirearchy. It was estimated that as much as one-third of the available arable land in Russia was controlled by the church through large monasteries. In fact, at one stage one monastery – the St. Sergius Monastery of the Trinity – had 100,000 peasants cultivating the estates it ran in 15 provinces.[iii]

7. In The ‘Monastic Cycle’ Devotion Tends To Move To Decadence.

Though some would argue St. Sergius was an exception rather than the monastic norm, Gordon Cosby argues that ‘groups organized around devotion and discipline tend to produce abundance, but ultimately that very success leads to…decadence.’ Cosby calls this historical pattern ‘the monastic cycle’. Cosby says this cycle can be seen repeated again and again in monastic movements from the Dominicans through to the Jesuits. And over time even the abbots of St. Benedict became ‘unenterprising, upper-class parasites’[iv]

8. Monastic Organization Are Susceptible To Institutional Appropriation

The patriarchal, hierarchical, and traditional organization of most monastic movements make monastics vulnerable to the institutional ecclesiastical appropriation of their order.  As we have noted in Francis’ story, he turned his religious movement into a religious order. He traveled to Rome and negotiated with the Pope for permission to organise his Friars Minor as an ‘apostolic religious order’. When Francis opposed the Pope’s call for a Crusade and traveled to Egypt to persuade the Crusaders to lay down their arms, the Pope appointed a Vicar-General to take control of his order and institute a revised set of rules which were more suitable to the Pope’s requirements. Thus Francis was displaced from his own order, the Franciscans were co-opted by the church and the Friars Minor became a tool that the church was later able to use in persecuting heretics during the inquisition.[v]

9. Monastic Isolation Makes Monastics Vulnerable During Persecution

There is protection in being part of community. But monastics tend to see themselves as ‘missionaries’ to the community rather than as ‘members’ of the community and are seen by the community as such. So during times of persecution, monastics are ‘sitting ducks’. The Nestorians, who took the gospel as far as Afghanistan, Tibet and China, were wiped out almost completely because their monastics lived apart from their communities and were easily identified and destroyed by those who were inimical to Christianity. [vi]

10. Monasticism Is Totally Unnecessary As A Means Of Renewal.

I would like to suggest a New Monasticism is totally unnecessary. Everything that my friend Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrave says that we need to do in order to recover our sense of purpose and redouble our resolve to follow in the footsteps of Jesus undergirded by deep theological reflection and action could be accomplished through a New Mysticism rather than a New Monasticism.

See my new book Out And Out published by Mosaic Melbourne 2012