Monastic Separateness & Engagement (part 3): Monasticism in Society

[This series of posts, “The Elements of Monasticism” asks the question, what exactly is monasticism? “Separateness & Engagement” will unfold in a series of 4 posts (links: 1, 2, 3, 4).]

A gem from Father Louis (aka Thomas Merton), in case you missed it a few weeks ago:

The monastery is neither a museum nor an asylum. The monk remains in the world from which the monk has fled, and the monk remains a potent, though hidden, force in that world. Beyond all the works which may accidentally attach themselves to the vocation, the monk acts on the world simply by being a monk. The presence of contemplatives is, to the world, what the presence of yeast is to dough … if the monk stands, in some sense, above the divisions of human society, that does not mean the monk has no place in the history of nations. The monk has always been, and always will be, by the vocation, sympathetic to any social and cultural movement that favors the growth of the human spirit.

From historical context to historical context, tradition to tradition, monastery to monastery, abbess to abbess, monk to monk, the truth is more complex than the assumptions in part 2 suggest. While Ariana Huffington’s casual critique (see part 1) of the idios kosmos of the monastery might more precisely be leveled at hermits (but seriously, can’t we just leave them alone?), one has to wonder:

What is the role of monasticism in society?

A correspondent of Thomas Merton’s, Discalced Carmelite hermit William McNamara (founder of the first Roman Catholic hermitic community in the United States), has written a fantastic piece on the “Prophetic Role of Monasticism“:

The monk is not a special kind of person; everyone is a special kind of monk, because the central and deepest human impulse is monastic. Monos means one, and the wayfaring human person finds oneness only by tracking Christ through deserts and dark nights into Glory. Nevertheless, a culture needs a sacred center, and the monastery provides an entry to that center, from which society derives essential clues to the mystery of its destiny.

Even if we’re not tracking Christ, per se, how can a secular monasticism serve as an entryway to the sacred center of an increasingly technological, interfaith society? Or can it?

When we talk about the value of a monastery to the society it’s a part of, there are a few different (though not mutually exclusive) possible perspectives:

Quietism: Monasteries have no direct value to society. The point of a monastery is to be disengaged from society. If society benefits from this (e.g. in seeing itself reflected somehow in the monastery), that is great for society, but it’s not the point.

Dying way of life: Whatever role they may have once played, monasteries have lost their relevance to the technological, developed, secular world. Nice while they lasted.

Asylums: Monasteries are homes for monks, mystics and other insane people [Sorry Father Louis].  See also “Mystic Storage.”

Survival of the Fittingest: Whatever monasteries may once have been, they are evolving, just as business has evolved, government has evolved, and the social sector has evolved. They fill a unique niche in society (e.g. the responsibly governed spiritual community niche), AND they are themselves a unique niche for certain people in society (they are home to certain people that would otherwise find it difficult to find a truly fitting place, and without which there would be many people deemed socially inept, deviant, useless)… a subtly distinct view from saying “monasteries are asylums”.

Activism: Monasteries are a part of a society. On one level, the monastics residing within are often called upon, out of uncommon stillness, to extraordinary activism. On a deeper level, monasteries reflect the values and conscience of a society. McNamara writes:

…There is an intimate relationship between real, live monasticism and the socio-political world. Seen in historical context, the vows of obedience and poverty originally represented ways of transcending and criticizing a conventional loyalty to status quo power arrangements and the reification of people in servitude to an unjust economic system. In the past the monastic vows exemplified a quality of relationship and communal equity undreamt of by either, the oppressed victims or their masters.

Politics is, after all, the science of the possible. Monasticism should be a real alternative, and thus make an enormous contribution to the future direction of political and economic organization.

…We take vows to overcome the slavery of modern utilitarianism. Most of us are enslaved: we are workers instead of men and women. Monastic life ought to be the most dangerous, the most difficult and the most wonderful, exciting adventure in the world. What’s wrong with monastic life today? In great monastic orders there is no creative subversion, no counterculture. Monastic orders are, for the most part, locked into serving the petrified conventions and institutions of contemporary society that cause the disease and frustration that are sickening so many people and rendering them impotent. We cannot survive on banality; we need firsthand experience of primordial truth.

…[M]onkishness is an indispensable and ineluctable dimension of every human being.

Economic Actors: Monasteries are real economic actors in a real marketplace. They produce, consume, demand, and supply. They have a rational self interest, and serve the rational (and trans-rational) self interest of their inhabitants.

Antechamber to another life: “The power base of monasticism is other-worldliness,” says McNamara. Monasteries offer us a glimpse of another world (whether you interpret that to mean something recognizably spiritual, or merely a life where you’re more whole, compassionate, aware, wise, awake, communal, human, alive etc.), and the rites of passage to get there.

Intentional Communities: Whatever role monasteries may once have played, they are now just one of a handful of types of intentional community, which we might divide into communities of interest, communities of practice, and communities of place such as communes, ecovillages, student cooperatives, land co-ops, cohousing groups, ashrams, kibbutzes, and farming collectives, co-working facilities. As such, they train humans to live together in harmony,

Retreat Centers for Contemplative Creatives: The growing class of “Contemplative Creatives” needs a place to escape to, even for a week or two.

Universities of Practice/Museums: It is important that there be institutions devoted to spiritual/contemplative practice alone—what we might call “universities of practice”.  It is important that there be a repository of culture, texts, and debate outside of academia.  [Sorry again, Father Louis]

Time Capsules: Whatever relevance monasteries have to the technological, developed, secular world, we should keep them around in case civilization collapses. They may help us through a coming dark age, the way they helped us through the last dark ages.

Subtlism: Regardless of whether monastics are actively engaged in society, a monastery serves a valuable function in society merely by existing. It is important that somewhere in the world, there are humans devoted entirely to the attainment of stillness, awakening, peace, etc. and that their efforts ripple out to the rest of society: directly, in that we in society can draw inspiration and peace just from knowing that there are people out there doing this, and indirectly, through the indeterminate and subtle impacts they might make.

Fourth Sector Organizations: Monasteries in some ways gave birth to the growing fourth sector:

[From the website]: Over the past few decades, the boundaries between the public (government), private (business), and social (non-profit) sectors have been blurring as many pioneering organizations have been blending social and environmental aims with business approaches.

There are many expressions of this trend, including corporate social responsibility, microfinance, venture philanthropy, sustainable businesses, social enterprise, privatization, community development and others. As this activity matures, it is becoming formalized as a ‘Fourth Sector’ of the economy. To better understand the emergence of the Fourth Sector, it is helpful to study recent shifts in organizational behavior across the three traditional sectors.

Businesses are dedicating more resources to delivering social and environmental benefits. Cause-based marketing, the triple bottom line, and corporate social responsibility are a few of the buzzwords that have come into usage in recent years as part of this trend. Meanwhile, public and social sector organizations are attempting to operate in a more businesslike method.

Quadruple-Bottom-Line Corporations: People, planet, profit… & spirit? From society’s perspective, monasteries are corporations that responsibly maximize financial capital, human capital, natural capital, and spiritual capital.

[This series of posts, “The Elements of Monasticism” asks the question, what exactly is monasticism? “Separateness & Engagement” will unfold in a series of 4 posts (links: 1, 2, 3, 4).]

A gem from Father Louis (aka Thomas Merton), in case you missed it a few weeks ago:

The monastery is neither a museum nor an asylum. The monk remains in the world from which the monk has fled, and the monk remains a potent, though hidden, force in that world. Beyond all the works which may accidentally attach themselves to the vocation, the monk acts on the world simply by being a monk. The presence of contemplatives is, to the world, what the presence of yeast is to dough … if the monk stands, in some sense, above the divisions of human society, that does not mean the monk has no place in the history of nations. The monk has always been, and always will be, by the vocation, sympathetic to any social and cultural movement that favors the growth of the human spirit.

From historical context to historical context, tradition to tradition, monastery to monastery, abbess to abbess, monk to monk, the truth is more complex than the assumptions in part 2 suggest. While Ariana Huffington’s casual critique (see part 1) of the idios kosmos of the monastery might more precisely be leveled at hermits (but seriously, can’t we just leave them alone?), one has to wonder:

What is the role of monasticism in society?

A correspondent of Thomas Merton’s, Discalced Carmelite hermit William McNamara (founder of the first Roman Catholic hermitic community in the United States), has written a fantastic piece on the “Prophetic Role of Monasticism“:

The monk is not a special kind of person; everyone is a special kind of monk, because the central and deepest human impulse is monastic. Monos means one, and the wayfaring human person finds oneness only by tracking Christ through deserts and dark nights into Glory. Nevertheless, a culture needs a sacred center, and the monastery provides an entry to that center, from which society derives essential clues to the mystery of its destiny.

Even if we’re not tracking Christ, per se, how can a secular monasticism serve as an entryway to the sacred center of an increasingly technological, interfaith society? Or can it?

When we talk about the value of a monastery to the society it’s a part of, there are a few different (though not mutually exclusive) possible perspectives:

Quietism: Monasteries have no direct value to society. The point of a monastery is to be disengaged from society. If society benefits from this (e.g. in seeing itself reflected somehow in the monastery), that is great for society, but it’s not the point.

Dying way of life: Whatever role they may have once played, monasteries have lost their relevance to the technological, developed, secular world. Nice while they lasted.

Asylums: Monasteries are homes for monks, mystics and other insane people [Sorry Father Louis].  See also “Mystic Storage.”

Survival of the Fittingest: Whatever monasteries may once have been, they are evolving, just as business has evolved, government has evolved, and the social sector has evolved. They fill a unique niche in society (e.g. the responsibly governed spiritual community niche), AND they are themselves a unique niche for certain people in society (they are home to certain people that would otherwise find it difficult to find a truly fitting place, and without which there would be many people deemed socially inept, deviant, useless)… a subtly distinct view from saying “monasteries are asylums”.

Activism: Monasteries are a part of a society. On one level, the monastics residing within are often called upon, out of uncommon stillness, to extraordinary activism. On a deeper level, monasteries reflect the values and conscience of a society. McNamara writes:

…There is an intimate relationship between real, live monasticism and the socio-political world. Seen in historical context, the vows of obedience and poverty originally represented ways of transcending and criticizing a conventional loyalty to status quo power arrangements and the reification of people in servitude to an unjust economic system. In the past the monastic vows exemplified a quality of relationship and communal equity undreamt of by either, the oppressed victims or their masters.

Politics is, after all, the science of the possible. Monasticism should be a real alternative, and thus make an enormous contribution to the future direction of political and economic organization.

…We take vows to overcome the slavery of modern utilitarianism. Most of us are enslaved: we are workers instead of men and women. Monastic life ought to be the most dangerous, the most difficult and the most wonderful, exciting adventure in the world. What’s wrong with monastic life today? In great monastic orders there is no creative subversion, no counterculture. Monastic orders are, for the most part, locked into serving the petrified conventions and institutions of contemporary society that cause the disease and frustration that are sickening so many people and rendering them impotent. We cannot survive on banality; we need firsthand experience of primordial truth.

…[M]onkishness is an indispensable and ineluctable dimension of every human being.

Economic Actors: Monasteries are real economic actors in a real marketplace. They produce, consume, demand, and supply. They have a rational self interest, and serve the rational (and trans-rational) self interest of their inhabitants.

Antechamber to another life: “The power base of monasticism is other-worldliness,” says McNamara. Monasteries offer us a glimpse of another world (whether you interpret that to mean something recognizably spiritual, or merely a life where you’re more whole, compassionate, aware, wise, awake, communal, human, alive etc.), and the rites of passage to get there.

Intentional Communities: Whatever role monasteries may once have played, they are now just one of a handful of types of intentional community, which we might divide into communities of interest, communities of practice, and communities of place such as communes, ecovillages, student cooperatives, land co-ops, cohousing groups, ashrams, kibbutzes, and farming collectives, co-working facilities. As such, they train humans to live together in harmony,

Retreat Centers for Contemplative Creatives: The growing class of “Contemplative Creatives” needs a place to escape to, even for a week or two.

Universities of Practice/Museums: It is important that there be institutions devoted to spiritual/contemplative practice alone—what we might call “universities of practice”.  It is important that there be a repository of culture, texts, and debate outside of academia.  [Sorry again, Father Louis]

Time Capsules: Whatever relevance monasteries have to the technological, developed, secular world, we should keep them around in case civilization collapses. They may help us through a coming dark age, the way they helped us through the last dark ages.

Subtlism: Regardless of whether monastics are actively engaged in society, a monastery serves a valuable function in society merely by existing. It is important that somewhere in the world, there are humans devoted entirely to the attainment of stillness, awakening, peace, etc. and that their efforts ripple out to the rest of society: directly, in that we in society can draw inspiration and peace just from knowing that there are people out there doing this, and indirectly, through the indeterminate and subtle impacts they might make.

Fourth Sector Organizations: Monasteries in some ways gave birth to the growing fourth sector:

[From the website]: Over the past few decades, the boundaries between the public (government), private (business), and social (non-profit) sectors have been blurring as many pioneering organizations have been blending social and environmental aims with business approaches.

There are many expressions of this trend, including corporate social responsibility, microfinance, venture philanthropy, sustainable businesses, social enterprise, privatization, community development and others. As this activity matures, it is becoming formalized as a ‘Fourth Sector’ of the economy. To better understand the emergence of the Fourth Sector, it is helpful to study recent shifts in organizational behavior across the three traditional sectors.

Businesses are dedicating more resources to delivering social and environmental benefits. Cause-based marketing, the triple bottom line, and corporate social responsibility are a few of the buzzwords that have come into usage in recent years as part of this trend. Meanwhile, public and social sector organizations are attempting to operate in a more businesslike method.

Quadruple-Bottom-Line Corporations: People, planet, profit… & spirit? From society’s perspective, monasteries are corporations that responsibly maximize financial capital, human capital, natural capital, and spiritual capital.