I first encountered Dreher when he was being promoted in the secular press as the greatest Catholic intellectual since St. Augustine of Hippo.
I actually purchased his "The Benedict Option" only to cast it aside because his "insights" aren't deep. They aren't even superficial. Bad theology wrapped up in bad politics, wrapped up in a gen…
I first encountered Dreher when he was being promoted in the secular press as the greatest Catholic intellectual since St. Augustine of Hippo.
I actually purchased his "The Benedict Option" only to cast it aside because his "insights" aren't deep. They aren't even superficial. Bad theology wrapped up in bad politics, wrapped up in a genuinely parochial, self centered vision of the world. Even the subtitle of the book gets everything wrong. There can't be a Post-Christian nation when there never was a "Christian" nation, in any meaningful sense of the word, to start with. Not to mention that we are living in a largely non-Christian world. There is no such thing as "Christianity" there are only Christianities.
St. Anthony of Egypt, setting the pattern for those who would flee the world, fled to the desert not because the secular world had become so evil (which it always was!)--- but as Christianity had spread in popularity it had become corrupt and incapable of delivering the tools of spiritual combat required for salvation. In fact the growing church had begun to disarm itself from spiritual combat altogether and finally, many decades later, simply becoming a political tool of the Empire. In other words the monastic impulse is not rooted so much in a retreat from the world as it is in the spiritual confrontation with the self.
The problem with the "Desert Fathers and Mothers" was the danger of delusion, mental disorder and an aberrant form of confirmation bias that lead further from baseline Christian virtues. Extremists always carry that demon in their breast.
St. Benedict and Saint Basil creatively responded to these dangers by establishing rules, that while distancing their sons and daughters from the distractions of "the world", also instilled a prudent moderation in ascetic practice. I will leave aside here the eventual corruption that led to reformers like St. Bernard, St. Francis and St. Dominic to creatively seek monastic renewal in their own time. The strongest periods of religious vitality were led by men and women creatively adapting to the changing world in which they lived and never by leaders trying to lead their flocks back into an irretrievable golden age of faith. To be honest Benedict is no longer an option for the serious Christian.
In contrast to Dreher (BA in Journalism) there is a lovely book by Patrick Henry [AB Harvard (history), MA Oxford (theology), PhD (history of Christianity) and probably studied under the great Jaroslav Pelikan] has written a lovely response called "The Benedictine OPTIONS." As the name suggests he offers a pluralistic, life embracing and world facing, and more authentic, approach to the Benedictine tradition that Dreher rides over rough shod in order to ennoble his white, Eurocentric male grievances.
I am so excited to read the book you suggested. Studying abroad I had the pleasure of visiting the birthplace of St. Bernard, Assisi in Italy, and through sheer luck ended up living a stones throw from a Carmelite monastery in one place and a Benedictine monastery in another. I didn't read the Benedict Option, but I was unnerved by the pretense when I read about it because my parents had attempted to "Benedict option" their family before that was a thing. (Move to a rural setting, homeschool, only hang out with others they deems "Catholic enough"). In my experience, self-imposed isolation because the rest of the world isn't "good enough" breeds a degree of narcissism I have yet to encounter in any corner of secular culture. It had nothing in common with the hospitality I experienced in monastic communities, the rejection of the materialism so vividly frescoed over the walls of Assisi's basilica, or the warmth that radiates from those committed to communal living.
"the rejection of the materialism so vividly frescoed over the walls of Assisi's basilica"- but those glorious frescoes give the Basilica of St. Francis a sort of lavishness that's quite a contrast to the Carceri hermitage. Franciscan churches seem often to have more simplicity than many others -- but not always.
One odd thing struck me in my study of Granada in Spain, which I hope to visit someday: The extravagantly gold-plated Basilica de San Juan de Dios was built to honor someone who devoted himself to selfless service to the poor and sick and homeless. It's a bit jarring when you think about it. Across Christendom there are many opulent churches built to honor lives of humble simplicity and service to the unfortunate. The word "hypocrisy"might come to mind. On the other hand, those lavishly decorated churches have brought enjoyment to millions of people (most of them not poor) over the centuries.
I have to admit, the smaller stone churches surrounding Assisi radiate a peacefulness that I didn't get from the Basilica. My favorite part of the visit was walking around the town and countryside early in the morning and exploring some of the humbler sites. Then I went to Rome, and I've joked that Assisi ruined the Roman churches for me. I went straight from Assisi to Rome, and the first church I visited was the Jesuit Church. The contrast between the Baroque, gold-plated everything style and Assisi was so, so jarring. Saint Peter's the next day felt equally discombobulating. I do have a fondness for the Gothic Cathedrals in France that that are mostly stone and stained glass, but the Baroque churches make me feel vaguely panicked!
I first encountered Dreher when he was being promoted in the secular press as the greatest Catholic intellectual since St. Augustine of Hippo.
I actually purchased his "The Benedict Option" only to cast it aside because his "insights" aren't deep. They aren't even superficial. Bad theology wrapped up in bad politics, wrapped up in a genuinely parochial, self centered vision of the world. Even the subtitle of the book gets everything wrong. There can't be a Post-Christian nation when there never was a "Christian" nation, in any meaningful sense of the word, to start with. Not to mention that we are living in a largely non-Christian world. There is no such thing as "Christianity" there are only Christianities.
St. Anthony of Egypt, setting the pattern for those who would flee the world, fled to the desert not because the secular world had become so evil (which it always was!)--- but as Christianity had spread in popularity it had become corrupt and incapable of delivering the tools of spiritual combat required for salvation. In fact the growing church had begun to disarm itself from spiritual combat altogether and finally, many decades later, simply becoming a political tool of the Empire. In other words the monastic impulse is not rooted so much in a retreat from the world as it is in the spiritual confrontation with the self.
The problem with the "Desert Fathers and Mothers" was the danger of delusion, mental disorder and an aberrant form of confirmation bias that lead further from baseline Christian virtues. Extremists always carry that demon in their breast.
St. Benedict and Saint Basil creatively responded to these dangers by establishing rules, that while distancing their sons and daughters from the distractions of "the world", also instilled a prudent moderation in ascetic practice. I will leave aside here the eventual corruption that led to reformers like St. Bernard, St. Francis and St. Dominic to creatively seek monastic renewal in their own time. The strongest periods of religious vitality were led by men and women creatively adapting to the changing world in which they lived and never by leaders trying to lead their flocks back into an irretrievable golden age of faith. To be honest Benedict is no longer an option for the serious Christian.
In contrast to Dreher (BA in Journalism) there is a lovely book by Patrick Henry [AB Harvard (history), MA Oxford (theology), PhD (history of Christianity) and probably studied under the great Jaroslav Pelikan] has written a lovely response called "The Benedictine OPTIONS." As the name suggests he offers a pluralistic, life embracing and world facing, and more authentic, approach to the Benedictine tradition that Dreher rides over rough shod in order to ennoble his white, Eurocentric male grievances.
https://www.ncronline.org/news/opinion/refuting-rod-dreher-author-patrick-henry-offers-benedictine-options-plural
I simply stopped taking Dreher seriously and nothing that JVL has posted about him has convinced me that I am wrong in so doing.
Dreher would also do well to abandon Twitter as the first step in an authentic spiritual journey.
I am so excited to read the book you suggested. Studying abroad I had the pleasure of visiting the birthplace of St. Bernard, Assisi in Italy, and through sheer luck ended up living a stones throw from a Carmelite monastery in one place and a Benedictine monastery in another. I didn't read the Benedict Option, but I was unnerved by the pretense when I read about it because my parents had attempted to "Benedict option" their family before that was a thing. (Move to a rural setting, homeschool, only hang out with others they deems "Catholic enough"). In my experience, self-imposed isolation because the rest of the world isn't "good enough" breeds a degree of narcissism I have yet to encounter in any corner of secular culture. It had nothing in common with the hospitality I experienced in monastic communities, the rejection of the materialism so vividly frescoed over the walls of Assisi's basilica, or the warmth that radiates from those committed to communal living.
"the rejection of the materialism so vividly frescoed over the walls of Assisi's basilica"- but those glorious frescoes give the Basilica of St. Francis a sort of lavishness that's quite a contrast to the Carceri hermitage. Franciscan churches seem often to have more simplicity than many others -- but not always.
One odd thing struck me in my study of Granada in Spain, which I hope to visit someday: The extravagantly gold-plated Basilica de San Juan de Dios was built to honor someone who devoted himself to selfless service to the poor and sick and homeless. It's a bit jarring when you think about it. Across Christendom there are many opulent churches built to honor lives of humble simplicity and service to the unfortunate. The word "hypocrisy"might come to mind. On the other hand, those lavishly decorated churches have brought enjoyment to millions of people (most of them not poor) over the centuries.
I have to admit, the smaller stone churches surrounding Assisi radiate a peacefulness that I didn't get from the Basilica. My favorite part of the visit was walking around the town and countryside early in the morning and exploring some of the humbler sites. Then I went to Rome, and I've joked that Assisi ruined the Roman churches for me. I went straight from Assisi to Rome, and the first church I visited was the Jesuit Church. The contrast between the Baroque, gold-plated everything style and Assisi was so, so jarring. Saint Peter's the next day felt equally discombobulating. I do have a fondness for the Gothic Cathedrals in France that that are mostly stone and stained glass, but the Baroque churches make me feel vaguely panicked!