On Alt-Spirituality Monasticism

[causticus]

A reply of mine to a friend who was asking me my take on a hypothetical "monastic order" for those who study/practice (non-Christian) Western mysticism and philosophy:

I think that here in the current western world, any notion of any full-time monastic life outside of an established institutional religion that includes a monastic path, like Christianity or Buddhism, is pretty much a fantasy. It took those religions centuries of institutional growth and geographic expansion to garner the resources necessary to allow for organized and well-funded monastic life to be a possibility. AND those religions existed in a cultural environment that was supportive of monastic life in the first place. Prior to that it was ascetics living out in the desert or jungles or whatnot, subsisting on handouts from the local rural people they came in contact with on their daily rounds (Southeast Asian Buddhist monks still live like this); those local people held a belief that supporting those wandering mendicants was the right thing to do and something that conferred personal benefit to themselves. I can say that here in the US, most Americans aren't going to give people money to sit around all day and pray, meditate, and philosophize.

What can be done though, is if someone has the means to life a mostly-solitary life then they can go that route, given they are able to support themselves or get support from family or friends. Even living with family though isn't really an ideal monastic life, since one will have to deal with the everyday stress of dealing with people who don't necessarily have any understanding or respect for what you are doing. One of the things that differentiates monastic from ordinary life is living in a place that is isolated from the everyday hustle-bustle of ordinary society. Having a nagging mother bugging you about your daily chores, sure ain't that. On the other hand, the abbot bugging you about your daily chores is at least going to be spiritually on the same page as you.

A little addendum on Americans and monasticism; I'd say in an American context, the only way this would work is if the monks/monastery provided some tangible service to the surrounding community. America works on the customer model. Also, ordinary people in the community would need to see your order as being legitimate. New Religious Movements are notoriously looked down as being fake and non-serious by the average person. So what comes first, the chicken or the egg?

Secondly, yes Americans will send people money to people or organizations for non-commercial purposes, but it's almost always to either those deemed as downtrodden according to their preferred set of political beliefs, or to charitable organizations or political activists who advance the political-social agenda the donor-in-question finds to be congenial.

Comments

[jprussell]

I largely agree with your conclusion that "monasteries" (dedicated buildings, community of monks, more-or-less self-sufficient, etc) for alternative spirituality are likely nowhere near a reality in the US for a long time coming.

That said, a few thoughts:

1) European monasteries historically did a lot to reduce their dependence on help from the lay community - gardening, crafts, and so forth. Some of that sometimes turned into a "business" (like the Trappist monks with their beer) that became a source of support from the community, but it also reduced how much they needed from outside. Of course, the biggest component of this was vows of poverty - they didn't have to make/grow much, because they weren't living large. There is, of course, a lower limit to how "self-sufficient" such a community could be, and that's made even trickier by how out-of-touch most of us are with that kind of brute labor and lack of amenities, but a sufficiently motivated community could greatly improve their viability if they are willing to do that work and can get over the initial hurdle of securing some suitable land for such efforts.

2) There are a few experiments in the solitary hermit/small community/"living monastically while otherwise going about your life" side of things that, as you say, historically preceded larger monastic communities. Pagan Monasticism, edited by Janet Munin, has some essays on the topic, with a fair variety of how folks are handling it. It made for an interesting read, with some different perspecties/approaches, even if it doesn't seem to be my own path any time soon.

3) Leaning into the "particularly American context" idea, and your thoughts about offering something of value to suit our largely mercantile character, and perhaps coming to mind since last week was one of two of his days, Johnny Appleseed comes to mind as a potential model. Wandering rather than stationary, providing value wherever he went (planting apple trees and selling cider), and sharing his weirdo beliefs when they were welcome, but not in a pushy way. I'm not sure how such an approach could coalesce into a community (something like the Ramblers in Davy? A guild or fraternal lodge that is mostly itinerant, but comes together periodically for meetings?), but it at least provides a potentially different model than "a picturesque compound in the Alps full of guys in robes."

Cheers,
Jeff

[causticus]

1) A constant flow of money and resources from Mother Church is what allowed those monasteries to be less dependent on local lay communities. Also this proved to be an effective way for the Church to own large swathes of property throughout various lands. Henry VIII's grand liquidation of the monasteries showed how extensive this arrangement had become.

2) I did read a few excerpts from that book. While there's lot of interesting discussions within, I think they're stretching the definition of monasticism just a bit. Materially-minimalist lay life might be a better way of describing what most of the contributors of that book are doing. But that's a big, unglamorous mouthful.

3) Indeed, solo mendicant life is always a possibility, granted the individual is good at hustling (people skills) for their daily sustenance needs. Leading by example and providing help and services would probably be the main thing, as opposed to preaching or lecturing people on various metaphysical issues. On that second part I can certainly see guilds or fraternal lodges for "self-improvement" sort of stuff becoming a thing; if such an organization were to grow enough in size it could perhaps help members live a life that is a lot less dependent on the system (again though, with a necessary service-provision angle).

Thanks for your insights!

[jprussell]

1) Fair enough, though my understanding is that the flow of resources from Mother Church was more of a feature later on than earlier, but I haven't looked into it in depth and might be mistaken.

2) Again, fair enough - it was perhaps precisely because it stretches the boundaries of "monasticism" that I thought it might be helpful for thinking about what may come, especially in early, transitional stages, since, as you said, the kind of established monastic tradition found in medieval Europe and in parts of Asia comes with all kinds of social and cultural "infrastructure" to make them possible.

3) Fully agreed there - arguably, "hustling" as a core mendicant skill would be very American, indeed.

And my pleasure, thanks for spurring some thoughts!
Jeff

[methylethyl]

Plenty of monasteries at least partially support themselves through crafts: beer, cheese, soap, candles, etc. It helps if there's a larger church that can be a customer for some of that: monasteries are often makers of liturgical vestments, liturgical artwork, communion wafers (catholics), incense, candles, icons, prayer cards etc. many of which are eminently ship-able, and in constant use in churches.

That'd be a challenge for a monastic type community without a church to support it for sure, but there's still beer and cheese ;) Seems also relevant to point out that in the middle ages, monasteries tended to own a lot of property from endowments (ultimately, this led to their downfall, as they kept accumulating more and more, and became absolutely massive landowners at everybody else's expense: there's a lesson there), and either farm it themselves, rent it out to tenant farmers, or both.

In the current environment, I could even see elder care and hospice type services as a *founding mission* for a monastic community.

One ongoing tradition of all sorts of monasteries (Catholic, Orthodox, Buddhist) is hospitality-- this is a thing that doesn't bring in income, but does help integrate the monastery into the community as a net good. Monasteries have a long tradition of running schools and orphanages. I think in the US, in the near future, there will once again be a very large niche for monastic communities who are willing to care for the sick, dying, old and infirm with love and dignity. We have a failing healthcare system and an aging population that is absolutely going to break all our current standard elder-care pathways.

[causticus]

All very good points!

I do wonder if we'll see a rise of new/old monastic organizations once the economy really goes south and the .gov social safety net we've long taken for granted is largely a thing of the past.

[methylethyl]

I certainly hope so!

We've seen a lot of older relatives entrusted to the care of nursing facilities over the years, and... the only one of those places that didn't squick me out was the one run by Catholic nuns. It seemed to be a sort of meta-mission: a care home to look after old retired nuns with dementia, that paid the bills by also taking in (for pay) residents who were not nuns. Could use more like that.

[lincoln_lynx]

Pagan monasticism isn't desirable at this stage IMO. For the most ardent pagans to isolate and concentrate themselves when paganism is tiny is a bad idea. Less interaction with non-believers means less chances to convert others and insular groups arouse more suspicion, and doing so when rhetoric from Christians has taken a darker tone already no less?

Two or three people with similar spiritual interests buying a place together and otherwise going about their lives normally seems like the best idea.

[causticus]

Agreed. I think it's neither desirable nor particularly realistic at this point.

Another thing that seldom doesn't get mentioned is that "paganism" (past and present) generally doesn't have a world-denying attitude, so it would be rather difficult to justify on religious grounds why pagans should sequester themselves from general society, and especially why the general public should financially support that lifestyle.

Finally, no two "pagans" today can agree on much of anything, so I do wonder how exactly a closed group of them living together would work out? Monastic communities need strict rules for living and a common spiritual vision in order to function properly. I think two or three people with similar spiritual interests buying a place together and otherwise going about their lives normally would actually be quite the feat today. Usually those two or three people only find each other using the internet.

[methylethyl]

Is paganism that keen on evangelizing though?

Among Catholics and Orthodox, we find that a good, well-run monastic community often becomes a hub of same-religion community. Like, people who don't want to be monastics will move nearby just to be close to the monastery, and the monastery acts as a preserver and promoter of the religious culture.

So I think maybe that is a two-way street. It *could* be isolating... or it could act as a condenser of sorts, allowing a flowering of culture and community that is a lot more difficult when people are spread thin out in "the world".