What Was I Thinking?

When I wrote the previous post, I was thinking that to write on a broader range of topics than those relating to Benedictine monasticism, I really should start another blog not referred to as an Oblate blog. What was I thinking?

The rational I used to justify the new blog was that William of St. Thierry, a Cistercian father, wrote a book that didn’t deal directly with monastic topics but rather focused on what it takes to be a Christian. I was thinking that he wasn’t writing in the monastic tradition, why, I don’t know. He most certainly was, because after all, what is the point of a monastery except to form a community dedicated to seeking God? What is the point of being an Oblate, except to seek God within my own vocation. It means, as I have said so many times before, that the whole point to the Rule, is to create a way of life that encompasses all important aspects of our human condition, work, prayer, conversion, community, hospitality, or dealing with authority and the importance of obedience. It’s all in there. I don’t know what made me think a study of the most important tenants of my faith, or commenting on what is going on in my world would be subjects not to be covered on an Oblate blog. What was I thinking?

I guess I just wasn’t, so I decided to correct the situation in the name of stability, another topic covered in the Rule.

Wisdom from G.K. Chesterton

“When the old Liberals removed the gags from all the heresies, their idea was that religious and philosophical discoveries might thus be made. Their view was that cosmic truth was so important that every one ought to bear independent testimony. The modern idea is that cosmic truth is so unimportant that it cannot matter what one says. The former freed inquiry as men loose a noble hound; the latter frees inquiry as men fling back into the sea a fish unfit for eating. Never has there been so little discussion about the nature of men as now, when, for the first time, any one can discuss it. The old restriction meant that only the orthodox were allowed to discuss religion. Modern liberty means that nobody is allowed to discuss it.”

                                                                            G. K. Chesterton, Heretics

The above was written in 1904 or 1905; it is as apt today as it was back then, or more so. It seems today that anyone can say anything and expect no consequences. But there are consequences and they are becoming more evident every day.


For the past many years, I would say since the time of the Viet Nam war, political and social dialogue in this county has become more polarized and it seems the point of the debate has become “winning,” not seeking the good of the country. Much less has it been seeking the good. Statements of all kinds, on both “sides” have become more extreme with each passing year. The consequence is that we are getting to the point that no one trusts anything anyone else says. It is becoming impossible to function as a society. This is a severe consequence.


The community envisioned by Benedict is one built on trust. The Rule says, in Chapter 4,

Let the brethren give their advice
with all the deference required by humility,
and not presume stubbornly to defend their opinions; 
but let the decision rather depend on the Abbot's judgment, 
and all submit to whatever he shall decide for their welfare.

I wish the wisdom of the 6th century, or even the early 20th century, were more prevalent today.

Even though this may seem a completely un-democratic environment, the passage shows that the basis of the monastic community is a mutual trust that each member of the community will seek the good of the entire community. The monks “shall not presume stubbornly to defend their opinions.” The goal isn’t to win, it’s to seek the good.

Good Stewards

I was in the doctor’s office the other day waiting for my appointment and picked up a car magazine, Car and Driver, to be specific, to while away the time. I don’t often read car magazines, I haven’t subscribed to any in years, even though I am a bit of a car nut. I grew up in Detroit after all. The first story I spotted was a column by David E. Davis, whom I have always enjoyed reading simply because he is a good writer.

Davis’ column started on cars his family had owned when he, too, was growing up in Michigan, I remember mention of a 1939 DeSoto, which does date Mr. Davis a bit. However, he soon turned to the topic of last year’s “Cash for Clunkers” program. When I realized that, I almost flipped the page; I’m getting more than fed up with political news and stories at the moment. Still, I read on and Davis was making a good point. He pointed out that, while he was growing up, used cars were something of a blessing (he didn’t use the word, but it was implied) for his family. Used cars represented affordable transportation that would not otherwise be available to them. He points out that, for many families around the world, not just in the U.S., used cars represents the same blessing, the opportunity to have enough mobility to travel greater distances to find work, having the freedom to move beyond the limits of a village or small town, or just the expansion of markets beyond those limits. If new or only slightly used cars were all that was available, those benefits would be lost. 

The “Cash for Clunkers” program, by taking thousands upon thousands of perfectly good autos off the road, needlessly denied them to people who could benefit from their use. It was hugely wasteful. Reading this, of course, I thought immediately of St. Benedict. What would he say about that? One way to know is to turn to The Rule. In Chapter 32, he writes:

Chapter 32: On the Tools and Property of the Monastery

For the care of the monastery's property
in tools, clothing and other articles
let the Abbot appoint brothers
on whose manner of life and character he can rely;
and let him, as he shall judge to be expedient,
consign the various articles to them,
to be looked after and to be collected again.
The Abbot shall keep a list of these articles,
so that as the brothers succeed one another in their assignments
he may know what he gives and what he receives back.
If anyone treats the monastery's property
in a slovenly or careless way,
let him be corrected.
If he fails to amend,
let him undergo the discipline of the Rule.

Benedict is pretty clear on how monastery property is to be treated, they should be “looked after . . . to be collected again.” He also says, “if anyone treats the monastery’s property in a slovenly or careless way, let him be corrected, if he fails to amend, let him undergo the discipline of the Rule.”

Destroying useful tools, and as much as I hate to say it, an automobile is a tool, deserves correction, even punishment. What does it say about us, as a society, that we condone such wanton waste?

It All Matters

We come to a distinct monastery and congregation, to the Rule, to be taught, not to teach them. We come to be directed, not to direct, to be formed, not to form. If we allow all those things to happen to us in humility we quite likely WILL be elements of change for the better in the community's history, but that change will be one planned by God, not ourselves.  Br. Jerome Leo

This quote from Br. Jerome's daily meditations on the Rule (today's edition), reminded me that, when talking about a vocation, every element of that vocation matters.  Typical of Beneditine spirituality, everything is a gift of God, no matter how trivial it seems, and we can be grateful for all of it.