hi scott. our first [nu] monastery was in 1997, in san francisco. we have been part of a number of others, some more monastic than others, all somehow linked or at least inspired by the intentional communities of the 60′s and 70′s.
this is a threat to the gains of the reformation – that managed to dissolve the monasteries in UK – but young people are looking to monastic rhythms and patterns of life , an integration of work and spirituality, and ministry of hospitality and pilgrimage that the monasteries did so well.
glad you are seeing the links across the decades. i see 1968 as the year in which at least 10 forms of church life were started that inform our current emerging church movements.

It’s interesting that you post that. I spent this past weekend at Gethsemani Monastery in Bardstown, KY, and upon returning home today, found myself still rising at 6:30 to sing the Psalms. Certain rhythms and movements of the traditional church might be useful for me (and others like me) to remember and engage.

I’m leading a quasi-new monastic community (I say quasi because many of the residents are seminarians and thus here for only 2-3 years). I admire the folks who were part of the particular conversation that issued in that book, and I have read the book and recommended it widely. However, it’s worth noting that they are one strand within the neo-monastic movement; they represent their strand beautifully, but do not capture the complexity of the whole movement.
When I did a workshop on the topic a few months back, I spoke of a continuum of neomonastic groups, with the two poles being those who are drawn especially to being a radical challenge to injustice in the name of Christ, and those who are drawn to the liturgical and community aspects of the aspect of the monastic tradition. (Most neo-monastics I’m aware of connect with both, but the emphasis varies dramatically.)
Another difference that at least in my experience so far matches up rather well with those two poles is whether the community members attend other church[es], or whether the community understands itself as a church. For a shining example of one constellation of emphases, I’d name Simple Way in PA; for the other, Vineyard Central in OH.

Hey Scot,
Glad you are wrestling this one out with us. While I am excited by much of the what the so called “New Monasticism” is moving towards, I am not sure I find the naming of it appropriate or helpful. By linking it so closely to monastic orders it has at least two negative consequences- first, it can undermine the history and complexity of the monastic tradition; second, and from my perspective more significant, it places important ecclesial values into a categorized “monastic” vocation, making it far too easy for the larger church to ignore or affirm but not practice.
Frankly, I believe that much of the NM are crucial elements of missional ecclesiology that the church as a whole must rediscover and pursue. That may look different than the current movement manifests, but the marks are generally important guides for the whole Body.
Peace,
Jamie

Frankly, I believe that much of the NM are crucial elements of missional ecclesiology that the church as a whole must rediscover and pursue.
I tend to agree with Jamie here. I believe that we can integrate some of the positive aspects of this movement into our current church models.

that was supposed to be a blockquote, I messed up the code

I heard Rich Nathan, pastor of the Columbus Vineyard, talk about western culture as a juggernaut marching through the world, sucking all into it’s value structure, media, etc. Kids even in the far reaches of the world are being shaped, increasingly, in their attitudes, philosophies and desires by western ads and media, and their exposure is minuscule by comparison to residents of western cultures. It’s forming us all with hi-tech repitition, repitition, repitition. Many see this at work in themselves, their parents, their children, their churches and think that more aggressive, more intentional tactics for formation into Christlikeness are going to be necessary to deal with and overcome the constant pictures, messages and stories that are filling us to overflowing–in our waking up and in our lying down and most things in between.
So, to deal with your questions: “Is this the 60s and 70s again?” Absolutely, and for similar reasons. “Is this part of the emerging movement?” Yes; and it’s beyond it. I’d say that John Piper’s ministry touches on the same nerve, along with several emerging types that are concerned with the insufficiency of typical church practices to win out over cultural forces in the long term. “Is this a cultural critique or an ecclesial critique?” As some/all of the original monastics, I think it’s both. It’s also an individual critique; meaning a critique of not just ‘our individualism’, but my individualism, and my own failures to overcome the culture when fidelity to Christ is at risk.

My wife and i will be visiting the Simple Way & Camden House this May. We will be apart of the New Monasticisms “Schools For Conversion.” Basically a 4 day event where we are allowed to experience what happens in the New Monasticism. Should be awesome.
I don’t know if this is the 60′s/70′s all over again, as i was born in 1981. I do know however that my wife and i connect so much with what they seem to do. I believe that the New Monasticism is embodying certain elements of the emerging church very well. To use Scot’s 5 Streams, they seem to totally live out the 3rd stream “Praxis Oriented.” And of course, out of that tends to flow the 1st and 5th streams as they encounter things in life.
My wife and I have experienced parts of intentional community in college. We also have experienced parts of the praxis stream of life on various trips (ranging from a few weeks to 6 months). We felt more alive doing life in these settings that ever before or since. Something deep inside us burns to live life differently, and the New Monasticism seems to be doing this. Although there are probably other forms of this type of life, the NM is one we are increasingly interested in.

I certainly agree with a couple previous posters that the missional elements found in many strands of neo-monasticism would be of benefit to the culture of a traditionally-organized church. However, I’d also want to point out that throughout history monastic movements have always had an “over-against” edge and have not been “assimilatable” in that way. They often arise as a critique to a wider church culture, and they always gather what the larger church has historically understood will only be a smaller group of folks who are called to one specific vocation within the Body of Christ.
IMHO, I think it’s vital to keep room in our minds for the notion of a more concentrated community/liturgical life as something a small group of Christians can be called to – just as we have room for the notion of someone being called as a missionary, etc.
Not every Christian is called to join, say, YWAM and serve there as a primary vocation, but the church can greatly benefit from the cross-cultural and other insights of those who are. Same for monastic movements: certainly God does not intend anything but a minority of Christians to live at places like Iona or Taize or Simple Way or Vineyard Central, but when the church can continue its historical practice of acknowledging the move of God in calling *some* to live that way and be able to resource and speak into the wider body, everyone benefits.

McKnight on New Monasticism at PastorResources Blog – Beta

[...] Read the article at McKnight’s blog. [...]

As one who has been a member of an intentional community for most of my adult life (I’m 43), I can say that it isn’t a new movement or even a 60s and 70s phenomena (some of the communities we relate to are quite old). There has been recent interest in intentional community (as evidenced by the book you mention).
I do believe that intentional community embodies many values and principles talked about within the emergent movement. As Beth said, not every Christian is called to live in intentional community, but there are some good reasons to consider it. Whatever the case, every Christian could benefit from the emphasis that community creates.

Scot,
Adam is right about it not being something new or related directly to the 60′s & 70′s.
I find it very interesting, though, that one of the products of this “New Monasticism” is “grassroots ecumenism.”
What are we to say about the earmarks of “New Mosasticism” if one of the main products is the merging of all religions into one homogenous group? What is desirable about that?
Is it significant that a major portion of the Anglican Church is about to be accepted back into the fold of the Roman Catholic Church? For Protestants, “New Monasticism” seems to be aimed at producing the very same thing. Is this good?

Ben,
That’s a big and inaccurate leap to make: grassroots ecumenism is not the same as “all religions into one homogenous group.” Before you jump to that you should look into what is going on … I’ve not seen what you are talking about at all. You’re tossing down a slippery slope argument. You need some more coffee.

Scot,
Unless the meaning of “ecumenism” has somehow morphed into something it doesn’t mean, or there is a “New Monastic” meaning not, heretofore, made known, I stand by what I said.
Actually, I’m not jumping into anything. “Ecumenism” is their Word, not mine. And I don’t believe the true meaning of ecumenism is changed simply because it is produced by the grassroots instead of the Heirarchy.
Of course, if this is off base, then more accurate terminology should be chosen when presenting oneself, group or movement to the world. A self description shouldn’t have to be reinterpreted by all who hear and read.
Unless there is an allegorical or metaphorical aspect of ecumenism I am not aware of.
Nevertheless, a little more coffee remains a great idea!

Scot,
I’m glad you wrote this post. How interesting… While I have heard of this, I’ve done no reading or reflecting on it. It does make me wonder, (as you ask) whether this reflects a critique of the culture or the church or both.
Whatever its origin, it seems to connect with a lot of people.

Scot, thanks for this post. I so appreciate hearing what others have to say, what they’ve experienced, or haven’t experienced, etc. One of my only concerns with this movement, however new or old it may be, is that sometimes a “critique” of one part of the Christian culture can actually push over into a judgmental spirit toward those folks who’ve not yet “seen the light” and live in mainstream America, trying to be faithful where they are planted.
I think it is very important that we keep in mind the fact that God is incredibly creative. We are not all called to the same way; just the same Way. Know what I mean? If we keep that in mind, we can celebrate what others are choosing and what we are choosing, without demanding (in ways subtle and not so subtle) that others choose lives that look just like ours. This sounds elementary, but really isn’t.
So, I celebrate this monastic movement … I know there is much we can learn from it, and have learned from it. I just don’t want to be immediately critiqued as “sold out to the empire” if we are part of a regular old church, have regular old jobs and live in a regular old neighborhood. I happen to believe the risen Jesus is present here, too.

a quick thought… one of the things that really frustrates emerging churches is people critiquing/judging them without really visiting them. maybe we need to start visiting such places and dialoguing with those within the movemetn to really get a better feel for what’s happening there

From another who lived through the time:
There were many types of communes during that time, not only Christian ones. Intentional community was certainly a hallmark of a part of the “Jesus Movement”. In its Protestant expression, it had more to do with strengthening one another’s faith, and being able to provide hospitality more easily. It did not want anything to do with RCatholicism and so did not value actual monastic contributions such as fixed-hour prayer and contemplation. Many turned into house churches; most dissolved.
I would, instead, point to communities like Iona, founded in the ’30s, Taize, founded in the ’40s, and the Community of Jesus (from which came Paraclete Press, one of Scot’s publishers), founded in the ’50s, as the trickling springs, to which others such as the Northumbria Community have been added and are now broadening out into something that looks like a noticeable river. The New Monastic communities now strike me as much more “intentional” and well-thought-out theologically, with attention to the history of the whole church, than the Christian communes of the hippie days.
Scot, perhaps you could think about posting something in later days about the “new ecumenism” as well. Good for gathering in the coffee shop again. (Hi Ben!)
Dana

Scot,
My wife and I have been pursuing the “intentional community” part of the NM for the last 5 years. It grew out of several desires including the desire for a consistent, weekly/weekday spirituality being played out with good friends/family. The other was to create an experience where pre-believers could see a practical experience of Christians living out their faith. In a day where many can “explain” what happens in any local church as the running of a good “program”, it is very difficult for people to explain multiple families and friends living together, sharing life in common and doing it in the name of Jesus’ call to mutual submission and love.
Also, as a side note, many look back to Bonhoeffer’s prediction in his book, Life Together, where he suggests that the Western church will be saved by the coming monastic movement.
I would also direct you to Kate Perkins from William & Mary U. She spent last Summer touring the nation and visiting many communities, including ours. It was interesting to hear her take on how different the communities that she visited were. While they seem to be driven by similar passions, each one was unique in their approach, their fleshing out as well as their long-term visions. Her post about her visit to our community (Saint Aidan’s Abbey) as well as her further thoughts and adventures are at
http://wanderings-and-wonderings.blogspot.com/
You might also check out some fellow Texans in Austin (Greg and Jolie Willis) at http://oakgroveabbey.com
Blessings!

Hi Dana!
You’re right! Scot should post on this “New Ecumenisn.” That should make for some interesting conversation, especially the nuanced differences between the old and new. However, I must say that my initial question, based on you comment is this:
Is New Ecumenism more “itentional” also? Is it more thought out theologically? If so, is the theology pedantically paraded before others in order to hide the more intentional ecumenism?
In light of Scot’s questions, “What do you know about it? Any issues?”
As I said, when I go to a group’s site and they tell me that they are producing ecumenism and that word is defined as “A movement seeking to achieve worldwide unity among religions through greater cooperation and understanding,” I take their statement at face value. I presume that they are intellectually sophisticated enough to know and understand the meanings of the terms they use and are, therefore, in the use of those terms, informing others of their end product.
I see nothing wrong with this presumption.
I do, however, see an issue with ecumenism. I see a conflict, at least initally, with local community being intertwined with the production of ecumenism. How is that possible? Community is local. Ecumenism is global. Is there a conflict. Is there a disparity? Is there an incongruety?
If not, then how does New Monasticism produce Ecumenism? Or “New Ecumenism?
Dana, Your Italian coffee is wonderful! A little weaker than I’m used to having in Texas, but the flavor is outstanding! We might call it “Texas Espresso!”

I think it would be best to let Scot decide how he wants to approach the “ecumenical” discussion, as this thread is something else. But I will definitely have some observations when he gets to it.
Ciao Benjamin!
Dana

I have some connection to the Church of the Sojourners in San Francisco and Reba Place in Evanston, Illinois, both part of Shalom Mission Communities.
One thing I note is that the ‘new monastic’ people and the people who have been in community for a while seem to be encouraging and challenging one another in good ways–sending people back and forth to talk, etc. For example, Sojourners is using the 12 marks as a way of talking about community along with the term ‘new monastacism.’ One of the Sojourners members is living at Rutba House while he attends Duke. This kind of inter-communal and inter-generational interaction wasn’t so much a hallmark of the “60s and 70s” as far as I know.
Your friend (and mine) Greg Clark should have more insight into the connections between ‘new monasticism’ and established communities.
(On a side note, I’m glad to have something mildly substantive to say, other than to thank Scot for his fashion advice. I’m really enjoying my Born shoes)

Wow,
As a founder of a “new contemplative” community in Greensboro, NC, I am very excited to see such good conversation happening on the topic of “New Monasticism”.
“Community is local. Ecumenism is global.” – Ben, those are some pretty stiff generalizations. Maybe that’s why you ask the questions; “Is there a conflict?”
I would say, “no”. Each word can be both local and global. I think each begins from a local situation and then tries to relate beyond that.
If community is only local then what does that say about the relationality of humanity as a whole? If ecumenism is only global than how does it have any bearing on particular congregation or intentional community? Transforming global movements move out from local centers…i.e. Jesus’ movement.
Ben, I do appreciate you pushing on this though. I think ecumenism is vital, but I balance that with equal value given to diversity. I too have my doubts that it can be manufactured.
I think it is stirred up in folks and communities with the attentiveness and openness that comes from contemplative practice. New Monasticism can “awaken” ecumenism because contemplation predisposes one to hospitality.
Another person mentioned concern about “self-righteousness” becoming a problem for neomonasticism. Calling out that concern is important. We are always in danger of becoming what we define ourselves against. Keep that concern awake…I try my best to. When I notice that tendency in myself, the “Jesus Prayer” becomes very helpful. It reminds of the space God made for us all in God’s self, and the space I must make for others in myself.

I won’t spend a lot of time debating about ecumenism, but I will share one anecdote and one thought. First the thought. I highly doubt Scot’s referring to inter-religion ecumenism, but rather ecumenism between various sects of Christianity. Highly doubt it. Second, I was part of an organization called Happening Ecumenical for several years, which hosted very incarnationally oriented retreats for youth and college students, and it was ecumenical in the way I just described. Except, of course, there were no rules that you had to be Christian to participate in the retreat, only in the leadership… liiiike any other local church.

http://icmi.org/
This is the web address to the Lindisfarne Community–US. Our “mother house” is in Ithaca, NY. I am a novice and ordinand within the community. While still small, we have members all over the globe. We are bound together by our common prayer book, A Way of Living, and the shared practices of our rule grounded in our “Understandings”. This expression of the Nu-Monasticism undergirds the fundamental commitment to a daily rhythm of prayer and practices. This is a first order assumption that “goes without saying” before the list of distinctives found above.
(I was disappointed in the CT article about a year ago on this because it seemed to emphasize only the more “Franciscan” streams of the movement–thus implying that this is all just communal living around solidarity poverty and social justice issues alone.)
I wasn’t alive in the 60′s, born in ’73. So I can’t speak to the first question.
Is it the emerging church?
Sure. Part of it. We represent our (EC) celebration of the historical, and the embrace of the authority of the Communion of Saints over the course of time expressed in spiritual practices. We are the care-takers of the “ancient” while living in the “future”.
Is this cultural or ecclesial critique?
It’s both. Given that so much of the ecclesial dynamics of our day have been co-opted by the cultural. I could go on and on about all the things requiring and deserving critique, but I think the main thing I see is this:
We represent a critique of mindfulness.
Our diverse practices and the rules of each community act as a quiet (and sometimes not so quiet) rebuke of the obtuse, mindless and soul-numbing social compulsions that drive us, and alienate us from each other and thus the very arena wherein we enact the life of God in relationship.
Thoughts? Are there other areas anyone thinks are more distinctive?

Is mindfulness the critique, or are you critiquing mindfulness?

Nathan, click my name. Scot’s discussion prompted me to write some stuff on NM at our Abbey site. I list some distinctives that reflect our community…as well as what I have seen in others.
Peace

Matt,
Why are we talking about ecumenism? I didn’t post about it; Ben brought it up. I’m not sure why this is an issue here.

Matt,
Definitely “mindfulness is the critique”. Thanks for the good natured help with clarity! My lyrical literary side got the best of me.

Scot,
Your post asked concerning New Monasticism:
“What do you know about it? ny issues? What is it?”
I simply went to their site and read the information they provided. As I stated previously, they mentioned “grassroots Ecumenism.” I brought it up as an issue in response to your question.
Please, don’t put this on my shoulders, as if I was going outside the bounds of your post. Once again, I take words at face value. If you don’t mean for certain things to take place on your posts, then please, narrow your parameters of conversation and be up front about it.
Until you do, I can only take your words for what they say. And your refusal to respond to answers to your own questions will not exactly meet the high level of conversational facilitation expected from you. It may give the impression that their are topics considered taboo at Jesus Creed.
I have a hard time believing that this is the case, having been the recipient of your evenhandedness on a few occasions, for which I am most grateful!

Ben,
That explains it … it was on their website and not from my summary.
I can’t speak for all NM ecumenism, but my own experience is that it not a soft-peddling of theology so much as a Christians on different paths committed to doing missional work together. That, I think, is how the NM tends to do “ecumenical” work at the “grassroots” level; I doubt very much this is a theological exploration into the lowest common denominator.

Scot,
Once again, it is a matter of words taken at face value.
“Ecumenical” applies to the unification of that which is named “Christian.”
“Ecumenism” refers to the unification of all religions worldwide.
So, which one is it? Is one prefereable to the other? Or are both bad?
Is New Monasticism for the grassroots unification of all things Christian? Or for the grassroots unification of all things religious?

I don’t think your last question is one that can be answered with a blanket statement. Much like there is no across-the-board concensus of the ultimate beliefs of the “emerging church”, there is no way to declare an across-the-board belief for the neuvo-monastic movement in regards to their perspective on denominational beliefs or world religions.
Unfortunately, actually fortunately, we live in a messy and diverse world that is often times unpredictable and beyond categorization. I believe this would be one such instance.
But, much like any topic, it would be good to focus on the multiple layers of the NM movement and not just one. It is simply too easy to write off great ideas as a whole when we simply disagree with only one aspect of them (even when that one aspect is not a blanket statment that holds true to all who espouse the original idea).
Peace!

Benjamin,
In my experience I see a celebration of the broadness of the Christian faith over time. I also see a respectful and honest interaction with other faiths in the spirit of what Tony Jones has recently written about over at the God’s Politics blog.
Even within specific communities there is a plurality of views on certain specific issues. These communities are bound by their rule and practices. We see this as a strength, not a cause for concern.
Also, I see a reclaiming of the historic understanding of “ecumenical”, not the politicized understanding of the term within what is an irrelevant battle of the artificial Left-Right dichotomy on the fringe of culture. But that’s just my take on it.
Peace

alt.jesus » New Monasticism

[...] Continue reading the rest of the article… Share and Enjoy: [...]

The 60s and 70s all over again?
Yes, of course, right down to the grassroots ecumenism.
I just wonder if the current wave will learn something from similar things that happened then, or will the same mistakes be repeated.

4peregrinos.com » New Monastics

[...] Scot McKnight on New Monasticism [...]