In Defense of Lutheran Monasticism
By Devin M.L. Andrews
from LF Spring 2021
Members of a Facebook group for those affiliated with confessional Lutheran churches were once asked whether monastic life should be supported; the responses were enlightening. There were a few who admitted to being Benedictine oblates or supporters while a sizable group was either in favor of monasticism or considered the matter an adiaphoron. On the other hand, another large group of respondents asserted that monasticism is wrong because Luther “was against it”; because we are supposed to “go forward and make disciples”; or because the Book of Concord says so. One person did not speak for or against it but merely said that there are “bigger fish to fry” than monasticism. In general, this group was divided on the issue of monasticism.
The question of supporting monasteries and friaries within confessional Lutheran churches in twenty-first-century America is important because most confessional Lutherans have not engaged in serious discussions of the subject. As a result, the idea of a Lutheran monastery seems like a paradox. There is, however, one Lutheran monastery in North America—Saint Augustine’s House, and it takes driving through a dusty road in the middle of a Michigan forest to reach it. This particular monastery is not affiliated with any specific Lutheran body, so it is open for all Lutherans drawn to monastic life guided by the teachings of St. Benedict of Nursia. Outside North America, there are two other Lutheran Benedictine monasteries, both for men only: Östanbäcks Kloster in Sweden, begun by four theological students in 1960; and the Priory of St. Wigbert (Priorat Sankt Wigberti) near Erfurt in Germany, approved by the local Lutheran bishop in 1987.
Monks and Friars
In addition to Saint Augustine’s House, there is an order of Lutheran friars called the Lutheran Franciscans. As a point of clarification, the difference between friars and monks is that friars, whilst taking essentially the same vows as a monk, do not live a cloistered life. In fact, most of their work is done in public, working with people. Monks, on the other hand, remain on the grounds of their monastery and will leave only out of necessity. With regard to the Lutheran Franciscans, they are affiliated with the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (elca). For most confessional Lutherans, unfortunately, doctrinal and moral differences will not allow them to consider the order of Lutheran Franciscans. This difficulty further necessitates our churches to at least begin to discuss monastic institutions.
My arguments for Lutheran monasticism will be based on the Order of St. Benedict, one of the earliest monastic orders. Unlike the Franciscan, Dominican, Cistercian, or Carmelite orders, which have headquarters and central leadership, the Order of St. Benedict allows independent monasteries to govern themselves, provided they obey and live by the teachings of St. Benedict of Nursia (c. 480–547). Such teachings always point directly back to Scripture in all forms of communal life, be it something as complex as discipline or as simple as how many times a day to gather for prayer. Indeed, Benedict encouraged daily Bible reading. This flexibility makes Benedictine monasticism so adaptable among Christian denominations that while most present-day Benedictine monasteries are Roman Catholic, there are also monasteries and convents amongst Anglicans, Lutherans, and even Methodists. Moreover, one does not need to be a member of the denomination with which a specific monastery is affiliated; being a committed Christian who agrees with the teachings of St. Benedict suffices.
While there is much to share about the blessings involved in monastic life, I will focus on the indictments against monasticism in the Book of Concord. Besides Scripture, which does not condemn monasticism as it existed in the apostolic age, confessional Lutherans also turn to the Book of Concord (specifically the Augsburg Confession, the Apology of the Augsburg Confession, and the Smalcald Articles), which was designed to return all Christians to fundamental Christian teachings. It is also, of course, a collection of writings that enunciate core Lutheran doctrine. It is therefore vital to address every statement in the Book of Concord that is used to dismiss or denigrate monasticism., as the most orthodox Lutherans use them all to support the idea that monasticism is un-Lutheran.
While Martin Luther was a remarkable man and a powerful Reformer, he was also human and made errors just as we do. Hence, not all he has written is useful for spiritual or practical life. As Christians, we are encouraged to take the words of those who claim to speak in the name of the Lord and weigh them against Scripture. We are further required to take all of our own actions and hold them up to the light of Christ. Then, as the Lutheran Church teaches, if something is not forbidden by Scripture, it is either beneficial or an adiaphoron. I intend to adduce evidence that monasticism is not forbidden but more than optional.
Indictment: Monasticism as Trap or Escape Hatch
These two statements form a great bulk of the indictments against monasticism in the Book of Concord. For the former, Martin Luther and his comrades called the monastery a “carefully planned” prison. The reformers, however, were reflecting on the conditions of the typical sixteenth-century monastery, which was rife with abuses. What was meant to be a place of learning, prayer, and refuge became a dumping ground for unloved and unwanted children. By the late Middle Ages, boys and girls whose parents could no longer take care of them were surrendered to the care of monasteries and convents, although girls were sometimes placed in convents in order to obtain a higher level of education than that usually afforded to females. While children were welcomed as part of the monastic community, they were not expected to live like the professed monks. The youths still had the responsibilities and freedoms of children.
By the sixteenth century, however, boys who were not of legal age could become monks. This change meant that a juvenile who was not mature enough to make decisions would have been expected to stay in the monastery and live by the vows of a monk for the rest of his life. The stipulation also held true for adults who were either of low intelligence or had been deceived, and thus could not understand the full meaning of monastic profession. It was a common abuse in monasteries at the time, and some who could not be tricked were often forced to take monastic vows. Regardless, once having made the vows, the monk was bound to his monastery and could not repudiate the vows without fear of damnation. Even if hellfire were not frightening enough to prevent a monk or nun from leaving the cloister, abbots and abbesses often had legal authority and could even imprison the recalcitrant member of the community.
Today’s monastery presents a very different picture. First, there are no longer any children or adolescents living in monasteries. The care of abandoned and orphaned children was transferred from the monastery centuries ago into orphanages run by monks or nuns from the local cloister. Even today there are children’s homes run by local monasteries or convents. Moreover, people cannot even live in the monastery unless they are of legal age, which excludes the idea of child monks altogether.
Deception is also no longer an issue; the total process for becoming a fully professed monk can take up to ten years, which is ample time for one to reconsider life in the cloister. Even if one were to become a full monk, he can still ask to be released from his vows. St. Benedict declared that one who leaves (insinuating the freedom to leave) can be welcomed back up to three times. As the United States is not a theocracy, forcing someone to stay in a monastery not only sullies its purpose but also subjects the monastery’s inhabitants to scandal and legal consequences. Hence, if the Lutheran Reformers could see the state of today's monasteries and convents, they would not encounter vows taken under duress, by minors, or by those deceived.
Regarding the monastery as an alleged hideout from the world, many Lutherans and other Protestants assert that it is a Christian's duty to “spread the Gospel” and “be fruitful and multiply.” Martin Luther and his colleagues supported their stance with Scripture, in which believers are instructed that “it is not good to be alone,” and that “every man should have one wife.” Indeed, it is not good for anyone to be alone. It is important to have someone to comfort us, advise us, and hold us accountable. Still, to say that marriage is the only pattern for this human bond undervalues the relationships between children and parents, teachers and students, mentors and protégés, close friends, and more to the point, between brothers in a monastery or sisters in a convent. This is why God has blessed us with four types of love: agape (divine); philia (friendship); storge (familial); and eros (intimate/sexual). Love between monks has the capacity to be brotherly, familial, and divine.
Moreover, St. Paul states that it is better if possible for Christians to remain single if they possess the gift of celibacy. Single believers are able to do the work of God and run the extra distance if they do not have families and spouses depending on their support. If someone has the true gift of celibacy, who has the right to criticize such a gift? Not everyone is meant to be married. If a man cannot settle to a life with a woman and children because he is called to a different life, everyone suffers. Elevating marriage above the single life is damaging not only to those who choose to be single but devastating for those who for medical, emotional, or social reasons cannot be married even though they may wish for a spouse. While God did tell Adam and Eve to be fruitful and multiply, what does that command mean? Do we fulfill this command only through procreation and childbirth? If so, are those who are barren, sterile, or cannot bring a pregnancy to term to be considered rebels against this command?
What if being fruitful and multiplying also means to multiply the number of those who trust Jesus? A monastery has the capacity to make disciples by showing hospitality to those in need and providing an atmosphere of prayer and devotion so that people can come to know Jesus as their personal Savior. This is what St. Anthony of Egypt, the predecessor of St. Benedict, did. He spent his life in the desert and on mountainsides praying, fasting, and reading Scripture. His example encouraged others to join him, and he had different types of people coming to him for prayer—especially for a sick relative—or to receive teaching from him. Imagine how many people came to Christ because of St. Anthony’s salt and light. Did he not multiply the number of Christians? Was he not a blessing to the world—even to unbelievers? What of the Essenes, a celibate Jewish community that lived in the desert? If not for these early celibates, we would not have the Dead Sea Scrolls. What about Anna the widowed prophetess, who prophesied when Jesus was a baby that He would bring redemption to Israel? It is written that she never left the Temple and that she prayed and fasted day and night. Does she not resemble a nun? It would therefore not be very bold to say that Scripture, God’s Word, does not refer to the heart of monasticism negatively or even neutrally. Anna will always be remembered positively as one of those who prophesied Christ’s ministry to the world.
Monasticism Teaches Works-Righteousness
This is the more serious indictment that the Reformers leveled against the monasteries of early modern Europe, and for a very good reason: the heart of Lutheran Christianity is that salvation is through grace alone. We cannot earn salvation by good works; our sins are far too great to atone for our sins through pious deeds. This is why Christ died on the cross—to pay the cost of our sins because we cannot do it for ourselves. Therefore, any accusation that one is trying to earn salvation and a place in God's Kingdom is a serious charge.
The Reformers noted that many sixteenth-century Christians joined monasteries in hopes of earning grace, particularly to receive forgiveness of sins. As a result, too many medieval monks and nuns were wracked with guilt, shame, and despair. To further entice such poor wretches to take final vows, abbots at the time often equated monastic vows with baptism. Just as false and spiritually dangerous, some monks believed that monastic life was a state of perfection. In other words, being a monk was considered a vocation superior to all others and that monasticism made people perfect in the sight of God. This belief not only contradicts the Lutheran Confessions but also the gospel. If humans could earn grace or perfection, then Christ died in vain!
In regard to the notion that monastic life is a state of perfection, it is a corruption of one of St. Benedict’s sayings. He wrote that the basic stage of monastic life is only the beginning of perfection. He further wrote that reading Scripture, the truest guide for human life, along with the writings of the church fathers can help one to “hasten” to perfection. In other words, monastic life is not a state of perfection but is a mere stepping-stone on the path to perfection. As Christians, we know that we are too full of sin to be perfect, but we are taught to strive for it nonetheless. After all, did not our God say, “Be holy, for I am holy”? Loosely defined, holiness means being set apart for God's use or purpose. The Lutheran church teaches that holiness can be found in the attorney, the grandmother, the teacher, and even the garbage collector. While monks and friars are not superior to these instruments of holiness, they are still fellow Christians set apart to serve in their own way.
Regarding baptism, the Lutheran church teaches that there are only two sacraments: baptism and communion. Monasticism is not on the list; it is not mentioned even among the seven sacraments of the Roman Catholic Church. The blasphemous notion that monastic vows are equal to baptism implies either that baptism is not needed if one takes monastic vows or that a person's baptism prior to monastic vows is not valid. For clarification, Trinitarian baptism requires believers (or sponsors in the case of children) to recognize their lowly estate as poor, miserable sinners who put their trust in Jesus Christ for their salvation. It requires faith and trust.
For most professed monks and friars (as well as nuns and sisters), there are three vows: poverty, obedience, and chastity. Within Benedictine cloisters, the vows are obedience, conversion of life, and stability (poverty and chastity are considered a part of conversion of life). What is so wicked about these vows, as the Reformers declared? What is so sinful about them? Absolutely nothing—provided these vows are not taken under duress or as a way of earning salvation. The Reformers also speak against “distinctive clothing, meats, and renunciation of property,” stating that the gospel does not “advise concerning them.” The question is, does the gospel or any part of the Bible advise against them? Consider the monastic habit; there is nothing fashionable or costly about it. It has only two purposes: modesty and practicality. Are not modesty and humility celebrated biblical virtues? Practicality is important because one does not need to decide each morning what to wear. Traditionally, a professed member of an order receives only two habits—one for wearing and one to launder for the next day. As for surrendering property, did not the first Christians have their goods in common? This is where Ananias and Sapphira had erred; they sold their property but dedicated only a fraction of the sale to the community, lying about the rest. By giving up property and limiting concerns about clothing, monastics are truly free of worldly entanglements and able to dedicate themselves to prayer and devotion.
Hence, baptism is for all Christians, but monastic vows are only for those who have been especially called to monastic life. Baptism is ordained by God according to Scripture, but monasticism is neither divinely ordained nor repudiated. It is only one of many ways we can serve the Lord and receive His blessing. While medieval monastics did not understand this point, both the earliest and modern monks did and do. Therefore, all indictments against monastic life found in the Book of Concord concern the misrepresentations and abuses of the sixteenth century and do not reflect modern monastic communities.
Contemporary Monasteries
In order to get an idea of how the monastery of Luther's time differs from today's monastery, one should visit a monastery—not just for one day but for several. If possible, one should visit more than one. In addition to St. Augustine's House in Michigan, there is the Monastery of the Holy Cross in Chicago's Bridgeport neighborhood. While the former is in the countryside, the latter is an urban monastery. The former is ecumenical Lutheran and the latter is Roman Catholic, but they are both Benedictine. Both locations have the seven offices of prayer, in addition to a full worship service in the mid-morning, but the order of worship is much earlier for the latter than the former, with the first prayer service beginning at 3:30 a.m., and the last at 7:15 p.m. For the former, the first prayer service begins at 5:10 a.m., and the last ends at 8:30 p.m.
At both monasteries, silence is more of a gift than a rule. Only at certain times of the day can people talk freely, but only in soft and gentle tones so as not to disrupt those in prayer and contemplation. Both observe the Great Silence, which begins after Compline (the bedtime prayer) and ends after Lauds (the dawn-time prayer). During the Great Silence, there is no talking or socializing. This time is used in addition to sleeping for prayer, meditation, or preparation for the next day. Otherwise, the monks are very hospitable and eager to answer questions. Both have spare rooms and encourage people to come for retreats, with the Monastery of the Holy Cross having two apartment suites that serve as a bed and breakfast. In addition to retreaters and monks, St. Augustine's House is also home to novices, postulants, and oblates.
For Lutherans who are not familiar with these terms, a postulant is one who is not yet a monk but has officially stated their intention and has begun the process of becoming a monk. A novice is a junior or “simple monk”; that is, one who has been exposed to monastic life after a few years and has taken temporary monastic vows. Novices live simple lives and are not attached to material possessions, keeping their focus on spiritual matters and on the welfare of the community. An oblate, on the other hand, is a person who cannot be a monk because of his or her life circumstances but is drawn to monastic life. Oblates dedicate themselves to God, His Church, and to the monastery of their choosing. While they do not take vows, they renew their dedication each year, in most circumstances. While oblates can live in the monastery, many do not.
To become an oblate or a monk, believers must have love for God, His creation, and all He has done for them in their hearts—to start. They must also learn the liturgical prayers and appreciation of the Psalms. After all, Psalms are chanted at each prayer service (or daily office). Next, oblates are expected to read Scripture daily and also learn church history and the teachings of the church fathers. These are activities that Martin Luther and the Reformers lamented were missing from the early modern monastery—a learning environment, such as Saints Anthony and Benedict established in their faith communities. Such communities not only provide adult Christian education but also have the potential to support and possibly produce clergy. This is why, of all of the oblates of St. Augustine, many are pastors. If such monasteries existed in Luther's time, peradventure he would have nearly as much to say against monasteries as he did in the Book of Concord.
Conclusion
In order to demonstrate the biblical and doctrinal harmony of monasticism, I sought to examine the criticisms leveled by the writers of the Book of Concord against monasticism and compare the monasteries they criticized to the early Christian and modern monastic communities. For instance, while the reformers found that monasteries were dens of entrapment for those who cannot defend themselves due to age, powerlessness, or mental deficits, today's monasteries are for adults of sincere desire for a contemplative spiritual life, and candidates (postulants and novices) are given years of opportunities to reconsider their decisions before becoming fully-professed monks. Those who become monks in the twenty-first century are following a specific life vocation instead of hiding from the world and denying worldly obligations. After all, as St. Anthony has demonstrated, one can be fruitful and multiply outside marriage and childbearing simply by offering weary Christians an oasis in which to rest and focus on what truly matters.
Furthermore, monasticism provides a way for one to pursue and seek perfection, but it is not itself a state of perfection. The average monk knows he is as much of a poor, miserable sinner as any other person. He did not take vows for his salvation, and he does not do good works to earn it either. He is aware that his vows and his vocation are not included in the sacraments, and that the day of his baptism is far more important than the day he became a monk. Finally, fundamental monasticism precedes all post-canonical saints and church fathers, as models of monks and nuns include the Essenes, the first Christian churches, and St. Anna the Prophetess.
What made monasteries and convents corrupt and evil during Luther's time are the abuses that plagued them. When these institutions became less about Christ and more about power and false guilt, they bore the fruits of hypocrisy, greed, and the slavery of souls. Luther was wont to say that as humans are sinful, human institutions, as spiritual and God-fearing as they may be, can become sources of sinful desires and behavior. That does not diminish their potential. The Internet, for example, has been used for the most sinful practices in history, but it is a comfort for those who can watch livestreamed church services when they cannot attend church because of the covid-19 pandemic. If one were to merely dismiss everything because of past abuses, many vital Christian treasures would also be dismissed, including the Bible itself.
Even Martin Luther admitted that monasteries in their original form should be encouraged. The vast majority of today's monastic communities are far closer to their original form than they were in Luther's time. This is where the Lutheran Confessions and those similar to them have done most Christians a great service. After centuries of debate and dissent, most of the church abuses written about are almost nonexistent in all levels and forms of Christianity—especially in monasteries of all orders and denominations. As a result, the criticisms Lutherans use to discredit or dismiss monastic life are based on confessional indictments that are no longer true. For this reason, Lutheran churches should see such a life for what it is now and what its possibilities are: devotion to loving service to God and humanity, and rich in prayer and reflection. For these reasons, Lutheran monasticism as a living reality instead of just an idea should be encouraged, appreciated, and advocated.
Footnotes have been omitted for readability but are included in the print version and are available upon request.
Dedicated to the memory of Father John Cochran, Prior of St. Augustine’s House, who went home to the Lord in March this year after a long battle with cancer. He was loved by his monastic community, its fellowship, and all other benefactors, and he will be greatly missed.
(From left to right: Brother Andy, Brother Michael, Brother Richard, and Father John)
Devin M.L. Andrews is an Oblate of St. Benedict who resides in a southwestern suburb of Chicago yet associates with Saint Augustine's House.
