Abstract
Full disclosure: I am a scholar of monasticism, not an expert on things social or political. Though I do feel much more educated now about socio-political engagement thanks to this well-written and informative book. This, I think, is the strongest kind of commendation ‒ going from knowing little about a topic to knowing quite a bit thanks to a good book. And this is a good book, both historical and theological when necessary but never moving far from a focus on the need for Christians to be doing something; that is, to engage in socio-political activity. The author says that this is “just another plea for formation or discipleship” (14) but it is, in reality, quite a bit more than that in some ways and exactly that in other ways.
The simplest way to summarize the book’s contents is to use the clever title, borrowed from the children’s song “Deep and Wide.” Howard insists that Christians must go deep (deep into prayer, deep into speaking and caring about issues) but they must also go wide (wide in caring about issues that affect society and the word, wide in living intentionally with other like-minded disciples of Jesus). But Howard makes his case in three general moves: (1) he shows that everyone, without exception, are political persons; (2) he argues that politics is more than just statecraft; and (3) that all change starts with a person but is never accomplished apart from community. Woven throughout the book’s eight chapters are principles and examples drawn from historical and contemporary monasticism.
Given my own area of specialty, I will limit my comments to the author’s use of monasticism in his overall project. Howard has an expansive definition of monasticism that many monks and nuns (of the traditional sort) might find overly broad. He writes, monasticism is “an embodiment of concrete means of spiritual formation, chosen in conscious distinction from others who do not share a similar way of life, symbolized through a formal and serious commitment to a particular way of life, a way of life the general principles of which are usually clearly articulated and which exhibit a rhythmic blend of prayer, work, study, and/or ministry” (181). The main ingredients of traditional monasticism (e.g., the Benedictines and Cistercians) are here but missing are the bedrock monastic principles of living in community, under intentional, lifelong vows and in obedience to an abbot/abbess or other religious authority. Howard mentions these elsewhere but does not include them in his definition. This, I think, means that one could remove the word “monasticism” and replace it with “the Christian life” and the definition still works. For example, Anglican Christians who follow the threefold “rule” of the Book of Common Prayer (Daily Office, Holy Eucharist, and personal devotion) are easily included in the author’s definition but most, if not all, Anglicans would not say or even think that they are living a monastic life. They are merely living out the Christian life as Anglicans.
Overall, this does not affect Howard’s argument. It merely changes its direction a bit. At the risk of oversimplification, the author’s main point is to suggest that there are forms of monasticism (which Howard also calls the “religious life”) that are conducive to socio-political engagement. He is not arguing that everyone should become a monk or a nun of some sort but does suggest that there is something to traditional and fresh expressions of the monastic life that lend themselves well to the kind of engagement he envisions. To this reviewer, this argument is a good one but too narrow. Why not think of the church qua church as the institution most agreeable to socio-political engagement? Of course, monasticism in an ecclesiola in ecclesia (a “little church” within the church) so it is not separate from the church but always a part of it. Nonetheless, all forms of monastic life are voluntary whereas membership in the church is not if one is a baptized Christian. That is, if all Christians are called to socio-political engagement because all people are political persons, and if the church supports the kind of disciplines and practices that support such engagement, then why limit one’s vision to expressions or forms of monastic life?
Thankfully, Howard avoids any kind of “monks and nuns are more spiritual than ‘normal’ Christians, so they are expected to be more fully engaged” argumentation. This is not a text that remotely suggests or advocates for a “monk as virtuoso” approach. In fact, Howard’s understanding of monasticism (i.e., religious life) is so broad that literally anyone can be a monk (a position that I do not necessarily reject) but I think such an understanding reinforces my observation (criticism?) that perhaps the book is better framed as being pertinent to every Christian in every pew as opposed to monks and nuns of any sort. As simply put as possible: a Christian is called to socio-political engagement as part of her life of discipleship to Jesus and formation in and by the Holy Spirit. Thus, the church must make such engagement possible, providing the resources (material and spiritual) to make such engagement possible. As it turns out, this book is “just another plea for formation or discipleship” and that is not a bad thing since formation and discipleship are the Christian life. One might note that the church cannot or has not been able to support such engagement but that is a different argument and book altogether. The answer, as Howard well knows, to failures in the church is not to create a higher, more holy church and call it “monasticism” but to call the church to live more fully into her divine mission.
Having said this, I want to unhesitatingly recommend this book to every Christian who is serious about her formation and discipleship. Howard has read and synthesized an incredible amount of literature, distilling it into a clear and easily understandable presentation. Given the realities of our (overly-)politicized world today, this book is a helpful guide for not just being concerned about society and politics but instructive of how every Christian can get serious in his socio-political engagement(s). This book has made me realize that my default tendency is toward political inaction. But it turns out that I was wrong for socio-political engagement is part of what it means to be a Christian. Monks and nuns have shown us this for centuries and Howard reminds of us this now.