Of Maronites and Monasticism

[dzheremi]

Hello, Syriac Maronite friends.

A recent thread (I can’t remember which) had a few posts from the more educated of our Maronite posters lamenting the decline and essential ruin of the Syriac Maronite monastic tradition. My question is: When and how did this occur?

I got the sense from those posts (and previous things I have read and watched, like LBC’s episodes on the Maronites for their “Confessions of Lebanon” series) that the Maronite monastic tradition used to be flourishing - a real anchor of Syriac spirituality for the Maronite people. Of course, none of these pro-Maronite sources really went into any sort of discussion on the decline of monasticism or the Church in general (I think the LBC documentary had something about how the “old guard” of Church leadership tried to warn the powerful Maronite families – e.g., the Gemayels, the Geageas, etc. – not to get involved in the civil war; what a lot of good that did!), but coming as I do from outside, and what’s more from a Church that has been scattered recently but has seemed to maintain its monastic traditions even in the lands of immigration (e.g., the Abbey in Texas, the monasteries in California, New York, Italy, etc.), I can’t help but feel a little sad along with you that a Church that was once so steeped in and formed by monastic practice and principles has become unmoored from this source of guidance and stability. Maybe if more people knew the histories of the Maronite monks (and, NO, I don’t mean those Latins pretending to be Maronites who have shown up here a few times…), they could be inspired to revive the traditions that are for now lost, just as there was a great revival of Coptic monasticism in very recent history (if I remember correctly, it was HH Pope Kyrillos VI who oversaw this in the 1960s, renovating or approving the renovation of many monasteries that had fallen into ruins over the years; also Fr. Matta el-Meskeen drew many to the monastery of St. Macarius in Wadi’ el-Natrun; Wiki says it grew from six monks at the time of his arrival in 1969 to 130 at the time of his death in 2006!). I have noticed that there are some Maronite monasteries, such as that of Mar Charbel in Annaya, that even have webpages – does anyone know if they have found new recruits from these modern methods? The only thing I’ve ever found about new Maronite monks that really seemed to follow the pattern of St. Anthony and the early monastics is that one video on Fr. Dario Escobar, who really went to the Qadisha valley from Colombia with nothing beyond a feeling that this is where God has planted him…may God bring a million more like him, and not just in Lebanon…

In the Coptic Church in the West, by the way, we have similar stories; check out, for instance, the story of Fr. Daniel St. Moses, formerly Matthew Rodriguez, who just a little while ago left behind the world to join the monks of the monastery in Texas. Such things can happen…maybe there are more stories like that among the Maronites, too, that for whatever reason go unnoticed in the rush to, uh…“modernize” the Syriac Maronite Church? (or whatever the heck is going on; I dunno…I just try to look for bright spots in everything.)

What say you – How did you get into this spot, and how/can you get out of it?

 

[Isaiah45_9]

That was a really cool story, from a fellow Boricua

 

[MorEphrem]

What say you – How did you get into this spot, and how/can you get out of it?

We got into this spot for two simple reasons: (1) a particular patriarch was just dying to throw every terrible innovation of Vatican II at us since he interpreted Vatican II as liturgically relevant to our Church [see latest English missal intro for this riveting tale], (2) anyone not destroyed by the brilliant moves of this patriarch and his successors was overtaken by individuals like the Latins who now call themselves the “Maronite Monks of Adoration.” Inorganic groups formed by entirely non-Maronite groups given “safe haven” from certain accusations, and monopolizing on monastic authority while lacking legitimacy or tradition. One can see how these two lead to our current status.

 

[Celticnovice]

I shared a video on Fr. Dario awhile back in the “Maronites and the Jesus prayer” thread. You can see him holding a prayer rope in the video youtu.be/loeFmgfLgOA

 

[Isaiah45_9]

Maybe I shouldn’t have watched this, it hit me hard, very hard.

Praying that Father Dario finds the peace he seeks in Christ Jesus.

 

[dzheremi]

I shared a video on Fr. Dario awhile back in the “Maronites and the Jesus prayer” thread. You can see him holding a prayer rope in the video youtu.be/loeFmgfLgOA

Yes, that’s the video I was referring to in the OP (I didn’t post it there because YT wasn’t working for me earlier, so I couldn’t access it). It’s wonderful to see a man so dedicated to his chosen path in the tradition of the hermits of the valley.

 

[shlomo3amrooh]

I am not Maronite, but the situation you have described deeply resembles the situation of both the Syriac Catholic Church and the Chaldean Church. So I will only speak on what i know.

The reason for the situation that the OP describe is, I believe, deeply rooted with the council’s idea to ‘open up’. And that ‘opening up’ should take precedence over everything (dogma, liturgy, tradition etc). many of the Eastern prelates jumped on this bandwagon.

Monasteries are, in and of themselves, closed institutions. They are closed from the world, filled with Men (or Women) who devote themselves to GOD. They are devoid of any earthly attachments, they are NOT OPEN to the world.

I believe a major error has been this so-called “opening up” of monasteries. This mentality has been detrimental to atleast the SCC and the Chaldean Church in terms of their monastries. Rahmani built many monastries in many parts of the world, they are now almost empty.

Fortunately though there are glimpses of a renewal (at least within the Chaldean Church).

As I have stated previously before, this situation is sad. The Syriac Churches are fundamentally rooted in their monastic, liturgical life.

 

[dzheremi]

Thank you for sharing your perspective as a Syriac Catholic, shlomo3amrooh. I guess I shouldn’t have limited the scope of the thread to Maronites, and I suppose I didn’t really mean to anyway…it just came out that way since it was our Maronite posters writing about their lost monastic traditions that inspired me to start this thread.

 

[malphono]

Interesting topic, dzheremi. I guess it’s time for me to weigh-in. :yawn:

What [post=11491592]MorEphrem[/post] said in an pearlier post is completely true, but there are some historical facts that I suppose bear mention.

Up until the 17th Century, Maronite monks (and nuns) were organized into independent monasteries, just as is the case with the Copts and even the EO. IOW, there was no such things as a “Religious Order” of monks. Further, there were two types of clergy: celibate monks and married village priests. Bishops, of course, were always drawn from the ranks of the monks.

That began to change in the 16th Century with the first effects of latinization, when the phenomenon of celibate secular clergy began to take hold. The change became more acute after the establishment of the so-called Maronite College" in Rome, when the alumni of that institution returned home, and most became bishops. A type of power struggle ensued, with these Latin-trained bishops attempting to control the monasteries. this went on for about a century until a monastic backlash resulted in an appeal to Rome and the formation of the first of the Monastic Orders (the Aleppines, which ultimately split a century later, into the OLM and what is now called the OMM) by Papal Bull. In 1700, a third Order (the OAM) was established in a similar way. All are of Pontifical Right, meaning that they are effectively independent and not subject to the machinations of local bishops. A few independent monasteries persisted for a while, but those were gone at least by the late 18th Century. And of course the trend of selecting bishops from the ranks of the Latin-inspired celibate secular clergy has continued. In recent years, though, a few monks have been ordained to the episcopate, and the current Patriarch is the first monk elected to the throne in over 200 years.

These days, the three Orders are a mixed bag, although they all seem to do well enough in the vocations department. One has, within the past 35 or so years, become extremely Latinized, to the point where they have required Sacred Heart deotions, reportedly on a daily basis. The second (and largest) underwent some internal upheaval in the late 1970s, and has since tended to “Arabize” things. (Think Louis Hage.) The third (and smallest) is the most authentic, and even offers Syriac classes to the public in a few places in Lebanon, but even they are but a shadow of what they were 35 years ago.

Not sure if any of that helps, but I’ll try to add more if needed.

 

[dzheremi]

Thanks for the info, Malphono. So in order to get back to the old ways you’d need to abolish the “secular clergy”/the orders that make this distinction possible, so that the monasteries could function independently again? Hmm. Sounds like a tall order, and one that Rome (and hence Rome-appeasing church leaders) would not be too happy about.

I don’t really understand why the West can’t have its orders to its heart’s content and let the East just have…monasticism…y’know, how there aren’t any “orders” in Oriental or Eastern Orthodox monasticism…but hey…somebody else’s fight, I guess…it’s just weird to see Franciscan Syriacs in Iraq, or Franciscan Copts in Egypt…even the Eastern/Byzantine Catholics that get “their own” orders, like the Basilians, are still in orders, which as far as I understand it is a concept foreign to traditional Byzantine monasticism; I’m pretty sure the Byzantines just have monastics like us (Coptic Orthodox), without further complications. They seem to be doing fine, so I have to wonder as an outsider what good or purpose any of this order or “secular clergy” business actually does anyone. I suppose it make Eastern/Oriental monasticism more easily relatable to the Latin Catholic majority who have historically called the shots for everybody in your communion? Seems like an awfully steep price to pay to affirm your “Catholicism”, not to mention inherently anti-catholic, at least in the way that the rest of the world (outside of Rome) understands that term…

 

[EphelDuath]

We got into this spot for two simple reasons: (1) a particular patriarch was just dying to throw every terrible innovation of Vatican II at us since he interpreted Vatican II as liturgically relevant to our Church [see latest English missal intro for this riveting tale], (2) anyone not destroyed by the brilliant moves of this patriarch and his successors was overtaken by individuals like the Latins who now call themselves the “Maronite Monks of Adoration.” Inorganic groups formed by entirely non-Maronite groups given “safe haven” from certain accusations, and monopolizing on monastic authority while lacking legitimacy or tradition. One can see how these two lead to our current status.

Would it be against forum rules to name this patriarch?

 

[malphono]

Would it be against forum rules to name this patriarch?

Probably not, but would it really matter?

 

[malphono]

Thanks for the info, Malphono. So in order to get back to the old ways you’d need to abolish the “secular clergy”/the orders that make this distinction possible, so that the monasteries could function independently again? Hmm. Sounds like a tall order, and one that Rome (and hence Rome-appeasing church leaders) would not be too happy about.

Well, I don’t care all that much about the celibate secular clergy, so whether it’s abolished or not is of little consequence. Even the GO have celibate seculars, so who cares? The monastic Orders are another matter. As I mentioned earlier, the reason they were established in the first place was for protection from Latin-trained non-monastic bishops. It’s kind of an odd case since Rome actually sided with the monks and against the bishops trained there. And there has ever been enmity between the non-monastic bishops and monks ever since, Pontifical Right notwithstanding. There still is to a degree.

There’s also another chapter in the Orders saga that I didn’t give earlier. When they were established, the constituent monasteries were organized rather loosely under an Abbot-General, something like the way the OSB is today. Each monastery had an abbot, as was traditional, and he had a voice in the chapter. The main thing was the Rule, and the fact of Pontifical Right. IOW, each monastery was quasi-independent. That went along until 1955 when an enemy of the monks was appointed Patriarch. Rome then insisted that the monks undergo a reorganization, and things changed. No longer did a monastery have an abbot. It had a superior. The model essentially changed from OSB to mendicant in that respect. It does happen occasionally that the superior is a former Abbot-General, in which case he of course retains the title and trappings of Abbot, but does not have abbatial jurisdiction within his house. IOW, even the quasi-independence was taken away.

I don’t really understand why the West can’t have its orders to its heart’s content and let the East just have…monasticism…

Because those who are trained by, and are ever subservient to, Rome, have decided otherwise. Makes no sense to me either. In matter of fact, whether it’s called an “Order” (like the OSB or O.Cist, e.g.) or not, is minor, since in both of those cases, each abbey is sui-juris, which is essentially the same as the traditional Oriental model of an inependant monastery. If that were still the case with us, there wouldn’t really be much to argue about. But of course it’s not. Far from it.

 

[Rafkqa]

I agree that the distancing of ourselves from Monastic traditions, has been a major loss for the Maronite Church. I visited Father Dario with my daughter when I was in Lebanon last year and it was fantastic. My cousins regularly go and see him and he always sends his love and prayers. He has really invigorated the region.

We can not change what has happened previously. Can I just say that the Maronites are not the only ones who have seen a dwindling of the Monastic traditions. Orders in Italy and all over the west have seen the same thing.

So what can we do? We can focus on the very smallest of principles and plant them in the hearts of our children so they may one day be inspired. Today is the Feast of St Nematallah Hardini. We know from the Maronite Synod of 1736 that in the lead up to Christmas, abstinence was required for the twelve days from 13th - 24th December (that may or may not have been a shortened fast to the original and some may attack it as a latinisation - I am not going to get into that). These are at minimum the fasts that St Nimatullah and St Charbel would have observed. We can all learn from those little things, fasting, meditation and prayer and we can teach them to our children. We can teach ourselves and our children about the great Monastics that came before us, men and women, Mar Maroun and his female disciple St Domnina, in the hope that one day they may be inspired to renew the great Monastic traditions of our forbearers.