Protestant monks

[Atemi]

I’m confused…are you saying that nobody is called to a monastic lifestyle, or that the Apostles weren’t?

I am saying that monasticism finds its source in man, not God. God did not invent monasticism and then direct His people to it, IMO.

Monasticism developed much later after the start of the church as a way to seek seclusion from this world of sin and “distraction.” On the contrary, we are all called to be salt and light and live in the world to reach as many as we can with the Gospel.

…

 

[Atemi]

I can tell you don’t know much about monasteries. A fact of life in every monastery is the constant flow of visitors.

Christ did not command that we go into all the world and wait for a flow of tourists and visitors.

…

 

[NotWorthy]

Christ did not command that we go into all the world and wait for a flow of tourists and visitors…

But Atemi, are you thankful for the monks?

Who do you think preserved the Bibles for all posterity? I don’t think any one group (here on earth) deserves more credit.

 

[VociMike]

Christ did not command that we go into all the world and wait for a flow of tourists and visitors.

You have no idea what God calls individuals to, and it would be better if you didn’t act like you did.

Let’s face it, you don’t like monasticism because it’s too Catholic (and Orthodox, never forget them). Only later do you look for reasons.

 

[as-a-child]

On the contrary, we are all called to be salt and light and live in the world to reach as many as we can with the Gospel.

…

Now the question is what does it mean to “live” in the world?

 

[Pixie_Dust]

It’s kidna hard to preach the gospel in a monastary. Protestants believe that it is important to preach the gospel to everyone. Also, historically it would have been difficult to setup a protestant monastary in the early days.

In the early days of the Church, or the early days of the 1500s?

and Finally, Protestants are stong believers in Scripute Alone, and no where in the bible is there a monastary mentioned.

They think they believe in Scripture Alone but they really don’t.

 

[Atemi]

You have no idea what God calls individuals to, and it would be better if you didn’t act like you did.

I repeat what I said previously:

Christ did not command that we go into all the world and wait for a flow of tourists and visitors.

That remains a fact.

Let’s face it, you don’t like monasticism because it’s too Catholic (and Orthodox, never forget them). Only later do you look for reasons.

I have no problem with monasticism at all. I think it to be a novel invention.

In any event, monasticism is moot.

The Apostles were not monastics and did not teach monasticism. To think we know better than they is not the wisest position, IMV.

…

 

[NotWorthy]

But Atemi, are you thankful for the monks?

Who do you think preserved the Bibles for all posterity? I don’t think any one group (here on earth) deserves more credit.

Atemi, you still haven’t given a “shout-out” to our brother monks who helped preserve the Bible for all of you thumpers out there!

 

[puzzleannie]

There was not a “formal way of living out” that gift during the Apostolic era. If you were giufted to be a celibate, then you were to be a celibate. Simple as that.

One does not need to be a monastic to be celibate. Please.

Again, same mistake.

One need not be a monastic at all to be devoted to prayer, to meditation on Scripture, and to daily work.

…

I did not say you have to be a monk to be celibate, I said monks are called to the charism of celibacy (along with others in other vocations). I did not say monastics are the only ones devoted to contemplative prayer, I said that is a major feature of their life style. don’t put words in my mouth.

 

[RevDrNorth]

It’s kidna hard to preach the gospel in a monastary. Protestants believe that it is important to preach the gospel to everyone. Also, historically it would have been difficult to setup a protestant monastary in the early days.

and Finally, Protestants are stong believers in Scripute Alone, and no where in the bible is there a monastary mentioned.

Nor automobile, US consitution, President of the United States, etc.

You and ALL of Western Christianity owe and immense debt of gratitude to monasteries for preserving the Christian faith, the bible and learning through the dark ages. NOT ONLY THAT…brothers and sisters brought hospitals and schools to many part of the US that would have not had them otherwise. These men and women were motivated by the same Gospel you are and were empowered by the Holy Spirit.

Today many Protestants are attracted by the thought of deepening their spirituality. This is why there is even a United Methodist Religious order that is ecumencical saint-luke.org

Gracias a Dios for monks, brothers, nuns, and priests

Rev North

 

[francesco920]

I wonder, since the Lord promised He would send the Holy Spirit to guide the Church, could it be that monasticism finds its origin not in man, as some have suggested, but in the Holy Spirit?

I think this shows one of the differences between Catholics and the more Protestant Protestants. For Catholics, the actions of the Church are not viewed simply as acts of men but as acts of God. For Protestants, the actions of the Church are viewed as merely acts of men.

To the Protestants who say that monasticism was/is not necessary, I say take a good look at your Bible…without the monastics, you wouldn’t have it.

And one more thing: Monasticism isn’t a new thing. It did begin in the early centuries of Christianity, making it far older than Protestantism. But you know what, there wasn’t a such thing as the Canon of the Bible either until a few centuries after Christ. Therefore, in my view, saying that monasticism is a novelty is akin to saying that having a Canon of Scripture is a novelty.

 

[RevDrNorth]

I wonder, since the Lord promised He would send the Holy Spirit to guide the Church, could it be that monasticism finds its origin not in man, as some have suggested, but in the Holy Spirit?

I think this shows one of the differences between Catholics and the more Protestant Protestants. For Catholics, the actions of the Church are not viewed simply as acts of men but as acts of God. For Protestants, the actions of the Church are viewed as merely acts of men.

To the Protestants who say that monasticism was/is not necessary, I say take a good look at your Bible…without the monastics, you wouldn’t have it.

And one more thing: Monasticism isn’t a new thing. It did begin in the early centuries of Christianity, making it far older than Protestantism. But you know what, there wasn’t a such thing as the Canon of the Bible either until a few centuries after Christ. Therefore, in my view, saying that monasticism is a novelty is akin to saying that having a Canon of Scripture is a novelty.

Indeed God has provided many good and godly Roman Catholic men and women whose various charisms have immensley benefited society (schools, hospitals, and preserving learning and the bible through the dark ages). They endured much hardship for the love of Christ. They followed St. James dictum.

ALso, the depth of their spirituality has found new meaning as even Protestants search for this (eg Methodist Religious order that has members who range from Baptist to United Methodist) saint-luke.org

If the Holy Spirit did not empower these brothers and sisters it is doubtful they could have done the great good they did.

Rev North

 

[Atemi]

I wonder, since the Lord promised He would send the Holy Spirit to guide the Church, could it be that monasticism finds its origin not in man, as some have suggested, but in the Holy Spirit?

But waited centuries after Pentecost to introduce it to the faith?

No. I don’t think this is feasible.

Monasticism itself is extremely ancient, but Christianity did not adopt it until much after its birth. I personally don’t think it wise to presume to know better of the faith than the Apostles who learned it directly from The Master. They saw fit not to introduce monasticism to the faith they passed on, unless one wants to claim that they were ignorant of such practices.

To the Protestants who say that monasticism was/is not necessary, I say take a good look at your Bible…without the monastics, you wouldn’t have it.

That is highly doubtful. I have much faith that God could preserve His Word with pigeons if He wanted to.

We must remember that it could also be said that we would not have our bibles if it was not for Hebrew copyists. That game goes on and on.

And one more thing: Monasticism isn’t a new thing. It did begin in the early centuries of Christianity, making it far older than Protestantism.

And many of your Councils. That is irrelevant.

But you know what, there wasn’t a such thing as the Canon of the Bible either until a few centuries after Christ. Therefore, in my view, saying that monasticism is a novelty is akin to saying that having a Canon of Scripture is a novelty.

Comparing lifestyles with moments in history is a huge category mistake.

…

 

[Rawb]

Monastics serve a very important part in Christ’s Body: they constantly pray.

Monastaries pray for those missionaries out in the world, and for those of us who live in the everyday world. Catholics believe that prayer is an important weapon in keeping us true to Our Lord and Our Faith, thus once the Church was large enough, many went into the ‘business’ of constant prayer for others.

If protestants believe Catholics aren’t evangelic enough, then perhaps they’re ignoring the facts of who spread Christianity to the Irish, Mexicans, South Americas, Carribbean, Goths, Saxons, and so on and so forth. All due, in no small part, to the many prayers offered up to God from monostaries for the success of missionaries.

Can the foot say to the hand “I don’t need you”? Can the eye say to the tongue “I don’t need you” ? We all hold different positions, and just because some are devoted to the practice of prayer for others doesn’t mean their position is any less than that of missionaries or less important.

 

[Johndigger]

But waited centuries after Pentecost to introduce it to the faith?

No. I don’t think this is feasible.

You’re talking about the completed, compiled and accurate bible, here, right?

 

[NotWorthy]

But waited centuries after Pentecost to introduce it to the faith?

So, are you then denying Protestantism? God waited 15 centuries to send us that.

That is highly doubtful. I have much faith that God could preserve His Word with pigeons if He wanted to.

But He didn’t send pigeons. He sent monks. Why is it so difficult to acknowledge that monks were the tools God used to preserve His writings and that we owe them a debt of gratitude, Atemi?

We must remember that it could also be said that we would not have our bibles if it was not for Hebrew copyists. That game goes on and on.

And I thank my Hebrew brothers for doing exactly that. We owe them that, and so much more!

 

[francesco920]

But waited centuries after Pentecost to introduce it to the faith?

No. I don’t think this is feasible.

Monasticism itself is extremely ancient, but Christianity did not adopt it until much after its birth. I personally don’t think it wise to presume to know better of the faith than the Apostles who learned it directly from The Master. They saw fit not to introduce monasticism to the faith they passed on, unless one wants to claim that they were ignorant of such practices.

You act as if monasticism just popped up out of nowhere. Ascetic practices were there from the beginning and developed. And again I raise the point that the Christian world was not to remain stuck with the practices and understanding of the faith of the Apostles…the Holy Spirit was promised to help Christians delve deeper into the meaning of the Apostolic faith, which led to deeper appreciation and things like monasticism.

And yes, they were largely ignorant of such practices…Christian monasticism had not been developed yet. BUT it is of course obvious that the Apostles weren’t called to be monastics, and that their primary concern was teaching the faith they had received. The Apostolic tradition, however, led to monasticism everywhere. It’s not as if one group in the Christian world suddenly had the idea to build a monastery out of nowhere, no, monasticism was an organic development that occurred as greater understanding of the Apostolic faith came about.

That is highly doubtful. I have much faith that God could preserve His Word with pigeons if He wanted to.

We must remember that it could also be said that we would not have our bibles if it was not for Hebrew copyists. That game goes on and on.

I often hear similar arguments for why Mary isn’t that important: “Well, God could have chosen any other woman.”

The point is, HE DIDN’T. And the way He preserved His Word is through the monasteries. I don’t believe in coincidences. If the monastics were responsible for preserving the Bible and many other texts, which they were, then that meant that they were called to do that by God, which means He approved and blessed the monastic tradition at least, and more likely in my opinion is it that monasticism was in His plan.

And many of your Councils. That is irrelevant.

I was merely commenting. However, it is interesting to me that Protestants seem to deny that the Holy Spirit cannot make His will manifest through the actions of the Church. I am interested, then, to know how exactly the Protestants think that the Holy Spirit guides the Church.

Comparing lifestyles with moments in history is a huge category mistake.

…

How so? My statement wasn’t false. All the elements of monasticism, even though they were in the form of seeds, were there since the Apostolic times. An example would be the Lord Himself going out to the desert and fasting/praying. The same can be said of the Biblical canon. Both were not fully developed until centuries later. Both were fostered by the Church guided by the Holy Spirit. Thus, it would be silly to say that the Canon was a novelty and sprouted up out of nowhere, and the same is true of monasticism.

 

[NotWorthy]

Wouldn’t the Essenes be considered Pre-Christian Monastics? Don’t we have them to thank for preserving the Dead-Sea Scrolls?

 

[Atemi]

Monasticism itself is extremely ancient, but Christianity did not adopt it until much after its birth. I personally don’t think it wise to presume to know better of the faith than the Apostles who learned it directly from The Master. They saw fit not to introduce monasticism to the faith they passed on, unless one wants to claim that they were ignorant of such practices.

You act as if monasticism just popped up out of nowhere.

I just said that monasticism is extremely ancient.

Ascetic practices were there from the beginning and developed. And again I raise the point that the Christian world was not to remain stuck with the practices and understanding of the faith of the Apostles…

I am sorry, but I do not look at following the faith once and for all delivered to God’s people as something to be “stuck” in.

And if anyone really believes they understand the Apostolic faith better than the Apostles themselves, then they are on their own there.

the Holy Spirit was promised to help Christians delve deeper into the meaning of the Apostolic faith, which led to deeper appreciation and things like monasticism.

Nowhere in Scripture did God ever promise to help anyone “delve deeper” into the “meaning” of Apostolic faith…of which monasticism was not a part.

And yes, they were largely ignorant of such practices…Christian monasticism had not been developed yet.

The Essenes themselves were monastics.

The Apostles were not ignorant of the monastic life or where that all fit in into the faith they passed on to us. I think to declare so could actually be construed as an insult to their own understanding of what they learned first-hand.

BUT it is of course obvious that the Apostles weren’t called to be monastics, and that their primary concern was teaching the faith they had received.

Nor did they teach anyone else to live a monastic life. Actually, just the opposite.

The Apostolic tradition, however, led to monasticism everywhere.

Tradition means it is traditional.

The Apostles did not teach it. Do not blame them.

What led to monasticism was the desire to flee the world and abandon the call to live in the world, but not part of it.

**That is highly doubtful. I have much faith that God could preserve His Word with pigeons if He wanted to.

We must remember that it could also be said that we would not have our bibles if it was not for Hebrew copyists. That game goes on and on.**

I often hear similar arguments for why Mary isn’t that important: “Well, God could have chosen any other woman.”

The point is, HE DIDN’T. And the way He preserved His Word is through the monasteries. I don’t believe in coincidences. If the monastics were responsible for preserving the Bible and many other texts, which they were, then that meant that they were called to do that by God, which means He approved and blessed the monastic tradition at least, and more likely in my opinion is it that monasticism was in His plan.

I think you misconstrue the point of why I posted in this thread.

This thread is not about Protestants who do not like the earlier Christian monks. This thread is why Protestants generally do not have a large monastic movement.

Monasticism was not necessary for the preservation of Scripture. That could have been done without monasticism.

Just as in today, we do not need monasticism to preserve the Scriptures. It is not monasticism that preserved the Scriptures…it was the will to preserve the Scriptures that preserved the Scriptures.

All the elements of monasticism, even though they were in the form of seeds, were there since the Apostolic times.

Invisible “seeds” are not doctrines and practices.

An example would be the Lord Himself going out to the desert and fasting/praying.

And He did that not as a monastic.

ANYONE can go off for periods of prayer and fasting. No need to be a monastic for any of this and that is exactly the point. Monasticism is moot.

Vows of strict obedience to some office not taught by the Apostles?

Never taught.

Vows of poverty?

Never taught.

Vows of celibacy?

Never taught.

Vows of silence?

Never taught.

Does one need to be a monastic to have a very effective and prayerful spiritual life?

No. None of the Apostles were monastics and they were as highly spiritually developed as they come.

This is the only point.

…

 

[NotWorthy]

And yet, Atemi, you still haven’t acknowledged the wondrous debt that you owe to these “non-apostolic” monks.

Atemi:

Monasticism was not necessary for the preservation of Scripture. That could have been done without monasticism.

But again, God didn’t trust the Biblical preservation to pigeons. He trusted it mainly to these “non-apostolic” monks.

Interesting. Is it that hard to acknowledge the gifts these people left this world?