(12) Discrimination

"...the differences between the lay brothers and choir monks had
become more pronounced as the century began. In a sort of
territorial ordering of space, physical separation ran along strict
lines of demarcation. The kitchens, agricultural areas, and trade
shops became the 'turf' of the brothers. The chapter room, choir
area, and classrooms were the territory of the priests and clerics.
They had separate recreation rooms and oratories, even separate
cemeteries. What was obvious to many outsiders was that priests
and lay brothers were separate but not equal."
[Joel Rippinger, O.S.B., THE BENEDICTINE ORDER IN THE
UNITED STATES: AN INTERPRETIVE HISTORY, The Liturgical
Press, 1990, pp. 154-155.]

Comment: The author of this book was discussing the Swiss-
American Congregation of Benedictines, as it was at the turn of
the 20th century. However, by 1920 European brothers were no
longer immigrating to the United States. Over time these brothers
dwindled, but "there was still operative a mentality that gave
theological justification to the separation of lay brothers and priests."

As Fr. Rippinger also noted, after World War II, what with "the
termination of many monastic farms and specialized trade shops,
as well as printing presses, sawmills, and other operations, the
practical basis for the existence of the lay brothers was rapidly
disappearing. This was combined with an increasing awareness
of the social inequalities in the American society of the 1950s and
1960s and the need to eliminate discrimination and segregation."
[Ibid, p. 158.]

Interestingly, years back I had occasion to talk with a Benedictine
prioress who told me a similar story, that her congregation once
discriminated between the kitchen-worker nuns and the more
educated nuns. She mentioned that the kitchen nuns had to wear
a special apron over their habit until recent times.

I suppose one could easily smart over these confessed conditions
as "discrimination." But, historically, this was very much the trait
of the earlier European class-system. The Benedictines reflected
this, at that time. No matter that St. Benedict, himself, was a layman.
His intent would seem more that his monastery be a place for all
men, including the preponderance of illiterate monks at that time.
Benedict was leery of priests joining his house--and if they did, they
need follow his Rule which talked about seniority in terms of entrance.

But humans are humans, so to speak. We have that barnyard
mentality when it comes to the pecking-order. Though it is not as
pronounced these days in Benedictine houses; because though
priests still dominate, the brothers are usually better educated
and simply prefer not to be ordained. Maybe less a class system,
the situation still stresses status.

Regardless, now in our own times, there seems yet another situation
rising when it comes to "status." There's a rising spread of Benedictine
Oblates, lay monastics attached to the monasteries and priories.
Often these lay people are quite well educated, sometimes successful
professionals, though not terribly trained in theology. Hence they
are addressed at the piety level, fairly parochial, not seriously deep.

Perhaps this case spawns the following situation. At least a
minority of these oblates are hankering towards a deeper theological
background. Some have actually trained at seminaries, colleges,
and universities! Hence they possess a depth of knowledge, and
even may be less "hot-house" in their approach towards theological
understanding.

One would think that these theologically educated oblates might be
more than welcome in the traditional monastic world, but that is not
usually the case. (There are exceptions, but they are rare.) However,
these days--as the call for monastic vocations within a monastery is
dwindling rapidly--methinks there should be a real emphasis, a real
effort towards supplying a seriously mature formation program for
these lay oblates.

Discrimination, put bluntly, holds back progress--as well as holding
back people. In our own time, there are probably as many, if not
more, seriously committed lay monastics out in the world, beyond the
walls, who yearn to carry forth the great Wisdom of the Benedictine
Tradition. Fortunately some of our traditional monks have begun to
take notice. There have been meetings about what to do with what
they term as the "non-traditional monks." How should they be trained?
Should the monasteries serve as formation centers, where the lay
monastic might spend a certain amount of time in serious study with
the monastery monks.

Perhaps still only "talk," but the thought it expresses is hopeful.