Sean Tarjoto
Individual & Society II
Prof. Washburn
Paper 1

The Happy Monk: Psychology
in The Rule of St. Benedict
	A Benedictine monk could never live the life demanded by his God, much less his abbot, without first undergoing severe psychological change. The sober asceticism demands more resources than the individual seeking such a lifestyle may possess.  It is the task of the abbot to guide the men in his monastery toward a divine union with the Catholic God.  Although this is a goal for which the monks voluntarily strive toward, it is made explicit in the Rule that these men may not necessarily understand what is required in this process; they are after all, learning to do so. The Rule of St. Benedict seeks to delineate the expectations demanded of the monk in fine detail, and through the execution of these rules, ensure that the monk become intimate with God. When applying the theories of modern psychology to the rules of Benedictine monasteries, it is apparent that the monk is both positively and negatively reinforced in his quest to reach eternal happiness.
	A cost-benefit ratio that exists to attract the new monk to a life of asceticism.  The advertisement of this relationship is central to the success of the Benedictine monastery. By exploiting the worldly concerns that is greed, more specifically, the greed all men have for happiness, Benedict can extrapolate a simple and convincing argument for monasticism. The cost of monasticism is the ego, and the benefit of monasticism is complete and never-ending happiness after death.  At first, this seems like a ridiculous proposition, especially to the most selfish man (who may also be the man most concerned with his worldly needs). However, when one compares the effort required in this finite life to the reward of infinite, indeed, eternal bliss, than it seems even more ridiculous to refuse.  It is, however, a gamble of faith, but such faith within the medieval European is quite intrinsic because it exists as part of feudal society, and cannot fail to psychologically penetrate the medieval citizen. This tactic may appear to rebuff the modern aspiring monk, but it is the faith prevalent in the Medieval social structure that does not totally destroy the ambition to become a monk. Modern secular society does not possess the intrinsic religious fabric for which the Benedictine monastery evolved from. The common man living in the European middle ages cannot avoid being conditioned to accept Catholicism simply because of the church’s ubiquitous socio-economic invidiousness.
	It the exploitation of this conditioning which Benedict must rely on. But foremost in the heavier conditioning Benedict must use to populate the monastery are the laws of humility. The laws of humility are integral to the structure of Benedictine asceticism. Save for the beneficence of the abbot, the monastery cannot run well without the humility of its members.  The abbot will find it impossible to direct anyone should they not consent to his authority, and this consent, this obedience, is inextricable from humility.  
	To remind his monks of the reason they are there Benedict cites Scripture (in this case, Luke 14:11, “Everyone who exalts himself shall be humbled, and he who humbles himself shall be exalted.”).  It is a method he does not rely on solely, however. It is juxtaposed with either allegory or explanation, Benedict gives his monks both faith and reason to follow his Rule, 
...if we wish to reach the highest peak of 
humility and soon arrive at the heavenly heights, 
we must, by our good deeds, set up a ladder like 
Jacob’s... Without doubt, we should understand 
that climbing as showing us that we go up by 
humbling ourselves and down by praising 
ourselves (57)
Such allegories are both poetic and simple to understand.  They are unthreatening and attract the man interested in monastic life. This initial explanation precedes the iteration of the laws of humility themselves. Having been given the reason (in both epistemological and theological form), the monks have an understanding of what they are seeking, but not yet how to.  Benedict speaks of the laws anyway. What we now have is Benedict using the attraction to monasticism created in Scripture and his own exposition to deliver monasticism’s true nature, and it’s rather difficult lifestyle. 
	Once the monk has entered the monastery, the actualization of his quest becomes almost torturously physical. Here, the monk is negatively reinforced, he is conditioned to detract from worldly concerns.  If he seeks to do anything which may disrupt the religious atmosphere of the monastery he will incur a host of different punishments, from physical beatings to emotionally crippling castigation that is isolation. 
“If a brother is found to be stubborn, disobedient, proud or a murmurer, or at odds with the Holy Rule, or scornful of his elders’ directions, he should be admonished by his superiors...” (70) 
Irrespective of whether he commits some act of fraudulence or sin, the monk understands the consequence of his action, has every inclination to avoid such consequence, and will do whatever it takes to remain in the favor of the abbot, or sometimes rather, outside the need of his redress. 
	The man who enters the monastery may be irrecognizable from the man who leaves, either for the place which he has striven for, or in the failure to do so.  To imagine the state of individual who at the price of his individuality and his ambition, sought eternal happiness brings about two different men. One man may be joyous at his intimacy with a being infinitely greater than him, while another man may simply see himself beaten to a shell of his former self, tired, frustrated, unsatisfied and regretful of his decision to embark on this lifestyle.  It is difficult to imagine this man not leaving the monastery early and abandoning his quest to seek God. 
	Whether this failure of the Benedictine philosophy is due to flaws in the Rule itself, the operation of the monastery, or the individual who could not withstand the demands placed on him is difficult to ascertain.	Whether the monk is aware of this process of change or not may change his ability to adapt. He may feel as if it is not God but his abbot which is ultimately responsible for his fate, and therefore see no transient realm separate and greater than the one he is struggling to depart from; this reality, which is harsh and imperfect.  This is the essence of atheism, however, and such belief in an age of staunch Catholicism would result in a unmerciful punishments more severe than any kind meted out by any abbot. 
	Benedict is not at all blind to the fallacies of his brothers. He realizes the punishments the Rule proportions to the monastery may instigate a monk to leave.  If he does, however, the Rule permits a monk to re-enter the monastery a maximum of three times, but after that “he will be forever forbidden re-entry.” This itself is not only a means to conserve the resources of the monastery (which relies on sustenance farming), but the limit creates within the dissident monk an understanding of finality.  He does not have the luxury of infinite mercy from the abbot. And this will incur the monk to, if he is serious, strive for betterment. To give up on a monk is the last resort, the worst punishment, greater than excommunication.
	To Benedict, the monastic life will bring about a reward entirely worth the sacrifice of physical pleasure. Worldly concerns are simply a fraction of reality, and the physical reality that we experience is but icing on the cake. It is pleasurable, but not healthy. The actual bliss is far greater than any physical satisfaction. It is in fact so great that it escapes our imagination; it escapes any allegory, and it is entirely pure, good, and permanent.