I wanted to share a very interesting comment made by a tonsured monk in my most recent article at Return of Kings ("How To Write In A Foreign Language").
Yes, you read that correctly.
This brother's handle is "Cui Pertinebit". The most startling comment is this one, in which he appreciates the red pill wisdom of the manosphere, and registers his contempt for contemporary culture, as we do here. In the comments, I asked him what order he belonged to. He replied at length:
To me, his comment raises some interesting discussion points:
1. To what extent does manosphere ("red pill") teachings intersect with traditional religious doctrine?
2. Are we likely to see a revival of traditional religion, as a backlash against feminist excesses?
3. Will traditional institutions continue to function, as they did in the remote past, as preservers of traditional civilization in the face of barbarian onslaughts?
.
Yes, you read that correctly.
This brother's handle is "Cui Pertinebit". The most startling comment is this one, in which he appreciates the red pill wisdom of the manosphere, and registers his contempt for contemporary culture, as we do here. In the comments, I asked him what order he belonged to. He replied at length:
Quote:Quote:
Camaldolese would be the best description of it. I'm Catholic, but my hermitage is not incorporated into the governing structure of the larger orders; Camaldolese spirituality makes room for a half-way point between eremitical and cenobitic (community) life, under the Rule of St. Benedict's spirit of moderation. I was tonsured a monk by my bishop, and my hermitage is in the process of becoming an institute of diocesan right.
The past century saw the invasion of modernism and all its falsehoods into the very bosom of the Church. What many men have dubbed "Churchianity," as I gather, eclipsed the true doctrine and nature of the Church. I believe that the Virgin predicted this crisis was to come, in her apparition at Fatima. I know some will think that religion or credence in the supernatural is a sign of idiocy or effeminacy, but, predictably, I disagree. The apparition at Fatima is striking to me, for the public notoriety of its miraculous events, and for the accuracy of its predictions about the 20th century: that Russia's errors would eventually contaminate the entire Earth (Communism, Socialism, Progressivism), even putting the "Church in eclipse," pitting the highest ranks of the clergy against each other in a major apostasy, dragging them and many thousands of the laity who blindly followed them into hell.
I would say that is exactly what has been happening in Western civilization for the past 60 years or so. For that reason, I found it impossible to simply join one of the established orders, which have all been appropriated by the modernists, and became an hermit instead.
Anyway, I realized some of the red pill truths about women a long time ago, but I also believe very firmly that a man needs to be honorable and virtuous. I was not willing to marry in the current culture, and I was also not willing to become an hedonist or sexual opportunist. I realized celibacy and a life lived in pursuit of manly virtue and the supreme Good was the only honorable path I could take, as a man in my position. I also realized that the monks preserved Western civilization the first time it went through a crisis, and we'll need some of them around to do it again.
I'm glad to volunteer for the job. I've amassed a library that covers the basic elements of mathematics, medicine, philosophy, law, etc., and I've tried to retain competence in basic mathematics (to algebra/trig), scientific knowledge and logic. I've got a library of many Classical and Patristic texts in the original Greek or Latin, and have undertaken the study of Greek and Latin as the key to the Western tradition. Also, frankly, I wanted to understand the authentic teachings of the Church before the modernists started disseminating their nonsense, always unofficially, in the 60s. Greek and Latin have helped with that - which, I'm sure, is why the modernists were so eager to banish Latin from the liturgy and the seminaries. I hope to God that there will be no call for me to preserve these things through a crisis. But, if there is, I'm ready to try and do so.
I like to read the "red pill" sites, because it pleases me to no end, to see that even secular men are starting to realize that the Church and the Patriarchy were right about manliness, hierarchy, the role of authority and tradition in society, etc. I suppose that not all "red-pill" sites are explicitly reactionary or neo-reactionary, and I know that many guys are only interested, initially, in "game" for the sake of getting laid. But in the process, they take a big swipe at feminism.
Feminism is the belly of the beast, at present; by dissenting from it, they put themselves on a trajectory that could lead them to neo-reaction/reaction/traditionalism, and in fact I often observe that this occurs. And then it is my turn to be "pleased and amused," that men who frequent a site like this are starting to have some ideological common ground with men of the cloth, who have always taught things about contraception, sexuality, patriarchy, authority, masculinity, etc., that many men are just now re-discovering. I am glad that the pleasure and amusement is mutual.
To me, his comment raises some interesting discussion points:
1. To what extent does manosphere ("red pill") teachings intersect with traditional religious doctrine?
2. Are we likely to see a revival of traditional religion, as a backlash against feminist excesses?
3. Will traditional institutions continue to function, as they did in the remote past, as preservers of traditional civilization in the face of barbarian onslaughts?
.