Thursday, November 5, 2015

Rod Dreher's Benedict Option thinking explained

by Keith

Stoner Jesus Bible Study

Benedict Option
If you don't understand his Benedict Option, you're not doing it right.
Fringe benefits: the sudden impulse to eat four dozen oysters.


Bookmark and Share

Posted by Keith at 11/05/2015 02:25:00 PM

Labels: , ,

55 comments:

  1. AnonymousNovember 5, 2015 at 3:00 PM

    Ah, the Bongedict - no, wait - Bongaddict Option.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousNovember 6, 2015 at 5:00 PM

      I think the strange behavior stems from the fact that the BO is lkely to go nowhere .... no book contrac no seminars paid for by the publisher, no book tour . etc and this realization is sinking in. Its really a dumb idea that Rod should have done some research on before he came up with the trademark. A wise author does his background research quietly before starting a manipulative publicity buzz that falls flat.

      Delete
    2. KeithNovember 6, 2015 at 5:54 PM

      I think you're probably right, Anonymous November 6, 2015 at 5:00 PM.

      Online sites will re-blog Dreher's catch phrase simply as a matter of good SERP policy, but the chances of encountering a person of faith in the wild actually wearing the "Ben Op" name tag seem to me right up there with getting a firm handshake from "Carl Grunion, Crunchy Con!".

      Particularly in the case of lazily slopped together proto-ideas, things fall apart; the centre cannot hold.

      Delete
  2. KeithNovember 5, 2015 at 3:54 PM

    There must be an alternate explanation for the rambling, the jerry-built Jenga towers of concepts attempted but never realized, the references to critical rituals, the random flights of euphoria alternating with paranoia...

    It's...

    It's...

    Whoa...have you ever thought that our universe might be nothing more than a complex molecule in a whole other universe?

    ReplyDelete
  3. pikkumattiNovember 5, 2015 at 4:49 PM

    From the Stoner Bible Study article:

    “When you think about physics and space and time, my favorite thing to think about lately is that we never, at any moment, actually exist,” Joye said, to a chorus of mm-hmm’s. “We are either remembering the past or anticipating the future, and to be in the now is where eternity is. Because it’s always now. But we’re always thinking in terms of the past — or the future.” She paused. “Sorry, I got off track.”

    And from a recent incredibly long Dreher post on the BOp:

    To be an American is to live in the present (“What do I want Now? What works for me Now?”). I would have said at one point that to be an American is to live in the future too, always looking ahead to the next new thing, but it seems to me that we don’t seriously plan for the future now, as in projecting ourselves imaginatively forward into the next generations, and allowing our present choices to be guided by a consideration of the effects they are likely to have on our children, their children, and their children’s children....

    .... Resistance requires remembrance. Remembrance requires enculturation. The culture of modernity, of modern America, annihilates memory, sees memory as its enemy. If we forget Jerusalem in our exile in American Babylon, we will be assimilated and cease to exist. If we small-o orthodox Christians in the West do not lay claim to the past, and make it a living, vital part of our present, we are not going to have a future.

    The only thing missing is the "Sorry, I got off track."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Somenonymous or otherNovember 5, 2015 at 7:41 PM

      Well, thee was this, on Tuesday:

      "But I ramble. Lord, don’t I ramble."

      http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/the-fragility-of-historical-memory/

      You have to scroll down a lot, after, um, lots of rambling, to find it. It's also followed by lots more rambling.

      Delete
    2. Somenonymous or otherNovember 5, 2015 at 7:43 PM

      *there was this
      sheesh

      Delete
  4. AnonymousNovember 5, 2015 at 5:12 PM

    I'd like to respectfully vote against posting photos of Rod here unless absolutely necessary. Two posts in a row; that's a lot to unsee.

    ReplyDelete
  5. UnknownNovember 6, 2015 at 10:29 AM

    Besides the Oysters you get to venerate the statute of Ignatius Reilly in New Orleans.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. KeithNovember 6, 2015 at 12:20 PM

      This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. KeithNovember 6, 2015 at 12:21 PM

      It's as if Christianity were being rallied by Pee-wee Herman, if Pee-wee happened to be in mortal terror of his penis.

      Sooner or later some Christian group will finally realize Rod's just been punking them all along.

      Delete
    3. AnonymousNovember 6, 2015 at 3:23 PM

      You weren't kidding!

      I think Rod references that book more often than he references the Bible or Church Fathers, even or maybe especially in his ostensibly Christian BO screeds.

      Delete
    4. AnonymousNovember 6, 2015 at 4:07 PM

      Dreher admitted once that he rarely reads the Bible. I doubt he reads the Church Fathers at all. Or the Philokalia. He claims to be reading The Brothers Karamazov now, but he couldn't get through Anna Karenina, so I doubt he'll get to the end, though he'll probably blog about it anyway. You could sum Dreher by saying that he doesn't read but only write and that he doesn't listen but only talk. If he's on the Autism spectrum, then he has my sympathy, but someone should intervene and tell him that his blogging isn't good for him - or anyone else.

      Delete
    5. AnonymousNovember 6, 2015 at 6:05 PM

      Funny you should mention autism. I have often speculated about whether rod has some degree of autism. It certainly would explain some of the behaviors one sees in his blocking. The extreme obsessiveness with certain topics such as homosexuality, the hypersensitivity to the environment and his own physial condition, and the extreme moralism and judgmental attitudes could represent aspects of autistic thinking. One of the characteristics of autistic persons is that they have great difficulty understanding the feelings and motivations of others. They tend to adopt extremely inflexible, rigid, and dogmatic views about the world and how it operates. They are truly baffled and even outraged by aspects of the world that don't fit the model which they have constructed. Of course, one can't diagnose the disorder based on blog posts. However, there would seem to be some parallels.

      Delete
    6. KeithNovember 6, 2015 at 10:29 PM

      Sadly, two of the five comments as of this posting are lionizing Conor Friedersdorf, not Our Working Boy, while another two are correcting OWB for screwing up the italics.

      Not only the italics, he also published the wrong picture.

      Delete
  6. KeithNovember 6, 2015 at 12:56 PM

    What Scrabble Thinking looks like, weed or no weed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. pikkumattiNovember 6, 2015 at 3:44 PM

      Good gosh. How can a professional blogger think that a three thousand word post (even including long quotes) is a good idea. Unless it came out of one of these sessions, I guess:

      A High Plains chill crept over Button’s back deck as Stoner Jesus Bible Study entered its third hour, by which time the weed had pretty well circulated through everyone’s bloodstream. ....

      P.S. BTW, the second half of that Dreher post has nothing to do with the "Why Trump Matters" title. (And the first half doesn't even attempt to explain how Trump matters.)

      Delete
    2. KeithNovember 6, 2015 at 5:09 PM

      Pik, this is why I refer to it as Scrabble Thinking, although I'm giving Dreher credit for facts not necessarily in evidence with respect to whether any thinking is actually involved in it. In truth, it's simply the essence of ultramodern blog writing: fill space with stuff.

      But Scrabble Blogging, let's call it, goes something like this:

      Blog posts are made up of words, words form sentences, sentences which, as we all know, can often be far too long, particularly for crimes involving drugs, drugs can circulate in the body for unpredictable lengths of time, time which no one has enough of these days, days which are getting shorter and shorter, shorter Rod Dreher Scrabble Blogging.

      Delete
    3. pikkumattiNovember 6, 2015 at 6:07 PM

      Blog posts are made up of words, words form sentences, sentences which, as we all know, can often be far too long ....

      Indeed. The result is sort of like this opus. In that words are arranged into proper sentences, and the sentences into proper paragraphs, but the paragraphs taken together add up to something pointless.

      Delete
    4. AnonymousNovember 6, 2015 at 6:28 PM

      Word salad?

      Delete
  7. OengusNovember 6, 2015 at 10:18 PM

    Another reason to not over-indulge in shellfish: domoic acid poisoning.

    ReplyDelete
  8. KeithNovember 7, 2015 at 5:48 PM

    Commenter Anne isn't smoking what Rod's smoking:

    So a church can’t be counted on to help you pass on the faith to your children, but a BenOp community can? There’s something wrong there, and it’s not just that BenOpters think the churches have failed, but that you think you know something they don’t that’s going to make all the difference. Really? Do you think churches haven’t tried? Or again, you think you know better?

    That sounds Protestant or individualist in principle, and yet you speak of the actual BenOp experience in terms that sound more Catholic/Orthodox in its focus on rite/ritual/liturgy than Protestant. What the…?

    The Dreher Ben Op involves a church, and one it more or less revolves around. Granted, a group of converts founded it, and got what they wanted in the way of a priest and pretty much all the rest. But that’s not the way churches normally work, at least not Orthodox or Catholic churches, and not most Protestant ones either, so what will the relationship of BenOp communities be with the churches? Who’s going to tell who what to do? You plan to take schooling into your own hands, away from public schools, but does that include religious education? How do you see the Church’s place there? Subordinate to the community, or vice versa?

    Most intentional church communities have been Protestant, and now it occurs to me why? The Catholic Church, for one, doesn’t normally take direction from its laity. You seem to think Catholic BenOp communities can just naturally spring up around monasteries. But then what? Who gets the final say in children’s religious education? Or sacramental formation? Or even of deciding who’s a member in good standing should a Douthat-type be in charge when a Francis-type is diocesan bishop or, well, Pope? Will BenOps be equivalent to religious orders? Or third orders? Or none of the above? Whichever, you should know the Church will eventually want to call the shots.

    When it comes to doctrine and religious formation, churches have a tendency to want to be in charge. But they’ve failed, you say. So how is this going to work?

    And most importantly, how do you keep the Noah Millmans quiet if you're not able to run your "Ben Op" community like TAC, a Rod Dreher blog, or a Soviet-era gulag?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Somenonymous or otherNovember 7, 2015 at 10:48 PM

      Preach it, Anne. She is so right. And Rod is so deep into his public display of incoherence about his Big Idea and the crowdsourcing thereof, and still can't answer Anne or probably even understand what she's saying. I mean I don't think he knows enough about the basic church processes she's outlining to have any answer for her that isn't pretty much a different version of the protestant "house church" movement, such as it is. (And what it is may be earnest, but so detached from the historic and traditional "thick" practices Rod promotes out of one side of his mouth.)

      Delete
    2. KeithNovember 8, 2015 at 12:43 AM

      anonymousse demonstrates how Rod's new communal Christian world order will work in practice:

      Is it really that hard for you to observe that there is really no moral difference between:
      1) being insulted by sombrero wearing, and
      2) being insulted by hurricane jokes?,

      that, in fact, the two are just morally identical pet causes of arbitrary people?

      The real moral distinction would be those who are comfortable with both jokes, versus those who take offense at one random joke rather than another.

      Such moral clarity, I guess, belongs to a different age (i.e. pre-1970 or so).

      anonymousse

      [NFR: “Morally identical pet causes”? People DIED in Katrina! Tens of thousands of people NEVER GOT TO COME HOME after that storm. People killed themselves in despair over the destruction of that storm. Nobody has killed himself over a college student wearing a g.d. sombrero. Tell you what: it’s time for you to shut up about this topic. Let me take care of that for you. — RD]

      Uppity human beings "thinning" your Christianity? Let Rod take care of that for you.

      Delete
    3. TomNovember 8, 2015 at 7:35 AM

      Same as it ever was. Whatever Rod is feeling right now is the indisputably morally correct thing to feel, and whoever doesn't share his feelings is a moral cretin.

      Delete
    4. DianeNovember 8, 2015 at 1:47 PM

      Did he really say that "take care of it for you" thing? That is textbook-case pathological control-freakery. Mama mia. Who else could get pull that without getting laughed off the stage?

      Re Ann's astute comment: oh yes. I see so many parallels with the charismatic covenant communities, which set themselves up as spiritually superior alternatives to the local parish, disdained parochial oversight and sometimes even episcopal oversight, allied with the cray-cray Shepherding and Discipling Movement via a Protestant group called Sword of the Spirit, and ended up a MESS with countless broken lives and broken marriages in their wake. But Dreher doesn't know recent history and doesn't care. Good thing his BenOp is just a chimera. If he actually had the energy, commitment, and managerial skills to get it going, we'd probably end up with the Cathodox (mostly Dox) Branch Davidians. Or worse.

      Delete
  9. AnonymousNovember 8, 2015 at 2:06 PM

    The market Dreher sought for the Benedict Option was conservative Catholics, but the Benedict Option is too "Protestant" for most of them. The market Dreher's found is conservative Evangelicals, but the Benedict Option is too "Catholic" for most of them, and, regardless, they already get the BO for free on Dreher's blog, so there's no need for them to buy the book.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Somenonymous or otherNovember 8, 2015 at 3:48 PM

    Let's try a thought experiment in which we allow that the culture becomes just as hostile to Christians as Rod foresees. Imagine a church historian writing in a century or two about how the Church endured through this early-mid 21st-century ordeal. Now imagine reading this historian's report that the thing that pulled Christians through it all was a movement with a cheesy brand name like "The BenOp." With the kind of incoherent yet classist underlying philosophy, and confusing mess of doctrinal and political priorities for a structure, that the BenOp seems so far to have, if it has any.

    Right.

    ReplyDelete
  11. AnonymousNovember 8, 2015 at 3:55 PM

    Christianity will be saved from "modernity" (i.e. same-sex marriage) by the internet rantings and ramblings of a repressed homosexual with Asperger's syndrome in small town Louisiana. Crazier things have happened, I guess, but not too many of them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousNovember 10, 2015 at 9:49 AM

      That's the best summation of what Rod's all about that I have ever read.

      Delete
  12. KeithNovember 8, 2015 at 7:15 PM

    Cumulative analysis of the BO reveals it to be little more than a concern trolling operation against communions other than the one Rod currently belongs to. Sure, you can try to implement the BO in all these other communions - and post after Dreher post reveals just how terribly badly your Catholicism, your Protestantism, your Whatever Else really needs it. Particularly your Catholicism, you know.

    Sure, even your Catholics can try.

    But for your BO to work properly, it turns out you have to have the exact mix of ingredients found in only Rod's personal ROCOR church. What a coinkydinky.

    Retrofitting can be so cumbersome and expensive - why not just switch instead? Let Rod help you with that today.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousNovember 8, 2015 at 9:08 PM

      I am Orthodox and I find Rod ideas to be incoherent and quite at odds with a traditional Orthodox ethos. I don't understand why a parish or monastic institution cant achieve what Rod wants his BenOP to do. We Orthodox have always held that it is monasticism that keeps the church vital and relevant within the culture. Rod never discusses Orthodox monasticism. From a traditional Orthodox perspective we should be encouraging monastic vocations as a way to strengthen parish life and the greater culture. Rods lack of understanding with regard to Orthodox theology os mirrored by his lack of understanding of traditional Orthodox praxis. And he is in ROCOR!!?? Also Rod puts the cart before the horse. The rising tide of secularism is not due to "the culture" but rather the church failing in its duty.

      Delete
    2. KeithNovember 8, 2015 at 10:16 PM

      In the event it's not always been crystal clear, I have no problems with Orthodoxy whatsoever.

      When I do point to it, I do so to emphasize how it is being hijacked solely as a utility for the psychological satisfaction of Rod Dreher.

      Indeed, if Rod Dreher himself thought of it as anything more than that he would almost certainly treat it with more obvious reverence.

      Delete
    3. DianeNovember 8, 2015 at 10:22 PM

      Thank you for this perspective! Yes, Rod's religion is sui generis. I take your word for it that he doesn't understand Orthodoxy. And he sure in heck never understood Catholicism.

      Delete
    4. AnonymousNovember 9, 2015 at 12:28 AM

      From my perspective, Rod can have his opinions. We have plenty of people in Orthodoxy who have strange opinions. But Rod is probably the most prominant Orthodox layperson in the USA right now. For better or worse, he is one of the public gaces of Orthodoxy right now. Consequently, Rod has a moral and ethical responsibility to endure that his blogging reflects Orthodox theology and praxis lest he create false impressions about our faith. He has abrogated this moral responsibility. For a man who is continually attacking others for being "objectively immoral" it's astonishing that he does not take his own moral and ethical responsibiliy to our Orthodox faith more seriously.

      Delete
    5. DianeNovember 9, 2015 at 9:42 AM

      Anon (and all the other Orthodox anons hereabouts): Can y'all explain exactly *how* Rod's theological blather departs from correct Orthodox theology and praxis? I ask because, when I said something like "I'm told Dreher's views don;t really represent Orthodoxy" at another blog combox, I was smacked down by a rude dude who goes by the moniker Ad Orientem. This AO guy insisted that Rod was a good, right-believing Orthodox, and that I didn't have a clue what I was talking about -- which is undoubtedly true, but I was just passing along what actual Real Orthodox (including cradles) have told me!

      So, anyway, I know it's a pain in the neck, and I apologize, but, if any Orthodox hereabouts *does* have the time and inclination, I for one would greatly appreciate some specifics as to how Dreherrhian Orthodoxy differs from the Real Thing. Thanks so much in advance!

      Delete
    6. PauliNovember 9, 2015 at 10:54 AM

      Rod never discusses Orthodox monasticism.

      And as Pik, myself and others have pointed out many times, Rod never discusses Orthodox anything. Unless perhaps it's the occasional "Here's how Roman Catholicism and Orthodoxy differ on this point."

      Delete
    7. KeithNovember 9, 2015 at 12:08 PM

      Well, let's remember, like being assigned a witness protection identity, Rod didn't exactly seek out Orthodoxy willingly.

      He forced himself to choose an alternative to Catholicism, and Orthodoxy presented itself to him as his least worst alternative.

      Delete
    8. AnonymousNovember 9, 2015 at 7:30 PM

      It is primarily how he thinks about sin, judgment and morality. Orthodoxy defines sin as amartia or :to :"mss the mark." We regard it as the misuse of our energes and abilities. We view it as a spiritual sickness and the person caught u in sin deserves our compassion not condemnation. Rod views sin as a violation of a moral law. Orthodoxy actually has no developed "moral theology" in the sense that wrstern christianity has developed it. So when Rod speaks of "christian morality" or describes someone as "objectively immoral" he immediately places himself outside the Orthodox ethos. Orthodoxy does not accept "natural law" theology as developed by post schism Aquinas. When Rod condemns transexuals as trangressing "natural boundaries" of gender he is speaking a language utterly foreign to out theological understanding. Rather than seeing these peole as suffering from a psychiatric condition he adopts a moralistic understanding foreign to the orthodox way. Rod has repeated stated that God's judgments may send some peopel to Hell but we Orthdox regard God's judgements as acts of restoration and healing not punishment etc .... Rod's view of the world is deeply Augustinian. In Orthidixy we view human beings as essentially good if flawed. We see God as good and His creation as good. Our understanding of the Fall is different than in the western view but Rod clings to a dark and dismal view of the world and the people in it. Proper Orthodox praxis is to ask for God's mercy for everyone in all places and all times. In Orthodoxy there is really only one prayer "Lord have mercy" vecause the mercy of God covers all things. And yet I can not imaging Rod extending mercy to those whom he judges so harshly.

      Delete
    9. DianeNovember 9, 2015 at 8:33 PM

      Well, I think you have caricatured Western Christianity ;) but I asked for it, didn't I?

      Fathomless Divine Mercy is actually a big deal in Catholicism -- and always has been. (Viz. devotion to the Sacred Heart, the supreme symbol of love and mercy.) From the way you describe Rod's approach, it seems much more akin to Calvinism than to Catholicism. Catholics are not Calvinists.

      Delete
    10. AnonymousNovember 9, 2015 at 9:15 PM

      Eastern Catholic here: the whole idea of categorizing things the way Rod does is just off from the Eastern way of thinking. It's not that we don't think there are grave sins, but we don't put the kind of emphasis on defining them and defining what makes it grave, etc, as the West. Like I know in Western Catholic thought there's kind of a rubric for it (did you know what you were doing, was it voluntary, etc). That's just not a thing in Eastern Christian thinking. Eastern Christians don't go around talking about "objectively disordered" etc we talk about theosis. We don't talk about how many weeks so and so will get for that in purgatory, it's left more open because all we know is so and so's outsides, only God knows what is inside, how they have repented, what barriers they have to being able to do things. And please, don't think this is snooty or judgmental or whatever because technically speaking, Eastern Catholics are in agreement with Western Catholics, so it's not a matter of "you're wrong and we're right." It's a matter of how concepts are explained and approached and emphasized. There is also a ton of emphasis on how judging others holds back your own theosis. The more time I spend pointing at others and saying "oh, that's a grave sin, and he's objectively disordered, and she's going to hell ferrr shuuure" the more that holds me back from my own process of coming near the Holy Spirit. I know "judge not" is in the West too, but it doesn't get hammered on in quite the same way, it's seen as needing to be charitable and generous to others, not an issue of shooting yourself in the spiritual foot.

      Delete
    11. TomNovember 10, 2015 at 7:41 AM

      Diane:

      It might be fairer to say that Catholics aren't supposed to be Calvinists. There are Spirit of Trent Catholics who act as though "anathema" is the most important word in any canon containing it.

      Delete
    12. Anonymous LeftieNovember 10, 2015 at 9:43 AM

      Funny thing... Rod has been quite complimentary towards Calvinism on his blog.

      I got kicked off his blog for noting that Rod's personal religion (that's what it is, to be honest - he couldn't handle any of the existing Orthodox churches in Baton Rouge, and thinking back to his time in Philadelphia, when he got fired by the Templeton Foundation, he didn't seem to like the Orthodox there any better) seems to have very little to do with, well, Jesus one too many times. I'm not just talking about Jesus' words in the Gospels. I'm talking about his Christology, which seems almost nonexistent. It's not that he denies Christ - it's that Christ appears to be a very minor player in his personal religion. In lots of ways, I think he's a nasty, bitter conservative version of a Unitarian Universalist, with UUism's notorious tendency to superficially misinterpret the actual religious practices of the world in a quest to make upper-middle-class people feel smart and special.

      He's even got the low-level persecution complex thing going on, except in Rod's case, it's amped up to 11. Most important to Rod are the "brass knuckles of religious authority", an attempt by Rod to convince himself that the ENTIRE COSMOS is aligned to get revenge on Rod for The Pantsing (has Rod talked about it yet this month?), the Shrieking Abortion Harpy, or any of the dozens of tableaux that Rod trots out to justify his gut reaction from his teenage years when he felt oppressed by his dad and ostracized by his hometown until he got to go to a special school where he could question his sexuality as much as he wanted.

      Delete
    13. DianeNovember 10, 2015 at 10:35 AM

      This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    14. KeithNovember 10, 2015 at 11:23 AM

      I think, compared to the Intensely Curated Safe Space for Rod I routinely mock (the Mizzou students are snowflakes...really?), this joint offers genuine Christian fellowship.

      After all, if you'll let a monkey like me in, you're already more than half way there.

      Delete
    15. AnonymousNovember 10, 2015 at 2:25 PM

      ROCOR tends to attract converts who are especially hard core. As a jurisdiction it was not in communion with any other Orthodox body for decades. Converts obsessed with "purity" of praxis tend to gravitate twards ROCOR. I have no idea why Rod is affiliated with a ROCOR parish in his town. I can imagine the drive to Baton Rouge every Sunday.can get old. I have no idea what his relationshi with the other parish members was like. You know there is always "that guy" whom you want to avoid at coffee hour whether Rod was "that guy" I have no idea.

      Delete
    16. AnonymousNovember 10, 2015 at 2:44 PM

      Rod actually established his "little mission church" - the parish didn't exist before Rod decided he wanted it. Rod's original conversion to Orthodoxy in Dallas was in the OCA, not ROCOR. Almost immediately, he got in the same sort of righteous struggles that he did in the Catholic Church. This, by the way, was one of the main reasons he was fired by the Templeton Foundation - he was told, in no uncertain terms, to knock off the gay-and-loose-women bashing and intra-church squabbling online and do what he was actually hired to do. Rod refused, and started posting a lot of stuff under the pseudonym "Muzhik", which largely amounted to Rod's incredulity that someone was wrong on the Internet and that only he could put things to rights.

      His little mission church is actually Rod's family, a few friends, and the priest (who, naturally, Rod himself was instrumental in getting to come to Rod's neck of the woods). There have been rumors that the church is used as a tax dodge by the actual owner of the property. For a guy who regularly rants about how flabby and weak all Christians who are not Rod Dreher are, and how the point of Christianity is discomfort and hardship (kind of a soft-core BDSM club, I guess), the idea that Rod couldn't handle a half-hour or 45-minute commute to one of the existing Orthodox churches is laughable (alas, though, this does come from a man who blogged, multiple times, about the extreme pain that he suffered from opening his fridge in the middle of the night. Truly, Rod is a martyr for the ages).

      Rod's personal ethics are a bit muddy - see this post: http://contrapauli.blogspot.com/2014/01/orthodox-ethics-in-st-francisville-la.html

      Delete
  13. AnonymousNovember 8, 2015 at 7:28 PM

    The BO amounts to joining ROCORB - Rod's Orthodox Church Outside Rod's Backyard.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. DianeNovember 8, 2015 at 9:00 PM

      Laughing Out Loud - seriously, that is funny! LOL!!

      Delete
    2. PauliNovember 9, 2015 at 10:51 AM

      Nice. Very clever, Anonymous.

      I wonder if publishers are basically replying to Rod's BO submissions with something like the following: "We think your idea is great. You just need to change the name from Benedict Option to something else and you need to change the details in a way that normal readers can understand and smart readers won't laugh at. Also you need to explain to us exactly who your target audience is."

      Delete
  14. AnonymousNovember 9, 2015 at 12:10 PM

    "You're an Orthodox blogger whose online readership is largely gay atheists, but you want us to publish a book about Catholic monasticism for Evangelicals concerned about same-sex marriage?"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. KeithNovember 9, 2015 at 12:40 PM

      You hit on a point many publishers aware of Dreher no doubt have already considered: being a successful blogger and being a successful book author are two very different and discrete skills sets, of which Dreher unquestionably possesses one.

      Delete
  15. AnonymousNovember 9, 2015 at 7:46 PM

    Why would anyone pay $15 to $25 dollars for a book of Rod Dreher's musing on his sister or on Dante or on the Benedict Option when everyone can get said musings for free and ad nauseam each and every day on his blog? Well, as it turns out, not many people *would* do that, which is why Dreher may be having trouble finding a publisher for his BO book.

    ReplyDelete
  16. AnonymousNovember 10, 2015 at 8:37 AM

    is commenter "Andrew W" actually Rod?

    ReplyDelete
  17. AnonymousNovember 10, 2015 at 2:45 PM

    Given "Muzhik," "The Benedict Post," and other such sock-puppet deceptions, there is reason to suspect that not only Andrew W but other commenters might actually be Rod.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)