the danger of distraction by Br. Leven Harton
No one should presume to relate to anyone else what he saw or heard outside the monastery, because that causes the greatest harm.
- rule of st. benedict 67: 5
So important is silence that permission to speak should seldom be granted even to mature disciples,
- rule of st. benedict 6: 3
18
Kansas Monks
Taken out of the context of a lived monastic charism, some of St.
Benedict’s rules can seem unnecessarily isolating and severe. What is the “harm” that hearing news of the outside world causes for a monk? And why ought speech amongst the brothers be regulated? Are monks not adults, who have the capacity to filter their own input and derive benefit from interaction with external realities? What is the positive value that Benedict has in mind when he legislates these (and other) limitations on communication in the monastery? It must be admitted that our culture is one that is filled to the brim – full of communication and information. We live in the “information age,” a moment in history where we enjoy unprecedented access to content of all varieties. And while we receive tremendous benefits with the ready availability of information, there is a great pitfall that threatens the foundation of human dignity: distraction. By “distraction” I do not mean the meager, pesky insect that buzzes around your consciousness from time to time, causing the temporary irritation of divided attention. I mean a life of distraction, filled with distraction, focused on distraction. The era in which we attempt to live Christianity is one that offers us a veritable “charism” of secularism in this kind of living—a life of distraction. To live distracted is to be habitually disconnected from the reality that is in front of us. For the Christian, distraction is a grave danger. Separation from reality is separation from God. Distraction barricades the avenue by which Christ comes to meet us. Thus, the life of distraction can be a hidden form of rebellion, a rejection of one’s life and the workings of providence as insufficient, not worthwhile, lacking. The ‘no’ to God in this style of living remains tacit, largely unacknowledged. Instead of encountering one’s life unfiltered, face-to-face, a comfortable buffer of entertainment intervenes. And we elude a conscious responsibility for our lives, hiding behind the hundreds of little choices that maintain distraction. The depth of commitment unique to human action is cast aside in this case, and we give ourselves to nothing. A distracted life, then, is alienated not only from God, but from the execution of truly human choosing.
