In an era where the Christian voice is diminishing in the public square and cultural foundations are shifting beneath our feet, the question of how to faithfully cultivate the kingdom of God through cultural engagement looms large for believers. As stewards of a faith that teaches the earth and its fullness belong to the Lord (Psalm 24:1), Christians are faced with the challenge of discerning how to live out this truth in increasingly secular societies. It’s a call not to retreat into our enclaves but to thoughtfully and robustly engage with the world around us.
Rod Dreher’s 2017 seminal work, The Benedict Option, has sparked a pivotal conversation about what this engagement might look like in practical terms. His book doesn’t stand alone; it has inspired a wave of discourse, proposing various “options” for Christians seeking to answer the call to be in the world but not of it. These strategies range from building intentional communities that mirror the early church’s resilience and hospitality to confronting modern-day idols with the truth of the gospel.
This article aims to delve into four distinct approaches that have emerged in this dialogue: The Benedict Option, The Boniface Option, The Inklings Option, and The Boroughs Option. Each presents a unique pathway for Christians to navigate the complexities of modern culture—offering definitions, examining advantages and disadvantages, and exploring how these strategies can intersect and complement one another in the pursuit of a faithful Christian witness in today’s world.
As we embark on this exploration, it’s crucial to remember that these options are not mutually exclusive nor exhaustive solutions. Instead, they represent a spectrum of responses that can inspire and guide Christians in their efforts to contribute positively and constructively to the cultural landscape, anchored by their faith and driven by a desire to serve as a light in the darkness.
The Benedict Option
The first thing to know is that Dreher says in the subtitle of his book that this is an option, not the option. His inspiration is from the monastic community of St. Benedict of Nursia. It has been a couple of years since I’ve read this book, so I found this review and summary to be most helpful. In his book, Dreher proposes a strategy based on the “rule” of Benedict, which includes Order, Prayer, Work, Asceticism, Stability, Community, Hospitality, and Balance.
At face value, it seems that The Benedict Option is more about cloistering than it is about scaffolding. Dreher says that is partly true:
“The Benedict Option is about both retreat and engagement.
“It is retreat in the sense that it requires a) an honest and sober recognition of the condition of our post-Christian culture, and the relationship of the church to it; b) a realistic understanding of how radically Christianity opposes the mainstream post-Christian culture; c) a clear grasp of how radically Christians have to live, in community, to “push back against the world as hard as it pushes against you” (Flannery O’Connor), and d) implementing these new, and renewed, ways of living, in part to build resilience for the trials to come, and to guard against assimilation.
“It is about engagement in that the church has a mission to serve the world, through evangelism and works of charity. The church can only fulfill its mission if it knows who, and what, it is. The early Benedictines lived in community, behind monastery walls, so they could pray as they were called to pray. But they also served the people outside the monastery walls. The former had everything to do with how effectively they did the latter.”
Pros:
As Dreher notes, The Benedict Option creates space with institutional walls so that disciplines can be practiced with integrity and truth, not for the sake of remaining separated, but for the sake of caring for the culture at large. It is about starting schools, not just boycotting state schools; about working with your hands in the dirt and living in the world with eyes wide open, not hiding behind fortress walls away from the world.
Cons:
I think it lacks the assertiveness that The Boniface Option has, and is, therefore, more of a passive engagement. Though it is foundational to the conversation, The Benedict Option is a first step, but not the whole trip.
For more info:
Read The Benedict Option and the review linked above.
The Boniface Option
The Boniface Option is an alternative to The Benedict Option more than it is a derivative of it. This article at The Gospel Coalition gives an even-handed critique of the model named for Benedict and offers one named for Boniface.
Boniface was a missionary to the Saxon people in Germany in the late 7th and early 8th centuries. The Saxons still had ties to the Norse pagan practices of their forefathers and tended to mix them with Christianity. There was a tall oak tree that they believed belonged to Thor. Boniface cut it down and built a church out of it. The display of Christ’s power over Thor led to Saxons converting en masse.
Boniface didn’t cut down Thor’s tree because he hated the Saxons and viewed them as his enemy, but because he loved them and wanted the best for them—Jesus. They had tried to blend their paganism with Christianity, clinging to their old selves rather than putting on Christ. Boniface was a surgeon, removing cancer from their midst, albeit with an axe rather than a scalpel.
Pros:
This is an assertive option that is more offensive than defensive by challenging the cultural idols of our day. It targets idols, rather than letting them consume the people.
Cons:
Nature doesn’t like a vacuum, so if the grace of Christ is not offered as an alternative, then attacking idols alone won’t be effective in changing people.
Cooper writes, “When we confuse our audience with our enemy, we’ll wield our axe with hatred instead of love. We’ll cut people instead of idols. Boniface confronted Thor for the sake of the lost. That must be our attitude as well. The people who watch us aren’t the enemy but victims of the Enemy.”
Thus, The Inklings Option below is a great option alongside this one.
For more info:
Start with the TGC article, and then move to Douglas Wilson’s review of Andrew Isker’s book on this subject. Then, if interested, go read Isker’s book.
The Inklings Option
Named after the famed Oxford group that included C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien, The Inklings Option is all about challenging the dark “Morgul magic” of materialism with the enchanting beauty of God. While these ideas originated with the Inklings, their cohesion into an “option” for which to engage culture is due to writer and pastor Josh Robinson.
“… beauty is no subjective thing. It is not merely in the eye of the beholder. Beauty lives, moves, and has its being in God, and thus has a morality to it — it is good and true because it exists in the God who is Goodness and Truth. Therefore, beauty, properly defined, does have the power to reform and re-enchant.
“The Inklings themselves saw their collective works as powerful, beautiful weapons of reform.”
So how do we do that? Through the church. Robinson says that the church should aspire to be like Rivendell in its honoring of beauty, as a place for the weary, and as a house of lore.
“Historically, the church gave rise to the most eminent writers, poets, painters, sculptors, composers, architects, scientists, and philosophers the world has ever witnessed. There exists no valid rationale for this not to be the prevailing circumstance today. If we aim to unveil the ugliness of worldliness, the process commences with the rediscovery of the forgotten Christian art of crafting beautiful things.”
To his point, Lewis said in his Preface to Paradise Lost that Milton proposed God created all things good, and therefore that which we call bad is only something good that has been perverted and twisted. Similarly, Tolkien says in The Silmarillion orcs were derivatives of elves whom Morgoth twisted and corrupted into evil creatures that served him. Therefore, the strength of this option is that it views the goodness of God in even the evilest of things, and that man, even though depraved, has a natural dignity because they are part of the Imago Dei.
Pros:
The Inklings Option can hold the defense of The Benedict Option with the offense of The Boniface Option in tension. For Robinson, if we are to construct Rivendell, we must be like Nehemiah’s men and carry both a sword (or Boniface’s axe) and a trowel. Chiefly, we do this by appealing to the Light of God and Men. Therefore, it pairs nicely with The Boniface Option and is my favorite out of this group.
Cons:
I wonder what about the Barliman Butterburs and other men of Bree who are not attracted to the high-mindedness of the high elves? How do we help “everyday” folk see and enjoy higher beauty?
Though I’m skeptical that this option is attractive to people who haven’t read any Lewis or Tolkien, Robinson did follow up recently with a personal example about his church plant in the coal country of West Virginia. No one in their church had heard of the Apostles Creed and several couldn’t even read. After years of practicing the Inklings Option, now the church catechizes their kids and knows with authority the origins of their faith.
For more info:
The Boroughs Option
Last is the option I know least about but can surmise a bit. New Christendom Press is hosting a conference later this year called “Building Christian Boroughs,” which I have dubbed “The Boroughs Option.” The Boroughs Option is modeled on King Alfred the Great’s strategy to protect his people from the Danish invasion (Vikings). In so doing he became the first truly English king after uniting England into one kingdom.
Per New Christendom Press, “To secure the people, Alfred organized the country into a series of interconnected and fortified town, often now called ‘boroughs,’ to provide a defensible refuge for the people to worship and build Christian culture. Our time is not so different from Alfred’s. There are enemies invading and enemies within. There are churches to build, walls to put up, and culture to reclaim.”
We see this a little bit already. Whether it’s the Mere Christendom of the Moscow Mood, the New Christendom of Ogden, or the call to masculinity from Batavia, church communities have created pockets of culture in their area. Perhaps that’s what this option is about.
I have not heard back yet if the conference talks will be made publicly available, but a lot of content will likely be produced from it. This option seems to be a blend of the others. From what I can gather it seems more strategic than The Benedict Option, more focused on kingdom building than idol toppling per The Boniface Option, while holding up the beauty of God’s goodness, ultimately seen in Christ, as the defense from the darkness per The Inklings Option.
Pros:
Community focused. A blend of the others.
Cons:
We don’t know much about it right now, and I’m curious how this might scale up and down.
For more info:
We’ll have to stay tuned!
So What?
First, these options matter because they are good strategies. The ideas behind these options are not concerned with handwringing and despair but with constructive action.
Second, not all solutions are created equal. Likewise, a solution to one problem may not fit a different problem. Knowing your options helps you adapt and overcome whatever problem you face. So it is with cultural problems.
Third, when Jesus returns, I want him to find me with my hands on the plow, working to make his kingdom become reality for those who oppose it. These options focus on culture building and engagement, which means building and constructing, rather than self-destructing like what will inevitably happen to progressive ideologies.
Though I enjoyed reading The Benedict Option, the discourse around The Boniface Option, particularly by Douglas Wilson and those in his camp, creates a more active approach. Mixed with The Inklings Option, one can seek to throw down idols while holding up a superior good, similar to Chalmer’s The Expulsive Power of a New Affection. It may be that The Boroughs Option is an improvement on the Benedict Option, but time will tell.
Don’t miss out! Subscribe to my website for articles directly in your inbox. You can also follow me on Facebook and Instagram.
Awake! Put on strength! 