Caroline Schroeder has transformed her doctoral dissertation (Duke 2002) into a book and, in the process, incorporated recent research. Her goal is to uncover the monastic ideology of Shenoute (leader of the White Monastery in Upper Egypt, d. 465) through a careful reading of his works. The theoretical influences on Schroeder are made clear in the introductory chapter (1–23): John Thompson on ideology (“meaning in the service of power,” 9), Michel Foucault on discourse and discipline, and Mary Douglas and others for theories of the body. After building this theoretical foundation, she turns directly to the works of Shenoute, perhaps because only one full-length study of his thought has been published since J. Leipoldt's Schenute von Atripe (Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs, 1903): Shenoute and the Women of the White Monastery, by Rebecca Krawiec (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002). While Krawiec addressed the difficult relationship between Shenoute and the women's community, Schroeder analyzes the overall monastic ideology expressed in his works and argues that his basic theme is that “the purity of the corporate monastic body depends upon the purity of the individual monastic body” (3). Each chapter explores some aspect of the interaction between the various monastic bodies. However, she is careful to specify what will not be attempted in the book: “a thorough analysis of Shenoute's exegetical system or the versions of the Coptic Bible from which he quotes” (21). She is aware that Shenoute states his ideas in biblical language but intends to limit her study of this area.

Schroeder begins her analysis (chapter 1) with Canon 1, which includes works written before Shenoute became head of the community. He criticizes the current leader, Ebonh, for failure to control theft, lying, and sexual sin among the monks. In biblical vocabulary, he likens the monastery to the unfaithful wife, Israel. Somehow Shenoute's critique of lax leadership resonated with other monks, for he became the next leader. Chapter 2 discusses the monastic rules that he enforced. Since the monks are “fellow-members” (see Rom. 12.5), the sin of one affects all, and offenders must be corrected or expelled. But Shenoute hopes that the Lord will forgive the offenders (read “may the Lord forgive them,” not “the Lord shall forgive them” [82]; see 2 Thess. 3.16) because the community cannot simply forgive if it is to maintain its purity.

The church at the White Monastery, still partially preserved, is the focus of several works by Shenoute in which he outlines its meaning for the community. Schroeder shows (90–125) that for Shenoute the church is another body and thus another venue for ascetic discipline: “the monk … existed in a four-part relationship in which ascetic discipline affected not only his or her own body and soul, but also the community, the church building, and even Jesus Christ” (92). This four-part scheme is compared with church building ideas in Pachomius, Paulinus of Nola, and Ambrose. It is useful—and rare—to find Shenoute read alongside other church fathers. But Schroeder misses the point when she suggests that Shenoute argued with Gnostics based on his use of the term “demiurge.” As in Athanasius and many Coptic tomb inscriptions, this is a term for God the Creator (read “they should not say humanity is evil; because it was created by the Demiurge, it is very good” [101, n. 49], my retranslation).

In the final chapter, Schroeder focuses on Shenoute's defense of the value of the body against ideas he deems heretical or pagan. Though he knows the language of Alexandrian orthodoxy, he makes his points in biblical terms: the body was created by God (Genesis); the incarnation is a full embodiment (John); bodies will be raised (Ezekiel, the Gospels). Schroeder shows that Shenoute uses embodiment beliefs as a test of orthodoxy and often “elides distinctions between pagans and heretics” (138) based on the issue of the body. This point provides useful balance to recent emphasis on identifying pagans in Shenoute's world. Schroeder concludes with an excellent summary of the way ascetic discipline works for individuals and community in Shenoute's system. The behavior of each person, whether a layperson from the surrounding area or a monk inside the White Monastery, can strengthen or weaken the body of Christ, yet each one is responsible for his or her own salvation.

The outline is good, but there are problems with the details. A few examples of the types of problems must suffice. First, misreading the scriptural context leads to misinterpretation of Shenoute. Schroeder discusses a text in which Shenoute compares sullied virginity to debased coinage and to an ostracon (not a clay jar, 116). Prov. 26.23 (not 2 Cor. 4.7 as Schroeder suggests) is behind his reasoning: “Silver dishonestly given is to be considered as a potsherd (ostracon, Coptic blče).” Shenoute argues that “the ostracon is worth more … because the ostracon is put to many uses … including the building of these great houses” (116, my retranslation), showing his knowledge of the use of sherds in construction. Elsewhere (150), the context in Ezekiel 37 is recognized, but the scripture passage is mistranslated so that Shenoute's point is lost. Read “Thus says Adonai the Lord, ‘Say to these bones’ (ačis ehoun),” not “Rise up from these bones” (ačise houn). He quotes scripture exactly, with supposed heretical modifications, and thus ridicules their views. Second, misreading Coptic rhetoric causes problems, for Shenoute also ridicules an opponent through sarcastic restatement of his argument. When the failed leader Ebonh said, “We don't know who sinned, do we?” Shenoute replied with exactly the same kind of Coptic rhetorical question: “God doesn't speak with ashes, does he?” (33, my retranslation). The expected answer to both is no, but the heavy sarcasm, given the fact that God did speak to “ashes” (Abraham, Job), makes Ebonh's denial ridiculous. This point is lost in Schroeder's translation, and she goes on to state that Shenoute is “never the most subtle” rhetorician (43). He may not be subtle, but he is highly skilled at quoting the Bible, applying biblical lessons, and using Coptic rhetorical devices.

Schroeder has made a valuable contribution to the study of Shenoute and early monasticism by clearly showing how his concept of interrelated monastic bodies drives ascetic practice, and the book is a good introduction to his thought. But there is more to be learned from a careful reading of these texts, and this depends on forthcoming critical editions and improved translations.