Upvote:4
These two factors may have been important:
1) It seems that Benedictine monasticism is not a strong or important force in the Ottonian lands. There is almost no mention of the Ottonian lands, for example in Marilyn Dunn's Emergence of Monasticism for example.
One reason for this may have been the prominence, instead, of the "Aachen Rule" for canonesses and canons found in the monastaries/chapels that the Ottonians were particularly fond of attaching to their noble houses. A bit on this in a footnote on p164 of Henry Mayr-Harting Rule and Conflict in an Early Medieval Society: Ottonian Saxony: "majority of the houses we have discussed here did not follow the Benedictine rule in the tenth and early eleventh centuries but a form of the Aachen rule..."
2) The critiques implicit of priestly life and the separation of it may have caused tension with the Ottonian rulers with their strong control over bishops, prelates, and religious life. In Mayr-Harting's book, this comes through strongly in chapter 8 "The Ottonians as Sacral Kings" and 9, "Lay Nobles and Sacrosanct Rulers"
Still though, hoping someone might be able to add more on direct interactions between the two.
Whatever antagonism there was, if there was active antagonism, it must have found resolution. Hentry II became an oblate for the Benedictine Order and is still remembered by it.