I may have spoken too soon however, these seems to be a series of new books on just this topic. http://lareviewofbooks.org/article.php?id=1166
Reading through your above posts, I agree with being careful about assuming secularization and treading carefully, though I always tend to take Foucaultian analysis with a grain of salt. For example, i would say that Ancient Greek and Roman conceptions of the polis, the citizen and the self inform our modern socio-political weltanschauung just as much if not more than Christianity (I haven't really read Foucault so I'm not sure how he tackles the issue of the 'Christian pastorate' influence). But that's tangential to the major issue here, which is a self education or paidea through Exercitia spiritualia
. Something which you mentioned here I think strikes at the root of the difference that I see between both (Buddhist and western) approaches however, namely western conceptions of individuality. The modern ideals seem to be much more individualized, the care of the self is either a 'self care of the self' in the manner of Montaigne or Marcus Aurelius. However there is also another strain which is systematized and medicalized, the psycho-therapeutic model (which I believe Foucault also critiques heavily in one of his books).
There seems to be in the west a widespread dislike and maybe even fear of authority. I think this is where conflict between the two would generally arise, and Buddhism has generally had to become much less hierarchical and authoritarian as it came west. Interestingly, I don't think that Buddhism is inherently structurally authoritarian (at least not to the extent we see it in some places), just the cultures that have inherited Buddhism have generally had such a structure. I still think that there are issues here however. Buddhism would say to you to find the most realized teacher you can and study under him. Western 'care of the self' (and here I mean the Greco-Roman tradition) seems to approach things auto-didactically, at least modern conceptions of it (modern 'Stoics' for example, check the new stoa website). Interestingly, this is not how ancient Greek philosophers would have approached things, as the importance of a philosophical guide and teacher was central in Greek education. Modern psychotherapy has, as we all know, been incorporating mindfulness and meditation for a while now but I think it lacks a sort of philosophical, communal and ethical stance (which in it's defense, is not its intended goal). This is why I turned to Buddhism, we in the west lack a holistic 'philosophy as a way of life', even though we have great techniques and practices to cure some of the problems that Buddhism addresses.
Vayadhammā saṅkhārā appamādena sampādethā — All things decay and disappoint, it is through vigilance that you succeed — Mahāparinibbāna Sutta
Tārakā timiraṃ dīpo māyāvaśyāya budbudaḥ supinaṃ vidyud abhraṃ ca evaṃ draṣṭavya saṃskṛtam — A shooting star, a clouding of the sight, a lamp, An illusion, a drop of dew, a bubble, A dream, a lightning’s flash, a thunder cloud — This is the way one should see the conditioned — Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā
I have seen all things that are done under the sun, and behold, all is vanity and a chase after wind — Ecclesiastes 1.14