Freedom

I see freedom in communal life.

When one willingly surrenders all their earthly possessions to the community, one also turns away from the worry, fear and anxiety that come along with amassing an earthly fortune. No longer enslaved to debts and wages, the member of a Christian community shares his burdens with many, making a lighter load.

“Bear one another's burdens and so you will fulfill the law of Christ.” (Gal 6:2)

It is a radical way of life requiring great commitment and forethought from which it would be difficult to extricate oneself after a long time. But it may also be a better life.

Why?????

Well I was talking to my boyfriend about the commune type of community, and he does not understand why I would want to live in one. He seems to think it is just because I do not want to move away from John and Katie Russell.

Where this may be part of the idea, it is certainly not all of the issue. I want to live with like minded people whom I can have open conversations with and I would almost never be alone (I hate being alone). In fact, it is sad, but I do not even do well when I am up and everyone else is asleep! However, that is not the entire reason either. I do not even know why I want this.

Every time I think of the commune, I want it. There is not really a strong explanation. So I ask all of you... why do you want it????

Speaking out of line?

I may be speaking out of line at this time, my intent for this post is to present another idea that came to me when reading some of the discussion. Now please remember this is a message I hear, I do not expect anyone else to hear it…

Genesis 12:1 “The LORD said to Abram: "Go forth from the land of your kinsfolk and from your father's house to a land that I will show you…”

I hear him calling me to a life that requires me to give up all. I feel he will lead me to the place I am to be, he will provide for me when I get there, and if I have to leave. I am not sure if I want to ask too many questions before I go. I know at this point I am trying to get relationships and finances in order for this. That is all I know.

A Response to Excellent Concerns

I began this post as a comment under "Commune Lite." I have moved it here due to its length.

Monica,

Firstly, allow me to say that your concerns are well rooted and eminently practical (something I am not at all). They are, perhaps, too practical for this idealist stage of pure speculation. The "what" and the "why" precede the "how." Nevertheless, I will - hesitantly - try to make some answer, as I am able at this point.

You write,

"If we had to leave, how could we possibly do it without being financially ruined?"

I suppose I may be revealing economic ignorance by admitting I don't understand this question. If some have to leave, they'll have to get new jobs, just like if they have to leave where they are now. If they leave the community, it has less people to provide for - therefore less need of their financial support. Perhaps you are talking about retirement savings?

Possibly, the community could set up a kind of "CRA" (community retirement account). This would have the advantage of commanding a higher interest rate due to its higher balance. If members leave the community, they could take with them the money they put in during their membership plus the interest it has earned. In this way, as long as they live in the community, ownership is common; should they choose to leave, they could revert to private ownership. Again, perhaps I am revealing economic ignorance?

You write,

"How do we solve differences of opinion in the 'outside world' factor?"

It is absolutely certain that differences of opinion regarding this and many other issues will surface on a regular basis. Undeniably, entering the community involves self-sacrifice. Such differences should be settled in the chapter room, wherein the community regularly meets to discuss its affairs in all charity. Ultimately and ideally, our bishop would govern these meetings. Many issues could be resolved democratically. But, the individual would have to sacrifice certain of his own desires to continue living in the community. We all would benefit from this. We all could be more humble.

You write,

"How do we solve the church question?"

This is the most important of your concerns, I believe. The community must form around the Church. It must begin and end with the Church. Without the Church's approval and endorsement, we are nothing. It may be that the Church refuses us as quacks. Let us submit to her wisdom, then. So be it. It may be that the Church does indeed endorse a community seeking to live the apostolic way. Let us submit to her wisdom, then too. So be it.

You write,

"If this ever works out we would probably just have to go to the church of our choice in the closest town"

This is not what I envision. As I say, I believe we should begin with the Church. I believe the community should attend one church of one rite or the other. If we are not common in prayer, then there is no reason for us to be a community. A bi-ritual community, while possible, would be confused. The different Churches even follow different calendars. It would be quite awkward for some members of the community to be fasting while others are feasting. The community must be as one. In prayer above all things, it must be as one.

For the sake of unity in prayer, the community must begin with the Church. If we "buy houses on the same block," as Dave suggests, the church should already be on that block.

I have already done this. I already live somewhat like Dave suggests. My beloved wife, son, and I live in a semi-common situation with Dusty - retaining private ownership. We live next to our parish church, to which we give ten-percent of our income. The parish uses these funds, in part, to maintain common buildings, such as a community hall where we share meals with the parish two or three times a week and a school building that it seeks to renovate and turn into a school. It is, as Dave often points out, fun. If others wish to join us, many houses are for sale in the neighborhood.

But I hope for something more than this. I hope, but do not unwaveringly expect.

Commune Lite

Another possible model for a Christian community would be for everyone to agree to buy houses on the same block--but still retain private ownership on these buildings. Then each family or individual would agree to pay a certain amount into a community fund, which would be used to buy common buildings such as a school and community center, and also to finance common meals. Of course, these meals could either be served at the community center or on a rotational basis at each family's home. The community funds would have to be set up as a non-profit corporation, of which each family owns a share.

The advantage of retaining a certain degree of private ownership is that it would be much easier for a family who needed to move--for whatever reason--to do so without becoming destitute or disrupting the community's finances.

beginning finances

Our project is clearly not a money-making venture, and I expect we will live in the sort of comfortable frugality that is only possible when many people work together. However, starting a community deep in debt could create a number of problems, not least of which would be the possibility of bankruptcy and foreclosure on our homes. In my opinion, the best way to start this community would be to buy property very gradually only when we are able to pay cash for it. This might mean that everyone would live in one house initially (as even today in this country, many immigrant families are living) and then we could add extra houses as we saved money. Presumably, a few families living a frugal lifestyle under one roof could save up enough for a second house VERY quickly--even within two years. We might even consider building our own houses--just as the Duggar family did. A family of 19, they also lived through a difficult period in cramped conditions, but were able to save up and build a large house for their large family.

(Another place to look for inspiration is the Colonial House "reality show" made by PBS that places a diverse group of people in a realistic colonial situation where they must work together in very close quarters. They experience problems that we would not, such as difficulty maintaining a mandatory Sunday chapel period, but their experience is entertaining and even educational.)

Returning to my point about how we might precede with purchasing property: I think that if we were able to pool enough money for one moderately large farm house in a rural area (perhaps 100k for the house and a barn and a little land for expansion), we could then begin to work very hard together saving up for a second building. With only four incomes coming from the adult male members of the community, we might earn a total of 100k a year--though this could be more or less depending on our location and whether there was suitable employment. For example, I think I would probably start at 40-50k if I had a professorship, but if there are no openings in the classics around, I might have to settle for less money doing something else. So 100k is a conservative estimate--but even at that amount, with ten people in our community, I think we could easily save 50k a year. Without rent or debt payments, Monica and I can live comfortably for less than $700 a month, and this factors in phone bills and car insurance and an occasional resaurant visit. Certianly, one person can live on $5,000 a year if he doesn't have to pay rent and a car payment, and in a large group where economies of scale would prevail (in large meals, etc.), the expenses could be far less. In other words, $50,000 a year for ten people would be at the extreme high end of what we need to support ourselves.

So, as I was saying, we could add an extra house every couple years, and before long we would all have our own homes--completely paid for. At this point, we could turn our extra money towards building a school, a rec building, and our own church. Suddenly we would have a village.

The difficulty of this model is that it would require great sacrifice at first. But undoubtedly this would bring the group together and in the long run would help build the strongest possible community--both holy and prosperous.

beginning members?

Besides the five of us who are members of this blog, who else do we have in mind as potential members of the community? I have a handful of friends who I am considering, but I don't think many of them would be willing to give up independent living (that is, either they wouldn't be willing, or their spouses wouldn't). There are a number of St. Boniface parishioners who might consider joining. I would love to include the the Neuliebs and the Smiths (Laura and Dan will be married soon), if they were interested. And from among the Blue Jacket group, I can imagine Christian Meadows considering it--a potential celibate!--but maybe no one else. We could also talk to the Schafers and their spouses.

It is sad to think of the people who may never be able to join--whether because of religion or inability to take on a communal lifestyle. I shouldn't just say inability, however; many may have no desire to live such a life and have good reasons for it.

But how many people do we know who might be interested?

the dusty vision

My idea of the communal living started when I was in elementary school. I lived across town from my friends and I always wanted to live close to them. I used to think it would be cool if all of our families lived together and ate together. This would mean I could always be with my friends. Hating to be alone, this desire stayed with me through high school. I gave up on the idea for a time when I realized my friends and I may not be friends for ever. Though the idea of a religious community was conceived in my head when I decided that I will home school my children.

Then College! I loved all of my new friends living together on campus. It was hard to keep drama down to an acceptable level because the people in this "community" were very selfish and self-serving. Here problems without number rose. This did change my idea of if it were possible to have a community just because people are too selfish. Over time the base of the community, in my mind, would be to share resources and have lots of party time. We would always have someone to play video games with or to eat with. I attempted to obtain this dream by always having roommates. This did not work so well, I ended up living alone. I decided at this point I would NEVER have a roommate again because I liked the freedom.

Then Catholicism! Here I met John and Katie Russell. After becoming their roommate the idea of the community started be cultivated once again. John was instrumental with this occurring. He also added the idea that we would eat, live, learn, and worship together! How wonderful! All would be shared. We would give our all and therefore, no one would have given more than another. Ideally we would need to have a strong list of beliefs that we all hold dear. (Note the word rule was not used. I do not think people should have rules.) These beliefs would be our guidelines. With Christ as our center and our leader, we shall not fail!

school

It would be possible to exist in a community without any independent source of income, because some of the members could go to work as usual. But some sort of business would be fitting, just as monasteries maintain themselves through their own labor, whether by harvesting agricultural products like honey or eggs, brewing beer, or any of a number of other businesses.

It seems to me that a good way for us to make a living would be to run a school. Many of the people who I can think of who would be interested in our project are learned in one academic discipline or another, and I think we could very easily provide a high level of instruction for motivated high school students. The school could be attractive for many parents because it would be religiously orthodox and the teachers would come from very strong academic backgrounds. We could easily provide a firm classical education, including classical language and literature, art, music, and mathematics, as well as subjects such as history and theology. We might be a little weak in the sciences, but I think we could work on that.

Old Believer communities

There are groups of Old Believers (a sect that broke from Russian Orthodoxy centuries ago) living an unchanged communal way of life in Siberia. Some of their beliefs, you will see, are far from ours, but there is definitely something admirable about their tenacity and indifference to earthly cares:

Orthodox communities shun modern life

The tone of the video is lamentably patronizing - not that there isn't anything to criticize, but it leaves out the richness of their liturgical and spiritual tradition that I know of from other sources.

my vision: a brief summary

One of the of the many attractions of a Christian community is the sharing of work. For many years my work life has operated in a regular cycle of intense activity and idleness. When idle, I have time and energy to spare for good causes, but am unable to commit to anything long term because these idle periods are never lasting; and when I am busy, I become fatigued because of overwork. In a community, I would happily help others when my own work was slack, and would naturally welcome their help when I am busy. This would be similar to the way that a husband and wife help each other--or indeed how all friends and family members should help each other.

I open with such a description because now I have so many obligations that I could use help (and Monica has been very helpful these past few weeks), even though In a few months I may find I have very little work.

Part of me is attracted to an extreme kind of community, the sort that builds compounds in the wilderness and cuts itself off entirely from the outside world. But I think that this idea, besides being impractical, would not be healthy for its members. What I think would be best is a kind of village attached to an already existing town or city. Members of the community would have freedom to do their work and shopping in town, the main difference being that these things could be done in common. Workers would share transportation and shoppers would travel together and go to the same stores. A significant advantage of this is that working together is FUN. It is fun to travel, work, and shop with one's friends--our modern loneliness at all of these activities is unnatural.

In my vision, education of the children would be in common. I see no reason to name any one person as headmaster or even teacher. Each member of the community would have something valuable to pass on, and classes would be so divided.

I think that common meals would also be important. Not only would the work of preparing and cleaning be shared, but every meal would be a cause for fellowship and communion.

I don't have much more time, but what should be emerging from this is how important I think it is for people to work and live together rather than by themselves. C. S. Lewis's Great Divorce envisions hell as people living at vaster and vaster distances from one another--even as they build grander homes. We cannot build a paradise on earth, but neither do I think that we should always be trying to imitate hell.

Book List

Books to be read by those who seek to form a Christian Community:

+The Book of Acts (all of Scripture of course, but particularly Acts).
+The Rule of St. Benedict
+St. Thomas More's Utopia

Others?

Common Children

"All things are common among us, except our wives."
+Tertullian (c. 197, Western).

I find it meaningful that Tertullian makes only one exception to the communal rule. Wives and, by implication, husbands are not held in common, but all else is. All, including our children, are held in common.

This is well reflected today in the tradition of godparents. Our children belong to the Church, even if we die. The godparents represent the common parentage of the Church and ensure that a baptized child will be raised in the faith. They are also to assist in raising the child in the faith even while the parents live.

In the community that I envision, all adult members actively share in this godparentage.

What is YOUR vision?

I keep getting ahead of myself. I keep wanting to talk about the building of which we should be looking; however, as John stated to me, we need to see what our collective Vision is...

1. (If we agree we should have an in community priest/church) What type of Catholic Church should we be?

2. How much in "common" do we want? Eating areas, shower areas? Transportation?

3. How secluded do we want to be. (IE of course those who work outside will have direct contact; however, do we want children to join outside activities?)

4. What is your general vision of how this is to be accomplished?

We can all post our ideas here... Then we can combine them, and re post the ideas in their own posts so we can talk about each of these distilled ideas.

Community of Goods

Now all who believed were together, and had all things in common, and sold their possessions and goods, and divided them among all, as anyone had need.
+Acts 2:44, 45.

Now the multitude of those who believed were of one heart and one soul; neither did anyone say that any of the things he possessed was his own, but they had all things in common.
+Acts 4:32.

You will share all things with your neighbor. You will not call things your own. For if you are partakers in common of things that are incorruptible, how much more [should you be] of those things which are corruptible.
+St. Barnabas (c. 70-130, Eastern).

We who used to value above everything the acquisition of wealth and possessions, now bring what we have into a common stock, and share with everyone in need.
+St. Justin Martyr (c. 160, Eastern).

All things therefore are common, and not for the rich to appropriate an undue share. Therefore, the expression, "I possess and possess in abundance; why then should I not enjoy?" is suitable neither to the man, nor to society. But more worthy of love is this: "I have; why should I not give to those in need?" ...I know very well that God has given to us the liberty of use. But only so far as is necessary. And He has determined that the use should be common. For it is monstrous for one to live in luxury, while many are in need.
+St. Clement of Alexandria (c. 195, Eastern).

[Addressed to Pagans:] Family possessions, which usually destroy brotherhood among you, create fraternal bonds among us. Being one in mind and soul, we do not hesitate to share our earthly goods with one another. All things are common among us, except our wives.
+Tertullian (c. 197, Western).

The above quotations were compiled by David W. Bercot in the book, A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs.

The Common Vocation

This weekend I presented the idea of living in community to my family. My sister seemed ambivalent. She gave the example of a holy family (the Zaks) living in the world amongst those that need them as an ideal.

I do not believe that everyone is called to communal life. Missionaries are necessary. Though the apostles founded communities, they often did not live in them themselves, being wanderers.

It strikes me, however, that communal life may be the more common vocation (note the pun), as opposed to the missionary or the hermitic.

Let Us Put Aside All Earthly Cares

In is work On Spiritual Knowledge, St. Diadochos of Photiki wrote,

"A person who is not detached from worldly cares can neither love God truly nor hate the devil as he should, for such cares are both a burden and a veil. His intellect cannot observe the tribunal which will judge him, neither can it foresee the verdict which will be given at his trial. For all these reasons, then, withdrawal from the world is invaluable."

Community

I have created this blog as a forum for continuing the informal discussion began elsewhere:

Dave said...
I like the utopia idea and think I've probably talked with John about it before. I would prefer a milder form, however, where some possessions are still held privately--in particular each family would have its own house--total communal living would lend itself to the kind of hierarchy that might detract from the individual families. I am not, for example, interested in living under a patriarch who makes all the decisions for every family, nor would I want to be one. In my utopia, the land would be held communally, as would a number of shared buildings such as a schoolhouse, chapel, dining hall, and recreation/fellowship hall. In my vision there is also a lake, but that's not necessary. Everyone would have to work together, but each family would retain some autonomy. I doubt that adultery would be a huge problem in a community that was built around shared values and faith--although in the more extreme communism (with several families sharing the same house, where a male leader might emerge to make decisions for everyone), there is a greater chance. This sort of a community begins to resemble a cult. Thanks for the kind words about the Long Walk. Indeed, one day we will be victorious!
1:02 PM

Dusty M Brahlek said...
I agree with the cult comment, it would be hard to keep that from happening. After I posted these John reminded me that we could have a community of homes, we do not have to be in one home :) I would also think purchasing or having a set of condos built would be OK as well.
3:23 PM

John R.P. Russell said...
I look to the early Christian communities as a model of what I am talking about. And to the monasteries, which I believe have best preserved the original idea of a Christian community. A Christian community is necessarily a patriarchy - that patriarch being called "bishop" (monasteries are headed by an abbot, which is simply a monastic bishop). I do agree, David, as Dusty points out in her last comment, that separate dwellings are a good idea.
7:54 PM

Dave said...
A Christian community is a patriarchy but not in the sense I'm talking about. The monastic example is accurate, however. All the monks vow obedience to the abbott, just as I could see a situation where one family (or its head) becomes the ruler of the other families in an absolute sense. This is the situation I would want to avoid, since I do not think it would be appropriate for a community of families to vow obedience to one of the other families (or its head, although the distinction would not always be clear). The system is much better suited for unmarried men and women who choose it.
8:56 PM

John R.P. Russell said...
I agree that the situation you describe is not desirable.I believe the ideal Christian community would obey it's rightful patriarch - that being their celibate bishop, not one of the other families or its head. This community should have celibate and married members, just like the early Christian communities. To one such early Christian community, the Smyrnaeans, St. Ignatius of Antioch wrote: "See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God.... Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church."http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0109.htm
10:01 PM

Dusty M Brahlek said...
Where do we get this "bishop"? Then the next question would be would he be Eastern or Western? I HAVE IT!!!! We can take Fr. Mitch Pacwa! I think he would be good for both... :) We have LOTS of work before we start our community. But then again we have what, 4-5 years, right?
9:28 AM

Dave said...
Sounds reasonable. If you can get the bishop, I'll scout out some land.
1:26 PM

John R.P. Russell said...
My love for the Eastern Church is in part due to the fact that I find the way of life it promotes to be more in accord with that of the Early Christians. Eastern Christianity simply has greater reverence for the Early Fathers of the Church and their Tradition. This closeness with the Early Christian communities I seek to emulate is, I think, a good argument that our community should be Eastern. (What did you think I'd say? )
9:18 PM

John R.P. Russell said...
Getting the bishop first is actually not, I think, the way to go about it. The formation of such a community begins with the gathering of like-minded faithful. St. Francis, for example, was a deacon. He was never ordained a priest, let alone a bishop. Yet it was he that gathered the community. The abbots came later from within the community.
9:22 PM

dave said...
In that case, I'll expect some help scouting out the land.
9:35 PM

Dusty M Brahlek said...
Good land... that will be in PA... right?
8:56 AM

Dave said...
It will depend: do we want good land or, like the Mormons, lots of cheap land that no one else wants?