I wasn't planning on writing today, but a lot has been on my mind and I have a lot to catch up on since last having time to do so over a year ago. So, I am just going to make some commentary on a few things I have been seeing lately.
A disclaimer first. In the course of composing these articles here, oftentimes a couple of things happen. For one, a lot of my content is "off the cuff," meaning I write it as I think it. If I were to develop some ideas more later, I would probably do my own extensive edits on myself. Secondly, and that being said, I apologize for the occasional typo you may see in these articles - at the end of each year, I cut, paste, and compile the year's work into an annual book, and in those I generally do a grammar and spell check so they will look better. Spelling and grammatical errors happen for a variety of reasons, some of which include the computer I am working on sometimes "burping" when there is a power outage or something, and then a segment of the text gets either repetitive or omitted to a degree it doesn't make sense, so often I will catch that and fix it. Self-publishing has been both an education and an adventure, both as far as blogging is concerned but also in publication of print books. I still have much to learn to refine things in those areas, so bear with me there.
So, in doing a number of perusings the past couple of days, there are some topics I just wanted to skim today. For the first, I came across two different things that immediately grabbed my attention. One is an organization called Christian Villages, which is largely made up of Evangelicals, and the second is one I came across the other day called Ark Homesteads, which has a similar mission but is Catholic. In looking over those, I have a couple of observations.
To begin, I have always been attracted to the idea of self-sustaining Christian communities, as I think it would be a way to solidify relationships with like-minded people as well as providing a degree of structure one normally does not find in contemporary society. These ideas have been around for a while, and there are some good models of success to look at with them - one is the town of Ave Maria in Florida, just as an example. Ave Maria was started as a university by the guy who founded Domino's Pizza, Tom Monaghan. In time, a whole community grew up around the university, and today it is actually a shining example of how Catholic social teaching can be lived out in a more structured setting. While Ave Maria is probably the best one I know about that exists today, there could be smaller and lower-profile communities as well - that would surely be worth looking into. I have a lot to say on this, so let me continue.
The problem with the concept is simple - it can be a potential for cultic activity too. We saw that with Jonestown in the late 1970s, and I don't think anyone with any moral scruples wants to see that repeated again. However, one thing to understand about Jonestown though is that it was not technically a Christian community - Jim Jones was a cult leader, an ideological Marxist, and he more or less used a religious face to advance his own nefarious agenda. Despite that set of facts though, it is understandable why some people would not want to consider a Christian community of any sort. Because we live in a fallen world, even a good idea can end up bearing tragic fruit if it is in the wrong hands, and that is what happened at Jonestown. The idea of Christian community is something that has the potential for devolving into utopian fantasy as well, and if that bar is set too high, then the potential for future problems is there. I believe this is one reason why perhaps the idea of a "Christian community" can scare people. I get that totally, and that is what I want to look at in regard to the first group I looked at, Christian Villages.
The idea that birthed Christian Villages comes from a guy named Jon England and his wife Melanie. If you will go to https://www.christianvillagesbook.com/book1774561831825, you will see he also wrote a book about it. Intrigued by this, I joined his mailing list, but it didn't take long to see where the potential issues were, and I will get into that shortly. In the book (which you can download as a digital copy for free), England talks about four stages that are necessary for the establishment of a Christian village:
1. Foundation
2. Formation
3. Fellowship
4. Fruitfulness
In order to achieve these, England notes that it will cost a lot of hard work, a loss of conveniences, and also a sacrifice of independence. It is one of those types of books which seeks to model what the "first Christians" lived like, and there are things in it about accountability, communal living, and also some sort of authority. In reading some of the material, England seems to be drawing from some poisoned wells such as Discipleship/Shepherding, the Bill Gothard-type model, and it seems like he wants to do some sort of totalitarian control over people who "covenant" with him in the experiment. Those are some serious red flags, because it sounds like the potential for a cult, and I began to back away from it shortly after discovering what was in the material the book contains. The wording is nice, true, but often an intent lies underneath the rhetoric, and that intent is what produces the fruit of whatever is being created. I don't think England's intent is healthy at all. And, that leads to a couple of other observations about this I want to make clear.
First, I still love the idea of an intentional Christian community by all means. However, it must be truly Christian, and not built upon some idea of utopian perfection in the mind of its creator. This means you acknowledge those who are part of it as unique persons created in God's image, and you recognize that natural law grants them rights that cannot be violated - if someone tries, they act outside God's will. Secondly, while it is OK to have dreams, there are two important and sometimes painful lessons I have learned over the years that will save someone a lot of heartache if they grasp them early. The first is that utopian visions are a personal thing in the mind of the person who creates it, and maybe will not reflect the ideas of others. Secondly, in this life you cannot expect perfection - you do your best, and nothing wrong with that, but be prepared for some things coming against you. As communities are made up of concupiscent human beings for one thing, not every day will be perfect, and we will inevitably not agree on everything. So, if one person is in control and imposes their will on others, it will create some problems. I think England may be running a risk of this if he institutes his model, and I have already seen emails where he is demanding huge investments from people who are just curious about the idea, and that cannot be good. Third, instead of trying to suppress differences, be a true community and listen to ideas - sometimes another person may have an idea you didn't think about and it may be an "aha" moment for the life of that community. Respect and appreciation for differences - and I am talking about minor individual differences that characterize all of us - will prove more cohesive than divisive, and a good leader understands that. If Jon England wants any success with his own vision, he will need to realize this quickly. Otherwise, he will disintegrate into another potential Jim Jones.
This is what I wanted to share about Jon England's Christian Village model, and now I want to contrast that with a Catholic intentional community model that has more potential in all honesty.
Ark Homesteads (see their website at https://www.arkhomesteads.com/) was the creation of a family, the Amezcuas. Two brothers - Erick and Aaron - bought with their families a parcel of land in Missouri for approximately $53,000. In contrast to the Englands, the Amezcuas have a very sustainable and realistic plan that started a community with their families, and now they want to offer the idea to other Catholics. The brothers mentioned they did this in 2021 I believe, and they moved from California to rural Missouri because they essentially thought some things about the world were getting somewhat negative to deal with. There is nothing remotely utopian about this family though - they recognize limitations in budgets, and they also are aware that in order to have a Catholic community, beliefs have to be in line with Magisterial teaching, and that means the potential of cultic development is minimized. They also don't pressure people like the Englands do - they just tell their story, and they are still in the formative stages of creating these communities, such as the acquisition of land, etc. The way their model works is that an interested family can buy a small parcel on a bigger tract of land at a fair price, and then build their own home according to their own plans. At the center of that community will be a parish church, and I am assuming some other infrastructure such as schools, etc., will come into play as well. My advice to the Amezcuas would be to seek good outside businesses to invest and set up shops and things as well, kind of like Tom Monaghan did with Ave Maria, and it could be a potential income source for the families who invest as well. I might actually initiate a conversation with Erick and Aaron about that and see what they think.
Intentional communities, then, are a good idea. However, they must be implemented responsibly and properly, and a narcissistic dictator cannot be the person with the controlling interest or it devolves quickly into a cult. I have more to say on this in the future, but just wanted to bring it to attention as it is an idea I have thought about myself for some time. There is a sort of exhilaration about creating and self-sufficiency attached to owning a piece of land, but also the appeal of true community - a place where you have close friends and know they have your back - is part of it as well. I have had some ideas of my own over the years that relate to this as well, including my own ideas about recycling, and at some point I think I will talk about that in another discussion given the length of this one already. However, to wrap up this part of the discussion, I like the idea of both forging a legacy in land for future generations, as well as a decent community of people who live around you to both witness this as well as their own participation in building legacies of their own. It is appealing.
I never got to the political thing yet, but wanted to touch on that briefly now. I have been reading things online from people I have known over the years, and I see something interesting. Let me go on record first as saying that although I voted for Trump as President, and so far I believe he is the best choice for the job compared to everything else that is out there, I am not always in agreement with everything he does. However, I am also not going to let disagreements on minors detract from the issues of major importance, as I feel that Trump is steering us overall in the right direction for once, and that is why I voted for him. I have seen others though - many of whom are conservative by conviction - almost lament the "old days" of Obama and Biden's weird regimes, and that is disconcerting. I have seen people who self-identify as "conservative" basically supporting unvetted illegal immigration, letting the LGBT agenda run rampant over our nation dictating new moralities that are in direct contradiction to Christian convictions, and even being soft on inner-city crime. One of the most glaring people who do this is former VP Mike Pence. I don't know, but despite the golden image Pence often displays, I just don't feel right about the man - something is off with him. Sure, he says the right things, and he projects the image of an upstanding God-fearing guy and all, and to be honest, as a person he may actually be decent, but it is just that for me something does not seem quite right. I see this with other self-styled "conservatives" too, and I believe that is one reason why for many years the "woke Left" has dominated society and culture. Thankfully, that has begun to change, and at least now it seems like "wokeness" is going out of vogue (even other Democrats are seeing how ludicrous it is). Yet, you have the Mike Pences almost mourning its demise, as if they loved the enemies of our faith. There are still a few of these even in the Trump administration - that Dr. Oz character is one of them, and I am convinced he is a Turkish agent as well as being disgusted with the way he has targeted Armenian-Americans in Los Angeles - and they are doing no one any favors. Simply put, they are relics of the neo-con era of Bush Jr. and McCain, and they no longer have any relevance. As we see the Left get more unhinged because they know they have lost the war, I also get disgusted at seeing so-called "Christians" and "Republicans" patting them on the back as they scream and saying "there, there" to them. Faux conservatives have chosen their side, and they are using a person - Trump - to project their own stupidity upon while our nation tries to recover. The neo-cons in particular - a group I could never personally support - are probably worse than the most radical Democratic Socialists because they are the ones making people like AOC possible. This is why if Mike Pence were to just fall into a well of obscurity and disappear (which actually seems like what he has done) I don't think his presence would be missed all that much. Like I said, I don't totally see eye-to-eye with Trump on everything either, but I also think for our nation right now he is what is needed - God doesn't expect a perfect saint to be a secular power in a nation, and Trump is definitely no saint! But, God can still use people like Trump for the greater good, and that is what I am looking at. Someone said a few years back that we don't elect pastors as President, but leaders. Leaders fail, they are like most of humanity not perfect, but what we should be asking ourselves is if said leader is overall having a positive impact or not. Trump's legacy will ultimately be based on that, and not what goofy things he may have done in his life over the years. Remember also, it was not that long ago when Trump was the darling of those who are now trying to kill him - the Trump of 30 years ago was not a conservative Republican (and in all aspects, he still isn't in all honesty) and he was the darling of people like Hillary Clinton and those who slander him now. We need to start separating fact from fiction, and be honest about Trump and others - they may not be our cup of tea personality-wise, but God allowed them to be where they are for a reason, and I see him as an answer to many prayers. "Woke" is dying, as it is being exposed for the radical mess it is, and we largely have Donald Trump's presidency to thank for that. Therefore, that is what I wanted to say when even so-called "conservative" voices tend to condemn Trump.
This was a long post, and probably more could be said about it - I already see subsequent discussions in it in a couple of places. However, thanks for bearing with me, and will see you next time.