Religion & CoHousing | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Blaise J. Tobia (tobiabjdunx1.ocs.drexel.edu) | |
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 1995 11:35:49 -0500 |
re: religion and cohousing This has been a long thread, and is, admittedly, becoming tiring, but I feel compelled to add my thoughts because of some recent posts that have essentially argued against mixing religion and cohousing on the basis of religion's unworthiness. I think that these are unwarranted, and are at least as problematic in a cohousing context (from an anti-religion standing) as may have been the infamous closing experience of the national conference (from a pro-religion, even if unintended, standing). I am a practicing member of an organized religion (although its hierarchy might dispute my understandings of this religion) and many of my Philadelphia-area cohousing-interested colleagues are religious and/or openly spiritual as well. Yet religion has never been an issue for us, either pro or con. I think we appreciate each other's traditions, and assume that our community will be "neutral ground" in terms of religions. By this I don't mean that there won't be any visible presence of religious or spiritual practice; just that these will not be central, and will not be unavoidable by those who aren't interested. Certainly one's choice (or avoidance) of religious/spiritual practice will have nothing to do with eligibility for any of our intended projects. I tend to think that the tenets of cohousing put forward in our "bible" (as it is often called -- are some people upset with other religions because they have made cohousing their religion of choice?) should be given a chance to work. I think they offer the greatest possibility for widespread acceptance and growth of the cohousing movement. Therefore, ideologies and religions should be secondary to the broadly accepted (among the movement) "universal" goals of cohousing. If an ideology or religion (or psycho-therapeutic group practice) is put forward as a requirement for a certain project, I believe that it shouldn't be called "cohousing." (period.) There can certainly be Mennonite communities that use cohousing as a model, or eco-farming communities that use it as such, but these should be referred to (at least by those of us who think the distinction is important) as the "X Mennonite Community, based on a cohousing model." ============================================================================= Blaise Tobia Philadelphia, PA 215-387-9706 tobiabj [at] post.drexel.edu ============================================================================= - artist/photographer/teacher (at Drexel University's College of Design Arts) - interested in CoHousing personally, politically and artistically - serving as contact person for the Delaware Valley CoHousing Association, an umbrella group encompassing several potential site-development projects: one, urban-retrofit (Germantown/Mt. Airy) three, new-construction ( Lambertville, still in early stage; Shawmont and Ambler, still just good ideas) =============================================================================
- (no other messages in thread)
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.