Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: Religious Conservatives in Cohousing?

[Sharon Villines (sharon]

I think the issue for most people when they think "religious" vs  
"cohousing" is "autocratic" vs "collaborative." While the religiosity  
that grows up around vegetarianism and consensus decision-making can  
be just as narrowly focused and non-negotiable, it is usually  
internally chosen and defined.

Religious "truths" tend to be externally defined and their followers  
autocratically led. One person or a body of "qualified" persons  
interprets the appropriate application. Exceptions would be Quaker and  
Unitarian congregations, but these represent a very small percentage  
of all religions. Many cohousers are also Quaker or Unitarian, or have  
been at some point in their lives.

Members of our fire department show up about once a year to look over  
the building so they know where the entrances and fire hose  
connections are in case of an emergency. One year when I explained how  
the community was built, one man was very interested and wanted to see  
the floor plans. He was a member of an African American church that  
owned land on which it was considering building housing for members of  
their community -- either to help the homeless, elderly, or to  
strengthen their community. The housing would have been limited to  
members of their church or people who would become members of their  
church, perhaps transferring from another community.

What is the definition of community? Does a monastery qualify? Does an  
Amish town qualify? Does an orthodox Jewish community where everyone  
lives within walking distance of the synagogue qualify?

Does a development qualify where one person sells lots to friends who  
have no other relationship except that they live close to each other  
and originally purchased their land from one person and thus probably  
have similar values and interests.

The first cooperatively owned buildings were formed by wealthy people  
who could no longer afford to maintain their mansions in Manhattan  
when family members could afford to live elsewhere and servants could  
find jobs in factories and shops. What were formerly wings or suites  
occupied by a family unit, unmarried adult children, or grandparents  
were converted into apartments and shares were sold to distant  
relatives and acquaintances. The coop legal structure was used to  
choose with whom one wanted to live. Cohousing makes similar choices  
by adopting limited physical and social structures.

Sharon
----
Sharon Villines
http://www.sociocracy.info