Just a little brainstorming here, looking for feedback.

The other day I was thinking out loud with a few of you (see copy of post
below) and shared the idea that the most basic units are as follows:

(1) an individual, responsible for his/her actions
(2) a couple, in a marriage/covenant relationship
(3) three couples working together (could include single adults)
(4) four sets of three couples
(5) five sets of four sets of three couples
etc.

Anyway, in thinking about the third level, three couples working together,
I've been pondering what this would look like, how one would decide who to
work with, etc.

I've pondered whether geography alone should be the determining factor, or
of there should be an element of preference.

It occurred to me today that this third level of union could be taken nearly
as seriously as the second. That there would be three couples who would
join together in a non-sexual covenant relationship with one another to love
and support, etc. each other, through thick and thin, rich or poor etc.
Like a couple, these three couples may or may not share a common business
interest, but their relationship would nonetheless aim to be synergistic
rather than contradictory.

Like with marriage of a couple, these three couples would probe around and
put a great deal of thought, prayer and 'courtship' into their selection.

Finally, when three couples felt they had made their decision, they could
actually have a public ceremony before family and friends, to make vows one
with another.

They would live near one another so they could be of sufficient support for
one another. Such a union would more often than not involve one or more of
the couples moving in order to be together in their new united life.

Like with the marriage of a couple, such a union of three couples would not
be easy, but it would also have many benefits which would make the union
more desirable than working separately.

It would not be as 'inseparable' as marriage of a couple, but still would be
taken very seriously, aiming for a life-long commitment of an eternal
quality.

Doubtless there would be instances where separations and realignments would
take place. Also, there would no doubt be some pain in the 'courtship'
phase of trying to find the 'right' three couples to work together.

While at work today, I shared the idea with a mainstream Mormon, who gave it
about thirty minutes thought before coming back with the reply that the
ideal structure is already set up in the LDS church, so why try to propose
anything new. I should have known I would have gotten this response. Even
when I tried to propose that this arrangement would be without
denominational boundaries (even as marriage is), he still didn't like the
idea of a covenant relationship outside of something that has been revealed
from 'the brethren.'

So much for thinking outside of the box!

Anyway, I think there is something to this and would love to get some
feedback.

Sincerely,

Sterling D. Allan
www.patriotsaints.com

p.s. I should mention J.J. Dewey's "molecular relationship" model as being a
significant seed for my thinking along these lines.

================

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PS_admin/message/45

From: "Sterling D. Allan" <sterlingda@...>
Date: Wed Jun 27, 2001 10:58 am
Subject: Q. support group structure?


To: Patriot Saints branch coordinator & admin.

One of the things that has been weighing heavily on me is the need to foster
among like-minded 'patriot saints' (whether they call themselves that or
not) a sense of commitment to help each other out. We all realize that
commitment as part of the gospel/baptismal covenant, but we need to realize
that it extends to the 'patriot' realm as well. There needs to be a sense
of community and helping each other out on that level as well. One of the
things I would like to recommend (I would like to compose an essay on the
subject) is for people to (if they are not already) begin grouping together,
from the ground level up. In the vernacular of the Bible, it speaks of
groups of ten families to be the most basic level of interaction and care
for one another. Five of these then associate for a group of fifty (five
times ten), which would then administer to the needs from group to group as
is necessary, and so forth.

My question to you is just what is the ideal structure? and why? Is it
'captains of ten, captains of fifty, etc. as in the Bible? Or is the most
ideal functioning unit smaller, e.g. three or even two families, which then
are a part of, say twelve families?

I would think it would be as follows (this is just off the top of my head --
after years of thinking about this off and on)

(1) The most basic unit is the individual, personally responsible for
his/her actions before God.

(2) The second most basic unit is the couple, who are seeking to work
together as one, along with the children under their care.

(3) The third unit is three couples who unite together to form a covenant
relationship of fellowship and care for one another on all matters, except
those specifically relevant to the first or second units. A single adult
could be included as a "couple" unit in this third unit.

(4) The fourth unit would be four of the above units of three, making twelve
families.

(5) The fifth unit would be five of the above twelve-family units, which is
sixty families.

(6) The sixth unit would be six of the above, or 360 (full circle) families.

(7) The seventh unit would be seven of the above, or 2,520 families.

(8) The eighth unit would be eight of the above, or 20,160 families.

(9) The ninth would be nine of the above, or 181,440 families.

(10) The tenth would be ten of the above, or 1,814,400 families.

(11) The eleventh would be eleven of the above, or 19,958,400 families.

And so forth.

The numbers given above, for unit three and above, would represent a ceiling
number, which when a unit reached a point of surpassing it, they would then
divide into two smaller units.

The organization would be from the bottom up, rather than from the top down.

All functions would be taken care of on the lowest level possible or
feasible.

These are my thoughts. Any feedback from you would be appreciated, as I
prepare to compose this essay.

Thanks,

Sincerely,

Sterling D. Allan
www.patriotsaints.com
435-835-1625