In 1848, John Humphrey Noyes founded a community that’s primary goal was to create, in a sense, heaven on earth; the Oneida Community. This community did indeed have good intentions for reaching this goal in life, but it is merely the means of how they attempted to reach this goal that are non-practical and lose focus on the essence of family. The founder and leader, Noyes, believed that he himself possessed divine authority over the Oneida Community, which was directly given to him by God. This belief of his was not only of Noyes, but was truly shared among all the members of the community, which allowed for his rules to be followed without question or concern. These unique “rules” included the process of mutual criticism, being granted by Noyes and only Noyes to give birth to a child, the required form of birth control: coitus reservatus, communal living, gender equality, and the practice of complex marriage. By actually visiting the Oneida Mansion where the community resided during most of the 1800’s, I was able to obtain as close as a first-hand experience as I possibly could by taking a tour of the Mansion accompanied by tour guides that were well-educated on the topic and readily answered the questions that I had. Through visiting their former residence and reading Without Sin: The Life and Death of the Oneida Community, one would be able to determine which perspectives and policies of the Oneida Community were strong or weak, and whether or not it would be practical to adopt these perspectives and policies in the present. The process of Mutual Criticism was a policy of Oneida which involved each member, in turn, sitting quietly while their fellow members told him/her their faults in an orderly and respective manner. Spencer Klaw states:
Sermons and confessions of faith and earnest discussion were not the only tools on which Noyes depended, as he once put it, to make crooked sticks straight and smooth. There was also the ordeal of mutual criticism, to which every Oneidan was expected to submit from time to time, and which converted the struggle for self-improvement at Oneida into a species of theater (112).
This quote explains how the Oneidan’s were led to achieve this goal derived from Noyes’s perspective on the good life. In order to keep the society peaceful and orderly, Noyes introduced this policy of Mutual Criticism to create some sort of behavioral control. The criticism was not always negative, as there was praise and blame given to the criticized. For example, a young woman was accused of disrespect for her elders and vanity, but was praised for her great joy of living life, and her high-spirited and passionate personality. Another older woman was also criticized for her careless dealings with young men during sex, but was also praised for kindness and loyalty. Even though criticism varied between praise and blame, the criticism was always helpful in changing that person or encouraging that person for the better. As you can see, this idea of mutual criticism is strongly effective in a community like so for two specific reasons: (1) criticism through blame can show someone that what they are doing is not right and that they need to change for the good of themselves and for their community as a whole, and (2) criticism through praise will ensure that person that what they are doing is right and will prevent them from straying away from their good-living, therefore helping the community become more “heaven-like”. Oneidans also lived in their community under Noyes’s idea of communal living; sharing a common goal as a whole community. Noyes also introduced a policy called “Bible Communism”, which was the idea that all things were held in common by each member of the community. This communal living and Bible Communism was yet another way to mimic heaven on earth, as the goal was to achieve a perfect Christian heaven on earth, and the Bible Communism was a way of sharing with your fellow brothers and sisters. The communal living is a great way for a community to function successfully. When in a community, one must function as a part of something greater, the community in its entirety, in order to reach the greater goal of the community that holds much more impact on every member’s than an individual feat. For example, a sports team follows the idea of communal acts, as each player is responsible for a certain position and role that will allow the team to function at its best as a whole. If a player does his part, as every other player is expected to, the team will win, therefore achieving a communal goal that will have an equal impact among every team member. On the contraire, if everyone tries to reach their own goal (the winning shot or catch), then the team will fall apart because the assigned roles and positions are not being fulfilled as they should be. If one of the individual players that only attempts to achiever their own goal does indeed achieve it, of course they will be satisfied, but the rest of the team will not be satisfied due to either losing the game or not being part of the reason as to why they won the game. As you can see, communal living is an effective means of becoming a successful community. As for Bible Communism, sharing everything can be effective in creating social and financial equality, but the Oneidans took the extreme of also sharing husbands and wives and children, completely disregarding the essence of immediate family. This disregarding of immediate family may not have been as important as it was back then in comparison to today’s society, which accounts for the reason as to why adopting Noyes’s perspective on the good life would not be practical. Noyes’s perspective would also not be practical in today’s society due to the form of birth control enforced among everyone after the age of 13. The form of birth control is known as coitus reservatus, which restricts the male from ejaculating during sexual intercourse, therefore preventing pregnancy. During the 1800’s, sexually transmitted diseases were not as harmful or common as they are now; some did not even develop yet until later years. Widely adopting this form of birth control and only this form of birth control today would indeed prevent pregnancy in the same effectiveness as it did with the Oneidans, but STDs would now be a detrimental factor in practicing coitus reservatus, deeming this non-practical in today’s society. And if a man and women did not want to use birth control, they couldn’t simply just make the decision themselves. They would have to receive permission from Noyes himself to have a child of their own, and in reality, the child would not be their own. As stressed before, Bible Communism suggests that all things be shared, including children. When the child is then born, he/she will be taken away from the parents and raised by the entire community as the community’s child. Klaw clearly states: “Mothers were not invariably happy about giving up their children to the care of the community” (132). This is indeed a weakness of this perspective on life, as it again disregards the true essence of family. Another important idea that was shared among the Oneidans was that men and women alike were created equally and shall remain equal. An example of how this belief was practiced is the assigning and choice of work. A woman had the right to choose to work in the factory just as a man had the right to choose to cook food in the kitchen. This shows that women and men were both equal and possessed the same rights, which went in accordance with the idea of Christian equality among members of the community or religion. In 1848, John Humphrey Noyes founded a community that’s primary goal was to create, in a sense, heaven on earth; the Oneida Community. This community did indeed have good intentions for reaching this goal in life, but it is merely the means of how they attempted to reach this goal that are non-practical and lose focus on the essence of family. The process of Mutual Criticism was a policy of Oneida which involved each member, in turn, sitting quietly while their fellow members told him/her their faults in an orderly and respective manner. This idea of mutual criticism is strongly effective in a community like so, helping the community become more “heaven-like”. Oneidans also lived in their community under Noyes’s idea of communal living; sharing a common goal as a whole community. The communal living is a great way for a community to function successfully. As for Bible Communism, sharing everything can be effective in creating social and financial equality, but the Oneidans took the extreme of also sharing husbands and wives and children, completely disregarding the essence of immediate family. This disregarding of immediate family may not have been as important as it was back then in comparison to today’s society, which accounts for the reason as to why adopting Noyes’s perspective on the good life would not be practical.