The NewVistas community concept is premised on individual stewardship and self-reliance. People who join the community must have a stewardship (an individually owned business) that can satisfy their needs and wants and leave a surplus. They must contribute their net worth to the community through agency 8. The community holds and unifies the title to all assets, which forms its institutional “capital corpus,” and which it uses to bolster its overall and stewards’ individual financial positions.  

The community is at the same time led by a set of principles, two of which are “no poor among them” and “all things in common.” All things in common, in its simplest sense, means that the community owns all factors of economic production. 

Historical context and scripture references  

The NewVistas community structure is inspired by the Plat of the City of Zion, the design of the House of the Lord, and other revelations that Joseph Smith and his companions in the early LDS movement received in the early 1830s. At the time Joseph Smith was called (1824), and during his subsequent ministry, a wave of Christian revivalism was sweeping across the United States and especially New England. Christians were eager to live the Bible and other sacred scripture, feeling that the modern church had drifted too far away from the original teaching of Christ and his apostles.  

One key part of scripture that the revivalists were excited about was in the New Testament, in the book of Acts of the Apostles. Acts 2:44-45 describes how the apostles lived, saying, “And all that believed were together, and had all things common; And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.” Acts 4:32-37 further elaborates, with verse 32 saying, “And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things in common.” 

Early LDS leadership encountered other movements that took these verses literally and sought to institute communalism amongst their followers. Sidney Rigdon, who had at one time been a Campbellite was particularly enthusiastic about communalism. His charisma, knowledge of the Bible, and other personal qualities meant he had an enormous influence on the early LDS community’s theology, especially its economic teachings and practice.  

Biblical teaching of early Christian communities was supported by passages in the Book of Mormon which described a time when there was prosperity in the world, with people being united. 4 Nephi 1:2-3 describes the community, “”And it came to pass in the thirty and sixth year, the people were all converted unto the Lord, upon all the face of the land, both Nephites and Lamanites, and there were no contentions and disputations among them, and every man did deal justly one with another. And they had all things common among them; therefore, there were not rich and poor, bond and free, but they were all made free, and partakers of the heavenly gift.” 

Other revelations also sought to emphasize the “all things in common” principle. They included D&C 70, given on November 12, 1831. D&C 70:14 states, “nevertheless, in your temporal things you shall be equal, and this not grudgingly, otherwise the abundance of the manifestations of the spirit shall be withheld.”  

The application of “all things in common” by early Christians and copied by the early LDS and other movements in the 1830s was similar to communalism. People were expected to bring their property, or sell it and bring in the money, which would then be redistributed in a welfare system. This approach did not envisage any economic production, only consumption. As expected, such a system would have been popular with poor people, who had little to lose and all to gain, and resistance by those who had property, who were not comfortable with having their hard-earned property quickly disappear, regardless of the dine inspiration behind the move.  

It is however clear from original revelations that God had no intention of having LDS members redistribute wealth. A key verse to show this is in the Law, verse 30 (with editing changes): Behold thou shalt consecrate all thy properties that which thou hast unto me with a covenant and Deed which cannot be broken…” 

The verse clearly states that people would “consecrate” all the property they had “unto me” – the Lord and His community of believers. This was different from what the saints then tried to practice, and revised into the revelation, “…remember the poor, and consecrate of thy properties for their support that which thou hast to impart unto them.” The Law, therefore, was diluted to become a wealth redistribution and welfare system, rather than a complex economic system which would have guaranteed individual stewardship, self-reliance, and no poor among them, while still achieving “all things in common.” 

The verse continues that, “… & they Shall be laid before the bishop of my church & two of the Elders such as he shall appoint & set apart for that purpose.” The consecrated property would be laid before the bishop and two of the elders.  

The bishop was the recipient of the consecrated property. This designation is later emphasized in the Plat of the City of Zion, in which the three bishop houses are entitled the “sacred apostolical repository for the use of the bishops.” The plat also says that relation to the three central blocks, “the one without any figure is for storehouses for the bishop and to be devoted to his use.” 

The sacred apostolical repository was not to be merely a storehouse, since, as a repository might suggest, resources are retrieved, used, and returned to it. The bishop’s job was therefore to manage the repository on behalf of the community.  

Another key part of the initial revelation was that the members who “consecrated” their property to the community of fellow believers would be issued with “a covenant and Deed which cannot be broken…” A covenant is an agreement which signifies deep commitment between the parties to it. While commonly used in a religious context, in secular instances, it is legally enforceable and includes clear obligations for all parties. The wording of the revelation showed that both the “consecrator” and the community had legal responsibilities and a commitment to abide by the agreement, beyond legal penalties.  

A deed is a legal instrument that shows the transfer of property rights from one party to another. A deed is usually notarized and registered by a government agency. The agreement is also enforceable not only against the parties, but third parties too. By transferring their property rights to the community, members would have given it the legal right to utilize the property, including leveraging it.  

Members of the community were, in this capacity, the “body of Christ.” consecrating one’s property to the Lord and the community meant consecrating it unto all other members, transferring the individual’s property rights, but retaining a deed to show what they had consecrated.  

The verse continues, as quoted above, that consecrated property would be “laid before” or deposited with the bishop and two elders. This clearly indicates that consecration was not a haphazard process, with property merely being “consecrated” to the community. The process was orderly, with clear responsibilities. The “covenant and deed” that a participant in the community received was given by the bishop. The significance of the bishop’s role in investment was to be further expanded in later revelations, especially the plat and the house design, including their administration of the storehouse.  

The revelation further continued that, “it shall come to pass that the Bishop of my church after that he has received the properties of my church that it cannot be taken from you he shall appoint every man a Steward in as much as shall be sufficient for himself and family.”  

Earlier, the bishop was to receive and administer the consecrated property. He would appoint 2 elders to set up stewardships for participants in the community. The stewardships would be able to sustain the needs and wants of the steward and his family. This shows a subtle, yet clear distinction between the role of the bishop and the elders. 

Regardless of how minor the distinctions may seem, saints were commanded to maintain them, as noted in D&C 107, given in revelation in April 1835, D&C 107:99, “wherefore, now let every man learn his duty, and to act in the office in which he is appointed, in all diligence.” While addressing office-bearers, the revelation may also be argued to extend to all participants in the community.  

All stewards were expected to be diligent in their stewardship, not to be slothful, to learn their duty, so that they could be “counted to be worthy,” and be counted “worthy.”  

To further show that this was not a donation to other people, D&C 119, given on 18 July 1838, defined tithing as being based on interest – meaning that the consecrated property would indeed earn the “consecrator” an interest, on which they would then pay a tithe. For the member to be able to pay a tithe, the bishop, the elders, and all other community officials must have collaboratively but independently put the property to good use and earned a return.  

Application in NewVistas

The NewVistas interpretation of “all things in common” differs significantly from both traditional communalism and modern private ownership systems.

In many historical communal systems, participants contributed property into a common pool from which resources were redistributed. Such systems often focused primarily on consumption and welfare. While they sought equality, they frequently struggled to preserve incentives for production, innovation, stewardship, and long-term growth.

NewVistas approaches the principle differently.

Rather than pooling resources for redistribution, NewVistas seeks to place productive assets within permanent stewardship structures while ensuring that every steward has access to the resources needed to be productive. The objective is not to eliminate individual responsibility, but to create a system in which productive capacity is held in common while stewardship remains individual.

The result is an economic architecture that attempts to reconcile three principles that often appear to be in tension: individual stewardship, no poor among them, and all things in common.

Consecration and Entry into the Community

When individuals join a NewVistas community, they enter into a stewardship relationship with the community.

Historically, the concept of consecration involved transferring property into a community repository administered by designated officers. NewVistas retains the principle that productive assets become part of a larger community corpus, but applies it through modern legal, financial, and organizational structures.

Property contributed to the community is received, classified, and administered through the long-duration asset stewardship systems responsible for preserving and managing community assets. The objective is not to liquidate and redistribute those resources, but to place them within structures capable of maintaining and leveraging them productively across generations.

In return, the steward receives legally enforceable agreements defining their rights, responsibilities, stewardship opportunities, and access to community resources.

The focus is therefore on productive participation rather than passive membership.

Stewardship Rather Than Ownership

The phrase “all things in common” is often misunderstood to mean that no one possesses anything personally.

NewVistas does not interpret the principle in this manner.

Instead, it distinguishes between ownership and stewardship.

Ownership concerns legal title. Stewardship concerns responsibility, use, maintenance, and productive management.

Under the NewVistas model, most long-duration assets, infrastructure, productive facilities, equipment systems, and community resources remain within permanent stewardship structures. Individual stewards gain access to these resources through leases, agreements, and stewardship arrangements.

Housing is leased. Commercial facilities are leased. Equipment is leased. Productive infrastructure is leased. In each case, the steward gains access to the resources necessary to live and work productively without requiring permanent personal ownership of the underlying assets.

The emphasis shifts from accumulation of title to productive use.

All Things in Common as Shared Productive Capacity

The modern economy often measures prosperity according to the assets individuals own.

NewVistas measures prosperity differently.

The relevant question is not who owns a productive asset, but whether productive capacity is available to those who can use it effectively.

A greenhouse that produces food, a workshop that manufactures goods, a vehicle that transports materials, or a building that houses families remains productive regardless of which steward currently uses it.

By preserving these assets within permanent stewardship structures, the community seeks to ensure that productive capacity remains continuously available rather than being fragmented, abandoned, or removed from productive use.

In this sense, all things are held in common because the productive foundation of the community remains available to the community itself rather than becoming permanently attached to individual ownership claims.

Agency Stewardship of Assets

The principle of “all things in common” is implemented operationally through the agency system.

Different classes of assets are governed by different stewardship structures.

Short-duration assets such as inventory, work-in-progress, receivables, and operating capital are administered through the stewardship systems responsible for short-duration assets.

Long-duration assets such as land, buildings, infrastructure, intellectual property title, and major facilities are administered through the stewardship systems responsible for long-duration assets.

Equipment, machinery, vehicles, appliances, computers, fixtures, and similar productive tools are administered through the stewardship systems responsible for equipment assets.

Each asset class is therefore governed according to its unique characteristics, financing requirements, maintenance cycles, and operational risks.

This specialization improves accountability while preserving the principle that productive assets remain part of a larger community asset base.

Individual Stewardship and Sufficiency

“All things in common” does not eliminate individual stewardship.

On the contrary, the principle assumes that every steward should possess meaningful responsibility.

Each steward is expected to engage in productive activity through a stewardship, enterprise, profession, trade, or other productive endeavor. The objective is for every steward to become capable of providing what is sufficient for themselves and those who depend upon them.

The community therefore seeks neither dependence nor centralized provision.

Instead, it seeks widespread productive capacity.

The success of the system depends upon large numbers of capable stewards operating successful stewardships while drawing upon shared community infrastructure and productive assets.

Residue and Community Growth

When a stewardship produces more than is required to meet obligations, allocations, operating expenses, and what is sufficient for the steward and their dependents, the remaining amount becomes residue.

Residue plays an important role within the NewVistas system.

Rather than being consumed immediately, residue contributes to the growth and maintenance of the broader community. It supports infrastructure, reserves, new productive opportunities, educational systems, community services, and future development.

In this way, successful stewardship contributes not only to the steward’s own prosperity but also to the long-term prosperity of the community as a whole.

No Poor Among Them

The principle of “all things in common” ultimately exists to support another foundational principle: that there should be no poor among them.

This objective is not pursued through permanent redistribution. It is pursued by ensuring that every steward has access to housing, productive opportunities, education, equipment, infrastructure, financing systems, and community support structures capable of enabling success.

When productive assets remain available to the community, barriers to participation are reduced. Individuals are not required to accumulate vast amounts of capital before becoming productive.

The community therefore seeks to create conditions in which prosperity becomes broadly attainable while maintaining personal responsibility and stewardship.

A Community of Stewards

The NewVistas model does not envision a community of passive beneficiaries.

It envisions a community of stewards.

Each steward participates in productive activity. Each steward benefits from the productive assets held in common. Each steward contributes to the maintenance and growth of those assets. Each steward operates within clearly defined constitutional responsibilities and boundaries.

In this way, the principles of individual stewardship, all things in common, and no poor among them reinforce one another.

The objective is not communal ownership for its own sake. The objective is the creation of a productive, resilient, and prosperous community in which the tools of civilization remain available to present and future generations alike.