Agency in the congregational context

This subchapter draws attention to the unique constitution of a Mormon congregation and its effect on agency.

4.4.1. Differences in types of congregational structure and commitment

In religions with an organized congregational component, social interaction and mutual dependency and control are important factors to consider in the assessment of agency.

Religious dedication implies commitment to comply with the group, thus partially surrendering agency to a higher decision-making level. The multiple studies of congregational life in mainly Christian churches, viewed from a sociological perspective, attest to the significance of these factors (see, e.g., Ammerman 1997; Ammerman et al.

1998; Chaves 2004; Wind and Lewis 1994; Guest, Tusting, and Woodhead, 2004).

Some denominations, such as Baptists, evangelicals, and Pentecostals, give a rather free hand to their affiliated congregations, which in turn grants more freedom to individuals who can choose to join a group of their liking. Others, such as Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons, have strict guidelines as to the organization and functioning of their local flocks. Members must attend the congregation where they live or are assigned to. They are valued not only for their compliance with religious rules, but also for their strict attendance and their acceptance to fund the organization and to function in a position in the structure, including various occasional assignments in charitable work or social activities.

In most Christian or Islamic congregations only a limited number of officers are involved in forms of leadership and service, while the rest of the congregants form a global group of followers, called members, adherents, or parishioners. This is particularly

143 apparent in Catholic parishes where only one or a few priests are responsible for a few thousand members, with only a handful of volunteers to assist.

The situation is quite different in the Mormon church. A congregation is called a ward—

reminiscent of the original geographical boundaries when Mormons laid out a pioneering settlement and used the street blocks to determine a close-knit ward, including guidelines for mutual protection (Hamilton 1995; Parera 2005; Sellers 1968). The Dutch translation wijk kept the original meaning, the French opted for the Catholic paroisse. The members are administratively listed, with a number of personal data. When one person moves to another location, the “membership record” is electronically forwarded to the new ward.

Nowadays a large ward may comprise some three to four hundred members in Sunday attendance. In Europe the size of a ward hovers between eighty to one hundred fifty persons in attendance (the membership on the ward list can easily be double or even triple as many are not practicing any more). Smaller units are called branches. A number of wards form a “stake” (ring). For an introduction to a “Sunday” in a Mormon ward, see 1.1.

4.4.2. The Mormon “ward family” as a hierarchical community

In 1978 Douglas D. Alder, president of the independent Mormon History Association, gave his presidential address on the question if the Mormon ward is a congregation or a community. His seminal text became the basis for sociological research on Mormon wards (Embry 1997; 2001; Phillips 2008; Shipps, May and May 1994; Taber 1993). These studies illustrate how the communitarian character of a Mormon ward indeed elevates it above a traditional congregation. Alder’s address was reprinted as a foundational “classic” in 2018. His main thesis is still valid today (2018, 152):

The Mormon ward seems to be somewhere between the casualness of a congregation and the totality of a monastic order. It carries out the basic functions of most Christian congregations, which are the locus of the life cycle from birth to death. But there are essential communitarian functions also—the fellowship, the communion, the association. The ward has a distinctive Mormon mix that is beyond a congregation.

The way wards and the overarching “stakes” function makes a fundamental appeal to individual agentic action because of the required and expected involvement from all members. In the following explanation I place the typical Mormon terms for this functioning between quotation marks, with the official Dutch translation between brackets. A ward forms an intricate grid of internal organizational bodies and officers or

“callings” (roepingen or taken). At the top the ward is led by a male “bishopric” (bisschap) comprised of the bishop and his two counselors (raadgevers). Like any other officer on local church levels, these are lay persons, having a normal profession in daily life or being

144

retired. They fulfill their church “calling” for a number of years, before being “released”

(ontheven) and next “called” (geroepen) to another position. The bishopric is assisted by a

“ward clerk” (wijkadministrateur) and a “ward executive secretary” (wijksecretaris). In larger wards these functions extend to the plural—ward clerks, assistant ward clerks, and ward executive secretaries, all male.

The ward is further composed of a network of sub-organizations: priesthood quorums (priesterschapsquorums) for boys and men according to age groups, the Relief Society (zustershulpvereniging) for all adult women, the Young Men and Young Women (Jongemannen en Jongevrouwen) organizations for adolescents, the Primary (Jeugdwerk) for children under twelve, the Sunday School (zondagsschool) organization, and next leadership functions for other fields, such as missionary work, welfare (welzijnszorg), music, and family history (familiegeschiedenis). For each suborganization a presidency with counselors is called by the bishop, and supplemented with secretaries, advisers, and teachers. In Relief Society, Young Women, and Primary, all these officers are women.

The principle is that every member should have a “calling” somewhere in the extensive tree-like hierarchical ward structure. A few hundred positions are indeed possible within a ward of a few hundred people—one or more for each member. Each suborganization has its own leadership and training meetings, while their presiding officers form a “ward council” (wijkraad) under the direction of the bishop. Kramer (2014, 181) noted that “one of the primary and most consistent and time-consuming duties a bishop has is staffing the ward.” The Chart of Callings on ward level in the Church Administrative Handbook covers six pages, with for each calling instructions for the order to be followed: who is entitled to recommend someone for a calling to whom? By whom is a proposed calling approved? Who extends the call in a private interview? Who among the membership needs to “sustain” (ondersteunen) a calling by raising the right hand (in most cases all the members of the ward)? Who is responsible for the “setting apart” (aanstelling) to the position by the laying on of hands?

Next comes, for each person with a calling, the obligation to fulfill the duties related to the position. Manuals with directives and training sessions provide the needed information. The system requires reliance on each other’s position since expected tasks are often interrelated, such as council meetings, class teaching, and assignments in church services and social activities. The ward is a beehive—indeed Utah’s emblem since the nineteenth century. Members also refer to their ward as a “ward family,” with the bishop as a father figure who presides over the ward the way fathers preside over nuclear families and where all family members are supposed to do their chores.

145 4.4.3. Female valorization through involvement and callings

The information in this section tones with the earlier remarks on the inside valorization of female religious identity, i.e., the studies that come to rather positive conclusions as to the value of Mormonism for women (2.4.2).

It must be conceded that few churches give so many opportunities for girls and women to be recognized in positions and to be actively involved in the local church organization, notwithstanding the priesthood limitation (Madsen 2016; McBaine 2014; McDannell 2019;

Solomon 2017). Girls from a very young age on are asked to give a personally worded prayer in their class group, read and comment in lessons, and participate in public performance, for example when the Primary (for ages 3 to 11) presents its program in a sacrament meeting in front of the whole congregation. The official instructions mention that the children “participate by reading or reciting scripture passages, giving talks, singing in small groups, and sharing their testimonies.”¹ Once they belong to the Young Women organization from age twelve on, girls can become involved in leadership responsibilities. Up to the end of 2019, the young women were divided into three groups according to their ages: Beehives (ages 12–13), Mia Maids² (ages 14–15), and Laurels (ages 16–17), thus reflecting the boys’ priesthood age groups as deacons, teachers, and priests.

In 2020 the system was adjusted to provide more flexibility because in smaller wards age groups can be very different: the bishopric and the adult Young Women can organize the girls in flexible age groups—from just one class group in wards with only a few young women, to any other partition. Large wards may have six class groups, one for each age, organized by year.

In each class a young woman is called to serve as a class president and allowed to choose two counselors and a secretary, mirroring the system in the priesthood organization. This happens, as for all callings in the ward, under the supervision of the bishopric, one of them doing the setting apart by the laying on of hands and giving a blessing. “When a member of the bishopric calls a young woman to serve as a class president, he asks her to recommend whom to call as counselors and a secretary. He counsels her to approach this responsibility prayerfully, seeking guidance from the Lord about whom to recommend.”³ The procedure is meant to deepen the understanding of higher aims than personal friendships: how to help others in the development of new skills and the building of self-confidence. Selection to these functions is thus not based on seniority, which means that a 13-year old could be called to preside over older girls,

1 Handbook 2, Administering the Church (2010), 92.

2 “The term Mia refers to the Mutual Improvement Association (MIA), which was once the name of the youth program in the Church. The word Maid means young woman. The Mutual Improvement Association adopted the rose as an emblem of their organization, and that emblem continues with Mia Maids today as a symbol of love, faith, and purity.” Handbook 2, Administering the Church (2010), 77.

3 Handbook 2, Administering the Church (2010), 78. Note that permission of the young woman’s parents needs to be obtained before a call can be extended.

146

thus instilling respect for the inspired process and compliance with the divine order of things. Class presidencies learn to plan activities, conduct class meetings, and care for the individual members.

From time to time a young woman is also asked to give a talk in sacrament meeting in front of the whole congregation, or to present a musical performance. The development of talents is encouraged. Before she reaches age eighteen and becomes part of the Relief Society, any Mormon girl has thus been part of an activation process including personal responsibilities. She cannot, however, participate in the priesthood ordinances that boys, ages 12 to 17, can perform in Sunday’s sacrament meeting, i.e., preparing, blessing, and passing the sacrament. That gender line is clearly set.

For adult women the opportunities to serve in church callings multiply. Three auxiliaries are fully “manned” by women: Relief Society, Young Women, and Primary.

Each has its president with two counselors and a secretary. But in each auxiliary various other female officers, with designations such as teachers, advisors, coordinators, assistants, committee members, or specialists help run the expected programs. Task-specific manuals clarify the programs and procedures. Even though in the initial step each calling and setting apart still needs to pass through the male bishopric first, in the execution of their work the women have the latitude allowed by the system. Moreover, the same leadership structure is repeated on the higher stake level where presidencies and related officers for each auxiliary instruct and encourage the persons involved in the ward auxiliaries within the stake.

The most striking aspect of this setting is that women who have never or hardly been involved in these kinds of positions in the secular society now receive opportunities and responsibilities within a safe and supporting environment. Women with a low educational level or mental limitations are equally called to appropriate positions in order to feel useful and to learn new skills. Women will frequently testify how a church calling helped them acquire new competencies and develop self-confidence. Their agency has been challenged to constructive action.

4.4.4. Structural limits on agency

The strong appeal to agency in church callings also puts structural limits on agency.

Orderliness, directives, and obedience to “the proper authority” (het juiste gezag) are deeply embedded in the system. It affects the way agency can be used in the structure.

First, women cannot be called to any position without male approval and the setting apart by a male who has priesthood authority. Likewise, the bishop can release any woman from her position without any previous discussion or possibility to appeal.

Second, a “divine” layer supplants human autonomy. Callings are said to come through inspiration. The male officer responsible to extend a calling would privately consider potential candidates for a position, weigh implications, eventually consult his counselors,

147 decide on a person and then, in prayer or meditation, seek “confirmation” (bevestiging) from a spiritual prompting. Stories abound how a priesthood leader received such impressions, including promptings that lead him to a person not originally considered.

Other stories tell of people who at first reacted negatively to their calling, but later testified how it blessed them in various ways. The overarching message is that callings come from God, hence, refusing a calling is somehow considered inappropriate and may entice feelings of guilt.

Third, the “divinely inspired” decision also implies that criticism of the choice of church positions or of the way the position is executed is unacceptable. Members are regularly reminded that they sustain each new calling by raising the right hand. “Evil speaking of the Lord’s anointed” is the standard phrase to condemn any later criticism.

As apostle Oaks remarked:

Criticism is particularly objectionable when it is directed toward church authorities, general or local. Evil speaking of the Lord’s anointed is in a class by itself. It is one thing to depreciate a person who exercises corporate power or even government power. It is quite another thing to criticize or depreciate a person for the performance of an office to which he or she has been called of God. It does not matter that the criticism is true.¹

Such counsel can be used to effectively silence even carefully worded objections. In public, within their own ward or stake, active church members will hardly ever voice dissent. Only in private and trustworthy settings will more liberal church members express concerns over one or the other local leader or policy. Even then, it will not often lead to an open conflict. In cases of obvious and enduring problems with a local leader, the higher-up can easily arrange for an honorable release.

Relevance for my research

With their long experience of service in the church, not only on ward but also on stake level, my respondents are well placed to assess agency in the congregational context.

Among Mormons from different wards a usual socializing question in making or renewing acquaintance is “What’s your present calling in the ward?” or “What callings have you had in the church?” The calling is an identity marker and an easy source for casual conversation. Wherever appropriate, the question is asked to my respondents as a strategy for fluent interaction. My own familiarity with ward and stake callings is an advantage. More importantly, talking about one’s calling often provides information on the person’s degree of involvement and satisfaction, as well as on interhuman relations.

1 Dallin H. Oaks, “Criticism,” Ensign (February 1987), https://www.lds.org/ensign/1987/02/criticism.

Accessed November 2, 2018.

148

A core issue is then to what extent women feel their agency is being respected and rewarded.