The solution to this riddle lies in the fairly flat leadership structure. Each bishop typically serves two districts. The eighty adults in each district are only one step away from the top of the church hierarchy. The flat, two-tier structure links grassroots members directly to the citadel of power and has several benefits. Each bishop personally knows the members of his districts and in this way monitors the pulse of the community. Members feel a close tie to the central decision-making structure because their bishop attends the fall and spring Bishops’ Meetings and can provide feedback on the discussion. The bishop, in turn, understands the larger concerns of his fellow bishops across the settlement. Thus he can personally explain churchwide regulations to his members. With about 160 adult members in his two districts, he knows his people well and is able to monitor social change on a first-name basis.
A seniority system based on age and tenure undergirds the power structure of the bishops. A young minister described the decision-making process among the bishops: “The oldest ones have priority. It tends to point to the oldest one. If they want a final decision, they say to him, ‘Let’s hear your decision.’” If health permits, the senior bishop presides over the Bishops’ Meeting, as well as various Ministers’ Meetings a few weeks later. The diplomatic skills of this highly esteemed elder statesman are crucial for upholding harmony. A minister described the seniority system: “Many bishops go to the oldest bishop to ask for his advice on a certain issue. And he will not hesitate to give his opinion, based on Scripture. Then he will conclude and say, ‘Don’t do it that way just because I told you, go home and work with your church.’ So it is not a dictatorship by any means; it works on a priority basis and a submitting basis” (emphasis added).
Twice each year, some seventy-five bishops across the settlement confer on problems and discuss changes that might imperil the welfare of the church. Four regional Ministers’ Meetings, involving bishops, ministers, and deacons, follow on the heels of the Bishops’ Meeting each fall and spring. These regional meetings of ordained leaders, numbering over one hundred men, meet in a home, barn, or cabinet shop. The bishops report on issues from their Bishops’ Meeting and solicit the ministers’ support. Other concerns or special problems are also handled. The leaders’ meetings play a significant role in maintaining cohesion and harmony across the settlement.
Historically, the hub of the settlement was around the village of Intercourse, but with the southward expansion the geographical and ideological center has shifted toward Georgetown. The number of districts grew from 11 in 1920 to 131 by 2000, stretching the organizational patterns. The leadership structure was revised in three ways to fit the prolific growth. First, the span of each bishop’s control remained the same. In pyramid fashion, growing organizations often add rungs in their hierarchy as well as widen the control of top managers. The Amish have resisted this pattern. Instead of adding more congregations to each bishopric, they increased the number of bishops as districts multiplied. Keeping two districts per bishop and allowing all bishops to participate in the Bishops’ Meeting prevented the development of new levels of authority. The flat architecture enhances social control as well as the church’s ability to monitor social change.
Multiplying the number of bishops, however, led to other problems. With eighteen districts in the 1940s, nine bishops could easily meet and conduct their business informally. As the number of bishops increased, leadership became consolidated in an informal “executive committee” of senior bishops. The wisdom of this small group carries compelling authority in the Bishops’ Meeting. Membership in this senior caucus of bishops is based on age and tenure rather than on election or appointment. Members of this inner circle do not directly supervise other bishops, for even these senior members have their own districts. Without the benefit of professional consultants or middle managers, all the bishops serve, in their words, as “watchmen on the walls of Zion,” looking out for the church’s welfare.
FIGURE 4.2 Distribution of Church Districts in the Lancaster Settlement and Boundaries of Four Regional Ministers’ Meetings
The growing number of districts precipitated a third change in organizational structure. By 1975 the community had expanded to fifty-two districts. It was difficult to find a meeting place to accommodate the large group of ordained leaders, which by then consisted of some two hundred bishops, ministers, and deacons. Conducting business was hampered without a loudspeaker system and formal parliamentary procedures. Thus, in April 1975, the leaders were divided into north and south subgroups along Route 340, an east and west road through the heart of the settlement.20 Facing relentless expansion, the settlement was divided again in 1993 into four quadrants, as shown in Figure 4.2. Bishops from the entire settlement continue to meet twice a year, followed by meetings of the ordained leaders in each respective quadrant. Many members credit the leaders’ meeting as a key factor that enabled the settlement to avoid schism and maintain a semblance of unity despite enormous change in recent years.
NETWORKS OF SOCIAL CAPITAL
No formal committees report to the Amish bishops. Over the years, as lay members have formed committees for special projects, they have often consulted with ordained leaders as a gesture of goodwill. In general, the ministers and bishops, guardians of tradition, are reluctant to initiate or endorse new ventures or serve on committees. The formal power structure, slanted toward tradition, reacts to social changes but rarely exercises a leadership role in establishing new programs. Although the bishops’ body has steered clear of formalized procedures, several networks have emerged to address special needs. In each case, interested laymen, sometimes with, and other times without, the blessing of the bishops, have coordinated activities that require resources beyond the scope of local districts. These networks illustrate how social capital is mobilized to address special needs across the settlement.
1. Amish Aid Society. Community barn raisings have been a longtime public symbol of mutual aid among the Amish. An informal plan pays for replacement materials and property destroyed by a fire or storm. Begun in 1875, the Amish Aid Society seeks to spread the costs of disaster across the community. Property owners who join the plan are assessed a fluctuating amount per $1,000 of property valuation. It is “assessment by need after the fire,” said one member. A committee monitors the plan, and each church district has a director who records property assessments and collects the “fire tax.” When the central treasury becomes depleted, the committee asks the director in each district to collect a new assessment. Collections vary by the frequency of fires but average about one a year. This modest system of fire and storm insurance operates without paid personnel, underwriters, agents, offices, computers, lawsuits, or profits. Its sole purpose is to provide a network of support for members. Manual labor for cleanup and rebuilding is freely given by members whenever disaster strikes.21
2. Old Order Book Society. In 1937, in response to the consolidation of public schools, a group of laymen organized a School Committee, which sought to have Amish children excused from public school after the eighth grade. Eventually Amish schools were built and administered by local Amish school boards. The School Committee evolved into a statewide organization known as the Old Order Book Society, which coordinates Amish schools today. The society maintains a liaison with state education officials and provides guidelines for the administration of one-room Amish schools. Representatives from different settlements in Pennsylvania attend the society’s annual meeting.22
3. Amish Liability Aid. In the 1960s, Amish businessmen began purchasing commercial liability insurance to protect themselves from lawsuits. The church had a longstanding opposition to worldly insurance programs, which use the force of law and undermine mutual aid. To resolve the dilemma of providing protection against lawsuits without using commercial insurance, Amish Liability Aid was established in 1965. Within a decade, the plan had nearly a thousand members.23 According to one member, this plan “protects you from others when there’s an accident and you’re no
t protected yourself.” Participation is voluntary, and members of the plan make a small annual contribution that fluctuates with the level of need across the settlement.
4. National Steering Committee. In the early 1960s, some Amish youth served as conscientious objectors in hospitals as an alternative to military service. These young men frequently became worldly, sometimes married non-Amish nurses, and often did not return home. And when they did, they found it difficult to fit into their rural communities. In an effort to solve this problem, Amish leaders across the nation met in Indiana in 1966. This meeting gave birth to a National Steering Committee, which became a broker of sorts between the Amish community and government officials.
Initially focused on alternative service, more recently the committee has mediated legal disputes between the government and the Amish on Social Security, hard hats, unemployment insurance, Worker’s Compensation, 401(k) savings plans, and many other matters. In the role of a meek lobbyist, the committee chairman stays abreast of legislation that might impinge on Amish life. He also provides feedback to legislators who want Amish reactions to pending legislation. The National Steering Committee has three members, directors in various states, and a network of local representatives. An annual national meeting reviews the work of the committee, whose chairman lives in the Lancaster settlement.24
TABLE 4.3
Social Networks and Committees by Date of Origin and Functiona
The committee functions as a self-perpetuating body outside the formal structure of the church. Individual bishops support the committee and often attend some of the meetings. In terms of size, structure, procedures, and written guidelines, the committee reflects the greatest imprint of bureaucracy of any organization to date. Despite this bureaucratic stamp, the committee operates from a home office with volunteer labor.
5. Church Aid. Caught between the rising costs of hospitalization and their reluctance to accept Medicare, some Amish families began buying medical insurance in the late 1960s. Fearing that commercial insurance would undercut the community’s reliance on spontaneous mutual aid, the Amish have always frowned on commercial policies. Rising hospital costs threatened to bring a fuller embrace of commercial insurance and to undercut traditional mutual aid. Thus, a group of Amishmen initiated Amish Church Aid—an informal community-based version of hospital insurance. The program began in January 1969, and within four years 1,450 members from thirty-six districts were involved in the program.25 Amish families may join Church Aid only if the ordained leaders in their district support the plan. About 75 percent of the districts participate. Some districts do not subscribe because of its similarity to commercial insurance. Nonparticipants with large medical bills are usually assisted by alms funds from their own district as well as from adjoining ones. Members who participate in Church Aid make a monthly contribution and receive help with medical bills that exceed a deductible of several thousand dollars. Church Aid guidelines make it clear that members involved in motor vehicle accidents in which they are the driver will not be reimbursed for medical expenses.26 The plan will also not assist with organ transplants or expenses at cancer clinics in Mexico.
6. Disaster Aid. The Lancaster Amish have been longtime participants in disaster relief projects organized by Mennonite Disaster Service. In 1969 they formed an Amish Disaster Committee to coordinate responses to Hurricane Camille in Florida. This committee eventually became a subcommittee of Mennonite Disaster Service and provides volunteers to assist in cleanup and rebuilding projects following natural disasters—tornadoes, hurricanes, and floods—outside the Amish community.
7. Bruderschaft Library. Following the example of some other Amish communities, the Lancaster Amish organized a historical library in May 1979. The project blossomed, and in August 1984 the Pequea Bruderschaft Library was incorporated northeast of the village of Intercourse. Established by a board of seven directors, the historical library exists “to assist members of the Amish Church and others in learning about past historic beliefs and practices of the Amish Church.”27 A new building was constructed in 1990, south of Gordonville. Several part-time librarians maintain the collection and aid researchers and curious tourists.28
8. Product Liability Aid. With more and more Amish operating businesses, product liability issues began to create concerns in the late 1980s. On the one hand, dealers selling Amish products in other states wanted proof of product liability insurance. The bishops, on the other hand, were not eager for businesses to rely on “worldly insurances that could prove harmful to the Old Order Amish way of life.”29 Finally, in 1992 the Product Liability Aid program was established to help members with large liability claims for one of their products. A five-member board of directors and an advisory board of ordained officials gives oversight to the plan, which solicits funds to help shop owners, contractors, bakers, farmers, and others who face liability problems related to their products.
9. Helping Hand. This informal network provides loans to Amish people who are purchasing property or setting up a business. Begun in the Midwest, the network was established in the Lancaster settlement in 1998. This network provides connections between the wealthy and the needy.
10. People’s Helpers. This mental health network that formed in 1998 was described by one participant as “a group of our people nationwide who do counseling.” Although this informal network of caregivers began in another state, Amish from the Lancaster settlement who are interested in mental illness and depression actively participate. The group provides informal support to families who have members struggling with mental illness and refers friends to professional counselors and medical personnel.
11. Safety Committee. In response to accidents on farms and in shops, a Safety Committee formed in 1998 to encourage both safety training and compliance with government safety standards. “It helped us know what to do in case of an accident or fatality,” said one member.
These eleven informal networks link resources with special needs across the community.30 For the most part, committee leaders work with ordained leaders to build ties of understanding and gain their support. No central board or administrator appoints or oversees these special interest clusters. The networks mobilize social capital resources to serve community-wide needs. Each committee arose spontaneously to meet special needs beyond the capacity of local districts. While some of these committees show traces of bureaucracy, they are mostly informal, flat, small, and obedient to tradition. Although their loose structure would create nightmares for modern bureaucrats, they have served the Amish community well.
A health-related organization that is not formally operated by the Amish merits special mention: the Clinic for Special Children. Established in 1990 by a physician, Dr. Holmes Morton, it serves Old Order Amish, Old Order Mennonites, and other families who suffer from a high incidence of genetic diseases such as glutaric aciduria and maple syrup urine disease. It provides infant testing programs as well as diagnostic and medical services for children with inherited metabolic disorders. The clinic addresses a major need and has provided excellent service to the community. The Amish have expressed their gratitude for Dr. Morton’s work by generously supporting annual benefit auctions for the clinic.31
ARCHITECTURAL SUMMARY
The social architecture of Amish society is small, compact, local, informal, and homogeneous—what sociologists sometimes call a Gemeinschaft. These features dramatically diverge from the design of postindustrial societies. Amish social structure embodies Gelassenheit and bolsters the groups’ defensive strategy against worldliness. A brief overview of the distinctive features concludes our architectural tour of Amish society.
1. Small. From egos to organizational units, Gelassenheit prefers small-scale things. The Amish realize that larger things bring specialization, hierarchy, and elite subgroups that remove average people from power. Meeting in homes for worship limits the size of congregations. Ironically, this commitment to small-scale units makes individuals “big” psychologically in that they
are known intimately by a small, stable group. It is impossible to get lost in the crowd in an Amish congregation. The security provided by a small congregation lessens the pressure for individuals to “make it on their own.” Small farms are preferable to large ones. Small schools provide a personalized education. Large craft and manufacturing operations are frowned upon because big operators garner attention to themselves, establish a threatening power base, and insult the egalitarian community with excessive wealth.
An Amish businessman explained:
My people look at a large business as a sign of greed. We’re not supposed to engage in large businesses, and I’m right at the borderline now and maybe too large for Amish standards. The Old Order Amish don’t like large exposed volume. You don’t drive down the road and see big Harvestore silos sitting on Amish farms, you don’t see one of those big 1,000-foot chicken houses. I can easily tell you which are the Mennonite farms. They’ll feed 200 head of cattle, have 50,000 chickens, and milk 120 cows. They’re a notch completely ahead of us.... My business is just at the point right now where it’s beyond where the Old Order Amish people think it should be. It’s just too large.
Another businessman expressed the fear of large organizations: “Our discipline thrives with a small group. Once you get into that big superstructure, it seems to gather momentum and you can’t stop it.” Describing a growing Amish organization that the bishops curbed, he said: “It became self-serving, like a pyramid. Suppose we get a rotten egg leading it sometime? He can do more damage, and wreck in one year what we built up in twenty years. That’s why the bishops curbed it.” The Amish do not read the scientific literature that analyzes the impact of size on social life, but they realize that in the long run the modern impulse for large-scale things could debilitate their community.
The Riddle of Amish Culture Page 12
