Branch vs Ward

[lajackson]

We have two branches in our stake. One is a singles branch and the other a deaf branch. Both are relatively small in number although they cover a rather wide area.

In such a situation, the number of members would be considered. The geographical area, though large, would have very little to do with the decision.

[Michael_Newman]

Aside from all of the logical considerations, it is also a paramount decision that can only be inspired or validated through prayer.

[ggllbb]

Just as another example and information (probably useless) about why a branch rather than a ward: I am in a branch that geographically is larger than all the stakes I have been in (several). The branch has about 80 members and gets about 40 attendance at sacrament meeting. The town we meet in is about 80 miles from any of the other wards and branches in the stake. We are just too isolated and dispersed to be practical to be connected with a ward. Also, the branch president is from the stake and does not live in the branch boundaries.

[lajackson]

The branch has about 80 members and gets about 40 attendance at sacrament meeting. The town we meet in is about 80 miles from any of the other wards and branches in the stake. We are just too isolated and dispersed to be practical to be connected with a ward. Also, the branch president is from the stake and does not live in the branch boundaries.

This is one of the more usual situations in which a branch may be established. Hopefully, the branch president who does not live in the branch will be able to (or already does) have counselors who live within the branch boundaries. Eventually, the ideal would be to have the complete branch presidency called from among the branch members.

Then the branch grows, and someday becomes a ward. This is what building the Kingdom is all about.

Many years ago, I served in a district presidency and visited 12 different branches as part of my responsibility. Today, each of those 12 branches is its own stake, and some of those cities have more than one.

It seemed like forever at the time. But, it seems like just yesterday as I look back on those wonderful experiences.

[kennethjorgensen]

It seemed like forever at the time. But, it seems like just yesterday as I look back on those wonderful experiences.

That is so true.

About the diffences between ward and branch I agree geography can influence things but as also stated it doesnt have to. It is more about the amount of worthy priesthood holders etc.

A branch also has more "flexibility" including the requirements for those called to some of the leadership positions and the curriculum they choose to follow and the individual classes they have.

I am trying to stay general here as I dont want to quote from the CHI but one of the publicly known differences is that the requirement for being a Branch President is that he has be a Priest within the Aaronic Priesthood whereas a Bishop has to be a High Priest.

Some might have read THIS wiki article which is actually wrong stating he has to be an Elder. In fairness many are Elders or High Priests but it is not a requirement.

The Branch Guidebook on lds.org is actually very informative and I can recommend it to anyone who is interested (here is the PDF).
The section about the Branch Presidency is relevant to some of my comments above.

Having had the experience of starting a branch I came to appreciate the differences and the flexibility being a branch gives you.

[greggo]

I just wanted to point out that the policies governing the creation of the different units of the church are not set in stone. They may change and exceptions can be made.

Between 2002-05, I was the stake clerk in the only English speaking stake (not a military unit) outside of any English speaking countries. Before it was organized, we had three English wards within a local language stake. The area president re-organized the units to go from 3 to 4 and then called a District Pres'y (the currently serving Stake Pres'y) to preside over the 4 units. At that time, we were a district with 4 branches, only because by policy a stake needed to have at least 5 wards. So all of the then bishops were made branch presidents, the HP groups were eliminated, and the HPGL's were made EQP's. Soon after all the re-sustainings/settings-apart, it was petitioned to the First Pres'y to have the district not be a part of the mission, but to report directly to the area pres'y and allow us to hold our own disciplinary councils, have our own patriarch, etc. When presented to Pres. Hinckley, he said rather than make these exceptions, why not make the exception on the number of wards and allow us to become a stake? So that's what was done (and everyone had to be re-called, re-sustained, re-set apart - again).

[Valient]

I wondered about this myself...so I was a member of a branch in New York for two years (2001-2003) then moved back to Montana, but I visit occasionally when I come see my daughter and most recently (2021) am visiting the ward which became a ward shortly after we left in 2003...they had 1 YW in the ward and 1 primary age child and maybe 15 sisters and brothers each...how can this b a ward? I was told a ward needs a certain number of priesthood holders yet a certain number of total members...anyone know the ground truth on this one?

[jdlessley]

... anyone know the ground truth on this one?

It is dependent on the area of the church. In the United States and Canada there are numbers used for organization membership and attendance over a period of time, worthy Melchizedek priesthood holders necessary to fill leadership callings, and other statistical determinants. There is no requirement for the number of youth and children. There is also leeway for the Area Authority to receive inspiration to make adjustments for local conditions and circumstances. If you are looking for exact criteria, no one here can give that. After a branch becomes a ward there can be a downturn in membership, attendance, and available worthy Melchizedek priesthood holders to fill leadership callings. The stake president, area coordinating council, and area authority watch these things and will discuss necessary unit boundary realignments when appropriate.

The organization of the Church is set out in scripture. Derived from that we have a living document in the General Handbook that provides further guidance for our current day and circumstances. General Handbook, sections 5-15, describes the organization of the Church. After describing the General and Area Leadership in section 5 the Stake Leadership is described and outlined in section 6. One sentence in section 6.1, Purposes of a Stake, states: "Today the Church is organized into stakes."

The organizational goal is to build stakes. Within section 6 is the organization of a stake. Notably there is section 6.3 which outlines the differences between the authority of district presidents and that of stake presidents. In reading that section we can get an understanding as to the differences in organization of a stake and a district. We get an understanding that a district is performing some of the functions of a stake under the leadership of a mission president.

As mentioned earlier in this thread, stake child unit organizations are wards and branches while child unit organizations of districts are branches. For a branch to become a ward it must reside within a stake. I have gone through the processes of making a branch a ward, splitting wards, and reorganizing ward boundaries to combine three wards into two, splitting stakes, and so on while serving in several stake callings and listening to general authorities and area authorities speak on the topic in meetings devoted to those organization changes. While numbers were discussed, they also were focusing on the stability of the unit in the future and meeting the needs of the membership.

[russellhltn]

The policy on creating new units can be found in the General Handbook 36.2.

Note that's a minimum for creating a ward. It's possible it may fall below that afterward. None of this appears to be automatic - the stake president has to initiate the change.