Catholic Church and DAO
Before diving into a discussion that touches on both religion and decentralised autonomous organisations (DAOs), I want to make it clear that the following content is based on my personal perspective and my unique relationship with my Catholic faith, the Church, and the concept of DAOs.
When I was at my parents’ house a couple of weeks ago, their Sunday morning didn’t look like a typical one. Instead of going to church (or if the church has been done the Saturday night before, chilling at home), people came to their residence. They were the parishioners living nearby, about to elect the next parish Council’s leader from the laity (as the head of the Council is the priest himself). My father holds the position of the community leader for the parishioners in our area, and as a result, the parishioners congregated at our home to conduct this election.
What struck me most during this gathering was the strong sense of community that permeated the event. This contrasted with my experiences in European Catholic churches during my time in the Netherlands and the UK. The roots of Catholicism in my country trace back to the Portuguese and Dutch missionaries who arrived centuries ago. Some elderly members of the community still referred to this gathering as a ‘kring,’ a term borrowed from Dutch, which literally translates to a circle. While the exact origin of this term is unclear, it likely pertains to the smaller community units surrounding the church, forming a sort of cyclical connection.
In essence, each community consists of a specific number of Catholic families residing within the jurisdiction of a Catholic church, and each community has its designated leader. The role of the community leader encompasses the responsibility of overseeing the welfare and affairs of the community. They serve as the primary point of contact for any church-related matters between the community members and the church itself. For instance, if an individual wishes to get married, they can approach the community leader to initiate the process and coordinate with the church, including the necessary paperwork or premarital courses. A similar process applies to requests for a priest’s visit for sick family members, organising a requiem mass, and various other church-related matters.
To foster a sense of togetherness, these communities regularly organise community masses, often on a monthly basis. These gatherings serve as opportunities for community members to convene with the parish priest, and the location of the mass rotates among the homes of community members. While this arrangement works well in our context, it may present challenges in other parts of the world, as I’ll elaborate on shortly.
As the world undergoes significant changes, particularly with a decline in pastoral numbers in Western churches, an intriguing reversal has occurred. Priests from my country are now being sent to Europe as part of their missionary assignments. It’s quite a departure from the historical norm, isn’t it? When these priests return for a brief respite from their missions, they bring back a treasure trove of stories to share with the local parishioners. They highlight the stark differences they’ve observed in Western churches when it comes to the sense of community. For instance, a senior from the same elementary school I attended, who is now a priest, shared his experiences in Germany, his missionary land. He noted that there’s a notable absence of a strong community establishment there. This wasn’t surprising to me, as I had also observed a similar phenomenon in places like Den Haag and Edinburgh. To be fair, the Indonesian diaspora in Den Haag still maintained their sense of community and regularly held community masses in their homes, often with an Indonesian priest presiding. However, this was more than a decade ago when I was studying there, and I’m uncertain about the current situation. This senior priest explained that in Germany, houses are considered private spaces, so visiting parishioners’ homes is not a common practice. However, my perspective on the matter differs. With many people residing in flats, especially during my time in Edinburgh, it simply wasn’t practical to invite a large number of guests for regular meetups. While having a visiting priest might be a possibility, hosting an entire community for a mass wasn’t feasible.
So, what parallels can be drawn between a Catholic church and a DAO?
The answer lies in governance.
Both entities, much like organic communities, organise themselves through community governance structures. Similar to the process of electing a new Council leader that I witnessed at my parents’ house, a DAO employs tokens to encourage active participation among its members in shaping their collective future. Drawing from several projects I’ve been involved in, there are numerous topics on which a DAO can solicit votes from its members. These topics may include decisions related to rewards mechanisms, loyalty programs, staking systems, and more. Members can also submit proposals and protocols for consideration. The overarching goal is to ensure robust member engagement in the governance process. However, it’s important to note that each governance model comes with its own set of advantages and disadvantages.
Token-Based vs. Wallet-Based
For instance, token-based voting is well-suited for situations where a DAO’s future should be predominantly influenced by members who have greater stakes or investments, often referred to as ‘whales.’ However, the downside is that it can inadvertently encourage a form of governance known as plutocracy, where decisions are primarily influenced by the wealthiest members. Conversely, wallet or identity-based voting, akin to how my parents’ church elected its laity Council leader, can be susceptible to Sybil attacks, where individuals create multiple identities to exert undue influence. In the case of the Council leader voting, the Sybil attack was mitigated by requiring every voter to physically visit the community leader’s house and cast their vote using a provided laptop. This illustrates an example of off-chain voting, which in the context of DAOs can occur on platforms like Discord or Telegram. It’s crucial to maintain stringent controls to ensure that each participating username in these channels corresponds to a unique individual.
Treasury management
As organisations, both the Catholic church and DAOs share the responsibility of managing their sources of revenue. While a Catholic church may not issue its own currency, as offerings and collections typically occur in the fiat currency of the country in which it operates, DAOs often function using their native tokens. Nevertheless, both entities must diligently oversee their financial statements and maintain balance sheets.
Democratic representatives and problems
Furthermore, within the Catholic Church, the Councils serve as a manifestation of the democratic process, where it’s expected that the will of the parishioners is carried out through this representative body. This mirrors the representative model seen in the decision-making processes of multi-signature (multi-sig) wallets within a DAO. It’s worth noting that such an approach is also employed in traditional organisations and is often referred to as approval mechanisms.
Voting, a practice as old as human civilization itself, offers various modalities for determining winners. Returning to the Council leader election in my parents’ church, consider a scenario in which a particular candidate secures a majority of the votes, but the total number of votes represents only a minority of the parishioners, say 30%. Several factors could contribute to this situation, including elderly parishioners who couldn’t physically make it to the community leader’s house or a general passive disinterest among parishioners regarding the church’s leadership, provided they receive the essential services they require.
To address this, a quorum-based system is employed in such voting mechanisms. However, it’s not without its shortcomings. In the case of DAOs, influential individuals might manipulate the number of participants by incentivising those with low enthusiasm, especially in wallet-based voting. Alternatively, an organised group could purchase a significant number of tokens to manipulate the outcome.
Conclusion
As old as humanity itself, decision-making processes have continued to evolve. As organisations grow in size, a pyramid model becomes more appealing, allowing only a select number of key members to participate in decision-making. In traditional companies, this role is often filled by board members. In DAOs, a similar model is used to appoint representatives, utilising a whitelisted wallet system. The parallels with the governance structures of countries become apparent. In smaller DAOs, the ethos of collective decision-making persists within the membership. However, when dealing with larger DAOs or mega-companies with a global presence, decision-making can diverge significantly from democratic models.
The primary challenge lies in managing the number of participants. With diverse perspectives and agendas, what I believe is best for the organisation might differ from your viewpoint. How do you envision the development of DAO governance as it continues to grow and evolve?
Leave comments below.
And of course, if you want to discuss about tokenomics of your project or overall product consultancy, feel free to contact me on my LinkedIn below.
LinkedIn: Sekar Langit
