One of Ludwig Wittegenstein’s commentators once wrote:   “I can remember the future” makes no sense for our linguistic system. This is not the way we use the verb “remember” — its grammar (= use) is clear. Remembering refers only to the past. (Gier, 1981, p.175).   In this article, I hope to argue that ‘remembering’ in religion involves more than simply recalling in one’s mind an event or idea from one’s personal past. ‘Remembering’ or ‘remembrance’ has a complexity of meaning, and situates the religious practitioner in the present and the future, as well as a past. In what follows, I shall give particular attention to the Jehovah’s Witnesses annual Memorial, and show how its salient features exhibit various facets of remembering which go beyond personal recollection.   At its most obvious, the word ‘remember’ means observing or marking a particular event or occasion. The ancient commandment ‘Remember the Sabbath day’ (Exodus 20:8) is not an instruction to recall mentally a particular Saturday in one’s personal history. The adverbial phrase that follows (‘by keeping it holy’) indicates that this is an injunction regarding a community’s present and future, with specific activities to be carried out or avoided. The observance of Remembrance Day in the United Kingdom and the British Commonwealth originally involved personal recollection of the events of the First World War, but, as increasing numbers of war veterans aged and died, few direct memories are part of the commemoration. Instead, personal memories of other conflicts become part of the remembrance, most notably the Second World War, but also other conflicts such as the 1982 Falklands War or the Iraq and Afghanistan combats, but for the majority of participants personal recollection has given way to observance through commemorative activities, such as the two minutes’ silence or the wearing poppies. If we are to speak of memory in such contexts, it is predominantly the collective memory of nations or of communities that is being preserved.   In the case of religious rituals, many of them are conducted precisely because they are not in the personal memory of the believer. Believers have not personally been party to the giving of Torah on Mount Sinai, the Last Supper, the Buddha’s parinirvana, or the formation of the Khalsa. One can argue, of course, about whether such events were genuine happenings that entered the memories of the early followers of Moses, Jesus, the Buddha and Guru Gobind Singh. The concept of ‘myth’, so commonly employed within the field of religious studies, has suggested that the purpose of the stories relating to the founding of a religion may not be historically authentic occurrences, but narratives devised to legitimate a religion and its key practices. Memory — in the sense of recalling to one’s mind an event one personally witnessed — has to be distinguished from false memory and from imagination, and the categories into which religious narratives fall is open to debate. [1] It is not my purpose to enter into such controversy here: it is sufficient to note that these narratives at least purport to relate events in past history. If they are genuine events, they can no longer exist in the minds of the original witnesses, who are long since dead. If they are not authentic historical happenings, then at least there must have been some similar decisive occurrence, which prompted their creation. For example, there must have been an early Israelite law-giver, or there would be no Torah. If Jesus did not institute the Last Supper, at least his sacrificial death is at least part of the collective Christian memory.   Shared memories are essential to the establishment of friendships and communities. The sharing of past experiences with other people is an important part of friendship. Friendships are made, rather than instantly created. The sharing of common experiences is importantly instrumental in creating and cementing friendships, generate a bank of shared phenomena (the communal memory), enabling reminiscence (the act of remembering) as a significant element of friendship and community. Forgotten memories can impair a relationship: ‘How could you forget?’ is a rebuke and not simply a mere expression of astonishment. Worse still is when we forget to remember in the sense of marking an important occasion, such as an anniversary. It is saddening, when an old friend falls victim to dementia, preventing our ability to maintain the same relationship of friendship that we once enjoyed.   As has been mentioned, believers do not normally entertain the key events of their tradition within their personal memories. There are a few exceptions: a new religion may celebrate an event in which some of the first-generation members participated, for example the Family Federation’s celebration of Foundation Day, [2] or Scientology’s celebration of L. Ron Hubbard’s birthday. Subsequent generations and new converts want to belong to the community by appropriating these events for themselves, and they become members by participating in the re-enactments of the events that are being commemorated. To re-enact the commemorated events places them — at least symbolically — in the same events as the original founding community, granting them the same sense of belonging, and the same privileges that accrue from their occurrence.   Philosophers and psychologists typically distinguish between two main types of memory: declarative (or explicit) and procedural (or implicit) (Anderson, 1976; Sutton, 2010). The distinction corresponds to Gilbert Ryle’s distinction between ‘knowing that’ and ‘knowing how’ (Ryle, 1971). The former concerns knowledge of facts, and embraces knowledge of the meanings of words, the names of people and places, historical facts — indeed, all the information that we have learned in the course of our lives. These examples are sometimes given the labels ‘propositional memory’ or ‘semantic memory’, since they are typically expressed in language the form of propositions. Examinations in the educational system have been traditionally designed to test this type of memory, causing candidates to memorise propositions which they hope will be recalled and expressed in written form. Also subsumed under declarative memory is ‘episodic memory’ (sometimes called ‘recollective memory’). Such memories embrace our recollections of events that have happened to us in the course of our personal history: a party we attended, a journey we made, a holiday, and so on.   Procedural memory — sometimes also referred to as ‘habitual memory’ — is ‘knowledge how’, and essentially concerns the acquisition and employment of skills. Riding a bicycle, playing the piano and swimming are all examples of skills that rely on our memory of how to perform them. These memories differ from declarative memories, since it is possible to have extensive knowledge of musical theory (knowledge involving declarative memory) but to lack the skill to play an instrument. These types of knowledge and memory are not wholly separate, of course, but are intertwined: my procedural memory of how to play the piano relies in part on my declarative (propositional) knowledge of musical notation, each of which I may associate with my episodic (recollective) memories of what my piano teacher once taught me. It is not my intention to pursue the issue of how such aspects of knowledge and memory interrelate, but to use the distinctions between semantic/propositional, recollective/episodic, and procedural/habitual memories as a means to understanding the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Memorial, and religious ritual activity more widely.   The Memorial In order to show how the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Memorial relates to these aspects of memory, it is first necessary to give some brief description of what takes place there. This annual celebration is the only event in the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ festival calendar, and is referred to as the Memorial or the Lord’s Evening Meal. The only other rite that they celebrate is baptism, which is the method of becoming a full member of the Watch Tower organization. [3] However, as a recent Watchtower article points out, the Lord’s Evening Meal is the only event that Witnesses are called upon to ‘memorialise’ — that is to say, it recalls a specific event from the past (Watch Tower, 2003, p.4). The Memorial commemorates Jesus’ last meal with his disciples, and is celebrated either in a Kingdom Hall, or in premises hired for the occasion, such as a local school hall. The latter arrangement is sometimes necessary, since two congregations may share the same Kingdom Hall, and the event must begin after sundown. The service consists of songs, a Bible reading, a talk by one of the Elders, extempore prayers, and the distribution of the ‘emblems’ of bread and wine. (Elders are senior men who are appointed by the organisation’s hierarchy to preside over the affairs of their congregation.) Only the 144,000 — the ‘anointed class’ — may consume the emblems; the rest of the congregation simply handle the vessels and pass them on. In practice, in most congregations, the emblems are only handled, not consumed, since few of the 144,000 now remain.   In claiming that the Memorial draws on all three types of memory identified above, I make no claim that the Memorial is in any way unique or unusual among religious rites more widely, but rather that these aspects of memory afford a helpful way of understanding the event. First, I turn to the role of procedural memory. The successful performance of religious ceremonies requires the officiants’ ‘knowing how’ to perform them, and not merely knowing relevant facts. The greatest amount of procedural memory, of course, is needed by the elders who officiate. They need the relevant skills in being able to read scripture well, to pray extempore, and to give a public Bible talk. Although the Watch Tower organisation does not have clergy and is therefore lay-led, the leading of services does not rely on the innate skills of a few well-intentioned volunteers. On the contrary, the Society gives great emphasis to the training of all who speak and undertake house-to-house work: a Theocratic Ministry School meets weekly, and gives its members instruction on skills such as preparing talks, delivering them in public and presenting their faith at people’s doors. There is a published course on such matters, and less experienced members are provided with cards bearing check-lists of relevant skills, which are progressively checked off by the instructors. The speaker will know that there is an official outline to be used, which comes from the Society: he can provide his own personal illustrations, but standardisation must be observed globally, and personal innovation is not expected: there are not personal opinions to be expressed, especially on theological matters — only ‘the truth’. (‘The truth’ is the Witnesses’ term for the body of doctrine that they teach.) It should be noted that I have deliberately avoided using inclusive language in this context: all those who address the congregation must be men, and indeed appointed elders: a woman must not address a congregation directly (except in some unavoidable circumstances).   In order to participate fully, the congregation must ideally know the music. Again, officiants know that these are set by the Governing Body for the occasion. They are all songs [4] that are composed by members of the Watch Tower organisation, and it is now the organisation’s practice to avoid the use of words and music that originate in mainstream Christianity, which is viewed as part of Babylon the Great. Singing is never half-hearted, but it is never merely a ‘joyful noise’ directed to Jehovah (Psalm 95:1). Congregations do not use choirs or professional musicians, believing that such practices would give glory to human beings, rather than to Jehovah, who should always be the true object of praise. However, it not sufficient for well-meaning but untutored pianists simply to do their best. Although live accompaniments are used where the technology is not available, the current practice in most Kingdom Halls is use a CD with pre-recorded music to accompany the singing, thus ensuring an impeccable quality of playing. When a new song book (Sing to Jehovah) was introduced in 2010 congregations were recommended to practise the new songs, and some members put some examples of the new music on the Internet, in order to encourage familiarity with them. If relevant skills do not reside within the procedural memory of the relevant members, they need to be learned and developed.   It scarcely needs mentioning that knowing when to stand and sit, the attitude in which to pray, and the need to maintain silence, apart from the singing, are standard aspects of the habitual memory of worshippers in any religious tradition. Regarding the distribution of the emblems, each member of the congregation knows whether he or she belongs to the ‘great crowd’ who simply handles the emblems, or the 144,000 who may consume them. One cannot simply decide on the spur of the moment that one belongs to the anointed class: this must come, through time, from a genuine inner conviction, appropriately encouraged by the congregation and in particular the elders. Since this number of people — which includes both men and women — is finite, it is now very rare to find new aspirants to this class.   Procedural memory interacts with declarative memory in determining what happens to the emblems after the Memorial is ended. Jehovah’s Witnesses are clear that the emblems are not in any literal sense the body and blood of Christ. In common with mainstream Protestantism, there is no belief in any miracle like transubstantiation taking place, and to make this clear the words of institution that appear in the New World Translation are, ‘This means my body’ (Luke 22:19). This is despite the policy of having an extremely literal translation of scripture. The Greek word is estin, but is given as ‘is’ only in a textual annotation, where it is clarified that the word indicates ‘means’ or ‘represents’. In churches where there is a belief in transubstantiation, or where there is a desire to indicate the especially sacred nature of the sacramental elements, steps are taken to ensure that the elements are not handled inappropriately: the priest meticulously washes out the chalice and consumes the remaining dregs and crumbs. Any consecrated bread and wine for distribution to the sick is safely locked away in an aumbry. Such habits are alien to Jehovah’s Witnesses, for whom the emblems are only symbols. They simply dispose of the unleavened bread, which is not sufficiently appetising for personal consumption, and re-use the wine for social or domestic purposes afterwards. However, if an anointed member cannot attend the Memorial, elders are encouraged to bring a portion of the bread and wine to his or her home [5] later that evening; alternatively an anointed member who is prevented from attending may undertake a private celebration of the Memorial 30 days later, in accordance with ancient Hebrew practice, where provision is made for Israelites to observe the festival at this later date, if they were unclean during the Passover time, or travelling (Numbers 9:9-14).   The role of declarative memory now merits attention. It is the semantic memory that features the most largely in Jehovah’s Witnesses’ thinking with regard to the Memorial. Christianity is inherently a religion that has placed great emphasis on belief, formulating creeds, and defining insiders and outsiders in terms of their acceptance and rejection of them. Jehovah’s Witnesses have never formulated creeds or statements of belief that are independent of the Bible, which they regard as the supreme authority. With regard to the Memorial, it is noted that the Bible uses the continuous imperative, not the present imperative, when recording Jesus’ words of institution: ‘Keep doing this in remembrance of me’ (Luke 22:19; 1 Corinthians 11:24). [6] This raises the question of how often one should celebrate the Memorial, a question to which different mainstream denominations give different answers. As one might expect, Jehovah’s Witnesses have a single agreed answer to questions relating to the Lord’s Evening Meal. Mainstream scholars have debated whether or not Jesus’ final meal with his disciples was a Passover meal, and have tended to highlight differences between the synoptic gospel writers, who suggest that it was a Passover celebration, and John, who places the occurrence of the meal on the night before the Passover lambs were slaughtered (Mark 14:12-16; John 13:1; 19:31. See, e.g., Keiffer, 2001:985). However, in common with Christian fundamentalists, the Watch Tower Society harmonises the apparently conflicting gospel narratives, asserting with confidence that the Lord’s Evening Meal was a Passover celebration.   The Jehovah’s Witnesses’ propositional reasoning is therefore that, since the Passover was an annual Jewish celebration, Jesus’ expectation must have been that this last meal should be commemorated annually, on the Passover date of 14 Nisan. Anyone following the relative occurrences of 14 Nisan and the Memorial date may notice that occasionally there is a lack of correspondence of dates between the Jewish Passover and the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Memorial. This occurred, for example, in 2008, and it is explained by the insertion of intercalary months in the Jewish calendar in certain years. The Watch Tower Society sets the Memorial date to coincide with the full moon after the spring equinox, which they believe to be the original Jewish practice. This usually, but not always, corresponds with the Jewish date of 14 Nisan.   The fact that only the 144,000 consume the elements is related to other beliefs (semantic memories) held by the Witnesses. Their reasoning is based on the following detail in Luke’s account of the meal.   And he said to them: “I have greatly desired to eat this passover with YOU before I suffer; ¹⁶ for I tell YOU, I will not eat it again until it becomes fulfilled in the kingdom of God.” ¹⁷ And, accepting a cup, he gave thanks and said: “Take this and pass it from one to the other among yourselves; ¹⁸ for I tell YOU, From now on I will not drink again from the product of the vine until the kingdom of God arrives.” (Luke 22:15-18). [7]   In this passage Jesus alludes to celebrating this evening meal again with his disciples, in the kingdom of God. Jesus’ eternal domain is heaven, not earth, and this kingdom of God, which began to become populated around 1918, is reserved for the 144,000. If the meal anticipates this resumption in heaven, it must therefore be for the anointed ones. The article’s title, ‘Remembering the future’, serves to indicate (a) the eschatological dimension to the Memorial, and (b) the fact that the relevant memory associated with the Memorial is not predominantly episodic, but semantic and procedural.   The role of the 144,000 in the Memorial does not merely highlight the eschatological benefits for this ‘spirit-anointed’ class. The previously-cited Watchtower article (Watch Tower, 2003) points out that the meaning of the Memorial reminds partakers of God’s enormous love for humankind. It reminds participants that Jesus offered a sacrificial death. Being sinless, Jesus was not subject to death as the penalty for Adam’s sin, and could have chosen to live for ever. The fact that he gave up his live indicates not only the voluntariness of the sacrifice, but the fact that God’s love for sinners is so great. Jesus’ surrendering of his life highlights the central doctrine of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, namely the ‘ransom sacrifice’ that Christ offered in order to bring about atonement. And atonement is a benefit enjoyed by both the ‘little flock’ (the 144,000) and the ‘great crowd’ alike — enabling them to attain eternal life, in heaven and on ‘paradise earth’ respectively.   To what extent is there episodic (recollective) memory involved in Memorial participation? Most participants will remember obvious basic facts about their personal history that impinge on the Memorial: previous Memorial services they have attended, the reminders they have been given of the time and venue, and so on. However, paramount in any recollection is memory of what the Watch Tower Society has taught regarding biblical understanding of the event — recollecting a propositional understanding of biblical teaching. Lest they have forgotten it, the elder who delivers the talk at the Memorial will remind participants. In accordance with the Watch Tower Society’s practice, a very detailed outline of the talk to be delivered at the Memorial is available, set out in seven sections, with exact timings. Apart from the minority of attendees who are present for the first time, this talk serves as a reminder to the congregation, activating episodic memories of previous celebrations of the Lord’s Evening Meal. The seven sections are as follows. (1) The congregation are reminded that this is the most important thing that they should do that night (3 minutes). (2) They are told why Jesus’ death should be commemorated (5 minutes). (3) They are reminded of when it should be observed — the evening of 14 Nisan in the original Jewish calendar (3 minutes). (4) The congregation are next asked to recall what the bread and wine represent (5 minutes). This aids their memory of the story, but also affords an opportunity to dispel unacceptable doctrines, for example that some supernatural miracle takes place to transform the emblems.   (5) Reminding the congregation of who may partake of the emblems is the next and longest section (13 minutes). Apart from having the obvious function of defining the expected protocol, preventing the unwary from consuming the bread and wine, it is common for the elder to refer to the 144,000 whose numbers are now almost complete in heaven, and their expectation of celebrating this meal in the new celestial kingdom. Here we find the eschatological component in the talk: members remember their future expectation that, although the majority of attendees will not reign with Christ in heaven, they will be part of the ‘great crowd’ of followers who will live for ever on the perfected paradise on earth. (6) Almost equal in length to the previous component is exegesis of Jesus’ words of institution in Matthew’s gospel (Matthew 26:26-28) (12 minutes). Witnesses regard Matthew’s gospel as the earliest: dated at around 41 C.E. it is believed to have been written only twelve years after Jesus death and is regarded as a first-hand account by a disciple who was present (Watch Tower, 1990, p.12). His account of the Lord’s Evening Meal therefore comes from his own episodic memory. (7) Finally, the congregation are reminded of the benefits of partaking (4 minutes). Such benefits include being reminded of God’s love, and of appreciation for Jesus’ ransom sacrifice should be shown in one’s conduct, study of the Bible, and in telling others of that love. Members are thus reminded of their obligation to undertake their house-to-house work. The Memorial, being the only event in the organisation’s liturgical calendar, attracts substantially larger numbers of attendees than would normally come to a Kingdom Hall service on a Sunday, and hence a significant proportion of the congregation are not actively involved in field ministry. They need to remember their obligations to the organisation. Recalling these will probably involve all of the aspects of memory this analysis has identified: semantic memory will recall the Society’s teachings on members’ obligations; episodic memory will bring to mind past occasions of study, training and house-to-house ministry; and procedural memory will recollect the needed skills for such work.   Connative aspects of memory Memory does not merely involve recalling facts and skills. Memories have associations and can be triggered by associations. As the final section of the Memorial talks reminds the listeners, the rite should evoke feelings of gratitude, love and determination. The importance of remembrance is highlighted by the previously mentioned observation that the Memorial is the only event in the liturgical calendar in which symbolism and ritual are employed. A Kingdom Hall is a plain building, whose design is entirely functional: there is no liturgical furniture such as a pulpit, a baptismal pool [8] or a communion table; there is no stained glass or religious symbols such as a cross. The Kingdom Hall is kept simple, with nothing more than seats for the congregation and a small podium on a slightly raised platform. The only embellishment one finds in a ‘year text’ mounted on a wall — the Governing Body selects a key text for each year, which is displayed on the premises for members to reflect upon — and very occasionally one may find a picture of Jesus, although this is the exception rather than not the norm. The only other forms of religious art which members encounter are the illustrations in Watch Tower publications.   The regular Sunday services are simple, consisting of extempore prayer, singing, and a Bible talk. Apart from standing for the singing and closing one’s eyes in prayer, there is no symbolic bodily involvement in the worship, such as kneeling or genuflecting, which in any case would tend to be associated with Roman Catholicism. The Memorial is therefore only one of two rites in which Jehovah’s Witnesses are asked during worship to perform actions with symbolic rather cognitive meaning. The distinctive character of these rites endows them with added impact, causing participants to reflect — as they are asked to do — on the reasons for commemorating Jesus’ death. Of course, the principal reason for the observance is not the impact of the symbolism, but the sheer fact that Jesus has instituted the Lord’s Evening Meal and given the commandment, ‘Keep doing this in remembrance of me.’   Finally, Jehovah’s Witnesses are emphatic that there are events that should not be remembered, either within worship, or at a popular level. Declarative and procedural memory interact in dictating what Witnesses do not do with regard to festivals. According to the Bible, Jesus specifically commanded the performance of the two rites that Witnesses observe — baptism and the Memorial. [9] Witnesses know, however, that the observance of the Memorial is not followed by Easter celebrations. This is for a variety of reasons: there is not biblical injunction for the celebration of Easter, Easter was not practised in the first-century Church and became part of an apostate Christianity through pagan influences. Historically, the Jehovah’s Witnesses derive from an Adventist tradition, where the sabbath was observed on the Saturday, thus precluding Easter Sunday celebrations. What is more important to Jehovah’s Witnesses is that the observance of the Memorial is that it anticipates the coming kingdom, rather than a frivolous pagan celebration.   Conclusion I have argued that most celebrations within a religious tradition commemorate events that lie outside the personal memories of the followers. Remembering therefore is not personal recollection, but remembering in the sense of observance of a past event is a means by which the present-day member appropriates the organisation’s collective past. By identifying oneself as a new-generation member of the tradition, one appropriates the benefits that accrue from the celebrated event. ‘Remembering’ is therefore to be understood in the sense of ‘marking’ an event, employing habit/procedural memories, and entailing propositional/semantic aspects, and not merely the recollective/episodic aspects of memory that are more typically associated with everyday memories. In the case of the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Memorial, the ‘remembering’ also includes the calling to mind of future events, and not merely past events, by its emphasis on eschatological components.  

Bibliography

Anderson, J.R. (1976). Language, Memory and Thought. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Barton, J. and Muddiman, J. (2001). The Oxford Bible Commentary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gier, Nicholas F. (1981). Wittgenstein and Phenomenology. Albany, NY: SUNY.
Keiffer, René (2001), in Barton and Muddiman (2001), pp.960-1000.
New World Bible Translation Committee (1961). New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures. Brooklyn, NY: Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania.
Ryle, Gilbert (1971). ‘Knowing How and Knowing That’; in Collected Papers: Vol. 2: Collected Essays, pp.212-225.
Sutton, John (2010). ‘Memory’. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Available on-line at http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/memory Accessed 25 February 2010.
Urmson, J. O. (1974) ‘Memory and Imagination’. Mind, vol. 74, pp. 83-91.
Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society (1990). “All Scripture Is Inspired of God and Beneficial”. Brooklyn, NY: Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of New York and International Bible Students Association.
Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society (2003). ‘The Lord’s Supper Has Great Meaning for You’. The Watchtower, 1 April, pp.4-7.
Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society (2009). Talk Outline for the Memorial of Jesus’ Death. Accessible at http://www.blogtalkradio.com/insightontheword/blog/2009/03/23/talk-outline-for-the-memorial-of-jesus-death Accessed 1 March 2010.
Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society (2009). Sing to Jehovah. Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of New York.
Zemach, E. M. (1977). ‘A Definition of Memory’. Mind, vol. 77, pp. 535-536.  

---