Organisations, members and movements

Troeltsch: distinguished between two main types of religious organisation

1. Churches: large organisations, run by a bureaucratic hierarchy of professional priests, + claim a monopoly of the truth. Universalistic, aiming to include the whole of society, but they generally attract higher classes as they are ideologically conservative + often linked closely to the state. 

2. Sects: small, exclusive groups. They are hostile to wider society + expect a high level of commitment. Draw members from the poor + oppressed and many are led by a charismatic leader. Believe they have a monopoly of religious truth.

What are demoninations (and who defined this)

• Niebuhr: describes denominations as lying midway between churches + sects:

  1. Membership is less exclusive than a sect, but they don’t appeal to all of society like Churches 

  2. They broadly accept society’s values, but aren’t linked to the state

  3. Impose some minor restrictions on members, but aren’t as demanding as sects

  4. They are tolerant of other religious organisations + don’t claim a monopoly of the truth

Cults

1. loose knit and highly individualistic

2. Lack a sharply defined + exclusive belief system

3. Usually led by ‘practitioners’ who claim special knowledge.

4.  Usually tolerant of other organisations + their beliefs and do not demand strong commitment from followers. 

5. Followers are more like customers than members

What two key similarities and differences does Wallis note

• How they see themselves: Churches + sects claim their interpretation of faith is the only legitimate one. Denominations + cults accept that there can be many valid interpretations

• How they are seen by wider society: Churches + denominations are seen as respectable + legitimate. Sects + cults are seen as deviant. 

How does Bruce criticse Troelstch

• Troeltsch’s idea of a Church as having a religious monopoly only applies to the Catholic Church before the 16th century. In today’s society, Churches are no longer truly Churches by Troeltsch’s definition as they have lost their monopoly + reduced to the status of denominations.

What 3 groups does Wallis catergorise New Religous movements into?

• Since the 1960s, there has been an increase in amount of new religious movements

• Wallis categorises these new religious movements into three groups based on their relationship to the outside world: 

1. World rejecting NRMs

2. World-accommodating NRMs

3. World-affirming NRMs

World rejecting NRMs

1. Clear understanding of God and focus on literal truth of a sacred text

2. Demand social change, do not agree with current state of the world

3. Must take a sharp break with their former life to achieve salvation

4. Members cut themselves off from wider society + live communally

5. Often have conservative moral codes

   mostly sects e.g. Moonies + Children of God 

World-accommodating NRMs

1. usually denominations or breakaways from existing mainstream Churches

2. although unhappy with current state of the world, wish to make the most of their situation to achieve salvation

3. Focus on improving lives of followers

4. Often popular with vulnerable communites as they inspire a more determined work ethic or offer salvation in the afterlife

e.g. pentecostalism

Word-affirming NRMs

1. Most are cults

2. Accept the world as it is and do not seek societial change

3. Non-exclusive + tolerant of other religions, but claim to offer additional knowledge that enable followers to unlock their own spiritual powers

4. their members are usually seen as clients/ customers rather than religious believers

5. Often charge fees for their services and teachings

   e.g. Scientology

Criticisms of Wallis' catergories

• Stark + Bainbridge: reject the idea of classifying

• we should distinguish between religious organisations using the degree of conflict between the religious group + wider society as the only criteria

Stark + Bainbridge: Identify two types of organisation that conflict with wider society

1. Sects: result from schisms (splits in existing organisations). They break away from churches, usually because of disagreements about doctrine. Promise other-worldly benefits to those suffering economic or ethical deprivation.

2. Cults: new religions or ones that are new to a particular society that have been imported. Promise this-worldly benefits to prosperous individuals who are suffering psychic/organismic deprivation

How do Stark and Briambridge subdivide cults

• subdivide cults according to how organised they are:

• Audience cults: usually transmit ideas through the media to a large audience and therefore do not require formal membership or commitment (e.g. astrology + UFO cults)

• Client cults: based on a personal relationship between a consultant + a client, and provide services to their followers designed to enhance clients quality of life

• Cultic movements: most organised + demand a higher level of commitment. Aims to meet all of its members’ religious needs + are rarely allowed to belong to other religious groups. Some client cults become cultic movements for their most enthusiastic members

Niebur: Sects

• Sects are often short-lived organisations, frequently lasting only 1 generation. 

• Niebuhr:

• Sects are world-rejecting organisations that come into existence because of schism (splitting from an established church because of disagreements over religious doctrine)

• Within a generation, they either die out or compromise with the world - abandoning their extreme ideas to become a denomination

• Several reasons for this:

1. The second generation, who are born into the sect lack the commitment of their parents who joined voluntarily. 

2. The ‘Protestant ethic’ effect, sects that practice asceticism tend to become upwardly mobile, and the members will be tempted to compromise with this world - so leave or abandon its world-rejecting beliefs. 

3. Death of the leader, sects with a charismatic leader either collapse upon the leader’s death or a more formal leadership takes over - making it a denomination.

Explaining the growth of religious movements: Weber

• Marginality

• Sects tend to arise in marginalised groups in society, these groups may feel that they’re disprivileged. 

• Sects offers its members a theodicy of disprivilege - a religious explanation + justification for their suffering + disadvantage. 

• E.g. It may explain their misfortune as a test of faith. 

• Historically, many sects have recruited from the marginalised poor.

Criticism of Marginality as an explanation

• Since the 1960s, the sect-like world-rejecting NRMs like the Moonies were recruited from more affluent groups.

Explaining the growth of religious movements: Relative deprivation

• The subjective sense of being deprived. 

• M/c people are materially well off, but may feel spiritually deprived. Especially in today’s materialistic world, which they may perceive as lacking in moral value

• They may turn to sects for a sense of community

• Stark + Bainbridge: 

• It’s the relatively deprived who break away from Churches to form sects

• When m/c members of a Church seek to compromise its beliefs in order to fit in with society, deprived members are likely to break away to form sects.

• World-rejecting sects offer to the deprived the compensators that they need for the rewards they are denied in this world. 

Social change: Wilson

• Periods of rapid change disrupt + undermine established norms, producing anomie

• In response to the uncertainty this creates, those who are most affected by the disruption may turn to sects as a solution. 

• E.g. the dislocation created by the industrial revolution in the late 18th century led to the birth of Methodism, which offered a sense of community.

Social Change: Bruce- Growth of cults

• The growth of sects + cults today are a response to the social changes involved in modernisation + secularisation.

• Society is now secularised so people are less attracted to the traditional Churches + strict sects that demand too much commitment. 

• People now prefer cults because they’re less demanding. 

Social Change: Wallis

• Points to social changes from the 1960s impacting young people, especially increased time in education

• Gave them freedom from adult responsibilities + enabled a counter-culture to develop (a group that rejected mainstream norms)

• Growth of radical political movements offered alternative ideas about the future

Social Change: Bruce- Growth of World-affirming NRMs

• The growth of world-affirming NRMs is a response to modernity, especially to rationalisation of work. 

• Work no longer provides a source of identity whereas in the past, the Protestant ethic gave work a religious meaning. 

• At the same time, we are expected to achieve, even if we lack the opportunities to succeed. 

• World-affirming NRMs provide a sense of identity + techniques that promise success in this world. 

The secretarian cycle

• Religious organisations move through a cycle

1. Schism: there’s tension between the needs of deprived + privileged members of a Church. Deprived members break away to found a world-rejecting sect

2. Initial Fervour: charismatic leadership + great tension between the sect’s beliefs + those of society. 

3. Denominationalism: the ‘Protestant Ethic’ effect means that the fervour disappears 

4. Establishment: sect becomes more world-accepting + tension with wider-society reduces

5. Further schism: less privileged members break away to find a new sect true to the original message. 

How does Bruce criticise the secretarian cycle

• not all sects follow this pattern.

• Conversionist sects whose aim is to convert large numbers of people are likely to grow into denominations.

• Adventists sects who believe that in order to be saved, they must hold themselves separate from the corrupt world around them so are less likely to become denominations.