Cults, New Religions, and the Spiritual Landscape: A Review of Four Collections

Abstract

Four recent edited collections on new religions inspired this essay. As a group, the books are complementary to one another and relatively cohesive, summarizing recent research on new religious movements and offering clues for more directions for theory and research. They also raise a number of questions about the field and its future.The collections vary slightly in their foci, and each would be useful in undergraduate classes on religious movements in the United States, social movements, or the sociology of religion. In Cults and New Religious Movements, Dawson suggests that the sociological study of new religious movements has come of age, and this collection sometimes presents opposing views on topics such as controversies on brainwashing. James R. Lewis's Oxford Handbook of New Religious Movements also includes core chapters on issues that have received the most sociological attention and pages in print over the past three decades. Lewis adds a specific emphasis on modernization and new technologies as they relate to cults.Lucas and Robbins's New Religious Movements in the 21st Century considers many of the same 20th century issues as the collections noted above, but adds an international element, with interesting chapters on globalization, Islamic sects, and developing nations. Only Davis and Hankins's New Religious Movements and Religious Liberty in America offers a unified thematic focus, examining controversial movements and their detractors over the past 200 years.These collections draw together chapters representing established research on new religions and much of the middle range theory currently grounding the field. All of the editors attempt to present major debates and areas of agreement about cults. It is also the case, however, that these books provide rather narrow interpretations of the sociology of new religious movements.

Insiders, outsiders, advocates and apostates and the religions they study: Location and the sociology of religion

“…The ability to do this may be different for leaders and followers. Goldman (2006) follows Bainbridge's (1997) definition of cults as exclusive, high commitment groups, but broadens the category to include less committed participants, referring to them as cult clients and cult audiences (Goldman, 2006: 92). McGuire points out that a group that starts as a cult (non-exclusive) can become a sect, as in the case of Christian Science (McGuire, 2002: 180À181).…”

3HO/Sikh Dharma of the Western Hemisphere: The ‘Forgotten’ New Religious Movement?

“…While it may be tempting to view these individuals as part and parcel of the movement, it is far more likely that the majority are simply interested yoga practitioners on the fringes of the organization 8 . As such, they are best understood as clients or consumers within the pluralistic spiritual marketplace developed by many NRMSs, including 3HO, which has sought a specific market niche within the wider society (Goldman 2006, p. 90).…”

“…According to Marion Goldman, not only the Internet but globalization too must be taken into consideration when looking at the rise in interest in new religions. Clearly, there is something novel in NRM's visible proliferation and also their approachability (Goldman 2006, pp. 88–9).…”

“…But the public controversies surrounding some of these groups soon catapulted them into the ‘cult’ category where they received the attention of NRMs researchers. Goldman has argued that 3HO/Sikh Dharma, among hundreds of other such groups, has largely passed under the radar of research because the group has simply not been perceived as ‘controversial’ enough, and has in many ways successfully integrated into society at large (Goldman 2006, p. 90). Certainly, for the past 10–20 years, Sikh Dharma has largely avoided being grouped into the cult category, despite the attention given in the media to some of its own controversial practices and scandals.…”

“…The lack of 3HO inclusion in recent collections focusing on NRMs is discussed by Marion S. Goldman. She notes that many scholars focus on the most visible, or, the most violent groups, thus limiting our understanding of how other new religions have been largely integrated into wider society (Goldman 2006, p. 93).…”