However, there are a number of problems with these explanations. First of all, the death of the leader does not necessarily mean the “death” of the sect. Many sects survive long after the leader dies, as members still see the individual as existing in some other form (e.g. spiritual presence). Also, it is important to note that not all sects depend on second generation members to ensure their continued existence. Aldridge rejects the ideas that all cults and sects have a 'charismatic leader' and that over time they often conform to less world-rejecting views. He states that there are many cults that exclude members if they view their behaviour to be below the group's high standards, therefore they are still able to maintain their principles. Aldridge also claims that children can be successfully socialised into acceptance of the sect and share the same enthusiasm as their parents.
In 1985, Stark and Bainbridge developed the 'Sectarian Cycle' which showed the four stages that sects tend to go through. Beginning with 'schism' the group breaks away from traditional religions to a world-rejecting sect which leads to 'initial fervour' which is when the members are initially enthusiastic and involved the group, however over the years the sect will lessen in its appeal which can then lead to 'denominationalism'. This is when the group is no longer considered a sect as they become less controversial and more world-accommodating, as a means to gain and maintain members. This confirms the idea that sects are extremely short-lived, as they either disappear due to lack of membership, or alternatively they become a denomination.
However, there is also evidence that sects can flourish in society and last for much longer than many sociologists assume. The 'Aum Shinrikyo' sect for example, were responsible for numerous gas attacks on the public of Japan, and had began to decline in size when their leader was imprisoned for murder. However, this did not destroy the sect, and on the contrary, it actually grew under the new leadership of “Aleph”, and the movement continued to recruit members. This casts doubt on the claim that sects are short lived movements, or if certain sects manage to continue on due to the dedication of the members.
Wilson proposes that there are a number of movements that can hold their ground and last for much longer than is popularly assume. He claims that 'Adventist' sects for example, such as the 'Seventh Day Adventists' and 'Jehovah’s Witnesses' believe in the end of the world, or “the second coming of Christ” and due to their strong nature, they can not compromise their beliefs, as they must live in separation from society in order to prepare for “judgement day”.
In terms of their influence on wider society, many sociologists argue that sects and cults have little impact, as they are small, “fringe organisations”. Indeed this appears to be the case, and the mere size of these movements clearly limits their influence on society. Whereas churches are large organisations that have close links to the state, sects and cults do not, and are relatively small in comparison to the larger, more formal organisations. However, it could be argued that the fact that a number of these movements oppose mainstream values, and are so controversial, is what makes them have such an influence over society.
Their behaviour is often sensationalised by the media, which can often create the illusion that the movement has a powerful influence on society when in reality, this is far from the case. However, in contemporary society, it is proposed that sects and cults are beginning to play a more important role. In a globalised, individualistic and impersonal world, members of society are faced a number of problems sects and cults offer solutions for, e.g. offering a simple path to happiness, success and fulfilment in our everyday lives. Those who experience relative deprivation often seek salvation in world-affirming movements. They provide guidance on how individuals can optimise their achievements, and inject a refreshing element of spirituality into their life.
In conclusion, the statement that sects and cults are “fringe organisations” that are short lived and of little impact on wider society seems to be a reasonable one; many sociologists have commented on the relatively short lifespan of cults and sects, and evidence adds support to their claims. However, it is rather narrow-minded to presume that all sects and cults follow this path, and in contemporary society, the importance of these so called “fringe organisations” may grow substantially. From providing support during periods of anomie, to giving people an element of spirituality in their otherwise secular lives. Certainly, churches are larger, more established and more influential than sects and cults, it is argued, but perhaps the importance of the smaller religious organisations in the modern world is underestimated.
by
yggm (student)
