Comments on: What is a New Religious Movement?

By: Ray

Ray — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 15:35:45 +0000

I would tend to accept 100 years over 500 years, but I also think that a religion should last past 3-4 generations before it is accepted as “established”. 200 years seems about right to me, but I really don’t care enough to draw a line in the sand.

By: J. Nelson-Seawright

J. Nelson-Seawright — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 14:44:15 +0000

John, sure, although I think it might make more sense to go in the opposite direction and say 100 years. After 100 years, the entire first generation is gone and the religion is older than anyone in it. A major change, to say the least.

By: john f.

john f. — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 11:37:13 +0000

Ray, why 200 years? Why not draw that circle a little bigger, say 500 years (that way it would encompass all of Protestantism, or at least everything after 1508, which gets pretty much everything)? I’m sure the Catholic Church would be amenable to that emendation of the criteria. Who can argue that compared to Catholicism or Judaism, even the most staid Protestant sects, with their stone cathedrals in Europe, is not an NRM?

By: J. Nelson-Seawright

J. Nelson-Seawright — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 02:00:32 +0000

E, as a matter of intellectual history, the “New Religious Movement” label was introduced as a way of steering people away from the very problematic term and concept of a “cult.” The NRM term is intended to point toward the shared dynamics of early religious development without implying, e.g., that everyone in the church is going to commit suicide in order to ride a comet.

By: E

Fri, 29 Feb 2008 01:05:40 +0000

I think this classification scheme is simply an excercise in institutionalizing bigotry and religious discrimination.

By: Ray

Ray — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 21:43:15 +0000

Premature submission: All the other definitions are meant strictly to exclude subjectively.

By: Ray

Ray — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 21:41:53 +0000

Personally, I would define a NRM as a “new religious movemnet” – which means the 200 year delineation would be the best one. If a religion lasts longer than 200 years, then it can “graduate” from kindergarten and enter the established elementary schools.

By: J. Nelson-Seawright

J. Nelson-Seawright — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 21:13:53 +0000

Just to be clear, I absolutely agree — as, I might note, do most scholars of NRMs that I’ve read — that early Christianity met the definition of a New Religious Movement. I’m just taking issue with what I take to be Doc’s initial characterization of Jesus as an authoritarian leader. I think the gospels show Jesus as charismatic, subversive, and authoritative, but not authoritarian. But, yeah, lots of other authoritarians did indeed show up in early Christianity. We could make an argument from the D&C’s definitions of proper priesthood leadership that perhaps that was an aspect of apostasy?

By: Clark Goble

Clark Goble — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 21:04:24 +0000

(whoops – missed your comment 18)

By: Clark Goble

Clark Goble — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 21:03:41 +0000

But don’t the latter elements of that correspond to what little is known about early Christianity? Heavens, one of the “edifying” stories told in Acts is of two folks killed for not paying their offerings. And there’s tons of stuff about changing family structure even by Jesus.