Criticisms of defining sects

Question 1

Barker

Answer 1

Barker says that as sects are so unique and diverse, they defy attempts to give them any meaningful group classification.
She argues that there are so many differences in sect practices and beliefs, that they do not lend themselves to a simple classification that has universal approval.

Question 2

Niebuhr

Answer 2

Niebuhr suggests that sects tend to be short-lived, as they will, over time, either turn into denominations or disappear altogether.

For example, the Methodists originally began as a world-rejecting religious sect, with members living distinctive lifestyles in opposition to existing society. However, the Methodists have long abandoned their world-rejecting features, and have evolved from a sect into a highly respectable denomination.

Question 3

Wallis

Answer 3

Troeltsch’s definition is outdated (written in 1912) and does not adequately describe the variety of sects that exist today. NRM’s is a more meaningful way of classifying sects as they are often difficult to distinguish from cults. Wallis says the range of new religions that developed from the 1960’s requires a whole new system of classification. He said sects and cults should be defined according to their relationship to the outside world as this characteristic will determine all the other features of the organisation. He said sects and cults are best defined as New Religious Movements whose members may ‘reject, accommodate or affirm’ the outside world