'Assess the View That Cults and Sects Are Only Fringe Organisations That Are Inevitably Short Lived and of Little Influence in Contemporary Society Essay\r'

'It can be argued that cults and religious sects argon still periphery organisations that argon inevitably forgetful lived and of picayune enamour in contemporary family, however whatever may fetch views to contrast this idea. A sect is an organization, which normally breaks off from an established religion, which finds itself in discord with beliefs and values of wider party and refuses to tolerate the beliefs of almost former(a)s. Although the desire to be a member is voluntary, as oppose to valet born into, akin religion, sects are rejected by ordination and claim strong obligation and cargo by its members.\r\nA sect is an extremely shockable organisation, which is often led by a attractive drawing card. Whereas, in contrast, a cult does not come from a mainstream religion and does not reject or challenge societal norms. However, as tolerant of other beliefs as they are, they still attract a spectacular deal of negative press, for example brainwashing. Membe rs in a cult are usually more like customers than followers. An example of a cult is Heavens gate, which is a destructive doomsday cult, centered in California.\r\n in that respect is a mess of harbouring shew that cults and sects are short lived and insignificant to wider society. Nevertheless, it must be keep that the matter is complex as thither are many sects and cults, which identify themselves differently.\r\nThere is demo to support this view of a short-lived nature of sects. This is callable to many reasons. World rejecting sects, due to their nature and bring home the bacon societal rejection and stigma of bad press, must be able to compromise with society and becoming a denomination and thitherfore cease to be a sect, if this is not d superstar then the sect go out bring out out. There is also an argument that sects cannot exact a great deal of affect upon society all over a long term halt as they cannot survive yesteryear the charismatic attraction’s flavourtime and therefore sustain themselves over more than one generation.\r\nThe American theologian Niebuhr theorises that another(prenominal) reason for transience of sects is that they rarely live past the 1st generation because the second generation usually lacks the belief of the 1st. In this way, their\r\nmembership dwindles as the 2nd generation chooses to leave the sect and hold other views in wider society.\r\nHowever Wilson disagrees with Neibuhrs view and says that he overates his depicted object and chooses to not pay attention to groups who did preserve a ‘ distinct sectarian stance’. Similarly, evidence proves to put wad the belief that a sect fails to live on past their leader’s death. For example, The Mormons confound go on for many generations and also the Amish- however this could be attributed to the protective ‘isolation-like’ in which they live. There is also a hypothesis that the Moonies surviving is due to the leader preparing for his son to exit over his position as the charismatic leader after his death, however this is yet to be seen.\r\nCults have seen a large incline in their shape recently and because they are more accepting of wider society and despite receiving bad press, broaden a matter-of-fact solution to peoples’ issues and wishes, seem less likely to die out due to refusal and disapproval. They are also financially sooner stable, the Church of Scientology for example has an estimated income of over £200m per year. This is down to the consumer attitude of cults. There is also a mass of evidence for their importance in society in a sense that audience cults have a mass market of ‘self help therapy’ there are many books available for example, tarot reading, crystals and reflexology regularly appear on the best seller joust and often more room is devoted to these books rather than Christianity books themselves. The view that cults are fringe movements is les s support than that for sects.\r\nSects very infrequently continue on as sects but cults such as scientology are not only prosperous but also have a huge celebrity following cut down; admired by the public for example gobbler Cruise.\r\nThere is also evidence that sects and cults can be of great influence to society †though it is debatable as to whether or not that is possible at once in a society as seemingly secular as ours. Weber suggests in his Theodicy of Disprivilege that because they offer a solution to problems: justification and explanation for life and its problems, to marginalised\r\ngroups such as dropouts or ethnic minorities, world rejecting sects that offer status appeal to people. An example of this is press release Theology which was for the poorer people which had great influence upon the priorities of the Catholic Church in Latin America (though it has buzz off more conservative, it continues to represent human rights and democracy).\r\nBruce argues th at it is not a religion and is instead a shallow, meaningless thing. due(p) to the elements of choice it offers, the choice about which bits to believe and whether to retort its readings into account, it does not require commitment. This he argues prevents it having religious status. aim Modernists see it as being spiritual obtain: it is part of a consumerist culture. Despite not inevitably being a religion, there is lots of evidence to show that it has influenced society as a wholly and, some sociologists would claim, aided secularisation. There is also evidence to show that it is unlikely to be particularly short lived as it fits in so well with our Capitalist, consumerist society and our individualistic values and is so profitable.\r\nTherefore, though there is strong evidence to show that sects and cults are ‘fringe organisations’, there is sufficient evidence to suggest that uncomplete are short lived in themselves either by means of the Sectarian cycle or demand and offer (though sects tend to become denominations) and also to suggest that the influence of sects and cults on society is greater than expected; though the influence of sects and cults is exemplified by older examples and so one cannot be sure as to how successful they forget be in today’s society, draw out in regards to specific sects and cults.\r\nIn conclusion, the view that cults, sects are fringe organisations that are inevitably short-lived and of trivial influence in modern-day society, is on the unit of measurement not wholly correct but has some strength in that the permanency of all is arguable as is their status as fringe organisations.\r\n'