Religious Organizations

Bruce argued that the
development of religious pluralism in societies undermines the dominance of the
church type of religious organization. To him, total institution in the form of
**church** is a historical phenomena that cannot continue to exist in modern
societies as the fragmentation of religion makes it more difficult for a single
set of religious beliefs to be exclusive supported by the state and reinforced
by all groups.

For bruce, **denominations**
are religious organizations lacking the claim to a monopoly of religious truth,
whereas **sects** were originally a product of Reformation, but some of them
developed into denominations that tolerated religious diversity. In modern
societies sects can prosper as people have more chances to form their own
subcultures, however some sects with radical ideology (e.g. the People’s
Temple) may still come into serious conflict with the society’s values. **Cults**
are much more individualistic and lack a fixed doctrine, varying with personal
experiences and interpretations. Bruce defined it as a ‘loosely knit group
organised around some common themes and interests but lacking any sharply
defined and exclusive belief system.’
Members have relatively little involvement, hence cults are becoming
more popular in a more secular world people are less likely to hole strong
commitments.

Most of the existing
sects and cults originated in the 20th century, 1960s in particular saw the
appearance of many new religious organisations. Hence, Bruce attributes the
development of many types of religious institutions to a general process of
modernization and secularization. He believes the weakness of conventional
institutionalized religions has encouraged some people to consider less
traditional alternatives, and sees world-affirming new religious movements as a
response to rationalization of the modern world, where the fragmentations made
many people feel increasingly difficult to draw on to their public roles for
satisfying and fulfilling sense of identity.

Bruce argued that most
could not survive beyond a single generation, because there is a certain
intrinsic tendency for radical movements of divert themselves, the rising
living standards and the bureaucratization can lead to sects watering down
their ideology living in greater harmony with mainstream society - hence
becoming denominations. Yet Bruce believe that few sects do manage to survive
by isolating themselves from the secular influences of society.

The New Age can best be
explained by Bruce as a product of modernity, rather than postmodernity, it is
a result form the latest stage in the development of modernity in Western
societies. It is a symptom of the extreme relativism of knowledge - what you
believe comes to depend simply on your subjective point of view. It is also a
symptom of the decline of traditional religion as people have little faith in
neither science nor religion.

He claimed that New Age
appeals to well-educated middle classes working in the “expressive
professions”, causing them to have articulate interest and beliefs of
individualism; traditional authorities are regarded with more skepticism.
Individuals has the right to decide what is and what is not true.

## Editors

* Amy
* Antonia

Back to Research