Troeltsch believed that a sect was “the opposite of a church” and he describes this type of religious organisation as a small, tightly knit group of individuals that often criticise mainstream values and attempt to change society in some way. Cults on the other hand, are loosely knit and don’t tend to have any firm beliefs. There are therefore some significant differences between these two organisations, however it is widely accepted that they are similar, in that they are usually short lived.

Many sociologists state that sects, cults and New Age movements only appeal to a minority of the population. For example, people on the margins of society who are poor are often attracted to sects as they offer them a sense of belonging. Others, who may be undergoing a personal crisis such as the death of a loved one, may find that belonging to a sect or cult may help them to overcome this crisis. However, when they feel they have been helped to get over the crisis, they often leave the sect, as there is no further reason to belong to it. This seems to suggest that these organisations only appeal to a small section of the population perhaps seeking short-term help, so they will remain fringe organisations. However, other organisations such as the Scientology movement are still around today with a well recognised and idolised member such as Tom Cruise has helped to increase the popularity of the sect.

Supporting the view that sects and cults are short lived, Niebuhr produced some explanations for this. One explanation was that sects only last for a certain number of years and in his terms last for ‘one generation only’. This may be due to the death of the founder or leader would have been a charismatic person and who had a deep connection or divine with the sect. Following the death of the leader, the sect tends to disappear. After original, the younger generations that are socialised into the sect may not maintain the same traditions as the movement. As a result, it is difficult to keep the same standards previously, which is why many sects eventually disappear or become a denomination; which is what happened to Methodism. When the sect was introduced, it offered people a set of rules and values to help through the changing certainty of industrial life. However, as time passed and Britain went into post industrialisation, the power of the values decrease; eading to the sect to turn into a denomination.

However, there are some criticisms of this explanation. Firstly, the death of the leader does not necessarily mean the end of the sect. Many sects still survive afterwards, as they still see the main leader, but in a different form. Also, not all sects depend on second generations to continue and expand the sect. The Shakers, a sect, have a rule that all of its member must promise a life of celibacy. With this view, they cannot have a second generation, so they recruit new members from the public instead. However, this is very risky as the sect future is based on the recruitment of new members who have to commit to a life of celibacy as well, which is why this could be a reason for why sects are often short lived.

Another point raised by Niebuhr was that some sects contain “the seeds of their own destruction”. By this statement, it means that some sects teach the core values of hard work, self-discipline etc., and by doing so, it could lead to some problems. A person could work really hard and gain large amounts of wealth. This could be a problem for the sect as this person could decide to leave, as they don’t need to be part of it anymore. They are dependent on their money, rather than the organisation. This shows how people’s changing lifestyles is a factor for why some sects are short lived. Also, some sects deliberately destroy their own sect. For example, the mass suicide organised by Jim Jones ‘people’s temple’ is an example of this. State interventions can also breakup sects. State conflict and social unrest with the Branch Davidians of Texas caused the sect to break up and caused the death of 80 of its members.

It is also suggested that cults are short lived for many reasons. One being that cults are very loose knit and ever changing. During Stark’s and Bainbridge’s research they formed three types of cult movements; the first being client cults who provide a service for their ‘customers’; audience cults which lack structure and are based around the general belief of the supernatural, for example, the belief in aliens, and finally cult movements, which are structured and very formal. An example of a cult movement is scientology. These variations in the term ‘cult’ often require little or no commitment. This is seen with Scientology, where members generally lead normal lives. With this view, it is easy for members to leave the organisation. This makes it hard for cults to gain and keep members to maintain their beliefs. In criticism, not all cults fit this description and that some place strict commitment demands on their members. For example, in Scientology they use social media as a form of communication and have complete access to your life, so if an individual decides to leave it us very hard for people to do so, in case the cult decides to publish any information about that individual. This is seen as a way that the cult gains power over its members.
And finally, when drawing their conclusions Stark and Bainbridge contradicted themselves. By the pair attempting to categorise cults, they created more problems by doing so.

On the contrary, not all sects and cults are short lived and some have been operational for many years. Sociologists such as Bryan Wilson studied the lifespan of sects and cults. He said that there are a number of movements that can stay their ground and last for long periods of time, more than what they were expected to. He claims that the Adventist sects – sects that believe in the end of the world and second coming such as Jehovah’s Witnesses – can’t change their values. However, ‘conversionist sects’ such as the Amish can still become a denomination, as they believe in converting people to make change in the world.

In conclusion, the statement that sects and cults are “fringe organisations” that are short lived seems to be a valid one. Numerous sociologists have commented on the relatively short lifespan of cults and sects, and evidence supports their viewpoints. However, it is rather narrow minded to assume that all sects and cults follow this path, and in society, the importance of these so called “fringe organisations” may grow in the future.