America and new religious movements: What can we learn?

[Dawnofhope]

America experienced a number of religious revivals or awakenings from the eighteenth century to the middle of the twentieth century. These movements along with other factors may have contributed to fertile ground for the birth of several new religious movements, some that remain prominent to this day. These movements include the Church of LDS of Jesus Christ, the Jehovah Witnesses and the seventh day Adventist’s.

There was also the emergence of several new movements from the Islamic world in the nineteenth century that included the Baha’i Faith and the Ahmadiyya Muslim sect. The history of the Baha’i Faith particularly intersects with American religious history. Although it originally emerged from Shi’a Islamic Persia 1844, it was the same year Joseph Smith died and the year William Miller predicted the Return of Christ.

The Baha’i Faith was introduced to the USA in the late nineteenth century and it was the Baha’i community of North America, not Persia that enabled the rapid spread of this faith throughout the world. Through the development of the American community it became a socially progressive movement with a strong Christian identity in the West.

So we have the rise of new religious movements, particularly from America but also worldwide. So what were the conditions in America that led to this proliferation of new religious movements. What can this period of history teach us about the world today as well as the state of religion in the West?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

. So what were the conditions in America that led to this proliferation of new religious movements

War and deep social divide, as the Great American Revival/Second Great Awakening (church history terms for the social phenomena of it) happened around and after the Civil War. It's also when "In God We Trust" began appearing on the currency here.

 

[Dawnofhope]

War and deep social divide, as the Great American Revival/Second Great Awakening (church history terms for the social phenomena of it) happened around and after the Civil War. It's also when "In God We Trust" began appearing on the currency here.

Its a fascinating time in American history and the world as a whole. The American Civil war from 1861-65 was a really big deal being the conflict that has killed more Americans than any other. Depending on your take on history the issue of slavery was pivotal.

The second great awakening was before the civil war and contributed to some much needed social reform as well as the emphasis on a personal relationship with God, the restoration movement and post-Millennialism.

 

[February-Saturday]

Two large parts of it were religious freedom and cultural mixing. Satanism and Wicca would have a hard time existing publicly before the end of WWII (although the Fraternity of Saturn and the Ophitic Cult of Satan are at least two examples of them existing privately before then, following occult revivals), but a lot of other religions like Theosophy and Spiritualism wouldn't have been able to exist openly without both access to a variety of cultures and a lack of fear of prosecution.

A lot of these occult religions are a result of lodges, mystery traditions, and secret orders gaining traction in the post-Enlightenment and having a wider access to more esoteric practices from around the world. Their traction is pretty neatly tied to religious freedom and Enlightenment philosophy.

Joseph Smith might have actually been influenced by this hodge-podge, with its own Cabala. The entire idea of the book of Mormon being written in an obscure Egyptian dialect might have been influenced by works like the Black Pullet.

Of course, in this hodge-podge, you also began having problems with a wide variety of cults. It's very similar to the post-Alexandrian empire, where a ton of new religions were being birthed out of syncreticism and charismatic leaders. The conditions were pretty much the same; a lot of cultural mixing and religious freedom.

I think "new" religious movements are just a facet of humanity. The Catholic Church itself had already been changing over time, and there were already a lot of local variations and folk saints, just as an example. It's a natural tendency of a small portion of the population to form or join these movements, I think, and it was just repressed or less dramatic until the modern age provided more freedom and connection.

 

[sun rise]

The world for a long time has been divided in East and West. East, especially India, was the home of spirituality - the personal search for God. The West was focused on the material world developing science.

In the West, religion was focused on beliefs and ceremonies, not on personal striving for God.

During the 20th century, this started breaking down. We had the World Parliament of Religions that to me was the start of this East is East... breaking down.

In Chicago for that event, we had representatives from quite a few religious groups but not all.

We had the spread of Chisti school Sufism brought to America and Europe by Hazrat Inayat Khan.

During the 1960's, this mingling took on expanded life with gurus flooding into the country and Americans traveling to India to absorb what was offered.

With the rise of India as an IT center etc, the West has been merging with traditional Indian society.

So we have the rise of new religious movements, particularly from America but also worldwide. So what were the conditions in America that led to this proliferation of new religious movements. What can this period of history teach us about the world today as well as the state of religion in the West?

So to answer that question, America was ready in it's development to be open to receive the East. We can refer back to the Transcendentalist Movement as a step along the way as well.

To me, this period is about the barriers and separation between people and culture breaking down and merging.

 

[CG Didymus]

America experienced a number of religious revivals or awakenings from the eighteenth century to the middle of the twentieth century. These movements along with other factors may have contributed to fertile ground for the birth of several new religious movements, some that remain prominent to this day. These movements include the Church of LDS of Jesus Christ, the Jehovah Witnesses and the seventh day Adventist’s.

There was also the emergence of several new movements from the Islamic world in the nineteenth century that included the Baha’i Faith and the Ahmadiyya Muslim sect. The history of the Baha’i Faith particularly intersects with American religious history. Although it originally emerged from Shi’a Islamic Persia 1844, it was the same year Joseph Smith died and the year William Miller predicted the Return of Christ.

The Baha’i Faith was introduced to the USA in the late nineteenth century and it was the Baha’i community of North America, not Persia that enabled the rapid spread of this faith throughout the world. Through the development of the American community it became a socially progressive movement with a strong Christian identity in the West.

So we have the rise of new religious movements, particularly from America but also worldwide. So what were the conditions in America that led to this proliferation of new religious movements. What can this period of history teach us about the world today as well as the state of religion in the West?

Something was in the air in the late 60's in the U.S. Transcendental Meditation, The Moonies, The Hare Krishna's. Other relatively new religious movements got a big boost. Self-Realization, Scientology, Nichiren Buddhism, and Christians with the "Jesus" movement. Then what happened?

Pot and LSD had something to do with it. The Vietnam war had something to do with it. After the war stopped, I think the momentum died. There was no hurry to "find" the truth. Young people went back to normal... going to malls and buying stuff, and going to discos and partying all night... then getting married, getting yuppie jobs. Oh, and in the early 80's there was a lot of peace and anti-nuke groups.

It's just when times get bad enough people look for some spiritual answer and it's usually not with the established religions. It is with more progressive, even radical, new ones. Baha'is, JW's and Mormons are all that by some to be "radical". And to themselves probably "progressive"... which is good because the old religious movements are too stuck doing the same old stuff to get very many people motivated. That is until a charismatic leader rises up and breathes a little life into them.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The second great awakening was before the civil war and contributed to some much needed social reform as well as the emphasis on a personal relationship with God, the restoration movement and post-Millennialism.

My time references may be slightly off, but very definitely it was the same religious fervor post-war that landed "in god we trust" on the currency.

Depending on your take on history the issue of slavery was pivotal.

Anyone who does a serious and honest inventory of historical data will realize it was fought over slavery. The heads of the CSA even said as much, with the seeds of the war being sown during the founding of America's sovereignty as the Southern Colonies then would not allow for their "god given right to own slaves" to be taken away. Now, the North did fight to preserve that Union, but the Union was divided over slavery. Acts such as the Missouri Compromise were addressing national tensions that revolved around slavery.

 

[sun rise]

Then what happened?

From what I've seen, change comes partly in waves. The 60's wave did indeed end. But changes continue including the falling away of traditional churches, the growth of "spiritual but not religious" folk and so forth. It used to be that Protestant doctrinal differences were taken really seriously and who attended which church was a matter of social class. I can't remember anytime in the past few decades when I heard about a serious doctrinal discussion between, for example, Lutherans and Baptists.

 

[CG Didymus]

From what I've seen, change comes partly in waves. The 60's wave did indeed end. But changes continue including the falling away of traditional churches, the growth of "spiritual but not religious" folk and so forth. It used to be that Protestant doctrinal differences were taken really seriously and who attended which church was a matter of social class. I can't remember anytime in the past few decades when I heard about a serious doctrinal discussion between, for example, Lutherans and Baptists.

Yes, the times keep a changin. There's a huge wave rolling in right now.

 

[Vinayaka]

I think a lot of it had to do with the rise in literacy rates, and in the ability to print books at a lower cost. From In 1820 it was 12% and by 1900 it was 21%. Before that a person learned by listening, or was just told how to think, or was so busy surviving, spirituality was rarely there at all.

I don't think it was anything 'special' just a natural outcome of the accessibility to learning. If a proponent of a new religion wanted to spread it, he/she could print books. That's a lot quicker than gathering a crowd and preaching from a box.

Literacy

 

[Dawnofhope]

I think a lot of it had to do with the rise in literacy rates, and in the ability to print books at a lower cost. From In 1820 it was 12% and by 1900 it was 21%. Before that a person learned by listening, or was just told how to think, or was so busy surviving, spirituality was rarely there at all.

I don't think it was anything 'special' just a natural outcome of the accessibility to learning. If a proponent of a new religion wanted to spread it, he/she could print books. That's a lot quicker than gathering a crowd and preaching from a box.

Literacy

It seems likely that education (that is closely associated with literacy) has an important influence on faith and belief. With the capacity to reason and investigate the nature of reality, some religious narratives are more plausible than others.

Its interesting that the USA had higher literacy rates than other countries in the nineteenth century. So there is a much greater potential for ideas to be communicated through the written as opposed to the spoken word. All the new religious movements listed have relied on new and innovative writings to be made accessible to a sizable number of their followers.

 

[night912]

I think the best thing is to start early with strict laws concerning religion. And the first and most important law should be that no religious law is above government laws. And of course freedom of religion. This assures that individuals' rights to practice their own religions and those rights are equally protected by law against discrimination and favoritism. But more importantly, this eliminates the discrimination of religion. One individual cannot discriminate against another based off of their religion.

 

[CG Didymus]

I think the best thing is to start early with strict laws concerning religion. And the first and most important law should be that no religious law is above government laws. And of course freedom of religion. This assures that individuals' rights to practice their own religions and those rights are equally protected by law against discrimination and favoritism. But more importantly, this eliminates the discrimination of religion. One individual cannot discriminate against another based off of their religion.

But some religious movements are dangerous. So where do we draw the line between a cult leader that has his followers drink kool aid and a religious leader that is using religion to get people to give him enough money to buy a private jet and a yacht? Or, one that tells people to get rid of their medication, that the Lord has healed them?

 

[Dawnofhope]

I think the best thing is to start early with strict laws concerning religion. And the first and most important law should be that no religious law is above government laws. And of course freedom of religion. This assures that individuals' rights to practice their own religions and those rights are equally protected by law against discrimination and favoritism. But more importantly, this eliminates the discrimination of religion. One individual cannot discriminate against another based off of their religion.

I agree and obedience to government and respect for civil law is a core principle of my faith (Baha’i) along with the freedom of religion. The one main exception would be if the government asked I renounce my faith.

We live in an increasingly pluralistic community and freedom of religion and non-discrimination is absolutely essential.

 

[Dawnofhope]

But some religious movements are dangerous. So where do we draw the line between a cult leader that has his followers drink kool aid and a religious leader that is using religion to get people to give him enough money to buy a private jet and a yacht? Or, one that tells people to get rid of their medication, that the Lord has healed them?

That’s an important question because some religions can be extremely harmful, not just to those who follow them, but to the wider community. We’re all familiar with the Branch Davidians and the Jonestown massacre.

On the other hand we have the established religions such as Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism and the Baha’i Faith. Most followers of these faiths are law abiding and contribute positively to the community.

 

[sun rise]

But some religious movements are dangerous. So where do we draw the line between a cult leader that has his followers drink kool aid and a religious leader that is using religion to get people to give him enough money to buy a private jet and a yacht? Or, one that tells people to get rid of their medication, that the Lord has healed them?

That's a very critical point that you made. It can be tricky when you have a charismatic leader. Besides the following quote I quite like, alarm bells go off for me if there's a hint of desire for followers, using money badly etc.

"A true leader does not seek followers, he wants to teach others how to be leaders. He does not want control, he wants the truth. He does not impose his leadership on others, nor does he take away anyone's autonomy. He inspires by love, not coercion. When it comes time to take credit, he makes himself invisible; but he is the first to arrive at the time of need, and he will never shrink away in fear. He is so passionate about your welfare that when you consult him for guidance, it is like coming face to face with yourself for the first time." Rebbe Menachem M Schneerson (Lubavitcher Rebbe)

And this lament is also a set of warning messages about leaders who have not "found the path":

Friend, please tell me what I can do about this world
I hold to, and keep spinning out!

I gave up sewn clothes, and wore a robe,
but I noticed one day that the cloth was well woven.

So I bought some burlap, but I still
throw it elegantly over my left shoulder

I pulled back my sexual longings,
and now I discover that I'm angry a lot.

I gave up rage, and now I notice
that I am greedy all day.

I worked hard at dissolving the greed,
and now I am proud of myself.

When the mind wants to break its link with the world
it still holds on to one thing.

Kabir says: Listen my friend,
there are very few that find the path!

 

[night912]

But some religious movements are dangerous. So where do we draw the line between a cult leader that has his followers drink kool aid and a religious leader that is using religion to get people to give him enough money to buy a private jet and a yacht? Or, one that tells people to get rid of their medication, that the Lord has healed them?

When an individual's beliefs effect the wellbeing of another. It's a simple and rational reason, eventhough not all are able to realize it.

 

[night912]

I agree and obedience to government and respect for civil law is a core principle of my faith (Baha’i) along with the freedom of religion. The one main exception would be if the government asked I renounce my faith.

We live in an increasingly pluralistic community and freedom of religion and non-discrimination is absolutely essential.

For me, it's an easy principle to follow, but some people cannot follow that principle. They are quick to accept that idea when it's other religions, but will make up excuses to try and justify themselves when it comes to do the same for their religion. Equality is successful only when it works both ways. I've noticed that it's easy for people to judge other beliefs but it's difficult for them to judge their own.

 

[CG Didymus]

It can be tricky when you have a charismatic leader.

Trump is a great example. He's saying exactly what about a third of America wants to hear and will stand behind him no matter what. Then the Republican party supports him, because they don't want to alienate that one third... and they control the Senate. Then a large group of people think he's taking the country in the wrong direction, but their leader isn't as charismatic.

So it's kind of like, "if it ain't broken, don't fix it." Too many people go along as if things aren't broken, but for others, things are very broken. Like the Black Lives Matter protests going on right now. Too many people haven't tried to fix things. Now the protesters are saying "enough".

How many years now have people warned about the environment, but most people don't want to do the things necessary to fix it.

Religion is the same way. Too many people go to a Church or Temple or wherever, and listen to a message about God, or they do some ritual, and they say some prayers, give some money and go home. A charismatic leader comes along and gets people motivated again.... gives them something new to believe in... Like the end times are here, or the end times are here and I am the Promised One.

For Adrian, the Promised One has come. His religion is saying things are broken and that they have the way to fix it. Great, although I question him constantly on some of the beliefs of the Baha'i Faith, things like racial equality, solving the economic and environmental problems I don't. But they are too quiet. They aren't like that charismatic leader that is shouting and leading marches. They sit back and whisper... "We have a way to fix this. Anybody want to listen?" Most of us ignore them. Most of us ignore most new religious movements, because most of them are too radical to be taken seriously.

With the Baha'is, I do think it worth listening to what they have to say. My only problem is that part of the "fix" is accepting the Baha'i prophet as the return of Christ and all the other promised ones of every major religion. So can the Baha'i give away their solutions without needing people to become Baha'is? But to become partners with Baha'is in adopting some of their solutions? Then, can people in other religions listen to and take advice from people in another religion?

 

[Dawnofhope]

For me, it's an easy principle to follow, but some people cannot follow that principle. They are quick to accept that idea when it's other religions, but will make up excuses to try and justify themselves when it comes to do the same for their religion. Equality is successful only when it works both ways. I've noticed that it's easy for people to judge other beliefs but it's difficult for them to judge their own.

Its an interesting dilemma. Not everything that every religion teaches is true and sometimes the teachings are harmful. Some religions are closer to the truth than others so in that sense not all religions are equal.

Some people make a choice about their religious beliefs (including atheism and agnosticism) while others simply follow in the footsteps of the ancestors. For those who do question there are plenty of options and if we can’t find an ideology or theology that aligns perfectly with how we see the world we can find the best fit.

There is one person we are responsible for in this life and that is our ourselves.