Much of the research interest in new religious movements (NRMs) in recent years has focused on second-generation members and former members and the effects of generational change in these groups. The current issue of Nova Religio (May/June), a journal of new religions, is devoted to the second (and third) generation of NRM members, specifically looking at such well-known groups as the Unification Church and Scientology, though the articles also examine wider questions related to generations in NRMs and particularly the study of children in these groups. Donald Westbrook, the editor for this special issue, writes in the introduction that the existence of second-, third-, and even fourth-generation members points to the arbitrariness of NRMs’ characterization as “new” religions. Holly Folk’s article on the Unification Church finds that the generational divide follows different trajectories that don’t line up with the monolithic view of the younger generations as being “traumatized” by their upbringing and involvement. She adds that the “Cult survivor narrative…fits into perceptions of religions as being harmful, which seems to be increasing in societies.”
Another article shows how second-generation members and ex-members rather than converts from groups such as the Unification Church, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and Soka Gakkai are more often viewed as a new class of “victims” in Japanese society, raising new religious freedom concerns. Veteran NRM researcher Susan Palmer concludes with a call for more research on children in NRMs, engaging with the ethical questions that such work might raise, so that accurate and unbiased data rather than stereotypes can guide law enforcement and social workers in dealing with this sensitive issue. Palmer acknowledges that child abuse and its protection are a reality in some NRMs and their child-rearing practices (more likely in groups considered “world rejecting,”), but she adds that only the same popular NRMs (as cited above) are focused on while the hundreds of other NRMs remain unstudied. For more information on this issue, visit: https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/56/journal/764
The debate over Christian nationalism continues to unfold, often with the media and academics finding and citing different survey results about the extent and meaning of Americans’ belief in a Christian country. In the journal Politics and Religion (online in May), Nilay Saiya (Nanyang Technological University in Singapore) takes a more granular approach, making the case that Christian nationalists are not in reality a monolithic group, saying a lot about their prospects. The article is noteworthy since it looks at the group’s actual beliefs and theology, while most attempts (by American authors) focus on their partisan political positions. In fact, Christian nationalists are often at odds with each other about their visions of a Christian America and fall into three categories:
1) Charismatic dominionism is the most important and widespread form of Christian nationalism, calling for Christians to dominate the different spheres of American society, and is associated with the New Apostolic Reformation, which seeks to restore the offices of apostles and prophets to the church. This group is decentralized (making it difficult to estimate its size) and has been the most activist (under such organizations as the ReAwaken America Tour) and supportive of Donald Trump.
2) Calvinist nationalism ranges from the Reconstructionist movement, holding to an American and Old Testament-based theocracy, to modified forms of Reformed nationalism, most fully expressed in the writings of Stephen Wolfe. While seen as an elite form of Christian nationalism, Saiya adds that these currents have found a large online following, through such writers as Douglas Wilson, and media promotion by Tucker Carlson, which may filter down to congregations. Calvinist nationalism may be closest to what critics see as the racial dimension of Christian nationalism, as Wolfe and some others have embraced racialist teachings, such as discouraging interracial marriage.
3) Finally, Catholic integralists hold to the belief that the state should be organized by Catholic teaching to one degree or another. The movement “lacks the popular strength of their Protestant counterparts” and is mainly found among academics, such as Patrick Deneen and Adrian Vermeule, though it has found a following among younger Catholics and can be found in seminaries and parishes.
Saiya concludes that while there is some overlap between these movements, adherents are more likely to conflict with each other over their charismatic, Reformed, and Catholic beliefs, as well as issues of race (with the charismatic dominionists, for instance, with their high rates of Latino participation, being likely to object to the racialist teachings of some Reformed nationalists). For more information on this article, visit: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/politics-and-religion
