Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
New religious movements, syncretic practices, and the spiritual-but-not-religious identity have challenged sociologists of religion to reexamine the structure of religious communities. Following increased visibility and attention in the 1960s, researchers have characterized these movements through two broad approaches, what I term structural and movement-oriented approaches. The first emphasizes broad social transformations and deemphasizes institutions and organizations, while the latter focuses on the histories of religious movements and the actions of central actors within them. Each approach includes rich explanations, but both obscure important religious features. I argue that religious movements must be conceptualized through what I term a "semi-autonomous" approach that emphasizes how broad social changes are enacted or rejected within communities. I demonstrate the necessity of this approach through an examination of individuals who identify with both Judaism and Buddhism—colloquially known as "JewBus"—and argue that one must analyze contemporary religious movements as both embedded within and partially autonomous from broader religious changes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Benjamin Kaplow (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: