The words sect and cult widely evoke negative sentiments. On the face of it, this may appear ironic since cult and sect formation constitute a dual process by which religious and human cultures are continuously being renewed and invigorated . From a sociological perspective, however, the conflict and tension generated by the presence of cults and sects is not particularly surprising. Cultural change is inherently controversial; those who seek change are advocating the overthrow or overhaul of elements of culture that others are usually quite content with. To advocate religious change--big or small--is to rock the foundations of our collective spiritual well-being. It is understandable that people get upset. Throughout history the advocates of religious change have been persecuted, prosecuted , banished, burned at the stake and, yes, crucified.

       Anthropologists estimate that there have been something on the order of one hundred thousand religions. At some point in time, each was new. There are no exceptions. We cannot go back and observe the creation of the world's major religions. But since new religions are continually being formed, we can learn a great deal about the creation, growth and development of religions by observing the formation of new traditions. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormons) is now a century and a half old and appears well on its way to becoming the fourth major monotheistic religious tradition. The Unification Church (Moonies) are now fifty years old, and Scientology has just celebrated four decades since it was founded. There are a number of other religions formed within this span that are doing exceedingly well; others flounder, while lots more have long vanished from the scene.

       Sociologists of religion are interested in studying this process of religious renewal. Where do groups get new ideas? What is the role of leadership in the process of creating new groups? What accounts for the fact that among the many groups formed, only a few survive? Why is conflict with other religions and the broader culture such a prevalent feature of the emergence of new religions? What is the importance of the host culture in determining the fate of new religions?

       These are just a few of the questions that excite sociologists who study the process of cult and sect formation. As almost all scholars know, regardless of the discipline, what excites them does not necessarily capture the imagination of their students. We all seek ways to convey the thrill of pursuing our subject matter as well as communicating why we believe our quest to be consequential.

       I have had the opportunity to observe several religious movements in their "natural habitat" and interviewed hundreds of members. And I have spent no small amount of time talking with persons who have created or belong to organizations that actively seek to diminish, even destroy, religious movements. Over the years I have told my stories of first hand encounters with religious movements to my students, but I learned early that my stories are never as interesting as the opportunity to meet a real member face-to-face.

       The concept "virtual reality" is widely applied today to describe the way in which state of the art technology can place people in situations that approach the real thing. However exciting the experience of "virtual reality," the Internet will never be able to capture the feeling of being in the midst of Holiness people handling poisonous snakes, or the ecstasy of being "slain in the spirit" at a Pentecostal meeting, or the awe and wonderment of watching the Reverend Sun Myung Moon joining in marriage two thousand couples in a mass ceremony.

       But the Internet does provide an opportunity to immerse oneself--however deeply one may choose--in the subcultural worlds of new religious movements. One can delve into the products being created for the goal of proselytizing. Or, one can log onto news groups that are mostly used by believers to discuss the fine points of their faith. Or, one can participate in heated debate about any number of groups. There are no small number of Web sites and news groups that are run by people whose primary objective in life seems to be the destruction of some religious group. These are usually, but not exclusively, people that sociologists would call apostates. One can join in their debates and experience shunning or be "flamed" for expressing politically incorrect views.

       The World Wide Web can't really take one into the innersanctum of religious groups, or the hearts and minds of those who believe. But without question, anyone who chooses can get much closer to scores of religious movements than has ever before been possible without actually encountering groups in the flesh. It's a great show and a great learning laboratory. Like a lot other things on the Internet, it is not always easy to locate the best spots.

       This site makes the process of locating materials a lot easier. This site does not seek to build links to everything about new religions on the Internet, nor does it seek to provide comprehensive linkage to any specific group. Rather, it seeks to identify and make links to sites that can enhance learning. Without exception, it will include the official home page of the groups presented here. When a group's own home page is not comprehensive, unofficial pages, usually created by members of the group are presented. Comprehensiveness and unique features have been used as criteria for inclusion of unofficial home pages when many exist for a single group. (Members of the Hare Krishna movement, for example, have created over one hundred unofficial home pages).

       We also seek pages that can be described as informative and/or analytical. As of this writing, the Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance (Formerly the Ontario Centre on Religious Tolerance) is among the most thoughtful and comprehensive sites on the WWW. OCRT, as the title suggests, also has a mission of promoting understanding and tolerance while reducing misinformation and religious hatred. These are goals to which we also subscribe You will find frequent links to OCRT from this site.

       Understanding the dynamics of cult and sect formation necessarily involves an examination of the Web sites of those who are, for theological or other reasons, opposed to specific new religious groups. Such sites don't exist for every group, but for some groups it is difficult to find information that has not been generated by anti-cultists. We present anti-cult sites without comment, other than to identify their character, leaving it to readers to assess the merits of the material.

       There is yet another type of literature that can be characterized as counter-cult. The authors of these pages are not motivated by animus but, rather, their own theological convictions. The best of these sites aspire to accuracy and their products can be informative.

       Finally, a word here regarding the accuracy of the text and the currency of information generated on this site (in contrast to materials to which we have built links). I would not consider myself to be an expert on more than a few of the groups that are presented here. I have no doubt made numerous factual errors. And everyone who has attempted to maintain a Web site with links knows that URLs are constantly changing, quickly making one's meticulous labor appear slovenly.

       Early on in the development of this site my undergraduate students volunteered to assist with the creation of pages for specific groups. The comprehensiveness of this site owes much to their enthusiastic work. It is a product of their labor and is their site as much as it is mine. For each group covered here, they have developed brief profiles, links and a select bibliography of printed materials. Their work, like my own, will inevitably contain errors, significant URLs and publications will be missed, and new Web sites and publications will appear subsequently.

       I sincerely seek counsel on how this site might be improved, as well as corrections where the information is wrong and additions when something that should be a part of this page has been missed. I welcome information about any and all groups.

       Just a couple of caveats for those who might elect to communicate for other reasons. First, I am aware that some people hold passionately negative convictions about one or many religious groups. I respect their right to believe as they choose, but I have no interest in engaging in dialogue or debate with them. Second, I am not a theologian. If the information presented about the beliefs of a particular group is incorrect, I want to get it right. But I am not qualified to discern finer points of belief that are the subject of debate within most faith traditions.

Jeffrey K. Hadden
Professor of Sociology
University of Virginia.

Also available in this site section:

• Welcome Message
• History of the Project