316 Rhys H. Williams
shaped by the fact that the movements are reliant on religion, and this in turn shapes
the extent to which religious activism continues to matter to our national public life.
I should begin by noting that I will focus in this chapter on social movements that
aim to change society at some corporate level – either through influencing legislation,
persuading politicians and other institutional elites or pushing other social groups to
action. I am less interested in movements that are aimed primarily atindividualsand
want to change them – and to the extent they have any desire to change the world it
is only through the actions of changed individuals. This is what is often referred to as
a “hearts and minds” or conversionist strategy of social change, in that it relies on the
changed attitudes and actions of converts to reshape society.
Limiting my focus in this chapter naturally leaves out a sizeable number of religious
movements who are primarily concerned with spreading a religious message and in-
creasing their adherents. Particularly those religious groups often referred to as “New
Religious Movements” might fall into this category. The Hare Krishnas, the Divine Light
Mission, and the Branch Dravidians might be representative of this type of individual-
ist, conversionist type of movement. They basically eschew the public world, and often
encourage a type of withdrawal from public and secular life. The Unification Church of
Rev. Sun Yung Moon presents an interesting case that may lie between a conversionist
New Religious Movement and a religiously based social movement.
Conversionist religious movements may in fact confront many of the same dynam-
ics and dilemmas that face religiously based movements that try to shape public life,
but because the former have a different fundamental purpose they also have some sig-
nificant differences. My decision is primarily an analytic one, made in order to limit the
scope and range of phenomena I discuss. Also, when movements attempt to change
aspects of the public sphere, their actions have implications for many people who are
not and will never be members. Thus, the interactions between movements and pub-
lic life take on added meaning and dimensions that are less relevant for movements
aiming foremost at private or personal change. While the specific movements I discuss
in this chapter are not necessarily “political” in the narrow sense, in that they don’t
sponsor candidates for elective office, or propose or lobby for legislation, they deliber-
ately engage society at the public level. Some groups, such as Promise Keepers, do both
and are interesting precisely because the public-private boundary is such a quandary
for them.
RELIGION AS A MOBILIZING FORCE
Every social movement has certain “dilemmas” it needs to solve. Scholars have gener-
ally described three: A movement needs toorganizeitself to allow coordinated action
and continuity over time; it needs to generate a movementculture, including persuasive
ideological claims; and it needs to negotiate successfully the socialenvironment, includ-
ing taking advantage of the opportunities available to it (see McAdam et al. 1996 for
a general discussion of these features; see Smith 1996a, and Williams 1994 for direct
application to religious movements). The first two factors are important mostly because
they involve motivating and mobilizing members; I will address them in this section of
the chapter. The third feature, negotiating the social environment, involves the inter-
action between the movement and the larger society and culture, and it is the necessary
terrain for movement success. How that environment has changed recently, and the