Analysis of the Study of Religious Organizations 125
political and institutional devices (Troeltsch 1981: 331). Weber felt that to accomplish
universal dominion churches also tended to adopt specific organizational features such
as a professional class of clergy to control the sacred, the objectification of religious
teachings and principles into rationalized dogma and rites that could be culturally
transmitted, and the formation of a hierocratic and compulsory authority structure
(1925/1978: 1164).
The “sect-type,” located at the opposite end of the continuum, is characterized
by a stance that is explicitly in opposition to the worldly values of the established
church. Sects are characterized by their goal of leading a pure, inner-directed life guided
by the moral example of Christ and his apostles. Consequently, Weber and Troeltsch
characterized the sect as a small voluntary community, living apart from society, and
focusing on the achievement of inner perfection. Their community is characterized by
a direct personal fellowship with other members in the sect, equality among members,
and a special and personal relationship with God.
Within the Catholic Church, Troeltsch saw the compromises that the church made
with secular values and authority as the price that it paid to perpetuate its dominance
in the world. The sects, by contrast, because they tended to reject secular values and cul-
tivated a worldview that was more inner-directed, sought to be independent of worldly
ambitions. For Weber and Troeltsch, these two organizational forms were interdepen-
dent elements that existed in a dynamic tension with one another. The sect served
as a source of moral idealism that periodically renewed the ideals and integrity of the
church, while the church served as a vehicle through which these ideals could be spread
universally (Troeltsch 1981: 337).
The Church-Sect Typology
The formalization of the “church-sect typology” based on the writings of Weber and
Troeltsch inspired a large number of studies in the sociology of religion from about
the 1930s to the late 1960s (Niebuhr 1929; Yinger 1946; Berger 1954; Johnson 1957;
Wilson 1959; Goode 1967a; Goode 1967b). Scholars sought to use Weber and Troeltsch’s
descriptions about “church-types” and “sect-types” to classify the kinds of worshipping
communities they observed in the United States. They pursued this intellectual strategy
assuming that there was a limited number of forms that a worshipping community
could take, and that these forms followed a natural life cycle that evolved between sect
and church. Their goal was to discover the dynamics of this natural order, which would
enable them to classify religious communities into different organizational types that
they believed also would be associated with typical religious behaviors.
Unfortunately, the “church-sect typology” was formulated from various observa-
tions, insights, and analyses made by Weber and Troeltsch that were scattered among
their various writings. These writings were sufficiently ambiguous that the appropri-
ate interpretation of the crucial characteristics and dimensions of this typology were
hotly contested. H. Richard Niebuhr (1929), for example, argued that the appropriate
dimension should be based on the social and ethical characteristics of religious com-
munities, while Becker (1932) sought to emphasize the kinds of social relationships
different collectives had with society, and Berger (1954) proposed a dimension based
on the “nearness of the religious spirit.”