Defining a "sect" or a "cult"

There's somebody missing from this thread.

I agree about the general perception of Methodism, but I would guess that, like most Churches and religions, it has its own sub groups - there used to be (still are?) Primitive Methodists, for example, and, surmising again, I would presume that they were more fundamentalist than the mainstream. There are Pentecostal Methodist groups, and Methodists led revival camps in the States.

(Wesley wasn't much of a soft touch, either - he was an evangelist. Evangelism and "Proclamation" (of the Gospel) were two of his tenets. I studied a bit of theology at one stage, a long time ago,mand am dredging my memory.)

I don't think Methodists believe anything different from CoE. It's more the organisation of the church that's different. 'Denomination' is the word that comes to mind as avoiding unintentional offence for variations of churches.

As language changes over time in its common usage , it's not always helpful to look at literal definitions IMHO. The words Sect and Cult seem to have taken on a more derogatory meaning now . When Methodism first appeared it was probably viewed as a weird offshoot of the Anglican Church , but surely now it is considered mainstream even to atheists, or other people who disagree with its beliefs.

Actually, I agree with both Elegran and Lilygran's posts.

Sorry, Elegran's I mean!

I would agree with Lilygran's definition of both words.

I don't think that a sect necessarily venerate their leader, a sect is an offshoot of a religious group, usually more narrow and strict that the mainstream.. Venerating a leader seems to me more like a cult - think Scientology and L Ron Hubbard, Waco and David Koresh.

annsixty you certainly don't need to apologise. I sometimes wonder how we manage, without body language, facial expressions and a knowledge of how someone would normally frame a thought in a conversation, not to completely misunderstand one another's train of thought all the time

Greenfinch I would call that a cult rather than a sect for the very reasons you put forward. Having said that Lilygran you sum up the whole problem. I have no idea what a "genuine religion" is either!

But having checked the various definitions of 'cult' it can also mean a group offering particular veneration to a leader or object, for example, a saint. But what do I know?

It's very tricky using terms like 'sect' because people think of them as being derogatory. But I think the definition you quote is correct, Gracesgran. 'Cult' is even trickier because it implies that the body referred to is part of a belief system which is either not current or not universally recognised as a genuine religion. Like Mithraism or Scientology. But that then poses another question, what is a 'genuine religion'? Oh, dearie, dearie me! (Head in hands, low moaning noise).

I believe that the correct definition of a sect is that it has a leader whom the followers venerate alongside Jesus. Thus the Mormons are a sect because of the role of Joseph Smith in their beliefs and so are the Moonies and the Christian Scientists amongst others while a group such as the Seventh Day Adventists remain within mainstream Christianity because Jesus is their supreme figurehead .Under this definition Methodists are certainly not members of a sect.

Well I obviously did misinterpret your post thereby misjudging you and I apologise.

I don't think that I said Methodists, or any others religious groups, were irrational annsixty. Sect would, I presume come from the same root as "section" which would not imply irrational thinking. The beliefs that have been described on here are, in my opinion, separate yet again from mainstream Methodism so you could say a sect within a sect. Whether the beliefs described fall within in a cult status is open to argument in my opinion.

All the Methodists I know, and that is plenty, are lovely rational people. You seem to be lumping them all together by judging them based on one poster on here. I hope I haven't misjudged you now.