ovde - vera znanje mir

pale’’,and, therefore, seen as less of a threat to the understanding of what is entailed in being a
‘‘real Christian’’. Here the challenge is to the nature of the content—the dilution or relativization
of the truth. Peter Brierley (2003: 2.2), an Evangelical Christian who does very useful work in
charting trends in the religious scene in the UK,considers that people (such as Jehovah’s
Witnesses) who do not accept the doctrine of the Trinity should not be classified with
‘‘denominational groups’’ which are comprised of Anglicans, Roman Catholics, Orthodox,
Presbyterian, Methodist and ‘‘All other churches’’.Non-Trinitarians are placed in a completely
separate category. It is not altogether unusual to hear a distinction being made by Roman Catholics
between Christians and Protestants—or by Protestants between Christians and Catholics.
Strength and Salience
Boundaries may be regarded as more or less important, not least for matters of identity. New
religions frequently exhibit what Mary Douglas (1970) has called strong-group control. In the
early days of the Unification Church,being or not being a Unificationist (or ‘‘Moonie’’ as
members were then popularly known) was the primary criterion for one’s basic identity—
positively for members and negatively for non-members. When I was studying the movement in
the 1970s, the British leader, frustrated by my methodological neutrality, frequently used to
declare ‘‘You must be either with us or against us.’’ With the passage of time, however, such a
dichotomous world-view tends to become less stringent as the boundary is increasingly crisscrossed
by other identities associated not with the movement but with‘‘outside’’ relationships such
as ‘‘work colleague’’, or ‘‘member of the parent–teacher association’’. Being an Anglican would,
for most members of the Church of England, be but one of many identities and, moreover,one that
they could wander into and out of without much concern on their own or anyone else’s behalf.
Permeability
This leads us to what might be termed boundary permeability—how easy it isto enter or leave a
group, or to gain or renounce a particular identity. Almost by definition, Douglas’s strong group is
likely to be less permeable than a weak group, though possibly not to the same extent in both
directions; it may be relatively easy to enter a group but very dificult to leave—or vice versa.
Advocates of irresistible-and-irreversible-brainwashing theories have claimed that people are
sucked into ‘‘cults’’ against their will, but subsequently find it impossible to escape through their
outwardly (as opposed to inwardly) impermeable boundaries. The high rate of turnover exhibited
by most of the movements suggests, however, that the boundaries might be of roughly equal
permeability in either direction.There are various processes that might facilitate or hinder
boundary crossing, such as rites of passage or expulsion, on the one hand, or exacting trials and
limited eligibility, on the other. As will be discussed below, theological or ideological
understandings of membership eligibility can play a significant role in determining the potential
permeability of the religious identity in question.
Negotiability and Manipulability
Relatedly, there are the degrees of negotiability or manipulability associated with a boundary.
These may depend on the extent to which the boundary is contentious or taken-for-granted and
how its current position is justified and/or policed by, say, a religious culture or by guns. Some
boundaries have changed radically with the passage of time, others have remained relatively
stable. The degree of consciousness with which changes have occurred also varies. Minority
religions such as the Church of Scientology and the Jehovah’s Witnesses have fought in the courts
to clarify and systematize boundaries. The Ecumenical movement and Interfaith Dialogue have
entered into boundary negotiations, although they may not always have recognized their
deliberations in such terms.
Relationships between Boundaries
Finally, boundaries may cross other boundaries in a variety of ways. There are several possible
relationships between two phenomena that may be considered to be identical, overlapping or
discrete. A may be taken to imply B:(being a priest may imply being a man); to exclude B: (being