Eskiyeni

Öz

This study employs a historical-phenomenological approach to examine the concepts of “new religion” and “new religious movement.” The concepts of religion and religious are examined by the history of religions in terms of the institutional and non-institutionalised nature of the religious structure and the variability and continuity of the hierophany-theophany role of the religious leader(s) in the sacred-profane relationship. This methodological approach renders this science invaluable for the study of religion and/or religious structures/persons. The concept of the New Religion, when the concepts of “New” and “Religion” are analysed in terms of whether the religious movement to which they are attributed is institutional or not, appears to be inconsistent in terms of the group that maintains the theological context of a theophanic religious leader and ensures the change-transformation of the group within this framework. It thus requires defining the relevant structure as religious. This situation renders a joint evaluation of the two terms impossible. However, since the sociological perspective adopts different approaches to the subject, it is beyond the scope of this study to determine whether a structure is religious or not. Consequently, it has become necessary to employ historical-phenomenological methods in the study of the related concepts and their equivalents, namely religious movements. The concept of the New Religious Movement is defined in two distinct ways. Primarily, it is defined as a sub-concept. Secondly, it is defined as a meta-inclusive concept. However, an examination of the conceptualisation reveals a historical-phenomenological inconsistency in the use of the terms “New Religion” and “New Religious Movement”. The terms “New' and “Religious” are deemed appropriate insofar as they serve to emphasise the theological continuity that characterises the change and transformation of religious structures and religious leaders. It can thus be stated that the term is currently in widespread use within the academic community. However, it has been acknowledged that the social structure and characterisations of the concept, as reflected in its examples, reflect the cultural perspective of Western European and US society. This perspective also encompasses Eastern religious movements, although examples from Central and Eastern Europe are included in the conceptual construction process. In this context, our study identifies inconsistencies in the historical-phenomenological conceptualisation of religion and religious movements in the concept of New Religion. Despite the designation of New Religious Movement as a meta-concept, our findings indicate that it is an inclusive and generalised concept that perpetuates a colonial cultural superiority approach without revising its sub-conceptual structure. This study aims to highlight these issues and provide a foundation for future research.