ABSTRACT
(Copyright © 1997 University of California Press. This chapter was first published in Nova Religio 1, no. 1 (October 1997), pp. 30–49. Reprinted with permission of the publisher)
Some people got no choice, And they can never find a voice, To talk with that they can even call their own. 1
(Lou Reed) Thomas Robbins’ most interesting article, “Religious Movements and Violence: A Friendly Critique of the Interpretive Approach,” offers a number of pertinent observations and expresses several legitimate concerns about the possible misuse of the methodology as an apologia for violence emanating from new religious movements. Robbins’ comments are both constructive and timely, and he singles out my own work as a prime example of the pleasures and the perils of this approach. This essay will therefore be divided into three sections. The first will offer some observations on Robbins’ critique of the “interpretive” approach. Section two will answer the specific comments centering on my own work. A final section will consider the future utility of the methodology. It will also suggest that the interpretive approach’s emphasis on dialogue may one day help to build bridges of mutual understanding that could help to allay the barriers of fear and hostility which have so long divided the mainstream culture from the adherents of millenarian and messianic movements, as well as from members of minority religio-political belief systems. 2