This is an interesting and worthwhile collection of fourteen essays, predominantly case studies, examining why and how schisms occurred in a variety of religious traditions and movements. With one exception, the first essay by Roger Finke and Christopher Scheitle, the chapters are largely descriptive in character, though several essays offer some additional theoretical insights. The volume begins with three chapters surveying the history and nature of schisms in Islam (Ron Greaves), Buddhism (Alan Cole) and Japanese new religious movements (Robert Kisala). The remainder of the essays deal with schisms in what are essentially new religions, with the exception of one essay by Joseph M. Bryant on the schismatic consequences of the Decian persecution of the early Christians and its implications for the triumph of Catholic Christianity in the Roman Empire. The groups discussed are the Jehovah's Witnesses, the Unification Church, the Church Universal and Triumphant, Theosophy, Satanists, Neo-Pagans, the Hare Krishna movement, Transcendental Meditation and the Rastafari. The essays are uniformly clear, informative and well written. Reading them provides a wealth of details on the recurrent and formative role of schismatic struggles in these groups and hence in the history of religious innovation generally. Regrettably, beyond a few pertinent but very limited comments in the editors’ ‘Introduction’, no sustained attempt is made to use the unique comparative basis to provide a more systematic theory of schism. The editors formulate a rough typology of the factors commonly thought to generate schisms, and advocate the development of a stage model of the process of schism, one which duly considers the dynamic interaction of personal motives and larger structural factors and grievances, as well as the role of cultural differences, in the configuration of schisms. But the other essays do not directly address these issues, or (with two partial exceptions) respond to the more specific theoretical offering of Finke and Scheitle.

In line with Finke's well-known religious economy perspective, Finke and Scheitle provide a succinct and helpful analysis of the influence of social context and organisational dynamics on schisms. They argue that schisms flourish when the social conditions facilitate religious competition and reduce the ‘start-up costs’ for new groups, and they explore the role of ‘market niche expansion’, different patterns of ‘resource exchange’ in groups and clergy professionalisation in fomenting schisms. David Bromley and Rachael Bobbitt offer some additional theoretical insights, with reference to the Unification Church, by analysing the different roles played by organisational elites, administrative/bureaucratic officials and grassroot members in generating challenges to charismatic authority which are conducive to schism. But most of the essays confine themselves to more idiosyncratic analyses of developments in specific groups. George Chryssides charts the history of the Jehovah's Witnesses and the schisms born of Rutherford's ruthless restructuring of Russell's original Watch Tower Society, noting that Rutherford's creation is itself a schismatic creation relative to the origins of the Witnesses. The four essays on Western Esoteric traditions (by Susan Palmer, Olav Hammer, Jesper Aagaard Petersen and Murphy Pizza) all illustrate the crucial role of clashes in leadership styles and the centrifugal impact of what might be called open source belief systems; noting, ironically, that repeated schisms can sometimes have positive implications for the growth of movements. In many of the essays we gain glimpses into the peculiar personalities and intense rivalries which mark so many of the schisms, which makes for fascinating reading at points.

In sum, the volume offers an interesting introduction to an overlooked topic in the sociology of religion through a series of well-crafted case studies. But the absence of studies of schismatic movements within the main body of Christianity, and other conventional religious traditions, is disappointing, and an opportunity is missed to elevate the significance of the book by introducing a greater measure of theoretical synthesis.