Some sociologists believe that religious sects such as the Quaker-base

Official Explanation

The author’s position is in opposition to the position of the sociologists cited. Because the author claims an alternative interpretation of the evidence, the most logical continuation of the passage will be the one which explains why such sects are not a recent phenomenon even though there are no old ones around. (A) does this neatly. Since the members abstain from sexual relations, they will not reproduce members and the sect will tend to die out. This explains why there are none more than 50 or 60 years old.

(C), if anything, supports the position of the sociologists, for it implicitly gives up trying to explain the evidence differently and also undercuts the explanation the author might have given.

(B) is irrelevant because intensity of religious fervor is irrelevant to the length of the sect’s existence; it cannot possibly help the author explain away the evidence of the sociologists.

(D) is irrelevant for another reason. The author needs to explain why the sects are all relatively young without having recourse to the thesis of the sociologists that they are a recent phenomenon. That there are other organizations that encourage sexual relations of whatever kind cannot help the author explain a phenomenon such as the Waiters.

Finally, (E) is a distraction, picking up as it does on a minor detail. The author needs to explain the short-livedness of groups of which the Waiters is only an example.

The correct answer is (A).