Sociology 3301: Sociology of Religion
Lecture 12: Organized Religion I: Charisma & Institutionalization
 Today we trace the development of religious groups from
fledgling “cults” to established, stable religious organizations.
 We consider how NRMs move from emerging movements based
around a charismatic leader to institutionalized religious groups
that suffer a series of dilemmas as a result.
Charisma and the Charismatic Leader:
 Max Weber: NRMs generally involve a charismatic leader, a
dynamic person seen as extraordinary and set apart from others.
 Charismatic leaders are able to use this power to mobilize
followers and to create within them a sense of mission.
 Believers may feel a sense of mystery and awe in his/her
presence. Whatever s/he says is believed to be true simply
because s/he said it.
 Eichler (1972) a charismatic leader’s wisdom is considered truth
just because s/he utters it. Ideological leaders, on the other hand,
are those whose leadership comes from an ability to interpret an
existing belief system in a compelling manner.
 Charismatic leadership possesses antiestablishment and
revolutionary tendencies. It is sharply opposed to rational, and
particularly bureaucratic or traditional authority.
 Nonetheless, once the charismatic leader has emerged and
developed a following, the group must undergo a transformation.
 Charismatic leadership is inherently unstable. Hence, the
movement undergoes the “routinization of charisma.”
The Routinization of Charisma:

If a NRM is to survive, a stable set of roles and statuses must be
established, and a consistent pattern of norms generated and
practiced, whereby the nature of charismatic authority is
transformed.
1











The community gathered around a dynamic leader must evolve
into one with a stable matrix of norms, roles, and statuses. This
process of routinization is commonly called institutionalization.
A group that fails to do so simply will not survive.
Institutionalization serves both ideal and material interests of
followers and leaders. The ideals of the group can be furthered
only if it survives and only if it mobilizes its resources. Thus, it
serves the ideological interests of adherents.
Yet followers and leaders also have a material stake in the
survival of the group. Insofar as they have invested time, energy,
and resources into the group, they are likely to feel that they have
a vested economic interest in its survival and success.
The most critical test is how the group handles succession. The
problem is who will provide the group with leadership? Equally
contentious, how is that to be decided?
Transfer of power to the next designated leader has important
implications for group evolution.
First, the charisma once identified with a personality must
become associated with the religious ideology and the
organization itself. The group, its body of beliefs, and perhaps a
written record (scripture) become sources of veneration. This
more stable source of authority changes the group.
Second, the decision making process itself becomes sacralized as
the divinely appointed method of choosing the successor.
Followers must recognize the new leader(s) as the legitimate
heirs or the group may be torn by schisms.
Commitment is now to the organization and to the ideology of
the movement, and the authority of the new leaders may be
restrained by these stabilizing forces.
No longer are the leader’s words taken as true simply because
s/he said them. They must be evaluated in light of what the
original leader said and did. The new leader is usually an
ideological rather than a charismatic one.
Another issue involves the provision of a stable economic base. If
some are to work full time for the movement, then a continuing
2




and consistent income must be secured. Without this, there can be
no full-time clergy, administrative staff, or other employees.
Further, if there are no career opportunities within the
organization, instrumental commitment may begin to wane.
Indeed, such staff may be necessary if the group is growing and
expects to continue expanding.
Sometimes routinization is slow and takes time. In some cases a
later organizer initiates institutionalization after the death of the
charismatic founder. In others, the charismatic leader also
happens to be an excellent organizer. Regardless, the routinizing
function must be performed.
There have been thousands of NRMs that have been spawned but
don’t survive.
Many scholars believe that most, if not all, religions begin as
charismatic cultic movements. Yet, if they are to survive, they
must undergo the process of institutionalization.
Dilemmas of Institutionalization:
 While institutionalization is necessary, it tends to change the
character of the movement and to create certain dilemmas for the
religious organization. O’Dea (1961) lists five of these:
(1) The dilemma of mixed motivation: The development of a stable
institutional structure may foster desire to occupy the more
creative, responsible, and prestigious positions. Thus can
stimulate jealousy and personality conflicts.
Concerns over positions and how secure they are can cause some
to lose sight of the group’s primary goals. Mixed motivation
occurs when such secondary concerns or motivations come to
overshadow the original goals and teachings of the leader.
(2) The symbolic dilemma: Objectification vs. Alienation: For a
community to worship together, a common set of symbols must
be generated that meaningfully expresses the worldview of the
group. Yet, this process of projecting subjective feeling onto
3
objective artifacts and behaviors can proceed to the point that the
symbols no longer have power for the members. They can
become cut off from experience, from the inner dispositions of
members, who become alienated from personal religiosity.
(3) The Dilemma of Administrative Order: Elaboration of Policy vs.
Flexibility: As a group grows and institutionalizes, it may
develop national offices and a bureaucratic structure, along with
a set of rational policies and regulations. This can create an
unwieldy, overcomplicated structure, and red tape. Moreover,
attempts at reform may foster severe resistance by those whose
status and security in the hierarchy are threatened.
(4) The Dilemma of Delimitation: Concrete Definition vs.
Substitution of the Letter for the Spirit: Over time religious
messages get translated into specific guidelines, concrete rules of
ethical behavior. If not done, the system may remain at such an
abstract level that the ordinary person does not grasp its meaning
or importance for everyday life. Yet, something may be lost.
Members may come to focus so intently on these rules that they
lose sight of the original spirit or outlook, and the religion can
degenerate into legalistic formulas and judgmental behaviors.
(5) The Dilemma of Power: Conversion vs. Coercion: If a religious
group is to stay together and sustain its common faith,
conformity to the values and norms of the group must be
ensured. To maintain organizational integrity and consensus,
organizations may resort to coercive methods of social control
(e.g. charges of heresy, excommunication, the Inquisition, etc.)
Conformity due to internalization of norms is often more
powerful, yet voluntary internalization by all is hard. Thus,
institutionalized religious organizations may turn to coercion.
Institutional Dilemmas and Social Context:
 Yinger (1961) noted that O’Dea’s institutional dilemmas were
not stated in terms of their social context. He didn’t specify the
4





conditions under which these dilemmas are most and least likely
to occur, seeing them as inherent, unavoidable, and inevitable.
Yet, there have been cases where some of these haven’t
occurred, while groups have dealt fairly well with the others
(Mathiesen, 1987).
Thus, some social organizations and some conditions may be
more conducive than others to certain dilemmas.
These dilemmas often do plague organized religion, but they are
by no means inevitable nor necessarily fatal.
However, it does appear that these dilemmas are more
pronounced when the organization is a majority religious
movement rather than a minority protest movement preoccupied
with tensions with the larger society.
Ultimately institutionalization is a mixed blessing. It is necessary
for a NRM to turn into an established religious tradition after the
death of a charismatic leader, but carries with it many dilemmas –
more specifically endemic to some religious groups than others.
5