Prophetic Charisma: The Psychology of Revolutionary Religious Personalities. - Review - book reviews

Jane Marie Pinzino

by LEN OAKES. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 1997, 246 + xiipp. $17.95.

In his revised doctoral dissertation, Len Oakes, scholar of religion and former member of a new religious movement, develops a psychology of charismatic leadership in Western culture. He argues that the historical foundation of spiritual leadership in Western culture resides in the charismatic movement led by Jesus of Nazareth. Three criteria define Oakes's idea of charismatic leadership. While we know little about the historical Jesus, we can reasonably assert that a) he led a revolutionary spiritual movement; b) he attracted devoted followers; c) he stood against some of the key values of the larger society. Jesus is the archetype of prophetic charisma in the West.

With that foundation, Oakes proposes a psychological theory of the charismatic personality. Oakes sets his work over against Max Weber's theory of charisma as a social relationship. Weber argued that charismatic leadership does not primarily have to do with special or supernatural attributes of the prophet. Rather, charismatic leadership involves an individual claiming divine authority and more significantly, a community validating that individual's claim. In order to be effective, charisma must be recognized by others, and thus Weber emphasized the social dynamics of charisma.

Oakes in contrast shifts theoretical focus to the charismatic leader. While acknowledging the importance of social context, Oakes believes that key aspects of charismatic leadership can best be understood within the framework of the psychology of personality. The chief psychological characteristic of a charismatic individual is narcissism. The narcissistic personality is characterized by self-styled notions of grandeur and a drive to manipulate and control his/her interior life and that of others. Whether the prophet is male or female, moral or immoral, educated or uneducated, rich or poor, charisma is rooted in psychological defenses against overwhelming and terrifying feelings of worthlessness, emptiness, and weakness. Charismatic individuals compensate for this narcissistic shame by assuming the role of prophet. They become what Sarah Hamilton-Byrne calls in her foreward "a legend in their own mind." Such individuals motivate others with a driving mission to spread his/her truth, a truth which resolves a social or spiritual crisis.

In Oakes's analysis, the narcissistic personality produces two types of prophets, the messianic and the charismatic. Many charismatic leaders, like Jesus, have overlapping characteristics of both types. The messianic prophet "gazes up in awe at his God whom he tries to emulate" and strives for a truth outside him/herself. On the other hand the charismatic prophet, rather than setting an external goal, is absorbed by an ideal of what he/she is or a special quality that he/she has.

The lives of both prophetic types are characterized by five psychological stages: 1) early narcissism - a child's struggle for ego strength; 2) incubation - the adolescent period and the initial sense of a prophetic calling; 3) awakening - the adoption of a prophetic role; 4) mission - founding an organization to spread his/her truth; and 5) decline or fall - a downfall in leadership either by external forces or internal crises.

Although Oakes conceives of his contribution in this work as a critique of Weber, it is,. in fact, a ready complement to it. Both one and the other are helpful. Taken together, they provide theoretical balance for the study of charisma and both sides of the social equation.

Several aspects of Oakes's analysis require reconsideration however. At the basic level of writing style, Oakes uses exclusive gender pronouns, "he" and "his" for which he argues smoother written expression. Oakes's attitude is outdated and undermined by his own point that a charismatic leader may be either male or female. Second, Oakes's distinction between "messianic" and "charismatic" prophets is confused by his argument that most prophets have overlapping aspects of each. Further, Oakes explains that both messianic and charismatic prophets are charismatic leaders, in effect nullifying any distinction between the two by subsuming messianic leadership under the charisma umbrella.

Of deeper concern, however, is Oakes's deprecating tone about charismatic movements. Oakes refers to charismatic leaders as great "repackagers" of old ideas, and implies that there really is nothing new under the sun. Oakes compares charisma to other forms of popular culture and cynically suggests that all forms lack genuine meaningfulness. At this point Oakes betrays a bitterness about his painful experience as a former insider to a charismatic community.

There is a religious vocabulary that has properties similar to the "languages" of modern art and popular music and, like them, can be creatively recombined in endless variations in ways no more meaningful than the way a pop songwriter moves product. A little dualism here, a touch of New Thought or mysticism there, some derivative meditation practices with a new twist, and some moral rules derived from an esoteric religious tradition, all packaged with intelligence, sensitivity and an inspiration born of genuine conviction, and soon one has a new religion (p. 189).

Finally, the most serious weakness of Oakes's work is its underlying ahistorical method. Leaping from Jesus of Nazareth's movement in first-century Palestine to twentieth-century urban charismatic movements in New Zealand and the US, Oakes fails to take into account that a lot of water has passed under the bridge in the interval. The author's sweeping generalizations about charisma are not substantiated by sufficient historical examples.

Len Oakes provides an evocative reassessment of scholarly method for studying charisma. The chief contribution of his work is the consideration it gives to psychological features of charisma as a complement to Weber's sociological analysis. Whither may a student of charisma now go? Having explored the psychology of charismatic leaders, Oakes has opened up the possibility of studying the psychology of personality of the charismatic community itself. Implementing the insights of both Weber and Oakes, we might now consider the psychology of charismatic discipleship.

Jane Marie Pinzino University of Puget Sound

COPYRIGHT 1998 Association for the Sociology of Religion
COPYRIGHT 2000 Gale Group