Theorizing about leadership in new religious movements has often assumed that leaders have a powerful form of charisma with magical powers allowing leaders to exercise total control over the group and its members. This “myth of the omnipotent leader” is complemented by the “myth of the passive and brainwashed follower,” which assumes that those who participate have their agency overcome by the leader’s charisma and are under some sort of spell cast by the leader. Both myths mislead and belie societal conditions that lead to the formation of new religions as well as the inherent agency of those who participate. Examples from research on newer religious groups are presented to demonstrate the naiveté of assuming that the intertwined myths promoted in the media offer a full and adequate explanation of group formation and decisions by individuals to participate.

Charismatic authority has been alternatively depicted as extraordinarily powerful and fragile and transitory. The argument developed here is that organizations generally, and newly emerging religious movements in particular, are sites of both coordination and contestation. If new movements are established with a charismatic authority structure, one important question is from what sources can challenges to that authority emanate. Three movement sectors are identified as potential sources of challenge: inner circle leadership, administrative functionaries, and grassroots membership. Using illustrative cases from contemporary emerging religious movements, instances of authority challenges are presented in support of the argument that both coordination and contestation are normal features of movement development.