A second observation to make is that the organizations that leaders lead are taken for granted, whether it be the military, a corporation, or a political party. I have found few critical examinations of the structures over which leaders exercise their power. This leads, in turn to a kind of pragmatism, or instrumentalism in discussions on leadership. The assumption is that the leader is in place to make the organization 'successful', and if there is any tinkering with the organization, it is to make it more so. I can understand this. An army needs a good general or field officer who can persuade his soldiers to risk life and limb (perhaps to die) to reach specific objectives. The corporation CEO puts people around him (sadly, 'tis still mostly a 'him') who will exercise efficiency in maximizing profits. The political leader will have to be hard-nosed enough to sacrifice friends and supporters in the pursuit of political ideals, and yet be good enough to carry enough sycophants along. Things have not changed much since Machiavelli. Anthony Burgess once observed that 'The US Presidency is like the Tudor monarchy with a telephone'.

One must now ask a question. Is 'Christian leadership' (granted there be such a thing) simply the religious version of what the non-church world has to offer, or is there something inherently different about it? Larry Huch, President of the Christian Leadership College in Portland, Oregon, states his views quite simply, 'God's plan for his children is to lead and succeed in every way.' This is an obvious adoption of the general ethos of mainstream North American society, and has nothing distinctly Christian to offer. The phrase (oxymoron?) 'servant leadership' is popular today, but it often is used in practice as a disguise for a dictatorial or abusive person, and the language often bears little or no resemblance to the reality it is supposed to be describing. In one of the few direct discussions of leadership in the Gospels, Jesus made a very simple point. Comparing life together in the Christian community with what went one outside, he stated 'It shall not be so among you' (Matt.20.26). The Christian community is not an army, it is not a corporation and it is not a political party, even though it has been shaped into all three. According to the Gospels the Christian community is primarily a family, and a new kind of family.

We do not live in a perfect world. Leadership, like death, and probably taxes, is a result of the Fall. The story of the demand for kingship in 1 Sam. 1-12 illustrates the popular wish for order out of chaos - usually a divine prerogative in the Bible. What has evolved, even in modern 'democracies' is a form of benign tyranny, bolstered by clever rhetoric, and empty promises, which persists because knowledgeable people choose to do little or nothing about it. The 'blessed rage for order' thus provides the excuse for the imposition of conformity, and peace, Blake's 'mill with complicated wheels' which is the bureaucratic leader's dream.
But, democracy is not about order so much as dissent, and this creates a dangerous situation for a leader. The 'good' leader will find ways of negotiating this intellectual and political minefield, and will not demand obedience to a new order simply because it is dictated. Lewis H. Lapham has put it well, '...in a true democracy everything is partisan...A democracy is about individuals who trust their own judgments, rely on the strength of their own thoughts, and speak in their own voices. Citizens, not courtiers. people who live for others and not for the opinion of others, who believe they can forge their energy and intelligence into the shape of their own destiny and their own future. People who recognize in other people the worth of their variant theories, tastes, customs and opinions, who know...that the spirit of liberty is the spirit which is not too sure that it is right.' It is within this context that the 'good' leader functions. Within this context, where the people trust themselves, and are to be trusted by the leaders, the 'good' leader must recognize that the 'saleman's smile and the gift for phrase' (Lapham) - the proof of the validity of which is demonstrated in a form of success - will not suffice. This might be sufficient for the boardroom but in the context of the Christian community it will not cut it. It is important that the 'good' Christian leader know something about the gospel, about grace, about truth, about pain, about cross-bearing, and about the way people are and feel, and respond accordingly. The 'good' Christian leader must also be willing to suffer the scrutiny of others on these counts, in other words, to be held accountable. That is for starters.

Each of these notions could be expanded into a thesis of its own, and I do not want to conclude with a list of 'do's' and 'don'ts' because that would allow 'good' leadership to degenerate into a technique, and technique, like the word suggests, implies manipulation. Good leadership is not a technique, any more than discipleship is. It is a life-long journey, not even a process, because process implies some form of advance, which is never in reality guaranteed.
There is a leadership style found in some circles which is all too rare, and it has been given the name of 'transformational leadership'. Analysis shows that, like 'servant leadership' it is something of an oxymoron, because it is based on the principles of mutual respect and trust between those placed in a position of leadership and those that follow. 
The notion of 'transformational leadership' was articulated by J. McGregor Burns in his 1979 book, Leadership. It is a refreshing book, outlining leadership as the function of engaging people in a common enterprise, so that both, leaders and followers will rise to higher levels of motivation and morality. This moves a long way from the neo-Machiavellianism of the present day with its dominant instrumentalism.

A 'transformational leader' believes in and trusts other people, out of her/his own sense of well-being. Such a leader interacts at every level with others on the assumption that they are competent, knowledgeable and well-intentioned. Of course, it may be argued that not all followers are so. But, the same is true of leaders. This mutual respect is something to be striven for, and in such a striving all can flourish. 

I am not going to argue that this was what Jesus was. The historical issues surrounding who Jesus was are far more complex than that. But, I will suggest that the 'transformational leadership' observed by Burns as an ideal is a responsible way of dealing with our common life as Christians and as Baptists. It avoids dictatorship, it lifts high questions of accountability, and it is fundamentally a moral vision. It seems as though it is close to some of our most cherished ideals.

MUSINGS FROM THE DESERT

Men may be from Mars and women may be from Venus, but when you are unemployed, it feels like you are from Uranus. If you view our planetary partners in the solar system, it will become apparent that nearly all have a slight tilt to them from the solar axis. Earth is about 23° from the vertical while Mars is about 25° from true. However, our far-flung neighbour Uranus is canted over at 81° from true. It orbits the sun at a completely different angle than any other of our celestial neighbours.

The image is descriptive of those who are unemployed, especially as clergy. For a time, life appears to be in harmony with the planets and everything is in its proper orbit. When the unthinkable happens and you are asked to resign, it feels as though your whole world has tipped over. You are still in “orbit”, but everything is different.This begins with the first day after departure from a regular posting. It is the start realization that everyone else you know “seems” to have something to do and you don’t. There are no telephones to answer, no letters to write no sermons to prepare. There is no purpose. Your world is tilted over and everything is odd. Finding a routine in the midst of chaos is essential to moving through this time of unemployment. It is too easy to slip into a mode of despair and do nothing.Strangely, the lack of work at the beginning can have a slightly euphoric feeling. Partly, this is because the pressures of the situation have been lifted and that you are no longer responsible for being a pastor in that situation. Like most experiences of euphoria, this is short lived and the longer-term reality begins to set in.Reflections on what has taken place emerge. Late night conversations with yourself are always argued brilliantly, with the regret that you wished you had said those things earlier. 

Fortunately, most of those things will never be said. Writing and using a journal to lift some of the emotional and historical burden is useful, yet it can only be done when you are ready to commit something to paper through prayer. Forcing yourself to do unnatural things, such as keeping a daily log or journal, when your spirit is in the dumpster may be injurious. When you already live in an unnatural state, adding yet something else “unnatural” may be hazardous to your whole being.Even prayer becomes a difficult matter. As a pastor who has trusted God on a daily basis and believed in the power of the promises of Christ, it is difficult to know what to ask for in order to receive. 

Sometimes it is strength to let go of the anger towards those who have caused this situation. It is likely that this anger, no matter how justified, will be released in small stages over a long period of time. There may be a tendency to enjoy the anger, once the shock of dismissal has receded. It feels good to hold on to a sense of righteous anger. After all, THEY dismissed one of God’s anointed from a Godly, blessed position. It makes you kin with the prophets and Christ in terms of persecution and it feels good for a while to hold on to that anger. Eventually, it becomes the millstone around your neck and it must recede into the background. Depending on circumstances, some may be able to release their anger completely. For others, it simply has less power over your daily routines as you move on to other experiences and opportunities. The ability to ride out this unnatural state is dependent upon the strength of relationships of family and friends. The stresses are great in families of clergy when the pastor is asked to leave. Spouses and children are affected just as deeply since they too, must leave that congregation to which they believed they were once called. They must leave without even being asked. They are simply included in the ‘package’ of dismissal and they must deal with the deep and invisible scars of rejection. The state of being tilted over gradually lessens with the ability for a family to try and maintain a degree of normality. It is dangerous to suddenly stop all family activities because the pastor is no longer in the pulpit. One such change is difficult, but to completely change the life style of the entire family system can be as adding fuel to a bonfire. Staying the course for the time being is crucial. One cannot retreat from life because of a forced resignation. Routines of other work must be found. Events surrounding schools and family fun must be continued. Life doesn’t stop because a ministry opportunity did. Routines offer the balance we need to gradually overcome the ‘cantedness” we feel. Routines offer us the control we need in our lives to fill the void caused by resignation. 

Every situation is unique and those who have been through such changes are the most understanding. Friends willing to step into your unusual world are gifts from God. They begin to offer an alternative view to your own. They are the ones who will be supportive to you and your family as they offer their love and care. This is a stability much needed in a time of upset. The assurance and support of friends can overcome erosion of self worth.There will be a time of re-entry into the pulpit. 

At least there is hope and a desire for such. Yet the person who emerges from this time in the desert, will be markedly different from the one who stepped down. It is small wonder that those closest to Jesus didn’t really recognize him when he began his ministry. Anything that touches the soul in such a powerful way cannot help but change who you are.These words are but musings from a desert place, a place full of life, beauty and hope. When you are in the desert, you have to work harder to find them.

DISSENT PROTOCOL
At the 1998 Assembly of Churches in the BCOQ a motion was passed directing the Council of the BCOQ 'to establish a clear and effective procedure whereby the BCOQ as a denomination and individual BCOQ churches can publicly express their dissent regarding statements made or actions taken by the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada or the Canadian Council of Churches.' Council discussed this matter subsequently and a protocol was decided upon and published in a September 18, 1998 announcement. As far as I can determine, this protocol was posted on the BCOQ web page on December 4, 1998. One assumes that the churches and pastors not connected by e-mail or the Internet received notice of this through regular mail.
For the benefit of readers who have not received the published protocol, I repeat it here.

Protocol
1. If the BCOQ in Assembly is in disagreement with a statement or action of either the EFC or the CCC, said agreement shall be forwarded to the appropriate organization by the Executive Minister.
2. If a member congregation of the BCOQ is in disagreement with a statement or action of either the EFC or the CCC, the congregation, after the congregation votes to do so, should forward its disagreement in writing to the BCOQ Council via the Executive Minister, to be forwarded to the respective organizations, with a copy sent to our governing board representatives. The Council may add strength to the concern by adding Council action, or forwarding to Assembly action items of significant impact. Council may additionally direct the Executive Minister to take one or more of the following actions:
2.1 publicize the objection in the Canadian Baptist;
2.2 publicize the objection on the BCOQ Web page;
2.3 inform our constituency or the public

Rationale
Forwarding objections through the BCOQ Council enables the Council to note the number of 
churches expressing concern about a particular issue, thereby adding weight of numbers. The EFC and the CCC have indicated that it would be more effective for them to receive concerns from a coordinated BCOQ source, so that messages can receive the most effective attention.

Ever mindful of the status of the local congregation within the fellowship of the BCOQ, I thought it interesting and possibly informative to reflect on the published protocol. I begin with the final statement of the 'rationale' appended to the protocol, 'The EFC and CCC have indicated that it would be more effective for them to receive concerns from a coordinated BCOQ source, so that messages can receive the most effective attention.' This is a confession of an approach to the entire issue of membership in such bodies raised during the last Assembly. Who decides what the churches in the BCOQ do? Several reactions come to mind. 

First, in terms of good English usage I am not sure what 'effective attention' is. In the context in which it is used it appears that information, dissent coming from a non-coordinated BCOQ source would receive ineffective attention.

Second, and also in interest of good English usage, I am not sure what a 'coordinated BCOQ source' is. The opposite, i.e. 'uncoordinated' or 'non-coordinated' appears to be what is not recommended in the protocol. That is, dissent voiced by an individual church, or group of churches who choose, for various reasons, not to record their dissent with the Council of the BCOQ via the Executive Minister. I would suggest that this is an individual church's prerogative.
Third, and this takes us beyond the simple use of the language, to the implications behind this usage, the structure established is to dictate a procedure which takes the final decision for action away from the local congregation, and places it in the hands of the Council of the BCOQ. I use the word 'dictate' advisedly because the language of the protocol does not allow any other interpretation. The protocol does not include suggestions, or possible ways of reaction, which congregations can choose, or not. But rather states that the local congregation 'should forward its disagreement in writing to the BCOQ Council via the Executive Minister...' This is not a suggestion of a possible course of action. It is a directive.

Fourth, the publication of any dissent is left up to the decision of Council which 'may [not 'should': Ed.] additionally direct the Executive Minister to take one or more of the following actions...' The possibility is, of course, that the Council may not do any such thing.
Fifth, the means of publication also needs some comment. Three are mentioned. The Canadian Baptist, the BCOQ Web page and some general information passed on to 'our constituency or the public'.

The Canadian Baptist, as it had been known, ceased publication in November 1998. Promised as a replacement is some form of centralized information-sheet originating from the offices of the BCOQ. This is hardly a forum for debate, and is simply a one-sided pronouncement vehicle. The Web page, while useful, has very limited application. The vast majority of BCOQ Baptist believers are not linked up to the Internet and do not have access to this source of information. The third, amorphous means of informing the public or the constituency places the local congregation[s], which make up said constituency, on the same level as the general public as recipients of the information. This is, to say the very least, unsatisfactory.

A serious polity issue emerges, as does a concern about trends and tendencies within the BCOQ. The trend is towards centralization. In the final analysis, the local congregation is robbed of its unique voice if its dissent has to be subjected to the importance of the 'weight of numbers' mentioned in the protocol, the ultimate judge of which is the Executive Minister. This is unacceptable.

Editor©

BOOKFILE

Your Editor highly recommends a new commentary on the Gospel of John, a commentary with a difference. It is B.J. Malina, D.L. Rohrbaugh, Social Science Commentary on the Gospel of John (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998) ISBN 0800629922. In spite of the ungainly title this commentary offers a host of new insights into the Gospel. It approaches the text from the perspective of modern linguistics, and unravels its character as "anti-language" reflecting an "anti-community". The book is well worth the effort of reading because it treats the community of John as a 'maverick group', and it expounds the Gospel in that light. Gatherers will find it particularly helpful and challenging.

NETWATCH

Try http://www.emory.edu/CARTER_CENTER This is, as its name suggests, the address of the Carter Center, at Emroy University in Atlanta. It provides an excellent list of resources of Christian and humanitarian concern.

The United Nations Commission on Human Rights has a web page at http://.www.unhchr.ch
The University of British Columbia maintain an excellent resource on ethics. It is not from a specifically Christian perspective, but is well worth browisng. It is found at http://www.ethics.ubc.ca.

The Baptist Peace Fellowship of North America, an organization with which many Gatherers are affiliated has its web site at http://www.primeline.com/~bpfna.

http://www.helwys.com/bwim.html is the Web site of an organization called Baptist Women in Ministry. It provides moral, spiritual and financial support to women either in ministry or in training for ministry, mostly, though not exclusively in the southern United States. It has broadened its borders to include an international membership, and the organization invites interested and concerned individuals and churches to become members.

Next issue - Biblical Studies.

NOTICE OF APRIL MEETING OF GATHERING

9:00 am Coffee and check-in
9:45-10:15 Gathered for Worship
10:30-11:45 Session One

12:00-1:15 LUNCH

1:30-3:00 Session Two
3:00 Closing Worship

Cost, including lunch, $10.00 for members, $15.00 for non-members. Please let Gary and Merle Caldwell know before April 19th if you are coming.
Or 2464 Concession 2 West, R.R. 1, Lynden, ON L0R 1T0.

TRAVEL - TAKE HIGHWAY 20 TO CENTRE OF FONTHILL, GO SOUTH ON PELHAM STREET, ONE BLOCK.

MEMBERSHIP DUES FOR 1999 ARE NOW DUE. $20.00 per household. Please send cheques to Gary at the above address, and make them out to Gary Caldwell/Gathering.

Feedback can be directed to:  The Gathering Newsletter c/o Ray Hobbs e-mail ray.hobbs@sympatico.ca