2009-8-21 11:56:00
Dan wrote:
"I have been thinking about this and trying to sort of project myself into a scenario where I was wanting to join some particular Zionic or Molecular project initiated by someone (other than me).
"I realized that I would have severe misgivings about investing any significant time, money, labor in something where someone else has total autonomy (absolute final say). Especially without some pretty specific and detailed limitations on that authority up front in the form of some kind of detailed and specific binding contracts."
JJ:
Even though the Molecular Relationship excites my readers more than any other it seems that most still do not understand how leadership works within it.
I would suggest members read two sections. First: Molecular Principles.
Secondly, there is an except from my book The Molecular Relationship that should be helpful. I would suggest members read Chapter 26 - Leadership In The Molecule.
The Molecule will be the first organization on the planet wherein leadership will operate entirely by the bottom-up principle wherein there will be no appointments. Its efficiency is destined to become "an ensign to the nations."
Free elections, however, only take us half way toward truly effective leadership. What good does it do us to elect a good leader if he has no power of decision? What good is it if we have a George Washington or an Abraham Lincoln leading us if we tie his hands and do not let him lead? In the Molecular Order the leaders are free to lead and have full power to make decisions for their stewardship. This immediately, with one master stroke, eliminates much of the sluggishness that exists in organizations today.
Do not get the idea that the Molecular Leader is a dictator who has power to boss people around. As Jesus pointed out, the Molecular leader is not a dictator, but a servant:
"And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors. But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve. For whether is greater, he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth? is not he that sitteth at meat? but I am among you as he that serveth." (Luke 22:25-27)
He also said: "he that is greatest among you shall be your servant." (Matthew 23:11)
Examples of "servant leaders" are George Washington and Abraham Lincoln. Examples of "you-serve-me leaders" are Hitler and Napoleon. The first seeks to serve the people; the second seek the people to serve him.
In the Molecule all leaders are forced to have their attention on service because their position can be taken by a more worthy member at any time. Nevertheless, this does not mean that they have to get the group's permission on every little item of business they handle. One of the main purposes of the Molecule is to streamline effectiveness and encourage the power of initiation.
The Christ did not ask for permission from The Twelve for every decision He made. Instead, He made many decisions on His own initiative which were designed to increase His ability to serve. Even the servant must have power to do his job without getting permission for every little detail, or else he will not be an effective worker. If the servant has a job watering horses, and the day is hotter than usual, then the good servant would naturally increase the amount of water, even if the master's permission is not available. Indeed, it is understood that the master expects the servant to use his best wisdom to insure the health of the horses. If the servant uses poor judgment and the horses die, then the servant will be dismissed, but if he keeps them healthy then the master cares not how he does his job.
Many groups cannot seem to understand this point. They seem to think that no decision can ever be made without endless group discussion. They would let the horses die for lack of water in favor of endless debate. They are so afraid of an individual decision that they allow no one the power to serve.
Not so in the Molecular Order. The leader is indeed a servant, but he also has power to serve, and power to serve only. The moment he begins to exercise unjust authority the group will be offended and replace him.
A little realized fact is that a group decision reflects, not the highest intelligence of the group, but the average intelligence of the group. Molecular decisions are to reflect the highest intelligence of the group by allowing the freedom of the individual to exercise his initiative.
Leaders in the Molecule, therefore, have power to serve their group to the best of their ability and, if a decision has to be made at a time when the group is not available for discussion, he has power to make it. Normally, however, he will present all important business to Molecular members, for if he does not get their input and participation, he is likely to be challenged and replaced.
If the leader sees a direction that he feels is good, but the group may reject, it will be his duty to teach the group the logical principles behind the idea. He will encounter difficulties with his ability to lead if he loses the support of his group.
Therefore he should look on other members as his brothers and counselors and include them as much as possible in all major decisions. On small decisions the group should trust their leader to have sufficient intelligence to deal with them, thus saving both the leader and the group much small talk.
For example, I have been a salesman most of my life and have found I would much rather sell to the small business owner than to a large company. In a large company you often have to present the product to three or four leaders before you can find the person you need to talk to; then, he will often report that he has to present the idea to some committee. If you then call back a month later they will usually have shelved the product and tell you to call again later or ask for additional information.
When the small business owner is approached by a salesman, he states right away whether or not he is interested. Neither the salesman or the owner's time is wasted and both can get on with their work. Every salesman appreciates the efficiency of a company where there is one individual who can say yes or no.
In the Molecular Order there is always a person who can say yes or no. The leader always has power of decision for his stewardship.
One may be alarmed at this and ask if this cannot lead to dictatorial powers, where the rights and input of the individual are abused. This is an important consideration, for in top-down governments, the power of authority is always abused; but not so in the bottom-up governments. In the Molecular Order, any leader who does not operate in the best interests of the majority will be challenged and replaced through the election process. Therefore, if the leader wants to keep his position, he must not lord himself over others, but consider their feelings, ideas, and opinions.
Because the leader must keep his stewardship happy to remain in power, he will have a natural desire to keep his organization as democratic as possible. He will find he must present every major decision that comes up to the group and receive their input. If the group disagrees with him, then his job is to guide the group to a decision that all can be happy with and support. If someone who is not in a leadership position comes up with an idea or project, it is to be heard with full consideration.
The two primary jobs of the leader are:
If the leader uses his authority and makes major decisions without taking the group's feelings and thoughts into consideration, then he will be quickly corrected by the outcry of the people. If he makes this mistake a number of times, he will be challenged for leadership and replaced.
Nevertheless, the leader must be trusted with some decision-making powers or we will merely have an organization like all others that are sluggish and with no power of movement. This will be left up to the leader's discretion. It is too difficult here to draw a black-and-white line. We do not need to do this. The group will do it for him. Thus, it is important that the leader tune into the consciousness of his stewardship and judge for himself where the line is.
Soul confirmation will be sought on major decisions and, hopefully, oneness can always be reached. If it is not, it means that some (or all) members are out of harmony with the Soul. If oneness cannot be reached and there is lack of oneness, then the leader may seek for a majority vote on the problem. If the majority approves on the side of the leader, then the whole group should consider the decision as made. Those not in agreement may not want to support the project and should not be forced to participate in something against their desires, but they should at least cease opposing it. At this point we should remember the maxim: "Lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way."
If the majority go against the leader after Soul confirmation has been sought (and this should be a rare occurrence) then the leader should try to adjust the plan so it is acceptable to the majority and seek an answer on this. If he is unable to get the group to support him and he believes the will of the majority runs contrary to the Hierarchy in this case, he must again do all in his power to teach the correct principles to the group and seek Soul confirmation with them. The leader (as with all of us) must follow the light of his Soul, and revelations confirmed by his Soul, even without majority support.
If the time comes that the leader does not receive majority support, a crisis will certainly appear. First it must be recognized that no person is infallible, but the Soul is always to be trusted. If the leader has indeed received Soul confirmation, then the right decision has been made. If he is going by the light of the personality, then he could be wrong. Those in the group who have not received Soul confirmation will be at the whims of personality discretion as to whether the leader is correct. They will have no way of knowing if he is following the Soul or the personality. In this case, all they can do is sit back and let the leader take those who support him and pursue the goal. Time will tell if he is right or not.
If the leader proves to be correct, then those who disagreed with him should question their own ability to be open-minded, and seek with greater sincerity to obtain Soul Contact so they can support the next endeavor and make the success even greater.
If the leader proves to be incorrect, and those who disagreed with him believe that they can do better, then they should challenge his leadership and replace him with someone more sensitive to Soul Contact.
Copyright © 2009 by J.J. Dewey, All Rights Reserved