Introduction

     1. The Problem. Working with each other– this is our great challenge! We must overcome our problems with our colleagues. Many of these problems revolve around questions of authority, honor, position, and other relationships. Our reactions to these problems are crucial.

Sometimes we seem to have more problems with colleagues than with Satan– unless, of course, we acknowledge that it is Satan’s business to disrupt our harmony. One could argue that disrupting harmony among colleagues is Satan’s most effective strategy. When we face a common enemy, we usually unite and become strong!

    2. Bible Stories. At least two Bible stories have an interesting bearing on this subject, Matthew 20:20-28 and the story of Joseph in Genesis 37:1-36. Because of their relevance, these stories form the background for this lesson. We will read our text, with a focus on verse 24, and refer to Genesis 37. 

20 Then the mother of the sons of Zebedee came to Him with her sons, bowing down, and making a request of Him.

21 And He said to her, “What do you wish?” She said To Him, “Command that in Your kingdom these two sons of mine may sit, one on Your right and one on Your left.”

22 But Jesus answered and said, “You do not know what you are asking for. Are you able to drink the cup that I am about to drink?” They said to Him, “We are able.”

23 He said to them, “My cup you shall drink; but to sit on My right and on My left, this is not Mine to give, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by My Father.”

24 And hearing this, the ten became indignant with the two brothers.

25 But Jesus called them to Himself, and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them.

26 It is not so among you, but whoever wishes to become great among you shall be your servant,

27 and whoever wishes to be first among you shall be your slave;

28 just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.” (NAS)

Our attention will gather around verse 24. The disciples were very angry with James and John because these two wanted to elevate themselves above the others. Their reaction was typical of most colleagues. Quite normally, there is resistance!

    3. Preview. Our relationships with our colleagues are very important. In our lesson today, we will study prospective leaders, colleagues of leaders, pathways to leadership, and a course of action.

Prospective Leaders.

    1. The Leadership Ladder. As long as there are people who associate with each other, there will be leaders and followers– this is a fact of life. Many men and women will attempt to climb the leadership ladder. In one way or another leaders will emerge.

When prospective leaders are emerging, they may well face angry colleagues. Because of this, they do well to take a close look at what they say, when they say it, and consider how their colleagues will react. We will study Joseph as well as James and John.

    2. James and John. Let’s take a look at the story of James and John, evaluate their motives in desiring to lead, and observe the effect of their actions. All this will be instructive for us. 

• The Story. James and John were part of a peer group. This peer group included the twelve disciples (Mt. 10:2ff.; Mk. 3:13ff.; Luke 6:13ff.). Peter is always mentioned first, and Judas Iscariot is always mentioned last.
  
  This group of twelve appears to be constituted of three sub-groups. Group A included two sets of brothers, Simon Peter and Andrew, James and John, and the sons of Zebedee. Andrew lived in Bethsaida. Assuming that Salome (some say Mary Clopas) was the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, James and John were cousins of Jesus. John wrote the Gospel of John, the three epistles bearing his name, and Revelation. Group B includes Philip, who lived in Bethsaida, Bartholomew/Nathanael, who was won to Christ by Philip, Thomas, and Matthew, the publican who wrote the gospel. Group C included James (the less) the son of Alphaeus, Simon, Lebbaeus Thaddaeus/Judas, and Judas Iscariot.
  
  James and John were young and appeared to be ambitious. Already, they had achieved, along with Peter, some status among the disciples. Their group seemed to be closest to Jesus. For example, we note that Peter, James, and John were with Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration (Mt. 17:1-7). However, James and John did not have enough status that the others clearly recognized them as above them. Now, they were asking to be raised to positions of honor, authority, and power.

• Evaluation. The other disciples believed that James and John were presumptuous and inconsiderate. No doubt they felt some disdain for James and John. They felt that these two disciples wanted to exalt or, as we sometimes say, aggrandize (to make great or greater) themselves and their ministries.
  
  Although this is entirely possible, it also is possible that they were sincere in wanting to serve better, but they were unwise in knowing how to arrive at a better vantage point. The most likely conclusion, as I see it, is that their motives were somewhat mixed. In any case Jesus did not condemn them.
  
  We cannot know with certainty what motive someone else has because motives are internal. We can only observe external behavior and surmise what the motives are. We should keep this in mind when judging others.
   
• Impact. The effect, or impact, of the actions of James and John was not surprising. The result was that their colleagues were indignant. Instinctively peers react to group members who are trying to take authority.

    3. Joseph. We will follow the same approach to the story of Joseph. We will consider the story, evaluate the actions of Joseph, and observe the result of what he did. 

• The Story. Joseph was seventeen years of age when this story began (Gen. 37:1-4). He was the son of Jacob’s old age. Joseph was pasturing the flock with his brothers and would take bad reports of their activities back to their father. His father loved him more than all his brothers and gave him a multicolored coat. His brothers hated him.
  
  Then Joseph had a dream, told it to his brothers, and they hated him more (Gen. 37:5-8). In his dream they were binding sheaves in the field, and Joseph’s sheaf rose up and stood erect while the others’ sheaves bowed down to his. This caused his brothers to ask, “Are you really going to rule over us?” They hated him more.
  
  Joseph then had still another dream. The sun, moon, and stars were bowing down to him (Gen. 37:9-11). Joseph told this dream to his father and to his brothers. Because the dream indicated that Joseph’s father and mother, as well as his brothers, would bow down to him, his father rebuked him. His brothers were jealous, but his father “kept the saying in mind.”

• Evaluation. Although the text does not say so, it seems clear that the dreams were from the Lord. Joseph merely reported the facts as they were revealed to him. We are not told what Joseph’s motive was in reporting the dreams. We are told, however, how the disciples reacted. As the story unfolds, we begin to feel that Joseph was unwise in telling what he had dreamed. However, at the end of the story, we realize how much good God brought out of what appeared to be unwise actions (Genesis 50:20).

• Impact. As we have seen, the brothers of Joseph became very angry over his dreams and hated him more. They plotted against him, threw him into a pit, and sold him to some Ishmaelite traders who were passing by. They, in turn, sold him in Egypt to Potiphar, Pharaoh’s officer, the captain of the bodyguard. This was the beginning of a victorious new story which would be written! For the moment, however, the important point is that brothers sometimes become angry when one among them lets it be known that he is rising to leadership.
  
  James and John expressed their desire to lead, and Joseph reported his dreams which identified him as the leader. The result among the peers was the same– they became very angry. The Bible says that the brothers of Joseph were jealous. Jealousy is a strong and negative force. It causes much havoc in the church.
  

Angry Colleagues.

Our primary concern here is the reaction of the other disciples to James and John and of the brothers to Joseph. However, we will pause to note the reaction of Joseph’s father as well. 

1. Joseph’s Father. Jacob, who was Joseph’s father, was in a place of authority. Moreover, he very much loved his son Joseph. When Joseph told him his dream, Jacob rebuked him but “kept the saying in mind.” One wonders how often, through the years of Joseph’s absence, Jacob thought of Joseph’s dreams. He did not know, of course, what was taking place in Joseph’s life.
2. Colleagues. Now, let us consider the disciples and the brothers. The disciples “became indignant” with James and John, and the brothers of Joseph were jealous of him. To a degree, I suppose, these colleagues had a right to become angry. Many of us would have been angry too!
   However, it would appear that the motivation of the colleagues was not all that pure either. Tead states, “Feelings of jealousy toward others who may aspire to rise to the status of a leader are also encountered as subtle evidences of a desire to have self-power remain unquestioned” (215). When others rise to the top, our own status, authority, and self- esteem may be challenged. This is enough to spark anger in our hearts.
3. Evaluation. The disciples and the brothers were hot-headed. It would have been better for them to remain cool. The disciples should have trusted Jesus who would not award positions of honor to the undeserving. The brothers should have trusted Jacob who had their interests, as well as Joseph’s, at heart. Instead the colleagues took matters into their own hands. In so doing they demonstrated their own flaws.
4. Jesus. In Matthew 20:25-28 Jesus dealt with both James and John and the other disciples. He spoke to them about authority and service. Thus replying he provided a solution for all of them. We will deal with these verses in subsequent lessons.
   

Pathways to Leadership.

1. Political Processes. Although we would not follow many of the ways of the politicians in rising to leadership, it is interesting to observe the processes they follow. We do see, in some ways, the parallels in the church. Some things that politicians do are legitimate in the church.
   
   In his book, The Processes of Leadership, Titus deals with the way politicians rise to power. One, prospective leaders convert groups or clusters of people to new objectives. In doing so they take control. Two, leaders may capture an organization or country. Because they have captured the organization or country, they can control it for their own purposes. Three, leaders may create an organization for the desired purposes. The founders of an organization, at least in the early stages, maintain control. Four, when leaders cannot control an organization through others means, conditioning is the approach. Leaders attempt to condition an organization from the outside.
   
   By way of application, let’s think of pastors and people in local churches. A pastor may rise to leadership by starting a new church– creation. Another pastor may become a strong leader by converting a local church to new objectives. Sometimes pastors have been known to “capture” local churches for their own purposes. Finally, pastors and people have sought to condition churches which they did not directly lead. Each of these approaches needs to be evaluated on its own merits.

2. Ministry Promotion. Sometimes much emphasis is put on marketing one’s ministry. Some evangelists, singers, musicians, and pastors do it. Very often, the people reached by the result of marketing will accept the ministers of those advertised. To some degree this approach is acceptable. After all, unless people know who you are, what credentials you have, and what gifts God has given you, they may not be interested. The wise minister, however, will be careful. Although the people being reached will accept some promotion of this type, peers are notorious for rejecting it. When ministers overdo their promotion, they risk alienating their peers.
   
   Paul was careful on this point. He wrote to the Corinthians, “Are we beginning to commend ourselves again? Or do we need, as some, letters of commendation to you or from you? You are our letter, written in our hearts, known and read by all men; being manifested that you are a letter of Christ, cared for by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone, but on tablets of human hearts” (II Cor. 3:1).However, Paul does not exclude all communication about his ministry. After all, his letter is itself a kind of communication.
3. God’s Promotion. Many times God clearly steps in and promotes someone to a place of leadership. When He does this, He blesses the ministry of the person promoted. For example, as the children of Israel prepared to cross the Jordan, the Lord said to Joshua, “This day I will begin to exalt you in the sight of all Israel, that they may know that just as I have been with Moses, I will be with you” (Josh. 3:7). When it is obvious that God has done the promoting, people will follow.
   
   This does not guarantee, though, that one’s peers will accept your new leadership. Mark Twain said, “There’s always something about your success that displeases even your best friends.” Close friends and colleagues often will make excuses for your success. Very happily, even such dissenters are sometimes won over.

4. Election. A common way to rise to leadership is through election. In politics candidates make their desires known, present themselves in the best light, vote for themselves, and gather people around themselves to help promote them. It is doubtful anyone could win an election without doing this. Who would vote for someone who did not think he was the best candidate?
   
   In the church a different process is followed. We stress humility and promoting others. It is never wise to be seen as someone wanting a given office. As a matter of fact, many church leaders do want to be elected to certain offices, but they dare not say so. To make this public would raise the opposition of the voters. It is acceptable, however, to allow one’s name to stand in an election process. At its worst, this whole process can be subtle and somewhat deceptive. At its best, it is an unfettered way of allowing God to bring leaders into places of responsibility.

5. God’s Will. For Christian leaders knowing God’s will is the most important point. When we are certain that we are in His will, we can proceed with confidence.
   
   Wolff writes, “In order to do the will of God it is essential for each man to know his divinely-appointed sphere and limit, to use the gifts which he has received, to be a faithful steward, to trade with his talents, to recognize and to accept his God-given role, i.e. to shoulder his responsibility and to accomplish his task. Such ambition is not only legitimate, but a necessary ingredient of leadership” (10).
   

A Course of Action.

With all this in focus what must both prospective leaders and their colleagues do? It will be helpful for us to think about both groups. 

1. Potential Leaders. We have many among us who are potential leaders. Many points could be made, but here are a few which stand out in my mind.
   • Ego. All people have an ego. Prospective leaders, no doubt, have stronger egos than others. Given this, they must be careful how they express their egos. Tead said, “Broadly speaking, it is necessary that the individual’s ego be enabled to express itself in ways that will not hurt others or his relation with others” (219).
   • Criticism. Remember that some criticism will come your way. The editor of Bits and Pieces, June edition, included this note, “The late David Sarnoff of RCA once said that he was just as grateful to his enemies as he was to his friends because ‘in certain situations, a kick in the pants can send you even further along the path of progress than a friendly hand’” (June, 1973). This is a tough idea to accept, but it is true.
   • Rungs in the Ladder. Prospective leaders should not be reluctant, or afraid, to put the rungs in the ladder. By that I mean they may know where they are going, but it may take a while to get there. They may have to do many things which will qualify them for their future role. The idea of apprenticeship is to prepare people for their future roles. Sometimes, prospective leaders wish to jump from where they are straight to their full stature.
   • Help Others. The apostle Paul wrote, “Let no one seek his own good, but that of his neighbor” (I Cor. 10:24). We can apply this principle to the ministries of others. Those who would lead should help others lead. Paradoxical, perhaps, but true! We demonstrate the Spirit of Christ when we are helping others in their tasks.
   • Timing. As we have pointed out, prospective leaders must be cautious about expressing a desire for certain positions. In most cases it is better not to express their desires at all. With regard to their vision, a slightly different situation prevails. Prospective leaders must express their vision, but it is important that they have the right timing. If they express their vision too soon, they may encounter much opposition. Leaders must seek the Lord to know when, as well as what, to speak.

2. Colleagues of Leaders. We must not focus on prospective leaders alone. All of us, at times, are colleagues of leaders and, in many cases, are followers.
   • Roles. We must realize that, by God’s design, each person has his role. Some of our peers may become leaders. Even when this is difficult for us, we must accept it. We must work together for the common good. To the Corinthians Paul wrote, “For we are God’s fellow workers; you are God’s field, God’s building” (I Cor. 3:9). We do not work alone. We accept the roles of our brothers and work together with God to build His kingdom.
   • Comparison. It is wise to avoid comparisons among us. Concerning himself, Paul said, “For we are not bold to class or compare ourselves with some of those who commend themselves; but when they measure themselves by themselves, they are without understanding” (II Cor. 10:12). Similarly, in Gal. 6:4-5, he wrote, “But let each one examine his own work, and then he will have reason for boasting in regard to himself alone, and not in regard to another.”
   • Word of God. Occasionally, someone will rise to prominence whose ministry seems, to us, to be unusual and perhaps suspect. Unless the ministry is clearly wrong, we are wise to wait a while before we make a final judgment. Over time, it will become clearer whether or not the ministry faithfully aligns with the Word of God. The ultimate test of a ministry is not its apparent success or failure, but it’s harmony with God’s truth.
   • Correction. When God leads, you may correct a brother or sister in the Lord. You must be sure, however, that your own motives are right. Ordway Tead states, “Sometimes the candid friend or kindly advisor may be able to bring home to the leader the fact that his will to power has come to be his undoing. In some way he has eventually to become conscious of the fault; and by taking counsel he has to lay bare the causes or reasons why the fault has grown” (216). There are times when God calls upon us to be that candid friend.
   • Cleansing. We must ask the Holy Spirit to cleanse our own spirit. Before we say much to anyone else, we must examine ourselves. It usually takes the search light of the Spirit Himself to reveal our own flaws. All too often, our own blind spots prevent us from seeing our weaknesses.
     

Conclusion

1. Group Life. We must realize that group life involves both following and leading. This means, of course, that there will be leaders and followers. At times we may lead, and without question we will be called upon to follow.
2. Unity. Fulton J. Sheen said, “Imagine a large circle and in the center of it rays of light that spread out to the circumference. The light in the center is God; each of us is a ray. The closer the rays are to the center, the closer the rays are to one another. The closer we live to God, the closer we are bound to our neighbor.”
   
   Finally, we read in Psalm 133:1, “Behold, how good and how pleasant it is For brothers to dwell together in unity!” How much better it is for us to be united than to be angry colleagues. By God’s grace, we will unite!
   
   

For Further Study 

    Editor. “Bits and Pieces” (June, 1973).

    Tead, Ordway. The Art of Leadership. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1935.

    Titus, C. H. The Processes of Leadership. Dubuque: Wm. C. Brown, 1950.

    Wolff, Richard. Man at the Top. Wheaton: Tyndale House Publishers, 1970.

© Copyright 2002. GMF 

Translations are done by Dr. G Flattery, unless otherwise attributed.