I DON’T REMEMBER how old she was when we had the conversation — perhaps in her early teens. She knew that as a professor I help train Christians to be family therapists, and told me that she was thinking of being a therapist herself someday. Curious, I asked her why; what was it about being a therapist that she found attractive? She didn’t even have to think about it. Without hesitation and in a very matter-of-fact tone of voice, she said, “Because I like telling people what to do.”

Maybe that’s not quite what she meant. Maybe she meant something more like, “Because I like being able to give advice that helps people.” But I appreciated her complete candor. “You know,” I replied playfully, “you don’t have to be a therapist to tell people what to do. You can just be a mom.”

And now, she is (and a good one at that).

THERE ARE MANY people, of course, who like telling others what to do, who like being large and in charge. The question is why. The best leaders are the ones who inspire loyalty by adapting their leadership style to the situation and to the people on their team. They can be decisive and take charge when there’s a crisis. But in calmer times, they tend to be good listeners who seek and value wise input. They influence others by being people of good character, and often use the power of their organizational position to empower others as they work together toward shared goals.

The worst leaders, however, inspire fear instead of loyalty. Often, they make decisions unilaterally, and expect to be obeyed without question. Indeed, anyone who tries to voice different ideas is treated as ignorant or insubordinate, and may be punished.

Why such a domineering style? If the truth be told, they may have a deep need to be the alpha — whether they recognize it or not. Controlling others gives them a sense of security or significance, and they react defensively to anything that threatens that sense of control.

Think of the bosses and supervisors you’ve had. Each of them held positions of power over others. But chances are, the ones you enjoyed working for the most wore that mantle of power lightly, while the ones you enjoyed least…well, you get the picture. And the same thing is true of Christian organizational environments. This isn’t just a modern phenomenon. Sad to say, as John’s letters suggest, this has been a problem since the earliest days of the church.

IT’S IMPOSSIBLE TO know, at a historical distance of two thousand years, the exact situation that forms the backdrop to 3 John. As we’ve seen, John writes to his friend Gaius to encourage him to keep being a man of loving hospitality who supports people doing the work of the gospel even if they’re strangers to him. We might think of the situation described in Luke 10 when Jesus sent 36 pairs of disciples to go ahead of him into the places he was about to visit. The 72 were to rely on the hospitality of others, staying in their homes and eating the food they were given. This is what Gaius was doing for the people sent out by the apostle John. In so doing, he honored both John and the gospel.

But if Gaius is such a great guy, why does he need a letter of encouragement? Because there is pressure — possibly direct pressure — from a man from Diotrephes for Gaius to refuse hospitality to John’s emissaries. Here’s what John says:

I wrote to the church, but Diotrephes, who loves to be first, will not welcome us. So when I come, I will call attention to what he is doing, spreading malicious nonsense about us. Not satisfied with that, he even refuses to welcome other believers. He also stops those who want to do so and puts them out of the church. (3 John 9-10, NIV)

“I wrote to the church,” John says. Is he referring to 2 John? As I suggested in an earlier post, it may be that Diotrephes read 2 John and took exception to it somehow. Perhaps he disagreed with John theologically. Perhaps he thought John was being too high-handed in saying that the secessionists were wicked people who should be turned away. Perhaps he had already received the secessionists into his home, and was therefore embarrassed when 2 John arrived later.

Whatever the case, for whatever reason, Diotrephes has retaliated against John. These verses are filled with Greek words that are unique in the New Testament to this letter alone. For example, Diotrephes refuses to “welcome” or give a proper reception to John or the people he sends. He also “spreads malicious nonsense” about them.

That doesn’t necessarily mean that Diotrephes is engaging in an intentional and well thought out smear campaign. John’s wording can describe someone who babbles baseless but hurtful accusations — the way we might when we prattle on angrily without thinking. John tells Gaius that when he comes, he’ll put a stop to that kind of gossip — not, presumably, because John wants to rescue his own reputation, but because Diotrephes is undermining the cause of the gospel with his vengeful behavior and careless words.

We don’t know who Diotrephes was. He was apparently someone with power in the community: the power to stop others from opening their homes to traveling Christians, the power to kick people out of the church if they did so — indeed, even if they only wanted to do so. He had doubled down on his enmity toward John by refusing hospitality to believers in general, and John, of course, had heard of it. This doesn’t mean that Diotrephes had some formal position of institutional power. It may simply mean that he was the leader of a house church, and therefore had the power to shut people out of his home.

But his influence, apparently, spread beyond that, possibly through his ranting and gossiping about John. Gaius may well have been directly associated with Diotrephes’ house church, or may have hosted a house church of his own. To have homes large enough to host such meetings meant that both men were comparatively well-to-do, men of social standing. Would Gaius put that standing at risk for the sake of the gospel, or cave to the pressure of the rumor mill? That’s the tension behind John’s letter.

Why did Diotrephes do all this? John says it’s because he “loves to be first.” That’s a literal translation of John’s word, which only appears this one time in the New Testament. It describes someone who seeks social prominence or to be in a position of power and control. Diotrephes, it seems, enjoys being the alpha and is not afraid to throw his weight around.

Such people can exist in any community or organization, and sometimes find their way into church or congregational leadership. They use power in self-serving ways even as they claim that everything they do is for the cause of Christ. Recognizing that this was the case even from the days of the New Testament itself might help us — I hope! — to be sober and realistic about the temptations of leadership. Those who “love to be first” should remember the words of Jesus: the first shall be last.