I’m fascinated by this passage in John’s third letter. It’s one of those you might fly right by…unless the Spirit gives you a nudge that there’s something there for you.
“I have written something to the church, but Diotrephes, who likes to put himself first, does not acknowledge our authority. So if I come, I will bring up what he is doing, talking wicked nonsense against us. And not content with that, he refuses to welcome the brothers, and also stops those who want to and puts them out of the church.” (vv 9-10).
Already? Jesus left the disciples with the Holy Spirit just a few decades earlier, and here’s a man who seems to be of some authority within a church but “who likes to put himself first.” Amazingly, he doesn’t even acknowledge the authority of John. John. The guy who wrote this:
“That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we looked upon and have touched with our hands, concerning the word of life—the life was made manifest, and we have seen it, and testify to it and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was made manifest to us—that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you…” (1 Jn 1:1-3)
John walked with Jesus himself. He was “the disciple whom Jesus loved.” He sat right next to him at the last supper. He was filled with the Holy Spirit at Pentecost and walked with Peter when the beggar was healed at the gate of the temple in the earliest days of the Church.
And this Diotrephes says, “Who is this guy that should we listen to him” (not to mention the “wicked nonsense” he was spouting). On top of that, he not only refused to welcome fellow Christians, but used his authority as a leader to put those who wanted to welcome them out of the Church.
What’s this then? The Church falling apart so soon? A mere 60 years after the resurrection? We know from history this is not the case, but I’m not drawn by the history here — I want to go how this passage is such an encouragement.
We know Christianity is far from perfect. Those who have claimed the name of Christ have done horrible things with that name (although I would contend they are/were never truly Christians). They’ve condoned slavery, tortured and murdered, stolen from the poor to fill their coffers and fly their jets — the exact opposite of how they were called by Christ. And naturally, people throughout history (especially today) have pointed to this behavior and said, “See? This is your Christ?”
Still, it’s not like there isn’t an accounting for this. Paul does it to Jewish leaders in Romans 2 when he says, “But if you call yourself a Jew and rely on the law and boast in God and know his will and approve what is excellent, because you are instructed from the law; and if you are sure that you yourself are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of children, having in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth— you then who teach others, do you not teach yourself? While you preach against stealing, do you steal? You who say that one must not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? You who boast in the law dishonor God by breaking the law. For, as it is written, ‘The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.’” This most certainly applies to those of the Christian faith. The third commandment isn’t just about saying a “naughty word,” it’s also (I would go so far as to say mostly) about bringing discredit on God’s name by how we act.
But I’m encouraged, because it’s clear that this isn’t just something recent, no matter how down we might be on things these days. From the beginning, the Church has had its share of blasphemers — even in positions (maybe especially in positions) of authority. The Church has been a mess from the first century, but that doesn’t detract from its foundation. Christ set it upon his authority. He commanded us to make disciples around the world, teaching his teachings. And nowhere in his teachings does he condone power-hungry self-centeredness…exactly what Diotrephes represented even as a “leader” in the Church. John’s first epistle goes on extensively about hating the world, loving others, and obeying God. Still, it’s not as simple as it sounds. As a matter of fact, there is ample evidence that it’s impossible to do that perfectly. And here we see it from the very start.
In the end, we don’t know what happened to Diotrephes. I can only hope he got straightened out. But his lesson is important. We should not be discouraged, nor cowed into meekness by criticism of a Church that has made plenty of mistakes. We should understand that everything here on earth is corrupted — especially by our human nature. But we cannot simply accept this, hunker down, and let it behavior that discredits the Church go unchecked. John himself says, “if I come, I will bring up what he’s doing.” John’s going to address the issue, and he’ll probably do it with something like what he said in his second epistle: “Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God” (look out Diotrephes — you don’t want to be in that place). John’s gonna handle it.
As should we — acknowledging the criticism, but not allowing it to run roughshod over the truth. And it’s that truth upon which we should stand — not on the lies of the world, nor on the discouragement of the world’s scorn. You may not see it, but that is my lesson of Diotrephes.
