Chookwatcher is obviously not aware of his own surroundings.

If he were he would realise that he very often adds articles that expose his own hypocrisy, forgetting that he has always written from the position of anonymity, and therefore is pathetically hidden, unaccountable, and secreted away from the kind of scrutiny he applies to others.

This, then, is the log in his eye.

In an article about calling sinners to repentance chookwatcher compares Chris Rosebrough to an Australian ministry, with Chris calling a US preacher to repentance having previously championed him, whereas the Australian ministry hasn’t yet made a blog statement about a member who was allegedly caught plagiarising material on her blog.

Now, originally, the latter had stated on their blog that they were undergoing counsel at their church under the oversight of the pastor, and this was publicly displayed for a while, then removed, possibly because faceless, nameless bloggers like the chookwatchers were taking advantage of the fact it was online.

By whose authority?

However, Chris Rosebrough wasn’t obliged, Biblically, to say anything about the minister he called to repentance, save that he had come under discipline, or needed to. Opinion and commentary are acceptable. However, as he is neither the minister’s pastor or overseer, it is not for Rosebrough to bring him to account in a public forum like his blog.

Of course, Rosebrough had previously championed this ministry as exemplary, so perhaps he had to distance himself in some way.

Neither is it incumbent on the Australian ministry to say a dickybird online about anyone they are bringing under correction. When the Word speaks of public rebuke, it is before the local church, not the whole globe including the unsaved.

Chookwatcher’s misapplication of the Word is really evident in his call for a local church pastor to publicly sanction a member on a church website. I don’t think there is any scriptural basis for this.

Chookwatcher quotes Paul as he admonishes Timothy who has been given charge of the Ephesian church.

1 Timothy 5:19-20 Do not receive an accusation against an elder except from two or three witnesses. Those who are sinning rebuke in the presence of all, that the rest also may fear.

Whose presence is he talking about here? It can only be in the presence of the elders and/or the local church. He is certainly not calling Timothy to rebuke an elder who is in error in a public forum of unsaved people like the world wide web.

And who is authorised to do this? It can only be the overseers of that assembly, or the district overseers. For so-called discernment bloggers to claim this right for themselves is a serious misrepresentation of scripture.

Rebuke your own flock

Rosebrough is a Lutheran pastor of a very small flock in the middle of the US. Let him rebuke members of that flock if he needs to, but he certainly has no authority whatsoever over anyone else’s flock.

And who is chookwatcher to claim authority over any flock in Australia? As far as can be ascertained, he doesn’t even attend a local church as a member, let alone as an elder or an overseer.

One could only surmise he is seeing himself as more than he ought. Is that a sin of which he needs to repent? Another beam to remove from his eye before he can point out the speck in another’s eye?

Romans 12:3 For I say, through the grace given to me, to everyone who is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think soberly, as God has dealt to each one a measure of faith.

And chookwatcher makes his judgments and demands repentance of people from a position of anonymity. What possible authority could he or his fellow chookwatcher entities have from this cloaked position? None, is the answer.

But here’s the thing. What if we wanted to point out similar errors or sins presented by one or more of the chookwatcher entities? Following chookwatcher’s poor, unscriptural advice and methodology we should have to write a blog entry or two, or three, calling him to repentance.

But how would anyone be able to call any of the moderators using the pseudonym ‘chookwatcher’ to account since they are too lily-livered to reveal their names, even though they publicly slate named people and ministries on their blogs?

The hypocrisy is risible.