A few
people have responded.
Richard Hall wrote about this issue of consultation:
My short answer would
be: No. Not if their pronouncements had been made for public consumption.
The value of blogging is its immediacy -- also its weakness, but that's
another issue -- and that would be lost if private consultation had to occur
before comment could be made. Of course, there's no excuse for a lack of
charity in our blogging, whether towards leaders or anyone else.
One of
Richard’s readers posted a link to
this commentary,
responding to a rebellious US church leader who has called on his critics to
apply Matthew 18:
Matthew 18, however,
has no application to a public leader and his public writings. Matthew 18
deals with personal concerns between two individuals - and is usually
conducted within the confines of a church.
Bene Diction also posted on this matter (Bene Diction’s archives don’t
seem to be working, and I have linked to the post via Google cache):
If Martin's conscience
is pricked, I think he needs to do what is best for him. However, my
attitude is mixed. If any 'leader' makes a public comment, I think it is up
for discussion, especially on blogs.
In the
comments section of Bene Diction’s website,
The Dane wrote:
We have no difficulty
voicing our displeasure with the teaching of Christian ministers like Benny
Hinn (who seem completely oblivious to the goal and direction of Scripture),
so where is the difference?...Public speech should expect (and indeed,
welcome) a public response. Of course, even proper opinion without the
temper of love is worthless at best. And there, I think, is the primary rub
in all of this. When does stern reprimand and careful warning give way to
antagonistic vitriol and bitter hostility?
Also in
Bene Diction’s comments section, the
Saint wrote:
Each of us is an
ambassador of Christ, and…in some sense we always represent each other too.
But extending grace to each other does not mean we should never admonish one
another either.
As for
me, I have decided that, at the very least, I was wrong not to have notified
the two Christian leaders whom I have particularly criticized –
Archbishop Peter
Carnley and
Rev Fred
Nile – about my comments. I did so belatedly, two weeks ago, affirming:
I am
writing to alert you to my article and to emphasise my desire to run my
website at all times in a spirit of Christian love and harmony. I would
welcome any comments you might have in response.
So far,
neither has replied. There the matter rests.
October 6th, 2003