Hard Cases: Church "outs" an anonymous blogger

It is not unusual for someone to have a problem with the leadership of their local church. Leaders - including pastors and elders/overseers/trustees/deacons/etc. - make mistakes or often are doing the right thing and simply not explaining themselves. My own church has been moving from a pure Congregational model to a more closed model in a way which has been disturbing to me. Scripture has fairly clear guidelines for dealing with such concerns, which generally goes, "talk to the problem person singly, then with one other person, then with the elders, and then before the Congregation." (Yes, Seminarians, I am aware there are many more verses and a whole history here. Feel free to expound in the comments.)

But what happens when a church dispute comes up against anonymous blogging? Should church leaders honor the unspoken agreement of the internet and let the blogger remain unknown? Isn't such a move in line with First Amendment rights of free speech? Or should church leaders seek out the blogger and discipline him/her for not following scripture.

In the case linked above, church leadership erred on the side of control and had a police officer (who also worked church security) seek out and expose the blogger. The blogger was then expelled from the church, as per 1 Corinthians 5:4-5.

To me, this seems like a hard case. On the one hand, the blogger clearly was not following scripture. On the other hand, it appears the pastor himself - in his zeal to discipline - clearly crossed the line to find the offender. Either way, Christ's name is being dragged through the mud, and the gospel becomes a laughing-stock among the world.

What would you do, as either the pastor or the congregant?

Are we ready to end Internet anonymity?

Ever since the "Web" went public and stopped being DARPANET, there has been an ongoing debate over the assumption of anonymity that is implicit in the web. The structure and standards of the web promote anonymity, which as lead to an explosion of creativity, free speech, and free thought on the Net which is nearly unimaginable in the real world. The Web is where you can badmouth your employer without being fired, give an honest critique of a book or movie without fear of being personally attacked by the author, and where you can leak documents critical to public safety without fear of your identity being immediately known.

But the Web has also become a place where sex predators can stalk children without fear of being caught, where a 50-year-old man can pretend to be a teenage boy and ruin the life of a teenage girl, or where anonymous bullies can drive a teenager to suicide.

Kentucky Representative Tim Couch thinks it is time to end internet anonymity in order to bring back responsibility and protect minors. But such an action would also effectively end many of the advantages of the Web as seen in whistleblowers being free to tell us what we need to know. Is Rep. Couch right, or are we throwing out the baby with the bathwater?

Honestly, I think this would be a revealing issue to raise in the new debate in the Presidential campaign.