Some describe the 2011 convention in Phoenix last week as our nadir, as in low numbers. I'd co-opt that word to describe the degeneration of a rather ho hum convention into a silly blogfest and tweetfest over a question Peter Lumpkins asked Al Mohler.
As long as I have been attending these meetings ordinary peons get to ask agency heads questions. Usually they are pablum and milk toast questions but occasionally they are pointed and tendentious questions. Every now and then a questioner will make convention attendees squirm in their seats.
Well, tough. We pay these people well into six figures. They should be able on this one occasion annually to handle these questions from the floor with grace, dignity, and without condescension and an attitude, even if a questioner is difficult. Our way of doing business at these meeting is messy. I see no reason why any of our leaders should not have the wherewithall to handle such things.
Two examples from this year:
Al Mohler’s Response to Peter Lumpkins: The Complete Video
Peter asked, OK, so it was a looooooong question. Mohler launched into an answer. Tough to see the problem here.
Thom Rainer Shows How Not to Answer Questions from Critics
I haven't see the Rainer video.
I think the SBC will survive questions to the leaders. We may not survive the tweeting and blogging absurdities, rancor, and venom that follows.