In the last three weeks, at least two different semi-private emails have been leaked to prominent bloggers. The first was an exchange involving a number of people, myself included, regarding the wording of the Yarnell-Barber Resolution on Regenerate Church Membership. A couple dozen folks were involved in the discussion, and there was some give-and-take (as is the case with all consensus statements), but in the end almost every person involved in the discussion publicly endorsed the resolution. The plot thickened, however, when someone sent at least portions of those exchanges to Wade Burleson, who highlighted the give-and-take aspect of the discussions on his blog.

About ten days ago, New Orleans Seminary provost Steve Lemke sent an email to his faculty. The purpose of the email was to inform his faculty about the Yarnell-Barber Resolution. Someone leaked that email to Paul Littleton, who has blogged about it today at SBC Outpost. According to Paul, the email contained some critical remarks about Tom Ascol, who of course has proposed a Resolution on Integrity in Church Membership for the third year in a row. Paul also raises some interesting questions about honesty, which will no doubt make for some vigorous discussion in the comments section over the next day or two.

No doubt some will respond to these two events by bemoaning the fact that Wade and Paul would publish this material. After all, neither of them were included in the original emails, hence the “semi-private” nature of the correspondence. Others will complain about the unknown (at least to me) individuals who forwarded these emails on to Wade, Paul, and who knows who else. One of the complaints some have had about Wade’s blog for over two years is that he makes public what ought to be left private. Wade responds by noting that relatively few things should remain private because SBC agencies serve all Southern Baptists and that interested Baptists deserve to know what’s happening at their CP-funded institutions.

I am not interested in either defending or criticizing Wade, Paul, or the individual(s) who forwarded them the items of correspondence referenced above (or any other correspondence). They have each one made their decisions for their reasons. Besides, there are plenty of others who will either excoriate them or call them blessed because they have chosen to make information like this available to the wider public, or at least that portion of the public that reads SBC-focused blogs. Instead, I want to speak to the new reality that has been ushered in by the blogs.

Take note, my fellow Southern Baptists: there are no more secrets. At least not many. From the denomination’s inception, the SBC has been influenced by a Group of individuals who possessed both the ministry platfrom and the desire to help direct the general trajectory of the SBC. The Group has changed over time–people come and go, after all. The ministry platforms have changed–the leading churches of 1867 are not necessarily the leading churches of 2008, while the institutions and boards of 1885 have expanded into the institutions and boards of 2008. The theologies have changed–the mostly consistent Calvinism of 1850 gave way to the atheological pragmatism and progressivism of 1960 that was replaced by the more broadly conservative and relatively revivalistic theology of 2008. And regardless of lifetime, platform, and theology, the Group is always in flux; simply stated, not every engaged Baptist leader cares about every issue of their era. But there has always been a Group, which may or may not be a bad thing, depending upon the convictions and practices of the particular Group in question.

Modern technology played a critical role in the Group’s transformation into a conservative body. Many of the pastors and professors and missionaries who would later become the current manifestation of the Group used computer mailing lists, conference calls, and airport conference rooms to help facilitate a grassroots movement to replace the then-Group with a new Group. Mission accomplished. Once emails came along, the Group was able to communicate almost instantaneously, effortlessly contract and expand for each given issue, and keep Group members informed about priorities, policies, and potential problems.

Flash forward to 2005 or so, and technology began to play a critical role in the undermining of the Group. Message boards had already tilled the soil, as it were, because information was disseminated on discussion threads that was once relegated to water cooler chats, annual meeting dinner and lunch recesses, and seminary cafeteria gossip. Then some of the message boarders (and many others) began to use their blogs to help communicate their concerns to anyone with a RSS feed or a “Favorites” function on their web browser. The information communicated was a mixed bag. Some of it included legitimate scoops, creating a sort of shadow-media that worked alongside (and often outdid) Baptist Press and Associated Baptist Press. Some of it was insightful commentary. Some of it was less insightful. Some of it was pure gossip and hearsay. Some of it was possibly gossip and hearsay. Some of it was probably not gossip and hearsay. Some of it was revolutionary, some of it was anarchy, some of it was cyber-cronyism, and some of it was heart-breaking. And that was just last month.

The point is, whether helpful, unhelpful, or likely both, blogs have undermined (though not eliminated) the Group’s ability to work behind the scenes to influence the direction of the convention. There are almost no secrets anymore. The world always finds out, and if it hasn’t happened yet, trust me, it will. This should offer a word of warning to anyone who is in a high-profile position within the convention. (The same warning could be applied to pastors of local churches.) People are always watching. They are always listening. Every misspoken word will be recorded. Every fleshly moment will be found out. Every secret decision will come to light. Every hidden sin will be discovered. Every closed-door debate will be let out into the open. In some of these cases, it will be a bad thing when the cat is let out of the bag; it is a fact that not every secret is nefarious and not every closed-door debate is insidious. But sometimes it will be a good thing, if for no other reason than the ongoing sanctification of the one who must now be careful concerning what he says and does behind closed doors. Because all of the doors are now made of glass.

So watch your life, your doctrine, and your email exchanges–somebody is always watching. And even if some secrets manage to slide pass the blogo-police who are always on patrol, remember that there is One who sees all, and pleasing Him is infinitely more important than maintaining whatever meager amount of influence any of us may presume to wield in the Southern Baptist Convention. May the very presence of blogs remind us to allow God’s Word to shine its gospel spotlight into the deepest recesses of each of our hearts, exposing our sin, convicting us of our transgressions, and conforming us to the image of the One who gave his life for us.