Darren

Thank you for a very reasoned and sympathetic assessment. I have just added your site to my "favourites" bookmark so you may be hearing from me a little bit.
I am very much involved in the Emerging Church/Fresh Expressions of Church movement in Liverpool UK,and I have to say that my I ally myself with your analysis that "This movement has more to do with raising questions about authenticity, doing church in some innovative ways, and being missional than trying to rewrite some of the faith's doctrines". Absolutely spot on. I don't want to rewrite church doctrine, but at the same time I do not accord church doctrine the same syatus as I accord the Bible itself. As a result I feel it must be subjected to just as rigorous anlaysis and debate as the restating of some doctrines by the emerging church movement are. Also is doctrinal theology always meant to be static/set in stone, or is there fluidity, room for re-evaluation, re-interpretation, repositioning even, given the seismic shifts that sometimes take place in the cultural landscape.

"Before we go challenging theological expression hammered out over centuries of reflection, let us take pause to see that sometimes theological propositions do matter and do well summarize key themes in Scripture." Again I largely agree but given that theological expression has been "hammered out", and given the numerous fallouts amongst theologians throughout church history, if a doctrine rings true is it not essential for it to be able to satnd up to the most serious challenge and the most robust of interrogations? If a doctrine does not adequately stand up to such scrutiny,
should we be a) adopting it ourselves, or b) teaching/advising/encouraging others to adopt/embrace/defend it also?

"The emerging church experiments and questions in a congregational context. There are questions that I would raise in a scholarly context that I would never share with my congregation. It is high price to be paid if you teach the wrong thing to a church."

Yes Stephen, I agree that it is, but surely problems occur when church leaders/teachers only engage with their fellow scholars/academics and don't engage with their congregations, or worse, sometimes don't understand the contexts in which their congregations live and move in once they step foot outside of the church building. Also how often do teachers/leaders seek their congregations' feedback on the stance that they are adopting on a particular issue. ie what does it feel like to sit under some of this teaching? It's not just about biblical truth, but is it helpful, is it taught in an engaging way, is it at the appropriate leve lie is it going over people's heads), is it relevant etc. These are the areas where I feel the emerging church has much to teach the more established churches.. It can be a high price to pay to teach the right thing in the wrong way, inappropriate style/context etc.

The other danger here is to assume that our congregations are not theologically astute at best, or theologically illiterate at worst. There are some very sharp, exceptionally shrewd people with enquiring minds in our congregations who often have burning issues/questions which are either never addressed, or they feel they are not allowed to ask for appearing to be "unsound" and not in accordance with the revered doctrinal stance of the church.

..and Craig..I agree with you wholeheartedly. Very well put.

Looking forward to conversing with you all in future.