The result of the growing investigation and critique of more prominent Emerging church leaders and their teachings could be either positive or negative.
The leaders he is referring to are the leaders of Emergent, who are described as being on the theologically liberal side of the emerging movement.
Aberrant leaders may prove humble enough to receive correction and maintain sound Christian doctrine, in which case the greater church of Jesus Christ would be best served. Or, aberrant Emerging church leaders could become more entrenched in their erroneous teachings.
While this process could be helpful, the conclusions will depend on the person judging sound doctrine and where they draw their line in the sand.
This could lead to a fracture in the evangelical church that forces a doctrinal debate similar to that of a previous generation, which also wrestled with such things as the inerrancy of Scripture, truth, sin, atonement, inability of other religions to save, women in ministry, gender roles, masculine names for God, and the nature of authority in the church.
These can be interesting discussions, if we are willing to agree to disagree. I would much rather see effort put toward identifying the essentials that we agree on, rather than debating everything else.
My fear is that these Emerging church leaders will only see their support base of new monastic community, labyrinth-walking, jolly-blogging, new kind of Christians grow...
Well, that was kind of catty.
...as the disgruntled children of evangelicalism declare heresy to be hip.
And this just isn't true. How many of you that have joined into the emerging conversation have decided that heresy is hip? Raise your hand.
Just what I thought. Nobody I know.
(You can put your hand down now.)
It would be nice if we could be taken seriously as mature Christians, who love God, scripture, and church, but have legitimate concerns about how evangelicalism in its current form is impacting the kingdom of God.