Leaders within the Energent Church have written a response that you may read here. In a way, it reminds me of the early church striving to define orthodoxy. The Christians are dealing with various persecutions and spreading the message and all of a sudden, this Marcion character shows up and says that the God of the OT isn’t the real God. He can prove it with a few of Paul’s letters he collected, bound together with the Gospel of Luke. Most of the other Christians didn’t have more than one or two letters, if they had any at all.

In the same way they had to define what was orthodox by criticism and heresy, it seems the ec is now doing the same.

I was quite happy to see a thoughtful, well-written response. I was also encouraged by several nods to the traditional Christian faith. As someone that was duped by a church that believed it had all the answers, it was refreshing to read humility in responding to critics.

I ask that if you will, engage me in conversation. I have a few questions and I would like to know what you think. Yes, I call the ec the Church of the English Majors. I do so because my previous attempts at conversation left me feeling like I was discussing litearary theory, not Jesus Christ. I have an English Literature degree, so I am affected by this reference. I also believe that I meet many of the aspects of the English major stereotype. I have no problem making fun of myself and taking myself less seriously.

I should be fair and tell you that I am feeling things from the emergent response that may not have been intended. I come from a church that does not take kindly to criticism. Members were encouraged to stay away from critics and even the internet as a whole because it would damage your faith. Someone that was a critic was labelled as bitter or slanderous and quickly dismissed. I have been hurt very badly because I joined a church that wanted to make a difference in the world. I joined because I wanted to help people and not argue over doctrine. Instead, I got abused, manipulated, and minimized because I did not conform to the characteristics of an ideal member. So far in my attempts, I have received similar treatment. I feel like if I do not use ec specific words and phrases and if I do not go along with 90% of what is proposed, that I am labelled as unworthy of dialogue. I honestly want to feel differently and will be fair in my dialogue. Please engage me.

Here are my questions:

Fourth, we respect the desire and responsibility of our critics to warn those under their care about ideas that they consider wrong or dangerous, and to keep clear boundaries to declare who is “in” and “out” of their circles. These boundary-keepers have an important role which we understand and respect. If one of your trusted spiritual leaders has criticized our work, we encourage you, in respect for their leadership, not to buy or read our work, but rather to ignore it and consider it unworthy of further consideration. We would only ask, if you accept our critics’ evaluation of our work, that in fairness you abstain from adding your critique to theirs unless you have actually read our books, heard us speak, and engaged with us in dialogue for yourself. Second-hand critique can easily become a kind of gossip that drifts from the truth and causes needless division.

If I believe that certain ideas of the ec are wrong, am I a ‘boundary-keeper’ interested in who is ‘in’ or ‘out’ of a circle? I do not believe it is possible to draw a solid boundary to who is in or out. When asked, Jesus replied that the questioner should worry about their own soul.

Fifth, because most of us write as local church practitioners rather than professional scholars, and because the professional scholars who criticize our work may find it hard to be convinced by people outside their guild, we feel it wisest at this juncture to ask those in the academy to respond to their peers about our work. We hope to generate fruitful conversations at several levels, including both the academic and ecclesial realms. If few in the academy come to our defense in the coming years, then we will have more reason to believe we are mistaken in our thinking and that our critics are correct in their unchallenged analyses.

If I believe in the need for professional scholars, does that give me membership into the guild?

We regret that some of our critics have made hasty generalizations and drawn erroneous conclusions based on limited and selective data. We would welcome future critics to converse with us directly and to visit our churches as part of their research. Of course, they would find weaknesses among us, as they would among any group of Christians, including their own. But we believe that they would also find much to celebrate and find many of their suspicions relieved when they see our high regard for the Scriptures, for truth, for worship, for evangelism, for spiritual formation, and for our fellow Christians – including our critics themselves.

I am not trying to be obtuse, but how many folks do I need to engage in conversation? Two? Seven? Twenty-three? I did not know you existed until two months ago. I cannot afford the books, but I have read blogs by Brian McLaren, information of emergentvillage.com, trying to engage in conversation, etc. When have I read enough to ask a question?

With millions suffering from hunger, disease, and injustice around the world, we hope that all of us – including our critics – can renew our commitment to “remember the poor” (Galatians 2:10) rather than invest excessive energy in “controversies about words.” “They will know you are my disciples,” Jesus said, not by our excessive disputation, but by our love. Words and ideas are essential, for they often set the course for thought and action, and constructive dialogue is needed and worthwhile, but we cannot let less productive internal debates preoccupy us at the expense of caring for those in need.

If I seek to understand by presenting my viewpoint, am I neglecting the poor? If I go and give all my possessions to the poor, can I then present my case and ask questions?

Do I really have to agree with the ec on many points before we can enter a conversation? Can’t I become convinced over time or do I have to believe in advance?

Thank you for your time.