Andrew,

It seems to me that what you’ve done is define your own personal theology and slapped on the label “emerging church”. Maybe you are somehow the “owner” of the movement and you can do that but it doesn’t seem genuine. That would be convenient but is not much different from drawing a new denominational box to fit your own needs. Protestants have been doing that for a long time now. I agree with many aspects of your theology and find more synergy with you than with many others, but I feel the point of the emerging church is to STOP doing that very thing and begin creating harmony among people with a variety of theological views. The box you’ve drawn may be bigger or a little more inclusive, but you still have the mentality that certain particular views are excluded. That will just lead to another denomination (or several more).

The most potent effect of the emerging church has been to open up conversations between people of contrasting theological views. If the result is to declare a new winner or meld into one new category then it will have failed.

To pick up on your metaphorical language, I would say that the ancient tree of biblical narrative is justice and it grows as it spreads through the development of the kingdom of God on Earth. Its juicy fruits are the many various applications, beliefs, rituals, art, music, and customs of many different faith traditions. Even though each variety of fruit has its own unique flavor, the core substance of the tree is the development of loving, peaceful and just families, communities and nations (i.e. social justice). If you spend all your energy fighting about which fruit tastes the best, then you’ve wasted the opportunity to bear more fruit and deliver that fruit to more people. I think that is what the emerging church stands for.