This specific instance aside, however, what I see is a more and more marked deviation from foundational preaching and biblical education, with the casting aside of the ‘full council of God’ in presenting the Gospel, all in the name of inclusive growth.

I see this as significant error.

Your are correct that there is a core, essential doctrine & belief that is required for a living, functioning, Christ-headed church. The Word is absolutely necessary, and if any kind of growth is to occur will be (increasingly) present.

That said, believers are too quick to put their pet preferences into the necessary catagory. A missions group I am aware of made the observation that the apostles’ requirement for saving belief was the fact of the finished work of Jesus to reconcile with God. They take this to mean (for example) that a saving belief does not of necessity start with accepting a trinitarian view of the Godhead - that is the job for the Church to teach as the new born comes along in the faith. They do expect that the Spirit will make Trinity clear in due time, of course - the key is that the new believer call only on the name of Jesus to become right with God. I was a little surprised when I first read that; they do have a record serving in very hostile places which leaves me unwilling to write the observation off.

The problem with things like catechism is that it is too often a reflection of the current polical climate, both in and outside the church. For an example, consider infant baptism. Jesus did command baptism, and went into the Jordan first. The church then decided that sooner was better than later. Many centuries on, Luther wasn’t as keen on infant baptism as are modern Luthereans (among others). He also didn’t think that it was worth splitting the church over it. Coming from a decided Protestant background, I think that the infant baptism is a none starter, a large error. Yet I don’t see why someone whose earthly father raised him in this tradition is of necessity outside of the kingdom. (I’m not suggesting you do, by the way - I’m trying to say that the number of basic beliefs that cannot be traded away is probably smaller than I think and or like, because God is a whole lot bigger than me.)

As a body we need to be willing and able to take other parts of the body as they are now, and build into their growth as they build into ours. I think this was the point of the message; I’m not sure how to add the “keep all the important bits” without distracting from what was supposed to be the key point of the message. (Then again, my skills at communication are easily demostrated to be lacking…)

A pastor in Victoria (while I was doing my Master’s, and so didn’t “need” to take notes because it was all so easily remembered ) observed that in every church there is a sprinkling of emphasis among the members. He had 4 “legs,” if you will: some who were very concerned about correct doctrine, some who were very concerned with showing the faith through good works, plus two others that I should have written down… The point was that the church needs all of these traits. Those who focus on reaching out are often prone to sluff over the core doctrine; those who focus on core doctrine are often prone to making life unbearable for anyway who sees things differently. The body only grows when all in it do their bit to help the others in the body do what God made them to do correctly. Sort of a team thing.

I really hope this rambling makes some sense…