whose voices? what emergence?

Linda's post Hearing Voices in Church is part of synchroblog co-ordinated by Julie Clawson, what is emerging?.

Linda says "what i am delighted to discover emerging in the church are the voices of women and people of color where their voices have historically been silenced". Julie acknowledges that the "church is far bigger than some of us might have once believed". As an African I've seen how marginal the voices of those from the global South have been in the emergent conversation, and indeed in the church. So listening to the voices of women and the 2/3rds world is overdue.

But will self styled emergents accept all those voices? Will they hear only what they want to hear? Will they hear on issues of poverty and political oppression but not on sexual morality? Will they listen to our voices on community but not on the supernatural?
One of the more cumbersome pieces of baggage which most emerging churches have dragged with them from their all too conveintly forgotten heritages is a curious blindness to the supernatural. Curious because its an anomaly, almost everyone throughout the world, and throughout human history has known about the existence of the supernatural, except for those churches most affected by Higher Criticism, either by accepting it, or by their centuries long fixation in guarding against it, and a small number of atheists who might in this light be regarded as a heresy, their peculiar beliefs only made possible by the particular form of Christianity they react against.
The emerging conversation has had very little room for talk of the supernatural. Materialism seems to be the conversations sole only philosophical pre-suppositional shibboleth. Linda is one of the few people in the conversation who will talk about the supernatural as well as justice, about the charismata and women in leadership.

So I fear that only some voices will be heard, those which confirm rather than challenge the worldview of white Northern American emergent bloggers, whether men or women.