John Smulo recently interviewed John Morehead on the synergies (or traditional lack thereof) between mission and apologetics in post-modern western cultures:
Unfortunately, missiology rarely informs apologetics, whether in academic or popular circles. Much of our Western apologetic, particularly in the American context, assumes a Christendom and modernist framework and provides an apologetic for questions that many times the culture is no longer asking.
A few writers have recognized the importance of cultural considerations to apologetics, including Harold Netland in an article he wrote on contextualized apologetics several years ago, as well as Alister McGrath and David Wilkinson in the U.K.
Missiology can and should inform apologetics in that it reminds us that an apologetic must be culturally sensitive and relevant, and that apologetics should be at the service of the mission efforts of the church rather than serve as an end unto itself. Some of our work with new religions blends contextual missions approaches with apologetics and we hope to encourage others to engage in this process as well.
Now, I have heard a number of voices within the emerging church dismiss apologetics but I would like to think we could move beyond these either/or dichotomies and explore more integrated both/and approaches. After all, there's a significant difference between post-rationality and anti-rationality.