Bridging cultural barriers with the gospel Courtenay McCormick explains how Alpha reaches Hispanics in Tennessee
Rocking for the gospel Steve Beard survived Ichthus and lived to tell about it
What can an ancient burial box tell us about Jesus? Ben WitheringtonIII unveils the significance of the James ossuary
Still knocking on heaven’s door
Scott M. Marshall explains the significance of the new Bob Dylan tribute album
COLUMNS
Editorial
The Risk of Renewal Groups
Renew Women’s NetworkNaming, Blaming, and Shaming
Mortals & the DivineThe Sweet Soul Music of Al Green
The Next Generation Privatism: An Unholy Fear of Influence
The Great Commission Ministry Beyond the “Nine-Day Wonder”
From the Heart The Sabbath Date Day
DEPARTMENTS
Letters
to the editor
News Analysis Political propaganda pervades Response
UM membership figures show growth outside the U.S.
Bishop Sprague blasts “Christo-centric exclusivism”
British theologian N.T. Wright comes to defense of the Resurrection
Liberal UM activists publish new book on "conservative renewal groups”
Michael Moore was booed at the Academy Awards in March
2003 when he accepted the award for best documentary and used the podium
to malign President Bush and decry the war in
The Section of Christian Social Responsibility brought a recommendation before the Women’s Division Spring Board of Directors meeting to “explore inviting Michael Moore, to present and discuss the making of his award-winning film Bowling for Columbine,” to the Women’s Division. This recommendation passed without dissent.
It is deeply disturbing that this controversial film and its hypocritical message resonates so with the Women’s Division. The fact that the board voted even to “explore” a dialogue with Michael Moore, and would consider showing this film, is another reminder that the Women’s Division moves in a highly controversial political and social arena, one that takes the mission of United Methodist Women away from its true purpose.
There is more.…
Strong opposition to any military action against terrorism or against
Saddam Hussein was again voiced. The Deputy General Secretary of the Women’s
Division used her report time to document her position against war, both
from Scripture, and from a quotation from Living the Peace by John Dear:
“If we cannot love Saddam Hussein, or any other government leader,
we cannot love anyone. What does it mean to love Saddam Hussein? It means
nonviolently resisting the U.S. government plans to kill him and his people;
and the likewise challenging him to stop his own oppressive violence….”
One must ask, had love and patience won Saddam
over during the twenty-five years of his reign of terror during which
thousands were murdered?
One staff person thanked the Renew Network for their recent challenge through the Call for Reform, claiming that this brought self-examination and an awareness that the commitment of the Division to social justice is as it should be. A UMW national officer claimed that there are those in the church who “don’t understand what’s in the name Women’s Division and United Methodist Women.” She added that these people's only purpose is to interpret things negatively. In her words, “Some in the church just don’t get it. Their agenda is clear, but ours is too.”
Rather than dealing with the specific documented issues raised by Renew and hundreds of individuals, we are accused of “just not getting it.”
Of even greater concern…
The April 2003 issue of Response magazine covers the topic
“Religion’s Role in the Backlash Against
Women.” (See related article on page 31.) Articles identify Islamic
fundamentalists, Jewish fundamentalists, and Christian fundamentalists
as those who comprise the “Religious Right.” According to Response,
the Christian “right” groups include: the Southern Baptist Convention,
the Vatican, the Christian Coalition, Focus on the Family, American Family
Association, Concerned Women for America, Family Research Council, Eagle
Forum, the Institute on Religion and Democracy, and Promise Keepers. Groups
identified in this category within United Methodism include: Good News,
Renew, Lifewatch, and UMAction. The Bush Administration is also identified as a
“right-wing” government, listening to the “Christian right.”
This issue of Response opposes faithful adherence to the fundamentals of the Christian faith, while espousing a new set of fundamentals that alter Christian orthodoxy. The pro-life position is rejected in favor of a pro-abortion position. Voicing disapproval of homosexual practice and homosexual marriage is jettisoned for approval of both. Pro-family legislation is rejected, but controversial U.N. treaties on women and children are sanctioned.
Local United Methodist Women need to ask whether or not the Women’s Division actions and the April Response magazine represent what they believe and want to endorse-because it is what they are funding.
This naming, blaming, and shaming is a sad way to respond to the sincere concerns of United Methodist Women.
(Contact Renew, the women’s
program ministry of Good News, for reports from the Spring Women’s
Division meeting and an analysis of the April 2003 issue of Response
magazine. Write or call: Renew Network,
Click here to send your response plus the title of this article to us at Good News.