Renew Network is a conservative United Methodist women's organization. It is "...a support network for evangelical, orthodox women within our church, providing a voice for their concerns, supplemental program resources for their program needs, and a place for them to share ministry with other women. Renew's service to the women of the church is two-fold. First of all, we are a network for renewal: to encourage women to establish and maintain a growing, intimate, and faithful relationship with Jesus Christ; to help provide a firm scriptural foundation for their faith; and to equip them for discipleship and witness. We are also a concerted voice for renewal and accountability on the part of the Women's Division, the official women's organization of the United Methodist Church."
Recently, Renew Network met with representatives of United Methodist Women and the Board of Global Ministries in a forum to discuss their differences. You can watch the video here.
Ms. Faye Short, the President of Renew Network, graciously agreed to an interview with Locusts & Honey.
How did the forum discussion go?
The discussion went well in our opinion. Those who have provided us with feedback felt the RENEW panel members conveyed a good spirit, while imparting their concerns and information with clarity. Many have said we lifted up Christ and the Scriptures, which was one of our major intentions. We were disappointed with some of the Women’s Division responses and will be addressing those in the days ahead. Overall, we believe this was a worthwhile and significant exchange.
What overt political activities does the Women’s Division engage in?
This question would take me a long time to answer. Much of the program of the Women’s Division is given over to political advocacy—they oppose the war on terrorism, and the war in Iraq; they oppose welfare reform; they support United Nations treaties and initiatives; they oppose much of the Bush Administration policy; they oppose the Patriot Act. One district UMW officer told me recently she found herself on the opposite side of every issue promoted by the Women’s Division through its Action Alert. The Women’s Division has a strong lobbying presence in Washington, and often encourages United Methodist Women to write letters endorsing a partisan perspective on legislative issues.
Does the Women’s Division promote erroneous theology?
Over the years the Women’s Division has embraced and promoted in its resources, or through various speakers, liberation theology, feminist theology, universalism, feminine language for God and a low view of the authority of Scripture. This is a partial list. Specific documentation can be found in “Our Basis for Concern,” posted to our web site, http://www.renewnetwork.org/, and in other recent reports at this same site.
In the March/April 2005 issue of Good News magazine, you said that the Women’s Division has published materials promoting New Age spirituality. Can you elaborate?
This was a brief reference in my monthly article and had particular reference to the August 2004 issue of Response magazine, the official magazine for United Methodist Women, published by the Women’s Division. This issue of the magazine, reviewed by Donna F. G. Hailson, lauded such persons as Delores Williams (Re-Imagining, “We don’t need people hanging on crosses and all that blood-dripping weird stuff.”), and post-Christian Matthew Fox who is a panentheist, a syncretist, a deep ecumenist. Yet, he is cited favorably, without critique, in a Response article. Holistic Healer, Linaya Hahn, self-identified as a “medical intuitive, an energy healer” is promoted. Ms. Hahn’s practices and interpretations are outside the Biblical parameters for healing and wholeness. In October 1993, J. Ann Craig, Executive Secretary for Theological Development for the Women’s Division, wrote an article entitled “Fear of New Age Dismantled.” Ms. Craig acknowledged, “the New Age movement is such a mix of popular religion in the United States. New Age expressions include practices from Eastern religions, healing practices, meditation, gurus, shamans, music, mystics, tarot cards, astrology, physics and virtually anything creative.” Still, Ms. Craig issued this challenge to Christians in her closing paragraphs, “In a world where diverse religions increasingly rub elbows, each must struggle with how to relate to other faiths…. Before condemning New Age people, find out if they are loving God and serving their neighbor.”
What legislative actions can be taken to rein in the Women’s Division?
At the last General Conference RENEW Network members put forward several legislative pieces designed to have this effect. Unfortunately, none of those legislative pieces passed. Many were defeated in sub-committees through well-planned opposition by Women’s Division supporters. Some delegates who wanted to help support the legislation were told they would not be re-elected to General Conference if they involved themselves in an effort to oppose Women’s Division legislation—or to support RENEW’s legislation. So, how can change take place through the legislative process? It can take place when delegates are bold enough and honest enough to vote through the legislation required to “rein in the Women’s Division.”
Editorial note: I normally include pictures of the subjects of interviews, but BloggerBot is currently malfunctioning, so I was unable to do so for Ms. Short.
Thursday, September 29, 2005
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Just watched the video- interesting stuff.
Am I a bit shocked and disappointed in the fear of all things male some (not all) of the Division of Women speakers displayed.
I'm also beginning to think that the religion of some on the left is not orthodoxy but Montanism, an early heresy which held that the ongoing spiritual experience of people trumps Apostolic teaching. A great deal of what I heard from the Women's Division seems to substantiate that concern. If this is so, then we're in trouble folks.
To be fair, there were some moments where the Renew members, who sharply criticize the Women's Board for over polticise the faith and making Christianity subject to politics, seem to do the same thing by the passion of their patriotism. In reality, the Christian Left and Christian Right both face the temptation of putting politics over good theology. When we Evangelicals get ready to through stones about the politics of the left, we have got to be careful that we aren't just as guilty in how we approach our politics.
I'm sorry. Is this person, this "division" for real? If so, John Wilks hit it: we're in real trouble not only for what they seem to stand for but for the name of their crew - "division", which is apparently all they are interested in fostering.
I haven't watched the video yet, but I was involved with the UMW (even when it was the WSCS) beginning when I was old enough to go as a child until I was in my mid 20s (almost 30 years ago).
The reason I quit going was the feminist/liberal/new age theology AND the fact that none of our women realized it was wrong, or was even willing to question it. They believed (and still do to some extent) that if a "PHD" or other type of "Leader" taught something, then it must be gospel! So, I just quit going.
I'd love to get involved again, but not when I feel like I have to dispute every single lesson and every single "cause" we are called upon to support.
I will be doing some digging into this organization.
Betty Newman
Dean,
Sorry if you think we've gone to bashing, but what has been said thus far which is incorrect?
I'm glad this little debate happened because it lets some issue breath. And in my own response, I tried to be fair and point out a flaw in the Renew bunch too.
Now granted, I did through down the "h" word. But go watch the video. Some of the comments sound like Montanism. And historically speaking, Montanism was deemed a heresy. It may be harsh, but it is a fair assessment.
In fact, I think we have two groups in Christendom right now who carry the torch of Montanism. The Pentecostal movement is certainly there, especially the faith healers and prosperity gospel crowd.
And the progressive camp, while decidedly less into the showy manifestations of the Spirit, seems to blend Montanist assumptions about the nature of revelation with secular humanistic social values.
If, for the sake of our discussion, the "h" word is too offensive, then I'll back up and say that Montanism is at least beyond the scope of traditional Christian thinking and practice.
Wikipedia on Montanism
Post a Comment