|
|
That Which We Call Renewal Groups
The Institute on Religion and Democracy (talk about a misnomer!) claims on its website that that its own work is done "in cooperation with like-minded groups that represent seven major denominations through our Association for Church Renewal." The IRD claims that it currently has over 30 such renewal groups in its active alliance. What is a Renewal Group? And why is the IRD investing so much in the establishment of their alliance? To answer the first question, let us look at some of those groups and read their own language describing themselves and stating why they came into existence.
From the `American Anglican Council':
From the Biblical Witness Fellowship (United Church of Christ):
From Good News (United Methodist): I won't go through all 30. They all say pretty much the same thing. They each identify themselves as a renewal group destined to return the wayward, apostate, heretical church in which they function to the true teachings of Holy Scripture and the historic, orthodox doctrines of the Church. The basis of their `renewal' is an argument that maintains that the teachings of Mainline Protestant Christianity have gone so far astray of scripture and tradition that they must `renew' efforts to return to orthodoxy. Over time, the issues which drive their passion for renewal, and which also provide the evidence of their denomination's apostasy, have changed. When the IRD initiated its first assault on the National Council of Churches in 1981, it used America's hatred of the `red threat' to enflame passions. It accused the National Council of churches and its member bodies of using money from the offering plates of our churches to fund communist rebels around the globe. Not long after that, the focus was on the ordination of women. In an article posted on the Presbyterian site The Laymen Online, Dr. R. C. Sproul cautions members not to leave an apostate church until such clear evidence can be presented that shows that said church has fully abandoned the teachings of scripture. He shares that the moment to leave came for him when his good colleague Walter Kenyon was defrocked for saying he would not participate in the ordination of women in 1981. Other such divisive issues have included a woman's right to reproductive choice and stem cell research. But far and away their most effective tool to date is the issue de jour: homosexuality.
Just a quick glimpse of each of their websites reveals the following: Again, we don't need to go through all of the websites: the point is made. Today's wedge issue is homosexuality, and renewal groups have latched onto it as the most recent evidence of the church's apostasy. Their mission is to save the church from such heretical practices, and to `renew' and restore the church to its truer, more historic past. The problem is that these groups have much more nefarious intentions. It is not the `renewal' of the church that they are interested in, but the destabilization and destruction of what has been throughout the history of the United States the most consistent, courageous, and clear voice of social reform and justice. Their own words betray them.
In the Mission Statement found on the IRD website we read this lengthy quote: These are not renewal groups: they are trained activists intent on the demise, the destabilization, and the destruction of Mainline Protestant Christianity. They use cleverly chosen wedge issues to divide otherwise united congregations and denominations. They produce, print, and circulate periodicals, pamphlets, and diatribes filled with innuendo and misinformation intended to enflame the passions of otherwise content congregants. This is not to argue that renewal groups should not exist. They should. It is simply an argument that what is sold today as a renewal group is anything but. They are well funded and well trained activists spent not on renewing, but destroying, the church. This is not to argue that the church should be a monolith of convention and homogeneity. It should reflect the rich diversity of opinion and principle of which every human family and institution is composed, be those principles liberal or conservative, orthodox or reform. And always the church should invite the kind of dialogue and debate that honors all such voices. But that advocate for reasonable debate cannot be the creation of a `renewal group' that begins the dialogue with an accusation of heresy and apostasy; that trains activists and tacticians to destroy and destabilize the church; and that circulates material meant to defame, defraud, and defy. It is imperative that we in Mainline Protestant churches know what we are up against. To call these organizations intent on our demise `Renewal Groups' is a gross mischaracterization of their true purpose. That which we call a renewal group by any other word would smell as rotten. Call it what you want, it is what it is.
That Which We Call Renewal Groups | 7 comments (7 topical, 0 hidden)
That Which We Call Renewal Groups | 7 comments (7 topical, 0 hidden)
|
|||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
print page
