It appears to have begun.

Just to refresh ourselves a bit: a wedge issue is a topic that can be exploited by renewalists and their trained activists in their campaign to divide churches. By selecting certain topics, trained activists can enter congregations and foment dissent. Over the years wedge issues have included communism (in December of 1982 Reader's Digest ran a slanderous piece of propaganda written for them by the IRD accusing the National Council of Churches of sending money from local churches to feed communist rebellions around the globe), the ordination of women, reproductive choice, stem cell research, and most recently homophobia. Introduce any of these into the life of a congregation; or accuse church leaders of supporting any of these; or deploy trained activists to submit IRD composed resolutions at church, regional, or national gatherings of the church and sparks are sure to fly.

The IRD has calculated that the issue now with the greatest potential to foment dissent is "radical Islam." Shamelessly exploiting the worst of our cultural fears (something they have no compunctions about, and which they have done throughout their history), the IRD posted this story the day BEFORE the 6th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks:

Islamic Group Honors Religious Left

Coincidence? Please.

Before we look at the content of that article, first read this from the web-site of the ISNA:

The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) is an independent, open and transparent membership organization that strives to be an exemplary and unifying Islamic organization in North America by contributing to the betterment of the Muslim community and society at large. ISNA is committed to freedom, to eradicating prejudice and to creating a society where Muslims can live peacefully and prosper alongside other Americans from all walks of life and diverse traditions and faith.
http://www.isna.net/index.php?id=35&backPID=1&tt_news=898

To be sure, there are radical Islamic fundamentalists who are a threat to US security. But these people are not they. Pandering to our worst fears, and hedging their bets against a more informed and educated American public, the IRD portrays the ISNA as a part of `radical Islam,' and attempts to denounce their old nemesis the National Council of Churches simply for receiving an award from them.

In an age where what divides us threatens to undo us, awards SHOULD be given to those who promote unity, understanding, and tolerance between nations, religions, and cultures that have historically done little to build bridges of understanding between them. That the National Council of Churches is recognized for such an effort deserves our plaudits, our praise, and our attention. That the IRD attempts to spin this as an act of traitorous intent deserving of their contempt once again reveals much more about them than it does about the target of their vitriolic spew.

The article begins:

At its recent convention in Chicago, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) honored the National Council of Churches' top interfaith official with its "Interfaith Unity Award."
Undoubtedly, the award was well deserved! The NCC, like most of the Religious Left, defends or accommodates radical Islam, even as it denounces "fundamentalist" Christianity and condemns Israel. Despite the Religious Left's support for liberal social causes like same-sex unions and abortion rights, it prefers the supporters of Islamic "Sharia" law to Christians or Jews who might sometimes vote Republican

Take note: "the Religious Left defends or accommodates radical Islam." That is by this evidence an insubstantial claim. ISNA is most certainly by any reasonable person's estimation NEVER to be confused with radical Islam. This is a canard - but do not therefore presume that such statements will not fuel a whole new level and layer of animosity and vitriol directed at the leaders of Mainline Protestant denominations across this country and executed by the lumpen-prole of a constituency that IRD trained activists have been able to build over 30 years of clandestine attack.
So too is the statement that the Religious Left prefers "supporters of Sharia law to Christians of Jews who might sometimes vote Republican." Because most Americans have no idea what Sharia law is, and because it is used in a sentence containing the words `radical' and `Islam,' IRD is hoping to fuel even more gut level fear; and having produced that, carefully direct it AT somebody (the Religious Left) and FOR somebody (Republican voters, who are also here - with no reason or rhyme, and against all credible evidence suggesting otherwise - portrayed as disenfranchised within Mainline Protestantism).
Of equal concern is the response of IRD president James Tonkowich when asked about the IRD's decision to mail the book out to so many clergy who are not a part of their network, who are not among their trained activists, and who were never privileged to be invited to any of their `invitation-only' training seminars:

"The gift is intended to help educate mainline Protestant and Catholic clergy and seminaries in the United States and Canada about "the history of Islam in light of growing radicalism".

By whose authority does Tonkowich assume the right and responsibility to educate clergy and seminaries not under his jurisdiction? Why does he not make clear his motivations? Why does he not name the benefactor who produced the $1.5 million+ it would have taken to purchase and mail 100,000 copies of this book?

Be aware of this new ploy by the IRD. We now know where they are casting their lot. We know how they have used these wedge issues in the past. Clergy who remain silent on this issue are playing into the hands of the IRD. A pastor's ability to define the clear line between radical Islam and Islam as most people experience it; to defend the very noble actions of many of our leaders who seek peace, tolerance, and understanding; and to ensure and induce within their own congregation's an irenic, an ecumenical, and an interfaith endeavor is critical at this time.