United Methodist Bishops Elect Radical Feminist Leaders     5/16/2002 United Methodist Bishops Elect Radical Feminist Leaders Bishop Sharon Brown Christopher to head Council of Bishops By Bishop Sharon Brown Christopher assumed the office of president of the Council of Bishops on May 3 while Bishop Sharon Rader was elected to continue her position as secretary — a post she has held for six years. Bishop Christopher is the first woman to hold the position of council president in the history of the UM Church. RE-IMAGINING A NEW HERESY Both women were early supporters of the “Re-imagining Movement,” which was founded in 1993 by a broad spectrum of feminist radicals who cast aside Christian orthodoxy and promoted a lesbian-affirming religiosity that denied the atonement of Christ and featured pagan rituals and worship of various “goddesses” in place of the Christian godhead. United Methodist bishop, Earl G. Hunt, said, “No comparable heresy has appeared in the church in the last 15 centuries. This material must be eradicated from Christian thinking.” Mark Tooley, executive director of the United Methodist Action Committee of the Institute on Religion and Democracy, said the president of the United Methodist Council of Bishops is “largely a symbolic post.” “However, it is sad that the bishops of this denomination could not elect a colleague who is committed to orthodox Christianity and to the beliefs of John Wesley,” Tooley said. “Once again, the Council of Bishops has shown that it is insular and more concerned about relationships among the bishops than with the Council’s overall accountability to the whole church.” Bishops Christopher and Rader were among those who vehemently denied that the Re-imagining movement was heretical and defended their participation in an open letter sent to the church shortly after the initial “re-imagining” conference. “A Time of Hope — A Time of Threat,” was signed by over 800 other churchwomen and testifies to the depth of feminist radicalism present in the UM Church. The letter states in part (emphasis added): This is a time of hope. The partnership of women and men in the United Methodist Church is growing—in the Council of Bishops, in Annual Conferences, in local congregations, and in theological schools…the voices of women are being heard, and cooperation among Christian women increases denominationally and ecumenically. In theological books, sermons, and liturgies, women are singing a new song. But this is also a time of threat…For years the United Methodist Church has been divided by controversy over the leadership of women, reproductive rights, inclusive language, and homosexuality. As women have addressed these issues, the clash of theological perspectives has intensified. At the heart of the conflict are diverse images of God…the dynamics of control and power. What is at stake is…who will set the agenda for the future of the church. CRITICS ARE ‘HOMOPHOBES’ The letter suggested that verbal attacks on the Re-Imagining Conference in Minneapolis, were intended to “split and weaken the United Methodist Church,” resulting in the following consequences (emphasis added): “Refusing to acknowledge the positive relationship between sexuality and spirituality, present in both Christian tradition and contemporary theological writings, deprives the church of a rich and essential wholeness. “Accusing feminist, womanist, and other women theologians, as well as our theological schools, of departing from historic Christian faith is an attempt to constrict the work of the Holy Spirit. “Engaging in verbal violence against lesbians reveals the homophobia in the church and denigrates the rich contributions that homosexual persons have made to the church through the centuries.” The letter also noted (emphasis added): “The use of the term, ‘heresy,’ in our time, may be a way of refusing to hear the voices of those who have been marginalized in the life of the church. Today creative theological minds explore a whole range of issues, including the biblical meaning of God’s Wisdom, Sophia, (like God’s Word, Logos). Similarly, in light of social experience, such as slavery and female sexual abuse, understandings of sacrifice, atonement, and martyrdom are being reexamined. “The scriptural promise of the Holy Spirit creates the space and the inspiration for new faith experience and fresh theological insights in every era. We stand strongly in the United Methodist tradition, which honors theological diversity and encourages openness to emerging theological initiatives.” Although supporters of the movement reject claims that denial of fundamental Christian beliefs, pagan rituals, and goddess worship constitute heresy, an observer at the 1998 conference disagreed. Donna Hailson, a clergywoman of the American Baptist Church, wrote the following for the Ecumenical Coalition on Women and Society (ECWS): At Re-imagining, we heard denied the deity and sinlessness of Jesus Christ. Lifted in His place, by one speaker, was the Cosmic Mother, the Mother Goddess of the Aztecs and others. This speaker, Mary Castellanos, said, ‘Mary is the composite of ancient, current, and future manifestations of the one who will not be suppressed…the ageless and universal sisterhood: Isis, Aphrodite, Bridig…whom I propose to you is the one whom we must continue to re-imagine.’ Castellanos went on to suggest that participants embrace the Virgin of Guadeloupe as a unifying ‘goddess of the Americas.’ Later, the ‘revival preacher,’ Barbara Lundblad, encouraged the people to laugh at the Bible and Jesus and twisted the words of her text, John 20, to insist that re-imaginers not hold on to Jesus, because some in the group had already heard ‘altogether too much’ about Jesus. As reported by the ECWS, the final ceremony of the conference weekend was the “ritual biting of the apple to symbolize a woman’s solidarity with Eve in her rebellion and determination to grasp knowledge regardless of the consequences.” Coupled with the clout of the Women’s Division of the General Board of Global Ministries (GBGM), the selection of bishops Christopher and Rader to the two top two posts in the Council of Bishops, means that the power and leadership of UM Church is largely in the hands of radical feminists. BIG BUDGET, FEMINIST QUOTA The GBGM is the most powerful agency of the UM Church, with a blockbuster budget approaching $200 million. Within the GBGM, the Women’s Division clearly wields the most power since the denomination’s Book of Discipline mandates that 40 percent of all Board positions and divisional staff positions must be occupied by women. The Women’s Division has used this power, in some measure, to pursue a radical feminist agenda with global reach. They have never condemned the heretical theology expressed by re-imagining proponents. In fact, a large number of books by speakers at the re-imagining conferences have been published by the Women’s Division or are on its recommended reading list. The realignment of power within the leadership of the UM Church promises that a major clash of theological views will take place during the next General Conference in 2004. The General Conference which, by church law, is evenly split between clergy and laity, is the primary policy making body of the denomination and has been tilting towards greater conservatism in recent gatherings — especially on the issue of affirming homosexuality.