STRONG-ARM TACTICS?
General Church leadership asked to defend autonomous Women's Division

I recently received a call from a pastor who indicated that he had received a mailing sent to the pastors of his district by the district UMW president.  In this correspondence RENEW and UMAction were maligned and support was solicited for United Methodist Women in the face of the Call for Reform of the Women's Division. Another call told of a district superintendent who wrote a letter to a pastor letting him know that his UMW president was associating with RENEW, and that this was not an acceptable organization for her to be a part of. In yet another situation, a bishop requested a local pastor and his UMW president to schedule an appointment with him because the UMW had voted to withdraw from United Methodist Women due to their concerns about the leadership of the Women's Division. These are but samples of many such incidences.

The Call for Reform raises concern about the autonomy of the Women's Division, and the fact that the local United Methodist Women's groups do not come under the authority of the local church's Administrative Council, but rather under the direct auspices of the Women's Division. 

We are aware that the Division claims to come under authority through adherence to the Discipline and to the rulings of General Conference.  However, we have seen violations, such as the closed meeting for teen and university women in December of 2000 which was contrary to the open meeting policy in the Discipline.  According to the General Council on 
Finance and Administration (GCFA), the GCFA had no authority to questions spending for this closed event because the Women's Division "does not receive any general Church funds."

Not only does the Discipline make it clear that the local United Methodist Women's organization comes solely under the direction of the Women's Division, but this was verified in writing from a staff person at the Women’s Division to a local UMW woman who asked for clarification on this issue.

One must ask why the autonomous Women's Division would encourage its district and conference officers to appeal to the bishops, district superintendents and pastors to come to their defense when these individuals and general church structures have no direct integrated ministry connection with the Women's Division or United Methodist Women's groups.  Rather than deal with documented charges  made against the Women's Division by thousands of United Methodist women and men, the Women's Division instead encourages United Methodist Women to appeal to these individuals for blanket protection.

Why should the pastor of a local church feel any coercion from his district superintendent or bishop (or from district and conference UMW officers) to strong-arm the women of his or her congregation because they question the leadership direction of the Women's Division?  It is these women who provide funding for the Women's Division, and, it is these women who have a right to question the leadership the Women's Division is providing, and to expect a respectful, compliant response. 
 

Joyce Sohl, Deputy General Secretary of the Women's Division, addressed the issue of Women's Division’s accountability in her April 2002 report to the Women's Division Board of Directors and in her February 2003 Response magazine column. In her writing, Ms. Sohl concluded that accountability is a subjective, not an objective science.  She opined, "accountability has little meaning if those receiving the information do not believe or agree with the basic assumptions under which a given action was taken." 

With defined criteria, however, it would seem that accountability is an objective science; and, that the measurement of actions over against set standards would not be affected by agreement or disagreement with those actions.

Ms. Sohl addressed the following areas of accountability: Accountability to UMW/WD History: RENEW and most all UM women appreciate the 100+ year history of United Methodist Women.  The active role of UMW in ministering to the needs of women, children and youth around the world is well known.  Accountability as it relates to history necessitates questioning the worldview and theological perspective of the Women's Division. This view shapes more recent UMW history through a perspective that leans heavily upon selective Social Principles and Resolutions that can be bent to fit the ideological agenda of the Women's Division. We remain concerned that the Division's perspective does not reflect that of most women at the local level. 

Accountability to Constituency: While Ms. Sohl claims Women's Division accountability to its membership, hundreds who have written regarding the leadership direction of the organization have received standard responses that indicate no change of policy.

Ms. Sohl's reports boast of the mission education and spiritual growth resources offered by the Women's 
Division, and of the leadership provided by staff and directors at UMW events.  However, the content of these resources and presentations by WD leadership have confirmed, rather than allayed, concern. 

A close examination of projects funded and programs underwritten by the Women's Division raises alarm regarding faithful stewardship of undesignated gifts. (RENEW's Financial File III addresses this stewardship issue.)

Accountability to the Gospel of Jesus Christ: Ms. Sohl's comments in this area are troubling. Claiming accountability to the Gospel of Jesus Christ as the "center of the accountability" of the Women's Division, Ms. Sohl identifies this as the "most difficult" area.  She says, "The opinions that each of us has about the gospel are ours, but they may not be the same as those of other members within our unit or within the membership of the organization.  All of us may feel that our understandings are the correct interpretations of the biblical message, but none of us can be sure of that fact."

One wonders how the Christian Church has managed to continue in existence for more than 2000 years if our understanding of the Gospel of Jesus Christ is so diverse and uncertain.  In actuality, the basic tenets of Christian faith are clearly defined and embraced across denominational lines.  These core beliefs deduced from Scripture comprise the heart of the Gospel--a Gospel that has transformed millions of lives, and for which millions have died. 

Continuing, Ms. Sohl states, "Accountability to the gospel puts us often in the center of controversy.  Such controversy comes about because of a variety of biblical interpretations, differences in our calls to discipleship and various understandings of what it means to be a follower of Christ."  From this point Ms. Sohl quotes from John Wesley's Sermon 39 regarding liberty of thought and opinion.  Lifted from its context, this quote fails to communicate the full intent of this sermon that relates particularly to denominational distinctives, modes of worship and opinions that do not strike at the root of Christian faith. 

Sermon 39, "Catholic Spirit," makes clear the difference between 'opinions' and 'essentials' with Wesley's words, "…a catholic spirit is not speculative latitudinarianism.  It is not indifference to all opinions: this is the spawn of hell, not the offspring of heaven.  This unsettledness of thought, this being 'driven to and fro, and tossed about with every wind of doctrine,' is a great curse, not a blessing, an irreconcilable enemy, not a friend of true catholicism.  A man of a truly catholic spirit has not now his religion to seek.  He is fixed as the sun in his judgement concerning the main branches of Christian doctrine."

Accountability Understood and Applied: Much that Ms. Sohl refers to in her concluding remarks, such as Wesley's questions for believers, raise thoughts that can be responded to with varying "opinions."  However, when it comes to accountability, we all come under the "essentials" defined in Scripture, attested to in the creeds of the Church and reinforced by our own United Methodist Doctrinal Standards and Articles of Religion. 

Claiming ambiguity about the Gospel of Jesus Christ, or confusion regarding what accountability is or is not, does not absolve the Women's Division from accountability.

(Reprinted from Good News magazine, March/April 2003.)
 

We are encouraged by this action on the part of the Women's Division.  It indicates that many contacts have been received, making a response necessary.  Unfortunately, this Information Packet fails to adequately address the concerns that have been raised and documented in the Call for Reform campaign. For the most part, this packet trots out earlier tepid statements that failed to answer specific charges then, and certainly fail to do so now. 

This is particularly true in relation to the six areas identified in Our Basis for Concern which are only slightly mentioned in this packet.  Our documented listing of misdirected programs and policies still stands as a strong witness of the theological, political and social worldview held and promoted by the Women's Division. 

It is interesting that a key focus of the Division's effort was defense of their financial support of questionable organizations.  Document 3 in the WD Information Packet attempted to re-identify the questionable groups supported monetarily by the Women's Division. These new identifications revealed  not a single inaccuracy in our descriptions.  RENEW and UMAction stand behind the descriptions provided in our financial analysis of these organizations. 

The Women’s Division’s identifying funding as one of their greatest concerns suggest that we must give more serious consideration to designated over undesignated giving.

No doubt, the Women's Division is sincere, and believe their work to be noble. However, the Women's Division’s perspective is devoid of the mission mandate to proclaim Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior of the world.  It is unfaithful to the historic witness of the Church universal in several areas.  It is a biased and politically partisan worldview that excludes the broader scope of Christian understanding that is at work in the world, transforming all aspects of human existence.

RENEW appreciates the faithful commitment of United Methodist women and men to the Call for Reform, and for the courageous stand many have taken.  It is not easy to question the status quo--nor to question boards and agencies that have long gone unchallenged.  However, the cause of Christ and the importance of providing viable women's 
ministries is well worth the effort. 

RENEW's analysis of the Women's Division "Information Packet" may be ordered by using the order form.
 

Good News and RENEW, in the context of our Call for Reform, have worked together to establish a legislative agenda to deal with issues concerning the Women’s Division. That agenda includes the following items:

• Lift up Jesus Christ; follow the mission of the UMC to make disciples for Him;
• Change the way directors are elected to the Women’s Division;
• Make the Women’s Division accountable to the Discipline, financially and otherwise;
• Make UMW optional in the local church; allow for other women’s ministries;
• Make local UMW units primarily accountable to the local church.

You can see the petitions we have prepared here.  You can copy and paste or download (in .PDF format) and customize any of these for your purposes. Or, use our order form.  We suggest you use these petitions as resolutions for your annual conference to pass and send on to General Conference. We believe if there are annual conferences who pass such resolutions, then the committees at General Conference might not be so quick to discard them. Or you can have your local church council, local UMW unit, or other group or individual approve a petition and have it sent on to General Conference. Let’s send a blizzard of paper to the General Conference asking for reform of the Women’s Division.

Remember not to fear, and remember, Jemima!

Bradley C. Knepp
Chair RENEW Oversight Committee 
Member Good News Board of Directors

Not a single official United Methodist voice has examined with any seriousness the case for decisive military action against Saddam.  Some church officials, such as the head of Church and Society, have even questioned whether a Christian can support a war.  Bishop Melvin Talbert, in an anti-war television commercial, said a war against Saddam would violate the teachings of Jesus Christ.

In truth, none of us should claim that we have direct guidance from Jesus Christ as to what our nation's foreign and military policies should be.  Jesus, for reasons known fully only to Him, chose not to directly critique the secular rulers of His day.  The institutional church should be modest and cautious when speaking to public policy issues.

But those church officials who are speaking about Iraq should have some responsibility for proposing alternatives if they are publicly opposed to U.S. policy.  Most insist that UN weapons inspections be given more chance.  But of course, those weapons inspectors were only allowed to return after U.S. threats of force, threats that these church   officials of course opposed.

Saddam's brutal regime has been in violation of UN resolutions for nearly 13 years.  His behavior is not likely to change now.  What would happen if Saddam were to pass weapons of mass destruction to terrorist organizations?  What would happen if he used such weapons against his neighbors' oil fields?  What would happen if Saddam were to again invade a neighboring country but this time was armed with nuclear weapons?  What would happen if a nuclearized Iraq prompted Israel to strike first against Iraq?  And what hope do a brutalized Iraqi people ever have as long as Saddam retains power?  How much longer will the U.S. Air Force have to protect the Kurds and Shiites in Iraq? 

No United Methodist official is answering these questions.  For this reason, among others, few United Methodists are likely to heed the statements made by church officials who too often claim to speak for United Methodism on political issues. (See our website: www.ird-renew.org.)

Mark Tooley, Executive Director, UMAction

Every time I speak to women about total commitment 
You always whisper “prove it!”           
 — Ruth Harms Calkin  

An excellent resource for introducing others to the RENEW Network and the“Call for Reform” of the Women’s Division.

The video lasts 35 minutes and is in three segments for easy use.  Comes with discussion questions.