This recent announcement that the Global Methodist Church will be shifting from Wespath to GuideStone is welcome news to me. I would acknowledge that Wespath has been faithful with the funds entrusted to them. My churches' investment and endowment funds have grown and performed competitively.
Even so, it became clear to me a couple of years ago that their priorities, socially, were at odds with mine. They were signed onto the ESG investment strategy of facilitating social change by exerting pressure on companies in any number of ways. I privately wrote Wespath leadership, which was not receptive to my concerns.
GuideStone does advocate for social positions with the money they oversee. However, it is my impression that the social policies they advocate more closely align with a biblical vision that is recognizable to conservatives. I have been given the impression that their rates for health insurance are commensurate with, if not lower than, Wespath's rates. I have also understood that the performance of their portfolios are on par with Wespath's. Finally, I have always been frustrated with Wespath's lack of transparent and regular financial reporting. It is my understanding that GuideStone is more responsive and transparent.
We will soon see. I have already asked Jeff Pospicil, the GMC's Chief Financial Officer, to film a conversation with me in which we talk through a lot of the nuts and bolts of the transition. We will hopefully be able to set something up after the GMC publishes a more detailed FAQ next week.
https://globalmethodist.org/gmc-announces-relationship-with-guidestone-financial-resources/
I'm publishing this here first to convey my thanks to those of you who have supported my work. Thank you.
Episode 1 takes up marriage, divorce and remarriage. Going into Johannesburg, our Book of Doctrines and Discipline told the world who could marry and never once used the word "divorce." On the last morning of General Conference, in about fifty minutes of floor debate, that changed. I walk Petition 1020 through its whole life: the language we inherited, Jonathan Lee's petition, the committee's 35–1 vote, and Saturday on the floor. That meant Rich Hoffman's amendment, Matt O'Reilly's rewrite, a motion to send the whole thing away for six years, and a final vote of 329–41.
Then we open Matthew 19 and 1 Corinthians 7 and ask what the church said, and what it chose not to say. I land somewhere between grateful and uneasy, and I want to hear where you land. The free discussion guide sets the old and new texts side by side, gives both sides in the delegates' own words, and has ...
I don't know why the live stream didn't work today. Here is what I did:
Update: I know I said I would start back up this week. I could easily start the morning live stream back up, but I have been feeling like I need to do some wrap-up on General Conference. It just took me some time get clear on what I would feel good about doing. And I finally got some really good thoughts together after a lot of percolation. Early next week, I should be publishing some very decent work on explaining some of the more impactful developments in Johannesburg. For right now, I'm aiming at eleven episodes dealing with:
1. Marriage, Divorce and Remarriage: how the church put words about divorce into our Book of Doctrines and Discipline on the final morning
2. Sex and Gender Identity: the rewriting of ¶302.8
3. Protecting the Unborn and the Mother: our new language on abortion
4. The Racial Theology Resolution: Resolution 1466, adopted and then defeated on a revote
5. The Articles of Faith: a new doctrinal standard for the Global Methodist Church
6. Restrictive Rules and the ...
