Beginning in the spring of 2029, United Methodists in the United States will see reports of the first meeting of a new governance body, the U.S. Regional Conference. Heather Hahn reported for United Methodist News Service on July 20 that the first meeting of a committee of laity and clergy appointed by the Council of Bishops had set the first session to take place before or after Easter in 2029. The specific dates are yet to be finalized.
History and Background – Central Conferences and Autonomous Conferences
United Methodism is worldwide in its witness and ministry, and United Methodism in the U.S. is richer because of these historic and ongoing connections. Many United Methodists from the U.S have had the opportunity to spend time among worldwide United Methodists and see the sacrificial discipleship from which the U.S. church can learn. Conferences outside this country are called Central Conferences. United Methodism also has ties to autonomous conferences that have no structural or governance ties to United Methodism. Some autonomous conferences were once part of the U.S. structure, and many continuing connections exist.
Central Conferences participate, along with all U.S. Annual Conferences, in General Conference. Equal lay and clergy delegates are elected by the respective conferences every four years. At one time the percentage of Central Conference delegates to General Conference was small. Today, given the rapid growth of United Methodism in many Central Conferences, delegates from outside the U.S. make up over 40 percent of the delegates.
The membership growth among United Methodism in other countries can be encouraging for United Methodists from the U.S. even while recognizing dramatic differences in cultural assumptions that make dialogue and some governance issues challenging. The theological and cultural dynamics related to sexuality issues, for example, have in recent decades sometimes made common policies difficult to achieve. However complicated these challenges are, the richness of relationships, shared support, and partnership continue.
Regional Conferences
While the General Conference sets policy for the entire denomination, Central Conferences have had the right for many years to modify some policies to fit their cultural contexts. This was essential, since for much of our shared history, virtually all policies assumed a U.S. context. The emergence of Regional Conferences is intended to build on the experience of Central Conferences and give regions of the world the opportunity to make modifications to fit their situations, including the United States region. Some basic components of United Methodism related to theology, history, polity, and Wesleyan heritage cannot be modified except by the General Conference.
Regional Conferences were approved by the General Conference meeting in 2024 and ratified by the annual conferences. The denomination is restructuring into nine Regional Conferences. This transition puts all geographic regions—the U.S. and former Central Conferences in Africa, Europe, and the Philippines—on equal legislative footing, empowering each region to contextualize church law and ministries for their own environments. The nine Regional Conferences are: East Africa, Mid Africa, Southern Africa, West Africa, Philippines, Central and Southern Europe, Germany, Nordic-Baltic-Ukraine, and United States.
Regional conferences are essential for context-appropriate leadership given the global composition of the denomination today. Frequently conversations about the global church begin with claims that the denomination is too “U.S.-centric.” Surely that is the case given its history. But there is a sense in which the United Methodist Church should be U.S.-centric in the same way it also needs to be Africa-centric or Asia-centric. To think that we can effectively take structures designed primarily for one nation and extend them into global entities is likely to mean that no group has what it needs. Therefore, a more modest role of General Conference in the future can make possible far greater decision-making for Regional Conferences.
Roles of General and Regional Conferences
It continues to be the role of the General Conference to define and clarify the history, theology, mission, and values of the United Methodist Church that all components of United Methodism affirm and share globally. To achieve clarity of identity and purpose along with the essential corresponding coherence throughout the new Regional Conferences, the work of the General Conference will need to be quite focused to be effective.
The Regional Conferences will then depend on the work of the General Conference to make sure that in all that they do, there is careful attention that they are always aligned with the General Conference’s work on Wesleyan identity, mission, and values.
One could say that Regional Conferences will make sure that all their actions flow from these General Conference’s definitions and agreements and are:
Identity-shaped
Mission-driven
Values-bounded
Context-appropriate
Now, the Regional Conferences will be able to bring the new dimensions that only a body closer to the regional circumstances can bring. Their work will need to be:
Context-appropriate
Demography-driven
In seminary I learned from James F. White three criteria for making decisions regarding appropriate worship practices: historical, theological, and pastoral. No one of the three is sufficient as a guide. One may be able to justify a practice on historical and theological grounds that would not be pastorally appropriate for a particular congregation. Such a practice may actually get in the way of meeting spiritual needs. In denominational life, the word “context” serves a purpose similar to White’s use of “pastoral.”
All actions throughout denominational life must be identity-shaped, mission-driven, values-bounded, and they must also be context-appropriate. Indeed, this is the primary motivating purpose in the creation of Regional Conferences. Different contexts require a degree of flexibility and nimbleness to manifest the identity, mission, and values in ways appropriate for their situations.
In the early decades when Methodism spread in England and North America, as David Hempton has noted, it “changed and adapted to new contexts, but it remained recognizably Methodist, not just evangelical, wherever it became established.” He goes on to use a biological metaphor of Methodism as “a recognizable religious species” that “grew, adapted, and procreated according to the suitability of its environmental conditions.”1
In the United States, adaptability came easily for the early preachers because their context was the only world they knew. “They were natives in the early republican world of egalitarianism, geographic mobility, and the religious free market,” notes John Wigger, “a world in which the older denominations were still but immigrants.”2
Notice how Hempton uses the word “recognizable” to describe the early Methodists. The Methodists expressed their faith in ways appropriate for their context but always knew they were different from the larger society. In the U.S., Methodists moved from subculture to counterculture to virtual identification with the predominant culture.3 This cultural identification that can erase the counter-status-quo nature of the gospel is always a danger. There is inevitable tension between adapting to one’s context and becoming captive to it.
The fear of cultural captivity is not an excuse not to engage a changing culture. While United Methodism is now more on the sidelines of U.S. culture than in the past, it is by no means a marginal religious sect. But we know that no living things continue to thrive generation by generation without environmental adaptability.
Demography-driven
A community recently celebrated a citywide religious observance that sought to bring together all the churches of that community. It was an impressive gathering in many ways. However, I was struck that the only persons of color present were those participating as part of a Girl Scout troop that shared in a presentation of flags. I could not help but think of Frances Hesselbein that day.
Frances Hesselbein was for many years the leader of the Girl Scouts of the USA. During her tenure with the Girl Scouts, the organization prospered in traditional ways. They grew, did well financially, and received recognition for effectiveness in fulfilling their mission. A major part of their renewed direction came from a commitment that the Girl Scouts would more accurately represent the increasingly diverse population of America than it had in the past. Hesselbein recognized that the racial, ethnic, and economic demographics of girls in the country were changing with the growth coming from outside the traditional Girl Scout constituency. She realized that the future of the Girl Scouts would not be strong if the organization did not broaden its base. It was Hesselbein who came up with one of the great leadership questions of all time. She asked that everyone associated with the Girl Scouts use this question regularly – “When the girls of a community look at the Girl Scouts, do they see themselves?”
Today racial diversity is a hallmark of Girl Scouts and an inspiration for other organizations. It was Hesselbein’s linking of identity, mission, values, and demographics that led to the turnaround for the Girl Scouts. Each Regional Conference will need to monitor and respond to their changing demographics if there is to be future relevance and viability for United Methodism within their regions. In the United States, the growing racial diversity of the population will continue to be one of the most pronounced demographic realities in the coming decades. Understanding this growing diversity, as well as understanding other changing demographic indicators, is essential to a vital United Methodist witness in the country.
Do Regional Conferences Jeopardize a Worldwide United Methodism?
Decisions have consequences, often unknown and unintended. There is a natural concern that elements of the United Methodist Church as a worldwide church may be lost with the increased focus on regions.
The commitment to a worldwide church is strong within the United Methodist Church. However, we need to acknowledge that the goal of a worldwide church has not received the sustained and appropriate attention the topic deserved over the years.
Many denominations have constituencies in multiple countries. However, there is a significant range of ways those relationships are handled. Most denominations recognize the challenge of working across many languages and cultures. Despite the far-flung reach of the United Methodist Church, there has not always been clarity about its understanding of the worldwide character of the denomination and its implications. Earlier models of domination and control do not work. The future requires true equality and partnership not always well demonstrated through past structures.
Even as United Methodism embarks on a new structure with Regional Conferences, the ongoing theological and practical assessment of the challenges and opportunities to become a truly worldwide church requires sustained attention.
Notes
[i] David Hempton, Methodism: Empire of the Spirit (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2005), 203-204.
[ii] John H. Wigger, Taking Heaven by Storm: Methodism and the Rise of Popular Christianity (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998), 79.
[iii] Wigger, Taking Heaven by Storm, 193.
To purchase An Aura of Hope: United Methodism’s Next Chapter in the United States
David Hempton, Methodism: Empire of the Spirit (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2005), 203-204.
John H. Wigger, Taking Heaven by Storm: Methodism and the Rise of Popular Christianity (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998), 79.
Wigger, Taking Heaven by Storm, 193.
Thanks so much. This is a good overview of the concept of regionalization.
Your knowledge of "how things work" in the UMC is vast and helpful to the rest of us as the new UMC emerges regionally and globally. I also find your ability to hold sociology and theology in a dynamic relationship to be vital. Thank you.