As 2026 dawns, The United Methodist Church enters a new era much like a chasing dog that caught a passing car: Now that they’ve got it, what do they do with it?
The UMC changed radically on Nov. 5, 2025, when the Council of Bishops announced church members and clergy voted overwhelmingly to ratify four constitutional amendments that restructured the worldwide denomination into a “connection” of eight co-equal regions. The restructure legally did away with the vestiges of colonialism through which the denomination resembled an octopus. Previously, the U.S. church formed a controlling head with sinuous appendages in Europe, Africa and Asia.
Despite vote totals of more than 90% each, the amendments failed to accomplish a clear roadmap into the future, because legislation doesn’t change hearts and minds.
Strident voices on social media have been gnawing at the minutia of the new UMC, contending the amendments and other changes enacted by the 2020/2024 General Conference are doomed to fail. However, that scenario roots itself in the U.S-dominated structure that held sway over the institution since it was formed in 1968.
The fact that the new regional organization grew from ideas proposed by one of the UMC’s outlying areas — the Philippines — still rankles those whose past dominance assured church political power.
“The UMC’s ‘America First’ faction lost out bigly, and they’re mad about it.”
In other words, the UMC’s “America First” faction lost out bigly, and they’re mad about it. Hence any attempt to make the new thing work automatically discredits it.
UMC regions beyond the United States aren’t faring well, either. Stirred up by traditionalist forces opposed to LGBTQ inclusion, parts of Africa have been particularly roiled by the restructure that gives them more authority over shaping ministry to meet their cultural contexts. Opposition to the UMC’s new stance on marriage especially inflames conflicts in Liberia, Nigeria and Zimbabwe, the three powerhouses of African United Methodism.
Lawsuits so far have ended with civil courts siding with the UMC’s institutional authority over its property and governance. Bishops and church communicators have been at great pains to explain that removing the 50-year-old taboo against sexual and gender variations as “incompatible with Christian teaching” doesn’t compel their region to violate either national law or cultural taboos. Stoked by disgust that “homosexuality” is a Western plague, opponents have riled local United Methodists to resistance, sometimes so physically violent that at least one pastor has died.
Ultimately, what may decide the UMC’s fate comes down to the same factor affecting so much institutional life: Money.
In the United States, the UMC lost 7,600 local churches to “disaffiliation” from 2019 through 2023. Some of the departing churches — mostly white, mostly rural — joined the traditionalist Global Methodist Church, but not all. With between a quarter and a third of its churches gone, the UMC understandably faces a sharp decline in its revenue.
This decline severely impacts the UMC beyond the United States in much the same way the withdrawal of U.S. foreign aid has harmed the world. African, Filipino and Eastern European churches have relied for decades on U.S. money, especially to pay clergy and fund missions.
Recently the president of the General Council on Finance and Administration warned the UMC’s financial house is “on fire” because of its deficits. Likewise, the General Board of Global Ministries, which includes the UMC’s “crown jewel” of outreach, the United Methodist Committee on Relief, launched “This Moment Matters,” a campaign aimed at getting church members to raise their “second mile” giving.
“The Council of Bishops has responded to the UMC’s institutional uncertainty by crafting a new vision statement.”
The Council of Bishops has responded to the UMC’s institutional uncertainty by crafting a new vision statement: “The United Methodist Church forms disciples of Jesus Christ who, empowered by the Holy Spirit, love boldly, serve joyfully and lead courageously in local communities and worldwide connections.” Shortened to “love boldly, serve joyfully and lead courageously,” the new vision has drawn both praise and critique.
While proponents extol the new vision as the logical embodiment of the new structure and inclusive precepts, critics deride it as a smokescreen for the UMC’s institutional challenges.
In many ways, the United Methodist Church’s circumstances resemble those of the United States of America in the period between the end of the Revolutionary War and the ratification of the U.S. Constitution. Leaders are fumbling to find ways to have vastly different cultures come together in a unified identity with a common purpose.
The Council of Bishops hopes its leadership conference in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, Oct 20–24, will shape the means to accomplish that purpose. Even avid supporters of the new UMC are looking askance at the event; its participants are being hand-picked by bishops, observers’ access remains murky despite the UMC’s “open meetings” rule, and it takes place in a country without an official United Methodist relationship.
Yet these criticisms of the bishops’ leadership conference simply mirror the UMC as it enters a new year and a new era. Some see the denomination crafting a new unity without requiring Western-dominated uniformity. Others believe the UMC has seriously lost its way and careens toward institutional catastrophe.
The way through such extremes likely will be torturous, often with only enough light for the next step. The overarching challenge remains whether United Methodists have enough faith to proceed into an uncertain future trusting God to show the way.
Cynthia Astle is a veteran journalist covering The United Methodist Church.