Petition 8 Jurisdictions Study Brief

Fostering Equitable Relationships in The UMC by Examining the Future of Jurisdictions

The Connectional Table has released the Petition 8 Jurisdictions Study Brief, a qualitative research document examining how jurisdictional structures in The United Methodist Church affect relationships, representation, and ministry across the denomination. The study draws on 71 interviews conducted from July to December 2025 with laity, clergy, bishops, and denominational leaders from the United States, Africa, Europe, and the Philippines.

↓ Download the Study Brief (PDF)

By the Numbers

About the Study

Petition 8 of Worldwide Regionalization authorized the Connectional Table and the Standing Committee of Regional Conference Matters Outside the United States to conduct a formal study on the future of jurisdictions within The United Methodist Church — both in the United States and in Central and Regional Conferences around the world.

The Connectional Table, mandated by ¶905.6 of the Book of Discipline to provide leadership in research, commissioned the study to build a foundation for denominational discernment. The resulting brief was prepared by United Ministries Intern Grace Sill and published in January 2026.

The study set out to answer three core questions:

1. Should jurisdictions be kept in the United States, and if so, in what form?
2. Do Regional Conferences outside of the U.S. desire jurisdictions in their regions?
3. How can The UMC prepare for potential structural changes to jurisdictions?

Historical Context: Jurisdictions and Their Origins

In 1939, the race-based Central Jurisdiction was created as a controversial compromise to facilitate the merger of the Methodist Protestant Church, the Methodist Episcopal Church, and the Methodist Episcopal Church South. The Central Jurisdiction structurally prevented Black and African American bishops from serving white, southern churches — institutionalizing racial segregation within The Methodist Church.

In 1968, the Central Jurisdiction was eliminated as a condition for the Evangelical United Brethren Church to merge with The Methodist Church, forming The United Methodist Church. While the Central Jurisdiction had institutionalized segregation, it had also created pathways for Black and African American clergy and leadership. Its dissolution — without adequate structural protections in place — eliminated those pathways.

The brief notes that since 1939, racism and colonialism embedded in Methodist institutional structures have been "repeatedly studied and interrogated," yet previous studies commissioned by General Conference have been unable to initiate lasting changes to The UMC's polity and structures.

“The UMC has created places and spaces for power to become centralized.”

Today, the ratification of regionalization, membership decline in the United States, growth in Africa, and declining financial resources are urging The UMC to address the legacies of racism and colonialism that persist in jurisdictional structures.

How the Study Was Conducted

The qualitative study was organized by the Connectional Table and conducted from July to December 2025 by United Ministries Intern Grace Sill. Researchers intentionally reached out to laity and clergy representing a cross-section of UMC caucuses, groups, and diverse racial-ethnic, age, and gender identities. Some interviewees from Africa, Europe, and the Philippines submitted written responses to accommodate language differences and scheduling needs.

Organizations Represented Among Interviewees

• Standing Committee on Central Conference Matters
• Interjurisdictional Episcopacy Committee
• Christmas Covenant
• Reconciling Ministries Network
• Black Methodists for Church Renewal
• Pacific Islander National Caucus of United Methodists
• Young People's Connectional Network

Racial and Ethnic Composition of Interviewees

Note: As a qualitative study, participant demographics are descriptive and do not claim to be statistically representative of the full denomination.

Key Findings

Across U.S. and international participants, the study surfaced consistent themes about jurisdictions' effect on trust, power, and ministry — while also identifying important differences in perspective between U.S. members and those from other regions.

1. Most U.S. members interviewed support eliminating or amending jurisdictions following General Conference 2028.
2. 95% of African, European, and Filipino interviewees did not support implementing jurisdictions in their region. All interviewees from Europe and the Philippines stated their current institutional structures meet their needs. The majority of African interviewees viewed regionalization as a good step toward equity and did not believe jurisdictions would benefit Africa.
3. Jurisdictions reinforce divisions that have allowed white churches in the U.S. to centralize power based on higher membership and financial resources.
4. Jurisdictions reinforce a lack of trust. Because they were created to separate, interviewees stated they continue to generate distrust across the denomination. The recent tension involving the appointment of an SEJ bishop to an NEJ annual conference was cited as a current example.
5. Interviewees named the Connectional Table as a trusted, neutral space to facilitate conversations on racism and de-colonialism across the connection.
6. Multiple interviewees stated The UMC has an accountability to repent for the racist history embedded in jurisdictional structures since 1939.

“What might it look like to lean into the very best part of our identity and dream the next possibility?”

Conclusion and Path Forward

The study's findings support The UMC initiating a denominational-wide time of repentance and discernment on racism and colonialism — in collaboration with the Connectional Table and the General Boards and Agencies — before pursuing structural changes to jurisdictions. The brief identifies General Conference 2032 or 2036 as the horizon for potential changes to jurisdictional polity.

A key caution in the brief: without intentional theological transformation, The UMC risks repeating the harms of 1968, when the Central Jurisdiction was dissolved without adequate structural protections for Black and African American representation and leadership.

The brief also notes that regionalization must be further clarified and solidified before the church can fully address jurisdictional structures. Once the effects of regionalization on current structures are better understood, The UMC can “courageously re-imagine if another structure better supports regional ministry, regional relationships, and the U.S. episcopacy.”

Six Questions for Ongoing Denominational Discernment

The brief closes by naming six unresolved questions that The UMC must address in the years ahead. These are offered not as conclusions, but as an invitation to continued discernment at all levels of the church.

1. How can U.S. Bishops be elected without jurisdictions?
2. How can we keep jurisdictions' ability to develop relationships while removing bureaucracy? Can we elevate jurisdictional life and lose the bureaucratic aspect?
3. Who could be harmed or lose power and voice through proposed structural changes?
4. How can the church celebrate the unity in our diversity?
5. How do we confront the racist history and contexts of jurisdictions that continue to permeate The UMC?
6. What is that space between a Regional Conference and an Annual Conference that would allow for conversations to happen at a higher level, but still with fair representation and better systems of power?

Read the Full Study Brief

Download the complete Petition 8 Jurisdictions Study Brief to explore the full methodology, findings, and analysis.

↓ Download the PDF

Questions or comments about this study?
Contact Rev. Grace Killian, Connectional Ministries Associate: [email protected]