The following is an entry in the Big Data and the UMC series: how data can help disrupt false narratives in the Church.
We’ve heard over and over that “The Southern USA rules the United Methodist Church.” When we use the boundaries set by the United Methodist Church, this might be the case. But when we apply different models that better account for cultural context, we get a very different story as to what is the dominant cultural force in the United Methodist Church.
The Model: American Nations
The picture above depicts Colin Woodard’s 2011 book American Nations, a history of 11 rival regional cultures that eventually became the United States of America. We know the Yankees and the Deep South, but what about Tidewater and New Netherland? Woodard draws out the cultural similarities of these regions as well as what differentiated them during colonial times. You can read some primers/reviews of Woodard’s book here, here, here, and here, as well as more maps using this lens here and here.
I find Woodard’s book and sketch to be pretty accurate. Having grown up & served churches in Greater Appalachia, studied in Yankeedom, and now live in the Left Coast, I’ve had both an insiders and an outsiders’ view to these regions, and I find Woodard’s rough sketches to be pretty accurate, as well as helpful to me as a minister to these regions. Many folks critique the book by pointing to the high level of mobility these days (my own story above being an example) and thus how the people who reside in these regions were not necessarily from there. But by and large, I find value in the model overall.
The Model and the UMC
The originating culture of the United Methodist Church came about alongside the birth of the United States of America. You can see the mutual impact in our history (we were born during the Revolution, split during the civil war, and did our last major unification after WW2), our structure (three branches: legislative, executive, and judicial), and our regions (our jurisdictions are in place so Northern bishops can’t serve in the South). It would then make sense to apply this model of American development to the UMC as it came about around the same time all these originating cultures existed.
While the United Methodist Church is now a worldwide church, with many nations large and small, we will use the term “nation” in Woodard’s vernacular as referring to the founding nations of America.
Let’s now apply this model of eleven cultures to the United Methodist Church (actually ten, as one culture is just in Canada). When we take the Annual Conferences of the United Methodist Church in 2013 (the last year we have the data), here’s what it looks like:
59 Annual Conferences in 5 regions (though some have merged since 2013). But if we overlay the Woodard book, look at what we get (click to enlarge).
This is a bit confusing, but it’s the best combination of two maps I could find that more or less lined up (everyone makes America taller or wider in ways that don’t cause East and West Coasts to line up, so this is the best I could do).
Some curiosities:
- Illinois is the most perfectly segmented by Nation in the United Methodist Church. The Northern Illinois conference (Chicago) is perfectly The Midlands, whereas Illinois/Great Rivers is perfectly Greater Appalachia.
- California is also segmented by nation with the dividing line between California-Pacific and California-Nevada conferences being exactly where Woodard puts the dividing line between El Norte (San Diego area) and The Left Coast (which is essentially Los Angeles to Seattle).
- Yes, the Texas Conference is very different from the rest of Texas because it is almost 100% Deep South, whereas the rest of Texas is mostly Greater Appalachia with a bit of El Norte.
- Great Plains (the merger of Kansas West, East, and Nebraska) is the most diverse, drawing about equal proportions from three nations: The Midlands, Greater Appalachia, and the Far West.
Evaluating the Nations of the UMC
To answer the question of “who rules the UMC?” we will evaluate the United Methodist Church’s power structure based on two criteria:
- Worship attendance
- Church membership
Both of the above are considered ways to evaluate vitality: the most vital churches are the ones with a healthy balance of people in the pews, names on the rosters, and dollars in the plates (we’re saving the finances for a future post). While these are false proxies as they do not accurately evaluate who is most vital or the best disciple, I will use them for their ease of comparison.
To apply this model, I divided the Conferences into the Nations (See the list – pdf) and then added up the population or attendance in each from the 2013 UMC Data (see end of post). One acknowledged variable is that our Annual Conferences do not always fall neatly over Woodard’s lines (though they often do!). In those cases, I’ve made an executive criteria: if most of the conference is in one region, I put it in one. If it falls into two pretty evenly, I gave half its value to each. I don’t know them all so it may be one nation within an Annual Conference has higher attendance/membership than the other, but outside of going county-by-county, this rough sketch is the best we’re gonna get at the moment.
Worship Attendance & Membership
Using the list alongside the 2013 data of membership and attendance, here’s how the Nations compare with regard to worship attendance at the end of 2013:
| Nation | Attendance | Percentage |
| Greater Appalachia | 1,030,222.50 | 35.42 |
| Deep South | 663,646.50 | 22.82 |
| The Midlands | 423,144.00 | 14.55 |
| Yankeedom | 249,193.00 | 8.57 |
| Tidewater | 162,685.50 | 5.59 |
| Far West | 161,197.00 | 5.54 |
| New Netherland | 75,816.00 | 2.61 |
| El Norte | 88,939.50 | 3.06 |
| Left Coast | 33,130.50 | 1.14 |
| New France | 20,377.50 | 0.7 |
| TOTAL | 2,908,352.00 |
Here’s how the Nations compare with regard to church membership at the end of 2013:
| American Nation | UM Membership | Percentage |
| Greater Appalachia | 2,656,707.00 | 36.39 |
| Deep South | 1,633,505.00 | 22.38 |
| The Midlands | 1,054,293.50 | 14.44 |
| Yankeedom | 614,256.00 | 8.41 |
| Tidewater | 475,794.50 | 6.52 |
| Far West | 331,476.00 | 4.54 |
| New Netherland | 207,492.50 | 2.84 |
| El Norte | 191,222.50 | 2.62 |
| Left Coast | 74,880.50 | 1.03 |
| New France | 60,125.50 | 0.82 |
| Total | 7,299,753 |
Summary: Barring other (significant) factors for the purposes of comparison, the cultural conditions of Greater Appalachia currently result in the greatest compatibility with the United Methodist Church’s mission and ministry. Greater Appalachia serves as the linchpin for two cultures that are highly different: the Midlands and the Deep South. By pairing cultural values with either of them, they reach 51% of the membership. Greater Appalachia is the strongest cultural force in the United Methodist Church, with a land mass that spans the midwest, to the plains of Oklahoma, to Texas, and the northern parts of what is considered to be “the South.”
Considerations
There are serious problems with evaluating power based on attendance and membership. Regarding attendance, in my culture of the None Zone, many of my most dedicated members attend bible studies, outreach events, and volunteer opportunities 2-3 times a week, but are only in worship 1-2 times a month. Why are they only counted in one aspect? Regarding membership, Hispanic and Asian communities can have roadblocks to church membership as some are undocumented and may worship regularly but do not want to be “listed” in an official capacity. So at best, these are false proxies that are problematic for the biggest mission areas of the church (minority populations and the secular West) but they benefit the one area where there’s the most power (Greater Appalachia), so changing our evaluative process is an uphill slog.
Thoughts?
I have a lot to draw from this map, but I wanted to gauge people’s perceptions of it first. One of the things we are proud of here at Hacking Christianity is our willingness to delve deep into data and draw some helpful narratives out of it. In our quest to be the Nate Silver of the UMC, we believe there are some conclusions that can be drawn from data and hopefully this was helpful for you.
Thoughts? Please comment and share!
====
Disclaimer: “The statistical data included herein were provided at no charge by the General Council on Finance and Administration of The United Methodist Church (GCFA) and may be obtained directly from GCFA, PO Box 340020, Nashville, TN 37203-0029. This data is proprietary and is owned by GCFA and may not be used in any commercial or exploitative way, to make a financial profit, or in a manner that defames the United Methodist denomination or its agencies or organizations. GCFA does not endorse any particular use of the data or accept responsibility for its interpretation or analysis by another.”
Thanks for the reference to me!
There is a pattern of Methodism that seems to be enriched in the western section of the Midlands. I mention it in More Maps of the American Nations. The settlement appears to follow the historical Santa Fe trail, and may be related.
See also my post:
Religions of the American Nations | JayMan’s Blog
Thanks for your work, Jay! Very helpful.
RE: “There are serious problems with evaluating power based on attendance and membership.” As long as General Conference allocates delegates based upon membership when practically no conference in the United States still uses membership to figure apportionments, membership will be a factor in doling out political power. The problem is: some jurisdictions who want to maintain political power have no motivation to keep their membership rolls updated, so they adopt the Baptist method of “once you are a member, you remain a member,” while other jurisdiction keep their rolls updated and it works to their disadvantage politically. It might also be noted: in those jurisdictions where there is growth in membership/attendance, the growth is still not keeping up with the population growth trend, which means we are still losing market share — the regional pundits that want to brag notwithstanding.
You’ve preempted my future work on “The tyranny of Charge Conference membership removal” (hopefully with a better title). Good comment. 🙂
That will be an interesting post for sure.
Great point! I look forward to the blog post about this.
I take issue with the article right out of the gate as the assertions that Illinois is perfectly segmented…hogwash. Several counties from the northern areas of the IGRC are indeed Midlands. As a pastor who has served in both the northern and southern areas of the IGRC…they are as different as night and day.
Mark, thanks for your comment. It is helpful to be pointed out from people in the context where the model falls short!
I smiled when I read your “perfectly segmented” comment about Illinois. There may a teeny-weeny bit of truth there. FWIW, here in the Northern Illinois Conference (within our geographically small conference) we often talk about two parts to the conference: west of the Fox River and east of the Fox River. This is the polite way of talking about Greater Chicago “versus” the rest of Northern Illinois (i.e. “city/suburbs” versus “rural”).
The same is true in Pa…..We have some areas that are definitely liberal and other parts of the state Very Evangelical….NW district is liberal and is a big problem in deviding the church….We have been losing members because of Bishop Johnsons past support of the LGBTQ….She/The U.M Church have lost a lot of support from the church’s members….and the conferences are sheer confusion and division….as long as this issue is the center of the church…we will continue to lose members so Evangelical and Liberal views has a big effect on membership right now and will continue to lose the UM Church members in the US…..Praise God for the Church in Africa and other Countries that are preventing us from going down that slippery slope to Distruction….But only for a little while….Many members are ready to walk out and will do so shortly if the UM Church does not go back to supporting the Word of God and Book of Discipline…and I am one of them!!
Sonja, you make a well known and ignored (by progressives) point! I too have thanked God in His faithfulness with the anchor the oversees church provides the US church. I don’t know if those who exercise authority OVER scripture will ever repent and be reformed or if the UMC will split. I say, don’t go based on frustration, only go is God leads you to go. There is always a faithful remnant!
This is a great article! I am wondering (and hoping!) if these numbers will influence those in this community with a progressive theological lens?
Having grown up in the Northern IL Conference, I agree with those speaking of the NIC (and mindset of Chicago ties) and IGRC. Also, it might be helpful to remember IL was a split state during the Civil War, which could well tie to the division you’ve noted in Midlands vs. Greater Appalachia.
I look forward to spending more time on this.
The assertion that Greater Appaltia is the strongest cultural force in UM politics may be a misnomer. We have “swing” states in US politics because that system is winner take all (in electoral votes) that is far from the case when it comes to voting delegates at General Conference.
I see your point rkirby, but I suspect (and this is anecdotal) that the delegates from that “nation” are likely to vote similarly. That is an area that values tradition, and I suspect often sends the same delegates back GC after GC. I remember at the GC here in Tampa, they honored some lady who had been a delegate at 10 GCs. Think about that. That means that for 40 years, that Annual Conference had the same delegate.
One of the things the UMC has got to do is put term limits on delegates, but that’s another topic.
The premise that somehow influence should be based on cultural factors presupposes a very flawed assumption that culture should be influencing Christianity. Instead, Christianity should be influencing culture. However, we know that faith must be put in context of culture (e.g., Paul in Athens), but in Christ there should be no slave or free, male or female, Grek or Jew, Greater Apoalachian or Yankeedom!
where are you from Doug? haha
Christianity should be influencinng culture more than the other way around.
It never has. Not even before Nicea I.
Correction on your comment Re Los Angeles. In the 11Nations map it is firmly in the El Norte nation. The Far West line is well above Santa Barbara. (Which is also in the El Norte nation.)
Your comment about the line between Cal-Nevada and California-Pacific Annual Conferences is accurate. It tracks the 11 Nations line.
Also there is some recent data regarding viral churches that may be very helpful to factor into your analysis. Have you seen that info?
Interesting work, Jeremy! I believe from what I remember there are some southeast conferences which do not purge the rolls and therefore have more voting power than actual membership. I try to get my folks to remove people who have left town but encounter great resistance: well, maybe they will move back one day… but theoretically it keeps them from joining another church. As if people had that sense of commitment to a worshiping community any more.
Those attendance stats are terrible for all areas! Good grief! Less than 40% in the best area! Less than 1% in the worst? How do those churches function? It is clear that God is not real in the daily lives of the majority of people who claim to be United Methodist! If God was present they would be in worship! Nuff said…
I thought this was going to be about how international the UMC of today is. The fact is, before too long we will be a majority African denomination. Now, Africa is a MASSIVE place, and as someone who visits there regularly, not monolithic either. But, we would do well to remember that soon the primary influence culturally on the UMC will be African, not North American.
Excellent point Ryan, and that influence is going to be further detrimental to the UMC in North America.
the African church is faithful to sound doctrine and that is a great thing!! They are also persecuted, it seems those two facts go together, the US church is often times lazy. I am glad we will have their influence!
Thanks, Ryan and BJohn, for bringing up the growing influence of the Central Conferences in the power structure of the UMC. And I think it is detrimental to both the U.S. Conferences and to the African and other Central Conferences.
We need to admit that our UMC grew up during the Colonial Period when our missionaries were sent out to the “underdeveloped” world to “save” them and “civilize” them and were often used by the great colonial powers for specifically that purpose. While the Colonies have gained their political freedom from their Colonial masters, they are still tied to our UMC world organization.
We are seeing some of the same sins that we could accuse the Colonial powers of committing, namely using “the colonial troops” to fight our battles at home. This does no good for either the U.S. Church or the Central Conferences. They have very important issues of their own that are often not even brought up or given short shrift at General Conference, such as female genital mutilation, witchcraft, slavery, transparency, nepotism, etc. etc. Embroiling them in our battles about abortion, homosexuality and Women’s rights relegates them to the role of mercenary.
At the same time the American UMC can no longer afford transporting over fifty percent of delegates from Africa and elsewhere to play that mercenary role at GC. With declining membership and stressed finances it is becoming increasingly resentful of it.
We need to seriously consider re-designing our world structure that gives more autonomy to the various continents or regions with only the most significant and universal of issues coming to a World Body or General Conference. Social issues should be considered at a more local level and not be forced upon the whole world by a single body.
amen Paul!
I think the African Bishops, at least, are realizing this.