Bishops See Opportunities, Challenges in Shared Administration

by

UMC Future

A United Methodist Insight Exclusive | April 23, 2026

Ever since American Methodism’s first bishop Francis Asbury rode on horseback to serve a circuit of churches, Methodist clergy have traveled to preach the gospel and minister to souls. Even the denomination’s top clergy, bishops, move in their assignments.

Today bishops are seen as the denomination’s CEOs, serving as the top administrators of regional church units known as annual conferences. Officially charged with the church’s “spiritual and temporal” leadership, bishops’ greatest influence on local churches frequently comes in making annual pastoral appointments. Hence, while pastors still move, past church leaders perceived bishops needed to be anchored to a geographic region to understand churches’ missional requirements in consultation with other leaders.

The system, from which the U.S. UMC drew its organizational identity, stemmed from two mergers. In 1939, three branches sundered by the Civil War reunited to form The Methodist Church. In 1968, the Methodist Church merged with its historically German counterpart, the Evangelical United Brethren Church, to create today’s United Methodist Church.

In both instances, jurisdictions formed as a way for the previous branches to preserve traditional identity. Unfortunately, jurisdictions also were a way to sustain institutional racism demanded by the southern church by creating the racially segregated Central Jurisdiction. Even when the Central Jurisdiction was abolished in the 1968 merger, jurisdictions still maintained cultural identity. A demographic study from the 1980s by the late sociologist Wade Clark Roof found the UMC wasn’t a single denomination but five different churches, each rooted in a geographic cultural tradition.

In 2024, this 85-year-old way of organizing the UMC’s administration in the United States changed dramatically. That year’s General Conference – the denomination’s highest legislative body – reduced the number of U.S. bishops from 39 to 32. The decision aimed to free funds to add bishops across Africa where the church is growing, and to account for diminshed resources after some 7,500 churches splintered off from 2019 to 2023.

The spirit of General Conference’s decision wasn’t all reactionary, but a way to equalize authority and influence across the worldwide denomination. While bishops previously had administered multiple conferences, as some still do, the 2024 assignment expanded the idea of episcopal itinerancy with two United Methodist bishops serving beyond the boundaries of the jurisdictions in which they were elected.

Bishop Debra Wallace-Padgett was assigned to oversee the Holston Conference in the Southeastern Jurisdiction and the adjacent West Virginia Conference in the Northeastern Jurisdiction. Holston covers parts of Tennessee, Georgia and Virginia, while West Virginia includes the state and a far-western portion of Maryland.

Following that model, Bishop Carlo A. Rapanut was assigned to administer the Desert Southwest Conference in the Western Jurisdiction and the New Mexico Conference in the South Central Jurisdiction. Desert Southwest encompasses Arizona and a portion of southeast Nevada, while New Mexico includes the state plus the El Paso, Texas, area.

These two assignments effectively discarded the old model, but the new model needed testing, if for no other reason than the demands placed on church administration by bishops’ traveling across hundreds of miles. Near the halfway point of their assignments, United Methodist Insight surveyed the cross-jurisdictional bishops regarding their experiences with shared administration. Here are their responses.

You’re almost two years into the extraordinary assignment of leading annual conferences in different jurisdictions. What have you learned thus far from the arrangement?

Bishop Rapanut: I have come to appreciate the uniqueness of each annual conference system and to hold that as a value so that I do not take a one-size-fits-all approach in my leadership. Instead I lean into the distinct gifts and needs of each system while exploring ways of cross-pollination in order to move them both forward towards vitality. I’ve only required the appointive cabinets to work jointly while encouraging other committees and groups to connect organically.

And yet in the uniqueness of each system, both are United Methodist and so there is enough of shared values and ways of doing things that makes the pivot in working from one conference to the other easy. Both conferences also share affinity in terms of the geography and demographics of the mission field which primes us for joint ministry engagements. (New Mexico Conference covers the state plus the El Paso, Texas, area, while Desert Southwest covers Arizona and the southeastern corner of Nevada.)

Bishop Wallace-Padgett: It has been a fast 19 months serving two conferences in two jurisdictions. Through this experience I have been reminded that United Methodists have many more commonalities than differences.

United Methodists in both jurisdictions as well as around the world emphasize personal piety and social holiness, speak often of grace, love God and others, are committed to making the world a better place, are justice seekers and strive to show hospitality to everyone.

We also face similar challenges and opportunities with a desire to reach as many people as possible, including younger and more diverse constituencies, dismantle racism, work for justice and live a Christian life in a rapidly changing world and culture.

I am glad to be United Methodist and privileged to serve God, the church and others in the Holston and West Virginia Conferences in the Southeastern and Northeastern Jurisdictions respectively.

What’s your biggest challenge?

Bishop Rapanut: I wouldn’t say “challenge” but the most important work of the past two years has been the building of trust and relationships. I was virtually an unknown entity to the folks in the New Mexico Conference before this assignment and so we needed to build relationships of trust that would serve as the foundation of our working with each other. The two conferences needed to learn to trust each other as well and learn the delicate give-and-take when it comes to sharing the time of the bishop.

Bishop Wallace-Padgett:  The biggest challenge has been finding a rhythm as I itinerate between the Holston and West Virginia Conferences. I alternate weeks in each Conference. That pattern is occasionally interrupted by denominational or World Methodist Conference responsibilitiesn (Bishop Wallace-Padgett currently is president of the World Methodist Council). Thankfully, by the end of year one, I had gained a sense of how to navigate the demands of my schedule.

Holston and West Virginia are both blessed with excellent assistants to the bishop, extended cabinets, district superintendents and executive assistants to the bishop. This makes all the difference for a bishop serving two conferences in two jurisdictions.

What feedback are you getting from clergy and laity in your conferences about this form of administration?

Bishop Rapanut: The feedback has been varied and spans a spectrum. There is genuine joy and appreciation from the cabinets who get to work together across conferences. There is excitement around the opportunity for these two relatively smaller annual conferences to model for the denomination a way of sharing episcopal leadership across jurisdictional boundaries. There is curiosity about how this would work long-term. There is openness to try out new things. There is genuine concern for my health and well-being. There is skepticism about the sustainability of this model. There are those who are standing back to wait and see. And there is stress in the dance of scheduling. All are good feedback as we figure this out.

Bishop Wallace-Padgett: Feedback shared with me through the Holston and West Virginia Committees on Episcopacy has been mostly positive about this arrangement. Though prior to 2022 each Conference was accustomed to their bishop serving only them, Holston and West Virginia are committed to doing their part in addressing our current United Methodist context in these years after a global pandemic and disaffiliation. Like other conferences and bishops around the connection, we are leaning into this season of recalibration.

How do you cope with the traveling and relationship distances?

Bishop Rapanut: We’ve had to redefine what it means for the bishop to be fully present, leaning into the gifts of technology and virtual communication. This has allowed me to be physically in one place but be virtually present for meetings in another. The travel schedule is grueling and there’s just no way around that. The key has been intentionality in scheduling so that trips are aren’t back-to-back without any margins in between for rest and recreation.

Bishop Wallace-Padgett: My husband, retired deacon Rev. Lee Padgett, is as committed as I am to making this arrangement work. As he drives us from one location to the next, I work from my car office with a hotspot, laptop, cell phone and earbuds.

My weeks in each Conference are filled with Extended Cabinet, Appointive Cabinet and other team and individual meetings as well as preaching and presenting. In addition, Zoom has become a friend with regular Cabinet check-ins and various meetings. 

How are you modeling appropriate self-care for your clergy?

Bishop Rapanut: For self-care, I try as much as I can to take a weekly day off as well as vacations. And when I’m off, I keep my boundaries in terms of checking my email and answering my phone. Among those I work closely with, I’ve set the expectation that unless there are dire emergencies, we would keep our texts and calls within 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. I am also intentional about prioritizing time for family. In scheduling meetings and engagements, I first mark my calendar with family events and our sons’ school and sports engagements and try as much as I can to work around those. For exercise, I cycle and swim regularly and have even entered a couple of long-distance bike races.

Bishop Wallace-Padgett: I observe a 24-hour sabbath each week. Though not always successful, I strive to also take at least an additional ½ day per week off. Also, I practice moments of sabbath daily, including double tasking with walking and prayer 30-40 minutes each morning, reading and studying Scripture and spending time with my husband, Lee. I also connect regularly with family and friends. The self-care enriches my life.

Do you see your cross-jurisdiction assignment as a future option for The United Methodist Church or a temporary expediency?

Bishop Rapanut: If episcopal leadership and presence is truly valued, the UMC, particularly in the US, will have to live into a structure and a support system that allows for that value to be fully experienced with realistic expectations that would not overburden its episcopal leaders. Vital experiential information can be gleaned from all the current cross-conference assignments to help inform how we move forward.

Bishop Wallace-Padgett: In some instances, cross-jurisdictional assignments are effective models. It depends on the affected jurisdictions, conferences and bishops. It is important as a church to have as many options as possible on the table and remain flexible and nimble as we innovate how we will live into the future.

Veteran religion journalist Cynthia B. Astle serves as Editor of United Methodist Insight, which she founded in 2011 as a media channel to amplify news and views for, by and about marginalized and under-served United Methodists.