What can church leaders learn from the latest Clergy Age Trends report? Jonathan Page identifies three key takeaways for the church: cultivating calls to ministry among younger people, recognizing how changing family and vocational realities are reshaping itinerancy, and addressing the financial challenges that affect clergy recruitment and retention.
For two decades, the Lewis Center for Church Leadership has tracked clergy age trends in the United Methodist Church, providing annual reports to summarize the changing age profile of its clergy. I am grateful to Lovett Weems for his leadership and diligent efforts in creating the 2026 report and to all those who have played a role in bringing it forward. My hope is that the data and highlights offered in the report will offer key insights that speak to leaders in local churches, annual conferences, and judicatories.
In addition to what is shared in the report, I’d like to suggest three implications for church leadership coming away from this work.
1. Shifting the outcomes in clergy age trends will likely begin with clarifying our understanding of how younger people are being motivated to discern this vocational identity.
Imagine with me for a moment a scenario: you are a teenager who experiences a moment of calling. The Spirit speaks to you, calling you to a life of ordained ministry. You go to your pastor and ask, “How can I become an ordained clergyperson?”
In the United Methodist tradition, the pastor’s response would need to include, but not be limited to, the following:
- Completion of an undergraduate degree (most often taking four years).
- A candidacy certification process that often (though not necessarily) precedes seminary enrollment.
- Completion of a graduate degree (most often taking three years).
- Writing dozens of pages and responding to hours of oral interviews with a board.
- Completion of a residency process that is a minimum of two years but often longer.
- Another round of writing dozens of pages and responding to hours of oral interviews with a board.
- Being approved by the clergy session of your Annual Conference.
This is not meant to be a critique of vetting clergy for ordination—such a process is necessary for the health and long-term sustainability of the church. That said, when the process by which one is ordained is at least as involved as the process by which one becomes a medical doctor, there is a question about incentivization and what might motivate a young person to pursue pastoral ministry as a career.
In my experience, the two greatest predictors of organizational health are clear systems of motivation and accountability. The process for ordination has created clarity around the accountability part of that equation. The challenge annual conference and denominational leaders face in this era is one of motivation. There are some great efforts ongoing such as the Exploration event put on by the General Board of Higher Education and Ministry of the United Methodist Church. But trends would suggest what exists has not been solely sufficient in changing age-related outcomes.
The work of motivation starts in the local church. If you are a clergy or lay leader in a local church, how are you introducing ministry as a vocational identity to young people in your congregation and community? Not as a casual suggestion every once and a while, but intentionally speaking into the giftedness of young people in your network. For those in broader spaces of leadership, how are you resourcing leaders “on the ground” to journey with individuals experiencing a call to ministry? How are you creating spaces for shared discernment that focus on the work of the Holy Spirit more than institutional or denominational norms?
Amongst possible factors in shifting motivation tactics, leaders at every level should consider the role of mentoring, active engagement, and forms of sustainable incentivization if there is a desire to recruit younger people into professional ministry spaces.
2. There must be recognition that perspectives on itinerancy are not static.
Elevations in the number of young deacons could have a number of explanations. It could be that shifts in denominational polity that allow for deacons to have sacramental authority is impacting vocational discernment toward deacon orders. There is a possibility that emphases in the missional outreach of the church are fostering greater senses of vocational identity that align with the work of the deacon.
One other possibility that must be considered in the rise of deacons and the overall decline in numbers of young clergy is the role of itinerancy and shifts over time in family structure. Itinerancy in the United Methodist Church refers specifically to the commitment by pastors to go and serve wherever their bishops send them. Deacons do not benefit from a guaranteed appointment but, as such, are not subject to itinerancy in the same way elders and local pastors are. The itinerant model is a historic element of United Methodist polity and has been in practice for decades.
In recent years, however, there are increased barriers to true itineration. Clergy spouses may have a lucrative career that is only available in a certain geographic location. Children may have needs that are best attended to in a particular school setting. Clergy may be serving in civic roles such as city/town councils or school boards that have residential requirements. Most annual conferences offer some form of limiting itinerancy to itinerant clergy, but such an offer comes with a recognition that full-time appointments may not be available. Many annual conferences are seeing a rise in persons serving in extension ministry or pursuing forms of leave, especially when itinerancy becomes a challenge.
How can leaders respond to barriers to itinerancy while also avoiding prolonged appointments with reduced present or future effectiveness? This begins by recognizing and acknowledging the shifting landscape. Offering clarity around expectations of itinerancy and methodologies for maintaining familial connection while resourcing the needs of local churches is a big step.
3. Follow the money.
I don’t know of anyone who stepped into a clergy vocation because of what it pays. It is unrealistic (and probably unhealthy) for anyone discerning a call to ministry to expect to become wealthy through the work of the church. But money may play a role in both the recruitment and retention of clergy leadership.
On the recruitment end of the conversation, as seminaries face challenges from shifts in governmental policy, enrollment figures, and fundraising, there are instances where scholarship availability is running at a lower rate. Meanwhile, the cost of degrees continues to rise. Annual conferences and seminaries should be working together to discern tactics for creating affordable, sustainable solutions for student education and engagement. Exiting seminary with tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt has never been ideal; however, it is now not a sustainable model, and few individuals are willing to take on that level of indebtedness.
As for retention, local churches and annual conferences are facing challenges of reduced financial resources and increased costs for benefits and housing. Clergy leaders are not immune from these challenges; they absorb them through minimal or non-existent raise structures while expenses grow, functionally receiving pay cuts even if salaries are maintained.
Again, there is not a magic wand to wave in this situation. I do not know of a prayer we can offer that will make money grow on trees. But leaders at every level need to pay attention to how clergy pay and benefit structures impact retention rates while considering creative solutions to grow financial opportunities for clergy leadership. How could cooperative parishes and multi-point charges create opportunities for financial growth? What would it look like to use funds from closed churches to create bonus structures that reward effective clergy leadership? The resolution to this challenge will not come from a single source, but leaders will do well to engage multiple conversation points and partners as they consider how to address the financial impacts of clergy leadership.
We love to hear from our readers! If you have any comments, suggestions, or questions about this article, please leave a voice message directly from your computer, tablet, or smartphone via Speakpipe. You may also email lewiscenter@wesleyseminary.edu or leave a comment on Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and Bluesky.
Download the 2026 Clergy Age Trends Report.
Related Resources
- Exploration 2026, a United Methodist Church event where you’ll join a community of adults, 18 and older, who are exploring their purpose, calling, and future.
- United Methodist Clergy Age Trends in 2026 by Lovett H. Weems Jr.
- Declines in Young Clergy Reflect a Changed Culture by Lovett H. Weems Jr.
- A Call to Overinvest in the Young by Janice Huie
- Previous Clergy Age Trends reports
