What does it take and how do you join an Anglican Church? What will be asked of you and what do you have to consent to?
It may depend on the church. I live in England so the Anglican church here is the Church of England. What would happen depends on where you are now. If you are not baptised: You would be baptised and confirmed. If you are baptised but not confirmed: You would be confirmed. If you are baptised and confirmed: You would be received into the Church by a bishop (usually at a confirmation service). All the above options would be preceded by an appropriate period of catechesis.
I'm considering joining the church at last in the next year or so. I have a fascimile of the 1611 KJV with the deuterocanon, a copy of the 1662 BCP with Hymns A&M, and the 1928 BCP. We only have two very small traditional Anglican churches here in the city, with the one nearest me being the biggest and uses the 1928 BCP, which is the reason I bought it to begin with. Looking forward to having my certificates signed in it. The other one which is further away is even smaller, but if they're brothers in the Lord, I'll gladly visit them someday too.
Unfortunately, many US Anglican churches do not take confirmation seriously and will admit someone as a member in good standing without so much as a question about or suggestion of confirmation. Then there is the matter of whether the confirmation was performed by a bishop or not. Certain segments of American Anglicanism are notorious for accepting confirmation from many sources, including churches that don't even claim an episcopal polity. In this sense, they have made confirmation more an affirmation of faith than a sacrament.
In the Anglican tradition, you can have things which are sacred, but not sacraments, because a sacrament has to fit a very strict definition, formulated by St. Augustine (and thus for him and for the Fathers, confirmation wasn't a sacrament). Things don't have to be sacraments, to be sacred. Marriage for example is not a sacrament, and yet is more sacred than the sacraments, because it was instituted for Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, whereas something like Baptism was only instituted in the 1st century AD. So if Confirmation is not a sacrament, then how is it sacred? Because it is far from being a mere affirmation of faith. Confirmation is very holy, because it is a completion of baptism, when the holy ghost descends upon us. Baptism is when we are born again, and at confirmation we receive the holy ghost. Anyway, yeah I agree with you, this teaching has fallen on hard times, and we have to work hard to reaffirm the classical Anglican doctrine.
I'm in the US and this exactly the procedure/s at our church. I came from the RCC so I was 'received' by our Bishop.
It certainly is, my wife, who’s an American, joined me in our local ACNA church plant in Illinois. She was baptised and confirmed into the church. I’m CofE and was sworn in years ago.
Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, Eph 1:14 Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory. 1Co 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. These verses say that a person receives the promised Holy Spirit when he first believes, and that the Holy Spirit is the One who baptizes us into Christ's body on earth. The Bible says we are brought into God's family spiritually, by God's grace, through faith. Yet water baptism is a physical deed. In the 10th Chapter of Acts, Peter taught the Gospel to a group of gentiles; before he could finish speaking, they (apparently believing what they were hearing about Jesus' death and resurrection) received the Holy Spirit. They were baptized in water soon thereafter. Perhaps Confirmation is a time when a believer might receive a greater infilling of the Holy Spirit, resulting in a greater state of readiness to live as a disciple of Christ should live? So that "rivers of living water" flow out of the Confirmed believer? What comes to mind is comparing a half-full glass of water, to a glass so full the water is flowing over the top and touching others who come in contact.
I guess we could start a thread on Confirmation. The locus classicus for the fact that the Holy Ghost isn’t (fully) received in Baptism is Acts chapter 8, verse 16: Acts 8 (KJV) [14] Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: [15] Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: [16] (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) [17] Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost. [18] And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, …
If so, does that mean that I'm so full I'm bursting, since I was confirmed in both the Episcopal Church and the RCC?
Now, the interesting thing about this passage is that this reception of the Holy Spirit could be outwardly witnessed. Was it the same outward sign as in Acts 2, Acts 10, and Acts 19? Some people think so. But, was the laying on of hands in Acts 8 a Confirmation ceremony? Or something different? Not sure.
This passage is important to the discussion taking place (Acts 19:1-7). Paul at Ephesus 19 And it happened, while Apollos was at Corinth, that Paul, having passed through the upper regions, came to Ephesus. And finding some disciples 2 he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” So they said to him, “We have not so much as heard whether there is a Holy Spirit.” 3 And he said to them, “Into what then were you baptized?” So they said, “Into John’s baptism.” 4 Then Paul said, “John indeed baptized with a baptism of repentance, saying to the people that they should believe on Him who would come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.” 5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 6 And when Paul had laid hands on them, the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied. 7 Now the men were about twelve in all.
Right. So baptism is not the same thing as having hands being laid on you. And you can be baptized but not (as yet) have any connection with the Holy Spirit.
I was in the hospital recently or one of those places that do group therapy because I was taken in by authorities for expressing homocidal tendencies towards bishops and other Roman catholics who left me damaged and traumatized in the past. I tried contacting the reverend of our local Anglican church and after leaving a few messages, was ignored while pleaing for help in the hospital. I was also ignored today when I asked the secretary if she would tell him to call me when he came back. I have heard Catholics of any sort are cold and distant and most of them from my experiences (and from the testimonies I've read by others) are very insular. I feel neglected and unwanted and conflicted by all sorts of things that I want to ask them about. Both orthodox Anglican churches I have contacted have ignored me and are very difficult to get in touch with. This is entirely alien to my evangelical Protestant experiences, as these churches seem to leave us in the dust. I was told by a dissident Roman Catholic from Ireland (Cameron) that both RC and Anglican churches are very isolated from doing outreach or offering help like evangelical churches are. I am finding it difficult to believe these are real churches in any regard and it reinforces my longstanding prejudices against Catholicism of any sort.
I don't know about Catholic Churches but my priest at the Anglican Church I sometimes attend will respond even to facebook messages and has offered to drive an hour or so to come see me if I needed to talk to him. I am sorry for your pain and trouble. I will pray for you.