Background: I live in the great state of North Carolina, which still is a solid member of the Bible belt. Over the past few years, I have begun to look deeper into Christianity in an attempt to grow spiritually, and find a compelling theology. Emerging from one of countless, rather stale and theologically dead, non-denominational churches in my area, I became dissatisfied both theologically and aesthetically with my "country club." Now that I am heading off to college, I have more freedom to look into things without the interference of a father (whom I respect in many ways) that's enamored with the likes of Joel Olstein. Disclaimer: I am by no means an expert in any of this, I am just a young novice with the opportunity to join the Anglican Church. Theological Evolution: Every church I have attended up until this point has been non-denominational. My experience with anything that could be described as traditional was a brief attendance at a local Moravian Church due to an invitation. Having attended church since birth, I can, unfortunately, say that I have never learned anything deeper than a general overview of the gospel mixed with some emotionalism and self-help Christianity. A few years ago, my brother started talking to me about Calvinism, which I had an immediate revulsion against. He started throwing Bible verses at me, which I was ill-prepared to handle. This led me to pull several mental gymnastic moves to refute what he was saying. I was so dissatisfied with my knowledge of Christian theology and how to refute Calvinism that I finally bought my very own KJV and decided to read it cover to cover. I began by reading the New Testament up until Revelation. After that, I could tell that I was no longer what I once was. The gospel preached at my church was nowhere close to reading it oneself. Next was the OT. The OT changed my view on everything. I had developed the idea at non-denom church that the OT was something that didn't concern us as gentile Christians. It was supposed to be archaic, boring, and in some way out of step with the NT. These ideas were shattered upon reading the OT in light of the NT. The connections between the OT and NT were clear, and I could tell that the OT was far more than a collection of personal stories that could be deployed as self-help lessons. The OT also made me a Calvinist. I don't mean to be insulting to anyone as this is my theological development. The NT moved me away from the cosmic grandpa idea that is so prevalent in modern Christianity, but the OT had finally pushed me the full 9 yards. This led me to look into many lectures by R.C. Sproul and John Gerstner. I was further won over by what they had to say regarding free will and other issues. Also around this time, I began to delve into church history. History has always been my favorite subject, so I bought a copy of Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History. Although Eusebius may have been a heretic, his work firmly convinced me of the historic nature of the 3 offices of the church (Bishops, Presbyters, and Deacons). Eusebius didn't cover the Papacy to the extent that would convince me of Vatican I Papal claims though. Romanism and Eastern Orthodoxy are two denominations I could never join. Currently, I am slowly working through Henry Beveridge's translation of John Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion. Many Romanists tend to claim that Protestants aren't rooted in church history, but it has been a wake-up call for me how many times Calvin quotes the likes of St. Augustine, Bernard, and many other church fathers (rightly or wrongly). I agree with many aspects of Calvin's theology, however, there are some points of disagreement. Occasionally, I waffle between a more Lutheran or Reformed view of the atonement and predestination. I ascribe to the idea of the via media between Wittenberg and Geneva, rather than between Rome and England (I don't claim to be an expert). What I am Looking at: Since I consider the TEC to be an apostate church, I am left with really only 3 options near my university (not to say there aren't some Christians still in the TEC). ACNA- This is the largest Anglican Church in the United States that I am aware of. Having done a bit of research on the ACNA, I view them as having some pretty major issues. Women's ordination, "3 streams" (I don't accept charismatics with no disrespect), and critical theory seem to have a hold on certain parts of the ACNA. REC- Although a member of the ACNA, the REC appears to be a bulwark of traditionalism within the ACNA. Although I am by no means an Anglo-Catholic, I would prefer more high church services. The REC has moved in a more Anglo-Catholic direction, but I am not a supporter of sectarianism (I'm not that sort of Reformed). UECNA- Although it would be a long drive from my university, I have developed a healthy respect for the UECNA based on what I have read and their Youtube channel. They are probably smaller than most of the other continuing churches. Any advice on this matter would be of use. It's great to be here!
I am in the REC, so that's a strong commendation from me. I'll be glad to offer any clarifications. As for the ACNA as a whole, what you'll hear a lot of traditionalists say is that, while you're right and it has those issues, but they're on a trajectory of major improvement over where things were say 10 years ago. In all the points you've listed, there's a remarkable improvement and solidification of at least a solid conservative (if not everywhere traditionalist) ethos. Women's ordination is on a decline; the 3 streams fabrication is on a huge decline, now that there is a single Prayer Book to unite the whole province (as BCPs have always done in the past). Critical theory is pushed really by one major diocese, so that's a problem but far less than in other big churches. We actually had a few highly-placed Critical Theory adherents, who have been fired or pushed out of the ACNA in the last 4-12 months. ACNA (as any proper historic church should) is a ship that moves very slowly, and makes changes over decades rather than months, so things like WO and the 3 streams are being addressed simply by the virtue of gravity. UECNA doesn't have a very long future; it is built on the personality of its single bishop, and has only a handful of parishes around the country. I will suspect that most of UECNA will merge into ACNA over the next 10 years. We have been receiving many faithful bishops recently, such as 2 bishops and an order of nuns that were pushed out from the Episcopal Church and were received under bishop Dobbs. Actually you may be interested in Bishop Dobbs and his diocese. It aims to be a strongly orthodox diocese in ACNA, rooted in the reformational formularies. They received the TEC exiles, and are growing rapidly. His diocese is not geographical, and stretches across most of the East Coast, so there is a chance you'll have parishes in the Carolinas. There are your more standard ACNA parishes in the Carolinas as well of course.
Welcome! That is a very interesting mini-biography. You seem to be a person of very firm convictions and great passion for the truth. What you have to say is recognizable and familiar. Both vocationally and intellectually, you are approximately where I was about two decades ago. My advice is to reconsider your stance on the Episcopal Church. I wish you well, wherever your journey takes you.
There is a Reformed Episcopal congregation near the University I will be attending in NC. I will probably make contact with the minister there this fall. I hope that the ACNA is able to move in the right direction. Where I live now, there is a Church that is in the Diocese of Christ Our Hope. Is this a good Diocese?
Do you know of any Orthodox (preferably Reformed in some sense) Episcopalian congregations near Raleigh, North Carolina?
Only knowing Bishop Breedlove from hearsay here and there, he actually seems to be one of those last remaining 3 streams guys. That being said, it is not the case that local parishes must adhere to the particular spirit of their Bishop, so your parish may have a character of its own.
My advice is to pick the nearest parish and pay them a visit. In an Episcopal Sunday liturgy, you will hear 3 biblical readings + 1 Psalm, the Creed, and the traditional structure of the Eucharist (Sursum corda, Sanctus, Benedictus, the Words of Institution, the Invocation, the Agnus Dei, etc.). The pattern of the Daily Office and weekly Communion that I have described (presupposing of course that one has received the Sacrament of Baptism), contains all the elements one needs in order to grow and be nourished in one’s life as a Christian. You will find that beyond that, you will get as much ‘orthodoxy’ out of any community as you’re willing to put into it. That’s not something that simply picking the right parish can do for you. That mindset can lead to dissatisfaction and even despair. It’s important to keep in mind that you will never find one that fits you perfectly, and that’s ok.
Welcome sir. North Carolina is prime territory for my own jurisdiction, the Orthodox Anglican Communion. The chancery is in Charlotte and there are a number of parishes peppering the Western side of the state. Unfortunately, we have nothing for you in Raleigh. I steer clear of the Diocese of Christ our Hope. That's one of those ACNA dioceses that is so gung ho about church planting they forget the Anglican part of the equation. The general character of the diocese is charismatic. I've had some modest interaction with them because they are the only diocese that will do anything in West Virginia. For whatever reason, the diocese of Pittsburgh pretends that geographical area 1 1/2 hours South or Southwest of them does not exist. UECNA has three active bishops. There is presiding bishop Peter Robinson, Bp. Hustwick in Michigan, and Steven Murrell for the Western diocese. But it is not uncommon to visit a UECNA church and see only 5-10 other people in attendance. Their missions just don't build a good head of steam in most places.
My suggestion is to attend a service at the REC parish and then make an appointment to sit down for a chat with the rector. You'll be able to get a feel for where he stands on any issues that are key to you personally, plus it's a chance to get to know each other a bit. That will either go a long way toward your comfort level or (less likely) it might raise a red flag or two. Sounds like the ACNA parish might be a 'backup' distant-second possibility for now. But don't count it out entirely, because the rector of a parish sets the tone in that parish. (I'm in the Living Word diocese of ACNA btw).
You now, I hope, have realised that was the biggest step toward a proper understanding of God's position in your life and yours in His, that you have so far taken in your entire life. In spite of everything you had previously been told to believe, you had finally latched on to God's Promises to you as His Covenant child and had begun your exploration of the 'Riches you have in Christ". Col.1:26-27. I see your problem as being one of having far too much choice in the USA as to which Anglican 'kindergarten' or 'university of the faith', to enrol in while you explore your relationship with Almighty God, through the Holy Spirit, sent upon you by His only begotten Son. It may well be the case that you will 'graduate' to other 'Theological schools' in your pilgrimage of discovery, but God will tell you when and where to go, when it comes time for you to move on. Meanwhile the good ol' KJV is not the only good library to have in your home. Try the RSV, excellently accurate and with footnotes and references or the (NRSV - Anglicised version of course if you want to read good proper English not what Americans call 'English' nowadays. ). Finally: Welcome and please continue to contribute by sticking your oar in whenever you like.
I have no idea, I'm on the other side of the Atalantic Ocean. One thing you must always remember though and never forget it; YOU are a gift from God to whatever church you attach yourself to, by His command. You are not to be an adherent of their theology, they are the beneficiaries of yours but, (if, and only if, yours comes from the mind of Christ). 1 Cor.2:16. .
I have a rather opposite, not-so-therapeutic way of seeing it. "If you find the perfect church, don't go there, because it will certainly stop being so once you become a part of it."
But that's not as 'opposite' perhaps, as you may imagine it to be. The Church is a healing institution. It contains both patients and physicians and most of them are both. .
As you've probably already gathered, by now, the ACNA is a mixed bag, and it can't really be explained with a simple answer. It's a patchwork and some pieces of the puzzle are going to look a lot more solid than others. Even when the culture of a whole diocese is one way, exceptions can still be found. I minister in one of the more charismatic-minded dioceses, for example, but I and my congregation are not really a part of that movement or identity. Thankfully, for the most part the ACNA has a very strong online presence, making it easier to "vet" potential visits beforehand. Here's the church-finder in case you've not already found it: https://anglicanchurch.net/find-a-congregation/ It appears there are four ACNA churches in or near Raleigh, two in the Diocese of the Carolinas, and one in the REC, so I expect there must be a solid offering for Anglican formation and worship there.
Seeking knowledge and truth is critical to remaining genuinely faithful, but don't let it take you too far from home in the search of the "perfect church", when there's perfectly suitable churches closer to home. The reality is that there is no perfect church, no perfect parish, no perfect priest. Everywhere you look you will see warts and flaws, and accepting that is important - because your theology is flawed too. Together you and your neighbours can help each other to better obey God's will, and sometimes that process will be better served by being exposed to things you disagree with so you can better understand why you disagree. Naturally there's a limit to this - there is a minimum line of orthodoxy that's necessary for nourishment, but it's a pretty low bar. I'm not an American but I imagine the differences between REC and non-REC ACNA churches are irrelevant as far as the big picture is concerned. My advice is to pick a local Anglican church that is convenient, and make it your home as best you can. I'm projecting here that your parish only permits one church, if there's two local Anglican churches then naturally feel free to investigate which one is a better fit (is this a thing in the States?). I'd again caution in the way you compare them though. Consider how they'll support your worship, don't waste time focusing on some other church they're in communion with that you wouldn't attend - all that matters is the one you'll be attending. Avoid deciding against an entire communion because it is accepting of charismatic churches. I wouldn't attend a charismatic church either, that's not a type of worship I respond well to, but if your local ACNA church is not a charismatic church then I can't see the possible problem. Let others worship in a way that is fulfilling for them and they'll let you worship in a way that is fulfilling for you. C.S. Lewis has a good bit on this in The Screwtape Letters. If you're not familiar, it's written from the perspective of a bureaucrat in Satan's government who is in charge of tempting, distracting and misleading humans. He's writing a letter to his incompetent nephew. My Dear Wormwood, You mentioned casually in your last letter that the patient has continued to attend one church, and only one, since he was converted, and that he is not wholly pleased with it. May I ask what you are about? Why have I no report on the causes of his fidelity to the parish church? Do you realize that unless it is due to indifference it is a very bad thing? Surely you know that if a man can’t be cured of churchgoing, the next best thing is to send him all over the neighborhood looking for the church that ‘suits’ him until he becomes a taster or connoisseur of churches. The reasons are obvious. In the first place the parochial organization should always be attacked, because, being a unity of place and not of likings, it brings people of different classes and psychology together in the kind of unity the Enemy desires. The congregational principle, on the other hand, makes each church into a kind of club, and finally, if all goes well, into a coterie or faction. In the second place, the search for a ‘suitable’ church makes the man a critic where the Enemy wants him to be a pupil. What he wants of the layman in church is an attitude which may, indeed, be critical in the sense of rejecting what is false or unhelpful, but which is wholly uncritical in the sense that it does not appraise – does not waste time in thinking about what it rejects, but lays itself open in uncommenting, humble receptivity to any nourishment that is going. …This attitude, especially during sermons, creates the condition (most hostile to our whole policy) in which platitudes can become really audible to a human soul. There is hardly any sermon, or any book, which may not be dangerous to us if it is received in this temper. So pray bestir yourself and send this fool the round of the neighboring churches as soon as possible.
Thanks for your well-put response. I certainly understand where you are coming from on this topic. With that being said, any church that I will attend in the future must meet a few core standards: 1: Reformed-ish 2: Commitment to some form of Biblical Inerrancy 3: A healthy church community (a think this should be a given) 4: Maintenance of Apostolic Succession (I don't want to be confirmed by someone who is a woman, was ordained by a woman, or ordains women) 5: Does not support women's ordination or LGBTQ+ values. Since I have the option of choice, I don't want to help a diocese grow that holds too many beliefs that I oppose. If a charismatic diocese begins to grow (even if that growth isn't in that diocese's charismatic churches), church leaders may begin to increase their support of the 3 streams idea. I do understand that this may be a bit of "youthful zealotry," but I feel that the complicity of the laity has been a major factor in the bastardization of many Protestant denominations.
I have been inspired by the comments here... just wanted y'all to know that, let's have some more of that youthful zealotry in the world
I'm not sure that's an achievable goal. It also potentially discounts the possibility that your own understanding will continue to grow over time. I think the other commenters are right to suggest focusing on the parish rather than the diocese (provided the diocese as a whole is something you can endorse). Variety within a diocese (and even within your parish), even if it occasionally includes some things you don't like, can be a healthy thing. Liturgy is liturgy precisely because it's not something we choose to do, but rather something to which we are solemnly engaging to conform.
To the small degree any of my decisions have an impact on the church as a whole, I would prefer that it builds up what I consider to be biblical versus the opposite. With your point regarding growth of understanding, I agree our understanding of the scriptures, fathers, and traditions of the church are extremely important. However, I would also contend that maybe a little bit too much growth of understanding can also be a bad thing. For instance, I could grow my understanding by going to a Unitarian Universalist Church in some way. Anglicanism obviously has a degree of theological diversity (which I support), but I tend to feel that certain novel, modern innovations just aren't really biblical or traditional.
Good advice Invictus. When young and enthusiastic we are characteristically inclined to 'know it all' and think our elders are less devoted to Christ and to truth than we are, because they are less theologically polarised on issues which may seem to young minds as being, 'plain as a pikestaff'. 'Wimins Minustry' being only one of them. This is one of the reasons that training posts for clergy are frequently chosen to give the candidate an opportunity to experience being among a congregation holding as diametrically an opposite tradition to the one he/she prefers, as possible. The Anglican church is a broad church and its leaders must learn to appreciate that there are Christians in different traditions whose sincerity is unquestionable but nevertheless products of a genuine faith. We must learn constantly to be able to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace without compromising our own understanding of the truth, as we have had it revealed to us. This requires great patience and self control, which are both mature fruit of the Spirit. . .