In the Anglican tradition, we often speak about the Church in terms of denominations, yet I find myself increasingly skeptical of “denominationalism.” Although I belong to a denomination—the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA), within the Reformed Episcopal Church (REC)—I don’t fundamentally believe that denominational structures define or preserve the true essence of the Church.

My ecclesiastical sense of belonging rests primarily in the diocese. It is there, under the bishop, that the life of the Church truly resides. I am only a presbyter as far as the Bishop has set me apart for that role and delegated me to celebrate the Church’s sacraments.

Generally the church should operate with a sense of subsidiarity, I’ve come to expect very little from “the denomination” beyond adjudicating occasional inter-diocesan concerns. Anything more centralizing than that often seems unnecessary, even counterproductive, to the organic life of local churches. Similar to the political debates over federalism.

The Two Orders That Matter

When one looks at the broader structure of the Church Catholic, the landscape clarifies into two realities:

1. The Diocese — the Church of the Bishop, grounded jure divino (by divine right).
2. The One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church — the Body of Christ present throughout the world and across all ages.

Everything beyond these two—our denominations, conventions, and synods—exists only bene esse: as things that might be helpful but are not essential to the Church’s being.

The REC’s View and Hooker’s Balance

This perspective often raises questions within Anglican circles, especially in light of the Reformed Episcopal Church’s Declaration of Principles. Some interpret the Declaration as rejecting jure divino episcopacy altogether. Yet this rejection was aimed not at the historic office itself, but at Rome’s exclusive claim to divine right—that only episcopal churches (of Rome’s Bishops) are truly the Church.

Bishop George Cummins, the REC’s founder, affirmed episcopacy as ancient, apostolic, and fitting for the normative ordering of the Church. He treated Bishops and Presbyters as distinct roles. His view aligns closely with that of Richard Hooker, who saw bishops not as optional functionaries but as the natural outgrowth of apostolic tradition and right order in the Church.

Four Ways of Seeing Episcopacy

To summarize the spectrum of thought on episcopacy:

• Esse (jure divino) – The Roman position: bishops are essential; no Church exists without them.
• Plene esse (jure divino) – The Anglican divines’ view (e.g., Lancelot Andrewes): other churches are real but lack the fullness of apostolic order.
• Bene esse – The Reformed or Bucerian view: bishops are good and ancient but not essential; a matter of beneficial order.
• Malum esse – The strict Presbyterian view: episcopacy is to be rejected as contrary to apostolic simplicity.

From my own vantage point, the episcopate is not an institutional ornament but a living expression of the Church’s apostolic character as the Body of Christ.