A Redditor recently shared one of my articles on anglo-catholicism in the Anglicanism subreddit, sparking a question I often encounter: How can the Reformed Episcopal Church have so many “Anglo-Catholics” when it was founded in opposition to the Oxford Movement?

“The dates are good, but the essay could use some more discussion of the REC. The writer explained its roots in rejecting Anglo-Catholicism in TEC at the time of the Oxford Movement and in favor of greater Protestant ecumenism. Yet, the writer is an REC clergyman who seems to be Anglo-Catholic. The discussion of the Continuing Anglican movement leaves out the REC.”
— BarbaraJames_75

“The author Fr Steve Macias is more Reformed in his outlook and churchmanship, he has a YT channel with some pretty interesting subjects. But yea it’s odd how the REC was literally founded to reject Anglo-Catholicism but now has quite a number of Anglo-Catholic oriented clergy.”
— Detrimentation

First, there’s a common misunderstanding today that anything “higher up the candlestick” automatically qualifies as “Anglo-Catholic” — an unfortunate oversimplification. While it’s true that the modern Reformed Episcopal Church has moved away from a more sectarian identity toward a more distinctly Anglican one, this should not be mistaken for an abandonment of Bishop Cummins’s original vision.

The history of the Reformed Episcopal Church is more complex than often assumed.

It is true that in 1873, the REC’s Declaration of Principles articulated theological convictions reacting against what Bishop George D. Cummins and others identified as errors within the Protestant Episcopal Church—particularly the growing influence of the Oxford Movement.

Yet the Declaration was not merely a protest against ritualism; it was also a deliberate rejection of ecclesiastical exclusivism—the idea that only episcopally governed churches with a Roman-style of apostolic succession were true churches. Positively, the REC sought to embody a vision within the Anglican tradition that welcomed faithful non-episcopal churches (such as Presbyterians and Methodists) into a unified Protestant body, an idea earlier championed in the Muhlenberg Memorial of 1853. In this ecumenical spirit, elaborate rituals and vestments were seen not only as theological errors but also as practical obstacles to broader Christian unity. The REC leaders that succeed Cummins were not always as capable to hold these balances and tensions in the proper order. Over time, the REC would wrestle with competing impulses toward both sectarianism and catholicity.

To summarize a century in a sentence: the early controversies within the Reformed Episcopal Church pushed parts of the denomination in an unhelpful direction, distancing them from their Anglican heritage — a trend the Church has since sought to correct in recent years.

American Religious Identity

The identity challenge for the Reformed Episcopal Church was not simply a matter of Low Church resistance to Anglo-Catholic ritual. Rather, it reflected broader issues tied to the religious settlement of late 19th-century America: the tensions between denominationalism and ecumenism, the role of tradition in a rapidly changing society, and the challenge of addressing formalism in a culture moving beyond established religious forms.

Was the Reformed Episcopal Church an Anglican church shaped by Evangelical beliefs, or an Evangelical church shaped by Anglican tradition?

Was its foundation more Anglican expressed in Evangelical terms, or Evangelical expressed through Anglican tradition?

How the REC navigated its early controversies over vestments shows that Bishop Cummins sought to steer the church along a middle way — aiming to preserve its Anglican identity rather than strip it away. Yet, Cummins could not posthumously prevent his successors from veering too far toward the low-end.

Vestment Struggle in the REC

Allen C. Guelzo of Gettysburg College writes,

“The Reformed Episcopal Church’s struggle over vestments can be seen in the debates that surfaced at its General Councils. In 1881, a motion was introduced to standardize clerical dress by requiring the black gown for all services. This motion was hotly debated… Ultimately, the proposal was rejected, a reflection of the Church’s reluctance to enforce strict uniformity. The decision revealed a characteristic feature of the Reformed Episcopal Church: while it was committed to certain principles, it was hesitant to enforce them by rigid legislation. It valued liberty of conscience within broad evangelical boundaries. [emphasis added] But the rejection of the black gown requirement also meant that vestment practices would continue to vary widely, sometimes fueling suspicion and division among congregations.” (A Test of Identity: The Vestments Controversy in the Reformed Episcopal Church, 1992 The Cupola)

The 16th-century reforms in the Church of England stripped away many traditional vestments—such as the alb, stole, and chasuble. However, the white surplice remained and was mandated by the Elizabethan Religious Settlement. What became known as “choir dress” — consisting of the surplice, black tippet (scarf), academic hood, and cap — emerged as a distinctly Anglican form of clerical attire. Nevertheless, this vesture still rankled many English Puritans, who regarded it as too closely resembling the sacerdotal dress of the Roman Church. Puritan influence, combined with a broader move away from clerical dress mandated by the Crown, contributed to the surplice’s limited popularity in the colonial American church.

Early American Episcopalianism was notably simple in vesture: the surplice was worn infrequently, reserved only for specific liturgical actions and never worn in the pulpit. This was not a Reformed Episcopal distinctive, but the general sentiment of American Anglicans. Perhaps this is related to the trend toward common dress among clergy (especially latitudinarians who adopted the styles of their age) and also related to the general use of the academic gowns in the Puritan and Reformed congregations. Culturally, clerical dress was falling out of favor for more than “protestant” reasons.

“Bring Your Robes with You”

What are the founding principles of the Reformed Episcopal Church? Was Bishop George D. Cummins’s mission more akin to a Presbyterian body with a prayer book?

The story of the REC’s first episcopal consecration with Bishop Charles Edward Cheney reveals the complex and human tensions beneath this reforming “zeal.”

In a letter written by Bishop Cummins’ widow, Mrs. A.M. Cummins, we learn that immediately after the REC’s founding, Bishop Cummins gave instructions that his episcopal robes — the traditional rochet and chimere — be “ripped up,” symbolizing his private rejection of pomp of episcopal vesture. To him, such garments fostered pride and an unhealthy sense of superiority among the clergy. He hoped the REC would maintain a simpler standard — a black gown, like that worn by Reformation ministers in Geneva and among early English Protestants. A vesture matching the broader American Protestant culture—though not distinctly Anglican.

So, when the time came to consecrate Dr. Cheney as the first bishop of the new church, Bishop Cummins packed his trunk without robes. Just before his departure, he received an urgent telegram from Cheney:

“Bring your Robes with you.”

Cummins responded with, “They are taken to pieces.”

Cheney sent a second telegram urging him:

“Bring them as they are”

Once in Chicago, Cheney and his supporters pressed the matter, arguing that if Cummins refused to wear the robes, critics—especially among the Protestant Episcopalians—would claim he was afraid to use them. Throughout his ministry, Cummins continued to wear these robes when ministering to the Canadian congregations and was eventually buried in them.

It was only after Cummins’s death that a more radical reform movement emerged within the REC, one that targeted not only Anglican vestments but also the 39 Articles and the Prayer Book. Twenty-one years later, at its 15th General Council, the REC narrowly passed a resolution mandating conformity to the black gown custom. Bishop Cheney protested by continuing to wear the rochet and chimere until his death in 1916.

This early episode is a bit of REC “dirty laundry,” but it reveals how the second generation pushed the aims of reform well beyond what the original bishops had intended.

Writing to Bishop Rudolph in 1930, an REC churchman laments that this controversy nearly sunk the church.

“We split our church in half once over the surplice question, which was not worth five minutes’ consideration. We have never recovered from that catastrophe.”

(Thomas J. Richards to Bishop Robert L. Rudolph, March 31, 1930, in Robert Livingston Rudolph Papers, Archives of the Reformed Episcopal Church, Philadelphia Theological Seminary.)

Today’s Reformed Episcopal Church

The story of the Reformed Episcopal Church today is not one of betrayal of its founding principles, but of a complex and deliberate realignment with the historic and worldwide Anglican tradition—faithful to the broader vision that Bishop George D. Cummins first set in motion.

For much of its history, the REC operated in relative isolation and obscurity, maintaining its distinct identity while larger mainline churches drifted toward theological liberalism and social progressivism. As the Episcopal Church adopted innovations such as the ordination of women, revisions to the Book of Common Prayer, and more liberal theology, other Anglican bodies—especially those forming the Continuing Anglican Movement after the 1977 Congress of St. Louis—shared many of the REC’s original convictions. Churches like the Anglican Catholic Church (ACC) and others echoed the REC’s concerns, standing for traditional Anglican faith and practice.

In the 1990s, as the Church of England itself moved to ordain women to the priesthood, the global identity of Anglicanism began to shift. Many within the REC recognized the need to re-anchor the church more intentionally within the broader Anglican tradition and the growing fellowship of orthodox Anglican churches worldwide. This turning point led to re-engagement with the international Anglican community, especially churches in the Global South—such as Nigeria, Rwanda, and Uganda.

A key leader in this renewal was Bishop Leonard W. Riches, who served as Presiding Bishop from 1996 to 2009. Under his leadership, the REC reaffirmed its commitment to historic Anglican doctrine, building strong bridges with conservative Anglican provinces in the US and abroad. These efforts positioned the REC as a significant partner in the broader Anglican realignment, culminating in its role as a founding jurisdiction of the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) in 2009.

This transformation mirrors, in part, the broader development of Anglican global identity. While the Episcopal Church was recognized as a sister church in the 18th century with the consecration of Bishops William White and Samuel Provoost, the formal structure of the Anglican Communion did not exist at that time. It wasn’t until the Second Lambeth Conference in 1878 that Anglicans around the world began to be organized into a “family” of autonomous churches in communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury. Notably, American Episcopalians were absent from (and not invited to) the First Lambeth Conference in 1867, only formally joining the global Anglican fellowship later.

Anglicanism—orthodox and mainline—are both currently undergoing institutional transformations. Crises force questions of identity. Anglican identity around the world is flux—navigating questions of theology, tradition, and authority. Yet in the midst of these uncertainties, the Reformed Episcopal Church stands with a clear and steady vision—one that is both faithfully Anglican and firmly anchored in its founding principles: the primacy of the Gospel and the supreme authority of Holy Scripture. As Anglicanism continues to evolve globally, the REC offers a compelling model of a church that cherishes its historic heritage while remaining uncompromisingly committed to the truth that first shaped its life and witness.

For those seeking a deeper understanding of what it means to be truly Anglican in such a time, I highly recommend Charles Erlandson’s book, Orthodox Anglican Identity: The Quest for Unity in a Diverse Religious Tradition. Fr. Erlandson provides a thoughtful and accessible exploration of Anglican identity that captures the enduring balance of Scripture, tradition, and reason—an ideal the REC continues to embody.