Anglican vs. Presbyterian Beliefs

Brothers and Sisters in Christ: A Heartfelt Guide to Anglican and Presbyterian Beliefs

In the great family of God, we find many rooms, each with its own unique beauty, history, and way of expressing love for our shared Lord, Jesus Christ. This journey is an exploration of two of those rooms: the Anglican tradition and the Presbyterian tradition. To many, they may seem similar, both being historic branches of the Protestant Reformation. Yet, within their walls, we discover distinct stories, deeply held beliefs, and different ways of living out the Christian faith.

This is not a contest to determine who is more “right” or “biblical.” Rather, it is a family conversation, an invitation to walk alongside our brothers and sisters in these traditions, to listen to their stories with an open heart, and to better understand the paths they walk. We will find that while their journeys began at different points and followed different maps, both are ultimately aimed at the same destination: the foot of the cross and the glory of the Triune God. As we explore their histories, their understanding of God’s Word, how they lead their churches, and how they worship, we may find that their differences teach us as much about our own faith as they do about theirs. It is in understanding and appreciating the vast web of the global Church that our own love for Christ and His people can deepen.

To begin our journey, let us look at a simple map that outlines the key features of each tradition. This will help us get our bearings before we delve into the heart of their stories.

Where Did Our Journeys Begin? A Tale of Two Reformations

The character of a family is often shaped by its foundational stories. To understand the heart of Anglicanism and Presbyterianism, we must return to their very different beginnings during the tumultuous era of the Protestant Reformation. The reasons for their birth, and the men who guided them, set them on distinct paths that continue to define them today.

How did the Anglican Church begin its unique journey?

The story of the Anglican Church begins not in a theologian’s study, but in the halls of royal power. Its origins were more political than theological, sparked by the personal and dynastic concerns of King Henry VIII of England in the early 16th century.¹ Desperate for a male heir to secure his throne, Henry sought an annulment from his wife, Catherine of Aragon. When Pope Clement VII refused his request, Henry took a radical step. Through a series of laws passed by the English Parliament, most notably the Act of Supremacy in 1534, he broke away from the authority of the Roman Catholic Church and declared himself the supreme head of a new, independent Church of England.¹

It is essential to understand that Henry VIII never considered himself a Protestant. He had even been named “Defender of the Faith” by a previous pope for his writings against Martin Luther.¹ His goal was to create a kind of “Catholicism without the Pope.” He dissolved the monasteries and seized their wealth, but he kept much of the Catholic doctrine and structure, including the government of the church by bishops in dioceses.¹

The true theological reformation of the Church of England began after Henry’s death, during the reign of his young son, Edward VI.² The architect of this change was the Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Cranmer. A brilliant scholar with Protestant sympathies, Cranmer crafted the first

Book of Common Prayer in 1549.³ This book was a work of genius; it took the ancient, liturgical patterns of worship familiar to the English people and infused them with the core doctrines of the Reformation, all in the beauty of the English language.⁴ For the first time, ordinary people could participate in a service that contained Morning and Evening Prayer, Holy Communion, and other rites in their own tongue.⁵

After a brief and bloody return to Catholicism under Queen Mary I, the daughter of Catherine of Aragon, the Anglican identity was finally solidified under Queen Elizabeth I.² The “Elizabethan Religious Settlement” established a church that sought a

via media, or “middle way.” It aimed to be a church that was both “Catholic and Reformed”—retaining the ancient, historic structure of bishops and a formal liturgy, while being firmly Protestant in its core theology.⁴ This unique origin, born of political compromise and a desire for national unity, created a tradition with a broad and comprehensive character, designed to hold together people with a variety of theological leanings.⁷

What is the story behind the Presbyterian Church’s origins?

In stark contrast to the political beginnings of Anglicanism, the Presbyterian story was a theological fire from its very inception. Its heart is not in London’s royal court, but in the Scotland of the passionate and uncompromising reformer, John Knox.⁹ Knox was a man forged in the crucible of persecution. After being captured by French forces, he endured 19 months as a galley slave, an experience that only hardened his resolve.¹⁰

Knox’s theological vision was profoundly shaped by his time in Geneva, Switzerland, where he studied under John Calvin, the great French theologian who systematized much of Protestant thought.¹¹ Knox returned to his native Scotland not simply to break with Rome, but to rebuild the church from the ground up according to a clear and specific biblical blueprint: Reformed theology, often called Calvinism.¹²

The Scottish Reformation of 1560 was a grassroots, doctrinally-driven movement. Under Knox’s leadership, the Scottish Parliament adopted the Scots Confession of Faith and abolished the authority of the pope.¹³ This was a conscious and radical reconstruction. The new Church of Scotland, or “the Kirk,” was to be defined not by continuity with the old ways, but by its faithfulness to the Word of God. This meant rejecting the old hierarchical structure of bishops entirely. Instead, the church would be governed by councils of elders, or

presbyters, a model they believed was more faithful to the pattern of the New Testament church.¹²

The result was a church whose identity was inseparable from its theology. It was a “confessional” built on the bedrock of God’s absolute sovereignty, the supreme authority of the Scriptures, and the doctrine of salvation by grace through faith.¹² This foundation, born of theological conviction rather than political necessity, created a tradition marked by its doctrinal precision and a passion for conforming every aspect of church life to the teachings of the Bible. The very motive for each tradition’s birth—one seeking a unified nation, the other a purified church—explains nearly every difference that would follow, from how they read the Bible to how they are led and how they worship on a Sunday morning.

Who Has the Final Say? Understanding Authority in Our Faith

At the very heart of the differences between Anglicans and Presbyterians lies a foundational question: How do we know what is true? How does God speak to His Church? While both traditions hold the Bible in the highest esteem, their answers to this question reveal two distinct approaches to discerning God’s will, shaping everything from their doctrine to their church culture.

How do Anglicans balance Scripture, Tradition, and Reason?

For Anglicans, the ultimate source of authority is Holy Scripture. The Bible is revered as the Word of God, containing all things necessary for our salvation.¹⁵ The historic Anglican formularies are clear: nothing can be taught as necessary for salvation that cannot be found in or proven by the Bible.¹⁵ This is a conviction they share with all Protestant churches.

But Anglicans believe that God does not expect us to read the Bible in a vacuum. He has given His Church other precious gifts to help us understand and apply its timeless truths. This approach is famously pictured as a “three-legged stool,” a concept most associated with the influential 16th-century Anglican theologian Richard Hooker.¹⁶ For the stool to be stable, all three legs must be present and in balance.

• Leg 1: Scripture: This is the primary and foundational leg, the “norming norm” against which everything else is measured.¹⁶ It is the unique and inspired revelation of God.
• Leg 2: Tradition: This refers to the accumulated wisdom and experience of the Church throughout 2,000 years of history. It is found especially in the ancient Creeds (the Apostles’ and Nicene Creeds), the decisions of the early ecumenical councils, and the writings of the early Church Fathers.¹⁸ Tradition is not equal to Scripture, but it acts as a faithful guide, helping to protect the Church from novel or purely individualistic interpretations of the Bible.¹⁶
• Leg 3: Reason: This is the God-given gift of the human intellect. Anglicans believe we are called to love God with our minds, to think critically, to ask questions, and to make sense of our faith in a way that is coherent and can be articulated in every generation.¹⁶ Reason helps us apply the unchanging truths of Scripture and Tradition to new and complex challenges.¹⁹

This balanced approach creates what is often called a “broad church”.⁸ It allows for a certain amount of theological diversity and tolerance for differing viewpoints on matters not essential to salvation, as long as they remain faithful to the witness of Scripture.¹⁶

What does “By Scripture Alone” truly mean for Presbyterians?

For Presbyterians, the bedrock principle of authority is Sola Scriptura—by Scripture Alone.²¹ This was one of the foundational rallying cries of the Reformation. It does not mean that Presbyterians reject Christian history, tradition, or reason. Rather, it means that the Bible is the

sole infallible and ultimate rule of faith and life.²¹ It is the supreme judge in all matters of religious controversy.²³

In the Presbyterian understanding, all other sources of authority are “subordinate” to the Bible. They are helpful and to be respected, but only insofar as they accurately reflect what Scripture teaches.²⁵ While Anglicans might picture a three-legged stool, Presbyterians might picture a pyramid. At the very peak is Scripture, the inerrant Word of God. Everything else is built upon that foundation and must be tested against it.²⁷

The most important of these “subordinate standards” for Presbyterians is the Westminster Confession of Faith, along with the Larger and Shorter Catechisms.²⁵ These documents, written by an assembly of theologians at Westminster Abbey in the 1640s, are not seen as a replacement for the Bible. Instead, they are cherished as a brilliant, systematic, and faithful summary of the Bible’s teaching on all the key doctrines of the Christian faith.²³ To be an ordained minister or elder in a confessional Presbyterian one must subscribe to the Westminster Standards, affirming that they contain the system of doctrine taught in Holy Scripture.¹²

This approach to authority directly shapes the culture of the church. The Anglican “stool” is designed to create a culture of comprehensiveness, able to hold together people with different theological emphases—some leaning more on Tradition (Anglo-Catholics), others more on Scripture (Evangelicals). The Presbyterian “pyramid” is designed to create a culture of confessional precision. It unites people around a detailed and specific understanding of biblical truth, ensuring a high degree of theological unity on core doctrines.

How Is the Church Led? A Look at Shepherds and Stewards

The way a church is governed is never just a matter of practical organization; it is a powerful statement about what that church believes. The different structures of leadership in the Anglican and Presbyterian traditions are a direct and visible expression of their different approaches to authority. One looks to the long line of history for its model, the other to the pages of Scripture.

Why do Anglicans have Bishops in a line from the Apostles?

The Anglican Church is structured with an episcopal polity, which simply means it is governed by bishops.²⁹ The word

bishop comes from the Greek word episkopos, which means “overseer.” This form of government, with its three orders of ministry—bishops, priests, and deacons—is a direct inheritance from the pre-Reformation church.⁴

This structure is deeply connected to the Anglican value for Tradition. Anglicans believe in the doctrine of Apostolic Succession. This is the conviction that their bishops stand in an unbroken, tangible line of succession that goes all the way back to the original twelve apostles of Jesus.³¹ This succession is passed down from one generation of bishops to the next through the sacred act of ordination, specifically the “laying on of hands”.³¹

For Anglicans, this is far more than a historical claim. It is seen as a visible sign of the Church’s faithfulness and continuity with the apostolic faith across the centuries.³³ It acts as a safeguard for orthodox teaching and a powerful symbol of the Church’s unity.³¹ In practice, bishops serve as the chief pastors of a geographic region called a diocese. They provide spiritual oversight, ordain new priests and deacons, and serve as a pastor to the pastors under their care.²⁹

Who are the “Elders” that govern a Presbyterian church?

The Presbyterian as its name suggests, is structured with a presbyterian polity. This means it is governed by elders, a name taken from the Greek word presbuteros, which also means “elder”.¹² This form of government is a direct result of the Presbyterian commitment to the principle of

Sola Scriptura. When the 16th-century reformers looked to the New Testament for a model of church government, they did not see the hierarchical structure of bishops that had developed over the centuries. Instead, they saw a model where local churches were led by councils of elders who shared authority.¹⁴

This commitment to shared, representative leadership is expressed through a system of interconnected church courts:

• The Session: This is the council that governs the local congregation. It is made up of the “ruling elders” (lay members elected by the congregation) and the “teaching elder” (the pastor or minister).¹⁴ The session is responsible for the spiritual oversight, discipline, and ministry of the local church.¹⁴
• The Presbytery: This is the next court up. It is composed of all the ministers and a representative ruling elder from each church within a specific geographical region.³⁵ The presbytery has oversight of its congregations and ministers, and it handles matters that affect the region as a whole.³⁵
• The General Assembly: This is the highest court of the church. It is made up of an equal number of ministers and ruling elders who are sent as commissioners from all the presbyteries.³⁵ The General Assembly meets annually to rule on matters of doctrine and discipline for the entire denomination, and its decisions are binding on the lower courts.¹⁴

This system of graded courts, from the local session to the national General Assembly, emphasizes corporate wisdom, mutual accountability, and a representative form of government, rather than the authority of a single individual.¹⁴ For Presbyterians, this structure is not simply an efficient way to run a church; it is an act of obedience to the pattern they see revealed in God’s Word.

What Happens at the Lord’s Table? The Sacred Meal and Holy Baptism

The two sacraments ordained by Christ himself—Baptism and the Lord’s Supper—are at the heart of Christian worship. Both Anglicans and Presbyterians cherish these sacred acts as visible signs of God’s invisible grace. Yet, their different theological starting points lead to subtle but meaningful differences in how they understand and practice these holy mysteries.

How do Anglicans and Presbyterians understand Christ’s presence in Holy Communion?

A point of beautiful unity is that both traditions believe in the real presence of Christ in the Lord’s Supper (also called the Eucharist or Holy Communion). They both affirm that this is more than just a symbolic memorial; Christ is truly present with His people in the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup.³⁶ Both traditions also reject the Roman Catholic doctrine of

transubstantiation—the belief that the bread and wine literally change into the substance of Christ’s body and blood.⁶

Beyond this shared ground, their views diverge, reflecting their unique characters:

• The Anglican View: True to its “broad church” nature, Anglicanism allows for a spectrum of beliefs about the Eucharist.⁸
• Those in the Anglo-Catholic tradition may believe in a corporeal (or bodily) presence of Christ. They hold that Christ is truly and objectively present in the consecrated bread and wine, though the exact manner of this presence is a sacred mystery that should not be overly defined.³⁶
• Those in the Evangelical Anglican tradition typically hold to a spiritual real presence. This view is very similar to the classic Presbyterian position. They believe that Christ is truly present and received, but spiritually, by the power of the Holy Spirit through the faith of the communicant.³⁶
• The Presbyterian View: The Presbyterian understanding is more theologically uniform, defined as a spiritual real presence.³⁷ Drawing from the theology of John Calvin, Presbyterians believe that in the Supper, the Holy Spirit lifts the believer up to spiritually feed on Christ. The bread and wine are powerful signs and seals of this spiritual reality, but they do not themselves contain the physical body and blood of Christ.³⁷ This view strongly emphasizes that the sacrifice of Christ was made “once and for all” on the cross and needs no repetition. This is why Presbyterians will almost always refer to the place of communion as a “table” rather than an “altar,” as an altar is a place of sacrifice.³⁸

Why do both churches baptize infants, and what does it mean for each?

Both Anglicans and Presbyterians practice infant baptism (a practice known as paedobaptism). They see a strong connection between baptism in the New Covenant and circumcision in the Old Covenant. Both are signs of being included in God’s covenant people.³⁹ For both, baptizing the children of believers is a joyful expression of the truth that God’s promises extend to families and that children are welcome in the community of faith.⁴⁰

But the theological language they use to describe what happens in baptism reveals a subtle difference in emphasis:

• The Anglican View: Anglicanism’s historic formularies, like the Book of Common Prayer and the 39 Articles, use strong, highly sacramental language. Article XXVII describes baptism as a “sign of Regeneration or New-Birth“.⁴¹ In the baptismal service, it is declared that the child is “grafted into the Church” and “made” a child of grace.⁴¹ This language suggests that a powerful change in the child’s spiritual status occurs in the act of baptism itself. Although Interpretations within Anglicanism vary—some see this as an automatic spiritual rebirth, others as the sealing of a promise that must later be activated by personal faith—the official language points to a very close link between the outward sign (water) and the inward grace it signifies. In this rite, parents and godparents make promises on behalf of the child, acting as “sureties” who will nurture the child in the faith.⁴¹
• The Presbyterian View: The Westminster Confession of Faith, in its characteristic precision, describes baptism as a “sign and a seal of the covenant of grace”.⁴⁰ Baptism visibly marks the child as a member of the visible church and the covenant community.³⁹ But Presbyterians are very careful to distinguish the outward sign from the inward reality. They teach that the act of baptism does not automatically save or regenerate the child.⁴⁰ The grace signified in baptism is only effective for those who will later come to genuine personal faith in Jesus Christ. Baptism is God’s visible promise to the child, but it does not guarantee the child’s future faith or salvation.⁴⁰

This difference, though subtle, can be felt. The Anglican rite often feels as if it is conferring a new status on the child in that moment. The Presbyterian rite feels more like it is declaring a beautiful promise over the child, a promise that awaits its personal and conscious fulfillment in the future. Both are powerful expressions of God’s grace reaching out to the youngest members of His family.

Are We Chosen by God? The Delicate Doctrine of Predestination

Few doctrines in Christian history have caused as much debate, confusion, and even heartache as the doctrine of predestination. It touches on the deepest questions of God’s sovereignty and human free will. It may be surprising to learn that both the Anglican and Presbyterian traditions have, in their foundational documents, strong statements affirming this very doctrine. The key difference, But lies not in what their historic books say, but in the authority those books hold today.

Do Anglicans and Presbyterians share the same view on predestination?

If one were to only read the 16th and 17th-century foundational texts of both churches, one would find a remarkable degree of unity on this topic, reflecting their shared heritage in the Reformation.

• The Anglican Position (Article 17): The Thirty-nine Articles of Religion, a cornerstone of Anglican doctrine, includes a long and detailed article on predestination. Article 17 begins by stating, “Predestination to Life is the everlasting purpose of God, whereby (before the foundations of the world were laid) he hath constantly decreed by his counsel secret to us, to deliver from curse and damnation those whom he hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, and to bring them by Christ to everlasting salvation”.⁴² The article goes on to describe this doctrine as being “full of sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable comfort to godly persons”.⁴⁴ This is a classic, positive statement of the Reformed doctrine of election.
• The Presbyterian Position (Westminster Confession): The Westminster Confession of Faith, the primary subordinate standard for Presbyterians, is even more systematic. Chapter 3, “Of God’s Eternal Decree,” states that God “did from all eternity, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass.” It continues, “By the decree of God, for the manifestation of His glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life; and others foreordained to everlasting death”.²³ This doctrine is not an isolated point but is woven into the very fabric of the Presbyterian understanding of God’s sovereignty, grace, and salvation.³⁸

The crucial difference between the two traditions today is not in the content of these historical statements, but in their current authority and centrality.

In modern Anglicanism, the “three-legged stool” of Scripture, Tradition, and Reason allows for a wide spectrum of belief. Many, if not most, Anglicans today would not describe themselves as Calvinists who believe in predestination. They may hold an Arminian view, which emphasizes human free will in salvation, or they may simply see the issue as a mystery.⁸ For them, the Thirty-nine Articles are an important historical document that shaped their tradition, but they are not a strictly binding creed that every member or minister must subscribe to in every detail.⁴⁷ In short, one can be a faithful Anglican in good standing and not believe in predestination.

In confessional Presbyterianism, the situation is entirely different. The doctrine of God’s sovereign election is considered a non-negotiable, foundational truth of the biblical gospel.²⁸ It is not seen as an optional belief or a historical relic. It is a central pillar of the entire theological system laid out in the Westminster Confession, which all ordained elders and ministers must sincerely receive and adopt.¹² For a Presbyterian, to deny predestination would be to undermine the very nature of God’s grace and sovereignty.

This distinction perfectly illustrates the difference between a tradition that views its founding documents as a revered historical artifact and one that views them as a living, binding confessional standard. The Anglican theological method has created a “big tent” that can comfortably house both Calvinists and Arminians. The Presbyterian theological method has created a “confessional house” built with a clear and unified architecture, where the doctrine of predestination is a load-bearing wall.

How Do We Worship? A Glimpse into a Sunday Service

Walking into a church for the first time, the “feel” of the worship service is often the most immediate and powerful impression. The style of worship is more than just a matter of preference; it is the outward expression of a church’s inward theology. The differences between a typical Anglican and Presbyterian service are a beautiful reflection of their different paths to approaching the same holy God.

What is a traditional Anglican service like?

Anglican worship is, at its heart, liturgical. This means it follows a set order of service with written prayers, much of which is spoken together by the entire congregation.⁴ The foundation and guide for this worship is the

Book of Common Prayer (BCP), a text cherished for its theological depth and majestic English prose.⁵

An Anglican service is a journey through the story of salvation, shaped by the rhythm of the Church Year. The year is divided into seasons—Advent, Christmas, Epiphany, Lent, Easter, and Pentecost—each with its own themes, moods, Scripture readings, and even colors for the clergy’s vestments and church decorations.⁴⁸ This annual cycle immerses the worshiper in the life of Christ and the history of God’s people.

A typical Sunday service of Holy Communion would include many ancient elements:

• Prayers of praise and adoration.
• A corporate confession of sin and a declaration of God’s forgiveness.
• Scripture readings from the Old Testament, the Psalms, the New Testament Epistles, and one of the four Gospels.
• A sermon explaining and applying the Scripture readings.
• The recitation of one of the ancient creeds, usually the Nicene Creed, as a statement of shared faith.
• Prayers of the people for the the world, and those in need.
• The celebration of the Eucharist, with its beautiful and historic Prayer of Consecration.

The experience is often rich in beauty, dignity, and a sense of connection to the Church throughout the ages. The goal is not simply to learn about God, but to encounter Him through a participatory and often sensory experience—to worship God “in the beauty of holiness”.⁴⁹

What can I expect when I visit a Presbyterian church?

Presbyterian worship is centered on the Word of God. The entire service is carefully structured to lead the congregation into a meaningful encounter with God as He has revealed Himself in the Bible.⁵⁰ While Presbyterians also have books of worship, like the

Book of Common Worship, the focus is less on a fixed liturgy and more on a biblical pattern.⁵⁰

This pattern is often described as a four-fold movement:

1. Gathering: The service begins with a call to worship, hymns of praise, and a prayer of confession, reminding the people that they come before a holy God.⁵⁰
2. The Word: This is the heart of the service. It includes the public reading of Scripture and, most centrally, the sermon.⁵⁰ The sermon is typically the longest part of the service and is “expository” in nature. This means the pastor’s primary goal is to carefully explain the meaning of a specific passage of Scripture in its original context and then apply its timeless truths to the lives of the congregation today.⁵¹
3. Response: Having heard God’s Word, the people respond with offerings, prayers, and, on scheduled Sundays, the celebration of the Lord’s Supper.⁵⁰
4. Sending: The service concludes with a final hymn and a benediction, which is a blessing from God’s Word spoken by the pastor over the people as they are sent out into the world to live for Christ.⁵³

The atmosphere is one of joyful reverence and thoughtful engagement. There is generally less ceremony and ritual than in an Anglican service. This is guided by what is known as the Regulative Principle of Worship, a belief that corporate worship should only include those elements that God has explicitly commanded or appointed in His Word.⁵⁴ The primary goal is to bring clarity to the mind and understanding to the heart, so that God may be glorified for who He truly is. These two approaches reflect different, but equally valid, spiritual sensibilities. Anglican worship often uses the path of

beauty and mystery to draw the heart to God. Presbyterian worship often uses the path of clarity and understanding to draw the mind, and through it the heart, to God.

How Do Others See Us? The View from the Catholic Church

Sometimes, seeing ourselves through the eyes of others can bring our own identity into sharper focus. The official stance of the Roman Catholic Church toward Anglican and Presbyterian churches, while challenging, reveals a fundamental difference in how each tradition understands the very nature of the the priesthood, and authority.

What is the Roman Catholic Church’s official stance on Anglican and Presbyterian churches?

The Roman Catholic Church’s view is built upon its unwavering belief in the importance of the priesthood and Apostolic Succession.⁵⁵ From the Catholic perspective, to have valid sacraments (such as the Eucharist, where they believe the bread and wine become the actual body and blood of Christ), a church must have validly ordained priests. To have valid priests, a church must have validly consecrated bishops who stand in that unbroken, physical line of succession stretching back to the original apostles.²⁹

With this principle as its foundation, the Catholic Church has made formal judgments on the status of Anglican and Presbyterian orders:

• View on Anglican Orders: In 1896, Pope Leo XIII issued a formal declaration known as a papal bull, titled Apostolicae Curae. This document declared all Anglican ordinations to be “absolutely null and utterly void”.⁵⁶ The Vatican’s reasoning was that during the English Reformation in the 16th century, the Church of England altered its ordination rites (the liturgy for making bishops and priests). In the Catholic Church’s judgment, these changes were so major that they broke the chain of Apostolic Succession. The new rites were found to have a “defect of form” (the words and actions were no longer sufficient) and a “defect of intention” (the rite no longer intended to create a sacrificing priest in the Catholic sense).⁵⁵
• View on Presbyterian Orders: Although there is no specific papal bull for Presbyterians, the conclusion follows even more directly from Catholic principles. Since the Presbyterian tradition was founded on a conscious and principled rejection of the office of bishops and the doctrine of Apostolic Succession, it follows from the Catholic viewpoint that they do not have a validly ordained priesthood.¹² Therefore, their celebration of the Lord’s Supper is not considered a valid Eucharist in the Catholic sense.

It is important to approach this topic with a pastoral heart. From a Protestant perspective, this judgment can sound harsh and exclusionary. It is a theological and institutional statement about sacramental validity, not a judgment on the personal faith or salvation of Anglicans and Presbyterians, whom the Catholic Church now officially refers to as “separated brethren”.⁵⁷ Many Anglicans, in turn, strongly contest this ruling. They see themselves as fully “catholic” (in the sense of being part of the one, universal Church) and maintain that their apostolic succession remains intact.⁶ They do not recognize the Pope’s authority to make such a final judgment over their church.⁵⁷

This disagreement reveals a core difference in how the “game” of Christianity is understood. For the Catholic the game requires an infallible umpire—the teaching office of the headed by the Pope—to make definitive rulings on faith and practice. For Protestant traditions like Anglicanism and Presbyterianism, the ultimate authority is the rulebook itself—the Holy Scriptures—which the players (the Church) must interpret together, guided by the Holy Spirit. This difference in ultimate authority is the deepest reason why ecumenical dialogue between Catholics and Protestants, while often warm and fruitful, faces such powerful challenges.

A Family with Many Branches: Finding Your Place Today

Perhaps the most important and practical thing for a person exploring these traditions today is to understand that the historical labels “Anglican” and “Presbyterian” can be both helpful and misleading. Both traditions have grown into global families with many different branches. The differences within each tradition can now be as major as the historical differences between them.

Are all Anglican and Presbyterian churches the same?

The answer is a resounding no. Over the last century, both traditions have experienced major divisions, primarily over how to interpret the Bible and apply its teachings to modern social issues. This has led to a major realignment in the Protestant world, often described as the divide between “mainline” and “conservative/evangelical” churches.

• Mainline Protestant Churches: Denominations like The Episcopal Church (the main Anglican body in the U.S.) and the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) or PC(USA) are considered “mainline”.⁵⁸ These churches tend to be more theologically liberal or progressive. They often approach the Bible with the tools of modern critical scholarship, questioning its literal inerrancy in all matters.⁵⁸ They have become affirming of LGBTQ+ marriage and ordination and place a strong emphasis on social justice as a central part of the church’s mission.⁵⁸ In the Western world, these denominations have experienced decades of major membership decline.⁶¹
• Conservative/Evangelical Churches: Denominations like the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) and the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) were often formed by groups that separated from the mainline bodies in reaction to their theological shifts.⁶⁴ These churches hold to a high view of Scripture as the inspired, inerrant, and authoritative Word of God.²⁸ They maintain traditional Christian teachings on matters of sexuality and marriage and place a strong emphasis on personal conversion, evangelism, and adherence to their historic confessions of faith.⁶⁴ These denominations are generally stable or growing in the United States.²⁸

The center of gravity for both global Anglicanism and Presbyterianism has shifted dramatically to the Global South (Africa, Asia, and Latin America). The largest Anglican populations are now found in countries like Nigeria and Uganda, and these churches are overwhelmingly more theologically conservative than their counterparts in the West.⁶⁷ The same is true for Presbyterianism, with large, vibrant churches in places like Korea and across Africa.⁷⁰ This global diversity has created major tensions within both communions.

For someone seeking a church home, this means that a local PC(USA) church may have more in common culturally and theologically with a local Episcopal church than it does with a PCA church just down the street. The name on the sign is only the beginning of the story.

What do real people say about their experiences in these churches?

Theological distinctions come alive in the personal stories of believers. Listening to their experiences can provide a heartfelt understanding of what draws people to these different traditions.

• Many who find a home in Anglicanism speak of being drawn to the reverence and beauty of the liturgy. They find a deep spiritual connection to the ancient prayers of the Book of Common Prayer and the sense of being part of a faith that stretches back through the centuries.⁷¹ Some appreciate the “broad church” ethos, which allows for theological questions and a degree of mystery without demanding conformity on every point.⁸
• Conversely, some who have moved from Anglicanism to a more confessional tradition, like Presbyterianism, express a frustration with what they perceive as a theological “mixed bag”.⁷³ One person who left an ACNA parish for a Presbyterian one noted the wide diversity of “Calvinists, Charismatics, and Anglo-Catholics” all in one place, which for them, lacked doctrinal coherence.⁷³
• Those drawn to Presbyterianism often express a deep appreciation for the centrality of the Bible and the intellectual rigor of the faith. They find spiritual nourishment in sermons that carefully unpack the meaning of Scripture and in a theological system that provides clear, consistent answers to life’s biggest questions.³⁰

These are not judgments, but honest reflections. They show that God uses different church cultures and styles to meet the unique spiritual needs and temperaments of His diverse children.

Conclusion

Our journey through the Anglican and Presbyterian traditions reveals two rich, deep, and faithful streams flowing from the great river of the Protestant Reformation. They began in different places and for different reasons—one born of a monarch’s will and a desire for national peace, the other of a reformer’s passion and a desire for theological purity. These distinct origins have shaped everything that followed, creating different ways of understanding authority, leading the approaching the sacraments, and worshiping God.

The Anglican path, with its “three-legged stool” of Scripture, Tradition, and Reason, has created a broad and comprehensive a “middle way” that seeks to hold together the best of the Catholic and Reformed worlds. Its worship is steeped in the beauty of ancient liturgy, and its leadership is a visible sign of its connection to the historic, apostolic faith.

The Presbyterian path, built on the bedrock of Sola Scriptura, has created a confessional and precise a community united by a detailed and systematic understanding of biblical truth. Its worship is centered on the preaching of the Word, and its leadership is a testament to its desire to follow the representative, elder-led model of the New Testament.

Yet, for all their differences, what unites them is infinitely greater than what divides them. At their best, both Anglicans and Presbyterians are people of the Book and people of the gospel. They worship the same Triune God. They place their hope for salvation in the finished work of the same Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. They rely on the same Holy Spirit to guide and sanctify them.

The diversity we see is not a sign of the Church’s failure, but a testament to the immense richness of the gospel. It is a gospel so powerful that it can take root and flourish in the structured beauty of a cathedral and in the theological clarity of a lecture hall. As we conclude our exploration, let us do so with a prayer for unity, love, and mutual respect. May we see our Anglican and Presbyterian neighbors not as rivals, but as beloved brothers and sisters in Christ, co-laborers for His kingdom, and fellow pilgrims on the one journey home.