For many faithful Christians the opportunity to ordained ministry is seen as out of reach, either based upon finances or available time to attend seminary.

I feel a call to ministry

A call to ministry is discerned over time in prayer, community, and concrete testing of gifts, whether that call is to full‑time or bi‑vocational service. Bi‑vocational ministry raises all the same discernment questions while adding a layer of reflection on work, economics, boundaries, and mission in the world. What “call to ministry” means In Christian tradition, vocation is not just a job but a participation in God’s work of healing and reconciling the world. Every baptized person is called to ministry, but some are set apart by the Church for particular responsibilities of word, sacrament, and pastoral oversight. Discernment is the shared work of listening for whether a specific form of ministry (lay, diaconal, priestly, episcopal, or other) fits a person’s character, gifts, and the needs of the Church. Core practices of discernment Discernment usually weaves together several ongoing practices rather than one decisive moment. Key elements include: Prayer and Scripture: Regular, honest prayer that asks for wisdom and attends to consolation, desolation, and the long‑term fruits of possible paths. Community confirmation: Conversations with pastors, mentors, and congregations that test whether others see the same call, not just personal desire. Self‑examination:
Reflecting on motivations, temperament, wounds, and strengths, often through a spiritual autobiography or similar exercise. Concrete service:
Serving in visible ministries over time so that gifts, resilience, and character can be observed in real situations. Structured processes:
In many Anglican and Episcopal contexts, formal parish and diocesan processes engage committees, clergy, and bishops over a year or more. We are no different, in fact scripture warns us about 'laying on of hands" in haste. Shared and communal discernment A call to ministry is never discerned in isolation, even though it is deeply personal. Many churches insist that a genuine call is both inward (the candidate’s conviction) and outward (the Church’s recognition and need). This is why diocesan and denominational guidelines emphasize parish vestries, discernment committees, and bishops all participating in listening together for the Spirit’s leading. Bi‑vocational calls: unique questions Bi‑vocational ministry means a person intentionally combines ordained or recognized church leadership with another regular occupation. Historically and today this pattern emerges out of mission strategy, financial reality, and a desire to embody the Gospel within ordinary workplaces and communities. Discernment for bi‑vocational ministry includes all the usual theological and ecclesial questions plus several additional ones: Integration of work and ministry: How will the minister’s “secular” work become a site of presence, evangelism, justice, and pastoral contact rather than a competing loyalty. Time and limits: What is a realistic pattern of hours, rest, and family life, and how will the parish’s expectations be negotiated clearly to avoid burnout and resentment. Economic clarity: Is bi‑vocationality a positive missionary choice, a financial necessity, or both, and how does that shape decisions about compensation and sustainability. Ecclesial support: What training, mentoring, and formation pathways (such as local schools for ministry) exist specifically for bi‑vocational clergy. Gifts and risks of bi‑vocational ministry Bi‑vocational ministry can profoundly enrich both the minister and the congregation. It often: Breaks down sacred–secular divides by placing pastoral leaders visibly in the same economic and social realities as their congregants. Opens unique mission doors through workplace relationships and networks that a full‑time church position might never touch. Reduces unhealthy dependence on clergy and can free ministers to speak prophetically without fear of losing their only income. At the same time, research and practice highlight real vulnerabilities: chronic overwork, ambiguous expectations around “part‑time,” and under‑resourcing if churches treat bi‑vocational ministers as “less than” or merely budget solutions. Healthy discernment therefore asks not only, “Am I called to bi‑vocational ministry?” but also, “What structures of support, clarity, and shared leadership will make this call life‑giving rather than corrosive?”

Education

In a perfect world every member of clergy would have the time and funding to attend a globally recognized seminary. We understand that for many candidates that is not possible. In a traditional denominational environment the candidate would be encouraged to consider lay ministry and volunteerism.

Many of our parishes are in rural areas and even with generous giving, they could never support the expenses of a traditional education.

Non‑seminary‑educated priests can be defended on biblical, historical, pastoral, and missional grounds, especially when their formation is rigorous, local, and accountable, even if it does not follow a traditional residential model. The question, in other words, is not “seminary or no training,” but “what kind of formation most faithfully serves Christ’s church in this time and place?” Biblical and historical patterns Scripture and much of church history shows leaders formed by apprenticeship and community more than by academic institutions. Neither Israel’s priests nor the apostles were shaped in something resembling modern seminaries; instead, they learned in embodied, mentor‑driven contexts under recognized teachers within worship communities. Early Christian ministry developed through catechesis, mentoring, and on‑the‑job formation, not through leaving one’s community for a distant school. Many widely respected pastors and writers (e.g., Bunyan, Spurgeon) lacked formal seminary degrees yet cultivated deep biblical and theological competence through disciplined study and apprenticeship. Formation, not just credentials Critiques of seminary often stress that academic programs alone cannot fully prepare pastors for the spiritual, emotional, and relational demands of priestly ministry. Classroom excellence does not guarantee maturity in prayer, character, or the capacity to suffer with a congregation over time. Even strong advocates for seminary admit that additional mentoring, supervised ministry, and congregational testing are indispensable. Robust non‑seminary pathways can intentionally combine structured study (Scripture, theology, history) with local mentoring, supervised practice, and spiritual direction, producing well‑formed priests without imposing a residential degree. Localized and contextual training In the CAC's context, dioceses are already developing high‑quality local formation programs as recognized alternatives to traditional seminary, especially for nontraditional and bi‑vocational candidates. These programs meet canonical requirements for study in Scripture, theology, ethics, pastoral care, liturgy, and Anglican tradition while keeping candidates rooted in their ministry context. Local formation collaboratives (e.g., Iona) provide graduate‑level curricula delivered in hybrid or modular formats, integrated with diocesan mentoring and parish‑based practice. Such pathways broaden access for candidates constrained by finances, geography, family, or work, without lowering standards of theological depth or pastoral skill. Serving mission and bi‑vocational realities The growing need for bi‑vocational and rural clergy makes exclusive reliance on residential seminary both impractical and, in some regions, a barrier to mission. Churches “now unable to call full‑time priests” often can raise up gifted local leaders whose lives are already embedded in the community but who cannot leave for three years of full‑time study. Local, non‑seminary routes allow priests to remain in their communities, maintain employment, and receive formation tailored to the real conditions of their ministry, rather than training primarily for large, resource‑rich parishes. This can strengthen dioceses by multiplying clergy who are economically realistic, contextually savvy, and able to model Christian vocation in the workplace as well as the sanctuary. Safeguards and standards An argument for non‑seminary‑educated priests is not an argument for minimal or haphazard preparation. Canonical norms already require candidates to be properly trained in Scripture and in the doctrine, discipline, and worship of the Church, and these can be satisfied through accredited or otherwise approved local programs of study. Bishops, diocesan commissions, and exam processes can ensure that non‑seminary pathways remain demanding, comprehensive, and subject to real evaluation. When local formation is taken seriously—as rigorous, mentored, and accountable—it can produce priests whose learning is deep, whose spirituality is tested in everyday ministry, and whose formation is organically tied to the people they serve, not to an academic credential.

Incardination and Transferring to the CAC

We have seen people wish to associate with the CAC for the purpose of increasing their own credibility. In some cases it has proven valid and in others, they were self-serving with a less than genuine purpose.

In other cases, they were alone in ministry and felt the need to associate with like minded faithful christian ministers and communities.

Our considerations include the following:
Education
Valid Apostolic Ordination
Character (Background Investigation)

We do not guarantee to provide stipends or immediate financial support to clergy or communities wishing to join the CAC. Many of our clergy are bi-vocational and self -supporting.

If you feel called to investigate a call to ministry contact us via the website and we will follow up with you.

Vocations. Considering a call to serve?

I feel a call to ministry

Education

Incardination and Transferring to the CAC