I am a Gen Z pastor. I know several—and am even tempted to say many—of my peers who have been a part of non-denominational Christian churches (typically considered “low church”) who have wrestled with leaving for a so-called “high church” tradition such as Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, or Anglicanism.[1] And several have done so. What does this mean for Christian churches, particularly in the Restoration Movement? How should we respond pastorally to such wrestling? This article seeks to introduce and explore two topics that seem (from my own vantage point) to be prevalent among those in my generation who desire to “go deeper” into the roots of their Christian faith by engaging theology and church history. These two topics are denominational apologetics and ecclesial anxiety. My perspective is that of a Gen Z pastor who wants to encourage conviction without panic. In this article, I will define those two terms and their relationship to YouTube, share a bit of my own story in this regard, engage a helpful paragraph from the theologian John Webster on this subject, and conclude with some thoughts for application.
1. Denominational Apologetics and Ecclesial Anxiety
Most of the young men I know spend quite a bit of time browsing YouTube. I am not exempt from that group. If you were to scroll through the YouTube app on my phone to see what kinds of content the algorithm is sending my way, you would see some political stuff, some theology stuff, some comedy stuff (mainly from John Crist!), and, of course, some memes.
But you would also see quite a bit of content from the part of YouTube known as “Denominational Apologetics.” A denomination is a distinct branch of the Christian religion. Apologetics refers to giving a reasoned defense of something. In the case of “Christian Apologetics,” this would be a reasoned defense of the truth of core Christian claims.
So, denominational apologetics would refer to various members from different Christian denominations arguing for the truth of their particular denomination from Scripture, tradition, reason, experience, and so forth. And denominational apologetics have, over the last several years, been especially prevalent on YouTube.
Roman Catholic YouTubers like Trent Horn, Jimmy Akin, or Joe Heschmeyer[2] argue that the Roman Catholic Church is the one true church—it alone constitutes the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church. All who belong to different denominations should leave their current denomination and join the Roman Catholic Church, as it is the church Christ established. You also have Eastern Orthodox YouTubers like Josiah Trenham or Cleave to Antiquity, among others.[3] They would generally argue that those outside of Orthodoxy should join the Eastern Orthodox Church—the fullness of the faith.
“Denominational apologetics have, over the last several years, been especially prevalent on YouTube.”
There are also a number of Protestant YouTubers such as Gavin Ortlund, Jordan B. Cooper, Redeemed Zoomer, or Sola Media. Usually, these different Protestant YouTubers are not arguing that all who are outside of their denomination are not a part of God’s one holy, catholic, and apostolic church.[4] They are usually more so seeking to defend the validity of their own particular churches or church traditions. Many of them, with Calvin, would likely say, “Wherever we see the Word of God purely preached and heard, and the sacraments administered according to Christ’s institution, there, it is not to be doubted, a church of God exists” (Institutes 4.1.9).
As you can imagine, for a person coming to faith in Jesus Christ for the first time, deciding which particular Christian denomination to join can cause quite a bit of anxiety! Questions and thoughts like these may race through their mind: “Which denomination gets the Bible right? How do I know? If I make the wrong decision, will I be damned? All of the arguments sound compelling but there is always one more video I haven’t watched!” Enter: ecclesial anxiety.
Ecclesial anxiety is an intense worry or fear about whether or not one belongs to the “right” church which holds the most correct theological beliefs, in alignment with Scripture and the history of the church. Dr. Ortlund has a fantastic video which can be found here in which he speaks on this topic.
“For a person coming to faith in Jesus Christ for the first time, deciding which particular Christian denomination to join can cause quite a bit of anxiety!”
Ecclesial anxiety is not limited to those who are exploring Christianity for the first time! Many who have grown up in particular denominations of Christianity—sometimes without realizing there are other denominations—are overwhelmed with the large variety of arguments offered for the correctness of the theological beliefs of other Christian traditions. It can be overwhelming to be presented with four (or more) different views on baptism, the Lord’s Supper, church leadership, predestination, or liturgical practice, all of which argue that they have the support of Scripture and the history of the church!
Often, ecclesial anxiety comes with a pressure to make a decision quickly. Say, for instance, that the Roman Catholic Church alone truly does constitute the one true church. (I believe that there are good reasons to hold that this is not the case—this is just for the sake of an example.[5]) It would behoove someone to drop everything, leave their current denomination in which they were raised or became a Christian in, and enter into the Roman Catholic Church as soon as possible. There’s no time to waste if this is the one true church!
It seems to me that many (but certainly not all) of the voices on YouTube denominational apologetics do not encourage sustained, thoughtful, and slow contemplation of the varied arguments. Far too often, those facing ecclesial anxiety are pressured—on multiple fronts!—to make a decision quickly without prayerfully seeking the truth alongside others in the context of their current Christian community.
I will have more to say on the subjects of denominational apologetics and ecclesial anxiety in the third section below, but I want to share a little bit of how my own story intersects with this topic as well.
2. My Story with Ecclesial Awareness/Anxiety
I grew up attending Southeast Christian Church in Louisville, Kentucky. Today, SECC meets in sixteen different locations and has an average attendance of around 25-30,000. Growing up at Southeast, it was just church to me. I didn’t really think too much about the fact that most Christians experienced worship in much, much, much smaller settings. This was just my home church to me—it just happened to be really BIG!
It wasn’t until I got to Ozark Christian College in Joplin, Missouri for my undergraduate education that I started to hear things about our school and our churches being a part of some sort of “movement.” I heard names like Barton W. Stone or Thomas and Alexander Campbell. This movement was referred to as the “Restoration Movement” or the “Stone-Campbell Movement.” As I began to understand more what this movement was and what it meant to be a part of it,[6] I began to have many more “ecclesial” questions.
It was during the summer of 2023 that I took an online class at Ozark called “Church History 2.”[7] That summer coincided with time I spent serving as a ministry intern at Riverlawn Christian Church in Wichita, Kansas.[8] In class, we discussed the Protestant Reformation of the sixteenth century and how divisions between Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Protestants, and Restorationists impact Christianity today. In Wichita, I first visited what is still my favorite Christian bookstore I have ever been to, Eighth Day Books. The owner is Eastern Orthodox and most of the staff are either Orthodox or Roman Catholic.
“As I began to understand more what this movement was and what it meant to be a part of it, I began to have many more ‘ecclesial’ questions.”
I frequented that bookstore throughout the summer to learn more about Orthodoxy (and buy more books than I needed to), and one of the employees ended up inviting me to attend a worship service at St. George Orthodox Christian Cathedral where I was introduced to Orthodox liturgy for the first time. I was astounded by the beauty of the liturgy. From this experience, much of my own wrestling with “ecclesial anxiety” deepened. I asked questions like, “Have I been missing out on what Christianity really should look like?”
Since then, I have devoured hundreds of hours of YouTube videos and podcasts from Protestant, Orthodox, and Catholic YouTubers and read dozens of books as I have wrestled personally with these issues. While I have only barely scratched the surface of my own personal wrestling with ecclesial anxiety, this overview is sufficient enough to recognize that the anxiety such wrestlings cause is real and worth taking seriously.
Toward that end, I would now like to share with you a paragraph I recently read that helped deeply clarify these topics for me.
3. John Webster on Conviction without Panic
In December of 2025, I dove into the writings of John Webster. Webster was an Anglican theologian who lived and taught in the UK. John Webster has been regarded as one of the most significant theologians of the last 50 years. Kevin Vanhoozer referred to Webster as the one whom theologians read not only simply to keep up with their field but “for the love of God.”[9] Ivor J. Davidson said that he “was a theologian’s theologian.”[10] Finally, Katherine Sonderegger referred to John as a “God-intoxicated theologian.”[11] Love and pursuit of the Triune God animated Webster’s writings.
The final paragraph of the final lecture of his book, The Culture of Theology nearly knocked me out of my chair due to the amount of ecclesial clarity it helped me to have—written by an Anglican, no less! For context, this work of Webster’s is an account of what Christian theology is and what its tasks are. The material was first written as six lectures: Culture, Texts, Traditions, Conversation, Criticisms, and Habits.[12] 
“Love and pursuit of the Triune God animated Webster’s writings.”
In the final lecture, “Habits,” Webster highlights three particular things that one who is engaged in the theological task should pray for “an especial measure of.” The first is the fear of God. The second is “a patient teachability or deference on the part of the theologian.”[13] I will quote the third in full, as it is where I would like to draw our attention:
If, nevertheless, that sounds rather constricting, let me add very briefly a third characteristic: freedom from self-preoccupation. Orthodoxy becomes dangerous when its maintenance is a matter of self-protection: anxious patrolling of the perimeter fence around our cultural space, sniping at intruders or at any poor souls trying to escape. But there is a mode of cheerful belonging to a tradition which is not obsessive in its attachments, but rather regards them with a free, unharassed relativity. Perhaps the best word for this is “irony”—by which we do not mean skepticism or refusal of belonging but a genuine freedom within commitment which has learned the wisdom to distinguish one’s own bit of the tradition from God. This healthy irony cannot be exercised too early; if it is, it usually descends into flippancy. It is properly something grown into and entails learning a measure of detachment from any one articulation of the gospel, usually through making oneself familiar with other articulations and seeing the kinds of apostolic, holy life and thought they promote.[14]
There is much that could be said by way of commentary on this dense paragraph. (As is often the case with Webster, it may be worth reading that paragraph one more time before moving on!) What this paragraph helped me realize is that God’s church is much larger than my “own bit of the tradition” that is the Restoration Movement.
“What this paragraph helped me realize is that God’s church is much larger than my ‘own bit of the tradition’ that is the Restoration Movement.”
But Webster does not deny the need to continue to mount biblical and historical arguments in favor of the beliefs we hold to be true about the practice and doctrine of the church. Denying that would be to descend into “flippancy.”
But such mounting of arguments should not come from a posture of “anxious patrolling” but rather of “cheerful belonging.” We are not to be obsessive in our attachments, but should learn “the wisdom to distinguish one’s own bit of the tradition from God.” This is what I love most about the Restoration Movement. From the beginning, they exercised a generous ecclesiology. God’s church was not limited to their particular sect, but as Alexander Campbell argued in his Lunenburg Letter, if their group were the only Christians in the world, then that would mean that “for many centuries there has been no church of Christ, no Christians in the world; and the promises concerning the everlasting kingdom of Messiah have failed, and the gates of hell have prevailed against his church! This cannot be; and therefore there are Christians among the sects.”[15]
When we make ourselves familiar with—through engaging the biblical and historical arguments of—other Christian traditions outside of our own, our understanding of (and “cheerful belonging” to) our own tradition deepens and grows. We see that the Holy Spirit has clearly moved—and is clearly moving—even among those with whom we have deep disagreements. We can have firm conviction without panic.
“We can have firm conviction without panic.”
Often, there is an idealism that can creep in here. “Idealism tells us there is a better community out there somewhere. There is a group of Christians who are really doing the faith right.”[16] Ultimately, the obsessive search for the “perfect church” is a fool’s errand, as our faith is not in the perfection of the church but in the perfect work of Christ accomplished on our behalf. The “irony” Webster speaks of is that we humbly admit we could be wrong as we continue to defend the rightness of our own beliefs! It is a freeing perspective indeed.
When we adopt the view that Webster proposes here, ecclesial anxiety lessens, as ultimately it is not up to us alone to figure it all out, but to trust that Christ is building his church upon that confession of Peter that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God (see Matthew 16:16-18). When Jesus said, “Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life” (John 5:24), he meant it. We can trust in the promises of God for assurance of our belonging to Christ, not our belonging to the “right” (or perfect) denomination or ecclesial tradition.[17]
4. Brief Applicational Thoughts
While I am not in a position to speak on behalf of what all this might mean for all pastors everywhere, I can share three commitments I have made to respond faithfully in this cultural moment, amidst the denominational apologetics, ecclesial anxiety, and all. This is my attempt to “cheerfully belong” to the church tradition which raised me in the faith without “anxiously patrolling the perimeter fence.”
First, I always do my best to steelman the arguments of those whom I disagree with ecclesiologically. If I am engaging with arguments in favor of Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, or other Protestant traditions—whether on essential, important, or personal elements—I want to restate their case in such a way that they would agree with it. Knocking down straw man arguments does not promote the kind of charity in dialogue and argumentation that fellow Christians should embody. It also makes onlookers think that our/my own arguments are bad since they do not adequately or charitably address the best arguments of Christians we/I disagree with.
“I always do my best to steelman the arguments of those whom I disagree with ecclesiologically.”
Second, I try to have an open mind in learning from other Christian traditions, as long as what they practice does not contradict the authority of Holy Scripture.[18] One rich aspect of “high-church” traditions is the frequency of corporate prayer and recitation of Scripture (particularly of the Psalms) during the worship service. I find the incorporation of some of these elements in what may be characterized typically as a “low-church” worship service to be particularly enriching.
Additionally, church traditions who have canonized saints often help their members stay in touch with the history of the church which is so much larger than our one corner of it. What if we, in our preaching and teaching, regularly drew attention to the faithful testimonies and stories of great men and women of the faith who have served Christ faithfully throughout the ages—whether from the patristic, medieval, reformation, or modern eras—since his ascension? This reminds Christians that we, in being a member of Christ’s church, are a part of something far larger than simply our own age.
Third, I strive to embody the desire for Christian unity today that characterized the early Restorationists, which was a desire ultimately sourced in the mouth of our Lord himself as he prayed just before his crucifixion. This certainly does not mean that we must follow the early Restorationists in everything they thought or taught, but their shared impulse toward unity in Christ is a virtuous one.
“I strive to embody the desire for Christian unity today that characterized the early Restorationists, which was a desire ultimately sourced in the mouth of our Lord himself as he prayed just before his crucifixion.”
Christian unity means working with our brothers and sisters in love “until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ” (Ephesians 4:13, NIV). This could look like regularly getting lunch with and getting to know ministers from other Christian denominations in our area we might not otherwise connect with.
As we strive to faithfully follow the Lord amidst the ecclesial complexity which has developed in the centuries since the time of the church of the New Testament, Christ’s high priestly prayer can guide us, and it is fitting that he has the final words: “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you” (John 17:20-21a, NIV).
[1] In my use of these terms, I am not referring to whether or not these traditions have a “high” view of the church, as I would argue the Restoration Movement has had and ideally should have. I am using them in terms of worship procedures. High churches typically place more emphasis on liturgical order, vestments, and the sacraments. Lower churches place less of an emphasis on these aspects and follow a more laid-back worship style.
[2] These lists of YouTubers are not exhaustive and each of these individuals engages in denominational apologetics to varying levels. For some, it is their primary focus; for others, it is a secondary or tertiary focus of their content.
[3] Dr. Gavin Ortlund recently engaged in two conversations with Orthodox Christians—Jonathan Pageau and Fr. Stephen De Young.
[4] The word “catholic” here is not referring to the Roman Catholic Church. It is derived from a Greek word (καθολικός) meaning “universal.” Thus, the “catholic church” in this sense means the church that comprises all believers across space and time in their totality.
[5] For more on why I think that this isn’t the case, you could begin to peruse the many, many videos that Dr. Ortlund has on the topic in this playlist. A great start would be Ortlund’s summative case against the papacy available here. If you are willing to leave the YouTube world and go straight to the good stuff (which I would recommend), you can pick up Ortlund’s outstanding book, What It Means to be Protestant, available here.
[6] This is not the place to give a full history lesson of the Restoration Movement, but the long story short is that a group of Christians—from varying denominations, but largely Presbyterians—at the beginning of the nineteenth century were tired of rigid confessionalism serving as a theologically authoritative boundary marker alongside Scripture that prohibited these varying Christian denominations from being united in Christ. Those in the Restoration Movement wanted to restore the simplicity of New Testament Christianity to the church of their day, without denominations, as the kinds of divisions which they saw manifest in their own day did not exist in the early church. The movement centers around two major pillars: biblical authority and Christian unity. For more, head here for a lecture series from Dr. Rick Cherok. To get a feel for the ethos of the Restoration Movement, I highly recommend this book, The Fool of God by Louis Cochran—it is a fictionalized narrative of Alexander Campbell’s life grounded in historical facts. The foreword was written by RENEW.org’s very own Bobby Harrington.
[7] I took this class with Andy Nichols. At the time, Andy Nichols was serving as an adjunct professor for Ozark. Now, Andy serves full time as Professor of Church History. He is a blessing to have at Ozark and Lincoln Seminary; I have learned so much from him.
[8] Shoutout to Riverlawn Christian Church!
[9] At the beginning of this lecture.
[10] Davidson, Ivor J., “Introduction,” in The Culture of Theology, eds. Ivor J. Davidson and Alden C. McCray (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2019), 1.
[11] Sonderegger, Katherine, “The God‐Intoxicated Theology of a Modern Theologian,” International Journal of Systematic Theology 21, no. 1 (2019): 24. EBSCOhost.
[12] See the introduction to the work for more background information.
[13] He clarifies what this means: “Deference to what? Deference to the gospel, finally, as the self-testimony of the risen Christ but also deference to the company of those who have studied, suffered, and prayed the gospel in the catholic community of faith. This is part of what is meant by orthodoxy. Rather than thinking of orthodoxy as mute subscription to dogmas, it is much better to understand it as participation in a shared, comprehensive culture, within whose scope one learns how to read the world by filling out certain roles, pondering and making use of certain ideas, figuring out how to speak a certain language well, in one or another of its different local dialects. Belonging precedes suspicion.” See Webster, “Habits,” in The Culture of Theology, 145-46. This does not mean that nothing in the tradition can ever be wrong or in error. I think that part of what it means can be nicely summed up by Karl Barth. He says that theology should honor the fifth commandment by honoring our mothers and fathers who pursued the task of interpreting Scripture before us. That does not mean our parents will always be right, as we are ultimately subject to God. See Barth, Church Dogmatics, I/2 §20, 585.
[14] Webster, “Habits,” 147.
[15] Campbell, Alexander, “The Lunenburg Letter with Attendant Comments,” Foundational and Controversial Stone-Campbell Movement Documents (Nashville, TN: Disciples of Christ Historical Society, 1837).
[16] A. J. Swoboda, After Doubt: How to Question Your Faith without Losing It (Grand Rapids: Brazos, 2021), 163.
[17] To be clear, Christians do need to be a part of a visible ecclesial institution in the form of their own local church. I agree fully with Cyprian: “No one can have God as a Father who does not have the Church as Mother.” I am highlighting that Christ’s church is not limited to the Roman Catholic or Orthodox communions, but ultimately is found in Christ’s body, of which he is the head. With Ortlund in this video, I would affirm that the Church is the arena of salvation, but not the distributor of salvation. Christ is the distributor of salvation. Our ultimate object of faith is Christ; studying the arguments will never give us the assurance which may be found in Christ alone.
[18] Gavin Ortlund—can you tell I’ve been influenced by him?—offers five suggestions in this video, “Evangelical Worship Needs Church History,” for adding theological and historical depth to more typically “low church” worship services, centering on (1) liturgy, (2) communion, (3) preaching, (4) passing the peace, and (5) singing theological songs.
