I know that both are acceptable in Anglicanism, and that the CoE and AC have trended one way or another at various times. Are there different Anglican groups that tend to be more Calvinist than Arminian, and vice versa?
Which ones are which? Episcopal, CoE, ACNA, REC, ACC, ACA, APA, UECNA, OAC....I have an idea - I'm assuming the ones that trend Anglo-Catholic are more Arminian and the ones that trend low church are more Calvinist, but I'm not sure how often that is the case. Particularly ACNA.
I don't know if any of the various sectarian assemblies in the Americas which claim an affiliation to Anglican doctrine take either a Calvinist TULIP-like stance or a full blown, 'free from', Arminian position, but I know that Anglican doctrine, as can be discerned from the 39 articles does not fall headlong into either ditch on the sides of The Way. Scripture is very ambiguous regarding 'freedom' and 'predestination', as even a quick search of those terms confirms the truth of it's ambiguity. Consequently I believe that the average Anglican believer, like myself, is neither totally Calvinist nor totally Arminian in their understanding of how God operates with regard to our salvation status throughout our lives on earth. Our understanding is something more like : "Perhaps Neither are true", "Perhaps Both are true" or even "Perhaps just a bit of both may be true". Faith just trusts God. It doesn't tell God how he must do anything, and scripture does not tell us everything we want to know about God and God's ways, only what we need to know about God and God's ways. .
I suspect the views will vary from diocese to diocese, and even from parish to parish. Most members probably don't know and don't care! It is not necessary for salvation to believe one way or the other on that issue. I am mostly a Molinist Arminian in my view. My rector describes himself as "very slightly Calvinist" (but he's no TULIP man).
Are you still attending an ACNA church? Is it more high church or low? Or modern, worship band-y even?
Yes, still there. The service is midway between high and low, I think. We sing traditional old hymns out of the hymnal, with piano (sometimes organ) and choir located in the rear, so there's no stage performance. The Kyrie and Gloria are sung. At some times of the year the psalm is sung rather than recited. We kneel for communion unless the front has been overtaken by flowers (mainly Christmas and Easter). On the other side of the coin, the priest rarely wears his cope, processions are sparse (1 deacon, 1 acolyte, and 1 chalice bearer precede the priest), and we never use incense.
Generally speaking, the charismatic 'stream' will fall in the Arminian camp. The UECNA is generally Reformed. Of course, I get routinely upbraided for pointing out that Arminianism is a subset of Reformed theology. Some of the micro jurisdictions within the Continuing movement stay micro because they demand strict adherence to one particular school of theology or liturgical practice. I don't spend a lot of time thinking about them because none of them will survive past the current generation.
Is it possible to be a semi universalist in opposition to the notion of full blown double predestinationalism? Why do so many people so love categorising other people and themselves over against other people not like themselves, who think differently and are therefore definitely thinking wrongly? .
Because otherwise there's no way to know who is actually a heretic and a real danger to the Church. We need some boxes to know who is orthodox and who isn't.