High vs Low and Liberal vs. Conservative

[HisHomeMaker]

Thanks for your ideas. I don't know that I can really put a label on my church.

My church has four services per week and communion at the altar at all. We do have a worship band; they play at the Saturday evening service and share the music at the Sunday morning family service. There are no images of saints, no rosaries, very little incense, full vestments on Sundays.

There is some controversy over the elevation of the elements and how this differs depending on who leads the service, but I don't understand this. It seems that some long-time Anglicans prefer the way Eucharist is lead by some priests at our church rather than others.

I knew nothing of the 39 articles until coming to this site.

Our parish has supported the ordination of two women who now lead other churches in our diocess. We do not perform same-sex marriage ceremonies, but anyone is welcome.

"Love and do not judge" certainly applies to my community. We do attract a number of former members of other churches. This Christmas, I noted that ANYONE could receive communion; the priest didn't even specify "all baptized Christians" as is normally said at each communion. We don't do a lot of outreach as a whole group, but there are smaller groups that take on projects. We are always encouraged to bring friends to worship and to more social activities and many of us do.

Our sermons are long. Scripture is seen as a man-made inspired work and when we struggle with a scripture, we look to a historical context. We are rarely told what to believe, we are encouraged to read our Bibles and to form a personal relationship with God through prayer.

 

[Shropshire Anglican]

Liberal and conservative will mingle. There are a number of large Anglican churches which do have a mix of conservative and liberal people within the congregation. In my experience most conservatives and liberals get on, as we do in my church.

 

[Shropshire Anglican]

Here is a good description of the differences between "high" and "low" churches:

Within Anglicanism, especially in the Church of England, various terms are frequently used – sometimes inconsistently – to denote the three principal forms of Anglican churchmanship: High Church, Low Church and Broad Church (or Latitudinarian).

• High Church is generally used to describe forms of Anglicanism influenced, to a greater or lesser extent, by the Catholic tradition. Anglo-Catholicism is often identified with this variety of churchmanship, although not all "High Church" Anglicans, such as Liberal Anglo-Catholics, would endorse some prominent aspects of Anglo-Catholicism.
• Low Church usually refers to Anglicans of a more Evangelical tradition who, more consistent with the Protestant tradition, emphasise the primacy of scripture and salvation through faith alone. Low Church Anglicans usually worship according to the official prayer books, but with much less ceremony.
• Broad Church generally refers to Anglicans somewhere between the "high" and "low" traditions. The term is sometimes used to denote Anglicans of a more liberal theological perspective.

• (from Anglo-Catholicism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

 

[Shropshire Anglican]

This is a good link about the "High" church: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_church

 

[MKJ]

Thanks for your ideas. I don't know that I can really put a label on my church.

My church has four services per week and communion at the altar at all. We do have a worship band; they play at the Saturday evening service and share the music at the Sunday morning family service. There are no images of saints, no rosaries, very little incense, full vestments on Sundays.

There is some controversy over the elevation of the elements and how this differs depending on who leads the service, but I don't understand this. It seems that some long-time Anglicans prefer the way Eucharist is lead by some priests at our church rather than others.

I knew nothing of the 39 articles until coming to this site.

Our parish has supported the ordination of two women who now lead other churches in our diocess. We do not perform same-sex marriage ceremonies, but anyone is welcome.

"Love and do not judge" certainly applies to my community. We do attract a number of former members of other churches. This Christmas, I noted that ANYONE could receive communion; the priest didn't even specify "all baptized Christians" as is normally said at each communion. We don't do a lot of outreach as a whole group, but there are smaller groups that take on projects. We are always encouraged to bring friends to worship and to more social activities and many of us do.

Our sermons are long. Scripture is seen as a man-made inspired work and when we struggle with a scripture, we look to a historical context. We are rarely told what to believe, we are encouraged to read our Bibles and to form a personal relationship with God through prayer.

Sounds broad and leaning to the liberal side. (Though looking at historic context alone doesn't make one a liberal interpreter of Scripture, even those who consider it inerrant do that.)

 

[HisHomeMaker]

Does it matter how our church is labeled? Does it serve a purpose other than to describe it to outsiders?

 

[MKJ]

Does it matter how our church is labeled? Does it serve a purpose other than to describe it to outsiders?

It depends. A lot of the time that is the main purpose it serves - so you might say "our worship is broad, not too low, not too high".

Sometimes it can really describe a theological position though, which might be important to someone looking to attend. I tend to prefer a rather high service, but I am by no means wedded to it. OTOH, I could not attend where they had something like lay presidency, or where they taught the Eucharist was symbolic.

 

[brightmorningstar]

Liberal and conservative will mingle. There are a number of large Anglican churches which do have a mix of conservative and liberal people within the congregation. In my experience most conservatives and liberals get on, as we do in my church.

Thats the sort of pretending that only comes from the liberals. As we see the Anglican Communion is impaired and its not because of high and low church.

 

[Shropshire Anglican]

Not pretending at all. In your church people may not mix, but in the majority of Anglican churches in the UK they do. Stop taking such a narrow view of who is and isn't a Christian. That's God's job not ours, and thank goodness for that!

 

[brightmorningstar]

Shropshire Anglican,
But the Anglican Communion is more than your church and my church which you are referring to, it is the worldwide communion which I am referring to. As the Anglican Communion is impaired bewteen so called liberal and conservative your church seems rather unusual and unrepresentative.

BTW, I said the Anglican Communion is impaired between liberal and conservative, your remark about whether either is Christian or not, is your remark, not mine. But seeing as you made the remark...
What makes you think its God's job?
What makes you think God hasnt already defined what is and isnt Christian?
How do you suppose Christianforums can separate Christian and non-Christian sections if noone could tell what is and what isnt Christian?
Did you not spot that many in the Anglican Communion pronouce the impairement over the liberal departure from the gospel?
When you say 'narrow Christianity' didnt Jesus say that? Broad is the way to destruction and narrow the way to salvation.

 

[Shropshire Anglican]

My church is a mainstream Anglican church built in the 17th century on the site of a much earlier Anglican church. It is no different to any other Anglican church in the UK in that it is a mixture of conservative and liberals. You seem to find this unusual but it is not. Perhaps you attend a very evangelical Anglican church that moderate and liberal Christians would not be welcome visiting, but if this is the case then it is you who are in the minority here, at least in the UK. (I cannot speak about what the Anglican church is like where you are because I do not know if you are even in the UK as your on screen information doesn't say).

The worldwide communion is split, but is working hard to repair the damage. It is the conservatives who have started to break off, not the moderates and liberals. So if anyone is damaging the Anglican communion it is the wing that you belong to.

And as for your latter statements, so you think God isn't in control? That He doesn't make the final decision on who is a Christian and who isn't?

God is the final judge, but you seem to have taken it on yourself to decide who is and who isn't a Christian. This is not your job anymore than it is mine. God alone will decide and if I'm wrong then so be it. But just bear it in mind. Christ told us in Matthew 7:1 not to judge. This is His job.

I'm not going to argue with you because it seems that the ad hominem approach is the one that you favour, and which ends up going in circles. If you ever want to listen to what me and others are saying then I will debate with you, but until then there is no point.

 

[brightmorningstar]

Shropshire Anglican,
Again, somewhat different experiences to match the somewhat different views.

How could it be no different to any other Anglican church in the UK if you also say my church wouldn’t welcome moderate and liberal Christians?
Who do you mean by moderate Christians, those who are in the worldwide minority?

The worldwide communion is split, but is working hard to repair the damage. It is the conservatives who have started to break off, not the moderates and liberals.

Which is another reason the moderate majority of conservatives cant work with the liberals.

And as for your latter statements,

They weren’t statements they were questions.

so you think God isn't in control?

That’s a question, you can’t give a question as an answer to a question.

That He doesn't make the final decision on who is a Christian and who isn't?

That’s what I asked you, I believe He has.

God is the final judge, but you seem to have taken it on yourself to decide who is and who isn't a Christian.

I asked you whether you thought God hadn’t. For your information I think God has.
So what do you think? It appears to me you are saying who is a Christian is impoosible to tell according to you. You tell me.

Matthew 7:1 not to judge. This is His job.

But Christ is God isnt He?
Besides Matthew teaches not to judge without expecting to be judged with the same measure, and not to judge sin in brothers, followed by a warning not to give dogs what is sacred.. so its really about judging brothers properly and not judging the world.

I'm not going to argue with you because it seems that the ad hominem approach is the one that you favour, and which ends up going in circles. If you ever want to listen to what me and others are saying then I will debate with you, but until then there is no point.

Sorry but ad hominem is most definitely not my approach, but it seems you feel disagreement with your view is somehow ad hominem.

One thing is for sure, I don’t really agree with much you say at all, and don’t know many Christians who would. At our church we welcome everyone, whether anyone agrees with the traditional historic apostolic majority Anglican Communion teaching is another matter.

 

[brightmorningstar]

Shropshire Anglican,
I hear what you are saying but would suggest where our views line up, mine is with the Lambeth 1.10, Gafcon majority, and yours the ECUSA. Of course I would consider the majority Anglican Communion moderate, and my church more in line than yours.. in short looking to a benchmark to judge our experiences.

 

[MKJ]

Thats the sort of pretending that only comes from the liberals. As we see the Anglican Communion is impaired and its not because of high and low church.

Actually I think he's right practically speaking. Many congregations are mixed. My congregation is basicly traditional, but you would also find quite a number of people who aren't. THey appear for different reasons - from the neighbourhood, or because of our outreach work, or for the music, or we get a lot of university students. THose people may have had almost no Christian experience, or from a non-Anglican background. They may not have ever considered issues that the parish as a whole considers impoartant.

But they come, and through the activities of the parish they enter into the historic Christian tradition, and often they end up in a much different place than they started. I'm not sure that would happen if we insisted they all adhere to some standard of conservatism before they came.

Now, in my experience it can be more difficult to be a traditionalist in a modernist (or post modernist) parish.

I think you spend too much time thinking about "conservatives' and "liberals".

 

[mark46]

I agree!

The way folks are talking, we should be have people take tests and separate them out when they don't pass our litmus test.

My local church and diocese are very conservative, but of course there are those in our family accross the spectrum in the congregation. Aren't all families like that? Most of the congregation never heard of Lambeth, never heard of the 39 articles, and cares little about whether LA has a homosexual bishop or not.

.I think you spend too much time thinking about "conservatives' and "liberals".

 

[brightmorningstar]

MJK,

Actually I think he's right practically speaking. Many congregations are mixed.

But your congregation is in Canada, not in areas where most Anglicans live, so one might expect you to see more of the minority view in a geography where the leadership has compromised and given in to the culture.

But they come, and through the activities of the parish they enter into the historic Christian tradition, and often they end up in a much different place than they started. I'm not sure that would happen if we insisted they all adhere to some standard of conservatism before they came.

So if they are mixed and they change then the mixed are new people who are being corrected from false teaching to correct doctrine and teaching. Sounds good, but firstly I would say that’s not mixed, that’s a church with immature or seeking Christians being discipled, not a mixed church. Secondly if they enter into a historic Christian tradition then the church is conservative isnt it?

I think you spend too much time thinking about "conservatives' and "liberals".

I always see liberals trying to detract from the enormity of the impairment. Liberals insist on everyone else upholding part of Lambeth 1.10 whilst refusing to comply to the other.

 

[brightmorningstar]

GAFCON consisted of a majority that see same sex realtionships as a significant departure from the gospel. Most posters here are either in support of same sex relationships, though they cant express it very freely, or nominaly in disagreement but not convinced. That isnt representative of the GAFCON majority.
And this isnt specific to STR, how many Africans and Asians are posting? Comparatively few.

 

[MKJ]

GAFCON consisted of a majority that see same sex realtionships as a significant departure from the gospel. Most posters here are either in support of same sex relationships, though they cant express it very freely, or nominaly in disagreement but not convinced. That isnt representative of the GAFCON majority.
And this isnt specific to STR, how many Africans and Asians are posting? Comparatively few.

You may actually be mistaken in what you see at STR to some degree. You are so polarized that even traditional Anglican Christians are inclined to disagree with you because your method is flawed.

I think you are way off base, but I'm actually probably far more theologically conservative than you are. I would not lable myself either a liberal or conservative though.