Usefulness of High and Low labels.

[Arcangl86]

One of the things i love about being Anglican is how comprehensive it can be. But one thing I noticed is how much we love to use labels to describe individual beliefs. In particular I can think of High Church, Low Church and the related but distinct Evangelical and Anglo Catholic. Are these terms really useful? They don't mean anything to people who aren't deeply immersed in the tradition, and they all tend to be rather ill defined. Like how being Anglo-Catholic is really an issue of ecclesiology, but tends to be conflated with being High Churchmanship. Why do we use these terms, and relatedly, how do you identify?

 

[Lovetrusion]

I always say if the Lord never spoke of it or did anything towards whatever you are thinking of, do not be consumed by it. Therein lies the Devil prowling like a lion looking to devour you by terms of arrogance, deceit, high mindedness, insolence, etc. Labels won't save you or give you grace. The equation to God's heart should be simple. Entrusting him to provide all wisdom.

 

[Albion]

Arcangl86, These terms do get mixed up, but OTOH, there is some consistency to them.

High and Low refer to ceremony, as you know, but most Anglo-Catholics are High Church and most Evangelical Anglicans are Broad or Low Church by preference, which does make sense. It's rare anymore--although it wasn't always so--for the combinations to go the other way.

 

[Arcangl86]

Arcangl86, These terms do get mixed up, but OTOH, there is some consistency to them.

High and Low refer to ceremony, as you know, but most Anglo-Catholics are High Church and most Evangelical Anglicans are Broad or Low Church by preference, which does make sense. It's rare anymore--although it wasn't always so--for the combinations to go the other way.

Yeah one thing I was fascinated to learn when I was doing research for a paper was that the leaders of the Oxford movement were not for the most part ritualists.

 

[seeking.IAM]

I sometimes travel for work. Although the labels may be imprecise, they provide some guidance as to where I'd like to worship in a city offering a variety of churches from which to choose.

 

[Paidiske]

I personally don't identify with any of the labels. I feel like "Anglican" is label enough, and I've been involved with and influenced by very different communities of Anglicans!

I do think that, while imprecise (and often used without a generosity of spirit) the labels can be a useful shorthand. "That parish is fairly hardline evangelical" tells people who know what it means, what to expect, much more succinctly than a paragraph on their views and practices.

 

[everbecoming2007]

I personally don't identify with any of the labels. I feel like "Anglican" is label enough, and I've been involved with and influenced by very different communities of Anglicans!

I do think that, while imprecise (and often used without a generosity of spirit) the labels can be a useful shorthand. "That parish is fairly hardline evangelical" tells people who know what it means, what to expect, much more succinctly than a paragraph on their views and practices.

There are so many combinations. My clergy have been Anglo-Catholic, the parish high church, and a number of laity, quite evangelical. But some are easily Anglo-Catholic in this parish, which does have those influences all over it.

 

[Andrewn]

I used to go to a church that had 2 services on Sunday: a traditional / liturgical service and an evangelical / non-liturgical service. So, it had both high church and low church services. I also came to understand that Methodists are really low church Anglicans.

Am I correct?

 

[Albion]

I used to go to a church that had 2 services on Sunday: a traditional / liturgical service and an evangelical / non-liturgical service. So, it had both high church and low church services. I also came to understand that Methodists are really low church Anglicans.

Am I correct?

My answer would be yes, but "partially" or "generally so."

For one thing, "Low Church" Anglicanism is or should be as ritualistic (i.e. liturgical) as "High Church" Anglicanism. It's mainly ceremony that distances the one from the other. I do know of Anglicans who are almost completely non-liturgical, but they are so rare....

Second, what you say about Methodism is generally correct (and was moreso in the past), but other emphases of Methodism are social activism, work among poor and underprivileged, avoidance of unseemly public amusements, and a modest form of the holiness movement that was further emphasized by the Pentecostal churches that developed later.

 

[seeking.IAM]

... I also came to understand that Methodists are really low church Anglicans.
Am I correct?

As a 50 year Methodist before becoming Episcopalian, I'd say they are very low church, sinking lower all the time which has everything to do with my leaving them to become Episcopalian.

 

[Naomi4Christ]

My church is evangelical in churchmanship, but we have a variety of services at varying points “up the candle”.