High and Low Anglican

[leothelioness]

What's the difference between high and low Anglican? Is one more conservative than the other? Do they have slightly differing beliefs?

What is an Anglican's view on transubstantiation, veneration of relics and praying to saints? Is the Anglican church still open to Calvinist doctrine?

Also, please state if you are high or low church.

Interested in reading your replies! :)

[Tomoz]

What's the difference between high and low Anglican? Is one more conservative than the other? Do they have slightly differing beliefs?

What is an Anglican's view on transubstantiation, veneration of relics and praying to saints? Is the Anglican church still open to Calvinist doctrine?

Also, please state if you are high or low church.

Interested in reading your replies! :)

Hi there leo!

The difference between high and low anglican basically comes down to worship styles (although this sometimes carries some theological differences). High church anglicans worship with a liturgy that is often quite elaborate and defined, while low church is usually more casual and informal.
For instance, the high church cathedral that I used to attend would have a procession of the clergy (who were all dressed in clerical clothing and vestments), lots of incense, a structured liturgy, and a fabulous choir that sang the ordinaries of the Mass, usually to settings that were writte nin the renaissance.
At the low church parish I now attend, the ministers are dressed in casual clothes, we sing contemporary worship music, we don't have a fixed order of service and the whole thing is more laid back. We do still do things such as reciting the creeds together and regularly celebrating the eucharist (which is actually done in the same way, and with the same prayers, as in high church liturgy).
Often (though not always) high church Anglicans will have certain beliefs about the sacraments and such that are different to low church Anglicans. Traditionally, low-church/evangelical Anglicans are reformed in their theology (though this is not always the case).
Some anglicans, often known as anglo-catholics, will hold to a belief in transubstantion and practice veneration of saints etc. Low church Anglicans, who tend to be more protestant, don't. Some hold to a memorialist view of the eucharist, some still believe in real presence but don't try to define it in anyway, and would never say that they believe in transustantiation.

I go to a low church parish which I love, but I don't have anything against high church worship or think it is wrong or anything - in fact I quite like it! Some people get their knickers in a knot over which is the "correct" style of churchmanship, but I figure everyone is different..

[Iosias]

What's the difference between high and low Anglican?

The key difference is how we worship. High Churchmen use a far more ritualistic system of worship often returning to the types and shadows of the Old Testament i.e. incense. Low Churchmen are Evangelical in that the emphasis is placed upon the preached word.

Doctrinally the High Church tend to be more Roman Catholic in outlook especially regarding the sacraments.

Is one more conservative than the other?

Not really, there are conservative High Churchmen and liberal High Churchmen as well as conservative Low Churchmen and liberal Low Churchmen.

Do they have slightly differing beliefs?

Yes.


What is an Anglican's view on transubstantiation, veneration of relics and praying to saints?

These are our 39 Articles (http://www.eskimo.com/~lhowell/bcp1662/articles/articles.html):

Article 22: "The Romish doctrine concerning Purgatory, Pardons, worshipping and adoration as well of Images as of Relics, and also Invocation of Saint, is a fond thing vainly invented, and grounded upon no warranty of Scripture; but rather repugnant to the word of God."

Article 28: "...Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of bread and wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by Holy Writ, but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions...The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was not by Christ's ordinance reserved, carried about, lifted up, or worshipped."

Is the Anglican church still open to Calvinist doctrine?

Absolutely! Whitefield, Toplady and many others were Calvinists.


Also, please state if you are high or low church.

I am a Low Churchman. :)


Interested in reading your replies! :)

:thumbsup:

[erin74]

I'm low church reformed doctrine - they read Calvin's Institutes at the college my dh attended. They have to read the entire thing before graduating.

There's a huge diversity in Anglican belief though. So while I wouldn't hold to any of the things you listed, there are plenty that hold to all of it.

We basically cover from virtually catholic/orthodox, to Reformed/evangelical/calvinists to Liberal theology - you want it we got it!

[Colabomb]

What's the difference between high and low Anglican?

Mainly it is an issue of worship style, High Churchers are Big and grand and have a involved liturgy with many deep symbols etc.

Low Church is a relative term. Pretty much anything from the Presbyterians to the Vineyard types could be considered Low.

There is also a third category called Broad. Broad Churchers use elements of both in their worship.

Is one more conservative than the other? Do they have slightly differing beliefs? [\quote]

There are conservatives and liberals in all parts of Anglicanism.


[quote]What is an Anglican's view on transubstantiation, veneration of relics and praying to saints?

It varies from person to person, parish to parish. But MOST anglicans believe in the Real Presence (that Christ is in the Eucharist) but do not necessarily define it, or go into great detail about it.



Is the Anglican church still open to Calvinist doctrine?

Some yes others no.



Also, please state if you are high or low church.

Interested in reading your replies! :)
Broad

[ChessCastle]

What is an Anglican's view on transubstantiation, veneration of relics and praying to saints?

:)

This particular question will vary the most from person to person. All of these things are taught, and practiced by some in my parish, the priest included. And yes, personally I believe and practice each of them. The 39 articles quoted earlier, are not binding to us.




Is the Anglican church still open to Calvinist doctrine?



I'm sure there are some (maybe many) Anglicans who hold to Calvinist doctrine. From what I have encountered, they would be just as welcome as those who disagree with some or all of TULIP.

[adam752]

Just remember you need two things to be Anglican:

1. A Bible
2. A Prayer Book

The rest is up to you....lol

As for me, I prefer the high church style of worship which is often refered to as "Anglo Catholic".

-adam

[gtsecc]

Just remember you need two things to be Anglican:

1. A Bible
2. A Prayer Book

The rest is up to you....lol

As for me, I prefer the high church style of worship which is often refered to as "Anglo Catholic".

-adam
...and, the Creeds, and the Sacraments, and the Historic Episcopate.

[adam752]

...and, the Creeds, and the Sacraments, and the Historic Episcopate.
Well of course! I guess I was trying to be concise because everything you need to be Anglican is included in the Prayer Book. The creeds are included in the Prayer Book along with the instructions for carrying out the sacraments.

After all, its formal title for the Episcopal Church of the US is, The Book of Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments and Other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church. I believe that includes all the particulars you mentioned.

-adam

[karen freeinchristman]

Well of course! I guess I was trying to be concise because everything you need to be Anglican is included in the Prayer Book. The creeds are included in the Prayer Book along with the instructions for carrying out the sacraments.

After all, its formal title for the Episcopal Church of the US is, The Book of Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments and Other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church. I believe that includes all the particulars you mentioned.

-adam


Welcome to Christian Forums and to your home forum - Scripture, Tradition and Reason (STR)! :wave:

[Iosias]

...the Historic Episcopate.

I pefer the Scriptural episcopate! ;)

[Naomi4Christ]

What's the difference between high and low Anglican? Is one more conservative than the other? Do they have slightly differing beliefs?

What is an Anglican's view on transubstantiation, veneration of relics and praying to saints? Is the Anglican church still open to Calvinist doctrine?

Also, please state if you are high or low church.

Interested in reading your replies! :)

Theoretically, high and low church describes a worship style - high level of trimmings versus low level. We often refer to how high "up the candle", because there is simply not high or low, but everything in between. And a church with multiple services is going to be in multiple places.

The other way to describe Anglican churches is by their churchmanship - basically, evangelical, liberal or catholic. In practice, it is more complicated, with most churches being a blend of churchmanships (broad church). In my opinion, we should all have elements of each churchmanship - scripture, reason, tradition, and all that.

I am low church and evangelical.

[karen freeinchristman]

In my opinion, we should all have elements of each churchmanship - scripture, reason, tradition, and all that.

I am low church and evangelical.How can you say in one breath that we should all have elements of each and in the next breath label yourself as being something that is distinctively on one end of the candle?

I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm just pointing out that your statement confuses me.

[Naomi4Christ]

How can you say in one breath that we should all have elements of each and in the next breath label yourself as being something that is distinctively on one end of the candle?

I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm just pointing out that your statement confuses me.
Let's say that I am 80% evangelical, 10% catholic and 10% liberal. Therefore, I am evangelical with healthy elements of catholic and liberal. :)

[She]

Is it true that the Anglican Catholics follow the Pope's teachings on such issues as contraception and abortion?

[Naomi4Christ]

Is it true that the Anglican Catholics follow the Pope's teachings on such issues as contraception and abortion?
No. Not at all. Why would we?

[She]

No. Not at all. Why would we?

:sorry:

Just the impression I got. The Anglican Catholic church is so Catholic. Also, a lot of Anglican Catholics seem to have a large number of children, so that's where I got that idea from. Sorry.

[gtsecc]

Generally, we stay out of the bedroom, and leave that to the couple to decide.

[picnic]

From what has been said so far it would seem that the anglican church in America is more anglo-catholic. In UK there is quite a mix I think, with evangelical, liberal and anglo-catholics wings and my understanding is that these roughly correspond to low, broad and high church.
Also I would say that the evangelical and anglo-catholic churches are quite conservative whilst others are less so.

I'm low and evangelical.

[higgs2]

Is it true that the Anglican Catholics follow the Pope's teachings on such issues as contraception and abortion?

No.

[higgs2]

From what has been said so far it would seem that the anglican church in America is more anglo-catholic. In UK there is quite a mix I think, with evangelical, liberal and anglo-catholics wings and my understanding is that these roughly correspond to low, broad and high church.
Also I would say that the evangelical and anglo-catholic churches are quite conservative whilst others are less so.

I'm low and evangelical.

You can't base any general statements about the Episcopal Church on what you read in this forum. The sample size is too small, and not represtentative of the population. :)

[gtsecc]

Actually, the American Church is typically far more Catholic, because our original Prayer Book came from Scotland, not the more Protestant England.

[No Swansong]

Just remember you need two things to be Anglican:

1. A Bible
2. A Prayer Book

The rest is up to you....lol

As for me, I prefer the high church style of worship which is often refered to as "Anglo Catholic".

-adam
Hi Adam, Welcome to CF and STR.

Unfortunately there are those who would use the Bible only to prop up the prayerbook.

[gtsecc]

Hi Adam, Welcome to CF and STR.

Unfortunately there are those who would use the Bible only to prop up the prayerbook.
I am not sure that is fair.
The Prayer Book instructs us to read the Bible.
If you just follow morning and evening offices, you will just about cover all the Psalms in a month.
Just going to Church on Sunday will cover almost the entire Bible every 3 years.

[No Swansong]

I am not sure that is fair.
The Prayer Book instructs us to read the Bible.
If you just follow morning and evening offices, you will just about cover all the Psalms in a month.
Just going to Church on Sunday will cover almost the entire Bible every 3 years.
Glen I was simply pointing out that many in the Anglican communion neglect the reading of Scripture. Do you deny this? I do not believe that the small portions of Scripture we get from the Liturgy nor from the hours are sufficient. I know more than a few Episcopalians who admit to not reading Scripture at all because they think they get plenty of it from the Liturgy. I know even more who only read Scripture in times of anxiety or trouble. That we use Scripture in the liturgy of the Church is absolutely true, I simply believe it is not enough if you do fine.

[gtsecc]

Glen I was simply pointing out that many in the Anglican communion neglect the reading of Scripture. Do you deny this?
Yeah, but that is meaningless. It doesn't mean that is the church teaching. For example, I can find Roman catholics who are atheists, does that mean the Church teaches it? No.

I do not believe that the small portions of Scripture we get from the Liturgy nor from the hours are sufficient.
Well, you get almsot the whole Bible in 3 years from the lectionary - that is as much as anyone in Chrisendom reads one avergae or more.

And, the Office? Wow, that is a ton of Scripture if you read jsut morning and evening prayer. Tons.

[No Swansong]

Yeah, but that is meaningless. It doesn't mean that is the church teaching. For example, I can find Roman catholics who are atheists, does that mean the Church teaches it? No.


Well, you get almsot the whole Bible in 3 years from the lectionary - that is as much as anyone in Chrisendom reads one avergae or more.

And, the Office? Wow, that is a ton of Scripture if you read jsut morning and evening prayer. Tons.
I never claimed anything about Church teaching. I was speaking only about individuals.


If you feel that what is found in liturgy is sufficient you have a right to your opinion. I don't think it is. I don't think it is even if you attend liturgy daily and pray all of the hours. I think this falls at least 20 chapters a day short. But hey, opinions vary.

[karen freeinchristman]

Actually, the American Church is typically far more Catholic, because our original Prayer Book came from Scotland, not the more Protestant England.
Tell me more. :)
I'm not well informed about the differences between the Scottish Prayer book and the English one; nor am I aware of how England is more Protestant than Scotland.

[RadixLecti]

Tell me more. :)
I'm not well informed about the differences between the Scottish Prayer book and the English one; nor am I aware of how England is more Protestant than Scotland.
I'd also be interested to learn about that.

[Iosias]

England's BCP followed the 1552 Prayer Book (http://justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/1552/BCP_1552.htm)which was far more Reformed (Martin Bucer (http://www.tlogical.net/biobucer.htm)helped to write it) whilst the Scottish followed the 1549 Prayer Book (http://justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/1549/BCP_1549.htm)which was basiclly the pre-Reformation liturgy in English and communion in 2 kinds.

[gtsecc]

Just as things are today, England ignored please from the American Church, and we had to skirt the more traditional channels for help. We needed Bishops for a number of reasons, not to mention ordaining priest and Bishops in the US. England ignored us for years. We sent Samuel Sebury to Sctoland, they Ordained him, and sent him back with the Scottish Prayer Book.

Here what wiki sayeth:

On March 25 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_25), 1783 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1783), a meeting of ten Episcopal clergy in Woodbury, Connecticut, elected Seabury bishop. There were no Anglican bishops in the Americas to ordain him, so he sailed to London on July 7. In England, however, his consecration was blocked because, as an American citizen, he could no longer take the oath of allegiance (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_allegiance) to the king. Seabury then turned to the Scottish Episcopal Church (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Episcopal_Church), whose bishops at that time refused to recognize the authority of King George III (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_George_III). He was consecrated in Aberdeen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aberdeen) on November 14 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/November_14), 1784 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1784). The anniversary of his consecration is a now a lesser feast day (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feast_day) on the calendars of both the Episcopal Church in the United States of America and the Anglican Church of Canada (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglican_Church_of_Canada).
He returned to Connecticut in 1785 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1785) and made New London, Connecticut (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_London%2C_Connecticut) his home, becoming rector of St James Church there. The validity of his consecration was at first questioned by some, but was recognized by the General Convention of his church in 1789 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1789). In 1790 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1790) Seabury took charge of the diocese of Rhode Island (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhode_Island) also. In 1792 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1792) he joined with Bishops William White (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_White_%28Bishop_of_Pennsylvania%29) and Samuel Provoost (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Provoost), who had received English consecration in 1787 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1787), and James Madison (1749 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1749)-1812 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1812)), who had received English consecration in 1790 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1790), in the consecration of Bishop Thomas J. Claggett (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thomas_John_Claggett&action=edit) of Maryland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Episcopal_Diocese_of_Maryland) in 1792 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1792), thus uniting the Scottish and the English successions.
Seabury played a decisive role in the evolution of Anglican liturgy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liturgy) in North America after the Revolution. His "Communion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communion) Office," published in New London in 1786, was based on the Scottish Book of Common Prayer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Common_Prayer) rather than the 1662 liturgy in use in the Church of England. Seabury's defense of the Scottish service—especially its restoration of the epiklesis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epiklesis) or invocation of the Holy Spirit in the consecration of the communion elements—influenced the first Book of Common Prayer adopted by the Episcopal Church in 1789. Besides the epiklesis, Seabury argued for the restoration of another ancient custom: the weekly celebration of Holy Communion on Sunday rather than the infrequent observance that became customary in most Protestant churches after the Reformation. In "An Earnest Persuasive to Frequent Communion," published in 1789 in New Haven, he wrote that "when I consider its importance, both on account of the positive command of Christ, and of the many and great benefits we receive from it, I cannot but regret that it does not make a part of every Sunday's solemnity." Seabury was ahead of his time, but two centuries later the custom of weekly Eucharist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eucharist) was rapidly spreading through many Protestant and Anglican congregations under the impact of the Liturgical Movement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liturgical_Movement).

[Iosias]

Have you come accross the non-juror liturgy? It makes facinating reading :) http://justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/Communion_Nonjurors.htm