• High Church and Informal

    Someone coming out of church on Sunday who isn’t a regular at St Mary’s said to me, “That was great – exactly what I like – high church and informal”.

    I was pleased that the person had understood what we are trying to do. High church and informal is precisely one of the ways in which I would describe the worship at St Mary’s. (Liturgical but not stuffy is another way of describing the same thing).

    The combination of all the glories of high church worship with a relaxed sense of fun seems to me to be quite an attractive option for churches.

    Generally speaking, I think that churches tend to be successful if people feel that they are in some way happy to be there. Some people describe that as feeling at home though I’m not sure that I’d talk about it like that. I think some people like going to churches where they feel they might be able to make friends though the real goal is a church where some people come feeling that and some people come sure in the knowledge that people will leave them alone if they want to be alone.

    The word for describing the sensibility of a local church is (or at least used to be) churchmanship. In many ways, it is a rather unhelpful word now, with all its sexist connotations. However, we still need ways of speaking about what particular churches are like.

    Churches have been described by all kinds of words in the past. Churchmanship has sometimes been described in terms like anglocatholic, low church, high church, evangelical broad church, moderate. I was interested to see recently that some people were starting to use Greenbelt (after the famous Christian Arts festival) as a churchmanship kind of term.

    I’m also interested that people are increasingly bonding multiple identities together to form new identities in terms of church in the same way that they are doing over cultural identities. People think of themselves as Black British, Asian American, New Scot and so on, the modifier indicating something that the basic identifier does not fully convey. Thus in church we get things like Open Evangelical (which I think has meant low church, supportive of women in ministry but not supportive of gay people in ministry) and Liberal Catholic (which I think has meant less stuffy than anglocatholic in worship and supportive of women and gay people in ministry until it costs anything).

    There are many ways of describing St Mary’s. We are certainly trying to be a Black Shoe congregation, which I think tells you just about all you need to know. However, High Church and Informal also describes things very well and I came out of church very pleased that someone had got it.

    What “churchmanship” term would you want your congregation to be known by. And what’s a better and more inclusive word than churchmanship anyway?

10 responses to “So, let me get this right…”

  1. Andrew Page Avatar

    I think you have understood if correctly (or at least as fully as it can be understood).

    This just shows how confused the church has become, or how keen it is to tie itself into the proverbial knots to appease both progressives and traditionalists.

    Either way, this position is both absurd and intellectually unsustainable.

  2. Kirstin Avatar

    Kelvin can I ask what submissions you are referring to, is there a new one?

  3. Joan H Craig Avatar
    Joan H Craig

    I think that, once marriage law is passed, current civil partnerships can convert to marriage by filling form, etc. Don’t think they said what happens if the couple want a religious marriage – or did I miss that?
    If our churches persist in saying no to marriage, wouldn’t it be better to do the blessing after they’ve converted their civil status – as in some countries where every marriage is a civil ceremony, and any religious service is done afterwards
    I hope everyone has completed the most recent consultation paper

  4. Rhea Avatar
    Rhea

    I think that the church wants to have its cake and eat it too. It wants everyone to be happy, and this is probably the best way that it knows to do this.

    Is it ridiculous? Of course.

  5. Kelvin Holdsworth Avatar

    There is to be a new one. I’ve not seen it. I understand that the position that the Faith and Order Board is holding to is that “church teaching” is what Canon 31 says – that and nothing else and therefore we are doctrinally against change.

    Is that not the case?

    1. kelvin Avatar

      So far as I understand it, the SEC has not moved in its position since the first response at all.

      The first response included this:
      Question 10: Do you agree that the law in Scotland should be changed to allow same sex marriage?
      The Canons of the Scottish Episcopal Church (Canon 31) state that the doctrine of the Church is that marriage is ‘a physical, spiritual and mystical union of one man and one woman created by their mutual consent of heart, mind and will thereto, and as a holy and lifelong estate instituted of God’. In the light of that Canon, there is no current basis for agreeing that the law should be changed to view marriage as possible between two people of the same sex.

    2. Kirstin Avatar

      The SEC’s last response was in line with what the current law was, indeed still is, this consultation asks a very different question. To which the answer ‘well it isn’t legal, so we can’t say’, (I paraphrase) can’t be the answer this time, can it?
      Of course Canon 31 also states it is a “lifelong estate” but had clause 4 added at a later date to allow for divorce and remarriage.

  6. Rev David Coleman Avatar
    Rev David Coleman

    I was watching the evidence to the Westminster parliamentary committees the other day. In all these things, even from churches which are prepared to be tentatively in favour, or declining to be opposed, what is missing from all the evidence is the human experience of joy and delight that actually characterises a true and good wedding, of any combination of partners. How can we get across the compelling and converting happiness when processes take the form they do?

  7. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
    Rosemary Hannah

    Is there any way of getting hold of the board – of ordinary church members getting hold of it and making it listen?? I mean I know my approach tends to lack in subtlety what it makes up for in directness, but then, well, it is very direct.

  8. Kimberly Avatar

    Rosemary, of all the many beautiful sentences you have written, that is the very very best.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • Synod Blogging8- Liturgy

    Liturgical formation. We have the chance to talk about what makes good liturgy. We talk a lot about the choice of hymns at the Synod Eucharist. We move on to discuss the new Manage Liturgy. Andrew Barr tells us it is taken as read that marriage is by definition something between a husband and wife;…

  • Synod Blogging -7 child protection vulnerable adults.

    During the preceding coffee break, the convenor of the Liturgy Committee tells me that I an sitting in a dark corner. I presume he is taking about the lighting in the hall as he is taking photographs. When back in my place, I start to wonder. Is it really that dark? Was he trying to…

  • Synod Bogging -5 The Anglican Covenant

    James Milne speaks on the Anglican Covenant and proposes the motion that the Faith & Order Board be given authority to respond on this subject. Nancy Adams speaks of the brokenness of the Communion. Alison Peden welcomes the emphasis on Mission in the covenant. However questions how the 39 Articles can be a unifying force.…

  • Synod Blogging 4

    Bishop Brian speaks entertainingly about the difference between the Episcopal Synod which consists of the bishops of the SEC and the College of Bishops which consists of the bishops of the SEC.They dress up for the former and let the public in. For the latter, they dress down and meet behind closed doors. Bishop David…