|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Church of England Theological colleges-how do they rank in terms of evangelical ?
|
aig
Shipmate
# 429
|
Posted
The thread on Anglican Evangelicals has interesting things to say, in the linked article on 'canals, rivers, and rapids', about where the evangelical colleges sit in regard to conservative/ open / charismatic students. Are these divisions still true? Can anyone can do the same for the other theological colleges in terms of their distinctive contributions to the Church of England?
[Title edited]
[ 17. August 2012, 10:19: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
That's not how we do it here.......
Posts: 464 | From: the middle bit at the bottom slightly to the right | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oxonian Ecclesiastic
Shipmate
# 12722
|
Posted
Here goes, roughly North to South:
Cranmer Hall, Durham: open evangelical, becoming slightly more conservative
Mirfield: modern catholic, with a traditional catholic past; their ordinands wear double-breasted cassocks, which gives a mildly Sarum flavour
S. John's Nottingham: charismatic evangelical, fairly open
Queens Birmingham: ecumenical, central, fairly liberal
Ridley Hall, Cambridge: open evangelical, a number of conservative ordinands, some charismatic influence
Westcott House, Cambridge: modern catholic, a (slightly unfair) reputation for strident liberalism
Wycliffe Hall, Oxford: conservative evangelical, used to be open; a number of charismatic ordinands
S. Stephen's House, Oxford: traditional catholic, with Papalist rather than British Museum leanings
Ripon College Cuddesdon: central, with modern catholic undertones
Oak Hill, London: conservative evangelical, influenced by Reform/Proclamation Trust/Diocese of Sydney
Trinity College, Bristol: open evangelical, with strong charismatic leanings
I think that's the lot!
Posts: 174 | From: London | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
aig
Shipmate
# 429
|
Posted
Thanks, Oxonian Ecclesiastic.
There are11 residential colleges:
Evangelical 6 (4 open, 2 conservative)
Central: 2
Catholic: 3 (1 trad, 2 modern)
In my experience more than half of the churches in the C of E are central or catholic. Assuming (and this may be very incorrect) that the colleges have comparable numbers of ordinands and there are more evangelical ordinands than evangelical churches, where do they end up for their title parishes?
--------------------
That's not how we do it here.......
Posts: 464 | From: the middle bit at the bottom slightly to the right | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
StarlightUK
Shipmate
# 4592
|
Posted
Where do the "part-time" training colleges such as SEITE fit into the mix?
Posts: 76 | From: Brighton | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Man with a Stick
Shipmate
# 12664
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by aig:
Thanks, Oxonian Ecclesiastic.
There are11 residential colleges:
Evangelical 6 (4 open, 2 conservative)
Central: 2
Catholic: 3 (1 trad, 2 modern)
In my experience more than half of the churches in the C of E are central or catholic. Assuming (and this may be very incorrect) that the colleges have comparable numbers of ordinands and there are more evangelical ordinands than evangelical churches, where do they end up for their title parishes?
The part-time courses are, IME, predominantly central, which probably somewhat resets the balance.
Posts: 335 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
aig
Shipmate
# 429
|
Posted
I think that because they are regionally based, courses like Seite and Stets cover the whole range of ordinands from conservative evangelical to traditional catholic backgounds. I suspect the flavour depends on the make up of ordinands in each cohort. I'm sure it must make communal life and worship interesting!
The difference with the residential colleges is that ordinands can go anywhere in England, assuming that their bishop agrees, so will choose the college for a number of reasons, including churchmanship.
--------------------
That's not how we do it here.......
Posts: 464 | From: the middle bit at the bottom slightly to the right | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by aig:
Assuming (and this may be very incorrect) that the colleges have comparable numbers of ordinands and there are more evangelical ordinands than evangelical churches, where do they end up for their title parishes?
All the statistics I've seen suggest that the mismatch in numbers is at the other end - not enough non-evangelicals of various stripes are being ordained to keep up the number of non-evangelical churches.
Also note that evangelical churches tend to be larger and are therefore more likely to have more than 1 or 2 people on staff.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
aig
Shipmate
# 429
|
Posted
originally posted by Chris Stiles
quote:
not enough non-evangelicals of various stripes are being ordained to keep up the number of non-evangelical churches.
But everyone needs a training incumbent and however many staff are in a church I think there is usually only one TI.
What happens when a conservative evangelical is offered a nice MOTR liberal church in which to serve their title?
--------------------
That's not how we do it here.......
Posts: 464 | From: the middle bit at the bottom slightly to the right | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
Re training incumbents: I know two students from evangelical colleges who served their titles in anglo-catholic parishes. Their motives were different but one went specifically because of the diocese it was in and because he wanted a church where his children would feel welcomed rather than somewhere full of old ladies that would put them off.
Re churchmanship in general - a lot of ordinands chose a college because it is local or near their partner's work.
Re the description 'modern catholic' above - I suspect it is meant to mean 'affirming catholic'. In catholic circles, it means someone who uses the modern roman or CW rite westward facing.
Re the description 'traditional' catholic, I suspect was meant anti-OOW. In catholic circles this term is catching on but it used to mean eastward -facing English Missal.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oxonian Ecclesiastic
Shipmate
# 12722
|
Posted
I suspect that what happens is that, in many dioceses, open evangelical ordinands are offered title posts in the central tradition, and conservative evangelical ordinands are offered title posts in the open evangelical tradition. However, bear in mind that, because evangelical churches tend to be larger, they are more likely to be training parishes.
Moreover, while it would obviously be silly for a traditional catholic to serve his or her title in a conservative evangelical parish (for example), the tradition is less important than might at first be thought. If the training incumbent and the assistant curate like each other, all sorts of doctrinal and liturgical differences can be accommodated. And some training incumbents rather like having someone who is a gentle contrast around.
Posts: 174 | From: London | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oxonian Ecclesiastic
Shipmate
# 12722
|
Posted
quote:
Re the description 'modern catholic' above - I suspect it is meant to mean 'affirming catholic'. In catholic circles, it means someone who uses the modern roman or CW rite westward facing.
No, I am using the labels as they (used to) appear on the title posts form. I know some traditional catholic female clergy. They wear biretti on their heads and dress in lace, they face east, &c.
In the same way, I know plenty of modern catholics who are opposed to the ordination of women. They wear polyester chasuble-albs and sing from the 'Celebration Hymnal'.
Posts: 174 | From: London | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
I know several catholic-inclined clergy who served their title in evangelical parishes. That's not including those – a fair number – who started off at that end of the spectrum. There are also several examples of the converse.
From a catholic POV it is unfortunate if the evangelical cleric gets a taste for vestments and tat in general, without a proper foundation in liturgical spirituality. They can end up in charge of an erstwhile 'catholic' parish and transform it into something quite different. That is not to say that a synthesis of catholic and evangelical is impossible, even less that it's not the ideal. I suspect it is easier for a catholic to work in an evangelical parish provided it has the essentials of regular eucharistic worship.
I wonder whether the non-residential courses offer a sound enough formation in living the liturgy. They will certainly experience many styles of worship and Christian expression, but without a disciplined pattern might very well flounder in a parish with no such praxis.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Poppy
Ship's dancing cat
# 2000
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
I wonder whether the non-residential courses offer a sound enough formation in living the liturgy. They will certainly experience many styles of worship and Christian expression, but without a disciplined pattern might very well flounder in a parish with no such praxis.
What you get on the part time course I was on is the expectation that you will be saying morning and evening prayer whether that is at home, in church, on the train or whenever the course is together. The persistant complaint about worship which I know about as I was worship rep for my course, was that it wasn't varied enough and that CW morning/evening prayer is repetitive. The answer was that bread and butter, open the book and get on with it worship is what we would be encountering in the parish and getting all creative with panpipes, a Moby CD and pebbles in water was fine for a special occassion but we needed to be grounded in what sustains long term.
--------------------
At the still point of the turning world - there the dance is...
Posts: 1406 | From: mostly on the edge | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oxonian Ecclesiastic
Shipmate
# 12722
|
Posted
quote:
I suspect it is easier for a catholic to work in an evangelical parish provided it has the essentials of regular eucharistic worship.
I have encountered this view before. I am not sure I can agree with it. Evangelicalism has as many distinctives as catholicism. Some of those are distinctive emphases: justification by faith, the centrality of the atonement, and the doctrine of assurance to name just three. Others are distinctive practices, of which expository preaching is probably the most notable, but which would also include meetings for extempore prayer during the week. As far as vesture is concerned, I suppose if an evangelical is willing to don a chasuble to serve in a catholic parish, then a catholic might be willing to preside in surplice and scarf.
What I am concerned about is that the view that catholics can work in evangelical parishes but not vice versâ is actually an undervaluing of the distinctive gifts which the evangelical tradition brings to the Church of England.
Posts: 174 | From: London | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
Re - the modern/traditional catholic thing - if you look at the Church Times 'Where to Worship' and, more so, the Forward in Faith paper, you will see that "Modern Catholic" is a term used by 'traditionalist' churches. I think we catholics have a right to define ourselves rather than have the definitions of others thrust upon us.
Re the OP, I think churchpersonship is somewhat outmoded. Our current curate trained at STETS .She is of a catholic persuasion but relished being trained alongside evangelicals and MOTR.
Similarly I trained for NSM in an ecumenical course and relished being trained alongside URCs etc. So maybe a more interesting question concerns the ecumenical relevance of colleges and courses.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oxonian Ecclesiastic:
What I am concerned about is that the view that catholics can work in evangelical parishes but not vice versâ is actually an undervaluing of the distinctive gifts which the evangelical tradition brings to the Church of England.
I agree. What I'm wary of is evangelicals working in a 'catholic' context but not absorbing the basics of the tradition, rather just accepting the tat and the superficialities. I'm sure this can happen the other way round, although I wonder how much of hardline evangelical theology is workable in another context. The love of and knowledge of the bible is a gift that evangelicals can bring to other traditions, as is a commitment to evangelism provided it is understood sensitively.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
venbede
Shipmate
# 16669
|
Posted
As a matter of interest, my last parish had women and out gay clergy and we always celebrated Eastward facing.
Since 2000 we used CW. Until then we used a Roman eucharistic prayer. And C of E red letter saints instead of Sunday. Vicar didn't want to be called Father. He was a Mirfield.
--------------------
Man was made for joy and woe;
And when this we rightly know,
Thro' the world we safely go.
Posts: 3201 | From: An historic market town nestling in the folds of Surrey's rolling North Downs, | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
venbede
Shipmate
# 16669
|
Posted
From a layman's perspective, I can attend Holy Communion at an evangelical parish, and I am still participating in the sacrifice of the mass and receiving the Body and Blood of Christ, however the folks there may think of what's going on. It would be the same thing, really.
It's difficult to imagine myself as an evangelical, but I wouldn't think I was getting the same thing at High Mass at St Clement's Railway Cuttings as I would at our friendly praise service at All Saints Abdication Avenue.
--------------------
Man was made for joy and woe;
And when this we rightly know,
Thro' the world we safely go.
Posts: 3201 | From: An historic market town nestling in the folds of Surrey's rolling North Downs, | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oxonian Ecclesiastic
Shipmate
# 12722
|
Posted
quote:
I think we catholics have a right to define ourselves rather than have the definitions of others thrust upon us.
Is anyone disagreeing with that? I thought I was agreeing with you.
On other matters, how much is churchpersonship-specific in terms of training is a moot point anyway. With the increasing standardisation of IME1-3, it is possible that even the colleges will begin producing identikit clergy. The primary reason I find this concerning is that I fear even less concern about doctrine, and even more of the consumerist mentality in which worship is seen in terms of the emotional response it produces. It is Bob Jackson who has commended the 'menu' approach to worship, and, while I can see the merit in providing worship in gently contrasting styles, the parish priest who provides both a High Mass in the morning and a charismatic-evangelical praise service in the evening (yes, I know some which do) is either schizophrenic, or is, at one of the events, just pretending.
Posts: 174 | From: London | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ender's Shadow
Shipmate
# 2272
|
Posted
OE, whilst I have every sympathy with your concern at worship only being valued as an emotional experience, I have to reject
quote:
Originally posted by Oxonian Ecclesiastic:
[T]he parish priest who provides both a High Mass in the morning and a charismatic-evangelical praise service in the evening (yes, I know some which do) is either schizophrenic, or is, at one of the events, just pretending.
as humbug...
quote:
Every day they met together in the temple courtyard. In their homes they broke bread and ate together.
Acts 2:46
For my money that gives us a glimpse of the early church both participating in the highly formal worship in the temple AND having informal Eucharists in homes - which would have not matched any sort of Catholic standards of presentation. Yet they held those in tension successfully - so why is it unreasonable for a parish priest to enable both style of worship in their parish? As a regular visitor both to Mirfield, whose worship I value, and a rabid Charismatic Evangelical whose home church is the sort of place Gamaliel is rightly slightly sceptical about, I hold both styles in high esteem; engaging in both ensures a more balanced perception of God: immanent AND transcendent, intimate AND holy.
--------------------
Test everything. Hold on to the good.
Please don't refer to me as 'Ender' - the whole point of Ender's Shadow is that he isn't Ender.
Posts: 5018 | From: Manchester, England | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oxonian Ecclesiastic
Shipmate
# 12722
|
Posted
That's just the point: I don't think it is just about style. It is about theology. It is obviously possible to have formal worship and informal worship in the same parish. But there is more to evangelicalism than informality, as can be demonstrated by the number of evangelical parishes whose worship is relatively formal, and the number of catholic parishes whose worship is informal.
You just can't be a Thomist and an Evangelical. It is not possible. Pretending to be is dishonest.
Posts: 174 | From: London | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
aig
Shipmate
# 429
|
Posted
Thank you whoever put in the missing G in the title.
So far nobody has disputed Oxonian Ecclesiastic's summary of Theological college characteristics. Is this an occasion when the Church of England speaks with one voice?
--------------------
That's not how we do it here.......
Posts: 464 | From: the middle bit at the bottom slightly to the right | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Scotus
Shipmate
# 8163
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oxonian Ecclesiastic:
You just can't be a Thomist and an Evangelical. It is not possible. Pretending to be is dishonest.
Surely you can be a Thomist and Charismatic?
Mass in the morning and a Charismatic Praise service in the evening is not unheard of in the (Roman) Catholic Church - it's not something I'm involved with myself, though I know people who are and I've been along to one.
Posts: 422 | From: Diocese of Brentwood | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Scotus
Shipmate
# 8163
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Poppy:
What you get on the part time course I was on is the expectation that you will be saying morning and evening prayer whether that is at home, in church, on the train or whenever the course is together. The persistant complaint about worship which I know about as I was worship rep for my course, was that it wasn't varied enough and that CW morning/evening prayer is repetitive. The answer was that bread and butter, open the book and get on with it worship is what we would be encountering in the parish and getting all creative with panpipes, a Moby CD and pebbles in water was fine for a special occassion but we needed to be grounded in what sustains long term.
The CME residentials and pre-ordination retreats offered by my former diocese must have counted as special occasions then!
Posts: 422 | From: Diocese of Brentwood | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oxonian Ecclesiastic:
I suspect that what happens is that, in many dioceses, open evangelical ordinands are offered title posts in the central tradition, and conservative evangelical ordinands are offered title posts in the open evangelical tradition. However, bear in mind that, because evangelical churches tend to be larger, they are more likely to be training parishes.
Moreover, while it would obviously be silly for a traditional catholic to serve his or her title in a conservative evangelical parish (for example), the tradition is less important than might at first be thought. If the training incumbent and the assistant curate like each other, all sorts of doctrinal and liturgical differences can be accommodated. And some training incumbents rather like having someone who is a gentle contrast around.
This is true. The personal relationship between the Minister and the Minister in Training / Assistant Minister is crucial. It’s more important they get on and are able to work together than whether or not they agree theologically.
Theological differences are often easier to accommodate than personality clashes.
Tubbs
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oxonian Ecclesiastic
Shipmate
# 12722
|
Posted
quote:
Surely you can be a Thomist and Charismatic?
Absolutely you can. But you can't be a Thomist and an Evangelical, however much some quarters of the Church of England are trying to make us think the differences don't matter. They do.
Posts: 174 | From: London | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ender's Shadow
Shipmate
# 2272
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oxonian Ecclesiastic:
That's just the point: I don't think it is just about style. It is about theology. It is obviously possible to have formal worship and informal worship in the same parish. But there is more to evangelicalism than informality, as can be demonstrated by the number of evangelical parishes whose worship is relatively formal, and the number of catholic parishes whose worship is informal.
You just can't be a Thomist and an Evangelical. It is not possible. Pretending to be is dishonest.
Hmm - now this is interesting. Given that the proponents of allowing more Catholic form to the worship of the CofE spent a lot of effort trying to argue the exact opposite, it's amusing to see the truth, which the Evangelicals of the day proclaimed loudly, now starting to emerge. Of course the original Oxford Movement leaders had no interest in such elements - it was only later that Anglo-Catholics started to alter the style of worship of the CofE.
IF the CofE has a consistent theological position on the Eucharist, then the bells and tat surrounding the event have no significance. If however this is not the case, then we have to look for a more complex understanding of how we can operate as a single church. Eucharistic doctrine for me is well into the range of second order issues; I'm really not excited about what precisely happens at such services. And I suspect that's quite a healthy attitude to enable different Christians to work alongside each other.
--------------------
Test everything. Hold on to the good.
Please don't refer to me as 'Ender' - the whole point of Ender's Shadow is that he isn't Ender.
Posts: 5018 | From: Manchester, England | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oxonian Ecclesiastic:
quote:
I think we catholics have a right to define ourselves rather than have the definitions of others thrust upon us.
Is anyone disagreeing with that? I thought I was agreeing with you.
Well, no - most students at S. Stephen's house would describe themselves as 'modern catholic', as does my parish church here, yet the majority in both oppose the OOW (which is what the term 'traditionalist' has been hijacked to denote.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oxonian Ecclesiastic:
I suspect that what happens is that, in many dioceses, open evangelical ordinands are offered title posts in the central tradition, and conservative evangelical ordinands are offered title posts in the open evangelical tradition.
Bordering on the anecdotal here, but the three self-identified evangelical parishes in our Deanery have all, for some years, tended to have clergy who were probably more theologically liberal than most of the congregation, and also probnably a little bit "higher up the candle" too. And I think that is true for at least some of the neighbouring deaneries as well.
I don't think that has been the case with the rather larger number of Anglo-Catholic parishes in our area. Their clergy have tended to be very much in line with the traditions of the parishes - with the possible exception that they have been rather more anti-women so it might be that some parishes were encouraged to seek alternative oversight (or whatever the correct terminilogy is) even though most of the members of the church didn't really feel strongly about women's ordination.
quote:
Moreover, while it would obviously be silly for a traditional catholic to serve his or her title in a conservative evangelical parish (for example),
But why exactly? And vice versa? Might it not be a good idea to give training curates a year or so in a parish that's very different from their home parish or their training college?
quote:
Originally posted by Poppy:
What you get on the part time course I was on is the expectation that you will be saying morning and evening prayer whether that is at home, in church, on the train or whenever the course is together.
They said something similar for us Readers. I know perfectly well that I am not capable of it on my own. Not that that matters much as I'm not an ordination candidate. But the only way I'm ever going to be able to do any regular practice of that sort for more than a few days at a time at special occasions - and the only way I ever have in the past - is if living with someone else who is also doing it and taking it seriously. Both when I was married to someone who did not do such things (or even approve of them) and now I am divorced and therefore single again, its just not going to happen. And if it did I'd probably go quickly mad. I need to get out and see people more often, not less. And there is no real daily routine that is the same each day and not much change of one developing. And I'm sure there are plenty of others in the same boat - maybe even including some ordination candidates. Its much, much, easier as part of a community, doing it together. That is one of the downsides of all these non-residential courses.
quote:
Originally posted by Oxonian Ecclesiastic:
quote:
I suspect it is easier for a catholic to work in an evangelical parish provided it has the essentials of regular eucharistic worship.
I have encountered this view before. I am not sure I can agree with it. Evangelicalism has as many distinctives as catholicism.
With you so far but...
quote:
Some of those are distinctive emphases: justification by faith, the centrality of the atonement, and the doctrine of assurance to name just three.
Plenty of "catholics" are fine with the first two of those, and, as we have seen on the seven hundred and thirty recent threads on this board along the lines of "All Calvinists are introverted unimaginitive autistic zombies with OCD who have been brainwashed by neo-conservatives to eat babies, castrate gays, and nuke New York", at least some unfortunatly misguided evangelicals disagree with the third.
quote:
Others are distinctive practices, of which expository preaching is probably the most notable, but which would also include meetings for extempore prayer during the week. As far as vesture is concerned, I suppose if an evangelical is willing to don a chasuble to serve in a catholic parish, then a catholic might be willing to preside in surplice and scarf.
What I am concerned about is that the view that catholics can work in evangelical parishes but not vice versâ is actually an undervaluing of the distinctive gifts which the evangelical tradition brings to the Church of England.
That all looks true though.
But why exzctly can;t we evangelicals be Thomists? I suppose by that I mean "what do you really mean by being a Thomist?" seeing as I am reasonably sure what you mean by being an evangelical.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Laurence
Shipmate
# 9135
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oxonian Ecclesiastic:
Most Eucharists at S. Stephen's House are celebrated facing East. Their vestments are Latin-shaped, and the principal wears his biretta. The albs are of lace. Here is a picture:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamesbradley/3619188400/in/set-72157619631142802
If this is 'modern catholic', I must needs be deluded.
Of the theological colleges of the C of E, Staggers has trained the largest number of Anglican ordinands who have joined the Ordinariate shortly after completing their training. I don't know the effect this has had on the ethos of the place- whether it's gone up or down the candle in response in any way.
(For example, Fr James Bradley, the owner of that flickr album above, is unlikely to be attending Mass at his alma mater in the near future....)
Posts: 648 | From: Lincolnshire | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oxonian Ecclesiastic
Shipmate
# 12722
|
Posted
quote:
"what do you really mean by being a Thomist?"
By Thomism, I suppose I mean the conviction that grace simply makes up what is lacking in nature, rather than transforming it. Connected with this is the 'analogia entis' or 'analogy of being', from which the unreformed derive the natural theology which was rejected by Luther and Calvin.
For this reason, a Roman or Anglo-Catholic for whom the atonement is central to his or her theological method would be, I think, an unusual thing. This, I conclude, makes it an evangelical distinctive, but I am open to hearing Tractarian (or even Roman) nuance on this point.
Posts: 174 | From: London | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
sebby
Shipmate
# 15147
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
quote:
Originally posted by Oxonian Ecclesiastic:
What I am concerned about is that the view that catholics can work in evangelical parishes but not vice versâ is actually an undervaluing of the distinctive gifts which the evangelical tradition brings to the Church of England.
I agree. What I'm wary of is evangelicals working in a 'catholic' context but not absorbing the basics of the tradition, rather just accepting the tat and the superficialities. I'm sure this can happen the other way round, although I wonder how much of hardline evangelical theology is workable in another context. The love of and knowledge of the bible is a gift that evangelicals can bring to other traditions, as is a commitment to evangelism provided it is understood sensitively.
It often seems easier to 'come down' than 'go up'. The High one knows the litguries, gestures, meaning behind them, and he or she can always do without a chasable. The simplicity of the ornaments in an evangelical church might not make it all that different from a modern catholic one (I know Reservation etc, but you know what I mean). It only takes a cleric from an evangleical background to be appointed to a cathedral, for the candle to be climbed. It may be that this ability, as well as the theologcal and other gifts of the candidate, was the reason for the appointment.
On the other hand the Low one sometimes finds it hard, or resists 'going up'.
Having written that, a number of immediate exceptions come to mind which make that very, very generalised. Similarly, there are those who start fairly low, and then climb the candle. This is probably far more common than we think.
A visit to Cranmer Hall 18 months ago, convinced me that it is far more mixed, and with more potential for ordinands 'going up' than would be imagined. That might have changed under the new head. However a quick check on YouTube at their recruitment film shows their director of mission (I think) dressed in a very High looking black shirt.
There was a service broadcast on Radio 4 not long ago from Cuddesdon. It seemed moderately High in a cathedral-esque sort of way.
And finally, one needs now to take into account the churchmanship of the so-called retired clergy and their considerable influence in staffing parishes either house-for-duty or as members of the team, locum work, use as spiritual directors, lecturers on courses etc. At the moment they are possibly predominantly middle to High.
--------------------
sebhyatt
Posts: 1340 | From: yorks | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
sebby
Shipmate
# 15147
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Scotus:
quote:
Originally posted by Oxonian Ecclesiastic:
You just can't be a Thomist and an Evangelical. It is not possible. Pretending to be is dishonest.
Surely you can be a Thomist and Charismatic?
Mass in the morning and a Charismatic Praise service in the evening is not unheard of in the (Roman) Catholic Church - it's not something I'm involved with myself, though I know people who are and I've been along to one.
THere was a huge popularity in some evangelical colleges in the 1980s of the works of Karl Rahner SJ, a neo-Thomist. Clearly therefore one can be.
--------------------
sebhyatt
Posts: 1340 | From: yorks | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by sebby:
And finally, one needs now to take into account the churchmanship of the so-called retired clergy and their considerable influence in staffing parishes either house-for-duty or as members of the team, locum work, use as spiritual directors, lecturers on courses etc. At the moment they are possibly predominantly middle to High.
You rang, m'Lord?
That's me. Most of the parishes where I am called upon as supply are well below me in candle-power. I don't find any problem with this at all, and I seem to be appreciated to the extent of being asked back, so my preaching must be evangelical enough for them. But as you point out, most anglo-catholic churches have simplified their liturgies (or are more laid back about them) so that evangelicals can usually manage OK.
The problem is more one of a consistent environment for one's own spiritual life. I'm struggling as a congregation member in a low church parish where the eucharist is not celebrated every Sunday, and find the need to go elsewhere for at least one mass during the week. I can imagine that a diet of sung masses and short sermons could be similarly frustrating for an evangelical.
Spiritual direction is another interesting area. I'm currently involved in running a training course for aspiring SDs. Most of these are from an evangelical background while all but one of the team would self-define as MOTR or catholic. We meet in a Jesuit house and use a course strongly influenced by Ignatian methods. In this sort of context, 'churchpersonship' issues fade into irrelevance.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oxonian Ecclesiastic:
Queens Birmingham: ecumenical, central, fairly liberal
I know a lecturer from there who finds that the number of evangelical ordinands is increasing. But I suppose it's all relative.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
Spiritual direction is another interesting area. I'm currently involved in running a training course for aspiring SDs. Most of these are from an evangelical background while all but one of the team would self-define as MOTR or catholic. We meet in a Jesuit house and use a course strongly influenced by Ignatian methods. In this sort of context, 'churchpersonship' issues fade into irrelevance.
My experience as a SD is similar. We are learning much from those from different traditions of churchpersonship.
It is predominantly evangelicals who are seeking SD and seeking to give it.
I made a conscious choice to seek out an evangelical SD when my previous one retired.
The wider church might, perhaps, learn something from the world of SD.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tyler Durden
Shipmate
# 2996
|
Posted
quote:
[A]parish priest who provides both a High Mass in the morning and a charismatic-evangelical praise service in the evening (yes, I know some which do) is either schizophrenic, or is, at one of the events, just pretending.
Really? I pretty much do that once a month and enjoy both services (admittedly the first is choral mattins not high mass but it could just as easily be a choral eucharist which is what we do most other Sundays. I am providing for the needs/tastes of two disparate (but overlapping) groups in our congregation but I myself enjoy both because I'm a post-evangelical who drifted. The fact is the church is broad and I think clergy should be able to work with different/all traditions.
[code]
[ 19. August 2012, 21:45: Message edited by: John Holding ]
--------------------
Have you ever noticed that anyone driving slower than you is a moron, while anyone driving faster is a maniac? Jerry Seinfeld
Posts: 509 | From: Kent | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tyler Durden
Shipmate
# 2996
|
Posted
Sorry. Messed up code. Do I self-correct?
[Nope -- a host does if it seems important enough. - JH]
[ 19. August 2012, 21:46: Message edited by: John Holding ]
--------------------
Have you ever noticed that anyone driving slower than you is a moron, while anyone driving faster is a maniac? Jerry Seinfeld
Posts: 509 | From: Kent | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cara
Shipmate
# 16966
|
Posted
My head is spinning!
Growing up as a Catholic, I knew very little about the contemporary Church of England. In college, fell away from practicing Christianity. Left the UK right after college. Via a circuitous route, ended up in USA and became a Christian again--drawn back to Christ first rather than to any church. Was with the Methodists for a while but then joined an Episcopalian congregation and stayed there for 20 plus years.
This is what my parish was like:
-1979 Book of Common Prayer
-weekly eucharist --two eucharist services on Sunday, one sung
--"open table"--any baptized Christian welcome (some clergy went further and said "anyone")
--eucharist for children at parents' discretion
-Vestments, liturgical colours
--Incense couple of times a year with some priests
-Mostly traditional hymns from fat blue book, forget name at the moment though could easily retrieve
-more modern hymns from a newer slim green book sometimes
-A real pipe organ and (mostly) music directors with deep knowledge of scared music tradition
-a (small) choir
-Female priests called to the parish as often as male ones--while i was there, more years with a female than a male rector
-socially liberal, for example welcoming participation, at all levels, of openly gay people, and very eager to become more racially mixed, as happened over the years.
So a balance of liturgically "high"-ish and socially progressive.
A balance I love and became used to.
I thought (in my ignorance) that as it was part of the Anglican communion, this is probably what Anglican services were like more or less everywhere.
On the short visits I made to England over the years, I sometimes went to church. I knew of course about the concepts of "High" and "Low" but I was absolutely thunderstruck by the variety of worship.
Hymns projected on a screen! Dreadful sappy modern hymn words! Clergy wearing ordinary clothes! Churches where Communion is celebrated only once a month! And strangest of all, to me, churches where there seems not an echo of the beautiful language of the Book of Common Prayer, there in the very country said Book came from!
I did find some churches where I felt more at home, I guess they would be considered "higher."
But I never knew there were all the ramifications and nuances this thread is discussing!
If in the UK I want to find a church rather like my Episcopalian one in the US, what would it call itself??
Though in fact I suppose churches don't define themselves, others do that for them--"Oh, St such-and-such is all bells and smells, while the other place down the road is very Evangelical."
How does one know? If the noticeboard shows weekly Communion, I suppose that says something.
So, ok, I do understand that one has to attend any church to see what it is "like;" but, out of interest, are there Anglican churches with the same sort of feel my Episcopalian one had, and if so how are they "labelled" when we're in the business of labelling, as in this rather bewildering thread?!
I'm guessing Middle of the Road but I am probably way off.....
Cara
--------------------
Pondering.
Posts: 898 | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
Affirming Catholicism would be the "label" I would think of, but it's unusual to see individual churches use that label. If you look closely most churches will say what service they use (BCP, Common Worship etc.), but you have to read between the lines and pick up code words to work out which churches are which. Churches that list "Mass" as a service tend to be very Anglo-Catholic, and usually at the more conservative end. A church that feels the need to describe itself as "Bible believing" or similar is usually code for Evangelical and fairly conservative.
CofE churches tend to be less demonstrative in their welcome of gay people, but many if not most are perfectly friendly.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cara
Shipmate
# 16966
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
Affirming Catholicism would be the "label" I would think of, but it's unusual to see individual churches use that label. If you look closely most churches will say what service they use (BCP, Common Worship etc.), but you have to read between the lines and pick up code words to work out which churches are which. Churches that list "Mass" as a service tend to be very Anglo-Catholic, and usually at the more conservative end. A church that feels the need to describe itself as "Bible believing" or similar is usually code for Evangelical and fairly conservative.
CofE churches tend to be less demonstrative in their welcome of gay people, but many if not most are perfectly friendly.
Thanks, Arethosemyfeet. I did know the "code" implicated in "Bible-believing" and "Mass," but not much more than that, code-wise.
"Affirming Catholicism" is entirely new to me as a label or concept and of course (well, perhaps not "of course," I don't know all Episcopal circles) I never heard such terms in my Episcopal church in the US. I know more or less what Anglo-Catholic is, but again, very little about nuances beyond that. It's funny to be so ignorant about current goings-on in the land of my birth...have read Trollope of course but not sure how much of a guide that would be these days!!!
Also have an interesting book by Monica Furlong, C of E The State It's In (2000) (I love her biography of Thomas Merton and her autobiographical writings) and I read it quickly before I was thinking so much about all these things--just remember she is --no, was, alas (d.2003)-- a strong advocate for women's ordination. Must re-read.
cara
--------------------
Pondering.
Posts: 898 | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oxonian Ecclesiastic
Shipmate
# 12722
|
Posted
quote:
I pretty much do that once a month and enjoy both services (admittedly the first is choral mattins not high mass but it could just as easily be a choral eucharist which is what we do most other Sundays. I am providing for the needs/tastes of two disparate (but overlapping) groups in our congregation but I myself enjoy both because I'm a post-evangelical who drifted. The fact is the church is broad and I think clergy should be able to work with different/all traditions.
I think you've proved my point. Choral Mattins is *not* a High Mass. If you accept the choreography that goes with a High Mass - genuflexions, &c; - and the sacrificial understanding that goes with it, you cannot be an 'evangelical' in the traditional sense of the word. So your evening charismatic service would not be 'evangelical', however trendy and informal it is.
I think clergy should be able to officiate in churches of contrasting styles: wearing different clothes or enjoying different types of music, for example. What they should not attempt to do is alter their theology as they so do. If they do change their theology depending on the service at which they are officiating, they either have no opinions or are liars.
Posts: 174 | From: London | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
quote:
If you accept the choreography that goes with a High Mass - genuflexions, &c; - and the sacrificial understanding that goes with it, you cannot be an 'evangelical' in the traditional sense of the word.
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
What about high-church Calvinists, then? Admittedly now thin on the ground, they do exist.
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oxonian Ecclesiastic
Shipmate
# 12722
|
Posted
I am a High Church Calvinist. I take the sacraments very seriously. My ecclesiology is stratospheric. But I am not Tridentine, nor do I ever pretend to be.
I could not have a High Mass in the morning and a charismatic-evangelical praise service in the evening, because I am neither a traditional catholic not a charismatic evangelical. As a High Church Calvinist, I should have a dignified celebration of the Lord's Supper in the morning, in accordance with the rubrics, and (where it is appropriate) with some ceremonial; and Evening Prayer, with a proper sermon. But I would neither ape Rome nor pretend I am under no authority, and, while I have some respect for proper Anglo-Catholics, someone in orders who is both and yet neither would not enjoy much respect from me, I confess.
Posts: 174 | From: London | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oxonian Ecclesiastic:
a High Mass in the morning and a charismatic-evangelical praise service in the evening (yes, I know some which do) is either schizophrenic, or is, at one of the events, just pretending.
Neither. A friend of mine was a charismatic anglo-catholic before he joined the ordinariate. He regularly did a solemn mass in the morning and a charismatic service concluding with benediction in the evening.
The early anglo-catholic heroes of the faith, e.g. Fr. Stanton and Fr. Eves at Holborn, regarded catholic ceremonial as a sort of 'top up' to evangelical preaching. Their sermons often contained an altar call.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by sebby:
There was a service broadcast on Radio 4 not long ago from Cuddesdon. It seemed moderately High in a cathedral-esque sort of way.
Yes. it was led by ex-journalist Michael Ford, whose PhD is on Henri Nowen. Michael used to worship in this parish and would probably describe himself as affirming catholic as would about half of those who are or were at Cuddeston.
Cuddeston was liberal catholic until it amalgamated with liberal/MOTR Ripon Hall - so there is now a mixture of traditions, which I think is healthy.
Another thing that influences the student intake is its geography. If you don't have a car, you will find it hard to escape the place when you want to have some fun.
[ 19. August 2012, 11:43: Message edited by: leo ]
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Oxonian Ecclesiastic
Shipmate
# 12722
|
Posted
quote:
a High Mass in the morning and a charismatic-evangelical praise service in the evening (yes, I know some which do) is either schizophrenic, or is, at one of the events, just pretending.
quote:
Neither. A friend of mine was a charismatic anglo-catholic before he joined the ordinariate. He regularly did a solemn mass in the morning and a charismatic service concluding with benediction in the evening.
Exactly! He *isn't* an evangelical. He is an *anglo-catholic*. His evening service was *charismatic*. It was not *evangelical*. I am not sure how much clearer I can be. As for Fr Stanton, his sermons are enthusiastic, and often evangelistic; but they are not evangelical.
Posts: 174 | From: London | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
