|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Eccles: The Ecclesiantics Altimeter
|
Thurible
Shipmate
# 3206
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
quote:
Originally posted by Thurible:
812.
Thurible
813. You forgot me.
Oh, I'm sorry, Father!
leo, 43 of those will be barefoot.
These figures all taken from the Slightly Bemused by the Question survey, conducted in May 2010.
Thurible
--------------------
"I've been baptised not lobotomised."
Posts: 8049 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PD:
I have noticed that quite a few TEC bishops wear rochet, chimere and stole, and carry their croziers when making visitations. Where does this pencil out in churchmanship terms?
PD
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
Nowt to do with churchmanship, just bad taste. Stoles (of any colour) clash horribly with a red chimere. Though I suppose with a black one they'd be OK.
I suppose American bishops, wherever they are on the altimeter (altarmeter?) are less likely than some English ones to ape Rome either theologically or sartorially.
--------------------
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
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
Nowt to do with churchmanship, just bad taste. Stoles (of any colour) clash horribly with a red chimere. Though I suppose with a black one they'd be OK.
I suppose American bishops, wherever they are on the altimeter (altarmeter?) are less likely than some English ones to ape Rome either theologically or sartorially.
I haven't ever encountered this IRL, but I recall seeing via web +Chane celebrating this way at his cathedral.
I'd imagine it boils down to simply a chance to wear the rochet and chimere, as they remembered bishops of their childhood doing.
Is it a matter of geography that you can tell, PD? Around here, I've only ever encountered bishop-celebrants dressed in a modern Roman way.
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
PD
Shipmate
# 12436
|
Posted
I used to associate it mainly with the Old South. Now I have seen it elsewhere, e.g. Maryland, Ohio, and occasionally around here - NV/AZ/NM, and even in the diocese of El Camino Real. My hunch is that it is a MOTR-Low thing because I have usually see it in churches of that stripe.
FWIW, it is also the default in my offshoot of the continuum, which tends to have a strong Southern bias - hence first theory above.
The one place I would never expect to see a bishop vested that way is in the former Biretta Belt.
PD
[ 05. July 2010, 02:26: Message edited by: PD ]
--------------------
Roadkill on the Information Super Highway!
My Assorted Rantings - http://www.theoldhighchurchman.blogspot.com
Posts: 4431 | From: Between a Rock and a Hard Place | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
The traditionally low church dioceses in Texas suffer from the coloured stole with rochet and chimere syndrome. These include the original Diocese of Texas and the Diocese of West Texas (misnamed: it actually encompasses South Texas). The Diocese of Northwest Texas has been IME inconsistent about episcopal vesture, though I've seen this fashion faux pas there at times. I don't think you'd likely find it in the Anglo-Catholic Dioceses of Fort Worth and Dallas. Dunno about the Diocese of El Camino Real, which takes in El Paso though is mostly in New Mexico. I gather that churchmanship there runs a broad MOTR-low to MOTR gamut.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chapelhead:
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
Nowt to do with churchmanship, just bad taste. Stoles (of any colour) clash horribly with a red chimere. Though I suppose with a black one they'd be OK.
Do you mean like this? (you need to scroll down)
Well, they're with red ones, and IMHO they look pretty silly. If they want to dress simply, why not just cassock-alb and stole? Or if they are supposed to be 'in uniform', ie choir habit, then wear a black scarf like all the others.
--------------------
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
|
|
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643
|
Posted
Oh dear.
That is all!
--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...
Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
I'm afraid you just have to admit this as an evolving, contemporary Anglican usage -- like cassock-albs ( ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif) ). In the USA tippets are very little used most places these days, especially with the disappearance of Morning Prayer as a main Sunday service. So stoles become the default clergy vestment. In the Texas dioceses I cited it's not unusual to see a visiting bishop celebrating the Eucharist in rochet, chimere, and stole of the colour appropriate to the season, feast or occasion. In my view, of course, this is a multiple faux pas, but it's contemporary American low-lowMotr style.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chapelhead
I am
# 21
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:
Oh dear.
Quite. Even if that multi-colored job is very ‘worthy’ (solidarity with the people of Guatemala, or something).
But back to the altimeter. I seem to recall a suggestion that the highness of a CofE Bishop can be judged by how blue his purple shirt is. Do we think there is any truth in this, and which way round is it (the bluer the higher, the redder the lower, or vice versa)?
A second question. Bells at the elevation suggest to me ‘high’ (and the more occasions for bells, the higher), but is there more to it than that? Is the type of bell an indication of anything (with those tinkly little things that sound like the vicar wants the butler to fetch the gin being especially high, perhaps)?
--------------------
At times like this I find myself thinking, what would the Amish do?
Posts: 9123 | From: Near where I was before. | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
...Anglo-Catholic Dioceses of Fort Worth and Dallas.
[apologies for the brief tangent]
I've always meant to ask you why there are two dioceses in such a small area. Is it simply an issue of size, or is it more complicated (churchmanship? argument?)
What about the rest of Texas?
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
In the Texas dioceses I cited it's not unusual to see a visiting bishop celebrating the Eucharist in rochet, chimere, and stole of the colour appropriate to the season, feast or occasion.
I thought that even 'low-church' TEC parishes normally use eucharistic vestments. Am I wrong?
--------------------
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
|
|
Knopwood
Shipmate
# 11596
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
Nowt to do with churchmanship, just bad taste. Stoles (of any colour) clash horribly with a red chimere. Though I suppose with a black one they'd be OK.
I've heard this complain about rochet, chimere, and stole a lot from co-religionists whose purism on such matters I would ordinarily share. But while the notion of celebrating Mass without a chasuble may horrify the Pope, Anglicans are quite accustomed to priests doing so in surplice and stole like any other sacrament. It might tend to be a "low church" mark but it surely is not problematic in principle. Why it should different for bishops, howbeit they have an extra layer of tat to contend with, has never been clear to me.
[ 07. July 2010, 16:27: Message edited by: LQ ]
Posts: 6806 | From: Tio'tia:ke | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
I've seen bishops in England celebrate in rochet (=surplice) and stole. That seems quite adequate to me: why wear that strange garment which if ever appropriate is part of choir habit? It's like wearing a stole with academic hood.
--------------------
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
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
In the Texas dioceses I cited it's not unusual to see a visiting bishop celebrating the Eucharist in rochet, chimere, and stole of the colour appropriate to the season, feast or occasion.
I thought that even 'low-church' TEC parishes normally use eucharistic vestments. Am I wrong?
Herein is a real oddity. The general answer to your question is yes -- for priests. Yet in lower churchmanship dioceses, the bishops will continue to wear their distinctive choir habit with stole to celebrate the Eucharist on episcopal visitation. I suspect that when celebrating a low mass at their own altars these same bishops may wear standard eucharistic garb. It's all very strange. A number of years ago the Ordinary of the Diocese of Texas explicitly forbade one of his suffragans to wear the mitre, "because we're a low church diocese". BTW, that reminds me of seeing many years ago the co-adjutor of Northwest Texas wearing a little mitre with choir habit and stole to celebrate mass. He subsequently switched to cope, stole, rochet and more decorated mitre after he became Ordinary, or to chazzie with standard the other normal gear.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
Messed up the last sentence and didn't make the edit window. Of course, I meant chazzie with the other standard gear.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Knopwood
Shipmate
# 11596
|
Posted
In Canada, too, episcopal vesture has climbed the candle more slowly. I was quite chagrined when serving Midnight Mass one Christmas Eve and a retired archbishop presided in cope and mitre. This man was not exactly a Laudian and I strongly doubt he affected a cope at the Eucharist while a presbyter. Gaiters have also been spotted in living memory (well, perhaps not mine).
Posts: 6806 | From: Tio'tia:ke | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Knopwood
Shipmate
# 11596
|
Posted
I'd also note that our Lutheran bishop for Canada east of Lake Superior sports a cope and crozier, but no mitre. (A pastor once commented to me that the bishop would have been quite happy to come and take confirmations if invited).
Posts: 6806 | From: Tio'tia:ke | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Silent Acolyte
Shipmate
# 1158
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
I thought that even 'low-church' TEC parishes normally use eucharistic vestments. Am I wrong?
No, you are not wrong. But, get a bishop involved and then all bets are off.
Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cruet
Shipmate
# 14586
|
Posted
As of the past 10 years, copes and miters are occasionaly appearing in the Diocese of Texas.
--------------------
snake belly land
Posts: 92 | From: Houston, Tx | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
PD
Shipmate
# 12436
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chapelhead:
quote:
Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:
Oh dear.
Quite. Even if that multi-colored job is very ‘worthy’ (solidarity with the people of Guatemala, or something).
But back to the altimeter. I seem to recall a suggestion that the highness of a CofE Bishop can be judged by how blue his purple shirt is. Do we think there is any truth in this, and which way round is it (the bluer the higher, the redder the lower, or vice versa)?
The rule with bishops is the bluer the shirt the lower the bishop; the higher the bishop the closer the colour approximates to magenta. Most bishops seem to wear a very definitely red-purple. I have always suspected that this colour was specially formulated by Almy to shout MOTR! A few really staunch Anglo-Catholics wear a black "keyhole" rabat like Roman Catholic bishops. I tend to favour either a mid-purple or a blue purple, which I guess fits the theory as I tend to be MOTR-Low.
The custom in the diocese where I serve is for the bishops to wear rochet, chimere and either stole or tippet most of the time, with the Cope and Mitre making cameo appearences from time to time. The odd times I have perpetrated the stole over rochet and chimere horror, the chimere has been black. I would say most of the diocese is MOTR-Low about two-thirds of the parishes use Euchies, the remainder are alb and stole.
PD
[ 08. July 2010, 02:51: Message edited by: PD ]
--------------------
Roadkill on the Information Super Highway!
My Assorted Rantings - http://www.theoldhighchurchman.blogspot.com
Posts: 4431 | From: Between a Rock and a Hard Place | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
PD
Shipmate
# 12436
|
Posted
Sorry, missed the edit!
Does anyoe know of any other Episcopal or Continuing Anglican bishops in the USA who wear a black chimere? I usually wear black, but do not see them in pics very often. That makes me think they have all but disappeared over here.
--------------------
Roadkill on the Information Super Highway!
My Assorted Rantings - http://www.theoldhighchurchman.blogspot.com
Posts: 4431 | From: Between a Rock and a Hard Place | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
PD, I've never seen a Continuing Anglican bishop in a black chimere, as my only experience of the Continuing Church was with the old Anglican Catholic Church. However, around 1971 Bishop Quarterman of the Diocese of Northwest Texas still appeared in black chimere. His co-adjutor, +Willis Henton, who was elected very soon after that wore red chimere and introduced the mitre to the diocese. So that might give some indication of the generational thing. In the other Texas dioceses I have only ever seen red chimere.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
However, around 1971 Bishop Quarterman of the Diocese of Northwest Texas still appeared in black chimere. His co-adjutor, +Willis Henton, who was elected very soon after that wore red chimere and introduced the mitre to the diocese.
This seems extremely odd to this C of E Anglican. The picture we usually get of TEC over here is that, liturgically at least, it is much higher up the candle than we are. Liverpool is possibly the 'lowest' diocese of the C of E, but even here bishops have worn the mitre at least since +David Sheppard's time (early 70s) - and, apart from the diocesan, from well before that.
--------------------
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
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
Bishops presiding at the Eucharist in choir habit with stole is AFAIK a purely Southern thing, though quite a lot of Southern dioceses are higher up the candle and have long had bishops celebrating in euchies and mitre. Another Southern oddity that is very old fashioned is the custom of having the crosier processed in front of the bishop down the nave, rather than being carried walking-stick style by the bishop himself (it would be a him in these instances). I don't know how much that still survives, but I'm pretty sure they're still doing it in the Diocese of Texas (essentially Houston, Austin, Waco, Beaumont and the surrounding areas of Central and Southeast Texas). The overall house style in TEC is ceremonially high-MOTR, with euchies almost always worn by the priest-celebrant. Again this is oddly true even in dioceses where the bishop appears as eucharistic celebrant in choir habit. One other oddity that I might mention which I have experienced in the Diocese of Texas is the abandonment of eucharistic vestments in Lent only. Chazzies and albs are worn at all other times, but during Lent in some parishes they go to cassock, surplice and stole for the eucharist. It seems they think euchies too festive for Lent or something, with surplice and stole being more austere. Yes, it's odd.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
PD
Shipmate
# 12436
|
Posted
Our Archbishop pulled the crozier as flag routine a couple of weeks ago, but was vested in Euchies and a Mitre! I associate the crozier as flag thing with rochet and chimere bishops. However our Archbishop does tend to pull unexpected variants. The fact he started out in a snakebelly Low diocese, then came up in churchmanship in middle age probably explains much of it.
PD
--------------------
Roadkill on the Information Super Highway!
My Assorted Rantings - http://www.theoldhighchurchman.blogspot.com
Posts: 4431 | From: Between a Rock and a Hard Place | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
PD
Shipmate
# 12436
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin L:
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
...Anglo-Catholic Dioceses of Fort Worth and Dallas.
[apologies for the brief tangent]
I've always meant to ask you why there are two dioceses in such a small area. Is it simply an issue of size, or is it more complicated (churchmanship? argument?)
What about the rest of Texas?
IIRC, Dallas serves effectively Northeast TX and Fort Worth North-central TX. They were one very large diocese until the early 1970s when Fort Worth was spun off from Dallas. The then Bishop - Donald Davis, who eventually muddied the waers further in the Continuum - elected to go with the more Anglo-Catholic Fort Worth. Dallas is/was Highish.
IIRC Texas was divided into three about 1875, with West Texas's first Bishop being a Low Churchman. Dallas (which may originally have been called North Texas) got someone who was more in tune with the High Church camp. By the 1870s, the High Church Movement was on the march, several dioceses founded in that era have a High Church flavour to them.
Arizona and New Mexico had strong links to New England, and tended to be Low.
PD
[ 10. July 2010, 04:29: Message edited by: PD ]
--------------------
Roadkill on the Information Super Highway!
My Assorted Rantings - http://www.theoldhighchurchman.blogspot.com
Posts: 4431 | From: Between a Rock and a Hard Place | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Knopwood
Shipmate
# 11596
|
Posted
Am I mistaken in the impression that Dallas and Fort Worth ultimately became in effect overlapping jurisdictions for the "two integrities" in the Dallas-Fort Worth area?
Posts: 6806 | From: Tio'tia:ke | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
PD
Shipmate
# 12436
|
Posted
Sort of. It applied more in the Metro Dallas-Fort Worth area than elsewhere in the two dioceses. +Iker looked after +Stanton's diehards; and +Stanton ordained women candidates for Holy Orders from Fort Worth. To my mind that was a workable trade within the context of TEC. Now I think +Iker has gotten himself up something a blind alley.
PD
--------------------
Roadkill on the Information Super Highway!
My Assorted Rantings - http://www.theoldhighchurchman.blogspot.com
Posts: 4431 | From: Between a Rock and a Hard Place | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
The colouration of the two dioceses really was different, from the inception of the D. of FW, however, because I think a cadre of clergy under +Donald Davies were determined that there be no compromise and no change in the new diocese. There were only a couple of "die hard" parishes in Dallas, of which St Francis was one. Female candidates for holy orders from the territory within the DoFW must have become canonically resident in Dallas and certainly couldn't exercise priest's orders in Fort Worth. Female deacons were rather begrudgingly ordained (only a few) in the Diocese of Fort Worth, but I'm not sure that continued after Davies.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
PD, the Diocese of Fort Worth didn't come into being until the beginning of the 1980s. I moved to Colorado in Dec. 1980, at which time the new diocese hadn't yet been inaugurated, though it had been getting organised for a while. The thing came into being sometime by 1982. Bp Davies, then Ordinary of the Diocese of Dallas, had his choice of staying in Dallas or becoming the first bishop of FW and chose the latter. I'd define the present territories of the two dioceses thus: Diocese of Dallas includes the great urban area of Dallas itself and its immediate suburban sprawl, together with the more culturally Southern area of Northeast Texas; Diocese of Fort Worth includes the more culturally Westward-looking and frankly provincial city of Fort Worth and its suburbs, together with the various towns and smallish cities to the immediate west and northwest of Fort Worth (of which Witchita Falls would be the largest)- much more cowboy country than the Diocese of Dallas.
[ 10. July 2010, 10:41: Message edited by: Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras ]
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
PD
Shipmate
# 12436
|
Posted
Thank you for sorting me out! Texas is a little bit off the beaten track for me, and I do not know it well.
PD
[ 10. July 2010, 15:06: Message edited by: PD ]
--------------------
Roadkill on the Information Super Highway!
My Assorted Rantings - http://www.theoldhighchurchman.blogspot.com
Posts: 4431 | From: Between a Rock and a Hard Place | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
De nada. And don't mean to come across as a know-it-all. I haven't lived in the DofFW since 1984, following a couple years in Colorado. I spent most of my Texas years in the Diocese of Texas, though we were travelling at the end to the one moderate Anglo-Catholic parish in San Antonio, the adjacent and errantly-named Diocese of West Texas. That was Saint Paul's Greyson Street, located across from the parade ground of Fort Sam Houston. It's a Rite II, rather folksy modern catholic place that, despite its almost entirely Anglo congregation employs some Spanish texts in the sung mass propers. A rather interesting place that marches to a different drummer than the rest of their diocese. Main Sunday service is a sung eucharist with incense; they have a Lady Shrine, holy water stoups, and occasional benediction of the Blessed Sacrament.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Try
Shipmate
# 4951
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin L:
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
...Anglo-Catholic Dioceses of Fort Worth and Dallas.
[apologies for the brief tangent]
I've always meant to ask you why there are two dioceses in such a small area. Is it simply an issue of size, or is it more complicated (churchmanship? argument?)
What about the rest of Texas?
The Diocese of Fort Worth was spun off of the Diocese of Dallas to provide a haven for priests who were opposed to the ordination of women. LSV says that he lived in the Diocese Of Dallas in the 70s- my own experience of the diocese is more recent, 04-06, when I was back in Texas and trying to decide if I wanted to be Methodist or Episcopalian.
Dallas is not Anglo-Catholic nowadays, it's an evangelical diocese, and with the departure of Christ Church Plano, I'd venture to guess that it's mostly an open, rather then conservative or charismatic evangelical diocese, but that happened after I had gone to Ohio. I only went to one Episcopal church in the DoD so I can't generalize about that diocse the way I can about the Diocse of Southern Ohio.
However, in terms of Methodism, in most ways the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex is certainly "higher" then anywhere in Ohio. In DFW the official ritual is inevitably used for Holy Communion, Baptism, and church membership. Communion rails are still in use, both in churches that have adopted intinction and in churches that still use wee cuppies. This is not universal, but it's still there. A Texas Methodist congregation will say the a Creed or affirmation of faith at least once per month. Either the current order of service or the order of service from the 1950s Methodist Hymnal is followed, and most prayers and acts of worship are taken from the hymnal. New churches are built in a traditional style. By contrast, new United Methodist churches in Ohio tend to be functional auditoriums. The official ritual is optional, even for the sacrements, and churches write their own prayers.
Posts: 852 | From: Beautiful Ohio, in dreams again I see... | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
I'm not really sure that the Diocese of Fort Worth came about chiefly due to opposition to OoW. There really is a significant geographical and population issue. The old Diocese of Dallas covered quite a large area and had only a single suffragan in addition to the Ordinary. The Diocese of Texas is ridiculously large geographically, but typically has at least two bishops suffragan and at least a couple of assisting bishops - retired or exiled clergy from elsewhere, sometimes from Latin America, so there are enough of them to get around to do confirmations and so forth. I would say that the present Diocese of Dallas and Diocese of Fort Worth are normal sized dioceses in terms of populations and territory. The Diocese of Northwest Texas (See now at Lubbock for many years; used to be Amarillo) is territorially large but a rather small number of congregations and total number oc communicants. The Diocese of West Texas (See City, San Antonio) is a fairly big territory but probably not so big in terms of number of parishes and communicants outside San Antonio itself. The Diocese of the Rio Grande includes only a small area of Texas around El Paso and is mainly a New Mexican diocese. In terms of churchmanship of actual parishes, both Dallas and Fort Worth were always more high church than actually advanced Anglo-Catholic, though both have had real A-C parishes and have historically tended to have A-C diocesan or suffragan bishops. I've a hard time picturing Dallas as truly evangelical, though I can see that being true in some of the burbs. I think that above all, all of the Texas dioceses can be termed "conservative" more than anything else. This is possibly a tad less true of Northwest Texas, notwithstanding the extremely Republican politics of that region of the state. But I'm increasingly out of touch with Texas and my own first hand knowledge is becoming ever-more dated.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
PD
Shipmate
# 12436
|
Posted
No, Fort Worth was spun off because Dallas had gotten too big. In 1980 it was the 15th largest diocese in terms of baptized, and probably higher in the ranking than that when it came to ASA. With the continuibg drift of the US population towards the Sun Belt, division was inevitable.
My impression is that the older parishes in the Dallas Diocese are MOTR-High and the newer ones and those that have grown significantly in recent years lean towards Evangelical. On the whole I would assume that Dallas is now MOTR with some High, and rather more Evangelical parishes.
Rio Grande is rather mixed both in terms of High/Low and Liberal/Conservative. I think it may become a little more liberal under the newly elected diocesan.
The Northwest TX thing also occurs in AZ. The TEC diocese in AZ tends to be liberal leaning even though the non-Hispanic population of the state is heavily Republican. However, TEC parishes in AZ are concentrated in the Phoenix Metro and Tucson areas which tend to be a bit less conservative than most of the state.
PD
--------------------
Roadkill on the Information Super Highway!
My Assorted Rantings - http://www.theoldhighchurchman.blogspot.com
Posts: 4431 | From: Between a Rock and a Hard Place | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643
|
Posted
I'm not sure that the minutiae of Anglican diocesan boundaries in... Texas? Or wherever we are talking about... is exactly Ecclesiantics territory. Keep things related to liturgy rather than just politics, I think.
dj_ordinaire, Eccles host
--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...
Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Edward Green
Review Editor
# 46
|
Posted
Heading back OP-wards.
The sermon is important.
If you are Low Church you preach on the Epistle.
If you are High Church you preach on the Gospel.
If you are Broad Church you preach on an Anecdote.
More seriously I would suggest that sacramental understanding is a more accurate scale.
Ranging from Congo and Clergy embrace the Real Absence to Congo and Clergy embrace the Real Presence.
Simple unfussy reservation of the sacrament (with a ministry of sacramental visiting) is also an indicator of an underlying 'catholic' faith. Of course having said 'catholic' it is fair to say that sacramental Anglican clergy may be anglo-catholic, anglo-lutheran, anglo-orthodox or anglo-wesleyan in their theology.
Of course there are many parishes where the Congo are uncertain of the sacraments despite the clergy preaching on them every Sunday. But this may be the case even Romewards?
Personally I would be happy with Max's vision, although in general find modern worship songs theologically limited. One of my favourite services is a simple week day Roman said low Mass. Ultimately I find myself in agreement with the theology and the focus and my intention at Common Worship Eucharists would be the same.
However I certainly don't move in Anglo-Papist circles. Sometimes prefer the company of Roman Catholic clergy to other Anglicans because we share far more of the essentials of faith. Of course if I were a women or gay, or divorced under non annul-able circumstances I might feel slightly different.
--------------------
blog//twitter//
linkedin
Posts: 4893 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mamacita
Lakefront liberal
# 3659
|
Posted
** bump **
--------------------
Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world’s grief. Do justly, now. Love mercy, now. Walk humbly, now. You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it.
Posts: 20761 | From: where the purple line ends | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ascension-ite
Shipmate
# 1985
|
Posted
Here in the Diocese of Virginia, the Bishops invariably show up in Rochet and Chimere, apparently you can request Cope and Mitre (I asked a Bishop once), but very few do. Although Eucharistic vestments are pretty common nowadays for Priests, this is still low-church country. The clergy may be MOTR, but the people in the pews are VERY Protestant. Incense, in the rare places that use it once a year or so, still sends the congo into coughing fits. One good indicator is that Reservation is practically unheard of, I know of only two places that do.
Posts: 318 | From: Old Dominion | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mamacita
Lakefront liberal
# 3659
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by malik3000 on another thread:
I always thought our church, EUSA, was MOTR but reading this, maybe candle meter readers can give a more accurate rating (i'd be interested in ratings from England, Canada, and elsewhere also)
All 3 Sunday services are always the Eucharist. All ministers fully vested in chazzies, dalmatics, etc.
8AM Eucharist Rite 1 no music. Only 2 readings.
9AM and 11:15AM Eucharist Rite 2. Both with robed choir, processing led by a verger and full set of eucharistic ministers fully vested. Both have the kind of hymns and anthems one might typically come across in your average ECUSA parish, at least in my opinion. Sometimes the 9AM, billed as the "family service" gets a little more folksy, including occasional appearances by a bluegrass group of which the rector is a part.
The 9AM service uses 2 readings and the 11:15 uses all 3 readings, with an Anglican chant (or sometimes plainsong) psalm after the 1st reading. (I must mention that our congregation does quite well at joining in the chanting.)
Our rector is probably the lowest on the candle of our 3 priests (2 men, 1 woman. We've just got a 4th priest but i don't know much about her yet.) The rector uses the sign of the Cross less than the others but he always uses it at the absolution and the final blessing. The other priests are higher up the candle including sign of the Cross. One of them especially is high up the candle, and his previous post was at the "highest" church in town.
We have no regular weekday services except Compline after "Wednesday Night Live" a basically family activities get-togther. I haven't been, but the bluegrass group sometimes sings at Compline. There is a once a month midday healing eucharist.
Incense. Used at the Easter Vigil and one of the 2 otherwise-identical Christmas Eve eucharists. Which service has the incense is clearly advertised. If this is to warn anyone with allergies, I don't think that should be a worry as the actual incens use is so tentative that one can barely smell it even if one is quite close up front. No Smokey Mary's here!
But we are nearly all-eucharist, fully vested. And we chant good. So what are we?
--------------------
Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world’s grief. Do justly, now. Love mercy, now. Walk humbly, now. You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it.
Posts: 20761 | From: where the purple line ends | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
Even here in low-church NW England that would rate as MOTR+ (or sunny side of central, if you prefer). The lack of weekday services is the giveaway.
--------------------
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
|
|
|
|
Knopwood
Shipmate
# 11596
|
Posted
In Canada, dalmatics and even special-occasion incense would certainly be "high" markers - the lack of weekday Eucharists would be rather out of keeping with that designation but not enough to overcome the factors that point to it.
Posts: 6806 | From: Tio'tia:ke | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jon in the Nati
Shipmate
# 15849
|
Posted
Dalmatics are a big-time 'high' marker in the US, too. Come to think on it, I've never seen a vested deacon in the ECUSA outside of AC churches and episcopal services. I'm sure they're out there, I just haven't seen them.
--------------------
Homer: Aww, this isn't about Jesus, is it?
Lovejoy: All things are about Jesus, Homer. Except this.
Posts: 773 | From: Region formerly known as the Biretta Belt | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
St Mark's, Beaumont, Texas is a typically MOTR parish that AFAIK never used incense in the mid-1980s when I was there, had a plain cross rather than a crucifix over the altar, no reservation of the Blessed Sacrament, but at 11.00 on Sunday had three sacred ministers (all priests) vested respectively in chazzie, dalmatic, and tunicle. There's one example of such a beast.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jon in the Nati
Shipmate
# 15849
|
Posted
quote:
typically MOTR parish [...] but at 11.00 on Sunday had three sacred ministers (all priests) vested respectively in chazzie, dalmatic, and tunicle
Fascinating, LSK. I wouldn't be terribly surprised to hear about a vested deacon in such a parish, but the three sacred ministers including subdeacon in tunicle is very surprising to me. That is something I can say (with 100% certainty) that I've never seen outside of explicitly AC churches. Then again, I've never been to Texas; maybe I should travel more.
Perhaps that parish had an Anglo-Catholic past, with that just being one of the holdovers? One finds that rather frequently in otherwise low-evangelical parishes that still reserve the MBS.
--------------------
Homer: Aww, this isn't about Jesus, is it?
Lovejoy: All things are about Jesus, Homer. Except this.
Posts: 773 | From: Region formerly known as the Biretta Belt | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
I never knew the explanation for it. Beaumont is in the notoriously low church Diocese of Texas (See is located at Houston). There's never been anything in the diocese higher than MOTR AFAIK. I should note that the three sacred ministers didn't really enact their roles as if celebrating a solemn mass. The deacon did some stuff, but less than would be the case in a traditional solemn high mass, while the subdeacon didn't do much of anything, just stood around (again even though all three were in priest's orders). It was a straight Rite I choral eucharist with some tedious things like the Prayer for the Whole State of Christ's Church read by a lector from the lectern! Quite an odd confection altogether.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
