Evangelicals poised to take over the Church

The Telegraph ^ | August 25, 2003 | Jonathan Petre

[Mr. Mulliner]

Interesting discussion by someone who is obviously not an evangelical and apparently sees the evangelical wing of the Anglican church as a bit of a threat. If the author would only travel a bit and see how evangelical the Anglican church is worldwide, perhaps these evangelicals wouldn't appear to be such a threat.

[goodnesswins]

Oh, the HORROR....following God's word....sheesh.

[secret garden]

Please pardon my ignorance, but can you provide the definition for evangelical as it is used in this article?

[Mr. Mulliner]

Here's something I found on Google just now.

evangelical  (Christianity)
adjective

1	of, based upon, or following from the Gospels

2	denoting or relating to any of certain Protestant sects or parties, which emphasize the importance of personal conversion and faith in atonement through the death of Christ as a means of salvation

3	another word for: evangelistic

noun

4	an upholder of evangelical doctrines or a member of an evangelical sect or party, esp. the Low-Church party of the Church of England

I think definitions 2 & 4 are pretty much what is being referred to here.

[lepton]

"Take over"? How about "remnant"?

[NewYorker]

Praise the Lord!

[secret garden]

Thank you. Now I have to learn the difference between Low Church and High Church.

[Mr. Mulliner]

ping to all y'alls

[Semi Civil Servant]

viewing sex outside marriage, including homosexuality, as outlawed by Scripture.

It's not "viewing"; it's what Scripture says.

"Moderns" can only see the color gray. It just kills them to comtemplate a world where there is a real "right and wrong".

[Mr. Mulliner]

I think the difference between Low Church and High Church is the importance of liturgy. If you're from a church background that uses liturgy - a set order of worship with read or recited prayers or prayers that follow a set pattern - you may not be able to conceive of a church without such patterns.

High Church usually refers to churches that rely more on liturgy and the Anglican Church is definitely more on the High Church end of things, although some congregations aren't. Baptists, on the other hand, and Pentecostals tend to not use much liturgy and are considered Low Church.

Perhaps someone else can offer a better definition of those terms, but that's the best I can do right now.

[TEXOKIE]

Thought you might like to see this. Mention of the financial base of the evangelicals is made.

[JRandomFreeper]

Where ever two or three are gathered, there He is also.

/john

[secret garden]

Thanks again, Mr.M.
:-)

[keats5]

I think you're right. High church is liturgical. Low church is not.

[pgkdan]

Moreover, all but a tiny proportion of the new breed of evangelicals will be theologically conservative, viewing sex outside marriage, including homosexuality, as outlawed by Scripture.

In other words, 'theologically sound'.

[aposiopetic]

According to the new analysis, they are consolidating their grip on the Church's income, contributing a significant amount of money to church funds.

How bizarre an analysis.

In a power-grab, those dangerous and ever-conspiratorial evangelicals give their money away. [here endeth the sarcasm]

Gimme a break.

[LiteKeeper]

SPOTREP!!

[Mr. Mulliner]

Yes, very different than the case of liberal control of many mainline denominations. In the denominations I'm most familiar with, it was usually conservative congregations sending lots of money to liberals who managed to gain control of the denominations. That is never questioned by the media.

But when evangelicals start to use their money to legitimately have a voice in their church's government, it raises all kinds of suspicions from the media.

Go figure.

[Libertina]

LOL What's the big deal here with evangelical? Is there ANY OTHER WAY? Imagine, following God's word and reading the Bible... As opposed to what - making it up myself?

[bd476]

While liturgy is relied upon and followed in "high" churches at least within the American Episcopal Church, liturgy is also relied upon and followed in the "lower" churches.

Some differences one might see in "higher" Episcopal services, are rituals followed in the services, such as singing certain parts of the liturgy, the priests burning incense, members of the congregation crossing themselves more often, and kneeling in reverence (genuflecting), the congregation generally kneels more often within a "high" service, and there might be slight differences within as well as frequency of the celebration of Holy Communion. The Holy Bible is read aloud, in both "low" and "high" services in the Episcopal Church. I have noticed more political commentary during sermons within a "lower" Episcopal service.

The above are also just my observations as a member since birth.

I have never heard a comparison between denominations such as Baptist and Episcopalian, or Pentecostal and Episcopalian, (as referenced in a post above) which would define differences between high church vs. low church.

It has always been my thought that the differences between "high" and "low" churches were found within each denomination, and not found by comparing one denomination to another. I have attended many Baptist, Methodist, Lutheran and Presbyterian church services with friends. I noticed many differences between services within each unique denomination.