The Church of St. Martin-in-the-Fields is an Episcopal parish in the Diocese of Pennsylvania that is centered on the worship of God, the ministry of all baptized persons, and the call to be agents of Christ’s love in the world.
Contact
Church of St. Martin-in-the-Fields
8000 St. Martin’s Lane
Philadelphia, PA 19118
215.247.7466

The Reverend Robert L. Tate, Rector

High, Low, and Broad

-contributed by Cathy Cowling, director of Christian formation

Periodically parishioners will hear someone refer to a church as ‘high’, ‘low’, or ‘broad’ and have wondered what does that mean. Whether you grew up in the Episcopal Church or came to it as an adult, you may be puzzled by this strange nomenclature, especially since its use is less common these days.

As with so many other things in Anglicanism, these terms are grounded in theology with liturgical implications (many people think these refer primarily or solely to liturgical styles, but they are mistaken). The expressions ‘high’, ‘low’, and ‘broad’ date back to the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries, respectively; however, the theological issues implied in these terms date back to the emergence of the Church of England in the turmoil of the 16th century. Essentially they are about ecclesiology, the theology of the church, and in particular with its understanding of authority, the role and necessity of the episcopacy, and the nature of the sacraments.

The Protestant Reformation unleashed tremendous conflict, affecting both church and state for more than a century. Within the Church of England were those who wished to reform the church and return it to what they considered through scripture to be its more pure origins (hence the name Puritan); the late mediaeval church, with its elaborate liturgies and powerful hierarchy, bore little to no resemblance to the church depicted in the New Testament. They most passionately objected to the role and authority of bishops and a theology of transubstantiation in the sacrament of the Eucharist as well as the use of the Book of Common Prayer. Consequently they also objected to the outward signs of these abuses: the use of vestments, candles on the altar, ornaments, ceremonial gestures, etc. were all deemed to be unscriptural and reeked of superstition.

Others, within the church, agreed that it was in need for reforming but disagreed with the extent to which the Puritans wished to pursue it. Was scripture the only source of authority for the church? Was not God active in the historical development of the church? In the eyes of these reformers, there was no sense of separation from the rest of the catholic church; the Church in England, while it had repudiated papal jurisdiction, was still part of the catholic church in its fundamental doctrines and constitution. Richard Hooker, the most famous Anglican apologist, refuted the puritan argument that scripture is the only authority of what is correct and defended the church’s right to make laws provided they were not contrary to scripture. Thus, while Anglicanism has taken the ‘via media’, it has retained much of its catholic ecclesiology. (Now, granted, this is a very simplified explanation of its history, but do you really want me to get into the divine right of kings, the English civil war, the Test Act, and the Oxford Movement?)

So, what does this bit of history have to do with church nomenclature and liturgical styles? Late in the 17th century, after the restoration of the monarchy as well as bishops and the prayer book, the term ‘high churchmen’ was coined to describe those members who emphasized the Church of England’s historical continuity as a branch of the catholic church and upheld ‘high’ conceptions of the authority of the church, the authority of bishops, and the nature of sacraments as outward and visible signs of inward and spiritual grace. In response to the influence of Protestant Evangelicalism in the 18th and early 19th centuries, high churchmanship experienced a renewal in the mid-19th century. While originally concerned with the theological doctrines named above, high church advocates or Anglo-Catholics came to be regarded as preoccupied with the externals of worship: elaborate vestments and ceremonial (such as bowing and making the sign of the cross), the use of incense, chanting the service, etc. all of which accentuated the mystery of the sacraments.

‘Low churchmen’ dates from the early 18th century and was used in contrast with ‘high churchmen’. People with ‘low churchmanship’ have tended to give a relatively unimportant or ‘low’ place to the claims of the episcopate, the priesthood, and the sacraments and generally stressed the more Protestant beliefs of the church. (An example of this today is that in many low churches in the South, a male priest is often referred to as ‘Mr.’ while in high parishes the priest is still called ‘Father’.) As with the term ‘high’, ‘low’ went out of use but was revived in the 19th century when it was applied to Evangelicals. Low church advocates have tended to emphasize the reading of scripture, preaching, and minimal externals in worship: simple vestments, few or no candles. Low churches tended to celebrate the Eucharist very infrequently, choosing instead to pray Morning Prayer as its primary worship.

However, because Anglicanism generally avoids extremes and positive definitions in theology, the term ‘broad church’ arose in the 19th century to describe those in the church who sought to interpret Anglicanism in a broad and liberal sense. While the expression was originally used lightheartedly, it gained weight as a response to the more high and low extremes. Most Episcopal churches today could be categorized as broad in their understanding of the church’s authority, the interpretation of scripture, and in their liturgical practices (broad liturgical practices would include the weekly celebration of the Eucharist, wearing vestments, having a minimal amount of ceremonial, and the like). As a result, the terms are not used so often although the differences in some outward liturgical styles remain. In our polarized climate today, we have drifted to referring to churches as ‘conservative’ and ‘liberal’, which really do not express the differences between high and low. However, when we examine a number of controversies in the recent life of the church – the ordination of women, the ordination of gays and lesbians, church architectural design, the need for confirmation – we can detect many of the same theological arguments and positions that shaped our church centuries ago.