<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Low Church Liturgy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.theoryspace.com/2009/12/29/low-church-liturgy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.theoryspace.com/2009/12/29/low-church-liturgy/</link>
	<description>~ traversing the many possibilities of life</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 15:22:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anson</title>
		<link>http://blog.theoryspace.com/2009/12/29/low-church-liturgy/comment-page-1/#comment-1327</link>
		<dc:creator>Anson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Dec 2009 22:53:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.theoryspace.com/?p=3005#comment-1327</guid>
		<description>Hi Rob, thanks for your comment. Yeah, I agree Buchanan&#039;s wordings might have painted things with a broad brush. 

But first of all, as an evangelical, I do consider myself pretty much a &quot;low church&quot; guy, as the term is originally used to label folks with evangelical convictions in the early eighteenth century Church of England. It is not referring to lower class people, but those who hold a &quot;low view&quot; of the doctrine of the church or the sacraments.

I&#039;m just a &quot;low church&quot; evangelical slowly learning to appreciate the traditions and liturgies that offer much sacramental value and meaning to worship life.

I find this article pretty helpful in clarifying the terms:
http://www.crivoice.org/lowhighchurch.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Rob, thanks for your comment. Yeah, I agree Buchanan&#8217;s wordings might have painted things with a broad brush. </p>
<p>But first of all, as an evangelical, I do consider myself pretty much a &#8220;low church&#8221; guy, as the term is originally used to label folks with evangelical convictions in the early eighteenth century Church of England. It is not referring to lower class people, but those who hold a &#8220;low view&#8221; of the doctrine of the church or the sacraments.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m just a &#8220;low church&#8221; evangelical slowly learning to appreciate the traditions and liturgies that offer much sacramental value and meaning to worship life.</p>
<p>I find this article pretty helpful in clarifying the terms:<br />
<a href="http://www.crivoice.org/lowhighchurch.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.crivoice.org/lowhighchurch.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rob Haskell</title>
		<link>http://blog.theoryspace.com/2009/12/29/low-church-liturgy/comment-page-1/#comment-1326</link>
		<dc:creator>Rob Haskell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Dec 2009 20:04:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.theoryspace.com/?p=3005#comment-1326</guid>
		<description>Hi Anson - Just an observation that strikes me as I read this quote. The terminology of high and low church seems a bit prejudicial here. If you just talk about &quot;high church&quot; it sounds ok. But as soon as you compare high to low, it sounds a bit off, especially if you describe low church like Buchanan does: &quot;where the building’s walls are stark, the music simple, the prayers clumsy and direct, made up as you pray them.&quot; Simple, lower class people whose simplicity may have more to do with lack of imagination and education than a considered theological position? Maybe I&#039;m making too much of it, but it&#039;s just how it strikes me. A bit classist, I guess.  But i agree that &quot;low&quot; church has its ironic rituals.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Anson &#8211; Just an observation that strikes me as I read this quote. The terminology of high and low church seems a bit prejudicial here. If you just talk about &#8220;high church&#8221; it sounds ok. But as soon as you compare high to low, it sounds a bit off, especially if you describe low church like Buchanan does: &#8220;where the building’s walls are stark, the music simple, the prayers clumsy and direct, made up as you pray them.&#8221; Simple, lower class people whose simplicity may have more to do with lack of imagination and education than a considered theological position? Maybe I&#8217;m making too much of it, but it&#8217;s just how it strikes me. A bit classist, I guess.  But i agree that &#8220;low&#8221; church has its ironic rituals.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

