3W4DW may be over, but that's no reason not to finish answering the questions...

[tree_and_leaf]

From aedifica

in novels set in Great Britain, I keep seeing references to people being "church" or "chapel". What does that mean?

This terminology has, as far as I know, died out. "Church" is the established church, i.e. the Church of England, and people who are "chapel" were members of one of the Protestant "non-conformist" churches, which might mean Methodists (the largest group), Presbyterians (who later became the URC), Congregationalists, or Baptists, etc., probably. There's often a class element to who belonged to which denomination; Methodism tended to be most successful with the 'respectable' working class, and there's a big overlap with the emerging Labour movement. "Church" people tended to be better off, and for a long time "Chapel" people were barred from standing for parliament etc (as were Catholics, though it was easier to conform enough to satisfy the law if you were Chapel than if you were RC).

Don't be confused by the Scottish tendency, still apparent at times to refer to Roman Catholic churches as 'chapels'. It should also be noted that the national church in Scotland is the Church of Scotland, which is Presbyterian (though it is more independent of the state than the C of E is, and it can't really be called 'established). 'Episcopalians,' as Scottish Anglicans are called, are a very small minority.

Comments

[aedifica]

Thank you! That also clears up my confusion on something I hadn't realized was connected: referring to someone (in a religious context) as "non-conformist."

[trialia]

addition: British Unitarians generally attend chapels. ;)

[tree_and_leaf]

Doh! Sorry, I had a feeling I was forgetting someone.

[rembrandtswife]

I did not know that Scottish Anglicans shared the name "Episcopalian" with us Yanks.

[kerravonsen]

I have a vague feeling that it's the other way around...

[tree_and_leaf]

Yes, indeed *g*

Of course, it was the Scots who consecrated Samuel Seabury, and thus the Anglican Communion as a world wide thing was actually founded by the Piskies, thus proving, once again, that the Scots invented everything....

[kerravonsen]

World-wide? (raises one eyebrow) I thought the Anglican Communion in Australia was a daughter of the English, not the Scottish branch. Or doesn't Australia count as part of the "wide world"? 8-P

[tree_and_leaf]

Yes, but Seabury was the first bishop appointed to minister outside the British Isles, so his consecration was where the idea that Anglican churches in other countries could have their own hierarchies and not be dependent on the episcopal authority of the established English church originated, which is why I said 'the Anglican Communion as a world-wide thing', not 'the Church of England.'

The fact that the idea caught on later merely proves it was a good one *g* (though I gather the Anglican church in Australia has only had its own primate since the 60s, it obviously took longer to catch on there...)

[kerravonsen]

Okay, I see what you're getting at...

[tree_and_leaf]

Of course if you talk about the clergy who founded congregations overseas, the the American church is a daughter of the English church too. But it makes more sense in terms of Anglican ecclesiology to go with the bishops, because otherwise you'd just have "Church of England, Diocese of Wherever"*, which is not what the Anglican Communion is.

* Like you still, today, have the Diocese of Europe, which is a normal part of the Church of England.

[nineveh_uk]

Whether or not the words have died out, the concept is still alive and well in north-west Leeds!

[aunty_marion]

I might be wrong, but I have an idea that the phrase and the idea still exists in Wales, and some parts of northern England...

[tree_and_leaf]

I know the mental distinction does, but I've never heard the vocabulary used. Very willing to be corrected, though!