There are 2,942 Catholic Denominations, Maybe more

[rtconstant]

If your definition of “Denomination” is truly “a group of people with the exact same beliefs in every area” then Catholicism really does have tons of denominations… I mean… you have varying worship styles, liberal priests here and there, Thomists, Molinists, Cafeteria Catholics, Augustinians, Orthodox, there are liberal Catholics and Conservative ones, differing beliefs about whether Genesis is literal or figurative or both, celibacy, mantilla wearing, limbo… this list could go on for miles and miles. And no "but those are “optional” dosen’t count, you set the definition here, not me. I’d have had the definition a bit narrower…

The refusal to define Denomination in a more precise way forces you to not have only one Catholic Church. If you have have no Unity, your whole argument fails.

Actually I discussed denomination more precisely earlier in this thread. The problem here is that while some Catholics here are being too lax on their interpretation of denomination, some Protestants here have gone to the opposite end of spectrum in strictness.

We can all agree that how the numbers in the study were arrived at were inaccurate, but no one is really arguing that. What the Catholics here are saying is that the figure itself never seemed like that big of a stretch.

It is true that having a different theology doesn’t necessarily imply a new denomination, however sometimes it does. Especially if those who are espousing the different theology wants to be separate. The Intent of the body in question is probably the biggest factor.

Another reason that 30.000 seems reasonable to Catholics is because the number of denominations grows everyday. The mainline denominations and the foundational evangelical denominations are loosing ground to non-denominational institutions that often are stand alone churches (if often rather large and wealthy).

Anyway, the point of the OP has been made the specific study in question has questionable methodologies.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Anyway, the point of the OP has been made the specific study in question has questionable methodologies.

Was that the point of the OP? Or was the point of the OP a ploy to distract attention from the proliferation of schisms among the Protestant denominations? An appeal to factitiousness rather than to underlying truth?

 

[lak611]

Was that the point of the OP? Or was the point of the OP a ploy to distract attention from the proliferation of schisms among the Protestant denominations? An appeal to factitiousness rather than to underlying truth?

How is it that we can cite a book claiming 300,000 Protestant denominations if that book also claims 2,942 Catholic denominations? If the author is wrong on the Catholic numbers, why cannot we concede that he is also wrong on the Protestant numbers?

 

[lak611]

Was that the point of the OP? Or was the point of the OP a ploy to distract attention from the proliferation of schisms among the Protestant denominations? An appeal to factitiousness rather than to underlying truth?

How is it that we can cite a book claiming 30,000 Protestant denominations if that book also claims 2,942 Catholic denominations? If the author is wrong on the Catholic numbers, why cannot we concede that he is also wrong on the Protestant numbers?

Typo in my previous post. Too late to edit.

 

[Syele]

Was that the point of the OP? Or was the point of the OP a ploy to distract attention from the proliferation of schisms among the Protestant denominations? An appeal to factitiousness rather than to underlying truth?

Obviously it was not a ploy to distract attention from the point. I made a separate thread from the ones I was reading the erroneous fact in, just so I WOULDN’T derail those threads and distract from your points, secondly when someone tried to make this thread the same discussion as those I directed them to an appropriate thread. How is pointing out error an appeal to fictitiousness? I have one point… Don’t lie to make your point just because “well it seems like it could be true.” Your attacking ME rather than admitting that there is error here is uncalled for.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Syele:

How is pointing out error an appeal to fictitiousness?

I believe I used the term ‘factitiousness.’ With an a not an i.

Syele:

I have one point… Don’t lie to make your point just because “well it seems like it could be true.”

May I respectfully suggest that your accusation is unsupported by evidence, unjustifiable, and a violation of the friendship necessary for furthering a discussion on these forums. You overstate your case to no good end imho.

:dts:

Syele:

Your attacking ME rather than admitting that there is error here is uncalled for.

I am not following you. Can you please specify how my comment is an attack on your person rather on what you said? Thank you.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

How is it that we can cite a book claiming 300,000 Protestant denominations if that book also claims 2,942 Catholic denominations? If the author is wrong on the Catholic numbers, why cannot we concede that he is also wrong on the Protestant numbers?

We can concede that he is wrong on the Protestant numbers – provided that that can be demonstrated and it has not. However, on the larger question, such a concession is sweating the details. It is a red herring. He may be wrong on the Protestant numbers, but it is not relevant to the larger question.

What is relevant to the larger question is that it is at the very least anomalous for individual Catholics to set up shop; hang their shingles out; and start new churches. Catholics who do that I believe will not remain Catholics for very long.

For many Protestant denominations, it is not anomalous at all for this to happen. It happens all the time.

For what reason is this happening?
For what reason are there so many divergent theories of the Gospel among the Protestant denominations?
For what reason are there so many divergent ‘authorities’? So many divergent church communities?

The challenge you put re conceding the numbers is also a false analogy. The author may be wrong on the Catholic numbers, but perfectly correct on the Protestant numbers. Folks would have to prove that being wrong on the Protestant numbers necessarily follows from being wrong on the Catholic numbers. Folks have not proven that. And it is not proveable because it is illogical.

The challenge you put re conceding the numbers is also not arguing in good faith. Arguing in good faith means that you don’t dismantle the entire thrust of what the author is saying simply because he failed on one point.

The entire thrust – like everything else – must be examined on its own merits. Not on the merits of a separate – but albeit related – point which could not be made.

So to refocus:

Are there 2942 Catholic denominations or not? Is this number relevant? Useful? Or a red herring?

More to the point: are there any Catholic denominations at all? If so, is the number of Catholic denominations – if any exist – significant? If so, what is the significance?

Are there 300 000 Protestant denominations? Is this number relevant? Useful? Or a red herring?

More to the point: are there any Protestant denominations? If so, is the number of Protestant denominations – if any exist – significant? If so, what is the significance?

 

[ricko]

The OP is incorrect in that there are other Catholic denominations. As Ani Lbi pointed out, those dissenters are actually no longer Catholic. The existing members may not all practice their Catholic faith as they should but they are still Catholic and struggling to become better Catholics. After all, the Church was established for the sinners not for the righteous. I believe the point of many posters here is that there is no cohesion among those outside of the Catholic Church. Though almost every one of them claims to be guided by the Holy Spirit, the divisions among them into thousands of different teachings says otherwise. Only the Catholic Church can claim the guidance and protection of the Holy Spirit and Christ as is guaranteed in scripture. This is obvious to us as Catholics as we gaze upon the factions and splinter groups growing every day. We see no guidance of the Holy Spirit in these churches, only division. All of these churches are of individuals who have their own personal idea of what scripture says and how to obtain salvation. Catholics look upon this mess with sadness and wonder how could anyone allow themselves to be misled in such a way. Scripture is very clear that Christ established a Church, guaranteed its existence until the end of the world and guidance of the Holy Spirit. However, man in his selfish way refused to obey Christ and submit to the Church’s authority feeling that he alone was interpreting scripture correctly. The result? The Reformation, (Revolution) of the 16th century. Once we were all united, now we are divided with splinters upon splinters from the original split 500 years ago. These groups will continue to divide as some individuals decide that they have a new and more modern teaching or in some cases claiming to return to the “original church”. From snake handlers and speaking in tongues, Shakers and Quakers and women’s rights to groups such as Jim and Tammy Baker, Jim Jones and the Hal Bop Comet group. It seems like any reasonable person using common sense could see that all of these are not in keeping with scripture. Until that happens, we will continue to see the numbers increasing.

 

[JoeyWarren]

I will add that one does not need to cite Barrett in order to count the number of denominations. I can look at my own protestant family’s history to get my own count.

 

[Syele]

The OP is incorrect in that there are other Catholic denominations. As Ani Lbi pointed out, those dissenters are actually no longer Catholic. The existing members may not all practice their Catholic faith as they should but they are still Catholic and struggling to become better Catholics. After all, the Church was established for the sinners not for the righteous.

You’ve entirely missed the point… The point is in the definition of Denominition and how they are counted. There are only Catholic “denominations” if you insist on misdefining the word Denomination. in my last post I mentioned many divisions in the Catholics church that DO NOT cause people to be non-catholic. I have to ask, yet another poster… Did you actually read this thread?

I believe the point of many posters here is that there is no cohesion among those outside of the Catholic Church.

Weird… I mentioned this point from the beginning and never disagreed with it. Again… Did you read the thread or do you post based on the title alone?

 

[Syele]

We can concede that he is wrong on the Protestant numbers – provided that that can be demonstrated and it has not. However, on the larger question, such a concession is sweating the details. It is a red herring. He may be wrong on the Protestant numbers, but it is not relevant to the larger question.

the 33k quote isn’t even Barretts number he cited 8 thoousand something. If you must quote something at least quote what’s really there.

What is relevant to the larger question is that it is at the very least anomalous for individual Catholics to set up shop; hang their shingles out; and start new churches. Catholics who do that I believe will not remain Catholics for very long.

For many Protestant denominations, it is not anomalous at all for this to happen. It happens all the time.

For what reason is this happening?
For what reason are there so many divergent theories of the Gospel among the Protestant denominations?
For what reason are there so many divergent ‘authorities’? So many divergent church communities?

The “larger question” as you put it is off topic to this thread.

The challenge you put re conceding the numbers is also a false analogy. The author may be wrong on the Catholic numbers, but perfectly correct on the Protestant numbers. Folks would have to prove that being wrong on the Protestant numbers necessarily follows from being wrong on the Catholic numbers. Folks have not proven that. And it is not proveable because it is illogical.

It is not a false analogy to say, “Barrett says there are 8,196 Protestant denominations and 30,000 is a misquote.” You can deny this till the cows come home. It’s STILL a misquote.

The challenge you put re conceding the numbers is also not arguing in good faith. Arguing in good faith means that you don’t dismantle the entire thrust of what the author is saying simply because he failed on one point.

The entire thrust – like everything else – must be examined on its own merits. Not on the merits of a separate – but albeit related – point which could not be made.

Really? Well, Barrett is not Catholic and his entire thrust had nothing at all to do with showing how divided Protestants are. He was not making ANY point about divisions at all. He is a protestant attempting to show how Christians have spread across the globe.
Salt Lake Tribunehttp://www.sltrib.com/2001/May/05192001/Saturday/98497.htm:

Why the title World Christian Encyclopedia, when it covers faith groups from Afghan Zoroastrians (304,000) to Zimbabwean animists (3.52 million)? Though Barrett says he publishes factual, unbiased data, he readily acknowledges it has a purpose: to serve as an informational undergirding for Christian missionary work.
“I don’t have the gift of evangelism through personality. I don’t have the gift of traditional preaching,” explains the soft-spoken Barrett.
Is he a missionary, then? “Certainly, but not the shouter on the street.”
He calls his blend of religion and science “missiometrics.”

So to refocus:

Are there 2942 Catholic denominations or not? Is this number relevant? Useful? Or a red herring?

Of course there aren’t. As stated already in the thread, it was to get your attention.

More to the point: are there any Catholic denominations at all? If so, is the number of Catholic denominations – if any exist – significant? If so, what is the significance?

Are there 300 000 Protestant denominations? Is this number relevant? Useful? Or a red herring?

The number is not useful. The numbers we have are misleading and irrelevant.

**

More to the point: are there any Protestant denominations? If so, is the number of Protestant denominations – if any exist – significant? If so, what is the significance?

**
So you get to redefine the point of my thread? Um no.

BTW you STILL haven’t defined denomination.

 

[Wampa]

Wow, this thread is the gift that keeps on giving. Just when I thought it would die down, new “interesting debaters” (holding my tongue for charity) join in. Syele, you have much patience to keep trying. It’s interesting to see what you’re now being accused of. Who knew trying to make a point of logic (aside from the substance of the fractionalization debate) could be so dangerous?

P.S. general posting tip: use paragraphs if you want people to read what you have to say. Posts w/ 30 lines and no paragraph breaks at all are going to get skipped by a lot of people.

 

[rr1213]

The reason that Protestants so dislike this assertion about 33k denominations is that, whether true or not, it is misleading. It suggests a level of theological chaos that simply does not exist. It is misleading because, even if there are 33k (or 33 million) denominations, these numbers do not represent the Churches in which most Protestants are found.

As I’ve noted in previous posts, I submit that most non-Catholic Christians in the United States are grouped within 20 to 30 denominations. A lot? Sure. Thirty-three thousand? Not even close.

A good analogy would be the number of languages spoken in the United States. According to the sources set forth below, the population of the United States for 2006 is approximately 298,444,215 (July 2006 est.).

Among these almost 300 million people, approximately ***337 ***languages are spoken or signed. This suggests a vast amount of linguistic chaos. Nonetheless, the percentage who speak these various languages are as follows: English 82.1%, Spanish 10.7%, other Indo-European 3.8%, Asian and Pacific island 2.7%, other 0.7% (2000 census).

In other words, while there are over 300 languages spoken in the United States, almost 93 % of the population speak English or Spanish. The other 7% of the population are split among the other 335 languages.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_in_the_United_States

cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/print/us.html

Likewise, Protestants in the United States. Thousands of denominations, yet most people are found worshipping in a vastly smaller number of Churches. The resulting theological diversity (or chaos) is also much less than what Catholic apologists in these forums like to suggest. That is why the 33k number is misleading. As Mark Twain said, there are lies, damn lies and statistics.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

rr1213:

The reason that Protestants so dislike this assertion about 33k denominations is that, whether true or not, it is misleading.

You have not proven that it is misleading. Also another reason that Protestants may dislike this assertion is that it is true.

rr1213:

It suggests a level of theological chaos that simply does not exist.

Again, you have not proven that theological chaos does not exist among the Protestant denominations. Merely offered a tautology perhaps assuming that, if you say something often enough, folks will think that it has merit.

rr1213:

It is misleading because, even if there are 33k (or 33 million) denominations, these numbers do not represent the Churches in which most Protestants are found.

What does this mean exactly?

rr1213:

As I’ve noted in previous posts, I submit that most non-Catholic Christians in the United States are grouped within 20 to 30 denominations. A lot? Sure. Thirty-three thousand? Not even close.

Evidence? Also you say ‘most’? Is there a problem with saying ‘all’ non-Catholic Christians in the United States are grouped within 20 to 30 denominations? It is ‘all’ we are looking at, is it not? Perhaps once we start using the word ‘all’, that would include a lot more non-Catholic Christians and we would be talking about a lot more denominations, is that not true?

rr1213:

Among these almost 300 million people, approximately ***337 ***languages are spoken or signed. This suggests a vast amount of linguistic chaos.

False analogy.

rr1213:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_in_the_United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_in_the_United_States

wikipedia is not a credible source.

rr1213:

As Mark Twain said, there are lies, damn lies and statistics.

Lies is very strong and unfriendly language even if it is only implied. Usually when folks start in with the tautologies, it is because they have fallen short of making their points and have no further points to offer; so they just repeat the points they have already tried – but failed – to make. Usually when folks start in with the unfounded accusations and personal attacks, it is because they have conceded the whole discussion.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Syele:

the 33k quote isn’t even Barretts number he cited 8 thoousand something. If you must quote something at least quote what’s really there.

Relevance? Also is the 33k number a quote or merely rhetorical language?

Syele:

The “larger question” as you put it is off topic to this thread.

Not at all. It is arguing in good faith rather than trying to dismantle an entire point of view on the basis of not getting the numbers right. Is arguing in good faith off topic to this thread?

Syele:

It is not a false analogy to say, “Barrett says there are 8,196 Protestant denominations and 30,000 is a misquote.”

Did I say that was a false analogy? No. I may have said something else was a false analogy. Please do not put words in my mouth.

Syele:

You can deny this till the cows come home. It’s STILL a misquote.

Then it is you who stand corrected.

Syele:

Really? Well, Barrett is not Catholic and his entire thrust had nothing at all to do with showing how divided Protestants are. He was not making ANY point about divisions at all. He is a protestant attempting to show how Christians have spread across the globe.

Relevance? I believe those responding to the OP may want to make points about divisions. This is after all an open forum and it is after all an open discussion.

Syele:

The number is not useful. The numbers we have are misleading and irrelevant.

Yet you attempt to dismantle whole points of view on the basis of the numbers alone. Who, for example, made the following claim?

Syele:

the 33k quote isn’t even Barretts number he cited 8 thoousand something. If you must quote something at least quote what’s really there.

Was it you? I think it was. So in one breath you claim that the number is not useful. In the next breath you attempt to dismantle a view opposed to your own on the basis of the numbers alone.

Folks who try having it both ways end up having it no way.

Also, are we quoting when we cite the 300 k number? Or are we using rhetorical language?

Syele:

So you get to redefine the point of my thread? Um no.

No, we don’t. Was anyone trying to? Um… no.

Folks however are contributing their points of view – which obviously diverge from your own – perhaps thinking that this is a discussion. If we had thought that this thread might be a vehicle for singlemindledly promoting one point of view only, then perhaps we would have gone on to other threads which do offer opportunities for discussion.

Syele:

BTW you STILL haven’t defined denomination.

I normally offer good evidence and links when I feel that they are being read and when there is a commensurate offering of good evidence and links on the part of those to whom I am responding.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Who knew trying to make a point of logic (aside from the substance of the fractionalization debate) could be so dangerous?

I note that you refrain from identifying which statement you believe to be a point of logic.

If you wish to make that identification, then we can discuss whether or not the statement is in fact logical. If you do not wish to make that identification then you concede the point.

 

[MrS]

A good analogy would be the number of languages spoken in the United States. According to the sources set forth below, the population of the United States for 2006 is approximately 298,444,215 (July 2006 est.).

In other words, while there are over 300 languages spoken in the United States, almost 93 % of the population speak English or Spanish. The other 7% of the population are split among the other 335 languages.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_in_the_United_States

cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/print/us.html

Likewise, Protestants in the United States. Thousands of denominations, yet most people are found worshipping in a vastly smaller number of Churches. The resulting theological diversity (or chaos) is also much less than what Catholic apologists in these forums like to suggest. That is why the 33k number is misleading. As Mark Twain said, there are lies, damn lies and statistics.

So if we continue with your analogy… do these "other languages have any desire to learn the one language of the country… English… or do they prefer to communicate in their native tongue and even perhaps “require” you to “convert” to their language.

Further… with languages, I doubt that a family speaking a relatively obscure tongue would expect their children to then start their own unique tongues.

Protestantism, on the other hand, has no visible problem with their children starting new faith communities. Whatever the number, it continues to grow…

and that growth is the sign of error, or confusion, of sin…

 

[rr1213]

You have not proven that it is misleading. Also another reason that Protestants may dislike this assertion is that it is true.
… Also you say ‘most’? Is there a problem with saying ‘all’ non-Catholic Christians in the United States are grouped within 20 to 30 denominations?

False analogy.

wikipedia is not a credible source.

Lies is very strong and unfriendly language even if it is only implied. Usually when folks start in with the tautologies, it is because they have fallen short of making their points and have no further points to offer; so they just repeat the points they have already tried – but failed – to make. Usually when folks start in with the unfounded accusations and personal attacks, it is because they have conceded the whole discussion.

Oh come on now. I’ve proved that its misleading both by demonstrating in previous posts that*** most ***(not all) of non-Catholic Protestants in the United States are grouped within 20 or 30 denominations. Note that NO ONE has offered any evidence to disprove that assertion. The analogy to languages in the US is especially pertinent considering that we are also talking about the number of non-Catholic denominations in the United States. The US is a large, diverse country. Just as there are many languages spoken, there are many denominations.

Further, just as it would be true, but misleading, to say that “Americans are linguistically divided up among 300+ languages” (misleading since over 90% speak English or Spanish) then, also, it is true, but misleading, to say that non-Catholics are divided up among 33k some denominations when most are found within 20 to 30 denominations.

As for sources, I quoted both a Central Intelligence Agency source as well as Wikipedia.

Finally, you’ve not heard the quote from Twain before? I’m not accusing anyone of lying but simply pointing out that statistics are often manipulated and deceiiving.

 

[Syele]

Relevance? Also is the 33k number a quote or merely rhetorical language?

It’s a quote. Barrett says there are 33,000 Christian Denominations and that of those 2, 942 are Catholic, 8.196 are Protestant and the rest are other Christians. Then some Catholics go ‘see 33,000 Protestants’!

Not at all. It is arguing in good faith rather than trying to dismantle an entire point of view on the basis of not getting the numbers right. Is arguing in good faith off topic to this thread?

Where on earth do you get me dismantling an entire point of view? I actually said Catholics were CORRECT on the unity issue more than once now. It is you who refuses to see the point of the thread.

Did I say that was a false analogy? No. I may have said something else was a false analogy. Please do not put words in my mouth.

You have put quite a few in mine.

Then it is you who stand corrected.

I stand corrected because YOU want there to be 33k denominations of protestantism???

Relevance? I believe those responding to the OP may want to make points about divisions. This is after all an open forum and it is after all an open discussion.

Well, I happen to be polite enough to to keep others topics on topic. If you are just that rude, I suppose I can’t stop you.

Yet you attempt to dismantle whole points of view on the basis of the numbers alone. Who, for example, made the following claim?

Was it you? I think it was. So in one breath you claim that the number is not useful. In the next breath you attempt to dismantle a view opposed to your own on the basis of the numbers alone.

Folks who try having it both ways end up having it no way.

Again, I’m not dismantling whole points, I’m only asking for honesty.

Also, are we quoting when we cite the 300 k number? Or are we using rhetorical language?

the 300k number has no relevance to my point.

No, we don’t. Was anyone trying to? Um… no.

Folks however are contributing their points of view – which obviously diverge from your own – perhaps thinking that this is a discussion. If we had thought that this thread might be a vehicle for singlemindledly promoting one point of view only, then perhaps we would have gone on to other threads which do offer opportunities for discussion.

The point of view that it’s acceptable to lie to make you point is the very thing I made the topic about. If folks still think it’s not only ok, but right then what can I say? An Appeal to their conscience has already failed.

I normally offer good evidence and links when I feel that they are being read and when there is a commensurate offering of good evidence and links on the part of those to whom I am responding.

Well I did offer evidence, links and a reference to a book most anyone can go examine at their local library. You’re implying that I haven’t makes me think you did not bother to read the whole thread before accusing me of things.

 

[eliasaph99]

The reason that Protestants so dislike this assertion about 33k denominations is that, whether true or not, it is misleading. It suggests a level of theological chaos that simply does not exist. It is misleading because, even if there are 33k (or 33 million) denominations, these numbers do not represent the Churches in which most Protestants are found.

As I’ve noted in previous posts, I submit that most non-Catholic Christians in the United States are grouped within 20 to 30 denominations. A lot? Sure. Thirty-three thousand? Not even close.

A good analogy would be the number of languages spoken in the United States. According to the sources set forth below, the population of the United States for 2006 is approximately 298,444,215 (July 2006 est.).

Among these almost 300 million people, approximately ***337 ***languages are spoken or signed. This suggests a vast amount of linguistic chaos. Nonetheless, the percentage who speak these various languages are as follows: English 82.1%, Spanish 10.7%, other Indo-European 3.8%, Asian and Pacific island 2.7%, other 0.7% (2000 census).

In other words, while there are over 300 languages spoken in the United States, almost 93 % of the population speak English or Spanish. The other 7% of the population are split among the other 335 languages.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_in_the_United_States

cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/print/us.html

Likewise, Protestants in the United States. Thousands of denominations, yet most people are found worshipping in a vastly smaller number of Churches. The resulting theological diversity (or chaos) is also much less than what Catholic apologists in these forums like to suggest. That is why the 33k number is misleading. As Mark Twain said, there are lies, damn lies and statistics.

That would be a good point if you could claim some sort of doctrinal cohesion between the 30 major groups.

But there isn’t cohesion.

The groups disagree widely on a number of important topics such as the nature of salvation, efficacy of baptism, the real presence, etc., etc.

Moreover, there is nothing in general Protestant theology which would prevent anyone from breaking communion and setting up another denomination. If enough people join it, then there are 31.

As I alluded to earlier, the overall point of the thread is a nitpicky non-point. When a poster brings up the number of Protestant denominations, the ultimate point is that they are not one.

It’s important to note that they are not even trying to be one. There are not ecumenical movements to unite the various churches under one umbrella of Christian Truth. Instead, in most protestant theological circles I have been in, there is a vague hand-waving argument that the real church is invisible, and people are saved Christians as long as they have the fundamentals right.

I could care less about 33,000. Almost every poster who has replied has said this. But somehow, we’re all missing the point. The problem is, there is no point, just a distraction from the real point:

Christ wants unity in the One Church, under One Shepherd. Protestantism willfully disobeys this.