Three Branches Of Christianity

  • Thread starter Thread starter sandmountainsli
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

sandmountainsli

Guest
They say that there are three branches of Christianity
Catholicism
Protestantism
Eastern Orthodoxy

My question is where do you put:
Palmarian Catholic Church
German “Old Catholics”
The followers of “Pope Gregory XVII” aka Jean-Gaston Tremblay
The followers of “Pope Peter II” aka Chester Olszewski??

Hope someone can clarify this.
WP
 
I’ve never heard that there were three branches, so I can’t really clarify. I could muddy the waters a bit, though, and say that the Oriental Orthodox deserve their own category, since they aren’t affiliated with the Eastern Orthodox but are actually from an older seperation. 😛

Where did you hear there were three branches?

Peace and God bless!
 
Yes I think it is a bit simplistic to say there are these three categories of Christianity. A more accurate (but less Ecumenical) version would be:

  1. *]Those in Communion with the Catholic Church.
    *]Those who hold to the faith of the Catholic Church but are schismatic.
    *]Those who are not only schismatic but also materially heretical.

    Therefore the Churches you mention would fit in with the Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox in the second category, whereas Protestantism would comprise the third category.
 
By the way this version works for the Eastern or Oriental Orthodox as well, except their Church would comprise category number 1, with the remaining two (Catholic or EO or OO) - as well as those small splinter groups - would comprise category 2.
 
Atreyu said:
A more accurate (but less Ecumenical) version would be:

  1. *]Those in Communion with the Catholic Church.
    *]Those who hold to the faith of the Catholic Church but are schismatic.
    *]Those who are not only schismatic but also materially heretical.

    Protestantism would comprise the third category.
Click to expand...

  1. Geez! What an elitist view! I believe that Presbyterianism and Methodism are every bit as legitimate as the Romish tradition NOT heretics. What are you gonna do about that answer, wait until St. Bartholomews Day and pick up where ye left off?:mad:
    WP
 
sandmountainsli said:
Geez! What an elitist view! I believe that Presbyterianism and Methodism are every bit as legitimate as the Romish tradition NOT heretics. What are you gonna do about that answer, wait until St. Bartholomews Day and pick up where ye left off?:mad:
WP
Click to expand...
Like I said, it was less Ecumenical. But it is more realistic. I mean, Presbyterianism and Methodism have contrary views and doctrines to the Catholic Church, correct? Therefore if I believe the Catholic Church to be correct - and I most seriously do - then these other Churches must teach heresy. Truth is not relative, don’t you agree? Surely Presbyterians would feel the same way about Catholics.
 
I would not call it heresy. I would say that they do not hold the full truth. As long as they believe in the basic Christian doctrine established at the Council of Nicea then they are not heretics to me. God speed.
 
Vigis said:
I would not call it heresy. I would say that they do not hold the full truth. As long as they believe in the basic Christian doctrine established at the Council of Nicea then they are not heretics to me. God speed.
Click to expand...
Their faith is different to ours. Heresy means “A belief or teaching considered unacceptable by a religious group”. There are numerous teachings in any Protestant group that are heterodox with respect to the Catholic faith. This is not news. The word “heresy” or “heretic” may in today’s society carry with it a pejorative tone but the word itself still has meaning. We just don’t like to use it because it has been used so pejoratively in the past. But if you insist on me not using it, how about I define group three as:
Those who are not only schismatic but also hold different teachings to be true.
It means exactly the same thing…
 
Some Protestants tend to lob Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy into the same theological block they call ‘liturgical churches’. While some Orthodox will lob Protestantism and Catholicism into a common block of they call ‘western schismatics’.

I tend to think Catholicism has more in common theologically with the Orthodox, yet at the same time Roman-rite Catholicism shares similar traditions and aesthetics with mainline Protestantism. So that would make Roman-rite Catholicism a sort of ‘hybridization’ of Orthodoxy and mainline Protestantism, though its not as simple as that.
 
Atreyu said:
Yes I think it is a bit simplistic to say there are these three categories of Christianity. A more accurate (but less Ecumenical) version would be:

  1. *]Those in Communion with the Catholic Church.
    *]Those who hold to the faith of the Catholic Church but are schismatic.
    *]Those who are not only schismatic but also materially heretical.

    Therefore the Churches you mention would fit in with the Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox in the second category, whereas Protestantism would comprise the third category.
Click to expand...

  1. Well if I were being un-Ecumenical I would point out that the Orthodox would not fit into category 2. Denying the supremacy and infallibility of the Roman Pontiff is heresy.

    But I’m very Ecumenical so I won’t mention it.
 
Sorry if I sounded angry but I do not take kindly to being called a heretic. I am a “Protestant” and worship every Sunday in my church as well as daily prayer. I believe in the Trinity and every word of the Nicene Creed and Apostles Creed, that makes me a Christian and not a heretical Infidel. I am a descendant of both Scottish Presbyterians and French Calvinists so I suppose my ancestors have been called “Heretics” in the past by your church but I do not call Catholics heretics or accuse you of flawed worship (though I do believe the RC Church has fallen away from the gospel a bit over the years).
I reserve the title Heretics for followers of Joseph Smith, the JW and other groups which have twisted Christianity into an unknown form by adding new “scriptures” and such.
Rant Over.
WP
 
sandmountainsli said:
Sorry if I sounded angry but I do not take kindly to being called a heretic. I am a “Protestant” and worship every Sunday in my church as well as daily prayer. I believe in the Trinity and every word of the Nicene Creed and Apostles Creed, that makes me a Christian and not a heretical Infidel. I am a descendant of both Scottish Presbyterians and French Calvinists so I suppose my ancestors have been called “Heretics” in the past by your church but I do not call Catholics heretics or accuse you of flawed worship (though I do believe the RC Church has fallen away from the gospel a bit over the years).
I reserve the title Heretics for followers of Joseph Smith, the JW and other groups which have twisted Christianity into an unknown form by adding new “scriptures” and such.
Rant Over.
WP
Click to expand...
Well, you misunderstood what I was saying. With words such as “heresy” and “Christian”, the very definition of the word can vary in between Churches, cultures and times. The only reason I used the word “heresy” was to use it in the original sense of the word: as one who does not hold the same faith as you; that believes in contradictory doctrine. Some Protestants use the word “Christian” in a way that would exclude Catholics - because they don’t believe in sola fide - and that’s something that usually bothers me. Then again, where JW’s and Mormons are concerned, it can be difficult to figure out if they do count as Christians or not. Personally I use the word “Christian” for pretty much everyone who wants to be called a Christian; for those who believe that Jesus is the Messiah. Note that this actually includes Muslims. Now would you have any problem with me calling a Muslim a heretic? Obviously you wouldn’t mind me calling a JW or a Mormon a heretic, so why can’t I apply the term to all of Protestantism? All I mean by it is that they do not follow what I understand to be the deposit of faith. I certainly don’t mean they are doomed to hell or they are infidels. In fact, if you check my first post you’ll notice that there’s a small but important word in there: material. If you want to know what I mean by that, then pm me.

As for the Orthodox, by the very virtue of their being schismatic they necessarily deny the primacy of the bishop of Rome. Therefore there is no need to label them as heretics as well. When this is the only difference, it is implied in the term “schismatic”. The only way you could be a schismatic and yet believe in the primacy of the bishop of Rome is if you were to be a sedevacantist.

By the way, I’m really sorry that we got off on the wrong foot here. I hope you can forgive me, and let me say welcome to the forums! I hope that doesn’t sound hollow. I really do hope you have a good time here, and learn a lot.
 
Atreyu said:
By the way, I’m really sorry that we got off on the wrong foot here. I hope you can forgive me, and let me say welcome to the forums! I hope that doesn’t sound hollow. I really do hope you have a good time here, and learn a lot.
Click to expand...
My apologies also. I certainly have enjoyed this forum and plan on sticking around a while:) Thank you for the welcome.
WP
 
The two-volume World Christian Encyclopedia (2001) has four classifications: (Roman) Catholic, (Eastern) Orthodox, Anglican, and Protestant. The main editor (David Barrett) is a statistician and a priest of the Anglican church, so (I assume) he holds the “3-branch theory” of the True Church: i.e., that the Catholic Church consists of three branches, namely Catholic, Orthodox, and Anglican. Every other body is classified as Protestant. The usual classification is Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, with the Anglican (and Episcopal) churches being considered Protestant.
Any group not in communion with the Pope and therefore not under the Catholic umbrella would be considered Protestant, regardless of what they called themselves.

Heresy is not a bad word. It simply means one who picks and chooses among religious doctrines. However, there are two types of heresy: formal and material. Since the Catholic Church was founded by Christ for the salvation of the world, those who choose some of her doctrines and reject others are heretics by definition, but most are material heretics in mitigating circumstances. The Church rarely uses the word anymore because it has unfortunate connotations. Separated brethren is the preferred term.

Peace be with you.
 
The Catholic Church lists Protestantism as not only a heresy but a great heresy of the Christian church. It may not be ecumenical and it may hurt peoples feelings but Protestants are certainly considered heretical by the Catholic Church.

catholic.com/library/Great_Heresies.asp
 
sandmountainsli said:
They say that there are three branches of Christianity
Catholicism
Protestantism
Eastern Orthodoxy

My question is where do you put:
Palmarian Catholic Church
German “Old Catholics”
The followers of “Pope Gregory XVII” aka Jean-Gaston Tremblay
The followers of “Pope Peter II” aka Chester Olszewski??

Hope someone can clarify this.
WP
Click to expand...
This is known as the “branch theory”, or “branch heresy”. This error originated with the Anglican Church in the mid 19th century who thought that the Church was divided, and said we should begin to work for Christian unity.

That error implies a false understanding of the Church, which can never be divided. Groups may split from the Church, such as the Anglicans or Protestants, but this will not effect the unity of the one true Church in any way. When they split from the Church, they cut themselves off from the Church, but the Church itself remains perfectly united.

When the Anglicans began to seek this false idea Christian unity (where the goups “unite” while remaining in separate groups), the Holy Office responded as follows:

"Therefore the Sacred Congregation [of the Holy Office] deeply regrets that it has happened to you who think that those Christian bodies which vaunt themselves as having an inheritance of the priesthood and the Catholic name, although cut off and separated from the Apostolic See of Peter, belong as parts to the true Church of Jesus Christ. There is no opinion which is more at variance with the genuine notion of the Catholic Church. For the Catholic Church…is that which, built upon a single Rock, rises up into one coherent body and is held together by unity of faith and charity" (The Holy Office, under Pius IX, November 8, 1865).

The following are a few other quotes of interest:

Pope Leo XIII said: "Jesus Christ never conceived of nor instituted a Church formed of many communities which were brought together by certain general traits - but which would be distinct one from another and not bound together among themselves by ties which make the Church one and indivisible - since we clearly profess in the Creed of our Faith: " ‘I believe in one…Church.’ " (Satis Cognitum)

Pope Pius XI said: “It is absurd and ridiculous to say that the Mystical Body can be formed out of separated and disjunct members. … It is to depart from divine truth to imagine a Church which one can neither see nor touch, which would be nothing more than spiritual in which numerous Christian communities would be united by an invisible bond, even though they are divided in faith.” (Mortalium Animos)

The best enclical to read in order to obtain a proper understanding of the unity of the Church is Satis Cognitum, of Pope Leo XIII, which can be found here papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13satis.htm
 
Perhaps it would be clearer to define the three branches as:

Schismatics
Catholics
Heretics

That way, all the OP’s listed churches/communities can be classified neatly.

I have no intention of being “ecumenical” with this post. Things are as they are.
 
3 “branches” of Christianity:
  1. Churches with valid bishops in Communion with the Church of Rome.
  2. Churches with valid bishops but not in communion with the Church of Rome.
  3. Church-like communities without valid bishops.
 
14 Q. Who are heretics?

A. Heretics are those of the baptised who obstinately refuse to believe some truth revealed by God and taught as an article of faith by the Catholic Church; for example, the Arians, the Nestorians and the various sects of Protestants.

16 Q. Who are schismatics?

A. Schismatics are those Christians who, while not explicitly denying any dogma, yet voluntarily separate themselves from the Church of Jesus Christ, that is, from their lawful pastors.

From the Catechism of Pius X
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top