Gay interest: Discussion v campaigning

[french frank]

'Separately organised religious body' from what?

Judaism, maybe ... ?

Well, it meant that up to the 18th c.: "Applied to any of the main religions of the world, as Christianity, Judaism, or Islam".

Now, though, it can refer to 'denominations' : "A collection of individuals classed together under the same name; now almost always spec. a religious sect or body having a common faith and organization, and designated by a distinctive name."

[scottycelt]

Well, it meant that up to the 18th c.: "Applied to any of the main religions of the world, as Christianity, Judaism, or Islam".

Now, though, it can refer to 'denominations' : "A collection of individuals classed together under the same name; now almost always spec. a religious sect or body having a common faith and organization, and designated by a distinctive name."

Which makes one wonder why the same change in meaning hasn't occurred in secular terms?

To repeat Wiki ...

<Although in past it was mostly used to refer to religious groups, it has since expanded and in modern culture can refer to any organization that breaks away from a larger one to follow a different set of rules and principles>

Strange, eh ... even maybe quite shockingly discriminatory as this change only seems to apply to religious folk, even if billions of them are probably blissfully unaware they have suddenly been shunted into these strange things called 'sects', anyway?

[french frank]

Let's look at the opening of the Wiki intro, if you prefer that to the OED:

"A sect is a subgroup of a religious, political or philosophical belief system [Ed: e.g. Christianity?], usually an offshoot of a larger religious group."

So it doesn't have to be 'an offshoot'. Would you say what Christians have in common is less significant than what separates them?

[zoomy]

So Christianity, Judaism and Islam are all sects of monotheism.

[jean]

Ah, I see ... so even the original much larger 'religious body' is now to be also known as a 'sect' maybe to comply with 'equality' laws ... ?

I answered your question; I didn't say what I thought about who should be regarded as a sect

If you'd asked instead about the second definition from the OED that FF gave:

Also, in a narrower sense, one of the bodies separated from the Church. the sects n. applied by Anglicans to the various bodies of Dissenters, by Roman Catholics to all forms of Protestantism.

my answer would have been different.

What's common to most uses of sect is that it's used pejoratively, and of something quite small.

This is interesting:

...In their book The Sacred Quest, scholars Lawrence Cunningham and John Kelsay describe characteristics of a church and a sect. They rely on the groundbreaking work of the early 20th century German scholar Ernst Troeltsch, who first made this distinction based on his observations of Europe, where established religious communities like the Church of England stood in contrast to dissident groups like the Quakers, whose religious beliefs cut them off from the greater culture of their country.

Cunningham and Kelsay define a church as "a religious community of some social standing that invites all members of a society to take part in its activities, has a stake in the well-being of the larger social community, and claims to be the custodian of religious truth."

A sect, on the other hand, "tends to demand more conformity in its members, is exclusive in its membership, distances itself from the concerns of the larger society, and also claims to be the bearer of religious truth." Sects are "exclusivist, inward looking, and in some tension with larger culture." Examples of modern-day sects in our country would be the Amish or Hasidic Jews.

While the hierarchy and its devotees spend all of their time and energy exiling the "dissidents" in the church, it is they who are becoming dissidents in society. Benedict's call for radical obedience and refusal to be questioned sounds more like a sect's absolute demand for conformity than the call of a universal church...

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Cunningham and Kelsay define a church as "a religious community of some social standing that invites all members of a society to take part in its activities, has a stake in the well-being of the larger social community, and claims to be the custodian of religious truth."

A sect, on the other hand, "tends to demand more conformity in its members, is exclusive in its membership, distances itself from the concerns of the larger society, and also claims to be the bearer of religious truth." Sects are "exclusivist, inward looking, and in some tension with larger culture."

Homesectual and heterosectual, then?

[scottycelt]

Let's look at the opening of the Wiki intro, if you prefer that to the OED:

"A sect is a subgroup of a religious, political or philosophical belief system [Ed: e.g. Christianity?], usually an offshoot of a larger religious group."

So it doesn't have to be 'an offshoot'. Would you say what Christians have in common is less significant than what separates them?

But 'it' does have to be a subgroup!

So, getting back to the point and my original question ... of which group is the Catholic Church a 'subgroup'?

My opinion on what is more or less significant for Christians is totally irrelevant.

[Pabmusic]

...I'd be interested in Pab revealing which mainstream group he considers the Catholic Church, probably the largest institution with the most widespread membership on Earth, to be a sub-group or off-shoot?

It is interesting that the only point to be commented upon from my post 141 was whether I should have used the word 'sect'. I rather feel that the rest of the post was more interesting, but this is all rather reminiscent of the Gay Marriage thread's occasional obsession with using dictionary definitions to prove a point.

For the record, I did not intend a pejorative use but I wanted to avoid Catholicism being seen as the sole representative (and thus arbiter) of Christianity. I should have thought that Catholicism is big enough to recognise that its views are not shared by all Christians. History should have warned me, though...

A glance at an online dictionary (the first I came to) gives 'subgoup' as "A distinct group within a group; a subdivision of a group", the first of three meanings. That'll do me. The Catholic Church is a subgroup of Christianity. And thus a sect.

I think Jean's most recent post is fascinating and rather helpful.

A final thought. Christianity began as an apocalyptic sect of Judaism, with Jesus's brother James and Simon Peter leading it - they were known as the Ebionites and were not open to gentiles. The Ebionites were branded heretics - as were the Gnostics, another sect or group of sects - when the later Pauline sect became the official religion of Rome. That's an early example of why it's important not to give prominence to one group of Christians.

[scottycelt]

I didn't mention the rest of #141 because it seemed to me more concerned about who invented the word 'murder' than sticking to the point. It also suggested that Catholics will have differing views as to what constitutes 'murder' compared to 'other sects'. I've never come across that. In fact. I've never come across anybody in my life who is uncertain as to what constitutes 'murder'. It's a bit rich to complain about myself referring to dictionary definitions when your post was simply getting us bogged down in ancient legal terms about the word and how Christianity had played little part in the framing of law (apart from bad, of course!).

I'm happy enough to accept the apparently new definition of 'sect' (which some dictionaries rightly acknowledge often has a pejorative aspect), as long as it is consistently applied. Apparently, it can now be applied outside the religious sphere.

So as 'democracy' is a 'political belief system' every political party can be described as a 'sect'? So David Cameron, Ed Miliband, Nick Clegg are leaders of 'sects' and all Liberal Democrat members, including, I believe, french frank, belong to one?

'Christianity' is not a 'group' but a term just like 'Democracy'. There are major groups and sub-groups within both and a 'sect' has always previously been used to denote a small, often tiny, sub-group holding non-mainstream religious belief.

For all it's many faults and shortcomings. that hardly applies to the Catholic Church!

[Pabmusic]

...It also suggested that Catholics will have differing views as to what constitutes 'murder' compared to 'other sects'. I've never come across that. In fact. I've never come across anybody in my life who is uncertain as to what constitutes 'murder'...

No it didn't, it said that individual sects will have differing views, but that the definition of 'murder' is a secular one (and although it's ancient, it is nevertheless the law that applies to you, Scotty). Read it again.

[scottycelt]

No it didn't. It said that the definition of 'murder' is a secular one (and although it's ancient, it is nevertheless the law that applies to you, Scotty). Read it again.

I have read it again and remain completely baffled regarding the relevant point.

Did I ever suggest secular law doesn't apply to me?

[Pabmusic]

I have read it again and remain completely baffled regarding the relevant point.

Did I ever suggest secular law doesn't apply to me?

Ah well. I'm on a different planet, so don't worry about it...

[jean]

So, getting back to the point and my original question ... of which group is the Catholic Church a 'subgroup'?

Of the Universal Church.

If you believe the Roman Catholic church is the church and all the rest are heresies, that answer is obvious nonsense.

But many outside the Roman Catholic church do not believe that.

I know someone who believes that the Roman Catholic church is an upstart invention of the Council of Trent. Not that I'm saying I agree with that, but it's a view.

(Did you read the article I linked to above?)

[ahinton]

Ah well. I'm on a different planet

Feeling its air, hopefully (and enjoying the fact that it's not hot air as may be found elsewhere - or so I hear)...

[jean]

Questions and Answers about the Marks and Attributes of the Church

152. Which is the one true Church established by Christ?

The one true Church established by Christ is the Catholic Church.

(a) Many churches which claim to be Christian have broken away from the one true Church established by Jesus Christ. These churches were founded by men who had no authority from God to found a church.

(b) Christ intended that there should be only one true Christian Church, for He always spoke of His Church as one.

153. How do we know that the Catholic Church is the one true Church established by Christ?

We know that the Catholic Church is the one true Church established by Christ because it alone has the marks of the true Church.

154. What do we mean by the marks of the Church?

By the marks of the Church we mean certain clear signs by which all men can recognize it as the true Church founded by Jesus Christ.

(a) Jesus Christ willed that the true Church should have these marks, which would distinguish it from all false religions.

155. What are the chief marks of the Church?

The chief marks of the Church are four: It is one, holy, catholic or universal, and apostolic.

(a) Sacred Scripture teaches that the one true Church of Christ must have these marks.

(b) The marks of the Church are themselves an indication that God guides the Church.

156. Why is the Catholic Church one?

The Catholic Church is one because all its members, according to the will of Christ, profess the same faith, have the same sacrifice and sacraments, and are united under one and the same visible head, the Pope.

(a) Our Divine Savior prayed explicitly that His Church might be one, and He made it one; thus men can recognize it as the true Church.

(b) Only the Catholic Church possesses this mark of unity. Various sects, having only fragments of Christianity, are divided in doctrine and practice and recognize no authority but their own judgment, which can easily lead them into error.

(c) There are many religious sects which claim to be Christian, but are separated from the unity of Christ by their rejection of the authority invested by Him in the Roman Pontiff, the successor to Saint Peter...