History of Anglican, Lutheran & Reformed Churches 

EYYOOOOO LETS GOOOOOOOOOOO

My opinion. First of, neither deeds or faith bring salvation. Only Jesus. Scripture is rather clear that it is God, who would judge our souls based on intentions, so if we actually are or try to be good people, rather then what we did or if we believe. Secondary. Scripture was written primarily for goat farmers and old Jewish temple. There is merit in argument that role of Church is interpretations of specific events in the bible basing on educated analyze, rather then arbitrarily interpretations of something written for completely different culture. Even if it is true that Church at the time did go too far due to corruption and infighting between different Popes (detail lot of people forget). Counter-Reformation actually recognized some justified complains and solve problem of multiple Popes. About Kelvinist predestination. It is based on misinterpretation. Though it is true that God know everything, God can everything and as he exist bound time, creation was in a sense concluded. But we still are ones who make the decisions. Whole argument seams to be rather attempt of answering on faith vs deeds debate and making things worst. In the end it is redundant debate, because it doesn't really matter.

You could also put Manichaeism as a gnostic religion, next to Mandaeism. It was once a major religion, especially in North Africa and even compared to christianity there. With the rise of Islam it was persecuted but until today there are Manichaean communities, especially in Fujian, China.

@@shyuw6473 Interesting

Could you add the Lollards as Proto-Protestants when you next update the chart!

You have 10 fingers and 10 toes. Is it better to sew them together?

​@@neuralwarp that's a Catholic order level split (Dominicans lead the inquisition, Jesuits teach, Franciscans take care of the poor) not a church level split (they don't even share Presbytes)

Alternatively, one believer would be a heretic

​@@makearunat All founding prophets are heretics-they broke away from one religion to start another. Abraham, Buddha, L. Ron Hubbard, Jesus, Martin Luther, Mohammed, Guru Nanak, Joseph Smith, Zarathustra etc.

four believers, a fight

how to start a crusade lmao

Easy, all are F tier

Orthodoxy is A tier, the rest are F

@@ICXC07 Go outside

lmaoooo

Agree. At 3,7m members and state church position it is comparable to the other Nordic churches now included. Note that separation was not dogmatic, but due to Finland changing hands from Sweden to Russia

Estonian and Latvian churches should also be added, as they're independent too.

definitely!

He's missing a whole lot with this chart, really. There are the several state churches, the Ukrainian and Russian Lutherans, the Lutherans of Kenya, South Africa, and New Guinea, not to mention the fact that there are a ton of smaller Lutheran denominations in the United States and Canada that he has implied don't even exist. Probably, a better way of looking at Lutheranism would be through the lens of the Lutheran World Federation, the International Lutheran Council, and the Confessing Evangelical Lutheran Council, and then maybe an "other Lutheran" category for the really small ones.

@@alm9322 i think generally the (former) official state churches like the faroes & icelandic churches

I know one was symbolism vs spiritual presence in the Eucharist. Were there any other?

Zwingli didn‘t emphasize predestination as much as Calvin.

​@@simon_gabriel573 this is funny because Calvin thinks Zwingli goes too far on predestination

Zwingli actually was first, although his reform movement often seems to get overlooked by the better-known Geneva movement. Zwingli's reform church was established not very long after Lutheranism -- in the 1520s. Unfortunately, by the time of the Consensus Tigurinus, Zwingli himself was dead, having horribly died in battle during internecine wars in Switzerland.

Also the complex borders of some cantons go back to reformation and which town joined which side.

As a Jew, SAME here!

As a theologically conservative Lutheran, I can say the same.

As an atheist I find it interesting as well

As a Maronite Catholic, SAME here too, I love this series

Very interesting series, assuming the non conformists will appear in a future episode including the likes of the unitarians, Quakers and so on on

Adding to this - the Scottish Episcopal Church passed apostolic succession by consecrating Samuel Seabury in 1784 as the Episcopal Church's (USA) first bishop. Without them, the Episcopal Church in the US would not exist!

Would it not be Service instead of Mass?

@@tomasroma2333 CofE tend to use Communion/Eucharist/Mass somewhat interchangeable, almost depending on the expected numbers of persons attended. There will be services where there is no Eucharist segment of it , which tend to be aimed at younger families. I assume the Anglicans in Scotland follow a similar pattern

@@highpath4776 Ah okay. I ask cause in the Church of Ireland. Everyone calls it Service and if you call it Mass you are probably a Catholic.

@@tomasroma2333 I have only been to one Church of Ireland service, I think there was a lack of time for communion as the incumbent covered two parishes, so one was a 9am then a drive to the next church for a 1030am. no organist so music was from LP records.

Yeah, that would be cool.

There are some Lutheran based ones thanks to the Germans using Spain as a holiday destination. Some will hold meetings in hotel areas for people on long term holiday / time shares rather than in a church building

It'd be easier if she moved to Gibraltar

@@highpath4776 my mother isn't Lutheran. She is CofE Anglican.

@@vampiregamingyt8754 try telling my mother that.

@@lucypreece7581 Spain of course had its own problems with the Civil War (my Uncle was one of a few english who went to fight agains Franco ), and being the generally closed dictatorship until the 1980s. I went on holiday to a less well known coastal part of spain and they seemed to have an even "beyond catholic" set of holy day celebrations of local saints and establishments.

Yup. They'll come later.

@@UsefulCharts Will you be discussing the Restorationist churches, such as The Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), Christian Churches/Churches of Christ (DoC) and the Churches of Christ? *phew!* Aren't they originally Congregationalist also?

What about Seventh Day Adventists?

Will cover all of those.

@@UsefulCharts Hello as Czech I have some notes: Name "Jan Hus": a) Jan is czech variant of name John (eng) / Hans/Johann (ger), and it is pronouced more like [yaan], b) the name generally means "John from Husinec" (Hussinetz in german), it is small town in western Bohemia, c) before Jan Hus there was even earlier proto-reformater/church critic John Wycliff, d) date of Hus execution is national holiday here, e) and after WWI in 1920 there was (after creation of Czechoslovakia) created reformed "sort of national" Czechoslovak Hussite church, spliting from Catholic church f) also after WWI in 1918 czech lutheran and reformed joined in Evangelical church of Czech Brethen (referencing also to Moravian Brethen and Jan Hus), today it is 2nd largest church here (after catholics) *) Charles University in Prague has three theological faculties: Roman-catholic, protestant/evangelical and hussite.

Glad I scanned through; I was going to ask this, too. 😊

I’m aware that as a Scot I’m biased. But yes I think this is an oversight especially considering the Scottish influence on Presbyterianism. The great Disruption really is noteworthy. I think including the PCI would be worth mentioning too.

Quite topical at the moment as well with the SNP Leadership election (which is the proxy election for First Minister). One of the candidates is a member of the Free Church and there is a debate whether some of their beliefs are compatible with being a modern day political leader.

​@@jamiepayton1574 to be fair he said it spread to Ireland so PCI is basically covered under that

The trouble is that the chart of Presbyterian denominations in Scotland is almost as large as this whole chart.

I think there were four main bands and ideas, 1) Jesus was man, not God, 2) Jesus was God, not Man, 3) there was additional "knowledge" mostly of heavens, principalities, powers (in a hierarchy of angels and enlightenments. 4) Differences on interpretation of the the existance/role of evil - Lucifer /Satan The Devil. This excludes other differences on women / included.excluded scriptures and effectively the Paul (Rome) and Peter (Jerusalem) Churches

Yes, I think this is a great suggestion. Excellent examples would be semi-Arianism, Eutychianism, and also a breakdown of the various traditions of Gnostic Christianity. Also, Acacianism.

@@highpath4776 There were many more than 4 major bands. There were at least 8 major bands. Even in Gnosticism alone, there are easily at least 6 mutually exclusive, completely different traditions that influenced early Christianity.

here are a few: 1. Legalists/Ebonites - need to keep Jewish tradition (esp circumcision) mixed with Christian belief in Jesus to earn salvation. They are similar to Jewish Ebionites of same name, it’s confusing. 2. Various Gnosticism (particularly Valentinianism) - reliance on hidden, revealed knowledge from an unknowable God, a distinct divinity from the Demiurge who created and oversees the material world; or in other variations humans are divine who are trapped in a wicked world made by Old Testament God, one of Dual Gods. 3. Marcionism - the God of Jesus was a different God from the God of t he Old Testament. Seen today again in some denominations. 4. Montanism - relied on NEW prophetic revelations from the Holy Spirit and additions to the New Testament. Similar to Jewish Merkava heterodoxy. I think modern Mormons fall into this group.... 5. Adoptionism - Jesus was not born the Son of God, but was adopted at his baptism, resurrection or ascension. Similar to later Indian heresy of Avatarism (Jesus was an avatar of higher God). 6. Docetism - Jesus was pure spirit and his physical form an illusion. 7. Antinomianism - once you become a Christian you can do what ever you want, you are forgiven. No need to show God love or gratitude nor man. 8. Collyridian - Mostly female Christians who believed Mary the mother of Jesus was a god.(Only in one source, maybe legendary.) 9. various Syncretism/combination of Christianity with other pagan religions. ----There are many, many other heresies, too many to list. And those are just the known, many died off unknown, too minor to be noted. = Then there was Arianism, which became a separate branch of Christianity for a while; the Ostrogoths in Italy, the Visigoths in Spain and the Vandals of north Africa were Arian. They believed Jesus was a junior god under a head god. = Related is a religion influenced by Christianity and by Zoroastrianism: Manichean Gnosticism is founded by prophet Mani in Mesopotamia. Manicheanism is a secretive dualistic religion by postulating two opposite powers - a good, spiritual world of light (heaven) of a weak God(Jesus), and an evil material (earthly) world of darkness of Satan, elements of the light are trapped in darkness; the world was created to purify the light elements leaving behind the dark world.

@@tommy-er6hh Light and Dark indeed mentioned (poss different context) in John/Revelation and in the Essens / Copper Scroll and Dead Sea Scrolls )

I agree. I attend an Ordinariate Church very often.

Yeah, there should be a dotted line somewhere for that.

That's about right, but the main difference between eastern catholics and converted anglicans is the lack of apostolic succession in England. That's why they had to form another denomination, rather than to rejoin the Catholic Church as a whole.

Yes I was going to bring this up

True.

True

The Missouri Synod in America had the same origin. Interestingly enough, the Wisconsin Synod (which isn't included in the chart) was organized by German Lutherans who were in favor of, or at least not bothered by the United church in Germany.

I think he already talked about them

I reawatched his videos to be sure, and you were right, he hasn't mentioned the Cathars. Although, I wouldn't consider them proto-protestant, more like neo-gnostic.

​@@MrWaterlionmonkey I've always considered the Cathars nothing more than a death cult.

@@shanebrown2009 I think that's an insane view. What made them a death cult? Anything I've ever seen on them says they favoured pacifism, piety, simple living and Christian teaching. And this is even from the Catholics who butchered most of them and the very few documents written by cathars themselves. 'Death cult'? What a strange thing to say. The main issue the Catholics had with it was its Gnostic teaching; that there are 2 gods. The wicked god of the old testament, who made matter, and the good god of the new testament that made spirit. This is really the only issue the Catholics had. There is more research on this topic where I heard that modern historians even doubt the cathars were real at the time. And that Catholic torture of 'cathars' and leading questions forced a few to 'admit' that they were Gnostics.

You could add the Bogomils in the Balkans and the Vaudois in Italy and south-east of France

In British Columbia (Canada), there was quite a lot of movement of clergy who moved from Anglicanism to Roman Catholicism. It would be an interesting footnote (and dotted) line.

A Catholic Church I attended in Texas was led by a priest who had been a married Episcopal priest first and came into the Catholic Church later. I think in this century, it's a mistake for the Latin church to insist on celibate (meaning "not-married") priests. For a lot of reasons, but celibacy is not an unbreakable rule in the priesthood and the Pope absolutely could lighten up about that.

@@rmdodsonbills I agree that celibacy isn’t dogmatic in the church but it’s not as simple as you may think. Most married priests aren’t in favor of removing the vow of celibacy, and most of the ones I’ve heard of agree with their wives to abstain from sex after their ordination.

@@louisrharmony It didn't say getting rid of it would be simple, I said keeping it is a mistake. A few more points: 1) since when are priests' opinions on what the church should or shouldn't do relevant? This ain't a democracy. 2) what married couples decide to do with their sex lives is non of my business, and irrelevant to the point. 3) I do want to make sure I'm clear here: I'm not advocating releasing anyone from any current vows of celibacy, but I am advocating for the church not to impose such vows on any future priests. Just in case that wasn't clear.

​@@rmdodsonbills I heard some days ago that the Pope spoke against mandatory celibacy in the priesthood

along the same lines, he's completely missing the Synodical Conference and its breakup

I wish he would have included the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod because it was founded by missionaries from Germany who were in favor of the Unity Lutheran/Reformed church that many of the other German Lutheran immigrants were escaping from. I know he's said it a smaller denomination, but I think it's historically important enough to be included.

Correct. I am LCMS, and our history is immigrants from Saxony (then part of the North German Confederation) were most unhappy about the Prussian Union and left for America. Landed in New Orleans and went up the Mississippi to Perry County in the St. Louis area. headquarters in St. Louis and that is why we have the "Missouri" Synod name. LCMS came out of German State Churches, shortly after Prussian Union.

See "who do you think you are" where folk (like Danny Dyer) can trace either a legitimate Female or illegitimate male or female line back to a monarch , which then is certainly back to William of Normandy and thence the Saxon Kings of England as the heralds have the main long ancestral tree. There are probably similar for French.German.Italian. Chinese and Japanese families too as these would be documented. It is more difficult in the UK to find a "commoner" line of decent from 1066 onwards due to attrition of any written sources unless they stayed in one area and the church ministers were very dilligent in correctly and comprehensively recording baptisms and marriages.

There's only one family tree that answers this: the family tree of the Kong clan, the descendants of Confucius. The main family line is currently in the 86th generation. They are scattered in China, Taiwan and Korea. EDIT: It should be the 80th generation, not 86th.

@@izenkixiron5173 FYI - Wikipedia transliterates their names as "Gokbu Gong" clan.

@@tompw3141 That's the name of the Korean branch, and it's correct.

If non royal, maybe back to the 1500s to 1600s. For Royals, from the 1000s. The family trees of Royals are very well documented. For my paternal family, I can trace it to the 1700s. Would have been further back but one dumb AF many times great grandmother burned all records and there's only a will.

Wycliff followers i believe were called Lollard. They should be added to the proto-Protestant groups.

there should also a line from Hugenots to Prussian Protestants

Really? That's what you think this chart needs? More information on the evil inherently anti-semitic German church, which might as well call itself "the Nazi church"? I am surprised it even still exists. What an embarrassment to Christianity. Colour me ignorant, I am German Lutheran myself, but after watching this video I feel like this our church should just abolish itself. Why do we even still exist? If we were true to our own humble claims- then we should just dissolve and be ashamed of ourselves for eternity.

​@@hokton8555 Most Prussian Protestants were not Huguenots. Huguenots were a small minority in Prussia.

@@ChristophZeiten ik but prussia got asfaik a plurality of them

@@hokton8555 I mean a plurality of a very small number is still a very small number. There were about 15000 Huguenots who came to Prussia at a time when Prussias population was around 2 million.

German -isch has an English cognate: -ish - “evangelish”? By contrast, I recall from somewhere that American-style evangelicalism is called “evangelikal”.

Henry VIII was Lord Protector of the Reformer Archbishop Thomas Cranmer. He did not allow Cranmer the free hand for reform though but his younger children did. Elizabeth I restored her mentors reform but with less radicalism after her older sister killed Cranmer and tried to reverse his reforms.

It's probably best not to listen to this because branch theory is well known Anglo-Catholic cope. Anglicanism is absolutely Protestant and all of our defining documents are Protestant. "Then with the influence of Thomas Cranmer..." Who, might I add, was undoubtedly a Protestant and had already become a Protestant through contact with the continental reformers.

@@ArdensSedVirens1 I’m not denying our reformation heritage. In fact, it is one of our defining features. However, I think calling ourselves Protestant is a little silly, due to the uniqueness of the English Reformation and the history of the English Church. I think a better descriptor would be Reformed Catholic, more so than anything. In fact, we are the via media between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism.

@@samuelspicer7468 Well no, it isn't silly precisely because of our Reformational heritage. Nothing you have wrote has given me the impression that England is unique, investiture was famously controversial in the Middle Ages. "In fact, we are the via media between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism." Only according to the Oxford Movement. When the Anglican divines used language of a 'middle way' they meant a middle way between the Reformed and the Lutherans, not Protestantism at large and Papism. It is unsurprising, due to this language of 'Via Media' being used now, that many Anglo-Catholics will just end up swimming the Tiber and becoming Papists.

There is no reason to actually listen to this. These videos are meant to provide information about the *actual* historical reasons behind why schisms and church independences occurred, not about the traditions that each individual church has to explain their own origins and to dismiss their opponents as heretics and what not. And since the channel so far has avoided doing this for the other denominations so far, it would be extremely unfair for yours to get that privilege. Frankly, it makes no sense.

@@ArdensSedVirens1 First off, I would like to say that I hope this makes sense and doesn’t come across as a mess of points. Now to the point. I’m well aware of the original connotation, however as our church grew, our practices have changed to become more like Medieval Christianity. With the Oxford Movement, getting back to pre-Reformation practices (I.e. wearing of vestments and centrality of the Eucharist) were important and largely adopted by the church over the next hundred years. With Branch Theory also, we also recognize Scandinavian Lutherans and Moravians for keeping that key institutional part of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, being the Episcopacy, as being part of the True Church. Alongside a higher view of the Sacraments and sacramental theology. On top of that, the English Church has spent more time outside of Papal control than it has inside it. For the first 600 years it was independent, until St. Augustine of Canterbury, and then breaking with the highly corrupt Papists in the 1530s. So, what I’m trying to say is that, although we differ in doctrine (I would argue rightfully so), but in large part because we have conserved the institutional aspect of the Church we are not entirely Protestant. Now that being said. I’m not disputing the Reformational part of our heritage as being irrelevant. What I am saying is that our church, the Anglican Church, is a church with ancient roots, that although it broke away from Roman Catholicism during the English Reformation, doesn’t put it on par with Calvinism when it comes to historical legitimacy. I guess that might be where we differ. I think having that historical lineage tracing back to the Apostles via our bishops is important and highly relevant to our practice. Like I said before, we are Reformed Catholics, an ancient historical church that took on a flavor of Reformed Christianity in the 1500s.

I agree. I understand placing the entire Protestant landscape in the Netherlands in this graph is difficult. I think this simplification paints a wrong picture. The relatively small town I went to church back in the day had 5 different denominations spread along the main street.

So far, only the Reformed (very large) and the Lutheran (rather small) parts of the Protestant landscape in the Netherlands have been sketched. What Mark ( @UsefulCharts ) has said in the video: “Because of the nature of Presbyterian church government, there were a lot of splits and mergers within American Presbyterianism. I won’t show most of them, however. …” goes for Reformed Protestantism in the Netherlands - which is usually intermediate between Presbyterian and Congregationalist in church government - as well. There are probably as many Reformed denominations in the Netherlands as there are in the USA: several dozens, despite the country having the population of a medium State. The “50 groups of Dutch Protestants” mentioned by @Gert de Jong downthread are not that exaggerated. And there are links between Reformed denominations and their diversity in the US and the Netherlands, as @Louis Hannett has pointed out downthread. To list all the details of this diversity is, I think beyond the scope of this chart and video series. Nevertheless, I agree, that the brief overview of Reformed Protestantism in the Netherlands is not representative. specifically: 1. A factual error is that the split did not take place in 1892. There were two splits, in 1834 and 1886, and the resulting churches merged in 1892. 2. The diversity of Reformed denominations in the Netherlands is significantly underrepresented by showing the ‘Reformed Churches in the Netherlands’ resulting from that 1892 merger as the only result of the splits. It was only the largest of the denominations resulting from the split. Various other groups split from these, both before and after the merger, and fragmented further since. The details of that fragmentation are beyond the scope of the chart, but the existence of that Reformed spectrum is very significant for the perception of Protestantism in the Netherlands, and the role it plays in Dutch society and politics. Small towns with five or more •Reformed• Protestant churches, as mentioned by Martin Emmaneel, are not rare in the Netherlands’ Bible Belt. The spectrum can be categorised into three ‘streams’: conservative orthodox, modern evangelical, and ‹bevindelijk›, close to puritan and pietist. The third stream are the ‘black stocking churches’ as mentioned by @cynthia van teylingen downthread. 3. At the beginning of Dutch Reformed Protestantism, at the Synod of Dordt 1618-1619 that basically defined the Dutch Reformed Church, the Arminians were forced out of the church, and formed their own denomination, the Remonstrant Church, somewhat related to Methodism and Baptism. Although tiny, this denomination survived to the present day and is historically significant, not just for the Dutch churches, but for the Dutch nation (and even beyond: every expert on the Law of Nations in the world knows of Hugo de Groot); the split being accompanied by one of the most reverberating politically motivated death sentences in Dutch history. The many denominations under 2 have made creative use of the fact that the Dutch language has two different words, that in English can both really only be translated as ‘reformed’: ‹hervormd› and ‹gereformeerd›. The same, indeed, that were mentioned upthread by @Gert van den Berg as having been taken over by Afrikaans; Reformed Protestantism and its divisions in South Africa were directly derived from the Netherlands, like the language. This is a reversal of the situation usually existing between English and Dutch: English often has both a Germanic and a Romance derived form of the same word, the forms having subsequently diverged in sense, whereas Dutch has only the Germanic form. In this case, Dutch has both the Germanic and Romance derived forms, and uses them to make a distinction, where the English has only the Romance derived form. In fact, the two Dutch churches mentioned in the chart in this episode prior to the 2004 merger use the different words; the ‘Dutch Reformed Church’ being the ‹Nederlands Hervormde Kerk› and the ‘Reformed Churches in the Netherlands’ being the ‹Gereformeerde Kerken in Nederland›. Among the Reformed spectrum that I’ve mentioned under 2. there are three or four of more significant size, the ‹Gereformeerde Kerken in Nederland (vrijgemaakt)›, ‘Reformed Churches in the Netherlands (freed)’, the ‹Christelijk Gereformeerde Kerken in Nederland›, ‘Christian Reformed Churches in the Netherlands’ (parallelled in the US as mentioned by @Louis Hannett downthread), the ‹Gereformeerde Gemeenten in Nederland en Noord-Amerika›, ‘Reformed Congregations in the Netherlands and North America’ (mentioned by M. A. above), and possibly the ‹Nederlands Gereformeerde Kerken›, ‘Dutch Reformed Churches’ - now you see the problem? A fifth sizeable denomination arose from refusing the 2004 merger: the ‹Hersteld Hervormde Kerk›, ‘Restored Reformed Church’ (mentioned by M. A. above). The distinction between the denominations does not exactly match that between the three ‘streams’ I wrote about above. All this is just a very brief summary of the full picture of Dutch Reformed Protestantism, believe me!

there should also a line from hugenots to prussia

So true!

guess 340k is large enough to get a comment, but still not make the chart.

Right. It was awesome to get the shout out, but it would be cool to have made the chart. While we might not be the biggest, we are pretty wide spread across the US, especially when considering the Midwest. I'm curious to the percentage of US residents that are part of the WELS, but the fact that you can't throw a stone in Milwaukee without hitting a WELS church or school, I feel, shows it's number, even if many of those churches may be under the 300 communicant mark

I’m LCMS myself, but if was forced to choose to become WELS or ELCA I’d choose WELS any day

Awesome comment!

And definitely most watched.

Yeah. Some of my Pennsylvania family were Huguenots that ended up with German Lutherans.

Agreed. My wife is from a Calvinist family in the Netherlands. I don't know all the ins-and-outs, but I'm pretty sure there's more, and probably significant, detail which could be added, even within the Netherlands. Really enjoying this series, btw NB Looks like he's added something in the next video, but didn't mention it in his intro.

It seems that Methodists have not been good with (a) retention of children in the faith, possibly due to economic factors and smaller families, and (b) having a evangelising program, which both the Anglicans and The Pentecostal churches have argueably taken over , Anglicans as a "establishment evangelism"- church funded/governed schools and the church as the parish hatch match and despatch role, and the Pentecostal (or style) churches in the be-living faith systems.

Yup, as a Canadian myself, I definitely have to include the United Church! I'll probably reach them in episode 5.

I believe that this would sit next to the other Nordic churches, Wikipedia says that it separated from the Church of Denmark, though reading around the matter, people seem to have different opinions on the extent of the Danish church’s influence

A notable former RCA congregation is the Shepherd's Grove church of The Hour of Power fame, now a PCUSA congregation.

Well the Australian Anglicans have unofficial High Church (robes, incense, partly Catholic theology like reverence for saints) and Low Church (mainstream Protestant) branches. Within each of those, there are conservative and liberal groups. While I'm not religious, I find the different approaches interesting and I know people who are liberal low church, conservative low church and conservative high church. It's the conservative low church who are the separatists, the other groups seem to be able to work together despite their differing beliefs.

looks like they're part of GAFCON

And the Reformed Episcopal Church.