If a tree branch falls in an imaginary forest, who hears it?

Here's a rather curious description from a news report from UPI:

PITTSBURGH, Sept. 9 (UPI) -- A former Catholic priest's plans to convert a small chapel into a large center near the Pennsylvania field where United Flight 93 crashed worries critics.

Bishop Alphonse Mascherino, who now serves with a branch of the Catholic Church not recognized by the Vatican, wants to move the former Lutheran church he converted into a Flight 93 shrine closer to the planned national memorial. The center would include an auditorium, conference rooms, museum and gift shop, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported. [puzzled emphasis added]

Is that most similar to:

• A branch of the U.S. government not recognized by the President, Congress, and the Supreme Court?
• A player for the New England Patriots not signed by the team or known to Coach Bill Belichick?
• A member of U2 who doesn't play or travel with the band and has never met Bono?
• A tree branch that lies on the ground and is no longer attached to the tree, but insists everything is "Just fine!"?

So, the reporter first describes Mascherino as a former Catholic priest, but then says he serves in a "branch of the Catholic Church", which would not be former, but current. Huh? In fact, Mascherino apparently was a Catholic priest for over thirty years before leaving and joining the schismatic North American Old Roman Catholic Church, which is not in communion with the Catholic Church (the one founded by Christ, with the Pope and such) in which he now serves as a "bishop". As a September 2009 article in The Tribune-Democrat (Johnstown, PA) reported:

His acceptance as a bishop in the Old Roman Catholic Church “severs his ties with the Roman Catholic Church,” said a news release from Bishop Joseph Vellone of the Old Roman Catholic Church.

Goodness, I'm so glad that has been clarified. Now I need to get back to learning the chords for "With or Without You" while waiting for a call from Bono...

Comments

[Mark Brumley]

It may be in dispute whether or not the church to which Mascherino belongs is a "branch" of the "Catholic Church", as it is disputed whether Anglicanism is a "branch" of the "Catholic Church". Those who acknowledge the authority of the Pope would, of course, not affirm the Branch Theory in either case and would deny that these entities are "branches" of the "Catholic Church", even if knowledgeable Catholics would agree that they are or may be in imperfect communion with "the Catholic Church". However, surely it is not in dispute that Mascherino's church is not a "branch" of the Catholic Church understood as headed up on earth by the Pope? That, surely, should have been the point. If you don't want to beg the question of what is or is not "the Catholic Church", fine. But discussing "branches" of the "Catholic Church" not recognized by Rome implies such things exist, which is to say, that the Pope and those who agree with him are in theological and ecclesiastical error. That begs a different question, namely, whether the Church of Rome is "the Catholic Church".