Archbishop Vigano, Schism and Excommunication.

Raised Baptist, I understand schism too well.  Since the first Baptist “separatists” broke from the Church of England (who split from the Catholic Church), Baptists have been unravelling since.  Today there are scores of Baptist “churches” that chose schism rather than unity; often for the pettiest of reasons. Reasons, such as “I don’t like their music or I don’t agree with the use of a specific version of the Bible.” (The last one is huge among the King James Version only crowd).  Some folks leave a church and search for one that meets their subjective needs, and others start a “new” church.  Schism in the Church is ancient, but the legacy of 500 years of Protestant Deformation has altered schism to appear as a badge of merit instead of a mark of shame.

There is no merit in schism.

But what about….??? 

What about, what? 

Arius, Martin Luther, King Henry VIII, Cardinal Lefebvre, and Archbishop Vigano were Catholics who left the Church in a toot (and/or were excommunicated), but they were all in error, having committed, among other things, the grave sin of schism for which there is no scriptural or traditional justification.  Arius denied the Trinity, Luther disobeyed the chain of command, Henry wanted a divorce, Lefebvre disobeyed Pope John Paul II, and Vigano disobeyed Church authority and encouraged schism. Whether they left first or were excommunicated later, where did they think they were going to go?  Christ is not the head of a harem where we may pick and choose which bride we want to be members of.

I fear that the Protestant spirit of unbridled rebellion has worn off on too many Catholics.  My father exhibited that militant spirit when he would say from the pulpit that he did not believe in “unity at any cost.” For him, unity was somehow equal to compromise, and there is no tolerance for such.  Down with ecumenism, down with the world council of churches, down with any thought of reconciling to the Church of Rome!  All this “anti-unity” rhetoric, most of which was spawned under the sin of the Reformation schism(s), is contrary to the very teachings of Sacred Scripture, Tradition and the will of the Holy Spirit.  To schism is to go against God.

The Church on earth is imperfect because she is comprised of sinners.  That’s just a fact.  And as individuals we do not always adapt easily to change or, for that matter, each other.  However, unless the proposed change is central to dogma, we ought to consider the matter unworthy of schism.  As for any change to dogma, I am not the least bit worried.  There has not been, in 2,000 years, any change to the Deposit of the Faith that has contradicted a prior dogmatic belief; for it is the Churches responsibility to ensure the integrity of Apostolic Teaching, Scripture and Tradition. And the Church has, and will continue to, embrace the responsibility under the continued guidance of the Holy Spirit.  Neither the Pope nor any Council can add or subtract from the 2,000-year-old Deposit of Faith.  The Sacrament of Marriage will never be redefined.  The Holy Eucharist will never change to “just a memorial meal.”  However, outside the bones of the Church we have seen and may see changes we do not like.  For example, the Church had the right to change the Mass from Latin to the local vernacular.  And, if the Church wants to change the liturgical “Ordinary” color from green to blue; she can do that too.   What the Church cannot, and will not do is swap out the apostolic bones of dogma for something new and contradictory.     

There are times when I ponder how we as laity, and those who are Papal Vaticanocrats, forget that we are not a human corporation.  We are a human and divine mystery of which Jesus is very much the active head and the Holy Spirit the COO.     

A word on Excommunication

Excommunication, that is the official severing of ties between the Church and a communicant, is the last resort of the Church in an attempt to correct error.  The initial threat of excommunication carries the hope that the errant will see their fault, repent and reconcile.   If, however, the errant refuses to admit to and repent of the error, then the desire for reconciliation turns punitive; and this action of “repent or be expelled” is scriptural.  In Romans 16:17 Paul exhorted the church to “Mark those who cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which you have learned and avoid them.”   In II Thessalonians he again warns of those who seek disorder, are busybodies and who do not “obey our word by this epistle.” Of these, Paul says, “have no company with him that he may be ashamed, yet count him not as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother.”  That last part is the intended spirit of Excommunication: to identify error, separate it from the Body, and pray that the errant corrects and returns.  The Church is required to protect the integrity of the Deposit of Faith and the Flock of Christ; even if that protection proves to be unpopular.   

Schism is a particularly harmful sin against the Bride and Body of Christ.  It is as unnatural as having a finger tell a hand, “I no longer recognize you, or the arm or the body to which you are attached!”  I cannot help but think that more than a little pride has catalyzed all forms of schism through the ages.  Would to God we could be as he desires us to be…one.