Mary's Relationship with the Trinity

EWTN ^ | January 1996 | Pope John Paul II

[Hermann the Cherusker]

Schism is the complete withdrawal from communion and obedience to the Roman Pontiff and/or those in communion with him. This is termed a refusal to submit, because the breach in obedience and communion is total. It is rare for a schism to occur without heresy.

Disobedience is a failure to obey an apparent legitimate command. If the Pope or Bishop ordered the use of a different liturgical color on a particular day, and you refused, you would be disobeying that order, but not necessarily rejecting the autohrity of the order - you might disagree with the underpinnings of it. In general every act of disobedience against legitmate commands tends towards schism.

Disobedience to an illegitimate command is not disobedience at all.

The status of the SSPX and Catholics attending their chapels must be clearly defined. As far as the Bishops of the SSPX, they have been excommunicated laete sententiae by the fact of their consecration. They are schismatic in so far as the SSPX is made by them into a counter church, complete with its own chapels, seminaries, marriage tribunals, its refusal of the 1983 Code of Canon Law, etc. The priests of the SSPX in positions of leadership follow in the schism of their Bishops. The regular clergy of the SSPX may not be in schism if they are earnestly working towards a healing of the breach between Rome and the SSPX, especially with regard to their own personal situation, and that of the faithful attending Mass at the chapels they have been given charge of. It is unlikely many of the priests would come in this category.

The faithful who attend SSPX chapels are schismatic too if they 1) reject the authority of their local bishop or pastor, 2) accept the false jurisdiction posited by the SSPX to form marriage tribunals and the like, or rashly deny the objective reality of the excommunication and schism of the Bishops and Priests of the SSPX (whatever the beliefs about Arbp. Lefebvre's belief that a state of necessity exists, the appeal of his sentence must be done in a formal canonical way - it cannot simply be denied, especially on the basis of a Code of Law which is rejected). Simply attending Mass and receiving the sacraments at their chapels is not schismatic if a person feels for a legitimate reason that it would harm their or their family's faith to go to a regular parish (what reasons? - homosexual priests, unworthy Masses, blatant disobedience to canonical and liturgical norms, etc.). This includes receiving confession, confirmation, and marriage, despite the lack of jurisidiction of those giving out or witnessing these sacraments. As far as the faithful go, although not the priests, ecclesia supplet.

[Salvation]

BTTT!