What’s the difference between schism and irregularity?

A word that is being used in church circles and on social media these days is the word “schism.” Its use is precipitated by the impending unauthorized ordinations of four bishops for the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), who are a priestly society within the Roman Catholic Church, but who lack canonical recognition due to their refusal to uphold the magisterial teachings of the Second Vatican Council.

This stance has caused their status in the Church to be “irregular,” since the Society lacks “full communion” with the Roman Catholic Church’s teaching and doctrine. Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller, then Prefect of the Congregation (now Dicastery) for the Doctrine of the Faith, in a letter to the SSPX on  June 26, 2017, stated conditions that would be required for full re-establishment of communion: making the 1998 profession of faith, accepting explicitly the teachings of the Second Vatican Council and subsequent church teachings, and recognizing the validity and legitimacy of the rite of Mass and the other Sacraments celebrated according to the liturgical books promulgated after the council.

What then is the difference between an “irregularity” — where something is lacking in terms of canonical regulations and may be dispensed, but the Church is not obligated to do so — and “schism” — which, according to Canon 751 of the Code of Canon Law is defined as a refusal of submission to the Pope or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him? The difference is the penalty involved. The penalty for committing schism is excommunication “latae sententiae,” meaning it is incurred automatically upon the act, and it excludes an individual from participating in sacraments and ecclesiastical offices (see Canons 1364 and 1365). In an irregular situation, the communion with the Catholic may be imperfect, but certain permissions can be granted, as Pope Francis did concerning SSPX priests hearing confessions and local ordinaries granting permission for SSPX priests to witness marriages. Unfortunately, such accommodations cease when schism and the accompanying excommunication occur.

It needs to be stated that any penalty in the Church’s Canon Law is seen as “medicinal” and is not meant to be a permanent state. However, this depends on whether a person or persons remain in “contumacy” — that is, the persistent state of stubborn refusal to obey or comply with legitimate authority. The Church treats schism as a serious fault because it undermines unity, charity, and obedience. This is the particular reason why the Catholic faithful are instructed not to receive the Sacraments in schismatic churches or from schismatic priests or bishops because of the lack of full communion and refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff. Schisms in the course of history have occurred over theological, ecclesiastical, and political disputes. Nonetheless, the Catholic Church continues to engage in ecumenical dialogue, particularly with the Eastern Orthodox Church and other Orthodox and Oriental Churches, to foster reconciliation and restore unity where possible.

What needs to be noted is that schismatic acts continue to occur with much lesser notoriety, such as when groups or individuals formally leave the Church or reject papal authority, which, as previously mentioned, automatically incurs excommunication under canon law. In such situations, the word “apostasy” is used frequently, but this is an incorrect application of the word because in canon law “apostasy” is defined as “total repudiation of the Christian faith” (see Canon 751). However, schism may involve “heresy.” Heresy in the Catholic Church is a willful rejection of essential truths of the Church’s profession of faith and its doctrines, i.e., official teachings, after having received baptism. The Church emphasizes pastoral care and the correction of heretical beliefs, aimed at restoring full communion rather than merely a punishment for holding such mistaken beliefs.

I share this primer with you because of the present situation in the Catholic Church, but also as an appeal to ensure that all the clergy and lay faithful in our parishes understand the importance of remaining in communion with the Church’s magisterium — the Pope and the Bishops in communion with him — in word and deed concerning doctrine, liturgical practice, and moral teachings. It worries me when I receive complaints regarding liturgical irregularities occurring in our parishes, or inquiries about the adherence to Catholic doctrine and morality in institutions in the diocese that bear the name “Catholic,” but seemingly (or even outrightly) endorse beliefs and practices contrary to Church teaching. Moreover, one cannot overlook those who in the recent past and into the present have questioned and publicly disparaged the legitimacy of the papacies of both Pope Francis and Pope Leo XIV. This dangerous act borders on and could be schismatic, depending on a person’s intent. To all, I would remind us of the need for unity and obedience, practiced with charity.

Furthermore, for those who see themselves as the Church’s watchdogs or police, I would offer a word of caution regarding being so critical of situations without knowing all the circumstances, or of the accompaniment that may be happening in the pastoral setting. I am also concerned about how easy it is to get caught up in all the “chatter” on social media and its accompanying lack of respect for the Church’s magisterium and its freelance interpretations. Remember that charity is the most important virtue for Catholics and the cornerstone of all Catholic social teaching, as well as the guide for all actions and decisions concerning love of God and neighbor. One reads in 1 Peter 4:8 – “Above all, let your love for one another be intense, because love covers a multitude of sins” — and in 1 John 4:20 — “If anyone says, ‘I love God,’ but hates his brother, he is a liar; for whoever does not love a brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen.’”

In all circumstances, our prayer needs to be that of Jesus, who prayed that “all may be one!” Let me conclude with Jesus’ prayer as found in John 17:20-23, for our own use and reflection: “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one—I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity.”

In my next column, I will reflect on our 250th anniversary as a nation, but in the meantime, have a very blessed and happy 4th of July!