FIRST ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 39, Art. 1]

Whether Schism Is a Special Sin?

Objection 1: It would seem that schism is not a special sin. For

"schism," as Pope Pelagius I says (Epist. ad Victor. et Pancrat.),

"denotes a division." But every sin causes a division, according to

Isa. 59: "Your sins have divided between you and your God." Therefore

schism is not a special sin.

Obj. 2: Further, a man is apparently a schismatic if he disobeys the

Church. But every sin makes a man disobey the commandments of the

Church, because sin, according to Ambrose (De Parad. viii) "is

disobedience against the heavenly commandments." Therefore every sin

is a schism.

Obj. 3: Further, heresy also divides a man from the unity of faith.

If, therefore, the word schism denotes a division, it would seem not

to differ, as a special sin, from the sin of unbelief.

_On the contrary,_ Augustine (Contra Faust. xx, 3; Contra Crescon.

ii, 4) distinguishes between schism and heresy, for he says that a

"schismatic is one who holds the same faith, and practises the same

worship, as others, and takes pleasure in the mere disunion of the

community, whereas a heretic is one who holds another faith from that

of the Catholic Church." Therefore schism is not a generic sin.

_I answer that,_ As Isidore says (Etym. viii, 3), schism takes its

name "from being a scission of minds," and scission is opposed to

unity. Wherefore the sin of schism is one that is directly and

essentially opposed to unity. For in the moral, as in the physical

order, the species is not constituted by that which is accidental.

Now, in the moral order, the essential is that which is intended, and

that which results beside the intention, is, as it were, accidental.

Hence the sin of schism is, properly speaking, a special sin, for the

reason that the schismatic intends to sever himself from that unity

which is the effect of charity: because charity unites not only one

person to another with the bond of spiritual love, but also the whole

Church in unity of spirit.

Accordingly schismatics properly so called are those who, wilfully

and intentionally separate themselves from the unity of the Church;

for this is the chief unity, and the particular unity of several

individuals among themselves is subordinate to the unity of the

Church, even as the mutual adaptation of each member of a natural

body is subordinate to the unity of the whole body. Now the unity of

the Church consists in two things; namely, in the mutual connection

or communion of the members of the Church, and again in the

subordination of all the members of the Church to the one head,

according to Col. 2:18, 19: "Puffed up by the sense of his flesh, and

not holding the Head, from which the whole body, by joints and bands,

being supplied with nourishment and compacted, groweth unto the

increase of God." Now this Head is Christ Himself, Whose viceregent

in the Church is the Sovereign Pontiff. Wherefore schismatics are

those who refuse to submit to the Sovereign Pontiff, and to hold

communion with those members of the Church who acknowledge his

supremacy.

Reply Obj. 1: The division between man and God that results from sin

is not intended by the sinner: it happens beside his intention as a

result of his turning inordinately to a mutable good, and so it is

not schism properly so called.

Reply Obj. 2: The essence of schism consists in rebelliously

disobeying the commandments: and I say "rebelliously," since a

schismatic both obstinately scorns the commandments of the Church,

and refuses to submit to her judgment. But every sinner does not do

this, wherefore not every sin is a schism.

Reply Obj. 3: Heresy and schism are distinguished in respect of those

things to which each is opposed essentially and directly. For heresy

is essentially opposed to faith, while schism is essentially opposed

to the unity of ecclesiastical charity. Wherefore just as faith and

charity are different virtues, although whoever lacks faith lacks

charity, so too schism and heresy are different vices, although

whoever is a heretic is also a schismatic, but not conversely. This

is what Jerome says in his commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians

[*In Ep. ad Tit. iii, 10]: "I consider the difference between schism

and heresy to be that heresy holds false doctrine while schism severs

a man from the Church." Nevertheless, just as the loss of charity is

the road to the loss of faith, according to 1 Tim. 1:6: "From which

things," i.e. charity and the like, "some going astray, are turned

aside into vain babbling," so too, schism is the road to heresy.

Wherefore Jerome adds (In Ep. ad Tit. iii, 10) that "at the outset it

is possible, in a certain respect, to find a difference between

schism and heresy: yet there is no schism that does not devise some

heresy for itself, that it may appear to have had a reason for

separating from the Church."

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part II-II (Secunda Secundae) Translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province · 第 276 / 1128 题