"The Grave Sin of Schism." An article by Metropolitan Alexander of Astana and Kazakhstan.

The concept of "schism" or "division," known in Greek as "schisma," appears in the New Testament of the Holy Scriptures. A well-known text from the First Epistle of Apostle Paul to the Corinthians states: "I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment" (1 Cor. 1:10). This passage contains one of the most vivid calls in the New Testament for the preservation of unity among the members of the church community.

The ever-memorable professor of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy, Archimandrite Ioannuary (Ivliev), noted that the word "schism" was originally used in everyday life to describe a tear in a covering, such as in an outer garment, like a cloak. A person wearing such a torn cloak would not only fail to protect themselves from the elements but would also become an object of ridicule. Similarly, any community that separates itself from the Church loses its salvific functions—it can no longer testify to humanity about peace, nor call people to love and harmony. Schisms and divisions have a detrimental effect on the Church's educational mission and hinder the fulfillment of the Divine Teacher's command to bring the Good News to all nations, "even to the ends of the earth" (Acts 1:8).

Reading the lines of the New Testament, we see that the issue of church divisions was acute and painful from the earliest years of the existence of the Church of Christ. The content of the aforementioned epistle shows that by the 50s, during the time of its writing, several groups had formed in Corinth, each claiming that it alone professed true Christianity. The Apostle refutes both sides, asserting that a person who has received Baptism and become a member of the Church belongs only to the Lord and to no one else. Any and all leaders of church communities, no matter how authoritative, remain merely servants of Christ. The Church is filled with the gifts of the Holy Spirit; within it, there are various forms of ministry, and throughout the ages, it has been renowned for its bright and talented figures. However, none of these figures can or has the right to replace the Church’s Divine Founder. The most authoritative spiritual father, preacher, or administrator should not overshadow the Lord Jesus Christ. It is not a person who saves, but the grace of the Holy Spirit, which operates within the bounds of the Orthodox Church through the Sacraments performed by lawfully ordained clergy. Maintaining the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace (Eph. 4:3) has always been the most important task of every Christian community.

The value of the above text of the Holy Scripture is also due to the fact that it reveals a serious psychological basis for all schisms—it speaks of human pride, manifested in the desire to dominate and rule. In another of his epistles, to the Romans, the Apostle Paul clearly addresses the spiritual and moral foundation of schism, describing those who cause divisions and offenses as serving their own belly, and by smooth talk and flattery, they deceive the hearts of the simple-minded (Rom. 16:17).

The problem of divisions and schisms is studied within the branch of dogmatic theology known as "ecclesiology"—the doctrine of the Church. Much has been said about the Church in both Holy Scripture and Tradition. Ecclesiology is closely linked with the doctrine of salvation—soteriology. These two theological disciplines illuminate one another, and in the examination of doctrinal and canonical issues, there is a remarkable harmony between Scripture and the writings of the holy fathers. The main idea, expressed both directly and through vivid, memorable metaphors, consistently remains the assertion that salvation, understood as full union with God—deification, or "theosis"—is possible only within the Church, and it exists in no other way outside of Her.

The Lord Jesus Christ likens the unity of believers in the Church with Himself to the unity of a vine and its branches. The Savior clearly warns: "If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned" (John 15:6). The Gospel teaches that members of the Church, who were initially joined to Her through the sacrament of Baptism but later departed from Her, are cut off from the Body of Christ, deprived of the life-giving grace of God, and ultimately perish and decay.

For understanding Orthodox ecclesiology, the work of St. Cyprian of Carthage (†258), the treatise "On the Unity of the Church," is of great importance. It contains the famous saying: "He can no longer have God as his Father who does not have the Church as his mother." St. Cyprian, in his reflections on the Church, uses the well-known biblical image of Noah's Ark. Following him, another great teacher of Orthodoxy, St. John Chrysostom (†407), uses this comparison: "As the ark saved those within it amid the sea, so the Church saves all who wander; but the ark only saved them, while the Church does something more. For example, the ark took in the irrational animals and saved them as they were, but the Church takes in irrational people and not only saves them but also transforms them" (Homily on Lazarus, VI). The patristic tradition draws a parallel between the events of the Old and New Testaments: just as only in Noah's Ark could one escape destruction from the Great Flood, so only in the Church is it possible to attain eternal salvation.

In light of such ecclesiology, the deep concern of the Fathers and Teachers of the Orthodox Church regarding the catastrophic consequences of any schisms and divisions becomes clear. A fatal rupture with the Church is not only caused by deviations from the purity of faith, known as heresy, but also by schism. St. John Chrysostom, whom we have already mentioned, compares division within the Church to heresy and asserts that "schism is no less an evil than heresy." The statement by St. Cyprian of Carthage that schism is "such a grievous sin that even the blood of martyrdom cannot wash it away" has become a classic expression of this grave reality.

Here is a fundamental definition by St. Basil the Great (†379) that is crucial for understanding the doctrine of the Church: "For the ancients have called some heresies, others schisms, and still others unlawful assemblies. Heresies are when some people have completely separated and become alien due to the very nature of their faith; schisms are when they differ from others in certain opinions concerning church matters that can be resolved; and unlawful assemblies are gatherings formed by presbyters or bishops who have departed from obedience, along with a simple-minded laity" (Canon 1 of St. Basil the Great). This most important canonical document not only allows for the classification of all instances of separation from the Church but also outlines the paths to reunification with it. Those who have fallen into manifest heresy, condemned by church councils, can be brought back into the Orthodox faith and accepted into the Church only through chrismation or even baptism. Those who have deviated into schism and departed from obedience are received back into the Church through Repentance.

Of course, healing a schism is easier than restoring a heretic to the purity of faith. However, from this fact, one should not conclude that heresy and schism are fundamentally different, incomparable phenomena, and that the sin of heresy is much graver than the sin of schism. A careful canonical and historical analysis shows that this is far from the case. St. Cyprian writes: "Can one who does not hold to the unity of the Church think that he keeps the faith?"

Where does the schism begin and how is it expressed? A schism begins with an act of disobedience to ecclesiastical authority and is externally expressed through the breaking of Eucharistic communion. The canonical tradition of the Orthodox Church teaches that the process of schism starts when "any presbyter, bishop, or metropolitan dares to sever communion with his patriarch and does not commemorate his name during the Divine liturgy as prescribed by the established order" (Canon 15 of the Council of Constantinople, the Second Council, 861 AD). From this, we see that schism manifests in disobedience to the ecclesiastical hierarchy and the rupture of Eucharistic unity.
One of the greatest canonists of the early 20th century, Confessor Bishop Nikodim (Milash; † 1915), discusses this by stating: "Schism consists in the refusal of certain individuals to obey the lawful hierarchy. Canonical rules subject clergy involved in schism to deposition, and laypeople following the schism to excommunication." Therefore, schism is the sin of disobedience to the will of the ecclesiastical authority, a violation of the hierarchical rules established by God in the Church.

The well-known 20th-century theologian and historian, Protopriest George Florovsky (†1979), describes schism as the loss and denial of conciliarity. "The spirit of schism is the direct opposite of churchliness," says the scholar.

His Holiness Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia emphasizes a significant consequence of schism: the destruction of the love commanded by Christ, the chief Gospel virtue. "The Church is called to be the place where people acquire the experience of love and unity. Where there is division, there is no love... How, then, can there be a proclamation of love, where is Christ, if the foundation of human existence is destroyed and trampled by human malice for the sake of private interests or worldly goals?" – our Primate rightly and clearly poses this question.
Within the canonical territory of the Russian Orthodox Church, legitimate ecclesiastical authority is vested in the Holy Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia, the Council of Hierarchs, and the ruling bishops. On important disciplinary matters, a bishop typically makes decisions based on the conclusions and recommendations of the diocesan ecclesiastical court. Certainly, the court may be imperfect, and the bishop may err. However, a clergyman or layperson has the right to disagree with the decision of the ecclesiastical authority. The Canonical Statutes of the Russian Orthodox Church provide mechanisms that allow a clergyman or layperson to seek a review and reversal of a ruling by the diocesan bishop. Often, the General Church Court overturns the decisions of diocesan courts. However, all actions taken by a clergyman or layperson must be conducted strictly within the legal framework, remaining within the church-canonical field. If they disregard these canonical rules, they automatically embark on the path of schism, which in essence is a renunciation of the Church.

Each time someone transgresses the God-established boundaries of church canons, the ecclesiastical authority, following the example of the Savior's gospel conduct, reaches out as follows: "If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector" (Matt. 18:15-17). The enemies of Orthodoxy maliciously attempt to discredit the activities of church courts, but the ecclesiastical authority, by taking canonical measures against those who fall into schism, strives, as Saint Gregory the Theologian says, "not for victory, but for the return of brothers, whose separation grieves us."
Since the time of the apostles, the doctrinal norm has been proclaimed, clearly stated in the 39th Apostolic Canon: "Let presbyters and deacons do nothing without the consent of the bishop; for he has been entrusted with the people of the Lord, and he will give an account of their souls." Saint Ignatius the God-bearer (†112) also writes about this inseparable spiritual and canonical bond between clergy and laity with the bishop: "For those who belong to God and Jesus Christ are with the bishop."

A cleric who separates himself from his bishop commits not only the sin of insubordination and self-will but also that of perjury. Before ordination to holy orders, whether as a deacon or a presbyter, the future clergyman takes an ordination oath, which includes these words: "I promise and swear before Almighty God and His Holy Cross and Gospel that I will strive to serve in all ways according to the word of God, the ecclesiastical canons, and the directives of the ecclesiastical authorities. I will not enter into prayerful or canonical communion with those not belonging to the Orthodox Church, who are in schism. I will not participate in any political parties, movements, or actions. Without the will of my Hierarch, I will not leave the place of service to which I am appointed, nor will I transfer myself anywhere else on my own accord." The 25th Apostolic Canon states: "A bishop, or presbyter, or deacon who is found guilty of fornication, perjury, or theft shall be deposed from the sacred order." This most authoritative canonical document clearly states the consequences of breaking the oath and equates this sin with other mortal offenses against God's Law.

An erring cleric often attempts to justify the violation of his ordination oath—essentially, an act of perjury—with contrived and seemingly righteous reasons, such as the defense of the Church's moral purity. However, blinded by pride, with his mind and heart clouded, such a person fails to understand that he has already placed himself outside the Church. It is appropriate here to recall the words of Blessed Augustine (†430): "He who separates himself from the communion of the Church, even if his life were worthy of praise, for that one iniquity alone, that he rejected unity with Christ, shall not have life, but the wrath of God abides on him." Earlier, we referenced an apostolic quote about the true roots of schism. Those who fall away from church unity are tempted by the vision of themselves and their like-minded followers as the last bastion of purity and truth, but they fail to notice—or choose not to notice—that they are "serving their own belly." This naturally occurs alongside a loss of interest in fulfilling their immediate pastoral duties and a cooling of their prayer life. Therefore, the primary remedy that can help both pastors and laity overcome the temptation of schismatic inclinations lies in the diligent fulfillment of their daily duties and the constant rekindling of zeal for serving God and others in their hearts.

It is necessary to address the issue of political temptations separately. In an era of informational openness and widespread fascination with internal and external political matters—discussed endlessly on talk shows and online forums by both experts and laypeople—the disease of politicization affects many. However, it must be understood that the Church is neither a political party nor an ordinary social organization. The Lord "desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth" (1 Tim. 2:4) and draws into His Church people of various political views and preferences. "The one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out" (John 6:37), says Christ the Savior. The ordination oath, cited earlier, clearly states that a clergyman must refrain from participating in political activities. It is also important to note that such participation is explicitly prohibited by state law in the Republic of Kazakhstan. This fundamentally apolitical stance—deeply thoughtful and responsible from a pastoral perspective—is sanctified in the history of our Church by the authority of Patriarch Tikhon, who, even in the most tragic moments of the Church and the nation's life, remained steadfast in his conviction that the clergy should stand apart from politics and political struggles.

Empires, states, ideologies, social movements, and parties are born and disappear, but the "Church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth" (1 Tim. 3:15) remains unchanged until the end of time. No matter how attractive the guise of a church schism may be, it is no less destructive to the soul than falling into heresy, a departure from the true faith. At the dawn of Christianity, the Holy Martyr Ignatius the God-Bearer warned, "Do not be deceived, my brothers! Whoever follows a schismatic will not inherit the Kingdom of God." These severe and stern words, denouncing the gravity of the sin of schism, belong to St. John Chrysostom. They are dictated solely by the fervent and selfless concern of the great Archpastor for the souls of his flock. In his commentary on the Epistle of the Apostle Paul to the Ephesians, he writes, "Therefore, I say and testify that causing divisions in the Church is no less an evil than falling into heresies… what Gehenna does he deserve who slays Christ Himself and divides Him into parts? Is it the one they threaten us with? It seems to me that it must be some other, even more dreadful one."

This great teacher of morality and champion of the Church's unity then pronounces the words we have previously cited, which have found their place in textbooks on history and dogmatic theology: "The sin of schism is not washed away even by the blood of martyrdom." In this, Chrysostom follows the Holy Martyr Cyprian of Carthage, who speaks more elaborately but no less harshly: "Even if schismatics suffer death for the confession of the name of Christ, their stain is not washed away even by their own blood. The indelible and grievous guilt of discord is not cleansed even by suffering. He who is not within the Church cannot be a martyr. He who leaves the Church cannot attain the Kingdom." The holy Cyprian calls the death of a schismatic not the glorious end of a pious struggle but the "outcome of despair," even if the enemies of Christ subjected him to torture, threw him to the beasts, or burned him in the flames.

Another holy martyr and prominent theologian of the 20th century, Archbishop Hilarion (Troitsky), the author of fundamental ecclesiological works, summarizes the Orthodox teaching concerning those who have separated from the Church: "Belonging to the Church is conditioned by unity with the Church. Any separation from the Church, any cessation of unity with the Church, is incompatible with belonging to the Church. It is not the extent of dogmatic disagreement of the one who has separated that matters; what is important and fully significant is the very fact of separation, the very cessation of unity with the Church. Even if the separation occurs solely on the grounds of ecclesiastical rebellion and disciplinary disobedience without any dogmatic disagreement, the separation from the Church will have all the tragic consequences for the one who has separated. It is not only heretics who separate from the Church, but also schismatics. The essence of separation remains the same" (Letter to R. Gardner, January 18, 1917).

"The wrath of man does not produce the righteousness of God" (James 1:20), says the Apostle. For the initiators and adherents of schism, characteristics such as impulsiveness, narcissism, lack of inner peace, and resentment toward others, often stemming from long-held grudges, are common. Their behavior frequently reveals a disturbed, highly agitated, and unbalanced state. In contrast, within the Church of Christ, known as a healing place, the grace of the Holy Spirit heals and transforms the human soul. The Apostle offers a clear Gospel criterion for a person's dwelling in the Spirit of God: "But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control" (Gal. 5:22). Is it possible to find kindness, patience, or gentleness in a schismatic? At times, there may appear a feigned, affected kindness or humility, but more often than not, even through deceptive, hypocritical piety, there is a visible obsession with proving their opponents wrong at any cost. They are willing to speak passionately and obsessively, day and night, about the sins and deviations of church hierarchs or their former brethren. In debates, they lose their temper, raise their voices, lose self-control, and unfortunately, they have the ability to infect trusting souls with their condition.

In communities that have separated from the Church, new authorities and heroes quickly emerge. However, all of them present a pitiful spectacle, a counterfeit, a diabolical parody of righteousness. The insightful observer of the human soul, Fyodor M. Dostoevsky, accurately describes the path of any sectarian group, which starts under the banner of fighting for the purity of faith but ends in new schisms and new forms of idolatry. At first, they say, "Blind men! Why do you kiss the vessel? The life-giving liquid it contains is what matters... but you kiss the glass, simple glass, worship the vessel, and attribute all sanctity to the glass, so much so that you forget about its precious contents! Idolaters!" And then the vessel is broken, and the precious contents spill out onto the ground and disappear into the earth, naturally. The vessel is shattered, and the liquid is lost. But while some of the liquid remains before it completely soaks into the ground, chaos ensues: people scramble to save what little is left in the broken shards, arguing that a new vessel must be made quickly, debating how and from what it should be made... the argument intensifies, and people break into hostile groups, each taking a few drops of the remaining precious liquid in their own peculiar, mismatched cups gathered from all over... Idolatry multiplies many times over, according to the number of shards into which the vessel was shattered" ("The Diary of a Writer," 1877).

In our turbulent and deceitful times, hierarchs, clergy, and believers are called to engage in careful inner work to avoid falling under the influence of false prophets infected with the sin of schismatic pride. The Apostle John the Theologian refers to this as "discerning the spirits" (1 John 4:1). His Holiness Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia warns against being deceived by the cunning arguments of schismatic teachers: "No arguments, no human wisdom, no human ideals can justify schism, for schism is a violation of the Lord's words about the unity of His inheritance."

According to the words of St. John of Kronstadt, "the entire order of priests must be the light of the Church" (Diary, 1856). I would like to express confidence that the clergy of the Metropolitan District of the Russian Orthodox Church in the Republic of Kazakhstan will remain steadfast in their calling, resisting schisms, and spreading the light of Christ's truth and love among the faithful.