SCHISM

The Greek word schisma literally denotes a rent, or cleft (cf. Matt. 9:16; Mark 2:21); hence metaphorically, discord or division (John 7:43; 9:16; 10:19). This is its meaning in 1 Cor. 1:10; 11:18; 12:25.
1 Corinthians 12:25 is vital to a proper understanding of a schism: “That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another.” Thus, schism is a rending of the body of Christ. It is a sin that exhibits a carelessness about the welfare of the body in general and its other members in particular. It is a sin against charity, a selfish introduction of dissention and division where there ought to be mutual tolerance and love.
This distinguishes schism from scriptural separation.* Scripturally, heretics (see Heresy) must be rejected (Titus 3:10) for they are schismatics from the body of true believers, having followed a self-willed opinion in preference to God’s revealed truth. Thus, separation from a communion on the grounds of the purity of fundamental Christian doctrine is not schism. For example, Calvin argued that the scriptural marks of a true church are the preaching of the pure gospel and the valid administration of the sacraments. Rome did not maintain these basic marks of a true church. Therefore, in separating from her the Reformers were not guilty of schism. Rome was the party, or sect, guilty of schism, for she had departed from the faith of the gospel.
The same argument holds good today. In an age when ecumenism is rampant, those who stand for Biblical separation are denounced as schismatics and are frequently likened to such sects as the Donatists.* But no Christian can deny that the ecumenical movement progresses by compromising the essentials of the gospel. Christians should therefore separate from ecumenical churches. The same goes for churches where modernism* and liberalism* dominate.
It is not right to remain in such fellowships merely because they nominally retain their ancient confessional standards. The argument is frequently put, for example, that while a Presbyterian church retains the Westminster Standards, it would be schism to separate from it. However, when the Reformers separated from Rome, she avowed her acceptance of the ancient creeds of the church. But that did not make her a pure church. It merely denoted the fact that lying and falsehood were added to her other impurities. Calvin said, “If the Church is ‘the pillar and ground of truth’ (1 Tim. 3:15), it is certain that there is no church where lying and falsehood have usurped the ascendancy.” If that was true of Rome with her professed acceptance of the ancient creeds of the church, it is no less true of those once Protestant churches that are seeking reunion with an unrepentant Rome, or are open to all great doctrinal impurity.
To sum up: schism is an expression of self-will or of heresy that leads to the setting up of sects—any group that is built on heresy is a schism from the body of Christ. Separation is on Biblical grounds, is commanded by the Lord (Eph. 5:11; 2 Cor. 6:14–18; 1 Tim. 6:3–5), and aims at maintaining essential Christian doctrine and practice.


Alan Cairns, Dictionary of Theological Terms (Belfast; Greenville, SC: Ambassador Emerald International, 2002), 404–405.