Forgive me for the lengthy quote, but Fr. Cleenewert says this much better than I. I also realize that he's not a "Church Father" so many might just dismiss him as another "modern theologian" whom we can ignore, but I believe it to be germane to the subject at hand, since this is ultimately an issue of ecclesiology.
Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi is a powerful and truthful maxim. We learn a lot about a community’s beliefs and consciousness by studying its prayer life. As we have seen, the Orthodox Churches consider liturgical tradition to be a basic and reliable manifestation of doctrine. With this principle in mind, what the liturgy of St. Basil has to say about the unity of the Church is quite relevant. The passage in question is part of a post-epiclesis prayer (therefore a very solem one):
Cause the schisms in the Church to cease...
If our question is “Can His Body be broken?” the answer given by St. Basil seems to be, yes. He himself experienced the consequences of the Arian heresy and was the sorrowful witness of many tragic splits. We may therefore say that the (local) Church can go through periods of apparent schism or even heresy when one wonders who the true bishop is and where the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church can be found. Sometimes, the confusion is temporary and does not lead to a lasting schism, both within the catholic Church and in the common union. But there are thresholds and circumstances when the schism becomes organic and permanent.
This discussion opens the door to a serious and vast topic...What is the nature of salvation? What are the means of salvation? Can one be saved outside the visible manifestation of the Church and without her sacraments? Can the pre-eternal Church be made manifest where there is heresy, schism, corruption and sin? Further, can the pre-eternal Church be made manifest in the same city by means of two competing bishops?
In the case of Cornelius and Novation (in the wake of persuctions in the late 3rd century, Rome found herself without a bishop. Cornelius was elected to the episcopacy by the Roman clergy, but a few days later the controversial presbyter Novation announced his own claims and managed to get himself consecrated by three distant Italian bishops) it was obvious who the “real” bishop of Rome was: the one who was recognized by all the other bishops, starting with those who represented the ancient and principal Churches. But what would happen if the episcopate was in fact divided on which bishop to be in communion with? (This happened in Antioch)
Where was the Church? How could one tell which one of the orthodox bishops was to be sided with? With the strict and pure (Novationists)? With those who went along with the governmental appointees (the Arians)? With those who were in communion with Rome (Paulinus)? Or with those who received support from neighboring bishops (Meletius)? In hindsight, it seems that Meletius can be recognized as the true orthodox and catholic bishop of the Church in Antioch, but does it mean that those who participated in the other Eucharists did not also participate in the invisible and transcendent communion of saints? (After all, St. Jerome was ordained by Paulinus). Is it personal holiness, orthodoxy of faith, legitimacy of election and consecration or communion with other Churches that determines the true manifestation of Christ’s body in a community?
If the Church is a divine organism fully revealed in the local catholic Church, what happened to the worldwide communion of Churches, however tragic, is only organizational - indeed a political - issue. In other words, the means of salvation are not at stake, but the faithfulness of our witness to Christ “the unifier” is compromised. We could also say that the holographic “whole-units,” instead of being organized in such a way as to create a beautiful icon of the Lord, have instead produced a distorted image.
The local Church is the whole Church. What we see (and need) beyond the local Church are structures of common union, communication and harmony. The main point is that these structures do not belong to the Eucharistic ontology of the catholic Church...In this context, every Church is the same catholic Church as every other, and their bishops have full ontological equality.
If the local Church (the “diocese”) is “the Catholic Church”, it contains in itself the fullness of means of grace, sanctification and salvation, whether or not “united” into a particular geopolitical superstructure. In other words, Cyprian of Carthage, Stephen of Rome and Firmilian of Caesarea can still be bishops of the catholic Church and saints in spite of their ruptures of communion. The Churches of St. Thomas in India, or those of Ethiopia were always one, holy, catholic and apostolic even when disconnected from Rome or Constantinople. It also means that the saints (of East and West, for instance St. Francis of Assisi and St. Sergius) do not drop in and out of the catholic Church because their patriarchs are quarreling over who knows what. Likewise, the idea that salvation is tied to a particular worldwide organism becomes obsolete.
- His Broken Body: Understanding and Healing the Schism between the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches.