In Roman Catholicism, what is the difference between excommunication and a personal i

In Roman Catholicism, what is the difference between excommunication and a personal interdict?

go to http://www.newadvent.org

Interdict differs from excommunication, in that it does not cut one off from the communion of the faithful or from Christian society, though the acts of religion forbidden in both cases are almost identical. It differs from suspension also in this respect: the latter affects the powers of clerics, inasmuch as they are clerics, while the interdict affects the rights of the faithful as such, and does not directly affect clerics as such but only as members of the Church. Of course, it follows that the clergy cannot exercise their functions towards those under interdict, or in interdicted places or buildings, but their powers are not directly affected, as happens in case of suspension; their jurisdiction remains unimpaired, which allows of a guilty individual being punished, without imperil ling the validity of his acts of jurisdiction. This shows that an interdict is more akin to excommunication than to suspension.

God Bless...

The difference, as I understand it, is that if you're a priest who is under interdict you remain a priest. If you're a layperson the difference is pretty much f*** all.