Whom does the Church anathematize and for what? Anathema - what is it

Anathema[Greek ἀνάθεμα - excommunication from the Church] - this is the excommunication of a Christian from communion with the faithful and from the holy sacraments, used as the highest church punishment for grave sins (primarily for betraying Orthodoxy and deviating into heresy or schism) and proclaimed conciliarly.

Church anathema should not be confused with excommunication (ἀφορισμός) - temporary ban a person to participate in church sacraments - a punishment for committed misconduct:

theft, fornication (Ap. 48), participation in obtaining a church position with the help of a bribe (Ap. 30), etc., does not require a conciliar decision and does not need a conciliar proclamation to come into force.

The meaning of anathema

Interview of Archpriest Maxim Kozlov to the newspaper "Trud"

Apparently, Father Maxim, it is natural to start the conversation by clarifying the meaning of the very term "anathema". The Great Soviet Encyclopedia claims that in Christianity it is "a church curse, excommunication." Is not it?

- "Anathema" - the Greek word, goes back to the verb "anatifimi", meaning "to lay, betray something to someone." Anathema - that which is given, handed over to the absolute will, to the absolute possession of anyone. In the ecclesiastical sense, anathema is that which is committed to the final judgment of God and for which (or for whom) the Church no longer has either its care or its prayer. By declaring an anathema to someone, she thus openly testifies: this person, even if he calls himself a Christian, is such that he himself certified by his worldview and actions that he has nothing to do with the Church of Christ.

So an anathema is not a “church curse”, as other people believe or illiterately interpret secular media following the Great Soviet Encyclopedia; nor is it excommunication from the Church in the secular sense of the term. Of course, the one who has been anathematized is no longer entitled to participate in the life of the Church: to confess, to take communion, to attend divine services. But excommunication from church communion, as such, happens even without anathema. According to our canons, a gravely sinner can be excluded from participation in the Church Sacraments for a certain period of time... Therefore, anathema means not just excommunication, but witnessing to the Church about what the guilty person, for his part, has long known and has been confirmed in that: his worldview, positions and views with the church do not coincide in any way, do not correlate in any way.

Is it true that for the first time all apostates were anathematized in the 9th century, after the victory of the Church over the heresy of iconoclasm?

This is not entirely true. Already in the apostolic epistles it is spoken of the anathematization of those who do not confess Christ as the Son of God, considering Him only wise teacher morality or some ideal prophet. The Holy Apostle Paul wrote: “As we said before, so now I say it again: whoever preaches to you not what you received, let him be anathema.” Anathemas were announced, of course, at the Ecumenical Councils. So, in the 4th century, the presbyter of the Alexandrian church, Arius, was convicted, denying that the Son of God is equal in everything to the Father. In the 5th century, the same fate befell Patriarch Nestorius of Constantinople, who falsely taught about the union of the Divine and human natures in Christ. There were such ecclesiastical trials until the 7th Ecumenical Council, at which the iconoclasts were anathematized.

In the year 842, in the Greek Church, on the first Sunday of Great Lent, it was celebrated for the first time as a sign of victory over all heresies condemned at the Ecumenical Councils, and in general over all impious anti-Christian teachings. The liturgical rite of this holiday included, firstly, the proclamation eternal memory ascetics of piety, defenders of the faith, secondly, the proclamation of many years for the kings, patriarchs and other current defenders of the faith, and, finally, the anathema to the main heresies and their bearers.

- This festive rite is still performed in our Church?

Recognizing him as one of the greatest Russian writers, the Church, at the same time, could not keep silent about the writer's religious errors, for "God is betrayed by silence." Just do not need to imagine that event according to the famous story of Kuprin, from the ambos of Russian churches the anathema to "Boyar Lev" was never proclaimed - this is the author's artistic conjecture. In fact, the very restrained Synodal decision of February 22, 1901 was evidence of the writer's own views. By that time, in his religious and philosophical searches, he himself came to the denial of the need for the Church and its Sacraments - Baptism, Confession, Communion, and to the denial of the basic postulate of Christianity - that Christ is really the Son of God. Finally, the writer dared to compile the “Gospel set forth by Leo Tolstoy”, in his pride believing that he was the best of all who lived for nineteen centuries before him, he understood best of all what Christ taught ... “... Therefore, the Church does not consider him its member and does not can consider until he repents and restores his communion with her ... ”- it was said in the church definition. Let me remind you that shortly before his death, Lev Nikolayevich was in Optina Hermitage, but he did not dare to enter the cell of the elder, and later the Optina elder was not allowed to see the dying writer. So the judgment of God was final for him.

- And what explains the anathematization of such a person as Hetman Mazepa?

Not only he, a traitor to the Fatherland, but also Grishka Otrepiev and Stepashka Razin were excommunicated from the Church not on doctrinal grounds, but as enemies of the state. In those days, there was a fundamental understanding of the "symphony of authorities" - ecclesiastical and secular. The first cared about the moral health of the people, the second - about the security of the state and the protection of the Church itself. Anyone who rebelled against the state, rebelled not only against the monarchy, but against the State, which for centuries was the stronghold of universal Orthodoxy. Because of this, anti-state actions were simultaneously regarded as anti-church, so those responsible for them were subjected to ecclesiastical condemnation through anathematization.

In recent years, former Metropolitan Filaret (Denisenko), former priest Gleb Yakunin have been anathematized for anti-church activities... Tell me, do they and other people equally severely condemned by the Church still have the opportunity to return to the House of God?

Anathema is not only a testimony to the church world about the guilty, but also a testimony addressed to them themselves, to these unfortunate people who have fallen into delusion, into proud self-blindness: “Think about it! The ultimate possible judgment on earth has been passed on you. Repent of what you have done and return to your father's house, to your native Church. Strange as it may seem to some, the anathema is also evidence of Christian love for people who, it would seem, have completely lost their way; nevertheless, the anathema does not deprive them of the path to repentance.

The rite of anathema is removed from people who have deeply repented and renounced their errors, the fullness of their stay in the Church is restored, they can again begin the Sacraments, and most importantly, they again receive the opportunity of salvation. The only thing that cannot be returned to them is their former rank.

- I wonder if there is anathematism in the Roman Catholic Church?

The Vatican has a Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which is the legal successor of the infamous Holy Inquisition, which threw heretics into the fires throughout Europe in the Middle Ages. I would like to emphasize here that the Russian Church has never engaged in the forcible eradication of heresy... So, in the current Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, judgments are periodically made about both specific individuals and specific areas of religious thought. One can name a number of former Catholic theologians and religious beliefs (for example, "liberation theology" in Latin America), which in the modern period were condemned by the Vatican, which is tantamount to anathematization.

In conclusion, I would ask you, Father Maxim, to return to the problem of restoring the church-wide rite of anathematization on the Sunday of the Triumph of Orthodoxy...

I think that with a detailed and broad explanation to the Orthodox people of what an anathema is, what the Church’s witness to those who are in error, the restoration of this rite would be of great importance for many of our contemporaries. First of all, for those who, under the influence of sectarian eloquence, began to believe that it was indeed permissible to be both Orthodox and, say, a Scientologist. Or be Orthodox and belong to some odious Protestant sect, whose leaders deceitfully say about themselves - "we are generally Christians."

I believe that the “prospect” of being anathematized can keep a spiritually unscrupulous person from being dangerously carried away by false teachers, and this will ultimately turn out to be beneficial for the spiritual health of the people as a whole. As far as I know, this opinion is shared by many priests and laity.

anathematize

Term

Greek the term ἀνάθεμα (ἀνάθημα) denoted by pagan authors (Homer, Sophocles, Herodotus) “something dedicated to God; a gift, an offering to the temple” (i.e., something separate, alien to everyday use). It was used in Greek translation of the Bible (Septuagint) to convey the Hebrew term - something cursed, rejected by people and doomed to destruction (Numbers 21.2-3; Lev 27.28 ff.; Deut 7.26; 13.15 (16), 17; 20. 17; Joshua 6. 17 ff.; 7. 11 ff.; Zech 14. 11; etc.). Under the influence of the Hebrew term "Anathema" received specific negative connotations and began to mean "what is rejected by people, is doomed to destruction" and therefore "cursed."

In this last sense the term is used in the epistles of St. app. Paul: 1 Cor 12.3; 16.22; Gal 1. 8-9; Rome 9. 3. Ap. Paul in one place uses special form curses: “Whoever does not love the Lord Jesus Christ is anathema, maran-afa” (1 Cor 16:22). The addition of "maran-afa" (aram. - the Lord is near) indicates Bud. the coming of Christ, Who alone can finally decide the fate of the sinner.

In early Judaism, excommunication from the synagogue can be considered a prototype of anathema, which was applied, in particular, to those who confessed Christ as the Messiah (cf. the term ἀποσυνάϒωϒος in Jn 9.22; 12.42; 16.2); St. Epiphanius of Cyprus (Adv. haer. 81, referring to John 16. 2).

The use of anathema in the history of the Church against heretics, schismatics and gross violators of church discipline is based on the use of this term in Gal 1. 8-9 and 1 Cor 16. 22. The term "Anathema" was first officially used in the canons of the Council of Elvira (after 300), and the canonical formula "if anyone ... let him be anathema" was established in church canons starting from the Gangra Council (c. 340 - Gangra. 1-20). Later the term was used in Laod. 29, 34, 35; II Universe. one; Karf. 11, 81 (92), 109 (123), 110-116 (124-130); III Universe. 7; Trul. one; VII Universe. one; Const. (879). 3 etc.

In Byzantium, the term "catathema" (κατάθεμα - something cursed) was occasionally used. "Katathema" in the meaning of "curse" is present in Rev. 22.3, as well as in the "Teaching of the 12 Apostles" (Didache). The NT contains the verbs ἀναθεματίζω (to swear; cf. Mk 14:71; Acts 23:12 and 14) and καταθεματίζω (cf.: Mt 26:74). All R. 9th century The K-Polish Patriarch Methodius I proclaimed an anathema and a “catathema” to the disciples of St. Theodore Studite Navkratiy and Athanasius, who did not want to condemn the writings of their teacher directed against the Patriarchs Tarasius (784-806) and Nicephorus I (806-815) (I. Doens, Ch. Hannick; J. Darrouzès; K. A. Maksimovich).

Socrates Scholastic in "Ecclesiastical History" gives his understanding of the term: anathema, lit. "laying on" means, in his opinion, as if "raising up" a special stele, on which curses are carved for heretics for public viewing and edification (Hist. Eccl. VII 34. 15-17).

Essence of anathema

In the 1st Epistle to the Corinthians (5. 1-5) ap. Paul suggests "handing over to Satan" the one who takes his father's wife as his wife. But the apostle himself says that only the flesh is given over to torment, and then only in order that the soul be saved (1 Tim 1.20; see the interpretation of this place in St. John Chrysostom (On 1 Tim. 5 - PG. 62. Col 528).However, under the influence of the apostolic letters mentioned above, the belief that A. represents a betrayal of Satan became widespread.Author of the treatise "On the fact that neither the living nor the dead should be anathematized" (PG. 48. Col. 945-952) , compiled in the form of a teaching and come down under the name of St. John Chrysostom (although, apparently, not belonging to him), shares this view (Sol. 949), and therefore considers A. unacceptable, since the deprivation of hope for salvation is contrary to the basic law of Christianity - the law love for one's neighbor, regardless of the purity of his faith (in connection with this, the parable of the merciful Samaritan from Luke 10: 30-37 is cited). He admits only the anathematization of dogmatic errors (Col. 952). That is exactly what the Apostle Paul did when he said " let it be anathema ”is it not against specific c, but against unrighteous deeds (1 Cor 16:22 and Gal 1.8) (PG. 48. Col. 948). As for people, the Supreme Judge administers judgment over them - those who condemn others to eternal death, appropriate His authority for themselves and will be severely punished as usurpers of the highest power (Сol. 949). This view of A. found its support among the Byzantines. canonist Theodore Balsamon (XII century) (Ράλλης , Ποτλής . III 97; cf.: PG. 137, 1237A).

The basis of the church anathema are the words of Christ: "... if he does not listen to the Church, then let him be to you as a pagan and a publican" (Mt 18.17) (Sinai, prot. S. 23, 25-26; Trinity. S. 5- 6).

The problem of the necessity and admissibility of anathema is very complex. In the history of the Church, the application or non-application of the anathema was dictated each time by a number of specific circumstances, among which the main role was played by the degree of danger for the church community of the punished act or person. Particular complexity gives the problem of A. its both theological and legal character.

In the Middle Ages, both in the West and in the Orthodox East, the opinion of Blzh. Augustine that St. Baptism hinders total exclusion an individual from the Church, and even an anathema does not completely close the path to salvation (Aug.). Nevertheless, anathematization was explicated in the early medieval era in the West as “tradition to eternal destruction” (Latin damnatio aeternae mortis, excommunicatio mortalis), which was applied, however, only for mortal sins and only in case of special persistence in delusions and inability to correct ( 56th rights of the Cathedral of Meaux - Mansi J. D. Sacrorum Conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio Florentiae, 1759. T. 14. Col. 832).

In Orthodoxy, a church anathema is a conciliarly proclaimed excommunication of a person (a group of persons) whose thoughts and actions (whose) threaten the purity of dogma and the unity of the Church, “healing” an act of isolation from the community of believers, an act of education both in relation to the anathematized and in relation to the community of the faithful. A. is applied after repeated futile attempts to arouse repentance in the person who committed the crime and with the hope of repentance and his return to church communion in the future, and, consequently, to his salvation. The Catholic tradition continues to consider A. a curse and a loss of hope for salvation. Hence the different attitude to the anathematization of those who have departed from earthly life: if an anathema is a curse, then it turns out that the dead are being punished; if the anathema is evidence that a person does not belong to the Church, then this evidence can take place at any moment.

Since the basis of its anathema as a punishment is in the Holy. Scripture, i.e. follows from Divine law, its application is not limited to historical frameworks.

Proclamation of anathema

Acts that deserve an anathema, as a rule, are in the nature of a major dogmatic or disciplinary crime, so the personal anathema was applied in the ancient Church mainly to heresiarchs, false teachers, and schismatics. Due to the severity of this punishment, it was preferred to resort to it in the most extreme cases, when milder means of influencing the sinners turned out to be ineffective.

The pronunciation of an anathema over someone originally assumed the formula "let the name be anathema" (ἀνάθεμα ἔστω), that is, "let it be excommunicated (cursed)"; Gradually, the formula could take on a different form, in which the term "Anathema" already meant not the excommunicated subject, but the act of excommunication as such: "namerek'u - anathema". The wording “I anathematize (eat) the name and (or) his heresy” is also possible.

In view of the seriousness and responsibility of such a step as anathematizing someone, initially only a representative council of bishops, a synod headed by the Patriarch, and in the most difficult cases, the Ecumenical Council could be the authorized body for this. Cathedral. The patriarchs, even in those cases when they single-handedly decided the issue of betraying someone to A., preferred to present this as an official conciliar decision. An episode from the life of St. John Chrysostom, when, as Archbishop of Constantinople, he refused to single-handedly condemn the supporters of Bishop. Dioscorus of Hermopolis and the writings of Origen, but insisted on a "conciliar decision" (καθολικὴ διάϒνωσις - cf.: Socr. Schol. Hist. eccl. VI 14. 1-3).

In the history of the Christian Church, the most dramatic case of the use of A. was the mutual anathematization of papal legates, card. Friedrich (future Pope Stephen X), card. Humbert and Archbishop Amalfi Peter, and the K-Polish Patriarch Michael I Kirularius in 1054, which served as a formal reason for the irrevocable division of the Zap. (Catholic) and Vost. (Orthodox) Christ. churches.

In the Russian Orthodox Church, “canonical bans, such as… excommunication through anathematization, are imposed by the diocesan bishop or the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia and the Holy Synod only on the proposal of the church court” (Ustav, 2000. VII 5).

If an anathema is imposed after death, then this means a ban on commemorating the soul of the deceased, requiems and memorial services, and reciting permissive prayers.

In the Orthodox liturgical tradition since 843 (the restoration of icon veneration) there is a special rite of the “Triumph of Orthodoxy” - the annual proclamation of salvific dogmas of faith, A. to heretics, “Eternal memory” to the departed and many years to the living faithful (see Orthodox week).

Anathema for non-church purposes

Since anathema is the highest ecclesiastical punishment, its use for non-ecclesiastical (in particular, political) purposes is not considered canonical: it has no basis in canon law. However, in conditions of close rapprochement between ecclesiastical and secular authorities in Orthodox states, sometimes there was an anathema of a political nature. In the history of Byzantium, cases of anathematization of rebels and usurpers of imperial power are known: in 1026, with the active participation of Emperor Constantine VIII, a conciliar resolution was adopted to anathematize the organizers and participants of the rebellion. Similar definitions were issued by subsequent emperors (in 1171 and 1272). (In 1294, Patriarch John XII Cosmas and the bishops prevented the issuance of a similar decree in favor of Michael IX Palaiologos). The “political” use of the anathema was resorted to in Byzantium also during the period civil war in the 40s. 14th century However, even then this practice met with a sharp rebuff from such leading canonists and theologians as Patriarch Philotheus Kokkin and Matthew Angel Panaret, who relied in their argument on the treatise already considered, attributed to St. John Chrysostom, and the opinion of Theodore Balsamon. Opponents of the “political” anathema also rightly pointed out that Orthodox Byzantine emperors were also usurpers, whose names, therefore, should have been deleted from diptychs and not mentioned at the liturgy, which, however, did not happen. In the history of the Russian Church, a similar incident took place at the Council of 1667, when a dispute arose between Greek and Russian bishops regarding the admissibility of anathema for conspirators trying to overthrow the existing government. The Greeks, referring to a certain Alexandrian patriarchal "collection of laws", insisted on anathema for such persons, but the Russian bishops, recognizing the legitimacy of anathema for heretics and schismatics, saw no reason to excommunicate from the Church persons who opposed not church, but against secular power (Sinaisky , Archpriest S. 58-59).

Under Emperor Peter I, under conditions full control state over the Church, there is a known case of anathema to a state criminal, imposed not by a council of bishops, but by an imperial decree (excommunication of the rebel Stefan Glebov by decree of August 23, 1718).

To the apotropaic use, that is, averting from undesirable actions, anathemas include inscriptions on numerous medieval tombstones, threatening anathema to those who open the grave. Copyist scribes often included a written anathema on the first or last page of a manuscript for possible theft of the book to deter thieves. Curses were sometimes invoked on the head of those who dared to change the text of the book, although in the latter case one cannot speak of “non-church purposes”, because such an use of anathema also contains the text of Holy Scripture (cf.: Rev. 22. 18-19).

Spiritual and legal consequences of anathema

The official declaration of someone anathematized (or anathematized over someone) leads to the exclusion of this person from the church community, excommunication from the holy sacraments, a ban on attending church and claiming a Christian burial. In the West, at the latest from the 9th century. anathema also relied on communication with persons anathematized (enshrined in the 3rd canon of the Lateran II Council of 1139). The anathematized person was limited in his right to act as a plaintiff and witness in court, and his murder was not punished in the usual legal order.

Removing the anathema

Anathema is not an act that irrevocably closes the path to return to the Church and, ultimately, to salvation. The removal of anathema as the highest ecclesiastical punishment occurs through a complex legal action, including a) repentance of an anathematized person, which is carried out in a special, as a rule, public order; repentance is brought directly through an appeal to the body of church authority that imposed the anathema, or through a person appointed by him (for example, through a confessor), b) if there are sufficient grounds (sincerity and fullness of repentance, the execution of the prescribed church punishment, the absence of danger from the anathematized for others members of the Church) decision by the body that issued the penalty to forgive the person. The anathema can also be removed after death - in this case, all types of commemoration of the deceased are again allowed.

In 1964, in Jerusalem, on the initiative of Athenagoras, Patriarch of Constantinople (1886-1972), he met with Pope Paul VI. This was the first meeting of this level since the Union of Florence in 1439 (see Ferrara-Florence Cathedral). The result of the meeting was the abolition of mutual anathemas that had existed since 1054. Of great importance for the Russian Church is the abolition of the anathema to schismatics of the Old Believers by the Council of the Russian Orthodox Church in 1971.

Anathema in the Russian Orthodox Church

The use of anathema in the Russian Church has a number of significant features in comparison with the ancient Church. In the history of the Russian Orthodox Church, unlike the Byzantine Church, there were not so many heresies, she almost did not know cases of obvious falling away from Christianity into paganism or other religions. In the pre-Mongol era, a number of rules arose directed against pagan rites - for example, rules 15 and 16 of John II, Metropolitan of Kyiv (1076 / 1077-1089), declare "alien to our faith and outcast from the catholic Church" all who make sacrifices on the peaks mountains, near swamps and wells, does not observe the establishment of Christian marriage and does not receive communion at least once a year. According to canon 2 of Cyril II, Metropolitan of Kyiv (c. 1247-1281), excommunication threatened those who church holidays arranged noisy games and fisticuffs, and those who died in such battles were cursed "in this century and in the future" (V. N. Beneshevich. Ancient Slavic helmsman of XIV titles without interpretation. Sofia, 1987. T. 2. S. 183). In addition, Canon 5 of Metropolitan John excommunicates from the Church those who do not receive communion and eat meat and “bad things” in great post, rule 23 - persons who sell Christians into slavery to "filthy", rule 25 and 26 - those who have entered into incestuous marriages (Ibid., pp. 79, 85-86).

Among the population western outskirts There have been deviations of the Russian state into Catholicism or Protestantism, however, against compatriots who entered into a union with Rome or converted to Protestantism, the ROC never applied an anathema, it prayed for their reunification with the Orthodox Church. characteristic feature The ROC in the fight against heresies, sects and schisms was, as a rule, a cautious and balanced use of anathema - it was proclaimed to irreconcilable schismatics and heretics in accordance with canon law. In 1375, the Strigolniki were excommunicated from the Church - the Novgorod-Pskov heresy of the Strigolniki was perhaps the only Russian heresy. It continued in the XV - early. 16th century in the Novgorod-Moscow heresy of the “Judaizers” (see Vol. ROC. pp. 53, 69-71), the anathema to the “Judaizers” followed in 1490 and 1504. The Old Believer schism of 1666-1667, which arose on the basis of disagreement with the correction of church books and rituals according to the Greek model, became a peculiar phenomenon of the Russian Church - an anathema to the schismatics of the Old Believers was proclaimed at the Councils of 1666-1667. The "Spiritual Regulations" of Peter I (1720) also contains an anathema to the gentlemen who shelter schismatics on their estates (Part 2. Worldly persons. 5).

The "Spiritual Regulations" details in which cases, for which crimes anathema is issued ("... if anyone clearly blasphemes the name of God or Holy Bible, or the Church, or clearly there is a sinner, not ashamed of his deed, but even more so boasting, or without the correct guilt of repentance and the holy Eucharist over a year does not accept; or he does something else with obvious swearing and ridicule of the law of God, such, after repeated punishment, being stubborn and proud, is worthy of being judged by a fraction of punishment. For it is not only subject to anathema for sin, but for the obvious and proud contempt of the judgment of God and the authority of the Church with the great temptation of weak brethren ... ”- Part 2. About bishops. 16), what is the procedure for an anathema (if, after repeated exhortations, “the criminal is adamant and stubborn, then the bishop will not even proceed to the anathema, but first he will write to the Spiritual Collegium about everything that was done, and from the Collegium, having received permission in a letter, will obviously anathematize a sinner ... "- Ibid.), what are the consequences of an anathema for the anathematized person and his family ("... he himself is personally subject to this anathema, but neither his wife nor children ... "- Ibid.) and the conditions for permission from an anathema, if "exposed "repents and wants to repent, but if he does not repent and "learns to curse the anathema of the church," then the Spiritual Collegium asks the court of worldly power. Anathema cuts off a person from the Body of Christ, the Church, being already a non-Christian and “alienated from the inheritance of all the blessings acquired by the Savior’s death for us” (Ibid.).

The iconoclast heretics D. Tveritinov and his supporters were anathematized during their trial in 1713-1723. The punishment of heretics and schismatics in the Patriarchal period was not limited to anathema - it was usually supplemented by either corporal (including self-mutilating) punishment, or exile and imprisonment, and often the death penalty by burning (the latter was applied to the "Judaic" in 1504 , in relation to the schismatic Old Believers, legalized by a royal decree of 1684).

Church excommunication was also proclaimed against persons who committed grave crimes against the state - impostors, rebels, traitors. In all these conflicts with the secular authorities, however, there was an element of speaking out against Orthodoxy, either in the form of conspiracy with heretics (the impostor Grigory Otrepyev went over to the side of the Polish interventionists in the early 17th century, the betrayal of the Hetman of Little Russia Ivan Mazepa in 1709, during war with the Swedes), or in the form of direct persecution of the Church, as during the peasant wars of the 18th century.

The rite of the "Triumph of Orthodoxy", which came to the Russian Church after the baptism of Russia, was gradually subjected to changes and additions here: in con. 15th century it included the names of the leaders of the “Judaizers”, in the 17th century - the names of traitors and impostors “Grishka Otrepiev”, “Timoshka Akindinov”, the rebel Stenka Razin, the schismatics Avvakum, Lazar, Nikita Suzdalets and others, in the 18th century - the name "Ivashki Mazepa". The rank, which allowed changes by diocesan bishops, lost its uniformity over time, so the Holy Synod in 1764 introduced its new, corrected version, which is mandatory for all dioceses. In 1801, the rite of the Triumph of Orthodoxy was significantly reduced: it lists only the heresies themselves, without mentioning the names of heretics, and from the names of state criminals left (already in a corrected form) "Grigory Otrepiev" and "Ivan Mazepa". Later, in the revision of 1869, these names were also omitted - instead of them, the rank appeared common phrase about "daring to revolt" against "Orthodox sovereigns". With the passage of time, thus, when anathematizing well-known persons, the Russian Church gradually reduced their number, avoiding naming names and designating these persons in a generalized way, according to involvement in one or another dogmatic or disciplinary error, as well as state crime.

The excommunication of the writer Count Leo Nikolayevich Tolstoy, carried out by the Holy Synod (February 20-23, 1901), received a great response in Russian society at the beginning of the 20th century. In the Definition of the Synod, Count Tolstoy is called a “false teacher” who preaches “the overthrow of all the dogmas of the Orthodox Church and the very essence of the Christian faith”, who, “cursing over the most sacred objects of the faith of the Orthodox people, did not shudder to mock the greatest of the Sacraments – the Holy Eucharist. ... The attempts that were to his admonishment were not crowned with success. Therefore, the Church does not consider him a member and cannot count until he repents and restores his communion with her.” Instead of the word "Anathema" in the Definition of the Synod, the expressions "teared himself away from any communion with the Orthodox Church", "his falling away from the Church" were used. 4 Apr. 1901 c. Tolstoy responded to the Determination of the Holy Synod, in which he stated: “I really renounced the Church, stopped performing its rites and wrote in my will to my relatives that when I die, they would not allow church ministers to see me ... The fact that I I reject the incomprehensible Trinity and the fable about the fall of the first man, the story of God, born of the Virgin, redeeming the human race, then this is completely fair ”(Quote from: Spiritual tragedy of Leo Tolstoy. M., 1995. P. 88). Feb. In 2001, the great-grandson of the writer V. Tolstoy turned to His Holiness Patriarch Alexy II with a letter in which he asked to remove the excommunication from Count Tolstoy. In response to correspondents on this issue, His Holiness the Patriarch said: Count Tolstoy refused to be an Orthodox Christian, refused to be a member of the Church, we do not deny that this is a literary genius, but he has clearly anti-Christian works; Do we have the right in 100 years to impose on a person what he refused?

His Holiness Patriarch Tikhon twice anathematized “workers of lawlessness and persecutors of the faith and the Orthodox Church”: in 1918 in connection with the persecution that had begun and in 1922 in connection with the seizure of sacred objects from churches under the pretext of helping the starving (Acts of St. Tikhon. S. 82-85, 188-190). The anti-religious policy of the authorities in the late 50s - 60s caused the appearance of the Decree of the Patriarch and Rev. Synod No. 23 of 30 Dec. 1959 "On those who publicly blasphemed the Name of God": the clergy who committed this crime, ex. Archpriest Alexander Osipov, former priest Pavel Darmansky, “to be considered deposed from the priesthood and deprived of any church communion”, “Evgraf Duluman and other former Orthodox laity who publicly blasphemed the Name of God, excommunicated from the Church” (ZHMP. 1960. No. 2. P. 27). In the autumn of 1993, during an armed confrontation near the White House in Moscow, the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church issued a Statement (October 1), urging people to change their minds and choose the path of dialogue. On October 8, His Holiness Patriarch Alexy II, the Holy Synod and the hierarchs, who arrived at the Trinity-Sergius Lavra on the day of memory of St. Sergius of Radonezh, delivered an Appeal in which, without naming specific names, they condemned those who shed the innocent blood of their neighbors - “this blood cries out to Heaven and, as the Holy Church warned, it will remain an indelible seal of Cain” on their conscience (Pravoslavnaya Moskva, 1993, no. 5).

The Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church in 1994, in the Definition “On pseudo-Christian sects, neo-paganism and occultism”, following the apostolic tradition, pronounced the words of excommunication (A.) to those who share the teachings of sects, “new religious movements”, paganism, astrological, theosophical, spiritualistic about -in, etc., declaring war on the Church of Christ. The Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church in 1997 excommunicated Mon. Filaret (Denisenko). Deprived of all degrees of priesthood at the Council of Bishops in 1992, warned by the Council of Bishops in 1994 that he would be anathematized if his schismatic activities continued, he continued to perform “liturgy”, false consecrations; “not having holy orders, the monk Filaret, to the temptation of many, dared to call himself “Patriarch of Kyiv and All Russia-Ukraine””, with his criminal deeds he continued to damage Orthodoxy. Cathedral, based on Ap. 28, Sardik. 14, Antioch. 4, Vasil. 88, determined: “To excommunicate the monk Filaret (Mikhail Antonovich Denisenko) from the Church of Christ. May he be anathema to all the people." The cathedral warned the former members of the criminal activities. mon. Filaret, called them to repentance - otherwise they will be excommunicated from church communion through anathematism. The Council informed the Primates of the Local Orthodox Church. Churches about the anathematization of the former. mon. Filaret (Denisenko) (ZHMP. 1997. No. 4. S. 19-20). The Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church in 1997 condemned the anti-church activities of Gleb Pavlovich Yakunin, who was defrocked by the Determination of the Priest. Synod of 8 Oct. 1993 and warned by the Council of Bishops in 1994: "In the event of continued disorderly wearing of the priest's cross and priestly robes ... the question of his excommunication from the Church will be raised." G. P. Yakunin did not heed the call addressed to him for repentance and an end to the atrocities. Cathedral on the basis of Ap. 28, Karf. 10, Sardik. 14, Antioch. 4, Double. 13 Vasil. 88 determined: “To excommunicate Gleb Pavlovich Yakunin from the Church of Christ. Let him be anathema before all the people” (Ibid., p. 20).

Lit.: Kober F . Der Kirchenbann nach den Grundsätzen des Kanonischen Rechts dargestellt. Tübingen, 1857; Suvorov N . About church punishments: Experience of research on church law. St. Petersburg, 1876; Nikolsky K. Anathematization, or Excommunication. SPb., 1879; Uspensky F . AND . Synod for the Week of Orthodoxy. Odessa, 1892; Petrovsky A.V. Anathema // PBE. Stb. 679-700; Turner C. H. The History and Use of Creeds and Anathemas in the Early Centuries of the Church. L., 1906; Sinaisky A ., prot. On the fallen and excommunicated in the ancient Christian Church and the Russian. St. Petersburg, 1908; Preobrazhensky A . Church excommunication (anathema) in its history and in its fundamental motives. Kaz., 1909; Shiryaev V . N . Religious crimes. Yaroslavl, 1909; Troitsky A . D . Church excommunication and its consequences. K., 1913; Amanieu A . Anatheme // Dictionnaire de droit canonique. 1935 Vol. 1. P. 512-516; Moshin V . A ., prot. Serbian edition of Synodika // VV. 1959. T. 16. S. 317-394; 1960. T. 17. S. 278-353; ̓Αλιβιζάτος Α . ̓Ανάθεμα // ΘΗΕ. T. 2. Σ. 469-473; Gouillard J. Le Synodicon de l'Orthodoxie // Travaux et Mémoires. 2. Center de Recherches d' Hist. et Civ. Byzant. P., 1967; Doens I ., Hannick Ch . Das Periorismos-Dekret des Patriarchen Methodios I. gegen die Studiten Naukratios und Athanasios // JÖB. 1973. Bd. 22. S. 93-102; Beck H.-G. Nomos, Kanon und Staatsraison in Byzanz. W., 1981, S. 51-57; Darrouz e s J . Le patriarche Methode; ΡάλληΚ. M . Ποινικὸν δίκαιον τῆς ̓Ορθοδόξου ̓Ανατολικῆς ̓Εκκλησίας. Θεσσαλονίκη, 19933; Fögen M . Th. von. Rebellion und Exkommunikation in Byzanz // Ordnung und Aufruhr im Mittelalter: Historische und juristische Studien zur Rebellion. F./M., 1995. S. 43-80; Palamarchuk P . (ed.) Anathema: History and the XX century. [M.], 1998; Maksimovič K . Patriarch Methodios I. (843-847) und das studitische Schisma (Quellenkritische Bemerkungen) // Byz. 2000. T. 50/2. P. 422-446.

1. What is an anathema

Anathema(from Greek ana - far away; tihein - set) - separation, excommunication from the Church, from communion with the faithful and from the holy sacraments, performed in the name of Christian love in order to enlighten and correct the guilty and warn, protect faithful Christians from the danger of temptation.

Anathema is conciliarly proclaimed certificate Church about the falling away from it of sinners who fell into heresy or schism.

The anathema is proclaimed after repeated exhortations, remaining futile attempts to call repentance from the perpetrator of the crime and with the hope of his repentance and return to church communion, and, therefore, with the hope of his salvation. Anathema is not a curse, an act that irrevocably closes the path to return to the Church and salvation. With repentance, the anathema can be lifted.

Bishop Nikodim Milos In his interpretation of the 5th rule of the saints, the apostle explains what an anathema is:

“A complete exclusion from the church or a major excommunication (παντελής άφορισμός, excommunicatio omnimoda sive major) consists in the fact that a well-known member of the church, for a serious church crime, is clearly and proven, completely deprived of church unity, i.e., loses:
a) the right of common prayer with the faithful,
b) the right to participate in any church service, and least of all in the divine liturgy,
c) the right to perform any sacrament or church ceremony over him, and
d) the right to be buried and buried in Orthodox cemetery after death.
With a person who has undergone complete excommunication, not a single faithful person should have any religious communion, while clergy should not have private communion with him.

Hieromonk Job (Gumerov):

“The church concept of anathema (from the Greek ana - far; tihein - to set) means excommunication, separation. In the rules of the Ecumenical Councils and Local Councils, as well as the holy fathers, it occurs 31 times.

The Apostle Paul has a formula that expresses the judgment of God over the unbelievers (Gal. 1, 8; 1 Cor. 16, 22). "Whoever does not love the Lord Jesus Christ is anathema, maran - afá" (1 Cor. 16:22), says Paul. When he says: "I myself would like to be excommunicated from Christ for my brothers, my kindred according to the flesh, that is, the Israelites, to whom belongs the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the statute, and worship, and the promises" (1 Rom. 9:3-4), he specifies that an anathema for a Christian is excommunication from Christ.

A criminal against Christ himself cuts himself off from Him, but the Church of Christ can resort to conciliar anathematization as the highest ecclesiastical punishment for grave sins, primarily for betrayal of Orthodoxy and deviation into heresies and schisms. Anathema is conciliarly proclaimed and consists in excommunicating a Christian from communion with the faithful and from the holy sacraments. Since anathematization is not a curse both upon repentance and sufficient grounds anathema can be lifted, during life or after death, conciliar anathematization also serves last measure of enlightenment».

Hieromartyr Vladimir (Bogoyavlensky), Metropolitan of Kyiv and Galicia:

“... we will receive such a definition of it: it is a rejection from external and internal communion with the Church, based on natural and Divine law, a complete deprivation of all means of salvation acquired in St. Baptism, cutting off from the living body of Jesus Christ and bringing down the excommunicated into the state of an unredeemed person; it is the heaviest of all church punishments, used in order to correct the culprit to uphold the honor and dignity of church society and to prevent from other members of his danger of temptation and infection.

2. Judgment of love

Anathema is the judgment of love in Christ Jesus. It is proclaimed for to help those who stubbornly sin to come to their senses and turn to saving repentance, and also in order to protect Christians who might be offended unrighteous teachings, from the destructive poison of heresies and schisms.

Prof. I. M. Andreev:

“Every act of excommunication from the Orthodox Church is always an act of Divine wrath of Love. The purpose of any church excommunication is to contribute to the salvation of the perishing human soul. When nothing works to enlighten the erring, fear can help. “And to some be merciful, with consideration, and save others with fear” (Jude 1:22-23). This is what the Holy Church of Christ does.”

Writes that anathema

“does not stem from a feeling of hatred and malice, but out of Christian love, compassion and mercy, and in relation to humanity, it stands incomparably higher than all the decisions of the newest criminal code.

writes that "The judgment now pronounced by the Church is the judgment of love":

« And to some be merciful, with consideration, and save others with fear, pulling out of the fire.
(Jude 1:22-23).

Isn't this the same, brethren, that the Holy Church is doing today? Some of its members allowed themselves to be embraced by the corrupting flame of ungodly heresies - and now she raises her voice like a trumpet and strikes them with the fear of anathema. “Will not God give them repentance to the knowledge of the truth, so that they will be freed from the snares of the devil” (2 Tim. 2, 25-26). The remedy is truly one of the most effective! The mere thought that people like us are being expelled from the society of believers, outside of which there is and cannot be salvation—this thought alone involuntarily shakes the heart and sets the feeling in motion...

It is all the more regrettable, brothers, for the Church that the feeling of saving fear, which she tries to instill in her children through the sacred rite now performed, is often disfigured, and sometimes completely suppressed by other reprehensible feelings. ... Others fall into the opposite extreme: the feeling of fear at the hearing of an anathema, combined with a feeling of regret for those struck by it, turns in their hearts into a secret murmur against the alleged immoderate severity of church rules. “Why,” such people think, “is the Church now using the voice of love, so akin to her, to terrifying curses?” These are people of little faith who have the weakness to think that the Church of Christ can ever act contrary to the law of love, which is the main foundation of all her rules and laws.

... the judgment now pronounced by the Church is a judgment filled with love: this will calm the lack of faith of those who think to see excessive severity in it.

... The judgment now pronounced by the Church, being a terrible judgment, is at the same time a judgment of love. The property of every action, brethren, is known from the motives that disposed to the action, the means used, and the end for which it was undertaken.

So, what prompts the Church, this loving mother, who every day calls on the most obstinate children of her blessings of God, what prompts her now to utter curses? Firstly, the need to show their fallen children the depth of evil into which their superstition has plunged. Being tolerant in the depths of the Church, they could calm their consciences by saying that their delusions do not yet involve inevitable death for their souls, that their way of thinking can still be combined with the spirit of the Gospel, that they, at least, are not so far away. deviated from the common path, to be considered already completely lost.

… Exposing the erring to shame, the Church thereby takes away from the delusions the charm of the special wisdom with which they deceive; striking them with the name of God, it takes away the hope of security; contrasting the confession of the Ecumenical Church with the superstition of private people, reveals the insignificance of the latter. Let the erring continue to feed, if you like, their errors: the Church does not bind their minds; but she did her job, showed them the abyss in which they are, pronounced judgment on them in advance, which, in case of impenitence, will overtake them beyond the grave.

Thus, the anathema is the last warning voice of the Church to the erring. But the voice of warning, brethren, however loud it may be, is it not the voice of love?

What else motivates the Church to pronounce cursing now? The need to warn their faithful children from falling. It is known that delusions in the mouths and writings of pernicious people (see John 17:12) often have the most seductive appearance: all dangerous sides are covered in a skillful way; on the contrary, their pseudo-useful consequences, which exist only in words, are depicted with all their attractiveness, so that the simple mind is involuntarily and inconspicuously tempted by them. Detailed scholarly rebuttals of these errors, though they are not lacking for those who know, would be beyond the understanding of many members of the Church. After that, what was left for the Church to do? What she is doing now is to expose delusions to shame in their disgusting nakedness and, presenting them as an abomination before the eyes of everyone, strike them with a curse.

… anathema, even as an execution, is dissolved by Christian love. The excommunicated are not deprived of the means to repentance: they are in the greatest danger, for they are deprived of the cover of grace, but for them all is not yet lost. The doors of mercy, which have so many times been opened for them in vain, can still be opened. Leave delusion, turn with sincere repentance to the Church - and she will not reject the prayers of the penitent.

And how can the Church reject them, when precisely in this - in the conversion of the erring - is the main goal of the curses now pronounced?

... The Church now with all her children kneels before the Lord Jesus ... implores Him by her own merits to give the spirit of repentance to those who are anathematized for their impenitence. For how does the Church begin the solemn rite that is now performed? - Prayers for the conversion of the lost. How does it end? - The same prayers. Yielding to necessity, like a judge, she pronounces condemnation; submissive to love, like a mother, she invokes the Spirit of God upon the condemned.”

Prot. Maxim Kozlov:

“The Church… Announcing an anathema to someone… thereby openly testifies: this person, even if he calls himself a Christian, is such that he himself confirmed by his worldview and actions that he has nothing to do with the Church of Christ.
… anathema means not just excommunication, but the witnessing of the Church about what the perpetrator, for his part, knew for a long time and was confirmed in it: his worldview, positions and views do not coincide with the Church’s, do not correlate in any way.

… Anathema is not only a testimony to the church world about the guilty, but also a testimony addressed to them themselves, to these unfortunate people who have fallen into delusion, into proud self-blindness: “Think about it! The ultimate possible judgment on earth has been passed on you. Repent of what you have done and return to your father's house, to your native Church. No matter how strange it may seem to someone, but the anathema is also evidence of Christian love for already, it would seem, completely lost people, the anathema still does not deprive them of the path to repentance.

3. Judgment of God. The spiritual side of the anathema

The Orthodox Church, from the very beginning of its existence, has held and holds on to the conviction that anathema is a divine institution and that the bishops, in determining such punishment, are acting in the name and commission of God.

Clearly and unambiguously expresses this idea St. John Chrysostom when, drawing the grave consequences of the anathema, he says: "Let no one despise the bonds of the Church, for the binder here is not a man, but Christ, who gave us this power, and the Lord, who vouchsafed people such a great honor."

Having the will of God as its source, anathema has for the guilty person not only external, visible to all, but also internal - spiritual - consequences. He ceases to be in union with the mysterious body of the Church, is deprived of the grace-filled patronage of the Church, and therefore is not protected in any way from the power of the devil over his soul.

Saint Innocent of Kherson and Tauride (Borisov) also writes about it:

“What if God Himself appeared before the most arrogant freethinker, as once before Job, and called him to His judgment? (see Job 40:1-2). Would he not melt in fear at His majesty and glory? The mere thought that the Creator calls the creature to judgement, contains everything that can be amazing for the creature: the judgment of God is always terrible!

But whose judgment is the Church now judging? Yours or God's? God's brothers, God's!

The true Church has never appropriated to herself any authority other than that with which she is vested from her Divine Founder. If she now pronounces an anathema against the stubborn enemies of the truth, it is because the Lord Himself commanded her so. Here are His own words: “If he does not listen to the church, then let him be to you, like a heathen and a publican” (Matt. 18:17). Those now condemned have disobeyed the voice of the Church, have not heeded her exhortations: and now, following exactly the words of the Lord, she deprives them of the name of Christians, casts them out of her bosom as pagans. She binds them on earth, but at the same time, by the immutable judgment of God, they are bound in heaven as well. No visible bonds are imposed on them, but the most severe bonds of damnation are imposed. Only those who do not believe the words of the Lord, Who said: whatever you permit on earth, it will be allowed in heaven (Matt. 18:18), can doubt this.

…So, tremble, stubborn opponent of the truth! The judgment that is now pronounced against you, in its very subject matter, is the judgment of God! The consequences of the Last Judgment of this will be fully revealed outside this life, there those condemned by the Church will know in all their power how heavy the curse of the bride of Christ is! But even in this life, its consequences are such that they can terrify anyone who is not completely stagnant in the blindness of the mind. For imagine what a person who has been anathematized loses: he loses, firstly, the name of a Christian and becomes a pagan - a great loss!

... Together with the name, the thing is also lost: the one who has been anathematized already ceases to be in union with the mysterious body of the Church, he is a cut off member, a branch taken from the tree. The greatest loss! For outside the Church there are no Sacraments that resurrect us into eternal life, there are no merits of Jesus Christ, without which a person is an enemy to God, there is no Spirit of God - outside the Church is the domain of the spirit of malice. In the Apostolic Church, the devil struck with visible torments those who, by their vices, deserved to be excommunicated from the Church: without a doubt, even now this enemy of human salvation does not sleep in the destruction of these unfortunate ones, and as soon as they are deprived of the grace-filled protection of the Church, he rules over their souls with the same ferocity, although not as visible. Tell me, is it possible to imagine such a state without horror?

... Ah, who has been anathematized even in this life experiences the misfortune that unrepentant sinners are destined to endure beyond the grave! There are priests here, a bloodless sacrifice for sins is offered, but the excommunicated do not participate in this sacrifice: their name is blotted out from the list of believers, the Church does not remember them in her prayers, they are the living dead!

In vain, the excommunicated from the Church would calm his conscience with the fact that even outside the Church there is no impossibility to earn the mercy of God, that the mercy of the Creator is boundless, that “in every nation he who fears Him and does what is right is pleasing to Him” (Acts 10, 35). So! There is no partiality in God, He is the God of Christians and pagans, He rewards everyone according to their deeds. But due to the very fact that there is no partiality in God, He cannot look with an eye of good will on one who is expelled from the Church. How? God, by His infinite mercy, has grafted (see Rom. I, 24) you, like a wild branch, to the life-giving olive tree - Jesus Christ; you, instead of holding on to its root with all your strength and, drinking the juice of life into yourself, bearing the fruits of truth, broke off this olive tree with your superstition. Will the Heavenly Worker tolerate you in His garden? Do not order to throw into the fire? Where will be His justice, His impartiality? Do not say that you, being outside the Church, can bear the fruit of virtue. Where there is no soul, there is no life; soul - Jesus Christ - only in the body - in the Church: it means that you, with your imaginary virtues, are dead before God. - Everything “that is not of faith is sin” (Rom. 14:23); and you, excommunicated, what is your faith? Is it demonic (see James 3:15). A pagan is better than you with God; he was not honored with those gifts that you neglected: he was not a son of the Church, and therefore will not be judged as a criminal son. “Heretics,” Saint Cyprian once wrote, “think that God will have mercy on them too. He will not have mercy until they turn to the Church. He who does not have the Church as a mother cannot have God as a father.”

Jerome. Job (Gumerov):

Anathema has two sides: formally disciplinary (deprivation of the right of church communion) and spiritually mysterious ( real loss grace, despite formal participation in church life). According to the words of St. Innocent of Kherson: “He who has been anathematized already ceases to be in union with the mysterious body of the Church.”

4. Is it possible to cancel the anathema?

Anathema is not an irreparable curse, it is not an act that irrevocably closes the way to return to the Church and to salvation. With repentance and sufficient grounds, the anathema can be lifted.

Saint Innocent, Archbishop of Kherson and Taurida writes:

“... anathema is, as we said, the most terrible action of church authority: in a sense, it is a spiritual execution; for he who has been cursed is dead to the Church. But this execution is by no means the same as bodily execution. After a bodily execution, one does not resurrect for this life, but after this spiritual execution one can always be resurrected for spiritual life through true repentance. Thus, anathema, even as an execution, is dissolved by Christian love. The excommunicated are not deprived of the means to repentance: they are in the greatest danger, for they are deprived of the cover of grace, but for them all is not yet lost. The doors of mercy, which have so many times been opened for them in vain, can still be opened. Leave the delusion, turn with sincere repentance to the Church - and she will not reject the prayers of the penitent.

Hieromonk Job (Gumerov):

The path to the restoration of grace-filled unity with the Church, as the Body of Christ, lies only through the sacrament of repentance.

5. Foundation and history of the church anathema

The basis of the church anathema the words of Christ serve: “... if he does not listen to the Church, then let him be to you as a pagan and a tax collector” (Matthew 18:17):

15 If your brother sins against you, go and reprove him between you and him alone; if he listens to you, then you have gained your brother;
16 But if he does not listen, take one or two more with you, so that every word may be confirmed by the mouth of two or three witnesses.
17 But if he does not listen to them, tell the church; and if he does not listen to the church, then let him be to you, like a pagan and a publican.
(Matthew 18)

And also the words of the apostolic epistles:

Who does not love the Lord Jesus Christ, anathema, maran-afa.
(1 Cor. 16:22)

But even if we or an angel from heaven began to preach to you not what we preached to you, let it be anathema.
As we said before, [so] and now I say again: whoever preaches to you not what you received, let him be anathema.
(1 Gal. 8-9)

Hieromartyr Vladimir (Bogoyavlensky), Metropolitan of Kyiv and Galicia writes about it:

“But just as the Lord clearly entrusted the apostles and their successors with the right and authority to baptize and thus introduce the worthy into the Church, so clearly He empowered them to excommunicate the unworthy from it. A clear indication of the Lord’s granting of this last authority to the Church is found in His commandment, recorded in the Gospel of Matthew: “If your brother sins against you, go and reprove him between you and that one, if he listens to you, he acquired your brother’s ecu” (Matt. 18, 15). These are the first words of this commandment; they mean that if your neighbor offends you in word or deed or causes some harm, then do not take this case to court immediately, but first stand eye to eye with the offender, explain to him his wrong and try to personally persuade him to peace , repentance and correction. If you succeed in this, then you saved him, made a moral revolution in him and returned him to the path of good; because, as St. app. James, “turning a sinner from the error of his path, will save the soul from death and cover many sins” (James 5:20) - “If he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you; Yes, with the success of two or three witnesses, every word will be” (Matt. 18, 16), the Lord continues; i.e. if your first attempt to convert a sinner remains without consequences, then aggravate your exhortations, put the matter publicly, give the offender instruction in front of witnesses so that your words in their presence have more power, and he, seeing their unanimity with you, rather came to the consciousness of his sin and correction; for "the Savior," as St. John Chrysostom says, "seeks the benefit of not only the offended, but also the offended." - “If he does not listen to them, command the Church” (Matt. 18, 17), that is, if he remains adamant in the face of witnesses, and your convictions for correction without success, in which case you have the right to declare this circumstance to representatives Churches, so that these latter, in the presence of the community, would even more publicly and convincingly admonish him and even more insistently demand correction from him. - “If the Church also disobeys, be to you like a pagan and a tax collector” (Matthew 18:17); i.e., if he turns out to be so obdurate in his vicious direction that he disregards the sacred authority of the Church’s representatives, and shows them obvious and stubborn resistance, then the representatives of the Church have the right to excommunicate him as stubborn and incorrigible from their society and reduce him to the level of such people who do not belong to the Church at all.”

Prot. Maxim Kozlov:

“Already in the apostolic epistles it is spoken of the anathematization of those who do not confess Christ as the Son of God, considering Him to be only a wise teacher of morality or some kind of ideal prophet. The Holy Apostle Paul wrote: “As we said before, so now I say it again: whoever preaches to you not what you received, let him be anathema.” Anathemas were announced, of course, at the Ecumenical Councils. So, in the 4th century, the presbyter of the Alexandrian church, Arius, was convicted, denying that the Son of God is equal in everything to the Father. In the 5th century, the same fate befell Patriarch Nestorius of Constantinople, who falsely taught about the union of the Divine and human natures in Christ. There were such ecclesiastical trials until the 7th Ecumenical Council, at which the iconoclasts were anathematized.”

For the first time, the term "anathema" in the decrees of the Church was officially used in the canons of the Council of Elvira (after 300), and the canonical formula "if anyone ... let him be anathema" was established in church canons starting from the Council of Gangra (c. 340). Later the term "anathema" was used in the canons of the Council of Laodicea (29, 34, 35); II Ecumenical (1); Carthaginian (11, 81 (92), 109 (123), 110-116 (124-130)); III Ecumenical (7); Trullsky (1); VII Ecumenical (1); Constantinople (879) (3) and other cathedrals.

In February 1901, the Holy Synod excommunicated the writer Count Leo Nikolayevich Tolstoy as a "false teacher", preaching "the overthrow of all the dogmas of the Orthodox Church and the very essence of the Christian faith", who, "cursing over the most sacred objects of faith of the Orthodox people, did not shudder to mock the greatest of the Sacraments is the Holy Eucharist. ... The attempts that were to his admonishment were not crowned with success. Therefore, the Church does not consider him a member and cannot count until he repents and restores his communion with her.” Instead of the word "anathema" in the Definition of the Synod, the expressions "teared himself away from any communion with the Orthodox Church", "his falling away from the Church" were used. 4 April 1901 c. Tolstoy responded to the Determination of the Holy Synod, in which he stated: “I really renounced the Church, stopped performing its rites and wrote in my will to my relatives that when I die, they would not allow church ministers to see me ... The fact that I I reject the incomprehensible Trinity and the fable about the fall of the first man, the story of God, born of the Virgin, redeeming the human race, then this is completely fair. (Spiritual tragedy of Leo Tolstoy. M., 1995. P. 88).

His Holiness Patriarch Tikhon twice anathematized “workers of lawlessness and persecutors of the faith and the Orthodox Church”: in 1918 in connection with the persecution that had begun and in 1922 in connection with the seizure of sacred objects from churches under the pretext of helping the starving.

The anti-religious policy of the authorities at the end of the 1950s caused in 1959 the Decree of the Patriarch and the Holy Synod “On those who publicly blasphemed the Name of God”: the clergy who committed this crime, the former archpriest Alexander Osipov, the former priest Pavel Darmansky, “are considered deposed from the priesthood and deprived of any church communion”, “Evgraf Duluman and other former Orthodox laity who publicly blasphemed the Name of God should be excommunicated from the Church.”

On October 8, 1993, during an armed confrontation near the White House in Moscow, His Holiness Patriarch Alexy II, the Holy Synod and the hierarchs issued an Appeal in which, without naming specific names, they condemned those who shed the innocent blood of their neighbors - “this blood cries out to Heaven and, as the Holy Church warned, will remain an indelible seal of Cain” on their conscience.

In 1994, the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church in the Definition "On pseudo-Christian sects, neo-paganism and the occult" excommunicated from the Church those who share the teachings of sects, "new religious movements", paganism, astrological, theosophical, spiritualist societies, etc., declaring war Churches of Christ.

In 1997, the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church excommunicated monk Filaret (Denisenko). Deprived of all degrees of priesthood at the Council of Bishops in 1992, warned by the Council of Bishops in 1994 that he would be anathematized if his schismatic activities continued, he continued to perform “liturgy”, false consecrations; “not having holy orders, the monk Filaret, to the temptation of many, dared to call himself “Patriarch of Kyiv and All Russia-Ukraine””, with his criminal deeds he continued to damage Orthodoxy.

In 1997, the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church condemned the anti-church activities of Gleb Pavlovich Yakunin, who was deprived of the priesthood by the Resolution of the Holy Synod of 8 October. 1993 and warned by the Council of Bishops in 1994: "In the event of continued disorderly wearing of the priest's cross and priestly robes ... the question of his excommunication from the Church will be raised." G. P. Yakunin did not heed the call addressed to him for repentance and an end to the atrocities. Cathedral on the basis of the Rules of Ap. 28, Karf. 10, Sardik. 14, Antioch. 4, Double. 13 Vasil. 88 determined: "To excommunicate Gleb Pavlovich Yakunin from the Church of Christ."

6. The rite of anathematism on the Sunday of the Triumph of Orthodoxy

The rite of the Triumph of Orthodoxy was established in Greece in the 9th century, in memory of the final victory over the enemies of Orthodoxy - the iconoclasts.

Jerome. Job (Gumerov):

“In 842, after the death of the last iconoclast emperor Theophilos, St. Empress Theodora and Patriarch of Constantinople St. Methodius finally restored the veneration of icons, confirmed at the VII Ecumenical Council (787). Orthodoxy was solemnly restored at a festive divine service in the Cathedral of St. Sophia in Constantinople on the first Sunday of Great Lent, February 19, 843. At the same time, anathemas were uttered against all heresies and all heretics. Gradually, this service expanded. In the order of the current divine service of the week of the Triumph of Orthodoxy, all heresies are actually named. The world, which according to St. Apostle John the Theologian "lies in evil" (1 John 5:19), continues to tempt people with various "new" false teachings. But all this is just old heresies in new guises.”

Triumph of Orthodoxy takes place on the first Week (Sunday) of Great Lent. This service represents the triumph of the church over all heresies and schisms that have ever existed. It affirms not only the Orthodox teaching on icon veneration, but also all the dogmas and decrees of the seven Ecumenical Councils. Not only iconodules are blessed, but also all those who live and have departed to the Lord in the faith and piety of their fathers. A special place in this service is occupied by the rite of anathematization. Anathema is proclaimed conciliarly not only to iconoclasts, but to all who have committed grave sins against the Church.
The rite of Orthodoxy in the Russian Empire was performed in cathedrals after reading the hours or before the end of the Liturgy in the middle of the church in front of the icons of the Savior and the Mother of God, reclining on the lectern. The rite contained the reading of the Creed, the pronouncing of an anathema to apostates from Orthodoxy, and the proclamation of eternal memory to all defenders of Orthodoxy. The twelve anathematizations, as they were proclaimed by the clergy on behalf of the church until 1917, are given below.

Twelve anathematizations

1. Denying the existence of God and affirming that this world is original and everything in it without God's providence and on occasion happens: anathema.

2. Those who say God should not be spirit, but flesh; or not be His righteous, merciful, wise, omniscient and like blasphemy to those who pronounce: anathema.

3. Those who dare to say that the Son of God is not consubstantial and not of equal honor with the Father, so is the Holy Spirit, and those who confess the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit are not one God: anathema.

4. Those who say foolishly that it is not necessary for our salvation and for the cleansing of sins, the coming into the world of the Son of God in the flesh, and His free suffering, death and resurrection: anathema.

5. To those who do not accept the grace of the redemption preached by the Gospel, as our only means of justification before God: anathema.

6. To those who dare to say that the Blessed Virgin Mary was not before Christmas, at Christmas and after Christmas the Virgin: anathema.

7. Unbelievers, like the Holy Spirit, make the prophets and apostles wise and through them lead us to the true path to eternal salvation, and confirm this with miracles, and now dwells in the hearts of faithful and true Christians and instructs them in all truth: anathema.

8. Those who avenge the immortality of the soul, the end of the age, the future judgment and eternal reward for virtues in heaven, and condemnation for sins: anathema.

9. To those who abolish all the sacraments, the holy one, supported by the Church of Christ: anathema.

10. To those who reject the councils of the saints, the Father and their traditions, who agree with Divine Revelation, and who are piously preserved by the Orthodox Catholic Church: anathema.

11. Sovereigns who think, as if Orthodox, are not enthroned by the special goodwill of God, and when anointed to the kingdom of the gift of the Holy Spirit to the passage of this great title, they are not poured out on them: and so daring against them for rebellion and treason: anathema.

12. Those who scold and blaspheme the holy icons, even the Holy Church, to the remembrance of the deeds of God and His saints, for the sake of exciting those who look at them to piety, and whom they accept as imitation, and those who say them be idols: anathema.

On the first Sunday of Great Lent in some churches, part of which should be anathematization. What is an anathema, to whom it was proclaimed in the past, and is it not necessary to include modernized anathematisms in the ancient rite? We asked Archpriest Vladislav Tsypin, Doctor of Church History, teacher of canon law at the Sretensky Theological Seminary, to answer these questions.

- Father Vladislav, when and in connection with what did the rite of the Triumph of Orthodoxy appear?

The rite of the Triumph of Orthodoxy came into use after the relapse of the iconoclastic heresy had been overcome. , who became the ruler of Byzantium after the death of her iconoclastic husband. As an icon worshiper, she used her power to help Orthodox Christians win.

After the victory over iconoclasm - the last great heresy of the era of the Ecumenical Councils - the mentioned rite of the Triumph of Orthodoxy was compiled and established. Part of this order, indeed, is the proclamation of an anathema to heresiarchs.

- What is an anathema in fact? Is it right, as some do, to call an anathema a "church curse"?

The word "curse" is the Russian equivalent of the Greek (ἀνάθεμα). At the same time, the word “curse” received from us an additional meaning of condemnation to eternal torment. The literal meaning of the word "anathema" consists in the deprivation of church communion - not temporary, like penance, not on certain period but in the perfect and complete. Of course, in the spirit of the Church of Christ, such an excommunication would still be subject to annulment if there were repentance of the excommunicated person.

- That is, even an anathematized heretic, having repented, could return to the Church?

In cases of anathematization of well-known heresiarchs, unfortunately, there was no such return. This extreme measure is not applied lightly by the Church, but only when it arises. If in other cases this measure served to correct and admonish the anathematized, then it, of course, was canceled.

- Are there such examples in the history of the Church?

I repeat: only not in the case of those who went down in history as the founders of heresy. But at the Council of Chalcedon, anathemas were removed from Blessed Theodoret and Willow of Edessa. An indispensable condition for removing the anathema from them was the proclamation by them of a public anathema to Nestorius. When they, who in the past revered him, although not of the same mind with him, fulfilled this, they were accepted into church communion.

Would it be correct to say that the proclamation of an anathema is a statement by the Church of the fact that a person is outside Her body?

Exactly. Statement in cases of qualified guilt of the excommunicated. Almost always, with the exception of political criminals in Russia, heresiarchs - leaders of heretics - were anathematized. As for the other heretics, usually when anathematizing, they were not designated by name, but simply “like them”, that is, those who follow the founder of the heresy, maintain communion with him.

At present, the rite of the Triumph of Orthodoxy is not performed in full in all churches, and anathematization is often omitted. In your opinion, what explains this?

As for the ancient heresiarchs, they lived in the distant past. Anyone who knows church history knows the names of heresiarchs and the very fact of their anathematization, that is, excommunication from church communion. I think this is the reason why in most churches, with the exception of some cathedrals, these anathematisms are not proclaimed.

The point is also that over time, new ones were added to the ancient anathematisms. Moreover, in Russia, in addition to heretics, political criminals were also anathematized, who, of course, committed serious sins: murder, violence - and they certainly deserved church bans. In this row, "Grishka Otrepiev", "", "Emelka Pugachev", "Stenka Razin". I give their names in the form in which they were used in the rite of anathematization. These are pejorative names, and it would not be entirely correct to write them in this form under other circumstances, say, in a historical study. However, the very fact of being anathematized for political reasons still does not fully correspond to the initial message of the rite - the proclamation of the founders of heresies as being outside the Church.

It is also likely that in Soviet times the annual proclamation of an anathema to Pugachev or Razin would have been perceived as some kind of political action. Then their names were surrounded by a romantic halo, they themselves were put on a par with revolutionaries, and their biographies and activities were key topics for Soviet historiography of the 17th-18th centuries. I don’t know exactly what the reaction of the authorities could have been, but I fully admit that they could simply ban it, and in the 1930s, punishment could follow such an anathema proclamation from the church pulpit.

- Were these political criminals excommunicated after being convicted by a secular court?

They were excommunicated for their established criminal, and therefore sinful, deeds. Another thing is that for some of them there was no way back to the Church due to the fact that they were subjected to the death penalty. But not all the anathematized were executed: in the case of Mazepa, for example, the execution was only symbolic.

- How interconnected was the proclamation of anathema and the civil execution of a heretic in the past?

In the Middle Ages, keeping a heretic alive was a big problem. I do not mean early Christian times and the era of the Ecumenical Councils. Then, in Byzantium, only extreme heretics, such as the Manicheans, were executed, and even then not always. It never happened that the Monophysites, or the Monothelites, or the Nestorians as such were subjected to the death penalty merely for their views. There could be all sorts of excesses, but this was not the norm.

By contrast, in medieval Western Europe, being declared a heretic generally carried the death penalty. In Spain, for example, this happened to Protestants until the beginning of the 19th century.

- Does the Catholic Church have a similar rite containing an anathema to heretics?

Undoubtedly. I do not know how this happens, but, of course, the canonical act of excommunication itself exists and is applied quite widely in our time.

Now among educated people, but far from the Church, when the term “anathema” is mentioned, Leo Tolstoy is often remembered. And then, as a rule, accusations against the Church follow, which supposedly helped the tsarist government to crack down on a bright dissenting personality ...

You know, with Tolstoy it wasn't quite like that. What is written in famous story Kuprin - this is fiction. Tolstoy's name has never been officially included in the order of the Triumph of Orthodoxy for anathematization. And in general, the term “anathema” is not used in the act of excommunication from church communion. The meaning of this act is tantamount to anathematization, but it is expressed more delicately, in more careful words, precisely because the word "anathema" was perceived in wide circles as odious. For obvious reasons, the Holy Synod did not use this term in relation to Tolstoy. The act of his excommunication contained only a statement: until the writer repents (and there was a possibility of his repentance), he remains outside the Church, and what he preaches does not express the teachings of the Church. It was quite obvious that Tolstoy's long preaching of ideas radically at odds with Orthodox Church teaching, accompanied by caustic attacks against Church sacraments, must have provoked some reaction.

Of course, at the same time or a little earlier, people lived and acted who publicly declared their worldview, which placed them outside the Church, such as Chernyshevsky, Pisarev, Herzen, as well as political figures of the opposition - the same Milyukov, who directly declared himself an atheist. However, they were not anathematized. There was more danger in Tolstoy's preaching. The fact is that many of those who sincerely considered themselves Christians became followers of Tolstoy, but were looking for a “better” and “most perfect” Christianity. To them, under the guise of "Christianity", the writer offered his own conjectures, and therefore, in religious terms, he was more dangerous than just an atheist.

Do you consider it expedient to resume the use of this part of the rite of the Triumph of Orthodoxy with the introduction of some changes in those of its provisions that can currently be perceived as an anachronism, for example, in the part concerning Orthodox sovereigns? It anathematizes “those who think, as if they are Orthodox, sovereigns are enthroned not by God’s special favor for them,” as well as those who dare “to rebel against them and treason” ...

It would be possible to think about changing the provisions of anathematisms somewhat. But it is impossible to solve this problem easily, because in the absence of Orthodox monarchs at the present time, such a change would mean a completely definite political position. On the contrary, the restoration of the mention of sovereigns could be perceived as agitation for the restoration of the monarchy, and the Church cannot take a political platform. Meanwhile, if you carefully read the text of this particular anathematism, it will become obvious that it does not point to the monarchy as the absolutely correct and only possible form of government. It's about about the fact that if the monarchs are crowned king and anointed, then this happened by the action of the Holy Spirit, that anointing to the kingdom is not just a symbol, but a real act of grace.

Speaking abstractly, it is possible to change this anathematism so that it refers to carriers state power generally. But it is obvious that Orthodox faith implies faith in the Providence of God. This means that all state power is set or allowed by God. To extend this anathema to all those who do not believe that any official, deputy, and in general anyone who is involved in state power, is either allowed by God or appointed? But one cannot but believe in this, because otherwise, as by the will of God, and in about los from the head of a man will not fall. However, this is a completely different idea. Therefore, such an alteration of the text does not seem appropriate. It is possible to change the content of this anathematism in some other way, but this requires serious and thorough consideration by the conciliar mind of the Church.

List of 12 anathematisms proclaimed until 1917:

1. Those who deny the existence of God and affirm that this world is original and everything in it without God's Providence and occasionally happens: anathema.
2. Those who say God should not be Spirit, but flesh; or not be His Righteous, Merciful, Wise, Omniscient and similar blasphemy to those who pronounce: anathema.
3. Those who dare to say that the Son of God is not consubstantial and not equal to the Father, so is the Holy Spirit, and those who confess the Father and the Son, and the Holy Spirit are not the only God: anathema.
4. Those who say insanely that it is not necessary to be for our salvation and for the cleansing of sins, the coming into the world of the Son of God in the flesh, and His free suffering, death and resurrection: anathema.
5. To those who do not accept the grace of the redemption preached by the Gospel, as our only means of justification before God: anathema.
6. Those who dare to say that the Blessed Virgin Mary did not exist before Christmas, at Christmas and after Christmas the Virgin: anathema.
7. For those who do not believe, as the Holy Spirit, make wise the prophets and apostles and through them lead us to the true path to eternal salvation, and confirm this with miracles, and now dwells in the hearts of faithful and true Christians and instructs them in all truth: anathema.
8. Those who will abolish the immortality of the soul, the end of the age, the future Judgment and eternal reward for virtues in heaven, and condemnation for sins: anathema.
9. To those who abolish all the Holy Sacraments, contained by the Church of Christ: anathema.
10. To those who reject the councils of the saints, the Father and their traditions, who agree with Divine Revelation, and who are piously preserved by the Orthodox Catholic Church: anathema.
11. Those who think, as if Orthodoxy, Sovereigns are not enthroned on the thrones by the special favor of God for them, and when they are anointed to the kingdom, the gifts of the Holy Spirit to the passage of this great title are not poured out on them; and tacos daring against them for rebellion and treason: anathema.
12. Scolding and blaspheming the holy icons, even the Holy Church, to the remembrance of the deeds of God and His saints, for the sake of exciting those who look at them to piety, and whom they accept as imitation, and those who say them be idols: anathema.

To anathematize - what is it.

A fairly well-known, often used, but usually not understood, phraseological unit: to anathematize - what is it. To anathematize, to declare an anathema, to read an anathema - these are synonyms for excommunication of a person from the church. However, not any person, but only a Christian who considers himself belonging to this church, but who, according to the church, is: a heretic. That is, the expression to anathematize is a purely internal, special church term. And it would be right to treat it this way, and not try to interpret the meaning of the expression - anathematize it, based on external, non-ecclesiastical, secular positions. Secular people who are not Christians usually "sin" unique ability simplify everything wildly. "Along the way" distorting the meaning of any church terms, in the most unpredictable way. Giving, at will, a completely uncharacteristic meaning to phraseology: to anathematize, which is an internal church term. we don’t even always know how to put the stress in the word anathema correctly, but we also give an interpretation there.

To anathematize - what is it? A synonym for anathematization, as we know, will be the expression: excommunication from the church. If we are talking about Orthodoxy, then people who consider themselves Orthodox Christians or declare themselves to be Orthodox Christians are excommunicated. However, in practice, those who profess a different religion and preach a doctrine incompatible with Christianity are anti-Christian views on behalf of the church. Leading an anti-Christian sermon, as if from within Orthodox Church, presenting their views as an updated, improved, advanced version of Orthodoxy, as opposed to the "outdated, distorted" church. That is, heretics.

It is clear that such a crafty position of a heretic and the situation as a whole cannot be considered normal and a natural reaction of the church arises, expressed in the desire to distance itself from heretical teachings or anti-Christian preaching conducted on its behalf. As a form of warning to Christians that the views of a heretic on doctrinal and dogmatic issues cannot be identified with the opinion of the church and supported by reference to its authority, there is the practice of an official announcement confirming the factual situation, "dividing the parties." Such an official announcement or warning is called excommunication or anathema to a heretic. Type of signal: beware - this is a sect.

To anathematize - what is it in a practical sense? The anathema does not provide for real physical actions or any restrictions on the freedom of expression of a heretic's own religious views. In addition to the ban on the preaching of heretical teachings within the walls of churches and church educational institutions. Therefore, anathematization or excommunication from the church is not considered in Orthodoxy as a punishment or a curse. But only as an informational message about the actual situation. Sometimes such an aspect of anathematization is indicated as a ban on visiting an Orthodox church. However, this is not true. A person excommunicated from the church, at his request, can visit an Orthodox church, pray, put candles in front of the icons, attend the service.

The Orthodox Church simply does not have a mechanism, a punitive body or a monitoring organization that allows, at least theoretically, to implement such a ban in practice. Yes, and it is stupid to chase a person around the temple, not allowing him to light candles - this is absurd. No one has ever reached such idiocy. If a heretic wants to light a candle in a church, let him. AT Orthodox church a representative of any religion, even the most anti-Christian, can put candles and pray in front of the icons. As long as a citizen observes the rules of conduct in an Orthodox church, behaves decently, that is enough. Moreover, you can pray at home - there would be a desire.

Anathema - what is it and is it possible for an excommunicated person to go to church? It is assumed that a heretic excommunicated from the church cannot be admitted to the Mysteries of Christ. However, in practice, such a ban can be implemented only in a completely fantastic situation. When an excommunicated heretic, he will inform the priest that he is anathematized and ask to be admitted to the Church Sacrament. Naturally, in such a situation, the priest will refuse. But upon admission to the Sacraments of Christ, no one is satisfied with "passport control" and there is no practice of "checking with the black list."

A repentant heretic who has renounced his views, without special procedures, can be churched, without re-baptism, after the removal of the anathema and admitted to all Church Sacraments. With the only limitation that it is generally considered impossible to restore him to the priesthood if he was previously. But even here there are subtleties, exceptions, special situations taken into account by the church.

(from the Greek. anatithenai - to establish or consecrate), in the Old Testament the word anathema refers to the creature or object being sacrificed. The sacrifice was considered both sacred and cursed. In the descriptions of the religious wars, the enemies and their besieged cities are also anathematized.

In the New Testament, the term has taken on a different meaning. St. Paul meant by the word anathema damnation and expulsion from the Christian community. In 431 St. Cyril of Alexandria advanced the famous 12 anathemas against the heretic Nestorius. Starting from the VI century. anathema came to mean the most severe form of excommunication of a heretic from the Christian church and condemnation of his doctrine. Excommunication from the sacraments was considered a milder form; guilt could be atoned for with the help of penance.

Ritual and order of proclamation anathemas was installed at the Council of Chalcedon (451) since then it has been repeatedly used for political purposes against various public figures, which, in the end, undermined the faith of most Christians in the mystical effectiveness of the ritual. Last anathema in the Orthodox Church was proclaimed in 1918 by Patriarch Tikhon, who thus cursed the dictatorship of the Bolsheviks in Catholicism anathemas communists were proclaimed until the end of the 60s.

Definitions, meanings of the word in other dictionaries:

bible encyclopedia

Anathema (curse, excommunication) (I Cor. XVI, 22) - under this word in general sense of course, the doom of any animal, person, or place of final death, or Divine vengeance (Lev. XXVII, 28, Joshua VI, 16). In a closer sense, under the word anathema in the ancient Christian ...

bible encyclopedia

Anathema, maran-afa (I Cor. XVI, 22) - Syrian exclamation, meaning: let him be excommunicated until the coming of the Lord. With these words, the Jews began the severe sentence of extreme excommunication, and by the power of the aforesaid words, the guilty person was not only excommunicated from their midst, but was already doomed, as far as it was ...

Encyclopedia "Religion"

ANATHEMA (from the Greek. "erect", "dedicate") - originally (Old Testament [see]) - a creature or object intended for sacrifice. Their use for other purposes was forbidden, they were doomed to destruction, becoming sacred or cursed at the same time. Apostle...