§ 152. a) Penalties for Laity

The church penalty to which a layman may be subjected for a sin he has committed is called in the canons excommunication (ἀφορισμός, excommunicatio).[1] It consists in this: that the sinner, according to the gravity of the sin committed, is deprived of greater or lesser participation in the church communion with the other faithful. This deprivation of communion, or excommunication, as we have mentioned, was a means that the church employed so that the sinner concerned might be converted; and for this she imposed on him certain penances, which he had to undergo until he had been wholly cleansed of the sin and had become worthy to be received again into the communion of the church. The graver the sin, the greater the penance and the longer the time of repentance lasted, and vice versa. There were four degrees of penance through which penitents had to pass. The first degree, σύστασις (consistentia), consisted in this: that the penitent could pray in church together with the others, but had no right to receive communion. The second, ὑπόπτωσις (substratio, genuflexio)—in this, that the person concerned could take part only in certain prayers in church, and at the appointed moment bent the knee, publicly confessed his sin, and, having heard the prayer read over him, would leave the church. The third, ἀκρόασις (auditio)—in this, that the penitent was allowed to stand only in the narthex (νάρθηξ, πρόναον) of the church, and from there to listen until the ordinary sermon had been spoken, at which point he had to withdraw. Finally the fourth, πρόσκλαυσις (fletus), consisted in this: that such penitents were forbidden entry into the church altogether, and they stood in penitential dress at the doors of the church, weeping and begging the faithful to obtain for them, by their prayers, forgiveness of their sins. As can be seen, this last degree was the heaviest, and the church condemned to it only those who had committed some grave sin. At every degree the persons concerned remained for years, and for all that time they had to perform various works of mercy, they prayed, they fasted, and they wore penitential garments.[2]

This was gradually abolished, and today there remains only deprivation of communion for a longer or shorter time, as the church penalty for laity,[3] and anathema. At death, whatever the offence a layman may have committed, if only he repents, the church deems him worthy of communion, and accordingly of Christian last rites and burial.[4] This last she refuses only to obstinate sinners who, even at the hour of death, were unwilling to be reconciled with the church, just as she likewise refuses it to those who deliberately deprive themselves of life, that is, suicides.[5]

Distinct from the penalties mentioned is anathema (ἀνάθεμα),[6] or the final exclusion of a person from the church. This penalty has its basis in holy scripture, and thus derives from divine right.[7] The church imposed this penalty for the gravest church offences, and only in extreme cases, when no other means availed to turn the person concerned onto the right path.[8] Anathema was usually pronounced at solemn church rites; and, in order to keep this dreadful penalty alive in the memory of the faithful, it was established at the Council of Constantinople of 842 that every year, on the first Sunday of Great Lent (the Sunday of Orthodoxy), all the offences against which anathema had been pronounced should be recalled at the solemn church service.[9] The effects of anathema consisted in this: that the person who had incurred anathema was deprived not only of the rights that the other members of the church possessed, that is, communion and common church prayer, but was also deprived of the right to associate with Orthodox Christians in ordinary life; and any Orthodox believer who dared to enter into any relation whatsoever with such a person was himself subjected to strict penalties.[10] Since the basis of this penalty rests on divine right, the church has the right, both now and always, to subject to anathema anyone who deserves it; and the secular authority, just as in earlier times it recognized the decisions of the church authority in this regard and for its part likewise subjected to its own penalties those persons who, for certain church offences, had incurred this church penalty,[11] so too that same secular authority, at least in most Christian states, subjects such church offenders today as well to its own penalties.[12]