Green on Article XXXIII: Of Excommunicate Persons, how they are to be avoided

The object both of this Article and of Article XXXIV. is the regulation of the internal discipline and usages of the Church, upon which subject there was much warm discussion in England during the reign of Edward VI.

§ 3.—. EXPOSITION.

(1.) The Church has the power of Excommunication.

That person which by open denunciation of the Church, is rightly cut off from the unity of the Church, and excommunicated.

In the Christian Church in all ages Excommunication has been practised, as indeed every society, if it is to exist in a healthy condition, must have the power of excluding unworthy members, and such as refuse to comply with the

conditions of membership.1 The Lord Himself gave to the Church the power of Excommunication (S. Matt, xviii. 15 — 18), and we have in the New Testament itself evidences of the exercise of the power. (See I Cor. v. 3— 5 ; I Tim. i. 20 ; cf. Tit. iii. 10.)

In the exercise of the disciplinary power of the Church three stages are to be distinguished : —

[…]

Cf. S. Ambrose, De Offic., lib. ii. cap. xxvii. : —

“ Cum dolore amputatur etiam, quae putruit pars corporis, et diu tractatur, si potest sanari medicamentis : si non potest, tunc a medico bono absciditur. Sic episcopi adfeetus boni est, ut optet sanare infirmos, serpentia auferre ulcera, adurere aliqua, non abscidere : postremo quod sanari non potest, cum dolore abscindere.”

(b) In case he persists in his error he is suspended from Communion. This is called the Lesser Excommunication, and did not exclude the offender from the Church, but from participation in the Eucharist and in the prayers of the faithful.

Cf. Theodoret, Epist. lxxvii. ad Eulalium : —

[…]

This Lesser Excommunication was inflicted for less serious crimes, or upon those who, having committed serious offences, exhibited signs of true repentance, and expressed their willingness to submit to penitential discipline.

(c) Lastly, there is the Greater Excommunication, or Anathema, as it was sometimes called, involving expulsion from the Church (1 Cor. v. 5? TrapaSovvai tm Varava) cf. I Tim. i. 20), and cutting off the guilty person not only from all share in the holy offices of her members, but even from all Christian fellowship. (See under heading (2.) below.)

1 We find Excommunication sanctioned under the Old Covenant, involving the separation of the offender from social intercourse and exclusion from par¬ ticipation in any Religious service (Gen. xvii. 14; Exod. xii. 19; Lev. vii. 20; Ezra x. 8 ; cf., in the New Testament, S. Luke vi. 22, acpoplawaiv ; S. John ix. 22, aTrocTwaycoyos ytvrjTCu ; xii. 42 ; xvi. 2).

This extreme penalty was reserved for such as persevered in sin after repeated warning, or had denied the faith ; and those thus cut off, if they remained impenitent, were not allowed Communion even in the hour of death, nor were they permitted the privilege of burial according to the rites of the Church.1

It is with this Greater Excommunication that our Article is concerned.

That the Church of England claims the power of using such Excommunication 2 appears further from —

(i.) Canon 65, which gives directions for the public denounc¬ ing of excommunicate persons.

(ii.) Canon 85, which, in detailing the duties of Church¬ wardens or Questmen, specifies —

“Especially they shall see … that all persons excom¬ municated, and so denounced, be kept out of the Church.”

(iii.) The Rubric at the commencement of the Burial Office, which provides that —

“ The Office ensuing is not to be used for any that die un baptized, or excommunicate, or have laid violent hands upon themselves.”

(2.) The attitude of Christians toward the Excommunicate.

That person which by open denunciation of the Church, is rightly cut off from the unity of the Church, and excommunicated,

1 In the eleventh century, owing to the fact that powerful barons, princes, and kings, sometimes defied a sentence of Excommunication, we find the more terrible sentence of Interdict occasionally resorted to by the Popes. This was, in fact, an excommunication of a whole district, province, or kingdom, accord¬ ing to the circumstances of the particular case. A well-known example in English history is the Interdict under which Pope Innocent III. laid this country (March 24, 1208) on account of his struggle with King John.

2 A form of publishing sentence of Excommunication was sanctioned by Convocation in 1571. After recounting the offence, it proceeds thus : —

“Et quoniam praedictus A.B. conscientia nequitiae suae, ad diem legitime dictum comparere contempsit, et se justitiae contumaciter subduxit, et alios exemplo suo ad similem contumaciam animavit ; idcirco hoc etiam vos in- super admonitos volo, episcopum nostrum nomine atque auctoritate Dei optimi maximi excommunicasse ilium ab omni societate ecclesiae Dei, et tanquam membrum emortuum amputasse a Christi corpore. Hoc file in statu versatur hoc tempore, et in tanto discrimine animae suae. Divus Paulus admonitus instinctu divini Spiritus, jubet ut talium hominum societatem, et contubernia fugiainus, ne participes simus ejusdem sceleris. Tamen, ut Christiana charitas nos monet, quoniam ipse pro se orari non vult, nec periculum suum intelligit, oremus Deum omnes ejus nomine, ut aliquando agnoscat miseriam, et foedi- tatem vitae suae, et agat poenitentiam, et convertatur ad Deum : Deus enim noster est misericors, et potest lapsos etiam a morte revocare.”

2 M

ought to he taken of the whole multitude of the faithful as an Heathen and Publican.1

Our Article is here referring to the words of the Lord, Who enjoined that when an obstinate offender refuses to listen to the admonition of the Church he is to be regarded as “ an Heathen and Publican” (S. Matt, xviii. 17). The particular terms employed were adopted by our Lord from the phraseology of His Jewish contemporaries, amongst whom both heathen and publicans were looked upon with abhorrence, and held to be without the pale of religious society. We find the Apostles acting upon the rule laid down by the Lord, and directing that those who cause divisions and offences contrary to their doctrine are to be marked and avoided (Rom. xvi. 17). Christians are to withdraw themselves from the brother who walketh dis¬ orderly (2 Thess. iii. 6), and to Lave no company with him who obeys not the Apostolic tradition, or written injunction (2 Thess. iii. 6, 14). The Corinthian Christians are exhorted by S. Paul not to keep company, or even to eat, with the brother who is a fornicator, &c. ( 1 Cor. v. 1 1 ), and the incestuous person whom the Apostle has excommunicated is accordingly to be put away from among them (1 Cor. v. 13). Similarly, S. John directs that the man who transgresseth and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ is not to be received into their houses by his hearers, nor to be bidden God speed (2 S. John 9, 10).

By Excommunication the brotherhood of grace is dis¬ solved, but the brotherhood of nature remains, and, since the power of the Church is only a spiritual power,2 a man’s natural and civil rights are unaffected ; so that an excom¬ municate person does not thereby lose authority over his family, nor a ruler who has been excluded from the Church

Cf. Reformatio Legum, “De Haeresibus,” Cap. 15

“Quasi prius excommunicatio possit in quoquam intelligi, quam Ecclesia sententiam excommunicationis contra ilium direxerit, in qua pronunciatur ilium non secus vitandum, quam ethnicum et publicanum.”

S. Cyprian, ad Pompon. (Ep. iv., ed. Goldliorn), after quoting Deut. xvii.

13, adds : —

“Interfici Deus jussit sacerdotibus suis non obtemperantes et judicibus a se ad tempus constitutis non obaudientes. Et tunc quidem gladio occidebantur, quando adhuc et circumcisio carnalis manebat : nunc autem, quia circumcisio spiritalis esse apud fideles servos Dei coepit, spiritali gladio superbi et contu- maces necantur, dum de ecclesia ejiciuntur.”

his office or charge in civil matters. With the growth of the temporal power of the Popes, however, Excommunication was made to take effect in the temporal as well as in the spiritual sphere ; and the Popes not only used it in such a way as to release men from natural obligations, but in their hands it became a powerful political engine for deposing sovereigns and absolving all subjects from their allegiance. Indirectly this misuse of Ecclesiastical censure favoured the progress of the Reformation, by confirming Henry VIII. and Queen Elizabeth in their alienation from the Roman See.

(3.) The purpose of Excommunication.

It must always be remembered that in pronouncing sentence of Excommunication the Church has a merciful end in view.

(a) Towards the whole Church — It is a cutting off of the diseased member, so as to save the whole body from con¬ tamination (1 Cor. v. 6, 7).

(b) With regard to the excommunicate person — Even this ex¬ treme step is taken with a view to the spiritual benefit of the individual concerned, that he may be ashamed of his wrong-doing (2 Thess. iii. 14) and renounce his error (1 Tim. i. 20), so that eventually the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus (1 Cor. v. 5).

(4.) The means of restoration — Penance.

until he be openly reconciled by penance, and received into the Church by a Judge that hath authority thereunto. (See 2 Cor. ii. 6-10.)

“ Penance ” signifies repentance and contrition, together with acceptance of the punishment assigned by the Church. It is expressly stated that the offender should be u openly reconciled by penance,” in order that the reception into the Church again may be as public an act as the formal exclusion. The “Judge that hath authority thereunto” is the Bishop, or the Ecclesiastical Court. In the case of temporary ex¬ clusion from Communion (Lesser Excommunication), the Prayer Book directs that the matter is to be referred to the Ordinary.

See the Rubric at the commencement of the Communion Office : —

“ Provided that every Minister so repelling any, as is specified in this, or the next precedent Paragraph of this Rubrick, shall he

obliged to give an account of the same to the Ordinary within fourteen days after at the farthest. And the Ordinary shall pro¬ ceed against the offending person according to the Canon.” 1

There are many difficulties in the way of a proper administra¬ tion of Church discipline, a state of things largely owing to the very imperfect manner in which the Reformation dealt with the Church’s disciplinary system.2 That due exercise of discipline is very necessary to the true well-being of the Church no one can doubt, and its restoration is much to be desired.

Cf. the address in the Commutation : —

“Brethren, in the Primitive Church there was a godly disci¬ pline, that, at the beginning of Lent, such persons as stood con¬ victed of notorious sin were put to open penance, and punished in this world, that their souls might be saved in the day of the Lord ; and that others, admonished by their example, might be the more afraid to offend.

“Instead whereof, (until the said discipline may be restored again, which is much to be wished,) it is thought good,” &c.

The Council of Trent (Session XXV., December 4, 1563), while defending a due use of Excommunication and Ecclesiastical

1 Cf. Canon 65

Ministers solemnly to denounce Recusants and Excommunicates.

“ All Ordinaries shall, in their several jurisdictions, carefully see and give order, that as well those who for obstinate refusing to frequent Divine Service established by public authority within this realm of England, as those also (especially of the better sort and condition) who for notorious contumacy, or other notable crimes, stand lawfully excommunicate, (unless within three months immediately after the said sentence of Excommunication pronounced against them, they reform themselves, and obtain the benefit of absolution,) be, every six months ensuing, as well in the Parish Church, as in the Cathedral Church of the diocese in which they remain, by the Minister openly, in time of Divine service, upon some Sunday, denounced and declared Excommunicate, that others may be thereby both admonished to refrain their company and society, and excited the rather to procure out a writ De excommunicato capiendo , thereby to bring and reduce them into due order and obedience. Likewise the registrar of every Ecclesiastical Court shall yearly between Michaelmas and Christmas duly certify the Archbishop of the Province of all and singular the premises aforesaid.”

2 See letter of Humphrey and Sampson to Bullinger (July 1566) : —

“ But what shall we say respecting discipline, the sinews of religion ? There is none at all, neither has our Church its rod, or any exercise of superinten¬ dence ” (Zurich Letters, i. p. 164).

Cf. also letter of Withers to the Elector Palatine, where, speaking of the con¬ dition of the Church in England during Elizabeth’s reign, he says : —

“ But the ministry is in fact nothing” at all, nor is there any discipline ” (Zurich Letters, ii. p. 163).

censures, recognised that their use without sufficient cause had been productive of evil : —

“ Quamvis excommunicationis gladius nervus sit ecclesiasticae disciplinae, et ad continendos in officio populos valde salutaris, sobrie tanien magnaque circumspectione exercendus est, cum experientia doceat, si temere aut levibus ex rebus incutiatur, magis contemni quam formidari, et perniciem potius parere quam salutem.”

Accordingly it was provided that the sword of Excom¬ munication should not be lightly used, and that Ecclesiastical censures should be abstained from when an Execution could be made upon the property or the person of the individual con¬ cerned. The decree on the subject concludes with the following words : —

“ Nefas autem sit saeculari cuilibet magistratui prohibere eccle- siastico judici, ne quem excommunicet, aut mandare, ut latam exconimunicationem revocet, sub praetextu, quod contenta in praesenti decreto non sint observata : cum non ad saeculares, sed ad ecclesiasticos haec cognitio pertineat. Excommunicatus vero quicumque, si post legitimas monitiones non resipuerit, non solum ac Sacramenta et communionem fidelium ac familiaritatem non recipiatur, sed, si obdurato animo censuris annexus in illis per annum insorduerit, etiam contra eum, tamquam de haeresi suspec- tum, procedi possit.”

The Reformers of the Lutheran or Saxon school upheld the power of the Church to impose penance and to excommunicate ; but of all those who separated from the Roman obedience in the sixteenth century, those who followed Calvin were most rigid in their notions of ecclesiastical discipline.1 Cf ’., e.g. : —

French Confession, Art. XXXIII. :

“ Sequendum nobis putamus, quod Dominus noster Iesus Christus de Excommunication e statuit, quam quidem approba- mus, et una cum suis appendicibus necessarian! esse arbitramur.”

Belgic Confession, Art. XXXII.:

“ Nos itaque omnia humana inventn, omncsque leges rejicimus, quae ad Dei cultum sunt introductae, ut iis conscientiae ullo.modo illaqueentur, aut obstringantur. Easque solas suscipimus, quae idoneae sunt, vel ad fovendam alendamque concordiam, vel ad nos in Dei obedientia retinendos. Ad id vero imprimis necessaria est excommunicatio, ex praecepto verbi Dei usurpata, et aliae illi annexae disciplinae ecclesiasticae appendices,

Notes

• Not a few English Churchmen, who, during their exile from this country- owing to the Marian persecution, had come under the influence of the Zurich school of Reformers, were inclined, after their return in Elizabeth’s reign, to despise the English Church owing to the. laxity which prevailed in the administration of discipline (see p. 276, note 2).