Excommunication

The excommunication is the permanent or temporary expulsion of a person from a religious denomination. During the period of excommunication, the affected person continues to be part of the community, but must serve a sentence; hence its name, from the Latin ex communication[ne]. In the most severe cases, he loses the ability to attend worship normally, and to take part in religious ceremonies. The various Christian churches have rules for excommunication or dealing with the excommunicated.

Excommunion penis for theft of books, in the library of the University of Salamanca.

It is practiced by all Christian denominations, but is also used more generally to refer to similar types of institutional religious practices of exclusion and rejection among other religious groups. For example, many Protestant denominations use the term "expulsion" to refer to his form of excommunication.

The word excommunication means to put a specific individual or group out of communion. In some denominations, excommunication includes the spiritual condemnation of the member or group. Excommunication can mean banishment, rejection, and shame, depending on the group, the offense that caused the excommunication, or the rules or regulations of the religious community. The grave act is often revoked in response to manifest repentance.

Judaism

Herem is the greatest ecclesiastical censure in Judaism. It is the total exclusion of a person from the Jewish community. Except in the cases of the Charedi community, the cherem ceased to exist after the Enlightenment, when local Jewish communities lost their political autonomy and Jews integrated into the Gentile nations in which they lived. A siruv order amounting to contempt of court issued by a rabbinic court may also limit religious participation.

Rabbinical movement conferences do expel members from time to time, but sometimes they choose the lesser penalty of censuring the offending rabbi. Between 2010 and 2015, the Central Jewish Reform Conference of American Rabbis expelled six rabbis, the Orthodox Jewish Rabbinical Council of America expelled three, and the Conservative Jewish Rabbinical Assembly expelled one, suspended three, and caused one to resign without being eligible for reinstatement. While the CCAR and RCA were relatively coy about their reasons for expelling the rabbis, the RA was more open about their reasons for expelling the rabbis. Reasons for expulsion from all three conferences include sexual misconduct, failure to conduct ethical investigations, establishing conversion groups without conference approval, stealing money from congregations, other financial misconduct, and being arrested.

Judaism, like Unitarian Universalism, tends toward Congregationalism, so decisions to exclude from a community of worship often rest with the congregation. Congregational bylaws sometimes allow a synagogue board of directors to ask people to leave or not to enter.

Christianity

Origins

The New Testament alludes in several passages to excommunication as a Jewish practice that consists of the exclusion of the believer from the synagogue. Christian excommunication is mentioned in several passages of the New Testament, especially Matthew 18:15-17 and 1 Corinthians 5,1-5.

Features

The purpose of excommunication is to exclude from the Church those members who engage in conduct or teachings contrary to the beliefs of a Christian community (heresy). Its purpose is to protect Church members from abuse and allow the offender admits his mistake and repents.

Catholic Church

Within the Catholic Church, there are differences between the discipline of the majority Latin Church regarding excommunication and that of the Eastern Catholic Churches.

Latin Church

Martin Luther was excommunicated by Pope Leo X in 1521.

Excommunication can be latae sententiae (automatic, incurred at the time of committing the crime for which canon law imposes that penalty) or ferendae sententiae (incurred only when it is imposed by a legitimate superior or declared as a sentence of an ecclesiastical court).

According to Bishop Thomas J. Paprocki "excommunication does not expel a person from the Catholic Church, but simply prohibits the excommunicated person from participating in certain activities." These activities are listed in Canon 1331 §1 and prohibit the individual from any ministerial participation in the celebration of the sacrifice of the Eucharist or any other ceremony of worship; celebrate or receive the sacraments; or exercising any office, ministry or ecclesiastical function.

Under current Catholic canon law, excommunicates are still subject to ecclesiastical obligations such as attending Mass, although they cannot receive the Eucharist or actively participate in the liturgy (read, bring offerings, etc.). "Excommunicated lose rights, such as the right to the sacraments, but remain subject to the obligations of the law; their rights are restored when they are reconciled by remission of sentence". They are encouraged to maintain a relationship with the Church, as the goal is to encourage them to repent and re-engage actively in their lives.

These are the only effects for those who have incurred excommunication latae sententiae. For example, a priest may not publicly deny Communion to those under an automatic excommunication, as long as it has not been officially declared by them, even if the priest knows they have incurred it. On the other hand, if the priest knows that someone has been excommunicated or an automatic excommunication has been declared (and it is no longer simply an undeclared automatic excommunication), he is prohibited from administering Holy Communion to that person.

In the Catholic Church, excommunication is normally resolved by a declaration of repentance, profession of the Creed (if the offense involved heresy) and an Act of Faith, or renewal of obedience (if that was a relevant part of the offensive act, i.e., an act of schism) by the excommunicated person and the lifting of the censure (absolution) by a priest or bishop empowered to do so. "Acquittal can be only in the internal (private) forum, or also in the external (public) forum, depending on whether a scandal would result if a person were acquitted in private and yet publicly considered unrepentant& #3. 4;. Since excommunication excludes from the reception of the sacraments, absolution from the excommunication is required before absolution from the sin that led to the censure can be given. In many cases, the entire process takes place on a single occasion in the privacy of the confessional. For some more serious crimes, absolution from excommunication is reserved for a bishop, another ordinary, or even the pope. They can delegate a priest to act on their behalf. ^{[citation needed ]}

Interdict is a censure similar to excommunication. It also excludes ministerial functions in public worship and the reception of the sacraments, but not the exercise of government.

Eastern Catholic Churches

In the Eastern Catholic Churches, excommunication is imposed only by decree, never automatically incurred by excommunication latae sententiae.

A distinction is made between minor and major excommunication.

Those on whom a minor excommunication has been imposed are excluded from receiving the Eucharist and may also be excluded from participating in the Divine Liturgy. They can even be excluded from entering a church when divine worship is celebrated there. The decree of excommunication must indicate the precise effect of the excommunication and, if required, its duration.

Those who are under major excommunication are also prohibited from receiving not only the Eucharist but also the other sacraments, administering the sacraments or sacramentals, exercising any office, ministry or ecclesiastical function, and any exercise by them is null and void. They must be withdrawn from participation in the Divine Liturgy and any public celebration of divine worship. They are prohibited from making use of the privileges granted to them and cannot be granted any dignity, position, ministry or function in the Church, cannot receive any pension or emoluments associated with these dignities, etc., and are deprived of the right. vote or be elected.

The lesser excommunication is roughly equivalent to the prohibition in Western law.

Excommunicable offenses

Excommunicable crimes in the Catholic Church can be distinguished

• as has been said, in those in whom punishment is latae sententiaethat is to say, the penalty is incurred for the commission itself of the act, and for those in which it must be imposed by a court,
• according to who has the right to absolve him: that is ordinary the bishop, or in some cases, the Apostolic See,
• if the offender must be avoided from now on (vitandusor not. According to the 1983 Code, the term is not used vitandus.

Persons belonging to an Eastern Catholic Church are never subject to latae sententiae punishment; therefore, this is not explicitly mentioned in the lists below.

Latae sententiae

A person is latae sententiae excommunicated or, if Eastern Catholic, ferendae sententiae if:

1. uses physical force against the Pope (reserved to the Apostolic See, for Eastern Catholics even to the pope in person; can. 1370 CIC, can. 1445 CCEO; used to result ipso facto in an excommunication vitandus until 1983, can. 2343 CIC / 1917),
2. He claims to absolve (which is invalid, can. 977) his own companion of a sin against the Sixth Commandment (reserved to the Apostolic See; can. 1378 § 1. CIC, can. 1457 CCEO, can. 728 §1 CCEO),
3. directly violates the Seal of the Confessional (reserved to the Apostolic See; can. 1388 CIC, can 1456 § 1 CCEO, Canon 728 §1 CCEO),
4. the Blessed Sacrament (reserved, for Latin Catholics, to the Apostolic See; Can. 1367 CIC, Can. 1442 CCEO), is forsaken or retained for sacred purposes.
5. consecrates, as a bishop, another bishop without a mandate from the Apostolic See or receives such consecration (reserved, for Latin Catholics, to the Apostolic See; can. 1383 CIC, can. 1459 § 1 CCEO),
6. is apostate (can. 1364 § 1 CIC, cf. can. 751 CIC; can. 1436 § 1 CCEO), i.e., to totally repudiate the Christian faith,
7. is heretic (can. 1364 § 1 CIC, cf. can. 751 CIC; can. 1436 § 1 CCEO), i.e. denies or doubts contumente de un dogma de la Iglesia Católica,
8. is schismatic (can. 1364 § 1 CIC, cf. can. 751 CIC; can. 1437 § 1 CCEO), that is, denies submission to the pope or to the other members of the Church subordinated to the pope (this is not per se true of who simply disobeys an order of the pope),
9. performed, performed, assisted or permitted an abortion (can. 1398 CIC, can. 1450 § 2 CCEO),
10. commits simony in a papal election (Universi Dominici gregis [UDG] no. 78),
11. as a Cardinal or any other person who participates in the conclave (secretary of the conclave, etc.), makes known an exclusive or help, in any other way, to a secular power to influence the papal election (UDG no. 80),
12. As a Cardinal, he makes pacts, deals or promises regarding the papal election in a conclave; this does not prohibit Cardinals from discussing whom to choose (UDG No. 81).
13. as a bishop tries to confer the sacred order on a woman, along with the woman who tried to receive the consecration. In both eastern and Latin rites, excommunication is reserved for the Apostolic See.

Ferendae sententiae

A person may be excommunicated ferendae sententiae if:

1. try to celebrate the Mass without being a priest (involves, for the Latin Catholics, also latae sententiae interdiction for lay people and suspension for clerics, can. 1378 § 2 no. 1 CIC, can. 1443 CCEO),
2. He hears a Confession or tries to absolve without being able to absolve (for Latin Catholics; this, of course, does not include obstacles on the side of the penitent for the mere audience of the Confessions, and hidden obstacles on the side of the penitent for absolution; can. 1378 § 2 n. 1; he also enters interdict latae sententiae for laity and suspension for clerics),
3. breaks the Confessional Seal as someone who is not the Confessor, for example, an interpreter or someone who heard something said (for Latin Catholics, can. 1388 § 2 CIC),
4. which violates a criminal law that allows the excommunication promulgated at the local level, which the local authority, however, can only do with great caution and for serious faults (for Latin Catholics, can. 1318 CIC),
5. omits obstinately, as an Eastern Catholic priest, the commemoration of the jerark in the Divine Liturgy and the Divine Praises (not obligatory, can. 1438 CCEO),
6. commits physical violence against a patriarch or a metropolitan, as an Eastern Catholic (can. 1445 § 1 CCEO),
7. incites sedition against any jerark, especially a patriarch or the pope, as an Eastern Catholic (can. 1447 § 1, non-mandatory),
8. commits murder, as an Eastern Catholic (can. 1450 § 1 CCEO),
9. seriously, maim or torture (physically or mentally) a person, such as Eastern Catholics (can. 1451 CCEO, not compulsory),
10. falsely accuses someone of a [canonical] crime, as Eastern Catholic (can. 1454 CCEO, not obligatory),
11. attempts to use the influence of secular authority to obtain admission to sacred orders or any function in the Church, as Eastern Catholic (can. 1460, not obligatory),
12. administers or receives a sacrament, excluding sacred orders, or any function in the Church through simony as an Eastern Catholic (can. 1461f. CCEO, not mandatory).

Former excommunicable offenses

According to the Code of Canon Law of 1917, the excommunications reserved to the Apostolic See were grouped into three categories, those reserved 1. simply, 2. in a special way, 3. in the most special way (each one solvable by the pope and by those priests whom the pope had delegated the power to acquit precisely for that degree); and below the excommunications reserved for the bishop (which now applies mainly to all excommunications), there was still a category of excommunications reserved for no one (that is, it could be resolved by any confessor).

Excommunications for desecration of the Blessed Sacrament, physical violence against the pope, attempted acquittal of an accomplice in a sin against the sixth commandment, and breaking the seal of the confessional (no. 1-4 of offenses latae sententiae listed above) were reserved to the Apostolic See in the most special way. Excommunications for apostasy, heresy, or schism were reserved to the apostolic see in a special way, although they could be resolved by the bishop (though not by the vicar general) in his place (c. 2314 § 2). The possible excommunication of someone other than the Confessor who revealed something under the Seal of the Confessional was not reserved for anyone; excommunication for illegal episcopal consecrations did not exist then (but there was a latae sententiae suspension), nor did the possible excommunication (and certain suspension) of a priest who does have faculties but absolves a penitent who knows that no regrets The other excommunications that still exist were reserved for the bishop, as they are now.

The following additional acts were excommunicable offenses

• reserved for the Apostolic See in a special way:
  1. have been suspected of heresy for six months without clearing the suspicion (can. 2315),
  2. editing books of apostates, heretics and schismatics defending apostasy, heresy or schism, or reading, without due permission, such books or those in particular prohibited by the apostolic headquarters (the latter did not include the entire Can. 2318 Index),
  3. simulating Holy Mass or sacramental absolution, without being a priest (can. 2322),
  4. appeal against the Pope to a future Council (can. 2332),
  5. resort to secular powers to hinder the promulgation of the acts of the Apostolic See or its legacies, or hinder its promulgation or execution by force or fear (can. 2333),
  6. to issue laws or decrees against the freedom and rights of the Church (can. 2334 n. 1),
  7. obstructing the Church, directly or indirectly, in the exercise of its power of government, both in the external and in the internal spheres, by resorting to secular power (can. 2334 n. 2),
  8. take a cardinal, a papal legacy, an important official of the Roman Curia or the diocesan bishop himself to a secular court for his actions in office (can. 2341),
  9. physical force against a cardinal, papal legacy or any bishop (can. 2343),
  10. usurp the goods and rights of the Church (can. 2345),
  11. the forgery of apostolic letters (can. 2360),
  12. falsely accuse a confessor of the offence of petitioning (can. 2363),
• simply reserved for the Holy See:
  1. commercially treat indulgences (can. 2327),
  2. to be initiated in the masonry or other associations of this kind, acting against the Church and the legitimate powers (can. 2335),
  3. to try to absolve the Holy See in a special or very special way without having the power to do so (can. 2338 § 1),
  4. to help the excommunicated Vitandus in their anti-Jewish act or, as a clergyman, to celebrate with them, consciously and freely, the Divine Office (c. 2338 § 2),
  5. to carry a bishop, abbot or prelate nullius, or one of the highest superiors of papally recognized orders to the secular court in compliance with his office (can. 2341),
  6. violate the enclosure of a convent (can. 2342),
  7. participate in a duel, in any function (can. 2351),
  8. attempt to marry (civil) as a subdiacon or superior clergy, or as a monk or nun with solemn vows (can. 2388 § 2),
  9. commit simony (can. 2392),
  10. accept, destroy, conceal or substantially modify a document addressed to the diocesan curia, as a capitular vicar or canon of the chapter (only during a vacancy?) (can. 2405),
• reserved to the diocesan bishop:
  1. to try to marry before a non-Catholic minister, or in the explicit or implied understanding that one or more of the children must be baptized outside the Catholic Church, or to knowingly give the children to be baptized by non-Catholics (can.2319),
  2. manufacture false relics or sell them knowingly, distribute them and expose them to public veneration (can. 2326),
  3. physical violence against a clergy, monk or nun (can. 2343 § 4),
  4. to marry, as a monk or nun of simple vows (can. 2388 § 2),
• reserved to no one:
  1. write, edit or print, without proper authorization, editions of Sacred Scripture or annotations or comments thereon (can. 2318 § 2),
  2. give ecclesial burial to infidels, apostates, heretics, schismatics or excommunicated or interdicts (can. 2339),
  3. Force a man to enter the clerical state or a woman to enter religion or make simple or solemn vows (can. 2352),
  4. for the victim of the request knowingly of the author ' s lack of complaint (not to be acquitted prior to the performance of the obligation, c. 2368 § 2).

Eastern Orthodox Churches

In Eastern Orthodox churches excommunication is the exclusion of a member from the Eucharist. It is not an expulsion from the churches. This can happen for reasons such as not having confessed within that year; excommunication may also be imposed as part of a penitential period. It is usually done with the goal of restoring the member to full communion. Before imposing an excommunication of significant duration, the bishop is usually consulted. The orthodox churches have a means of expulsion, by pronouncing anathema, but this is reserved only for acts of serious and unrepentant heresy. As an example of this, the Second Council of Constantinople in 553, in its eleventh chapter, stated: "If anyone does not anathematize Arius, Eunomius, Macedonius, Apollinarius, Nestorius, Eutyches, and Origen, as well as their heretical books, and also all the other heretics who have already been condemned and anathematized by the holy, catholic and apostolic church and by the four holy synods that have already been mentioned, and also all those who have thought or think now in the same way as the heretics mentioned and that he persist in his error until death: let him be anathema ".

Lutheran Churches

Although Lutheranism technically has an excommunication process, some denominations and congregations do not use it. In the Smalcald articles, Luther differentiates between the "great" and the "little one". The "little" excommunication is simply excluding an individual from the Lord's Supper and "other communion in the church." While the "great" excommunication excluded a person from both the church and political communities that he considered outside the authority of the church and only for civil leaders. A modern Lutheran practice is presented in the 1986 explanation of the Shorter Catechism of the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, defined from Questions No. 277-284, in "The Office of Keys". They strive to follow the process that Jesus laid out in the 18th chapter of the Gospel of Matthew. According to the explanation, the excommunication requires:

1. The confrontation between the subject and the individual against whom he has sinned.
2. If this fails, the confrontation between the subject, the injured individual and two or three witnesses of such acts of sin.
3. The information of the pastor of the subject's congregation.
4. A clash between the pastor and the subject.

Many Lutheran denominations operate on the premise that the entire congregation (as opposed to the pastor alone) must take appropriate action for excommunication, and there are not always precise rules, to the point where individual congregations often set rules to excommunicate the laity (rather than the clergy). For example, churches may sometimes require a vote to be taken at Sunday services; some congregations require this vote to be unanimous.

The Church of Sweden and church visitation on Sundays were a manatory (Konventikelplakatet) for all Swedes from 1600-1858 as the only religious organization allowed in the country, with a few exceptions, such as by the Great Synagogue in Stockholm and Embassies. The other side is that you cannot be excluded from a state institution that is mandatory by law for everyone. The topic has some interesting aspects of the Excommunication (Catholic Church) of the Swedish parliament by canon law of the Catholic Church and the interdict (Catholic Church strike) as a background to the Reformation in Sweden.

In the Church of Sweden and the Church of Denmark excommunicated individuals are expelled from their parish in front of their congregation. However, they are not prohibited from attending church and participating in other acts of devotion, although they must sit in a place designated by the priest (who was at a distance from others).

The Lutheran process, while rarely used, has created unusual situations in recent years due to its somewhat democratic excommunication process. One example was an effort to have serial killer Dennis Rader excommunicated from his denomination (the Evangelical Lutheran Church in the United States) by people who tried to "pressure" the murderer. members of Rader's church to vote for his excommunication.

Anglican Communion

Church of England

The Church of England has no specific canon on how or why a member may be excommunicated, although it does have a canon that ecclesiastical burial may be denied to someone "declared excommunicated for some serious and notorious offense and no man to testify. his regret & # 34;.

The punishment of imprisonment for being excommunicated from the Church of England was removed from English law in 1963.

Episcopal Church in the United States of America

ECUSA is in the Anglican Communion and shares many canons with the Church of England that would determine its excommunication policy. ^{[ citation needed ]}

Reformed Churches

In Reformed churches, excommunication has generally been regarded as the culmination of ecclesiastical discipline which is one of the three marks of the Church. The Westminster Confession of Faith sees it as the third step after the "admonition" and the "suspension of the sacrament of the Lord's Supper for a while". However, John Calvin argues in his Institutes of the Christian Religion that the censures of the church do not "consign the excommunicated to perpetual ruin and damnation", but are designed to induce repentance, reconciliation, and restoration to communion. Calvin points out, "although church discipline does not permit us to be on familiar and intimate terms with excommunicated persons, we must endeavor by all possible means to bring them to a better mind and win them back to the communion and unity of the Church. "

At least one modern Reformed theologian maintains that excommunication is not the final step in the disciplinary process. Jay E. Adams argues that in excommunication, the offender is still seen as a brother, but in the final step he becomes "a heathen and a tax collector" (Matthew 18:17). Adams writes: 'Nowhere in the Bible is excommunication (the removal of communion from the Lord's table, according to Adams) equated with what happens in step 5; rather, step 5 is called" remove out of the way, deliver to Satan ". and the like."

Former president and Princeton theologian Jonathan Edwards addresses the notion of excommunication as "removal of communion from the Lord's table" in his treatise entitled & # 34; The nature and purpose of the excommunication & # 34;. Edwards holds that "in particular, we are prohibited to such a degree from associating with (excommunicants), as to make them our guests at our tables, or to be their guests at their tables; as manifested in the text, where they are ordered not to have company with them, not to eat ”. Edwards insists: "That this respects not eating with them at the Lord's Supper, but a common meal, is evident from the words, that eating here prohibited, is one of the lowest degrees of company, which are prohibited. Do not keep company". with such, says the apostle, no, not to eat, so much as to say, not in so low a degree as to eat with it. But eating with him at the Lord's Supper is the highest degree of visible Christian fellowship. Who can suppose that the apostle meant this: Take heed and have no company with a man, not so much as in the highest degree of fellowship you can have? Furthermore, the apostle mentions this meal as a form of company which they might yet have with the heathen. He tells them not to keep company with fornicators. He then informs them, he does not mean with the fornicators of this world, that is, the pagans; but, says he, "if anyone, who is called a brother, is a fornicator, &c. with such a person, do not keep company, no, do not eat". This makes it more evident that the apostle is not referring to eating at the Lord's table.

Methodist Church

In the Methodist Episcopal Church, individuals could be excommunicated after "a trial before a jury of their peers and after having had the privilege of appeal to a higher court." However, an excommunication could be lifted after a sufficient penance.

John Wesley the founder of the Methodist Churches, excommunicated sixty-four members of the Newcastle Methodist Society for the following reasons alone:

Two to curse and swear.

Two for violating the usual Sabbath.

Seventeen for drunkenness.

Two for the sale of spirits.

Three for fights and fights.

One for beating his wife.

Three for usual and deliberate lie.

Four for insulting and speaking bad.

One for idleness and laziness. And,

Nine and twenty for lightness and carelessness.

The Allegheny Wesleyan Methodist Connection in its 2014 Discipline includes "homosexuality, lesbianism, bisexuality, bestiality, incest, fornication, adultery and any attempt to altering gender through surgery", as well as remarrying after divorce among their excommunicable crimes.

The Evangelical Wesleyan Church in its 2015 Discipline states that "Any member of our church who is accused of neglecting the means of grace or other duties required by the Word of God, the indulgence of tempers, sinful words or actions, the sowing of dissension, or any other violation of church order and discipline, may, after proper work and admonition, be censured, put to the test, or expelled by the official circuit board of which he is a member. If requested by trial, however, within thirty dates of the official board's final action, " will be granted.

Evangelical Christianity

In evangelical Christian movements that adhere to the doctrine of the Church of Believers, excommunication is used as a last resort by denominations and churches for members who do not want to repent of beliefs or behaviors at odds with the confession of faith of the community. The vote of the members of the community can restore a person who has repented.

When believers were baptized and brought into church membership by Anabaptists, it was done not only as a symbol of cleansing from sin, but also as a public commitment to identify with Jesus Christ and conform the lives of one to the teaching and example of Jesus. as understood by the church. In practice, that meant that church membership implied a commitment to try to live up to the standards of Christian behavior widely held by the Anabaptist tradition.

Ideally, discipline in the Anabaptist tradition requires the church to confront a notoriously erring and unrepentant member of the church, first directly in a very small circle and, if no resolution is reached, expanding the circle further. steps eventually to include the entire church congregation. If the erring member persists unrepentantly and rejects even the admonition of the congregation, that person is excommunicated or excluded from church membership. Exclusion from the church is the acknowledgment by the congregation that this person has separated from the church because of their visible and unrepentant sin. This is done ostensibly as a last resort to protect the integrity of the church. When this occurs, the church is expected to continue to pray for the excluded member and seek to restore him or her to its fellowship. There was originally no inherent expectation to avoid (completely break all ties with) an excluded member, however differences over this very issue led to early schisms between the different Anabaptist leaders and those who followed them.

Amish

Jakob Ammann, founder of the Amish sect, believed that Swiss Anabaptists should systematically reject those under the ban, just as it did in the north and as described in the Dordrecht Confession. Ammann's uncompromising zeal regarding this practice was one of the main disputes that led to the schism between the Anabaptist groups that became Amish and those that would eventually be called Mennonites. More moderate Amish groups have recently become less strict. in the application of excommunication as discipline. This has led to divisions in various communities, an example of which is the Swartzetruber Amish who split from the main body of the Old Order Amish due to the latter's practice of lifting the ban on members who later join other churches. In general, the Amish will excommunicate baptized members for failure to abide by their Ordnung (church rules) as interpreted by the local Bishop if certain repeated violations of the Ordnung occur.

Excommunication among Old Order Amish results in rejection from the Meidung the severity of which depends on many factors, including family, local community, and type of Amish. Some Amish communities stop rejecting after a year if the person joins another church later, especially if it is another Mennonite church. In the most severe case, other members of the congregation are prohibited from almost all contact with an excommunicated member, including social and business ties between the excommunicate and the congregation, sometimes even marital contact between the excommunicate and the remaining spouse. in the congregation or family contact between adult children. and parents.

Mennonites

In the Mennonite Church, excommunication is rare and takes place only after many attempts at reconciliation and someone who is flagrantly and repeatedly violating the standards of behavior the church expects. Occasionally, excommunication is also carried out against those who repeatedly question the behavior of the church or who also genuinely disagree with the theology of the church, although in almost all cases the dissenter will leave the church before any discipline needs to be invoked.. In either case, the church will attempt to reconcile with the member in private, first one on one and then with some church leaders. Only if the church's attempts at reconciliation are unsuccessful does the congregation formally revoke membership from the church. Church members usually pray for the excluded member.

Some area conferences (the Mennonite counterpart to dioceses of other denominations) of the Mennonite Church have moved to expel member congregations that have openly welcomed non-celibate homosexuals as members. This internal conflict regarding homosexuality has also been a problem for other moderate denominations, such as American Baptists and Methodists.

The practice among Old Order Mennonite congregations is more similar to that of the Amish, but perhaps less severe in general. A member of the Old Order who disobeys the Ordnung (church regulations) must meet with the church leaders. If a church regulation is broken a second time, there is a confession in the church. Those who refuse to confess are excommunicated. However, after a subsequent confession, the church member will be reinstated. An excommunicated member is subject to the ban. This person is not prohibited from eating with her own family. Excommunicated persons may still have business dealings with members of the church and may maintain marital relations with a spouse, who remains a member of the church.

Hutterites

Separatist, communal, and autonomous Hutterites also use excommunication and shunning as a form of ecclesiastical discipline. Since Hutterites have communal ownership of property, the effects of excommunication could impose a hardship on the excluded member and family leaving them without labor income and material goods such as a house. However, arrangements are often made to provide material benefits to the family leaving the colonia, such as a car and some transition funds for rent, etc. A Hutterite colony in Manitoba, Canada, had a protracted dispute when leaders tried to force a colony out. group that had been excommunicated but would not leave. About a dozen lawsuits were filed in Canada and the United States between the various Hutterite factions and colonies regarding excommunication, shunning, leadership legitimacy, and communal property rights.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) practices excommunication as a punishment for those who commit serious sins that is actions that significantly impair the name or moral influence of the church or represent a threat to other people. In 2020, the church stopped using the term "excommunication" and instead refers to "withdrawal from membership". According to the General Church Leadership Manual the purposes of withdrawing membership or imposing restrictions on membership are, (1) to help protect others; (2) help a person access the redemptive power of Jesus Christ through repentance; and (3) protect the integrity of the Church. The origins of LDS disciplinary procedures and excommunications can be traced to a revelation Joseph Smith dictated on February 9, 1831, later canonized as Doctrine and Covenants section 42 and codified in the General Manual.

This Church also practices the lesser sanctions of privy advice and caution and formal and informal restrictions on membership. (Informal membership restrictions were formerly known as "probation"; formal membership restrictions were formerly known as "expulsion".)

Formal membership restrictions are used for serious sins that do not rise to the level of membership withdrawal. The formal membership restriction denies some privileges but does not include loss of church membership. Once formal membership restrictions have been put in place, people cannot take the sacrament or enter church buildings or offer public prayers or sermons. These individuals may continue to attend most church functions and are permitted to wear temple garments, pay tithes and offerings, and participate in church classes if their conduct is orderly. Formal membership restrictions generally they last for one year, after which one can be reinstated as a member in good standing.

In the most serious or recalcitrant cases, membership withdrawal becomes a disciplinary option. Such action is generally reserved for what are considered the most serious sins including the commission of serious crimes such as murder, child abuse, and incest; commit adultery; participation in or teaching of polygamy; participation in homosexual conduct; apostasy; participation in an abortion; teach false doctrine; or openly criticize church leaders. The general manual states that formally joining another church constitutes apostasy and is worthy of withdrawal from membership; however, simply attending another church does not constitute apostasy.

Withdrawal from membership can only occur after a formal church membership council. Formerly called "disciplinary council" or 'church court,' the councils were renamed to avoid focusing on guilt and instead emphasize the availability of repentance.

The decision to withdraw a Melchizedek priesthood holder from membership is generally a matter of stake leadership. In such a disciplinary council, the stake presidency and, sometimes in more difficult cases, the stake high council attend. If the high council is involved, the twelve members of the high council are divided in half: one group represents the member in question and is charged with "prevent [ing] insults or injustices"; the other group represents the church as a whole. The member under scrutiny is invited to attend membership proceedings, but the council can proceed without him. When making a decision, high council leaders consult with the stake presidency, but the decision about what discipline is necessary rests solely with the stake president. It is possible to appeal a decision of a stake membership council to the First Presidency of the church.

For women and men not yet initiated into the Melchizedek priesthood, a ward member council is held. In such cases, a bishop determines whether removal from membership or a lesser penalty is warranted. He does so in consultation with his two counselors, and the final determination is made by the bishop after the prayer. The decision of a ward membership council may be appealed to the stake president.

The following list of variables serves as a general set of guidelines for when withdrawal from membership or minor action may be warranted, starting with those most likely to result in a severe penalty:

1. Violation of conventions: Conventions are made together with specific ordinances in the SUD Church. Violated agreements that may result in excommunication are usually those that surround marriage agreements, temple conventions and priesthood conventions.
2. Position of trust or authority: the position of the person in the church hierarchy influences the decision. It is considered more serious when a sin is committed by an area of seventy; a chairman of stake, mission or temple; a bishop; a patriarch; or a full-time missionary.
3. Repetition: the repetition of a sin is more serious than a single instance.
4. Magnitude: How often, how many people were affected and who is aware of the sin factor in decision.
5. Age, maturity and experience: Those who are young in age or immature in their understanding generally receive indulgence.
6. Interests of the innocent: it can be considered how the discipline will affect the innocent members of the family.
7. Time between transgression and confession: if sin was committed in a distant past and there has been no repetition, it can be considered indulgence.
8. Voluntary confession: if a person voluntarily confesses sin, it is suggested indulgence.
9. Evidence of repentance: the pain for sin and the commitment shown to repentance, as well as faith in Jesus Christ, play a role in determining the severity of discipline.

Membership withdrawal notices may be made public, especially in cases of apostasy, where members could be misled. However, the specific reasons for individual withdrawal from membership are generally kept confidential and are rarely made public by church leadership.

Those whose membership is terminated lose the right to partake of the sacrament. These people are generally allowed to attend church meetings, but participation is limited: they cannot offer public prayers or preach sermons, and they cannot enter temples. Such persons are also prohibited from wearing or purchasing temple garments and paying tithing. A person whose membership has been withdrawn may be rebaptized after a waiting period of at least a year and sincere repentance as judged by a series of interviews with church leaders.

Some critics have charged that LDS Church leaders have used the threat of membership withdrawal to silence or punish church members and researchers who disagree with established policy and doctrine, who study or discuss topics that are controversial or that may be involved in disputes with local stake leaders or general authorities; see, for example, Brian Evenson a former BYU professor and writer whose fiction was criticized by BYU and LDS Leadership officials. Another notable case of excommunication from the LDS Church was the " Sixth of September, a group of intellectuals and professors, five of whom were excommunicated and the sixth expelled. However, church policy dictates that local leaders are responsible for membership withdrawal, without influence from church headquarters. Therefore, the church argues that this policy is evidence against any systematic persecution of scholars or dissenters. The data shows that per capita excommunication rates among the LDS Church have varied dramatically over the years, from a low of about 1 in 6,400 members in the early 1900s to one in 640 in the 1970s, an increase that has been speculatively attributed to "informal guidance from above" to enforce the growing list of potential violations added to editions of the General Manual over time.

Jehovah's Witnesses

Main article: Jehovah's Witnesses and congregational discipline

Jehovah's Witnesses practice a form of excommunication, using the term "expulsion," in cases where a member is believed to have unrepentantly committed one or more of several "grave sins& #3. 4; documented. The practice is based on his interpretation of 1 Corinthians 5:11-13 ("to stop mixing with someone called a brother who is a fornicator or a covetous person or an idolater or a slanderer or a drunkard or an extortionist, not even eating with such a man... remove the wicked from among you ") and 2 John 10 (" never receive him into your house or greet him "). They interpret these verses to mean that any baptized believer who engages in "gross sins" he must be expelled from the congregation and rejected.

When a member confesses or is accused of a serious sin, a judicial committee of at least three elders is formed. This committee investigates the case and determines the magnitude of the sin committed. If the person is found guilty of a expellable offense, the committee decides, based on the person's attitude and "deeds worthy of repentance" (Acts 26:20), if the person is to be considered repentant. The "jobs" They can include trying to correct the mistake, apologizing to the offended person, and following the advice above. If found guilty but repentant, the person is not expelled, but is formally reprimanded and has restrictions.imposed, which exclude the individual from various activities such as making speeches, offering prayers public or make comments at religious gatherings. If the person is deemed guilty and unrepentant, he will be expelled. Unless an appeal is made within seven days, the expulsion is formalized by an announcement at the next service meeting of the congregation. Appeals are granted to determine whether procedural errors are believed to have occurred that may have affected the outcome.

Disfellowshipping is the breaking of friendly relations between all Jehovah's Witnesses and the disfellowshipped person. Interaction with extended family is generally restricted to a minimum, such as presence at the reading of wills and the provision of essential care for the elderly. Within a home, typical family contact may continue, but without spiritual fellowship, such as family Bible study and religious discussions. Parents of expelled minors living in the family home may continue to try to convince the child of the group's teachings. Jehovah's Witnesses believe that this form of discipline encourages the disfellowshipped person to conform to Biblical standards and prevents the person from influencing other members of the congregation.

Along with violations of the Witness moral code, openly disagreeing with the teachings of Jehovah's Witnesses is considered grounds for rejection. These people are labeled as "apostates" and are described in Watch Tower Society literature as "mentally ill." descriptions of "apostates" appearing in Witness literature have been the subject of investigation in the UK to determine whether they violate religious hate laws. Sociologist Andrew Holden asserts that many Witnesses who would otherwise drop out due to disillusionment with the organization and its teachings remain affiliated for fear of rejection and loss of contact with friends and family.such as relational aggression in psychological literature. When used by church members and member-spouse parents against excommunicating parents, it contains elements of what psychologists call parental alienation. Extreme rejection can cause trauma to rejects (and their dependents) similar to what is studied in the psychology of torture. ^{[ need a quote to verify ]}

Dissociation is a form of refusal in which a member expresses verbally or in writing that they do not want to be associated with Jehovah's Witnesses, rather than having committed some 'sin' of their own. specific. Elders can also decide that an individual has disassociated, without any formal declaration by the individual, through actions such as accepting a blood transfusion, or joining another religious or military organization. People who are considered by the elders to have disassociated do not have the right to appeal.

Each year, congregational elders are instructed to consider meeting with disfellowshipped persons to determine changing circumstances and encourage them to seek reinstatement. reset is not automatic after a certain period of time, nor is there a minimum duration; Disfellowshipped persons may speak to the elders at any time, but must make a written request to be considered for reinstatement into the congregation. elders consider each case individually and are instructed to ensure "sufficient time has passed for the disfellowshipped person to prove that his profession of repentance is genuine." A judicial committee meets with the person to determine their repentance, and if this is established, the person is reinstated into the congregation and may participate with the congregation in their formal ministry (such as house-to-house preaching), but is prohibited from commenting in meetings or have privileges during a period established by the judicial committee. If possible, the same members of the judicial committee who removed the person are selected for the reinstatement hearing. If the applicant is in a different area, the person will meet with a local judicial committee that will contact the original judicial committee, if available, or a new one in the original congregation.

A Witness who has been formally disbarred or reinstated may not be assigned to any special service privileges for at least one year. Serious sins involving child sexual abuse permanently disqualify the sinner from being appointed to any congregational service privileges regardless of whether the sinner was convicted of any secular crimes.

Christadelphians

Similarly to many groups that trace their origins to the Restoration Movement of the 1830s, Christadelphians call their form of excommunication 'expulsion', although they do not practice 'rejection';. Separation can occur for moral reasons, change of belief, or (in some churches) for not attending communion (known as "the emblems" or "the breaking of bread").

In such cases, the person involved is usually required to discuss the issues. If they do not conform, the church ('meeting' or 'ecclesia') is recommended by the management committee ('Brother Organizers') to vote on the expulsion of person. These procedures were formulated from 1863 onwards by the early Christadelphians, ^{[ citation needed ]} and later codified in 1883 by Robert Roberts in A Guide to the Training and Conduct of the Christadelphian Ecclesiastes (colloquially "The Ecclesial Guide"). However, the Christadelphians justify and apply their practice not only from this document but also from passages such as the exclusion in 1Co.5 and the recovery in 2Co.2.

Christadelphians normally avoid the term "excommunication" that many associate with the Catholic Church; and they may feel that the word has implications they disagree with, such as undue conviction and punishment, as well as failing to recognize the remedial intent of the action.

• Behavioral cases. Many cases related to moral matters tend to involve relational matters such as marriage outside of faith, divorce and new marriage (some ecclesiasticals consider adultery in some circumstances) or homosexuality. re-establishment for moral issues is determined by the evaluation of ecclesia of whether the individual has "apart" from (cessed) the course of action considered immoral by the church. This can be complex when it comes to divorce and subsequent marriage, with different positions adopted by different ecclesiastes, but generally within the main group "Central", these cases can be accommodated. Some "becas" of minorities do not adapt to this under any circumstances.
• Doctrinal cases. Changes of belief in what the Cristadelfians call doctrines of the "first principle" are difficult to accommodate unless the individual agrees not to teach or spread them, as the body has a documented Declaration of Faith which serves informally as a basis for ecclesial membership and intereccletal fellowship. Those who are expelled for reasons of different beliefs rarely return, because they are expected to conform to an understanding with which they disagree. Having different beliefs about fundamental issues is considered error and apostasy which can limit a person's salvation. However, in practice, expulsion for doctrinal reasons is now unusual.

In the case of adultery and divorce, the passage of time usually means that a member can be restored if desired. In the case of continued behavior, cohabitation, homosexual activity, then the terms of the suspension have not been met.

The mechanics of "regrouping" follow the reverse process of the original; the individual submits an application to the "ecclesia", and the "organizing brothers" they give a recommendation to voting members. If the "Organizing Brothers" judge that a vote may divide the ecclesia, or upset some members personally, they may look for a third-party ecclesia that is willing to "re-fraternize" with the member. According to the Ecclesial Guide, a third party ecclesia can also take the initiative to "re-fraternise" with a member of another meeting. However, this cannot be done unilaterally, as this would constitute a heteronomy over the autonomy of the members of the original ecclesia.

Society of Friends (Quakers)

Among many of the groups of the Society of Friends (Quakers), one is removed from the meeting for behavior incompatible with the purpose of the meeting. In Britain, a meeting can register a minute of disunity. However, it is the responsibility of each meeting, quarterly meeting and annual meeting, to act with respect to its own members. For example, during the Vietnam War, many Friends were concerned about Friend Richard Nixon's position on the war, which seemed to contradict his beliefs; however, it was the responsibility of Nixon's own meeting, the East Whittier meeting of Whittier, California to act if indeed that meeting felt inclined. They didn't.

In the 17th century, before the founding of abolitionist societies, Friends who tried too hard to convince their co-religionists of the evils of slavery were removed from the meeting. Benjamin Lay was read at the Philadelphia Annual Meeting for this. During the American Revolution, over 400 Friends were removed from the meeting for their military involvement or support.

Iglesia ni Cristo

Iglesia ni Cristo practices the expulsion of members that it considers have seriously sinned or go against the teachings and doctrines of the church. The Sanggunian, the church council, has jurisdiction to expel members of the church. People expelled by the church are called dismissed (Tagalog: tiwalag). Offenses that can be disfellowshipped include marrying a non-member, becoming pregnant out of wedlock (unless the couple is married before the child is born), and, most notably, disagreeing with the administration of church. A disfellowshipped member may be reinstated by pledging obedience to the church administration and its rules, values, and teachings.

Unitary Universalism

Unitarian Universalism being a liberal religious group and a Congregational denomination has a wide diversity of opinions and sentiments. However, Unitarian Universalists have had to deal with disruptive individuals. Congregations that did not have policies on disruptive individuals have sometimes been forced to create such policies, up to (and including) expulsion.

By the late 1990s, several churches were using the West Shore UU Church policy as a model. If someone threatens, disrupts, or distracts from the attractiveness of the church for its members, a church using this model has three recommended levels of response to the offending individual. While the first level involves dialogue between a committee or clergy member and the offender, the second and third levels involve expulsion, either from the church itself or from a church activity.

Buddhism

There is no direct equivalent to excommunication in Buddhism. However, in the Theravadan monastic community, monks can be expelled from monasteries for heresy or other acts. Additionally, monks have four vows, called the four defeats, which are to abstain from sexual intercourse, steal, murder, and refrain from lying about spiritual gains (for example, having special power or ability to perform miracles). If even one is broken, the monk automatically becomes a layman again and can never become a monk in his current lifetime. ^{[ citation needed ]}

Most Japanese Buddhist sects have ecclesiastical authority over their followers and have their own rules for expelling sangha members, laymen, or bishoprics. ^{[ citation needed ]} The Japanese lay Buddhist organization Sōka Gakkai was expelled from the Nichiren Shoshu sect in 1991 (1997).

Hinduism

Hinduism is too diverse to be seen as a homogeneous and monolithic religion, it is often described as an unorganized and syncretic religion with a conspicuous absence of the listed doctrines there are multiple religious institutions (ecclesia is the Christian equivalent) within the Hinduism Hinduism that teach slight variations. of Dharma and Karma therefore Hinduism does not have the concept of excommunication and therefore no Hindu can be expelled from the Hindu religion, although a person can easily lose caste status through gramanya. wide variety of infractions of caste prohibitions. This may or may not be recoverable. However, some of the modern organized sects within Hinduism may practice something equivalent to excommunication today, expelling a person from their own sect.

In medieval and modern times (and sometimes even now) in South Asia, excommunication from one's own caste (jati or varna i>) used to be practiced (by caste councils) and often had serious consequences, such as degrading caste status and even throwing it into the sphere of untouchables or bhangi. In the 19th century , a Hindu faced excommunication for going abroad, as it was presumed that he would be forced to to break caste restrictions and would be defiled as a result.

After the excommunication, it would be up to the caste council whether or not they would accept some form of repentance (ritual or otherwise). Such current examples of excommunication in Hinduism are often more political or social than religious, for example the excommunication of lower castes for refusing to work as scavengers in Tamil Nadu.

An earlier example of excommunication in Hinduism is that of Shastri Yagnapurushdas who voluntarily left and was later expelled from Swaminarayan Sampraday's Vadtal Gadi by the then Vadtal acharya in 1906. He then formed his own institution, Bochasanwasi Swaminarayan Sanstha or BSS (now BAPS) stating that Gunatitanand Swami was Swaminarayan's legitimate spiritual successor.

Islamic

Since there has been no universally and unequivocally recognized religious authority among the many Islamic denominations that have arisen throughout history, papal excommunication has no exact equivalent in Islam, at least as far as religious beliefs are concerned. conflicting attitudes of any religious authority with respect to an individual or other sect. they are judged to be coordinated, not subordinate to one another. However, condemning heterodoxy and punishing heretics through rejection and ostracism is comparable to the practice in non-Catholic Christian religions.

Islamic theologians commonly employ two terms when describing measures to be taken against schismatics and heresy: هَجْر (hajr "abandon") and تَكْفِير ( takfīr "make or declare a non-believer"). The former means the act of leaving some place (such as migration, as in the Islamic prophet's journey out of Mecca, which is called al-Hijra ("the (e)migration")) or someone (used in the Quran in the case of disciplining a dissonant or disobedient wife or avoiding a harmful person), while the latter means a definitive statement denouncing a person as kāfir ("infidel"). However, because such a charge would carry serious consequences for the defendant, who would then be considered a مُرْتَدّ (murtadd "a backslider; an apostate), less extreme allegations, such as an accusation of بِدْعَة (bidʽah" [deviant ] innovation; heresy ") followed by rejection and excommunication have historically predominated over trials for apostasy.

Takfīr has often been practiced through the courts. More recently, ^{[ when? ]} there have been cases where people have been considered non-believers. ^{[ citation needed ]} These decisions followed lawsuits against individuals, mainly in response to their writings that some have seen as anti-Islamic. The most famous cases are those of Salman Rushdie Nasr Abu Zayd and Nawal El-Saadawi. The repercussions of these cases have included divorce, since according to traditional interpretations of Islamic law, Muslim women cannot marry non-Muslim men.

However, takfir remains a highly contentious issue, mainly because there is no universally accepted authority on Islamic law. In fact, according to classical commentators, the reverse of blasphemy charges also appears to be true, as Muhammad reportedly equated the act of declaring someone a kafir to blasphemy if the accused he was muslim.