Orthodox and capital punishment of heretics?

[jam070406]

Were there any countries in the East that had capital punishment for heresy?
I have read that Orthodoxy opposes capital punishment, as it finds it incompatible with the Gospels. I’ve see quotes by leading Orthodox Bishops and theologians that say as much. And…I am tending to agree.

And…I must admit I find the 3rd canon of the 4th Lateran council a tad disturbing. Comments? How do we justify or defend this?

4th Lateran council canon 3: On Heresy:

We excommunicate and anathematize every heresy that raises against the holy, orthodox and Catholic faith which we have above explained; condemning all heretics under whatever names they may be known, for while they have different faces they are nevertheless bound to each other by their tails, since in a’ll of them vanity is a common element. Those condemned, being handed over to the secular rulers of their bailiffs, let them be abandoned, to be punished with due justice, clerics being first degraded from their orders. As to the property of the condemned, if they are laymen, let it be confiscated; if clerics, let it be applied to the churches from which they received revenues. But those who are only suspected, due consideration being given to the nature of the suspicion and the character of the person, unless they prove their innocence by a proper defense, let them be anathematized and avoided by all 1-intil they have made suitable satisfaction; but if they have been under excommunication for one year, then let them be condemned as heretics. Secular authorities, whatever office they may hold, shall be admonished and induced and if necessary compelled by ecclesiastical censure, that as they wish to be esteemed and numbered among the faithful, so for the defense of the faith they ought publicly to take an oath that they will strive in good faith and to the best of their ability to exterminate in the territories subject to their jurisdiction all heretics pointed out by the Church; so that whenever anyone shall have assumed authority, whether spiritual or temporal, let him be bound to confirm this decree by oath. But if a temporal ruler, after having been requested and admonished by the Church, should neglect to cleanse his territory of this heretical foulness, let him be excommunicated by the metropolitan and the other bishops of the province. If he refuses to make satisfaction within a year, let the matter be made known to the supreme pontiff, that he may declare the ruler’s vassals absolved from their allegiance and may offer the territory to be ruled lay Catholics, who on the extermination of the heretics may possess it without hindrance and preserve it in the purity of faith; the right, however, of the chief ruler is to be respected as long as he offers no obstacle in this matter and permits freedom of action. The same law is to be observed in regard to those who have no chief rulers (that is, are independent). Catholics who have girded themselves with the cross for the extermination of the heretics, shall enjoy the indulgences and privileges granted to those who go in defense of the Holy Land…

fordham.edu/halsall/source/lat4-c3.html

 

[Nine_Two]

As far as I know none have inshrined such things into law.

With that said, it has happened on at least one occasion, the Heresiarch Avvakum was burned at the stake after spending much of his later life imprisoned by the tsar. Whether that was a case of the Tsar arbitrarily ordering his death, or actually following out the letter of the law I don’t know for sure, although I’m guessing the former, since it took so long to be carried out.

 

[Hesychios]

It’s a good question.

 

[Le_Cracquere]

Something that may complicate the issue is the historically closer Orthodox bond between Church and ruler. At the very least, they’ve often been closer-knit than in the West, and it may be hard to say whether certain historical executions were for more political or more religious reasons, and whether they happened on the authority of the Emperor/Tsar/King or the Patriarch.

 

[Hesychios]

Something that may complicate the issue is the historically closer Orthodox bond between Church and ruler. At the very least, they’ve often been closer-knit than in the West,…

Not exactly so.

The relationship between churches and states has always been very close in the west as well, until very modern times. Often, churches have been considered arms of the state, which is why the state would sometimes provide a stipend to the local clergy.

For instance, Saint Joan or Arc was condemned and burnt by Catholic bishops, but this was possible because those bishops were dependent on the king of England. The church (and thus the inquisition) in Spain was an agency of the state. These types of arrangement were very common.

The national character of the Catholic churches in the west was reflected in the Council of Constance particularly well. The great western schism was finally settled when the royal monarchs of Europe decided they had had enough of it.

 

[Madaglan]

Were there any countries in the East that had capital punishment for heresy?
I have read that Orthodoxy opposes capital punishment, as it finds it incompatible with the Gospels. I’ve see quotes by leading Orthodox Bishops and theologians that say as much. And…I am tending to agree.

And…I must admit I find the 3rd canon of the 4th Lateran council a tad disturbing. Comments? How do we justify or defend this?

4th Lateran council canon 3: On Heresy:

We excommunicate and anathematize every heresy that raises against the holy, orthodox and Catholic faith which we have above explained; condemning all heretics under whatever names they may be known, for while they have different faces they are nevertheless bound to each other by their tails, since in a’ll of them vanity is a common element. Those condemned, being handed over to the secular rulers of their bailiffs, let them be abandoned, to be punished with due justice, clerics being first degraded from their orders. As to the property of the condemned, if they are laymen, let it be confiscated; if clerics, let it be applied to the churches from which they received revenues. But those who are only suspected, due consideration being given to the nature of the suspicion and the character of the person, unless they prove their innocence by a proper defense, let them be anathematized and avoided by all 1-intil they have made suitable satisfaction; but if they have been under excommunication for one year, then let them be condemned as heretics. Secular authorities, whatever office they may hold, shall be admonished and induced and if necessary compelled by ecclesiastical censure, that as they wish to be esteemed and numbered among the faithful, so for the defense of the faith they ought publicly to take an oath that they will strive in good faith and to the best of their ability to exterminate in the territories subject to their jurisdiction all heretics pointed out by the Church; so that whenever anyone shall have assumed authority, whether spiritual or temporal, let him be bound to confirm this decree by oath. But if a temporal ruler, after having been requested and admonished by the Church, should neglect to cleanse his territory of this heretical foulness, let him be excommunicated by the metropolitan and the other bishops of the province. If he refuses to make satisfaction within a year, let the matter be made known to the supreme pontiff, that he may declare the ruler’s vassals absolved from their allegiance and may offer the territory to be ruled lay Catholics, who on the extermination of the heretics may possess it without hindrance and preserve it in the purity of faith; the right, however, of the chief ruler is to be respected as long as he offers no obstacle in this matter and permits freedom of action. The same law is to be observed in regard to those who have no chief rulers (that is, are independent). Catholics who have girded themselves with the cross for the extermination of the heretics, shall enjoy the indulgences and privileges granted to those who go in defense of the Holy Land…

fordham.edu/halsall/source/lat4-c3.html

I’ve read about some of it happening in 15th century Novgorod, but other than that, I am not familiar with the capital punishment of heretics.

See: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sect_of_Skhariya_the_Jew for details on the Novgorod incident. The introduction to the works of Nil Sorsky (Paulist Press) also provides information on the heresy condemnations.