ANATHEMA. (a-n5.th't-ma), (Gr. civdOekta, on ath'ent-a), literally, anything laid up or sus pended, and hence anything laid up in a temple, set apart as sacred.
(1) Setting Apart. In this general sense the form employed is ctudOnpa, an ath'qe-ma, a word of not unfrequent occurrence in Greek classic au thors, and found once in the New Testament (Luke xxi:5). The form dvdecam, as as meaning, appears to be peculiar to the Hellenistic dialect. The distinction has probably arisen from the special use made of the word by the Greek Jews. In the Septuagint. 4 _v_nciza, a thing set apart or accursed, is the ordinary rendering of the Hebrew word kheh'rem, to consecrate (al though in some instances it varies between the two forms, as in Lev. xxvii :a3. 29), and in order to ascertain its meaning it will be necessary to in quire into the signification of this word.
We find that the I:belt-rem was a person or thing consecrated or devoted irrevocably to God, and that it differed from anything merely vowed or sanctified to the Lord in this respect, that the latter could be redeemed (Lev. xxvii :1-27), whilst the former was irreclaimable (Lev. xxvii:2I, 28; NUM. xviii :t. ; Ezek. xliv :29) : hence, in reference to living creatures, the devoted thing, whether man or beast, must be put to death (Lev. xxvii: 29). The prominent idea, therefore, which the word conveyed was that of a person or thing devoted to destruction, or accursed. Thus the cities of the Canaanites were anathematized (Num. xxi :2, 3), and after their complete destruc tion the name of the place was called Hannah Sept. Thus, again, the city of Jericho was made an anathema to the Lord (Josh. vi:t7), that is, every living thing in it (except Rahah and her faintly) was devoted to death; that which could he destroyed by fire •a‘ burnt, and all that could not be thus consumed (as gold and silver) was forever alienated from man and devoted to the use of the sanctuary (Josh. vi :24). The prominence thus given to the idea of a thing accursed led naturally to the use of the word in cases where there was no reference whatever to consecration to the service of God. as in Deut. vii:26; xiii :17, where an idol is called cherem, or cirdeepa (a thing accursed), and the Israelites are warned against idolatry lest they should be anathema like it. In these instances the
term denotes the object of the curse, but it is sometimes used to designate the curse itself (e. g. Dent. xx :17, Sept.; Comp. Acts xxiii :14), and it is in this latter sense that the English word is generally employed.
(2) Among the Later Jews. In this sense, also, the Jews of later times use the Hebrew term, though with a somewhat different meaning as to the curse intended. The Kheh-rcin of the Rab. bins signifies excommunication or exclusion from the Jewish church. The more recent Rabbinical writers reckon three kinds or degrees of excom munication, all of which are occasionally desig nated by the generic term Kheh-rem (Elias Levita, in Sepher •isbi). The first of these is merely a temporary separation or suspension from ecclesiastical privileges, involving, however, vari• ous civil inconveniences, particularly seclusion from society to the distance of four cubits. The person thus excommunicated was not debarred entering the temple, but instead of going in on the right hand, as was customary, lie was obliged to enter on the left, the usual way of departure; if he died whilst in this condition there was no mourning for him, but a stone was thrown on his coffin to indicate that he was separated from the people and had deserved stoning. Buxtorf (Lex. Chald., Talus. ct Rabbin., col. 1304) enu merates twenty-four causes of this kind of ex communication; it lasted thirty days and was pronounced without a curse. If the individual did not repent at the expiration of the term (which, however, according to Buxtorf, was extended in such cases to sixty or ninety days). the second kind of excommunication was resorted to. This was called simply and more properly fach-rem. It could only be pronounced by an assembly of at least ten persons, and was always accompanied with curses. The formula employed is given at length by Buxtorf (Le.r. col. 828). A person thus excommunicated was cut off from all religious and social privileges; it was unlawful either to eat or drink with him (Compare I Cor. v:11). The curse could be dissolved, however, by three common persons, or by one person of dignity. If the excommunicated person still con tinued impenitent, a yet more severe sentence was, according to the later Rabbins, pronounced against him.