John Calvin’s understanding of the Bible legitimized the execution of his theological rivals. While he did not personally execute anyone or ignite any fires that burned heretics, Calvin’s interpretations of both the Old and New Testaments asserted that such capital punishments were in accordance with divine will.
How
was that justified? Calvin held that not all Old Covenant laws were negated by
the New Covenant introduced by Jesus. He rejected the straightforward
interpretation of Hebrews, which claims, “God has made the first covenant
obsolete” (Hebrews 8:13). He also sidestepped Paul’s assertion: “the Law became
a tutor to lead us to Christ and now that faith has come we are no longer under
a tutor” (Galatians 3:24-25; cf. Rom 10:4). Calvin dismissed these New
Testament teachings and maintained that the moral laws from the Old Covenant,
particularly those in the Torah, still held relevance. Consequently, he
perceived it as a moral imperative to execute anyone who distorted his “pristine
doctrine.”
Calvin
explicitly invoked Leviticus 24:16 to support the execution of heretics,
stating, “The one who blasphemes the name of the Lord should be put to death;
all the congregation must stone him. Any foreigner or native who blasphemes the
Name should be put to death.” Despite Jesus’ command to “love your enemies,”
Calvin endorsed and advocated the execution of his theological adversaries. He
also ignored Paul’s guidance regarding how to interact with those who hold
differing theological views: “The Lord’s bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but
be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, with gentleness correcting
those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading
to the knowledge of the truth” (2
Timothy 2:24-25). Rather than engaging in patient dialogue, Calvin solicited
executions, issued death threats, and expressed gratitude to God for the
suffering inflicted upon heretics. He articulated his theologically motivated
vengeance in a personal letter. “I am persuaded that it is not without the
special will of God that, apart from any verdict of the judges, the criminals
have endured protracted torment at the hands of the executioner.” (Calvin’s
letter to Farel on 24 July).
Calvin
believed that God ensured criminals experienced prolonged suffering during
torture. His vengeful mindset and support for antiquated Old Covenant laws,
which advocated capital punishment against theological rivals, resemble actions
more aligned with ISIS than those of Jesus.
John
Calvin’s Conflict with Heretics
Personal
letters and documents from the city council reveal John Calvin’s significant
influence in Geneva. Although he was expelled in 1538 for imposing his strict
moral codes and advocating the church’s authority to excommunicate individuals,
officials in Geneva invited him back in 1541 to help resolve church discord.
After his return, the city council approved his Ecclesiastical Ordinances,
which established the Consistory, a church tribunal that governed the moral
conduct of Geneva’s citizens. This body convened weekly to examine cases, and
although the Consistory lacked the authority to imprison, exile, or execute
offenders, Calvin could persuade city magistrates to exercise such powers
against those who opposed him theologically.
When
Jacques Gruet, a theologian with differing opinions, placed a note in Calvin’s
pulpit labeling him a hypocrite, he was arrested, tortured for a month, and
executed by beheading on July 26, 1547. Gruet’s theological writings were
subsequently destroyed, and his home was burned down, while his wife was forced
into the street to witness the devastation.
Michael
Servetus, a Spanish physician and biblical scholar, faced a more horrific fate.
He was a longstanding acquaintance of Calvin who resisted Roman Catholic Church
authority. However, upon returning a copy of Calvin’s Institutes with critical
annotations, he angered Calvin. Calvin’s response, revealed in a letter to a
friend, was: “Servetus offers to come hither, if it be agreeable to me. But I
am unwilling to pledge my word for his safety, for if he shall come, I shall
never permit him to depart alive, provided my authority be of any avail.” (Letter
to Farel, 13 February 1546).
On
Servetus’s next visit to Calvin’s Sunday service, he was arrested and charged
with heresy, facing 38 official accusations, including the denial of the
Trinity and infant baptism. The city magistrates sentenced him to death. Calvin
advocated for a beheading rather than burning at the stake, but his plea was
disregarded. While some may interpret this as a sign of Calvin’s compassion for
a less brutal method of execution, it ultimately reveals his support for the
death of Servetus and all heretics.
On
October 27, 1553, Servetus was subjected to a fire made of green wood, which
made his execution a slow and torturous process as he was baked alive from his
feet upward. For half an hour, he cried out for mercy and prayed to Jesus while
the flames ascended his body, consuming the theological book strapped to him as
a representation of his heresy. Calvin later summarized Servetus’s execution as
follows: “Servetus . . . suffered the penalty due to his heresies, but was it
by my will? Certainly, his arrogance destroyed him no less than his impiety.
And what crime was it of mine if our Council, at my exhortation, indeed, but in
conformity with the opinion of several Churches, took vengeance on his
execrable blasphemies?” – Calvin.
How
could such cruelty be justified? In November 1552, the Geneva Council declared
Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion to be a, “holy doctrine which no
man might speak against.” Disagreement with Calvin’s understanding of God was
considered a crime worthy of death under his interpretation of Leviticus 24:16.
The records from Geneva’s city council describe an incident where a man who
publicly opposed Calvin’s doctrine of predestination was whipped in all the
major intersections of the city and then expelled (“The Minutes Book of the
Geneva City Council, 1541-59,” translated by Stefan Zweig, Erasmus: The Right
to Heresy). Disagreeing with Calvin was not tolerated in Geneva.
Flawed
Biblical Interpretation Can Lead to Death
John
Calvin asserted, “Whoever shall now contend that it is unjust to put heretics
and blasphemers to death, knowingly and willingly incur their guilt. It is not
human authority that speaks, it is God who speaks and prescribes a perpetual
rule for His Church.”
While
most poor biblical interpretation results in disappointment in a non-biblical
concept of God, anxiety over His demands, or a false sense of security based on
biased beliefs, it can also lead to death. John Calvin used his flawed biblical
interpretation to justify murder. This does not define his entire life or his
contributions to the Protestant church, but it serves as a lesson from a grave
misstep. It is my view that culture ought not to distort our obedience to
Scripture. I want my values to be shaped by Scripture, not the other way
around.
John
Calvin followed Augustine’s biblical rationale for executing heretics.
Augustine defended extreme measures through his interpretation of Jesus’ Great
Banquet parable found in Luke 14:16-24. In the narrative, when the master could
not fill his banquet, he instructed his servants in Luke 14:23 “to compel
people to come so that my house will be filled.” Both Augustine and Calvin
believed that executing heretics would “compel” more individuals to join their
faith community. Interpreting “compulsion” as justification for killing,
without recognizing Jesus’ other teaching to “love your enemies,” signifies a
profound hermeneutical error. Every aspect of Jesus’ teachings should be
understood in the context of the entirety of his message.
No comments:
Post a Comment