Some Basic Info On John Calvin

Here is some more history from Calvin's reign in Geneva. The sources are cited at the end of each paragarph with page numbers.

Execution of A Child and Adulterers in Calvin's Geneva
The sections below are from historical works both old and new. The most recent source cited below is Robert M. Kingdon, Adultery and Divorce in Calvin's Geneva (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1995 [the same year my own work, Leaving the Fold was published]). At the end of each section appears the SOURCE. These particular quotations deal only with "the execution of a child" and "execution of adulterers" in Calvin's Geneva and Calvin's complicity.



EXECUTION OF A CHILD AND ADULTERERS IN CALVIN'S GENEVA
On the legislation of Geneva… he [Calvin] exercised a twofold, a direct and indirect, influence. Immediately after his return [to Geneva] he established the code of morals… The revision of the laws generally was committed to him, as well as the task of framing a code of morals… By his strenuous co-operation a collection of laws and ordinances [p. 354] was completed in the year 1543, and in the same year a new liturgy was given to the church. [p. 355]…



In the year 1555 [the year when the majority of Calvin's political opponents had been routed] he [Calvin] succeeded in limiting the freedom of the state, so that his opponents might not have it always in their power to summon the [greater, larger] council [of 200], which possessed so great, so almost irresistible an influence. His [Calvin's] name is not mentioned in the report of the proceedings, but nothing whatever was attempted at this period without his being consulted. [p. 357]…



It may appear strange that Calvin did not undertake the second revision of the laws [of Geneva]; but it seems that a certain degree of jealousy, on the part of the magistrates, prevented their entrusting him again with so important a matter, not only because he was a foreigner, but because of the religious power which he possessed. The task was therefore entrusted to Germain Colladon though he too was a stranger. But as Calvin was on very intimate terms with Colladon, who entertained the most devoted regard for him [they were not only neighbors but they were also the only two university-trained lawyers of repute in Geneva. -- E.T.B.], he [Calvin] still continued to exercise an indirect influence on the legislation. If Calvin therefore considered a new law necessary, he appeared before the council and demanded it in the name of the Consistory; and this was granted whenever any of the members of the assembly were of his opinion or party. A great many remarkable documents show, that Calvin thoroughly examined not only the higher spheres of Genevese legislation, but penetrated even to its minutest peculiarities…



We recognize in Calvin's legislation the majesty, the earnestness [p. 358] and strictness of his mind, the qualities which God glorifies in his own holy severity as the judge of the wicked. He had the honor of God, and not merely the security of man, in view. The spirit that guided him, and the principle which lay nearest his heart, are found expressed in a letter to Somerset, the regent of England, to whom, in 1546, he tendered instructions, in the highest degree characteristic, respecting the Christian government of a kingdom. The right of punishment established by the old covenant, which everywhere threatened the stiff-necked people with death, proclaiming thereby the anger and righteousness of God, is constantly apparent in the statements of Calvin. With him, as with Moses, the spiritual members of the state were judges; both were zealous for the honor of God. As with Moses idolatry, so now was blasphemy punished with death. As the law of Moses recognizes no peculiar crime as treason against the state, which however must probably occur in the existence of a nation; so with Calvin, in the same way, it is marked as treason against God. To curse, to strike a parent, is punished in both systems with death; theft in both is punished with loss of freedom only; unchastity is treated severely in both, and the penalty of adultery is death. …



There is even reason to believe that Calvin, as soon as he obtained increased authority, endeavored to sharpen by degrees the severity of the earlier laws, which had been received by the state; that they retained their original form till about the year 1560, but were, after his death [in 1564], thoroughly imbued with his sterner principles. Several cases of punishment illustrate this statement. Edicts exist, drawn up by him [Calvin] in 1556, "Sur les paillardises, adulteres, blasphemes, juremens et despitemens de Dieu;" but the council of two hundred found them too severe, and decided (Nov. 15th) that, because they seemed too rude to some, they should be moderated and revised, and après entre presentes en general. [Audin gives a date of 1560 and a translation for the above edicts: "On the 15th of November, 1560, they [the Genevan council] decided that the new decrees, `regarding debauchery, adultery, blasphemy, and contempt of God,' added to his [Calvin's] code, `seemed to some persons too severe, and ought to be revised and moderated, and afterwards be in general presented.'"
-- J. M. V. Audin, History of the Life, Works, and Doctrines of John Calvin, trans. Rev. John McGill, (Louisville, R. J. Webb & Brother), p. 357]



The overthrow [in 1555] of the "Libertines" [which was the name Calvin had given his major political opponents, though they called themselves "The Children of Geneva" -- E.T.B.] had given power to the Consistory, and offenders could now be punished with more success than formerly. Adultery, which, before Calvin's return [to Geneva], was [p. 359] punished only by an imprisonment of some days, or by a trifling fine, was now punished with death. An adulteress was drowned in the Rhone. Thus two citizens of the best families (Heinrich Philip and Jacques le Nevue) were beheaded. [p. 360]…



There is great beauty in the earnestness with which the authority of parents is defended. In the year 1563, a young girl who had insulted her mother was kept confined, fed on bread and water, and obliged to express her repentance publicly in the church. A peasant boy who had called his mother a devil, and flung a stone at her, was publicly whipped, and suspended by his arms to a gallows as a sign that he deserved death, and was only spared on account of his youth. Another child in 1568, for having struck his parents was beheaded. A lad of sixteen, for having only threatened to strike his mother, was condemned to death; on account of his youth the sentence was softened, and he was only banished, after being publicly whipped, with a halter about his neck. [p. 361]…



The military ordinance before alluded to declares that… the double crime of adultery should be punished with loss of life: simple adultery was to be punished with the iron-collar; witchcraft with only nineteen days' imprisonment; but the states-register names a great number of individuals who were drowned for this species of crime…



The severity of the legislation thus established is evinced in some of the minutest points of discipline… The clergy showed themselves still more earnest in this matter than the council: they refused to tolerate many amusements [p. 362] which the council accounted innocent. In the year 1576 they excommunicated some young people, who on the day of the three holy kings were found playing at a game common to the festival, and one of the simplest among them was persuaded into the belief that his head would be cut off. The council considered that such a punishment would be too severe, and made their representations to the Consistory accordingly...

 

Exerpts from Calvins reign in Geneva Part 2

In respect to attendance at church, he [Calvin] acted with such determination, that he inflicted a regular penalty of some sous on those who were guilty of negligence. He admonished the people with great earnestness on this duty, as we see from the following letter: "Invaluable is the fruit of that holy institution, by means of which we assemble together in one place, to be instructed in common in the divine doctrines of Christ… to show ourselves before God and the angels as the soldiers of Christ. This is indispensably necessary, and Satan could not expose you to a more dangerous temptation than that of inducing you, under any pretence whatever, to treat so great a benefit with contempt. … God's anger is openly revealed against those whose hearts are not made partakers of his Word."



Much has been said respecting the violence which he [Calvin] employed in compelling men to perform the services of religion. Calvin may possibly have derived this compulsory mode of acting, in matters of pastoral duty, from his great master, Augustine, who, unlike Calvin, was somewhat inconsistent with himself [p. 445] in his adoption of compulsory principles, which he partly put in force and partly rejected, in his treatment of opponents [like the Donatists -- E.T.B.]. Calvin, impressed with the idea that Christians need a spiritual education, and that ministers are answerable for souls, went further in his zeal for pastoral superintendence than his great exemplar…



All… regulations for the guidance of ministers were reviewed by the Consistory. The members of this evangelical, moral tribunal afforded regular reports of that which was brought before them. Every unbecoming word, even heard in the street, was made known to the Consistory. Judgment was pronounced without respect to persons: an officer brought the offenders before the tribunal [which met weekly]. Thus both men and women of the highest [and lowest] class, the daughters of the first families [and the last families], were obliged to appear, and questions were put to them on the tenderest points of conscience. We may easily imagine with what rage and indignation those proceedings would be regarded by the old families, who… delighted… in music and dancing, in theatrical and other public amusements. Under the Catholic bishops they had enjoyed themselves… and had struggled successfully for their political liberty. But now they were obliged to submit themselves to the power of the stern reformer [who was almost always in attendance at each meeting of the Consistory, as the Registers of the Consistory proceedings attest. -- E.T.B.], who demanded a lofty earnestness, … chasteness and purity, both in word and action. The Consistory admonished offenders. Very frequently such offenders would not submit themselves, but appealed to the council, which in its turn desired them to seek reconciliation with the church, and to pray the Consistory to pardon the offences that they had committed. In obedience to this injunction, they were obliged to kneel before the tribunal, to listen to its severe rebukes, and in bad cases to remain separated from communion, which was considered the most humiliating of disgraces. [p. 446]…



Calvin, notwithstanding his vehemence, always conducted himself with great dignity in the Consistory… But it also appears that Calvin sometimes used very strong language towards those before him, calling them hypocrites, and that they returned the abuse, a conduct which he did not leave unpunished. On such occasions he would rise indignantly from his seat, command attention, and require the Consistory to give the matter over to the council, that the offence might be punished as it deserved. As soon as the Consistory entertained a suspicion against any one, it referred them to the council, who ordered the accused to prison.



Calvin felt that he was especially elected to uphold the purity of doctrine… Many facts indeed tend to show that, at the first, any one who opposed the faith, or offended believers, or even ventured to take accused persons under his protection, exposed himself to great annoyances, complaints and processes. [p. 447]…



Heretical speeches against religions might even place the offender's life in danger. Thus a woman, Copa of Ferrara, was sentenced in 1559 to ask mercy of God and of justice, and to be banished, with the order that she should depart within 24-hours, under pain of losing her head. This sentence was pronounced upon her because she had uttered certain heretical expressions against Calvin, and the directions of the Consistory… Some men who laughed while Calvin was preaching were put in prison for three days, and condemned to ask pardon before the Consistory. Numberless processes of this kind took place. In the two years 1558 and 1559 alone there were 414 such trials. [p. 448]



SOURCE:
Paul Henry, D.D. [Protestant minister and seminary-inspector of Berlin], The Life and Times of John Calvin, The Great Reformer, Vol. I (Translated by Henry Stebbing, D.D., F.R.S., author of "The Church and Reformation" in Lardner's Cyclopaedia; History of the Church of Christ From the Diet of Augusburg; Lives of the Italian Poets, etc.) (London: Whittaker and Co., 1849) [The "Translator's Preface" in Vol. I states: "The present work affords ample details on the main points connected with Calvin's history, and with that of his age. They have been derived from sources now, in great part, for the first time made public… Dr. Henry's admiration of Calvin is almost unbounded. But devoted as is his veneration for the great reformer, he has been too candid to conceal either his faults or his errors. Though generally taking the part of an apologist, he never omits facts or documents; never garbles a letter, or weakens, by an imperfect abstract, a hostile argument… Twenty years, we understand, intervened between the commencement and the completion of Dr. Henry's work." The "Author's Preface" follows the "Translator's Preface" and the translator has injected merely a paragraph where the author had originally listed the sources he consulted for his information. The sources are therefore listed in the original German publication, but not in the English translation, which contains only this paragraph: "Dr. Henry gives a detailed account of the sources of his information. The substance of this statement will be found in the notes and references. No author perhaps could ever lay claim to greater industry or honesty in the examination of original authorities than Dr. Henry." So the original German edition of Dr. Henry's work must be consulted for the sources that he employed. -- E.T.B.]

 

Calvins Statement on Seperation of Church and State

Summary from the Institutes

Calvin believed that the church should not be subject to the state, or vice versa. While both church and state are subject to God's law, they both have their own God-ordained spheres of influence. For example, the church does not have the authority to impose penalties for civil offenses, although it can call on the civil authorities to punish them. Conversely, the state is not to intrude on the operations of the church. However, it has a duty to protect the church and its ability to function as the church.

As a magisterial reformer, Calvin thought of the State as a Christian nation rather than a secular government. He did not advocate religious freedom in the same sense as the Baptists later would, for example. However, his ecclesiology sowed the seeds of the modern secular democracy

References
•Calvin, John, Commentary on the Book of Psalms. Transl. James Anderson. Vol. 1. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1949.
•Ibid., Institutes of the Christian Religion. Transl. Ford Lewis Battles. 4 vols. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1960.
•McGrath, Alister E., A Life of John Calvin: A Study in the Shaping of Western Culture. Oxford: Blackwell, 1990.
•Schaff, Philip, History of the Christian Church. 3rd ed. Vol. 8. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1882.
•Robert M. Kingdon, "The Geneva Consistory in the Time of Calvin," in Calvinism in Europe 1540-1620, Andrew Pettegree et al., eds. Cambridge University Press, 1994.
The Institutes

Yet, here is a summary of his government in Geneva

Protestant Reformation, Other Leaders
Calvin and the City of Geneva- Theocracy
John Calvin the French lawyer who became a minister and eventually began the "Calvinist movement" established a religious ruled City (Theocracy) in Geneva, Switzerland. Upon taking rule of the City he announced that the basis of all law would be the Bible, as interpreted by Protestant clergy, government thus became a form of theocracy. Calvin was dictator of Geneva for 23 years, until his death in 1564. In Geneva there were laws for everything, for example: "The whole household shall attend the sermons on Sunday." Those who arrived late were first warned, then fined.
Just as in Catholic territories, heresy was an insult to God and treason to the state. Heretics would not be tolerated. During Calvin's tenure, 76 persons were banished from Geneva, and 58 killed. One year, charges were brought against 14 witches who conspired with Satan to bring the plague to Geneva, the Council burned them all. There’s no record to show if this improved the plague.
Never before or since, has a city's virtue been so thoroughly enforced. Geneva was cleansed of drunkenness, dancing, immoral songs, excess entertainment, extravagance, and immodest dress. The law specified the color of clothing and the number of dishes at a meal. Theater was first limited to religious plays; then these too were banned. Calvinists often focused on the old Testament of the Bible, therefore many of their children were named for Bible characters. One father was commanded to name his son Abraham, he preferred the boy be named Claude, for this sin he spent four days in jail.
The Geneva press was completely censored by Calvin, who had his own index of forbidden books. And it was a crime to speak disrespectfully of Calvin. Failure to comply was treated with a specified sequence of punishments. First came reprimand, then fines, imprisonment, or banishment. Fornicators might be exiled or drowned. Adulterers, blasphemers and idolaters were killed. One child was beheaded for striking his parents. As was the general custom, confessions were obtained by torture.
Geneva was reportedly free of prostitution, of lewdness and even of rouge. There were no lawsuits. There were also no church bells and no organs. Actually, control may not have been that complete. There are records of illegitimate children, of abandoned infants, and forced marriages. Calvin's own stepdaughter and son-in-law were condemned for adultery.
Calvin's virtues did not include a sense of humor. But he approved bowling and other games, and enjoyed wine in moderation.
Ironically, one man declared heretic by both Catholics and Calvin was named Servetus. He offended both groups by opposing the baptism of infants. In his interpretation of the Chapter of the Old Testament of the Bible named Isaiah [7:14] he followed the original Hebrew rather than either the Greek or Latin translations. The notion that God had predestined some to burn forever in hell regardless of their guilt, he labeled blasphemy. Interpreting the New Testament, 1 Corinthians 13, Servetus taught that faith is good, but love is better. He accurately described Judea (modern day Israel) as a barren country; this was deemed heresy, because the Bible described Judea as a land flowing with milk and honey.
Servetus was right about some things. Unfortunately he also quarreled with everybody. He believed he was appointed to lead a holy war against both the Pope and Calvin. A Catholic court condemned him to death by a slow fire. Unenthusiastic about this prospect, Servetus escaped, and wandered about France for three months. He stayed one month in Geneva, and was about to leave for Zurich. Then while attending church, he was recognized and arrested. During his imprisonment he and Calvin exchanged a number of insulting letters. Servetus identified Calvin as a "liar, impostor, hypocrite, and miserable wretch." For his part, Calvin concluded that Servetus was a "perfidious scamp" and a "dirty dog."
But it was Calvin who held the full power of the State and Servetus fate was sealed. Servetus made one last request: that he not be burned, rather beheaded. But Calvin saw no light in this. The next morning Servetus was burned.

Same sources cited

One can only conclude that this man was not only a murderer, but a bearer of false witness and a liar.

 

Calvin Persecution of Anabaptists

Calvin was no friend to our forerunners, and Anabaptists, the ones who probably preserved the NT church as Christ promised. Here is a guy who was constantly criticizing the Catholics, yet, persecuted the very local churches that did not not fit his model, the very churches that did preserve the true church for well over 1000 years.


[This is a summary of several chapters of Willem Balke's Calvin and the Anabaptist Radicals.]

John Calvin was no friend to Anabaptists and others in the “left-wing of the Reformation.” This fact is widely known, but less commonly recognized is how early and widespread were Calvin’s acquaintance with them. The term “Anabaptist” itself is a bit of a red-herring. Calvin, like most sixteenth-century writers, uses the term or “Catabaptists” to refer to a broad range of disconnected groups: German spiritualists, Italian rationalists, heterodox anarchists, and others. Almost everyone who did not fit into the Roman or Lutheran/Reformed churches was labeled Anabaptist. Many polemical treatises written against “Anabaptists” either could not or would not distinguish between these groups, or incorrectly assumed that traits belonging to one group were shared by all.

Calvin likely first came into contact with these sectarians during a stay in Paris in 1534. Paris was a hotbed of theological controversy, and representatives of all these groups were in residence. Calvin personally met Quintin Thieffrey, the head of a “libertine” sect, and Michael Servetus. A letter to Martin Bucer shows that by this time, Calvin was already knowledgeable enough in Anabaptist theology to differentiate it from Reformation theology. This same year, Calvin began to work on Psychopannychia (The Soul’s Vigilance), a defense of the soul’s existence and perception after death. Various sects and even some Lutherans at the time were attracted to the idea of soul sleep. The treatise would not be published until 1542; each successive preface strengthened the anti-Anabaptist rhetoric.

Later in 1534, Calvin fled Paris to Basel, where he met Bullinger and other Reformation leaders, and probably Karlstadt and Caroli. Basel had been a locus of Anabaptist activity; several debates had been held and refutations of Anabaptist theology written. Thus, by the end of 1534, Calvin was well-acquainted with the teachings of various left-wing sects.

Throughout 1534 and 1535, Calvin was preparing his first edition of Institutes. Calvin originally intended it as a summary of Reformation doctrine, but enlarged it in the aftermath of the Münster rebellion. A radical Anabaptist sect took control of the German town of Münster. One leader, Jan Matthys, declared the city the New Jerusalem and himself the royal successor of David. He legalized polygamy and instituted a communal lifestyle. Shocked by these developments, Catholic and Protestant armies joined forces, retook the town, and executed the ringleaders.

Governments across Europe were terrified by the idea that theological ideas could lead to such political disturbance. Many Catholics blamed Lutheran doctrine for the Anabaptists and insisted that spreading Protestantism would lead to similar outbreaks. Francis I, king of France, began persecuting Lutherans in his kingdom. Calvin, himself a Frenchman, added several chapters to Institutes and wrote a dedicatory letter to Francis, pleading for him to support the Reformation cause.

Throughout the first edition of Institutes, Calvin articulates Reformation doctrine against the Romanists one side and the Anabaptists on the other. He alludes to Münster several times. He promotes Reformation doctrine as a pure worship of God that encourages good morals and civil obedience. He expressly condemns violent rebellion and denies any connection to the Anabaptists. Calvin hoped that Francis would support the Reformation, but he at least desired that he recognize the distinction between Lutheran and Anabaptist and cease the persecution of loyal citizens. Unfortunately, Francis was unmoved by Calvin’s appeals.

As early as 1535, then, Calvin’s main objections to Anabaptism were already established. He embraced an organic conception of society in which the state worked with the church for the total well-being of its people. He recognized the divine establishment of government and the right of public persons to punish with the sword. He renounced the perfectionism that he saw at the root of the Anabaptist refusal to engage society. His theology of Word and Spirit prohibited a merely memorial view of the sacraments. He affirmed the propriety of infant baptism, but his justification for the practice had not yet moved much beyond Luther’s supposition of infant faith.

 

Here is more evidence of Calvins persecution of the local autonomous churches of the time

" Calvin and Persecution "
Why the Silence!
"...that an end could be put to their machinations in no other way than cutting them off by an ignominious death" (John Calvin).

The great declaration of the Reformation was "Sola Scriptura," Scripture Alone. To this we give a hearty amen. But for John Calvin it clearly was not Scripture alone. It was Scripture plus some key leftovers of the Roman Catholic Church: notably: infant baptism, a state church, and persecution of those who did not fall into line. As H.R Pike writes, "It was Scripture plus the sword of the state, hangings, burning at the stake, prison, tortures..." (The Other Side of John Calvin, p. 54).

Below is evidence that this is not overstatement!

Most who call themselves Calvinist say very little about the famous Reformer having a persecuting side. This reflects a selective silence that began quite early. We are greatly indebted to John Foxe and his Book of Martyrs for detailing the terrible atrocities meted out by Papal Rome. But Foxe, a contemporary and friend of Calvin (he outlived Calvin by 23 years), gives not one paragraph to the many persecutions that took place at Calvin's Geneva and elsewhere across Europe. Only those who suffered at the hand of Rome are mentioned (Pike, n.122).

That Rome's crimes were much greater in magnitude does not excuse this silence concerning the considerable persecution Protestants meted out. Nor can we accept the excuse that "Calvin's actions must be seen in light of the standards of that age". Regardless of the age, the New Testament is the standard against which actions are judged!


CHRONOLOGY OF CALVIN'S LIFE

1509 -- Born at Noyon, northwest of Paris. His father was lawyer-secretary to the local Catholic bishop.
1521 -- Placed on church payroll as a "benefice."

1523 -- Sent to the University of Paris to study for the priesthood. Begins to be attracted to anti Romanist views.

1528 -- His father and older brother are excommunicated from the Catholic Church. Leaves Paris to study law at Orleans and then at Bourges. Comes under the influence of the reformer Melchoir Wolmar.

1531 -- After death of father he returns to Paris to study Greek and Hebrew, but shortly after resumes law studies at Orleans. There he receives a doctorate with highest honours.

1533 -- Comes under the influence of a cousin, Olivetan, a Waldensian pastor and translator of the Bible into French. Makes final break with the Catholic Church and declares himself a Protestant. His writings do not give a clear testimony of his own salvation experience (Pike, pp.7-9).

1533-36 -- Flees Paris, takes up residence in Basel. Finishes first edition of his Institutes of the Christian Religion.

1536 -- Arrives in Geneva, a city that had recently declared itself free from the Catholic Church. Is persuaded by William Farel to develop a church-state system for Geneva. All in the city are required to attend the Reformed Church. All must give an oath of allegiance to a code of faith and discipline on fear of banishment from the city. In less than two years Calvin and Farel are forced to flee Geneva because of the harshness of their system.

1538 -- Oversees a church of French refugees in Strasbourg. Comes under the influence of Martin Bucer. Revises his Institutes. Writes a commentary on Romans. Does all in his power to oppose the Anabaptists.


CALVIN'S STATEMENTS SUPPORTING PERSECUTION
Prefatory Address in his Institutes to Francis, King of the French, 1536. "But when I perceived that the fury of certain bad men had risen to such a height in your realm, that there was no place in it for sound doctrine, I thought it might be of service if I were in the same work both to give instruction to my countrymen, and also lay before your Majesty a Confession, from which you may learn what the doctrine is that so inflames the rage of those madmen who are this day, with fire and sword, troubling your kingdom. For I fear not to declare, that what I have here given may be regarded as a summary of the very doctrine which, they vociferate, ought to be punished with confiscation, exile, imprisonment, and flames, as well as exterminated by land and sea. This, I allow, is a fearful punishment which God sends on the earth; but if the wickedness of men so deserves, why do we strive to oppose the just vengeance of God?"

Letter to William Farel, February 13, 1546. "If he [Servetus] comes [to Geneva], I shall never let him go out alive if my authority has weight."

Letter to the Lord Protector of Somerset, adviser to King Edward VI, October 22, 1548. "[They] well deserve to be repressed by the sword which is committed to you, seeing that they attack not the King only, but God who has seated him upon the throne, and has entrusted to you the protection as well of His person as of His majesty."

Letter of August 20, 1553, one week after Servetus arrest. "I hope that Servetus will be condemned to death."

Defense of Orthodox Faith against the Prodigious Errors of the Spaniard Michael Servetus, published in early 1554. "Whoever shall now contend that it is unjust to put heretics and blasphemers to death will knowingly and willingly incur their very guilt. This is not laid down on human authority; it is God who speaks and prescribes a perpetual rule for his Church. It is not in vain that he banishes all those human affections which soften our hearts; that he commands paternal love and all the benevolent feelings between brothers, relations, and friends to cease; in a word, that he almost deprives men of their nature in order that nothing may hinder their holy zeal. Why is so implacable a severity exacted but that we may know that God is defrauded of his honour, unless the piety that is due to him be preferred to all human duties, and that when his glory is to be asserted, humanity must be almost obliterated from our memories? Many people have accused me of such ferocious cruelty that I would like to kill again the man I have destroyed. Not only am I indifferent to their comments, but I rejoice in the fact that they spit in my face."

Preface to Commentaries, July 22, 1557. "To these irreligious characters. and despisers of the heavenly doctrineŠ. I think that there is scarcely any of the weapons which are forged in the workshop of Satan, which has not been employed by them in order to obtain their object. And at length matters had come to such a state, that an end could be put to their machinations in no other way than cutting them off by an ignominious death; which was indeed a painful and pitiable spectacle to me. They no doubt deserved the severest punishment, but I always rather desired that they might live in prosperity, and continue safe and untouched; which would have been the case had they not been altogether incorrigible, and obstinately refused to listen to wholesome admonition."

Comments on Ex. 22:20, Lev. 24:16, Deut. 13:5-15, 17:2-5. "Moreover, God Himself has explicitly instructed us to kill heretics, to smite with the sword any city that abandons the worship of the true faith revealed by Him."

Letter to the Marquis Paet, chamberlain to the King of Navarre, 1561. "Honour, glory, and riches shall be the reward of your pains; but above all, do not fail to rid the country of those scoundrels [Anabaptists and others], who stir up the people to revolt against us. Such monsters should be exterminated, as I have exterminated Michael Servetus the Spaniard."

 

Part 2 persecutions of the Anabaptists

PERSECUTIONS AT CALVIN'S GENEVA
The Minutes Book of the Geneva City Council, 1541-59 (translated by Stefan Zweig, Erasmus: The Right to Heresy):

"During the ravages of the pestilence in 1545 more than twenty men and women were burnt alive for witchcraft.

From 1542 to 1546 fifty-eight judgements of death and seventy-six decrees of banishment were passed.

During the years 1558 and 1559 the cases of various punishments for all sorts of offences amounted to four hundred and fourteen.

One burgher smiled while attending a baptism: three days imprisonment.

Another, tired out on a hot summer day, went to sleep during a sermon: prison.

Some workingmen ate pastry at breakfast: three days on bread and water.

Two burghers played skittles: prison.

Two others diced for a quarter bottle of wine: prison.

A blind fiddler played a dance: expelled from the city.

Another praised Castellio's translation of the Bible: expelled from Geneva.

A girl was caught skating, a widow threw herself on the grave of her husband, a burgher offered his neighbour a pinch of snuff during divine service: they were summoned before the Consistory, exhorted, and ordered to do penance.

Some cheerful fellows at Epiphany stuck a bean into the cake: four-and-twenty hours on bread and water.

A couple of peasants talked about business matters on coming out of church: prison.

A man played cards: he was pilloried with the pack of cards hung around his neck.

Another sang riotously in the street: was told 'they could go and sing elsewhere,' this meaning he was banished from the city.

Two bargees had a brawl: executed.

A man who publicly protested against the reformer's doctrine of predestination was flogged at all the crossways of the city and then expelled.

A book printer who in his cups [columns] had railed at Calvin, was sentenced to have his tongue perforated with a red-hot iron before being expelled from the city.

Jacques Gruent was racked and then executed for calling Calvin a hypocrite.

Each offence, even the most paltry, was carefully entered in the record of the Consistory, so that the private life of every citizen could unfailingly be held up against him in evidence." (See Pike, pp. 61-63).
Sources quoted in Philip Schaff's History of the Christian Church, vol. 8:
"The death penalty against heresy, idolatry and blasphemy and barbarous customs of torture were retained. Attendance at public worship was commanded on penalty of three sols. Watchmen were appointed to see that people went to church. The members of the Consistory visited every house once a year to examine the faith and morals of the family. Every unseemly word and act on the street was reported, and the offenders were cited before the Consistory to be either censured and warned, or to be handed over to the Council for severer punishment."

Several women, among them the wife of Ami Perrin, the captain-general, were imprisoned for dancing.

A man was banished from the city for three months because on hearing an ass bray, he said jestingly 'He prays a beautiful psalm.'

A young man was punished because he gave his bride a book on housekeeping with the remark: 'This is the best Psalter.'

Three men who laughed during a sermon were imprisoned for three days.

Three children were punished because they remained outside of the church during the sermon to eat cakes.

A man who swore by the 'body and blood of Christ' was fined and condemned to stand for an hour in the pillory on the public square.

A child was whipped for calling his mother a thief and a she-devil.

A girl was beheaded for striking her parents.

A banker was executed for repeated adultery.

A person named Chapuis was imprisoned for four days because he persisted in calling his child Claude (a Roman Catholic saint) instead of Abraham.

Men and women were burnt to death for witchcraft. (See Pike, pp. 55,56).
From Other Sources:
Belot, an Anabaptist was arrested for passing out tracts in Geneva and also accusing Calvin of excessive use of wine. With his books and tracts burned, he was banished from the city and told not to return on pain of hanging (J.L. Adams, The Radical Reformation, pp. 597-598).

Martin Luther said of Calvin's actions in Geneva, "With a death sentence they solve all argumentation" (Juergan L. Neve, A History of Christian Thought, vol. I, p. 285).

"About the month of January 1546, a member of the Little Council, Pierre Ameaux, asserted that Calvin was nothing but a wicked man - who was preaching false doctrine. Calvin felt that his authority as an interpreter of the Word of God was being attacked: he so completely identified his own ministry with the will of God that he considered Ameaux's words as an insult to the honour of Christ. The Magistrates offered to make the culprit beg Calvin's pardon on bended knees before the Council of the Two Hundred, but Calvin found this insufficient. On April 8, Ameaux was sentenced to walk all round the town, dressed only in a shirt, bareheaded and carrying a lighted torch in his hand, and after that to present himself before the tribunal and cry to God for mercy" (F. Wendel, Calvin, pp. 85, 86).
"Doth a fountain send forth at the same place sweet water and bitter?" James 3:11.

One can only conclude that Calvin did not care about the church of Jesus Christ, but his own political power.

 

More on Calvin's life to follow, including his beliefs in infant baptism and his own arrest as a youth on morality charges.

 

Whew! You lucked out on that. :laugh:

By the way, nothing you've cited changes the facts.

http://www.banneroftruth.org/pages/articles/article_detail.php?457

 

You remind me of the Apostle Peter, who, despite his salvation, just kept stepping in it.

One does not execute people for disagreeing theologically. You would have been a crispy critter decades ago if that were the case.

The defense of John Calvin would be comical if it were not so pathetic. If Michael Servetus was the only victim, then one might make a case. However, in my above posts are dozens of examples of torture and murder, and those are the documented ones. The article reads like a transcript of the first OJ Simpson trial. It will not be very effective in before the Holy Throne of Heaven.

The very fact that your post criticizing was a spelling error tells loud and clear you have run out of talking points.

The fact that one does not like the character of John Calvin does not mean one is pro Roman Catholic. I am as anti-Catholic as it gets. The fact that one does not like the character of John Calvin does not mean one is an Arminian. I strongly believe in doctrines of grace and sovereignty. It certainly does not mean one is ill informed of church history. You are living proof since you applaud his life along with your siamese twin Rippon.

Both of you clearly leave out the fact that the thug persecuted local, autonomous churches of the time, the very church that was preserving the NT church of Jesus Christ.

Both of you should hang your heads in shame.

 

Smores anyone? :laugh:

 

I am as solid a theological Calvinist as they come and still a strong baptist. I do agree, however, that Calvin's historical life is not to be admired. I guess one must simply fit him to the historical time, and that was not good for the church. It is like the preacher who preaches a sound gospel message, but literally steals from the local church.

Cheers, and bless,

Jim

 

This was posted to someone else, not me...

Woope! the spelling police are out again! They get me a lot.

On discuion boards I am the worst regarding spelling. Why, you ask?

Becuse this is not a spelling bee, and we are not writing resumes. All we want do do is get our point across quickly.


I veiw the spelling police as people who are losing the battle and are simply desperate.

Carry on

 

AIC, just so you know ( I am sure you do) smaller people are the ones who major on minors. (BTW it is Whoopie, I think, rather than "woopie".)

 

That was Aaron on my spelling. I looked up the dictionary, and I was correct. The point is, he is out of ideas for defending John Calvin, and turned to my spelling. Both he and Rippon have been crushed, slam dunk.

 

Quatumfaith,

you posted...

Hey...Thats good. :wavey: I am going to remember that.

And did you notice....my spelling was perfect!! :type:

Do I get a prize??

 

AIC, I was never so thrilled when I looked up the word (discernable ) or discernible. Either spelling is correct. Aaron stepped right into it. One thing I have learned on BB in seven years, when spelling errors are pointed out, they are out of arguments, regardless of the side.

 

my, my, what a dysfunctional family the Creator has.

 

Really, you should be kinder to Rippon than that.