Chapter 3
Calvin’s Dark Side
You are about to read an important part of church history from the Reformation period that has been so concealed in our day that very few people know the facts. Brace yourself for a shock.
On October 27, 1553 John Calvin, the founder of Calvinism, had Michael Servetus, the Spanish physician,[1] burned at the stake just outside of Geneva for his doctrinal heresies![2] This event was something Calvin had considered long before Servetus was even captured, for Calvin wrote his friend, Farel, on February 13, 1546 (seven years prior to Servetus’ arrest) and went on record as saying:
Servetus lately wrote to me, and coupled with his letter a long volume of his delirious fancies, with the Thrasonic boast, that I should see something astonishing and unheard of. He takes it upon him 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.[3]
Obviously, in that day in Geneva, Switzerland Calvin had ultimate authority. This is why some referred to Geneva as the “Rome of Protestantism”[4] and to Calvin as the “famous Protestant ‘Pope’ of Geneva.”[5]
During Servetus’ trial, Calvin wrote to his friend:
I hope that the verdict will call for the death penalty.[6]
Although Calvin consented to Servetus’ request to be beheaded, he apparently acquiesced to the mode of execution employed. But why did Calvin want Servetus beheaded? Why the death wish for Servetus in the first place? Let’s answer both of these questions in order:
At one point, it is true, Calvin wanted Servetus beheaded. Beheading was employed for civil offenses, and Calvin wanted it to appear to be a civil matter rather than a religious one. But as there were no grounds for this, the idea had to be given up.[7]
To rescue Servetus from his heresies, Calvin replied with the latest edition of his Institutes of the Christian Religion, which Servetus promptly returned with insulting marginal comments. Despite Servetus’s [sic] pleas, Calvin, who developed an intense dislike of Servetus during their correspondence, refused to return any of the incriminating material.[8]
Convicted of heresy by the Roman Catholic authorities, Servetus escaped the death penalty by a prison break. Heading for Italy, Servetus unaccountably stopped at Geneva, where he had been denounced by Calvin and the Reformers. He was seized the day after his arrival, condemned as a heretic when he refused to recant, and burned in 1553 with the apparent tacit approval of Calvin.[9]
Please note that Servetus sent back to Calvin his Institutes with insulting marginal comments. How this act must have fostered Calvin’s intense dislike of him. As for Calvin, how did he view his own work of the Institutes? In 1545, John Calvin wrote:
I dare not bear too strong a testimony in its favour, and declare how profitable the reading of it will be, lest I should seem to prize my own work too highly. However, I may promise this much, that it will be a kind of key opening up to all the children of God a right and ready access to the understanding of the sacred volume. Wherefore, should our Lord give me henceforth means and opportunity of composing some Commentaries, I will use the greatest possible brevity, as there will be no occasion to make long digressions, seeing that I have in a manner deduced at length all the articles which pertain to Christianity.
And since we are bound to acknowledge that all truth and sound doctrine proceed from God, I will venture boldly to declare what I think of this work, acknowledging it to be God’s work rather than mine. To him, indeed, the praise due to it must be ascribed.[10]
One can’t help but recognize the similarity between Calvin’s exalted estimation of his own book and Mary Baker Eddy, the founder of Christian Science, who entitled her own book, Science and Health With Key to the Scriptures. Both felt they had a key to the Scriptures.
Servetus’ Arrest And Imprisonment
In the course of his flight from Vienne, Servetus stopped in Geneva and made the mistake of attending a sermon by Calvin. He was recognized and arrested after the services.[11]
Calvin had him [Servetus] arrested as a heretic. Convicted and burned to death.[12]
But Servetus’ fate was sealed. “In prison he was subjected to cruel treatment; and he was denied the benefit of counsel. . . His religious views had neither been printed nor uttered in Genevan territory. The Genevan government, therefore, had not the slightest legal jurisdiction for his arrest, imprisonment, torture, and death.”[13]
From the time that Calvin had him arrested on August 14th until his condemnation, Servetus spent his remaining days “. . . in an atrocious dungeon with no light or heat, little food, and no sanitary facilities.” [14]
Let it be known that half-green wood was placed around the feet of Servetus and a wreath strewn with sulfur on his head. It took over thirty minutes to render him lifeless in such a fire. A different account said it was three hours. On the way to the execution, Calvin’s friend, Farel, walked beside the condemned man.
Farel And Servetus
Farel walked beside the condemned man, and kept up a constant barrage of words, in complete insensitivity to what Servetus might be feeling. All he had in mind was to extort from the prisoner an acknowledgement of his theological error—a shocking example of the soulless cure of souls. After some minutes of this, Servetus ceased making any reply and prayed quietly to himself. When they arrived at the place of execution, Farel announced to the watching crowd: “Here you see what power Satan possesses when he has a man in his power. This man is a scholar of distinction, and he perhaps believed he was acting rightly. But now Satan possesses him completely, as he might possess you, should you fall into his traps.”
When the executioner began his work, Servetus whispered with trembling voice: “Oh God, Oh God!” The thwarted Farel snapped at him: “Have you nothing else to say?” This time Servetus replied to him: “What else might I do, but speak of God!” Thereupon he was lifted onto the pyre and chained to the stake. A wreath strewn with sulfur was placed on his head. When the faggots were ignited, a piercing cry of horror broke from him. “Mercy, mercy!” he cried. For more than half an hour the horrible agony continued, for the pyre had been made of half-green wood, which burned slowly. “Jesus, Son of the eternal God, have mercy on me,” the tormented man cried from the midst of the flames. . .[15]
The agony, however, was prolonged. It seems that in the case of Servetus green wood was used, so that it took three hours before he was pronounced dead.[16]
Calvin and Farel saw, in his refusal to recant, only the obstinacy of an incorrigible heretic and blasphemer. We must recognize in it the strength of his conviction. He forgave his enemies; he asked the pardon even of Calvin. Why should we not forgive him? He had a deeply religious nature. We must honor his enthusiastic devotion to the Scriptures and to the person of Christ. From the prayers and ejaculations inserted in his book, and from his dying cry for mercy, it is evident that he worshipped Jesus Christ as his Lord and Saviour.[17]
Thus the heretic was silenced, but at what a price! For more than three centuries the smoke and flame which ascended about the tortured body of Servetus have cast back a lurid light upon the form of Calvin.[18]
Farel noted that Servetus might have been saved by shifting the position of the adjective and confessing Christ as the Eternal Son rather than as the Son of the Eternal God.[19]
Although the Bible declares, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved” (Acts 2:21; Rom. 10:13 cf. Lk. 23:42,43), Farel still reckoned Servetus an unsaved man at the end of his life.
As the Roman Catholic authorities of 1415 burned John Hus[20] at the stake over doctrine, John Calvin similarly had Michael Servetus burned at the stake. But was doctrine the only issue? Could there have been another reason, a political one?
As an “obstinate heretic” he had all his property confiscated without more ado. He was badly treated in prison. It is understandable, therefore, that Servetus was rude and insulting at his confrontation with Calvin. Unfortunately for him, at this time Calvin was fighting to maintain his weakening power in Geneva. Calvin’s opponents used Servetus as a pretext for attacking the Geneva Reformer’s theocratic government. It became a matter of prestige—always the sore point for any dictatorial regime—for Calvin to assert his power in this respect. He was forced to push the condemnation of Servetus with all the means at his command.[21]
Ironically enough, the execution of Servetus did not really bolster the strength of the Geneva Reformation. On the contrary, as Fritz Barth has indicated, it “gravely compromised Calvinism and put into the hands of the Catholics, to whom Calvin wanted to demonstrate his Christian orthodoxy, the very best weapon for the persecution of the Huguenots, who were nothing but heretics in their eyes.” The procedure against Servetus served as a model of a Protestant heretic trial. . . it differed in no respect from the methods of the medieval Inquisition. . . The victorious Reformation, too, was unable to resist the temptations of power.[22]
Was Calvin A Great Theologian?
Is it possible for a man such as John Calvin to have been a “great theologian” and at the same time violate Scripture to such a degree and afterwards show no remorse? Dear reader, do you have a heart that could, like John Calvin, burn another person at the stake?
Let’s look at this in a different way. Suppose a man from your congregation with a reputation for being a spiritual leader captured your neighbor’s dog, chained it to a stake, then used a small amount of green kindling to slowly burn the dog to death. What would you think of such a person, especially if he afterwards showed no remorse? Would you want him to interpret the Bible for you? To make the matter even worse for John Calvin, a person, unlike a dog, is created in the image of God!
Like it or not, the Scriptures lead to the conclusion that John Calvin’s heart was not spiritually enlightened, but rather darkened as a result of his murderous hate for Servetus. Calvin was, therefore, spiritually incapable of rightly dividing the word of truth.[23]
Scripture declares the following about murderers:
“But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death” (Rev. 21:8, NIV).
“And you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding [remaining] in him” (1 Jn. 3:15, NKJV).
Some Greek texts[24] include the Greek word meno in 1 Jn. 3:15. That Greek word is translated “remaining” (Marshall’s Literal, Young’s Literal) or “abiding” (NASB, NKJV, NRSV, Amplified, Wuest, Green’s, KJV) and states that murderous people don’t have eternal life remaining (abiding) in them. (The implication of this Greek word is antithetical to OSAS, since saved people can become murderous, as David did.)
All murderers are, therefore, unsaved. Since John Calvin was a murderer, then Calvin was unsaved, according to Scripture! Moreover, since the unsaved are darkened in their spiritual understanding (Eph. 4:18), and cannot understand Scripture in general, then Calvin was darkened in his spiritual understanding.
“The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned” (1 Cor. 2:14, NIV).
This truth must cast suspicion on Calvin’s unique teachings the same way suspicion should be cast on the teachings of the Watchtower Society after they are identified as a false prophet based on Deut. 18:20-22. To point these facts out about John Calvin or the Watchtower Society is not the ad hominem argument as some confuse it, but basic truth about the Scriptures being spiritually discerned.
Also, Calvin was drawn to teachings that came from a man who stood condemned, according to Scripture, for preaching another gospel! (See the Chapter 2 entitled, OSAS Definitions and Origin.) How could Calvin be drawn to such a source of teachings if he himself was spiritually enlightened and the source he was drawn to was spiritually darkened? Scripture says:
“They are of the world. Therefore they speak as of the world, and the world hears them” (1 Jn. 4:5, NKJV).
Was Augustine of the world? Besides Gal. 1:8,9, we also have the fact that only the unsaved persecute people for their religious beliefs. Never do we see in the New Testament a Christian doing such! In spite of this, Augustine did. Yet Calvin followed his unscriptural example in persecuting people for their religious beliefs!
Jesus said we can know people by their fruit (Mt. 12:33)—be it John Calvin or anyone else! Similarly, the Apostle John wrote:
“This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not a child of God; nor is anyone who does not love his brother” (1 Jn. 3:10, NIV).
Can you say Calvin did what was right regarding the death of Servetus (and the scores of others) or was he in blatant violation of Scripture?
No other examples are needed to objectively assess Calvin’s spiritual condition. However, two other men should also be briefly mentioned:
Two other famous episodes concerned Jacques Gruet and Jerome Bolsec. Gruet, whom Calvin considered a Libertine, had written letters critical of the Consistory and, more serious, petitioned the Catholic king of France to intervene in the political and religious affairs of Geneva. With Calvin’s concurrence he was beheaded for treason. Bolsec publicly challenged Calvin’s teaching on predestination, a doctrine Bolsec, with many others, found morally repugnant. Banished from the city in 1551, he revenged himself in 1577 by publishing a biography of Calvin that charged him with greed, financial misconduct, and sexual aberration.[25]
How Should A Heretic Be Dealt With?
How should a heretic or any false teacher be dealt with, that is, if one is willing to abide by the Biblical guidelines?
Paul wrote Titus and touched upon this very issue, which first starts out as a qualification for eldership in the church:
“He [the elder] must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it. For there are many rebellious people, mere talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision group. They must be silenced, because they are ruining whole households by teaching things they ought not to teach—and that for the sake of dishonest gain” (Titus 1:9-11, NIV).
Clearly, then, a false teacher should be silenced, not by having him killed, as Calvinism’s founder did, but by refuting him with Scripture. This is the true Christian method, in contrast to the examples of Calvin and his predecessor, Augustine.
If Calvin’s example was our standard, the next time the Jehovah’s Witnesses come to our door, we should physically overpower them, bind them to a stake, and make human candles out of them. Can you imagine a professing Christian doing this, much less a reputed theologian? If done, could you force yourself to believe such a person was truly saved and adhere to his strange doctrinal distinctives?
Also, false teachers should be openly named as Paul openly named Hymenaeus and Philetus, who were destroying the faith of some of the Christians whom Paul knew:
“Their teaching will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, who have wandered away from the truth. They say that the resurrection has already taken place, and they destroy the faith of some” (2 Tim. 2:17,18, NIV).
As distasteful as it may be to some, citing names is also an important preventative against a false teacher’s spiritual poison.
Getting back to Calvin, can you say some are wrong to conclude that he must have been governed by a different spirit than Paul had, since Paul’s directives and example regarding how to deal with a heretic were diametrically opposed by him?
Regarding these facts about John Calvin’s life, why have these been overlooked in our day? Could it be because many could only view them as an embarrassment and refutation to Calvinism?
Most people are only now learning the shocking facts about John Calvin as they read them for the first time!
No event has more influenced history’s judgment of Calvin than the role he played in the capture and execution of the Spanish physician and amateur theologian Michael Servetus in 1553. This event has overshadowed everything else Calvin accomplished and continues to embarrass his modern admirers.[26]Three important questions remain for all of us to answer:
(1) Can John Calvin be Scripturally justified for putting Michael Servetus to death?
(2) Does a murderous hate, such as Calvin had, render one spiritually unable to accurately interpret the Scriptures (1 Cor. 2:14; 1 Jn. 2:9-11)?
(3) Can an unrepentant murderer be saved (1 Jn. 3:15 cf. Rev. 21:8)?
Calvin’s Theology
Calvin’s version of Christianity is very popular around the world, but is his view Scriptural? To answer in the affirmative is to say that Calvin’s double predestination is true, that is, some are predestined for heaven and others are predestined for hell.[27] This would violate many Scriptures, especially 2 Pet. 3:9:
“The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance” (NIV).
One OSAS author comments on the adverse effect that this Calvinistic teaching had on poem writer, William Cowper:
Cowper also wrestled with a theological problem that he did not correctly resolve. He grew up in an era when the doctrine of election was stressed, namely, the idea that God is the one who chooses who will be saved and leaves the rest to be damned. Cowper felt that he was not worthy to be classified as belonging to the chosen. He thought that, for whatever reason, election excluded him from the wonders of God’s love.[28]
Furthermore, Calvin’s teachings declare Jesus’ work on the cross was not infinite, because according to that teaching, he did not shed his blood for every human, but only for the elect—those predestined to be saved. This is clearly refuted by 1 Jn. 2:2:
“He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world” (NIV).
For those who accept this point in Calvinism, known as limited atonement, they could never tell people at random that Jesus died for them, because unless they are one of the elect, then Jesus didn’t!
Moreover, Calvinism actually teaches regeneration precedes faith:
Surely seeing the kingdom of God is the act of faith and, if so, such faith is impossible without regeneration. Hence regeneration must be prior to faith. We can affirm then on these grounds that the order is regeneration, faith, justification.[29]
Also, Calvin’s “perseverance of the saints” doctrine would assert that God’s power will keep a truly saved person saved, even if he would fall into grievous sins and for a time continue therein.[30] This clearly violates many Scriptural examples and warnings which prove the opposite!
It should be apparent that, from Calvin himself down to us today, the “perseverance of the saints” doctrine (commonly known by some as “once saved always saved”) has most often been a “license for immorality” taught under the banner of grace. Jude 3,4 state:
“Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt I had to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints. For certain men whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are godless men, who change the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord” (NIV).
As Calvin’s own theology allowed for his cruel, unscriptural actions against Servetus, many in our day are sexually immoral, liars, drunkards, filled with greed, etc., while they still profess salvation. This is a ramification of Calvin’s grace message—a teaching which has spread from a man who could openly burn another to death and for the remaining ten years and seven months of his life, never publicly repent of his crime and sin.
Posterity Owes Me a Debt of Gratitude
Calvin never changed his views or regretted his conduct towards Servetus. Nine years after his execution he justified it in self-defence against the reproaches of Baudouin (1562), saying: “Servetus suffered the penalty due to his heresies, but was it by my will? Certainly his arrogance destroyed him not 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? Let Baudouin abuse me as long as he will, provided that, by the judgment of Melanchthon, posterity owes me a debt of gratitude for having purged the Church of so pernicious a monster.”[31]
In fact, not only did Calvin never repent of the Servetus episode, he went much beyond that to defend himself:
Calvin’s work against Servetus gave complete satisfaction to Melanchthon. It is the strongest refutation of the errors of his opponent which his age produced, but it is not free from bitterness against one who, at last, had humbly asked his pardon, and who had been sent to the judgment seat of God by a violent death. It is impossible to read without pain the following passage: “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.”[32]
Dear modern reader, do you think it is unjust to put a heretic to death? If you are like most, then according to John Calvin, the great Reformer, you incur their very guilt! (Of course, there’s no Scripture that can be given to support this statement from Calvin.)
Also, for Calvin to say it was God who was speaking, doesn’t it seem like he was claiming to be a prophet? Moreover, according to Calvin, God has this treatment for heretics as a perpetual rule for his Church. This is the real, unvarnished John Calvin that few know existed!
We now come to the dark chapter in the history of Calvin which has cast a gloom over his fair name, and exposed him, not unjustly, to the charge of intolerance and persecution, which he shares with his whole age.
The burning of Servetus and the decretum horribile[33] are sufficient in the judgment of a large part of the Christian world to condemn him and his theology. . .[34]
In Defense Of Calvin
In spite of the aforementioned facts, there are nonetheless a few people who will still try to defend John Calvin by saying:
(1) Trinitarian heresy was a death sentence crime in that day and culture;
(2) The decision was really not Calvin’s at all but was a decision of Geneva’s “Council of 25,” and was the spirit of the age;
(3) Calvin had a wrong view of church and state;
(4) Other major Reformers agreed with the judgment.
Absolutely none of these arguments offered to defend Calvin can be supported with Scripture!
Luke 14:23
Like Augustine, John Calvin cites Lk. 14:23 as Scriptural support to punish heresy by death. Let’s consider that passage:
Then the master said to the servant, “Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled” (NKJV).
This verse is clearly not speaking of destruction but salvation! Also, we see in the book of Acts the early disciples compelled people to come to salvation with Scriptural argumentation, never persecution and death.
Finally, if one is predestined either for salvation or damnation, then how could we compel them to come in anyhow? That doctrine teaches that one is saved or lost based solely on God’s random choice!
Specifically regarding Trinitarian heresy, McNeill comments:
Calvin harbored others who were far from Trinitarian orthodoxy. But toward Servetus he was relentless.[35]
By Calvin’s own admission, he promised to bring Servetus to death, even before his trial, and accomplished such. Geneva’s “Council of 25” had only a subordinate role. Remember, Calvin was the pope-like ruling authority in Geneva:
The burning of Servetus—let it be said with utmost clarity—was a deed for which Calvin must be held largely responsible. It was not done in spite of Calvin, as some over-ardent admirers of his are wont to say. He planned it beforehand and maneuvered it from start to finish. It occurred because of him and not in spite of him. . . Contrary to the legend that is kept alive by over-ardent admirers of Calvin, the spirit of the age was already relegating such inhumanity to the limbo of the past.[36]
We should not comply with the dictates of our day and culture that are unscriptural. While it is true that Calvin had a wrong view of church and state, it must be added that it was wrong because it was unscriptural and one which led to the premature deaths of others.
Finally, it is irrelevant if other Reformers agree or disagree with Calvin’s decision. This carries no weight at all on what is right or wrong. Only Scripture and Scripture alone can determine that (2 Tim. 3:16,17), and the same explicitly condemns Calvin’s cruel actions. Remember, Sola Scriptura!
Servetus’ ashes will cry out against him as long as the names of these two men are known in the world.[37]
Ponder This . . .
John Calvin wrote:
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.[38]
The following are John Calvin’s own words, prefixed to the French Edition in 1545, about his own Institutes of the Christian Religion:
I dare not bear too strong a testimony in its favour, and declare how profitable the reading of it will be, lest I should seem to prize my own work too highly. However, I may promise this much, that it will be a kind of key opening up to all the children of God a right and ready access to the understanding of the sacred volume. Wherefore, should our Lord give me henceforth means and opportunity of composing some Commentaries, I will use the greatest possible brevity, as there will be no occasion to make long digressions, seeing that I have in a manner deduced at length all the articles which pertain to Christianity.
And since we are bound to acknowledge that all truth and sound doctrine proceed from God, I will venture boldly to declare what I think of this work, acknowledging it to be God’s work rather than mine. To him, indeed, the praise due to it must be ascribed.[39]
---------------------------
Notes
[1] Servetus wrote of the pulmonary circulation of the blood many years before William Harvey was given the credit for its discovery.
[2] “On only two counts, significantly, was Servetus condemned—namely, anti-Trinitarianism and anti-paedobaptism.” Roland H. Bainton, Hunted Heretic (Boston: The Beacon Press, 1953), p. 207. [Comment: While Servetus was wrong about the Trinity, regarding his rejection of infant baptism, Servetus said, “It is an invention of the devil, an infernal falsity for the destruction of all Christianity” (Ibid., p. 186). Many Christians of our day could only give an “Amen” to this statement made about infant baptism. However, this is, in part, why Servetus was condemned to death.]
[3] Henry C. Sheldon, History of the Christian Church, Vol. 3 (Hendrickson Publishers, Inc. Edition, Second Printing, 1994), p. 159, fn.
[4] Elgin Moyer, The Wycliffe Biographical Dictionary Of The Church, Revised and enlarged by Earle E. Cairns (Chicago: Moody Press, 1982), p. 73.
[5] Stephen Hole Fritchman, Men Of Liberty (Port Washington, NY: Kennikat Press, Inc., Reissued, 1968), p. 8.
[6] Walter Nigg, The Heretics (Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1962), p. 328.
[7] Fisk, Calvinistic Paths Retraced, p. 116.
[8] Steven Ozment, The Age Of Reformation 1250-1550 (New Haven and London Yale University Press, 1980), p. 370.
[9] William P. Barker, Who‛s Who In Church History (Old Tappan, NJ: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1969), p. 252.
[10] John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Reprinted 1995), translated by Henry Beveridge, pp. 22, 23.
[11] Nigg, The Heretics, p. 326.
[12] Moyer, The Wycliffe Biographical Dictionary Of The Church, p. 366.
[13] Fisk, Calvinistic Paths Retraced, p. 116.
[14] John F. Fulton, Michael Servetus: Humanist and Martyr (New York, NY: Herbert Reichner, 1953), p. 35.
[15] Nigg, The Heretics, p. 327.
[16] Fisk, Calvinistic Paths Retraced, p. 116.
[17] Schaff, History of the Christian Church, Vol. VIII, p. 789.
[18] Sheldon, History of the Christian Church, Vol. 3, p. 160.
[19] Bainton, Hunted Heretic, p. 214. [Comment: Nowhere in the Bible do we see this sort of emphasis for one‛s salvation. The dying thief, the Philippian jailer and Cornelius were all saved by a most basic trusting-submitting faith in Jesus.]
[20] John Hus attacked various Roman Catholic heresies such as transubstantiation, subservience to the pope, belief in the saints, efficacy of absolution through the priesthood, unconditional obedience to earthly rulers and simony. Hus also made the Holy Scriptures the only rule in matters of religion and faith. See The Wycliffe Biographical Dictionary Of The Church, p. 201.
[21] Nigg, The Heretics, p. 326.
[22] Ibid., pp. 328, 329.
[23] For example, contrast the meaning that Jesus gave of the parable of the weeds in the field (Mt. 13:24-43) to what Calvin taught. The Lord told us “the field is the world” (v. 38); John Calvin taught “the field is the church.” See Calvin‛s verse by verse commentary of Matthew‛s gospel.
[24] Twenty-first edition of Eberhard Nestle‛s Novum Testament Graece and Textus Receptus.
[25] Ozment, The Age Of Reformation 1250-1550, pp. 368, 369. Bolsec‛s book in which he charges Calvin as he did is cited as Histoire de la vie, moeurs, actes, doctrine, constance et mort de Jean Calvin . . . pub. a Lyon en 1577, ed. M. Louis-Francois Chastel (Lyon, 1875).
[26] Ibid., p. 369.
[27] Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Vol. 2, p. 202.
[28] Erwin W. Lutzer, How You Can Be Sure That You Will Spend Eterntiy With God (Chicago: Moody Press, 1996), pp. 137, 138.
[29] John Murray, Redemption—Accomplished and Applied (Grand Rapids 3, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1955), p. 104.
[30] Westminster Confession, Of the Perseverance of the Saints, chapter XVII, paragraph 3, 6.096.
[31] Schaff, History of the Christian Church, Vol. VIII, pp. 690, 691.
[32] Ibid., p. 791.
[33] Refers to Calvin‛s decree of reprobation (Ibid., p. 559).
[34] Ibid., p. 687.
[35] Fisk, Calvinistic Paths Retraced, p. 116.
[36] Ibid., pp. 115, 116.
[37] Nigg, The Heretics, p. 328.
[38] Schaff, History of the Christian Church, Vol. VIII, p. 791.
[39] Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, pp. 22, 23.
Servetus’ ashes will cry out against him as long as the names of these two men are known in the world.[37]
Ponder This . . .
John Calvin wrote:
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.[38]
The following are John Calvin’s own words, prefixed to the French Edition in 1545, about his own Institutes of the Christian Religion:
I dare not bear too strong a testimony in its favour, and declare how profitable the reading of it will be, lest I should seem to prize my own work too highly. However, I may promise this much, that it will be a kind of key opening up to all the children of God a right and ready access to the understanding of the sacred volume. Wherefore, should our Lord give me henceforth means and opportunity of composing some Commentaries, I will use the greatest possible brevity, as there will be no occasion to make long digressions, seeing that I have in a manner deduced at length all the articles which pertain to Christianity.
And since we are bound to acknowledge that all truth and sound doctrine proceed from God, I will venture boldly to declare what I think of this work, acknowledging it to be God’s work rather than mine. To him, indeed, the praise due to it must be ascribed.[39]
---------------------------
Notes
[1] Servetus wrote of the pulmonary circulation of the blood many years before William Harvey was given the credit for its discovery.
[2] “On only two counts, significantly, was Servetus condemned—namely, anti-Trinitarianism and anti-paedobaptism.” Roland H. Bainton, Hunted Heretic (Boston: The Beacon Press, 1953), p. 207. [Comment: While Servetus was wrong about the Trinity, regarding his rejection of infant baptism, Servetus said, “It is an invention of the devil, an infernal falsity for the destruction of all Christianity” (Ibid., p. 186). Many Christians of our day could only give an “Amen” to this statement made about infant baptism. However, this is, in part, why Servetus was condemned to death.]
[3] Henry C. Sheldon, History of the Christian Church, Vol. 3 (Hendrickson Publishers, Inc. Edition, Second Printing, 1994), p. 159, fn.
[4] Elgin Moyer, The Wycliffe Biographical Dictionary Of The Church, Revised and enlarged by Earle E. Cairns (Chicago: Moody Press, 1982), p. 73.
[5] Stephen Hole Fritchman, Men Of Liberty (Port Washington, NY: Kennikat Press, Inc., Reissued, 1968), p. 8.
[6] Walter Nigg, The Heretics (Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1962), p. 328.
[7] Fisk, Calvinistic Paths Retraced, p. 116.
[8] Steven Ozment, The Age Of Reformation 1250-1550 (New Haven and London Yale University Press, 1980), p. 370.
[9] William P. Barker, Who‛s Who In Church History (Old Tappan, NJ: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1969), p. 252.
[10] John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Reprinted 1995), translated by Henry Beveridge, pp. 22, 23.
[11] Nigg, The Heretics, p. 326.
[12] Moyer, The Wycliffe Biographical Dictionary Of The Church, p. 366.
[13] Fisk, Calvinistic Paths Retraced, p. 116.
[14] John F. Fulton, Michael Servetus: Humanist and Martyr (New York, NY: Herbert Reichner, 1953), p. 35.
[15] Nigg, The Heretics, p. 327.
[16] Fisk, Calvinistic Paths Retraced, p. 116.
[17] Schaff, History of the Christian Church, Vol. VIII, p. 789.
[18] Sheldon, History of the Christian Church, Vol. 3, p. 160.
[19] Bainton, Hunted Heretic, p. 214. [Comment: Nowhere in the Bible do we see this sort of emphasis for one‛s salvation. The dying thief, the Philippian jailer and Cornelius were all saved by a most basic trusting-submitting faith in Jesus.]
[20] John Hus attacked various Roman Catholic heresies such as transubstantiation, subservience to the pope, belief in the saints, efficacy of absolution through the priesthood, unconditional obedience to earthly rulers and simony. Hus also made the Holy Scriptures the only rule in matters of religion and faith. See The Wycliffe Biographical Dictionary Of The Church, p. 201.
[21] Nigg, The Heretics, p. 326.
[22] Ibid., pp. 328, 329.
[23] For example, contrast the meaning that Jesus gave of the parable of the weeds in the field (Mt. 13:24-43) to what Calvin taught. The Lord told us “the field is the world” (v. 38); John Calvin taught “the field is the church.” See Calvin‛s verse by verse commentary of Matthew‛s gospel.
[24] Twenty-first edition of Eberhard Nestle‛s Novum Testament Graece and Textus Receptus.
[25] Ozment, The Age Of Reformation 1250-1550, pp. 368, 369. Bolsec‛s book in which he charges Calvin as he did is cited as Histoire de la vie, moeurs, actes, doctrine, constance et mort de Jean Calvin . . . pub. a Lyon en 1577, ed. M. Louis-Francois Chastel (Lyon, 1875).
[26] Ibid., p. 369.
[27] Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Vol. 2, p. 202.
[28] Erwin W. Lutzer, How You Can Be Sure That You Will Spend Eterntiy With God (Chicago: Moody Press, 1996), pp. 137, 138.
[29] John Murray, Redemption—Accomplished and Applied (Grand Rapids 3, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1955), p. 104.
[30] Westminster Confession, Of the Perseverance of the Saints, chapter XVII, paragraph 3, 6.096.
[31] Schaff, History of the Christian Church, Vol. VIII, pp. 690, 691.
[32] Ibid., p. 791.
[33] Refers to Calvin‛s decree of reprobation (Ibid., p. 559).
[34] Ibid., p. 687.
[35] Fisk, Calvinistic Paths Retraced, p. 116.
[36] Ibid., pp. 115, 116.
[37] Nigg, The Heretics, p. 328.
[38] Schaff, History of the Christian Church, Vol. VIII, p. 791.
[39] Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, pp. 22, 23.
