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.
Leave a comment