- David F. Wells
With a nod from John Calvin, the Geneva city council in 1553 burned Michael Servetus at the stake. Servetus was a heretic who denied the Trinity of persons within the Godhead and denied paedobaptism. While Calvin preferred to give Servetus a quick death via decapitation, he had to compromise with the council who preferred to let Servetus burn to death.
On a related note, a few years earlier, Swiss reformer Ulrich Zwingli, and his council, persecuted Anabaptists by giving them their "third baptism": a death by drowning. Zwingli would later die by the sword, fighting Catholics in neighboring counties.
Sadly, the history of Christianity is rich with bloodshed. Thankfully, these days we don't kill guys like Joel Osteen and whoever the guy is who wrote The Shack, but I think the history of dealing with heresy should teach us that orthodoxy -- right thinking -- really matters. To be sure, I don't condone certain ways the church has dealt with heresies in the past; in fact, I find many of those ways appalling. While I'm not a pacifist, I tend to think that the Anabaptists had a lot of right ideas when it came to their aversion to violence.
Heresy is serious, and an appropriate response to heresy is something the evangelical church needs to grapple with in this age of pluralism, "tolerance," and sweltering anti-Christianity. As far as an appropriate response goes, violence is not the answer.
Trackback URL: http://thinklings.org/bloo.trackback.php/5466.
Ruben, Calvin didn't order Servetus to be killed. He was not the law in Geneva, although a lot of people have that misconception. Here's a brief video to set the Calvin/Servetus record straight:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbBozoYGz1w

If doctrine really mattered to John Calvin then how could he justify ordering a man to be killed for the wrong beliefs? There is no scriptural warrant for that, it goes against the new testament. Just goes to show how theology can blind a person to the simple truths of the Bible.