I'm not Reformed, but I was asking questions about it in a Facebook group and lo and behold this one (Reformed) person said that Reformed tradition put heretics to death. I asked if they themselves supported the death penalty for heretics, and they said they did.
I know there are lots of Reformed people on this forum. What do you think of this?
Sent from my SM-J737T1 using Tapatalk
Does Reformed theology require one to murder heretics
Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by evenifigoalone, Dec 23, 2019.
Page 1 of 2
-
evenifigoalone Well-Known Member
-
There is probably some from all theological positions that support some sort death penalty for heretics or other particular sins they believe to be really bad.
IMO, It is outrageous to say or promote such thinking.
Jesus changed the conditions for supporting the death of others. You must be without sin.
Peace to you. -
Although it's nearly passed without a peep, 2019 is the 400th anniversary of the Synod of Dort. Earlier this year, I wondered why the Reformed were not commemorating their dogma's greatest victory.
Then I started reading about the vile acts that accompanied the vaunted doctrinal deliverance:
Executed in the Netherlands 13 May 1619 as the Synod of Dort closed, a champion of the Arminians Johan van Oldenbarnevelt. He had been imprisoned for the duration of the Synod of Dort, and was beheaded for ‘subversion of the country’s religion’ shortly after the Gomarists’ form of Calvinism was adopted by the Synod.
Even Ligonier Ministries admits persecution of him “was a shameful act against a Dutch patriot and one of the low points for Dutch Calvinists”:
Arminius and the Remonstrants -
They next turned their fury on the already-dead body of another opponent of their theology:
Trial of Oldenbarnevelt, Grotius and Hogerbeets
“The next sentence was pronounced on 15 May 1619 over Gilles van Ledenberg, who had been dead since the end of the previous September. Obviously, he could not be executed, but the judges declared in the verdict that he was ‘worthy of death’ and would so have been sentenced if he had been alive. His “exemplary sentence” was that his embalmed body would be hung from a gibbet in its coffin.”
“It was left hanging for 21 days, and after it was taken down, it was buried in the churchyard of the church at Voorburg. However, the same night a mob disinterred the corpse and threw it in a ditch. This caused sufficient revulsion to cause the Hof van Holland (the main Dutch court) to issue an injunction against further depredations. The body was later secretly reburied”
Gilles van Ledenberg -
a gibbet ?
I had to look that one up:
“gibbeting refers to the use of a gallows-type structure from which the dead or dying bodies of criminals were hung on public display…to discourage others from committing similar offences” -
Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk -
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
evenifigoalone Well-Known Member
Sent from my SM-J737T1 using Tapatalk -
I have never met a Presbyterian who wanted me dead.
-
evenifigoalone Well-Known Member
Some (apparently), not all.
I knew that a lot of the denominations had really sketchy histories where they perescuted other Christians for having the "wrong" doctrine, but I never expected to run into someone who still agrees with that mindset. -
No TRUE theology requires killing anyone, except in war or self-defense. Religious killings are simply murders. Thus, the executions of "heretics" by the various RC "Inquisitions" were simply murders.
-
church mouse guy Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
Reformed1689 Well-Known Member
-
evenifigoalone Well-Known Member
I'm glad to hear that this view is the minority in Reformed circles.
I was talking to the person who originally told me this and someone who happens to share the same view, and apparently they say it's limited to people like Mohammed or Jim Jones, extreme cases. But still, the definition of "heretic" is too subject to personal opinion for me to be able to support there being laws to give the death penalty for "heretics". Leave people alone unless you have objective evidence that they're going to hurt someone.
I don't know if it was the right move or not, but I ended up leaving the facebook group this took place in. It was one of my favorite groups, so it's regrettable. -
Martin Marprelate Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
At the time of the Reformation, many kingdoms or principalities threw out Romanism, but did not allow their subjects to choose what belief they would follow. So some Sates were Lutheran, some Zwinglian and some Reformed. according to the dictate of the ruler. The ordinary citizen had no say. It was the Anabaptists who were the first to advocate freedom of religion and gathered churches, but that did not go down well with the rulers, especially after the debacle of Munster, and the Anabaptists were persecuted both by Rome and by the Protestant princes.
But persecution was not a purely 'Reformed' thing. When the Arminians gained control of the Church of England under Archbishop laud, they persecuted the Calvinists and the other dissenters as hard as they could go. It was not until the 'Act of Settlement in 1688 that there was a degree of toleration for Dissenters in England.
I hope that's helpful for you. -
Does not the blood run deep prior to the return of Christ? -
It has and continues to be present in the human efforts to make everyone think alike.
Even in the Millennial reign that will not happen. -
Squire Robertsson AdministratorAdministrator
The situation with the established/state churches rises from the concept of sacralism:
Sacral Bound together by a common religious loyalty
Sacral society [A] society held together by a religion to which all the members of that society are committed.
Leonard Verduin, “The Reformers and Their Stepchildren”, p.23
on a prctrical outworking
From This Day in Baptist History, David L. Cummins & E. Wayne Thompson
John Cotton as the prosecuting attorney in the trial of Obadiah Holmes and John Clark at the sentencing “’preached . . . that denying infants’ baptism would overthrow all; and this was a capital offense; therefore they were soul murderers.’ After this Cotton requested the death sentence.” Page 275
Concerning the trial of other Baptists, Governor Endicott said “You have denied infant baptism, and deserve to die; I will have no such trash brought to our jurisdiction.” Page 276 -
evenifigoalone Well-Known Member
So when I asked the guy if the persecution of anabaptists was justified, he responded with a yes and because (according to him) the anabaptists were anti-trinitarian, and many were rapists, murderers, etc. Any thoughts or reactions to this?
I admit a lack of knowledge on this history other than the fact that anabaptists were sorely persecuted. -
Martin Marprelate Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Page 1 of 2