R*o
发帖数: 3781 | 1 Good Intentions Gone Astray
No one has ever been as successful as John Calvin at totalitarian imposition
of "godliness" upon a whole society. And therefore no one has proved as cle
arly as he that coercion cannot succeed because it can never change the hear
ts of men. Calvin's theology as laid out in his Institutes denied that unreg
enerate man could choose to believe and obey God. Apparently he was ignorant
of the commonsense fact that genuine choice is essential if man is to love
and obey God or show love and real compassion to his fellows. By his determi
ned efforts to make Geneva's citizens obey, Calvin disproved his own theorie
s of Unconditional Election and Irresistible Grace. What he did prove, seemi
ngly, by years of totalitarian and surely ungodly force, was the first of Ca
lvinism's Five Points, Total Depravity. Try as he might, there were many who
m he simply could not persuade to live as he decreed, no matter how severe t
he penalty for failing to do so. He did succeed in creating many hypocrites
who outwardly conformed to the law so long as the authorities were looking,
but in their hearts longed for and practiced, when possible, the same old si
ns of the past.
Yes, there were reports from visitors that "cursing and swearing, unchastity
, sacrilege, adultery, and impure living" such as were found elsewhere were
absent from Geneva. 41 John Knox, of course, was enthusiastic. He called Gen
eva "the most perfect school of Christ that ever was in the earth since the
days of the Apostles." 42 A visiting Lutheran minister, who thought Calvin's
coercion was commendable, wrote in 1610, "When I was in Geneva I observed s
omething great which I shall remember and desire as long as I live." He prai
sed the "weekly investigations into the conduct, and even the smallest trans
gressions, of the citizens" and concluded, "If it were not for the differenc
e of religion, I would have been chained to Geneva forever." 43 Difference o
f religion? Yes, Calvinism was not Lutheranism, although both persecuted the
Anabaptists. Protestantism involved several rival factions to say nothing o
f millions of true Christians who had never given allegiance to Rome and thu
s had not come out of her as "Protestants." These believers had been martyre
d by Roman Catholics at the instigations of various popes for a thousand yea
rs before Luther and Calvin were born. Thus today's representation of Calvin
ism as "Reformation theology" that supposedly revived true Christianity is g
rossly inaccurate. Calvinists have, in fact, hijacked the Reformation.
Admirers of John Calvin cite favorable stories as proof of the godly influen
ce he and his theories exerted in changing a godless society into one that h
onored God. His methods, however, far from Christlike, could not be justifie
d by any results. Nor could Calvin's means, as we have already noted, be jus
tified by the fact that torture, imprisonment and execution had been employe
d by Luther and the popes and other Roman Catholic clergy to force their rel
igious views upon those under their power. A true follower of Christ is not
to be conformed to this world but in his behavior is to follow Christ's exam
ple.
Calvin's followers boast that he was the greatest of exegetes and followed S
cripture meticulously both in formulating his theology and in guiding his li
fe. Supposedly, Calvin "was willing to break sharply with tradition where it
was contrary to the Word of God." 44 At the same time, he is defended with
the excuse that he was only conforming to the traditions long established by
Rome which began with Constantine. Scott says, "In the early years of the R
eformation, censorship of manners and morals remained a settled, accepted pa
rt of existing, ancient police regulations not only in Geneva, but in all Eu
rope." 45 This is true. Such curbs discouraged rebellious attempts to leave
one's "class," etc. But that was not Christianity as taught and exemplified
by Christ and His apostles.
There is no way to defend Calvin's conduct from Scripture. Yes, he was lovin
g and caring toward those who agreed with him. Yes, he expended himself and
shortened his life through visiting the sick, caring for the flock and preac
hing continually. But in his treatment of those who disagreed with him he wa
s anything but a Christian. |
|
