John Calvin Commentary Deuteronomy 13:5

"And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death, because he hath spoken rebellion against Jehovah your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed thee out of the house of bondage, to draw thee aside out of the way which Jehovah thy God commanded thee to walk in. So shalt thou put away the evil from the midst of thee." — Deuteronomy 13:5 (ASV)

And that prophet. Since the ministers of Satan deceive people by their plausible exterior when they vaunt themselves to be the prophets of God, Moses had already admonished them that not all teachers were to be listened to uncritically, but that the true were to be distinguished from the false, and that, after judgment was made, those who deserved it should obtain credit. He now adds the punishment for those who would creep in under the name of a prophet to lead the people into rebellion. For he does not condemn to capital punishment those who may have spread false doctrine merely on account of some particular or trifling error, but those who are the authors of apostasy and so who pluck up religion by the roots.

Observe, again, that the time for this severity would not come until an established religion should be instituted. Therefore, the grossness of the impiety is expressly named: if they should have tried to turn the people away from the worship of the true God. Moreover, so that all excuse might be removed, Moses says that it is sufficiently clear who God is and how He is to be worshipped, both by the wonderful blessing of their redemption and by the doctrine of the Law. Therefore, in order that God may show that such a heavy punishment is justly inflicted upon apostates, He declares the certainty of that religion which was to exist among the Israelites. This is as if to say that no pardon could be granted for such impious contempt, since God had abundantly proved the glory of His Godhead by the miracle of their redemption and had manifested His will in the Law.

It must then be remembered that the crime of impiety would not otherwise merit punishment unless the religion had not only been received by public consent and the approval of the people, but, being also supported by sure and indisputable proofs, should place its truth beyond the reach of doubt. Thus, while their severity is preposterous who defend superstitions with the sword, so also in a well-ordered state, profane men by whom religion is subverted are by no means to be tolerated.⁵³

Thus, those who desire to be at liberty to make disturbances with impunity are unable to endure this, and therefore they call those bloodthirsty who teach that the errors by which religion is undermined and consequently destroyed should be restrained by public authority. But what will they gain by openly raving against God? God commands the false prophets to be put to death, who pluck up the foundations of religion and are the authors and leaders of rebellion. Some scoundrel or other contradicts this and sets himself against the author of life and death. What insolence is this!⁵⁴

As for their denial that the truth of God needs such support, it is very true. But what is the meaning of this madness in imposing a law upon God, that He should not make use of the obedience of magistrates in this respect? And what good does it do to question the necessity of this, since it pleases God so? God might, indeed, do without the assistance of the sword in defending religion, but such is not His will.

And what wonder is it if God should command magistrates to be the avengers of His glory, when He neither wills nor allows thefts, fornications, and drunkenness to be exempt from punishment? In minor offenses, the judge shall not be permitted to hesitate; and when the worship of God and all of religion is violated, shall so great a crime be encouraged by his deliberate inaction? Capital punishment shall be decreed against adulterers; but shall the despisers of God be permitted with impunity to adulterate the doctrines of salvation and to draw away wretched souls from the faith? Pardon shall never be extended to poisoners, by whom the body alone is injured; and shall it be a game to deliver souls to eternal destruction? Finally, if the magistrates' own authority is attacked, they shall take severe vengeance upon that contempt; and shall they allow the profanation of God’s holy name to go unavenged? What can be more monstrous!

But it is unnecessary to contend by argument when God has once pronounced what His will is, for we must abide by His inviolable decree.

But it is questioned whether the law pertains to the kingdom of Christ, which is spiritual and distinct from all earthly dominion. There are some men, not otherwise ill-disposed, to whom it appears that our condition under the Gospel is different from that of the ancient people under the Law. This is not only because the kingdom of Christ is not of this world, but because Christ was unwilling that the beginnings of His kingdom should be aided by the sword. However, when human judges consecrate their work to the promotion of Christ’s kingdom, I deny that for that reason its nature is changed.

For although it was Christ’s will that His Gospel should be proclaimed by His disciples in opposition to the power of the whole world, and He exposed them armed with the Word alone like sheep among wolves, He did not impose on Himself an eternal law that He should never bring kings under His subjection, nor tame their violence, nor change them from being cruel persecutors into the patrons and guardians of His Church. Magistrates at first exercised tyranny against the Church because the time had not yet come when they should kiss the Son of God and, laying aside their violence, should become the nursing fathers of the Church, which they had attacked, according to Isaiah’s prophecy that undoubtedly refers to the coming of Christ (Isaiah 49:6–23). Nor was it without reason that Paul, when he urges prayers to be made for kings and other worldly rulers, added the reason that under them we may lead a quiet and peaceable life
in all godliness and honesty. (1 Timothy 2:2).

Christ, indeed, as He is meek, would also, I confess, have us be imitators of His gentleness. But that does not prevent pious magistrates from providing for the tranquility and safety of the Church by their defense of godliness, since to neglect this part of their duty would be the greatest perfidy and cruelty. Assuredly, nothing can be more base than, when we see wretched souls drawn away to eternal destruction because of the impunity granted to impious, wicked, and perverse impostors, to count the salvation of those souls for nothing.

But if under this pretext the superstitious have dared to shed innocent blood, I reply that what God has once commanded must not be nullified on account of any abuse or corruption of men. For if the cause alone abundantly distinguishes the martyrs of Christ from malefactors, though their punishment may be identical, so the Papal executioners will not bring it about by their unjust cruelty that the zeal of pious magistrates in punishing false and noxious teachers should be anything but pleasing to God.

And this is admirably expressed in the words of Moses, when he reminds them that judgment must be passed according to the law of God. I have already said that this severity must not be extended to particular errors, but only where impiety erupts even into rebellion. When it is added, to thrust thee out of the way, which the Lord thy God commanded thee, we gather from it that none are to be handed over for punishment but those who have been convicted by the plain word of God, lest men should judge them arbitrarily. From this it also appears that zeal will err in hastily drawing the sword, unless a lawful examination has first been conducted.

⁵³ It is impossible not to be here reminded of Calvin’s acquiescence in the punishment of Servetus. In the principle he lays down, we have, as it were, his final apology for the part he took in that matter. Any discussion of the much-vexed question would here be out of place, but it may not be altogether amiss to introduce the few following calm reflections from the pen of a very able modern historian, M. de Felice — “1. Servetus was not an ordinary heretic; he was audaciously Pantheistic, and outraged the doctrine of all the great Christian communions, by saying that God in three persons was a Cerberus — a monster with three heads. 2. He had already been condemned to death by the (Roman) Catholic Doctors at Vienna in Dauphine. 3. The matter was adjudicated, not by Calvin, but by the magistrates of Geneva; and, if it be objected that his opinion must have influenced their decision, it must be remembered that the Councils of the other Reformed Cantons of Switzerland unanimously approved of the sentence. 4. It was of supreme importance that the Reformation should clearly separate its cause from that of an Infidel like Servetus. The (Roman) Catholic Church, which now-a-days accuses Calvin of having participated in his condemnation, would, in the sixteenth century, have much more harshly accused him, if he had sought for his acquittal.” — Hist, , des Protestants de France. Liv. 1., Section 5.Liv. 1., Section 5.

⁵⁴ “Quant a ce qui tels babouins alleguent,” etc. — ,” etc. — Fr..