Perhaps, but to suggest the Church had nothing to do with enacting those laws is silly.
Absolutely agreed :-O
The Church, through the use of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition, defined what orthodox belief was. Therefore, the Church defined what was heretical.
The rulers of the States at that time (and for a couple of hundred years hence) believed they did so by divine writ. And their job was to act as the enforcers: if the Church deemed somebody heretical, it was their responsibility to enforce that: heresy, in a fashion, is treason against God. Since the state, in the view of the rulers at the time, was an instrument of God, it was also considered as treason against the State (in fact more so).
And, in all honesty, the ruler of the State had the obligation to enforce this, as well. Had the ruler been seen to coddle or even tolerate heretics within his realm, the Church hierarchy would have provided some sort of ecclesiastical interdict against that ruler, up to and including excommunication. No ruler, prior to the Protestant schism, could have continued to rule if excommunicated: his rivals in court or, in fact, the people themselves would have risen up to expel the evil over them.
That brings the question of burning: Would the Church have tolerated a lesser form of death, such as hanging or beheading? Unknown, but possibly: although mercy is a mark of the Church, excommunicated heretics put themselves outside the realm of mercy (particularly considering the fact that they were always repeatedly given opportunities to repent). In addition, the public spectacle and horror of a burning would serve as a great disincentive for other people to publically preach heretical doctrines.
Again, keep in mind that in any of the cases you've cited and, in fact, in any case with which I am familiar, if the case is actually examined, you will see that excommunication is the last option: the Church always attempts to reconcile the person several times before breaking contact! And, before criticizing this, consider that this is the Biblical way of doing things:
Titus 3:10-11:
10 After a first and second warning, break off contact with a heretic,
11 realizing that such a person is perverted and sinful and stands self-condemned.
But you need to consider this: there are many currently in the modern American Church who are begging, pleading, and praying for the modern bishops to do the same exact thing to heterodox clerics (e.g., many in the Jesuit order, so-called Catholics for Free Choice, etc.) and to so-called Catholic politicians who are pro-abortion. Let's assume, for a minute, that we actually had some bishops who had some chutzpah, rather than the bunch of weak-kneed wimps who are in office now. Let's say John Kerry was excommunicated because of his unrepentant attitude. Would that make any difference to anybody? (unfortunately, including a good percentage of Catholics? Suppose that a priest who was constantly preaching that homosexuality was OK and who actually performed homosexual "marriages" (in between demonstrating for "women's reproductive rights") was subsequently branded a heretic and excommunicated. Would that matter to anybody? Would anybody who is debating here argue that the Church was wrong in taking those actions?
I, frankly, doubt it.
Well, if this was the middle ages, once the Church did what she did, the State would take over and assign the appropriate temporal punishment. That doesn't happen anymore because we don't take the Bible quite as literally anymore as was done in earlier times:
Rom 13
1 Let every person be subordinate to the higher authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been established by God.
2 Therefore, whoever resists authority opposes what God has appointed, and those who oppose it will bring judgment upon themselves.
3 For rulers are not a cause of fear to good conduct, but to evil. Do you wish to have no fear of authority? Then do what is good and you will receive approval from it,
4 for it is a servant of God for your good. But if you do evil, be afraid, for it does not bear the sword without purpose; it is the servant of God to inflict wrath on the evildoer.
5 Therefore, it is necessary to be subject not only because of the wrath but also because of conscience.
6 This is why you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, devoting themselves to this very thing.
7 Pay to all their dues, taxes to whom taxes are due, toll to whom toll is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due.
And to look at this relationship between rulers and God and rulers and people from the other angle, we have:
Wis 6:
1 Hear, therefore, kings, and understand; learn, you magistrates of the earth's expanse!
2 Hearken, you who are in power over the multitude and lord it over throngs of peoples!
3 Because authority was given you by the LORD and sovereignty by the Most High, who shall probe your works and scrutinize your counsels!
4 Because, though you were ministers of his kingdom, you judged not rightly, and did not keep the law, nor walk according to the will of God,
5 Terribly and swiftly shall he come against you, because judgment is stern for the exalted -
6 For the lowly may be pardoned out of mercy but the mighty shall be mightily put to the test.