John
Calvin (AD 1509-1564), namesake of the Calvinists of today, is a hero to
many. His books are often recommended
and referenced. He was a leader in the Protestant
Reformation.
But Calvin had a dark side. Part of that dark side was absolutely denying freedom of speech and religious liberty. On October 27, 1553, John Calvin had Michael Servetus (c. 1509-1553) mercilessly burned to death. Why? Because Servetus disagreed with Calvin’s beliefs.
Leonard
Verduin (AD 1897-1999) speaks authoritatively on this issue. He was a graduate of Calvin Theological
Seminary, and the University of Michigan.
Verduin knew Hebrew, Greek, Latin, German, French, Dutch, English. On the subject of Calvin, it is noteworthy
that Verduin is of the Reformed tradition.
In
his highly praised book, The Reformers
and Their Stepchildren,” Leonard Verduin says about John Calvin:
“The
burning of Servetus – let it be said with utmost clarity – was a deed for which
Calvin must be held largely responsible.
It was not done in spite of Calvin, as some over-ardent admirers of his
are wont to say. He planned it
beforehand and maneuvered it from start to finish. It occurred because of him and not in spite
of him. After it had taken place Calvin
defended it, with every possible and impossible argument. There is every reason to believe that if it
had not been for the fact that public opinion was beginning to run against this
kind of thing there would have been many more such burnings. The event was the direct result of the
sacralism to which Calvin remained committed, a sacralism which he never
discarded.”
“Here
was a man (Servetus) who posed no threat to civil serenity in Geneva – unless of
course it be granted that anyone who deviates from the orthodoxy expoused by
the State is ipso facto a threat to that civil serenity. [Footnote in the book: In the sacral pattern
heresy is automatically sedition.] Servetus started no parades, made no speeches,
carried no placards, had no political ambitions. He did have some erratic ideas touching the
doctrine of the Trinity; and he entertained some deviating notions concerning
baptism, especially infant baptism. No doubt
there was something of the spiritual iconoclast in him, as there is in all men
of genius (Servetus was something of a scientific genius in that he anticipated
the idea of the circulatory course of the blood). But he was not a revolutionary in the
political sense. He was indeed ‘off the
beam’ in matters of religious doctrine, but he did not deserve to be arrested
or executed – a judgment in which the man of sacralist convictions cannot of
course concur. Only in a sacralist
climate would men deal in such a way with such a man.”
Footnote
from book, p. 55: “In the sentences
whereby heretics were sent to the stake it was usually specified that the execution
was to be by ‘small fire.’ It seems that
in the case of Servetus green wood was used, so that it took three hours before
he was pronounced dead.”
“When
the news was out that Servetus had died in the fire, a cry of outrage resounded
over most of Europe. It is true that
many of the leaders of the Reform applauded the burning (Melanchthon, for
example, wrote that ‘the Church owes and always will owe a debt of gratitude to
you for having put the heretic to death’); although it is also true that some,
even in Geneva itself, refused to put their names to a document supporting the
execution. But there was a chorus of
protest that issued at once from those circles that had been deeply influenced
by the humanizing tendencies of the times.
Contrary to the legend that is kept alive by over-ardent admirers of
Calvin, the spirit of the age was already relegating such inhumanity to the
limbo of the past. The Renaissance had
not been without its fruitage of toleration.”
-Leonard Verduin, The Reformers and Their Stepchildren, Eerdmans; 1964. Reprinted by The Baptist Standard Bearer,Inc., Paris, Arkansas.
Verduin
goes on to point out how after the burning of Servetus, John Calvin and Beza continued
to vigorously defend their brutal, torturous murder of Servetus.
Thank
God for the ideal, largely promoted by Anabaptists and Baptists, of Religious
Liberty for all. Thank God for Religious
Liberty in America, although that liberty is being threatened.
The
book, The Reformers and Their Stepchildren, should be read by anyone interested in Anabaptists, Baptists,
the Radical Reformers, and Religious Liberty.
The book is marred in places by Latin and other languages with no
English translation. I’m a big believer
in writing in easy to understand language.
It would also be helpful to explain the geographical sites with modern
day language and countries, maybe a map or two.
In spite of this, it is well worth reading and studying.
“It
is difficult for me to speak in restrained terms about this most excellent
study. Verduin has done a thorough job of research. He writes obviously out of
a background rich in historical information and understanding. This book is all
the more significant since it comes from the pen of one of the Reformers'
family and not from among the offspring of the ‘stepchildren.’”
- W. R. Estep Jr., SWBTS
The
Reformers and Their Stepchildren has also been highly recommended by Paige
Patterson.
Sacralism
– Leonard Verduin’s term for the belief and practice that the church and state
are one. The government should have a
state religion and enforce those beliefs against any dissenters. Religious Liberty is rejected. This also means the church is filled with
unsaved people, since everyone is automatically enrolled in the state church. Anabaptists, Baptists, baptistic Christians,
and others obviously dissented.
-David R. Brumbelow, Gulf Coast Pastor,
September 27, AD 2016.
Articles:
Other articles in lower right margin.
