Notes on Servetus

[Logan]

After a comment was made in a recent thread regarding Calvin and burning of Servetus, I wanted to say that from my reading of the matter, it seems to be clear that the judgment of Servetus was a civil matter, done by the city of Geneva. Calvin certainly testified against him and his heresies, but evidence indicates that Calvin pleaded for his punishment to be mitigated to beheading, and even testified to him in his cell the night before he was executed.

Calvin the man taught to bear with all men, Calvin the shepherd, testified against this wolf.

I recently read in his sermons on Titus where he has this to say about heretics:

"But St Paul presupposeth that a man must first be known to be an heretic, before he be rejected. For what a thing were it if we should in all cases condemn whatsoever misliketh us? Discretion had need to be used in this behalf. And therefore let us mark, that by an heretic he meaneth all such as cannot find in their hearts to consent to God's truth, and which separate themselves from the union of the faith, and stir up trouble in the church. For we hear how he saith to the Philippians (Php 1:17), that the faithful may peradventure disagree upon some point, and not consent fully in all things, but yet must they then use mildness and maintain peace and concord, till God have revealed unto them the things they were ignorant in before. Then can we not know all things, some shall go much forwarder than othersome. Now then, shall he that is foremost despise the rest, because he knoweth more than they? What a presumptuousness were that? Nay, it may happen that he which is best practiced in the holy scripture, and to whom God hath revealed most of his secrets, shall be ignorant in some one point. And therefore it behooveth us to bear one with another in such cases. All they then which agree not with us, must not be condemned for heretics, but the heretics are they that band themselves against God's truth, and turn away from the principles of our faith, and from the things that are called the substance of our Christianity, and by that means do separate folk from the body of our Lord Jesus Christ. These therefore that do so scatter the church, and trouble the building of God, those are termed heretics in this text."

For Calvin, it was not enough to simply disagree with a person to call them a heretic. A person might be ignorant, and still be a brother. But it was those who separated folk from the body of Christ that he was most concerned with. He continues:

"Now whereas St Paul saith that they must be warned, he speaketh not only of the warnings that may be given them privately, but also his meaning is that they should be sharply reproved and convicted. As for example, if a man be in some error, he is not by and by an heretic though he have erred; although (say I) his fault be very foul, and he hath somewhat overshot himself, he must be but rebuked. True it is, that his fault was gross, and he was not to be soothed up in it, but yet howsoever the case stand, it is not an heresy where there is no stubbornness, and where a man separateth not himself from the union of the faithful. For there must be a division [[or cutting off]] ere there can be an heresy. Then sith it is so, let us mark, that if a man be warned privately, he is never the more an heretic for that: but if he continue willful, and will not be reclaimed, then must he come to open and lawful trial."

Here he makes it clear that a person may privately hold to a gross error, yet if he is privately rebuked, he is not a heretic and worthy of separation. But those who repeatedly and publicly continued to try to lead others astray, and thus to separate them from the body of Christ, were indeed heretics, and worthy of trial. Calvin exchanged many, many letters with Servetus, even offering to meet him in person (and with a price on his own head). Yet it was not in capacity of a man that Calvin testified against Servetus, but as a shepherd, and it was the civil government that condemned him. Perhaps Jon can speak more to this, as he wrote a paper on it a while back.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

See also:
The “Calvin as Tyrant” Meme | R. Scott Clark

 

[Scott1]

While many of us Americans have a difficult time relating to government punishing, let alone executing heretics, it was part of European views of church/state for several centuries.

Mr. Servitus was excommunicated and sentenced, escaping execution, in both Spain and France before coming to Mr. Calvin's Geneva.

The heretic was the only one ever executed on grounds of heresy in Geneva.

Mr. Calvin spent years patiently trying to engage him on the pernicious views on the Holy Trinity he was spreading throughout Europe, but to no avail. The heretic remained impenitent.

In the end, Mr. Calvin intervened for a more humane form of execution for the heretic.

 

[Logan]

I forgot to mention that this series of sermons apparently comes very close upon the Servetus affair (Calvin mentions this "recent" heretic in one of the sermons). Thus I think his thoughts on heretics in general all the more poignant. I can post the entire section if anyone is interested.