John Calvin, Founding Father

The Washington Post ^ | July 07, 2009 | Doug Phillips

[Alex Murphy]

On July 10, six days after our own Independence Day, the world will celebrate the birthday of John Calvin, the man most responsible for our American system of liberty based on Republican principles of representative government.

It was Founding Father and the second President of the United States, John Adams, who described Calvin as "a vast genius," a man of "singular eloquence, vast erudition, and polished taste, [who] embraced the cause of Reformation," adding: "Let not Geneva be forgotten or despised. Religious liberty owes it much respect."

Calvin, a humble scholar and convert to Reformation Christianity from Noyon, France, is best known for his influence on the city of Geneva. It was there that his careful articulation of Christian theology as applied to familial, civil, and ecclesiastical authority modeled many of the principles of liberty later embraced by our own Founders, including anti-statism, the belief in transcendent principles of law as the foundation of an ethical legal system, free market economics, decentralized authority, an educated citizenry as a safeguard against tyranny, and republican representative government which was accountable to the people and a higher law.

In time, these ideas were imported to America. Certainly, the cause of American independence did not begin in 1776, but well over a century before as the first settlers arrived. These included the Huguenots of France, the Presbyterians of Scotland and Ireland, and the Puritans of New England. A common denominator of all these groups was their adherence to Reformed and Calvinistic confessions of faiths and a common heritage forged in the midst of civil and ecclesiastical tyranny. This is one reason why historians like Leopold von Ranke have observed that "Calvin was virtually the founder of America."

King George once dismissed the American War for Independence as a mere "Presbyterian rebellion." He did so

[Alex Murphy]

The execution of anti-Trinitarian agitator Michael Servetus by Genevan officials is often cited as proof of the religious intolerance of John Calvin. This analysis does not hold water. Servetus had a death sentence on his head in multiple European cities. Along with Geneva's magistrates, dozens of important civil leaders outside this Swiss city called for the execution of Servetus. Calvin was not one of them. Calvin neither sat on the council which passed judgment on Servetus, nor was he even a citizen of Geneva at the time.

"He who will not honor the memory and respect the influence of Calvin knows but little of the origin of American liberty."

[PetroniusMaximus]

“It was Founding Father and the second President of the United States, John Adams, who described Calvin as “a vast genius,” a man of “singular eloquence, vast erudition, and polished taste, [who] embraced the cause of Reformation,”

Yea, it’s just too bad he got the whole predestination this so screwed up wrong.

[samtheman]

an educated citizenry as a safeguard against tyranny

Boy, the Left sure figured out a way around that one, didn't they?

[BGHater]

Vatican newspaper praises French Protestant John Calvin

[RushingWater]

John Calvin represents bad theology. Just as the Muslim faith does not have a concept of compassion, John Calvin had little if any in his either.

From The Right to Heresy by Stefan Zweig, page 52:

The celebration of Easter and Christmas, begun by early Christians in the Roman catacombs, was abolished in Geneva. Saints’ days were no longer recognized. All the old-established customs of the Church were prohibited. Calvin’s God did not want to be celebrated, or even to be loved, but only to be feared.

[Alex Murphy]

The Right to Heresy by Stefan Zweig

From Wikipedia:

Religion did not play a central role in his education. "My mother and father were Jewish only through accident of birth," Zweig said later in an interview. Yet he did not renounce his Jewish faith and wrote repeatedly on Jewish themes....In 1941 [Stefan Zweig] went to Brazil, where in 1942 he and his second wife Lotte (née Charlotte Elisabeth Altmann) committed suicide together in Petrópolis,[1] despairing at the future of Europe and its culture.

[steve-b]

From a comment setting the record straight:

Calvin became a leader of the reformation movement and after a long battle with the catholic forces Calvin's forces took control of Geneva - catholic priests were thrown into jail, catholic churches were destroyed, and Calvin's new Gospel was established in both Geneva and Zurich.

58 Executions of those who refused to follow his way took place over the first 5 years of his reign.

Michael Servetus, a Unitarian, a skilled doctor/debator and one who had the courage to go toe to toe against Calvin, the so-called great theologican, was burnt alive at Calvin's insistence.

Calvin was a vindictive and sometimes cruel man and to associate our great nation with such a man in the light of modern scholarship shows a lack of good judgment or a failure to avail one's self of modern scholarship.

[bperiwinkle7]

Well, posting an article about Calvin sure attracts the loonies....

I don’t recall that other religious postings receive the trashing that Calvin posts receive. They do not diminish him.

I am grateful for Calvin’s determined patient endurance in his service for God and truth. I note that men of high intellect and accomplishments hold him in great regard for his contributions to civilization.

Presently I am proof-listening to an audio book of Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion, Books one and Two. They are a Blessing!

:-)

[Natural Law]

"John Calvin, the man most responsible for our American system of liberty based on Republican principles of representative government."

What a load of tripe. The zeal with which he condemned, pursued, imprisoned, and executed his political and theological opponents paints him as the antithesis of the principles of the American Revolution and the Bill of Rights.

[Marysecretary]

If they could see Europe now, they’d spin in their graves.

[Marysecretary]

Sounds like the early Popes and the Catholic church. Remember, all of those early religios folk were pretty violent.

[nathanbedford]

The author, identified and published in a recognized-if left-wing-national newspaper of undeniably high prestige, says Calvin is innocent.

The unidentified commentator says he is guilty but he makes no acknowledgement whatsoever of the author's assertions or evidence, indeed, one cannot even be certain from the comment that he has even read the article. The author says that Calvin was not even in town at the time of the execution. The commentator says he was responsible for it and even ordered it! The author asserts the negative, the commentator asserts the affirmative. The author cites no facts in support of his position or references. The commentator merely rehearses the original allegations against Calvin which the author had categorically refuted. But the commentator gives me not a single reason to believe what he says. Advocating the affirmative side of a proposition, the commentator is in a better position to submit facts in support. The author is advocating the negative and we are all aware of how difficult it is to prove the negative. Yet the author did submit facts and references. The commentator has not.

Please tell me how merely repeating the commentator's unsupported statement advances our understanding of Calvin and his contribution, if any, to American independence? If we have a brief against Calvin, can we at least make the case and support it? Or is this a proxy?

[ckilmer]

people may trash calvin. however it is undeniable that—at the time of the american revolution — the majority of the american denominations — swedish,dutch, german, french, english and scottish —were calvinist.

Its also undeniable that almost immediatly after the revolution — the USA began its long march away from calvinism.

The big heresy of the 19th century was the arian heresy The article mentions servetus. but the USA didn’t get its arianism from servetus. rather that heresy came from Issac Newton — who was held in near godlike status for 200 years or so after his death in the english speaking world.

Newton in turn got his arianism from bacon/decartes scientific methodology. They created a tree of knowledge which totally inverted the tree of knowledge (of good and evil) in the garden of eden. according to bacon/decartes tree of knowledge —theology side by side with witchcraft was placed as a sub branch of philsophy —

[raynearhood]

Michael Servetus, a Unitarian, a skilled doctor/debator and one who had the courage to go toe to toe against Calvin, the so-called great theologican, was burnt alive at Calvin's insistence.

Why is it that people are saying this over and over as if repetition will make it true?

First of all, Servetus wasn't a Unitarian. Unitarians, proper, didn't exist. The forerunners of the Unitarians (and political opponents to Calvin), the Libertines tried to attach a martyr status to Servetus. That really didn't work out so well because it was other opponents of Calvin that ultimately had Servetus burnt at the stake.

What Servetus was was an anti-trinitarian heretic that tried to spread his writings across Europe. He was condemned to death twice before getting to Geneva, once in Vienne and once in Lyons (after he had escaped authorities in Paris). From both of those convictions he escaped and was on the lamb, headed towards Italy when he stopped in Geneva, inexplicably, since he had been warned not to come to Geneva for surety of his execution.

He never "went toe to toe" with Calvin. He even skipped out twice on meetings they were supposed to have on neutral ground before Servetus was declared a heretic.

Servetus and his teachings were denounced by everyone from Calvin to Luther to the Catholics and every ecumenical council of western Europe. He was an enemy of the Church, no matter which church or city council (ruling body of the cities) you look to.

Anyhow, Calvin did not have him burnt. First of all, Calvin was no longer a member of the Geneva Council. Having lost his power in the council to the libertines the year before, Calvin resigned his position in July 1553 (before Servetus showed up in Geneva). Calvin was called as witness to the trial. There he presented Servetus' writings and letters between Calvin and him as evidence against Servetus. What is often overlooked, though, is Calvin's actual role. In Philip Schaff's History of the Christian Christian Church, Volume VIII, ch. 16 SERVETUS: HIS LIFE. OPINIONS, TRIAL, AND EXECUTION Schaff writes at the beginning of sec. 137...

We now come to the dark chapter in the history of Calvin which has cast a gloom over his fair name, and exposed him, not unjustly, to the charge of intolerance and persecution, which he shares with his whole age.

The burning of Servetus and the decretum horribile are sufficient in the judgment of a large part of the Christian world to condemn him and his theology, but cannot destroy the rocky foundation of his rare virtues and lasting merits. History knows only of one spotless being—the Saviour of sinners. Human greatness and purity are spotted by marks of infirmity, which forbid idolatry. Large bodies cast large shadows, and great virtues are often coupled with great vices.

...establishing how he treats the subject (I show this to show that Schaff was no Calvin propogandist on this subject). Later he reflects on the procedures of the arrest and trial of Servetus):

The prisoner [Servetus] was allowed to have paper and ink, and such books as could be procured at Geneva or Lyons at his own expense. Calvin lent him Ignatius, Polycarp, Tertullian, and Irenaeus.

Calvin gave Servetus access to his personal library for use in his defense.

Also, in accordance with Geneva law, the accused (Servetus) and the accuser (not Calvin but a student of Calvin named Nicholas de la Fontaine brought the charges against Servetus) were both jailed so that the accuser could recieve just punishment for false accusation if the accused were found not guilty.

Calvin attended the trial only as a witness during it's first part, and the trial lasted almost two months in two parts. The Geneva Council found Servetus guilty of heresy and did not condemn him, because they had no authority to do so (Servetus wasn't a citizen of Geneva). However other ecumenical council asked that he not be released. Geneva sought authority by ecumemical agreement, then, to execute Servetus under the penalty of law. They recieved such authority. Calvin wrote to a friend:

The messenger has returned from the Swiss Churches. They are unanimous in pronouncing that Servetus has now renewed those impious errors with which Satan formerly disturbed the Church, and that he is a monster not to be borne. Those of Basel are judicious. The Zürichers are the most vehement of all … They of Schaffhausen agree. To an appropriate letter from the Bernese is added one from the Senate in which they stimulate ours not a little. Caesar, the comedian [so he sarcastically called Perrin], after feigning illness for three days, at length went up to the assembly in order to free that wretch [Servetus] from punishment. Nor was he ashamed to ask that the case be referred to the Council of the Two Hundred. However, Servetus was without dissent condemned. He will be led forth to punishment to-morrow.

The condemnation:

The judges, after enumerating the crimes of Servetus, in calling the holy Trinity a monster with three heads, blaspheming the Son of God, denying infant-baptism as an invention of the devil and of witchcraft, assailing the Christian faith, and after mentioning that he had been condemned and burned in effigy at Vienne, and had during his residence in Geneva persisted in his vile and detestable errors, and called all true Christians tritheists, atheists, sorcerers, putting aside all remonstrances and corrections with a malicious and perverse obstinacy, pronounced the fearful sentence:—

"We condemn thee, Michael Servetus, to be bound, and led to the place of Champel, there to be fastened to a stake and burnt alive, together with thy book, as well the one written by thy hand as the printed one, even till thy body be reduced to ashes; and thus shalt thou finish thy days to furnish an example to others who might wish to commit the like.

"And we command our Lieutenant to see that this our present sentence be executed."

Calvin agreed with the death sentence...

...BUT...
Calvin did not want Servetus burned. In the letter to his friend on the judgement of the councils:

...He will be led forth to punishment to-morrow. We endeavored to alter the mode of his death, but in vain. Why we did not succeed, I defer for narration until I see you.

Calvin wanted that the council show mercy in its execution method, by sword instead of burning. Calvin was overruled and chided for leniency.

Calvin sent for a minister from outside of Geneva to perform the pastoral duties to the condemned. He did not attend the execution.

58 Executions of those who refused to follow his way took place over the first 5 years of his reign.

Well, not for nothing, but the numbers are disputed. That really doesn't matter though. What matters is that the city governments were set up as Christocratic theocracies which used the Levitical code as a base on which to establish the law. People were executed for the same reasons they were executed under OT law. Remember, this wasn't the church proper carrying out the sentence or passing judgement (the church constitory never had authority to conduct anything beyond excommunication, which they eventually lost to the Council, btw), but elected officials on the city government's Geneva Council.

[Cvengr]

A good synopsis.

From my perspective, many of the errors attributed to Reformed theology didn’t arise from Calvin as much as from his juniors who added to theology from his shoulders, e.g. Beza with double predestination,..etc.)

Calvin and Luther did advance Christian theology wrt soteriology, just as Catholicism advanced doctrines of the Trinity a Millenium before.

I don’t know Calvin’s guilt or innocence regarding Severtus, although my understanding of the events reveals Calvin was far out of fellowship with God during the entire episode. We’ll better understand at the bema seat as to what were the basis of his actions.

[lupie]

Thank you for your informative post. Do you have references for this besides the one you gave?

Thanks.

[Frumanchu]

Gross fallacy there. The discarding of some of these "old-established customs" of the Catholic Church had nothing to do with lack of compassion and everything to do with throwing off some of the traditions of men.

And I'm sorry, you cannot read some of the magnificent works of the Puritans and then argue that Calvinists believe God "[does] not want to be celebrated, or even to be loved, but only to be feared."

The easiest, and most common, way to dismiss Calvinist doctrine is the naked ad hominem argument against Calvin himself. The Servetus Card is played early and often...

[raynearhood]

I leaned on that link heavily for the post because I found it to be one of the most fair and most thorough accounts of the life, trial, and execution of Servetus. I must admit, a lot of what I write about the Servetus incident comes from books, memory, and actively engaing in this argument innumerable times. But, here are few good links.

Wikipedia is suprisingly balanced in its treatment.

Also see: here, here, here, here, and here. These are all short articles, but pretty good. I know there is more stuff out there on the web, but I'm on a fairly new computer (my old one died) and I have to recompile some of the resources.

[raynearhood]

Consider the “Servetus Card” officially stolen!

That is great.

[raynearhood]

58 Executions of those who refused to follow his way took place over the first 5 years of his reign.

Dagnabbit! I forgot to add: A cursory search into the executions that happened under Calvin's lead of the Geneva Council will reveal that the vast majority of them were for intentionally spreading the plague.