I am an inveterate reader. I have the great benefit of growing up in a readers’ home, with my dad very typically reading one entire book a day. The result of his lifelong passion for reading (his sister taught him how to read when he was four years old) was that my dad was always the most well-informed person in the room. Always.
I bring all of this up because I have decided to
read a book sent to me in the mail about a week ago, having no idea who sent it
to me. Having caught the reading bug from my dad following my conversion, I am
presently reading 30 books, usually a chapter from each book per day and at
least three chapters from the Bible each day. The book that I received in the
mail, written by Curt Daniel, is titled The History & Theology of
Calvinism, 906 pages. Yesterday I
decided to read it, adding it to the many books I am already reading.
Upon reflection, I find it interesting that at my
age (I am now 70), I have never read a book written by John Calvin. I have the
22 volume set of Calvin’s Commentaries, though I have only rarely consulted with
them and have not purposefully read any of them. I also have Calvin’s Christian Institutes, without having read that work either.
As I prepare to read this massive book, I think it
would be good to reflect on a few things before starting:
Number one, it must be incredibly stupid to form an
opinion about a man without having read any portion of his body of work. I know
many people have unjustified and unwarranted thoughts because the basis of
their views is a rumor, innuendo, and gossip. It should be every gospel
minister’s posture to avoid, whenever possible, having a decided opinion about
anyone or anything he has not personally studied. To have an opinion about John
Calvin or his doctrinal position without reading John Calvin is not just stupid
and ill-advised; it is lazy. There is no room in the gospel ministry for
intellectual laziness. We have too much of that already.
Number two, it isn't very reasonable to evaluate
someone who lived long ago by modern-day standards. An example of this came to
me yesterday when I learned that late-night talk show host Jimmy Fallon
performed a black face comedy routine 20 years ago when he was on the cast of
Saturday Night Live. Of course, the cancel culture wants him fired today for
doing something 20 years ago that was at that time acceptable to everyone in
the entertainment industry. However, gospel ministers have long been guilty of the
same kind of cancel culture thinking.
I bring this up concerning the universal
condemnation that I have heard throughout my Christian life regarding John
Calvin’s connection with a man named Michael Servetus (1511-1153). The incident
almost always comes up in a discussion about Calvinism. It is referred to by my
Baptist brethren as a cudgel against John Calvin and his doctrinal stance for
supposedly being an accessory to the murder of a Baptist.
Not so fast. History shows us that Servetus was a
Spaniard, an Anabaptist, and a heretic who denied the Trinity and Christ’s
deity. Before he arrived in Geneva, he had been condemned to death by the Roman
Catholic Inquisition and had been warned by Calvin that it would not be a good
idea for him to come to Geneva. Once he was in Geneva, he was arrested,
prosecuted, and executed by burning.
Contrary to what many of my Baptist brethren claim,
John Calvin was not a judge at the trial, nor was he the prosecutor. He was
called a witness for the prosecution, and he testified, but he exercised no
role other than that in either finding Servetus guilty or executing him. Not
only did John Calvin have no authority to stop the execution of Servetus, but
it is almost sure that whatever city he had gone to Servetus would have been
arrested, tried, and executed, whether the town was a Protestant city or a
Roman Catholic city.
My Baptist brethren should be reminded that we
would recognize not all Anabaptists as our spiritual forebears. Are you a
Baptist if you sprinkle rather than immerse? Are you a Baptist if you deny
justification by faith? Are you a Baptist if you repudiate the doctrine of the
Trinity? Are you a Baptist if you deny the deity of Jesus Christ?
I am not for one moment communicating approval of
the execution of Servetus. However, let us recognize that no city on earth in
John Calvin’s day tolerated religious dissent. And there were many offenses
dealt with harshly in that day, which we allow to pass without comment in our
day. Let us also recognize that John Calvin did not occupy the same
relationship with Geneva’s government or religious institutions that a Baptist
pastor enjoys in the 21st century. Never forget that John Calvin was
a foreigner, a Frenchman living and serving in Geneva, Switzerland. He had
neither the freedom of action nor the freedom of speech that every Baptist in
America takes for granted.
Let us be very careful that we do not practice our
own form of cancel culture. Most people I know would decry the attempt to have
Jimmy Fallon fired today because of something he did 20 years ago that no one
then disapproved of. Let us apply the same kind of standard to one of the most
prominent Christian leaders of his era who lived five centuries ago, who
exercised no control over whether Servetus was arrested, tried, convicted, or
executed.
I am not going to make up my mind about this man
and his doctrinal position before I read what he wrote. I advise the same for
others. I am sorry for any church member whose pastor has such a pygmy mind
that he is willing to decide and speak about his decisions without giving the
man a fair hearing.
