[/B]
Indeed it was an execution --a state sponsored one.
Mr.S. would have been executed anywhere in Europe at that period in history. All the other Reformers had the same opinion as Calvin on the matter,but some thought he was too soft.
It was not an illegitimate act. Michael S. was undermining authority anywhere he lived.
As was stated before,Calvin did not want him burned. He wanted a beheading because it was more merciful. But he was out-numbered. He did not have the influence that you make out at that time. He didn't have more "power" until a few years later --nine years before he died.
While it's true that all the focus is on Calvin, when everyone else felt the same way (including the Catholics, whom the Protestants were in the heat of fighting against), that precisely shows that problem being one of unbiblical power.
"undermining
authority". If the issue was really one of doctrinal truth, then God is the authority. In this issue, the authority being defended is clearly that of man, through his institutions of state and state "church".
That's what really drive the desire to execute. And it was a total turnaround from Biblical times, when the true believers (including the Lord Himself) were the ones to be executed, and the currupt unbelievers were the ones to use the power of the state to do the executing.
Servetus' story was covered in the book
The Hunted Heretic (Bainton), and it reads much like a classic martyrdom. What does that say to the world?
Hence:
I'm still trying to figure out how Calvin - guilty or not - helped to create Unitarianism.
I disagree with the proposal however it goes something like this. Calvin is just as bad as the Romanist and thus liberal Reformist went to the opposit extreme and over promoted tollerance. I guess thats the just of it.
The first time I ever heard of Servetus, it was right before I became a Christian, when I visited a Unitarian Universalist church, and their literature mentioned the burning by "the Calvinists". So they do use this as a defense of their stances, as much of the world has been rebelling against "all the horrors of Christian history; the intolerance, mean-spiritedness, etc).
Yes,Calvin did indeed spend weeks trying to get Servetus to repent. And that somehow is evil in your eyes? Calvin was merciful. If he had beed successful Michael Servetus would have been spared his life.
Presuppositionalism, at its best. You're just wrong because our authority says so. He didn't even really argue from scripture much (at least Servetus aimed to). It's just that if you go against our doctrines, you're just a heretic and need to die; and this included the doctrines on baptism, state church, etc. (i.e. the Anabaptists were similarly condemned as well)
The irony was that he was not even really unitarian. His view actually more like pre-Nicene
orthodoxy! (a là Hippolytus, Irenaeus, Tertullian; less symmetrical view of the Three). He did have some apparent adoptionist leanings (making him sound to some extent like a unitarian, and thus similar to Nestorianism), but even this he later modified, but because he still insisted on "Son of the Eternal" instead of [the extrabiblical] "Eternal Son", Calvin was ummoved.
So this was really defense of Nicene/Chalcedon "orthodoxy" (the historic
Catholic "authority") and not [necessarily] scriptural truth.
And not only did they similarly level vitriol against Rome (whom they agreed with on all three of those doctrines mentioned), but even each other as well. It's amazing to see Calvin and Luther's "self-humility" in calling themselves "lowly worms" and such, but they sure didn't seem like they saw themselves as worms when it came to denouncing "heretics", and even each other; let alone believing people needed to be killed. If they believed they were worms, then they would realize they were fundamentally no different than the heretics, Rome, and everyone else they condemned. If those people deserved to die, then so did they! (And that's supposed to be the whole point of the Reformation. So this is perhaps why people are so hard on them over this stuff).
But it's like all the scriptural admonition to charity, kindness and patience that we are so familiar with now was suspended for all those centuries.
One more thing: Calvin had written to Servetus the following:"I neither hate you nor despise you,nor do I wish to persecute you;but I would be as hard as iron when I behold you insulting sound doctrine with so great audacity."
In other words, some people are there own worst enemies. :tear:
It's true that Servetus certainly lacked
tact. He should have realized the bloodthirsty nature of all the Christian authorities at the time, and at least presented his case in a less confrontational way (like not accusing all Christians of Worshipping a "three headed Cerberus").