What do you know about Michael Servetus (or, John Calvin for that matter)?

Mariano,

I'm a HUGE fan of your blog, and I follow avidly. As for White's attempt to deal with Barker's critique of Calvin, I think that he is the one who is not dealing with the facts very well. While I think Barker is incredibly off-base in almost everything that comes out of his mouth, he's actually right about the Calvin-Servetus affair. Calvin DID set up a theocracy in Geneva. He WAS a despot, and nothing that went on in Geneva happened without his okay. Calvin sought Servetus' death for his anti-Trinitarianism prior to his execution. Also, Calvin reveled in Servetus' death afterward. Here is a quote from Calvin to back this up:

"Honour, glory, and riches shall be the reward of your pains; but above all, do not fail to rid the country of those scoundrels, who stir up the people to revolt against us. Such monsters should be exterminated, as I have exterminated Michael Servetus the Spaniard." (from a 1561 letter from Calvin to the Marquis Paet, high chamberlain to the King of Navarre)

White and other Calvinists really should just give up the ghost in trying to defend Calvin and other Reformers on this score. They should realize that they need not distort history just to make their theological heroes look good. Calvin, Luther, and Zwingli made invaluable contributions to the Church (though their neo-Augustinianism was off). But we've got to call these guys (and other folks) to the carpet when they were nothing more than murderous thugs. In this instance (and some others) Calvin was a liar, murderer, and a hypocrite. It's that simple. White's attempts to try to nuance these things reflect badly upon him. He should just acknowledge that Barker is right here and point to the fact that Barker--in light of his views of evolution and morality--has little basis upon which to critique the Church. I thought he was going to spin-off onto that, but he instead chose to defend his boy Calvin. Bad move.