|
|
Ronald S. Wallace, in his acclaimed book Calvin, Geneva, and the Reformation, approaches his studies as an intellectual historian. Much more time is given to the ideas believed than in other works of history. This is not hard to understand, for Wallace is sympathetic to the period he is recounting, himself having been a Reformed minister. This does make the book much more interesting, for it is quite obvious that the author has a great admiration for Calvin, and because this is so, the book seems to have a positive gleam to it. It is refreshing to read a historical survey of such a controversial character as Calvin from someone who actually stands in defense of the fellow. Though it certainly has its bias, it is a competent history of the life of Calvin, and of the city of Geneva, from the viewpoint of an admirer. One should be leery of historians who do not enjoy their subject matter.
Wallace attempts to do away with several myths that have been associated with Calvin, and with the city of Geneva. From the outset, he warns us (his readers) that whatever we do, " We have to try and judge the proceedings in Geneva in light of the customs of the day," and that "We must not blame a man for the environment he is born into" (p.47). Calvin of course has the reputation of being an austere and harsh ruler of Geneva. But this idea is challenged. Yes, cards and dice were outlawed, and yes there were laws mandating the observance of the sabbath. But as Wallace shows, these laws were on the books in 1459 before Calvin arrived. Thus, the harshness with which we moderns view Calvin may just be a twentieth century bias toward medieval common law. In fact, it is even argued that when Calvin arrived, he did put into effect laws (which by our standards seem quite harsh and strict) that were considered "liberal" in the eyes of the people of his day for the simple reason that they were used to even harsher legislation. Wallace then cites records indicating that some considered Calvin to be a progressive because "he insisted that parents had no right to force their children into any marriage," and that he taught "the wife is not more subject to the husband than the husband to the wife" (p. 51-52).
Was Calvin a despot? Was Geneva a theocracy? Wallace answers no on both counts. And his arguments are fairly convincing. For one thing, Calvin did not always get what he wanted. As many of us know, he was removed from his post and exiled from Geneva early in his ministry. After he was invited to return, the detailed minutes of the city council meetings record that "Calvin's was often only one respected voice among many" (p. 78). Secondly, Calvin seems to get the blame for the burning of Servetus, but if Wallace is correct, Calvin pleaded with the council for a more humane form of execution, but that "the body did not alter its determination to conform to the customary way of dealing with such heretics" (p. 77). But if Geneva was not a theocracy, why then was a heretic burned to death? Wallace explains:
"The reformers were also Catholic in their faith as well as Reformed. They always made a claim to be the true extension in history of the Holy and Universal Church. But belief in the Trinity had been the foundation not only of all the Catholic doctrine but of Christian civilization itself. To spread denial of such a doctrine was an act of treason and an attempt to spread anarchy...There was no place in the world of the day either Catholic or Protestant where Servetus would have met with anything but a sentence of death. There had been controversy about the manner of death which should be given to such a heretic and it is certainly strange that against Calvin's wishes the Genevan authorities should have insisted on burning him" (p. 80).
It is clear that Wallace is putting Calvin in the best possible light, but he does require that we look at him more in the context of a society that is different than our own. In any case, it cannot be denied that Wallace is correct in challenging the myth that Calvin was a strict and harsh religious authoritarian who virtually ruled Geneva. On the contrary, it has been documented that Calvin was rather progressive for a man of his period, who often did not get what he desired.
Calvin, Geneva, and the Reformation is a formidable book. It is well documented and researched. Wallace does an excellent job of challenging the misconceptions and helps to bring a little warmth to the man John Calvin which is a refreshing change from the cold austere portrait of Calvin that is so commonly presented.
This article was made available on the
internet via REFORMATION INK
(www.markers.com/ink).
Refer any correspondence to Shane Rosenthal: ReformationInk at mac.com (connect and write as @mac.com -- when I connect them I get a lot of junk mail).