Engels and the “Trial of Servetus”

The article examines a fragment of Dialectics of Nature that reflects Marxist views on the role and place of Christian churches and their doctrines in the history of science. It demonstrates that Engels’ reconstruction of the Renaissance period is flawed and that the events he cites to support his position are irrelevant to the question at hand. The author argues that one of the reasons for these errors lies in Engels’ reliance on superficial information and his failure to engage with primary sources. A significant contributing factor was Engels’ undue trust in the works of John W. Draper.The article provides a brief historical overview of the subject, noting that the trial records of Michael Servetus indicate his execution had no connection to any supposed conflict between natural science and theology. The author highlights the doctrinal principles of theism that served as prerequisites for the discovery Engels wrote about. Additionally, the influence of Servetus’ theological predecessors – who operated within a theological discourse – on his scientific insights is explored. It is proven that Servetus had access to the writings of Nemesius of Emesa, which would have been of interest to him both as a theologian and a scientist. Furthermore, the article demonstrates that Nemesius influenced (directly or indirectly, through Hunayn ibn Ishaq) Ibn al-Nafis, from whom Servetus may have borrowed his description of pulmonary circulation. The role of Christian theology in Ibn al-Nafis’ anticipation of Servetus’ discoveries is supported by two key points: first, the Arabic scholar used his circulatory model to defend the dogma of resurrection; second, this dogma, within the Abrahamic religious tradition, owes its genesis specifically to Christianity. Additional historical evidence is presented to argue that there were no fundamental contradictions between science and Reformed theology. The article thus challenges Engels’ narrative while emphasizing the complex interplay between theological thought and scientific progress.