imbibed both the political and religious principles of his ancestors; for it is far more probable that he was trained up in those principles, in a country where it is known they had always been inculcated from the times of the Goths, than that he learned them all on a sudden in Italy.'

In Navarre, where we suppose Servetus was born, and received the first rudiments of his education, some degree of civil and religious liberty still existed. 6 There (says the above writer) Jews, Moors, and Christians, lived at ease, and there most likely he received his education and his notions of civil and religious liberty, as well as his knowledge of physic, and his peculiar sentiments of religion.' Brought up amid the vallies and mountains where the Waldenses had once flourished, many of whom were unitarians, an ingenious and studious youth, might meditate on their history, and it would be natural for him to catch something of their spirit, and have his mind excited to the examination of their principles. He might converse with Jews and Mahommedans, without crossing to Africa, and be instructed by them in the doctrine of the divine unity. The bold scenery of nature around him would, in a mind so active and studious, inspire exalted thoughts

of the Deity, and lead to the contemplation of the one first cause of all things. Thus the rudiments of Servetus' character might be formed. The face of nature might, by the magnificent objects it exhibited, inspire the love of liberty in so ardent a mind, and awaken grand ideas. The voice of paternal instruction might foster the impressions nature made, and direct his thoughts into the channel in which they flowed. If he met with no written accounts of the Waldenses, traditions concerning them were likely to reach his ear, and excite sympathy and congenial thoughts. Conversation with Jews of Mahommedans might convince him more fully of the divine unity, and an attention to the scriptures mature his judgment and establish him in his opinions.

After all, it must be acknowledged, these are but conjectures, yet they are founded in probability. It is possible for Servetus to have derived his opinions simply from the scriptures.They most plainly teach the unity of God, and are utterly irreconcileable with the popular notions he opposed. Could it be proved that he derived those opinions, which were so obnoxious to the reformers, simply from the study of the scriptures, it would argue very strongly in fayor of their consistency with divine revelation;

for it would be very unlikely that a youth, situated as he was, should perceive them in the sacred writings if they were not conspicuous there. It is presumed, that if christians would bring every opinion to the test of reason and scripture, they would find many things, which pass for doctrines of truth, to be extremely erroneous. Whatever might lead Servetus to the adoption of the opinions he maintained, he certainly believed them to be scriptural, and thought himself capable of defending them by scripture and reason: nor dare his opponents leave the points in dispute to be decided by rational and scriptural argument; they resorted to fire and faggot, and silenced him by taking away his life.

SECTION II.

Servetus publishes a book concerning the errors about a Trinity, which creates great alarm among the protestants.

The bookseller at Basil, to whose care Servetus had entrusted his manuscript concerning the trinity, either through prejudice, or fear of the consequences, declined printing it. He

H

sent it to Haguenau, where Servetus went himself in order to hasten its publication. This work appeared in 1531. In it the author opposed the unintelligible notion of three persons in the Godhead, and asserted that the name Son of God denotes only a man.

The publication of a book of this kind was sure to give much alarm to the trinitarians. Bucer, who has been called a very moderate man, was irritated to such a degree, that he declared from the pulpit, That Servetus deserved to be cut in pieces, and to have his bowels torn out of him.'

The divines in Switzerland were much offended. This appears from a letter of Oecolampadius to Bucer. 'I saw this week (says he) our friends of Berne, who make their compliments to you and to Capito. They are very much offended with the book entitled, De Trinitatis Erroribus, which some of them have seen. I desire you would acquaint Luther, that this book was printed out of this country, and without our knowledge. For (to mention but one article) it is an impudent thing to affirm, as the author does, that the Lutherans do not understand the doctrine of justification. But that man, whether he be a Photinian, or of any other sect, thinks he knows more than every body else. Our church will be very ill spoken of, unless our

1

divines make it their business to cry him down. I beseech you in particular, to keep a watchful eye over it, and to make an apology for our church, at least in your confutation inscribed to the emperor. We know not how that beast came to creep in among us. He wrests all the passages of the scripture, to prove that the Son is not co-eternal, and consubstantial with the Father, and that the man Christ is the Son of God.' Oecolampadii & Zuingl. Epis.

In the foregoing letter the writer expresses himself neither like a gentleman, nor like a christian. However, we are told, when the same Oecolampadius made a discourse in the presence of the magistrates of Basil, to show that De Trinitatis Erroribus was a pernicious book, he expressed himself with great moderation. Whether this arose from his having thought further on the subject, and discovered that abuse is a poor substitute for argument, or that the awe he felt in the presence of his superiors restrained his temper, and curbed the violence of his zeal, we are not informed. said he also wrote two letters to Servetus, about his book, wherein he endeavored to confute him in a very civil manner, and intreated him to

It is