THE CAREER OF SERVETUS.

227

himself of the groundlessness of the claims of the Roman Catholic Church; but he was not satisfied with the Protestant theology, especially on the subject of the Trinity. Going to Basel he formed an acquaintance with Ecolampadius, who expressed a strong dislike of his notions. Zwingle, whom Ecolampadius consulted, said that such notions would subvert the Christian religion, but seems to have discountenanced a resort to force for the suppression of them.1 The book of Servetus on the "Errors of the Trinity," appeared in 1531. In it he defended a view closely allied to the Sabellian theory, and an idea of the incarnation in which the common belief of two natures in Christ had no place. He endeavored to draw Calvin into a correspondence, but became angry at the manner in which Calvin treated him and his speculations. He wrote Calvin a number of letters well stored with invectives against the prevalent conceptions of Christian doctrine, as well as against Calvin personally. At length he returned to Paris, where he had previously studied at the same time that Calvin was there, and under the assumed name of Villanovus, derived from the village where he was born, he prosecuted his studies in natural science and medicine, for which he had a remarkable aptitude. He divined the true method of the circulation of the blood, almost anticipating the later discovery of Harvey.2 As a practitioner of medicine he stood in high repute. After repeatedly changing his name and residence, he finally took up his abode in Vienne, in the south of France, where he was hospitably received by the Archbishop, and long lived in the lucrative practice of his profession. During all this time, in the aggregate more than twenty years, he conformed outwardly to the Catholic Church, attended mass, and was not suspected of heresy. Here he finished a book, not less obnoxious than the first, en1 Mosheim, Geschichte Servets, p. 17. 2 Henry, Leben Calvins, iii. Beil. 59.

titled "The Restoration of Christianity"- Christianismi Restitutio-and not being able to get it printed in Basel, he bribed the Archbishop's own printer and two of his assistants, to print it for him secretly. He superintended the press, and sent copies of the anonymous book to various places for sale, not forgetting to despatch one or more copies as presents to the Genevan theologians. In this work his conception of the person of Christ is somewhat modified; its doctrine makes a nearer approach to Pantheistic theories. The two grand hindrances in the way of the spread of Christianity were declared to be the doctrine of the Trinity and that of Infant Baptism. The manuscript of the first draft of the work had been sent to Calvin at an earlier day. A French refugee residing at Geneva, by the name of Guillaume Trie, in a letter to Antoine Arneys, a Roman Catholic relative at Lyons, made reference to Servetus as the author of this pestiferous book, and as, nevertheless, enjoying immunity in a Church that pretended to be zealous for the extirpation of heresy. Arneys carried the information to the Archbishop of Lyons. Servetus was arrested; and an ecclesiastical court was constituted for his trial. Some pages of an annotated copy of the "Institutes," which he had long before sent to Calvin, and a parcel of his letters were transmitted from Geneva by Trie, for the purpose of establishing the charge which he had indirectly caused to be made. Trie prevailed on Calvin to grant him this additional evidence. Servetus, and the printers with him, had sworn that they knew nothing of the book which they had published. Servetus also swore that he was not the person who had written the book on the "Errors of the Trinity." But when the Genevan documents ar

1 "Es gibt kaum ein anderes System, das so sehr wie das Servets als ein pantheistiches bezeichnet zu werden verdient in dem gewöhnlich mit diesem Worte verbundenen Sinn." - Baur, Die christl. Lehre v. d. Dreieingkeit, etc., II. i. 2,

SERVETUS AT GENEVA.

229

rived, he saw that conviction was inevitable, and contrived to escape from his jailer. The Vienne court had to content itself with seizing his property and burning his effigy. We know Calvin's disposition towards him; for in a letter to Farel he had once said that if his authority was of any avail, in case Servetus were to come to Geneva, he should not go away alive.1

Servetus, having escaped from Vienne, after a few months actually appeared in Geneva and took lodgings in an inn near one of the gates. He had been there for a month without being recognized, when Calvin was informed of his presence, and procured his arrest. A scribe of Calvin made the accusation. Ultimately, Calvin and all the other preachers were brought face to face with the prisoner, before the Senate which was to sit in judgment upon him. In the subsequent proceedings he defended his theological opinions with much acuteness, but with a strange outpouring of violent denunciation.2 His propositions relative to the participation of all things in the Deity, and the identity of the world with God, although he made the embodiment of the primordial essence in the world to spring from a volition, were couched in phraseology which made them seem to his accusers in the highest degree dangerous and repulsive. He caricatured the Church doctrine of the Trinity by the most offensive comparisons. His ideas were out of relation to the existing philosophy and theology, and were an anticipation of phases of speculation of a much later date. His physical

1 February 13, 1546. Bonnet, ii. 19.

2 Dyer, a writer not at all disposed to excuse Calvin, says (p. 337) of the indorsements made by Servetus on the list of thirty-eight heretical propositions which Calvin had extracted from his writings: "The replies of Servetus to this document are very insolent, and seem almost like the productions of a madman.' These replies may be read in the new edition of Calvin's works, viii.

519 seq.

3 "Man kann sich daher nicht wundern, dass auch die Gegner an diesem so offen vor Augen liegenden Character des Systems den grössten Anstoss nahmen." ― Baur, Ibid., p. 103.

theories were interwoven with his theology. His maxim, that " no force acts except by contact," was connected

with his doctrine of the substantial communication of the Deity to all things; and he told Calvin contemptuously that if he only understood natural science, he could comprehend this subject. While he was undergoing his trial, a messenger arrived from the tribunal at Vienne to demand their escaped prisoner. There was no safety for him with Papist or Protestant! He chose to remain and take his chance where he was. It is not improbable that his boldness and vehemence were inspired by suggestions from the Libertine party, and that he felt that they stood at his back. Calvin was far from being omnipotent in Geneva at this time. He was, in fact, in the very crisis of his conflict with his adversaries. It was on the 27th of August, 1553, that he denounced Servetus from the pulpit; he had been arrested on the 13th of the same month. On the 3d of September, Calvin refused the Lord's Supper to the younger Berthelier, a leader of the Libertines. So strong was this party, that had the cause of Servetus been carried, as was attempted, to the Council of One Hundred, Servetus would have escaped. He was extremely bold, and demanded that Calvin should be banished for bringing a malicious accusation, and that his property should be handed over to him. Contrary to his expectation, he was condemned. He called Calvin to his prison, and asked pardon for his personal treatment of him; but all attempts to extort from him a retraction of his doctrines, whether made by Calvin or by Farel before the execution of the sentence, were ineffectual. He adhered to his opinions with heroic constancy, and was burned at the stake on the morning of the 27th of October, 1553.

Two?

7.218

1 Guizot expresses the decided opinion that Servetus went to Geneva relying on the Libertines, and that they expected support from him. St. Louis and Calvin, p. 313. But there is no good evidence of any previous understanding

between him and them.

CALVIN AND SERVETUS.

231 On the one hand, it is not true that Calvin arranged that the mode of his death should be needlessly painful. He made the attempt to have it mitigated; probably that the sword might be used instead of the fagot. And notwithstanding the previous threat, to which reference has been made, it is likely that he expected, and he had reason to expect, that Servetus would recant. On the other hand, it cannot be denied that he yielded to the solicitation of Trie, and supplied the documentary evidence which went from Geneva to the court at Vienne. He caused the arrest of Servetus at Geneva, and it is a 'violation of historical truth to say that he did not desire his execution. The infliction of capital punishment on one whom he considered a blasphemer, as well as an assailant of the fundamental truths of Christianity, was in his judgment right. In the defense of the doctrine of the Trinity against Servetus, which Calvin published in 1554, he enters into a formal argument in favor of the capital punishment of contumacious heretics by the civil authority. He thinks that if Roman Catholic rulers slay the innocent, this is no reason why better and more enlightened magistrates should spare the guilty. The whole discussion proves that the arguments for toleration, both from Scripture and reason, were not unknown to him, for he tries to answer them. He makes his appeal, in great part, to the Old Testament. Guizot thus pronounces upon the case of Servetus and Calvin: "It was their tragical destiny to enter into mortal combat as the champions of two great causes. It is my profound conviction that Calvin's cause was the good one; that it was the cause of morality, of social order, of civilization. Servetus

1 We have already cited his letter to Farel, of February 13, 1546. After the arrest of Servetus, Calvin wrote to Farel (August 20, 1553), saying: "I hope (spero) the sentence will at least be capital; but desire the atrocity of the punishment to be abated." He wished him to be put to death, but not by fire. Calvin published an elaborate work in defense of the proceeding. Henry has mistranslated the above passage: see Dyer, Life of Calvin, p. 339.