Maimbourg, equally known by his partialities and his falsehoods, have never dared to advance those things which modern historians have not been ashamed to risk. Bolzec says, that Servetus quitted Lyons to establish himself at Charlieu, because 'his pride, his insolence, and the danger of his projects, made him equally feared and hated. He adds, that 'Servetus returned to Lyons; that he entered into a correspondence with Calvin; that he communicated to him his ideas; that Calvin combated them with force, and that Servetus persisted in them with obstinacy; that he sent him his work entitled Restitutio Christianismi, which he printed at that time; and that Calvin, indignant, declined all acquaintance with him.** "It is evident that Calvin did not betray the secret of Servetus, and that he did not occasion his arrest at Vienne, since he wrote to Viret and to Farel, that, if that heretic came to Geneva, he would take care that he should be capitally punished. "The ideas of Calvin included in this revolting sentence, were the ideas of all persons and of all sects: they constituted the spirit of the laws, and of the public administration of the times. "Disputes are frequently the source of intolerance; we easily learn to hate those who try to convince us that we are wrong: this was not, however, the case with Calvin; he bore with Servetus as long as there was any hope of reclaiming him. Servetus began with employ "Restitutio Christianismi, hoc est totius ecclesiæ apostolicæ ad sua limina vocatio: in integrum restitutâ cognitione Dei, fidei Christianæ, justificationis nos træ, Regenerationis, Baptismi, et Cœnæ Domini manducationis; restituto denique nobis regno cœlesti, Babylonis impià cap tivitate soluto, et anti-christo cum suis penitus destructo.'-This book is extremely scarce; all the copies were burned at Vienne and Frankfort: it has been long doubted whether there were any remaining; but it appears certain that Doctor Mead possessed a copy, which found its way into the library of the Duke de la Valiere." ing injurious expressions of the grossest kind. It is certain that be had rendered himself odious to all who knew him, and that the ideas of most persons agreed with those of Calvin on the punishment which he merited. It is evident, from the letters of Farel and of Viret, that they did not blame the conduct of Calvin in this affair. Bucer was not ashamed to write that 'Servetus deserved something worse than death." The excellent, the gentle Melancthon, approved the punishment of Servetus. Writing to Calvin, he remarks: In my opinion, your magistrates have acted justly, in putting to death a blaspherer, convicted by due process of law. The opinion of Melancthon on this subject is farther expressed in a letter to Bullinger:-'I have read your statement respecting the blasphemy of Servetus, and praise your piety and judgment; and am persuaded that the Council of Geneva has done right in putting to death this obstinate man, who would never have ceased his blasphemies. I am astonished that any one can be found to disapprove of this proceeding; but I have transmitted you a few papers which will sufficiently explain our sentiments."* Farel expressly says, that 'Servetus deserved a capital punishment.' And Beza defended the sentence. All these celebrated men entertained the same opinion on the subject; and as no personal hatred of Servetus can be imputed to them, it is at least as unjust to accuse Calvin of it. "But Calvin, it is said, abused the confidence of Servetus; he sent to Vienne the letters which he had received from him, to which he added his work entitled Restitutio Christianismi, of which Servetus had made him a present. This accusation is mysterious: is it to be believed that Calvin, whose name was execrated in all Catholick countries, could expect from their magistrates any at "Life of Melancthon, by F. A. Cox, A. M. 2d edit. tentions to his complaints, or any regard to his letters? where they made use of it according to their fancy. I don't dispute, however, whether it was by deliberate malice he had forged such lies to bring the hatred of many upon me, or whether fear made him suspicious: only I demand how it could happen, that since the time I discovered him, he has lived three years in the sight of his enemies, without being disquieted, or speaking one word about it to him; certainly either those who complain of me must confess, that it has been falsely invented, or that their martyr, Servetus, has had more favour from the papists than I: if this had been objected to me with justice, and that I had published it in order to have him punished by any person whatsoever, I would not have denied it, and I don't think it could have turned to my dishonour.' This I am confident is sufficient to satisfy reasonable men: above all, if we add to it, what Calvin had said immediately before the passage I have cited: "The extreme improbability of the correspondence here alluded to, may be inferred from the character of the individual to whom Calvin is said to have applied. All historians agree in representing Cardinal Tournon to us as the scourge of heresy. He caused the severest edicts to be published against the innovators. He established at Paris a fiery court (Chambre Ardente), which was properly an inquisition, and ordered all the tribunals of the kingdom to prosecute the new errors as crimes against the state. The fury of his zeal transported him so far, that he caused all the hereticks to be burned who had the misfortune to fall into his hands. Behold the man they want to make a correspondent of Calvin by letters! Whatever wickedness they would load him with, they must suppose him a perfect blockhead to attempt such a correspondence, by a criminal accusation of A report flies about that I had his enemy; as it would appear by the loud fits of laughter they make the cardinal fall into, upon receiving this letter. "But, supposing that this reformer had been capable of such extravagant folly, how can we imagine that the cardinal, this scourge of heresy,' would have satisfied himself with laughing at this affair? That he made himself merry with the accuser, needs not surprise us; but that he neglected to prosecute such a heretick as Servetus, we cannot so easily be persuaded of. Thus Calvin himself gives no other reason in answer to the calumny we are refuting, as we shall see by his own words, than that the calumny came originally from Servetus; and that Bolzec knew nothing of the matter, but from uncertain reports. 'I have no occasion,' says Calvin, to insist longer to answer such a frivolous calumny, which falls to the ground, when I shall have said, in one word, that there is nothing in it. It is four years since Servetus forged this fable upon me, and made the report travel from Venice to Padua, VOL. II.-Ch. Adv. endeavoured to have had Servetus apprehended in a popish country, viz. at Vienne; upon which a great many say, that I have not behaved discreetly in exposing him to the mortal enemies of the faith, as if I had thrown him in the jaws of wolves; but I pray you, from whence so suddenly this private dealing with the Pope's satellites? It is very creditable, indeed, that we should correspond together by letters, and that those who agree with me, as well as Belial agrees with Jesus Christ, should enter into a plot with such a mortal enemy, as with their own companion.' "But, supposing Calvin could have been capable of such an absurdity, is it to be imagined that he could have kept silence during seven years; that he would not have persecuted him sooner; that he would not have sent to the places where Servetus resided, the letters which he had received, and the work which he possessed? It is evident, however, that Calvin had corresponded with Servetus seven years; and the famous letter of CalC vin, which Uttembogaert saw in the library of the King of France, shows that Calvin was then perfectly acquainted with his character, and that he had seen his famous work:-'Servetus lately wrote to me, and accompanied his letter with a large volume of his extravagant opinions, with a hectoring boast, that I should see extraordinary and unheard-of things, if I were willing that he would come hither: but I was unwilling to give my promise; for if he should come, I shall use my authority in such a manner as not to suffer him to depart alive." This letter is dated in February, 1546; Calvin evidently refers to the work entitled Restitutio Christianismi: he plainly discovers his judgment of it, and of the punishment which he thought its author deserved; but it is equally evident that he was very far from engaging him to come to Geneva, and that he had forewarned him of what he might expect to meet with, if he should have the temerity to appear in that city. It is, therefore, evident, that if Calvin endeavoured to keep Servetus from Geneva to induce him to avoid the punishment with which he threatened him, he could not possibly think of inflicting it upon him elsewhere, which would have been attended with considerable difficulty, if not absolutely impossible. "But what end could Calvin's letters to the magistrates of Vienne have answered? Calvin was assured that Servetus was known to be the author of the work entitled Restitutio Christianismi, since it bore the name of Villanovanus. Servetus was well known by this name: it was, therefore, useless for Calvin to send them intelligence which was publick: neither was it more necessary for him to inform them what that book "Servetus nuper ad me scripsit, et litteris adjunxit magnum volumen suorum deliriorum cum thrasonicâ jactantià me stupenda ac inaudita visurum, si mihi placeat, huc se venturum recipit; sed nolo fidem meam interponere; nam si venerit, modò valeat anca autoritas, vivum exire nunquam patiar.'" contained; a single perusal evinced it. It would have been absurd in Calvin to send them a copy of the work, since it had been printed in France, under their own eyes; so that it is difficult to imagine the possibility of the conduct of Calvin in this affair being what his enemies have represented it. Farther; the sentence pronounced at Vienne against Servetus, takes no notice of any interposition on the part of Calvin: it condemns Servetus for his printed work, on the report of the Doctors in Theology consulted on the occasion; on the ground of the errors contained in that work; and, finally, on the confessions of that unhappy man. It is true that the magistrates of Vienne, having learned that Servetus corresponded with Calvin, demanded his letters with all writings relating to him; but the demand was made to the Council of Geneva, who complied with their request. From these circumstances it appears that Calvin had no share in sending the letters of Servetus, and that they had no influence upon the decision of Vienne, as no mention is made of them. "Happily, those persons who take pleasure in calumniating others, seldom consider all the circumstances of the facts which they wish to impose, but discover the imposture by the impossibility of harmonizing what they invent, with what is real. Thus the report that Calvin, instructed of the escape of Servetus from the prison of Vienne, caused him to be arrested two or three days after his arrival at Geneva, stands selfcorrected; as it is certain that he left Vienne before the execution of the sentence which condemned him to be burnt in effigy on the 17th of June: supposing him to have been a fortnight in reaching Geneva, he must have arrived there in the beginning of July, at the latest: he was not, however, arrested until the 13th of August. It is absurd to say that he concealed himself in other places; for to what other places could he have gone? His safety required him to quit those in which the Romish religion was established, lest the clamours of Vienne should have reached them; and Geneva was the first place in which he could hope for an asylum. It is therefore evident that Servetus, far from having been arrested upon his arrival at Geneva, must have resided there at least six weeks. "The laws of Geneva requiring that the accuser and the accused should enter the prison together, Calvin directed the process to be made by Nicolas de la Fontaine, his secretary, and a student in theology. Calvin confesses that this was done with his knowledge. De la Fontaine made himself a prisoner, requiring the detention of Servetus, and produced forty articles upon which he demanded that Servetus should be examined. Servetus was shortly afterwards found guilty. The lieutenant-criminal undertook the process at the instance of the procureur-general, and the student was liberated. "The principal accusations exhibited against Servetus were, First, his having asserted in his Ptolémée, that the Bible celebrated improperly the fertility of the land of Canaan, whilst it was unfruitful and barren. Secondly, his having called one God in three persons a Cerberus, a threeheaded monster. Thirdly, his having taught that God was all, and that all was God. Servetus did not deny the truth of the principal accusations, but whilst in prison called the Trinity a Cerberus, a three-headed monster; he also grossly insulted Calvin, and was so fearful that death would be the punishment of heresy at Geneva, as well as at other places, that he presented a petition on the 22d of August, in which he defended the cause of ignorance, and urged the necessity of toleration: the procureur-general replied to him in about eight days, and no doubt did it very ill. Servetus was condemned upon extracts from his books, De Trinitatis Erroribus, and In Ptolemæum Commentarius; from the edition of the Bible which he had pub lished in 1552; from his book Restitutio Christianismi; and from a letter which he had written to Abel Paupin, a minister of Geneva.* "The enemies of Calvin exulted in this affair, and, for once, with the appearance of reason: but their efforts injured the cause of Servetus; they endeavoured to bring him before * "A copy of the sentence pronounced against Servetus will not be uninteresting to the reader. We Syndics, judges of all criminal causes in this city, having witnessed the process made and instituted against you, on the part of our lieutenant in the aforesaid causes, instituted against you, Michael de Villeneuve, in the kingdom of Arragon, in Spain, in which your voluntary confessions in our hands, made and often reiterated, and the books before us produced, plainly show that you, Servetus, have published false and heretical doctrines; and also despising all remonstrances and corrections, have, with a perverse inclination, sown and divulged them in a book published against God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit; in sum, against all the true foundations of the Christian religion, and have thereby tried to introduce schism into the Church of God, by which many souls may have been ruined and lost, things horrible, frightful, scandalous, and infectious, and have not been ashamed to set yourself in array against the Divine Majesty and the Holy Trinity; but rather have obstinately employed yourself in infecting the world with your heresies, and stinking heretical poison; a case and crime of heresy grievous and detestable, and deserving of corporal punishment. For these and other just reasons moving us, and being desirous to purge the church of God from such infection, and to cut off from it so rotten a member, having had good participation of counsel with our citizens, and having invoked the name of God that we may make a right judgment, sitting upon the tribunal of our predecessors, having God and the Holy Scriptures before our eyes, saying in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, by that definitive sentence, which we here give by condemned to be bound and led to Chamthis writing, you Michael Servetus, are pel, and there fastened to a stake and burned alive with your book written with your hand, and printed, until your body shall be reduced to ashes, and your days thus finished as an example to others who might commit the same things; and we command you our lieutenant to put this our sentence into execution. Read by the seigneur syndic D'Arlord.'" the Council of Two Hundred, in which, however, they did not succeed. "The Council of Vienne claimed Servetus, who, being left at liberty to return to his ancient judges, preferred the chance of a more favourable judgment at Geneva, to the certainty of suffering the capital punishment pronounced against him at Vienne, where he had been condemned to be burned. "To the Council of Geneva justice ought to be done with respect to this transaction, though we may blame the principles of its jurisprudence: they neglected nothing to discover the truth; they multiplied their interrogatories; they employed all possible means to make Servetus retract; and, as they experienced the inutility of these measures, they wrote to the reformed Swiss cantons for their advice. Is it credible? they were unanimous in exhorting the council to punish the wicked man, and to put it out of his power to increase heresy. If Calvin may be supposed to have influenced the Council of Geneva, shall he domineer at his pleasure over four councils of four different states, and all the persons who were consulted by them in forming their judgments? Shall the fury imputed to him render so many magistrates cruel, whom he had never known? It must be confessed, that the intolerant spirit of the age dictated the sentence of Servetus at Geneva; but, it is not equally evident that Calvin was the author of that atrocity, and that he laboured with ardour to accomplish it. "On the 27th of October, Servetus was condemned to be burnt alive; and the sentence was executed on the same day. "Some general observations on the conduct of the council, and that of Calvin, may serve to silence those persons who are disposed to fancy themselves considerable, because they have calumniated a state, and a great man." To be concluded in our next.) FOR THE CHRISTIAN ADVOCATE. Mr. Editor,-With your leave, a constant reader of your miscellany wishes to offer for publication in that work a few thoughts ON THE INFLUENCE AND IMPORTANCE OF HABIT. Man in his maturity has been said to be "a bundle of habits." We begin to form them at the hour of our birth, and they are seldom changed after the age of forty.-Before twenty, very many of them are fixed for life. Their influence and importance are unspeakable; and the manner in which they are contracted and exercised is not easily explained. We wonder when we see a man walking a rope, or a wire, suspended twenty feet from the ground: but we forget, or do not know, that every one of us walks on the ground itself, by the very same art of balancing the body which strikes us as so singular an attainment in the rope dancer; and that we learned to do this at a period beyond the reach of our memory. Look at an infant of a year old, when he is beginning to walk, and you will see him practising in precisely the same way with him who is taking his first lessons on the slack wire. The speed, as well as facility, with which we perform voluntary actions by the power of habit, is truly wonderful. Every motion or direction of the pen with which I now writeand I write very fast-requires a distinct volition. This, however, is nothing to what takes place in playing a rapid and complex tune on the Piano, or in swift running, or in speaking with eloquence, or singing with melody. In none of these operations is there a motion, or a modification of a muscle, which does not require an act of the will to make it what it is. Every muscular movement, in the cases specified, and in all of a similar nature, is clearly voluntary; since it ceases, or is changed, exactly as the will directs. Yet the volitions concerned in these opera |