SECTION VI.

An account of the Doctor from his leaving Paris to his removal to Vienne.

Leaving Paris, Servetus went to Lyons, where he made some stay. He made a journey to Avignon, returned to Lyons. and at last settled at Charlieu, where he practised medicine about three years. He is accused of committing some blunder at Charlieu, which occasioned his leaving that place. Bolsec, the only writer who mentions it, does not say what it was. This undefined charge rests solely on the testimony of one man; and he seems, judging from his language, to write with no goodwill to the Doctor. He says This Servetus was arrogant and insolent, as those have affirmed who knew him at Charlieu;' but while he accuses him of arrogance and insolence, on the ground of what others affirmed, he neither mentions who the persons were that affirmed this, nor produces any instances of his arrogant and insolent behaviour. It is a mere charge without proof. No doubt the singularity of his opinions might create him enemies at Charlieu: his daring to think freely, and contradict their notions,

would seem to them a proof of arrogance and insolence. Bolsec says further, that he was forced to leave that place on account of his extravagances;' but he explains not what he means by extravagances. The Doctor has never been accused of extravagance in his mode of living. It must relate to his opinions, either medical or theological, perhaps to both. His opinions and conversation would appear extravagant to bigots and the slaves of superstition; and it, is probable they would treat him in such a manner as would render it eligible for him once more to change his residence.

From Charlieu Servetus returned to Lyons, where he met with Peter Palmier, archbishop of Vienne, in Dauphine. This prelate had been some time ago at Paris either a friend or pupil of the Doctor, who had given him lectures on Ptolemy's geography. Being a great lover of learned men, and fond of Servetus, he pressed him to go to Vienne, to practice physic, and offered him an apartment in his palace. This offer the Doctor accepted.

His friendship with the archbishop, and residence in his palace, led the enemies of Servetus to reproach him with hypocrisy: as if two men of learning and liberal sentiments could not

live together in peace, however different their opinions on certain subjects, without one of them being a hypocrite. 'Not knowing (says Mr. Robinson) either his or his patron's principles of religious liberty, knowing for certain that one was what they called a popish prelate, and the other an antitrinitarian anabaptist; and judging of the conduct of both by their own maxims, they had no notion of two such men living together each in the enjoyment of his own religious principles, and neither presuming to offer any force to the other. This prelate seems to have been one of those, of whom there have been numbers in the catholic church, who think freely but do not act consistently, who regulate their own private conduct by principles the most virtuous and liberal, but who for reasons best known to themselves, adjust all their public measures by established rules of despotism, which they inwardly disapprove. It belongs to the great being alone to combine all the circumstances that go to make up the merit or demerit of such men: and to him alone it must be left to pass the definitive sentence. If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door,' Happy would it be, if christians of all parties, would treat each other with the forbearance and

respect which this roman catholic archbishop, and antitrinitarian baptist, notwithstanding the known discordance of their opinions, appear to have manifested during their long intimacy.

SECTION VII.

An account of Servetus during his residence at Vienne.

During a residence of about thirteen years, the Doctor seems to have been fully employed at Vienne, either in the duties of his profession, or in some literary occupation. During that period he lived upon good terms with his right reverend patron, enjoying safety under his auspices, and might have continued to have done so had not his repose been destroyed by the wicked machinations of his enemies.

From Vienne he made frequent journies to Lyons, where he revised an edition of the Bible in folio, printed by Hugo de la Parte, to which he prefixed a preface, and added marginal notes. He likewise corrected several other books for the press, for John Frellon, a bookseller at Lyons, and translated some treatises on grammar from latin into Spanish.

Frellon, the bookseller just mentioned, was an admirer of Calvin. By some means he engaged Servetus to enter into an epistolary correspondence with that reformer. Calvin conducted the correspondence under the fictitious name of Charles D'Espeville, and the letters passed through the hands of Frellon.

Calvin says that Servetus sent him the three following questions from Lyons, and desired him to answer them. 1. Whether the man Jesus who was crucified, is the Son of God; and what is the foundation of that Sonship? 2. Whether the kingdom of Christ is in men? when may a man be said to enter into it, and when to be regenerated? 3. Whether the baptism Christ instituted ought to be received in faith, even as the supper is? and to what purpose these were instituted under the new covenant? Calvin answered these queries, but Servetus, far from being satisfied with his explications, wrote him a second letter, containing a confutation of his answers. Calvin being much displeased with that letter, made a sharp reply to it, as he himself owns. It seems he could not bear the liberty which the Doctor took with him, in controverting his opinions, and probably felt himself pushed hard by his arguments. Consequently, he determined to break off the correspondence, which