ought not to be massacred because they are in error. In his petition to the Magistrates of Geneva he shows That the persecution of a man for the doctrine of scripture, or for any question arising from it, is a new invention, unknown to the apostles and their disciples, and to the ancient church.' Thus it appears it was his opinion that men should be left to enquire concerning the doctrines of scripture, or any questions arising from those doctrines, freely, without incurring any pains or penalties.

I have barely selected the leading opinions of the Doctor, those for which he suffered martyrdom. It is not necessary to descend to his views upon more subordinate points, and it would be extremely difficult to ascertain what they were. In the opinions I have noticed what is there worthy of death or even of bonds? In the present more liberal age, and this more tolerant country, opinions deemed equally heretical are avowed and defended with impunity; and what injury does any person sustain by the exercise of this liberty? Whether the opinions of Servetus were true or false, and men of learning and piety will differ on that point, he had an unquestionable right to propagate them. Human laws cannot change the nature of

justice, though they may subvert justice; they cannot disprove, though they may destroy, the rights of christians. By such proscribing and unjust laws was Servetus condemned.

Z 3

CHAPTER VII.

SERVETUS VINDICATED.

Sect. 1. On the ground of natural right. Sect. 2. On the ground of reason and scripture, which authorize the liberty he used, and approve his leading doctrines.

Sect, 3. On the

By the example

Sect. 5. By the

ground of antiquity. Sect. 4. of Calvin and his associates. effects produced by his writings and sufferings. Sect. 6. By the countenance his leading doctrines have received, from some of the greatest men, since that time. Sect. 7. The failings of Servetus did not arise from a vicious principle.

THOUGH it is presumed the circumstances placcd before the reader, in the preceding chapters, will, upon an impartial examination, vindicate the character of Servetus, it is thought proper to enter into a more direct, though concise, defence of his conduct, in the avowal and propagation of his most leading doctrines.

His

opinions were at that time thought singular and dangerous; in the same light they are still viewed by many christians, but the question is, has not every man a right to form his own opinions, and, if he think proper, to publish them to the world? Ought not every honest mau to be protected in the full enjoyment, and free exerof this right? Is it not every man's duty to judge for himself, and can he avow any other opinions than those he believes, without being a hypocrite? The vindication of Servetus involves a defence of the dearest rights of christians, the right of private judgment, and of acting according to the dictates of. their own conscience. Either he must be vindicated or the act of toleration, which allows liberty of conscience, must be condemned, and all who wish to think and act for themselves in religious matters, left to the merciless rage of bigots and persecutors.

Z 4

SECTION 1.

On the ground of natural right.

Every man has an unquestionable right to judge for himself in all matters of religion and conscience. No one can have a right to dictate to another what he shall believe, and how he shall worship God. Every man has a natural claim to liberty of speech: this is a right common to all men: no one can give a reason why he should exercise this right that will not apply to all men. It is of no use saying men have a right to judge for themselves, if you will not allow them to express their judgment. Freedom of thought and action, independence of mind and conduct, stamp dignity on the human character, they ennoble man. Servetus claimed nothing more than his natural rights, as a creature endowed with reason and conscience. He chose to use the reason God had given him, to form his own opinions on religious subjects, to follow the dictates of his conscience. It was a noble choice, and infamy attaches to the men who punished him for making it. He attempted not to judge for others, to restrain them from the exercise of the same