be insensible that it is highly disreputable for the world to know that the founder of their party, the champion of their peculiar dogmas, was an unrelenting persecutor; yet they themselves cease not to make known, from age to age, the persecuting conduct of catholics, in former times; nor does their uncharitableness at the present time entitle them to expect that the unchristian temper and cruel deeds of their great leader should be forgotten.

Apprehending that the case of Servetus is not sufficiently known to the generality of christians, and that many have not so much as heard of it, I have been led to compose the following work, which I hope will excite a greater and more general abhorrence of bigotry and persecution. Though many accounts of Servetus have been published, I know not that any thing has appeared as an avowed apology for him, at least in our own language: hence it is presumed this volume will not be unacceptable to the candid and impartial reader.

The design of the following pages is not to stigmatize Calvin and his colleagues; but to vindicate an injured character. That Calvin was a man of learning, piety and zeal is heartily admitted. His learning, piety, and laudable exertions to promote the reformation, are de

Mr. Fuller has undertaken to prove that Calvinism has a superior moral tendency to Unitarianism; and hence concludes that the former is true and the latter false. In reply to his arguments Mr. Kentish has shown that the principles of Unitarianism are, in their own nature, calculated to produce better moral effects than those of Calvinism. Dr. Toulmin has replied to Mr. Fuller in a different way, he has proved, from the Acts of the Apostles, that the discourses of the first preachers of the gospel were strictly Unitarian, and contained none of the peculiar doctrines of Calvinism: yet that they produced the best moral effects. This is carrying the argument further back than Mr. Fuller seems to have intended carrying it; but it is certainly placing it on its true ground. It may he proper to define the phrase 'moral tendency.' It is certainly taken in too restricted a sense by modern Calvinists, as if it did not include the exercise of that candor, and christian charity, which embrace, with brotherly affection, all who fear God and work righteousness. Moral effects ought not to be regarded as merely comprehending a regular attendance on the public ordinances and instrumental duties of christianity, a refraining from gross sins, and an abstinence from the levities and fashionable amuse

ments of the world; but as including every be nign temper, generous disposition, and an active course of unassuming virtue and goodness: especially the moral effects produced by christianity include the exercise of gentleness and kind treatment towards all men, unabating liberality of sentiment and conduct, and brotherly love towards all who believe and obey the gospel, however much they may differ from us in opinion. If this definition be just, Calvinism has sadly failed of producing the moral effects which characterize the religion of Jesus; for, it is to be feared, there are but few Calvinists who would, without scruple, receive and treat, in all respects, as their christian brethren, those christians who reject, though from the sincerest regard to truth, the peculiarities of their system. The moral effects of the gospel certainly do not include austerity of manners, that self-righteous disposition which produces a contempt of others, a censorious condemning spirit, illiberality of sentiment, and uncandid and unkind treatment of those who differ from us: yet these things have frequently been associated with the boasted moral effects of Calvinism. Unitarians have no need to fear the agitation of the question, whether they or their opponents be most conspicuous for the exercise of candor and beneve.

lence, and the general spirit of christianity? But there seems something invidious in this mode of arguing, therefore I desist from it; yet it is the mode of deciding on the truth or falsehood of religious systems which some Calvinists are fond of adopting.

Could we bring ourselves to adopt the uncandid spirit and mode of reasoning adopted by our opponents, we might contend that the tendency of Calvinism is morally bad, that it leads to persecution, cruelty and murder, and prove it from the conduct of Calvin and his associates; but we are willing to impute their persecuting temper and conduct, not to their particular sys tem, nor to vicious principles generated by their peculiar doctrines, but to the ignorance and barbarous temper of the age in which they lived; and we only wish that Calvinists would exercise a small degree of the same candor when prying into the defects of Unitarians If it be still contended that the truth of religious sys tems is to be determined by the temper and conduct of those who adopt them, we must insist that Calvinism ought to be judged of by the spirit and conduct of Calvin, from whom it derived its name. We find the moral tendency of christianity fully exemplified in the temper and conduct of Jesus and his apostles, the

founders of that divine system. Our opponents contend that the truth or falsehood of opposite systems, under the christian name, is to be determined by their influence on those who profess them, by the moral effects they produce. Is it unfair then to say, using the argumentum ad hominem, that Calvinism is to be judged of by the spirit and conduct of John Calvin, and that its tendency is to produce bigotry, persecution and murder: that consequently it is false? I write thus barely to show the fallacy of Mr. Fuller's mode of deciding on particular religious systems. The following pages will furnish a sufficient specimen of the temper and conduct of the reformer of Geneva.

To avoid the trouble of frequent reference, I will give the reader an account, in the outset, of the sources from which I have drawn my information respecting Servetus, and the authorities on which the facts I have narrated, in the historic part of this work, are founded.

The history of Servetus in the Memoirs of literature, written by M. DE LA ROCHE, and afterwards augmented by him, and translated into French, in his Bibliotheque Angloise. tom. ii. part i. article vii.