Michael Servetus: Exegete of Divine History

Normative theological systems may be influenced by philosophical considerations but must be based upon Scriptural authority. While different Christian denominations place varying degrees of emphasis upon the primacy of the Bible, or suggest contrasting methods of interpretation, Scripture remains the criterion of the theological formulations. If one alters normative thinking, one must necessarily change the existing relationship with Scripture through reinterpretation of at least key passages relevant to those modifications. At a result, it is often possible, through an examination of an approach to the Bible, to determine the limits of a system's orthodoxy or heterodoxy. Michael Servetus, one of the founders of the Antitrinitarian/Unitarian movement, and persona non grata in sixteenth-century orthodox circles, has been analyzed from the vantage point of the Unitarian movement, as well as within the limits of his own experience, but nowhere can the reader find a systematic presentation of this radical Spaniard's approach to Scripture.1 This unfortunately neglected aspect of Servetus' thought is of exceptional importance, for it is through such an examination that it is possible to determine not only the limits of his Trinitarianism, but also his interest in millenarianism, his unique concept of prophecy, his radical exegesis and his sense of history. In other words, the long, the short and the wide of Servetus' system can be determined through an examination of the function of Scripture in his thought. This paper will present exactly such an examination. In the introduction he prepared for his edition of the famous Pagninus Polyglot Bible,2 Servetus presented views concerning the Bible as a prime religious document, and set down several principles of Scriptural analysis and exegesis. Foremost in Servetus' mind was his desire to bolster and support his modalistic Trinitarian views.3 This was no simple undertaking considering that the early 1. The best general biography of the difficult Spaniard's life is Roland H. Bainton, Michael Servetus; The Hunted Heretic (Boston, 1953). For a traditional treatment of Servetus as part of a larger Unitarian tradition see volume 1 of E. M. Wilbur, History of Unitarianism (Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1945). Historians who have dealt with Servetus have mentioned the existence and general nature of his exegetical views, but there has been almost Po attempt to see these ideas as part of a larger coherent pattern involving Servetus' other radical views. The most complete treatment is Anonymous, An Impartial History of Michael Servetus, Burned Alive at Geneva for Heresy (London, 1724). 2. Michael Servetus, Biblia Sacra ex Santis Pagnini tralatione . . . (Lyon, 1542). Because there are several different editions of this work, all citations will be based upon Scripture passage number, and not page number of this specific edition. 3. While Servetus' Trinitarian views are very complicated, even within the framework of this short article we can present some of the limits of these sometimes contradictory ideas. While there are countless locations where Servetus attacked the notion of the Trinity, he was certainly no Unitarian: "And so I admit Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, three persons in one Godhead, and this is the true Trinity." Concerning the Errors of the Trinity (Hagenau, 1531) If. 64b. On the other hand he certainly was not an orthodox Trinitarian either. The following citations demonstrate that the Spaniard's views were generally modalist and subordinationist: . . . there are three wonderful dispositions of God, in each of which His divinity shines forth, and from this you might well understand a Trinity." Errors If. 28b-29a. The ante-Nicene quality of Servetus' views is often quite apparent: "And Peter in the Clcmentine Recognitions speaks not of three equal beings but a threefold invocation of the divine name." Errors lf. 8b. In yet other places Servetus spoke of "'multiformes deitatis aspectus", Errors If. 29a, of various "species" of deity, ibid. Mr. Friedman is assistant professor of history in Kent State University, Kent, Ohio.