diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | .gitattributes | 3 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 7319-h.zip | bin | 0 -> 141544 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 7319-h/7319-h.htm | 9907 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 7319.txt | 7487 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 7319.zip | bin | 0 -> 132172 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | LICENSE.txt | 11 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | README.md | 2 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/gsens10.txt | 6533 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/gsens10.zip | bin | 0 -> 133031 bytes |
9 files changed, 23943 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6833f05 --- /dev/null +++ b/.gitattributes @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +* text=auto +*.txt text +*.md text diff --git a/7319-h.zip b/7319-h.zip Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..6ab095b --- /dev/null +++ b/7319-h.zip diff --git a/7319-h/7319-h.htm b/7319-h/7319-h.htm new file mode 100644 index 0000000..569cd24 --- /dev/null +++ b/7319-h/7319-h.htm @@ -0,0 +1,9907 @@ +<?xml version="1.0" encoding="us-ascii"?> + +<!DOCTYPE html + PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" + "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd" > + +<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en"> + <head> + <title> + Good Sense Without God by Baron D'holbach + </title> + <style type="text/css" xml:space="preserve"> + + body { margin:5%; background:#faebd0; text-align:justify} + P { text-indent: 1em; margin-top: .25em; margin-bottom: .25em; } + H1,H2,H3,H4,H5,H6 { text-align: center; margin-left: 15%; margin-right: 15%; } + hr { width: 50%; text-align: center;} + .foot { margin-left: 20%; margin-right: 20%; text-align: justify; text-indent: -3em; font-size: 90%; } + blockquote {font-size: 97%; font-style: italic; margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%;} + .mynote {background-color: #DDE; color: #000; padding: .5em; margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 95%;} + .toc { margin-left: 10%; margin-bottom: .75em;} + .toc2 { margin-left: 20%;} + div.fig { display:block; margin:0 auto; text-align:center; } + div.middle { margin-left: 20%; margin-right: 20%; text-align: justify; } + .figleft {float: left; margin-left: 0%; margin-right: 1%;} + .figright {float: right; margin-right: 0%; margin-left: 1%;} + .pagenum {display:inline; font-size: 70%; font-style:normal; + margin: 0; padding: 0; position: absolute; right: 1%; + text-align: right;} + pre { font-style: italic; font-size: 90%; margin-left: 10%;} + +</style> + </head> + <body> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + +Project Gutenberg's Good Sense, by Paul Henri Thiry, Baron D'Holbach + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + + +Title: Good Sense + 1772 + +Author: Paul Henri Thiry, Baron D'Holbach + +Translator: Unknown + +Release Date: July 29, 2009 [EBook #7319] +Last Updated: January 25, 2013 + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: ASCII + +*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK GOOD SENSE *** + + + + +Produced by Freethought Archives, and David Widger + + + + + + +</pre> + <p> + <br /><br /> + </p> + <h1> + GOOD SENSE WITHOUT GOD: + </h1> + <h3> + OR + </h3> + <h2> + FREETHOUGHTS OPPOSED TO SUPERNATURAL IDEAS + </h2> + <p> + <br /><br /> + </p> + <h2> + By Baron D'holbach + </h2> + <p> + <br /><br /> + </p> + <h4> + "Freethinker's Library" Series <br /><br /> London: W. Stewart & Co. + <br /><br /> A Translation Of Baron D'holbach's "Le Bon Sens" + </h4> + <p> + <br /><br /> + </p> + <p> + Transcriber's note: this e-text is based on an undated English translation + of "Le Bon Sens" published c. 1900. The name of the translator was not + stated. + </p> + <p> + <br /> <br /> + </p> + <hr /> + <p> + <br /> <br /> + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + "<i>Atheism</i> leaves men to Sense, to Philosophy, to Laws, to + Reputation, all which may be guides to moral Virtue, tho' + Religion were not: but Superstition dismounts all these, and + erects an absolute Monarchy in the Minds of Men. Therefore, + Atheism did never perturb States; but Superstition hath been + the confusion of many. The causes of Superstition are + pleasing and sensual rights, and Ceremonies; Excess of + Pharisaical and outside holiness, Reverence to Traditions + and the stratagems of Prelates for their own Ambition and + Lucre."—<i>Lord Bacon.</i> +</pre> + <p> + <br /> <br /> + </p> + <hr /> + <p> + <br /> <br /> + </p> + <blockquote> + <p class="toc"> + <big><b>CONTENTS</b></big> + </p> + <p> + <br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_TOC"> DETAILED CONTENTS </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0001"> PUBLISHER'S NOTE </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0002"> THE AUTHOR'S PREFACE </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0003"> <big><b>GOOD SENSE WITHOUT GOD</b></big> </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0004"> APOLOGUE </a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0005"> 1. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0006"> 2. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0007"> 3. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0008"> 4. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0009"> 5. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0010"> 6. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0011"> 7. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0012"> 8. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0013"> 9. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0014"> 10. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0015"> 11. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0016"> 12. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0017"> 13. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0018"> 14. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0019"> 15. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0020"> 16. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0021"> 17. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0022"> 18. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0023"> 19. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0024"> 20. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0025"> 21. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0026"> 22. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0027"> 23. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0028"> 24. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0029"> 25. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0030"> 26. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0031"> 27. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0032"> 28. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0033"> 29. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0034"> 30. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0035"> 31. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0036"> 32. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0037"> 33. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0038"> 34. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0039"> 35. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0040"> 36. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0041"> 37. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0042"> 38. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0043"> 39. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0044"> 40. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0045"> 41. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0046"> 42. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0047"> 43. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0048"> 44. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0049"> 45. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0050"> 46. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0051"> 47. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0052"> 48. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0053"> 49. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0054"> 50. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0055"> 51. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0056"> 52. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0057"> 53. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0058"> 54. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0059"> 55. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0060"> 56. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0061"> 57. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0062"> 58. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0063"> 59. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0064"> 60. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0065"> 61. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0066"> 62. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0067"> 63. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0068"> 64. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0069"> 65. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0070"> 66. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0071"> 67. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0072"> 68. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0073"> 69. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0074"> 70. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0075"> 71. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0076"> 72. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0077"> 73. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0078"> 74. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0079"> 75. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0080"> 76. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0081"> 77. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0082"> 78. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0083"> 79. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0084"> 80. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0085"> 81. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0086"> 82. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0087"> 83. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0088"> 84. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0089"> 85. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0090"> 86. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0091"> 87. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0092"> 88. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0093"> 89. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0094"> 90. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0095"> 91. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0096"> 92. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0097"> 93. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0098"> 94. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0099"> 95. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0100"> 96. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0101"> 97. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0102"> 98. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0103"> 99. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0104"> 100. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0105"> 101. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0106"> 102. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0107"> 103. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0108"> 104. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0109"> 105. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0110"> 106. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0111"> 107. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0112"> 108. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0113"> 109. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0114"> 110. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0115"> 111. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0116"> 112. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0117"> 113. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0118"> 114. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0119"> 115. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0120"> 116. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0121"> 117. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0122"> 118. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0123"> 119. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0124"> 120. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0125"> 121. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0126"> 122. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0127"> 123. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0128"> 124. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0129"> 125. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0130"> 126. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0131"> 127. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0132"> 128. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0133"> 129. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0134"> 130. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0135"> 131. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0136"> 132. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0137"> 133. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0138"> 134. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0139"> 135. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0140"> 136. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0141"> 137. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0142"> 138. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0143"> 139. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0144"> 140. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0145"> 141. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0146"> 142. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0147"> 143. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0148"> 144. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0149"> 145. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0150"> 146. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0151"> 147. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0152"> 148. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0153"> 149. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0154"> 150. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0155"> 151. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0156"> 152. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0157"> 153. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0158"> 154. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0159"> 155. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0160"> 156. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0161"> 157. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0162"> 158. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0163"> 159. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0164"> 160. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0165"> 161. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0166"> 162. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0167"> 163. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0168"> 164. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0169"> 165. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0170"> 166. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0171"> 167. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0172"> 168. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0173"> 169. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0174"> 170. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0175"> 171. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0176"> 172. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0177"> 173. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0178"> 174. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0179"> 175. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0180"> 176. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0181"> 177. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0182"> 178. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0183"> 179. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0184"> 180. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0185"> 181. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0186"> 182. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0187"> 183. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0188"> 184. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0189"> 185. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0190"> 186. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0191"> 187. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0192"> 188. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0193"> 189. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0194"> 190. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0195"> 191. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0196"> 192. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0197"> 193. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0198"> 194. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0199"> 195. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0200"> 196. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0201"> 197. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0202"> 198. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0203"> 199. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0204"> 200. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0205"> 201. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0206"> 202. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0207"> 203. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0208"> 204. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0209"> 205. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0210"> 206. </a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> <br /> + </p> + <hr /> + <p> + <br /> <br /> + </p> + <p> + 1. APOLOGUE + </p> + <p> + 2. What is Theology? + </p> + <p> + 3. What is Theology? + </p> + <p> + 4. Man is not born with any ideas of Religion + </p> + <p> + 5. It is not necessary to believe in a God + </p> + <p> + 6. Religion is founded on credulity + </p> + <p> + 7. All religion is an absurdity + </p> + <p> + 8. The idea of God is impossible + </p> + <p> + 9. On the Origin of Superstition + </p> + <p> + 10. On the Origin of all Religion + </p> + <p> + 11. Religious fears expose men to become a prey to imposters + </p> + <p> + 12. Religion seduces ignorance by the aid of the marvellous + </p> + <p> + 13. Religion seduces ignorance by the aid of the marvellous + </p> + <p> + 14. No Religion, if not ages of Stupidity and Barbarism + </p> + <p> + 15. All Religion was produced by the desire of domination + </p> + <p> + 16. What serves as a basis to Religion is most uncertain + </p> + <p> + 17. It is impossible to be convinced of the existence of a God + </p> + <p> + 18. It is impossible to be convinced of the existence of a God + </p> + <p> + 19. The existence of God is not proved + </p> + <p> + 20. It explains nothing to say, that God is a spirit + </p> + <p> + 21. Spirituality is an absurdity p> + </p> + <p> + 22. Whatever exists is derived from Matter + </p> + <p> + 23. What is the metaphysical God of modern Theology? + </p> + <p> + 24. Less unreasonable to adore the Sun, than adore a spiritual Deity + </p> + <p> + 25. A spiritual Deity is incapable of volition and action + </p> + <p> + 26. What is God? + </p> + <p> + 27. Some remarkable Contradictions in Theology + </p> + <p> + 28. To adore God, is to adore a fiction + </p> + <p> + 29. Atheism is authorised by the infinity of God + </p> + <p> + 30. Believing not safer than not believing in God + </p> + <p> + 31. Belief in God is a habit acquired in infancy + </p> + <p> + 32. Belief in God is a prejudice ov successive generations + </p> + <p> + 33. On the Origin of Prejudices + </p> + <p> + 34. On the effects of Prejudices + </p> + <p> + 35. Theology must be instilled before the age of reason + </p> + <p> + 36. The wonders of nature do not prove the existence of God + </p> + <p> + 37. Nature may be explained by natural causes + </p> + <p> + 38. Nature may be explained by natural causes + </p> + <p> + 39. The world has never been created: Matter moves of itself + </p> + <p> + 40. The world has never been created: Matter moves of itself + </p> + <p> + 41. Motion is essential to Matter: no Spiritual Mover + </p> + <p> + 42. The existence of Man does not prove the existence of God + </p> + <p> + 43. Neither Man nor the Universe are the effects of chance + </p> + <p> + 44. Order of the Universe does not prove the existence of a God + </p> + <p> + 45. Order of the Universe does not prove the existence of a God + </p> + <p> + 46. Absurd to adore a divine intelligence + </p> + <p> + 47. Qualities given God contrary to the Essence attributed to him + </p> + <p> + 48. Qualities given God contrary to the Essence attributed to him + </p> + <p> + 49. Absurd to say that the human race is the object of the Universe + </p> + <p> + 50. God is not made for Man, nor Man for God + </p> + <p> + 51. Untrue that the object of the Universe was to render Man happy + </p> + <p> + 52. What is called Providence is a word without meaning + </p> + <p> + 53. This pretended Providence is the enemy of Man + </p> + <p> + 54. The world is not governed by an intelligent being + </p> + <p> + 55. God cannot be considered immutable + </p> + <p> + 56. Good and evil are the necessary effects of natural causes + </p> + <p> + 57. The consolations of Theology and paradise are imaginary + </p> + <p> + 58. Another romantic reverie + </p> + <p> + 59. Vain that Theology attempts to clear its God from human defects + </p> + <p> + 60. Impossible to believe God is of infinite goodness and power + </p> + <p> + 61. Impossible to believe God is of infinite goodness and power + </p> + <p> + 62. Theology's God a monster of absurdity and injustice + </p> + <p> + 63. All Religion inspires contemptible fears + </p> + <p> + 64. Religion, the same as the most somber and servile Superstition + </p> + <p> + 65. The love of God is impossible + </p> + <p> + 66. An eternally tormenting God is a most detestable being + </p> + <p> + 67. Theology is a tissue of palpable contradictions + </p> + <p> + 68. The pretended works of God do not prove Divine Perfections + </p> + <p> + 69. The perfection of God and the pretended creation of angels + </p> + <p> + 70. Theology preaches Omnipotence of its God, yet makes impotent + </p> + <p> + 71. Per all religious systems, God is capricious and foolish + </p> + <p> + 72. It is absurd to say that Evil does not proceed from God + </p> + <p> + 73. The foreknowledge of God proves his cruelty + </p> + <p> + 74. Absurdity of the stories concerning Original Sin, and Satan + </p> + <p> + 75. The Devil, like Religion, was invented to enrich the priests + </p> + <p> + 76. God has no right to punish man + </p> + <p> + 77. It is absurd to say, that the conduct of God a mystery + </p> + <p> + 78. Ought we look for consolation, from the author of our misery? + </p> + <p> + 79. God who punishes the faults which he might have prevented + </p> + <p> + 80. What is called Free Will is an absurdity + </p> + <p> + 81. But we must not conclude that Society has no right to punish + </p> + <p> + 82. Refutation of the arguments in favour of Free Will + </p> + <p> + 83. Refutation of the arguments in favour of Free Will + </p> + <p> + 84. God, if there were a God, would not be free + </p> + <p> + 85. According to Theology, man is not free a single instant + </p> + <p> + 86. There is no evil, and no sin, but must be attributed to God + </p> + <p> + 87. The prayers prove dissatisfaction of the divine will + </p> + <p> + 88. Absurd to imagine repair of misfortune in another world + </p> + <p> + 89. Theology justifies the evil permitted by its God + </p> + <p> + 90. Jehovah, exterminations prove an unjust and barbarous God + </p> + <p> + 91. Is God a generous, equitable, and tender father? + </p> + <p> + 92. Man's life, deposes against goodness of a pretended God + </p> + <p> + 93. We owe no gratitude to what is called <i>Providence</i> + </p> + <p> + 94. It is folly to suppose that Man is the favourite of God + </p> + <p> + 95. A comparison between Man and brutes + </p> + <p> + 96. There are no animals so detestable as Tyrants + </p> + <p> + 97. A refutation of the excellence of Man + </p> + <p> + 98. An oriental Tale + </p> + <p> + 99. It is madness to see nothing but the goodness of God + </p> + <p> + 100. What is the Soul? + </p> + <p> + 101. The existence of a <i>Soul</i> is an absurd supposition + </p> + <p> + 102. It is evident that Man dies <i>in toto</i> + </p> + <p> + 103. Incontestible arguments against the Spirituality of the Soul + </p> + <p> + 104. On the absurdity of the supernatural causes + </p> + <p> + 105. It is false that Materialism degrades + </p> + <p> + 106. It is false that Materialism degrades + </p> + <p> + 107. Idea of future life only useful to priest's trade + </p> + <p> + 108. It is false that the idea of a future life is consoling + </p> + <p> + 109. All religious principles are derived from the imagination + </p> + <p> + 110. Religion a system to reconciles contradictions by mysteries + </p> + <p> + 111. Absurdity of all Mysteries, invented for the interests of Priests + </p> + <p> + 112, Absurdity of all Mysteries, invented for the interests of Priests + </p> + <p> + 113. Absurdity of all Mysteries, invented for the interests of Priests + </p> + <p> + 114. An universal God ought to have revealed an universal Religion + </p> + <p> + 115. Religion is unnecessary, as it is unintelligible + </p> + <p> + 116. All Religions are rendered ridiculous by the multitude of creeds + </p> + <p> + 117. Opinion of a famous Theologian + </p> + <p> + 118. The God of the Deists is not less contradictory + </p> + <p> + 119. Aged belief in a Deity does not prove the existence of God + </p> + <p> + 120. All Gods are savage: all Religions are monuments of ignorance + </p> + <p> + 121. All religious usages bear marks of stupidity and barbarism + </p> + <p> + 122. The more a religion is ancient and general, the more suspect + </p> + <p> + 123. Scepticism in religious matters from very superficial study + </p> + <p> + 124. Revelations examined + </p> + <p> + 125. Where is the proof that God ever shewed himself or spoke to Men + </p> + <p> + 126. There is nothing that proves miracles to have been ever performed + </p> + <p> + 127. Strange that God spoke differently to different sects + </p> + <p> + 128. Obscurity and suspicious origin of oracles + </p> + <p> + 129. Absurdity of all miracles + </p> + <p> + 130. Refutation of the reasoning of Pascal on miracles + </p> + <p> + 131. Every new revelation is necessarily false + </p> + <p> + 132. Blood of martyrs testifies <i>against</i> the truth of miracles + </p> + <p> + 133. Fanaticism of martyrs, and the interested zeal of missionaries + </p> + <p> + 134. Theology makes its God an enemy to Reason and Common Sense + </p> + <p> + 135. Faith irreconcilable with Reason; and Reason preferable to Faith + </p> + <p> + 136. To what absurd and ridiculous sophisms the religious are reduced + </p> + <p> + 137. Ought a man to believe, on the assurance of another man + </p> + <p> + 138. Faith can take root only in feeble, ignorant, or slothful minds + </p> + <p> + 139. That one Religion has greater pretensions to truth an absurdity + </p> + <p> + 140. Religion is unnecessary to Morality + </p> + <p> + 141. Religion the weakest barrier that can be opposed to the passions + </p> + <p> + 142. Honour is a more salutary and powerful bond than Religion + </p> + <p> + 143. Religion does not restrain the passions of kings + </p> + <p> + 144. Origin of "the divine right of kings" + </p> + <p> + 145. Religion is fatal to political ameliorations + </p> + <p> + 146. Christianity preaching implicit obedience to despotism + </p> + <p> + 147. One object of religious principles: eternize the tyranny of kings + </p> + <p> + 148. Fatal it is to persuade kings they are responsible to God alone + </p> + <p> + 149. A devout king is the scourge of his kingdom + </p> + <p> + 150. Tyranny finds Religion a weak obstacle to the despair of the people + </p> + <p> + 151. Religion favours the wickedness of princes + </p> + <p> + 152. What is an enlightened Sovereign? + </p> + <p> + 153. Of the prevailing passions and crimes of the priesthood + </p> + <p> + 154. The quackery of priests + </p> + <p> + 155. Religion has corrupted Morality, and produced innumerable evils + </p> + <p> + 156. Every Religion is intolerant + </p> + <p> + 157. The evils of a state Religion + </p> + <p> + 158. Religion legitimates and authorizes crime + </p> + <p> + 159. The argument, that evils attributed to Religion are faults of men + </p> + <p> + 160. Religion is incompatible with Morality + </p> + <p> + 161. The Morality of the Gospel is impracticable + </p> + <p> + 162. A society of Saints would be impossible + </p> + <p> + 163. Human nature is not depraved + </p> + <p> + 164. Concerning the effects of Jesus Christ's mission + </p> + <p> + 165. The remission of sins was invented for the interest of priests + </p> + <p> + 166. Who fear God? + </p> + <p> + 167. Hell is an absurd invention + </p> + <p> + 168. The bad foundation of religious morals + </p> + <p> + 169. Christian Charity, as preached and practised by Theologians!!! + </p> + <p> + 170. Confession, priestcraft's gold mine + </p> + <p> + 171. Supposition of the existence of a God unnecessary to Morality + </p> + <p> + 172. Supernatural Morality are fatal to the public welfare + </p> + <p> + 173. The union of Church and State is a calamity + </p> + <p> + 174. National Religions are ruinous + </p> + <p> + 175. Religion paralyses Morality + </p> + <p> + 176. Fatal consequences of Devotion + </p> + <p> + 177. The idea of a future life is not consoling to man + </p> + <p> + 178. An Atheist is fully as conscientious as a religious man + </p> + <p> + 179. An Atheistical king far preferable to a religious king + </p> + <p> + 180. Philosophy produces Morality + </p> + <p> + 181. Religious opinions have little influence upon conduct + </p> + <p> + 182. Reason leads man to Atheism + </p> + <p> + 183. Fear alone makes Theists + </p> + <p> + 184. Can we, and ought we, to love God? + </p> + <p> + 185. God and Religion are proved to be absurdities + </p> + <p> + 186. The existence of God, has not yet been demonstrated + </p> + <p> + 187. Priests are more actuated by self-interest, than unbelievers + </p> + <p> + 188. Presumption, and badness, more in priests, than in Atheists + </p> + <p> + 189. Prejudices last but for a time + </p> + <p> + 190. What if priests the apostles of reason + </p> + <p> + 191. If Philosophy were substituted for Religion! + </p> + <p> + 192. Recantation of an unbeliever at the point of death proves nothing + </p> + <p> + 193. It is not true that Atheism breaks the bonds of society + </p> + <p> + 194. Refutation of the opinion, that Religion necessary for the vulgar + </p> + <p> + 195. Logical systems are not adapted to the capacity of the vulgar + </p> + <p> + 196. On the futility and danger of Theology + </p> + <p> + 197. On the evils produced by implicit faith + </p> + <p> + 198. On the evils produced by implicit faith + </p> + <p> + 199. All Religions were established by impostors, in days of ignorance + </p> + <p> + 200. All Religions borrow from one another ridiculous ceremonies + </p> + <p> + 201. Theology has always diverted philosophy from its right path + </p> + <p> + 202. Theology explains nothing + </p> + <p> + 203. Theology has always fettered Morality, and retarded progress + </p> + <p> + 204. Theology has always fettered Morality, and retarded progress + </p> + <p> + 205. Religion is an extravagance and a calamity + </p> + <p> + 206. Religion prevents us from seeing the true causes of misfortunes + </p> + </blockquote> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0001" id="link2H_4_0001"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + PUBLISHER'S NOTE + </h2> + <p> + The chief design in reprinting this translation, is to preserve "<i>the + strongest atheistical work</i>" for present and future generations of + English Freethinkers. + </p> + <p> + The real author was, unquestionably, Paul Thyry; Baron D'Holbach, and not + John Meslier, to whom this work has been wrongly attributed, under the + title of "Le Bon Sens" (Common Sense). + </p> + <p> + In 1770, Baron D'Holbach published his masterpiece, "Systeme de la + Nature," which for a long time passed as the posthumous work of M. de + Mirabaud. That text-book of "Atheistical Philosophy" caused a great + sensation, and two years later, 1772, the Baron published this excellent + abridgment of it, freed from arbitrary ideas; and by its clearness of + expression, facility, and precision of style, rendered it most suitable + for the average student. + </p> + <p> + "Le Bon Sens" was privately printed in Amsterdam, and the author's name + was kept a profound secret; hence, Baron D'Holbach escaped persecution. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0002" id="link2H_4_0002"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + THE AUTHOR'S PREFACE + </h2> + <p> + When we examine the opinions of men, we find that nothing is more + uncommon, than common sense; or, in other words, they lack judgment to + discover plain truths, or to reject absurdities, and palpable + contradictions. We have an example of this in Theology, a system revered + in all countries by a great number of men; an object regarded by them as + most important, and indispensable to happiness. An examination of the + principles upon which this pretended system is founded, forces us to + acknowledge, that these principles are only suppositions, imagined by + ignorance, propagated by enthusiasm or knavery, adopted by timid + credulity, preserved by custom which never reasons, and revered solely + because not understood. + </p> + <p> + In a word, whoever uses common sense upon religious opinions, and will + bestow on this inquiry the attention that is commonly given to most + subjects, will easily perceive that Religion is a mere castle in the air. + Theology is ignorance of natural causes; a tissue of fallacies and + contradictions. In every country, it presents romances void of + probability, the hero of which is composed of impossible qualities. His + name, exciting fear in all minds, is only a vague word, to which, men + affix ideas or qualities, which are either contradicted by facts, or + inconsistent. + </p> + <p> + Notions of this being, or rather, <i>the word</i> by which he is + designated, would be a matter of indifference, if it did not cause + innumerable ravages in the world. But men, prepossessed with the opinion + that this phantom is a reality of the greatest interest, instead of + concluding wisely from its incomprehensibility, that they are not bound to + regard it, infer on the contrary, that they must contemplate it, without + ceasing, and never lose sight of it. Their invincible ignorance, upon this + subject, irritates their curiosity; instead of putting them upon guard + against their imagination, this ignorance renders them decisive, dogmatic, + imperious, and even exasperates them against all, who oppose doubts to the + reveries which they have begotten. + </p> + <p> + What perplexity arises, when it is required to solve an insolvable + problem; unceasing meditation upon an object, impossible to understand, + but in which however he thinks himself much concerned, cannot but excite + man, and produce a fever in his brain. Let interest, vanity, and ambition, + co-operate ever so little with this unfortunate turn of mind, and society + must necessarily be disturbed. This is the reason that so many nations + have often been the scene of extravagances of senseless visionaries, who, + believing their empty speculations to be eternal truths, and publishing + them as such, have kindled the zeal of princes and their subjects, and + made them take up arms for opinions, represented to them as essential to + the glory of the Deity. In all parts of our globe, fanatics have cut each + other's throats, publicly burnt each other, committed without a scruple + and even as a duty, the greatest crimes, and shed torrents of blood. For + what? To strengthen, support, or propagate the impertinent conjectures of + some enthusiasts, or to give validity to the cheats of impostors, in the + name of a being, who exists only in their imagination, and who has made + himself known only by the ravages, disputes, and follies, he has caused. + </p> + <p> + Savage and furious nations, perpetually at war, adore, under divers names, + some God, conformable to their ideas, that is to say, cruel, carnivorous, + selfish, blood-thirsty. We find, in all the religions, "a God of armies," + a "jealous God," an "avenging God," a "destroying God," a "God," who is + pleased with carnage, and whom his worshippers consider it a duty to + serve. Lambs, bulls, children, men, and women, are sacrificed to him. + Zealous servants of this barbarous God think themselves obliged even to + offer up themselves as a sacrifice to him. Madmen may everywhere be seen, + who, after meditating upon their terrible God, imagine that to please him + they must inflict on themselves, the most exquisite torments. The gloomy + ideas formed of the deity, far from consoling them, have every where + disquieted their minds, and prejudiced follies destructive to happiness. + </p> + <p> + How could the human mind progress, while tormented with frightful + phantoms, and guided by men, interested in perpetuating its ignorance and + fears? Man has been forced to vegetate in his primitive stupidity: he has + been taught stories about invisible powers upon whom his happiness was + supposed to depend. Occupied solely by his fears, and by unintelligible + reveries, he has always been at the mercy of priests, who have reserved to + themselves the right of thinking for him, and of directing his actions. + </p> + <p> + Thus, man has remained a slave without courage, fearing to reason, and + unable to extricate himself from the labyrinth, in which he has been + wandering. He believes himself forced under the yoke of his gods, known to + him only by the fabulous accounts given by his ministers, who, after + binding each unhappy mortal in the chains of prejudice, remain his + masters, or else abandon him defenceless to the absolute power of tyrants, + no less terrible than the gods, of whom they are the representatives. + </p> + <p> + Oppressed by the double yoke of spiritual and temporal power, it has been + impossible for the people to be happy. Religion became sacred, and men + have had no other Morality, than what their legislators and priests + brought from the unknown regions of heaven. The human mind, confused by + theological opinions, ceased to know its own powers, mistrusted + experience, feared truth and disdained reason, in order to follow + authority. Man has been a mere machine in the hands of tyrants and + priests. Always treated as a slave, man has contracted the vices of + slavery. + </p> + <p> + Such are the true causes of the corruption of morals. Ignorance and + servitude are calculated to make men wicked and unhappy. Knowledge, + Reason, and Liberty, can alone reform and make men happier. But every + thing conspires to blind them, and to confirm their errors. Priests cheat + them, tyrants corrupt and enslave them. Tyranny ever was, and ever will + be, the true cause of man's depravity, and also of his calamities. Almost + always fascinated by religious fiction, poor mortals turn not their eyes + to the natural and obvious causes of their misery; but attribute their + vices to the imperfection of their natures, and their unhappiness to the + anger of the gods. They offer to heaven vows, sacrifices, and presents, to + obtain the end of sufferings, which in reality, are attributable only to + the negligence, ignorance, and perversity of their guides, to the folly of + their customs, and above all, to the general want of knowledge. Let men's + minds be filled with true ideas; let their reason be cultivated; and there + will be no need of opposing to the passions, such a feeble barrier, as the + fear of gods. Men will be good, when they are well instructed; and when + they are despised for evil, or justly rewarded for good, which they do to + their fellow citizens. + </p> + <p> + In vain should we attempt to cure men of their vices, unless we begin by + curing them of their prejudices. It is only by showing them the truth, + that they will perceive their true interests, and the real motives that + ought to incline them to do good. Instructors have long enough fixed men's + eyes upon heaven; let them now turn them upon earth. An incomprehensible + theology, ridiculous fables, impenetrable mysteries, puerile ceremonies, + are to be no longer endured. Let the human mind apply itself to what is + natural, to intelligible objects, truth, and useful knowledge. + </p> + <p> + Does it not suffice to annihilate religious prejudice, to shew, that what + is inconceivable to man, cannot be good for him? Does it require any + thing, but plain common sense, to perceive, that a being, incompatible + with the most evident notions—that a cause continually opposed to + the effects which we attribute to it—that a being, of whom we can + say nothing, without falling into contradiction—that a being, who, + far from explaining the enigmas of the universe, only makes them more + inexplicable—that a being, whom for so many ages men have vainly + addressed to obtain their happiness, and the end of sufferings—does + it require, I say, any thing but plain, common sense, to perceive—that + the idea of such a being is an idea without model, and that he himself is + merely a phantom of the imagination? Is any thing necessary but common + sense to perceive, at least, that it is folly and madness for men to hate + and damn one another about unintelligible opinions concerning a being of + this kind? In short, does not every thing prove, that Morality and Virtue + are totally incompatible with the notions of a God, whom his ministers and + interpreters have described, in every country, as the most capricious, + unjust, and cruel of tyrants, whose pretended will, however, must serve as + law and rule the inhabitants of the earth? + </p> + <p> + To discover the true principles of Morality, men have no need of theology, + of revelation, or of gods: They have need only of common sense. They have + only to commune with themselves, to reflect upon their own nature, to + consider the objects of society, and of the individuals, who compose it; + and they will easily perceive, that virtue is advantageous, and vice + disadvantageous to themselves. Let us persuade men to be just, beneficent, + moderate, sociable; not because such conduct is demanded by the gods, but, + because it is pleasant to men. Let us advise them to abstain from vice and + crime; not because they will be punished in another world, but because + they will suffer for it in this.—<i>These are,</i> says Montesquieu, + <i>means to prevent crimes—these are punishments; these reform + manners—these are good examples.</i> + </p> + <p> + The way of truth is straight; that of imposture is crooked and dark. + Truth, ever necessary to man, must necessarily be felt by all upright + minds; the lessons of reason are to be followed by all honest men. Men are + unhappy, only because they are ignorant; they are ignorant, only because + every thing conspires to prevent their being enlightened; they are wicked + only because their reason is not sufficiently developed. + </p> + <p> + By what fatality then, have the first founders of all sects given to their + gods ferocious characters, at which nature revolts? Can we imagine a + conduct more abominable, than that which Moses tells us his God showed + towards the Egyptians, where that assassin proceeds boldly to declare, in + the name and by the order of <i>his God</i>, that Egypt shall be afflicted + with the greatest calamities, that can happen to man? Of all the different + ideas, which they give us of a supreme being, of a God, creator and + preserver of mankind, there are none more horrible, than those of the + impostors, who represented themselves as inspired by a divine spirit, and + "Thus saith the Lord." + </p> + <p> + Why, O theologians! do you presume to inquire into the impenetrable + mysteries of a being, whom you consider inconceivable to the human mind? + You are the blasphemers, when you imagine that a being, perfect according + to you, could be guilty of such cruelty towards creatures whom he has made + out of nothing. Confess, your ignorance of a creating God; and cease + meddling with mysteries, which are repugnant to <i>Common Sense</i>. + </p> + <p> + <br /> <br /> + </p> + <hr /> + <p> + <br /> <a name="link2H_TOC" id="link2H_TOC"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> <br /> + </p> + <h3> + DETAILED TABLE OF CONTENTS GIVEN IN THE FRENCH EDITION + </h3> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + Section + + 1. APOLOGUE + + 2, 3. What is Theology? + + 4. Man is not born with any ideas of Religion + + 5. It is not necessary to believe in a God + + 6. Religion is founded on credulity + + 7. All religion is an absurdity + + 8. The idea of God is impossible + + 9. On the Origin of Superstition + + 10. On the Origin of all Religion + + 11. Religious fears expose men to become a prey to imposters + + 12, 13. Religion seduces ignorance by the aid of the marvellous + + 14. There would never have been any Religion, if there had not been + ages of Stupidity and Barbarism + + 15. All Religion was produced by the desire of domination + + 16. What serves as a basis to Religion is most uncertain + + 17, 18. It is impossible to be convinced of the existence of a God + + 19. The existence of God is not proved + + 20. It explains nothing to say, that God is a spirit + + 21. Spirituality is an absurdity + + 22. Whatever exists is derived from Matter + + 23. What is the metaphysical God of modern Theology? + + 24. It would be less unreasonable to adore the Sun, than to adore + a spiritual Deity + + 25. A spiritual Deity is incapable of volition and action + + 26. What is God? + + 27. Some remarkable Contradictions in Theology + + 28. To adore God, is to adore a fiction + + 29. Atheism is authorised by the infinity of God, and the impossibility + of knowing the Divine essence + + 30. Believing in God is neither safer nor less criminal than not + believing in him + + 31. Belief in God is a habit acquired in infancy + + 32. Belief in God is a prejudice established by successive generations + + 33. On the Origin of Prejudices + + 34. On the effects of Prejudices + + 35. The Religious principles of modern Theology could not be believed + if they were not instilled into the mind before the age of reason + + 36. The wonders of nature do not prove the existence of God + + 37, 38. Nature may be explained by natural causes + + 39, 40. The world has never been created: Matter moves of itself + + 41. Additional proofs that motion is essential to Matter, and that + consequently it is unnecessary to imagine a Spiritual Mover + + 42. The existence of Man does not prove the existence of God + + 43. Nevertheless, neither Man nor the Universe are the effects of chance + + 44, 45. The order of the Universe does not prove the existence of a God + + 46. A Spirit cannot be intelligent it is absurd to adore a divine + intelligence + + 47, 48. All the qualities, which Theology gives to its God are contrary + to the Essence which is attributed to him + + 49. It is absurd to say that the human race is the object and end + of the formation of the Universe + + 50. God is not made for Man, nor Man for God + + 51. It is not true that the object of the formation of the Universe + was to render Man happy + + 52. What is called Providence is a word without meaning + + 53. This pretended Providence is the enemy of Man + + 54. The world is not governed by an intelligent being + + 55. God cannot be considered immutable + + 56. Good and evil are the necessary effects of natural causes. + What is a God that cannot change any thing? + + 57. The consolations of Theology and the hope of paradise and of + a future life, are imaginary + + 58. Another romantic reverie + + 59. It is in vain that Theology attempts to clear its God from human + defects: either this God is not free, or else he is more wicked + than good + + 60, 61. It is impossible to believe that there exists a God of + infinite goodness and power + + 62. Theology makes its God a monster of absurdity, injustice, + malice, and atrocity + + 63. All Religion inspires contemptible fears + + 64. There is no difference between Religion, and the most somber + and servile Superstition + + 65. To judge from the ideas which Theology gives of the Deity, the + love of God is impossible + + 66. An eternally tormenting God is a most detestable being + + 67. Theology is a tissue of palpable contradictions + + 68. The pretended works of God do not prove Divine Perfections + + 69. The perfection of God is not rendered more evident by the + pretended creation of angels + + 70. Theology preaches the Omnipotence of its God, yet constantly + makes him appear impotent + + 71. According to all religious systems, God would be the most + capricious and most foolish of beings + + 72. It is absurd to say that Evil does not proceed from God + + 73. The foreknowledge attributed to God would give men a right + to complain of his cruelty + + 74. Absurdity of the theological stories concerning Original Sin, + and concerning Satan + + 75. The Devil, like Religion, was invented to enrich the priests + + 76. If God has been unable to render human nature incapable of sin, + he has no right to punish man + + 77. It is absurd to say, that the conduct of God ought to be a mystery + for man + + 78. Ought the unfortunate look for consolation, to the sole author + of their misery + + 79. A God, who punishes the faults which he might have prevented, + is a mad tyrant, who joins injustice to folly + + 80. What is called Free Will is an absurdity + + 81. But we must not conclude that Society has no right to punish + + 82, 83. Refutation of the arguments in favour of Free Will + + 84. God himself, if there were a God, would not be free: hence the + inutility of all Religion + + 85. According to the principles of Theology, man is not free a + single instant + + 86. There is no evil, no disorder, and no sin, but must be attributed + to God: consequently God has no right either to punish or recompence + + 87. The prayers offered to God sufficiently prove dissatisfaction of + the divine will + + 88. It is the height of absurdity to imagine, that the injuries and + misfortunes, endured in this world, will be repaired in another world + + 89. Theology justifies the evil and the wickedness, permitted by its God, + only by attributing to him the principle, that "Might makes Right," + which is the violation of all Right + + 90. The absurd doctrine of Redemption, and the frequent exterminations + attributed to Jehovah, impress one with the idea of an unjust and + barbarous God + + 91. Can a being, who has called us into existence merely to make us + miserable, be a generous, equitable, and tender father? + + 92. Man's life, and all that occurs, deposes against the liberty of Man, + and against the justice and goodness of a pretended God + + 93. It is not true, that we owe any gratitude to what is called + <i>Providence</i> + + 94. It is folly to suppose that Man is the king of nature, the favourite + of God, and unique object of his labours + + 95. A comparison between Man and brutes + + 96. There are no animals so detestable as Tyrants + + 97. A refutation of the excellence of Man + + 98. An oriental Tale + + 99. It is madness to see nothing but the goodness of God, or to think + that this universe is only made for Man + + 100. What is the Soul? + + 101. The existence of a <i>Soul</i> is an absurd supposition; and the existence + of an <i>immortal</i> Soul still more absurd + + 102. It is evident that Man dies <i>in toto</i> + + 103. Incontestible arguments against the Spirituality of the Soul + + 104. On the absurdity of the supernatural causes, to which Theologians + are constantly having recourse + + 105, 106. It is false that Materialism degrades + + 107. The idea of a future life is only useful to those, who trade on + public credulity + + 108. It is false that the idea of a future life is consoling + + 109. All religious principles are derived from the imagination. + God is a chimera; and the qualities, attributed to him, + reciprocally destroy one another + + 110. Religion is but a system imagined in order to reconcile + contradictions by the aid of mysteries + + 111, 112, 113. Absurdity and inutility of all Mysteries, which were only + invented for the interests of Priests + + 114. An universal God ought to have revealed an universal Religion + + 115. What proves, that Religion is unnecessary, is, that it is + unintelligible + + 116. All Religions are rendered ridiculous by the multitude of creeds, + all opposite to one another, and all equally foolish + + 117. Opinion of a famous Theologian + + 118. The God of the Deists is not less contradictory, nor less chimerical + than the God of the Christians + + 119. It by no means proves the existence of God to say, that, in every + age, all nations have acknowledged some Deity or other + + 120. All Gods are of a savage origin: all Religions are monuments of + the ignorance, superstition, and ferocity of former times: modern + Religions are but ancient follies, re-edited with additions and + corrections + + 121. All religious usages bear marks of stupidity and barbarism + + 122. The more a religious opinion is ancient and general, the more it + ought to be suspected + + 123. Mere scepticism in religious matters, can only be the effect of + a very superficial examination + + 124. Revelations examined + + 125. Where is the proof that God ever shewed himself to Men, or ever + spoke to them? + + 126. There is nothing that proves miracles to have been ever performed + + 127. If God has spoken, is it not strange that he should have spoken + so differently to the different religious sects? + + 128. Obscurity and suspicious origin of oracles + + 129. Absurdity of all miracles + + 130. Refutation of the reasoning of Pascal concerning the manner in which + we must judge of miracles + + 131. Every new revelation is necessarily false + + 132. The blood of martyrs testifies <i>against</i> the truth of miracles, and + <i>against</i> the divine origin attributed to Christianity + + 133. The fanaticism of martyrs, and the interested zeal of missionaries, + by no means prove the truth of Religion + + 134. Theology makes its God an enemy to Reason and Common Sense + + 135. Faith is irreconcilable with Reason; and Reason is preferable + to Faith + + 136. To what absurd and ridiculous sophisms every one is reduced, who + would substitute Faith for Reason! + + 137. Ought a man to believe, on the assurance of another man, what is + of the greatest importance to himself + + 138. Faith can take root only in feeble, ignorant, or slothful minds + + 139. To teach, that any one Religion has greater pretensions to truth + than another, is an absurdity, and cause of tumult + + 140. Religion is unnecessary to Morality + + 141. Religion is the weakest barrier that can be opposed to the passions + + 142. Honour is a more salutary and powerful bond than Religion + + 143. Religion does not restrain the passions of kings + + 144. Origin of "the divine right of kings," the most absurd, ridiculous, + and odious, of usurpations + + 145. Religion is fatal to political ameliorations: it makes despots + licentious and wicked, and their subjects abject and miserable + + 146. Christianity has propagated itself by preaching implicit obedience + to despotism + + 147. One object of religious principles is to eternize the tyranny + of kings + + 148. How fatal it is to persuade kings that they are responsible for + their actions to God alone + + 149. A devout king is the scourge of his kingdom + + 150. Tyranny sometimes finds the aegis of Religion a weak obstacle + to the despair of the people + + 151. Religion favours the wickedness of princes by delivering them + from fear and remorse + + 152. What is an enlightened Sovereign? + + 153. Of the prevailing passions and crimes of the priesthood + + 154. The quackery of priests + + 155. Religion has corrupted Morality, and produced innumerable evils + + 156. Every Religion is intolerant + + 157. The evils of a state Religion + + 158. Religion legitimates and authorizes crime + + 159. Refutation of the argument, that the evils attributed to Religion + are but the bad effects of human passions + + 160. Religion is incompatible with Morality + + 161. The Morality of the Gospel is impracticable + + 162. A society of Saints would be impossible + + 163. Human nature is not depraved + + 164. Concerning the effects of Jesus Christ's mission + + 165. The dogma of the remission of sins was invented for the interest + of priests + + 166. Who fear God? + + 167. Hell is an absurd invention + + 168. The bad foundation of religious morals + + 169. Christian Charity, as preached and practised by Theologians!!! + + 170. Confession, priestcraft's gold mine, and the destruction of the + true principles of Morality + + 171. The supposition of the existence of a God is by no means necessary + to Morality + + 172. Religion and its supernatural Morality are fatal to the + public welfare + + 173. The union of Church and State is a calamity + + 174. National Religions are ruinous + + 175. Religion paralyses Morality + + 176. Fatal consequences of Devotion + + 177. The idea of a future life is not consoling to man + + 178. An Atheist is fully as conscientious as a religious man, and has + better motives for doing good + + 179. An Atheistical king would be far preferable to a religious king + + 180. Philosophy produces Morality + + 181. Religious opinions have little influence upon conduct + + 182. Reason leads man to Atheism + + 183. Fear alone makes Theists + + 184. Can we, and ought we, to love God? + + 185. God and Religion are proved to be absurdities by the different + ideas formed of them + + 186. The existence of God, which is the basis of Religion, has not yet + been demonstrated + + 187. Priests are more actuated by self-interest, than unbelievers + + 188. Pride, presumption, and badness, are more often found in priests, + than in Atheists + + 189. Prejudices last but for a time: no power is durable which is not + founded upon truth + + 190. What an honourable power ministers of the Gods would obtain, + if they became the apostles of reason and the defenders of liberty! + + 191. What a glorious and happy revolution it would be for the world, + if Philosophy were substituted for Religion! + + 192. The recantation of an unbeliever at the point of death proves + nothing against the reasonableness of unbelief + + 193. It is not true that Atheism breaks the bonds of society + + 194. Refutation of the often repeated opinion, that Religion is necessary + for the vulgar + + 195. Logical and argumentative systems are not adapted to the capacity + of the vulgar + + 196. On the futility and danger of Theology + + 197, 198. On the evils produced by implicit faith + + 199. History teaches us, that all Religions were established by + impostors, in days of ignorance + + 200. All Religions, ancient or modern, have borrowed from one + another ridiculous ceremonies + + 201. Theology has always diverted philosophy from its right path + + 202. Theology explains nothing + + 203, 204. Theology has always fettered Morality, and retarded progress + + 205. It cannot be too often repeated and proved, that Religion is an + extravagance and a calamity + + 206. Religion prevents us from seeing the true causes of misfortunes +</pre> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0003" id="link2H_4_0003"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h1> + GOOD SENSE WITHOUT GOD + </h1> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0004" id="link2H_4_0004"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + APOLOGUE + </h2> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0005" id="link2H_4_0005"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 1. + </h2> + <p> + There is a vast empire, governed by a monarch, whose strange conduct is to + confound the minds of his subjects. He wishes to be known, loved, + respected, obeyed; but never shows himself to his subjects, and everything + conspires to render uncertain the ideas formed of his character. + </p> + <p> + The people, subjected to his power, have, of the character and laws of + their invisible sovereign, such ideas only, as his ministers give them. + They, however, confess, that they have no idea of their master; that his + ways are impenetrable; his views and nature totally incomprehensible. + These ministers, likewise, disagree upon the commands which they pretend + have been issued by the sovereign, whose servants they call themselves. + They defame one another, and mutually treat each other as impostors and + false teachers. The decrees and ordinances, they take upon themselves to + promulgate, are obscure; they are enigmas, little calculated to be + understood, or even divined, by the subjects, for whose instruction they + were intended. The laws of the concealed monarch require interpreters; but + the interpreters are always disputing upon the true manner of + understanding them. Besides, they are not consistent with themselves; all + they relate of their concealed prince is only a string of contradictions. + They utter concerning him not a single word that does not immediately + confute itself. They call him supremely good; yet many complain of his + decrees. They suppose him infinitely wise; and under his administration + everything appears to contradict reason. They extol his justice; and the + best of his subjects are generally the least favoured. They assert, he + sees everything; yet his presence avails nothing. He is, say they, the + friend of order; yet throughout his dominions, all is in confusion and + disorder. He makes all for himself; and the events seldom answer his + designs. He foresees everything; but cannot prevent anything. He + impatiently suffers offence, yet gives everyone the power of offending + him. Men admire the wisdom and perfection of his works; yet his works, + full of imperfection, are of short duration. He is continually doing and + undoing; repairing what he has made; but is never pleased with his work. + In all his undertakings, he proposes only his own glory; yet is never + glorified. His only end is the happiness of his subjects; and his + subjects, for the most part want necessaries. Those, whom he seems to + favour are generally least satisfied with their fate; almost all appear in + perpetual revolt against a master, whose greatness they never cease to + admire, whose wisdom to extol, whose goodness to adore, whose justice to + fear, and whose laws to reverence, though never obeyed! + </p> + <p> + This EMPIRE is the WORLD; this MONARCH GOD; his MINISTERS are the PRIESTS; + his SUBJECTS MANKIND. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0006" id="link2H_4_0006"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 2. + </h2> + <p> + There is a science that has for its object only things incomprehensible. + Contrary to all other sciences, it treats only of what cannot fall under + our senses. Hobbes calls it the <i>kingdom of darkness</i>. It is a + country, where every thing is governed by laws, contrary to those which + mankind are permitted to know in the world they inhabit. In this + marvellous region, light is only darkness; evidence is doubtful or false; + impossibilities are credible: reason is a deceitful guide; and good sense + becomes madness. This <i>science</i> is called <i>theology</i>, and this + theology is a continual insult to the reason of man. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0007" id="link2H_4_0007"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 3. + </h2> + <p> + By the magical power of "ifs," "buts," "perhaps's," "what do we know," + etc., heaped together, a shapeless and unconnected system is formed, + perplexing mankind, by obliterating from their minds, the most clear ideas + and rendering uncertain truths most evident. By reason of this systematic + confusion, nature is an enigma; the visible world has disappeared, to give + place to regions invisible; reason is compelled to yield to imagination, + who leads to the country of her self-invented chimeras. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0008" id="link2H_4_0008"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 4. + </h2> + <p> + The principles of every religion are founded upon the idea of a GOD. Now, + it is impossible to have true ideas of a being, who acts upon none of our + senses. All our ideas are representations of sensible objects. What then + can represent to us the idea of God, which is evidently an idea without an + object? Is not such an idea as impossible, as an effect without a cause? + Can an idea without an archetype be anything, but a chimera? There are, + however, divines, who assure us that the idea of God is innate; or that we + have this idea in our mother's womb. Every principle is the result of + reason; all reason is the effect of experience; experience is acquired + only by the exercise of our senses: therefore, religious principles are + not founded upon reason, and are not innate. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0009" id="link2H_4_0009"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 5. + </h2> + <p> + Every system of religion can be founded only upon the nature of God and + man; and upon the relations, which subsist between them. But to judge of + the reality of those relations, we must have some idea of the divine + nature. Now, the world exclaims, the divine nature is incomprehensible to + man; yet ceases not to assign attributes to this incomprehensible God, and + to assure us, that it is our indispensable duty to find out that God, whom + it is impossible to comprehend. + </p> + <p> + The most important concern of man is what he can least comprehend. If God + is incomprehensible to man, it would seem reasonable never to think of + him; but religion maintains, man cannot with impunity cease a moment to + think (or rather dream) of his God. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0010" id="link2H_4_0010"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 6. + </h2> + <p> + We are told, that divine qualities are not of a nature to be comprehended + by finite minds. The natural consequence must be, that divine qualities + are not made to occupy finite minds. But religion tells us, that the poor + finite mind of man ought never to lose sight of an inconceivable being, + whose qualities he can never comprehend. Thus, we see, religion is the art + of turning the attention of mankind upon subjects they can never + comprehend. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0011" id="link2H_4_0011"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 7. + </h2> + <p> + Religion unites man with God, or forms a communication between them; yet + do they not say, God is infinite? If God be infinite, no finite being can + have communication or relation with him. Where there is no relation, there + can be no union, communication, or duties. If there be no duties between + man and his God, there is no religion for man. Thus, in saying God is + infinite, you annihilate religion for man, who is a finite being. The idea + of infinity is to us an idea without model, without archetype, without + object. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0012" id="link2H_4_0012"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 8. + </h2> + <p> + If God be an infinite being, there cannot be, either in the present or + future world, any relative proportion between man and his God. Thus, the + idea of God can never enter the human mind. In supposition of a life, in + which man would be much more enlightened, than in this, the idea of the + infinity of God would ever remain the same distance from his finite mind. + Thus the idea of God will be no more clear in the future, than in the + present life. Thus, intelligences, superior to man, can have no more + complete ideas of God, than man, who has not the least conception of him + in his present life. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0013" id="link2H_4_0013"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 9. + </h2> + <p> + How has it been possible to persuade reasonable beings, that the thing, + most impossible to comprehend, was most essential to them? It is because + they have been greatly terrified; because, when they fear, they cease to + reason; because, they have been taught to mistrust their own + understanding; because, when the brain is troubled, they believe every + thing, and examine nothing. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0014" id="link2H_4_0014"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 10. + </h2> + <p> + Ignorance and fear are the two hinges of all religion. The uncertainty in + which man finds himself in relation to his God, is precisely the motive + that attaches him to his religion. Man is fearful in the dark—in + moral, as well as physical darkness. His fear becomes habitual, and habit + makes it natural; he would think that he wanted something, if he had + nothing to fear. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0015" id="link2H_4_0015"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 11. + </h2> + <p> + He, who from infancy has habituated himself to tremble when he hears + pronounced certain words, requires those words and needs to tremble. He is + therefore more disposed to listen to one, who entertains him in his fears, + than to one, who dissuades him from them. The superstitious man wishes to + fear; his imagination demands it; one might say, that he fears nothing so + much, as to have nothing to fear. + </p> + <p> + Men are imaginary invalids, whose weakness empirics are interested to + encourage, in order to have sale for their drugs. They listen rather to + the physician, who prescribes a variety of remedies, than to him, who + recommends good regimen, and leaves nature to herself. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0016" id="link2H_4_0016"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 12. + </h2> + <p> + If religion were more clear, it would have less charms for the ignorant, + who are pleased only with obscurity, terrors, fables, prodigies, and + things incredible. Romances, silly stories, and the tales of ghosts and + wizards, are more pleasing to vulgar minds than true histories. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0017" id="link2H_4_0017"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 13. + </h2> + <p> + In point of religion, men are only great children. The more a religion is + absurd and filled with wonders, the greater ascendancy it acquires over + them. The devout man thinks himself obliged to place no bounds to his + credulity; the more things are inconceivable, they appear to him divine; + the more they are incredible, the greater merit, he imagines, there is in + believing them. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0018" id="link2H_4_0018"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 14. + </h2> + <p> + The origin of religious opinions is generally dated from the time, when + savage nations were yet in infancy. It was to gross, ignorant, and stupid + people, that the founders of religion have in all ages addressed + themselves, when they wished to give them their Gods, their mode of + worship, their mythology, their marvellous and frightful fables. These + chimeras, adopted without examination by parents, are transmitted, with + more or less alteration, to their children, who seldom reason any more + than their parents. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0019" id="link2H_4_0019"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 15. + </h2> + <p> + The object of the first legislators was to govern the people; and the + easiest method to effect it was to terrify their minds, and to prevent the + exercise of reason. They led them through winding bye-paths, lest they + might perceive the designs of their guides; they forced them to fix their + eyes in the air, for fear they should look at their feet; they amused them + on the way with idle stories; in a word, they treated them as nurses do + children, who sing lullabies, to put them to sleep, and scold, to make + them quiet. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0020" id="link2H_4_0020"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 16. + </h2> + <p> + The existence of a God is the basis of all religion. Few appear to doubt + his existence; yet this fundamental article utterly embarrasses every mind + that reasons. The first question of every catechism has been, and ever + will be, the most difficult to resolve. (In the year 1701, the holy + fathers of the oratory of Vendome maintained in a thesis, this proposition—that, + according to St. Thomas, the existence of God is not, and cannot be, a + subject of faith.) + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0021" id="link2H_4_0021"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 17. + </h2> + <p> + Can we imagine ourselves sincerely convinced of the existence of a being, + whose nature we know not; who is inaccessible to all our senses; whose + attributes, we are assured, are incomprehensible to us? To persuade me + that a being exists or can exist, I must be first told what that being is. + To induce me to believe the existence or the possibility of such a being, + it is necessary to tell me things concerning him that are not + contradictory, and do not destroy one another. In short, to fully convince + me of the existence of that being, it is necessary to tell me things that + I can understand. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0022" id="link2H_4_0022"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 18. + </h2> + <p> + A thing is impossible, when it includes two ideas that mutually destroy + one another, and which can neither be conceived nor united in thought. + Conviction can be founded only upon the constant testimony of our senses, + which alone give birth to our ideas, and enable us to judge of their + agreement or disagreement. That, which exists necessarily, is that, whose + non-existence implies a contradiction. These principles, universally + acknowledged, become erroneous, when applied to the existence of a God. + Whatever has been hitherto said upon the subject, is either + unintelligible, or perfect contradiction, and must therefore appear absurd + to every rational man. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0023" id="link2H_4_0023"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 19. + </h2> + <p> + All human knowledge is more or less clear. By what strange fatality have + we never been able to elucidate the science of God? The most civilized + nations, and among them the most profound thinkers, are in this respect no + more enlightened than the most savage tribes and ignorant peasants; and, + examining the subject closely, we shall find, that, by the speculations + and subtle refinements of men, the divine science has been only more and + more obscured. Every religion has hitherto been founded only upon what is + called, in logic, <i>begging the question</i>; it takes things for + granted, and then proves, by suppositions, instead of principles. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0024" id="link2H_4_0024"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 20. + </h2> + <p> + Metaphysics teach us, that God is a <i>pure spirit</i>. But, is modern + theology superior to that of the savages? The savages acknowledge a <i>great + spirit</i>, for the master of the world. The savages, like all ignorant + people, attribute to <i>spirits</i> all the effects, of which their + experience cannot discover the true causes. Ask a savage, what works your + watch? He will answer, <i>it is a spirit</i>. Ask the divines, what moves + the universe? They answer, <i>it is a spirit</i>. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0025" id="link2H_4_0025"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 21. + </h2> + <p> + The savage, when he speaks of a spirit, affixes, at least, some idea to + the word; he means thereby an agent, like the air, the breeze, the breath, + that invisibly produces discernible effects. By subtilizing every thing, + the modern theologian becomes as unintelligible to himself as to others. + Ask him, what he understands by a spirit? He will answer you, that it is + an unknown substance, perfectly simple, that has no extension, that has + nothing common with matter. Indeed, is there any one, who can form the + least idea of such a substance? What then is a spirit, to speak in the + language of modern theology, but the absence of an idea? The idea of <i>spirituality</i> + is an idea without model. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0026" id="link2H_4_0026"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 22. + </h2> + <p> + Is it not more natural and intelligible to draw universal existence from + the matter, whose existence is demonstrated by all the senses, and whose + effects we experience, which we see act, move, communicate motion, and + incessantly generate, than to attribute the formation of things to an + unknown power, to a spiritual being, who cannot derive from his nature + what he has not himself, and who, by his spiritual essence, can create + neither matter nor motion? Nothing is more evident, than that the idea + they endeavour to give us, of the action of mind upon matter, represents + no object. It is an idea without model. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0027" id="link2H_4_0027"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 23. + </h2> + <p> + The material <i>Jupiter</i> of the ancients could move, compose, destroy, + and create beings, similar to himself; but the God of modern theology is + sterile. He can neither occupy any place in space, nor move matter, nor + form a visible world, nor create men or gods. The metaphysical God is fit + only to produce confusion, reveries, follies, and disputes. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0028" id="link2H_4_0028"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 24. + </h2> + <p> + Since a God was indispensably requisite to men, why did they not worship + the Sun, that visible God, adored by so many nations? What being had + greater claim to the homage of men, than the day-star, who enlightens, + warms, and vivifies all beings; whose presence enlivens and regenerates + nature, whose absence seems to cast her into gloom and languor? If any + being announced to mankind, power, activity, beneficence, and duration, it + was certainly the Sun, whom they ought to have regarded as the parent of + nature, as the divinity. At least, they could not, without folly, dispute + his existence, or refuse to acknowledge his influence. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0029" id="link2H_4_0029"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 25. + </h2> + <p> + The theologian exclaims to us, that God wants neither hands nor arms to + act; that <i>he acts by his will</i>. But pray, who or what is that God, + who has a will, and what can be the subject of his divine will? + </p> + <p> + Are the stories of witches, ghosts, wizards, hobgoblins, etc., more absurd + and difficult to believe than the magical or impossible action of mind + upon matter? When we admit such a God, fables and reveries may claim + belief. Theologians treat men as children, whose simplicity makes them + believe all the stories they hear. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0030" id="link2H_4_0030"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 26. + </h2> + <p> + To shake the existence of God, we need only to ask a theologian to speak + of him. As soon as he has said a word upon the subject, the least + reflection will convince us, that his observations are totally + incompatible with the essence he ascribes to his God. What then is God? It + is an abstract word, denoting the hidden power of nature; or it is a + mathematical point, that has neither length, breadth, nor thickness. David + Hume, speaking of theologians, has ingeniously observed, <i>that they have + discovered the solution of the famous problem of Archimedes—a point + in the heavens, whence they move the world</i>. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0031" id="link2H_4_0031"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 27. + </h2> + <p> + Religion prostrates men before a being, who, without extension, is + infinite, and fills all with his immensity; a being, all-powerful, who + never executes his will; a being, sovereignly good, who creates only + disquietudes; a being, the friend of order, and in whose government all is + in confusion and disorder. What then, can we imagine, can be the God of + theology? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0032" id="link2H_4_0032"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 28. + </h2> + <p> + To avoid all embarrassment, we are told, "that it is not necessary to know + what God is; that we must adore him; that we are not permitted to extend + our views to his attributes." But, before we know that we must adore a + God, must we not know certainly, that he exists? But, how can we assure + ourselves, that he exists, if we never examine whether the various + qualities, attributed to him, do really exist and agree in him? Indeed, to + adore God, is to adore only the fictions of one's own imagination, or + rather, it is to adore nothing. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0033" id="link2H_4_0033"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 29. + </h2> + <p> + In view of confounding things the more, theologians have not declared what + their God is; they tell us only what he is not. By means of negations and + abstractions, they think they have composed a real and perfect being. Mind + is that, which is <i>not</i> body. An infinite being is a being, who is <i>not</i> + finite. A perfect being is a being, who is <i>not</i> imperfect. Indeed, + is there any one, who can form real ideas of such a mass of absence of + ideas? That, which excludes all idea, can it be any thing but nothing? + </p> + <p> + To pretend, that the divine attributes are beyond the reach of human + conception, is to grant, that God is not made for man. To assure us, that, + in God, all is infinite, is to own that there can be nothing common to him + and his creatures. If there be nothing common to God and his creatures, + God is annihilated for man, or, at least, rendered useless to him. "God," + they say, "has made man intelligent, but he has not made him omniscient;" + hence it is inferred, that he has not been able to give him faculties + sufficiently enlarged to know his divine essence. In this case, it is + evident, that God has not been able nor willing to be known by his + creatures. By what right then would God be angry with beings, who were + naturally incapable of knowing the divine essence? God would be evidently + the most unjust and capricious of tyrants, if he should punish an Atheist + for not having known, what, by his nature, it was impossible he should + know. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0034" id="link2H_4_0034"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 30. + </h2> + <p> + To the generality of men, nothing renders an argument more convincing than + fear. It is therefore, that theologians assure us, <i>we must take the + safest part</i>; that nothing is so criminal as incredulity; that God will + punish without pity every one who has the temerity to doubt his existence; + that his severity is just, since madness or perversity only can make us + deny the existence of an enraged monarch, who without mercy avenges + himself on Atheists. If we coolly examine these threatenings, we shall + find, they always suppose the thing in question. They must first prove the + existence of a God, before they assure us, it is safest to believe, and + horrible to doubt or deny his existence. They must then prove, that it is + possible and consistent, that a just God cruelly punishes men for having + been in a state of madness, that prevented their believing the existence + of a being, whom their perverted reason could not conceive. In a word, + they must prove, that an infinitely just God can infinitely punish the + invincible and natural ignorance of man with respect to the divine nature. + Do not theologians reason very strangely? They invent phantoms, they + compose them of contradictions; they then assure us, it is safest not to + doubt the existence of these phantoms they themselves have invented. + According to this mode of reasoning, there is no absurdity, which it would + not be more safe to believe, than not to believe. + </p> + <p> + All children are born Atheists; they have no idea of God. Are they then + criminal on account of their ignorance? At what age must they begin to + believe in God? It is, you say, at the age of reason. But at what time + should this age commence? Besides, if the profoundest theologians lose + themselves in the divine nature, which they do not presume to comprehend, + what ideas must man have of him? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0035" id="link2H_4_0035"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 31. + </h2> + <p> + Men believe in God only upon the word of those, who have no more idea of + him than themselves. Our nurses are our first theologians. They talk to + children of God as if he were a scarecrow; they teach them from the + earliest age to join their hands mechanically. Have nurses then more true + ideas of God than the children whom they teach to pray? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0036" id="link2H_4_0036"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 32. + </h2> + <p> + Religion, like a family estate, passes, with its incumbrances, from + parents to children. Few men in the world would have a God, had not pains + been taken in infancy to give them one. Each would receive from his + parents and teachers the God whom they received from theirs; but each, + agreeably to his disposition, would arrange, modify, and paint him in his + own manner. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0037" id="link2H_4_0037"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 33. + </h2> + <p> + The brain of man, especially in infancy, is like soft wax, fit to receive + every impression that is made upon it. Education furnishes him with almost + all his ideas at a time, when he is incapable of judging for himself. We + believe we have received from nature, or have brought with us at birth, + the true or false ideas, which, in a tender age, had been instilled into + our minds; and this persuasion is one of the greatest sources of errors. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0038" id="link2H_4_0038"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 34. + </h2> + <p> + Prejudice contributes to cement in us the opinions of those who have been + charged with our instruction. We believe them much more experienced than + ourselves; we suppose they are fully convinced of the things which they + teach us; we have the greatest confidence in them; by the care they have + taken of us in infancy, we judge them incapable of wishing to deceive us. + These are the motives that make us adopt a thousand errors, without other + foundation than the hazardous authority of those by whom we have been + brought up. The prohibition likewise of reasoning upon what they teach us, + by no means lessens our confidence; but often contributes to increase our + respect for their opinions. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0039" id="link2H_4_0039"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 35. + </h2> + <p> + Divines act very wisely in teaching men their religious principles before + they are capable of distinguishing truth from falsehood, or their left + hand from their right. It would be as difficult to instill into the mind + of a man, forty years old, the extravagant notions that are given us of + the divinity, as to eradicate them from the mind of him who had imbibed + them from infancy. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0040" id="link2H_4_0040"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 36. + </h2> + <p> + It is observed, that the wonders of nature are sufficient to lead us to + the existence of a God, and fully to convince us of this important truth. + But how many are there in the world who have the time, capacity, or + disposition, necessary to contemplate Nature and meditate her progress? + Men, for the most part, pay no regard to it. The peasant is not struck + with the beauty of the sun, which he sees every day. The sailor is not + surprised at the regular motion of the ocean; he will never draw from it + theological conclusions. The phenomena of nature prove the existence of a + God only to some prejudiced men, who have been early taught to behold the + finger of God in every thing whose mechanism could embarrass them. In the + wonders of nature, the unprejudiced philosopher sees nothing but the power + of nature, the permanent and various laws, the necessary effects of + different combinations of matter infinitely diversified. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0041" id="link2H_4_0041"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 37. + </h2> + <p> + Is there any thing more surprising than the logic of these divines, who, + instead of confessing their ignorance of natural causes, seek beyond + nature, in imaginary regions, a cause much more unknown than that nature, + of which they can form at least some idea? To say, that God is the author + of the phenomena of nature, is it not to attribute them to an occult + cause? What is God? What is a spirit? They are causes of which we have no + idea. O wise divines! Study nature and her laws; and since you can there + discover the action of natural causes, go not to those that are + supernatural, which, far from enlightening, will only darken your ideas, + and make it utterly impossible that you should understand yourselves. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0042" id="link2H_4_0042"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 38. + </h2> + <p> + Nature, you say, is totally inexplicable without a God. That is to say, to + explain what you understand very little, you have need of a cause which + you understand not at all. You think to elucidate what is obscure, by + doubling the obscurity; to solve difficulties, by multiplying them. O + enthusiastic philosophers! To prove the existence of a God, write complete + treatises of botany; enter into a minute detail of the parts of the human + body; launch forth into the sky, to contemplate the revolution of the + stars; then return to the earth to admire the course of waters; behold + with transport the butterflies, the insects, the polypi, and the organized + atoms, in which you think you discern the greatness of your God. All these + things will not prove the existence of God; they will prove only, that you + have not just ideas of the immense variety of matter, and of the effects, + producible by its infinitely diversified combinations, that constitute the + universe. They will prove only your ignorance of nature; that you have no + idea of her powers, when you judge her incapable of producing a multitude + of forms and beings, of which your eyes, even with the assistance of + microscopes, never discern but the smallest part. In a word, they will + prove, that, for want of knowing sensible agents, or those possible to + know, you find it shorter to have recourse to a word, expressing an + inconceivable agent. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0043" id="link2H_4_0043"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 39. + </h2> + <p> + We are gravely and repeatedly told, that, <i>there is no effect without a + cause</i>; that, <i>the world did not make itself</i>. But the universe is + a cause, it is not an effect; it is not a work; it has not been made, + because it is impossible that it should have been made. The world has + always been; its existence is necessary; it is its own cause. Nature, + whose essence is visibly to act and produce, requires not, to discharge + her functions, an invisible mover, much more unknown than herself. Matter + moves by its own energy, by a necessary consequence of its heterogeneity. + The diversity of motion, or modes of mutual action, constitutes alone the + diversity of matter. We distinguish beings from one another only by the + different impressions or motions which they communicate to our organs. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0044" id="link2H_4_0044"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 40. + </h2> + <p> + You see, that all is action in nature, and yet pretend that nature, by + itself, is dead and without power. You imagine, that this all, essentially + acting, needs a mover! What then is this mover? It is a spirit; a being + absolutely incomprehensible and contradictory. Acknowledge then, that + matter acts of itself, and cease to reason of your spiritual mover, who + has nothing that is requisite to put it in action. Return from your + useless excursions; enter again into a real world; keep to <i>second + causes</i>, and leave to divines their <i>first cause</i>, of which nature + has no need, to produce all the effects you observe in the world. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0045" id="link2H_4_0045"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 41. + </h2> + <p> + It can be only by the diversity of impressions and effects, which bodies + make upon us, that we feel them; that we have perceptions and ideas of + them; that we distinguish one from another; that we assign them + properties. Now, to see or feel an object, the object must act upon our + organs; this object cannot act upon us, without exciting some motion in + us; it cannot excite motion in us, if it be not in motion itself. At the + instant I see an object, my eyes are struck by it; I can have no + conception of light and vision, without motion, communicated to my eye, + from the luminous, extended, coloured body. At the instant I smell + something, my sense is irritated, or put in motion, by the parts that + exhale from the odoriferous body. At the moment I hear a sound, the + tympanum of my ear is struck by the air, put in motion by a sonorous body, + which would not act if it were not in motion itself. Whence it evidently + follows, that, without motion, I can neither feel, see, distinguish, + compare, judge, nor occupy my thoughts upon any subject whatever. + </p> + <p> + We are taught, that <i>the essence of a thing is that from which all its + properties flow</i>. Now, it is evident, that all the properties of + bodies, of which we have ideas, are owing to motion, which alone informs + us of their existence, and gives us the first conceptions of them. I + cannot be informed of my own existence but by the motions I experience in + myself. I am therefore forced to conclude, that motion is as essential to + matter as extension, and that matter cannot be conceived without it. + </p> + <p> + Should any person deny, that motion is essential and necessary to matter; + they cannot, at least, help acknowledging that bodies, which seem dead and + inert, produce motion of themselves, when placed in a fit situation to act + upon one another. For instance; phosphorus, when exposed to the air, + immediately takes fire. Meal and water, when mixed, ferment. Thus dead + matter begets motion of itself. Matter has then the power of self-motion; + and nature, to act, has no need of a mover, whose pretended essence would + hinder him from acting. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0046" id="link2H_4_0046"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 42. + </h2> + <p> + Whence comes man? What is his origin? Did the first man spring, ready + formed, from the dust of the earth? Man appears, like all other beings, a + production of nature. Whence came the first stones, the first trees, the + first lions, the first elephants, the first ants, the first acorns? We are + incessantly told to acknowledge and revere the hand of God, of an + infinitely wise, intelligent and powerful maker, in so wonderful a work as + the human machine. I readily confess, that the human machine appears to me + surprising. But as man exists in nature, I am not authorized to say that + his formation, is above the power of nature. But I can much less conceive + of this formation, when to explain it, I am told, that a pure spirit, who + has neither eyes, feet, hands, head, lungs, mouth nor breath, made man by + taking a little clay, and breathing upon it. + </p> + <p> + We laugh at the savage inhabitants of Paraguay, for calling themselves the + descendants of the moon. The divines of Europe call themselves the + descendants, or the creation, of a pure spirit. Is this pretension any + more rational? Man is intelligent; thence it is inferred, that he can be + the work only of an intelligent being, and not of a nature, which is void + of intelligence. Although nothing is more rare, than to see man make use + of this intelligence, of which he seems so proud, I will grant that he is + intelligent, that his wants develop this faculty, that society especially + contributes to cultivate it. But I see nothing in the human machine, and + in the intelligence with which it is endued, that announces very precisely + the infinite intelligence of the maker to whom it is ascribed. I see that + this admirable machine is liable to be deranged; I see, that his wonderful + intelligence is then disordered, and sometimes totally disappears; I + infer, that human intelligence depends upon a certain disposition of the + material organs of the body, and that we cannot infer the intelligence of + God, any more from the intelligence of man, than from his materiality. All + that we can infer from it, is, that God is material. The intelligence of + man no more proves the intelligence of God, than the malice of man proves + the malice of that God, who is the pretended maker of man. In spite of all + the arguments of divines, God will always be a cause contradicted by its + effects, or of which it is impossible to judge by its works. We shall + always see evil, imperfection and folly result from such a cause, that is + said to be full of goodness, perfection and wisdom. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0047" id="link2H_4_0047"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 43. + </h2> + <p> + "What?" you will say, "is intelligent man, is the universe, and all it + contains, the effect of <i>chance</i>?" No; I repeat it, <i>the universe + is not an effect</i>; it is the cause of all effects; every being it + contains is the necessary effect of this cause, which sometimes shews us + its manner of acting, but generally conceals its operations. Men use the + word <i>chance</i> to hide their ignorance of true causes, which, though + not understood, act not less according to certain laws. There is no effect + without a cause. Nature is a word, used to denote the immense assemblage + of beings, various matter, infinite combinations, and diversified motions, + that we behold. All bodies, organized or unorganized, are necessary + effects of certain causes. Nothing in nature can happen by chance. Every + thing is subject to fixed laws. These laws are only the necessary + connection of certain effects with their causes. One atom of matter cannot + meet another <i>by chance</i>; this meeting is the effect of permanent + laws, which cause every being necessarily to act as it does, and hinder it + from acting otherwise, in given circumstances. To talk of the <i>fortuitous + concourse of atoms</i>, or to attribute some effects to chance, is merely + saying that we are ignorant of the laws, by which bodies act, meet, + combine, or separate. + </p> + <p> + Those, who are unacquainted with nature, the properties of beings, and the + effects which must necessarily result from the concurrence of certain + causes, think, that every thing takes place by chance. It is not chance, + that has placed the sun in the centre of our planetary system; it is by + its own essence, that the substance, of which it is composed, must occupy + that place, and thence be diffused. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0048" id="link2H_4_0048"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 44. + </h2> + <p> + The worshippers of a God find, in the order of the universe, an invincible + proof of the existence of an intelligent and wise being, who governs it. + But this order is nothing but a series of movements necessarily produced + by causes or circumstances, which are sometimes favourable, and sometimes + hurtful to us: we approve of some, and complain of others. + </p> + <p> + Nature uniformly follows the same round; that is, the same causes produce + the same effects, as long as their action is not disturbed by other + causes, which force them to produce different effects. When the operation + of causes, whose effects we experience, is interrupted by causes, which, + though unknown, are not the less natural and necessary, we are confounded; + we cry out, <i>a miracle!</i> and attribute it to a cause much more + unknown, than any of those acting before our eyes. + </p> + <p> + The universe is always in order. It cannot be in disorder. It is our + machine, that suffers, when we complain of disorder. The bodies, causes, + and beings, which this world contains, necessarily act in the manner in + which we see them act, whether we approve or disapprove of their effects. + Earthquakes, volcanoes, inundations, pestilences, and famines are effects + as necessary, or as much in the order of nature, as the fall of heavy + bodies, the courses of rivers, the periodical motions of the seas, the + blowing of the winds, the fruitful rains, and the favourable effects, for + which men praise God, and thank him for his goodness. + </p> + <p> + To be astonished that a certain order reigns in the world, is to be + surprised that the same causes constantly produce the same effects. To be + shocked at disorder, is to forget, that when things change, or are + interrupted in their actions, the effects can no longer be the same. To + wonder at the order of nature, is to wonder that any thing can exist; it + is to be surprised at any one's own existence. What is order to one being, + is disorder to another. All wicked beings find that every thing is in + order, when they can with impunity put every thing in disorder. They find, + on the contrary, that every thing is in disorder, when they are disturbed + in the exercise of their wickedness. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0049" id="link2H_4_0049"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 45. + </h2> + <p> + Upon supposition that God is the author and mover of nature, there could + be no disorder with respect to him. Would not all the causes, that he + should have made, necessarily act according to the properties, essences, + and impulses given them? If God should change the ordinary course of + nature, he would not be immutable. If the order of the universe, in which + man thinks he sees the most convincing proof of the existence, + intelligence, power and goodness of God, should happen to contradict + itself, one might suspect his existence, or, at least, accuse him of + inconstancy, impotence, want of foresight and wisdom in the arrangement of + things; one would have a right to accuse him of an oversight in the choice + of the agents and instruments, which he makes, prepares, and puts in + action. In short, if the order of nature proves the power and intelligence + of the Deity, disorder must prove his weakness, instability, and + irrationality. + </p> + <p> + You say, that God is omnipresent, that he fills the universe with his + immensity, that nothing is done without him, that matter could not act + without his agency. But in this case, you admit, that your God is the + author of disorder, that it is he who deranges nature, that he is the + father of confusion, that he is in man, and moves him at the moment he + sins. If God is every where, he is in me, he acts with me, he is deceived + with me, he offends God with me, and combats with me the existence of God! + O theologians! you never understand yourselves, when you speak of God. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0050" id="link2H_4_0050"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 46. + </h2> + <p> + In order to have what we call intelligence, it is necessary to have ideas, + thoughts, and wishes; to have ideas, thoughts, and wishes, it is necessary + to have organs; to have organs, it is necessary to have a body; to act + upon bodies, it is necessary to have a body; to experience disorder, it is + necessary to be capable of suffering. Whence it evidently follows, that a + pure spirit can neither be intelligent, nor affected by what passes in the + universe. + </p> + <p> + Divine intelligence, ideas, and views, have, you say, nothing common with + those of men. Very well. How then can men judge, right or wrong, of these + views; reason upon these ideas; or admire this intelligence? This would be + to judge, admire, and adore that, of which we can have no ideas. To adore + the profound views of divine wisdom, is it not to adore that, of which we + cannot possibly judge? To admire these views, is it not to admire without + knowing why? Admiration is always the daughter of ignorance. Men admire + and adore only what they do not comprehend. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0051" id="link2H_4_0051"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 47. + </h2> + <p> + All those qualities, ascribed to God, are totally incompatible with a + being, who, by his very essence, is void of all analogy with human beings. + It is true, the divines imagine they extricate themselves from this + difficulty, by exaggerating the human qualities, attributed to the + Divinity; they enlarge them to infinity, where they cease to understand + themselves. What results from this combination of man with God? A mere + chimera, of which, if any thing be affirmed, the phantom, combined with so + much pains, instantly vanishes. + </p> + <p> + Dante, in his poem upon <i>Paradise</i>, relates, that the Deity appeared + to him under the figure of three circles, forming an iris, whose lively + colours generated each other; but that, looking steadily upon the dazzling + light, he saw only his own figure. While adoring God, it is himself, that + man adores. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0052" id="link2H_4_0052"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 48. + </h2> + <p> + Ought not the least reflection suffice to prove, that God can have none of + the human qualities, all ties, virtues, or perfections? Our virtues and + perfections are consequences of the modifications of our passions. But has + God passions as we have? Again: our good qualities consist in our + dispositions towards the beings with whom we live in society. God, + according to you, is an insulated being. God has no equals—no + fellow-beings. God does not live in society. He wants the assistance of no + one. He enjoys an unchangeable felicity. Admit then, according to your own + principles, that God cannot have what we call virtues, and that man cannot + be virtuous with respect to him. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0053" id="link2H_4_0053"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 49. + </h2> + <p> + Man, wrapped up in his own merit, imagines the human race to be the sole + object of God in creating the universe. Upon what does he found this + flattering opinion? We are told: that man is the only being endued with + intelligence, which enables him to know the Deity, and to render him + homage. We are assured, that God made the world only for his own glory, + and that it was necessary that the human species should come into this + plan, that there might be some one to admire his works, and glorify him + for them. But, according to these suppositions, has not God evidently + missed his object? 1st. Man, according to yourselves, will always labour + under the completest impossibility of knowing his God, and the most + invincible ignorance of his divine essence. 2ndly. A being, who has no + equal, cannot be susceptible of glory; for glory can result only from the + comparison of one's own excellence with that of others. 3rdly. If God be + infinitely happy, if he be self-sufficient, what need has he of the homage + of his feeble creatures? 4thly. God, notwithstanding all his endeavours, + is not glorified; but, on the contrary, all the religions in the world + represent him as perpetually offended; their sole object is to reconcile + sinful, ungrateful, rebellious man with his angry God. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0054" id="link2H_4_0054"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 50. + </h2> + <p> + If God be infinite, he has much less relation with man, than man with + ants. Would the ants reason pertinently concerning the intentions, + desires, and projects of the gardener? Could they justly imagine, that a + park was planted for them alone, by an ostentatious monarch, and that the + sole object of his goodness was to furnish them with a superb residence? + But, according to theology, man is, with respect to God, far below what + the vilest insect is to man. Thus, by theology itself, which is wholly + devoted to the attributes and views of the Divinity, theology appears a + complete folly. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0055" id="link2H_4_0055"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 51. + </h2> + <p> + We are told, that, in the formation of the universe, God's only object was + the happiness of man. But, in a world made purposely for him, and governed + by an omnipotent God, is man in reality very happy? Are his enjoyments + durable? Are not his pleasures mixed with pains? Are many persons + satisfied with their fate? Is not man continually the victim of physical + and moral evils? Is not the human machine, which is represented as a + master-piece of the Creator's skill, liable to derangement in a thousand + ways? Should we be surprised at the workmanship of a mechanic, who should + shew us a complex machine, ready to stop every moment, and which, in a + short time, would break in pieces of itself? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0056" id="link2H_4_0056"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 52. + </h2> + <p> + The generous care, displayed by the Deity in providing for the wants, and + watching over the happiness of his beloved creatures, is called <i>Providence</i>. + But, when we open our eyes, we find that God provides nothing. Providence + sleeps over the greater part of the inhabitants of this world. For a very + small number of men who are supposed to be happy, what an immense + multitude groan under oppression, and languish in misery! Are not nations + forced to deprive themselves of bread, to administer to the extravagances + of a few gloomy tyrants, who are no happier than their oppressed slaves? + </p> + <p> + At the same time that our divines emphatically expatiate upon the goodness + of Providence, while they exhort us to repose our confidence in her, do we + not hear them, at the sight of unforeseen catastrophes, exclaim, that <i>Providence + sports with the vain projects of man</i>, that she frustrates their + designs, that she laughs at their efforts, that profound wisdom delights + to bewilder the minds of mortals? But, shall we put confidence in a + malignant Providence, who laughs at, and sports with mankind? How will one + admire the unknown ways of a hidden wisdom, whose manner of acting is + inexplicable? Judge of it by effects, you will say. We do; and find, that + these effects are sometimes useful, and sometimes hurtful. + </p> + <p> + Men think they justify Providence, by saying, that, in this world, there + is much more good than evil to every individual of mankind. Supposing the + good, we enjoy from Providence, is to the evil, as a <i>hundred to ten</i>; + will it not still follow, that, for a hundred degrees of goodness, + Providence possesses ten of malignity; which is incompatible with the + supposed perfection of the divine nature. + </p> + <p> + Almost all books are filled with the most flattering praises of + Providence, whose attentive care is highly extolled. It would seem as if + man, to live happily here below, needed not his own exertions. Yet, + without his own labour, man could subsist hardly a day. To live, he is + obliged to sweat, toil, hunt, fish, and labour without intermission. + Without these second causes, the first cause, at least in most countries, + would provide for none of our wants. In all parts of the globe, we see + savage and civilized man in a perpetual struggle with Providence. He is + necessitated to ward off the strokes directed against him by Providence, + in hurricanes, tempests, frosts, hail-storms, inundations, droughts, and + the various accidents, which so often render useless all his labours. In a + word, we see man continually occupied in guarding against the ill offices + of that Providence, which is supposed to be attentive to his happiness. + </p> + <p> + A bigot admired divine Providence for wisely ordering rivers to pass + through those places, where men have built large cities. Is not this man's + reasoning as rational, as that of many learned men, who incessantly talk + of <i>final causes</i>, or who pretend that they clearly perceive the + beneficent views of God in the formation of all things? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0057" id="link2H_4_0057"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 53. + </h2> + <p> + Do we see then, that Providence so very sensibly manifests herself in the + preservation of those admirable works, which we attribute to her? If it is + she, who governs the world, we find her as active in destroying, as in + forming; in exterminating, as in producing. Does she not every moment + destroy, by thousands, the very men, to whose preservation and welfare we + suppose her continually attentive? Every moment she loses sight of her + beloved creature. Sometimes she shakes his dwelling, sometimes she + annihilates his harvests, sometimes she inundates his fields, sometimes + she desolates them by a burning drought. She arms all nature against man. + She arms man himself against his own species, and commonly terminates his + existence in anguish. Is this then what is called preserving the universe? + </p> + <p> + If we could view, without prejudice, the equivocal conduct of Providence + towards the human race and all sensible beings, we should find, that far + from resembling a tender and careful mother, she resembles rather those + unnatural mothers, who instantly forgetting the unfortunates of their + licentious love, abandon their infants, as soon as they are born, and who, + content with having borne them, expose them, helpless, to the caprice of + fortune. + </p> + <p> + The Hottentots, in this respect are much wiser than other nations, who + treat them as barbarians, and refuse to worship God; because, they say, <i>if + he often does good, he often does evil</i>. Is not this manner of + reasoning more just and conformable to experience, than that of many men, + who are determined to see, in their God, nothing but goodness, wisdom, and + foresight, and who refuse to see that the innumerable evils, of which this + world is the theatre, must come from the same hand, which they kiss with + delight? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0058" id="link2H_4_0058"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 54. + </h2> + <p> + Common sense teaches, that we cannot, and ought not, to judge of a cause, + but by its effects. A cause can be reputed constantly good, only when it + constantly produces good. A cause, which produces both good and evil, is + sometimes good, and sometimes evil. But the logic of theology destroys all + this. According to that, the phenomena of nature, or the effects we behold + in this world, prove to us the existence of a cause infinitely good; and + this cause is God. Although this world is full of evils; although disorder + often reigns in it; although men incessantly repine at their hard fate; we + must be convinced, that these effects are owing to a beneficent and + immutable cause; and many people believe it, or feign believe. + </p> + <p> + Every thing that passes in the world, proves to us, in the clearest + manner, that it is not governed by an intelligent being. We can judge of + the intelligence of a being only by the conformity of the means, which he + employs to attain his proposed object. The object of God, is the happiness + of a man. Yet, a like necessity governs the fate of all sensible beings, + who are born only to suffer much, enjoy little, and die. The cup of man is + filled with joy and bitterness; good is every where attended with evil; + order gives place to disorder; generation is followed by destruction. If + you say, that the designs of God are mysterious and that his ways are + impenetrable; I answer, that, in this case, it is impossible to judge + whether God be intelligent. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0059" id="link2H_4_0059"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 55. + </h2> + <p> + You pretend, that God is immutable! What then produces a continual + instability in this world, which you make his empire? Is there a state, + subject to more frequent and cruel revolutions, than that of this unknown + monarch? How can we attribute to an immutable God, sufficiently powerful + to give solidity to his works, a government, in which every thing is in + continual vicissitude? If I imagine I see a God of uniform character in + all the effects favourable to my species, what kind of a God can I see in + their continual misfortunes? You tell me, it is our sins, which compel him + to punish. I answer, that God, according to yourselves, is then not + immutable, since the sins of men force him to change his conduct towards + them. Can a being, who is sometimes provoked, and sometimes appeased, be + constantly the same? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0060" id="link2H_4_0060"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 56. + </h2> + <p> + The universe can be only what it is; all sensible beings in it enjoy and + suffer; that is, are moved sometimes in an agreeable, and sometimes in a + disagreeable manner. These effects are necessary; they result necessarily + from causes, which act only according to their properties. These effects + necessarily please, or displease, by a consequence of nature. This same + nature compels me to avoid, avert, and resist some things, and to seek, + desire, and procure others. In a world, where every thing is necessary, a + God, who remedies nothing, who leaves things to run in their necessary + course,—is he any thing but destiny, or necessity personified? It is + a deaf and useless God, who can effect no change in general laws, to which + he is himself subject. Of what importance is the infinite power of a + being, who will do but very little in my favour? Where is the infinite + goodness of a being, indifferent to happiness? Of what service is the + favour of a being, who, is able to do an infinite good, does not do even a + finite one? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0061" id="link2H_4_0061"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 57. + </h2> + <p> + When we ask, why so many miserable objects appear under the government of + a good God, we are told, by way of consolation, that the present world is + only a passage, designed to conduct man to a happier one. The divines + assure us, that the earth we inhabit, is a state of trial. In short, they + shut our mouths, by saying, that God could communicate to his creatures + neither impossibility nor infinite happiness, which are reserved for + himself alone. Can such answers be satisfactory? 1st. The existence of + another life is guaranteed to us only by the imagination of man, who, by + supposing it, have only realized the desire they have of surviving + themselves, in order to enjoy hereafter a purer and more durable + happiness. 2ndly. How can we conceive that a God, who knows every thing, + and must be fully acquainted with the dispositions of his creatures, + should want so many experiments, in order to be sure of their + dispositions? 3rdly. According to the calculations of their chronologists, + our earth has existed six or seven thousand years. During that time, + nations have experienced calamities. History exhibits the human species at + all times tormented and ravaged by tyrants, conquerors, and heroes; by + wars, inundations, famines, plagues, etc. Are such long trials then likely + to inspire us with very great confidence in the secret views of the Deity? + Do such numerous and constant evils give a very exalted idea of the future + state, his goodness is preparing for us? 4thly. If God is so kindly + disposed, as he is asserted to be, without giving men infinite happiness, + could he not at least have communicated the degree of happiness, of which + finite beings are susceptible here below? To be happy, must we have an <i>infinite</i> + or <i>divine</i> happiness? 5thly. If God could not make men happier than + they are here below, what will become of the hope of a <i>paradise</i>, + where it is pretended, that the elect will for ever enjoy ineffable bliss? + If God neither could nor would avert evil from the earth, the only + residence we can know, what reason have we to presume, that he can or will + avert evil from another world, of which we have no idea? Epicurus + observed: "either God would remove evil out of this world, and cannot; or + he can, and will not; or he has neither the power nor will; or, lastly, he + has both the power and will. If he has the will, and not the power, this + shews weakness, which is contrary to the nature of God. If he has the + power, and not the will, it is malignity; and this is no less contrary to + his nature. If he is neither able nor willing, he is both impotent and + malignant, and consequently cannot be God. If he be both willing and able + (which alone is consonant to the nature of God) whence comes evil, or why + does he not prevent it?" Reflecting minds are still waiting for a + reasonable solution of these difficulties; and our divines tell us, that + they will be removed only in a future life. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0062" id="link2H_4_0062"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 58. + </h2> + <p> + We are told of a pretended <i>scale of beings</i>. It is supposed, that + God has divided his creatures into different classes, in which each enjoys + the degree of happiness, of which it is susceptible. According to this + romantic arrangement, from the oyster to the celestial angels, all beings + enjoy a happiness, which is suitable to their nature. Experience + explicitly contradicts this sublime reverie. In this world, all sensible + beings suffer and live in the midst of dangers. Man cannot walk without + hurting, tormenting, or killing a multitude of sensible beings, which are + in his way; while he himself is exposed, at every step, to a multitude of + evils, foreseen or unforeseen, which may lead him to destruction. During + the whole course of his life, he is exposed to pains; he is not sure, a + moment, of his existence, to which he is so strongly attached, and which + he regards as the greatest gift of the Divinity. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0063" id="link2H_4_0063"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 59. + </h2> + <p> + The world, it will be said, has all the perfection, of which it is + susceptible: since it is not God who made it, it must have great qualities + and great defects. But we answer, that, as the world must necessarily have + great defects, it would have been more conformable to the nature of a good + God, not to have created a world, which he could not make completely + happy. If God was supremely happy, before the creation of the world, and + could have continued to be supremely happy, without creating the world, + why did he not remain at rest? Why must man suffer? Why must man exist? Of + what importance is his existence to God? Nothing, or something? If man's + existence is not useful or necessary to God, why did God make man? If + man's existence is necessary to God's glory, he had need of man; he was + deficient in something before man existed. We can pardon an unskilful + workman for making an imperfect work; because he must work, well or ill, + upon penalty of starving. This workman is excusable, but God is not. + According to you, he is self-sufficient; if so, why does he make men? He + has, you say, every thing requisite to make man happy. Why then does he + not do it? Confess, that your God has more malice than goodness, unless + you admit, that God, was necessitated to do what he has done, without + being able to do it otherwise. Yet, you assure us, that God is free. You + say also, that he is immutable, although it was in <i>Time</i> that he + began and ceased to exercise his power, like the inconstant beings of this + world. O theologians! Vain are your efforts to free your God from defects. + This perfect God has always some human imperfections. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0064" id="link2H_4_0064"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 60. + </h2> + <p> + "Is not God master of his favours? Can he not give them? Can he not take + them away? It does not belong to his creatures to require reasons for his + conduct. He can dispose of the works of his own hands as he pleases. + Absolute sovereign of mortals, he distributes happiness or misery, + according to his good pleasure." Such are the solutions given by + theologians to console us for the evils which God inflicts upon us. We + reply, that a God, who is infinitely good, cannot be <i>master of his + favours</i>, but would by his nature be obliged to bestow them upon his + creatures; that a being, truly beneficent, cannot refrain from doing good; + that a being, truly generous, does not take back what he has given; and + that every man, who does so, dispenses with gratitude, and has no right to + complain of finding ungrateful men. + </p> + <p> + How can the odd and capricious conduct, which theologians ascribe to God, + be reconciled with religion, which supposes a covenant, or mutual + engagements between God and men? If God owes nothing to his creatures, + they, on their part, can owe nothing to their God. All religion is founded + upon the happiness that men think they have a right to expect from the + Deity, who is supposed to say to them: <i>Love me, adore me, obey me: and + I will make you happy</i>. Men, on their part, say to him: <i>Make us + happy, be faithful to your promises, and we will love you, we will adore + you, and obey your laws</i>. By neglecting the happiness of his creatures, + distributing his favours according to his caprice, and retracting his + gifts, does not God break the covenant, which serves as the basis of all + religion? Cicero has justly observed, that <i>if God is not agreeable to + man, he cannot be his God</i>. Goodness constitutes deity; this goodness + can be manifested to man only by the blessings he enjoys; as soon as he is + unhappy, this goodness disappears, and with it the divinity. An infinite + goodness can be neither limited, partial, nor exclusive. If God be + infinitely good, he owes happiness to all his creatures. The unhappiness + of a single being would suffice to annihilate unbounded goodness. Under an + infinitely good and powerful God, is it possible to conceive that a single + man should suffer? One animal, or mite, that suffers, furnishes invincible + arguments against divine providence and its infinite goodness. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0065" id="link2H_4_0065"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 61. + </h2> + <p> + According to theology, the afflictions and evils of this life are + chastisements, which guilty men incur from the hand of God. But why are + men guilty? If God is omnipotent, does it cost him more to say: "Let every + thing in the world be in order; let all my subjects be good, innocent, and + fortunate," than to say: "Let every thing exist"? Was it more difficult + for this God to do his work well, than badly? Religion tells us of a hell; + that is, a frightful abode, where, notwithstanding his goodness, God + reserves infinite torments for the majority of men. Thus after having + rendered mortals very unhappy in this world, religion tells them, that God + can render them still more unhappy in another! The theologian gets over + this, by saying, that the goodness of God will then give place to his + justice. But a goodness, which gives place to the most terrible cruelty, + is not an infinite goodness. Besides, can a God, who, after having been + infinitely good, becomes infinitely bad, be regarded as an immutable + being? Can we discern the shadow of clemency or goodness, in a God filled + with implacable fury? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0066" id="link2H_4_0066"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 62. + </h2> + <p> + Divine justice, as stated by our divines, is undoubtedly a quality very + proper to cherish in us the love of the Divinity. According to the ideas + of modern theology, it is evident, that God has created the majority of + men, with the sole view of putting them in a fair way to incur eternal + punishment. Would it not have been more conformable to goodness, reason, + and equity, to have created only stones or plants, and not to have created + sensible beings; than to have formed men, whose conduct in this world + might subject them to endless punishment in the other? A God perfidious + and malicious enough to create a single man, and then to abandon him to + the danger of being damned, cannot be regarded as a perfect being; but as + an unreasonable, unjust, and ill-natured. Very far from composing a + perfect God, theologians have formed the most imperfect of beings. + According to theological notions, God would resemble a tyrant, who, having + put out the eyes of the greater part of his slaves, should shut them up in + a dungeon, where, for his amusement, he would, incognito, observe their + conduct through a trap-door, in order to punish with rigour all those, + who, while walking about, should hit against each other; but who would + magnificently reward the few whom he had not deprived of sight, in + avoiding to run against their comrades. Such are the ideas, which the + dogma of gratuitous predestination gives us of the divinity! + </p> + <p> + Although men are continually repeating that their God is infinitely good; + yet it is evident, that in reality, they can believe nothing of the kind. + How can we love what we do not know? How can we love a being, whose + character is only fit to throw us into inquietude and trouble? How can we + love a being, of whom all that is said tends to render him an object of + utter detestation? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0067" id="link2H_4_0067"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 63. + </h2> + <p> + Many people make a subtle distinction between true religion and + superstition. They say, that the latter is only a base and inordinate fear + of the Deity; but that the truly religious man has confidence in his God, + and loves him sincerely; whereas, the superstitious man sees in him only + an enemy, has no confidence in him, and represents him to himself as a + distrustful, cruel tyrant, sparing of his benefits, lavish of his + chastisements. But, in reality, does not all religion give us the same + ideas of God? At the same time that we are told, that God is infinitely + good, are we not also told, that he is very easily provoked, that he + grants his favours to a few people only, and that he furiously chastises + those, to whom he has not been pleased to grant favours? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0068" id="link2H_4_0068"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 64. + </h2> + <p> + If we take our ideas of God from the nature of things, where we find a + mixture of good and evil, this God, just like the good and evil of which + we experience, must naturally appear capricious, inconstant, sometimes + good, and sometimes malevolent; and therefore, instead of exciting our + love, must generate distrust, fear, and uncertainty. There is then no real + difference between natural religion, and the most gloomy and servile + superstition. If the theist sees God only in a favourable light; the bigot + views him in the most hideous light. The folly of the one is cheerful, + that of the other is melancholy; but both are equally delirious. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0069" id="link2H_4_0069"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 65. + </h2> + <p> + If I draw my ideas of God from theology, he appears to inspire aversion. + Devotees, who tell us, that they sincerely love their God, are either + liars or fools, who see their God only in profile. It is impossible to + love a being, the very idea of whom strikes us with terror, and whose + judgments make us tremble. How can we, without being alarmed, look upon a + God, who is reputed to be barbarous enough to damn us? Let not divines + talk to us of a filial, or respectful fear, mixed with love, which men + ought to have for their God. A son can by no means love his father, when + he knows him to be cruel enough to inflict upon him studied torments for + the least faults he may commit. No man upon earth can have the least spark + of love for a God, who reserves chastisements, infinite in duration and + violence, for ninety-nine hundredths of his children. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0070" id="link2H_4_0070"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 66. + </h2> + <p> + The inventors of the dogma of eternal hell-torments have made of that God, + whom they call so good, the most detestable of beings. Cruelty in men is + the last act of wickedness. Every sensible mind must revolt at the bare + recital of the torments, inflicted on the greatest criminal; but cruelty + is much more apt to excite indignation, when void of motives. The most + sanguinary tyrants, the Caligulas, the Neros, the Domitians, had, at + least, some motives for tormenting their victims. These motives were, + either their own safety, or the fury of revenge, or the design of + frightening by terrible examples, or perhaps the vanity of making a + display of their power, and the desire of satisfying a barbarous + curiosity. Can a God have any of these motives? In tormenting the victims + of his wrath, he would punish beings, who could neither endanger his + immoveable power, nor disturb his unchangeable felicity. On the other + hand, the punishments of the other life would be useless to the living, + who cannot be witnesses of them. These punishments would be useless to the + damned, since in hell there is no longer room for conversion, and the time + of mercy is past. Whence it follows, that God, in the exercise of his + eternal vengeance, could have no other end than to amuse himself, and + insult the weakness of his creatures. I appeal to the whole human race;—is + there a man who feels cruel enough coolly to torment, I do not say his + fellow-creature, but any sensible being whatever, without emolument, + without profit, without curiosity, without having any thing to fear? + Confess then, O theologians, that, even according to your own principles, + your God is infinitely more malevolent than the worst of men. + </p> + <p> + Perhaps you will say, that infinite offences deserve infinite punishments. + I answer, that we cannot offend a God, whose happiness is infinite; that + the offences of finite beings cannot be infinite; that a God, who is + unwilling to be offended, cannot consent that the offences of his + creatures should be eternal; that a God, infinitely good, can neither be + infinitely cruel, nor grant his creatures an infinite duration, solely for + the pleasure of eternal torments. + </p> + <p> + Nothing but the most savage barbarity, the most egregious roguery, or the + blindest ambition could have imagined the doctrine of eternal punishments. + If there is a God, whom we can offend or blaspheme, there are not upon + earth greater blasphemers than those, who dare to say, that this same God + is a tyrant, perverse enough to delight, during eternity, in the useless + torments of his feeble creatures. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0071" id="link2H_4_0071"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 67. + </h2> + <p> + To pretend, that God can be offended at the actions of men, is to + annihilate all the ideas, which divines endeavour to give us, in other + respects, of this being. To say, that man can trouble the order of the + universe; that he can kindle the thunder in the hands of his God; that he + can defeat his projects, is to say, that man is stronger than his God, + that he is the arbiter of his will, that it depends upon him to change his + goodness into cruelty. Theology continually pulls down, with one hand, + what it erects with the other. If all religion is founded upon a God, who + is provoked and appeased, all religion is founded on a palpable + contradiction. + </p> + <p> + All religions agree in exalting the wisdom and infinite power of the + Deity. But no sooner do they display his conduct, than we see nothing but + imprudence, want of foresight, weakness and folly. God, it is said, + created the world for himself; and yet, hitherto, he has never been able + to make himself suitably honoured by it. God created men in order to have, + in his dominions, subjects to render him their homage; and yet, we see men + in continual revolt against him. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0072" id="link2H_4_0072"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 68. + </h2> + <p> + They incessantly extol the divine perfections; and when we demand proofs + of them, they point to his works, in which, they assure us, these + perfections are written in indelible characters. All these works are, + however, imperfect and perishable. Man, who is ever regarded as the most + marvellous work, as the master-piece of the Deity, is full of + imperfections, which render him disagreeable to the eyes of the almighty + Being, who formed him. This surprising work often becomes so revolting and + odious to its author, that he is obliged to throw it into the fire. But, + if the fairest of God's works is imperfect, how can we judge of the divine + perfections? Can a work, with which the author himself is so little + pleased, induce us to admire the ability of its Maker? Man, considered in + a physical sense, is subject to a thousand infirmities, to numberless + evils, and to death. Man, considered in a moral sense, is full of faults; + yet we are unceasingly told, that he is the most beautiful work of the + most perfect of beings. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0073" id="link2H_4_0073"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 69. + </h2> + <p> + In creating beings more perfect than men, it appears, that heretofore God + has not better succeeded, nor given stronger proofs of his perfection. Do + we not see, in many religions, that angels, have even attempted to + dethrone him? God proposed the happiness of angels and men; yet, he has + never been able to render happy either angels or men;—the pride, + malice, sins, and imperfections of the creatures have always opposed the + will of the perfect Creator. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0074" id="link2H_4_0074"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 70. + </h2> + <p> + All religion is obviously founded upon this principle, that <i>God does + what he can, and man what he will</i>. Every system of religion presents + to us an unequal combat between the Deity on one part, and his creatures + on the other, in which the former never comes off to his honour. + Notwithstanding his omnipotence, he cannot succeed in rendering the works + of his hands such as he would have them. To complete the absurdity, there + is a religion, which pretends, that God himself has died to redeem + mankind; and yet, men are not farther from any thing, than they are from + what God would have them. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0075" id="link2H_4_0075"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 71. + </h2> + <p> + Nothing is more extravagant, than the part, theology makes the Divinity + act in every country. Did he really exist, we should see in him the most + capricious, and senseless being. We should be compelled to believe, that + God made the world only to be the theatre of his disgraceful wars with his + creatures; that he created angels, men, and demons, only to make + adversaries, against whom he might exercise his power. He renders men free + to offend him, malicious enough to defeat his projects, too obstinate to + submit; and all this merely for the pleasure of being angry, appeased, + reconciled, and of repairing the disorder they have made. Had the Deity at + once formed his creatures such as he would have them, what pains would he + not have spared himself, or, at least, from what embarrassments would he + not have relieved his theologians! + </p> + <p> + Every religion represents God as busy only in doing himself evil. He + resembles those empirics, who inflict upon themselves wounds, to have an + opportunity of exhibiting to the public the efficacy of their ointment. + But we see not, that the Deity has hitherto been able radically to cure + himself of the evil, which he suffers from man. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0076" id="link2H_4_0076"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 72. + </h2> + <p> + God is the author of all; and yet, we are assured that evil does not come + from God. Whence then does it come? From man. But, who made man? God. Evil + then comes from God. If he had not made man as he is, moral evil or sin + would not have existed in the world. The perversity of man is therefore + chargeable to God. If man has power to do evil, or to offend God, we are + forced to infer, that God chooses to be offended; that God, who made man, + has resolved that man shall do evil; otherwise man would be an effect + contrary to the cause, from which he derives his being. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0077" id="link2H_4_0077"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 73. + </h2> + <p> + Man ascribes to God the faculty of foreseeing, or knowing beforehand + whatever will happen; but this prescience seldom turns to his glory, nor + protects him from the lawful reproaches of man. If God foreknows the + future, must he not have foreseen the fall of his creatures? If he + resolved in his decrees to permit this fall, it is undoubtedly because it + was his will that this fall should take place, otherwise it could not have + happened. If God's foreknowledge of the sins of his creatures had been + necessary or forced, one might suppose, that he has been constrained by + his justice to punish the guilty; but, enjoying the faculty of foreseeing, + and the power of predetermining every thing, did it not depend upon God + not to impose upon himself cruel laws, or, at least, could he not dispense + with creating beings, whom he might be under the necessity of punishing, + and rendering unhappy by a subsequent decree? Of what consequence is it, + whether God has destined men to happiness or misery by an anterior decree, + an effect of his prescience, or by a posterior decree, an effect of his + justice? Does the arrangement of his decrees alter the fate of the + unhappy? Would they not have the same right to complain of a God, who, + being able to omit their creation, has notwithstanding created them, + although he plainly foresaw that his justice would oblige him, sooner or + later, to punish them? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0078" id="link2H_4_0078"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 74. + </h2> + <p> + "Man," you say, "when he came from the hand of God, was pure, innocent, + and good; but his nature has been corrupted, as a punishment for sin." If + man, when just out of the hands of his God, could sin, his nature was + imperfect. Why did God suffer him to sin, and his nature to be corrupted? + Why did God permit him to be seduced, well knowing that he was too feeble + to resist temptation? Why did God create <i>satan</i>, an evil spirit, a + tempter? Why did not God, who wishes so much good to the human race, + annihilate once for all so many evil genii, who are naturally enemies of + our happiness; or rather, why did God create evil spirits, whose victories + and fatal influence over mankind, he must have foreseen? In fine, by what + strange fatality in all religions of the world, has the evil principle + such a decided advantage over the good principle, or the divinity? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0079" id="link2H_4_0079"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 75. + </h2> + <p> + There is related an instance of simplicity, which does honour to the heart + of an Italian monk. One day, while preaching, this pious man thought he + must announce to his audience, that he had, thank heaven, at last + discovered, by dint of meditation, a sure way of rendering all men happy. + "The devil," said he, "tempts men only to have in hell companions of his + misery. Let us therefore apply to the Pope, who has the keys of heaven and + hell; let us prevail upon him to pray to God, at the head of the whole + church, to consent to a reconciliation with the devil, to restore him to + favour, to reinstate him in his former rank, which cannot fail to put an + end to his malicious projects against mankind." Perhaps the honest monk + did not see, that the devil is at least as useful as God to the ministers + of religion. They have too much interest in their dissensions, to be + instrumental in an accommodation between two enemies, upon whose combats + their own existence and revenues depend. Let men cease to be tempted and + to sin, and the ministry of priests will be useless. Manicheism is + evidently the hinge of every religion; but unhappily, the devil, invented + to clear the deity from the suspicion of malice, proves to us, every + moment, the impotence or unskilfulness of his celestial adversary. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0080" id="link2H_4_0080"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 76. + </h2> + <p> + The nature of man, it is said, was necessarily liable to corruption. God + could not communicate to him <i>impeccability</i>, which is an inalienable + attribute of his divine perfection. But if God could not make man + impeccable, why did he give himself the pains to make man, whose nature + must necessarily be corrupted, and who must consequently offend God? On + the other hand, if God himself could not make human nature impeccable, by + what right does he punish men for not being impeccable? It can be only by + the right of the strongest; but the right of the strongest is called + violence, and violence cannot be compatible with the justest of beings. + God would be supremely unjust, should he punish men for not sharing with + him his divine perfections, or for not being able to be gods like him. + </p> + <p> + Could not God, at least, have communicated to all men that kind of + perfection, of which their nature is susceptible? If some men are good, or + render themselves agreeable to their God, why has not that God done the + same favour, or given the same dispositions to all beings of our species? + Why does the number of the wicked so much exceed the number of the good? + Why, for one friend, has God ten thousand enemies, in a world, which it + depended entirely upon him to people with honest men? If it be true, that, + in heaven, God designs to form a court of saints, of elect, or of men who + shall have lived upon earth conformably to his views, would he not have + had a more numerous, brilliant, and honourable assembly, had he composed + it of all men, to whom, in creating them, he could grant the degree of + goodness, necessary to attain eternal happiness? Finally, would it not + have been shorter not to have made man, than to have created him a being + full of faults, rebellious to his creator, perpetually exposed to cause + his own destruction by a fatal abuse of his liberty? + </p> + <p> + Instead of creating men, a perfect God ought to have created only angels + very docile and submissive. Angels, it is said, are free; some have + sinned; but, at any rate, all have not abused their liberty by revolting + against their master. Could not God have created only angels of the good + kind? If God has created angels, who have not sinned, could he not have + created impeccable men, or men who should never abuse their liberty? If + the elect are incapable of sinning in heaven, could not God have made + impeccable men upon earth? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0081" id="link2H_4_0081"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 77. + </h2> + <p> + Divines never fail to persuade us, that the enormous distance which + separates God and man, necessarily renders the conduct of God a mystery to + us, and that we have no right to interrogate our master. Is this answer + satisfactory? Since my eternal happiness is at stake, have I not a right + to examine the conduct of God himself? It is only in hope of happiness + that men submit to the authority of a God. A despot, to whom men submit + only through fear, a master, whom they cannot interrogate, a sovereign + totally inaccessible, can never merit the homage of intelligent beings. If + the conduct of God is a mystery, it is not made for us. Man can neither + adore, admire, respect, nor imitate conduct, in which every thing is + inconceivable, or, of which he can often form only revolting ideas; unless + it is pretended, that we ought to adore every thing of which we are forced + to be ignorant, and that every thing, which we do not know, becomes for + that reason an object of admiration. Divines! You never cease telling us, + that the designs of God are impenetrable; that <i>his ways are not our + ways, nor his thoughts our thoughts</i>; that it is absurd to complain of + his administration, of the motives and springs of which we are totally + ignorant; that it is presumption to tax his judgments with injustice, + because we cannot comprehend them. But when you speak in this strain, do + you not perceive, that you destroy with your own hands all your profound + systems, whose only end is to explain to us the ways of the divinity, + which, you say, are impenetrable? Have you penetrated his judgments, his + ways, his designs? You dare not assert it, and though you reason about + them without end, you do not comprehend them any more than we do. If, by + chance, you know the plan of God, which you wish us to admire, while most + people find it so little worthy of a just, good, intelligent, and + reasonable being, no longer say, this plan is impenetrable. If you are as + ignorant of it as we are, have some indulgence for those who ingenuously + confess, they comprehend nothing in it, or that they see in it nothing + divine. Cease to persecute for opinions, of which you understand nothing + yourselves; cease to defame each other for dreams and conjectures, which + every thing seems to contradict. Talk to us of things intelligible and + really useful to men; and no longer talk to us of the impenetrable ways of + God, about which you only stammer and contradict yourselves. + </p> + <p> + By continually speaking of the immense depths of divine wisdom, forbidding + us to sound them, saying it is insolence to cite God before the tribunal + of our feeble reason, making it a crime to judge our master, divines teach + us nothing but the embarrassment they are in, when it is required to + account for the conduct of a God, whose conduct they think marvellous only + because they are utterly incapable of comprehending it themselves. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0082" id="link2H_4_0082"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 78. + </h2> + <p> + Physical evil is commonly regarded as a punishment for sin. Diseases, + famines, wars, earthquakes, are means which God uses to chastise wicked + men. Thus, they make no scruple of attributing these evils to the severity + of a just and good God. But, do not these scourges fall indiscriminately + upon the good and bad, upon the impious and devout, upon the innocent and + guilty? How, in this proceeding, would they have us admire the justice and + goodness of a being, the idea of whom seems comforting to so many + wretches, whose brain must undoubtedly be disordered by their misfortunes, + since they forget, that their God is the arbiter, the sole disposer of the + events of this world. This being the case, ought they not to impute their + sufferings to him, into whose arms they fly for comfort? Unfortunate + father! Thou consolest thyself in the bosom of Providence, for the loss of + a dear child, or beloved wife, who made thy happiness. Alas! Dost thou not + see, that thy God has killed them? Thy God has rendered thee miserable, + and thou desirest thy God to comfort thee for the dreadful afflictions he + has sent thee! + </p> + <p> + The chimerical or supernatural notions of theology have so succeeded in + destroying, in the minds of men, the most simple, dear, and natural ideas, + that the devout, unable to accuse God of malice, accustom themselves to + regard the several strokes of fate as indubitable proofs of celestial + goodness. When in affliction, they are ordered to believe that God loves + them, that God visits them, that God wishes to try them. Thus religion has + attained the art of converting evil into good! A profane person said with + reason—<i>If God Almighty thus treats those whom he loves, I + earnestly beseech him never to think of me</i>. + </p> + <p> + Men must have received very gloomy and cruel ideas of their God, who is + called so good, to believe that the most dreadful calamities and piercing + afflictions are marks of his favour! Would an evil genius, a demon, be + more ingenious in tormenting his enemies, than the God of goodness + sometimes is, who so often exercises his severity upon his dearest + friends? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0083" id="link2H_4_0083"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 79. + </h2> + <p> + What shall we say of a father, who, we are assured, watches without + intermission over the preservation and happiness of his weak and + short-sighted children, and who yet leaves them at liberty to wander at + random among rocks, precipices, and waters; who rarely hinders them from + following their inordinate appetites; who permits them to handle, without + precaution, murderous arms, at the risk of their life? What should we + think of the same father, if, instead of imputing to himself the evil that + happens to his poor children, he should punish them for their wanderings + in the most cruel manner? We should say, with reason, that this father is + a madman, who unites injustice to folly. A God, who punishes faults, which + he could have prevented, is a being deficient in wisdom, goodness, and + equity. A foreseeing God would prevent evil, and thereby avoid having to + punish it. A good God would not punish weaknesses, which he knew to be + inherent in human nature. A just God, if he made man, would not punish him + for not being made strong enough to resist his desires. <i>To punish + weakness is the most unjust tyranny.</i> Is it not calumniating a just + God, to say, that he punishes men for their faults, even in the present + life? How could he punish beings, whom it belonged to him alone to reform, + and who, while they have not <i>grace</i>, cannot act otherwise than they + do? + </p> + <p> + According to the principles of theologians themselves, man, in his present + state of corruption, can do nothing but evil, since, without divine grace, + he is never able to do good. Now, if the nature of man, left to itself, or + destitute of divine aid, necessarily determines him to evil, or renders + him incapable of good, what becomes of the free-will of man? According to + such principles, man can neither merit nor demerit. By rewarding man for + the good he does, God would only reward himself; by punishing man for the + evil he does, God would punish him for not giving him grace, without which + he could not possibly do better. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0084" id="link2H_4_0084"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 80. + </h2> + <p> + Theologians repeatedly tell us, that man is free, while all their + principles conspire to destroy his liberty. By endeavouring to justify the + Divinity, they in reality accuse him of the blackest injustice. They + suppose, that without grace, man is necessitated to do evil. They affirm, + that God will punish him, because God has not given him grace to do good! + </p> + <p> + Little reflection will suffice to convince us, that man is necessitated in + all his actions, that his free will is a chimera, even in the system of + theologians. Does it depend upon man to be born of such or such parents? + Does it depend upon man to imbibe or not to imbibe the opinions of his + parents or instructors? If I had been born of idolatrous or Mahometan + parents, would it have depended upon me to become a Christian? Yet, + divines gravely assure us, that a just God will damn without pity all + those, to whom he has not given grace to know the Christian religion! + </p> + <p> + Man's birth is wholly independent of his choice. He is not asked whether + he is willing, or not, to come into the world. Nature does not consult him + upon the country and parents she gives him. His acquired ideas, his + opinions, his notions true or false, are necessary fruits of the education + which he has received, and of which he has not been the director. His + passions and desires are necessary consequences of the temperament given + him by nature. During his whole life, his volitions and actions are + determined by his connections, habits, occupations, pleasures, and + conversations; by the thoughts, that are involuntarily presented to his + mind; in a word, by a multitude of events and accidents, which it is out + of his power to foresee or prevent. Incapable of looking into futurity, he + knows not what he will do. From the instant of his birth to that of his + death, he is never free. You will say, that he wills, deliberates, + chooses, determines; and you will hence conclude, that his actions are + free. It is true, that man wills, but he is not master of his will or his + desires; he can desire and will only what he judges advantageous to + himself; he can neither love pain, nor detest pleasure. It will be said, + that he sometimes prefers pain to pleasure; but then he prefers a + momentary pain with a view of procuring a greater and more durable + pleasure. In this case, the prospect of a greater good necessarily + determines him to forego a less considerable good. + </p> + <p> + The lover does not give his mistress the features which captivate him; he + is not then master of loving, or not loving the object of his tenderness; + he is not master of his imagination or temperament. Whence it evidently + follows, that man is not master of his volitions and desires. "But man," + you will say, "can resist his desires; therefore he is free." Man resists + his desires, when the motives, which divert him from an object, are + stronger than those, which incline him towards it; but then his resistance + is necessary. A man, whose fear of dishonour or punishment is greater than + his love of money, necessarily resists the desire of stealing. + </p> + <p> + "Are we not free, when we deliberate?" But, are we masters of knowing or + not knowing, of being in doubt or certainty? Deliberation is a necessary + effect of our uncertainty respecting the consequences of our actions. When + we are sure, or think we are sure, of these consequences, we necessarily + decide, and we then act necessarily according to our true or false + judgment. Our judgments, true or false, are not free; they are necessarily + determined by the ideas, we have received, or which our minds have formed. + </p> + <p> + Man is not free in his choice; he is evidently necessitated to choose what + he judges most useful and agreeable. Neither is he free, when he suspends + his choice; he is forced to suspend it until he knows, or thinks he knows, + the qualities of the objects presented to him, or, until he has weighed + the consequences of his actions. "Man," you will say, "often decides in + favour of actions, which he knows must be detrimental to himself; man + sometimes kills himself; therefore he is free." I deny it. Is man master + of reasoning well or ill? Do not his reason and wisdom depend upon the + opinions he has formed, or upon the conformation of his machine? As + neither one nor the other depends upon his will, they are no proof of + liberty. "If I lay a wager, that I shall do, or not do a thing, am I not + free? Does it not depend upon me to do it or not?" No, I answer; the + desire of winning the wager will necessarily determine you to do, or not + to do the thing in question. "But, supposing I consent to lose the wager?" + Then the desire of proving to me, that you are free, will have become a + stronger motive than the desire of winning the wager; and this motive will + have necessarily determined you to do, or not to do, the thing in + question. + </p> + <p> + "But," you will say, "I feel free." This is an illusion, that may be + compared to that of the fly in the fable, who, lighting upon the pole of a + heavy carriage, applauded himself for directing its course. Man, who + thinks himself free, is a fly, who imagines he has power to move the + universe, while he is himself unknowingly carried along by it. + </p> + <p> + The inward persuasion that we are free to do, or not to do a thing, is but + a mere illusion. If we trace the true principle of our actions, we shall + find, that they are always necessary consequences of our volitions and + desires, which are never in our power. You think yourself free, because + you do what you will; but are you free to will, or not to will; to desire, + or not to desire? Are not your volitions and desires necessarily excited + by objects or qualities totally independent of you? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0085" id="link2H_4_0085"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 81. + </h2> + <p> + "If the actions of men are necessary, if men are not free, by what right + does society punish criminals? Is it not very unjust to chastise beings, + who could not act otherwise than they have done?" If the wicked act + necessarily according to the impulses of their evil nature, society, in + punishing them, acts necessarily by the desire of self-preservation. + Certain objects necessarily produce in us the sensation of pain; our + nature then forces us against them, and avert them from us. A tiger, + pressed by hunger, springs upon the man, whom he wishes to devour; but + this man is not master of his fear, and necessarily seeks means to destroy + the tiger. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0086" id="link2H_4_0086"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 82. + </h2> + <p> + "If every thing be necessary, the errors, opinions, and ideas of men are + fatal; and, if so, how or why should we attempt to reform them?" The + errors of men are necessary consequences of ignorance. Their ignorance, + prejudice, and credulity are necessary consequences of their inexperience, + negligence, and want of reflection, in the same manner as delirium or + lethargy are necessary effects of certain diseases. Truth, experience, + reflection, and reason, are remedies calculated to cure ignorance, + fanaticism and follies. But, you will ask, why does not truth produce this + effect upon many disordered minds? It is because some diseases resist all + remedies; because it is impossible to cure obstinate patients, who refuse + the remedies presented to them; because the interest of some men, and the + folly of others, necessarily oppose the admission of truth. + </p> + <p> + A cause produces its effect only when its action is not interrupted by + stronger causes, which then weakens or render useless, the action of the + former. It is impossible that the best arguments should be adopted by men, + who are interested in error, prejudiced in its favour, and who decline all + reflection; but truth must necessarily undeceive honest minds, who seek + her sincerely. Truth is a cause; it necessarily produces its effects, when + its impulse is not intercepted by causes, which suspend its effects. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0087" id="link2H_4_0087"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 83. + </h2> + <p> + "To deprive man of his free will," it is said, "makes him a mere machine, + an automaton. Without liberty, he will no longer have either merit or + virtue." What is merit in man? It is a manner of acting, which renders him + estimable in the eyes of his fellow-beings. What is virtue? It is a + disposition, which inclines us to do good to others. What can there be + contemptible in machines, or automatons, capable of producing effects so + desirable? Marcus Aurelius was useful to the vast Roman Empire. By what + right would a machine despise a machine, whose springs facilitate its + action? Good men are springs, which second society in its tendency to + happiness; the wicked are ill-formed springs, which disturb the order, + progress, and harmony of society. If, for its own utility, society + cherishes and rewards the good, it also harasses and destroys the wicked, + as useless or hurtful. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0088" id="link2H_4_0088"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 84. + </h2> + <p> + The world is a necessary agent. All the beings, that compose it, are + united to each other, and cannot act otherwise than they do, so long as + they are moved by the same causes, and endued with the same properties. + When they lose properties, they will necessarily act in a different way. + God himself, admitting his existence, cannot be considered a free agent. + If there existed a God, his manner of acting would necessarily be + determined by the properties inherent in his nature; nothing would be + capable of arresting or altering his will. This being granted, neither our + actions, prayers, nor sacrifices could suspend, or change his invariable + conduct and immutable designs; whence we are forced to infer, that all + religion would be useless. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0089" id="link2H_4_0089"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 85. + </h2> + <p> + Were not divines in perpetual contradiction with themselves, they would + see, that, according to their hypothesis, man cannot be reputed free an + instant. Do they not suppose man continually dependent on his God? Are we + free, when we cannot exist and be preserved without God, and when we cease + to exist at the pleasure of his supreme will? If God has made man out of + nothing; if his preservation is a continued creation; if God cannot, an + instant, lose sight of his creature; if whatever happens to him, is an + effect of the divine will; if man can do nothing of himself; if all the + events, which he experiences, are effects of the divine decrees; if he + does no good without grace from on high, how can they maintain, that a man + enjoys a moment's liberty? If God did not preserve him in the moment of + sin, how could man sin? If God then preserves him, God forces him to + exist, that he may sin. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0090" id="link2H_4_0090"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 86. + </h2> + <p> + The Divinity is frequently compared to a king, whose revolted subjects are + the greater part of mankind; and it is said, he has a right to reward the + subjects who remain faithful to him, and to punish the rebellious. This + comparison is not just in any of its parts. God presides over a machine, + every spring of which he has created. These springs act agreeable to the + manner, in which God has formed them; he ought to impute it to his own + unskilfulness, if these springs do not contribute to the harmony of the + machine, into which it was his will to insert them. God is a created king, + who has created to himself subjects of every description; who has formed + them according to his own pleasure whose will can never find resistance. + If God has rebellious subjects in his empire, it is because God has + resolved to have rebellious subjects. If the sins of men disturb the order + of the world, it is because it is the will of God that this order should + be disturbed. + </p> + <p> + Nobody dares to call in question the divine justice; yet, under the + government of a just God, we see nothing but acts of injustice and + violence. Force decides the fate of nations, equity seems banished from + the earth; a few men sport, unpunished, with the peace, property, liberty, + and life of others. All is disorder in a world governed by a God who is + said to be infinitely displeased with disorder. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0091" id="link2H_4_0091"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 87. + </h2> + <p> + Although men are for ever admiring the wisdom, goodness, justice, and + beautiful order of Providence, they are, in reality, never satisfied with + it. Do not the prayers, continually addressed to heaven, shew, that men + are by no means satisfied with the divine dispensations? To pray to God + for a favour, shews diffidence of his watchful care; to pray to him to + avert or put an end to an evil, is to endeavour to obstruct the course of + his justice; to implore the assistance of God in our calamities, is to + address the author himself of these calamities, to represent to him, that + he ought, for our sake, to rectify his plan, which does not accord with + our interest. + </p> + <p> + The Optimist, or he who maintains that <i>all is well</i>, and who + incessantly cries that we live in <i>the best world possible</i>, to be + consistent, should never pray; neither ought he to expect another world, + where man will be happier. Can there be a better world than <i>the best + world possible</i>? Some theologians have treated the Optimists as + impious, for having intimated that God could not produce a better world, + than that in which we live. According to these doctors, it is to limit the + power of God, and to offer him insult. But do not these divines see, that + it shews much less indignity to God, to assert that he has done his best + in producing this world, than to say, that, being able to produce a + better, he has had malice enough to produce a very bad one? If the + Optimist, by his system, detracts from the divine power, the theologian, + who treats him as a blasphemer, is himself a blasphemer, who offends the + goodness of God in espousing the cause of his omnipotence. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0092" id="link2H_4_0092"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 88. + </h2> + <p> + When we complain of the evils, of which our world is the theatre, we are + referred to the other world, where it is said, God will make reparation + for all the iniquity and misery, which, for a time, he permits here below. + But if God, suffering his eternal justice to remain at rest for a long + time, could consent to evil during the whole continuance of our present + world, what assurance have we, that, during the continuance of another + world, divine justice will not, in like manner, sleep over the misery of + its inhabitants? + </p> + <p> + The divines console us for our sufferings by saying, that God is patient, + and that his justice, though often slow, is not the less sure. But do they + not see, that patience is incompatible with a just, immutable, and + omnipotent being? Can God then permit injustice, even for an instant? To + temporize with a known evil, announces either weakness, uncertainty, or + collusion. To tolerate evil, when one has power to prevent it, is to + consent to the commission of evil. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0093" id="link2H_4_0093"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 89. + </h2> + <p> + Divines every where exclaim, that God is infinitely just; but that <i>his + justice is not the justice of man</i>. Of what kind or nature then is this + divine justice? What idea can I form of a justice, which so often + resembles injustice? Is it not to confound all ideas of just and unjust, + to say, that what is equitable in God is iniquitous in his creatures? How + can we receive for our model a being, whose divine perfections are + precisely the reverse of human? + </p> + <p> + "God," it is said, "is sovereign arbiter of our destinies. His supreme + power, which nothing can limit, justly permits him to do with the works of + his own hands according to his good pleasure. A worm, like man, has no + right even to complain." This arrogant style is evidently borrowed from + the language, used by the ministers of tyrants, when they stop the mouths + of those who suffer from their violences. It cannot then be the language + of the ministers of a God, whose equity is highly extolled; it is not made + to be imposed upon a being, who reasons. Ministers of a just God! I will + inform you then, that the greatest power cannot confer upon your God + himself the right of being unjust even to the vilest of his creatures. A + despot is not a God. A God, who arrogates to himself the right of doing + evil, is a tyrant; a tyrant is not a model for men; he must be an object + execrable to their eyes. + </p> + <p> + Is it not indeed strange, that in order to justify the Divinity, they make + him every moment the most unjust of beings! As soon as we complain of his + conduct, they think to silence us by alleging, that <i>God is master</i>; + which signifies, that God, being the strongest, is not bound by ordinary + rules. But the right of the strongest is the violation of all rights. It + seems right only to the eyes of a savage conqueror, who in the heat of his + fury imagines, that he may do whatever he pleases with the unfortunate + victims, whom he has conquered. This barbarous right can appear legitimate + only to slaves blind enough to believe that everything is lawful to + tyrants whom they feel too weak to resist. + </p> + <p> + In the greatest calamities, do not devout persons, through a ridiculous + simplicity, or rather a sensible contradiction in terms, exclaim, that <i>the + Almighty is master</i>. Thus, inconsistent reasoners, believe, that the <i>Almighty</i> + (a Being, one of whose first attributes is goodness,) sends you + pestilence, war, and famine! You believe that the <i>Almighty</i>, this + good being, has the will and right to inflict the greatest evils, you can + bear! Cease, at least, to call your God <i>good</i>, when he does you + evil; say not, that he is just, say that he is the strongest, and that it + is impossible for you to ward off the blows of his caprice. + </p> + <p> + <i>God</i>, say you, <i>chastises only for our good</i>. But what real + good can result to a people from being exterminated by the plague, ravaged + by wars, corrupted by the examples of perverse rulers, continually crushed + under the iron sceptre of a succession of merciless tyrants, annihilated + by the scourges of a bad government, whose destructive effects are often + felt for ages? If chastisements are good, then they cannot have too much + of a good thing! <i>The eyes of faith</i> must be strange eyes, if with + them they see advantages in the most dreadful calamities, in the vices and + follies with which our species are afflicted. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0094" id="link2H_4_0094"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 90. + </h2> + <p> + What strange ideas of divine justice must Christians have, who are taught + to believe, that their God, in view of reconciling to himself the human + race, guilty, though unconscious, of the sin of their fathers, has put to + death his own son, who was innocent and incapable of sinning? What should + we say of a king, whose subjects should revolt, and who, to appease + himself, should find no other expedient than to put to death the heir of + his crown, who had not participated in the general rebellion? "It is," the + Christian will say, "through goodness to his subjects, unable of + themselves to satisfy divine justice, that God has consented to the cruel + death of his son." But the goodness of a father to strangers does not give + him the right of being unjust and barbarous to his own son. All the + qualities, which theology ascribes to God, reciprocally destroy one + another. The exercise of one of his perfections is always at the expense + of the exercise of another. + </p> + <p> + Has the Jew more rational ideas of divine justice than the Christian? The + pride of a king kindles the anger of heaven; <i>Jehovah</i> causes the + pestilence to descend upon his innocent people; seventy thousand subjects + are exterminated to expiate the fault of a monarch, whom the goodness of + God resolved to spare. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0095" id="link2H_4_0095"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 91. + </h2> + <p> + Notwithstanding the various acts of injustice, with which all religions + delight to blacken the Divinity, men cannot consent to accuse him of + iniquity. They fear, that, like the tyrants of this world, truth will + offend him, and redouble upon them the weight of his malice and tyranny. + They hearken therefore to their priests, who tell them, that their God is + a tender father; that this God is an equitable monarch whose object in + this world is to assure himself of the love, obedience and respect of his + subjects; who gives them liberty of acting only to afford them an + opportunity of meriting his favours, and of acquiring an eternal + happiness, which he does not owe them. By what signs can men discover the + tenderness of a father, who has given life to the greater part of his + children merely to drag out upon the earth a painful, restless, bitter + existence? Is there a more unfortunate present, than that pretended + liberty, which, we are told, men are very liable to abuse, and thereby to + incur eternal misery? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0096" id="link2H_4_0096"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 92. + </h2> + <p> + By calling mortals to life, what a cruel and dangerous part has not the + Deity forced them to act? Thrown into the world without their consent, + provided with a temperament of which they are not masters, animated by + passions and desires inherent in their nature, exposed to snares which + they have not power to escape, hurried away by events which they could not + foresee or prevent, unhappy mortals are compelled to run a career, which + may lead them to punishments horrible in duration and violence. + </p> + <p> + Travellers inform us, that, in Asia, a Sultan reigned, full of fantastical + ideas, and very absolute in his whims. By a strange madness, this prince + spent his time seated at a table, upon which were placed three dice and a + dice-box. One end of the table was covered with pieces of silver, designed + to excite the avarice of his courtiers and people. He, knowing the foible + of his subjects, addresses them as follows: <i>Slaves, I wish your + happiness. My goodness proposes to enrich you, and make you all happy. Do + you see these treasures? Well, they are for you; strive to gain them; let + each, in his turn, take the box and dice; whoever has the fortune to throw + sixes, shall be master of the treasure. But, I forewarn you, that he who + has not the happiness to throw the number required, shall be precipitated + for ever into a dark dungeon, where my justice demands that he be burned + with a slow fire.</i> Upon this discourse of the monarch, the company look + at each other affrighted. No one wishes to expose himself to so dangerous + a chance. <i>What!</i> says the enraged Sultan, <i>does no one offer to + play? I tell you then you must; My glory requires that you should play. + Play then; obey without replying.</i> It is well to observe, that the dice + of the despot are so prepared, that out of a hundred thousand throws, + there is but one, which can gain the number required. Thus the generous + monarch has the pleasure of seeing his prison well filled, and his riches + seldom ravished from him. Mortals! this SULTAN is your GOD; his TREASURE + IS HEAVEN; his DUNGEON IS HELL, and it is you who hold the DICE! + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0097" id="link2H_4_0097"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 93. + </h2> + <p> + Divines repeatedly assure us, that we owe Providence infinite gratitude + for the numberless blessings it bestows. They loudly extol the happiness + of existence. But, alas! how many mortals are truly satisfied with their + mode of existence? If life has sweets, with how much bitterness is it not + mixed? Does not a single chagrin often suffice suddenly to poison the most + peaceable and fortunate life? Are there many, who, if it were in their + power would begin again, at the same price, the painful career, in which, + without their consent, destiny has placed them? + </p> + <p> + They say, that existence is a great blessing. But is not this existence + continually troubled with fears, and maladies, often cruel and little + deserved? May not this existence, threatened on so many sides, be torn + from us any moment? Where is the man, who has not been deprived of a dear + wife, beloved child, or consoling friend, whose loss every moment intrudes + upon his thoughts? There are few, who have not been forced to drink of the + cup of misfortune; there are few, who have not desired their end. Finally, + it did not depend upon us to exist or not to exist. Should the bird then + be very grateful to the fowler for taking him in his net and confining him + in his cage for his diversion? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0098" id="link2H_4_0098"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 94. + </h2> + <p> + Notwithstanding the infirmities and misery which man is forced to undergo, + he has, nevertheless, the folly to think himself the favourite of his God, + the object of all his cares, the sole end of all his works. He imagines, + that the whole universe is made for him; he arrogantly calls himself the + <i>king of nature</i>, and values himself far above other animals. Mortal! + upon what canst thou found thy haughty pretensions? It is, sayest thou, + upon thy soul, upon thy reason, upon the sublime faculties, which enable + thee to exercise an absolute empire over the beings, which surround thee. + But, weak sovereign of the world; art thou sure, one moment, of the + continuance of thy reign? Do not the smallest atoms of matter, which thou + despisest, suffice to tear thee from thy throne, and deprive thee of life? + Finally, does not the king of animals at last become the food of worms? + Thou speakest of thy soul! But dost thou know what a soul is? Dost thou + not see, that this soul is only the assemblage of thy organs, from which + results life? Wouldst thou then refuse a soul to other animals, who live, + think, judge, and compare, like thee; who seek pleasure, and avoid pain, + like thee; and who often have organs, which serve them better than thine? + Thou boastest of thy intellectual faculties; but do these faculties, of + which thou art so proud, make thee happier than other animals? Dost thou + often make use of that reason, in which thou gloriest, and to which + religion commands thee not to listen? Are those brutes, which thou + disdainest, because they are less strong or less cunning than thou art, + subject to mental pains, to a thousand frivolous passions, to a thousand + imaginary wants, to which thou art a continual prey? Are they, like thee, + tormented by the past, alarmed at the future? Confined solely to the + present, does not what you call their <i>instinct</i>, and what I call + their <i>intelligence</i>, suffice to preserve and defend them, and to + supply them with all they want? Does not this instinct, of which thou + speakest with contempt, often serve them better than thy wonderful + faculties? Is not their peaceful ignorance more advantageous to them, than + those extravagant meditations and worthless researches, which render thee + unhappy, and for which thy zeal urges thee even to massacre the beings of + thy noble species? Finally, have these beasts, like so many mortals, a + troubled imagination, which makes them fear, not only death, but likewise + eternal torments? + </p> + <p> + Augustus, hearing that Herod, king of Judea, had put his sons to death, + exclaimed: <i>It is much better to be Herod's hog, than his son</i>. As + much may be said of man. This dear child of Providence runs far greater + risks than all other animals; having suffered much in this world, does he + not imagine, that he is in danger of suffering eternally in another? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0099" id="link2H_4_0099"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 95. + </h2> + <p> + Where is the precise line of distinction between man and the animals whom + he calls brutes? In what does he differ essentially from beasts? It is, we + are told, by his intelligence, by the faculties of his mind, and by his + reason, that man appears superior to all other animals, who, in all their + actions, move only by physical impulses, in which reason has no share. But + finally, brutes, having fewer wants than man, easily do without his + intellectual faculties, which would be perfectly useless in their mode of + existence. Their instinct is sufficient; while all the faculties of man + scarcely suffice to render his existence supportable, and to satisfy the + wants, which his imagination and his prejudices multiply to his torment. + </p> + <p> + Brutes are not influenced by the same objects, as man; they have not the + same wants, desires, nor fancies; and they very soon arrive to maturity, + while the mind of man seldom attains to the full enjoyment and free + exercise of its faculties and to such a use of them, as is conducive to + his happiness. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0100" id="link2H_4_0100"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 96. + </h2> + <p> + We are assured, that the human soul is a simple substance. It should then + be the same in every individual, each having the same intellectual + faculties; yet this is not the case. Men differ as much in the qualities + of the mind, as in the features of the face. There are human beings as + different from one another, as man is from a horse or a dog. What + conformity or resemblance do we find between some men? What an infinite + distance is there between the genius of a Locke or a Newton, and that of a + peasant, Hottentot, or Laplander? + </p> + <p> + Man differs from other animals only in his organization, which enables him + to produce effects, of which animals are not capable. The variety, + observable in the organs of individuals of the human species suffices to + explain the differences in what is called their intellectual faculties. + More or less delicacy in these organs, warmth in the blood, mobility in + the fluids, flexibility or stiffness in the fibres and nerves, must + necessarily produce the infinite diversity, which we observe in the minds + of men. It is by exercise, habit and education, that the mind is unfolded + and becomes superior to that of others. Man, without culture and + experience, is as void of reason and industry, as the brute. A stupid man + is one, whose organs move with difficulty, whose brain does not easily + vibrate, whose blood circulates slowly. A man of genius is he, whose + organs are flexible, whose sensations are quick, whose brain vibrates with + celerity. A learned man is he, whose organs and brain have been long + exercised upon objects to which he is devoted. + </p> + <p> + Without culture, experience, or reason, is not man more contemptible and + worthy of hatred, than the vilest insects or most ferocious beasts? Is + there in nature a more detestable being, than a Tiberius, a Nero, or a + Caligula? Have those destroyers of the human race, known by the name of + conquerors, more estimable souls than bears, lions, or panthers? Are there + animals in the world more detestable than tyrants? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0101" id="link2H_4_0101"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 97. + </h2> + <p> + The superiority which man so gratuitously arrogates to himself over other + animals, soon vanishes in the light of reason, when we reflect on human + extravagances. How many animals shew more mildness, reflection, and + reason, than the animal, who calls himself reasonable above all others? + Are there among men, so often enslaved and oppressed, societies as well + constituted as those of the ants, bees, or beavers? Do we ever see + ferocious beasts of the same species mangle and destroy one another + without profit? Do we ever see religious wars among them? The cruelty of + beasts towards other species arises from hunger, the necessity of + nourishment; the cruelty of man towards man arises only from the vanity of + his masters and the folly of his impertinent prejudices. Speculative men, + who endeavour to make us believe, that all in the universe was made for + man, are much embarrassed, when we ask, how so many hurtful animals can + contribute to the happiness of man? What known advantage results to the + friend of the gods, from being bitten by a viper, stung by a gnat, + devoured by vermin, torn in pieces by a tiger, etc.? Would not all these + animals reason as justly as our theologians, should they pretend that man + was made for them? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0102" id="link2H_4_0102"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 98. + </h2> + <h3> + AN EASTERN TALE. + </h3> + <p> + At some distance from Bagdad, a hermit, renowned for his sanctity, passed + his days in an agreeable solitude. The neighbouring inhabitants, to obtain + an interest in his prayers, daily flocked to his hermitage, to carry him + provisions and presents. The holy man, without ceasing, gave thanks to God + for the blessings, with which providence loaded him. "O Allah!" said he, + "how ineffable is thy love to thy servants. What have I done to merit the + favours, that I receive from thy bounty? O Monarch of the skies! O Father + of nature! what praises could worthily celebrate thy munificence, and thy + paternal care! O Allah! how great is thy goodness to the children of men!" + Penetrated with gratitude, the hermit made a vow to undertake, for the + seventh time, a pilgrimage to Mecca. The war which then raged between the + Persians and Turks, could not induce him to defer his pious enterprise. + Full of confidence in God, he sets out under the inviolable safeguard of a + religious habit. He passes through the hostile troops without any + obstacle; far from being molested, he receives, at every step, marks of + veneration from the soldiers of the two parties. At length, borne down + with fatigue, he is obliged to seek refuge against the rays of a scorching + sun; he rests under the cool shade of a group of palm-trees. In this + solitary place, the man of God finds not only an enchanting retreat, but a + delicious repast. He has only to put forth his hand to gather dates and + other pleasant fruits; a brook affords him the means of quenching his + thirst. A green turf invites him to sleep; upon waking he performs the + sacred ablution, and exclaims in a transport of joy: "O Allah! how great + is thy goodness to the children of men!" After this perfect refreshment, + the saint, full of strength and gaiety, pursues his way; it leads him + across a smiling country, which presents to his eyes flowery hillocks, + enamelled meadows, and trees loaded with fruit. Affected by this sight, he + ceases not to adore the rich and liberal hand of providence, which appears + every where providing for the happiness of the human race. Going a little + farther, the mountains are pretty difficult to pass; but having once + arrived at the summit, a hideous spectacle suddenly appears to his view. + His soul is filled with horror. He discovers a vast plain laid waste with + fire and sword; he beholds it covered with hundreds of carcases, the + deplorable remains of a bloody battle, lately fought upon this field. + Eagles, vultures, ravens and wolves were greedily devouring the dead + bodies with which the ground was covered. This sight plunges our pilgrim + into a gloomy meditation. Heaven, by special favour, had enabled him to + understand the language of beasts. He heard a wolf, gorged with human + flesh, cry out in the excess of his joy: "O Allah! how great is thy + goodness to the children of wolves. Thy provident wisdom takes care to + craze the minds of these detestable men, who are so dangerous to our + species. By an effect of thy Providence, which watches over thy creatures, + these destroyers cut one another's throats, and furnish us with sumptuous + meals. O Allah! how great is thy goodness to the children of wolves!" + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0103" id="link2H_4_0103"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 99. + </h2> + <p> + A heated imagination sees in the universe only the blessings of heaven; a + calmer mind finds in it both good and evil. "I exist," say you; but is + this existence always a good? "Behold," you say, "that sun, which lights; + this earth, which for you is covered with crops and verdure; these + flowers, which bloom to regale your senses; these trees, which bend under + the weight of delicious fruits; these pure waters, which run only to + quench your thirst; those seas, which embrace the universe to facilitate + your commerce; these animals, which a foreseeing nature provides for your + use." Yes; I see all these things, and I enjoy them. But in many climates, + this beautiful sun is almost always hidden; in others, its excessive heat + torments, creates storms, produces frightful diseases, and parches the + fields; the pastures are without verdure, the trees without fruit, the + crops are scorched, the springs are dried up; I can only with difficulty + subsist, and now complain of the cruelties of nature, which to you always + appears so beneficent. If these seas bring me spices, and useless + commodities, do they not destroy numberless mortals, who are foolish + enough to seek them? The vanity of man persuades him, that he is the sole + center of the universe; he creates for himself a world and a God; he + thinks himself of sufficient consequence to derange nature at his + pleasure. But, concerning other animals, he reasons like an atheist. Does + he not imagine, that the individuals different from his own are automatons + unworthy of the blessings of universal providence, and that brutes cannot + be objects of his justice or goodness? Mortals regard the happy or unhappy + events, health or sickness, life or death, plenty or want, as rewards or + punishments for the right use or abuse of the liberty, with which they + erroneously imagine themselves endowed. Do they reason in the same manner + concerning the brutes? No. Although they see them, under a just God, enjoy + and suffer, equally subject to health and sickness, live and die, like + themselves, it never occurs to them to ask by what crime, these beasts + could have incurred the displeasure of their Creator? Have not men, + blinded by their religious prejudices, in order to free themselves from + embarrassment, carried their folly so far as to pretend that beasts have + no feeling? + </p> + <p> + Will men never renounce their foolish pretensions? Will they never + acknowledge that nature is not made for them? Will they never see that + nature has placed equality among all beings she has produced? Will they + never perceive that all organized beings are equally made to be born and + die, enjoy and suffer? Finally, far from having any cause to be puffed up + with their mental faculties, are they not forced to grant, that these + faculties often make them more unhappy than beasts, in which we find + neither opinions, prejudices, vanities, nor follies, which every moment + decide the welfare of man? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0104" id="link2H_4_0104"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 100. + </h2> + <p> + The superiority which men arrogate over other animals, is chiefly founded + upon their opinion, that they have the exclusive possession of an immortal + soul. But ask them what this soul is, and they are puzzled. They will say, + it is an unknown substance—a secret power distinct from their bodies—a + spirit, of which they have no idea. Ask them how this spirit, which they + suppose to be like their God wholly void of extension, could combine + itself with their material bodies, and they will tell you, they know + nothing about it; that it is to them a mystery; that this combination is + an effect of the omnipotence of God. These are the ideas that men form of + the hidden, or rather imaginary substance, which they consider as the main + spring of all their actions! + </p> + <p> + If the soul is a substance essentially different from the body, and can + have no relation to it, their union would be, not a mystery, but an + impossibility. Besides, this soul being of a nature different from the + body, must necessarily act in a different manner; yet we see that this + pretended soul is sensible of the motions experienced by the body, and + that these two substances, essentially different, always acts in concert. + You will say that this harmony is also a mystery. But I will tell you, + that I see not my soul, that I know and am sensible of my body only, that + it is this body which feels, thinks, judges, suffers, and enjoys; and that + all these faculties are necessary results of its own mechanism, or + organization. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0105" id="link2H_4_0105"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 101. + </h2> + <p> + Although it is impossible for men to form the least idea of the soul, or + the pretended spirit, which animates them; yet they persuade themselves + that this unknown soul is exempt from death. Every thing proves to them, + that they feel, that they think, that they acquire ideas, that they enjoy + and suffer, only by means of the senses, or material organs of the body. + Admitting even the existence of this soul, they cannot help acknowledging, + that it depends entirely upon the body, and undergoes, all its + vicissitudes; and yet it is imagined, that this soul has nothing, in its + nature, similar to the body; that it can act and feel without the + assistance of the body; in a word, that this soul, freed from the body, + and disengaged from its senses, can live, enjoy, suffer, experience + happiness, or feel excruciating torments. Upon such a tissue of + absurdities is built the marvellous opinion of the <i>immortality of the + soul</i>. If I ask, what are the motives for believing the soul immortal, + they immediately answer, that it is because man naturally desires to be + immortal: but, because you desire a thing ardently, can you infer that + your desire will be fulfilled? By what strange logic can we dare affirm, + that a thing cannot fail to happen, because we ardently desire it? Are + desires, begotten by the imagination, the measure of reality? The impious, + you say, deprived of the flattering hope of another life, wish to be + annihilated. Very well: may they not then as justly conclude, from <i>their</i> + desire, that they shall be annihilated, as you may conclude from <i>your</i> + desire, that you shall exist for ever. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0106" id="link2H_4_0106"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 102. + </h2> + <p> + Man dies, and the human body after death is no longer anything but a mass + incapable of producing those motions, of which the sum total constituted + life. We see, that it has no longer circulation, respiration, digestion, + speech, or thought. It is pretended, that the soul is then separated from + the body; but to say, that this soul, with which we are unacquainted, is + the principle of life, is to say nothing, unless that an unknown power is + the hidden principle of imperceptible movements. Nothing is more natural + and simple, than to believe, that the dead man no longer lives: nothing is + more extravagant, than to believe, that the dead man is still alive. We + laugh at the simplicity of some nations, whose custom is to bury provision + with the dead, under an idea that it will be useful and necessary to them + in the other life. Is it then more ridiculous or absurd to suppose, that + men will eat after death, than to imagine, that they will think, that they + will be actuated by agreeable or disagreeable ideas, that they will enjoy + or suffer, and that they will experience repentance or delight, after the + organs, adapted to produce sensations or ideas, are once dissolved. To say + that the souls of men will be happy or unhappy after death, is in other + words to say, that men will see without eyes, hear without ears, taste + without palates, smell without noses, and touch without hands. And + persons, who consider themselves very reasonable, adopt these ideas! + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0107" id="link2H_4_0107"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 103. + </h2> + <p> + The dogma of the immortality of the soul supposes the soul to be a simple + substance; in a word, a spirit. But I ask again, what is a spirit? "It + is," say you, "a substance void of extension, incorruptible, having + nothing common with matter." If so, how is your soul born, and how does it + grow, how does it strengthen or weaken itself, how does it get disordered + and grow old, in the same progression as your body? + </p> + <p> + To all these questions you answer, that these are mysteries. If so, you + cannot understand them. If you cannot understand them, why do you decide + about a thing, of which you are unable to form the least idea? To believe + or affirm any thing, it is necessary, at least, to know in what it + consists. To believe in the existence of your immaterial soul, is to say, + that you are persuaded of the existence of a thing, of which it is + impossible for you to form any true notion; it is to believe in words + without meaning. To affirm that the thing is as you say, is the height of + folly or vanity. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0108" id="link2H_4_0108"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 104. + </h2> + <p> + Are not theologians strange reasoners? Whenever they cannot divine the <i>natural</i> + causes of things, they invent what they call <i>supernatural</i>; such as + spirits, occult causes, inexplicable agents, or rather <i>words</i>, much + more obscure than the <i>things</i> they endeavour to explain. Let us + remain in nature, when we wish to account for the phenomena of nature; let + us be content to remain ignorant of causes too delicate for our organs; + and let us be persuaded, that, by going beyond nature, we shall never + solve the problems which nature presents. + </p> + <p> + Even upon the hypothesis of theology, (that is, supposing an all-powerful + mover of matter,) by what right would theologians deny, that their God has + power to give this matter the faculty of thought? Was it then more + difficult for him to create combinations of matter, from which thought + might result, than spirits who could think? At least, by supposing matter, + which thinks, we should have some notions of the subject of thought, or of + what thinks in us; whereas, by attributing thought to an immaterial being, + it is impossible to form the least idea of it. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0109" id="link2H_4_0109"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 105. + </h2> + <p> + It is objected against us, that materialism makes man a mere machine, + which is said to be very dishonourable. But, will it be much more + honourable for man, if we should say, that he acts by the secret impulses + of a spirit, or by a certain <i>I know not what</i>, that animates him in + a manner totally inexplicable. + </p> + <p> + It is easy to perceive, that the supposed superiority of <i>spirit</i> + over matter, or of the soul over the body, has no other foundation than + men's ignorance of this soul, while they are more familiarized with <i>matter</i>, + with which they imagine they are acquainted, and of which they think they + can discern the origin. But the most simple movements of our bodies are to + every man, who studies them, as inexplicable as thought. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0110" id="link2H_4_0110"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 106. + </h2> + <p> + The high value, which so many people set upon spiritual substance, has no + other motive than their absolute inability to define it intelligibly. The + contempt shewn for <i>matter</i> by our metaphysicians, arises only from + the circumstance, that familiarity begets contempt. When they tell us, + that <i>the soul is more excellent and noble than the body</i>, they say + what they know not. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0111" id="link2H_4_0111"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 107. + </h2> + <p> + The dogma of another life is incessantly extolled, as useful. It is + maintained, that even though it should be only a fiction, it is + advantageous, because it deceives men, and conducts them to virtue. But is + it true, that this dogma makes men wiser and more virtuous? Are the + nations, who believe this fiction, remarkable for purity of morals? Has + not the visible world ever the advantage over the invisible? If those, who + are trusted with the instruction and government of men, had knowledge and + virtue themselves, they would govern them much better by realities, than + by fictions. But crafty, ambitious and corrupt legislators, have every + where found it better to amuse with fables, than to teach them truths, to + unfold their reason, to excite them to virtue by sensible and real + motives, in fine, to govern them in a rational manner. Priests undoubtedly + had reasons for making the soul immaterial; they wanted souls to people + the imaginary regions, which they have discovered in the other life. + Material souls would, like all bodies, have been subject to dissolution. + Now, if men should believe, that all must perish with the body, the + geographers of the other world would evidently lose the right of guiding + men's souls towards that unknown abode; they would reap no profits from + the hope with which they feed them, and the terrors with which they + oppress them. If futurity is of no real utility to mankind, it is, at + least, of the greatest utility to those, who have assumed the office of + conducting them thither. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0112" id="link2H_4_0112"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 108. + </h2> + <p> + "But," it will be said, "is not the dogma of the immortality of the soul + comforting to beings, who are often very unhappy here below? Though it + should be an error, is it not pleasing? Is it not a blessing to man to + believe, that he shall be able to enjoy hereafter a happiness, which is + denied him upon earth?" Thus, poor mortals! you make your wishes the + measure of truth; because you desire to live for ever, and to be happier, + you at once conclude, that you shall live for ever, and that you shall be + more fortunate in an unknown world, than in this known world, where you + often find nothing but affliction! Consent therefore to leave, without + regret, this world which gives the greater part of you much more torment + than pleasure. Submit to the order of nature, which demands that you, as + well as all other beings, should not endure for ever. + </p> + <p> + We are incessantly told, that religion has infinite consolations for the + unfortunate, that the idea of the soul's immortality, and of a happier + life, is very proper to elevate man, and to support him under adversity, + which awaits him upon earth. It is said, on the contrary, that materialism + is an afflicting system, calculated to degrade man; then it puts him upon + a level with the brutes, breaks his courage, and shows him no other + prospect than frightful annihilation, capable of driving him to despair + and suicide, whenever he is unhappy. The great art of theologians is to + blow hot and cold, to afflict and console, to frighten and encourage. + </p> + <p> + It appears by theological fictions, that the regions of the other life are + happy and unhappy. Nothing is more difficult than to become worthy of the + abode of felicity; nothing more easy than to obtain a place in the abode + of torment, which God is preparing for the unfortunate victims of eternal + fury. Have those then, who think the other life so pleasant and + flattering, forgotten, that according to them, that life is to be attended + with torments to the greater part of mortals? Is not the idea of total + annihilation infinitely preferable to the idea of an eternal existence, + attended with anguish and <i>gnashing of teeth</i>? Is the fear of an end + more afflicting, than that of having had a beginning! The fear of ceasing + to exist is a real evil only to the imagination, which alone begat the + dogma of another life. + </p> + <p> + Christian ministers say that the idea of a happier life is joyous. + Admitted. Every person would desire a more agreeable existence than that + he enjoys here. But, if paradise is inviting, you will grant, that hell is + frightful. Heaven is very difficult, and hell very easy to be merited. Do + you not say, that a <i>narrow</i> way leads to the happy regions, and a <i>broad</i> + way to the regions of misery? Do you not often say, that <i>the number of + the elect is very small, and that of the reprobate very large</i>? Is not + Grace, which your God grants but to a very few, necessary to salvation? + Now, I assure you, that these ideas are by no means consoling; that I had + rather be annihilated, once for all, than to burn for ever; that the fate + of beasts is to me more desirable than that of the damned; that the + opinion which relieves me from afflicting fears in this world, appears to + me more joyous, than the uncertainty arising from the opinion of a God, + who, master of his grace, grants it to none but his favourites, and + permits all others to become worthy of eternal torment. Nothing but + enthusiasm or folly can induce a man to prefer improbable conjectures, + attended with uncertainty and insupportable fears. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0113" id="link2H_4_0113"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 109. + </h2> + <p> + All religious principles are the work of pure imagination, in which + experience and reason have no share. It is extremely difficult to combat + them, because the imagination, once prepossessed by chimeras, which + astonish or disturb it, is incapable of reasoning. To combat religion and + its phantoms with the arms of reason, is like using a sword to kill gnats; + as soon as the blow is struck, the gnats and chimeras come hovering round + again, and resume in the mind the place, from which they were thought to + have been for ever banished. + </p> + <p> + When we reject, as too weak, the proofs given of the existence of a God, + they instantly oppose to the arguments, which destroy that existence, an + <i>inward sense</i>, a deep persuasion, an invincible inclination, born in + every man, which holds up to his mind, in spite of himself, the idea of an + almighty being, whom he cannot entirely expel from his mind, and whom he + is compelled to acknowledge, in spite of the strongest reasons that can be + urged. But whoever will analyse this <i>inward sense</i>, upon which such + stress is laid, will perceive, that it is only the effect of a rooted + habit, which, shutting their eyes against the most demonstrative proofs, + subjects the greater part of men, and often even the most enlightened, to + the prejudices of childhood. What avails this inward sense, or this deep + persuasion, against the evidence, which demonstrates, that <i>whatever + implies a contradiction cannot exist</i>? + </p> + <p> + We are gravely assured, that the non-existence of God is not demonstrated. + Yet, by all that men have hitherto said of him, nothing is better + demonstrated, than that this God is a chimera, whose existence is totally + impossible; since nothing is more evident, than that a being cannot + possess qualities so unlike, so contradictory, so irreconcilable, as + those, which every religion upon earth attributes to the Divinity. Is not + the theologian's God, as well as that of the deist, a cause incompatible + with the effects attributed to it? Let them do what they will, it is + necessary either to invent another God, or to grant, that he, who, for so + many ages, has been held up to the terror of mortals, is at the same time + very good and very bad, very powerful and very weak, unchangeable and + fickle, perfectly intelligent and perfectly void of reason, of order and + permitting disorder, very just and most unjust, very skilful and + unskilful. In short, are we not forced to confess, that it is impossible + to reconcile the discordant attributes, heaped upon a being, of whom we + cannot speak without the most palpable contradictions? Let any one + attribute a single quality to the Divinity, and it is universally + contradicted by the effects, ascribed to this cause. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0114" id="link2H_4_0114"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 110. + </h2> + <p> + Theology might justly be defined the <i>science of contradictions</i>. + Every religion is only a system, invented to reconcile irreconcilable + notions. By the aid of habit and terror, man becomes obstinate in the + greatest absurdities, even after they are exposed in the clearest manner. + All religions are easily combated, but with difficulty extirpated. Reason + avails nothing against custom, which becomes, says the proverb, <i>a + second nature</i>. Many persons, in other respects sensible, even after + having examined the rotten foundation of their belief, adhere to it in + contempt of the most striking arguments. Whenever we complain of religion, + its shocking absurdities, and impossibilities, we are told that we are not + made to understand the truths of religion; that reason goes astray, and is + capable of leading us to perdition; and moreover, that <i>what is folly in + the eyes of man, is wisdom in the eyes of God</i>, to whom nothing is + impossible. In short, to surmount, by a single word, the most + insurmountable difficulties, presented on all sides by theology, they get + rid of them by saying, these are <i>mysteries</i>! + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0115" id="link2H_4_0115"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 111. + </h2> + <p> + What is a mystery? By examining the thing closely, I soon perceive, that a + mystery is nothing but a contradiction, a palpable absurdity, a manifest + impossibility, over which theologians would oblige men humbly to shut + their eyes. In a word, a mystery is whatever our spiritual guides cannot + explain. + </p> + <p> + It is profitable to the ministers of religion, that people understand + nothing of what they teach. It is impossible to examine what we do not + comprehend; when we do not see, we must suffer ourselves to be led. If + religion were clear, priests would find less business. + </p> + <p> + Without mysteries there can be no religion; mystery is essential to it; a + religion void of mysteries, would be a contradiction in terms. The God, + who serves as the foundation of <i>natural religion</i>, or <i>deism</i>, + is himself the greatest of mysteries. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0116" id="link2H_4_0116"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 112. + </h2> + <p> + Every revealed religion is filled with mysterious dogmas, unintelligible + principles, incredible wonders, astonishing recitals, which appear to have + been invented solely to confound reason. Every religion announces a hidden + God, whose essence is a mystery; consequently, the conduct, ascribed to + him, is no less inconceivable than his essence. The Deity has never spoken + only in an enigmatical and mysterious manner, in the various religions, + which have been founded in different regions of our globe; he has + everywhere revealed himself only to announce mysteries; that is, to inform + mortals, that he intended they should believe contradictions, + impossibilities, and things to which they were incapable of affixing any + clear ideas. + </p> + <p> + The more mysterious and incredible a religion is, the more power it has to + please the imagination of men. The darker a religion is, the more it + appears divine, that is, conformable to the nature of a hidden being, of + whom they have no ideas. Ignorance prefers the unknown, the hidden, the + fabulous, the marvellous, the incredible, or even the terrible, to what is + clear, simple, and true. Truth does not operate upon the imagination in so + lively a manner as fiction, which, in other respects, everyone is able to + arrange in his own way. The vulgar like to listen to fables. Priests and + legislators, by inventing religions and forging mysteries have served the + vulgar people well. They have thereby gained enthusiasts, women and fools. + Beings of this stamp are easily satisfied with things, which they are + incapable of examining. The love of simplicity and truth is to be found + only among the few, whose imagination is regulated by study and + reflection. + </p> + <p> + The inhabitants of a village are never better pleased with their parson, + than when he introduces Latin into his sermon. The ignorant always + imagine, that he, who speaks to them of things they do not understand, is + a learned man. Such is the true principle of the credulity of the people, + and of the authority of those, who pretend to guide nations. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0117" id="link2H_4_0117"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 113. + </h2> + <p> + To announce mysteries to men, is to give and withhold; it is to talk in + order not to be understood. He, who speaks only obscurely, either seeks to + amuse himself by the embarrassment, which he causes, or finds his interest + in not explaining himself too clearly. All secrecy indicates distrust, + impotence, and fear. Princes and their ministers make a mystery of their + projects, for fear their enemies should discover and render them abortive. + Can a good God amuse himself by perplexing his creatures? What interest + then could he have in commanding his ministers to announce riddles and + mysteries? + </p> + <p> + It is said, that man, by the weakness of his nature, is totally incapable + of understanding the divine dispensations, which can be to him only a + series of mysteries; God cannot disclose to him secrets, necessarily above + his reach. If so, I answer again, that man is not made to attend to the + divine dispensations; that these dispensations are to him by no means + interesting; that he has no need of mysteries, which he cannot understand; + and consequently, that a mysterious religion is no more fit for him, than + an eloquent discourse is for a flock of sheep. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0118" id="link2H_4_0118"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 114. + </h2> + <p> + The Deity has revealed himself with so little uniformity in the different + countries of our globe, that in point of religion, men regard one another + with hatred and contempt. The partisans of the different sects think each + other very ridiculous and foolish. Mysteries, most revered in one + religion, are objects of derision to another. God, in revealing himself to + mankind, ought at least, to have spoken the same language to all, and + saved their feeble minds the perplexity of inquiring which religion really + emanated from him, or what form of worship is most acceptable in his + sight. + </p> + <p> + A universal God ought to have revealed a universal religion. By what + fatality then are there so many different religions upon earth? Which is + really right, among the great number of those, each of which exclusively + pretends to be the true one? There is great reason to believe, that no + religion enjoys this advantage. Division and disputes upon opinions are + indubitable signs of the uncertainty and obscurity of the principles, upon + which they build. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0119" id="link2H_4_0119"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 115. + </h2> + <p> + If religion were necessary at all, it ought to be intelligible to all. If + this religion were the most important concern of men, the goodness of God + would seem to demand, that it should be to them of all things the most + clear, evident, and demonstrative. Is it not then astonishing, that this + thing so essential to the happiness of mortals, is precisely that, which + they understand least, and about which, for so many ages, their teachers + have most disputed? Priests have never agreed upon the manner of + understanding the will of a God, who has revealed himself. + </p> + <p> + The world, may be compared to a public fair, in which are several + empirics, each of whom endeavours to attract the passengers by decrying + the remedies sold by his brothers. Each shop has its customers, who are + persuaded, that their quacks possess the only true remedies; and + notwithstanding a continual use of them, they perceive not the inefficacy + of these remedies, or that they are as infirm as those, who run after the + quacks of a different shop. + </p> + <p> + Devotion is a disorder of the imagination contracted in infancy. The + devout man is a hypochondriac, who only augments his malady by the + application of remedies. The wise man abstains from them entirely; he pays + attention to his diet, and in other respects leaves nature to her course. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0120" id="link2H_4_0120"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 116. + </h2> + <p> + To a man of sense, nothing appears more ridiculous, than the opinions, + which the partisans of the different religions with equal folly entertain + of each other. A Christian regards the <i>Koran</i>, that is, the divine + revelation announced by Mahomet, as nothing but a tissue of impertinent + reveries, and impostures insulting to the divinity. The Mahometan, on the + other hand, treats the Christian as an <i>idolater</i> and a <i>dog</i>. + He sees nothing but absurdities in his religion. He imagines he has a + right to subdue the Christian, and to force him, sword in hand, to receive + the religion of his divine prophet. Finally, he believes, that nothing is + more impious and unreasonable, than to worship a man, or to believe in the + Trinity. The <i>protestant</i> Christian who without scruple worships a + man, and firmly believes the inconceivable mystery of the <i>trinity</i>, + ridicules the <i>catholic</i> Christian for believing in the mystery of <i>transubstantiation</i>; + he considers him mad, impious, and idolatrous, because he kneels to + worship some bread, in which he thinks he sees God. Christians of every + sect regard, as silly stories, the incarnations of <i>Vishnu</i>, the God + of the Indies; they maintain, that the only true <i>incarnation</i> is + that of <i>Jesus</i>, son of a carpenter. The deist, who calls himself the + follower of a religion, which he supposes to be that of nature, content + with admitting a God, of whom he has no idea, makes a jest of all the + mysteries, taught by the various religions in the world. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0121" id="link2H_4_0121"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 117. + </h2> + <p> + Is there any thing more contradictory, impossible, or mysterious, than the + creation of matter by an immaterial being, who, though immutable, operates + continual changes in the world? Is any thing more incompatible with every + notion of common sense, than to believe, that a supremely good, wise, + equitable and powerful being presides over nature, and by himself directs + the movements of a world, full of folly, misery, crimes and disorders, + which by a single word, he could have prevented or removed? In fine, + whenever we admit a being as contradictory as the God of theology, how can + we reject the most improbable fables, astonishing miracles, and profound + mysteries. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0122" id="link2H_4_0122"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 118. + </h2> + <p> + The Deist exclaims: "Abstain from worshipping the cruel and capricious God + of theology; mine is a being infinitely wise and good; he is the father of + men, the mildest of sovereigns; it is he who fills the universe with his + benefits." But do you not see that every thing in this world contradicts + the good qualities, which you ascribe to your God? In the numerous family + of this tender father, almost all are unhappy. Under the government of + this just sovereign, vice is triumphant, and virtue in distress. Among + those blessings you extol, and which only enthusiasm can see, I behold a + multitude of evils, against which you obstinately shut your eyes. Forced + to acknowledge, that your beneficent God, in contradiction with himself, + distributes good and evil with the same hand, for his justification you + must, like the priest, refer me to the regions of another life. Invent, + therefore, another God; for yours is no less contradictory than that of + theologians. + </p> + <p> + A good God, who does evil, or consents to the commission of evil; a God + full of equity, and in whose empire innocence is often oppressed; a + perfect God, who produces none but imperfect and miserable works; are not + such a God and his conduct as great mysteries, as that of the incarnation? + </p> + <p> + You blush for your fellow-citizens, who allow themselves to be persuaded, + that the God of the universe could change himself into a man, and die upon + a cross in a corner of Asia. The mystery of the incarnation appears to you + very absurd. You think nothing more ridiculous, than a God, who transforms + himself into bread, and causes himself daily to be eaten in a thousand + different places. But are all these mysteries more contradictory to reason + than a God, the avenger and rewarder of the actions of men? Is man, + according to you, free, or not free? In either case, your God, if he has + the shadow of equity, can neither punish nor reward him. If man is free, + it is God, who has made him free; therefore God is the primitive cause of + all his actions; in punishing him for his faults, he would punish him for + having executed what he had given him liberty to do. If man is not free to + act otherwise than he does, would not God be most unjust, in punishing man + for faults, which he could not help committing. + </p> + <p> + The minor, or secondary, absurdities, with which all religions abound, are + to many people truly striking; but they have not the courage to trace the + source of these absurdities. They see not, that a God full of + contradictions, caprices and inconsistent qualities, has only served to + disorder men's imaginations, and to produce an endless succession of + chimeras. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0123" id="link2H_4_0123"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 119. + </h2> + <p> + The theologian would shut the mouths of those who deny the existence of + God, by saying, that all men, in all ages and countries, have acknowledged + some divinity or other; that every people have believed in an invisible + and powerful being, who has been the object of their worship and + veneration; in short, that there is no nation, however savage, who are not + persuaded of the existence of some intelligence superior to human nature. + But, can an error be changed into truth by the belief of all men? The + great philosopher Bayle has justly observed, that "general tradition, or + the unanimous consent of mankind, is no criterion of truth." + </p> + <p> + There was a time, when all men believed that the sun moved round the + earth, but this error was detected. There was a time, when nobody believed + the existence of the antipodes, and when every one was persecuted, who had + temerity enough to maintain it. At present, every informed man firmly + believes it. All nations, with the exception of a few men who are less + credulous than the rest, still believe in ghosts and spirits. No sensible + man now adopts such nonsense. But the most sensible people consider it + their duty to believe in a universal spirit! + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0124" id="link2H_4_0124"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 120. + </h2> + <p> + All the gods, adored by men, are of savage origin. They have evidently + been imagined by stupid people, or presented, by ambitious and crafty + legislators, to ignorant and uncivilized nations, who had neither capacity + nor courage to examine the objects, which through terror they were made to + worship. + </p> + <p> + By closely examining God, we are forced to acknowledge, that he evidently + bears marks of a savage nature. To be savage is to acknowledge no right + but force; it is to be cruel beyond measure; to follow only one's own + caprice; to want foresight, prudence, and reason. Ye nations, who call + yourselves civilized! Do you not discern, in this hideous character, the + God, on whom you lavish your incense? Are not the descriptions given you + of the divinity, visibly borrowed from the implacable, jealous, revengeful, + sanguinary, capricious inconsiderate humour of man, who has not cultivated + his reason? O men! You adore only a great savage, whom you regard, + however, as a model to imitate, as an amiable master, as a sovereign full + of perfection. + </p> + <p> + Religious opinions are ancient monuments of ignorance, credulity, + cowardice, and barbarism of their ancestors. Every savage is a child fond + of the marvellous, who believes every thing, and examines nothing. + Ignorant of nature, he attributes to spirits, enchantments, and to magic, + whatever appears to him extraordinary. His priests appear to him + sorcerers, in whom he supposes a power purely divine, before whom his + confounded reason humbles itself, whose oracles are to him infallible + decrees which it would be dangerous to contradict. + </p> + <p> + In religion, men have, for the most part, remained in their primitive + barbarity. Modern religions are only ancient follies revived, or presented + under some new form. If the savages of antiquity adored mountains, rivers, + serpents, trees, and idols of every kind; if the EGYPTIANS paid homage to + crocodiles, rats, and onions, do we not see nations, who think themselves + wiser than they, worship bread, into which they imagine, that through the + enchantments of their priests, the divinity has descended. Is not the + Bread-God the idol of many Christian nations, who, in this respect, are as + irrational, as the most savage? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0125" id="link2H_4_0125"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 121. + </h2> + <p> + The ferocity, stupidity, and folly of uncivilized man have ever disclosed + themselves in religious practices, either cruel or extravagant. A spirit + of barbarity still survives, and penetrates the religions even of the most + polished nations. Do we not still see human victims offered to the + divinity? To appease the anger of a God, who is always supposed as + ferocious, jealous and vindictive, as a savage, do not those, whose manner + of thinking is supposed to displease him, expire under studied torments, + by the command of sanguinary laws? Modern nations, at the instigation of + their priests, have perhaps improved upon the atrocious folly of barbarous + nations; at least, we find, that it has ever entered the heads of savages + to torment for opinions, to search the thoughts, to molest men for the + invisible movements of their brains? + </p> + <p> + When we see learned nations, such as the English, French, German, etc., + continue, notwithstanding their knowledge, to kneel before the barbarous + God of the Jews; when we see these enlightened nations divide into sects, + defame, hate, and despise one another for their equally ridiculous + opinions concerning the conduct and intentions of this unreasonable God; + when we see men of ability foolishly devote their time to meditate the + will of this God, who is full of caprice and folly, we are tempted to cry + out: O men, you are still savage!!! + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0126" id="link2H_4_0126"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 122. + </h2> + <p> + Whoever has formed true ideas of the ignorance, credulity, negligence, and + stupidity of the vulgar, will suspect opinions the more, as he finds them + generally established. Men, for the most part, examine nothing: they + blindly submit to custom and authority. Their religious opinions, above + all others, are those which they have the least courage and capacity to + examine: as they comprehend nothing about them, they are forced to be + silent, or at least are soon destitute of arguments. Ask any man, whether + he believes in a God? He will be much surprised that you can doubt it. Ask + him again, what he understands by the word <i>God</i>. You throw him into + the greatest embarrassment; you will perceive immediately, that he is + incapable of affixing any real idea to this word, he incessantly repeats. + He will tell you, that God is God. He knows neither what he thinks of it, + nor his motives for believing in it. + </p> + <p> + All nations speak of a God; but do they agree upon this God? By no means. + But division upon an opinion proves not its evidence; it is rather a sign + of uncertainty and obscurity. Does the same man always agree with himself + in the notions he forms of his God? No. His idea varies with the changes, + which he experiences;—another sign of uncertainty. Men always agree + in demonstrative truths. In any situation, except that of insanity, every + one knows that two and two make four, that the sun shines, that the whole + is greater than its part; that benevolence is necessary to merit the + affection of men; that injustice and cruelty are incompatible with + goodness. Are they thus agreed when they speak of God? Whatever they + think, or say of him, is immediately destroyed by the effects they + attribute to him. + </p> + <p> + Ask several painters to represent a chimera, and each will paint it in a + different manner. You will find no resemblance between the features, each + has given it a portrait, that has no original. All theologians, in giving + us a picture of God, give us one of a great chimera, in whose features + they never agree, whom each arranges in his own way, and who exists only + in their imaginations. There are not two individuals, who have, or can + have, the same ideas of their God. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0127" id="link2H_4_0127"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 123. + </h2> + <p> + It might be said with more truth, that men are either skeptics or + atheists, than that they are convinced of the existence of God. How can we + be assured of the existence of a being, whom we could never examine, and + of whom it is impossible to conceive any permanent idea? How can we + convince ourselves of the existence of a being, to whom we are every + moment forced to attribute conduct, opposed to the ideas, we had + endeavoured to form of him? Is it then possible to believe what we cannot + conceive? Is not such a belief the opinions of others without having any + of our own? Priests govern by faith; but do not priests themselves + acknowledge that God is to them incomprehensible? Confess then, that a + full and entire conviction of the existence of God is not so general, as + is imagined. + </p> + <p> + Scepticism arises from a want of motives sufficient to form a judgment. + Upon examining the proofs which seem to establish, and the arguments which + combat, the existence of God, some persons have doubted and withheld their + assent. But this uncertainty arises from not having sufficiently examined. + Is it possible to doubt any thing evident? Sensible people ridicule an + absolute scepticism, and think it even impossible. A man, who doubted his + own existence, or that of the sun, would appear ridiculous. Is this more + extravagant than to doubt the non-existence of an evidently impossible + being? Is it more absurd to doubt one's own existence, than to hesitate + upon the impossibility of a being, whose qualities reciprocally destroy + one another? Do we find greater probability for believing the existence of + a spiritual being, than the existence of a stick without two ends? Is the + notion of an infinitely good and powerful being, who causes or permits an + infinity of evils, less absurd or impossible, than that of a square + triangle? Let us conclude then, that religious scepticism can result only + from a superficial examination of theological principles, which are in + perpetual contradiction with the most clear and demonstrative principles. + </p> + <p> + To doubt, is to deliberate. Scepticism is only a state of indetermination, + resulting from an insufficient examination of things. Is it possible for + any one to be sceptical in matters of religion, who will deign to revert + to its principles, and closely examine the notion of God, who serves as + its basis? Doubt generally arises either from indolence, weakness, + indifference, or incapacity. With many people, to doubt is to fear the + trouble of examining things, which are thought uninteresting. But religion + being presented to men as their most important concern in this and the + future world, skepticism and doubt on this subject must occasion perpetual + anxiety and must really constitute a bed of thorns. Every man who has not + courage to contemplate, without prejudice, the God upon whom all religion + is founded, can never know for what religion to decide: he knows not what + he should believe or not believe, admit or reject, hope or fear. + </p> + <p> + Indifference upon religion must not be confounded with scepticism. This + indifference is founded upon the absolute assurance, or at any rate upon + the probable belief, that religion is not interesting. A persuasion that a + thing which is pretended to be important is not so, or is only + indifferent, supposes a sufficient examination of the thing, without which + it would be impossible to have this persuasion. Those who call themselves + sceptics in the fundamental points of religion, are commonly either + indolent or incapable of examining. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0128" id="link2H_4_0128"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 124. + </h2> + <p> + In every country, we are assured, that a God has revealed himself. What + has he taught men? Has he proved evidently that he exists? Has he informed + them where he resides? Has he taught them what he is, or in what his + essence consists? Has he clearly explained to them his intentions and + plan? Does what he says of this plan correspond with the effects, which we + see? No. He informs them solely, that <i>he is what he is</i>; that he is + a <i>hidden God</i>; that his ways are unspeakable; that he is exasperated + against all who have the temerity to fathom his decrees, or to consult + reason in judging him or his works. + </p> + <p> + Does the revealed conduct of God answer the magnificent ideas which + theologians would give us of his wisdom, goodness, justice, and + omnipotence? By no means. In every revelation, this conduct announces a + partial and capricious being, the protector of favourite people, and the + enemy of all others. If he deigns to appear to some men, he takes care to + keep all others in an invincible ignorance of his divine intentions. Every + private revelation evidently announces in God, injustice, partiality and + malignity. + </p> + <p> + Do the commands, revealed by any God, astonish us by their sublime reason + or wisdom? Do they evidently tend to promote the happiness of the people, + to whom the Divinity discloses them? Upon examining the divine commands, + one sees in every country, nothing but strange ordinances, ridiculous + precepts, impertinent ceremonies, puerile customs, oblations, sacrifices, + and expiations, useful indeed to the ministers of God, but very + burthensome to the rest of the citizens. I see likewise, that these laws + often tend to make men unsociable, disdainful, intolerant, quarrelsome, + unjust, and inhuman, to those who have not received the same revelations, + the same ordinances, or the same favours from heaven. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0129" id="link2H_4_0129"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 125. + </h2> + <p> + Are the precepts of morality, announced by the Deity, really divine, or + superior to those which every reasonable man might imagine? They are + divine solely because it is impossible for the human mind to discover + their utility. They make virtue consist in a total renunciation of nature, + in a voluntary forgetfulness of reason, a holy hatred of ourselves. + Finally, these sublime precepts often exhibit perfection in a conduct, + cruel to ourselves, and perfectly useless to others. + </p> + <p> + Has a God appeared? Has he himself promulgated his laws? Has he spoken to + men with his own mouth? I am told, that God has not appeared to a whole + people; but that he has always manifested himself through the medium of + some favourite personages, who have been intrusted with the care of + announcing and explaining his intentions. The people have never been + permitted to enter the sanctuary; the ministers of the gods have alone had + the right to relate what passes there. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0130" id="link2H_4_0130"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 126. + </h2> + <p> + If in every system of divine revelation, I complain of not seeing either + the wisdom, goodness, or equity of God; if I suspect knavery, ambition, or + interest; it is replied, that God has confirmed by miracles the mission of + those, who speak in his name. But was it not more simple for him to appear + in person, to explain his nature and will? Again, if I have the curiosity + to examine these miracles, I find, that they are improbable tales, related + by suspected people, who had the greatest interest in giving out that they + were the messengers of the Most High. + </p> + <p> + What witnesses are appealed to in order to induce us to believe incredible + miracles? Weak people, who existed thousands of years ago, and who, even + though they could attest these miracles, may be suspected of being duped + by their own imagination, and imposed upon by the tricks of dexterous + impostors. But, you will say, these miracles are written in books, which + by tradition have been transmitted to us. By whom were these books + written? Who are the men who have transmitted them? They are either the + founders of religions themselves, or their adherents and assigns. Thus, in + religion, the evidence of interested parties becomes irrefragable and + incontestable. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0131" id="link2H_4_0131"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 127. + </h2> + <p> + God has spoken differently to every people. The Indian believes not a word + of what He has revealed to the Chinese; the Mahometan considers as fables + what He has said to the Christian; the Jew regards both the Mahometan and + Christian as sacrilegious corrupters of the sacred law, which his God had + given to his fathers. The Christian, proud of his more modern revelation, + indiscriminately damns the Indian, Chinese, Mahometan, and even the Jew, + from whom he receives his sacred books. Who is wrong or right? Each + exclaims, <i>I am in the right!</i> Each adduces the same proofs: each + mentions his miracles, diviners, prophets, and martyrs. The man of sense + tells them, they are all delirious; that God has not spoken, if it is true + that he is a spirit, and can have neither mouth nor tongue; that without + borrowing the organ of mortals, God could inspire his creatures with what + he would have them learn; and that, as they are all equally ignorant what + to think of God, it is evident that it has not been the will of God to + inform them on the subject. + </p> + <p> + The followers of different forms of worship which are established, accuse + one another of superstition and impiety. Christians look with abhorrence + upon the Pagan, Chinese, and Mahometan superstition. Roman Catholics + treat, as impious, Protestant Christians; and the latter incessantly + declaim against the superstition of the Catholics. They are all right. To + be impious, is to have opinions offensive to the God adored; to be + superstitious, is to have of him false ideas. In accusing one another of + superstition, the different religionists resemble humpbacks, who reproach + one another with their deformity. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0132" id="link2H_4_0132"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 128. + </h2> + <p> + Are the oracles, which the Divinity has revealed by his different + messengers, remarkable for clearness? Alas! no two men interpret them + alike. Those who explain them to others are not agreed among themselves. + To elucidate them, they have recourse to interpretations, to commentaries, + to allegories, to explanations: they discover <i>mystical sense</i> very + different from the <i>literal sense</i>. Men are every where wanted to + explain the commands of a God, who could not, or would not, announce + himself clearly to those, whom he wished to enlighten. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0133" id="link2H_4_0133"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 129. + </h2> + <p> + The founders of religion, have generally proved their missions by + miracles. But what is a miracle? It is an operation directly opposite to + the laws of nature. But who, according to you, made those laws? God. Thus, + your God, who, according to you, foresaw every thing, counteracts the + laws, which his wisdom prescribed to nature! These laws were then + defective, or at least in certain circumstances they did not accord with + the views of the same God, since you inform us that he judged it necessary + to suspend or counteract them. + </p> + <p> + It is said, that a few men, favoured by the Most High, have received power + to perform miracles. But to perform a miracle, it is necessary to have + ability to create new causes capable of producing effects contrary to + those of common causes. Is it easy to conceive, that God can give men the + inconceivable power of creating causes out of nothing? Is it credible, + that an immutable God can communicate to men power to change or rectify + his plan, a power, which by his essence an immutable being cannot save + himself? Miracles, far from doing much honour to God, far from proving the + divinity of a religion, evidently annihilate the God idea. How can a + theologian tell us, that God, who must have embraced the whole of his + plan, who could have made none but perfect laws, and who cannot alter + them, is forced to employ miracles to accomplish his projects, or can + grant his creatures the power of working prodigies to execute his divine + will? An omnipotent being, whose will is always fulfilled, who holds in + his hand his creatures, has only to <i>will</i>, to make them believe + whatever he desires. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0134" id="link2H_4_0134"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 130. + </h2> + <p> + What shall we say of religions that prove their divinity by miracles? How + can we credit miracles recorded in the sacred books of the Christians, + where God boasts of hardening the hearts and blinding those whom he wishes + to destroy; where he permits malicious spirits and magicians to work + miracles as great as those of his servants; where it is predicted, that <i>Antichrist</i> + shall have power to perform prodigies capable of shaking the faith even of + the elect? In this case, by what signs shall we know whether God means to + instruct or ensnare us? How shall we distinguish whether the wonders, we + behold, come from God or devil? To remove our perplexity, Pascal gravely + tells us, that <i>it is necessary to judge the doctrine by the miracles, + and the miracles by the doctrine; that the doctrine proves the miracles, + and the miracles the doctrine</i>. If there exist a vicious and ridiculous + circle, it is undoubtedly in this splendid reasoning of one of the + greatest defenders of Christianity. Where is the religion, that does not + boast of the most admirable doctrine, and which does not produce numerous + miracles for its support? + </p> + <p> + Is a miracle capable of annihilating the evidence of a demonstrated truth? + Although a man should have the secret of healing all the sick, of making + all the lame to walk, of raising in all the dead of a city, of ascending + into the air, of stopping the course of the sun and moon, can he thereby + convince me, that two and two do not make four, that one makes three, and + that three make only one; that a God, whose immensity fills the universe, + could have been contained in the body of a Jew; that the ETERNAL can die + like a man; that a God, who is said to be immutable, provident, and + sensible, could have changed his mind upon his religion, and reformed his + own work by a new revelation? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0135" id="link2H_4_0135"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 131. + </h2> + <p> + According to the very principles either of natural or revealed theology, + every new revelation should be regarded as false; every change in a + religion emanated from the Deity should be reputed an impiety and + blasphemy. Does not all reform suppose, that, in his first effort, God + could not give his religion the solidity and perfection required? To say, + that God, in giving a first law, conformed to the rude ideas of the people + whom he wished to enlighten, is to pretend that God was neither able nor + willing to render the people, whom he was enlightening, so reasonable as + was necessary in order to please him. + </p> + <p> + Christianity is an impiety, if it is true that Judaism is a religion which + has really emanated from a holy, immutable, omnipotent, and foreseeing + God. The religion of Christ supposes either defects in the law which God + himself had given by Moses, or impotence or malice in the same God, who + was either unable or unwilling to render the Jews such as they ought to + have been in order to please him. Every new religion, or reform of ancient + religions, is evidently founded upon the impotence, inconstancy, + imprudence, or malice of the Divinity. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0136" id="link2H_4_0136"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 132. + </h2> + <p> + If history informs me, that the first apostles, the founders or reformers + of religions, wrought great miracles; history also informs me, that these + reformers and their adherents were commonly buffeted, persecuted, and put + to death, as disturbers of the peace of nations. I am therefore tempted to + believe, that they did not perform the miracles ascribed to them; indeed, + such miracles must have gained them numerous partisans among the + eye-witnesses, who ought to have protected the operators from abuse. My + incredulity redoubles, when I am told, that the workers of miracles were + cruelly tormented, or ignominiously executed. How is it possible to + believe, that missionaries, protected by God, invested with his divine + power, and enjoying the gift of miracles, could not have wrought such a + simple miracle, as to escape the cruelty of their persecutors? + </p> + <p> + Priests have the art of drawing from the persecutions themselves, a + convincing proof in favour of the religion of the persecuted. But a + religion, which boasts of having cost the lives of many martyrs, and + informs us, that its founders, in order to extend it, have suffered + punishments, cannot be the religion of a beneficent, equitable and + omnipotent God. A good God would not permit men, intrusted with announcing + his commands, to be ill-treated. An all-powerful God, wishing to found a + religion, would proceed in a manner more simple and less fatal to the most + faithful of his servants. To say that God would have his religion sealed + with blood, is to say that he is weak, unjust, ungrateful, and sanguinary; + and that he is cruel enough to sacrifice his messengers to the views of + his ambition. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0137" id="link2H_4_0137"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 133. + </h2> + <p> + To die for religion proves not that the religion is true, or divine; it + proves, at most, that it is supposed to be such. An enthusiast proves + nothing by his death, unless that religious fanaticism is often stronger + than the love of life. An impostor may sometimes die with courage; he then + makes, in the language of the proverb, <i>a virtue of necessity</i>. + </p> + <p> + People are often surprised and affected at sight of the generous courage + and disinterested zeal, which has prompted missionaries to preach their + doctrine, even at the risk of suffering the most rigorous treatment. From + this ardour for the salvation of men, are drawn inferences favourable to + the religion they have announced. But in reality, this disinterestedness + is only apparent. He, who ventures nothing should gain nothing. A + missionary seeks to make his fortune by his doctrine. He knows that, if he + is fortunate enough to sell his commodity, he will become absolute master + of those who receive him for their guide; he is sure of becoming the + object of their attention, respect, and veneration. Such are the true + motives, which kindle the zeal and charity of so many preachers and + missionaries. + </p> + <p> + To die for an opinion, proves the truth or goodness of that opinion no + more than to die in battle proves the justice of a cause, in which + thousands have the folly to devote their lives. The courage of a martyr, + elated with the idea of paradise, is not more supernatural, than the + courage of a soldier, intoxicated with the idea of glory, or impelled by + the fear of disgrace. What is the difference between an Iroquois, who + sings while he is burning by inches, and the martyr ST. LAURENCE, who upon + the gridiron insults his tyrant? + </p> + <p> + The preachers of a new doctrine fail, because they are the weakest; + apostles generally practise a perilous trade. Their courageous death + proves neither the truth of their principles nor their own sincerity, any + more than the violent death of the ambitious man, or of the robber, + proves, that they were right in disturbing society, or that they thought + themselves authorised in so doing. The trade of a missionary was always + flattering to ambition, and formed a convenient method of living at the + expense of the vulgar. These advantages have often been enough to efface + every idea of danger. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0138" id="link2H_4_0138"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 134. + </h2> + <p> + You tell us, theologians! that <i>what is folly in the eyes of men, is + wisdom before God, who delights to confound the wisdom of the wise</i>. + But do you not say, that human wisdom is a gift of heaven? In saying this + wisdom displeases God, is but folly in his sight, and that he is pleased + to confound it, you declare that your God is the friend only of ignorant + people, and that he makes sensible people a fatal present for which this + perfidious tyrant promises to punish them cruelly at some future day. Is + it not strange, that one can be the friend of your God, only by declaring + one's self the enemy of reason and good sense? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0139" id="link2H_4_0139"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 135. + </h2> + <p> + According to the divines, <i>faith is an assent without evidence</i>. + Whence it follows, that religion requires us firmly to believe inevident + things, and propositions often improbable or contrary to reason. But when + we reject reason as a judge of faith, do we not confess, that reason is + incompatible with faith? As the ministers of religion have resolved to + banish reason, they must have felt the impossibility of reconciling it + with faith, which is visibly only a blind submission to priests, whose + authority seems to many persons more weighty than evidence itself, and + preferable to the testimony of the senses. + </p> + <p> + "Sacrifice your reason; renounce experience; mistrust the testimony of + your senses; submit without enquiry to what we announce to you in the name + of heaven." Such is the uniform language of priests throughout the world; + they agree upon no point, except upon the necessity of never reasoning + upon the principles which they present to us as most important to our + felicity! + </p> + <p> + I will <i>not</i> sacrifice my reason; because this reason alone enables + me to distinguish good from evil, truth from falsehood. If, as you say, my + reason comes from God, I shall never believe that a God, whom you call + good, has given me reason, as a snare, to lead me to perdition. Priests! + do you not see, that, by decrying reason, you calumniate your God, from + whom you declare it to be a gift. + </p> + <p> + I will <i>not</i> renounce experience; because it is a guide much more + sure than the imagination or authority of spiritual guides. Experience + teaches me, that enthusiasm and interest may blind and lead them astray + themselves; and that the authority of experience ought to have much more + influence upon my mind, than the suspicious testimony of many men, who I + know are either very liable to be deceived themselves, or otherwise are + very much interested in deceiving others. + </p> + <p> + I <i>will</i> mistrust my senses; because I am sensible they sometimes + mislead me. But, on the other hand, I know that they will not always + deceive me. I well know, that the eye shews me the sun much smaller than + it really is; but experience, which is only the repeated application of + the senses, informs me, that objects always appear to diminish, as their + distance increases; thus I attain to a certainty, that the sun is much + larger than the earth; thus my senses suffice to rectify the hasty + judgments, which they themselves had caused. + </p> + <p> + In warning us to mistrust the testimony of our senses, the priests + annihilate the proofs of all religion. If men may be dupes of their + imagination; if their senses are deceitful, how shall we believe the + miracles, which struck the treacherous senses of our ancestors? If my + senses are unfaithful guides, I ought not to credit even the miracles + wrought before my eyes. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0140" id="link2H_4_0140"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 136. + </h2> + <p> + You incessantly repeat that <i>the truths of religion are above reason</i>. + If so, do you not perceive, that these truths are not adapted to + reasonable beings? To pretend that reason can deceive us, is to say, that + truth can be false; that the useful can be hurtful. Is reason any thing + but a knowledge of the useful and true? Besides, as our reason and senses + are our only guides in this life, to say they are unfaithful, is to say, + that our errors are necessary, our ignorance invincible, and that, without + the extreme of injustice, God cannot punish us for following the only + guides it was his supreme will to give. + </p> + <p> + To say, we are obliged to believe things above our reason, is ridiculous. + To assure us, that upon some objects we are not allowed to consult reason, + is to say, that, in the most interesting matter, we must consult only + imagination, or act only at random. Our divines say, we must sacrifice our + reason to God. But what motives can we have to sacrifice our reason to a + being, who makes us only useless presents, which he does not intend us to + use? What confidence can we put in a God, who, according to our divines + themselves, is malicious enough to harden the heart, to strike with + blindness, to lay snares for us, to <i>lead us into temptation?</i> In + fine, what confidence can we put in the ministers of this God, who, to + guide us more conveniently, commands us to shut our eyes? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0141" id="link2H_4_0141"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 137. + </h2> + <p> + Men are persuaded, that religion is to them of all things the most + serious, while it is precisely what they least examine for themselves. In + pursuit of an office, a piece of land, a house, a place of profit; in any + transaction or contract whatever, every one carefully examines all, takes + the greatest precaution, weighs every word of a writing, is guarded + against every surprise. Not so in religion; every one receives it at a + venture, and believes it upon the word of others, without ever taking the + trouble to examine. + </p> + <p> + Two causes concur to foster the negligence and carelessness of men, with + regard to their religious opinions. The first is the despair of overcoming + the obscurity, in which all religion is necessarily enveloped. Their first + principles are only adapted to disgust lazy minds, who regard them as a + chaos impossible to be understood. The second cause is, that every one is + averse to being too much bound by severe precepts, which all admire in + theory, but very few care to practice with rigour. The religion of many + people is like old family ties, which they have never taken pains to + examine, but which they deposit in their archives to have recourse to them + occasionally. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0142" id="link2H_4_0142"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 138. + </h2> + <p> + The disciples of Pythagoras paid implicit faith to the doctrine of their + master; <i>he has said it</i>, was to them the solution of every problem. + The generality of men are not more rational. In matters of religion, a + curate, a priest, an ignorant monk becomes master of the thoughts. Faith + relieves the weakness of the human mind, to which application is commonly + painful; it is much more convenient to depend upon others, than to examine + for one's self. Inquiry, being slow and difficult, equally, displeases the + stupidity of the ignorant, and the ardour of the enlightened. Such is + undoubtedly the reason why Faith has so many partisans. + </p> + <p> + The more men are deficient in knowledge and reason, the more zealous they + are in religion. In theological quarrels, the populace, like ferocious + beasts, fall upon all those, against whom their priest is desirous of + exciting them. A profound ignorance, boundless credulity, weak intellect, + and warm imagination, are the materials, of which are made bigots, + zealots, fanatics, and saints. How can the voice of reason be heard by + them who make it a principle never to examine for themselves, but to + submit blindly to the guidance of others? The saints and the populace are, + in the hands of their directors, automatons, moved at pleasure. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0143" id="link2H_4_0143"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 139. + </h2> + <p> + Religion is an affair of custom and fashion. <i>We must do as others do.</i> + But, among the numerous religions in the world, which should men choose? + This inquiry would be too painful and long. They must therefore adhere to + the religion of their fathers, to that of their country, which, having + force on its side, must be the best. + </p> + <p> + If we judge of the intentions of Providence by the events and revolutions + of this world, we are compelled to believe, that He is very indifferent + about the various religions upon earth. For thousands of years, paganism, + polytheism, idolatry, were the prevailing religions. We are now assured, + that the most flourishing nations had not the least idea of God; an idea, + regarded as so essential to the happiness of man. Christians say, all + mankind lived in the grossest ignorance of their duties towards God, and + had no notions of him, but what were insulting to his Divine Majesty. + Christianity, growing out of Judaism, very humble in its obscure origin, + became powerful and cruel under the Christian emperors, who, prompted by + holy zeal, rapidly spread it in their empire by means of fire and sword, + and established it upon the ruins of paganism. Mahomet and his successors, + seconded by Providence or their victorious arms, in a short time banished + the Christian religion from a part of Asia, Africa, and even Europe; and + the <i>gospel</i> was then forced to yield to the <i>Koran</i>. + </p> + <p> + In all the factions or sects, which, for many ages have distracted + Christianity, <i>the best argument has been always that of the strongest + party</i>; arms have decided which doctrine is most conducive to the + happiness of nations. May we not hence infer, either that the Deity feels + little interested in the religion of men, or that he always declares in + favour of the opinions, which best suit the interest of earthly powers; in + fine, that he changes his plan to accommodate their fancy? + </p> + <p> + Rulers infallibly decide the religion of the people. The true religion is + always the religion of the prince; the true God is the God, whom the + prince desires his people to adore; the will of the priests, who govern + the prince, always becomes the will of God. A wit justly observed, that <i>the + true religion is always that, on whose side are the prince and the + hangman.</i> Emperors and hangmen long supported the gods of Rome against + the God of Christians; the latter, having gained to his interest the + emperors, their soldiers, and their hangmen, succeeded in destroying the + worship of the Roman gods. The God of Mahomet has dispossessed the God of + Christians of a great part of the dominions, which he formerly occupied. + </p> + <p> + In the eastern part of Asia, is a vast, flourishing, fertile, populous + country, governed by such wise laws, that the fiercest conquerors have + adopted them with respect. I mean China. Excepting Christianity, which was + banished as dangerous, the people there follow such superstitions as they + please, while the <i>mandarins</i>, or magistrates, having long known the + errors of the popular religion, are vigilant to prevent the <i>bonzes</i> + or priests from using it as an instrument of discord. Yet we see not, that + Providence refuses his blessing to a nation, whose chiefs are so + indifferent about the worship that is rendered to him. On the contrary, + the Chinese enjoy a happiness and repose worthy to be envied, by the many + nations whom religion divides, and often devastates. + </p> + <p> + We cannot reasonably propose to divest the people of their follies; but we + may perhaps cure the follies of those who govern the people, and who will + then prevent the follies of the people from becoming dangerous. + Superstition is to be feared only when princes and soldiers rally round + her standard; then she becomes cruel and sanguinary. Every sovereign, who + is the protector of one sect or religious faction, is commonly the tyrant + of others, and becomes himself the most cruel disturber of the peace of + his dominions. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0144" id="link2H_4_0144"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 140. + </h2> + <p> + It is incessantly repeated, and many sensible persons are induced to + believe, that religion is a restraint necessary to men; that without it, + there would no longer exist the least check for the vulgar; and that + morality and religion are intimately connected with it. "The fear of the + Lord," cries the priest, "is the beginning of wisdom. The terrors of + another life are <i>salutary</i>, and are proper to curb the passions of + men." + </p> + <p> + To perceive the inutility of religious notions, we have only to open our + eyes and contemplate the morals of those nations, who are the most under + the dominion of religion. We there find proud tyrants, oppressive + ministers, perfidious courtiers, shameless extortioners, corrupt + magistrates, knaves, adulterers, debauchees, prostitutes, thieves, and + rogues of every kind, who have never doubted either the existence of an + avenging and rewarding God, the torments of hell, or the joys of paradise. + Without the least utility to the greater part of mankind, the ministers of + religion have studied to render death terrible to the eyes of their + followers. If devout Christians could but be consistent, they would pass + their whole life in tears, and die under the most dreadful apprehensions. + What can be more terrible than death, to the unfortunate who are told, <i>that + it is horrible to fall into the hands of the living God; that we must work + out our salvation with fear and trembling!</i> Yet we are assured, that + the death of the Christian is attended with infinite consolations, of + which the unbeliever is deprived. The good Christian, it is said, dies in + the firm hope of an eternal happiness which he has strived to merit. But + is not this firm assurance itself a presumption punishable in the eyes of + a severe God? Ought not the greatest saints to be ignorant whether they + are <i>worthy of love or hatred?</i> Ye Priests! while consoling us with + the hope of the joys of paradise; have you then had the advantage to see + your names and ours inscribed <i>in the book of life?</i> + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0145" id="link2H_4_0145"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 141. + </h2> + <p> + To oppose the passions and present interests of men the obscure notions of + a metaphysical, inconceivable God,—the incredible punishments of + another life,—or the pleasures of the heaven, of which nobody has + the least idea,—is not this combating realities with fictions? Men + have never any but confused ideas of their God: they see him only in + clouds. They never think of him when they are desirous to do evil: + whenever ambition, fortune, or pleasure allures them, God's threatenings + and promises are forgotten. In the things of this life, there is a degree + of certainty, which the most lively faith cannot give to the things of + another life. + </p> + <p> + Every religion was originally a curb invented by legislators, who wished + to establish their authority over the minds of rude nations. Like nurses + who frighten children to oblige them to be quiet, the ambitious used the + name of the gods to frighten savages; and had recourse to terror in order + to make them support quietly the yoke they wished to impose. Are then the + bugbears of infancy made for riper age? At the age of maturity, no man + longer believes them, or if he does, they excite little emotion in him, + and never alter his conduct. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0146" id="link2H_4_0146"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 142. + </h2> + <p> + Almost every man fears what he sees much more than what he does not see; + he fears the judgments of men of which he feels the effects, more than the + judgments of God of whom he has only fluctuating ideas. The desire of + pleasing the world, the force of custom, the fear of ridicule, and of + censure, have more force than all religious opinions. Does not the + soldier, through fear of disgrace, daily expose his life in battle, even + at the risk of incurring eternal damnation? + </p> + <p> + The most religious persons have often more respect for a varlet, than for + God. A man who firmly believes, that God sees every thing, and that he is + omniscient and omnipresent, will be guilty, when alone, of actions, which + he would never do in presence of the meanest of mortals. Those, who + pretend to be the most fully convinced of the existence of God, every + moment act as if they believed the contrary. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0147" id="link2H_4_0147"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 143. + </h2> + <p> + "Let us, at least," it will be said, "cherish the idea of a God, which + alone may serve as a barrier to the passions of kings." But, can we + sincerely admire the wonderful effects, which the fear of this God + generally produces upon the minds of princes, who are called his images? + What idea shall we form of the original, if we judge of it by the copies! + </p> + <p> + Sovereigns, it is true, call themselves the representatives of God, his + vicegerents upon earth. But does the fear of a master, more powerful than + they are, incline them seriously to study the welfare of the nations, whom + Providence has intrusted to their care? Does the pretended terror, which + ought to be inspired into them by the idea of an invisible judge, to whom + alone they acknowledge themselves accountable for their actions, render + them more equitable, more compassionate, more sparing of blood and + treasure of their subjects, more temperate in their pleasures, more + attentive to their duties? In fine, does this God, by whose authority + kings reign, deter them from inflicting a thousand evils upon the people + to whom they ought to act as guides, protectors, and fathers? Alas! If we + survey the whole earth, we shall see men almost every where governed by + tyrants, who use religion merely as an instrument to render more stupid + the slaves, whom they overwhelm under the weight of their vices, or whom + they sacrifice without mercy to their extravagancies. + </p> + <p> + Far from being a check upon the passions of kings, Religion, by its very + principles, frees them from all restraint. It transforms them into + divinities, whose caprice the people are never permitted to resist. While + it gives up the reins to princes, and on their part breaks the bonds of + the social compact, it endeavours to chain the minds and hands of their + oppressed subjects. Is it then surprising, that the gods of the earth + imagine every thing lawful for them, and regard their subjects only as + instruments of their caprice or ambition? + </p> + <p> + In every country, Religion has represented the Monarch of nature as a + cruel, fantastical, partial tyrant, whose caprice is law; the Monarch God, + is but too faithfully imitated by his representatives upon earth. Religion + seems every where invented solely to lull the people in the lap of + slavery, in order that their masters may easily oppress them, or render + them wretched with impunity. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0148" id="link2H_4_0148"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 144. + </h2> + <p> + To guard against the enterprises of a haughty pontiff who wished to reign + over kings, to shelter their persons from the attempts of credulous + nations excited by the priests, several European princes have pretended to + hold their crowns and rights from God alone, and to be accountable only to + him for their actions. After a long contest between the civil and + spiritual power, the former at length triumphed; and the priests, forced + to yield, acknowledged the divine right of kings and preached them to the + people, reserving the liberty of changing their minds and of preaching + revolt, whenever the divine rights of kings clashed with the divine rights + of the clergy. It was always at the expense of nations, that peace was + concluded between kings and priests; but the latter, in spite of treaties, + always preserved their pretensions. + </p> + <p> + Tyrants and wicked princes, whose consciences continually reproach them + with negligence or perversity, far from fearing their God, had rather deal + with this invisible judge who never opposes any thing, or with his priests + who are always condescending to the rulers of the earth, than with their + own subjects. The people, reduced to despair, might probably <i>appeal</i> + from the divine right of their chiefs. Men when oppressed to the last + degree, sometimes become turbulent; and the divine rights of the tyrant + are then forced to yield to the natural rights of the subjects. + </p> + <p> + It is cheaper dealing with gods than men. Kings are accountable for their + actions to God alone; priests are accountable only to themselves. There is + much reason to believe, that both are more confident of the indulgence of + heaven, than of that of earth. It is much easier to escape the vengeance + of gods who may be cheaply appeased, than the vengeance of men whose + patience is exhausted. + </p> + <p> + "If you remove the fear of an invisible power, what restraint will you + impose upon the passions of sovereigns?" Let them learn to reign; let them + learn to be just; to respect the rights if the people; and to acknowledge + the kindness of the nations, from whom they hold their greatness and + power. Let them learn to fear men, and to submit to the laws of equity. + Let nobody transgress these laws with impunity; and let them be equally + binding upon the powerful and the weak, the great and the small, the + sovereign and the subjects. + </p> + <p> + The fear of gods, Religion, and the terrors of another life, are the + metaphysical and supernatural bulwarks, opposed to the impetuous passions + of princes! Are these bulwarks effectual? Let experience resolve the + question. To oppose Religion to the wickedness of tyrants, is to wish, + that vague, uncertain, unintelligible speculations may be stronger than + propensities which every thing conspires daily to strengthen. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0149" id="link2H_4_0149"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 145. + </h2> + <p> + The immense service of religion to politics is incessantly boasted; but, a + little reflection will convince us, that religious opinions equally blind + both sovereigns and people, and never enlighten them upon their true + duties or interests. Religion but too often forms licentious, immoral + despots, obeyed by slaves, whom every thing obliges to conform to their + views. + </p> + <p> + For want of having studied or known the true principles of administration, + the objects and rights of social life, the real interests of men and their + reciprocal duties, princes, in almost every country, have become + licentious, absolute, and perverse; and their subjects abject, wicked, and + unhappy. It was to avoid the trouble of studying these important objects, + that recourse was had to chimeras, which, far from remedying any thing, + have hitherto only multiplied the evils of mankind, and diverted them from + whatever is most essential to their happiness. + </p> + <p> + Does not the unjust and cruel manner in which so many nations are + governed, manifestly furnish one of the strongest proofs, not only of the + small effect produced by the fear of another life, but also of the + non-existence of a Providence, busied with the fate of the human race? If + there existed a good God, should we not be forced to admit, that in this + life he strangely neglects the greater part of mankind? It would seem, + that this God has created nations only to be the sport of the passions and + follies of his representatives upon earth. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0150" id="link2H_4_0150"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 146. + </h2> + <p> + By reading history with attention, we shall perceive that Christianity, at + first weak and servile, established itself among the savage and free + nations of Europe only intimating to their chiefs, that its religious + principles favoured despotism and rendered them absolute. Consequently, we + see barbarous princes suddenly converted; that is, we see them adopt, + without examination, a system so favourable to their ambition, and use + every art to induce their subjects to embrace it. If the ministers of this + religion have since often derogated from their favourite principles, it is + because the theory influences the conduct of the ministers of the Lord, + only when it suits their temporal interests. + </p> + <p> + Christianity boasts of procuring men a happiness unknown to preceding + ages. It is true, the Greeks knew not the <i>divine rights</i> of tyrants + or of the usurpers of the rights of their country. Under paganism, it + never entered the head of any man to suppose, that it was against the will + of heaven for a nation to defend themselves against a ferocious beast, who + had the audacity to lay waste their possessions. The religion of the + Christians was the first that screened tyrants from danger, by laying down + as a principle that the people must renounce the legitimate defence of + themselves. Thus Christian nations are deprived of the first law of + nature, which orders man to resist evil, and to disarm whoever is + preparing to destroy him! If the ministers of the church have often + permitted the people to revolt for the interest of heaven, they have never + permitted them to revolt for their own deliverance from real evils or + known violences. + </p> + <p> + From heaven came the chains, that were used for fettering the minds of + mortals. Why is the Mahometan every where a slave? Because his prophet + enslaved him in the name of the Deity, as Moses had before subdued the + Jews. In all parts of the earth, we see, that the first legislators were + the first sovereigns and the first priests of the savages, to whom they + gave laws. + </p> + <p> + Religion seems invented solely to exalt princes above their nations, and + rivet the fetters of slavery. As soon as the people are too unhappy here + below, priests are ready to silence them by threatening them with the + anger of God. They are made to fix their eyes upon heaven, lest they + should perceive the true causes of their misfortunes, and apply the + remedies which nature presents. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0151" id="link2H_4_0151"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 147. + </h2> + <p> + By dint of repeating to men, that the earth is not their true country; + that the present life is only a passage; that they are not made to be + happy in this world; that their sovereigns hold their authority from God + alone, and are accountable only to him for the abuse of it; that it is not + lawful to resist them, etc., priests have eternized the misgovernment of + kings and the misery of the people; the interests of nations have been + basely sacrificed to their chiefs. The more we consider the dogmas and + principles of religion, the more we shall be convinced, that their sole + object is the advantage of tyrants and priests, without regard to that of + societies. + </p> + <p> + To mask the impotence of its deaf gods, religion has persuaded mortals, + that iniquities always kindle the wrath of heaven. People impute to + themselves alone the disasters that daily befal them. If nations sometimes + feel the strokes of convulsed nature, their bad governments are but too + often the immediate and permanent causes, from whence proceed the + continual calamities which they are forced to endure. Are not the + ambition, negligence, vices, and oppressions of kings and nobles, + generally the causes of scarcity, beggary, wars, pestilences, corrupt + morals, and all the multiplied scourges which desolate the earth? + </p> + <p> + In fixing men's eyes continually upon heaven; in persuading them, that all + their misfortunes are effects of divine anger; in providing none but + ineffectual and futile means to put an end to their sufferings, we might + justly conclude, that the only object of priests was to divert nations + from thinking about the true sources of their misery, and thus to render + it eternal. The ministers of religion conduct themselves almost like those + indigent mothers, who, for want of bread, sing their starved children to + sleep, or give them playthings to divert their thoughts from afflicting + hunger. + </p> + <p> + Blinded by error from their very infancy, restrained by the invisible + bonds of opinion, overcome by panic terrors, their faculties blunted by + ignorance, how should the people know the true causes of their + wretchedness? They imagine that they can avert it by invoking the gods. + Alas! do they not see, that it is, in the name of these gods, that they + are ordered to present their throats to the sword of their merciless + tyrants, in whom they might find the obvious cause of the evils under + which they groan, and for whom they cease not to implore, in vain, the + assistance of heaven? + </p> + <p> + Ye credulous people! In your misfortunes, redouble your prayers, + offerings, and sacrifices; throng to your temples; fast in sack-cloth and + ashes; bathe yourselves in your own tears; and above all, completely ruin + yourselves to enrich your gods! You will only enrich their priests. The + gods of heaven will be propitious, only when the gods of the earth shall + acknowledge themselves, men, like you, and shall devote to your welfare + the attention you deserve. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0152" id="link2H_4_0152"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 148. + </h2> + <p> + Negligent, ambitious, and perverse Princes are the real causes of public + misfortunes. Useless, unjust Wars depopulate the earth. Encroaching and + despotic Governments absorb the benefits of nature. The rapacity of Courts + discourages agriculture, extinguishes industry, produces want, pestilence + and misery. Heaven is neither cruel nor propitious to the prayers of the + people; it is their proud chiefs, who have almost always hearts of stone. + </p> + <p> + It is destructive to the morals of princes, to persuade them that they + have God alone to fear, when they injure their subjects, or neglect their + happiness. Sovereigns! It is not the gods, but your people, that you + offend, when you do evil. It is your people and yourselves that you + injure, when you govern unjustly. + </p> + <p> + In history, nothing is more common than to see Religious Tyrants; nothing + more rare than to find equitable, vigilant, enlightened princes. A monarch + may be pious, punctual in a servile discharge of the duties of his + religion, very submissive and liberal to his priests, and yet at the same + time be destitute of every virtue and talent necessary for governing. To + princes, Religion is only an instrument destined to keep the people more + completely under the yoke. By the excellent principles of religious + morality, a tyrant who, during a long reign, has done nothing but oppress + his subjects, wresting, from them the fruits of their labour, sacrificing + them without mercy to his insatiable ambition,—a conqueror, who has + usurped the provinces of others, slaughtered whole nations, and who, + during his whole life, has been a scourge to mankind,—imagines his + conscience may rest, when, to expiate so many crimes, he has wept at the + feet of a priest, who generally has the base complaisance to console and + encourage a robber, whom the most hideous despair would too lightly punish + for the misery he has caused upon earth. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0153" id="link2H_4_0153"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 149. + </h2> + <p> + A sovereign, sincerely devout, is commonly dangerous to the state. + Credulity always supposes a contracted mind; devotion generally absorbs + the attention, which a prince should pay to the government of his people. + Obsequious to the suggestions of his priests, he becomes the sport of + their caprices, the favourer of their quarrels, and the instrument and + accomplice of their follies, which he imagines to be of the greatest + importance. Among the most fatal presents, which religion has made the + world, ought to be reckoned those devout and zealous monarchs, who, under + an idea of working for the welfare of their subjects, have made it a + sacred duty to torment, persecute, and destroy those, who thought + differently from themselves. A bigot, at the head of an empire, is one of + the greatest scourges. A single fanatical or knavish priest, listened to + by a credulous and powerful prince, suffices to put a state in disorder. + </p> + <p> + In almost all countries, priests and pious persons are intrusted with + forming the minds and hearts of young princes, destined to govern nations. + What qualifications have instructors of this stamp! By what interests can + they be animated? Full of prejudices themselves, they will teach their + pupil to regard superstition, as most important and sacred; its chimerical + duties, as most indispensable, intolerance and persecution, as the true + foundation of his future authority. They will endeavour to make him a + party leader, a turbulent fanatic, a tyrant; they will early stifle his + reason, and forewarn him against the use of it; they will prevent truth + from reaching his ears; they will exasperate him against true talents, and + prejudice him in favour of contemptible ones; in short, they will make him + a weak devotee, who will have no idea either of justice or injustice, nor + of true glory, nor of true greatness, and who will be destitute of the + knowledge and virtues necessary to the government of a great nation. Such + is the plan of the education of a child, destined one day to create the + happiness or misery of millions of men! + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0154" id="link2H_4_0154"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 150. + </h2> + <p> + Priests have ever shewn themselves the friends of despotism, and the + enemies of public liberty: their trade requires abject and submissive + slaves, who have never the audacity to reason. In an absolute government, + who ever gains an ascendancy over the mind of a weak and stupid prince, + becomes master of the state. Instead of conducting the people to + salvation, priests have always conducted them to servitude. + </p> + <p> + In consideration of the supernatural titles, which religion has forged for + the worst of princes, the latter have commonly united with priests, who, + sure of governing by opinion the sovereign himself, have undertaken to + bind the hands of the people and to hold them under the yoke. But the + tyrant, covered with the shield of religion, in vain flatters himself that + he is secure from every stroke of fate; opinion is a weak rampart against + the despair of the people. Besides, the priest is a friend of the tyrant + only while he finds his account in tyranny; he preaches sedition, and + demolishes the idol he has made, when he finds it no longer sufficiently + conformable to the interest of God, whom he makes to speak at his will, + and who never speaks except according to his interests. + </p> + <p> + It will no doubt be said, that sovereigns, knowing all the advantages + which religion procures them, are truly interested in supporting it with + all their strength. If religious opinions are useful to tyrants, it is + very evident, that they are useful to those, who govern by the laws of + reason and equity. Is there then any advantage in exercising tyranny? Are + princes truly interested in being tyrants? Does not tyranny deprive them + of true power, of the love of the people, and of all safety? Ought not + every reasonable prince to perceive, that the despot is a madman, and an + enemy to himself? Should not every enlightened prince beware of + flatterers, whose object is to lull him to sleep upon the brink of the + precipice which they form beneath him? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0155" id="link2H_4_0155"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 151. + </h2> + <p> + If sacerdotal flatteries succeed in perverting princes and making them + tyrants; tyrants, on their part, necessarily corrupt both the great and + the humble. Under an unjust ruler, void of goodness and virtue, who knows + no law but his caprice, a nation must necessarily be depraved. Will this + ruler wish to have, about his person, honest, enlightened, and virtuous + men? No. He wants none but flatterers, approvers, imitators, slaves, base + and servile souls, who conform themselves to his inclinations. His court + will propagate the contagion of vice among the lower ranks. All will + gradually become corrupted in a state, whose chief is corrupt. It was long + since said, that "Princes seem to command others to do whatever they do + themselves." + </p> + <p> + Religion, far from being a restraint upon sovereigns, enables them to + indulge without fear or remorse, in acts of licentiousness as injurious to + themselves, as to the nations whom they govern. It is never with impunity, + that men are deceived. Tell a sovereign, that he is a god; he will very + soon believe that he owes nothing to any one. Provided he is feared, he + will care very little about being loved: he will observe neither rules, + nor relations with his subjects, nor duties towards them. Tell this + prince, that he is <i>accountable for his actions to God alone</i>, and he + will soon act as if he were accountable to no one. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0156" id="link2H_4_0156"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 152. + </h2> + <p> + An enlightened sovereign is he, who knows his true interests; who knows, + that they are connected with the interests of his nation; that a prince + cannot be great, powerful, beloved, or respected, while he commands only + unhappy slaves; that equity, beneficence, and vigilance will give him more + real authority over his people, than the fabulous titles, said to be + derived from heaven. He will see, that Religion is useful only to priests, + that it is useless to society and often troubles it, and that it ought to + be restrained in order to be prevented from doing injury. Finally, he will + perceive, that, to reign with glory, he must have good laws and inculcate + virtue, and not found his power upon impostures and fallacies. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0157" id="link2H_4_0157"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 153. + </h2> + <p> + The ministers of religion have taken great care to make of their God, a + formidable, capricious, and fickle tyrant. Such a God was necessary to + their variable interests. A God, who should be just and good, without + mixture of caprice or perversity; a God, who had constantly the qualities + of an honest man, or of a kind sovereign, would by no means suit his + ministers. It is useful to priests, that men should tremble before their + God, in order that they may apply to them to obtain relief from their + fears. "No man is a hero before his valet de chambre." It is not + surprising, that a God, dressed up by his priests so as to be terrible to + others, should rarely impose upon them, or should have but very little + influence upon their conduct. Hence, in every country, their conduct is + very much the same. Under pretext of the glory of their God, they every + where prey upon ignorance, degrade the mind, discourage industry, and sow + discord. Ambition and avarice have at all times been the ruling passions + of the priesthood. The priest every where rises superior to sovereigns and + laws; we see him every where occupied with the interests of his pride, of + his cupidity, and of his despotic, revengeful humour. In the room of + useful and social virtues, he everywhere substitutes expiations, + sacrifices, ceremonies, mysterious practices, in a word, inventions + lucrative to himself and ruinous to others. + </p> + <p> + The mind is confounded and the reason is amazed upon viewing the + ridiculous customs and pitiful means, which the ministers of the gods have + invented in every country to purify souls, and render heaven favourable. + Here they cut off part of a child's prepuce, to secure for him divine + benevolence; there, they pour water upon his head, to cleanse him of + crimes, which he could not as yet have committed. In one place, they + command him to plunge into a river, whose waters have the power of washing + away all stains; in another, he is forbidden to eat certain food, the use + of which will not fail to excite the celestial wrath; in other countries, + they enjoin upon sinful man to come periodically and confess his faults to + a priest, who is often a greater sinner than himself, etc., etc., etc. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0158" id="link2H_4_0158"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 154. + </h2> + <p> + What should we say of a set of empirics, who, resorting every day to a + public place, should extol the goodness of their remedies, and vend them + as infallible, while they themselves were full of the infirmities, which + they pretend to cure? Should we have much confidence in the recipes of + these quacks, though they stun us with crying, "take our remedies, their + effects are infallible; they cure every body; except us." What should we + afterwards think, should those quacks spend their lives in complaining, + that their remedies never produced the desired effect upon the sick, who + take them? In fine, what idea should we form of the stupidity of the + vulgar, who, notwithstanding these confessions, should not cease to pay + dearly for remedies, the inefficacy of which every thing tends to prove? + Priests resemble these alchymists, who boldly tell us, they have the + secret of making gold, while they have scarcely clothes to cover their + nakedness. + </p> + <p> + The ministers of religion incessantly declaim against the corruption of + the age, and loudly complain of the little effect of their lessons, while + at the same time they assure us, that religion is the <i>universal remedy</i>, + the true <i>panacea</i> against the wickedness of mankind. These priests + are very sick themselves, yet men continue to frequent their shops, and to + have faith in their divine antidotes, which, by their own confession, + never effect a cure! + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0159" id="link2H_4_0159"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 155. + </h2> + <p> + Religion, especially with the moderns, has tried to identify itself with + Morality, the principles of which it has thereby totally obscured. It has + rendered men unsociable by duty, and forced them to be inhuman to everyone + who thought differently from themselves. Theological disputes, equally + unintelligible to each of the enraged parties, have shaken empires, caused + revolutions, been fatal to sovereigns, and desolated all Europe. These + contemptible quarrels have not been extinguished even in rivers of blood. + Since the extinction of paganism, the people have made it a religious + principle to become outrageous, whenever any opinion is advanced which + their priests think contrary to <i>sound doctrine</i>. The sectaries of a + religion, which preaches, in appearance, nothing but charity, concord, and + peace, have proved themselves more ferocious than cannibals or savages, + whenever their divines excited them to destroy their brethren. There is no + crime, which men have not committed under the idea of pleasing the + Divinity, or appeasing his wrath. + </p> + <p> + The idea of a terrible God, whom we paint to ourselves as a despot, must + necessarily render his subjects wicked. Fear makes only slaves, and slaves + are cowardly, base, cruel, and think every thing lawful, in order to gain + the favour or escape the chastisements of the master whom they fear. + Liberty of thinking alone can give men humanity and greatness of soul. The + notion of a tyrant-god tends only to make them abject, morose, + quarrelsome, intolerant slaves. + </p> + <p> + Every religion, which supposes a God easily provoked, jealous, revengeful, + punctilious about his rights or the etiquette with which he is treated;—a + God little enough to be hurt by the opinions which men can form of him;—a + God unjust enough to require that we have uniform notions of his conduct; + a religion which supposes such a God necessarily becomes restless, + unsociable, and sanguinary; the worshippers of such a God would never + think, that they could, without offence, forbear hating and even + destroying every one, who is pointed out to them, as an adversary of this + God; they would think, that it would be to betray the cause of their + celestial Monarch, to live in friendly intercourse with rebellious + fellow-citizens. If we love what God hates, do we not expose ourselves to + his implacable hatred? + </p> + <p> + Infamous persecutors, and devout men-haters! Will you never discern the + folly and injustice of your intolerant disposition? Do you not see, that + man is no more master of his religious opinions, his belief or unbelief, + than of the language, which he learns from infancy? To punish a man for + his errors, is it not to punish him for having been educated differently + from you? If I am an unbeliever, is it possible for me to banish from my + mind the reasons that have shaken my faith? If your God gives men leave to + be damned, what have you to meddle with? Are you more prudent and wise, + than this God, whose rights you would avenge? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0160" id="link2H_4_0160"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 156. + </h2> + <p> + There is no devotee, who does not, according to his temperament, hate, + despise, or pity the adherents of a sect, different from his own. The <i>established</i> + religion, which is never any other than that of the sovereign and the + armies, always makes its superiority felt in a very cruel and injurious + manner by the weaker sects. As yet there is no true toleration upon earth; + men every where adore a jealous God, of whom each nation believes itself + the friend, to the exclusion of all others. + </p> + <p> + Every sect boasts of adoring alone the true God, the universal God, the + Sovereign of all nature. But when we come to examine this Monarch of the + world, we find that every society, sect, party, or religious cabal, makes + of this powerful God only a pitiful sovereign, whose care and goodness + extend only to a small number of his subjects, who pretend that they alone + have the happiness to enjoy his favours, and that he is not at all + concerned about the others. + </p> + <p> + The founders of religions, and the priests who support them, evidently + proposed to separate the nations, whom they taught, from the other + nations; they wished to separate their own flock by distinguishing marks; + they gave their followers gods, who were hostile to the other gods; they + taught them modes of worship, dogmas and ceremonies apart; and above all, + they persuaded them, that the religion of others was impious and + abominable. By this unworthy artifice, the ambitious knaves established, + their usurpation over the minds of their followers, rendered them + unsociable, and made them regard with an evil eye all persons who had not + the same mode of worship and the same ideas as they had. Thus it is, that + Religion has shut up the heart and for ever banished from it the affection + that man ought to have for his fellow-creature. Sociability, indulgence, + humanity, those first virtues of all morality, are totally incompatible + with religious prejudices. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0161" id="link2H_4_0161"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 157. + </h2> + <p> + Every national religion is calculated to make man vain, unsociable, and + wicked; the first step towards humanity is to permit every one peaceably + to embrace the mode of worship and opinions, which he judges to be right. + But this conduct cannot be pleasing to the ministers of religion, who wish + to have the right of tyrannizing over men even in their thoughts. + </p> + <p> + Blind and bigoted princes! You hate and persecute heretics, and order them + to execution, because you are told, that these wretches displease God. But + do you not say, that your God is full of goodness? How then can you expect + to please him by acts of barbarity, which he must necessarily disapprove? + Besides, who has informed you, that their opinions displease your God? + Your priests? But, who assures you, that your priests are not themselves + deceived or wish to deceive you? The same priests? Princes! It is then + upon the hazardous word of your priests, that you commit the most + atrocious crimes, under the idea of pleasing the Divinity! + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0162" id="link2H_4_0162"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 158. + </h2> + <p> + Pascal says, "that man never does evil so fully and cheerfully, as when he + acts from a false principle of conscience." Nothing is more dangerous than + a religion, which lets loose the ferocity of the multitude, and justifies + their blackest crimes. They will set no bounds to their wickedness, when + they think it authorized by their God, whose interests, they are told, can + make every action legitimate. Is religion in danger?—the most + civilized people immediately becomes true savages, and think nothing + forbidden. The more cruel they are, the more agreeable they suppose they + are to their God, whose cause they imagine cannot be supported with too + much warmth. + </p> + <p> + All religions have authorized innumerable crimes. The Jews, intoxicated + with the promises of their God, arrogated the rights of exterminating + whole nations. Relying on the oracles of their God, the Romans conquered + and ravaged the world. The Arabians, encouraged by their divine prophet, + carried fire and sword among the Christians and the idolaters. The + CHRISTIANS, under pretext of extending their holy religion, have often + deluged both hemispheres in blood. + </p> + <p> + In all events favourable to their own interest, which they always call <i>the + cause of God</i>, priests show us the <i>finger of God</i>. According to + these principles, the devout have the happiness to see the <i>finger of + God</i> in revolts, revolutions, massacres, regicides, crimes, + prostitutions, horrors; and, if these things contribute ever so little to + the triumph of religion, we are told, that "God uses all sorts of means to + attain his ends." Is any thing more capable of effacing every idea of + morality from the minds of men, than to inform them, that their God, so + powerful and perfect, is often forced to make use of criminal actions in + order to accomplish his designs? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0163" id="link2H_4_0163"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 159. + </h2> + <p> + No sooner do we complain of the extravagancies and evils, which Religion + has so often caused upon the earth, than we are reminded, that these + excesses are not owing to Religion; but "that they are the sad effects of + the passions of men." But I would ask, what has let loose these passions? + It is evidently Religion; it is zeal, that renders men inhuman, and serves + to conceal the greatest atrocities. Do not these disorders then prove, + that religion, far from restraining the passions of men, only covers them + with a veil, which sanctifies them, and that nothing would be more useful, + than to tear away this sacred veil of which men often make such a terrible + use? What horrors would be banished from society, if the wicked were + deprived of so plausible a pretext for disturbing it! + </p> + <p> + Instead of being angels of peace among men, priests have been demons of + discord. They have pretended to receive from heaven the right of being + quarrelsome, turbulent, and rebellious. Do not the ministers of the Lord + think themselves aggrieved, and pretend that the divine Majesty is + offended, whenever sovereigns have the temerity to prevent them from doing + evil? Priests are like the spiteful woman who cried <i>fire! murder! + assassination!</i> while her husband held her hands to prevent her from + striking him. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0164" id="link2H_4_0164"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 160. + </h2> + <p> + Notwithstanding the bloody tragedies, which Religion often acts, it is + insisted, that, without Religion, there can be no Morality. If we judge + theological opinions by their effects, we may confidently assert, that all + Morality is perfectly incompatible with men's religious opinions. + </p> + <p> + "Imitate God," exclaim the pious. But, what would be our Morality, should + we imitate this God! and what God ought we to imitate? The God of the + Deist? But even this God cannot serve us as a very constant model of + goodness. If he is the author of all things, he is the author both of good + and evil. If he is the author of order, he is also the author of disorder, + which could not take place without his permission. If he produces, he + destroys; if he gives life, he takes it away; if he grants abundance, + riches, prosperity, and peace, he permits or sends scarcity, poverty, + calamities, and wars. How then can we receive as a model of permanent + beneficence, the God of Deism or natural religion, whose favourable + dispositions are every instant contradicted by all the effects we behold? + Morality must have a basis less tottering than the example of a God, whose + conduct varies, and who cannot be called good, unless we obstinately shut + our eyes against the evil which he causes or permits in this world. + </p> + <p> + Shall we imitate the <i>beneficent, mighty Jupiter</i> of heathen + antiquity? To imitate such a god, is to admit as a model, a rebellious + son, who ravishes the throne from his father. It is to imitate a + debauchee, an adulterer, one guilty of incest and of base passions, at + whose conduct every reasonable mortal would blush. What would have been + the condition of men under paganism, had they imagined, like Plato, that + virtue consisted in imitating the gods! + </p> + <p> + Must we imitate the God of the Jews! Shall we find in <i>Jehovah</i> a + model for our conduct? This is a truly savage god, made for a stupid, + cruel, and immoral people; he is always furious, breathes nothing but + vengeance, commands carnage, theft, and unsociability. The conduct of this + god cannot serve as a model to that of an honest man, and can be imitated + only by a chief of robbers. + </p> + <p> + Shall we then imitate the <i>Jesus</i> of the Christians? Does this God, + who died to appease the implacable fury of his father, furnish us an + example which men ought to follow? Alas! we shall see in him only a God, + or rather a fanatic, a misanthrope, who, himself plunged in wretchedness + and preaching to wretches, will advise them to be poor, to combat with and + stifle nature, to hate pleasure, seek grief, and detest themselves. He + will tell them to leave father, mother, relations, friends, etc., to + follow him. "Fine morality!" you say. It is, undoubtedly, admirable: it + must be divine, for it is impracticable to men. But is not such sublime + morality calculated to render virtue odious? According to the so much + boasted morality of the <i>man</i>-God of the Christians, a disciple of + his in this world must be like <i>Tantalus</i>, tormented with a burning + thirst, which he is not allowed to quench. Does not such morality give us + a wonderful idea of the author of nature? If, as we are assured, he has + created all things for his creatures, by what strange whim does he forbid + them the use of the goods he has created for them? Is pleasure then, which + man continually desires, only a snare, which God has maliciously laid to + surprise his weakness? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0165" id="link2H_4_0165"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 161. + </h2> + <p> + The followers of Christ would have us regard, as a miracle, the + establishment of their Religion, which is totally repugnant to nature, + opposite to all the propensities of the heart, and inimical to sensual + pleasures. But the austerity of a doctrine renders it the more marvellous + in the eyes of the vulgar. The same disposition, which respects + inconceivable mysteries as divine and supernatural, admires, as divine and + supernatural, a Morality, that is impracticable, and beyond the powers of + man. + </p> + <p> + To admire a system of Morality, and to put it in practice, are two very + different things. All Christians admire and extol the Morality of the + gospel; which they do not practise. + </p> + <p> + The whole world is more or less infected with a Religious morality, + founded upon the opinion, that to please the Divinity, it is absolutely + necessary to render ourselves unhappy upon earth. In all parts of our + globe, we see penitents, fakirs, and fanatics, who seem to have profoundly + studied the means of tormenting themselves, in honour of a being whose + goodness all agree in celebrating. Religion, by its essence, is an enemy + to the joy and happiness of men. "Blessed are the poor, blessed are they, + who weep; blessed are they, who suffer; misery to those, who are in + abundance and joy." Such are the rare discoveries, announced by + Christianity! + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0166" id="link2H_4_0166"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 162. + </h2> + <p> + What is a Saint in every religion? A man, who prays, and fasts, who + torments himself, and shuns the world; who like an owl, delights only in + solitude, abstains from all pleasure, and seems frightened of every + object, which may divert him from his fanatical meditations. Is this + virtue? Is a being of this type, kind to himself, or useful to others? + Would not society be dissolved, and man return to a savage state, if every + one were fool enough to be a Saint? + </p> + <p> + It is evident, that the literal and rigorous practice of the divine + Morality of the Christians would prove the infallible ruin of nations. A + Christian, aiming at perfection, ought to free his mind from whatever can + divert it from heaven, his true country. Upon earth, he sees nothing but + temptations, snares, and rocks of perdition. He must fear science, as + hurtful to faith; he must avoid industry, as a means of obtaining riches, + too fatal to salvation; he must renounce offices and honours, as capable + of exciting his pride, and calling off his attention from the care of his + soul. In a word, the sublime Morality of Christ, were it practicable, + would break all the bonds of society. + </p> + <p> + A Saint in society is as useless, as a Saint in the desert; his humour is + morose, discontented, and often turbulent; his zeal sometimes obliges him + in conscience to trouble society by opinions or dreams, which his vanity + makes him consider as inspirations from on high. The annals of every + religion are full of restless Saints, intractable Saints, and seditious + Saints, who have become famous by the ravages, with which, <i>for the + greater glory of God</i>, they have desolated the universe. If Saints, who + live in retirement, are useless, those who live in the world, are often + very dangerous. + </p> + <p> + The vanity of acting, the desire of appearing illustrious and peculiar in + conduct, commonly constitute the distinguishing character of Saints. Pride + persuades them, that they are extraordinary men far above human nature, + beings much more perfect than others, favourites whom God regards with + much more complaisance than the rest of mortals. Humility, in a Saint, is + commonly only a more refined pride than that of the generality of men. + Nothing but the most ridiculous vanity can induce man to wage continual + war against his own nature. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0167" id="link2H_4_0167"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 163. + </h2> + <p> + A morality, which contradicts the nature of man, is not made for man. + "But," say you, "the nature of man is depraved." In what consists this + pretended depravity? In having passions? But, are not passions essential + to man? Is he not obliged to seek, desire, and love what is, or what he + thinks is, conducive to his happiness? Is he not forced to fear and avoid + what he judges disagreeable or fatal? Kindle his passions for useful + objects; connect his welfare with those objects; divert him, by sensible + and known motives, from what may injure either him or others, and you will + make him a reasonable and virtuous being. A man without passions would be + equally indifferent to vice and to virtue. + </p> + <p> + Holy Doctors! you are always repeating to us that the nature of man is + perverted; you exclaim, "that <i>all flesh has corrupted its way</i>, that + all the propensities of nature have become inordinate." In this case, you + accuse your God; who was either unable, or unwilling, that this nature + should preserve its primitive perfection. If this nature is corrupted, why + has not God repaired it? The Christian immediately assures me, "that human + nature is repaired; that the death of his God has restored its integrity." + How then, I would ask, do you pretend that human nature, notwithstanding + the death of a God, is still depraved? Is then the death of your God + wholly fruitless? What becomes of his omnipotence and of his victory over + the Devil, if it is true that the Devil still preserves the empire, which, + according to you, he has always exercised in the world? + </p> + <p> + According to Christian theology, Death is the <i>wages of sin</i>. This + opinion is conformable to that of some negro and savage nations, who + imagine that the Death of a man is always the supernatural effect of the + anger of the Gods. Christians firmly believe, that Christ has delivered + them from sin; though they see, that, in their Religion, as in others, man + is subject to Death. To say that Jesus Christ has delivered us from sin, + is it not to say, that a judge has pardoned a criminal, while we see that + he leaves him for execution? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0168" id="link2H_4_0168"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 164. + </h2> + <p> + If shutting our eyes upon whatever passes in the world, we would credit + the partisans of the Christian Religion, we should believe, that the + coming of their divine Saviour produced the most wonderful and complete + reform in the morals of nations. + </p> + <p> + If we examine the Morals of Christian nations, and listen to the clamours + of their priests, we shall be forced to conclude, that Jesus Christ, their + God, preached and died, in vain; his omnipotent will still finds in men, a + resistance, over which he cannot, or will not triumph. The Morality of + this divine Teacher, which his disciples so much admire and so little + practise, is followed, in a whole century only by half a dozen obscure + saints, and fanatics, and unknown monks, who alone will have the glory of + shining in the celestial court, while all the rest of mortals, though + redeemed by the blood of this God, will be the prey of eternal flames. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0169" id="link2H_4_0169"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 165. + </h2> + <p> + When a man is strongly inclined to sin, he thinks very little about his + God. Nay more, whatever crimes he has committed, he always flatters + himself, that this God will soften, in his favour, the rigour of his + decrees. No mortal seriously believes, that his conduct can damn him. + Though he fears a terrible God, who often makes him tremble, yet, whenever + he is strongly tempted, he yields; and he afterwards sees only the God of + <i>mercies</i>, the idea of whom calms his apprehensions. If a man commits + evil, he hopes, he shall have time to reform, and promises to repent at a + future day. + </p> + <p> + In religious pharmacy, there are infallible prescriptions to quiet + consciences: priests, in every country, possess sovereign secrets to + disarm the anger of heaven. Yet, if it be true that the Deity is appeased + by prayers, offerings, sacrifices, and penances, it can no longer be said, + that Religion is a check to the irregularities of men; they will first + sin, and then seek the means to appease God. Every Religion, which + expiates crime and promises a remission of them, if it restrain some + persons, encourages the majority to commit evil. Notwithstanding his + immutability, God, in every Religion, is a true <i>Proteus</i>. His + priests represent him at one time armed with severity, at another full of + clemency and mildness; sometimes cruel and unmerciful, and sometimes + easily melted by the sorrow and tears of sinners. Consequently, men see + the Divinity only on the side most conformable to their present interests. + A God always angry would discourage his worshippers, or throw them into + despair. Men must have a God, who is both irritable, and placable. If his + anger frightens some timorous souls, his clemency encourages the + resolutely wicked, who depend upon recurring, sooner or later, to the + means of accommodation. If the judgments of God terrify some faint-hearted + pious persons, who by constitution and habit are not prone to evil, <i>the + treasures of divine mercy</i> encourage the greatest criminals, who have + reason to hope they participate therein equally with the others. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0170" id="link2H_4_0170"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 166. + </h2> + <p> + Most men seldom think of God, or, at least, bestow on him serious + attention. The only ideas we can form of him are so devoid of object, and + are at the same time so afflicting, that the only imaginations they can + arrest are those of melancholy hypochondriacs, who do not constitute the + majority of the inhabitants of this world. The vulgar have no conception + of God; their weak brains are confused, whenever they think of him. The + man of business thinks only of his business; the courtier of his + intrigues; men of fashion, women, and young people of their pleasures; + dissipation soon effaces in them all the fatiguing notions of Religion. + The ambitious man, the miser and the debauchee carefully avoid + speculations too feeble to counterbalance their various passions. + </p> + <p> + Who is awed by the idea of a God? A few enfeebled men, morose and + disgusted with the world; a few, in whom the passions are already deadened + by age, by infirmity, or by the strokes of fortune. Religion is a check, + to those alone who by their state of mind and body, or by fortuitous + circumstances, have been already brought to reason. The fear of God + hinders from sin only those, who are not much inclined to it, or else + those who are no longer able to commit it. To tell men, that the Deity + punishes crimes in this world, is to advance an assertion, which + experience every moment contradicts. The worst of men are commonly the + arbiters of the world, and are those whom fortune loads with her favours. + To refer us to another life, in order to convince us of the judgments of + God, is to refer us to conjectures, in order to destroy facts, which + cannot be doubted. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0171" id="link2H_4_0171"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 167. + </h2> + <p> + Nobody thinks of the life to come, when he is strongly smitten with the + objects he finds here below. In the eyes of a passionate lover, the + presence of his mistress extinguishes the flames of hell, and her charms + efface all the pleasures of paradise. Woman! you leave, say you, your + lover for your God. This is either because your lover is no longer the + same in your eyes, or because he leaves you. + </p> + <p> + Nothing is more common, than to see ambitious, perverse, corrupt, and + immoral men, who have some ideas of Religion, and sometimes appear even + zealous for its interest. If they do not practise it at present, they hope + to in the future. They lay it up, as a remedy, which will be necessary to + salve the conscience for the evil they intend to commit. Besides, the + party of devotees and priests being very numerous, active, and powerful, + is it not astonishing, that rogues and knaves seek its support to attain + their ends? It will undoubtedly be said, that many honest people are + sincerely religious, and that without profit; but is uprightness of heart + always accompanied with knowledge? + </p> + <p> + It is urged, that many learned men, many men of genius have been strongly + attached to Religion. This proves, that men of genius may have prejudices, + be pusillanimous, and have an imagination, which misleads them and + prevents them from examining subjects coolly. Pascal proves nothing in + favour of Religion, unless that a man of genius may be foolish on some + subjects, and is but a child, when he is weak enough to listen to his + prejudices. Pascal himself tells us, that <i>the mind may be strong and + contracted, enlarged and weak</i>. He previously observes, that <i>a man + may have a sound mind, and not understand every subject equally well; for + there are some, who, having a sound judgment in a certain order of things, + are bewildered in others</i>. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0172" id="link2H_4_0172"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 168. + </h2> + <p> + What is virtue according to theology? <i>It is</i>, we are told, <i>the + conformity of the actions of man to the will of God</i>. But, what is God? + A being, of whom nobody has the least conception, and whom every one + consequently modifies in his own way. What is the will of God? It is what + men, who have seen God, or whom God has inspired, have declared to be the + will of God. Who are those, who have seen God? They are either fanatics, + or rogues, or ambitious men, whom we cannot believe. + </p> + <p> + To found Morality upon a God, whom every man paints to himself + differently, composes in his way, and arranges according to his own + temperament and interest, is evidently to found Morality upon the caprice + and imagination of men; it is to found it upon the whims of a sect, a + faction, a party, who believe they have the advantage to adore a true God + to the exclusion of all others. + </p> + <p> + To establish Morality or the duties of man upon the divine will, is to + found it upon the will, the reveries and the interests of those, who make + God speak, without ever fearing that he will contradict them. In every + Religion, priests alone have a right to decide what is pleasing or + displeasing to their God, and we are certain they will always decide, that + it is what pleases or displeases themselves. The dogmas, the ceremonies, + the morals, and the virtues, prescribed by every Religion, are visibly + calculated only to extend the power or augment the emoluments of the + founders and ministers of these Religions. The dogmas are obscure, + inconceivable, frightful, and are therefore well calculated to bewilder + the imagination and to render the vulgar more obsequious to the will of + those who wish to domineer over them. The ceremonies and practices procure + the priests, riches or respect. Religion consists in a submissive faith, + which prohibits the exercise of reason; in a devout humility, which + insures priests the submission of their slaves; in an ardent zeal, when + Religion, that is, when the interest of these priests, is in danger. The + only object of all religions is evidently the advantage of its ministers. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0173" id="link2H_4_0173"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 169. + </h2> + <p> + When we reproach theologians with the barrenness of their divine virtues, + they emphatically extol <i>charity</i>, that tender love of one's + neighbour, which Christianity makes an essential duty of its disciples. + But, alas! what becomes of this pretended charity, when we examine the + conduct of the ministers of the Lord? Ask them, whether we must love or do + good to our neighbour, if he be an impious man, a heretic, or an infidel, + that is, if he do not think like them? Ask them, whether we must tolerate + opinions contrary to those of the religion, they profess? Ask them, + whether the sovereign can show indulgence to those who are in error? Their + charity instantly disappears, and the established clergy will tell you, + that <i>the prince bears the sword only to support the cause of the Most + High</i>: they will tell you that, through love for our neighbour, we must + prosecute, imprison, exile, and burn him. You will find no toleration + except among a few priests, persecuted themselves, who will lay aside + Christian charity the instant they have power to persecute in their turn. + </p> + <p> + The Christian religion, in its origin preached by beggars and miserable + men, under the name of <i>charity</i>, strongly recommends alms. The + religion of Mahomet also enjoins it as an indispensable duty. Nothing + undoubtedly is more conformable to humanity, than to succour the + unfortunate, to clothe the naked, to extend the hand of beneficence to + every one in distress. But would it not be more humane and charitable to + prevent the source of misery and poverty? If Religion, instead of deifying + princes, had taught them to respect the property of their subjects, to be + just, to exercise only their lawful rights, we should not be shocked by + the sight of such a multitude of beggars. A rapacious, unjust, tyrannical + government multiplies misery; heavy taxes produce discouragement, sloth, + and poverty, which in their turn beget robberies, assassinations, and + crimes of every description. Had sovereigns more humanity, charity, and + equity, their dominions would not be peopled by so many wretches, whose + misery it becomes impossible to alleviate. + </p> + <p> + Christian and Mahometan states are full of large hospitals, richly + endowed, in which we admire the pious charity of the kings and sultans, + who erected them. But would it not have been more humane to govern the + people justly, to render them happy, to excite and favour industry and + commerce, and to let men enjoy in safety the fruit of their labours, than + to crush them under a despotic yoke, to impoverish them by foolish wars, + to reduce them to beggary, in order that luxury may be satisfied, and then + to erect splendid buildings, which can contain but a very small portion of + those, who have been rendered miserable? Religion has only deluded men; + instead of preventing evils, it always applies ineffectual remedies. + </p> + <p> + The ministers of heaven have always known how to profit by the calamities + of others. Public misery is their element. They have every where become + administrators of the property of the poor, distributors of alms, + depositaries of charitable donations; and thereby they have at all times + extended and supported their power over the unhappy, who generally compose + the most numerous, restless, and seditious part of society. Thus the + greatest evils turn to the profit of the ministers of the Lord. Christian + priests tell us, that the property they possess is the property of the + poor, and that it is therefore sacred. Consequently they have eagerly + accumulated lands, revenues, and treasures. Under colour of charity, + spiritual guides have become extremely opulent, and in the face of + impoverished nations enjoy wealth, which was destined solely for the + unfortunate; while the latter, far from murmuring, applaud a pious + generosity, which enriches the church, but rarely contributes to the + relief of the poor. + </p> + <p> + According to the principles of Christianity, poverty itself is a virtue; + indeed, it is the virtue, which sovereigns and priests oblige their slaves + to observe most rigorously. With this idea, many pious Christians have of + their own accord renounced riches, distributed their patrimony among the + poor, and retired into deserts, there to live in voluntary indigence. But + this enthusiasm, this supernatural taste for misery, has been soon forced + to yield to nature. The successors of these volunteers in poverty sold to + the devout people their prayers, and their intercessions with the Deity. + They became rich and powerful. Thus monks and hermits lived in indolence, + and under colour of charity, impudently devoured the substance of the + poor. + </p> + <p> + The species of poverty, most esteemed by Religion, is <i>poverty of mind</i>. + The fundamental virtue of every Religion, most useful to its ministers, is + <i>faith</i>. It consists in unbounded credulity, which admits, without + enquiry, whatever the interpreters of the Deity are interested in making + men believe. By the aid of this wonderful virtue, priests became the + arbiters of right and wrong, of good and evil: they could easily cause the + commission of crimes to advance their interest. Implicit faith has been + the source of the greatest outrages that have been committed. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0174" id="link2H_4_0174"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 170. + </h2> + <p> + He, who first taught nations, that, when we wrong Man, we must ask pardon + of God, appease <i>him</i> by presents, and offer <i>him</i> sacrifices, + evidently destroyed the true principles of Morality. According to such + ideas, many persons imagine that they may obtain of the king of heaven, as + of kings of the earth, permission to be unjust and wicked, or may at least + obtain pardon for the evil they may commit. + </p> + <p> + Morality is founded upon the relations, wants, and constant interests of + mankind; the relations, which subsist between God and Men, are either + perfectly unknown, or imaginary. Religion, by associating God with Man, + has wisely weakened, or destroyed, the bonds, which unite them. Mortals + imagine, they may injure one another with impunity, by making suitable + satisfaction to the almighty being, who is supposed to have the right of + remitting all offences committed against his creatures. + </p> + <p> + Is any thing better calculated to encourage the wicked or harden them in + crimes, than to persuade them that there exists an invisible being, who + has a right to forgive acts of injustice, rapine, and outrage committed + against society? By these destructive ideas, perverse men perpetrate the + most horrid crimes, and believe they make reparation by imploring divine + mercy; their conscience is at rest, when a priest assures them that heaven + is disarmed by a repentance, which, though sincere, is very useless to the + world. + </p> + <p> + In the mind of a devout man, God must be regarded more than his creatures; + it is better to obey him, than men. The interests of the celestial monarch + must prevail over those of weak mortals. But the interests of heaven are + obviously those of its ministers; whence it evidently follows, that in + every religion, priests, under pretext of the interests of heaven or the + glory of God, can dispense with the duties of human Morality, when they + clash with the duties, which God has a right to impose. Besides, must not + he, who has power to pardon crimes, have a right to encourage the + commission of crimes? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0175" id="link2H_4_0175"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 171. + </h2> + <p> + We are perpetually told, that, without a God there would be no <i>moral + obligation</i>; that the people and even the sovereigns require a + legislator powerful enough to constrain them. Moral constraint supposes a + law; but this law arises from the eternal and necessary relations of + things with one another; relations, which have nothing common with the + existence of a God. The rules of Man's conduct are derived from his own + nature which he is capable of knowing, and not from the Divine nature of + which he has no idea. These rules constrain or oblige us; that is, we + render ourselves estimable or contemptible, amiable or detestable, worthy + of reward or of punishment, happy or unhappy, accordingly as we conform + to, or deviate from these rules. The law, which obliges man not to hurt + himself, is founded upon the nature of a sensible being, who, in whatever + way he came into this world, is forced by his actual essence to seek good + and shun evil, to love pleasure and fear pain. The law, which obliges man + not to injure, and even to do good to others, is founded upon the nature + of sensible beings, living in society, whose essence compels them to + despise those who are useless, and to detest those who oppose their + felicity. + </p> + <p> + Whether there exists a God or not, whether this God has spoken or not, the + moral duties of men will be always the same, so long as they are sensible + beings. Have men then need of a God whom they know not, of an invisible + legislator, of a mysterious religion and of chimerical fears, in order to + learn that every excess evidently tends to destroy them, that to preserve + health they must be temperate; that to gain the love of others it is + necessary to do them good, that to do them evil is a sure means to incur + their vengeance and hatred? "Before the law there was no sin." Nothing is + more false than this maxim. It suffices that man is what he is, or that he + is a sensible being, in order to distinguish what gives him pleasure or + displeasure. It suffices that one man knows that another man is a sensible + being like himself, to perceive what is useful or hurtful to him. It + suffices that man needs his fellow-creature, in order to know that he must + fear to excite sentiments unfavourable to himself. Thus the feeling and + thinking being has only to feel and think, in order to discover what he + must do for himself and others. I feel, and another feels like me; this is + the foundation of all morals. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0176" id="link2H_4_0176"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 172. + </h2> + <p> + We can judge of the goodness of a system of Morals, only by its conformity + to the nature of man. By this comparison, we have a right to reject it, if + contrary to the welfare of our species. Whoever has seriously meditated + Religion; whoever has carefully weighed its advantages and disadvantages, + will be fully convinced, that both are injurious to the interests of Man, + or directly opposite to his nature. + </p> + <p> + "To arms! the cause of your God is at stake! Heaven is outraged! The faith + is in danger! Impiety! blasphemy! heresy!" The magical power of these + formidable words, the real value of which the people never understand, + have at all times enabled priests to excite revolts, to dethrone kings, to + kindle civil wars, and to lay waste. If we examine the important objects, + which have produced so many ravages upon earth, it appears, that either + the foolish reveries and whimsical conjectures of some theologian who did + not understand himself, or else the pretensions of the clergy, have broken + every social bond and deluged mankind with blood and tears. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0177" id="link2H_4_0177"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 173. + </h2> + <p> + The sovereigns of this world, by associating the Divinity in the + government of their dominions, by proclaiming themselves his vicegerents + and representatives upon earth, and by acknowledging they hold their power + from him, have necessarily constituted his ministers their own rivals or + masters. Is it then astonishing, that priests have often made kings feel + the superiority of the Celestial Monarch? Have they not more than once + convinced temporal princes, that even the greatest power is compelled to + yield to the spiritual power of opinion? Nothing is more difficult than to + serve two masters, especially when they are not agreed upon what they + require. + </p> + <p> + The association of Religion with Politics necessarily introduced double + legislation. The law of God, interpreted by his priests, was often + repugnant to the law of the sovereign, or the interest of the state. When + princes have firmness and are confident of the love of their subjects, the + law of God is sometimes forced to yield to the wise intentions of the + temporal sovereign; but generally the <i>sovereign</i> authority is + obliged to give way to the <i>divine</i> authority, that is, to the + interests of the clergy. Nothing is more dangerous to a prince, than to <i>encroach + upon the authority of the Church</i>, that is, to attempt to reform abuses + consecrated by religion. God is never more angry than when we touch the + divine rights, privileges, possessions, or immunities of his priests. + </p> + <p> + The metaphysical speculations or religious opinions of men influence their + conduct, only when they judge them conformable to their interest. Nothing + proves this truth more clearly, than the conduct of many princes with + respect to the spiritual power, which they often resist. Ought not a + sovereign, persuaded of the importance and rights of Religion, to believe + himself in conscience bound to receive respectfully the orders of its + priests, and to regard them as the orders of the Divinity? There was a + time, when kings and people, more consistent in their conduct, were + convinced of the rights of spiritual power, and becoming its slaves, + yielded to it upon every occasion, and were but docile instruments in its + hands. That happy time is passed. By a strange inconsistency the most + devout monarchs are sometimes seen to oppose the enterprises of those, + whom they yet regard as the ministers of God. A sovereign, deeply + religious, ought to remain prostrate at the feet of his ministers, and + regard them as true sovereigns. Is there upon earth a power which has a + right to put itself in competition with that of the Most High? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0178" id="link2H_4_0178"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 174. + </h2> + <p> + Have princes then, who imagine themselves interested in cherishing the + prejudices of their subjects, seriously reflected upon the effects, which + have been, and may be again produced by certain privileged demagogues, who + have a right to speak at pleasure, and in the name of heaven to inflame + the passions of millions of subjects? What ravages would not these sacred + haranguers cause, if they should conspire, as they have so often done, to + disturb the tranquillity of a state! + </p> + <p> + To most nations, nothing is more burthensome and ruinous than the worship + of their gods. Not only do the ministers of these gods every where + constitute the first order in the state, but they also enjoy the largest + portion of the goods of society, and have a right to levy permanent taxes + upon their fellow-citizens. What real advantages then do these organs of + the Most High procure the people, for the immense profits extorted from + their industry? In exchange for their riches and benefits, what do they + give them but mysteries, hypotheses, ceremonies, subtle questions, and + endless quarrels, which states are again compelled to pay with blood? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0179" id="link2H_4_0179"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 175. + </h2> + <p> + Religion, though said to be the firmest prop of Morality, evidently + destroys its true springs, in order to substitute imaginary ones, + inconceivable chimeras, which, being obviously contrary to reason, nobody + firmly believes. All nations declare that they firmly believe in a God, + who rewards and punishes; all say they are persuaded of the existence of + hell and paradise; yet, do these ideas render men better or counteract the + most trifling interests? Every one assures us, that he trembles at the + judgments of God; yet every one follows his passions, when he thinks + himself sure of escaping the judgments of Man. The fear of invisible + powers is seldom so strong as the fear of visible ones. Unknown or remote + punishments strike the multitude far less forcibly than the sight of the + gallows. Few courtiers fear the anger of their God so much as the + displeasure of their master. A pension, a title, or a riband suffices to + efface the remembrance both of the torments of hell, and of the pleasures + of the celestial court. The caresses of a woman repeatedly prevail over + the menaces of the Most High. A jest, a stroke of ridicule, a witticism, + make more impression upon the man of the world, than all the grave notions + of his Religion. + </p> + <p> + Are we not assured that <i>a true repentance</i> is enough to appease the + Deity? Yet we do not see that this <i>true repentance</i> is very sincere; + at least, it is rare to see noted thieves, even at the point of death, + restore goods, which they have unjustly acquired. Men are undoubtedly + persuaded, that they shall fit themselves for eternal fire, if they cannot + insure themselves against it. But, "Some useful compacts may be made with + heaven." By giving the church a part of his fortune, almost every devout + rogue may die in peace, without concerning himself in what he gained his + riches. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0180" id="link2H_4_0180"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 176. + </h2> + <p> + By the confession of the warmest defenders of Religion and of its utility, + nothing is more rare than sincere conversions, and, we might add, nothing + more unprofitable to society. Men are not disgusted with the world, until + the world is disgusted with them. + </p> + <p> + If the devout have the talent of pleasing God and his priests, they have + seldom that of being agreeable or useful to society. To a devotee, + Religion is a veil, which covers all passions; pride, ill-humour, anger, + revenge, impatience, and rancour. Devotion arrogates a tyrannical + superiority, which banishes gentleness, indulgence, and gaiety; it + authorizes people to censure their neighbours, to reprove and revile the + profane for the greater glory of God. It is very common to be devout, and + at the same time destitute of every virtue and quality necessary to social + life. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0181" id="link2H_4_0181"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 177. + </h2> + <p> + It is asserted, that the dogma of another life is of the utmost importance + to peace and happiness; that without it, men would be destitute of motives + to do good. What need is there of terrors and fables to make man sensible + how he ought to conduct himself? Does not every one see, that he has the + greatest interest, in meriting the approbation, esteem, and benevolence of + the beings who surround him, and in abstaining from every thing, by which + he may incur the censure, contempt, and resentment of society? However + short an entertainment, a conversation, or visit, does not each desire to + act his part decently, and agreeably to himself and others? If life is but + a passage, let us strive to make it easy; which we cannot effect, if we + fail in regard for those who travel with us. Religion, occupied with its + gloomy reveries, considers man merely as a pilgrim upon earth; and + therefore supposes that, in order to travel the more securely, he must + forsake company, and deprive himself of pleasure and amusements, which + might console him for the tediousness and fatigue of the journey. A + stoical and morose philosopher sometimes gives us advice as irrational as + that of Religion. But a more rational philosophy invites us to spread + flowers upon the way of life, to dispel melancholy and banish terrors, to + connect our interest with that of our fellow-travellers, and by gaiety and + lawful pleasures, to divert our attention from difficulties and accidents, + to which we are often exposed; it teaches us, that, to travel agreeably, + we should abstain from what might be injurious to ourselves, and carefully + shun what might render us odious to our associates. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0182" id="link2H_4_0182"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 178. + </h2> + <p> + It is asked, <i>what motives an Atheist can have to do good?</i> The + motive to please himself and his fellow-creatures; to live happily and + peaceably; to gain the affection and esteem of men. "Can he, who fears not + the gods, fear any thing?" He can fear men; he can fear contempt, + dishonour, the punishment of the laws; in short, he can fear himself, and + the remorse felt by all those who are conscious of having incurred or + merited the hatred of their fellow-creatures. + </p> + <p> + Conscience is the internal testimony, which we bear to ourselves, of + having acted so as to merit the esteem or blame of the beings, with whom + we live; and it is founded upon the clear knowledge we have of men, and of + the sentiments which our actions must produce in them. The Conscience of + the religious man consists in imagining that he has pleased or displeased + his God, of whom he has no idea, and whose obscure and doubtful intentions + are explained to him only by men of doubtful veracity, who, like him, are + utterly unacquainted with the essence of the Deity, and are little agreed + upon what can please or displease him. In a word, the conscience of the + credulous is directed by men, who have themselves an erroneous conscience, + or whose interest stifles knowledge. + </p> + <p> + "Can an Atheist have a Conscience? What are his motives to abstain from + hidden vices and secret crimes of which other men are ignorant, and which + are beyond the reach of laws?" He may be assured by constant experience, + that there is no vice, which, by the nature of things, does not punish + itself. Would he preserve this life? he will avoid every excess, that may + impair his health; he will not wish to lead a languishing life, which + would render him a burden to himself and others. As for secret crimes, he + will abstain from them, for fear he shall be forced to blush at himself, + from whom he cannot flee. If he has any reason, he will know the value of + the esteem which an honest man ought to have for himself. He will see, + that unforeseen circumstances may unveil the conduct, which he feels + interested in concealing from others. The other world furnishes no motives + for doing good, to him, who finds none on earth. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0183" id="link2H_4_0183"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 179. + </h2> + <p> + "The speculative Atheist," says the Theist, "may be an honest man, but his + writings will make political Atheists. Princes and ministers, no longer + restrained by the fear of God, will abandon themselves, without scruple, + to the most horrid excesses." But, however great the depravity of an + Atheist upon the throne, can it be stronger and more destructive, than + that of the many conquerors, tyrants, persecutors, ambitious men, and + perverse courtiers, who, though not Atheists, but often very religious and + devout, have notwithstanding made humanity groan under the weight of their + crimes? Can an atheistical prince do more harm to the world, than a Louis + XI., a Philip II., a Richelieu, who all united Religion with crime? + Nothing is more rare, than atheistical princes; nothing more common, than + tyrants and ministers, who are very wicked and very religious. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0184" id="link2H_4_0184"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 180. + </h2> + <p> + A man of reflection cannot be incapable of his duties, of discovering the + relations subsisting between men, of meditating his own nature, of + discerning his own wants, propensities, and desires, and of perceiving + what he owes to beings, who are necessary to his happiness. These + reflections naturally lead him to a knowledge of the Morality most + essential to social beings. Dangerous passions seldom fall to the lot of a + man who loves to commune with himself, to study, and to investigate the + principles of things. The strongest passion of such a man will be to know + truth, and his ambition to teach it to others. Philosophy cultivates the + mind. On the score of morals and honesty, has not he who reflects and + reasons, evidently an advantage over him, who makes it a principle never + to reason? + </p> + <p> + If ignorance is useful to priests, and to the oppressors of mankind, it is + fatal to society. Man, void of knowledge, does not enjoy reason; without + reason and knowledge, he is a savage, liable to commit crimes. Morality, + or the science of duties, is acquired only by the study of Man, and of + what is relative to Man. He, who does not reflect, is unacquainted with + true Morality, and walks with precarious steps, in the path of virtue. The + less men reason, the more wicked they are. Savages, princes, nobles, and + the dregs of the people, are commonly the worst of men, because they + reason the least. The devout man seldom reflects, and rarely reasons. He + fears all enquiry, scrupulously follows authority, and often, through an + error of conscience, makes it a sacred duty to commit evil. The Atheist + reasons: he consults experience, which he prefers to prejudice. If he + reasons justly, his conscience is enlightened; he finds more real motives + to do good than the bigot whose only motives are his fallacies, and who + never listens to reason. Are not the motives of the Atheist sufficiently + powerful to counteract his passions? Is he blind enough to be unmindful of + his true interest, which ought to restrain him? But he will be neither + worse nor better, than the numerous believers, who, notwithstanding + Religion and its sublime precepts, follow a conduct which Religion + condemns. Is a credulous assassin less to be feared, than an assassin who + believes nothing? Is a very devout tyrant less tyrannical than an undevout + tyrant? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0185" id="link2H_4_0185"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 181. + </h2> + <p> + Nothing is more uncommon, than to see men consistent. Their opinions never + influence their conduct except when conformable to their temperaments, + passions, and interests. Daily experience shows, that religious opinions + produce much evil and little good. They are hurtful, because they often + favour the passions of tyrants, of ambitious men, of fanatics, and of + priests; they are of no effect, because incapable of counter-balancing the + present interests of the greater part of mankind. Religious principles are + of no avail, when they act in opposition to ardent desires; though not + unbelievers, men then conduct themselves as if they believed nothing. + </p> + <p> + We shall always be liable to err, when we judge of the opinions of men by + their conduct, or of their conduct by their opinions. A religious man, + notwithstanding the unsociable principles of a sanguinary religion, will + sometimes by a happy inconsistency, be humane, tolerant, and moderate; the + principles of his religion do not then agree with the gentleness of his + character. Libertines, debauchees, hypocrites, adulterers, and rogues, + often appear to have the best ideas upon morals. Why do they not reduce + them to practice? Because their temperament, their interest, and their + habits do not accord with their sublime theories. The rigid principles of + Christian morality, which many people regard as divine, have but little + influence upon the conduct of those, who preach them to others. Do they + not daily tell us, <i>to do what they preach, and not what they practise?</i> + </p> + <p> + The partisans of Religion often denote an infidel by the word <i>libertine</i>. + It is possible that many unbelievers may have loose morals, which is owing + to their temperament, and not to their opinions. But how does their + conduct affect their opinions? Cannot then an immoral man be a good + physician, architect, geometrician, logician, or metaphysician? A man of + irreproachable conduct may be extremely deficient in knowledge and reason. + In quest of truth, it little concerns us from whom it comes. Let us not + judge men by their opinions, nor opinions by men; let us judge men by + their conduct, and their opinions by their conformity with experience and + reason and by their utility to mankind. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0186" id="link2H_4_0186"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 182. + </h2> + <p> + Every man, who reasons, soon becomes an unbeliever; for reason shows, that + theology is nothing but a tissue of chimeras; that religion is contrary to + every principle of good sense, that it tinctures all human knowledge with + falsity. The sensible man is an unbeliever, because he sees, that, far + from making men happier, religion is the chief source of the greatest + disorders, and the permanent calamities, with which man is afflicted. The + man, who seeks his own welfare and tranquillity, examines and throws aside + religion, because he thinks it no less troublesome than useless, to spend + his life in trembling before phantoms, fit to impose only upon silly women + or children. + </p> + <p> + If licentiousness, which reasons but little, sometimes leads to + irreligion, the man of pure morals may have very good motives for + examining his religion, and banishing it from his mind. Religious terrors, + too weak to impose upon the wicked in whom vice is deeply rooted, afflict, + torment and overwhelm restless imaginations. Courageous and vigorous minds + soon shake off the insupportable yoke. But those, who are weak and + timorous, languish under it during life; and as they grow old their fears + increase. + </p> + <p> + Priests have represented God as so malicious, austere, and terrible a + being, that most men would cordially wish, that there was no God. It is + impossible to be happy, while always trembling. Ye devout! you adore a + terrible God! But you hate him; you would be glad, if he did not exist. + Can we refrain from desiring the absence or destruction of a master, the + idea of whom destroys our happiness? The black colours, in which priests + paint the Divinity, are truly shocking, and force us to hate and reject + him. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0187" id="link2H_4_0187"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 183. + </h2> + <p> + If fear created the gods, fear supports their empire over the minds of + mortals. So early are men accustomed to shudder at the mere name of the + Deity, that they regard him as a spectre, a hobgoblin, a bugbear, which + torments and deprives them of courage even to wish relief from their + fears. They apprehend, that the invisible spectre, will strike them the + moment they cease to be afraid. Bigots are too much in fear of their God + to love him sincerely. They serve him like slaves, who, unable to escape + his power, resolve to flatter their master, and who, by dint of lying, at + length persuade themselves, that they in some measure love him. They make + a virtue of necessity. The love of devotees for their God, and of slaves + for their despots, is only a feigned homage. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0188" id="link2H_4_0188"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 184. + </h2> + <p> + Christian divines have represented their God so terrible and so little + worthy of love, that several of them have thought they must dispense with + loving him; a blasphemy, shocking to other divines, who were less + ingenuous. St. Thomas having maintained, that we are obliged to love God + as soon as we attain the use of reason, the Jesuit Sirmond answered him, + <i>that is very soon</i>. The Jesuit Vasquez assures us, that <i>it is + enough to love God at the point of death</i>. Hurtado, more rigid, says, + <i>we must love God very year</i>. Henriquez is contented that we love him + <i>every five years</i>; Sotus, <i>every Sunday</i>. Upon what are these + opinions grounded? asks father Sirmond; who adds, that Suarez requires us + to <i>love God sometimes</i>. But when? He leaves that to us; he knows + nothing about it himself. <i>Now</i>, says he, <i>who will be able to know + that, of which such a learned divine is ignorant?</i> The same Jesuit + Sirmond further observes, that <i>God</i> "does not command us to love him + with an affectionate love, nor does he promise us salvation upon condition + that we give him our hearts; it is enough to obey and love him with an + effective love by executing his orders; this is the only love we owe him; + and he has not so much commanded us to love him, as not to hate him." This + doctrine appears heretical, impious, and abominable to the Jansenists, + who, by the revolting severity they attribute to their God, make him far + less amiable, than the Jesuits, their adversaries. The latter, to gain + adherents, paint God in colours capable of encouraging the most perverse + of mortals. Thus nothing is more undecided with the Christians, than the + important question, whether they can, ought, or ought not to love God. + Some of their spiritual guides maintain, that it is necessary to love him + with all one's heart, notwithstanding all his severity; others, like + father Daniel, think that, <i>an act of pure love to God is the most + heroic act of Christian virtue, and almost beyond the reach of human + weakness</i>. The Jesuit Pintereau goes farther; he says, <i>a deliverance + from the grievous yoke of loving God is a privilege of the new covenant</i>. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0189" id="link2H_4_0189"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 185. + </h2> + <p> + The character of the Man always decides that of his God; every body makes + one for himself and like himself. The man of gaiety, involved in + dissipation and pleasure, does not imagine, that, God can be stern and + cross; he wants a good-natured God, with whom he can find reconciliation. + The man of a rigid, morose, bilious, sour disposition, must have a God + like himself, a God of terror; and he regards, as perverse, those, who + admit a placable, indulgent God. As men are constituted, organized, and + modified in a manner, which cannot be precisely the same, how can they + agree about a chimera, which exists only in their brains? + </p> + <p> + The cruel and endless disputes between the ministers of the Lord, are not + such as to attract the confidence of those, who impartially consider them. + How can we avoid complete infidelity, upon viewing principles, about which + those who teach them to others are never agreed? How can we help doubting + the existence of a God, of whom it is evident that even his ministers can + only form very fluctuating ideas? How can we in short avoid totally + rejecting a God, who is nothing but a shapeless heap of contradictions? + How can we refer the matter to the decision of priests, who are + perpetually at war, treating each other as impious and heretical, defaming + and persecuting each other without mercy, for differing in the manner of + understanding what they announce to the world? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0190" id="link2H_4_0190"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 186. + </h2> + <p> + The existence of a God is the basis of all Religion. Nevertheless, this + important truth has not as yet been demonstrated, I do not say so as to + convince unbelievers, but in a manner satisfactory to theologians + themselves. Profound thinkers have at all times been occupied in inventing + new proofs. What are the fruits of their meditations and arguments? They + have left the subject in a worse condition; they have demonstrated + nothing; they have almost always excited the clamours of their brethren, + who have accused them of having poorly defended the best of causes. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0191" id="link2H_4_0191"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 187. + </h2> + <p> + The apologists of religion daily repeat, that the passions alone make + unbelievers. "Pride," say they, "and the desire of signalizing themselves, + make men Atheists. They endeavour to efface from their minds the idea of + God, only because they have reason to fear his terrible judgments." + Whatever may be the motives, which incline men to Atheism, it is our + business to examine, whether their sentiments are founded in truth. No man + acts without motives. Let us first examine the arguments and afterwards + the motives. We shall see whether these motives are not legitimate, and + more rational than those of many credulous bigots, who suffer themselves + to be guided by masters little worthy of the confidence of men. + </p> + <p> + You say then, Priests of the Lord! that the passions make unbelievers; + that they renounce Religion only through interest, or because it + contradicts their inordinate propensities; you assert, that they attack + your gods only because they fear their severity. But, are you yourselves, + in defending Religion and its chimeras, truly exempt from passions and + interests? Who reap advantages from this Religion, for which priests + display so much zeal? Priests. To whom does Religion procure power, + influence, riches, and honours? To Priests. Who wage war, in every + country, against reason, science, truth, and philosophy, and render them + odious to sovereigns and people? Priests. Who profit by the ignorance and + vain prejudices of men? Priests.—Priests! you are rewarded, honoured + and paid for deceiving mortals, and you cause those to be punished who + undeceive them. The follies of men procure you benefices, offerings, and + expiations; while those, who announce the most useful truths, are rewarded + only with chains, gibbets and funeral-piles. Let the world judge between + us. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0192" id="link2H_4_0192"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 188. + </h2> + <p> + Pride and vanity have been, and ever will be, inherent in the priesthood. + Is any thing more capable of rendering men haughty and vain, than the + pretence of exercising a power derived from heaven, of bearing a sacred + character, of being the messengers and ministers of the Most High? Are not + these dispositions perpetually nourished by the credulity of the people, + the deference and respect of sovereigns, the immunities, privileges, and + distinctions enjoyed by the clergy? In every country, the vulgar are much + more devoted to their spiritual guides, whom they regard as divine, than + to their temporal superiors, whom they consider as no more than ordinary + men. The parson of a village acts a much more conspicuous part, than the + lord of the manor or the justice of the peace. Among the Christians, a + priest thinks himself far above a king or an emperor. A Spanish grandee + having spoken rather haughtily to a monk, the latter arrogantly said, + "Learn to respect a man, who daily has your God in his hands, and your + Queen at his feet." Have priests then a right to accuse unbelievers of + pride? Are they themselves remarkable for uncommon modesty or profound + humility? Is it not evident, that the desire of domineering over men is + essential to their trade? If the ministers of the Lord were truly modest, + should we see them so greedy of respect, so impatient of contradiction, so + positive in their decisions, and so unmercifully revengeful to those whose + opinions offend them? Has not Science the modesty to acknowledge how + difficult it is to discover truth? What other passion but ungovernable + pride can make men so savage, revengeful, and void of indulgence and + gentleness? What can be more presumptuous, than to arm nations and deluge + the world in blood, in order to establish or defend futile conjectures? + </p> + <p> + You say, that presumption alone makes Atheists. Inform them then what your + God is; teach them his essence; speak of him intelligibly; say something + about him, which is reasonable, and not contradictory or impossible. If + you are unable to satisfy them, if hitherto none of you have been able to + demonstrate the existence of a God in a clear and convincing manner; if by + your own confession, his essence is completely veiled from you, as from + the rest of mortals, forgive those, who cannot admit what they can neither + understand nor make consistent with itself; do not tax with presumption + and vanity those who are sincere enough to confess their ignorance; do not + accuse of folly those who find themselves incapable of believing + contradictions; and for once, blush at exciting the hatred and fury of + sovereigns and people against men, who think not like you concerning a + being, of whom you have no idea. Is any thing more rash and extravagant, + than to reason concerning an object, known to be inconceivable? You say, + that the corruption of the heart produces Atheism, that men shake off the + yoke of the Deity only because they fear his formidable judgments. But, + why do you paint your God in colours so shocking, that he becomes + insupportable? Why does so powerful a God permit men to be so corrupt? How + can we help endeavouring to shake off the yoke of a tyrant, who, able to + do as he pleases with men, consents to their perversion, who hardens, and + blinds them, and refuses them his grace, that he may have the satisfaction + to punish them eternally, for having been hardened, and blinded, and for + not having the grace which he refused? Theologians and priests must be + very confident of the grace of heaven and a happy futurity, to refrain + from detesting a master so capricious as the God they announce. A God, who + damns eternally, is the most odious of beings that the human mind can + invent. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0193" id="link2H_4_0193"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 189. + </h2> + <p> + No man upon earth is truly interested in the support of error, which is + forced sooner or later to yield to truth. The general good must at length + open the eyes of mortals: the passions themselves sometimes contribute to + break the chains of prejudices. Did not the passions of sovereigns, + centuries ago, annihilate in some countries of Europe the tyrannical + power, which a too haughty pontiff once exercised over all princes of his + sect? In consequence of the progress of political science, the clergy were + then stripped of immense riches, which credulity had accumulated upon + them. Ought not this memorable example to convince priests, that + prejudices triumph but for a time, and that truth alone can insure solid + happiness? + </p> + <p> + By caressing sovereigns, by fabricating divine rights for them, by + deifying them, and by abandoning the people, bound hand and foot, to their + will, the ministers of the Most High must see, that they are labouring to + make them tyrants. Have they not reason to apprehend, that the gigantic + idols, which they raised to the clouds, will one day crush them by their + enormous weight? Do not a thousand examples remind them that these + tyrants, after preying upon the people, may prey upon them in their turn. + </p> + <p> + We will respect priests, when they become sensible men. Let them, if they + please, use the authority of heaven to frighten those princes who are + continually desolating the earth; but let them no more adjudge to them the + horrid right of being unjust with impunity. Let them acknowledge, that no + man is interested in living under tyranny; and let them teach sovereigns, + that they themselves are not interested in exercising a despotism, which, + by rendering them odious, exposes them to danger, and detracts from their + power and greatness. Finally, let priests and kings become so far + enlightened as to acknowledge, that no power is secure which is not + founded upon truth, reason, and equity. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0194" id="link2H_4_0194"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 190. + </h2> + <p> + By waging war against Reason, which they ought to have protected and + developed, the ministers of the gods evidently act against their own + interest. What power, influence, and respect might they not have gained + among the wisest of men, what gratitude would they not have excited in the + people, if, instead of wasting their time about their vain disputes, they + had applied themselves to really useful science, and investigated the true + principles of philosophy, government, and morals! Who would dare to + reproach a body with its opulence or influence, if the members dedicating + themselves to the public good, employed their leisure in study, and + exercised their authority in enlightening the minds both of sovereigns and + subjects? + </p> + <p> + Priests! Forsake your chimeras, your unintelligible dogmas, your + contemptible quarrels! Banish those phantoms which could be useful only in + the infancy of nations. Assume, at length, the language of reason. Instead + of exciting persecution; instead of entertaining the people with silly + disputes; instead of preaching useless and fanatical dogmas, preach human + and social morality; preach virtues really useful to the world; become the + apostles of reason, the defenders of liberty, and the reformers of abuses. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0195" id="link2H_4_0195"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 191. + </h2> + <p> + Philosophers have every where taken upon themselves a part, which seemed + destined to the ministers of Religion. The hatred of the latter for + philosophy was only a jealousy of trade. But, instead of endeavouring to + injure and decry each other, all men of good sense should unite their + efforts to combat error, seek truth, and especially to put to flight the + prejudices, that are equally injurious to sovereigns and subjects, and of + which the abettors themselves sooner or later become the victims. + </p> + <p> + In the hands of an enlightened government, the priests would become the + most useful of the citizens. Already richly paid by the state, and free + from the care of providing for their own subsistence, how could they be + better employed than in qualifying themselves for the instruction of + others? Would not their minds be better satisfied with discovering + luminous truths, than in wandering through the thick darkness of error? + Would it be more difficult to discern the clear principles of Morality, + than the imaginary principles of a divine and theological Morality? Would + men of ordinary capacities find it as difficult to fix in their heads the + simple notions of their duties, as to load their memories with mysteries, + unintelligible words and obscure definitions, of which they can never form + a clear idea? What time and pains are lost in learning and teaching + things, which are not of the least real utility! What resources for the + encouragement of the sciences, the advancement of knowledge, and the + education of youth, well disposed sovereigns might find in the many + monasteries, which in several countries live upon the people without in + the slightest degree profiting them! But superstition, jealous of its + exclusive empire, seems resolved to form only useless beings. To what + advantage might we not turn a multitude of cenobites of both sexes, who, + in many countries, are amply endowed for doing nothing? Instead of + overwhelming them with fasting and austerities; instead of barren + contemplations, mechanical prayers, and trifling ceremonies; why should we + not excite in them a salutary emulation, which may incline them to seek + the means, not of being <i>dead</i> to the world, but of being <i>useful</i> + to it? Instead of filling the youthful minds of their pupils with fables, + sterile dogmas, and puerilities, why are not priests obliged, or invited + to teach them truths, and to render them useful citizens of their country? + Under the present system, men are only useful to the clergy who blind + them, and to the tyrants who fleece them. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0196" id="link2H_4_0196"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 192. + </h2> + <p> + The partisans of credulity often accuse unbelievers of insincerity, + because they sometimes waver in their principles, alter their minds in + sickness, and retract at death. When the body is disordered, the faculty + of reasoning is commonly disordered with it. At the approach of death, + man, weak and decayed, is sometimes himself sensible that Reason abandons + him, and that Prejudice returns. There are some diseases, which tend to + weaken the brain; to create despondency and pusillanimity; and there are + others, which destroy the body, but do not disturb the reason. At any + rate, an unbeliever who recants in sickness is not more extraordinary, + than a devotee who neglects in health the duties which his religion + explicitly enjoins. + </p> + <p> + Ministers of Religion openly contradict in their daily conduct the + rigorous principles, they teach to others; in consequence of which, + unbelievers, in their turn, may justly accuse them of insincerity. Is it + easy to find many prelates humble, generous, void of ambition, enemies of + pomp and grandeur, and friends of poverty? In short, is the conduct of + Christian ministers conformable to the austere morality of Christ, their + God, and their model? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0197" id="link2H_4_0197"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 193. + </h2> + <p> + <i>Atheism</i>, it is said, <i>breaks all the ties of society. Without the + belief of a God, what will become of the sacredness of oaths? How shall we + oblige a man to speak the truth, who cannot seriously call the Deity to + witness what he says?</i> But, does an oath strengthen our obligation to + fulfil the engagements contracted? Will he, who is not fearful of lying, + be less fearful of perjury? He, who is base enough to break his word, or + unjust enough to violate his engagements, in contempt of the esteem of + men, will not be more faithful therein for having called all the gods to + witness his oaths. Those, who disregard the judgments of men, will soon + disregard the judgments of God. Are not princes, of all men, the most + ready to swear, and the most ready to violate their oaths? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0198" id="link2H_4_0198"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 194. + </h2> + <p> + <i>The vulgar</i>, it is repeatedly said, <i>must have a Religion. If + enlightened persons have no need of the restraint of opinion, it is at + least necessary to rude men, whose reason is uncultivated by education</i>. + But, is it indeed a fact, that religion is a restraint upon the vulgar? Do + we see, that this religion preserves them from intemperance, drunkenness, + brutality, violence, fraud, and every kind of excess? Could a people who + have no idea of the Deity conduct themselves in a more detestable manner, + than these believing people, among whom we find dissipation and vices, the + most unworthy of reasonable beings? Upon going out of the churches, do not + the working classes, and the populace, plunge without fear into their + ordinary irregularities, under the idea, that the periodical homage, which + they render to their God, authorizes them to follow, without remorse, + their vicious habits and pernicious propensities? Finally, if the people + are so low-minded and unreasonable, is not their stupidity chargeable to + the negligence of their princes, who are wholly regardless of public + education, or who even oppose the instruction of their subjects? Is not + the want of reason in the people evidently the work of the priests, who, + instead of instructing men in a rational morality, entertain them with + fables, reveries, ceremonies, fallacies, and false virtues which they + think of the greatest importance? + </p> + <p> + To the people, Religion is but a vain display of ceremonies, to which they + are attached by habit, which entertains their eyes, and produces a + transient emotion in their torpid understandings, without influencing + their conduct or reforming their morals. Even by the confession of the + ministers of the altars, nothing is more rare than that <i>internal</i> + and <i>spiritual</i> Religion, which alone is capable of regulating the + life of man and of triumphing over his evil propensities. In the most + numerous and devout nation, are there many persons, who are really capable + of understanding the principles of their religious system, and who find + them powerful enough to stifle their perverse inclinations? + </p> + <p> + Many persons will say, that <i>any restraint whatever is better than none.</i> + They will maintain, that <i>if religion awes not the greater part, it + serves at least to restrain some individuals, who would otherwise without + remorse abandon themselves to crime</i>. Men ought undoubtedly to have a + restraint, but not an imaginary one. Religion only frightens those whose + imbecility of character has already prevented them from being formidable + to their fellow-citizens. An equitable government, severe laws, and sound + morality have an equal power over all; at least, every person must believe + in them, and perceive the danger of not conforming to them. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0199" id="link2H_4_0199"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 195. + </h2> + <p> + Perhaps it will be asked, <i>whether Atheism can be proper for the + multitude?</i> I answer, that any system, which requires discussion, is + not made for the multitude. <i>What purpose then can it serve to preach + Atheism?</i> It may at least serve to convince all those who reason, that + nothing is more extravagant than to fret one's self, and nothing more + unjust than to vex others, for mere groundless conjectures. As for the + vulgar who never reason, the arguments of an Atheist are no more fit for + them than the systems of a natural philosopher, the observations of an + astronomer, the experiments of a chemist, the calculations of a + geometrician, the researches of a physician, the plans of an architect, or + the pleadings of a lawyer, who all labour for the people without their + knowledge. + </p> + <p> + Are the metaphysical reasonings and religious disputes, which have so long + engrossed the time and attention of so many profound thinkers, better + adapted to the generality of men than the reasoning of an Atheist? Nay, as + the principles of Atheism are founded upon plain common sense, are they + not more intelligible, than those of a theology, beset with difficulties, + which even the persons of the greatest genius cannot explain? In every + country, the people have a religion, the principles of which they are + totally ignorant, and which they follow from habit without any + examination: their priests alone are engaged in theology, which is too + dense for vulgar heads. If the people should chance to lose this unknown + theology, they mighty easily console themselves for the loss of a thing, + not only perfectly useless, but also productive of dangerous commotions. + </p> + <p> + It would be madness to write for the vulgar, or to attempt to cure their + prejudices all at once. We write for those only, who read and reason; the + multitude read but little, and reason still less. Calm and rational + persons will require new ideas, and knowledge will be gradually diffused. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0200" id="link2H_4_0200"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 196. + </h2> + <p> + If theology is a branch of commerce profitable to theologians, it is + evidently not only superfluous, but injurious to the rest of society. + Self-interest will sooner or later open the eyes of men. Sovereigns and + subjects will one day adopt the profound indifference and contempt, + merited by a futile system, which serves only to make men miserable. All + persons will be sensible of the inutility of the many expensive + ceremonies, which contribute nothing to public felicity. Contemptible + quarrels will cease to disturb the tranquility of states, when we blush at + having considered them important. + </p> + <p> + Instead of Parliament meddling with the senseless combats of your clergy; + instead of foolishly espousing their impertinent quarrels, and attempting + to make your subjects adopt uniform opinions—strive to make them + happy in this world. Respect their liberty and property, watch over their + education, encourage them in their labours, reward their talents and + virtues, repress licentiousness; and do not concern yourselves with their + manner of thinking. Theological fables are useful only to tyrants and the + ignorant. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0201" id="link2H_4_0201"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 197. + </h2> + <p> + Does it then require an extraordinary effort of genius to comprehend, that + what is above the capacity of man, is not made for him; that things + supernatural are not made for natural beings; that impenetrable mysteries + are not made for limited minds? If theologians are foolish enough to + dispute upon objects, which they acknowledge to be unintelligible even to + themselves, ought society to take any part in their silly quarrels? Must + the blood of nations flow to enhance the conjectures of a few infatuated + dreamers? If it is difficult to cure theologians of their madness and the + people of their prejudices, it is at least easy to prevent the + extravagancies of one party, and the silliness of the other from producing + pernicious effects. Let every one be permitted to think as he pleases; but + never let him be permitted to injure others for their manner of thinking. + Were the rulers of nations more just and rational, theological opinions + would not affect the public tranquillity, more than the disputes of + natural philosophers, physicians, grammarians, and critics. It is tyranny + which causes theological quarrels to be attended with serious + consequences. + </p> + <p> + Those, who extol the importance and utility of Religion, ought to shew us + its happy effects, the advantages for instance, which the disputes and + abstract speculations of theology can be to porters, artisans, and + labourers, and to the multitude of unfortunate women and corrupt servants + with which great cities abound. All these beings are religious; they have + what is called <i>an implicit faith</i>. Their parsons believe for them; + and they stupidly adhere to the unknown belief of their guides. They go to + hear sermons, and would think it a great crime to transgress any of the + ordinances, to which, in childhood, they are taught to conform. But of + what service to morals is all this? None at all. They have not the least + idea of Morality, and are even guilty of all the roguery, fraud, rapine, + and excess, that is out of the reach of law. + </p> + <p> + The populace have no idea of their Religion; what they call Religion is + nothing but a blind attachment to unknown opinions and mysterious + practices. In fact, to deprive people of Religion is to deprive them of + nothing. By overthrowing their prejudices, we should only lessen or + annihilate the dangerous confidence they put in interested guides, and + should teach them to mistrust those, who, under the pretext of Religion, + often lead them into fatal excesses. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0202" id="link2H_4_0202"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 198. + </h2> + <p> + While pretending to instruct and enlighten men, Religion in reality keeps + them in ignorance, and stifles the desire of knowing the most interesting + objects. The people have no other rule of conduct, than what their priests + are pleased to prescribe. Religion supplies the place of every thing else: + but being in itself essentially obscure, it is more proper to lead mortals + astray than to guide them in the path of science and happiness. Religion + renders enigmatical all Natural Philosophy, Morality, Legislation and + Politics. A man blinded by religious prejudices, fears truth, whenever it + clashes with his opinions: he cannot know his own nature he cannot + cultivate his reason, he cannot perform experiments. + </p> + <p> + Everything concurs to render the people devout; but every thing tends to + prevent them from being humane, reasonable and virtuous. Religion seems to + have no other object, than to stupefy the mind. + </p> + <p> + Priests have been ever at war with genius and talent, because + well-informed men perceive, that superstition shackles the human mind, and + would keep it in eternal infancy, occupied solely by fables and frightened + by phantoms. Incapable of improvement itself, Theology opposed + insurmountable barriers to the progress of true knowledge; its sole object + is to keep nations and their rulers in the most profound ignorance of + their duties, and of the real motives, that should incline them to do + good. It obscures Morality, renders its principles arbitrary, and subjects + it to the caprice of the gods or of their ministers. It converts the art + of governing men into a mysterious tyranny, which is the scourge of + nations. It changes princes into unjust, licentious despots, and the + people into ignorant slaves, who become corrupt in order to merit the + favour of their masters. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0203" id="link2H_4_0203"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 199. + </h2> + <p> + By tracing the history of the human mind, we shall be easily convinced, + that Theology has cautiously guarded against its progress. It began by + giving out fables as sacred truth: it produced poetry, which filled the + imagination of men with its puerile fictions: it entertained them with its + gods and their incredible deeds. In a word, Religion has always treated + men, like children, whom it lulled to sleep with tales, which its + ministers would have us still regard as incontestable truths. + </p> + <p> + If the ministers of the gods have sometimes made useful discoveries, they + have always been careful to give them a dogmatical tone, and envelope them + in the shades of mystery. Pythagoras and Plato, in order to acquire some + trifling knowledge, were obliged to court the favour of priests, to be + initiated in their mysteries, and to undergo whatever trials they were + pleased to impose. At this price, they were permitted to imbibe those + exalted notions, still so bewitching to all those who admire only what is + perfectly unintelligible. It was from Egyptian, Indian, and Chaldean + priests, from the schools of these visionaries, professionally interested + in bewildering human reason, that philosophy was obliged to borrow its + first rudiments. Obscure and false in its principles, mixed with fictions + and fables, and made only to dazzle the imagination, the progress of this + philosophy was precarious, and its theories unintelligible; instead of + enlightening, it blighted the mind, and diverted it from objects truly + useful. + </p> + <p> + The theological speculations and mystical reveries of the ancients are + still law in a great part of the philosophic world; and being adopted by + modern theology, it is heresy to abandon them. They tell us "of aerial + beings, of spirits, angels, demons, genii," and other phantoms, which are + the object of their meditations, and serve as the basis of <i>metaphysics</i>, + an abstract and futile science, which for thousands of years the greatest + geniuses have vainly studied. Hypothesis, imagined by a few visionaries of + Memphis and Babylon, constitute even now the foundations of a science, + whose obscurity makes it revered as marvellous and divine. + </p> + <p> + The first legislators were priests; the first mythologists, poets, learned + men, and physicians were priests. In their hands science became sacred and + was withheld from the profane. They spoke only in allegories, emblems, + enigmas, and ambiguous oracles—means well calculated to excite + curiosity, and above all to inspire the astonished vulgar with a holy + respect for men, who when they were thought to be instructed by the gods, + and capable of reading in the heavens the fate of the earth, boldly + proclaimed themselves the oracles of the Deity. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0204" id="link2H_4_0204"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 200. + </h2> + <p> + The religions of ancient priests have only changed form. Although our + modern theologians regard their predecessors as impostors, yet they have + collected many scattered fragments of their religious systems. In modern + Religions we find, not only their metaphysical dogmas, which theology has + merely clothed in a new dress, but also some remarkable remains of their + superstitious practices, their magic, and their enchantments. Christians + are still commanded to respect the remaining monuments of the legislators, + priests, and prophets of the Hebrew Religion, which had borrowed its + strange practices from Egypt. Thus extravagancies, imagined by knaves or + idolatrous visionaries, are still sacred among Christians! + </p> + <p> + If we examine history, we shall find a striking resemblance among all + Religions. In all parts of the earth, we see, that religious notions, + periodically depress and elevate the people. The attention of man is every + where engrossed, by rites often abominable, and by mysteries always + formidable, which become the sole objects of meditation. The different + superstitions borrow, from one another, their abstract reveries and + ceremonies. Religions are in general mere unintelligible rhapsodies, + combined by new teachers, who use the materials of their predecessors, + reserving the right of adding or retrenching whatever is not conformable + to the present age. The religion of Egypt was evidently the basis of the + religion of Moses, who banished the worship of idols: Moses was merely a + schismatic Egyptian. Christianism is only reformed Judaism. Mahometanism + is composed of Judaism, Christianity, and the ancient religion of Arabia, + etc. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0205" id="link2H_4_0205"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 201. + </h2> + <p> + Theology, from the remotest antiquity to the present time, has had the + exclusive privilege of directing philosophy. What assistance has been + derived from its labours? It changed philosophy into an unintelligible + jargon, calculated to render uncertain the clearest truths; it has + converted the art of reasoning into a jargon of words; it has carried the + human mind into the airy regions of metaphysics, and there employed it in + vainly fathoming an obscure abyss. Instead of physical and simple causes, + this transformed philosophy has substituted supernatural, or rather, <i>occult</i> + causes; it has explained phenomena difficult to be conceived by agents + still more inconceivable. It has filled language with words, void of + sense, incapable of accounting for things, better calculated to obscure + than enlighten, and which seems invented expressly to discourage man, to + guard him against the powers of his mind, to make him mistrust the + principles of reason and evidence, and to raise an insurmountable barrier + between him and truth. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0206" id="link2H_4_0206"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 202. + </h2> + <p> + Were we to believe the partisans of Religion, nothing could be explained + without it; nature would be a perpetual enigma, and man would be incapable + of understanding himself. But, what does this Religion in reality explain? + The more we examine it, the more we are convinced that its theological + notions are fit only to confuse our ideas; they change every thing into + mystery: they explain difficult things by things that are impossible. Is + it a satisfactory explanation of phenomena, to attribute them to unknown + agents, to invisible powers, to immaterial causes? Does the human mind + receive much light by being referred to <i>the depths of the treasures of + divine wisdom</i>, to which, we are repeatedly told, it is vain to extend + our rash enquiries? Can the divine nature, of which we have no conception, + enable us to conceive the nature of man? + </p> + <p> + Ask a Christian, what is the origin of the world? He will answer, that God + created it. What is God? He cannot tell. What is it to create? He knows + not. What is the cause of pestilence, famine, wars, droughts, inundations + and earthquakes? The anger of God. What remedies can be applied to these + calamities? Prayers, sacrifices, processions, offerings, and ceremonies + are, it is said, the true means of disarming celestial fury. But why is + heaven enraged? Because men are wicked. Why are men wicked? Because their + nature is corrupt. What is the cause of this corruption? It is, says the + theologian, because the first man, beguiled by the first woman, ate an + apple, which God had forbidden him to touch. Who beguiled this woman into + such folly? The devil. Who made the devil? God. But, why did God make this + devil, destined to pervert mankind? This is unknown; it is a mystery which + the Deity alone is acquainted with. + </p> + <p> + It is now universally acknowledged, that the earth turns round the sun. + Centuries ago, this opinion was blasphemy, as being irreconcileable with + the sacred books which every Christian reveres as inspired by the Deity + himself. Notwithstanding divine revelation, astronomers now depend rather + upon evidence, than upon the testimony of their inspired books. + </p> + <p> + What is the hidden principle of the motions of the human body? The soul. + What is a soul? A spirit. What is a spirit? A substance, which has neither + form, nor colour, nor extension, nor parts. How can we form any idea of + such a substance? How can it move a body? That is not known; it is a + mystery. Have beasts souls? But, do they not act, feel, and think, in a + manner very similar to man? Mere illusion! By what right do you deprive + beasts of a soul, which you attribute to man, though you know nothing at + all about it? Because the souls of beasts would embarrass our theologians, + who are satisfied with the power of terrifying and damning the immaterial + souls of men, and are not so much interested in damning those of beasts. + Such are the puerile solutions, which philosophy, always in the leading + strings of theology, was obliged to invent, in order to explain the + problems of the physical and moral world? + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0207" id="link2H_4_0207"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 203. + </h2> + <p> + How many evasions have been used, both in ancient and modern times, in + order to avoid an engagement with the ministers of the gods, who have ever + been the tyrants of thought? How many hypotheses and shifts were such men + as Descartes, Mallebranche, and Leibnitz, forced to invent, in order to + reconcile their discoveries with the fables and mistakes which Religion + had consecrated! In what guarded phrases have the greatest philosophers + expressed themselves, even at the risk of being absurd, inconsistent, or + unintelligible, whenever their ideas did not accord with the principles of + theology! Priests have been always attentive to extinguish systems which + opposed their interest. Theology was ever the bed of Procrustes, to be + adapted to which, the limbs of travellers, if too long were cut off, and + if too short were lengthened. + </p> + <p> + Can any sensible man, delighted with the sciences and attached to the + welfare of his fellow-creatures, reflect, without vexation and anguish, + how many profound, laborious, and subtle brains have been for ages + foolishly occupied in the study of absurdities? What a treasure of + knowledge might have been diffused by many celebrated thinkers, if instead + of engaging in the impertinent disputes of vain theology, they had devoted + their attention to intelligible objects really important to mankind? Half + the efforts which religious opinions have cost genius, and half the wealth + which frivolous forms of worship have cost nations would have sufficed to + instruct them perfectly in morality, politics, natural philosophy, + medicine, agriculture, etc. Superstition generally absorbs the attention, + admiration, and treasures of the people; their Religion costs them very + dear; but they have neither knowledge, virtue, nor happiness, for their + money. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0208" id="link2H_4_0208"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 204. + </h2> + <p> + Some ancient and modern philosophers have been bold enough to assume + experience and reason for their guides, and to shake off the chains of + superstition. Democritus, Epicurus, and other Greeks presumed to tear away + the veil of prejudice, and to deliver philosophy from theological + shackles. But their systems, too simple, too sensible, and too free from + the marvellous, for imaginations enamoured with chimeras, were obliged to + yield to the fabulous conjectures of such men as Plato and Socrates. Among + the moderns, Hobbes, Spinosa, Bayle, etc., have followed the steps of + Epicurus; but their doctrine has found very few followers, in a world, + still intoxicated with fables, to listen to reason. + </p> + <p> + In every age, it has been dangerous to depart from prejudices. Discoveries + of every kind have been prohibited. All that enlightened men could do, was + to speak ambiguously, hence they often confounded falsehood with truth. + Several had a <i>double doctrine</i>, one public and the other secret; the + key of the latter being lost, their true sentiments, have often become + unintelligible and consequently useless. + </p> + <p> + How could modern philosophers, who, under pain of cruel persecution, were + commanded to renounce reason, and to subject it to faith, that is, to the + authority of priests; how, I say, could men, thus bound, give free scope + to their genius, improve reason, and accelerate the progress of the human + mind? It was with fear and trembling that even the greatest men obtained a + glimpse of truth; rarely had they the courage to announce it; and those, + who did, were terribly punished. With Religion, it has ever been unlawful + to think, or to combat the prejudices of which man is every where the + victim and the dupe. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0209" id="link2H_4_0209"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 205. + </h2> + <p> + Every man, sufficiently intrepid to announce truths to the world, is sure + of incurring the hatred of the ministers of Religion, who loudly call to + their aid secular powers; and want the assistance of laws to support both + their arguments and their gods. Their clamours expose too evidently the + weakness of their cause. + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + "None call for aid but those who feel distressed." +</pre> + <p> + In Religion, man is not permitted to err. In general, those who err are + pitied, and some kindness is shewn to persons who discover new truths; + but, when Religion is thought to be interested either in the errors or the + discoveries, a holy zeal is kindled, the populace become frantic, and + nations are in an uproar. + </p> + <p> + Can any thing be more afflicting, than to see public and private felicity + depending upon a futile system, which is destitute if principles, founded + only on a distempered imagination, and incapable of presenting any thing + but words void of sense? In what consists the so much boasted utility of a + Religion, which nobody can comprehend, which continually torments those + who are weak enough to meddle with it, which is incapable of rendering men + better, and which often makes them consider it meritorious to be unjust + and wicked? Is there a folly more deplorable, and more justly to be + combated, than that, which far from doing any service to the human race, + only makes them blind, delirious, and miserable, by depriving them of + Truth, the sole cure for their wretchedness. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0210" id="link2H_4_0210"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + 206. + </h2> + <p> + Religion has ever filled the mind of man with darkness, and kept him in + ignorance of his real duties and true interests. It is only by dispelling + the clouds and phantoms of Religion, that we shall discover Truth, Reason, + and Morality. Religion diverts us from the causes of evils, and from the + remedies which nature prescribes; far from curing, it only aggravates, + multiplies, and perpetuates them. Let us observe with the celebrated Lord + Bolingbroke, that "<i>theology is the box of Pandora; and if it is + impossible to shut it, it is at least useful to inform men, that this + fatal box is open</i>." + </p> + <p> + THE END. + </p> + <div style="height: 6em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + + + + + +End of Project Gutenberg's Good Sense, by Paul Henri Thiry, Baron D'Holbach + +*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK GOOD SENSE *** + +***** This file should be named 7319-h.htm or 7319-h.zip ***** +This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: + http://www.gutenberg.org/7/3/1/7319/ + +Produced by Freethought Archives, and David Widger + + +Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions +will be renamed. + +Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no +one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation +(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without +permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, +set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to +copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to +protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project +Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you +charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you +do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the +rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose +such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and +research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do +practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is +subject to the trademark license, especially commercial +redistribution. + + + +*** START: FULL LICENSE *** + +THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE +PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK + +To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free +distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work +(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project +Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at +http://gutenberg.org/license). + + +Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works + +1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to +and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property +(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all +the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy +all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. +If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the +terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or +entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. + +1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be +used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who +agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few +things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See +paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement +and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. See paragraph 1.E below. + +1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" +or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the +collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an +individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are +located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from +copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative +works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg +are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project +Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by +freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of +this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with +the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by +keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project +Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. + +1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern +what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in +a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check +the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement +before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or +creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project +Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning +the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United +States. + +1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: + +1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate +access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently +whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the +phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project +Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, +copied or distributed: + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + +1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived +from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is +posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied +and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees +or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work +with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the +work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 +through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the +Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or +1.E.9. + +1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted +with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution +must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional +terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked +to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the +permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. + +1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this +work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. + +1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this +electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without +prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with +active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project +Gutenberg-tm License. + +1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, +compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any +word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or +distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than +"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version +posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), +you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a +copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon +request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other +form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. + +1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, +performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works +unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing +access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided +that + +- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from + the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method + you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is + owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he + has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the + Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments + must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you + prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax + returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and + sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the + address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to + the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." + +- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies + you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he + does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm + License. You must require such a user to return or + destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium + and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of + Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any + money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the + electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days + of receipt of the work. + +- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free + distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set +forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from +both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael +Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the +Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. + +1.F. + +1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable +effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread +public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm +collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain +"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual +property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a +computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by +your equipment. + +1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right +of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project +Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal +fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT +LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE +PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE +TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE +LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR +INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH +DAMAGE. + +1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a +defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can +receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a +written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you +received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with +your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with +the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a +refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity +providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to +receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy +is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further +opportunities to fix the problem. + +1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth +in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO +WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. + +1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied +warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. +If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the +law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be +interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by +the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any +provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. + +1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the +trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone +providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance +with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, +promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, +harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, +that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do +or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm +work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any +Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. + + +Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm + +Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of +electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers +including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists +because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from +people in all walks of life. + +Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the +assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's +goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will +remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure +and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. +To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation +and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 +and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. + + +Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive +Foundation + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit +501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the +state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal +Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification +number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at +http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent +permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. + +The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. +Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered +throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at +809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email +business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact +information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official +page at http://pglaf.org + +For additional contact information: + Dr. Gregory B. Newby + Chief Executive and Director + gbnewby@pglaf.org + + +Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation + +Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide +spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of +increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be +freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest +array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations +($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt +status with the IRS. + +The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating +charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United +States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a +considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up +with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations +where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To +SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any +particular state visit http://pglaf.org + +While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we +have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition +against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who +approach us with offers to donate. + +International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make +any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from +outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. + +Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation +methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other +ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. +To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate + + +Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. + +Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm +concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared +with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project +Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. + + +Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. +unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily +keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. + + +Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: + + http://www.gutenberg.org + +This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, +including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to +subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. + + +</pre> + </body> +</html> diff --git a/7319.txt b/7319.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..1554d0c --- /dev/null +++ b/7319.txt @@ -0,0 +1,7487 @@ +Project Gutenberg's Good Sense, by Paul Henri Thiry, Baron D'Holbach + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + + +Title: Good Sense + 1772 + +Author: Paul Henri Thiry, Baron D'Holbach + +Translator: Unknown + +Release Date: January, 2005 [EBook #7319] +Posting Date: July 29, 2009 + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: ASCII + +*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK GOOD SENSE *** + + + + +Produced by Freethought Archives + + + + + + + + + +GOOD SENSE WITHOUT GOD: + +OR + +FREETHOUGHTS OPPOSED TO SUPERNATURAL IDEAS + + +By Baron D'holbach + + +"Freethinker's Library" Series + +London: W. Stewart & Co. + + + +A Translation Of Baron D'holbach's "Le Bon Sens" + + +Transcriber's note: this e-text is based on an undated English translation +of "Le Bon Sens" published c. 1900. The name of the translator was not +stated. + + + + "_Atheism_ leaves men to Sense, to Philosophy, to Laws, to + Reputation, all which may be guides to moral Virtue, tho' + Religion were not: but Superstition dismounts all these, and + erects an absolute Monarchy in the Minds of Men. Therefore, + Atheism did never perturb States; but Superstition hath been + the confusion of many. The causes of Superstition are + pleasing and sensual rights, and Ceremonies; Excess of + Pharisaical and outside holiness, Reverence to Traditions + and the stratagems of Prelates for their own Ambition and + Lucre."--_Lord Bacon._ + + + +CONTENTS + +1. APOLOGUE + +2. What is Theology? + +3. What is Theology? + +4. Man is not born with any ideas of Religion + +5. It is not necessary to believe in a God + +6. Religion is founded on credulity + +7. All religion is an absurdity + +8. The idea of God is impossible + +9. On the Origin of Superstition + +10. On the Origin of all Religion + +11. Religious fears expose men to become a prey to imposters + +12. Religion seduces ignorance by the aid of the marvellous + +13. Religion seduces ignorance by the aid of the marvellous + +14. No Religion, if not ages of Stupidity and Barbarism + +15. All Religion was produced by the desire of domination + +16. What serves as a basis to Religion is most uncertain + +17. It is impossible to be convinced of the existence of a God + +18. It is impossible to be convinced of the existence of a God + +19. The existence of God is not proved + +20. It explains nothing to say, that God is a spirit + +21. Spirituality is an absurdity + +22. Whatever exists is derived from Matter + +23. What is the metaphysical God of modern Theology? + +24. Less unreasonable to adore the Sun, than adore a spiritual Deity + +25. A spiritual Deity is incapable of volition and action + +26. What is God? + +27. Some remarkable Contradictions in Theology + +28. To adore God, is to adore a fiction + +29. Atheism is authorised by the infinity of God + +30. Believing not safer than not believing in God + +31. Belief in God is a habit acquired in infancy + +32. Belief in God is a prejudice ov successive generations + +33. On the Origin of Prejudices + +34. On the effects of Prejudices + +35. Theology must be instilled before the age of reason + +36. The wonders of nature do not prove the existence of God + +37. Nature may be explained by natural causes + +38. Nature may be explained by natural causes + +39. The world has never been created: Matter moves of itself + +40. The world has never been created: Matter moves of itself + +41. Motion is essential to Matter: no Spiritual Mover + +42. The existence of Man does not prove the existence of God + +43. Neither Man nor the Universe are the effects of chance + +44. Order of the Universe does not prove the existence of a God + +45. Order of the Universe does not prove the existence of a God + +46. Absurd to adore a divine intelligence + +47. Qualities given God contrary to the Essence attributed to him + +48. Qualities given God contrary to the Essence attributed to him + +49. Absurd to say that the human race is the object of the Universe + +50. God is not made for Man, nor Man for God + +51. Untrue that the object of the Universe was to render Man happy + +52. What is called Providence is a word without meaning + +53. This pretended Providence is the enemy of Man + +54. The world is not governed by an intelligent being + +55. God cannot be considered immutable + +56. Good and evil are the necessary effects of natural causes + +57. The consolations of Theology and paradise are imaginary + +58. Another romantic reverie + +59. Vain that Theology attempts to clear its God from human defects + +60. Impossible to believe God is of infinite goodness and power + +61. Impossible to believe God is of infinite goodness and power + +62. Theology's God a monster of absurdity and injustice + +63. All Religion inspires contemptible fears + +64. Religion, the same as the most somber and servile Superstition + +65. The love of God is impossible + +66. An eternally tormenting God is a most detestable being + +67. Theology is a tissue of palpable contradictions + +68. The pretended works of God do not prove Divine Perfections + +69. The perfection of God and the pretended creation of angels + +70. Theology preaches Omnipotence of its God, yet makes impotent + +71. Per all religious systems, God is capricious and foolish + +72. It is absurd to say that Evil does not proceed from God + +73. The foreknowledge of God proves his cruelty + +74. Absurdity of the stories concerning Original Sin, and Satan + +75. The Devil, like Religion, was invented to enrich the priests + +76. God has no right to punish man + +77. It is absurd to say, that the conduct of God a mystery + +78. Ought we look for consolation, from the author of our misery? + +79. God who punishes the faults which he might have prevented + +80. What is called Free Will is an absurdity + +81. But we must not conclude that Society has no right to punish + +82. Refutation of the arguments in favour of Free Will + +83. Refutation of the arguments in favour of Free Will + +84. God, if there were a God, would not be free + +85. According to Theology, man is not free a single instant + +86. There is no evil, and no sin, but must be attributed to God + +87. The prayers prove dissatisfaction of the divine will + +88. Absurd to imagine repair of misfortune in another world + +89. Theology justifies the evil permitted by its God + +90. Jehovah, exterminations prove an unjust and barbarous God + +91. Is God a generous, equitable, and tender father? + +92. Man's life, deposes against goodness of a pretended God + +93. We owe no gratitude to what is called _Providence_ + +94. It is folly to suppose that Man is the favourite of God + +95. A comparison between Man and brutes + +96. There are no animals so detestable as Tyrants + +97. A refutation of the excellence of Man + +98. An oriental Tale + +99. It is madness to see nothing but the goodness of God + +100. What is the Soul? + +101. The existence of a _Soul_ is an absurd supposition + +102. It is evident that Man dies _in toto_ + +103. Incontestible arguments against the Spirituality of the Soul + +104. On the absurdity of the supernatural causes + +105. It is false that Materialism degrades + +106. It is false that Materialism degrades + +107. Idea of future life only useful to priest's trade + +108. It is false that the idea of a future life is consoling + +109. All religious principles are derived from the imagination + +110. Religion a system to reconciles contradictions by mysteries + +111. Absurdity of all Mysteries, invented for the interests of Priests + +112, Absurdity of all Mysteries, invented for the interests of Priests + +113. Absurdity of all Mysteries, invented for the interests of Priests + +114. An universal God ought to have revealed an universal Religion + +115. Religion is unnecessary, as it is unintelligible + +116. All Religions are rendered ridiculous by the multitude of creeds + +117. Opinion of a famous Theologian + +118. The God of the Deists is not less contradictory + +119. Aged belief in a Deity does not prove the existence of God + +120. All Gods are savage: all Religions are monuments of ignorance + +121. All religious usages bear marks of stupidity and barbarism + +122. The more a religion is ancient and general, the more suspect + +123. Scepticism in religious matters from very superficial study + +124. Revelations examined + +125. Where is the proof that God ever shewed himself or spoke to Men + +126. There is nothing that proves miracles to have been ever performed + +127. Strange that God spoke differently to different sects + +128. Obscurity and suspicious origin of oracles + +129. Absurdity of all miracles + +130. Refutation of the reasoning of Pascal on miracles + +131. Every new revelation is necessarily false + +132. Blood of martyrs testifies _against_ the truth of miracles + +133. Fanaticism of martyrs, and the interested zeal of missionaries + +134. Theology makes its God an enemy to Reason and Common Sense + +135. Faith irreconcilable with Reason; and Reason preferable to Faith + +136. To what absurd and ridiculous sophisms the religious are reduced + +137. Ought a man to believe, on the assurance of another man + +138. Faith can take root only in feeble, ignorant, or slothful minds + +139. That one Religion has greater pretensions to truth an absurdity + +140. Religion is unnecessary to Morality + +141. Religion the weakest barrier that can be opposed to the passions + +142. Honour is a more salutary and powerful bond than Religion + +143. Religion does not restrain the passions of kings + +144. Origin of "the divine right of kings" + +145. Religion is fatal to political ameliorations + +146. Christianity preaching implicit obedience to despotism + +147. One object of religious principles: eternize the tyranny of kings + +148. Fatal it is to persuade kings they are responsible to God alone + +149. A devout king is the scourge of his kingdom + +150. Tyranny finds Religion a weak obstacle to the despair of the people + +151. Religion favours the wickedness of princes + +152. What is an enlightened Sovereign? + +153. Of the prevailing passions and crimes of the priesthood + +154. The quackery of priests + +155. Religion has corrupted Morality, and produced innumerable evils + +156. Every Religion is intolerant + +157. The evils of a state Religion + +158. Religion legitimates and authorizes crime + +159. The argument, that evils attributed to Religion are faults of men + +160. Religion is incompatible with Morality + +161. The Morality of the Gospel is impracticable + +162. A society of Saints would be impossible + +163. Human nature is not depraved + +164. Concerning the effects of Jesus Christ's mission + +165. The remission of sins was invented for the interest of priests + +166. Who fear God? + +167. Hell is an absurd invention + +168. The bad foundation of religious morals + +169. Christian Charity, as preached and practised by Theologians!!! + +170. Confession, priestcraft's gold mine + +171. Supposition of the existence of a God unnecessary to Morality + +172. Supernatural Morality are fatal to the public welfare + +173. The union of Church and State is a calamity + +174. National Religions are ruinous + +175. Religion paralyses Morality + +176. Fatal consequences of Devotion + +177. The idea of a future life is not consoling to man + +178. An Atheist is fully as conscientious as a religious man + +179. An Atheistical king far preferable to a religious king + +180. Philosophy produces Morality + +181. Religious opinions have little influence upon conduct + +182. Reason leads man to Atheism + +183. Fear alone makes Theists + +184. Can we, and ought we, to love God? + +185. God and Religion are proved to be absurdities + +186. The existence of God, has not yet been demonstrated + +187. Priests are more actuated by self-interest, than unbelievers + +188. Presumption, and badness, more in priests, than in Atheists + +189. Prejudices last but for a time + +190. What if priests the apostles of reason + +191. If Philosophy were substituted for Religion! + +192. Recantation of an unbeliever at the point of death proves nothing + +193. It is not true that Atheism breaks the bonds of society + +194. Refutation of the opinion, that Religion necessary for the vulgar + +195. Logical systems are not adapted to the capacity of the vulgar + +196. On the futility and danger of Theology + +197. On the evils produced by implicit faith + +198. On the evils produced by implicit faith + +199. All Religions were established by impostors, in days of ignorance + +200. All Religions borrow from one another ridiculous ceremonies + +201. Theology has always diverted philosophy from its right path + +202. Theology explains nothing + +203. Theology has always fettered Morality, and retarded progress + +204. Theology has always fettered Morality, and retarded progress + +205. Religion is an extravagance and a calamity + +206. Religion prevents us from seeing the true causes of misfortunes + + + + +PUBLISHER'S NOTE + + +The chief design in reprinting this translation, is to preserve "_the +strongest atheistical work_" for present and future generations of English +Freethinkers. + +The real author was, unquestionably, Paul Thyry; Baron D'Holbach, and not +John Meslier, to whom this work has been wrongly attributed, under the +title of "Le Bon Sens" (Common Sense). + +In 1770, Baron D'Holbach published his masterpiece, "Systeme de la +Nature," which for a long time passed as the posthumous work of M. de +Mirabaud. That text-book of "Atheistical Philosophy" caused a great +sensation, and two years later, 1772, the Baron published this excellent +abridgment of it, freed from arbitrary ideas; and by its clearness of +expression, facility, and precision of style, rendered it most suitable +for the average student. + +"Le Bon Sens" was privately printed in Amsterdam, and the author's name +was kept a profound secret; hence, Baron D'Holbach escaped persecution. + + + + +THE AUTHOR'S PREFACE + + +When we examine the opinions of men, we find that nothing is more +uncommon, than common sense; or, in other words, they lack judgment +to discover plain truths, or to reject absurdities, and palpable +contradictions. We have an example of this in Theology, a system revered +in all countries by a great number of men; an object regarded by them +as most important, and indispensable to happiness. An examination of +the principles upon which this pretended system is founded, forces us +to acknowledge, that these principles are only suppositions, imagined +by ignorance, propagated by enthusiasm or knavery, adopted by timid +credulity, preserved by custom which never reasons, and revered solely +because not understood. + +In a word, whoever uses common sense upon religious opinions, and will +bestow on this inquiry the attention that is commonly given to most +subjects, will easily perceive that Religion is a mere castle in the +air. Theology is ignorance of natural causes; a tissue of fallacies +and contradictions. In every country, it presents romances void of +probability, the hero of which is composed of impossible qualities. His +name, exciting fear in all minds, is only a vague word, to which, men +affix ideas or qualities, which are either contradicted by facts, or +inconsistent. + +Notions of this being, or rather, _the word_ by which he is designated, +would be a matter of indifference, if it did not cause innumerable ravages +in the world. But men, prepossessed with the opinion that this phantom is +a reality of the greatest interest, instead of concluding wisely from its +incomprehensibility, that they are not bound to regard it, infer on the +contrary, that they must contemplate it, without ceasing, and never lose +sight of it. Their invincible ignorance, upon this subject, irritates +their curiosity; instead of putting them upon guard against their +imagination, this ignorance renders them decisive, dogmatic, imperious, +and even exasperates them against all, who oppose doubts to the reveries +which they have begotten. + +What perplexity arises, when it is required to solve an insolvable +problem; unceasing meditation upon an object, impossible to understand, +but in which however he thinks himself much concerned, cannot but excite +man, and produce a fever in his brain. Let interest, vanity, and ambition, +co-operate ever so little with this unfortunate turn of mind, and society +must necessarily be disturbed. This is the reason that so many nations +have often been the scene of extravagances of senseless visionaries, who, +believing their empty speculations to be eternal truths, and publishing +them as such, have kindled the zeal of princes and their subjects, and +made them take up arms for opinions, represented to them as essential to +the glory of the Deity. In all parts of our globe, fanatics have cut each +other's throats, publicly burnt each other, committed without a scruple +and even as a duty, the greatest crimes, and shed torrents of blood. For +what? To strengthen, support, or propagate the impertinent conjectures of +some enthusiasts, or to give validity to the cheats of impostors, in the +name of a being, who exists only in their imagination, and who has made +himself known only by the ravages, disputes, and follies, he has caused. + +Savage and furious nations, perpetually at war, adore, under divers names, +some God, conformable to their ideas, that is to say, cruel, carnivorous, +selfish, blood-thirsty. We find, in all the religions, "a God of armies," +a "jealous God," an "avenging God," a "destroying God," a "God," who +is pleased with carnage, and whom his worshippers consider it a duty to +serve. Lambs, bulls, children, men, and women, are sacrificed to him. +Zealous servants of this barbarous God think themselves obliged even to +offer up themselves as a sacrifice to him. Madmen may everywhere be seen, +who, after meditating upon their terrible God, imagine that to please him +they must inflict on themselves, the most exquisite torments. The gloomy +ideas formed of the deity, far from consoling them, have every where +disquieted their minds, and prejudiced follies destructive to happiness. + +How could the human mind progress, while tormented with frightful +phantoms, and guided by men, interested in perpetuating its ignorance and +fears? Man has been forced to vegetate in his primitive stupidity: he has +been taught stories about invisible powers upon whom his happiness was +supposed to depend. Occupied solely by his fears, and by unintelligible +reveries, he has always been at the mercy of priests, who have reserved to +themselves the right of thinking for him, and of directing his actions. + +Thus, man has remained a slave without courage, fearing to reason, and +unable to extricate himself from the labyrinth, in which he has been +wandering. He believes himself forced under the yoke of his gods, known +to him only by the fabulous accounts given by his ministers, who, after +binding each unhappy mortal in the chains of prejudice, remain his +masters, or else abandon him defenceless to the absolute power of tyrants, +no less terrible than the gods, of whom they are the representatives. + +Oppressed by the double yoke of spiritual and temporal power, it has been +impossible for the people to be happy. Religion became sacred, and men +have had no other Morality, than what their legislators and priests +brought from the unknown regions of heaven. The human mind, confused +by theological opinions, ceased to know its own powers, mistrusted +experience, feared truth and disdained reason, in order to follow +authority. Man has been a mere machine in the hands of tyrants and +priests. Always treated as a slave, man has contracted the vices of +slavery. + +Such are the true causes of the corruption of morals. Ignorance and +servitude are calculated to make men wicked and unhappy. Knowledge, +Reason, and Liberty, can alone reform and make men happier. But every +thing conspires to blind them, and to confirm their errors. Priests cheat +them, tyrants corrupt and enslave them. Tyranny ever was, and ever will +be, the true cause of man's depravity, and also of his calamities. Almost +always fascinated by religious fiction, poor mortals turn not their eyes +to the natural and obvious causes of their misery; but attribute their +vices to the imperfection of their natures, and their unhappiness to the +anger of the gods. They offer to heaven vows, sacrifices, and presents, to +obtain the end of sufferings, which in reality, are attributable only to +the negligence, ignorance, and perversity of their guides, to the folly of +their customs, and above all, to the general want of knowledge. Let men's +minds be filled with true ideas; let their reason be cultivated; and there +will be no need of opposing to the passions, such a feeble barrier, as the +fear of gods. Men will be good, when they are well instructed; and when +they are despised for evil, or justly rewarded for good, which they do to +their fellow citizens. + +In vain should we attempt to cure men of their vices, unless we begin by +curing them of their prejudices. It is only by showing them the truth, +that they will perceive their true interests, and the real motives that +ought to incline them to do good. Instructors have long enough fixed men's +eyes upon heaven; let them now turn them upon earth. An incomprehensible +theology, ridiculous fables, impenetrable mysteries, puerile ceremonies, +are to be no longer endured. Let the human mind apply itself to what is +natural, to intelligible objects, truth, and useful knowledge. + +Does it not suffice to annihilate religious prejudice, to shew, that +what is inconceivable to man, cannot be good for him? Does it require any +thing, but plain common sense, to perceive, that a being, incompatible +with the most evident notions--that a cause continually opposed to +the effects which we attribute to it--that a being, of whom we can say +nothing, without falling into contradiction--that a being, who, far +from explaining the enigmas of the universe, only makes them more +inexplicable--that a being, whom for so many ages men have vainly +addressed to obtain their happiness, and the end of sufferings--does it +require, I say, any thing but plain, common sense, to perceive--that the +idea of such a being is an idea without model, and that he himself is +merely a phantom of the imagination? Is any thing necessary but common +sense to perceive, at least, that it is folly and madness for men to hate +and damn one another about unintelligible opinions concerning a being of +this kind? In short, does not every thing prove, that Morality and Virtue +are totally incompatible with the notions of a God, whom his ministers +and interpreters have described, in every country, as the most capricious, +unjust, and cruel of tyrants, whose pretended will, however, must serve as +law and rule the inhabitants of the earth? + +To discover the true principles of Morality, men have no need of theology, +of revelation, or of gods: They have need only of common sense. They have +only to commune with themselves, to reflect upon their own nature, to +consider the objects of society, and of the individuals, who compose +it; and they will easily perceive, that virtue is advantageous, and vice +disadvantageous to themselves. Let us persuade men to be just, beneficent, +moderate, sociable; not because such conduct is demanded by the gods, but, +because it is pleasant to men. Let us advise them to abstain from vice +and crime; not because they will be punished in another world, but because +they will suffer for it in this.--_These are,_ says Montesquieu, _means +to prevent crimes--these are punishments; these reform manners--these are +good examples._ + +The way of truth is straight; that of imposture is crooked and dark. +Truth, ever necessary to man, must necessarily be felt by all upright +minds; the lessons of reason are to be followed by all honest men. Men are +unhappy, only because they are ignorant; they are ignorant, only because +every thing conspires to prevent their being enlightened; they are wicked +only because their reason is not sufficiently developed. + +By what fatality then, have the first founders of all sects given to +their gods ferocious characters, at which nature revolts? Can we imagine +a conduct more abominable, than that which Moses tells us his God showed +towards the Egyptians, where that assassin proceeds boldly to declare, in +the name and by the order of _his God_, that Egypt shall be afflicted +with the greatest calamities, that can happen to man? Of all the different +ideas, which they give us of a supreme being, of a God, creator and +preserver of mankind, there are none more horrible, than those of the +impostors, who represented themselves as inspired by a divine spirit, and +"Thus saith the Lord." + +Why, O theologians! do you presume to inquire into the impenetrable +mysteries of a being, whom you consider inconceivable to the human mind? +You are the blasphemers, when you imagine that a being, perfect according +to you, could be guilty of such cruelty towards creatures whom he has +made out of nothing. Confess, your ignorance of a creating God; and cease +meddling with mysteries, which are repugnant to _Common Sense_. + + + +DETAILED TABLE OF CONTENTS GIVEN IN THE FRENCH EDITION + + + Section + + 1. APOLOGUE + + 2, 3. What is Theology? + + 4. Man is not born with any ideas of Religion + + 5. It is not necessary to believe in a God + + 6. Religion is founded on credulity + + 7. All religion is an absurdity + + 8. The idea of God is impossible + + 9. On the Origin of Superstition + + 10. On the Origin of all Religion + + 11. Religious fears expose men to become a prey to imposters + + 12, 13. Religion seduces ignorance by the aid of the marvellous + + 14. There would never have been any Religion, if there had not been + ages of Stupidity and Barbarism + + 15. All Religion was produced by the desire of domination + + 16. What serves as a basis to Religion is most uncertain + + 17, 18. It is impossible to be convinced of the existence of a God + + 19. The existence of God is not proved + + 20. It explains nothing to say, that God is a spirit + + 21. Spirituality is an absurdity + + 22. Whatever exists is derived from Matter + + 23. What is the metaphysical God of modern Theology? + + 24. It would be less unreasonable to adore the Sun, than to adore + a spiritual Deity + + 25. A spiritual Deity is incapable of volition and action + + 26. What is God? + + 27. Some remarkable Contradictions in Theology + + 28. To adore God, is to adore a fiction + + 29. Atheism is authorised by the infinity of God, and the impossibility + of knowing the Divine essence + + 30. Believing in God is neither safer nor less criminal than not + believing in him + + 31. Belief in God is a habit acquired in infancy + + 32. Belief in God is a prejudice established by successive generations + + 33. On the Origin of Prejudices + + 34. On the effects of Prejudices + + 35. The Religious principles of modern Theology could not be believed + if they were not instilled into the mind before the age of reason + + 36. The wonders of nature do not prove the existence of God + + 37, 38. Nature may be explained by natural causes + + 39, 40. The world has never been created: Matter moves of itself + + 41. Additional proofs that motion is essential to Matter, and that + consequently it is unnecessary to imagine a Spiritual Mover + + 42. The existence of Man does not prove the existence of God + + 43. Nevertheless, neither Man nor the Universe are the effects of chance + + 44, 45. The order of the Universe does not prove the existence of a God + + 46. A Spirit cannot be intelligent it is absurd to adore a divine + intelligence + + 47, 48. All the qualities, which Theology gives to its God are contrary + to the Essence which is attributed to him + + 49. It is absurd to say that the human race is the object and end + of the formation of the Universe + + 50. God is not made for Man, nor Man for God + + 51. It is not true that the object of the formation of the Universe + was to render Man happy + + 52. What is called Providence is a word without meaning + + 53. This pretended Providence is the enemy of Man + + 54. The world is not governed by an intelligent being + + 55. God cannot be considered immutable + + 56. Good and evil are the necessary effects of natural causes. + What is a God that cannot change any thing? + + 57. The consolations of Theology and the hope of paradise and of + a future life, are imaginary + + 58. Another romantic reverie + + 59. It is in vain that Theology attempts to clear its God from human + defects: either this God is not free, or else he is more wicked + than good + + 60, 61. It is impossible to believe that there exists a God of + infinite goodness and power + + 62. Theology makes its God a monster of absurdity, injustice, + malice, and atrocity + + 63. All Religion inspires contemptible fears + + 64. There is no difference between Religion, and the most somber + and servile Superstition + + 65. To judge from the ideas which Theology gives of the Deity, the + love of God is impossible + + 66. An eternally tormenting God is a most detestable being + + 67. Theology is a tissue of palpable contradictions + + 68. The pretended works of God do not prove Divine Perfections + + 69. The perfection of God is not rendered more evident by the + pretended creation of angels + + 70. Theology preaches the Omnipotence of its God, yet constantly + makes him appear impotent + + 71. According to all religious systems, God would be the most + capricious and most foolish of beings + + 72. It is absurd to say that Evil does not proceed from God + + 73. The foreknowledge attributed to God would give men a right + to complain of his cruelty + + 74. Absurdity of the theological stories concerning Original Sin, + and concerning Satan + + 75. The Devil, like Religion, was invented to enrich the priests + + 76. If God has been unable to render human nature incapable of sin, + he has no right to punish man + + 77. It is absurd to say, that the conduct of God ought to be a mystery + for man + + 78. Ought the unfortunate look for consolation, to the sole author + of their misery + + 79. A God, who punishes the faults which he might have prevented, + is a mad tyrant, who joins injustice to folly + + 80. What is called Free Will is an absurdity + + 81. But we must not conclude that Society has no right to punish + + 82, 83. Refutation of the arguments in favour of Free Will + + 84. God himself, if there were a God, would not be free: hence the + inutility of all Religion + + 85. According to the principles of Theology, man is not free a + single instant + + 86. There is no evil, no disorder, and no sin, but must be attributed + to God: consequently God has no right either to punish or recompence + + 87. The prayers offered to God sufficiently prove dissatisfaction of + the divine will + + 88. It is the height of absurdity to imagine, that the injuries and + misfortunes, endured in this world, will be repaired in another world + + 89. Theology justifies the evil and the wickedness, permitted by its God, + only by attributing to him the principle, that "Might makes Right," + which is the violation of all Right + + 90. The absurd doctrine of Redemption, and the frequent exterminations + attributed to Jehovah, impress one with the idea of an unjust and + barbarous God + + 91. Can a being, who has called us into existence merely to make us + miserable, be a generous, equitable, and tender father? + + 92. Man's life, and all that occurs, deposes against the liberty of Man, + and against the justice and goodness of a pretended God + + 93. It is not true, that we owe any gratitude to what is called + _Providence_ + + 94. It is folly to suppose that Man is the king of nature, the favourite + of God, and unique object of his labours + + 95. A comparison between Man and brutes + + 96. There are no animals so detestable as Tyrants + + 97. A refutation of the excellence of Man + + 98. An oriental Tale + + 99. It is madness to see nothing but the goodness of God, or to think + that this universe is only made for Man + + 100. What is the Soul? + + 101. The existence of a _Soul_ is an absurd supposition; and the existence + of an _immortal_ Soul still more absurd + + 102. It is evident that Man dies _in toto_ + + 103. Incontestible arguments against the Spirituality of the Soul + + 104. On the absurdity of the supernatural causes, to which Theologians + are constantly having recourse + + 105, 106. It is false that Materialism degrades + + 107. The idea of a future life is only useful to those, who trade on + public credulity + + 108. It is false that the idea of a future life is consoling + + 109. All religious principles are derived from the imagination. + God is a chimera; and the qualities, attributed to him, + reciprocally destroy one another + + 110. Religion is but a system imagined in order to reconcile + contradictions by the aid of mysteries + + 111, 112, 113. Absurdity and inutility of all Mysteries, which were only + invented for the interests of Priests + + 114. An universal God ought to have revealed an universal Religion + + 115. What proves, that Religion is unnecessary, is, that it is + unintelligible + + 116. All Religions are rendered ridiculous by the multitude of creeds, + all opposite to one another, and all equally foolish + + 117. Opinion of a famous Theologian + + 118. The God of the Deists is not less contradictory, nor less chimerical + than the God of the Christians + + 119. It by no means proves the existence of God to say, that, in every + age, all nations have acknowledged some Deity or other + + 120. All Gods are of a savage origin: all Religions are monuments of + the ignorance, superstition, and ferocity of former times: modern + Religions are but ancient follies, re-edited with additions and + corrections + + 121. All religious usages bear marks of stupidity and barbarism + + 122. The more a religious opinion is ancient and general, the more it + ought to be suspected + + 123. Mere scepticism in religious matters, can only be the effect of + a very superficial examination + + 124. Revelations examined + + 125. Where is the proof that God ever shewed himself to Men, or ever + spoke to them? + + 126. There is nothing that proves miracles to have been ever performed + + 127. If God has spoken, is it not strange that he should have spoken + so differently to the different religious sects? + + 128. Obscurity and suspicious origin of oracles + + 129. Absurdity of all miracles + + 130. Refutation of the reasoning of Pascal concerning the manner in which + we must judge of miracles + + 131. Every new revelation is necessarily false + + 132. The blood of martyrs testifies _against_ the truth of miracles, and + _against_ the divine origin attributed to Christianity + + 133. The fanaticism of martyrs, and the interested zeal of missionaries, + by no means prove the truth of Religion + + 134. Theology makes its God an enemy to Reason and Common Sense + + 135. Faith is irreconcilable with Reason; and Reason is preferable + to Faith + + 136. To what absurd and ridiculous sophisms every one is reduced, who + would substitute Faith for Reason! + + 137. Ought a man to believe, on the assurance of another man, what is + of the greatest importance to himself + + 138. Faith can take root only in feeble, ignorant, or slothful minds + + 139. To teach, that any one Religion has greater pretensions to truth + than another, is an absurdity, and cause of tumult + + 140. Religion is unnecessary to Morality + + 141. Religion is the weakest barrier that can be opposed to the passions + + 142. Honour is a more salutary and powerful bond than Religion + + 143. Religion does not restrain the passions of kings + + 144. Origin of "the divine right of kings," the most absurd, ridiculous, + and odious, of usurpations + + 145. Religion is fatal to political ameliorations: it makes despots + licentious and wicked, and their subjects abject and miserable + + 146. Christianity has propagated itself by preaching implicit obedience + to despotism + + 147. One object of religious principles is to eternize the tyranny + of kings + + 148. How fatal it is to persuade kings that they are responsible for + their actions to God alone + + 149. A devout king is the scourge of his kingdom + + 150. Tyranny sometimes finds the aegis of Religion a weak obstacle + to the despair of the people + + 151. Religion favours the wickedness of princes by delivering them + from fear and remorse + + 152. What is an enlightened Sovereign? + + 153. Of the prevailing passions and crimes of the priesthood + + 154. The quackery of priests + + 155. Religion has corrupted Morality, and produced innumerable evils + + 156. Every Religion is intolerant + + 157. The evils of a state Religion + + 158. Religion legitimates and authorizes crime + + 159. Refutation of the argument, that the evils attributed to Religion + are but the bad effects of human passions + + 160. Religion is incompatible with Morality + + 161. The Morality of the Gospel is impracticable + + 162. A society of Saints would be impossible + + 163. Human nature is not depraved + + 164. Concerning the effects of Jesus Christ's mission + + 165. The dogma of the remission of sins was invented for the interest + of priests + + 166. Who fear God? + + 167. Hell is an absurd invention + + 168. The bad foundation of religious morals + + 169. Christian Charity, as preached and practised by Theologians!!! + + 170. Confession, priestcraft's gold mine, and the destruction of the + true principles of Morality + + 171. The supposition of the existence of a God is by no means necessary + to Morality + + 172. Religion and its supernatural Morality are fatal to the + public welfare + + 173. The union of Church and State is a calamity + + 174. National Religions are ruinous + + 175. Religion paralyses Morality + + 176. Fatal consequences of Devotion + + 177. The idea of a future life is not consoling to man + + 178. An Atheist is fully as conscientious as a religious man, and has + better motives for doing good + + 179. An Atheistical king would be far preferable to a religious king + + 180. Philosophy produces Morality + + 181. Religious opinions have little influence upon conduct + + 182. Reason leads man to Atheism + + 183. Fear alone makes Theists + + 184. Can we, and ought we, to love God? + + 185. God and Religion are proved to be absurdities by the different + ideas formed of them + + 186. The existence of God, which is the basis of Religion, has not yet + been demonstrated + + 187. Priests are more actuated by self-interest, than unbelievers + + 188. Pride, presumption, and badness, are more often found in priests, + than in Atheists + + 189. Prejudices last but for a time: no power is durable which is not + founded upon truth + + 190. What an honourable power ministers of the Gods would obtain, + if they became the apostles of reason and the defenders of liberty! + + 191. What a glorious and happy revolution it would be for the world, + if Philosophy were substituted for Religion! + + 192. The recantation of an unbeliever at the point of death proves + nothing against the reasonableness of unbelief + + 193. It is not true that Atheism breaks the bonds of society + + 194. Refutation of the often repeated opinion, that Religion is necessary + for the vulgar + + 195. Logical and argumentative systems are not adapted to the capacity + of the vulgar + + 196. On the futility and danger of Theology + + 197, 198. On the evils produced by implicit faith + + 199. History teaches us, that all Religions were established by + impostors, in days of ignorance + + 200. All Religions, ancient or modern, have borrowed from one + another ridiculous ceremonies + + 201. Theology has always diverted philosophy from its right path + + 202. Theology explains nothing + + 203, 204. Theology has always fettered Morality, and retarded progress + + 205. It cannot be too often repeated and proved, that Religion is an + extravagance and a calamity + + 206. Religion prevents us from seeing the true causes of misfortunes + + + + +GOOD SENSE WITHOUT GOD + + + + +APOLOGUE + + + + +1. + +There is a vast empire, governed by a monarch, whose strange conduct is +to confound the minds of his subjects. He wishes to be known, loved, +respected, obeyed; but never shows himself to his subjects, and everything +conspires to render uncertain the ideas formed of his character. + +The people, subjected to his power, have, of the character and laws of +their invisible sovereign, such ideas only, as his ministers give them. +They, however, confess, that they have no idea of their master; that his +ways are impenetrable; his views and nature totally incomprehensible. +These ministers, likewise, disagree upon the commands which they pretend +have been issued by the sovereign, whose servants they call themselves. +They defame one another, and mutually treat each other as impostors and +false teachers. The decrees and ordinances, they take upon themselves +to promulgate, are obscure; they are enigmas, little calculated to be +understood, or even divined, by the subjects, for whose instruction they +were intended. The laws of the concealed monarch require interpreters; +but the interpreters are always disputing upon the true manner of +understanding them. Besides, they are not consistent with themselves; all +they relate of their concealed prince is only a string of contradictions. +They utter concerning him not a single word that does not immediately +confute itself. They call him supremely good; yet many complain of his +decrees. They suppose him infinitely wise; and under his administration +everything appears to contradict reason. They extol his justice; and the +best of his subjects are generally the least favoured. They assert, he +sees everything; yet his presence avails nothing. He is, say they, the +friend of order; yet throughout his dominions, all is in confusion and +disorder. He makes all for himself; and the events seldom answer +his designs. He foresees everything; but cannot prevent anything. He +impatiently suffers offence, yet gives everyone the power of offending +him. Men admire the wisdom and perfection of his works; yet his works, +full of imperfection, are of short duration. He is continually doing and +undoing; repairing what he has made; but is never pleased with his work. +In all his undertakings, he proposes only his own glory; yet is never +glorified. His only end is the happiness of his subjects; and his +subjects, for the most part want necessaries. Those, whom he seems to +favour are generally least satisfied with their fate; almost all appear +in perpetual revolt against a master, whose greatness they never cease to +admire, whose wisdom to extol, whose goodness to adore, whose justice to +fear, and whose laws to reverence, though never obeyed! + +This EMPIRE is the WORLD; this MONARCH GOD; his MINISTERS are the PRIESTS; +his SUBJECTS MANKIND. + + + + +2. + +There is a science that has for its object only things incomprehensible. +Contrary to all other sciences, it treats only of what cannot fall under +our senses. Hobbes calls it the _kingdom of darkness_. It is a country, +where every thing is governed by laws, contrary to those which mankind are +permitted to know in the world they inhabit. In this marvellous region, +light is only darkness; evidence is doubtful or false; impossibilities +are credible: reason is a deceitful guide; and good sense becomes madness. +This _science_ is called _theology_, and this theology is a continual +insult to the reason of man. + + + + +3. + +By the magical power of "ifs," "buts," "perhaps's," "what do we know," +etc., heaped together, a shapeless and unconnected system is formed, +perplexing mankind, by obliterating from their minds, the most clear ideas +and rendering uncertain truths most evident. By reason of this systematic +confusion, nature is an enigma; the visible world has disappeared, to give +place to regions invisible; reason is compelled to yield to imagination, +who leads to the country of her self-invented chimeras. + + + + +4. + +The principles of every religion are founded upon the idea of a GOD. Now, +it is impossible to have true ideas of a being, who acts upon none of our +senses. All our ideas are representations of sensible objects. What then +can represent to us the idea of God, which is evidently an idea without an +object? Is not such an idea as impossible, as an effect without a cause? +Can an idea without an archetype be anything, but a chimera? There are, +however, divines, who assure us that the idea of God is innate; or that +we have this idea in our mother's womb. Every principle is the result of +reason; all reason is the effect of experience; experience is acquired +only by the exercise of our senses: therefore, religious principles are +not founded upon reason, and are not innate. + + + + +5. + +Every system of religion can be founded only upon the nature of God and +man; and upon the relations, which subsist between them. But to judge +of the reality of those relations, we must have some idea of the divine +nature. Now, the world exclaims, the divine nature is incomprehensible to +man; yet ceases not to assign attributes to this incomprehensible God, and +to assure us, that it is our indispensable duty to find out that God, whom +it is impossible to comprehend. + +The most important concern of man is what he can least comprehend. If God +is incomprehensible to man, it would seem reasonable never to think of +him; but religion maintains, man cannot with impunity cease a moment to +think (or rather dream) of his God. + + + + +6. + +We are told, that divine qualities are not of a nature to be comprehended +by finite minds. The natural consequence must be, that divine qualities +are not made to occupy finite minds. But religion tells us, that the poor +finite mind of man ought never to lose sight of an inconceivable being, +whose qualities he can never comprehend. Thus, we see, religion is the +art of turning the attention of mankind upon subjects they can never +comprehend. + + + + +7. + +Religion unites man with God, or forms a communication between them; yet +do they not say, God is infinite? If God be infinite, no finite being can +have communication or relation with him. Where there is no relation, there +can be no union, communication, or duties. If there be no duties between +man and his God, there is no religion for man. Thus, in saying God is +infinite, you annihilate religion for man, who is a finite being. The idea +of infinity is to us an idea without model, without archetype, without +object. + + + + +8. + +If God be an infinite being, there cannot be, either in the present or +future world, any relative proportion between man and his God. Thus, the +idea of God can never enter the human mind. In supposition of a life, in +which man would be much more enlightened, than in this, the idea of the +infinity of God would ever remain the same distance from his finite mind. +Thus the idea of God will be no more clear in the future, than in the +present life. Thus, intelligences, superior to man, can have no more +complete ideas of God, than man, who has not the least conception of him +in his present life. + + + + +9. + +How has it been possible to persuade reasonable beings, that the thing, +most impossible to comprehend, was most essential to them? It is because +they have been greatly terrified; because, when they fear, they cease +to reason; because, they have been taught to mistrust their own +understanding; because, when the brain is troubled, they believe every +thing, and examine nothing. + + + + +10. + +Ignorance and fear are the two hinges of all religion. The uncertainty in +which man finds himself in relation to his God, is precisely the motive +that attaches him to his religion. Man is fearful in the dark--in moral, +as well as physical darkness. His fear becomes habitual, and habit makes +it natural; he would think that he wanted something, if he had nothing to +fear. + + + + +11. + +He, who from infancy has habituated himself to tremble when he hears +pronounced certain words, requires those words and needs to tremble. He is +therefore more disposed to listen to one, who entertains him in his fears, +than to one, who dissuades him from them. The superstitious man wishes to +fear; his imagination demands it; one might say, that he fears nothing so +much, as to have nothing to fear. + +Men are imaginary invalids, whose weakness empirics are interested to +encourage, in order to have sale for their drugs. They listen rather to +the physician, who prescribes a variety of remedies, than to him, who +recommends good regimen, and leaves nature to herself. + + + + +12. + +If religion were more clear, it would have less charms for the ignorant, +who are pleased only with obscurity, terrors, fables, prodigies, and +things incredible. Romances, silly stories, and the tales of ghosts and +wizards, are more pleasing to vulgar minds than true histories. + + + + +13. + +In point of religion, men are only great children. The more a religion is +absurd and filled with wonders, the greater ascendancy it acquires over +them. The devout man thinks himself obliged to place no bounds to his +credulity; the more things are inconceivable, they appear to him divine; +the more they are incredible, the greater merit, he imagines, there is in +believing them. + + + + +14. + +The origin of religious opinions is generally dated from the time, when +savage nations were yet in infancy. It was to gross, ignorant, and +stupid people, that the founders of religion have in all ages addressed +themselves, when they wished to give them their Gods, their mode of +worship, their mythology, their marvellous and frightful fables. These +chimeras, adopted without examination by parents, are transmitted, with +more or less alteration, to their children, who seldom reason any more +than their parents. + + + + +15. + +The object of the first legislators was to govern the people; and the +easiest method to effect it was to terrify their minds, and to prevent +the exercise of reason. They led them through winding bye-paths, lest they +might perceive the designs of their guides; they forced them to fix their +eyes in the air, for fear they should look at their feet; they amused them +on the way with idle stories; in a word, they treated them as nurses do +children, who sing lullabies, to put them to sleep, and scold, to make +them quiet. + + + + +16. + +The existence of a God is the basis of all religion. Few appear to doubt +his existence; yet this fundamental article utterly embarrasses every mind +that reasons. The first question of every catechism has been, and ever +will be, the most difficult to resolve. (In the year 1701, the +holy fathers of the oratory of Vendome maintained in a thesis, this +proposition--that, according to St. Thomas, the existence of God is not, +and cannot be, a subject of faith.) + + + + +17. + +Can we imagine ourselves sincerely convinced of the existence of a being, +whose nature we know not; who is inaccessible to all our senses; whose +attributes, we are assured, are incomprehensible to us? To persuade me +that a being exists or can exist, I must be first told what that being is. +To induce me to believe the existence or the possibility of such a +being, it is necessary to tell me things concerning him that are not +contradictory, and do not destroy one another. In short, to fully convince +me of the existence of that being, it is necessary to tell me things that +I can understand. + + + + +18. + +A thing is impossible, when it includes two ideas that mutually destroy +one another, and which can neither be conceived nor united in thought. +Conviction can be founded only upon the constant testimony of our senses, +which alone give birth to our ideas, and enable us to judge of their +agreement or disagreement. That, which exists necessarily, is that, whose +non-existence implies a contradiction. These principles, universally +acknowledged, become erroneous, when applied to the existence of a +God. Whatever has been hitherto said upon the subject, is either +unintelligible, or perfect contradiction, and must therefore appear absurd +to every rational man. + + + + +19. + +All human knowledge is more or less clear. By what strange fatality have +we never been able to elucidate the science of God? The most civilized +nations, and among them the most profound thinkers, are in this respect no +more enlightened than the most savage tribes and ignorant peasants; and, +examining the subject closely, we shall find, that, by the speculations +and subtle refinements of men, the divine science has been only more and +more obscured. Every religion has hitherto been founded only upon what is +called, in logic, _begging the question_; it takes things for granted, and +then proves, by suppositions, instead of principles. + + + + +20. + +Metaphysics teach us, that God is a _pure spirit_. But, is modern theology +superior to that of the savages? The savages acknowledge a _great spirit_, +for the master of the world. The savages, like all ignorant people, +attribute to _spirits_ all the effects, of which their experience cannot +discover the true causes. Ask a savage, what works your watch? He will +answer, _it is a spirit_. Ask the divines, what moves the universe? They +answer, _it is a spirit_. + + + + +21. + +The savage, when he speaks of a spirit, affixes, at least, some idea to +the word; he means thereby an agent, like the air, the breeze, the breath, +that invisibly produces discernible effects. By subtilizing every thing, +the modern theologian becomes as unintelligible to himself as to others. +Ask him, what he understands by a spirit? He will answer you, that it is +an unknown substance, perfectly simple, that has no extension, that has +nothing common with matter. Indeed, is there any one, who can form the +least idea of such a substance? What then is a spirit, to speak in the +language of modern theology, but the absence of an idea? The idea of +_spirituality_ is an idea without model. + + + + +22. + +Is it not more natural and intelligible to draw universal existence from +the matter, whose existence is demonstrated by all the senses, and whose +effects we experience, which we see act, move, communicate motion, and +incessantly generate, than to attribute the formation of things to an +unknown power, to a spiritual being, who cannot derive from his nature +what he has not himself, and who, by his spiritual essence, can create +neither matter nor motion? Nothing is more evident, than that the idea +they endeavour to give us, of the action of mind upon matter, represents +no object. It is an idea without model. + + + + +23. + +The material _Jupiter_ of the ancients could move, compose, destroy, +and create beings, similar to himself; but the God of modern theology is +sterile. He can neither occupy any place in space, nor move matter, nor +form a visible world, nor create men or gods. The metaphysical God is fit +only to produce confusion, reveries, follies, and disputes. + + + + +24. + +Since a God was indispensably requisite to men, why did they not worship +the Sun, that visible God, adored by so many nations? What being had +greater claim to the homage of men, than the day-star, who enlightens, +warms, and vivifies all beings; whose presence enlivens and regenerates +nature, whose absence seems to cast her into gloom and languor? If any +being announced to mankind, power, activity, beneficence, and duration, it +was certainly the Sun, whom they ought to have regarded as the parent of +nature, as the divinity. At least, they could not, without folly, dispute +his existence, or refuse to acknowledge his influence. + + + + +25. + +The theologian exclaims to us, that God wants neither hands nor arms to +act; that _he acts by his will_. But pray, who or what is that God, who +has a will, and what can be the subject of his divine will? + +Are the stories of witches, ghosts, wizards, hobgoblins, etc., more absurd +and difficult to believe than the magical or impossible action of mind +upon matter? When we admit such a God, fables and reveries may claim +belief. Theologians treat men as children, whose simplicity makes them +believe all the stories they hear. + + + + +26. + +To shake the existence of God, we need only to ask a theologian to +speak of him. As soon as he has said a word upon the subject, the +least reflection will convince us, that his observations are totally +incompatible with the essence he ascribes to his God. What then is God? +It is an abstract word, denoting the hidden power of nature; or it is a +mathematical point, that has neither length, breadth, nor thickness. David +Hume, speaking of theologians, has ingeniously observed, _that they have +discovered the solution of the famous problem of Archimedes--a point in +the heavens, whence they move the world_. + + + + +27. + +Religion prostrates men before a being, who, without extension, is +infinite, and fills all with his immensity; a being, all-powerful, who +never executes his will; a being, sovereignly good, who creates only +disquietudes; a being, the friend of order, and in whose government all +is in confusion and disorder. What then, can we imagine, can be the God of +theology? + + + + +28. + +To avoid all embarrassment, we are told, "that it is not necessary to know +what God is; that we must adore him; that we are not permitted to extend +our views to his attributes." But, before we know that we must adore a +God, must we not know certainly, that he exists? But, how can we assure +ourselves, that he exists, if we never examine whether the various +qualities, attributed to him, do really exist and agree in him? Indeed, +to adore God, is to adore only the fictions of one's own imagination, or +rather, it is to adore nothing. + + + + +29. + +In view of confounding things the more, theologians have not declared what +their God is; they tell us only what he is not. By means of negations and +abstractions, they think they have composed a real and perfect being. Mind +is that, which is _not_ body. An infinite being is a being, who is _not_ +finite. A perfect being is a being, who is _not_ imperfect. Indeed, is +there any one, who can form real ideas of such a mass of absence of ideas? +That, which excludes all idea, can it be any thing but nothing? + +To pretend, that the divine attributes are beyond the reach of human +conception, is to grant, that God is not made for man. To assure us, that, +in God, all is infinite, is to own that there can be nothing common to him +and his creatures. If there be nothing common to God and his creatures, +God is annihilated for man, or, at least, rendered useless to him. "God," +they say, "has made man intelligent, but he has not made him omniscient;" +hence it is inferred, that he has not been able to give him faculties +sufficiently enlarged to know his divine essence. In this case, it +is evident, that God has not been able nor willing to be known by his +creatures. By what right then would God be angry with beings, who were +naturally incapable of knowing the divine essence? God would be evidently +the most unjust and capricious of tyrants, if he should punish an Atheist +for not having known, what, by his nature, it was impossible he should +know. + + + + +30. + +To the generality of men, nothing renders an argument more convincing +than fear. It is therefore, that theologians assure us, _we must take the +safest part_; that nothing is so criminal as incredulity; that God will +punish without pity every one who has the temerity to doubt his existence; +that his severity is just, since madness or perversity only can make +us deny the existence of an enraged monarch, who without mercy avenges +himself on Atheists. If we coolly examine these threatenings, we shall +find, they always suppose the thing in question. They must first prove the +existence of a God, before they assure us, it is safest to believe, and +horrible to doubt or deny his existence. They must then prove, that it is +possible and consistent, that a just God cruelly punishes men for having +been in a state of madness, that prevented their believing the existence +of a being, whom their perverted reason could not conceive. In a word, +they must prove, that an infinitely just God can infinitely punish the +invincible and natural ignorance of man with respect to the divine nature. +Do not theologians reason very strangely? They invent phantoms, they +compose them of contradictions; they then assure us, it is safest not +to doubt the existence of these phantoms they themselves have invented. +According to this mode of reasoning, there is no absurdity, which it would +not be more safe to believe, than not to believe. + +All children are born Atheists; they have no idea of God. Are they then +criminal on account of their ignorance? At what age must they begin to +believe in God? It is, you say, at the age of reason. But at what time +should this age commence? Besides, if the profoundest theologians lose +themselves in the divine nature, which they do not presume to comprehend, +what ideas must man have of him? + + + + +31. + +Men believe in God only upon the word of those, who have no more idea of +him than themselves. Our nurses are our first theologians. They talk +to children of God as if he were a scarecrow; they teach them from the +earliest age to join their hands mechanically. Have nurses then more true +ideas of God than the children whom they teach to pray? + + + + +32. + +Religion, like a family estate, passes, with its incumbrances, from +parents to children. Few men in the world would have a God, had not +pains been taken in infancy to give them one. Each would receive from his +parents and teachers the God whom they received from theirs; but each, +agreeably to his disposition, would arrange, modify, and paint him in his +own manner. + + + + +33. + +The brain of man, especially in infancy, is like soft wax, fit to receive +every impression that is made upon it. Education furnishes him with almost +all his ideas at a time, when he is incapable of judging for himself. We +believe we have received from nature, or have brought with us at birth, +the true or false ideas, which, in a tender age, had been instilled into +our minds; and this persuasion is one of the greatest sources of errors. + + + + +34. + +Prejudice contributes to cement in us the opinions of those who have been +charged with our instruction. We believe them much more experienced than +ourselves; we suppose they are fully convinced of the things which they +teach us; we have the greatest confidence in them; by the care they have +taken of us in infancy, we judge them incapable of wishing to deceive us. +These are the motives that make us adopt a thousand errors, without other +foundation than the hazardous authority of those by whom we have been +brought up. The prohibition likewise of reasoning upon what they teach us, +by no means lessens our confidence; but often contributes to increase our +respect for their opinions. + + + + +35. + +Divines act very wisely in teaching men their religious principles before +they are capable of distinguishing truth from falsehood, or their left +hand from their right. It would be as difficult to instill into the mind +of a man, forty years old, the extravagant notions that are given us of +the divinity, as to eradicate them from the mind of him who had imbibed +them from infancy. + + + + +36. + +It is observed, that the wonders of nature are sufficient to lead us to +the existence of a God, and fully to convince us of this important truth. +But how many are there in the world who have the time, capacity, or +disposition, necessary to contemplate Nature and meditate her progress? +Men, for the most part, pay no regard to it. The peasant is not struck +with the beauty of the sun, which he sees every day. The sailor is not +surprised at the regular motion of the ocean; he will never draw from it +theological conclusions. The phenomena of nature prove the existence of a +God only to some prejudiced men, who have been early taught to behold the +finger of God in every thing whose mechanism could embarrass them. In the +wonders of nature, the unprejudiced philosopher sees nothing but the +power of nature, the permanent and various laws, the necessary effects of +different combinations of matter infinitely diversified. + + + + +37. + +Is there any thing more surprising than the logic of these divines, who, +instead of confessing their ignorance of natural causes, seek beyond +nature, in imaginary regions, a cause much more unknown than that nature, +of which they can form at least some idea? To say, that God is the author +of the phenomena of nature, is it not to attribute them to an occult +cause? What is God? What is a spirit? They are causes of which we have no +idea. O wise divines! Study nature and her laws; and since you can +there discover the action of natural causes, go not to those that are +supernatural, which, far from enlightening, will only darken your ideas, +and make it utterly impossible that you should understand yourselves. + + + + +38. + +Nature, you say, is totally inexplicable without a God. That is to say, +to explain what you understand very little, you have need of a cause which +you understand not at all. You think to elucidate what is obscure, by +doubling the obscurity; to solve difficulties, by multiplying them. O +enthusiastic philosophers! To prove the existence of a God, write complete +treatises of botany; enter into a minute detail of the parts of the human +body; launch forth into the sky, to contemplate the revolution of the +stars; then return to the earth to admire the course of waters; behold +with transport the butterflies, the insects, the polypi, and the organized +atoms, in which you think you discern the greatness of your God. All these +things will not prove the existence of God; they will prove only, that you +have not just ideas of the immense variety of matter, and of the effects, +producible by its infinitely diversified combinations, that constitute the +universe. They will prove only your ignorance of nature; that you have no +idea of her powers, when you judge her incapable of producing a multitude +of forms and beings, of which your eyes, even with the assistance of +microscopes, never discern but the smallest part. In a word, they will +prove, that, for want of knowing sensible agents, or those possible +to know, you find it shorter to have recourse to a word, expressing an +inconceivable agent. + + + + +39. + +We are gravely and repeatedly told, that, _there is no effect without +a cause_; that, _the world did not make itself_. But the universe is +a cause, it is not an effect; it is not a work; it has not been made, +because it is impossible that it should have been made. The world has +always been; its existence is necessary; it is its own cause. Nature, +whose essence is visibly to act and produce, requires not, to discharge +her functions, an invisible mover, much more unknown than herself. Matter +moves by its own energy, by a necessary consequence of its heterogeneity. +The diversity of motion, or modes of mutual action, constitutes alone the +diversity of matter. We distinguish beings from one another only by the +different impressions or motions which they communicate to our organs. + + + + +40. + +You see, that all is action in nature, and yet pretend that nature, by +itself, is dead and without power. You imagine, that this all, essentially +acting, needs a mover! What then is this mover? It is a spirit; a being +absolutely incomprehensible and contradictory. Acknowledge then, that +matter acts of itself, and cease to reason of your spiritual mover, +who has nothing that is requisite to put it in action. Return from +your useless excursions; enter again into a real world; keep to _second +causes_, and leave to divines their _first cause_, of which nature has no +need, to produce all the effects you observe in the world. + + + + +41. + +It can be only by the diversity of impressions and effects, which bodies +make upon us, that we feel them; that we have perceptions and ideas +of them; that we distinguish one from another; that we assign them +properties. Now, to see or feel an object, the object must act upon our +organs; this object cannot act upon us, without exciting some motion in +us; it cannot excite motion in us, if it be not in motion itself. At +the instant I see an object, my eyes are struck by it; I can have no +conception of light and vision, without motion, communicated to my +eye, from the luminous, extended, coloured body. At the instant I smell +something, my sense is irritated, or put in motion, by the parts that +exhale from the odoriferous body. At the moment I hear a sound, the +tympanum of my ear is struck by the air, put in motion by a sonorous body, +which would not act if it were not in motion itself. Whence it evidently +follows, that, without motion, I can neither feel, see, distinguish, +compare, judge, nor occupy my thoughts upon any subject whatever. + +We are taught, that _the essence of a thing is that from which all its +properties flow_. Now, it is evident, that all the properties of bodies, +of which we have ideas, are owing to motion, which alone informs us of +their existence, and gives us the first conceptions of them. I cannot be +informed of my own existence but by the motions I experience in myself. I +am therefore forced to conclude, that motion is as essential to matter as +extension, and that matter cannot be conceived without it. + +Should any person deny, that motion is essential and necessary to matter; +they cannot, at least, help acknowledging that bodies, which seem dead and +inert, produce motion of themselves, when placed in a fit situation to +act upon one another. For instance; phosphorus, when exposed to the air, +immediately takes fire. Meal and water, when mixed, ferment. Thus dead +matter begets motion of itself. Matter has then the power of self-motion; +and nature, to act, has no need of a mover, whose pretended essence would +hinder him from acting. + + + + +42. + +Whence comes man? What is his origin? Did the first man spring, ready +formed, from the dust of the earth? Man appears, like all other beings, a +production of nature. Whence came the first stones, the first trees, the +first lions, the first elephants, the first ants, the first acorns? We +are incessantly told to acknowledge and revere the hand of God, of an +infinitely wise, intelligent and powerful maker, in so wonderful a work as +the human machine. I readily confess, that the human machine appears to me +surprising. But as man exists in nature, I am not authorized to say that +his formation, is above the power of nature. But I can much less conceive +of this formation, when to explain it, I am told, that a pure spirit, who +has neither eyes, feet, hands, head, lungs, mouth nor breath, made man by +taking a little clay, and breathing upon it. + +We laugh at the savage inhabitants of Paraguay, for calling themselves +the descendants of the moon. The divines of Europe call themselves the +descendants, or the creation, of a pure spirit. Is this pretension any +more rational? Man is intelligent; thence it is inferred, that he can be +the work only of an intelligent being, and not of a nature, which is void +of intelligence. Although nothing is more rare, than to see man make use +of this intelligence, of which he seems so proud, I will grant that he is +intelligent, that his wants develop this faculty, that society especially +contributes to cultivate it. But I see nothing in the human machine, and +in the intelligence with which it is endued, that announces very precisely +the infinite intelligence of the maker to whom it is ascribed. I see that +this admirable machine is liable to be deranged; I see, that his wonderful +intelligence is then disordered, and sometimes totally disappears; I +infer, that human intelligence depends upon a certain disposition of the +material organs of the body, and that we cannot infer the intelligence of +God, any more from the intelligence of man, than from his materiality. All +that we can infer from it, is, that God is material. The intelligence of +man no more proves the intelligence of God, than the malice of man proves +the malice of that God, who is the pretended maker of man. In spite of all +the arguments of divines, God will always be a cause contradicted by its +effects, or of which it is impossible to judge by its works. We shall +always see evil, imperfection and folly result from such a cause, that is +said to be full of goodness, perfection and wisdom. + + + + +43. + +"What?" you will say, "is intelligent man, is the universe, and all it +contains, the effect of _chance_?" No; I repeat it, _the universe is not +an effect_; it is the cause of all effects; every being it contains is +the necessary effect of this cause, which sometimes shews us its manner of +acting, but generally conceals its operations. Men use the word _chance_ +to hide their ignorance of true causes, which, though not understood, act +not less according to certain laws. There is no effect without a cause. +Nature is a word, used to denote the immense assemblage of beings, various +matter, infinite combinations, and diversified motions, that we behold. +All bodies, organized or unorganized, are necessary effects of certain +causes. Nothing in nature can happen by chance. Every thing is subject +to fixed laws. These laws are only the necessary connection of certain +effects with their causes. One atom of matter cannot meet another _by +chance_; this meeting is the effect of permanent laws, which cause every +being necessarily to act as it does, and hinder it from acting otherwise, +in given circumstances. To talk of the _fortuitous concourse of atoms_, or +to attribute some effects to chance, is merely saying that we are ignorant +of the laws, by which bodies act, meet, combine, or separate. + +Those, who are unacquainted with nature, the properties of beings, and +the effects which must necessarily result from the concurrence of certain +causes, think, that every thing takes place by chance. It is not chance, +that has placed the sun in the centre of our planetary system; it is by +its own essence, that the substance, of which it is composed, must occupy +that place, and thence be diffused. + + + + +44. + +The worshippers of a God find, in the order of the universe, an invincible +proof of the existence of an intelligent and wise being, who governs it. +But this order is nothing but a series of movements necessarily produced +by causes or circumstances, which are sometimes favourable, and sometimes +hurtful to us: we approve of some, and complain of others. + +Nature uniformly follows the same round; that is, the same causes produce +the same effects, as long as their action is not disturbed by other +causes, which force them to produce different effects. When the operation +of causes, whose effects we experience, is interrupted by causes, which, +though unknown, are not the less natural and necessary, we are confounded; +we cry out, _a miracle!_ and attribute it to a cause much more unknown, +than any of those acting before our eyes. + +The universe is always in order. It cannot be in disorder. It is our +machine, that suffers, when we complain of disorder. The bodies, causes, +and beings, which this world contains, necessarily act in the manner in +which we see them act, whether we approve or disapprove of their effects. +Earthquakes, volcanoes, inundations, pestilences, and famines are effects +as necessary, or as much in the order of nature, as the fall of heavy +bodies, the courses of rivers, the periodical motions of the seas, the +blowing of the winds, the fruitful rains, and the favourable effects, for +which men praise God, and thank him for his goodness. + +To be astonished that a certain order reigns in the world, is to be +surprised that the same causes constantly produce the same effects. To +be shocked at disorder, is to forget, that when things change, or are +interrupted in their actions, the effects can no longer be the same. To +wonder at the order of nature, is to wonder that any thing can exist; it +is to be surprised at any one's own existence. What is order to one being, +is disorder to another. All wicked beings find that every thing is in +order, when they can with impunity put every thing in disorder. They find, +on the contrary, that every thing is in disorder, when they are disturbed +in the exercise of their wickedness. + + + + +45. + +Upon supposition that God is the author and mover of nature, there could +be no disorder with respect to him. Would not all the causes, that he +should have made, necessarily act according to the properties, essences, +and impulses given them? If God should change the ordinary course of +nature, he would not be immutable. If the order of the universe, in +which man thinks he sees the most convincing proof of the existence, +intelligence, power and goodness of God, should happen to contradict +itself, one might suspect his existence, or, at least, accuse him of +inconstancy, impotence, want of foresight and wisdom in the arrangement of +things; one would have a right to accuse him of an oversight in the choice +of the agents and instruments, which he makes, prepares, and puts in +action. In short, if the order of nature proves the power and intelligence +of the Deity, disorder must prove his weakness, instability, and +irrationality. + +You say, that God is omnipresent, that he fills the universe with his +immensity, that nothing is done without him, that matter could not act +without his agency. But in this case, you admit, that your God is the +author of disorder, that it is he who deranges nature, that he is the +father of confusion, that he is in man, and moves him at the moment he +sins. If God is every where, he is in me, he acts with me, he is deceived +with me, he offends God with me, and combats with me the existence of God! +O theologians! you never understand yourselves, when you speak of God. + + + + +46. + +In order to have what we call intelligence, it is necessary to have ideas, +thoughts, and wishes; to have ideas, thoughts, and wishes, it is necessary +to have organs; to have organs, it is necessary to have a body; to act +upon bodies, it is necessary to have a body; to experience disorder, it is +necessary to be capable of suffering. Whence it evidently follows, that a +pure spirit can neither be intelligent, nor affected by what passes in the +universe. + +Divine intelligence, ideas, and views, have, you say, nothing common with +those of men. Very well. How then can men judge, right or wrong, of these +views; reason upon these ideas; or admire this intelligence? This would be +to judge, admire, and adore that, of which we can have no ideas. To adore +the profound views of divine wisdom, is it not to adore that, of which we +cannot possibly judge? To admire these views, is it not to admire without +knowing why? Admiration is always the daughter of ignorance. Men admire +and adore only what they do not comprehend. + + + + +47. + +All those qualities, ascribed to God, are totally incompatible with a +being, who, by his very essence, is void of all analogy with human beings. +It is true, the divines imagine they extricate themselves from this +difficulty, by exaggerating the human qualities, attributed to the +Divinity; they enlarge them to infinity, where they cease to understand +themselves. What results from this combination of man with God? A mere +chimera, of which, if any thing be affirmed, the phantom, combined with so +much pains, instantly vanishes. + +Dante, in his poem upon _Paradise_, relates, that the Deity appeared +to him under the figure of three circles, forming an iris, whose lively +colours generated each other; but that, looking steadily upon the dazzling +light, he saw only his own figure. While adoring God, it is himself, that +man adores. + + + + +48. + +Ought not the least reflection suffice to prove, that God can have none +of the human qualities, all ties, virtues, or perfections? Our virtues and +perfections are consequences of the modifications of our passions. But +has God passions as we have? Again: our good qualities consist in our +dispositions towards the beings with whom we live in society. God, +according to you, is an insulated being. God has no equals--no +fellow-beings. God does not live in society. He wants the assistance of no +one. He enjoys an unchangeable felicity. Admit then, according to your own +principles, that God cannot have what we call virtues, and that man cannot +be virtuous with respect to him. + + + + +49. + +Man, wrapped up in his own merit, imagines the human race to be the sole +object of God in creating the universe. Upon what does he found this +flattering opinion? We are told: that man is the only being endued with +intelligence, which enables him to know the Deity, and to render him +homage. We are assured, that God made the world only for his own glory, +and that it was necessary that the human species should come into this +plan, that there might be some one to admire his works, and glorify him +for them. But, according to these suppositions, has not God evidently +missed his object? 1st. Man, according to yourselves, will always labour +under the completest impossibility of knowing his God, and the most +invincible ignorance of his divine essence. 2ndly. A being, who has no +equal, cannot be susceptible of glory; for glory can result only from the +comparison of one's own excellence with that of others. 3rdly. If God be +infinitely happy, if he be self-sufficient, what need has he of the homage +of his feeble creatures? 4thly. God, notwithstanding all his endeavours, +is not glorified; but, on the contrary, all the religions in the world +represent him as perpetually offended; their sole object is to reconcile +sinful, ungrateful, rebellious man with his angry God. + + + + +50. + +If God be infinite, he has much less relation with man, than man with +ants. Would the ants reason pertinently concerning the intentions, +desires, and projects of the gardener? Could they justly imagine, that a +park was planted for them alone, by an ostentatious monarch, and that the +sole object of his goodness was to furnish them with a superb residence? +But, according to theology, man is, with respect to God, far below what +the vilest insect is to man. Thus, by theology itself, which is wholly +devoted to the attributes and views of the Divinity, theology appears a +complete folly. + + + + +51. + +We are told, that, in the formation of the universe, God's only object was +the happiness of man. But, in a world made purposely for him, and governed +by an omnipotent God, is man in reality very happy? Are his enjoyments +durable? Are not his pleasures mixed with pains? Are many persons +satisfied with their fate? Is not man continually the victim of physical +and moral evils? Is not the human machine, which is represented as a +master-piece of the Creator's skill, liable to derangement in a thousand +ways? Should we be surprised at the workmanship of a mechanic, who should +shew us a complex machine, ready to stop every moment, and which, in a +short time, would break in pieces of itself? + + + + +52. + +The generous care, displayed by the Deity in providing for the wants, +and watching over the happiness of his beloved creatures, is called +_Providence_. But, when we open our eyes, we find that God provides +nothing. Providence sleeps over the greater part of the inhabitants of +this world. For a very small number of men who are supposed to be happy, +what an immense multitude groan under oppression, and languish in misery! +Are not nations forced to deprive themselves of bread, to administer to +the extravagances of a few gloomy tyrants, who are no happier than their +oppressed slaves? + +At the same time that our divines emphatically expatiate upon the goodness +of Providence, while they exhort us to repose our confidence in her, do +we not hear them, at the sight of unforeseen catastrophes, exclaim, that +_Providence sports with the vain projects of man_, that she frustrates +their designs, that she laughs at their efforts, that profound wisdom +delights to bewilder the minds of mortals? But, shall we put confidence in +a malignant Providence, who laughs at, and sports with mankind? How will +one admire the unknown ways of a hidden wisdom, whose manner of acting is +inexplicable? Judge of it by effects, you will say. We do; and find, that +these effects are sometimes useful, and sometimes hurtful. + +Men think they justify Providence, by saying, that, in this world, there +is much more good than evil to every individual of mankind. Supposing the +good, we enjoy from Providence, is to the evil, as a _hundred to ten_; +will it not still follow, that, for a hundred degrees of goodness, +Providence possesses ten of malignity; which is incompatible with the +supposed perfection of the divine nature. + +Almost all books are filled with the most flattering praises of +Providence, whose attentive care is highly extolled. It would seem as +if man, to live happily here below, needed not his own exertions. Yet, +without his own labour, man could subsist hardly a day. To live, he is +obliged to sweat, toil, hunt, fish, and labour without intermission. +Without these second causes, the first cause, at least in most countries, +would provide for none of our wants. In all parts of the globe, we see +savage and civilized man in a perpetual struggle with Providence. He is +necessitated to ward off the strokes directed against him by Providence, +in hurricanes, tempests, frosts, hail-storms, inundations, droughts, and +the various accidents, which so often render useless all his labours. In a +word, we see man continually occupied in guarding against the ill offices +of that Providence, which is supposed to be attentive to his happiness. + +A bigot admired divine Providence for wisely ordering rivers to pass +through those places, where men have built large cities. Is not this man's +reasoning as rational, as that of many learned men, who incessantly +talk of _final causes_, or who pretend that they clearly perceive the +beneficent views of God in the formation of all things? + + + + +53. + +Do we see then, that Providence so very sensibly manifests herself in the +preservation of those admirable works, which we attribute to her? If it +is she, who governs the world, we find her as active in destroying, as +in forming; in exterminating, as in producing. Does she not every moment +destroy, by thousands, the very men, to whose preservation and welfare +we suppose her continually attentive? Every moment she loses sight of +her beloved creature. Sometimes she shakes his dwelling, sometimes she +annihilates his harvests, sometimes she inundates his fields, sometimes +she desolates them by a burning drought. She arms all nature against man. +She arms man himself against his own species, and commonly terminates his +existence in anguish. Is this then what is called preserving the universe? + +If we could view, without prejudice, the equivocal conduct of Providence +towards the human race and all sensible beings, we should find, that far +from resembling a tender and careful mother, she resembles rather those +unnatural mothers, who instantly forgetting the unfortunates of their +licentious love, abandon their infants, as soon as they are born, and who, +content with having borne them, expose them, helpless, to the caprice of +fortune. + +The Hottentots, in this respect are much wiser than other nations, who +treat them as barbarians, and refuse to worship God; because, they +say, _if he often does good, he often does evil_. Is not this manner of +reasoning more just and conformable to experience, than that of many men, +who are determined to see, in their God, nothing but goodness, wisdom, and +foresight, and who refuse to see that the innumerable evils, of which this +world is the theatre, must come from the same hand, which they kiss with +delight? + + + + +54. + +Common sense teaches, that we cannot, and ought not, to judge of a cause, +but by its effects. A cause can be reputed constantly good, only when it +constantly produces good. A cause, which produces both good and evil, is +sometimes good, and sometimes evil. But the logic of theology destroys all +this. According to that, the phenomena of nature, or the effects we behold +in this world, prove to us the existence of a cause infinitely good; and +this cause is God. Although this world is full of evils; although disorder +often reigns in it; although men incessantly repine at their hard fate; +we must be convinced, that these effects are owing to a beneficent and +immutable cause; and many people believe it, or feign believe. + +Every thing that passes in the world, proves to us, in the clearest +manner, that it is not governed by an intelligent being. We can judge of +the intelligence of a being only by the conformity of the means, which he +employs to attain his proposed object. The object of God, is the happiness +of a man. Yet, a like necessity governs the fate of all sensible beings, +who are born only to suffer much, enjoy little, and die. The cup of man +is filled with joy and bitterness; good is every where attended with evil; +order gives place to disorder; generation is followed by destruction. +If you say, that the designs of God are mysterious and that his ways are +impenetrable; I answer, that, in this case, it is impossible to judge +whether God be intelligent. + + + + +55. + +You pretend, that God is immutable! What then produces a continual +instability in this world, which you make his empire? Is there a state, +subject to more frequent and cruel revolutions, than that of this unknown +monarch? How can we attribute to an immutable God, sufficiently powerful +to give solidity to his works, a government, in which every thing is in +continual vicissitude? If I imagine I see a God of uniform character in +all the effects favourable to my species, what kind of a God can I see in +their continual misfortunes? You tell me, it is our sins, which compel +him to punish. I answer, that God, according to yourselves, is then not +immutable, since the sins of men force him to change his conduct towards +them. Can a being, who is sometimes provoked, and sometimes appeased, be +constantly the same? + + + + +56. + +The universe can be only what it is; all sensible beings in it enjoy and +suffer; that is, are moved sometimes in an agreeable, and sometimes in a +disagreeable manner. These effects are necessary; they result necessarily +from causes, which act only according to their properties. These effects +necessarily please, or displease, by a consequence of nature. This same +nature compels me to avoid, avert, and resist some things, and to seek, +desire, and procure others. In a world, where every thing is necessary, +a God, who remedies nothing, who leaves things to run in their necessary +course,--is he any thing but destiny, or necessity personified? It is a +deaf and useless God, who can effect no change in general laws, to which +he is himself subject. Of what importance is the infinite power of a +being, who will do but very little in my favour? Where is the infinite +goodness of a being, indifferent to happiness? Of what service is the +favour of a being, who, is able to do an infinite good, does not do even a +finite one? + + + + +57. + +When we ask, why so many miserable objects appear under the government of +a good God, we are told, by way of consolation, that the present world +is only a passage, designed to conduct man to a happier one. The divines +assure us, that the earth we inhabit, is a state of trial. In short, they +shut our mouths, by saying, that God could communicate to his creatures +neither impossibility nor infinite happiness, which are reserved for +himself alone. Can such answers be satisfactory? 1st. The existence of +another life is guaranteed to us only by the imagination of man, who, +by supposing it, have only realized the desire they have of surviving +themselves, in order to enjoy hereafter a purer and more durable +happiness. 2ndly. How can we conceive that a God, who knows every thing, +and must be fully acquainted with the dispositions of his creatures, +should want so many experiments, in order to be sure of their +dispositions? 3rdly. According to the calculations of their chronologists, +our earth has existed six or seven thousand years. During that time, +nations have experienced calamities. History exhibits the human species +at all times tormented and ravaged by tyrants, conquerors, and heroes; by +wars, inundations, famines, plagues, etc. Are such long trials then likely +to inspire us with very great confidence in the secret views of the Deity? +Do such numerous and constant evils give a very exalted idea of the +future state, his goodness is preparing for us? 4thly. If God is so kindly +disposed, as he is asserted to be, without giving men infinite happiness, +could he not at least have communicated the degree of happiness, of which +finite beings are susceptible here below? To be happy, must we have an +_infinite_ or _divine_ happiness? 5thly. If God could not make men happier +than they are here below, what will become of the hope of a _paradise_, +where it is pretended, that the elect will for ever enjoy ineffable +bliss? If God neither could nor would avert evil from the earth, the only +residence we can know, what reason have we to presume, that he can or +will avert evil from another world, of which we have no idea? Epicurus +observed: "either God would remove evil out of this world, and cannot; or +he can, and will not; or he has neither the power nor will; or, lastly, he +has both the power and will. If he has the will, and not the power, this +shews weakness, which is contrary to the nature of God. If he has the +power, and not the will, it is malignity; and this is no less contrary +to his nature. If he is neither able nor willing, he is both impotent and +malignant, and consequently cannot be God. If he be both willing and able +(which alone is consonant to the nature of God) whence comes evil, or +why does he not prevent it?" Reflecting minds are still waiting for a +reasonable solution of these difficulties; and our divines tell us, that +they will be removed only in a future life. + + + + +58. + +We are told of a pretended _scale of beings_. It is supposed, that God +has divided his creatures into different classes, in which each enjoys +the degree of happiness, of which it is susceptible. According to this +romantic arrangement, from the oyster to the celestial angels, all +beings enjoy a happiness, which is suitable to their nature. Experience +explicitly contradicts this sublime reverie. In this world, all sensible +beings suffer and live in the midst of dangers. Man cannot walk without +hurting, tormenting, or killing a multitude of sensible beings, which are +in his way; while he himself is exposed, at every step, to a multitude of +evils, foreseen or unforeseen, which may lead him to destruction. During +the whole course of his life, he is exposed to pains; he is not sure, a +moment, of his existence, to which he is so strongly attached, and which +he regards as the greatest gift of the Divinity. + + + + +59. + +The world, it will be said, has all the perfection, of which it is +susceptible: since it is not God who made it, it must have great qualities +and great defects. But we answer, that, as the world must necessarily have +great defects, it would have been more conformable to the nature of a +good God, not to have created a world, which he could not make completely +happy. If God was supremely happy, before the creation of the world, and +could have continued to be supremely happy, without creating the world, +why did he not remain at rest? Why must man suffer? Why must man exist? Of +what importance is his existence to God? Nothing, or something? If man's +existence is not useful or necessary to God, why did God make man? If +man's existence is necessary to God's glory, he had need of man; he was +deficient in something before man existed. We can pardon an unskilful +workman for making an imperfect work; because he must work, well or ill, +upon penalty of starving. This workman is excusable, but God is not. +According to you, he is self-sufficient; if so, why does he make men? He +has, you say, every thing requisite to make man happy. Why then does he +not do it? Confess, that your God has more malice than goodness, unless +you admit, that God, was necessitated to do what he has done, without +being able to do it otherwise. Yet, you assure us, that God is free. You +say also, that he is immutable, although it was in _Time_ that he began +and ceased to exercise his power, like the inconstant beings of this +world. O theologians! Vain are your efforts to free your God from defects. +This perfect God has always some human imperfections. + + + + +60. + +"Is not God master of his favours? Can he not give them? Can he not take +them away? It does not belong to his creatures to require reasons for +his conduct. He can dispose of the works of his own hands as he pleases. +Absolute sovereign of mortals, he distributes happiness or misery, +according to his good pleasure." Such are the solutions given by +theologians to console us for the evils which God inflicts upon us. +We reply, that a God, who is infinitely good, cannot be _master of his +favours_, but would by his nature be obliged to bestow them upon his +creatures; that a being, truly beneficent, cannot refrain from doing good; +that a being, truly generous, does not take back what he has given; and +that every man, who does so, dispenses with gratitude, and has no right to +complain of finding ungrateful men. + +How can the odd and capricious conduct, which theologians ascribe to +God, be reconciled with religion, which supposes a covenant, or mutual +engagements between God and men? If God owes nothing to his creatures, +they, on their part, can owe nothing to their God. All religion is founded +upon the happiness that men think they have a right to expect from the +Deity, who is supposed to say to them: _Love me, adore me, obey me: and I +will make you happy_. Men, on their part, say to him: _Make us happy, be +faithful to your promises, and we will love you, we will adore you, +and obey your laws_. By neglecting the happiness of his creatures, +distributing his favours according to his caprice, and retracting his +gifts, does not God break the covenant, which serves as the basis of all +religion? Cicero has justly observed, that _if God is not agreeable to +man, he cannot be his God_. Goodness constitutes deity; this goodness can +be manifested to man only by the blessings he enjoys; as soon as he is +unhappy, this goodness disappears, and with it the divinity. An infinite +goodness can be neither limited, partial, nor exclusive. If God be +infinitely good, he owes happiness to all his creatures. The unhappiness +of a single being would suffice to annihilate unbounded goodness. Under an +infinitely good and powerful God, is it possible to conceive that a single +man should suffer? One animal, or mite, that suffers, furnishes invincible +arguments against divine providence and its infinite goodness. + + + + +61. + +According to theology, the afflictions and evils of this life are +chastisements, which guilty men incur from the hand of God. But why are +men guilty? If God is omnipotent, does it cost him more to say: "Let every +thing in the world be in order; let all my subjects be good, innocent, and +fortunate," than to say: "Let every thing exist"? Was it more difficult +for this God to do his work well, than badly? Religion tells us of a +hell; that is, a frightful abode, where, notwithstanding his goodness, +God reserves infinite torments for the majority of men. Thus after having +rendered mortals very unhappy in this world, religion tells them, that God +can render them still more unhappy in another! The theologian gets over +this, by saying, that the goodness of God will then give place to his +justice. But a goodness, which gives place to the most terrible cruelty, +is not an infinite goodness. Besides, can a God, who, after having been +infinitely good, becomes infinitely bad, be regarded as an immutable +being? Can we discern the shadow of clemency or goodness, in a God filled +with implacable fury? + + + + +62. + +Divine justice, as stated by our divines, is undoubtedly a quality very +proper to cherish in us the love of the Divinity. According to the ideas +of modern theology, it is evident, that God has created the majority of +men, with the sole view of putting them in a fair way to incur eternal +punishment. Would it not have been more conformable to goodness, reason, +and equity, to have created only stones or plants, and not to have created +sensible beings; than to have formed men, whose conduct in this world +might subject them to endless punishment in the other? A God perfidious +and malicious enough to create a single man, and then to abandon him to +the danger of being damned, cannot be regarded as a perfect being; but +as an unreasonable, unjust, and ill-natured. Very far from composing +a perfect God, theologians have formed the most imperfect of beings. +According to theological notions, God would resemble a tyrant, who, having +put out the eyes of the greater part of his slaves, should shut them up +in a dungeon, where, for his amusement, he would, incognito, observe their +conduct through a trap-door, in order to punish with rigour all those, +who, while walking about, should hit against each other; but who would +magnificently reward the few whom he had not deprived of sight, in +avoiding to run against their comrades. Such are the ideas, which the +dogma of gratuitous predestination gives us of the divinity! + +Although men are continually repeating that their God is infinitely good; +yet it is evident, that in reality, they can believe nothing of the +kind. How can we love what we do not know? How can we love a being, whose +character is only fit to throw us into inquietude and trouble? How can we +love a being, of whom all that is said tends to render him an object of +utter detestation? + + + + +63. + +Many people make a subtle distinction between true religion and +superstition. They say, that the latter is only a base and inordinate fear +of the Deity; but that the truly religious man has confidence in his God, +and loves him sincerely; whereas, the superstitious man sees in him only +an enemy, has no confidence in him, and represents him to himself as +a distrustful, cruel tyrant, sparing of his benefits, lavish of his +chastisements. But, in reality, does not all religion give us the same +ideas of God? At the same time that we are told, that God is infinitely +good, are we not also told, that he is very easily provoked, that he +grants his favours to a few people only, and that he furiously chastises +those, to whom he has not been pleased to grant favours? + + + + +64. + +If we take our ideas of God from the nature of things, where we find a +mixture of good and evil, this God, just like the good and evil of which +we experience, must naturally appear capricious, inconstant, sometimes +good, and sometimes malevolent; and therefore, instead of exciting our +love, must generate distrust, fear, and uncertainty. There is then no +real difference between natural religion, and the most gloomy and servile +superstition. If the theist sees God only in a favourable light; the bigot +views him in the most hideous light. The folly of the one is cheerful, +that of the other is melancholy; but both are equally delirious. + + + + +65. + +If I draw my ideas of God from theology, he appears to inspire aversion. +Devotees, who tell us, that they sincerely love their God, are either +liars or fools, who see their God only in profile. It is impossible to +love a being, the very idea of whom strikes us with terror, and whose +judgments make us tremble. How can we, without being alarmed, look upon +a God, who is reputed to be barbarous enough to damn us? Let not divines +talk to us of a filial, or respectful fear, mixed with love, which men +ought to have for their God. A son can by no means love his father, when +he knows him to be cruel enough to inflict upon him studied torments for +the least faults he may commit. No man upon earth can have the least spark +of love for a God, who reserves chastisements, infinite in duration and +violence, for ninety-nine hundredths of his children. + + + + +66. + +The inventors of the dogma of eternal hell-torments have made of that God, +whom they call so good, the most detestable of beings. Cruelty in men is +the last act of wickedness. Every sensible mind must revolt at the bare +recital of the torments, inflicted on the greatest criminal; but cruelty +is much more apt to excite indignation, when void of motives. The most +sanguinary tyrants, the Caligulas, the Neros, the Domitians, had, at +least, some motives for tormenting their victims. These motives were, +either their own safety, or the fury of revenge, or the design of +frightening by terrible examples, or perhaps the vanity of making +a display of their power, and the desire of satisfying a barbarous +curiosity. Can a God have any of these motives? In tormenting the victims +of his wrath, he would punish beings, who could neither endanger his +immoveable power, nor disturb his unchangeable felicity. On the other +hand, the punishments of the other life would be useless to the living, +who cannot be witnesses of them. These punishments would be useless to the +damned, since in hell there is no longer room for conversion, and the +time of mercy is past. Whence it follows, that God, in the exercise of +his eternal vengeance, could have no other end than to amuse himself, +and insult the weakness of his creatures. I appeal to the whole human +race;--is there a man who feels cruel enough coolly to torment, I do +not say his fellow-creature, but any sensible being whatever, without +emolument, without profit, without curiosity, without having any thing +to fear? Confess then, O theologians, that, even according to your own +principles, your God is infinitely more malevolent than the worst of men. + +Perhaps you will say, that infinite offences deserve infinite punishments. +I answer, that we cannot offend a God, whose happiness is infinite; that +the offences of finite beings cannot be infinite; that a God, who +is unwilling to be offended, cannot consent that the offences of his +creatures should be eternal; that a God, infinitely good, can neither be +infinitely cruel, nor grant his creatures an infinite duration, solely for +the pleasure of eternal torments. + +Nothing but the most savage barbarity, the most egregious roguery, or the +blindest ambition could have imagined the doctrine of eternal punishments. +If there is a God, whom we can offend or blaspheme, there are not upon +earth greater blasphemers than those, who dare to say, that this same God +is a tyrant, perverse enough to delight, during eternity, in the useless +torments of his feeble creatures. + + + + +67. + +To pretend, that God can be offended at the actions of men, is to +annihilate all the ideas, which divines endeavour to give us, in other +respects, of this being. To say, that man can trouble the order of the +universe; that he can kindle the thunder in the hands of his God; that +he can defeat his projects, is to say, that man is stronger than his God, +that he is the arbiter of his will, that it depends upon him to change +his goodness into cruelty. Theology continually pulls down, with one hand, +what it erects with the other. If all religion is founded upon a God, +who is provoked and appeased, all religion is founded on a palpable +contradiction. + +All religions agree in exalting the wisdom and infinite power of the +Deity. But no sooner do they display his conduct, than we see nothing +but imprudence, want of foresight, weakness and folly. God, it is said, +created the world for himself; and yet, hitherto, he has never been able +to make himself suitably honoured by it. God created men in order to have, +in his dominions, subjects to render him their homage; and yet, we see men +in continual revolt against him. + + + + +68. + +They incessantly extol the divine perfections; and when we demand +proofs of them, they point to his works, in which, they assure us, these +perfections are written in indelible characters. All these works are, +however, imperfect and perishable. Man, who is ever regarded as the +most marvellous work, as the master-piece of the Deity, is full of +imperfections, which render him disagreeable to the eyes of the almighty +Being, who formed him. This surprising work often becomes so revolting and +odious to its author, that he is obliged to throw it into the fire. But, +if the fairest of God's works is imperfect, how can we judge of the +divine perfections? Can a work, with which the author himself is so little +pleased, induce us to admire the ability of its Maker? Man, considered +in a physical sense, is subject to a thousand infirmities, to numberless +evils, and to death. Man, considered in a moral sense, is full of faults; +yet we are unceasingly told, that he is the most beautiful work of the +most perfect of beings. + + + + +69. + +In creating beings more perfect than men, it appears, that heretofore God +has not better succeeded, nor given stronger proofs of his perfection. +Do we not see, in many religions, that angels, have even attempted to +dethrone him? God proposed the happiness of angels and men; yet, he has +never been able to render happy either angels or men;--the pride, malice, +sins, and imperfections of the creatures have always opposed the will of +the perfect Creator. + + + + +70. + +All religion is obviously founded upon this principle, that _God does what +he can, and man what he will_. Every system of religion presents to us +an unequal combat between the Deity on one part, and his creatures on the +other, in which the former never comes off to his honour. Notwithstanding +his omnipotence, he cannot succeed in rendering the works of his hands +such as he would have them. To complete the absurdity, there is a +religion, which pretends, that God himself has died to redeem mankind; and +yet, men are not farther from any thing, than they are from what God would +have them. + + + + +71. + +Nothing is more extravagant, than the part, theology makes the Divinity +act in every country. Did he really exist, we should see in him the most +capricious, and senseless being. We should be compelled to believe, that +God made the world only to be the theatre of his disgraceful wars with +his creatures; that he created angels, men, and demons, only to make +adversaries, against whom he might exercise his power. He renders men free +to offend him, malicious enough to defeat his projects, too obstinate to +submit; and all this merely for the pleasure of being angry, appeased, +reconciled, and of repairing the disorder they have made. Had the Deity at +once formed his creatures such as he would have them, what pains would he +not have spared himself, or, at least, from what embarrassments would he +not have relieved his theologians! + +Every religion represents God as busy only in doing himself evil. He +resembles those empirics, who inflict upon themselves wounds, to have an +opportunity of exhibiting to the public the efficacy of their ointment. +But we see not, that the Deity has hitherto been able radically to cure +himself of the evil, which he suffers from man. + + + + +72. + +God is the author of all; and yet, we are assured that evil does not come +from God. Whence then does it come? From man. But, who made man? God. Evil +then comes from God. If he had not made man as he is, moral evil or sin +would not have existed in the world. The perversity of man is therefore +chargeable to God. If man has power to do evil, or to offend God, we are +forced to infer, that God chooses to be offended; that God, who made man, +has resolved that man shall do evil; otherwise man would be an effect +contrary to the cause, from which he derives his being. + + + + +73. + +Man ascribes to God the faculty of foreseeing, or knowing beforehand +whatever will happen; but this prescience seldom turns to his glory, +nor protects him from the lawful reproaches of man. If God foreknows +the future, must he not have foreseen the fall of his creatures? If he +resolved in his decrees to permit this fall, it is undoubtedly because it +was his will that this fall should take place, otherwise it could not have +happened. If God's foreknowledge of the sins of his creatures had been +necessary or forced, one might suppose, that he has been constrained by +his justice to punish the guilty; but, enjoying the faculty of foreseeing, +and the power of predetermining every thing, did it not depend upon God +not to impose upon himself cruel laws, or, at least, could he not dispense +with creating beings, whom he might be under the necessity of punishing, +and rendering unhappy by a subsequent decree? Of what consequence is it, +whether God has destined men to happiness or misery by an anterior decree, +an effect of his prescience, or by a posterior decree, an effect of +his justice? Does the arrangement of his decrees alter the fate of the +unhappy? Would they not have the same right to complain of a God, who, +being able to omit their creation, has notwithstanding created them, +although he plainly foresaw that his justice would oblige him, sooner or +later, to punish them? + + + + +74. + +"Man," you say, "when he came from the hand of God, was pure, innocent, +and good; but his nature has been corrupted, as a punishment for sin." +If man, when just out of the hands of his God, could sin, his nature was +imperfect. Why did God suffer him to sin, and his nature to be corrupted? +Why did God permit him to be seduced, well knowing that he was too feeble +to resist temptation? Why did God create _satan_, an evil spirit, a +tempter? Why did not God, who wishes so much good to the human race, +annihilate once for all so many evil genii, who are naturally enemies of +our happiness; or rather, why did God create evil spirits, whose victories +and fatal influence over mankind, he must have foreseen? In fine, by what +strange fatality in all religions of the world, has the evil principle +such a decided advantage over the good principle, or the divinity? + + + + +75. + +There is related an instance of simplicity, which does honour to the heart +of an Italian monk. One day, while preaching, this pious man thought +he must announce to his audience, that he had, thank heaven, at last +discovered, by dint of meditation, a sure way of rendering all men happy. +"The devil," said he, "tempts men only to have in hell companions of his +misery. Let us therefore apply to the Pope, who has the keys of heaven +and hell; let us prevail upon him to pray to God, at the head of the whole +church, to consent to a reconciliation with the devil, to restore him to +favour, to reinstate him in his former rank, which cannot fail to put an +end to his malicious projects against mankind." Perhaps the honest monk +did not see, that the devil is at least as useful as God to the ministers +of religion. They have too much interest in their dissensions, to be +instrumental in an accommodation between two enemies, upon whose combats +their own existence and revenues depend. Let men cease to be tempted +and to sin, and the ministry of priests will be useless. Manicheism is +evidently the hinge of every religion; but unhappily, the devil, invented +to clear the deity from the suspicion of malice, proves to us, every +moment, the impotence or unskilfulness of his celestial adversary. + + + + +76. + +The nature of man, it is said, was necessarily liable to corruption. God +could not communicate to him _impeccability_, which is an inalienable +attribute of his divine perfection. But if God could not make man +impeccable, why did he give himself the pains to make man, whose nature +must necessarily be corrupted, and who must consequently offend God? On +the other hand, if God himself could not make human nature impeccable, by +what right does he punish men for not being impeccable? It can be only +by the right of the strongest; but the right of the strongest is called +violence, and violence cannot be compatible with the justest of beings. +God would be supremely unjust, should he punish men for not sharing with +him his divine perfections, or for not being able to be gods like him. + +Could not God, at least, have communicated to all men that kind of +perfection, of which their nature is susceptible? If some men are good, +or render themselves agreeable to their God, why has not that God done the +same favour, or given the same dispositions to all beings of our species? +Why does the number of the wicked so much exceed the number of the good? +Why, for one friend, has God ten thousand enemies, in a world, which it +depended entirely upon him to people with honest men? If it be true, that, +in heaven, God designs to form a court of saints, of elect, or of men who +shall have lived upon earth conformably to his views, would he not have +had a more numerous, brilliant, and honourable assembly, had he composed +it of all men, to whom, in creating them, he could grant the degree of +goodness, necessary to attain eternal happiness? Finally, would it not +have been shorter not to have made man, than to have created him a being +full of faults, rebellious to his creator, perpetually exposed to cause +his own destruction by a fatal abuse of his liberty? + +Instead of creating men, a perfect God ought to have created only angels +very docile and submissive. Angels, it is said, are free; some have +sinned; but, at any rate, all have not abused their liberty by revolting +against their master. Could not God have created only angels of the good +kind? If God has created angels, who have not sinned, could he not have +created impeccable men, or men who should never abuse their liberty? If +the elect are incapable of sinning in heaven, could not God have made +impeccable men upon earth? + + + + +77. + +Divines never fail to persuade us, that the enormous distance which +separates God and man, necessarily renders the conduct of God a mystery +to us, and that we have no right to interrogate our master. Is this answer +satisfactory? Since my eternal happiness is at stake, have I not a right +to examine the conduct of God himself? It is only in hope of happiness +that men submit to the authority of a God. A despot, to whom men submit +only through fear, a master, whom they cannot interrogate, a sovereign +totally inaccessible, can never merit the homage of intelligent beings. +If the conduct of God is a mystery, it is not made for us. Man can neither +adore, admire, respect, nor imitate conduct, in which every thing is +inconceivable, or, of which he can often form only revolting ideas; unless +it is pretended, that we ought to adore every thing of which we are forced +to be ignorant, and that every thing, which we do not know, becomes for +that reason an object of admiration. Divines! You never cease telling us, +that the designs of God are impenetrable; that _his ways are not our +ways, nor his thoughts our thoughts_; that it is absurd to complain of +his administration, of the motives and springs of which we are totally +ignorant; that it is presumption to tax his judgments with injustice, +because we cannot comprehend them. But when you speak in this strain, do +you not perceive, that you destroy with your own hands all your profound +systems, whose only end is to explain to us the ways of the divinity, +which, you say, are impenetrable? Have you penetrated his judgments, his +ways, his designs? You dare not assert it, and though you reason about +them without end, you do not comprehend them any more than we do. If, by +chance, you know the plan of God, which you wish us to admire, while +most people find it so little worthy of a just, good, intelligent, and +reasonable being, no longer say, this plan is impenetrable. If you are as +ignorant of it as we are, have some indulgence for those who ingenuously +confess, they comprehend nothing in it, or that they see in it nothing +divine. Cease to persecute for opinions, of which you understand nothing +yourselves; cease to defame each other for dreams and conjectures, which +every thing seems to contradict. Talk to us of things intelligible and +really useful to men; and no longer talk to us of the impenetrable ways of +God, about which you only stammer and contradict yourselves. + +By continually speaking of the immense depths of divine wisdom, forbidding +us to sound them, saying it is insolence to cite God before the tribunal +of our feeble reason, making it a crime to judge our master, divines +teach us nothing but the embarrassment they are in, when it is required to +account for the conduct of a God, whose conduct they think marvellous only +because they are utterly incapable of comprehending it themselves. + + + + +78. + +Physical evil is commonly regarded as a punishment for sin. Diseases, +famines, wars, earthquakes, are means which God uses to chastise wicked +men. Thus, they make no scruple of attributing these evils to the severity +of a just and good God. But, do not these scourges fall indiscriminately +upon the good and bad, upon the impious and devout, upon the innocent and +guilty? How, in this proceeding, would they have us admire the justice +and goodness of a being, the idea of whom seems comforting to so many +wretches, whose brain must undoubtedly be disordered by their misfortunes, +since they forget, that their God is the arbiter, the sole disposer of the +events of this world. This being the case, ought they not to impute their +sufferings to him, into whose arms they fly for comfort? Unfortunate +father! Thou consolest thyself in the bosom of Providence, for the loss of +a dear child, or beloved wife, who made thy happiness. Alas! Dost thou not +see, that thy God has killed them? Thy God has rendered thee miserable, +and thou desirest thy God to comfort thee for the dreadful afflictions he +has sent thee! + +The chimerical or supernatural notions of theology have so succeeded in +destroying, in the minds of men, the most simple, dear, and natural ideas, +that the devout, unable to accuse God of malice, accustom themselves to +regard the several strokes of fate as indubitable proofs of celestial +goodness. When in affliction, they are ordered to believe that God loves +them, that God visits them, that God wishes to try them. Thus religion has +attained the art of converting evil into good! A profane person said with +reason--_If God Almighty thus treats those whom he loves, I earnestly +beseech him never to think of me_. + +Men must have received very gloomy and cruel ideas of their God, who is +called so good, to believe that the most dreadful calamities and piercing +afflictions are marks of his favour! Would an evil genius, a demon, +be more ingenious in tormenting his enemies, than the God of goodness +sometimes is, who so often exercises his severity upon his dearest +friends? + + + + +79. + +What shall we say of a father, who, we are assured, watches without +intermission over the preservation and happiness of his weak and +short-sighted children, and who yet leaves them at liberty to wander at +random among rocks, precipices, and waters; who rarely hinders them from +following their inordinate appetites; who permits them to handle, without +precaution, murderous arms, at the risk of their life? What should we +think of the same father, if, instead of imputing to himself the evil that +happens to his poor children, he should punish them for their wanderings +in the most cruel manner? We should say, with reason, that this father is +a madman, who unites injustice to folly. A God, who punishes faults, which +he could have prevented, is a being deficient in wisdom, goodness, and +equity. A foreseeing God would prevent evil, and thereby avoid having to +punish it. A good God would not punish weaknesses, which he knew to be +inherent in human nature. A just God, if he made man, would not punish +him for not being made strong enough to resist his desires. _To punish +weakness is the most unjust tyranny._ Is it not calumniating a just God, +to say, that he punishes men for their faults, even in the present life? +How could he punish beings, whom it belonged to him alone to reform, and +who, while they have not _grace_, cannot act otherwise than they do? + +According to the principles of theologians themselves, man, in his present +state of corruption, can do nothing but evil, since, without divine grace, +he is never able to do good. Now, if the nature of man, left to itself, +or destitute of divine aid, necessarily determines him to evil, or renders +him incapable of good, what becomes of the free-will of man? According to +such principles, man can neither merit nor demerit. By rewarding man for +the good he does, God would only reward himself; by punishing man for the +evil he does, God would punish him for not giving him grace, without which +he could not possibly do better. + + + + +80. + +Theologians repeatedly tell us, that man is free, while all their +principles conspire to destroy his liberty. By endeavouring to justify +the Divinity, they in reality accuse him of the blackest injustice. They +suppose, that without grace, man is necessitated to do evil. They affirm, +that God will punish him, because God has not given him grace to do good! + +Little reflection will suffice to convince us, that man is necessitated +in all his actions, that his free will is a chimera, even in the system of +theologians. Does it depend upon man to be born of such or such parents? +Does it depend upon man to imbibe or not to imbibe the opinions of his +parents or instructors? If I had been born of idolatrous or Mahometan +parents, would it have depended upon me to become a Christian? Yet, +divines gravely assure us, that a just God will damn without pity all +those, to whom he has not given grace to know the Christian religion! + +Man's birth is wholly independent of his choice. He is not asked whether +he is willing, or not, to come into the world. Nature does not consult +him upon the country and parents she gives him. His acquired ideas, his +opinions, his notions true or false, are necessary fruits of the education +which he has received, and of which he has not been the director. His +passions and desires are necessary consequences of the temperament given +him by nature. During his whole life, his volitions and actions are +determined by his connections, habits, occupations, pleasures, and +conversations; by the thoughts, that are involuntarily presented to his +mind; in a word, by a multitude of events and accidents, which it is out +of his power to foresee or prevent. Incapable of looking into futurity, +he knows not what he will do. From the instant of his birth to that of +his death, he is never free. You will say, that he wills, deliberates, +chooses, determines; and you will hence conclude, that his actions are +free. It is true, that man wills, but he is not master of his will or +his desires; he can desire and will only what he judges advantageous to +himself; he can neither love pain, nor detest pleasure. It will be +said, that he sometimes prefers pain to pleasure; but then he prefers +a momentary pain with a view of procuring a greater and more durable +pleasure. In this case, the prospect of a greater good necessarily +determines him to forego a less considerable good. + +The lover does not give his mistress the features which captivate him; he +is not then master of loving, or not loving the object of his tenderness; +he is not master of his imagination or temperament. Whence it evidently +follows, that man is not master of his volitions and desires. "But man," +you will say, "can resist his desires; therefore he is free." Man resists +his desires, when the motives, which divert him from an object, are +stronger than those, which incline him towards it; but then his resistance +is necessary. A man, whose fear of dishonour or punishment is greater than +his love of money, necessarily resists the desire of stealing. + +"Are we not free, when we deliberate?" But, are we masters of knowing or +not knowing, of being in doubt or certainty? Deliberation is a necessary +effect of our uncertainty respecting the consequences of our actions. When +we are sure, or think we are sure, of these consequences, we necessarily +decide, and we then act necessarily according to our true or false +judgment. Our judgments, true or false, are not free; they are necessarily +determined by the ideas, we have received, or which our minds have formed. + +Man is not free in his choice; he is evidently necessitated to choose what +he judges most useful and agreeable. Neither is he free, when he suspends +his choice; he is forced to suspend it until he knows, or thinks he knows, +the qualities of the objects presented to him, or, until he has weighed +the consequences of his actions. "Man," you will say, "often decides in +favour of actions, which he knows must be detrimental to himself; man +sometimes kills himself; therefore he is free." I deny it. Is man master +of reasoning well or ill? Do not his reason and wisdom depend upon the +opinions he has formed, or upon the conformation of his machine? As +neither one nor the other depends upon his will, they are no proof of +liberty. "If I lay a wager, that I shall do, or not do a thing, am I +not free? Does it not depend upon me to do it or not?" No, I answer; the +desire of winning the wager will necessarily determine you to do, or not +to do the thing in question. "But, supposing I consent to lose the wager?" +Then the desire of proving to me, that you are free, will have become a +stronger motive than the desire of winning the wager; and this motive +will have necessarily determined you to do, or not to do, the thing in +question. + +"But," you will say, "I feel free." This is an illusion, that may be +compared to that of the fly in the fable, who, lighting upon the pole of +a heavy carriage, applauded himself for directing its course. Man, who +thinks himself free, is a fly, who imagines he has power to move the +universe, while he is himself unknowingly carried along by it. + +The inward persuasion that we are free to do, or not to do a thing, is but +a mere illusion. If we trace the true principle of our actions, we shall +find, that they are always necessary consequences of our volitions and +desires, which are never in our power. You think yourself free, because +you do what you will; but are you free to will, or not to will; to desire, +or not to desire? Are not your volitions and desires necessarily excited +by objects or qualities totally independent of you? + + + + +81. + +"If the actions of men are necessary, if men are not free, by what right +does society punish criminals? Is it not very unjust to chastise beings, +who could not act otherwise than they have done?" If the wicked act +necessarily according to the impulses of their evil nature, society, +in punishing them, acts necessarily by the desire of self-preservation. +Certain objects necessarily produce in us the sensation of pain; our +nature then forces us against them, and avert them from us. A tiger, +pressed by hunger, springs upon the man, whom he wishes to devour; but +this man is not master of his fear, and necessarily seeks means to destroy +the tiger. + + + + +82. + +"If every thing be necessary, the errors, opinions, and ideas of men +are fatal; and, if so, how or why should we attempt to reform them?" The +errors of men are necessary consequences of ignorance. Their ignorance, +prejudice, and credulity are necessary consequences of their inexperience, +negligence, and want of reflection, in the same manner as delirium or +lethargy are necessary effects of certain diseases. Truth, experience, +reflection, and reason, are remedies calculated to cure ignorance, +fanaticism and follies. But, you will ask, why does not truth produce this +effect upon many disordered minds? It is because some diseases resist all +remedies; because it is impossible to cure obstinate patients, who refuse +the remedies presented to them; because the interest of some men, and the +folly of others, necessarily oppose the admission of truth. + +A cause produces its effect only when its action is not interrupted by +stronger causes, which then weakens or render useless, the action of the +former. It is impossible that the best arguments should be adopted by men, +who are interested in error, prejudiced in its favour, and who decline all +reflection; but truth must necessarily undeceive honest minds, who seek +her sincerely. Truth is a cause; it necessarily produces its effects, when +its impulse is not intercepted by causes, which suspend its effects. + + + + +83. + +"To deprive man of his free will," it is said, "makes him a mere machine, +an automaton. Without liberty, he will no longer have either merit or +virtue." What is merit in man? It is a manner of acting, which renders +him estimable in the eyes of his fellow-beings. What is virtue? It is a +disposition, which inclines us to do good to others. What can there be +contemptible in machines, or automatons, capable of producing effects so +desirable? Marcus Aurelius was useful to the vast Roman Empire. By what +right would a machine despise a machine, whose springs facilitate its +action? Good men are springs, which second society in its tendency to +happiness; the wicked are ill-formed springs, which disturb the order, +progress, and harmony of society. If, for its own utility, society +cherishes and rewards the good, it also harasses and destroys the wicked, +as useless or hurtful. + + + + +84. + +The world is a necessary agent. All the beings, that compose it, are +united to each other, and cannot act otherwise than they do, so long as +they are moved by the same causes, and endued with the same properties. +When they lose properties, they will necessarily act in a different way. +God himself, admitting his existence, cannot be considered a free +agent. If there existed a God, his manner of acting would necessarily +be determined by the properties inherent in his nature; nothing would be +capable of arresting or altering his will. This being granted, neither our +actions, prayers, nor sacrifices could suspend, or change his invariable +conduct and immutable designs; whence we are forced to infer, that all +religion would be useless. + + + + +85. + +Were not divines in perpetual contradiction with themselves, they would +see, that, according to their hypothesis, man cannot be reputed free an +instant. Do they not suppose man continually dependent on his God? Are we +free, when we cannot exist and be preserved without God, and when we cease +to exist at the pleasure of his supreme will? If God has made man out of +nothing; if his preservation is a continued creation; if God cannot, an +instant, lose sight of his creature; if whatever happens to him, is an +effect of the divine will; if man can do nothing of himself; if all the +events, which he experiences, are effects of the divine decrees; if he +does no good without grace from on high, how can they maintain, that a man +enjoys a moment's liberty? If God did not preserve him in the moment +of sin, how could man sin? If God then preserves him, God forces him to +exist, that he may sin. + + + + +86. + +The Divinity is frequently compared to a king, whose revolted subjects are +the greater part of mankind; and it is said, he has a right to reward the +subjects who remain faithful to him, and to punish the rebellious. This +comparison is not just in any of its parts. God presides over a machine, +every spring of which he has created. These springs act agreeable to the +manner, in which God has formed them; he ought to impute it to his own +unskilfulness, if these springs do not contribute to the harmony of the +machine, into which it was his will to insert them. God is a created king, +who has created to himself subjects of every description; who has formed +them according to his own pleasure whose will can never find resistance. +If God has rebellious subjects in his empire, it is because God has +resolved to have rebellious subjects. If the sins of men disturb the order +of the world, it is because it is the will of God that this order should +be disturbed. + +Nobody dares to call in question the divine justice; yet, under the +government of a just God, we see nothing but acts of injustice and +violence. Force decides the fate of nations, equity seems banished from +the earth; a few men sport, unpunished, with the peace, property, liberty, +and life of others. All is disorder in a world governed by a God who is +said to be infinitely displeased with disorder. + + + + +87. + +Although men are for ever admiring the wisdom, goodness, justice, and +beautiful order of Providence, they are, in reality, never satisfied with +it. Do not the prayers, continually addressed to heaven, shew, that men +are by no means satisfied with the divine dispensations? To pray to God +for a favour, shews diffidence of his watchful care; to pray to him to +avert or put an end to an evil, is to endeavour to obstruct the course +of his justice; to implore the assistance of God in our calamities, is to +address the author himself of these calamities, to represent to him, that +he ought, for our sake, to rectify his plan, which does not accord with +our interest. + +The Optimist, or he who maintains that _all is well_, and who incessantly +cries that we live in _the best world possible_, to be consistent, should +never pray; neither ought he to expect another world, where man will be +happier. Can there be a better world than _the best world possible_? Some +theologians have treated the Optimists as impious, for having intimated +that God could not produce a better world, than that in which we live. +According to these doctors, it is to limit the power of God, and to +offer him insult. But do not these divines see, that it shews much less +indignity to God, to assert that he has done his best in producing this +world, than to say, that, being able to produce a better, he has had +malice enough to produce a very bad one? If the Optimist, by his system, +detracts from the divine power, the theologian, who treats him as a +blasphemer, is himself a blasphemer, who offends the goodness of God in +espousing the cause of his omnipotence. + + + + +88. + +When we complain of the evils, of which our world is the theatre, we are +referred to the other world, where it is said, God will make reparation +for all the iniquity and misery, which, for a time, he permits here below. +But if God, suffering his eternal justice to remain at rest for a long +time, could consent to evil during the whole continuance of our present +world, what assurance have we, that, during the continuance of another +world, divine justice will not, in like manner, sleep over the misery of +its inhabitants? + +The divines console us for our sufferings by saying, that God is patient, +and that his justice, though often slow, is not the less sure. But do +they not see, that patience is incompatible with a just, immutable, and +omnipotent being? Can God then permit injustice, even for an instant? To +temporize with a known evil, announces either weakness, uncertainty, +or collusion. To tolerate evil, when one has power to prevent it, is to +consent to the commission of evil. + + + + +89. + +Divines every where exclaim, that God is infinitely just; but that _his +justice is not the justice of man_. Of what kind or nature then is +this divine justice? What idea can I form of a justice, which so often +resembles injustice? Is it not to confound all ideas of just and unjust, +to say, that what is equitable in God is iniquitous in his creatures? +How can we receive for our model a being, whose divine perfections are +precisely the reverse of human? + +"God," it is said, "is sovereign arbiter of our destinies. His supreme +power, which nothing can limit, justly permits him to do with the works +of his own hands according to his good pleasure. A worm, like man, has no +right even to complain." This arrogant style is evidently borrowed from +the language, used by the ministers of tyrants, when they stop the mouths +of those who suffer from their violences. It cannot then be the language +of the ministers of a God, whose equity is highly extolled; it is not made +to be imposed upon a being, who reasons. Ministers of a just God! I will +inform you then, that the greatest power cannot confer upon your God +himself the right of being unjust even to the vilest of his creatures. A +despot is not a God. A God, who arrogates to himself the right of doing +evil, is a tyrant; a tyrant is not a model for men; he must be an object +execrable to their eyes. + +Is it not indeed strange, that in order to justify the Divinity, they make +him every moment the most unjust of beings! As soon as we complain of his +conduct, they think to silence us by alleging, that _God is master_; which +signifies, that God, being the strongest, is not bound by ordinary rules. +But the right of the strongest is the violation of all rights. It seems +right only to the eyes of a savage conqueror, who in the heat of his fury +imagines, that he may do whatever he pleases with the unfortunate victims, +whom he has conquered. This barbarous right can appear legitimate only to +slaves blind enough to believe that everything is lawful to tyrants whom +they feel too weak to resist. + +In the greatest calamities, do not devout persons, through a ridiculous +simplicity, or rather a sensible contradiction in terms, exclaim, that +_the Almighty is master_. Thus, inconsistent reasoners, believe, that the +_Almighty_ (a Being, one of whose first attributes is goodness,) sends you +pestilence, war, and famine! You believe that the _Almighty_, this good +being, has the will and right to inflict the greatest evils, you can bear! +Cease, at least, to call your God _good_, when he does you evil; say not, +that he is just, say that he is the strongest, and that it is impossible +for you to ward off the blows of his caprice. + +_God_, say you, _chastises only for our good_. But what real good can +result to a people from being exterminated by the plague, ravaged by wars, +corrupted by the examples of perverse rulers, continually crushed under +the iron sceptre of a succession of merciless tyrants, annihilated by the +scourges of a bad government, whose destructive effects are often felt for +ages? If chastisements are good, then they cannot have too much of a good +thing! _The eyes of faith_ must be strange eyes, if with them they see +advantages in the most dreadful calamities, in the vices and follies with +which our species are afflicted. + + + + +90. + +What strange ideas of divine justice must Christians have, who are taught +to believe, that their God, in view of reconciling to himself the human +race, guilty, though unconscious, of the sin of their fathers, has put to +death his own son, who was innocent and incapable of sinning? What should +we say of a king, whose subjects should revolt, and who, to appease +himself, should find no other expedient than to put to death the heir of +his crown, who had not participated in the general rebellion? "It is," +the Christian will say, "through goodness to his subjects, unable of +themselves to satisfy divine justice, that God has consented to the cruel +death of his son." But the goodness of a father to strangers does not +give him the right of being unjust and barbarous to his own son. All +the qualities, which theology ascribes to God, reciprocally destroy one +another. The exercise of one of his perfections is always at the expense +of the exercise of another. + +Has the Jew more rational ideas of divine justice than the Christian? +The pride of a king kindles the anger of heaven; _Jehovah_ causes the +pestilence to descend upon his innocent people; seventy thousand subjects +are exterminated to expiate the fault of a monarch, whom the goodness of +God resolved to spare. + + + + +91. + +Notwithstanding the various acts of injustice, with which all religions +delight to blacken the Divinity, men cannot consent to accuse him of +iniquity. They fear, that, like the tyrants of this world, truth will +offend him, and redouble upon them the weight of his malice and tyranny. +They hearken therefore to their priests, who tell them, that their God +is a tender father; that this God is an equitable monarch whose object in +this world is to assure himself of the love, obedience and respect of +his subjects; who gives them liberty of acting only to afford them +an opportunity of meriting his favours, and of acquiring an eternal +happiness, which he does not owe them. By what signs can men discover +the tenderness of a father, who has given life to the greater part of his +children merely to drag out upon the earth a painful, restless, bitter +existence? Is there a more unfortunate present, than that pretended +liberty, which, we are told, men are very liable to abuse, and thereby to +incur eternal misery? + + + + +92. + +By calling mortals to life, what a cruel and dangerous part has not the +Deity forced them to act? Thrown into the world without their consent, +provided with a temperament of which they are not masters, animated by +passions and desires inherent in their nature, exposed to snares which +they have not power to escape, hurried away by events which they could not +foresee or prevent, unhappy mortals are compelled to run a career, which +may lead them to punishments horrible in duration and violence. + +Travellers inform us, that, in Asia, a Sultan reigned, full of fantastical +ideas, and very absolute in his whims. By a strange madness, this prince +spent his time seated at a table, upon which were placed three dice and a +dice-box. One end of the table was covered with pieces of silver, designed +to excite the avarice of his courtiers and people. He, knowing the +foible of his subjects, addresses them as follows: _Slaves, I wish your +happiness. My goodness proposes to enrich you, and make you all happy. Do +you see these treasures? Well, they are for you; strive to gain them; let +each, in his turn, take the box and dice; whoever has the fortune to throw +sixes, shall be master of the treasure. But, I forewarn you, that he who +has not the happiness to throw the number required, shall be precipitated +for ever into a dark dungeon, where my justice demands that he be burned +with a slow fire._ Upon this discourse of the monarch, the company look at +each other affrighted. No one wishes to expose himself to so dangerous +a chance. _What!_ says the enraged Sultan, _does no one offer to play? I +tell you then you must; My glory requires that you should play. Play then; +obey without replying._ It is well to observe, that the dice of the despot +are so prepared, that out of a hundred thousand throws, there is but one, +which can gain the number required. Thus the generous monarch has the +pleasure of seeing his prison well filled, and his riches seldom ravished +from him. Mortals! this SULTAN is your GOD; his TREASURE IS HEAVEN; his +DUNGEON IS HELL, and it is you who hold the DICE! + + + + +93. + +Divines repeatedly assure us, that we owe Providence infinite gratitude +for the numberless blessings it bestows. They loudly extol the happiness +of existence. But, alas! how many mortals are truly satisfied with their +mode of existence? If life has sweets, with how much bitterness is it not +mixed? Does not a single chagrin often suffice suddenly to poison the most +peaceable and fortunate life? Are there many, who, if it were in their +power would begin again, at the same price, the painful career, in which, +without their consent, destiny has placed them? + +They say, that existence is a great blessing. But is not this existence +continually troubled with fears, and maladies, often cruel and little +deserved? May not this existence, threatened on so many sides, be torn +from us any moment? Where is the man, who has not been deprived of a dear +wife, beloved child, or consoling friend, whose loss every moment intrudes +upon his thoughts? There are few, who have not been forced to drink of the +cup of misfortune; there are few, who have not desired their end. Finally, +it did not depend upon us to exist or not to exist. Should the bird then +be very grateful to the fowler for taking him in his net and confining him +in his cage for his diversion? + + + + +94. + +Notwithstanding the infirmities and misery which man is forced to undergo, +he has, nevertheless, the folly to think himself the favourite of his God, +the object of all his cares, the sole end of all his works. He imagines, +that the whole universe is made for him; he arrogantly calls himself the +_king of nature_, and values himself far above other animals. Mortal! upon +what canst thou found thy haughty pretensions? It is, sayest thou, upon +thy soul, upon thy reason, upon the sublime faculties, which enable thee +to exercise an absolute empire over the beings, which surround thee. But, +weak sovereign of the world; art thou sure, one moment, of the continuance +of thy reign? Do not the smallest atoms of matter, which thou despisest, +suffice to tear thee from thy throne, and deprive thee of life? Finally, +does not the king of animals at last become the food of worms? Thou +speakest of thy soul! But dost thou know what a soul is? Dost thou not +see, that this soul is only the assemblage of thy organs, from which +results life? Wouldst thou then refuse a soul to other animals, who live, +think, judge, and compare, like thee; who seek pleasure, and avoid pain, +like thee; and who often have organs, which serve them better than thine? +Thou boastest of thy intellectual faculties; but do these faculties, of +which thou art so proud, make thee happier than other animals? Dost +thou often make use of that reason, in which thou gloriest, and to +which religion commands thee not to listen? Are those brutes, which thou +disdainest, because they are less strong or less cunning than thou art, +subject to mental pains, to a thousand frivolous passions, to a thousand +imaginary wants, to which thou art a continual prey? Are they, like thee, +tormented by the past, alarmed at the future? Confined solely to the +present, does not what you call their _instinct_, and what I call their +_intelligence_, suffice to preserve and defend them, and to supply them +with all they want? Does not this instinct, of which thou speakest with +contempt, often serve them better than thy wonderful faculties? Is not +their peaceful ignorance more advantageous to them, than those extravagant +meditations and worthless researches, which render thee unhappy, and +for which thy zeal urges thee even to massacre the beings of thy noble +species? Finally, have these beasts, like so many mortals, a troubled +imagination, which makes them fear, not only death, but likewise eternal +torments? + +Augustus, hearing that Herod, king of Judea, had put his sons to death, +exclaimed: _It is much better to be Herod's hog, than his son_. As much +may be said of man. This dear child of Providence runs far greater risks +than all other animals; having suffered much in this world, does he not +imagine, that he is in danger of suffering eternally in another? + + + + +95. + +Where is the precise line of distinction between man and the animals whom +he calls brutes? In what does he differ essentially from beasts? It is, +we are told, by his intelligence, by the faculties of his mind, and by his +reason, that man appears superior to all other animals, who, in all their +actions, move only by physical impulses, in which reason has no share. +But finally, brutes, having fewer wants than man, easily do without his +intellectual faculties, which would be perfectly useless in their mode of +existence. Their instinct is sufficient; while all the faculties of man +scarcely suffice to render his existence supportable, and to satisfy the +wants, which his imagination and his prejudices multiply to his torment. + +Brutes are not influenced by the same objects, as man; they have not the +same wants, desires, nor fancies; and they very soon arrive to maturity, +while the mind of man seldom attains to the full enjoyment and free +exercise of its faculties and to such a use of them, as is conducive to +his happiness. + + + + +96. + +We are assured, that the human soul is a simple substance. It should +then be the same in every individual, each having the same intellectual +faculties; yet this is not the case. Men differ as much in the qualities +of the mind, as in the features of the face. There are human beings +as different from one another, as man is from a horse or a dog. What +conformity or resemblance do we find between some men? What an infinite +distance is there between the genius of a Locke or a Newton, and that of a +peasant, Hottentot, or Laplander? + +Man differs from other animals only in his organization, which enables +him to produce effects, of which animals are not capable. The variety, +observable in the organs of individuals of the human species suffices to +explain the differences in what is called their intellectual faculties. +More or less delicacy in these organs, warmth in the blood, mobility +in the fluids, flexibility or stiffness in the fibres and nerves, must +necessarily produce the infinite diversity, which we observe in the minds +of men. It is by exercise, habit and education, that the mind is +unfolded and becomes superior to that of others. Man, without culture and +experience, is as void of reason and industry, as the brute. A stupid man +is one, whose organs move with difficulty, whose brain does not easily +vibrate, whose blood circulates slowly. A man of genius is he, whose +organs are flexible, whose sensations are quick, whose brain vibrates +with celerity. A learned man is he, whose organs and brain have been long +exercised upon objects to which he is devoted. + +Without culture, experience, or reason, is not man more contemptible and +worthy of hatred, than the vilest insects or most ferocious beasts? Is +there in nature a more detestable being, than a Tiberius, a Nero, or a +Caligula? Have those destroyers of the human race, known by the name of +conquerors, more estimable souls than bears, lions, or panthers? Are there +animals in the world more detestable than tyrants? + + + + +97. + +The superiority which man so gratuitously arrogates to himself over other +animals, soon vanishes in the light of reason, when we reflect on human +extravagances. How many animals shew more mildness, reflection, and +reason, than the animal, who calls himself reasonable above all others? +Are there among men, so often enslaved and oppressed, societies as +well constituted as those of the ants, bees, or beavers? Do we ever +see ferocious beasts of the same species mangle and destroy one another +without profit? Do we ever see religious wars among them? The cruelty +of beasts towards other species arises from hunger, the necessity of +nourishment; the cruelty of man towards man arises only from the vanity of +his masters and the folly of his impertinent prejudices. Speculative men, +who endeavour to make us believe, that all in the universe was made for +man, are much embarrassed, when we ask, how so many hurtful animals can +contribute to the happiness of man? What known advantage results to +the friend of the gods, from being bitten by a viper, stung by a gnat, +devoured by vermin, torn in pieces by a tiger, etc.? Would not all these +animals reason as justly as our theologians, should they pretend that man +was made for them? + + + + +98. + +AN EASTERN TALE. + +At some distance from Bagdad, a hermit, renowned for his sanctity, passed +his days in an agreeable solitude. The neighbouring inhabitants, to obtain +an interest in his prayers, daily flocked to his hermitage, to carry him +provisions and presents. The holy man, without ceasing, gave thanks to God +for the blessings, with which providence loaded him. "O Allah!" said he, +"how ineffable is thy love to thy servants. What have I done to merit the +favours, that I receive from thy bounty? O Monarch of the skies! O Father +of nature! what praises could worthily celebrate thy munificence, and thy +paternal care! O Allah! how great is thy goodness to the children of men!" +Penetrated with gratitude, the hermit made a vow to undertake, for the +seventh time, a pilgrimage to Mecca. The war which then raged between the +Persians and Turks, could not induce him to defer his pious enterprise. +Full of confidence in God, he sets out under the inviolable safeguard of +a religious habit. He passes through the hostile troops without any +obstacle; far from being molested, he receives, at every step, marks of +veneration from the soldiers of the two parties. At length, borne down +with fatigue, he is obliged to seek refuge against the rays of a scorching +sun; he rests under the cool shade of a group of palm-trees. In this +solitary place, the man of God finds not only an enchanting retreat, but +a delicious repast. He has only to put forth his hand to gather dates +and other pleasant fruits; a brook affords him the means of quenching his +thirst. A green turf invites him to sleep; upon waking he performs the +sacred ablution, and exclaims in a transport of joy: "O Allah! how great +is thy goodness to the children of men!" After this perfect refreshment, +the saint, full of strength and gaiety, pursues his way; it leads him +across a smiling country, which presents to his eyes flowery hillocks, +enamelled meadows, and trees loaded with fruit. Affected by this sight, he +ceases not to adore the rich and liberal hand of providence, which appears +every where providing for the happiness of the human race. Going a little +farther, the mountains are pretty difficult to pass; but having once +arrived at the summit, a hideous spectacle suddenly appears to his view. +His soul is filled with horror. He discovers a vast plain laid waste +with fire and sword; he beholds it covered with hundreds of carcases, +the deplorable remains of a bloody battle, lately fought upon this field. +Eagles, vultures, ravens and wolves were greedily devouring the dead +bodies with which the ground was covered. This sight plunges our pilgrim +into a gloomy meditation. Heaven, by special favour, had enabled him to +understand the language of beasts. He heard a wolf, gorged with human +flesh, cry out in the excess of his joy: "O Allah! how great is thy +goodness to the children of wolves. Thy provident wisdom takes care to +craze the minds of these detestable men, who are so dangerous to our +species. By an effect of thy Providence, which watches over thy creatures, +these destroyers cut one another's throats, and furnish us with sumptuous +meals. O Allah! how great is thy goodness to the children of wolves!" + + + + +99. + +A heated imagination sees in the universe only the blessings of heaven; +a calmer mind finds in it both good and evil. "I exist," say you; but is +this existence always a good? "Behold," you say, "that sun, which lights; +this earth, which for you is covered with crops and verdure; these +flowers, which bloom to regale your senses; these trees, which bend under +the weight of delicious fruits; these pure waters, which run only to +quench your thirst; those seas, which embrace the universe to facilitate +your commerce; these animals, which a foreseeing nature provides for your +use." Yes; I see all these things, and I enjoy them. But in many climates, +this beautiful sun is almost always hidden; in others, its excessive heat +torments, creates storms, produces frightful diseases, and parches the +fields; the pastures are without verdure, the trees without fruit, the +crops are scorched, the springs are dried up; I can only with difficulty +subsist, and now complain of the cruelties of nature, which to you +always appears so beneficent. If these seas bring me spices, and useless +commodities, do they not destroy numberless mortals, who are foolish +enough to seek them? The vanity of man persuades him, that he is the +sole center of the universe; he creates for himself a world and a God; +he thinks himself of sufficient consequence to derange nature at his +pleasure. But, concerning other animals, he reasons like an atheist. Does +he not imagine, that the individuals different from his own are automatons +unworthy of the blessings of universal providence, and that brutes cannot +be objects of his justice or goodness? Mortals regard the happy or unhappy +events, health or sickness, life or death, plenty or want, as rewards or +punishments for the right use or abuse of the liberty, with which they +erroneously imagine themselves endowed. Do they reason in the same manner +concerning the brutes? No. Although they see them, under a just God, enjoy +and suffer, equally subject to health and sickness, live and die, like +themselves, it never occurs to them to ask by what crime, these beasts +could have incurred the displeasure of their Creator? Have not men, +blinded by their religious prejudices, in order to free themselves from +embarrassment, carried their folly so far as to pretend that beasts have +no feeling? + +Will men never renounce their foolish pretensions? Will they never +acknowledge that nature is not made for them? Will they never see that +nature has placed equality among all beings she has produced? Will they +never perceive that all organized beings are equally made to be born and +die, enjoy and suffer? Finally, far from having any cause to be puffed +up with their mental faculties, are they not forced to grant, that these +faculties often make them more unhappy than beasts, in which we find +neither opinions, prejudices, vanities, nor follies, which every moment +decide the welfare of man? + + + + +100. + +The superiority which men arrogate over other animals, is chiefly founded +upon their opinion, that they have the exclusive possession of an immortal +soul. But ask them what this soul is, and they are puzzled. They will say, +it is an unknown substance--a secret power distinct from their bodies--a +spirit, of which they have no idea. Ask them how this spirit, which they +suppose to be like their God wholly void of extension, could combine +itself with their material bodies, and they will tell you, they know +nothing about it; that it is to them a mystery; that this combination is +an effect of the omnipotence of God. These are the ideas that men form of +the hidden, or rather imaginary substance, which they consider as the main +spring of all their actions! + +If the soul is a substance essentially different from the body, and +can have no relation to it, their union would be, not a mystery, but an +impossibility. Besides, this soul being of a nature different from the +body, must necessarily act in a different manner; yet we see that this +pretended soul is sensible of the motions experienced by the body, and +that these two substances, essentially different, always acts in concert. +You will say that this harmony is also a mystery. But I will tell you, +that I see not my soul, that I know and am sensible of my body only, that +it is this body which feels, thinks, judges, suffers, and enjoys; and +that all these faculties are necessary results of its own mechanism, or +organization. + + + + +101. + +Although it is impossible for men to form the least idea of the soul, or +the pretended spirit, which animates them; yet they persuade themselves +that this unknown soul is exempt from death. Every thing proves to them, +that they feel, that they think, that they acquire ideas, that they enjoy +and suffer, only by means of the senses, or material organs of the body. +Admitting even the existence of this soul, they cannot help acknowledging, +that it depends entirely upon the body, and undergoes, all its +vicissitudes; and yet it is imagined, that this soul has nothing, in +its nature, similar to the body; that it can act and feel without the +assistance of the body; in a word, that this soul, freed from the body, +and disengaged from its senses, can live, enjoy, suffer, experience +happiness, or feel excruciating torments. Upon such a tissue of +absurdities is built the marvellous opinion of the _immortality of the +soul_. If I ask, what are the motives for believing the soul immortal, +they immediately answer, that it is because man naturally desires to be +immortal: but, because you desire a thing ardently, can you infer that +your desire will be fulfilled? By what strange logic can we dare affirm, +that a thing cannot fail to happen, because we ardently desire it? Are +desires, begotten by the imagination, the measure of reality? The impious, +you say, deprived of the flattering hope of another life, wish to be +annihilated. Very well: may they not then as justly conclude, from _their_ +desire, that they shall be annihilated, as you may conclude from _your_ +desire, that you shall exist for ever. + + + + +102. + +Man dies, and the human body after death is no longer anything but a mass +incapable of producing those motions, of which the sum total constituted +life. We see, that it has no longer circulation, respiration, digestion, +speech, or thought. It is pretended, that the soul is then separated from +the body; but to say, that this soul, with which we are unacquainted, is +the principle of life, is to say nothing, unless that an unknown power is +the hidden principle of imperceptible movements. Nothing is more natural +and simple, than to believe, that the dead man no longer lives: nothing +is more extravagant, than to believe, that the dead man is still alive. We +laugh at the simplicity of some nations, whose custom is to bury provision +with the dead, under an idea that it will be useful and necessary to them +in the other life. Is it then more ridiculous or absurd to suppose, that +men will eat after death, than to imagine, that they will think, that they +will be actuated by agreeable or disagreeable ideas, that they will enjoy +or suffer, and that they will experience repentance or delight, after the +organs, adapted to produce sensations or ideas, are once dissolved. To say +that the souls of men will be happy or unhappy after death, is in other +words to say, that men will see without eyes, hear without ears, taste +without palates, smell without noses, and touch without hands. And +persons, who consider themselves very reasonable, adopt these ideas! + + + + +103. + +The dogma of the immortality of the soul supposes the soul to be a simple +substance; in a word, a spirit. But I ask again, what is a spirit? "It +is," say you, "a substance void of extension, incorruptible, having +nothing common with matter." If so, how is your soul born, and how does it +grow, how does it strengthen or weaken itself, how does it get disordered +and grow old, in the same progression as your body? + +To all these questions you answer, that these are mysteries. If so, you +cannot understand them. If you cannot understand them, why do you decide +about a thing, of which you are unable to form the least idea? To believe +or affirm any thing, it is necessary, at least, to know in what it +consists. To believe in the existence of your immaterial soul, is to +say, that you are persuaded of the existence of a thing, of which it is +impossible for you to form any true notion; it is to believe in words +without meaning. To affirm that the thing is as you say, is the height of +folly or vanity. + + + + +104. + +Are not theologians strange reasoners? Whenever they cannot divine the +_natural_ causes of things, they invent what they call _supernatural_; +such as spirits, occult causes, inexplicable agents, or rather _words_, +much more obscure than the _things_ they endeavour to explain. Let us +remain in nature, when we wish to account for the phenomena of nature; let +us be content to remain ignorant of causes too delicate for our organs; +and let us be persuaded, that, by going beyond nature, we shall never +solve the problems which nature presents. + +Even upon the hypothesis of theology, (that is, supposing an all-powerful +mover of matter,) by what right would theologians deny, that their God +has power to give this matter the faculty of thought? Was it then more +difficult for him to create combinations of matter, from which thought +might result, than spirits who could think? At least, by supposing matter, +which thinks, we should have some notions of the subject of thought, or of +what thinks in us; whereas, by attributing thought to an immaterial being, +it is impossible to form the least idea of it. + + + + +105. + +It is objected against us, that materialism makes man a mere machine, +which is said to be very dishonourable. But, will it be much more +honourable for man, if we should say, that he acts by the secret impulses +of a spirit, or by a certain _I know not what_, that animates him in a +manner totally inexplicable. + +It is easy to perceive, that the supposed superiority of _spirit_ over +matter, or of the soul over the body, has no other foundation than men's +ignorance of this soul, while they are more familiarized with _matter_, +with which they imagine they are acquainted, and of which they think they +can discern the origin. But the most simple movements of our bodies are to +every man, who studies them, as inexplicable as thought. + + + + +106. + +The high value, which so many people set upon spiritual substance, has no +other motive than their absolute inability to define it intelligibly. The +contempt shewn for _matter_ by our metaphysicians, arises only from the +circumstance, that familiarity begets contempt. When they tell us, that +_the soul is more excellent and noble than the body_, they say what they +know not. + + + + +107. + +The dogma of another life is incessantly extolled, as useful. It +is maintained, that even though it should be only a fiction, it is +advantageous, because it deceives men, and conducts them to virtue. But +is it true, that this dogma makes men wiser and more virtuous? Are the +nations, who believe this fiction, remarkable for purity of morals? Has +not the visible world ever the advantage over the invisible? If those, who +are trusted with the instruction and government of men, had knowledge and +virtue themselves, they would govern them much better by realities, than +by fictions. But crafty, ambitious and corrupt legislators, have every +where found it better to amuse with fables, than to teach them truths, +to unfold their reason, to excite them to virtue by sensible and real +motives, in fine, to govern them in a rational manner. Priests undoubtedly +had reasons for making the soul immaterial; they wanted souls to people +the imaginary regions, which they have discovered in the other life. +Material souls would, like all bodies, have been subject to dissolution. +Now, if men should believe, that all must perish with the body, the +geographers of the other world would evidently lose the right of guiding +men's souls towards that unknown abode; they would reap no profits from +the hope with which they feed them, and the terrors with which they +oppress them. If futurity is of no real utility to mankind, it is, at +least, of the greatest utility to those, who have assumed the office of +conducting them thither. + + + + +108. + +"But," it will be said, "is not the dogma of the immortality of the soul +comforting to beings, who are often very unhappy here below? Though it +should be an error, is it not pleasing? Is it not a blessing to man to +believe, that he shall be able to enjoy hereafter a happiness, which +is denied him upon earth?" Thus, poor mortals! you make your wishes the +measure of truth; because you desire to live for ever, and to be happier, +you at once conclude, that you shall live for ever, and that you shall be +more fortunate in an unknown world, than in this known world, where you +often find nothing but affliction! Consent therefore to leave, without +regret, this world which gives the greater part of you much more torment +than pleasure. Submit to the order of nature, which demands that you, as +well as all other beings, should not endure for ever. + +We are incessantly told, that religion has infinite consolations for the +unfortunate, that the idea of the soul's immortality, and of a happier +life, is very proper to elevate man, and to support him under adversity, +which awaits him upon earth. It is said, on the contrary, that materialism +is an afflicting system, calculated to degrade man; then it puts him +upon a level with the brutes, breaks his courage, and shows him no other +prospect than frightful annihilation, capable of driving him to despair +and suicide, whenever he is unhappy. The great art of theologians is to +blow hot and cold, to afflict and console, to frighten and encourage. + +It appears by theological fictions, that the regions of the other life are +happy and unhappy. Nothing is more difficult than to become worthy of the +abode of felicity; nothing more easy than to obtain a place in the abode +of torment, which God is preparing for the unfortunate victims of +eternal fury. Have those then, who think the other life so pleasant and +flattering, forgotten, that according to them, that life is to be attended +with torments to the greater part of mortals? Is not the idea of total +annihilation infinitely preferable to the idea of an eternal existence, +attended with anguish and _gnashing of teeth_? Is the fear of an end more +afflicting, than that of having had a beginning! The fear of ceasing to +exist is a real evil only to the imagination, which alone begat the dogma +of another life. + +Christian ministers say that the idea of a happier life is joyous. +Admitted. Every person would desire a more agreeable existence than that +he enjoys here. But, if paradise is inviting, you will grant, that hell is +frightful. Heaven is very difficult, and hell very easy to be merited. Do +you not say, that a _narrow_ way leads to the happy regions, and a _broad_ +way to the regions of misery? Do you not often say, that _the number of +the elect is very small, and that of the reprobate very large_? Is not +Grace, which your God grants but to a very few, necessary to salvation? +Now, I assure you, that these ideas are by no means consoling; that I had +rather be annihilated, once for all, than to burn for ever; that the +fate of beasts is to me more desirable than that of the damned; that the +opinion which relieves me from afflicting fears in this world, appears to +me more joyous, than the uncertainty arising from the opinion of a God, +who, master of his grace, grants it to none but his favourites, and +permits all others to become worthy of eternal torment. Nothing but +enthusiasm or folly can induce a man to prefer improbable conjectures, +attended with uncertainty and insupportable fears. + + + + +109. + +All religious principles are the work of pure imagination, in which +experience and reason have no share. It is extremely difficult to combat +them, because the imagination, once prepossessed by chimeras, which +astonish or disturb it, is incapable of reasoning. To combat religion and +its phantoms with the arms of reason, is like using a sword to kill gnats; +as soon as the blow is struck, the gnats and chimeras come hovering round +again, and resume in the mind the place, from which they were thought to +have been for ever banished. + +When we reject, as too weak, the proofs given of the existence of a God, +they instantly oppose to the arguments, which destroy that existence, +an _inward sense_, a deep persuasion, an invincible inclination, born in +every man, which holds up to his mind, in spite of himself, the idea of an +almighty being, whom he cannot entirely expel from his mind, and whom he +is compelled to acknowledge, in spite of the strongest reasons that can +be urged. But whoever will analyse this _inward sense_, upon which such +stress is laid, will perceive, that it is only the effect of a rooted +habit, which, shutting their eyes against the most demonstrative proofs, +subjects the greater part of men, and often even the most enlightened, to +the prejudices of childhood. What avails this inward sense, or this deep +persuasion, against the evidence, which demonstrates, that _whatever +implies a contradiction cannot exist_? + +We are gravely assured, that the non-existence of God is not demonstrated. +Yet, by all that men have hitherto said of him, nothing is better +demonstrated, than that this God is a chimera, whose existence is totally +impossible; since nothing is more evident, than that a being cannot +possess qualities so unlike, so contradictory, so irreconcilable, as +those, which every religion upon earth attributes to the Divinity. Is not +the theologian's God, as well as that of the deist, a cause incompatible +with the effects attributed to it? Let them do what they will, it is +necessary either to invent another God, or to grant, that he, who, for so +many ages, has been held up to the terror of mortals, is at the same time +very good and very bad, very powerful and very weak, unchangeable and +fickle, perfectly intelligent and perfectly void of reason, of order +and permitting disorder, very just and most unjust, very skilful and +unskilful. In short, are we not forced to confess, that it is impossible +to reconcile the discordant attributes, heaped upon a being, of whom +we cannot speak without the most palpable contradictions? Let any +one attribute a single quality to the Divinity, and it is universally +contradicted by the effects, ascribed to this cause. + + + + +110. + +Theology might justly be defined the _science of contradictions_. Every +religion is only a system, invented to reconcile irreconcilable notions. +By the aid of habit and terror, man becomes obstinate in the greatest +absurdities, even after they are exposed in the clearest manner. All +religions are easily combated, but with difficulty extirpated. Reason +avails nothing against custom, which becomes, says the proverb, _a second +nature_. Many persons, in other respects sensible, even after having +examined the rotten foundation of their belief, adhere to it in contempt +of the most striking arguments. Whenever we complain of religion, its +shocking absurdities, and impossibilities, we are told that we are not +made to understand the truths of religion; that reason goes astray, and is +capable of leading us to perdition; and moreover, that _what is folly +in the eyes of man, is wisdom in the eyes of God_, to whom nothing +is impossible. In short, to surmount, by a single word, the most +insurmountable difficulties, presented on all sides by theology, they get +rid of them by saying, these are _mysteries_! + + + + +111. + +What is a mystery? By examining the thing closely, I soon perceive, that +a mystery is nothing but a contradiction, a palpable absurdity, a manifest +impossibility, over which theologians would oblige men humbly to shut +their eyes. In a word, a mystery is whatever our spiritual guides cannot +explain. + +It is profitable to the ministers of religion, that people understand +nothing of what they teach. It is impossible to examine what we do not +comprehend; when we do not see, we must suffer ourselves to be led. If +religion were clear, priests would find less business. + +Without mysteries there can be no religion; mystery is essential to it; +a religion void of mysteries, would be a contradiction in terms. The God, +who serves as the foundation of _natural religion_, or _deism_, is himself +the greatest of mysteries. + + + + +112. + +Every revealed religion is filled with mysterious dogmas, unintelligible +principles, incredible wonders, astonishing recitals, which appear to have +been invented solely to confound reason. Every religion announces a hidden +God, whose essence is a mystery; consequently, the conduct, ascribed to +him, is no less inconceivable than his essence. The Deity has never spoken +only in an enigmatical and mysterious manner, in the various religions, +which have been founded in different regions of our globe; he has +everywhere revealed himself only to announce mysteries; that is, to +inform mortals, that he intended they should believe contradictions, +impossibilities, and things to which they were incapable of affixing any +clear ideas. + +The more mysterious and incredible a religion is, the more power it has +to please the imagination of men. The darker a religion is, the more it +appears divine, that is, conformable to the nature of a hidden being, of +whom they have no ideas. Ignorance prefers the unknown, the hidden, the +fabulous, the marvellous, the incredible, or even the terrible, to what is +clear, simple, and true. Truth does not operate upon the imagination in so +lively a manner as fiction, which, in other respects, everyone is able to +arrange in his own way. The vulgar like to listen to fables. Priests and +legislators, by inventing religions and forging mysteries have served the +vulgar people well. They have thereby gained enthusiasts, women and fools. +Beings of this stamp are easily satisfied with things, which they are +incapable of examining. The love of simplicity and truth is to be +found only among the few, whose imagination is regulated by study and +reflection. + +The inhabitants of a village are never better pleased with their parson, +than when he introduces Latin into his sermon. The ignorant always +imagine, that he, who speaks to them of things they do not understand, is +a learned man. Such is the true principle of the credulity of the people, +and of the authority of those, who pretend to guide nations. + + + + +113. + +To announce mysteries to men, is to give and withhold; it is to talk in +order not to be understood. He, who speaks only obscurely, either seeks to +amuse himself by the embarrassment, which he causes, or finds his interest +in not explaining himself too clearly. All secrecy indicates distrust, +impotence, and fear. Princes and their ministers make a mystery of their +projects, for fear their enemies should discover and render them abortive. +Can a good God amuse himself by perplexing his creatures? What interest +then could he have in commanding his ministers to announce riddles and +mysteries? + +It is said, that man, by the weakness of his nature, is totally incapable +of understanding the divine dispensations, which can be to him only a +series of mysteries; God cannot disclose to him secrets, necessarily above +his reach. If so, I answer again, that man is not made to attend to the +divine dispensations; that these dispensations are to him by no means +interesting; that he has no need of mysteries, which he cannot understand; +and consequently, that a mysterious religion is no more fit for him, than +an eloquent discourse is for a flock of sheep. + + + + +114. + +The Deity has revealed himself with so little uniformity in the different +countries of our globe, that in point of religion, men regard one another +with hatred and contempt. The partisans of the different sects think +each other very ridiculous and foolish. Mysteries, most revered in one +religion, are objects of derision to another. God, in revealing himself +to mankind, ought at least, to have spoken the same language to all, and +saved their feeble minds the perplexity of inquiring which religion really +emanated from him, or what form of worship is most acceptable in his +sight. + +A universal God ought to have revealed a universal religion. By what +fatality then are there so many different religions upon earth? Which is +really right, among the great number of those, each of which exclusively +pretends to be the true one? There is great reason to believe, that no +religion enjoys this advantage. Division and disputes upon opinions are +indubitable signs of the uncertainty and obscurity of the principles, upon +which they build. + + + + +115. + +If religion were necessary at all, it ought to be intelligible to all. If +this religion were the most important concern of men, the goodness of God +would seem to demand, that it should be to them of all things the most +clear, evident, and demonstrative. Is it not then astonishing, that this +thing so essential to the happiness of mortals, is precisely that, which +they understand least, and about which, for so many ages, their teachers +have most disputed? Priests have never agreed upon the manner of +understanding the will of a God, who has revealed himself. + +The world, may be compared to a public fair, in which are several +empirics, each of whom endeavours to attract the passengers by decrying +the remedies sold by his brothers. Each shop has its customers, who +are persuaded, that their quacks possess the only true remedies; and +notwithstanding a continual use of them, they perceive not the inefficacy +of these remedies, or that they are as infirm as those, who run after the +quacks of a different shop. + +Devotion is a disorder of the imagination contracted in infancy. The +devout man is a hypochondriac, who only augments his malady by the +application of remedies. The wise man abstains from them entirely; he pays +attention to his diet, and in other respects leaves nature to her course. + + + + +116. + +To a man of sense, nothing appears more ridiculous, than the opinions, +which the partisans of the different religions with equal folly entertain +of each other. A Christian regards the _Koran_, that is, the divine +revelation announced by Mahomet, as nothing but a tissue of impertinent +reveries, and impostures insulting to the divinity. The Mahometan, on the +other hand, treats the Christian as an _idolater_ and a _dog_. He sees +nothing but absurdities in his religion. He imagines he has a right to +subdue the Christian, and to force him, sword in hand, to receive the +religion of his divine prophet. Finally, he believes, that nothing is +more impious and unreasonable, than to worship a man, or to believe in the +Trinity. The _protestant_ Christian who without scruple worships a man, +and firmly believes the inconceivable mystery of the _trinity_, +ridicules the _catholic_ Christian for believing in the mystery of +_transubstantiation_; he considers him mad, impious, and idolatrous, +because he kneels to worship some bread, in which he thinks he sees God. +Christians of every sect regard, as silly stories, the incarnations +of _Vishnu_, the God of the Indies; they maintain, that the only true +_incarnation_ is that of _Jesus_, son of a carpenter. The deist, who +calls himself the follower of a religion, which he supposes to be that of +nature, content with admitting a God, of whom he has no idea, makes a jest +of all the mysteries, taught by the various religions in the world. + + + + +117. + +Is there any thing more contradictory, impossible, or mysterious, than the +creation of matter by an immaterial being, who, though immutable, operates +continual changes in the world? Is any thing more incompatible with every +notion of common sense, than to believe, that a supremely good, wise, +equitable and powerful being presides over nature, and by himself directs +the movements of a world, full of folly, misery, crimes and disorders, +which by a single word, he could have prevented or removed? In fine, +whenever we admit a being as contradictory as the God of theology, how can +we reject the most improbable fables, astonishing miracles, and profound +mysteries. + + + + +118. + +The Deist exclaims: "Abstain from worshipping the cruel and capricious God +of theology; mine is a being infinitely wise and good; he is the father of +men, the mildest of sovereigns; it is he who fills the universe with his +benefits." But do you not see that every thing in this world contradicts +the good qualities, which you ascribe to your God? In the numerous family +of this tender father, almost all are unhappy. Under the government of +this just sovereign, vice is triumphant, and virtue in distress. Among +those blessings you extol, and which only enthusiasm can see, I behold a +multitude of evils, against which you obstinately shut your eyes. Forced +to acknowledge, that your beneficent God, in contradiction with himself, +distributes good and evil with the same hand, for his justification you +must, like the priest, refer me to the regions of another life. Invent, +therefore, another God; for yours is no less contradictory than that of +theologians. + +A good God, who does evil, or consents to the commission of evil; a +God full of equity, and in whose empire innocence is often oppressed; a +perfect God, who produces none but imperfect and miserable works; are not +such a God and his conduct as great mysteries, as that of the incarnation? + +You blush for your fellow-citizens, who allow themselves to be persuaded, +that the God of the universe could change himself into a man, and die upon +a cross in a corner of Asia. The mystery of the incarnation appears to you +very absurd. You think nothing more ridiculous, than a God, who transforms +himself into bread, and causes himself daily to be eaten in a thousand +different places. But are all these mysteries more contradictory to +reason than a God, the avenger and rewarder of the actions of men? Is man, +according to you, free, or not free? In either case, your God, if he has +the shadow of equity, can neither punish nor reward him. If man is free, +it is God, who has made him free; therefore God is the primitive cause of +all his actions; in punishing him for his faults, he would punish him for +having executed what he had given him liberty to do. If man is not free to +act otherwise than he does, would not God be most unjust, in punishing man +for faults, which he could not help committing. + +The minor, or secondary, absurdities, with which all religions abound, are +to many people truly striking; but they have not the courage to trace +the source of these absurdities. They see not, that a God full of +contradictions, caprices and inconsistent qualities, has only served +to disorder men's imaginations, and to produce an endless succession of +chimeras. + + + + +119. + +The theologian would shut the mouths of those who deny the existence of +God, by saying, that all men, in all ages and countries, have acknowledged +some divinity or other; that every people have believed in an invisible +and powerful being, who has been the object of their worship and +veneration; in short, that there is no nation, however savage, who are not +persuaded of the existence of some intelligence superior to human nature. +But, can an error be changed into truth by the belief of all men? The +great philosopher Bayle has justly observed, that "general tradition, or +the unanimous consent of mankind, is no criterion of truth." + +There was a time, when all men believed that the sun moved round the +earth, but this error was detected. There was a time, when nobody believed +the existence of the antipodes, and when every one was persecuted, who +had temerity enough to maintain it. At present, every informed man firmly +believes it. All nations, with the exception of a few men who are less +credulous than the rest, still believe in ghosts and spirits. No sensible +man now adopts such nonsense. But the most sensible people consider it +their duty to believe in a universal spirit! + + + + +120. + +All the gods, adored by men, are of savage origin. They have evidently +been imagined by stupid people, or presented, by ambitious and crafty +legislators, to ignorant and uncivilized nations, who had neither capacity +nor courage to examine the objects, which through terror they were made to +worship. + +By closely examining God, we are forced to acknowledge, that he evidently +bears marks of a savage nature. To be savage is to acknowledge no right +but force; it is to be cruel beyond measure; to follow only one's own +caprice; to want foresight, prudence, and reason. Ye nations, who call +yourselves civilized! Do you not discern, in this hideous character, the +God, on whom you lavish your incense? Are not the descriptions given +you of the divinity, visibly borrowed from the implacable, jealous, +revengeful, sanguinary, capricious inconsiderate humour of man, who has +not cultivated his reason? O men! You adore only a great savage, whom +you regard, however, as a model to imitate, as an amiable master, as a +sovereign full of perfection. + +Religious opinions are ancient monuments of ignorance, credulity, +cowardice, and barbarism of their ancestors. Every savage is a child +fond of the marvellous, who believes every thing, and examines nothing. +Ignorant of nature, he attributes to spirits, enchantments, and to +magic, whatever appears to him extraordinary. His priests appear to him +sorcerers, in whom he supposes a power purely divine, before whom his +confounded reason humbles itself, whose oracles are to him infallible +decrees which it would be dangerous to contradict. + +In religion, men have, for the most part, remained in their primitive +barbarity. Modern religions are only ancient follies revived, or presented +under some new form. If the savages of antiquity adored mountains, rivers, +serpents, trees, and idols of every kind; if the EGYPTIANS paid homage to +crocodiles, rats, and onions, do we not see nations, who think themselves +wiser than they, worship bread, into which they imagine, that through +the enchantments of their priests, the divinity has descended. Is not the +Bread-God the idol of many Christian nations, who, in this respect, are as +irrational, as the most savage? + + + + +121. + +The ferocity, stupidity, and folly of uncivilized man have ever disclosed +themselves in religious practices, either cruel or extravagant. A spirit +of barbarity still survives, and penetrates the religions even of the +most polished nations. Do we not still see human victims offered to +the divinity? To appease the anger of a God, who is always supposed as +ferocious, jealous and vindictive, as a savage, do not those, whose manner +of thinking is supposed to displease him, expire under studied torments, +by the command of sanguinary laws? Modern nations, at the instigation of +their priests, have perhaps improved upon the atrocious folly of barbarous +nations; at least, we find, that it has ever entered the heads of savages +to torment for opinions, to search the thoughts, to molest men for the +invisible movements of their brains? + +When we see learned nations, such as the English, French, German, etc., +continue, notwithstanding their knowledge, to kneel before the barbarous +God of the Jews; when we see these enlightened nations divide into +sects, defame, hate, and despise one another for their equally ridiculous +opinions concerning the conduct and intentions of this unreasonable God; +when we see men of ability foolishly devote their time to meditate the +will of this God, who is full of caprice and folly, we are tempted to cry +out: O men, you are still savage!!! + + + + +122. + +Whoever has formed true ideas of the ignorance, credulity, negligence, and +stupidity of the vulgar, will suspect opinions the more, as he finds +them generally established. Men, for the most part, examine nothing: they +blindly submit to custom and authority. Their religious opinions, above +all others, are those which they have the least courage and capacity to +examine: as they comprehend nothing about them, they are forced to be +silent, or at least are soon destitute of arguments. Ask any man, whether +he believes in a God? He will be much surprised that you can doubt it. Ask +him again, what he understands by the word _God_. You throw him into +the greatest embarrassment; you will perceive immediately, that he is +incapable of affixing any real idea to this word, he incessantly repeats. +He will tell you, that God is God. He knows neither what he thinks of it, +nor his motives for believing in it. + +All nations speak of a God; but do they agree upon this God? By no means. +But division upon an opinion proves not its evidence; it is rather a sign +of uncertainty and obscurity. Does the same man always agree with himself +in the notions he forms of his God? No. His idea varies with the changes, +which he experiences;--another sign of uncertainty. Men always agree in +demonstrative truths. In any situation, except that of insanity, every one +knows that two and two make four, that the sun shines, that the whole +is greater than its part; that benevolence is necessary to merit the +affection of men; that injustice and cruelty are incompatible with +goodness. Are they thus agreed when they speak of God? Whatever they +think, or say of him, is immediately destroyed by the effects they +attribute to him. + +Ask several painters to represent a chimera, and each will paint it in a +different manner. You will find no resemblance between the features, each +has given it a portrait, that has no original. All theologians, in giving +us a picture of God, give us one of a great chimera, in whose features +they never agree, whom each arranges in his own way, and who exists only +in their imaginations. There are not two individuals, who have, or can +have, the same ideas of their God. + + + + +123. + +It might be said with more truth, that men are either skeptics or +atheists, than that they are convinced of the existence of God. How can we +be assured of the existence of a being, whom we could never examine, +and of whom it is impossible to conceive any permanent idea? How can +we convince ourselves of the existence of a being, to whom we are +every moment forced to attribute conduct, opposed to the ideas, we had +endeavoured to form of him? Is it then possible to believe what we cannot +conceive? Is not such a belief the opinions of others without having +any of our own? Priests govern by faith; but do not priests themselves +acknowledge that God is to them incomprehensible? Confess then, that a +full and entire conviction of the existence of God is not so general, as +is imagined. + +Scepticism arises from a want of motives sufficient to form a judgment. +Upon examining the proofs which seem to establish, and the arguments which +combat, the existence of God, some persons have doubted and withheld their +assent. But this uncertainty arises from not having sufficiently examined. +Is it possible to doubt any thing evident? Sensible people ridicule an +absolute scepticism, and think it even impossible. A man, who doubted his +own existence, or that of the sun, would appear ridiculous. Is this more +extravagant than to doubt the non-existence of an evidently impossible +being? Is it more absurd to doubt one's own existence, than to hesitate +upon the impossibility of a being, whose qualities reciprocally destroy +one another? Do we find greater probability for believing the existence of +a spiritual being, than the existence of a stick without two ends? Is the +notion of an infinitely good and powerful being, who causes or permits +an infinity of evils, less absurd or impossible, than that of a square +triangle? Let us conclude then, that religious scepticism can result only +from a superficial examination of theological principles, which are in +perpetual contradiction with the most clear and demonstrative principles. + +To doubt, is to deliberate. Scepticism is only a state of indetermination, +resulting from an insufficient examination of things. Is it possible for +any one to be sceptical in matters of religion, who will deign to revert +to its principles, and closely examine the notion of God, who serves +as its basis? Doubt generally arises either from indolence, weakness, +indifference, or incapacity. With many people, to doubt is to fear the +trouble of examining things, which are thought uninteresting. But religion +being presented to men as their most important concern in this and the +future world, skepticism and doubt on this subject must occasion perpetual +anxiety and must really constitute a bed of thorns. Every man who has not +courage to contemplate, without prejudice, the God upon whom all religion +is founded, can never know for what religion to decide: he knows not what +he should believe or not believe, admit or reject, hope or fear. + +Indifference upon religion must not be confounded with scepticism. This +indifference is founded upon the absolute assurance, or at any rate upon +the probable belief, that religion is not interesting. A persuasion that +a thing which is pretended to be important is not so, or is only +indifferent, supposes a sufficient examination of the thing, without which +it would be impossible to have this persuasion. Those who call themselves +sceptics in the fundamental points of religion, are commonly either +indolent or incapable of examining. + + + + +124. + +In every country, we are assured, that a God has revealed himself. What +has he taught men? Has he proved evidently that he exists? Has he informed +them where he resides? Has he taught them what he is, or in what his +essence consists? Has he clearly explained to them his intentions and +plan? Does what he says of this plan correspond with the effects, which +we see? No. He informs them solely, that _he is what he is_; that he is +a _hidden God_; that his ways are unspeakable; that he is exasperated +against all who have the temerity to fathom his decrees, or to consult +reason in judging him or his works. + +Does the revealed conduct of God answer the magnificent ideas which +theologians would give us of his wisdom, goodness, justice, and +omnipotence? By no means. In every revelation, this conduct announces a +partial and capricious being, the protector of favourite people, and the +enemy of all others. If he deigns to appear to some men, he takes care to +keep all others in an invincible ignorance of his divine intentions. Every +private revelation evidently announces in God, injustice, partiality and +malignity. + +Do the commands, revealed by any God, astonish us by their sublime reason +or wisdom? Do they evidently tend to promote the happiness of the people, +to whom the Divinity discloses them? Upon examining the divine commands, +one sees in every country, nothing but strange ordinances, ridiculous +precepts, impertinent ceremonies, puerile customs, oblations, sacrifices, +and expiations, useful indeed to the ministers of God, but very +burthensome to the rest of the citizens. I see likewise, that these laws +often tend to make men unsociable, disdainful, intolerant, quarrelsome, +unjust, and inhuman, to those who have not received the same revelations, +the same ordinances, or the same favours from heaven. + + + + +125. + +Are the precepts of morality, announced by the Deity, really divine, +or superior to those which every reasonable man might imagine? They are +divine solely because it is impossible for the human mind to discover +their utility. They make virtue consist in a total renunciation of nature, +in a voluntary forgetfulness of reason, a holy hatred of ourselves. +Finally, these sublime precepts often exhibit perfection in a conduct, +cruel to ourselves, and perfectly useless to others. + +Has a God appeared? Has he himself promulgated his laws? Has he spoken to +men with his own mouth? I am told, that God has not appeared to a whole +people; but that he has always manifested himself through the medium +of some favourite personages, who have been intrusted with the care of +announcing and explaining his intentions. The people have never been +permitted to enter the sanctuary; the ministers of the gods have alone had +the right to relate what passes there. + + + + +126. + +If in every system of divine revelation, I complain of not seeing either +the wisdom, goodness, or equity of God; if I suspect knavery, ambition, or +interest; it is replied, that God has confirmed by miracles the mission of +those, who speak in his name. But was it not more simple for him to appear +in person, to explain his nature and will? Again, if I have the curiosity +to examine these miracles, I find, that they are improbable tales, related +by suspected people, who had the greatest interest in giving out that they +were the messengers of the Most High. + +What witnesses are appealed to in order to induce us to believe incredible +miracles? Weak people, who existed thousands of years ago, and who, even +though they could attest these miracles, may be suspected of being duped +by their own imagination, and imposed upon by the tricks of dexterous +impostors. But, you will say, these miracles are written in books, +which by tradition have been transmitted to us. By whom were these books +written? Who are the men who have transmitted them? They are either the +founders of religions themselves, or their adherents and assigns. Thus, +in religion, the evidence of interested parties becomes irrefragable and +incontestable. + + + + +127. + +God has spoken differently to every people. The Indian believes not a word +of what He has revealed to the Chinese; the Mahometan considers as fables +what He has said to the Christian; the Jew regards both the Mahometan and +Christian as sacrilegious corrupters of the sacred law, which his God had +given to his fathers. The Christian, proud of his more modern revelation, +indiscriminately damns the Indian, Chinese, Mahometan, and even the +Jew, from whom he receives his sacred books. Who is wrong or right? Each +exclaims, _I am in the right!_ Each adduces the same proofs: each mentions +his miracles, diviners, prophets, and martyrs. The man of sense tells +them, they are all delirious; that God has not spoken, if it is true +that he is a spirit, and can have neither mouth nor tongue; that without +borrowing the organ of mortals, God could inspire his creatures with what +he would have them learn; and that, as they are all equally ignorant what +to think of God, it is evident that it has not been the will of God to +inform them on the subject. + +The followers of different forms of worship which are established, accuse +one another of superstition and impiety. Christians look with abhorrence +upon the Pagan, Chinese, and Mahometan superstition. Roman Catholics +treat, as impious, Protestant Christians; and the latter incessantly +declaim against the superstition of the Catholics. They are all right. +To be impious, is to have opinions offensive to the God adored; to be +superstitious, is to have of him false ideas. In accusing one another of +superstition, the different religionists resemble humpbacks, who reproach +one another with their deformity. + + + + +128. + +Are the oracles, which the Divinity has revealed by his different +messengers, remarkable for clearness? Alas! no two men interpret them +alike. Those who explain them to others are not agreed among themselves. +To elucidate them, they have recourse to interpretations, to commentaries, +to allegories, to explanations: they discover _mystical sense_ very +different from the _literal sense_. Men are every where wanted to explain +the commands of a God, who could not, or would not, announce himself +clearly to those, whom he wished to enlighten. + + + + +129. + +The founders of religion, have generally proved their missions by +miracles. But what is a miracle? It is an operation directly opposite to +the laws of nature. But who, according to you, made those laws? God. Thus, +your God, who, according to you, foresaw every thing, counteracts +the laws, which his wisdom prescribed to nature! These laws were then +defective, or at least in certain circumstances they did not accord with +the views of the same God, since you inform us that he judged it necessary +to suspend or counteract them. + +It is said, that a few men, favoured by the Most High, have received power +to perform miracles. But to perform a miracle, it is necessary to have +ability to create new causes capable of producing effects contrary to +those of common causes. Is it easy to conceive, that God can give men the +inconceivable power of creating causes out of nothing? Is it credible, +that an immutable God can communicate to men power to change or rectify +his plan, a power, which by his essence an immutable being cannot save +himself? Miracles, far from doing much honour to God, far from proving +the divinity of a religion, evidently annihilate the God idea. How can +a theologian tell us, that God, who must have embraced the whole of his +plan, who could have made none but perfect laws, and who cannot alter +them, is forced to employ miracles to accomplish his projects, or can +grant his creatures the power of working prodigies to execute his divine +will? An omnipotent being, whose will is always fulfilled, who holds in +his hand his creatures, has only to _will_, to make them believe whatever +he desires. + + + + +130. + +What shall we say of religions that prove their divinity by miracles? How +can we credit miracles recorded in the sacred books of the Christians, +where God boasts of hardening the hearts and blinding those whom he wishes +to destroy; where he permits malicious spirits and magicians to work +miracles as great as those of his servants; where it is predicted, that +_Antichrist_ shall have power to perform prodigies capable of shaking the +faith even of the elect? In this case, by what signs shall we know whether +God means to instruct or ensnare us? How shall we distinguish whether +the wonders, we behold, come from God or devil? To remove our perplexity, +Pascal gravely tells us, that _it is necessary to judge the doctrine by +the miracles, and the miracles by the doctrine; that the doctrine proves +the miracles, and the miracles the doctrine_. If there exist a vicious and +ridiculous circle, it is undoubtedly in this splendid reasoning of one of +the greatest defenders of Christianity. Where is the religion, that does +not boast of the most admirable doctrine, and which does not produce +numerous miracles for its support? + +Is a miracle capable of annihilating the evidence of a demonstrated truth? +Although a man should have the secret of healing all the sick, of making +all the lame to walk, of raising in all the dead of a city, of ascending +into the air, of stopping the course of the sun and moon, can he thereby +convince me, that two and two do not make four, that one makes three, and +that three make only one; that a God, whose immensity fills the universe, +could have been contained in the body of a Jew; that the ETERNAL can +die like a man; that a God, who is said to be immutable, provident, and +sensible, could have changed his mind upon his religion, and reformed his +own work by a new revelation? + + + + +131. + +According to the very principles either of natural or revealed theology, +every new revelation should be regarded as false; every change in +a religion emanated from the Deity should be reputed an impiety and +blasphemy. Does not all reform suppose, that, in his first effort, God +could not give his religion the solidity and perfection required? To say, +that God, in giving a first law, conformed to the rude ideas of the people +whom he wished to enlighten, is to pretend that God was neither able nor +willing to render the people, whom he was enlightening, so reasonable as +was necessary in order to please him. + +Christianity is an impiety, if it is true that Judaism is a religion which +has really emanated from a holy, immutable, omnipotent, and foreseeing +God. The religion of Christ supposes either defects in the law which God +himself had given by Moses, or impotence or malice in the same God, who +was either unable or unwilling to render the Jews such as they ought to +have been in order to please him. Every new religion, or reform of +ancient religions, is evidently founded upon the impotence, inconstancy, +imprudence, or malice of the Divinity. + + + + +132. + +If history informs me, that the first apostles, the founders or reformers +of religions, wrought great miracles; history also informs me, that these +reformers and their adherents were commonly buffeted, persecuted, and put +to death, as disturbers of the peace of nations. I am therefore tempted to +believe, that they did not perform the miracles ascribed to them; +indeed, such miracles must have gained them numerous partisans among the +eye-witnesses, who ought to have protected the operators from abuse. My +incredulity redoubles, when I am told, that the workers of miracles +were cruelly tormented, or ignominiously executed. How is it possible to +believe, that missionaries, protected by God, invested with his divine +power, and enjoying the gift of miracles, could not have wrought such a +simple miracle, as to escape the cruelty of their persecutors? + +Priests have the art of drawing from the persecutions themselves, a +convincing proof in favour of the religion of the persecuted. But a +religion, which boasts of having cost the lives of many martyrs, and +informs us, that its founders, in order to extend it, have suffered +punishments, cannot be the religion of a beneficent, equitable and +omnipotent God. A good God would not permit men, intrusted with announcing +his commands, to be ill-treated. An all-powerful God, wishing to found a +religion, would proceed in a manner more simple and less fatal to the most +faithful of his servants. To say that God would have his religion sealed +with blood, is to say that he is weak, unjust, ungrateful, and sanguinary; +and that he is cruel enough to sacrifice his messengers to the views of +his ambition. + + + + +133. + +To die for religion proves not that the religion is true, or divine; it +proves, at most, that it is supposed to be such. An enthusiast proves +nothing by his death, unless that religious fanaticism is often stronger +than the love of life. An impostor may sometimes die with courage; he then +makes, in the language of the proverb, _a virtue of necessity_. + +People are often surprised and affected at sight of the generous courage +and disinterested zeal, which has prompted missionaries to preach their +doctrine, even at the risk of suffering the most rigorous treatment. From +this ardour for the salvation of men, are drawn inferences favourable to +the religion they have announced. But in reality, this disinterestedness +is only apparent. He, who ventures nothing should gain nothing. A +missionary seeks to make his fortune by his doctrine. He knows that, if he +is fortunate enough to sell his commodity, he will become absolute master +of those who receive him for their guide; he is sure of becoming the +object of their attention, respect, and veneration. Such are the true +motives, which kindle the zeal and charity of so many preachers and +missionaries. + +To die for an opinion, proves the truth or goodness of that opinion +no more than to die in battle proves the justice of a cause, in which +thousands have the folly to devote their lives. The courage of a martyr, +elated with the idea of paradise, is not more supernatural, than the +courage of a soldier, intoxicated with the idea of glory, or impelled +by the fear of disgrace. What is the difference between an Iroquois, who +sings while he is burning by inches, and the martyr ST. LAURENCE, who upon +the gridiron insults his tyrant? + +The preachers of a new doctrine fail, because they are the weakest; +apostles generally practise a perilous trade. Their courageous death +proves neither the truth of their principles nor their own sincerity, +any more than the violent death of the ambitious man, or of the robber, +proves, that they were right in disturbing society, or that they thought +themselves authorised in so doing. The trade of a missionary was always +flattering to ambition, and formed a convenient method of living at the +expense of the vulgar. These advantages have often been enough to efface +every idea of danger. + + + + +134. + +You tell us, theologians! that _what is folly in the eyes of men, is +wisdom before God, who delights to confound the wisdom of the wise_. But +do you not say, that human wisdom is a gift of heaven? In saying this +wisdom displeases God, is but folly in his sight, and that he is pleased +to confound it, you declare that your God is the friend only of ignorant +people, and that he makes sensible people a fatal present for which this +perfidious tyrant promises to punish them cruelly at some future day. Is +it not strange, that one can be the friend of your God, only by declaring +one's self the enemy of reason and good sense? + + + + +135. + +According to the divines, _faith is an assent without evidence_. Whence it +follows, that religion requires us firmly to believe inevident things, and +propositions often improbable or contrary to reason. But when we reject +reason as a judge of faith, do we not confess, that reason is incompatible +with faith? As the ministers of religion have resolved to banish reason, +they must have felt the impossibility of reconciling it with faith, which +is visibly only a blind submission to priests, whose authority seems to +many persons more weighty than evidence itself, and preferable to the +testimony of the senses. + +"Sacrifice your reason; renounce experience; mistrust the testimony of +your senses; submit without enquiry to what we announce to you in the name +of heaven." Such is the uniform language of priests throughout the world; +they agree upon no point, except upon the necessity of never reasoning +upon the principles which they present to us as most important to our +felicity! + +I will _not_ sacrifice my reason; because this reason alone enables me +to distinguish good from evil, truth from falsehood. If, as you say, my +reason comes from God, I shall never believe that a God, whom you call +good, has given me reason, as a snare, to lead me to perdition. Priests! +do you not see, that, by decrying reason, you calumniate your God, from +whom you declare it to be a gift. + +I will _not_ renounce experience; because it is a guide much more sure +than the imagination or authority of spiritual guides. Experience +teaches me, that enthusiasm and interest may blind and lead them astray +themselves; and that the authority of experience ought to have much more +influence upon my mind, than the suspicious testimony of many men, who I +know are either very liable to be deceived themselves, or otherwise are +very much interested in deceiving others. + +I _will_ mistrust my senses; because I am sensible they sometimes mislead +me. But, on the other hand, I know that they will not always deceive me. +I well know, that the eye shews me the sun much smaller than it really +is; but experience, which is only the repeated application of the senses, +informs me, that objects always appear to diminish, as their distance +increases; thus I attain to a certainty, that the sun is much larger than +the earth; thus my senses suffice to rectify the hasty judgments, which +they themselves had caused. + +In warning us to mistrust the testimony of our senses, the priests +annihilate the proofs of all religion. If men may be dupes of their +imagination; if their senses are deceitful, how shall we believe the +miracles, which struck the treacherous senses of our ancestors? If my +senses are unfaithful guides, I ought not to credit even the miracles +wrought before my eyes. + + + + +136. + +You incessantly repeat that _the truths of religion are above reason_. If +so, do you not perceive, that these truths are not adapted to reasonable +beings? To pretend that reason can deceive us, is to say, that truth +can be false; that the useful can be hurtful. Is reason any thing but a +knowledge of the useful and true? Besides, as our reason and senses are +our only guides in this life, to say they are unfaithful, is to say, that +our errors are necessary, our ignorance invincible, and that, without the +extreme of injustice, God cannot punish us for following the only guides +it was his supreme will to give. + +To say, we are obliged to believe things above our reason, is ridiculous. +To assure us, that upon some objects we are not allowed to consult reason, +is to say, that, in the most interesting matter, we must consult only +imagination, or act only at random. Our divines say, we must sacrifice our +reason to God. But what motives can we have to sacrifice our reason to a +being, who makes us only useless presents, which he does not intend us to +use? What confidence can we put in a God, who, according to our divines +themselves, is malicious enough to harden the heart, to strike with +blindness, to lay snares for us, to _lead us into temptation?_ In fine, +what confidence can we put in the ministers of this God, who, to guide us +more conveniently, commands us to shut our eyes? + + + + +137. + +Men are persuaded, that religion is to them of all things the most +serious, while it is precisely what they least examine for themselves. In +pursuit of an office, a piece of land, a house, a place of profit; in any +transaction or contract whatever, every one carefully examines all, +takes the greatest precaution, weighs every word of a writing, is guarded +against every surprise. Not so in religion; every one receives it at a +venture, and believes it upon the word of others, without ever taking the +trouble to examine. + +Two causes concur to foster the negligence and carelessness of men, with +regard to their religious opinions. The first is the despair of overcoming +the obscurity, in which all religion is necessarily enveloped. Their first +principles are only adapted to disgust lazy minds, who regard them as a +chaos impossible to be understood. The second cause is, that every one +is averse to being too much bound by severe precepts, which all admire in +theory, but very few care to practice with rigour. The religion of many +people is like old family ties, which they have never taken pains to +examine, but which they deposit in their archives to have recourse to them +occasionally. + + + + +138. + +The disciples of Pythagoras paid implicit faith to the doctrine of their +master; _he has said it_, was to them the solution of every problem. The +generality of men are not more rational. In matters of religion, a curate, +a priest, an ignorant monk becomes master of the thoughts. Faith relieves +the weakness of the human mind, to which application is commonly painful; +it is much more convenient to depend upon others, than to examine for +one's self. Inquiry, being slow and difficult, equally, displeases the +stupidity of the ignorant, and the ardour of the enlightened. Such is +undoubtedly the reason why Faith has so many partisans. + +The more men are deficient in knowledge and reason, the more zealous they +are in religion. In theological quarrels, the populace, like ferocious +beasts, fall upon all those, against whom their priest is desirous of +exciting them. A profound ignorance, boundless credulity, weak intellect, +and warm imagination, are the materials, of which are made bigots, +zealots, fanatics, and saints. How can the voice of reason be heard by +them who make it a principle never to examine for themselves, but to +submit blindly to the guidance of others? The saints and the populace are, +in the hands of their directors, automatons, moved at pleasure. + + + + +139. + +Religion is an affair of custom and fashion. _We must do as others do._ +But, among the numerous religions in the world, which should men choose? +This inquiry would be too painful and long. They must therefore adhere +to the religion of their fathers, to that of their country, which, having +force on its side, must be the best. + +If we judge of the intentions of Providence by the events and revolutions +of this world, we are compelled to believe, that He is very indifferent +about the various religions upon earth. For thousands of years, paganism, +polytheism, idolatry, were the prevailing religions. We are now assured, +that the most flourishing nations had not the least idea of God; an idea, +regarded as so essential to the happiness of man. Christians say, all +mankind lived in the grossest ignorance of their duties towards God, and +had no notions of him, but what were insulting to his Divine Majesty. +Christianity, growing out of Judaism, very humble in its obscure origin, +became powerful and cruel under the Christian emperors, who, prompted by +holy zeal, rapidly spread it in their empire by means of fire and sword, +and established it upon the ruins of paganism. Mahomet and his successors, +seconded by Providence or their victorious arms, in a short time banished +the Christian religion from a part of Asia, Africa, and even Europe; and +the _gospel_ was then forced to yield to the _Koran_. + +In all the factions or sects, which, for many ages have distracted +Christianity, _the best argument has been always that of the strongest +party_; arms have decided which doctrine is most conducive to the +happiness of nations. May we not hence infer, either that the Deity feels +little interested in the religion of men, or that he always declares in +favour of the opinions, which best suit the interest of earthly powers; in +fine, that he changes his plan to accommodate their fancy? + +Rulers infallibly decide the religion of the people. The true religion +is always the religion of the prince; the true God is the God, whom the +prince desires his people to adore; the will of the priests, who govern +the prince, always becomes the will of God. A wit justly observed, that +_the true religion is always that, on whose side are the prince and the +hangman._ Emperors and hangmen long supported the gods of Rome against the +God of Christians; the latter, having gained to his interest the emperors, +their soldiers, and their hangmen, succeeded in destroying the worship of +the Roman gods. The God of Mahomet has dispossessed the God of Christians +of a great part of the dominions, which he formerly occupied. + +In the eastern part of Asia, is a vast, flourishing, fertile, populous +country, governed by such wise laws, that the fiercest conquerors have +adopted them with respect. I mean China. Excepting Christianity, which was +banished as dangerous, the people there follow such superstitions as +they please, while the _mandarins_, or magistrates, having long known the +errors of the popular religion, are vigilant to prevent the _bonzes_ or +priests from using it as an instrument of discord. Yet we see not, +that Providence refuses his blessing to a nation, whose chiefs are so +indifferent about the worship that is rendered to him. On the contrary, +the Chinese enjoy a happiness and repose worthy to be envied, by the many +nations whom religion divides, and often devastates. + +We cannot reasonably propose to divest the people of their follies; but we +may perhaps cure the follies of those who govern the people, and who +will then prevent the follies of the people from becoming dangerous. +Superstition is to be feared only when princes and soldiers rally round +her standard; then she becomes cruel and sanguinary. Every sovereign, who +is the protector of one sect or religious faction, is commonly the tyrant +of others, and becomes himself the most cruel disturber of the peace of +his dominions. + + + + +140. + +It is incessantly repeated, and many sensible persons are induced to +believe, that religion is a restraint necessary to men; that without +it, there would no longer exist the least check for the vulgar; and that +morality and religion are intimately connected with it. "The fear of +the Lord," cries the priest, "is the beginning of wisdom. The terrors of +another life are _salutary_, and are proper to curb the passions of men." + +To perceive the inutility of religious notions, we have only to open our +eyes and contemplate the morals of those nations, who are the most +under the dominion of religion. We there find proud tyrants, oppressive +ministers, perfidious courtiers, shameless extortioners, corrupt +magistrates, knaves, adulterers, debauchees, prostitutes, thieves, and +rogues of every kind, who have never doubted either the existence of an +avenging and rewarding God, the torments of hell, or the joys of paradise. +Without the least utility to the greater part of mankind, the ministers +of religion have studied to render death terrible to the eyes of their +followers. If devout Christians could but be consistent, they would pass +their whole life in tears, and die under the most dreadful apprehensions. +What can be more terrible than death, to the unfortunate who are told, +_that it is horrible to fall into the hands of the living God; that we +must work out our salvation with fear and trembling!_ Yet we are assured, +that the death of the Christian is attended with infinite consolations, of +which the unbeliever is deprived. The good Christian, it is said, dies in +the firm hope of an eternal happiness which he has strived to merit. But +is not this firm assurance itself a presumption punishable in the eyes of +a severe God? Ought not the greatest saints to be ignorant whether they +are _worthy of love or hatred?_ Ye Priests! while consoling us with the +hope of the joys of paradise; have you then had the advantage to see your +names and ours inscribed _in the book of life?_ + + + + +141. + +To oppose the passions and present interests of men the obscure notions of +a metaphysical, inconceivable God,--the incredible punishments of another +life,--or the pleasures of the heaven, of which nobody has the least +idea,--is not this combating realities with fictions? Men have never any +but confused ideas of their God: they see him only in clouds. They +never think of him when they are desirous to do evil: whenever ambition, +fortune, or pleasure allures them, God's threatenings and promises are +forgotten. In the things of this life, there is a degree of certainty, +which the most lively faith cannot give to the things of another life. + +Every religion was originally a curb invented by legislators, who wished +to establish their authority over the minds of rude nations. Like nurses +who frighten children to oblige them to be quiet, the ambitious used the +name of the gods to frighten savages; and had recourse to terror in order +to make them support quietly the yoke they wished to impose. Are then the +bugbears of infancy made for riper age? At the age of maturity, no man +longer believes them, or if he does, they excite little emotion in him, +and never alter his conduct. + + + + +142. + +Almost every man fears what he sees much more than what he does not see; +he fears the judgments of men of which he feels the effects, more than +the judgments of God of whom he has only fluctuating ideas. The desire +of pleasing the world, the force of custom, the fear of ridicule, and +of censure, have more force than all religious opinions. Does not the +soldier, through fear of disgrace, daily expose his life in battle, even +at the risk of incurring eternal damnation? + +The most religious persons have often more respect for a varlet, than for +God. A man who firmly believes, that God sees every thing, and that he is +omniscient and omnipresent, will be guilty, when alone, of actions, +which he would never do in presence of the meanest of mortals. Those, +who pretend to be the most fully convinced of the existence of God, every +moment act as if they believed the contrary. + + + + +143. + +"Let us, at least," it will be said, "cherish the idea of a God, which +alone may serve as a barrier to the passions of kings." But, can we +sincerely admire the wonderful effects, which the fear of this God +generally produces upon the minds of princes, who are called his images? +What idea shall we form of the original, if we judge of it by the copies! + +Sovereigns, it is true, call themselves the representatives of God, his +vicegerents upon earth. But does the fear of a master, more powerful than +they are, incline them seriously to study the welfare of the nations, whom +Providence has intrusted to their care? Does the pretended terror, which +ought to be inspired into them by the idea of an invisible judge, to whom +alone they acknowledge themselves accountable for their actions, render +them more equitable, more compassionate, more sparing of blood and +treasure of their subjects, more temperate in their pleasures, more +attentive to their duties? In fine, does this God, by whose authority +kings reign, deter them from inflicting a thousand evils upon the people +to whom they ought to act as guides, protectors, and fathers? Alas! If we +survey the whole earth, we shall see men almost every where governed by +tyrants, who use religion merely as an instrument to render more stupid +the slaves, whom they overwhelm under the weight of their vices, or whom +they sacrifice without mercy to their extravagancies. + +Far from being a check upon the passions of kings, Religion, by its +very principles, frees them from all restraint. It transforms them into +divinities, whose caprice the people are never permitted to resist. While +it gives up the reins to princes, and on their part breaks the bonds of +the social compact, it endeavours to chain the minds and hands of their +oppressed subjects. Is it then surprising, that the gods of the earth +imagine every thing lawful for them, and regard their subjects only as +instruments of their caprice or ambition? + +In every country, Religion has represented the Monarch of nature as a +cruel, fantastical, partial tyrant, whose caprice is law; the Monarch God, +is but too faithfully imitated by his representatives upon earth. Religion +seems every where invented solely to lull the people in the lap of +slavery, in order that their masters may easily oppress them, or render +them wretched with impunity. + + + + +144. + +To guard against the enterprises of a haughty pontiff who wished to +reign over kings, to shelter their persons from the attempts of credulous +nations excited by the priests, several European princes have pretended to +hold their crowns and rights from God alone, and to be accountable only +to him for their actions. After a long contest between the civil and +spiritual power, the former at length triumphed; and the priests, forced +to yield, acknowledged the divine right of kings and preached them to the +people, reserving the liberty of changing their minds and of preaching +revolt, whenever the divine rights of kings clashed with the divine rights +of the clergy. It was always at the expense of nations, that peace was +concluded between kings and priests; but the latter, in spite of treaties, +always preserved their pretensions. + +Tyrants and wicked princes, whose consciences continually reproach them +with negligence or perversity, far from fearing their God, had rather deal +with this invisible judge who never opposes any thing, or with his priests +who are always condescending to the rulers of the earth, than with their +own subjects. The people, reduced to despair, might probably _appeal_ from +the divine right of their chiefs. Men when oppressed to the last degree, +sometimes become turbulent; and the divine rights of the tyrant are then +forced to yield to the natural rights of the subjects. + +It is cheaper dealing with gods than men. Kings are accountable for their +actions to God alone; priests are accountable only to themselves. There is +much reason to believe, that both are more confident of the indulgence of +heaven, than of that of earth. It is much easier to escape the vengeance +of gods who may be cheaply appeased, than the vengeance of men whose +patience is exhausted. + +"If you remove the fear of an invisible power, what restraint will you +impose upon the passions of sovereigns?" Let them learn to reign; let them +learn to be just; to respect the rights if the people; and to acknowledge +the kindness of the nations, from whom they hold their greatness and +power. Let them learn to fear men, and to submit to the laws of equity. +Let nobody transgress these laws with impunity; and let them be equally +binding upon the powerful and the weak, the great and the small, the +sovereign and the subjects. + +The fear of gods, Religion, and the terrors of another life, are the +metaphysical and supernatural bulwarks, opposed to the impetuous passions +of princes! Are these bulwarks effectual? Let experience resolve the +question. To oppose Religion to the wickedness of tyrants, is to wish, +that vague, uncertain, unintelligible speculations may be stronger than +propensities which every thing conspires daily to strengthen. + + + + +145. + +The immense service of religion to politics is incessantly boasted; but, a +little reflection will convince us, that religious opinions equally blind +both sovereigns and people, and never enlighten them upon their true +duties or interests. Religion but too often forms licentious, immoral +despots, obeyed by slaves, whom every thing obliges to conform to their +views. + +For want of having studied or known the true principles of administration, +the objects and rights of social life, the real interests of men and +their reciprocal duties, princes, in almost every country, have become +licentious, absolute, and perverse; and their subjects abject, wicked, and +unhappy. It was to avoid the trouble of studying these important objects, +that recourse was had to chimeras, which, far from remedying any thing, +have hitherto only multiplied the evils of mankind, and diverted them from +whatever is most essential to their happiness. + +Does not the unjust and cruel manner in which so many nations are +governed, manifestly furnish one of the strongest proofs, not only of +the small effect produced by the fear of another life, but also of the +non-existence of a Providence, busied with the fate of the human race? If +there existed a good God, should we not be forced to admit, that in this +life he strangely neglects the greater part of mankind? It would seem, +that this God has created nations only to be the sport of the passions and +follies of his representatives upon earth. + + + + +146. + +By reading history with attention, we shall perceive that Christianity, +at first weak and servile, established itself among the savage and free +nations of Europe only intimating to their chiefs, that its religious +principles favoured despotism and rendered them absolute. Consequently, +we see barbarous princes suddenly converted; that is, we see them adopt, +without examination, a system so favourable to their ambition, and use +every art to induce their subjects to embrace it. If the ministers of this +religion have since often derogated from their favourite principles, it +is because the theory influences the conduct of the ministers of the Lord, +only when it suits their temporal interests. + +Christianity boasts of procuring men a happiness unknown to preceding +ages. It is true, the Greeks knew not the _divine rights_ of tyrants or +of the usurpers of the rights of their country. Under paganism, it never +entered the head of any man to suppose, that it was against the will of +heaven for a nation to defend themselves against a ferocious beast, who +had the audacity to lay waste their possessions. The religion of the +Christians was the first that screened tyrants from danger, by laying down +as a principle that the people must renounce the legitimate defence +of themselves. Thus Christian nations are deprived of the first law +of nature, which orders man to resist evil, and to disarm whoever is +preparing to destroy him! If the ministers of the church have often +permitted the people to revolt for the interest of heaven, they have never +permitted them to revolt for their own deliverance from real evils or +known violences. + +From heaven came the chains, that were used for fettering the minds of +mortals. Why is the Mahometan every where a slave? Because his prophet +enslaved him in the name of the Deity, as Moses had before subdued the +Jews. In all parts of the earth, we see, that the first legislators were +the first sovereigns and the first priests of the savages, to whom they +gave laws. + +Religion seems invented solely to exalt princes above their nations, and +rivet the fetters of slavery. As soon as the people are too unhappy here +below, priests are ready to silence them by threatening them with the +anger of God. They are made to fix their eyes upon heaven, lest they +should perceive the true causes of their misfortunes, and apply the +remedies which nature presents. + + + + +147. + +By dint of repeating to men, that the earth is not their true country; +that the present life is only a passage; that they are not made to be +happy in this world; that their sovereigns hold their authority from God +alone, and are accountable only to him for the abuse of it; that it is not +lawful to resist them, etc., priests have eternized the misgovernment of +kings and the misery of the people; the interests of nations have been +basely sacrificed to their chiefs. The more we consider the dogmas and +principles of religion, the more we shall be convinced, that their sole +object is the advantage of tyrants and priests, without regard to that of +societies. + +To mask the impotence of its deaf gods, religion has persuaded mortals, +that iniquities always kindle the wrath of heaven. People impute to +themselves alone the disasters that daily befal them. If nations sometimes +feel the strokes of convulsed nature, their bad governments are but +too often the immediate and permanent causes, from whence proceed +the continual calamities which they are forced to endure. Are not +the ambition, negligence, vices, and oppressions of kings and nobles, +generally the causes of scarcity, beggary, wars, pestilences, corrupt +morals, and all the multiplied scourges which desolate the earth? + +In fixing men's eyes continually upon heaven; in persuading them, that +all their misfortunes are effects of divine anger; in providing none but +ineffectual and futile means to put an end to their sufferings, we might +justly conclude, that the only object of priests was to divert nations +from thinking about the true sources of their misery, and thus to render +it eternal. The ministers of religion conduct themselves almost like those +indigent mothers, who, for want of bread, sing their starved children to +sleep, or give them playthings to divert their thoughts from afflicting +hunger. + +Blinded by error from their very infancy, restrained by the invisible +bonds of opinion, overcome by panic terrors, their faculties blunted +by ignorance, how should the people know the true causes of their +wretchedness? They imagine that they can avert it by invoking the gods. +Alas! do they not see, that it is, in the name of these gods, that they +are ordered to present their throats to the sword of their merciless +tyrants, in whom they might find the obvious cause of the evils under +which they groan, and for whom they cease not to implore, in vain, the +assistance of heaven? + +Ye credulous people! In your misfortunes, redouble your prayers, +offerings, and sacrifices; throng to your temples; fast in sack-cloth and +ashes; bathe yourselves in your own tears; and above all, completely ruin +yourselves to enrich your gods! You will only enrich their priests. The +gods of heaven will be propitious, only when the gods of the earth shall +acknowledge themselves, men, like you, and shall devote to your welfare +the attention you deserve. + + + + +148. + +Negligent, ambitious, and perverse Princes are the real causes of public +misfortunes. Useless, unjust Wars depopulate the earth. Encroaching and +despotic Governments absorb the benefits of nature. The rapacity of Courts +discourages agriculture, extinguishes industry, produces want, pestilence +and misery. Heaven is neither cruel nor propitious to the prayers of the +people; it is their proud chiefs, who have almost always hearts of stone. + +It is destructive to the morals of princes, to persuade them that they +have God alone to fear, when they injure their subjects, or neglect their +happiness. Sovereigns! It is not the gods, but your people, that you +offend, when you do evil. It is your people and yourselves that you +injure, when you govern unjustly. + +In history, nothing is more common than to see Religious Tyrants; nothing +more rare than to find equitable, vigilant, enlightened princes. A +monarch may be pious, punctual in a servile discharge of the duties of his +religion, very submissive and liberal to his priests, and yet at the same +time be destitute of every virtue and talent necessary for governing. To +princes, Religion is only an instrument destined to keep the people +more completely under the yoke. By the excellent principles of religious +morality, a tyrant who, during a long reign, has done nothing but oppress +his subjects, wresting, from them the fruits of their labour, sacrificing +them without mercy to his insatiable ambition,--a conqueror, who has +usurped the provinces of others, slaughtered whole nations, and who, +during his whole life, has been a scourge to mankind,--imagines his +conscience may rest, when, to expiate so many crimes, he has wept at the +feet of a priest, who generally has the base complaisance to console and +encourage a robber, whom the most hideous despair would too lightly punish +for the misery he has caused upon earth. + + + + +149. + +A sovereign, sincerely devout, is commonly dangerous to the state. +Credulity always supposes a contracted mind; devotion generally absorbs +the attention, which a prince should pay to the government of his people. +Obsequious to the suggestions of his priests, he becomes the sport of +their caprices, the favourer of their quarrels, and the instrument and +accomplice of their follies, which he imagines to be of the greatest +importance. Among the most fatal presents, which religion has made the +world, ought to be reckoned those devout and zealous monarchs, who, under +an idea of working for the welfare of their subjects, have made it +a sacred duty to torment, persecute, and destroy those, who thought +differently from themselves. A bigot, at the head of an empire, is one of +the greatest scourges. A single fanatical or knavish priest, listened to +by a credulous and powerful prince, suffices to put a state in disorder. + +In almost all countries, priests and pious persons are intrusted with +forming the minds and hearts of young princes, destined to govern nations. +What qualifications have instructors of this stamp! By what interests can +they be animated? Full of prejudices themselves, they will teach their +pupil to regard superstition, as most important and sacred; its chimerical +duties, as most indispensable, intolerance and persecution, as the true +foundation of his future authority. They will endeavour to make him a +party leader, a turbulent fanatic, a tyrant; they will early stifle his +reason, and forewarn him against the use of it; they will prevent truth +from reaching his ears; they will exasperate him against true talents, and +prejudice him in favour of contemptible ones; in short, they will make him +a weak devotee, who will have no idea either of justice or injustice, nor +of true glory, nor of true greatness, and who will be destitute of the +knowledge and virtues necessary to the government of a great nation. Such +is the plan of the education of a child, destined one day to create the +happiness or misery of millions of men! + + + + +150. + +Priests have ever shewn themselves the friends of despotism, and the +enemies of public liberty: their trade requires abject and submissive +slaves, who have never the audacity to reason. In an absolute government, +who ever gains an ascendancy over the mind of a weak and stupid prince, +becomes master of the state. Instead of conducting the people to +salvation, priests have always conducted them to servitude. + +In consideration of the supernatural titles, which religion has forged for +the worst of princes, the latter have commonly united with priests, who, +sure of governing by opinion the sovereign himself, have undertaken to +bind the hands of the people and to hold them under the yoke. But the +tyrant, covered with the shield of religion, in vain flatters himself that +he is secure from every stroke of fate; opinion is a weak rampart against +the despair of the people. Besides, the priest is a friend of the tyrant +only while he finds his account in tyranny; he preaches sedition, and +demolishes the idol he has made, when he finds it no longer sufficiently +conformable to the interest of God, whom he makes to speak at his will, +and who never speaks except according to his interests. + +It will no doubt be said, that sovereigns, knowing all the advantages +which religion procures them, are truly interested in supporting it with +all their strength. If religious opinions are useful to tyrants, it is +very evident, that they are useful to those, who govern by the laws of +reason and equity. Is there then any advantage in exercising tyranny? Are +princes truly interested in being tyrants? Does not tyranny deprive them +of true power, of the love of the people, and of all safety? Ought not +every reasonable prince to perceive, that the despot is a madman, and +an enemy to himself? Should not every enlightened prince beware of +flatterers, whose object is to lull him to sleep upon the brink of the +precipice which they form beneath him? + + + + +151. + +If sacerdotal flatteries succeed in perverting princes and making them +tyrants; tyrants, on their part, necessarily corrupt both the great and +the humble. Under an unjust ruler, void of goodness and virtue, who knows +no law but his caprice, a nation must necessarily be depraved. Will this +ruler wish to have, about his person, honest, enlightened, and virtuous +men? No. He wants none but flatterers, approvers, imitators, slaves, base +and servile souls, who conform themselves to his inclinations. His court +will propagate the contagion of vice among the lower ranks. All will +gradually become corrupted in a state, whose chief is corrupt. It was long +since said, that "Princes seem to command others to do whatever they do +themselves." + +Religion, far from being a restraint upon sovereigns, enables them to +indulge without fear or remorse, in acts of licentiousness as injurious to +themselves, as to the nations whom they govern. It is never with impunity, +that men are deceived. Tell a sovereign, that he is a god; he will very +soon believe that he owes nothing to any one. Provided he is feared, he +will care very little about being loved: he will observe neither rules, +nor relations with his subjects, nor duties towards them. Tell this +prince, that he is _accountable for his actions to God alone_, and he will +soon act as if he were accountable to no one. + + + + +152. + +An enlightened sovereign is he, who knows his true interests; who knows, +that they are connected with the interests of his nation; that a prince +cannot be great, powerful, beloved, or respected, while he commands only +unhappy slaves; that equity, beneficence, and vigilance will give him +more real authority over his people, than the fabulous titles, said to be +derived from heaven. He will see, that Religion is useful only to priests, +that it is useless to society and often troubles it, and that it ought to +be restrained in order to be prevented from doing injury. Finally, he will +perceive, that, to reign with glory, he must have good laws and inculcate +virtue, and not found his power upon impostures and fallacies. + + + + +153. + +The ministers of religion have taken great care to make of their God, a +formidable, capricious, and fickle tyrant. Such a God was necessary to +their variable interests. A God, who should be just and good, without +mixture of caprice or perversity; a God, who had constantly the qualities +of an honest man, or of a kind sovereign, would by no means suit his +ministers. It is useful to priests, that men should tremble before their +God, in order that they may apply to them to obtain relief from their +fears. "No man is a hero before his valet de chambre." It is not +surprising, that a God, dressed up by his priests so as to be terrible +to others, should rarely impose upon them, or should have but very little +influence upon their conduct. Hence, in every country, their conduct is +very much the same. Under pretext of the glory of their God, they every +where prey upon ignorance, degrade the mind, discourage industry, and sow +discord. Ambition and avarice have at all times been the ruling passions +of the priesthood. The priest every where rises superior to sovereigns and +laws; we see him every where occupied with the interests of his pride, +of his cupidity, and of his despotic, revengeful humour. In the room +of useful and social virtues, he everywhere substitutes expiations, +sacrifices, ceremonies, mysterious practices, in a word, inventions +lucrative to himself and ruinous to others. + +The mind is confounded and the reason is amazed upon viewing the +ridiculous customs and pitiful means, which the ministers of the gods have +invented in every country to purify souls, and render heaven favourable. +Here they cut off part of a child's prepuce, to secure for him divine +benevolence; there, they pour water upon his head, to cleanse him of +crimes, which he could not as yet have committed. In one place, they +command him to plunge into a river, whose waters have the power of washing +away all stains; in another, he is forbidden to eat certain food, the use +of which will not fail to excite the celestial wrath; in other countries, +they enjoin upon sinful man to come periodically and confess his faults to +a priest, who is often a greater sinner than himself, etc., etc., etc. + + + + +154. + +What should we say of a set of empirics, who, resorting every day to a +public place, should extol the goodness of their remedies, and vend them +as infallible, while they themselves were full of the infirmities, which +they pretend to cure? Should we have much confidence in the recipes of +these quacks, though they stun us with crying, "take our remedies, their +effects are infallible; they cure every body; except us." What should we +afterwards think, should those quacks spend their lives in complaining, +that their remedies never produced the desired effect upon the sick, +who take them? In fine, what idea should we form of the stupidity of the +vulgar, who, notwithstanding these confessions, should not cease to pay +dearly for remedies, the inefficacy of which every thing tends to prove? +Priests resemble these alchymists, who boldly tell us, they have the +secret of making gold, while they have scarcely clothes to cover their +nakedness. + +The ministers of religion incessantly declaim against the corruption of +the age, and loudly complain of the little effect of their lessons, while +at the same time they assure us, that religion is the _universal remedy_, +the true _panacea_ against the wickedness of mankind. These priests are +very sick themselves, yet men continue to frequent their shops, and to +have faith in their divine antidotes, which, by their own confession, +never effect a cure! + + + + +155. + +Religion, especially with the moderns, has tried to identify itself with +Morality, the principles of which it has thereby totally obscured. It has +rendered men unsociable by duty, and forced them to be inhuman to everyone +who thought differently from themselves. Theological disputes, equally +unintelligible to each of the enraged parties, have shaken empires, caused +revolutions, been fatal to sovereigns, and desolated all Europe. These +contemptible quarrels have not been extinguished even in rivers of blood. +Since the extinction of paganism, the people have made it a religious +principle to become outrageous, whenever any opinion is advanced which +their priests think contrary to _sound doctrine_. The sectaries of a +religion, which preaches, in appearance, nothing but charity, concord, and +peace, have proved themselves more ferocious than cannibals or savages, +whenever their divines excited them to destroy their brethren. There is +no crime, which men have not committed under the idea of pleasing the +Divinity, or appeasing his wrath. + +The idea of a terrible God, whom we paint to ourselves as a despot, must +necessarily render his subjects wicked. Fear makes only slaves, and slaves +are cowardly, base, cruel, and think every thing lawful, in order to +gain the favour or escape the chastisements of the master whom they fear. +Liberty of thinking alone can give men humanity and greatness of soul. +The notion of a tyrant-god tends only to make them abject, morose, +quarrelsome, intolerant slaves. + +Every religion, which supposes a God easily provoked, jealous, revengeful, +punctilious about his rights or the etiquette with which he is treated;--a +God little enough to be hurt by the opinions which men can form of him;--a +God unjust enough to require that we have uniform notions of his conduct; +a religion which supposes such a God necessarily becomes restless, +unsociable, and sanguinary; the worshippers of such a God would never +think, that they could, without offence, forbear hating and even +destroying every one, who is pointed out to them, as an adversary of +this God; they would think, that it would be to betray the cause of +their celestial Monarch, to live in friendly intercourse with rebellious +fellow-citizens. If we love what God hates, do we not expose ourselves to +his implacable hatred? + +Infamous persecutors, and devout men-haters! Will you never discern the +folly and injustice of your intolerant disposition? Do you not see, that +man is no more master of his religious opinions, his belief or unbelief, +than of the language, which he learns from infancy? To punish a man for +his errors, is it not to punish him for having been educated differently +from you? If I am an unbeliever, is it possible for me to banish from my +mind the reasons that have shaken my faith? If your God gives men leave +to be damned, what have you to meddle with? Are you more prudent and wise, +than this God, whose rights you would avenge? + + + + +156. + +There is no devotee, who does not, according to his temperament, hate, +despise, or pity the adherents of a sect, different from his own. +The _established_ religion, which is never any other than that of the +sovereign and the armies, always makes its superiority felt in a very +cruel and injurious manner by the weaker sects. As yet there is no true +toleration upon earth; men every where adore a jealous God, of whom each +nation believes itself the friend, to the exclusion of all others. + +Every sect boasts of adoring alone the true God, the universal God, the +Sovereign of all nature. But when we come to examine this Monarch of the +world, we find that every society, sect, party, or religious cabal, makes +of this powerful God only a pitiful sovereign, whose care and goodness +extend only to a small number of his subjects, who pretend that they +alone have the happiness to enjoy his favours, and that he is not at all +concerned about the others. + +The founders of religions, and the priests who support them, evidently +proposed to separate the nations, whom they taught, from the other +nations; they wished to separate their own flock by distinguishing marks; +they gave their followers gods, who were hostile to the other gods; they +taught them modes of worship, dogmas and ceremonies apart; and above +all, they persuaded them, that the religion of others was impious and +abominable. By this unworthy artifice, the ambitious knaves established, +their usurpation over the minds of their followers, rendered them +unsociable, and made them regard with an evil eye all persons who had not +the same mode of worship and the same ideas as they had. Thus it is, that +Religion has shut up the heart and for ever banished from it the affection +that man ought to have for his fellow-creature. Sociability, indulgence, +humanity, those first virtues of all morality, are totally incompatible +with religious prejudices. + + + + +157. + +Every national religion is calculated to make man vain, unsociable, and +wicked; the first step towards humanity is to permit every one peaceably +to embrace the mode of worship and opinions, which he judges to be right. +But this conduct cannot be pleasing to the ministers of religion, who wish +to have the right of tyrannizing over men even in their thoughts. + +Blind and bigoted princes! You hate and persecute heretics, and order them +to execution, because you are told, that these wretches displease God. But +do you not say, that your God is full of goodness? How then can you expect +to please him by acts of barbarity, which he must necessarily disapprove? +Besides, who has informed you, that their opinions displease your God? +Your priests? But, who assures you, that your priests are not themselves +deceived or wish to deceive you? The same priests? Princes! It is +then upon the hazardous word of your priests, that you commit the most +atrocious crimes, under the idea of pleasing the Divinity! + + + + +158. + +Pascal says, "that man never does evil so fully and cheerfully, as when he +acts from a false principle of conscience." Nothing is more dangerous than +a religion, which lets loose the ferocity of the multitude, and justifies +their blackest crimes. They will set no bounds to their wickedness, when +they think it authorized by their God, whose interests, they are told, can +make every action legitimate. Is religion in danger?--the most civilized +people immediately becomes true savages, and think nothing forbidden. The +more cruel they are, the more agreeable they suppose they are to their +God, whose cause they imagine cannot be supported with too much warmth. + +All religions have authorized innumerable crimes. The Jews, intoxicated +with the promises of their God, arrogated the rights of exterminating +whole nations. Relying on the oracles of their God, the Romans conquered +and ravaged the world. The Arabians, encouraged by their divine prophet, +carried fire and sword among the Christians and the idolaters. The +CHRISTIANS, under pretext of extending their holy religion, have often +deluged both hemispheres in blood. + +In all events favourable to their own interest, which they always call +_the cause of God_, priests show us the _finger of God_. According to +these principles, the devout have the happiness to see the _finger of +God_ in revolts, revolutions, massacres, regicides, crimes, prostitutions, +horrors; and, if these things contribute ever so little to the triumph +of religion, we are told, that "God uses all sorts of means to attain his +ends." Is any thing more capable of effacing every idea of morality from +the minds of men, than to inform them, that their God, so powerful and +perfect, is often forced to make use of criminal actions in order to +accomplish his designs? + + + + +159. + +No sooner do we complain of the extravagancies and evils, which Religion +has so often caused upon the earth, than we are reminded, that these +excesses are not owing to Religion; but "that they are the sad effects of +the passions of men." But I would ask, what has let loose these passions? +It is evidently Religion; it is zeal, that renders men inhuman, and serves +to conceal the greatest atrocities. Do not these disorders then prove, +that religion, far from restraining the passions of men, only covers them +with a veil, which sanctifies them, and that nothing would be more useful, +than to tear away this sacred veil of which men often make such a terrible +use? What horrors would be banished from society, if the wicked were +deprived of so plausible a pretext for disturbing it! + +Instead of being angels of peace among men, priests have been demons of +discord. They have pretended to receive from heaven the right of being +quarrelsome, turbulent, and rebellious. Do not the ministers of the +Lord think themselves aggrieved, and pretend that the divine Majesty is +offended, whenever sovereigns have the temerity to prevent them from +doing evil? Priests are like the spiteful woman who cried _fire! murder! +assassination!_ while her husband held her hands to prevent her from +striking him. + + + + +160. + +Notwithstanding the bloody tragedies, which Religion often acts, it is +insisted, that, without Religion, there can be no Morality. If we judge +theological opinions by their effects, we may confidently assert, that all +Morality is perfectly incompatible with men's religious opinions. + +"Imitate God," exclaim the pious. But, what would be our Morality, should +we imitate this God! and what God ought we to imitate? The God of the +Deist? But even this God cannot serve us as a very constant model of +goodness. If he is the author of all things, he is the author both of good +and evil. If he is the author of order, he is also the author of disorder, +which could not take place without his permission. If he produces, he +destroys; if he gives life, he takes it away; if he grants abundance, +riches, prosperity, and peace, he permits or sends scarcity, poverty, +calamities, and wars. How then can we receive as a model of permanent +beneficence, the God of Deism or natural religion, whose favourable +dispositions are every instant contradicted by all the effects we behold? +Morality must have a basis less tottering than the example of a God, whose +conduct varies, and who cannot be called good, unless we obstinately shut +our eyes against the evil which he causes or permits in this world. + +Shall we imitate the _beneficent, mighty Jupiter_ of heathen antiquity? To +imitate such a god, is to admit as a model, a rebellious son, who ravishes +the throne from his father. It is to imitate a debauchee, an adulterer, +one guilty of incest and of base passions, at whose conduct every +reasonable mortal would blush. What would have been the condition of men +under paganism, had they imagined, like Plato, that virtue consisted in +imitating the gods! + +Must we imitate the God of the Jews! Shall we find in _Jehovah_ a model +for our conduct? This is a truly savage god, made for a stupid, cruel, +and immoral people; he is always furious, breathes nothing but vengeance, +commands carnage, theft, and unsociability. The conduct of this god cannot +serve as a model to that of an honest man, and can be imitated only by a +chief of robbers. + +Shall we then imitate the _Jesus_ of the Christians? Does this God, who +died to appease the implacable fury of his father, furnish us an example +which men ought to follow? Alas! we shall see in him only a God, or +rather a fanatic, a misanthrope, who, himself plunged in wretchedness and +preaching to wretches, will advise them to be poor, to combat with and +stifle nature, to hate pleasure, seek grief, and detest themselves. He +will tell them to leave father, mother, relations, friends, etc., to +follow him. "Fine morality!" you say. It is, undoubtedly, admirable: it +must be divine, for it is impracticable to men. But is not such sublime +morality calculated to render virtue odious? According to the so much +boasted morality of the _man_-God of the Christians, a disciple of his in +this world must be like _Tantalus_, tormented with a burning thirst, which +he is not allowed to quench. Does not such morality give us a wonderful +idea of the author of nature? If, as we are assured, he has created all +things for his creatures, by what strange whim does he forbid them the +use of the goods he has created for them? Is pleasure then, which man +continually desires, only a snare, which God has maliciously laid to +surprise his weakness? + + + + +161. + +The followers of Christ would have us regard, as a miracle, the +establishment of their Religion, which is totally repugnant to nature, +opposite to all the propensities of the heart, and inimical to sensual +pleasures. But the austerity of a doctrine renders it the more marvellous +in the eyes of the vulgar. The same disposition, which respects +inconceivable mysteries as divine and supernatural, admires, as divine and +supernatural, a Morality, that is impracticable, and beyond the powers of +man. + +To admire a system of Morality, and to put it in practice, are two very +different things. All Christians admire and extol the Morality of the +gospel; which they do not practise. + +The whole world is more or less infected with a Religious morality, +founded upon the opinion, that to please the Divinity, it is absolutely +necessary to render ourselves unhappy upon earth. In all parts of our +globe, we see penitents, fakirs, and fanatics, who seem to have profoundly +studied the means of tormenting themselves, in honour of a being whose +goodness all agree in celebrating. Religion, by its essence, is an enemy +to the joy and happiness of men. "Blessed are the poor, blessed are +they, who weep; blessed are they, who suffer; misery to those, who are +in abundance and joy." Such are the rare discoveries, announced by +Christianity! + + + + +162. + +What is a Saint in every religion? A man, who prays, and fasts, who +torments himself, and shuns the world; who like an owl, delights only +in solitude, abstains from all pleasure, and seems frightened of every +object, which may divert him from his fanatical meditations. Is this +virtue? Is a being of this type, kind to himself, or useful to others? +Would not society be dissolved, and man return to a savage state, if every +one were fool enough to be a Saint? + +It is evident, that the literal and rigorous practice of the divine +Morality of the Christians would prove the infallible ruin of nations. A +Christian, aiming at perfection, ought to free his mind from whatever can +divert it from heaven, his true country. Upon earth, he sees nothing but +temptations, snares, and rocks of perdition. He must fear science, as +hurtful to faith; he must avoid industry, as a means of obtaining riches, +too fatal to salvation; he must renounce offices and honours, as capable +of exciting his pride, and calling off his attention from the care of +his soul. In a word, the sublime Morality of Christ, were it practicable, +would break all the bonds of society. + +A Saint in society is as useless, as a Saint in the desert; his humour is +morose, discontented, and often turbulent; his zeal sometimes obliges him +in conscience to trouble society by opinions or dreams, which his vanity +makes him consider as inspirations from on high. The annals of every +religion are full of restless Saints, intractable Saints, and seditious +Saints, who have become famous by the ravages, with which, _for the +greater glory of God_, they have desolated the universe. If Saints, who +live in retirement, are useless, those who live in the world, are often +very dangerous. + +The vanity of acting, the desire of appearing illustrious and peculiar in +conduct, commonly constitute the distinguishing character of Saints. Pride +persuades them, that they are extraordinary men far above human nature, +beings much more perfect than others, favourites whom God regards with +much more complaisance than the rest of mortals. Humility, in a Saint, +is commonly only a more refined pride than that of the generality of men. +Nothing but the most ridiculous vanity can induce man to wage continual +war against his own nature. + + + + +163. + +A morality, which contradicts the nature of man, is not made for man. +"But," say you, "the nature of man is depraved." In what consists this +pretended depravity? In having passions? But, are not passions essential +to man? Is he not obliged to seek, desire, and love what is, or what he +thinks is, conducive to his happiness? Is he not forced to fear and avoid +what he judges disagreeable or fatal? Kindle his passions for useful +objects; connect his welfare with those objects; divert him, by sensible +and known motives, from what may injure either him or others, and you will +make him a reasonable and virtuous being. A man without passions would be +equally indifferent to vice and to virtue. + +Holy Doctors! you are always repeating to us that the nature of man is +perverted; you exclaim, "that _all flesh has corrupted its way_, that +all the propensities of nature have become inordinate." In this case, you +accuse your God; who was either unable, or unwilling, that this nature +should preserve its primitive perfection. If this nature is corrupted, why +has not God repaired it? The Christian immediately assures me, "that human +nature is repaired; that the death of his God has restored its integrity." +How then, I would ask, do you pretend that human nature, notwithstanding +the death of a God, is still depraved? Is then the death of your God +wholly fruitless? What becomes of his omnipotence and of his victory over +the Devil, if it is true that the Devil still preserves the empire, which, +according to you, he has always exercised in the world? + +According to Christian theology, Death is the _wages of sin_. This opinion +is conformable to that of some negro and savage nations, who imagine that +the Death of a man is always the supernatural effect of the anger of the +Gods. Christians firmly believe, that Christ has delivered them from sin; +though they see, that, in their Religion, as in others, man is subject to +Death. To say that Jesus Christ has delivered us from sin, is it not to +say, that a judge has pardoned a criminal, while we see that he leaves him +for execution? + + + + +164. + +If shutting our eyes upon whatever passes in the world, we would credit +the partisans of the Christian Religion, we should believe, that the +coming of their divine Saviour produced the most wonderful and complete +reform in the morals of nations. + +If we examine the Morals of Christian nations, and listen to the clamours +of their priests, we shall be forced to conclude, that Jesus Christ, their +God, preached and died, in vain; his omnipotent will still finds in men, +a resistance, over which he cannot, or will not triumph. The Morality +of this divine Teacher, which his disciples so much admire and so little +practise, is followed, in a whole century only by half a dozen obscure +saints, and fanatics, and unknown monks, who alone will have the glory +of shining in the celestial court, while all the rest of mortals, though +redeemed by the blood of this God, will be the prey of eternal flames. + + + + +165. + +When a man is strongly inclined to sin, he thinks very little about +his God. Nay more, whatever crimes he has committed, he always flatters +himself, that this God will soften, in his favour, the rigour of his +decrees. No mortal seriously believes, that his conduct can damn him. +Though he fears a terrible God, who often makes him tremble, yet, whenever +he is strongly tempted, he yields; and he afterwards sees only the God +of _mercies_, the idea of whom calms his apprehensions. If a man commits +evil, he hopes, he shall have time to reform, and promises to repent at a +future day. + +In religious pharmacy, there are infallible prescriptions to quiet +consciences: priests, in every country, possess sovereign secrets to +disarm the anger of heaven. Yet, if it be true that the Deity is appeased +by prayers, offerings, sacrifices, and penances, it can no longer be said, +that Religion is a check to the irregularities of men; they will first +sin, and then seek the means to appease God. Every Religion, which +expiates crime and promises a remission of them, if it restrain some +persons, encourages the majority to commit evil. Notwithstanding his +immutability, God, in every Religion, is a true _Proteus_. His priests +represent him at one time armed with severity, at another full of clemency +and mildness; sometimes cruel and unmerciful, and sometimes easily melted +by the sorrow and tears of sinners. Consequently, men see the Divinity +only on the side most conformable to their present interests. A God always +angry would discourage his worshippers, or throw them into despair. +Men must have a God, who is both irritable, and placable. If his anger +frightens some timorous souls, his clemency encourages the resolutely +wicked, who depend upon recurring, sooner or later, to the means of +accommodation. If the judgments of God terrify some faint-hearted pious +persons, who by constitution and habit are not prone to evil, _the +treasures of divine mercy_ encourage the greatest criminals, who have +reason to hope they participate therein equally with the others. + + + + +166. + +Most men seldom think of God, or, at least, bestow on him serious +attention. The only ideas we can form of him are so devoid of object, and +are at the same time so afflicting, that the only imaginations they can +arrest are those of melancholy hypochondriacs, who do not constitute the +majority of the inhabitants of this world. The vulgar have no conception +of God; their weak brains are confused, whenever they think of him. +The man of business thinks only of his business; the courtier of his +intrigues; men of fashion, women, and young people of their pleasures; +dissipation soon effaces in them all the fatiguing notions of Religion. +The ambitious man, the miser and the debauchee carefully avoid +speculations too feeble to counterbalance their various passions. + +Who is awed by the idea of a God? A few enfeebled men, morose and +disgusted with the world; a few, in whom the passions are already deadened +by age, by infirmity, or by the strokes of fortune. Religion is a check, +to those alone who by their state of mind and body, or by fortuitous +circumstances, have been already brought to reason. The fear of God +hinders from sin only those, who are not much inclined to it, or else +those who are no longer able to commit it. To tell men, that the +Deity punishes crimes in this world, is to advance an assertion, which +experience every moment contradicts. The worst of men are commonly the +arbiters of the world, and are those whom fortune loads with her favours. +To refer us to another life, in order to convince us of the judgments +of God, is to refer us to conjectures, in order to destroy facts, which +cannot be doubted. + + + + +167. + +Nobody thinks of the life to come, when he is strongly smitten with +the objects he finds here below. In the eyes of a passionate lover, the +presence of his mistress extinguishes the flames of hell, and her charms +efface all the pleasures of paradise. Woman! you leave, say you, your +lover for your God. This is either because your lover is no longer the +same in your eyes, or because he leaves you. + +Nothing is more common, than to see ambitious, perverse, corrupt, and +immoral men, who have some ideas of Religion, and sometimes appear even +zealous for its interest. If they do not practise it at present, they hope +to in the future. They lay it up, as a remedy, which will be necessary +to salve the conscience for the evil they intend to commit. Besides, the +party of devotees and priests being very numerous, active, and powerful, +is it not astonishing, that rogues and knaves seek its support to attain +their ends? It will undoubtedly be said, that many honest people are +sincerely religious, and that without profit; but is uprightness of heart +always accompanied with knowledge? + +It is urged, that many learned men, many men of genius have been strongly +attached to Religion. This proves, that men of genius may have prejudices, +be pusillanimous, and have an imagination, which misleads them and +prevents them from examining subjects coolly. Pascal proves nothing in +favour of Religion, unless that a man of genius may be foolish on some +subjects, and is but a child, when he is weak enough to listen to his +prejudices. Pascal himself tells us, that _the mind may be strong and +contracted, enlarged and weak_. He previously observes, that _a man may +have a sound mind, and not understand every subject equally well; for +there are some, who, having a sound judgment in a certain order of things, +are bewildered in others_. + + + + +168. + +What is virtue according to theology? _It is_, we are told, _the +conformity of the actions of man to the will of God_. But, what is God? +A being, of whom nobody has the least conception, and whom every one +consequently modifies in his own way. What is the will of God? It is what +men, who have seen God, or whom God has inspired, have declared to be the +will of God. Who are those, who have seen God? They are either fanatics, +or rogues, or ambitious men, whom we cannot believe. + +To found Morality upon a God, whom every man paints to himself +differently, composes in his way, and arranges according to his own +temperament and interest, is evidently to found Morality upon the caprice +and imagination of men; it is to found it upon the whims of a sect, a +faction, a party, who believe they have the advantage to adore a true God +to the exclusion of all others. + +To establish Morality or the duties of man upon the divine will, is to +found it upon the will, the reveries and the interests of those, who make +God speak, without ever fearing that he will contradict them. In every +Religion, priests alone have a right to decide what is pleasing or +displeasing to their God, and we are certain they will always decide, that +it is what pleases or displeases themselves. The dogmas, the ceremonies, +the morals, and the virtues, prescribed by every Religion, are visibly +calculated only to extend the power or augment the emoluments of the +founders and ministers of these Religions. The dogmas are obscure, +inconceivable, frightful, and are therefore well calculated to bewilder +the imagination and to render the vulgar more obsequious to the will of +those who wish to domineer over them. The ceremonies and practices procure +the priests, riches or respect. Religion consists in a submissive faith, +which prohibits the exercise of reason; in a devout humility, which +insures priests the submission of their slaves; in an ardent zeal, when +Religion, that is, when the interest of these priests, is in danger. The +only object of all religions is evidently the advantage of its ministers. + + + + +169. + +When we reproach theologians with the barrenness of their divine virtues, +they emphatically extol _charity_, that tender love of one's neighbour, +which Christianity makes an essential duty of its disciples. But, alas! +what becomes of this pretended charity, when we examine the conduct of the +ministers of the Lord? Ask them, whether we must love or do good to our +neighbour, if he be an impious man, a heretic, or an infidel, that is, +if he do not think like them? Ask them, whether we must tolerate opinions +contrary to those of the religion, they profess? Ask them, whether the +sovereign can show indulgence to those who are in error? Their charity +instantly disappears, and the established clergy will tell you, that _the +prince bears the sword only to support the cause of the Most High_: they +will tell you that, through love for our neighbour, we must prosecute, +imprison, exile, and burn him. You will find no toleration except among a +few priests, persecuted themselves, who will lay aside Christian charity +the instant they have power to persecute in their turn. + +The Christian religion, in its origin preached by beggars and miserable +men, under the name of _charity_, strongly recommends alms. The religion +of Mahomet also enjoins it as an indispensable duty. Nothing undoubtedly +is more conformable to humanity, than to succour the unfortunate, to +clothe the naked, to extend the hand of beneficence to every one in +distress. But would it not be more humane and charitable to prevent the +source of misery and poverty? If Religion, instead of deifying princes, +had taught them to respect the property of their subjects, to be just, to +exercise only their lawful rights, we should not be shocked by the sight +of such a multitude of beggars. A rapacious, unjust, tyrannical government +multiplies misery; heavy taxes produce discouragement, sloth, and poverty, +which in their turn beget robberies, assassinations, and crimes of every +description. Had sovereigns more humanity, charity, and equity, their +dominions would not be peopled by so many wretches, whose misery it +becomes impossible to alleviate. + +Christian and Mahometan states are full of large hospitals, richly +endowed, in which we admire the pious charity of the kings and sultans, +who erected them. But would it not have been more humane to govern the +people justly, to render them happy, to excite and favour industry and +commerce, and to let men enjoy in safety the fruit of their labours, than +to crush them under a despotic yoke, to impoverish them by foolish wars, +to reduce them to beggary, in order that luxury may be satisfied, and then +to erect splendid buildings, which can contain but a very small portion +of those, who have been rendered miserable? Religion has only deluded men; +instead of preventing evils, it always applies ineffectual remedies. + +The ministers of heaven have always known how to profit by the calamities +of others. Public misery is their element. They have every where become +administrators of the property of the poor, distributors of alms, +depositaries of charitable donations; and thereby they have at all times +extended and supported their power over the unhappy, who generally compose +the most numerous, restless, and seditious part of society. Thus the +greatest evils turn to the profit of the ministers of the Lord. Christian +priests tell us, that the property they possess is the property of the +poor, and that it is therefore sacred. Consequently they have eagerly +accumulated lands, revenues, and treasures. Under colour of charity, +spiritual guides have become extremely opulent, and in the face of +impoverished nations enjoy wealth, which was destined solely for the +unfortunate; while the latter, far from murmuring, applaud a pious +generosity, which enriches the church, but rarely contributes to the +relief of the poor. + +According to the principles of Christianity, poverty itself is a virtue; +indeed, it is the virtue, which sovereigns and priests oblige their slaves +to observe most rigorously. With this idea, many pious Christians have of +their own accord renounced riches, distributed their patrimony among the +poor, and retired into deserts, there to live in voluntary indigence. But +this enthusiasm, this supernatural taste for misery, has been soon forced +to yield to nature. The successors of these volunteers in poverty sold to +the devout people their prayers, and their intercessions with the Deity. +They became rich and powerful. Thus monks and hermits lived in indolence, +and under colour of charity, impudently devoured the substance of the +poor. + +The species of poverty, most esteemed by Religion, is _poverty of mind_. +The fundamental virtue of every Religion, most useful to its ministers, +is _faith_. It consists in unbounded credulity, which admits, without +enquiry, whatever the interpreters of the Deity are interested in making +men believe. By the aid of this wonderful virtue, priests became the +arbiters of right and wrong, of good and evil: they could easily cause the +commission of crimes to advance their interest. Implicit faith has been +the source of the greatest outrages that have been committed. + + + + +170. + +He, who first taught nations, that, when we wrong Man, we must ask pardon +of God, appease _him_ by presents, and offer _him_ sacrifices, evidently +destroyed the true principles of Morality. According to such ideas, many +persons imagine that they may obtain of the king of heaven, as of kings +of the earth, permission to be unjust and wicked, or may at least obtain +pardon for the evil they may commit. + +Morality is founded upon the relations, wants, and constant interests +of mankind; the relations, which subsist between God and Men, are either +perfectly unknown, or imaginary. Religion, by associating God with Man, +has wisely weakened, or destroyed, the bonds, which unite them. Mortals +imagine, they may injure one another with impunity, by making suitable +satisfaction to the almighty being, who is supposed to have the right of +remitting all offences committed against his creatures. + +Is any thing better calculated to encourage the wicked or harden them in +crimes, than to persuade them that there exists an invisible being, who +has a right to forgive acts of injustice, rapine, and outrage committed +against society? By these destructive ideas, perverse men perpetrate the +most horrid crimes, and believe they make reparation by imploring divine +mercy; their conscience is at rest, when a priest assures them that heaven +is disarmed by a repentance, which, though sincere, is very useless to the +world. + +In the mind of a devout man, God must be regarded more than his creatures; +it is better to obey him, than men. The interests of the celestial monarch +must prevail over those of weak mortals. But the interests of heaven are +obviously those of its ministers; whence it evidently follows, that in +every religion, priests, under pretext of the interests of heaven or the +glory of God, can dispense with the duties of human Morality, when they +clash with the duties, which God has a right to impose. Besides, must +not he, who has power to pardon crimes, have a right to encourage the +commission of crimes? + + + + +171. + +We are perpetually told, that, without a God there would be no _moral +obligation_; that the people and even the sovereigns require a legislator +powerful enough to constrain them. Moral constraint supposes a law; but +this law arises from the eternal and necessary relations of things with +one another; relations, which have nothing common with the existence of a +God. The rules of Man's conduct are derived from his own nature which he +is capable of knowing, and not from the Divine nature of which he has no +idea. These rules constrain or oblige us; that is, we render ourselves +estimable or contemptible, amiable or detestable, worthy of reward or of +punishment, happy or unhappy, accordingly as we conform to, or deviate +from these rules. The law, which obliges man not to hurt himself, is +founded upon the nature of a sensible being, who, in whatever way he came +into this world, is forced by his actual essence to seek good and shun +evil, to love pleasure and fear pain. The law, which obliges man not +to injure, and even to do good to others, is founded upon the nature of +sensible beings, living in society, whose essence compels them to despise +those who are useless, and to detest those who oppose their felicity. + +Whether there exists a God or not, whether this God has spoken or not, the +moral duties of men will be always the same, so long as they are sensible +beings. Have men then need of a God whom they know not, of an invisible +legislator, of a mysterious religion and of chimerical fears, in order to +learn that every excess evidently tends to destroy them, that to preserve +health they must be temperate; that to gain the love of others it is +necessary to do them good, that to do them evil is a sure means to incur +their vengeance and hatred? "Before the law there was no sin." Nothing is +more false than this maxim. It suffices that man is what he is, or that +he is a sensible being, in order to distinguish what gives him pleasure or +displeasure. It suffices that one man knows that another man is a sensible +being like himself, to perceive what is useful or hurtful to him. It +suffices that man needs his fellow-creature, in order to know that he must +fear to excite sentiments unfavourable to himself. Thus the feeling and +thinking being has only to feel and think, in order to discover what he +must do for himself and others. I feel, and another feels like me; this is +the foundation of all morals. + + + + +172. + +We can judge of the goodness of a system of Morals, only by its conformity +to the nature of man. By this comparison, we have a right to reject it, +if contrary to the welfare of our species. Whoever has seriously meditated +Religion; whoever has carefully weighed its advantages and disadvantages, +will be fully convinced, that both are injurious to the interests of Man, +or directly opposite to his nature. + +"To arms! the cause of your God is at stake! Heaven is outraged! The faith +is in danger! Impiety! blasphemy! heresy!" The magical power of these +formidable words, the real value of which the people never understand, +have at all times enabled priests to excite revolts, to dethrone kings, to +kindle civil wars, and to lay waste. If we examine the important objects, +which have produced so many ravages upon earth, it appears, that either +the foolish reveries and whimsical conjectures of some theologian who did +not understand himself, or else the pretensions of the clergy, have broken +every social bond and deluged mankind with blood and tears. + + + + +173. + +The sovereigns of this world, by associating the Divinity in the +government of their dominions, by proclaiming themselves his vicegerents +and representatives upon earth, and by acknowledging they hold their power +from him, have necessarily constituted his ministers their own rivals or +masters. Is it then astonishing, that priests have often made kings feel +the superiority of the Celestial Monarch? Have they not more than once +convinced temporal princes, that even the greatest power is compelled to +yield to the spiritual power of opinion? Nothing is more difficult than +to serve two masters, especially when they are not agreed upon what they +require. + +The association of Religion with Politics necessarily introduced double +legislation. The law of God, interpreted by his priests, was often +repugnant to the law of the sovereign, or the interest of the state. When +princes have firmness and are confident of the love of their subjects, +the law of God is sometimes forced to yield to the wise intentions of the +temporal sovereign; but generally the _sovereign_ authority is obliged +to give way to the _divine_ authority, that is, to the interests of the +clergy. Nothing is more dangerous to a prince, than to _encroach upon the +authority of the Church_, that is, to attempt to reform abuses consecrated +by religion. God is never more angry than when we touch the divine rights, +privileges, possessions, or immunities of his priests. + +The metaphysical speculations or religious opinions of men influence their +conduct, only when they judge them conformable to their interest. Nothing +proves this truth more clearly, than the conduct of many princes with +respect to the spiritual power, which they often resist. Ought not a +sovereign, persuaded of the importance and rights of Religion, to believe +himself in conscience bound to receive respectfully the orders of its +priests, and to regard them as the orders of the Divinity? There was +a time, when kings and people, more consistent in their conduct, were +convinced of the rights of spiritual power, and becoming its slaves, +yielded to it upon every occasion, and were but docile instruments in +its hands. That happy time is passed. By a strange inconsistency the most +devout monarchs are sometimes seen to oppose the enterprises of those, +whom they yet regard as the ministers of God. A sovereign, deeply +religious, ought to remain prostrate at the feet of his ministers, and +regard them as true sovereigns. Is there upon earth a power which has a +right to put itself in competition with that of the Most High? + + + + +174. + +Have princes then, who imagine themselves interested in cherishing the +prejudices of their subjects, seriously reflected upon the effects, which +have been, and may be again produced by certain privileged demagogues, who +have a right to speak at pleasure, and in the name of heaven to inflame +the passions of millions of subjects? What ravages would not these sacred +haranguers cause, if they should conspire, as they have so often done, to +disturb the tranquillity of a state! + +To most nations, nothing is more burthensome and ruinous than the worship +of their gods. Not only do the ministers of these gods every where +constitute the first order in the state, but they also enjoy the largest +portion of the goods of society, and have a right to levy permanent taxes +upon their fellow-citizens. What real advantages then do these organs of +the Most High procure the people, for the immense profits extorted from +their industry? In exchange for their riches and benefits, what do they +give them but mysteries, hypotheses, ceremonies, subtle questions, and +endless quarrels, which states are again compelled to pay with blood? + + + + +175. + +Religion, though said to be the firmest prop of Morality, evidently +destroys its true springs, in order to substitute imaginary ones, +inconceivable chimeras, which, being obviously contrary to reason, nobody +firmly believes. All nations declare that they firmly believe in a God, +who rewards and punishes; all say they are persuaded of the existence of +hell and paradise; yet, do these ideas render men better or counteract +the most trifling interests? Every one assures us, that he trembles at +the judgments of God; yet every one follows his passions, when he thinks +himself sure of escaping the judgments of Man. The fear of invisible +powers is seldom so strong as the fear of visible ones. Unknown or remote +punishments strike the multitude far less forcibly than the sight of +the gallows. Few courtiers fear the anger of their God so much as the +displeasure of their master. A pension, a title, or a riband suffices to +efface the remembrance both of the torments of hell, and of the pleasures +of the celestial court. The caresses of a woman repeatedly prevail over +the menaces of the Most High. A jest, a stroke of ridicule, a witticism, +make more impression upon the man of the world, than all the grave notions +of his Religion. + +Are we not assured that _a true repentance_ is enough to appease the +Deity? Yet we do not see that this _true repentance_ is very sincere; +at least, it is rare to see noted thieves, even at the point of death, +restore goods, which they have unjustly acquired. Men are undoubtedly +persuaded, that they shall fit themselves for eternal fire, if they cannot +insure themselves against it. But, "Some useful compacts may be made with +heaven." By giving the church a part of his fortune, almost every devout +rogue may die in peace, without concerning himself in what he gained his +riches. + + + + +176. + +By the confession of the warmest defenders of Religion and of its utility, +nothing is more rare than sincere conversions, and, we might add, nothing +more unprofitable to society. Men are not disgusted with the world, until +the world is disgusted with them. + +If the devout have the talent of pleasing God and his priests, they +have seldom that of being agreeable or useful to society. To a devotee, +Religion is a veil, which covers all passions; pride, ill-humour, +anger, revenge, impatience, and rancour. Devotion arrogates a tyrannical +superiority, which banishes gentleness, indulgence, and gaiety; it +authorizes people to censure their neighbours, to reprove and revile the +profane for the greater glory of God. It is very common to be devout, and +at the same time destitute of every virtue and quality necessary to social +life. + + + + +177. + +It is asserted, that the dogma of another life is of the utmost importance +to peace and happiness; that without it, men would be destitute of motives +to do good. What need is there of terrors and fables to make man sensible +how he ought to conduct himself? Does not every one see, that he has the +greatest interest, in meriting the approbation, esteem, and benevolence of +the beings who surround him, and in abstaining from every thing, by which +he may incur the censure, contempt, and resentment of society? However +short an entertainment, a conversation, or visit, does not each desire to +act his part decently, and agreeably to himself and others? If life is but +a passage, let us strive to make it easy; which we cannot effect, if we +fail in regard for those who travel with us. Religion, occupied with +its gloomy reveries, considers man merely as a pilgrim upon earth; and +therefore supposes that, in order to travel the more securely, he must +forsake company, and deprive himself of pleasure and amusements, which +might console him for the tediousness and fatigue of the journey. A +stoical and morose philosopher sometimes gives us advice as irrational +as that of Religion. But a more rational philosophy invites us to spread +flowers upon the way of life, to dispel melancholy and banish terrors, to +connect our interest with that of our fellow-travellers, and by gaiety and +lawful pleasures, to divert our attention from difficulties and accidents, +to which we are often exposed; it teaches us, that, to travel agreeably, +we should abstain from what might be injurious to ourselves, and carefully +shun what might render us odious to our associates. + + + + +178. + +It is asked, _what motives an Atheist can have to do good?_ The motive to +please himself and his fellow-creatures; to live happily and peaceably; +to gain the affection and esteem of men. "Can he, who fears not the gods, +fear any thing?" He can fear men; he can fear contempt, dishonour, the +punishment of the laws; in short, he can fear himself, and the remorse +felt by all those who are conscious of having incurred or merited the +hatred of their fellow-creatures. + +Conscience is the internal testimony, which we bear to ourselves, of +having acted so as to merit the esteem or blame of the beings, with whom +we live; and it is founded upon the clear knowledge we have of men, and of +the sentiments which our actions must produce in them. The Conscience of +the religious man consists in imagining that he has pleased or displeased +his God, of whom he has no idea, and whose obscure and doubtful intentions +are explained to him only by men of doubtful veracity, who, like him, are +utterly unacquainted with the essence of the Deity, and are little agreed +upon what can please or displease him. In a word, the conscience of the +credulous is directed by men, who have themselves an erroneous conscience, +or whose interest stifles knowledge. + +"Can an Atheist have a Conscience? What are his motives to abstain from +hidden vices and secret crimes of which other men are ignorant, and which +are beyond the reach of laws?" He may be assured by constant experience, +that there is no vice, which, by the nature of things, does not punish +itself. Would he preserve this life? he will avoid every excess, that +may impair his health; he will not wish to lead a languishing life, which +would render him a burden to himself and others. As for secret crimes, he +will abstain from them, for fear he shall be forced to blush at himself, +from whom he cannot flee. If he has any reason, he will know the value +of the esteem which an honest man ought to have for himself. He will +see, that unforeseen circumstances may unveil the conduct, which he feels +interested in concealing from others. The other world furnishes no motives +for doing good, to him, who finds none on earth. + + + + +179. + +"The speculative Atheist," says the Theist, "may be an honest man, but his +writings will make political Atheists. Princes and ministers, no longer +restrained by the fear of God, will abandon themselves, without scruple, +to the most horrid excesses." But, however great the depravity of an +Atheist upon the throne, can it be stronger and more destructive, than +that of the many conquerors, tyrants, persecutors, ambitious men, and +perverse courtiers, who, though not Atheists, but often very religious and +devout, have notwithstanding made humanity groan under the weight of their +crimes? Can an atheistical prince do more harm to the world, than a +Louis XI., a Philip II., a Richelieu, who all united Religion with crime? +Nothing is more rare, than atheistical princes; nothing more common, than +tyrants and ministers, who are very wicked and very religious. + + + + +180. + +A man of reflection cannot be incapable of his duties, of discovering +the relations subsisting between men, of meditating his own nature, of +discerning his own wants, propensities, and desires, and of perceiving +what he owes to beings, who are necessary to his happiness. These +reflections naturally lead him to a knowledge of the Morality most +essential to social beings. Dangerous passions seldom fall to the lot of +a man who loves to commune with himself, to study, and to investigate the +principles of things. The strongest passion of such a man will be to know +truth, and his ambition to teach it to others. Philosophy cultivates the +mind. On the score of morals and honesty, has not he who reflects and +reasons, evidently an advantage over him, who makes it a principle never +to reason? + +If ignorance is useful to priests, and to the oppressors of mankind, it is +fatal to society. Man, void of knowledge, does not enjoy reason; without +reason and knowledge, he is a savage, liable to commit crimes. Morality, +or the science of duties, is acquired only by the study of Man, and of +what is relative to Man. He, who does not reflect, is unacquainted with +true Morality, and walks with precarious steps, in the path of virtue. The +less men reason, the more wicked they are. Savages, princes, nobles, +and the dregs of the people, are commonly the worst of men, because they +reason the least. The devout man seldom reflects, and rarely reasons. He +fears all enquiry, scrupulously follows authority, and often, through an +error of conscience, makes it a sacred duty to commit evil. The Atheist +reasons: he consults experience, which he prefers to prejudice. If he +reasons justly, his conscience is enlightened; he finds more real motives +to do good than the bigot whose only motives are his fallacies, and who +never listens to reason. Are not the motives of the Atheist sufficiently +powerful to counteract his passions? Is he blind enough to be unmindful +of his true interest, which ought to restrain him? But he will be neither +worse nor better, than the numerous believers, who, notwithstanding +Religion and its sublime precepts, follow a conduct which Religion +condemns. Is a credulous assassin less to be feared, than an assassin who +believes nothing? Is a very devout tyrant less tyrannical than an undevout +tyrant? + + + + +181. + +Nothing is more uncommon, than to see men consistent. Their opinions never +influence their conduct except when conformable to their temperaments, +passions, and interests. Daily experience shows, that religious opinions +produce much evil and little good. They are hurtful, because they often +favour the passions of tyrants, of ambitious men, of fanatics, and of +priests; they are of no effect, because incapable of counter-balancing the +present interests of the greater part of mankind. Religious principles +are of no avail, when they act in opposition to ardent desires; though not +unbelievers, men then conduct themselves as if they believed nothing. + +We shall always be liable to err, when we judge of the opinions of men +by their conduct, or of their conduct by their opinions. A religious man, +notwithstanding the unsociable principles of a sanguinary religion, will +sometimes by a happy inconsistency, be humane, tolerant, and moderate; the +principles of his religion do not then agree with the gentleness of his +character. Libertines, debauchees, hypocrites, adulterers, and rogues, +often appear to have the best ideas upon morals. Why do they not reduce +them to practice? Because their temperament, their interest, and their +habits do not accord with their sublime theories. The rigid principles of +Christian morality, which many people regard as divine, have but little +influence upon the conduct of those, who preach them to others. Do they +not daily tell us, _to do what they preach, and not what they practise?_ + +The partisans of Religion often denote an infidel by the word _libertine_. +It is possible that many unbelievers may have loose morals, which is +owing to their temperament, and not to their opinions. But how does +their conduct affect their opinions? Cannot then an immoral man be a good +physician, architect, geometrician, logician, or metaphysician? A man of +irreproachable conduct may be extremely deficient in knowledge and reason. +In quest of truth, it little concerns us from whom it comes. Let us not +judge men by their opinions, nor opinions by men; let us judge men by +their conduct, and their opinions by their conformity with experience and +reason and by their utility to mankind. + + + + +182. + +Every man, who reasons, soon becomes an unbeliever; for reason shows, that +theology is nothing but a tissue of chimeras; that religion is contrary to +every principle of good sense, that it tinctures all human knowledge with +falsity. The sensible man is an unbeliever, because he sees, that, far +from making men happier, religion is the chief source of the greatest +disorders, and the permanent calamities, with which man is afflicted. The +man, who seeks his own welfare and tranquillity, examines and throws aside +religion, because he thinks it no less troublesome than useless, to spend +his life in trembling before phantoms, fit to impose only upon silly women +or children. + +If licentiousness, which reasons but little, sometimes leads to +irreligion, the man of pure morals may have very good motives for +examining his religion, and banishing it from his mind. Religious terrors, +too weak to impose upon the wicked in whom vice is deeply rooted, afflict, +torment and overwhelm restless imaginations. Courageous and vigorous +minds soon shake off the insupportable yoke. But those, who are weak and +timorous, languish under it during life; and as they grow old their fears +increase. + +Priests have represented God as so malicious, austere, and terrible a +being, that most men would cordially wish, that there was no God. It is +impossible to be happy, while always trembling. Ye devout! you adore a +terrible God! But you hate him; you would be glad, if he did not exist. +Can we refrain from desiring the absence or destruction of a master, the +idea of whom destroys our happiness? The black colours, in which priests +paint the Divinity, are truly shocking, and force us to hate and reject +him. + + + + +183. + +If fear created the gods, fear supports their empire over the minds of +mortals. So early are men accustomed to shudder at the mere name of the +Deity, that they regard him as a spectre, a hobgoblin, a bugbear, which +torments and deprives them of courage even to wish relief from their +fears. They apprehend, that the invisible spectre, will strike them the +moment they cease to be afraid. Bigots are too much in fear of their God +to love him sincerely. They serve him like slaves, who, unable to escape +his power, resolve to flatter their master, and who, by dint of lying, at +length persuade themselves, that they in some measure love him. They make +a virtue of necessity. The love of devotees for their God, and of slaves +for their despots, is only a feigned homage. + + + + +184. + +Christian divines have represented their God so terrible and so little +worthy of love, that several of them have thought they must dispense +with loving him; a blasphemy, shocking to other divines, who were less +ingenuous. St. Thomas having maintained, that we are obliged to love God +as soon as we attain the use of reason, the Jesuit Sirmond answered him, +_that is very soon_. The Jesuit Vasquez assures us, that _it is enough to +love God at the point of death_. Hurtado, more rigid, says, _we must +love God very year_. Henriquez is contented that we love him _every five +years_; Sotus, _every Sunday_. Upon what are these opinions grounded? asks +father Sirmond; who adds, that Suarez requires us to _love God sometimes_. +But when? He leaves that to us; he knows nothing about it himself. _Now_, +says he, _who will be able to know that, of which such a learned divine is +ignorant?_ The same Jesuit Sirmond further observes, that _God_ "does not +command us to love him with an affectionate love, nor does he promise us +salvation upon condition that we give him our hearts; it is enough to obey +and love him with an effective love by executing his orders; this is the +only love we owe him; and he has not so much commanded us to love him, as +not to hate him." This doctrine appears heretical, impious, and abominable +to the Jansenists, who, by the revolting severity they attribute to their +God, make him far less amiable, than the Jesuits, their adversaries. The +latter, to gain adherents, paint God in colours capable of encouraging +the most perverse of mortals. Thus nothing is more undecided with the +Christians, than the important question, whether they can, ought, or +ought not to love God. Some of their spiritual guides maintain, that it +is necessary to love him with all one's heart, notwithstanding all his +severity; others, like father Daniel, think that, _an act of pure love +to God is the most heroic act of Christian virtue, and almost beyond the +reach of human weakness_. The Jesuit Pintereau goes farther; he says, _a +deliverance from the grievous yoke of loving God is a privilege of the new +covenant_. + + + + +185. + +The character of the Man always decides that of his God; every body +makes one for himself and like himself. The man of gaiety, involved in +dissipation and pleasure, does not imagine, that, God can be stern and +cross; he wants a good-natured God, with whom he can find reconciliation. +The man of a rigid, morose, bilious, sour disposition, must have a God +like himself, a God of terror; and he regards, as perverse, those, who +admit a placable, indulgent God. As men are constituted, organized, and +modified in a manner, which cannot be precisely the same, how can they +agree about a chimera, which exists only in their brains? + +The cruel and endless disputes between the ministers of the Lord, are not +such as to attract the confidence of those, who impartially consider them. +How can we avoid complete infidelity, upon viewing principles, about which +those who teach them to others are never agreed? How can we help doubting +the existence of a God, of whom it is evident that even his ministers +can only form very fluctuating ideas? How can we in short avoid totally +rejecting a God, who is nothing but a shapeless heap of contradictions? +How can we refer the matter to the decision of priests, who are +perpetually at war, treating each other as impious and heretical, defaming +and persecuting each other without mercy, for differing in the manner of +understanding what they announce to the world? + + + + +186. + +The existence of a God is the basis of all Religion. Nevertheless, this +important truth has not as yet been demonstrated, I do not say so as +to convince unbelievers, but in a manner satisfactory to theologians +themselves. Profound thinkers have at all times been occupied in inventing +new proofs. What are the fruits of their meditations and arguments? +They have left the subject in a worse condition; they have demonstrated +nothing; they have almost always excited the clamours of their brethren, +who have accused them of having poorly defended the best of causes. + + + + +187. + +The apologists of religion daily repeat, that the passions alone make +unbelievers. "Pride," say they, "and the desire of signalizing themselves, +make men Atheists. They endeavour to efface from their minds the idea +of God, only because they have reason to fear his terrible judgments." +Whatever may be the motives, which incline men to Atheism, it is our +business to examine, whether their sentiments are founded in truth. No man +acts without motives. Let us first examine the arguments and afterwards +the motives. We shall see whether these motives are not legitimate, and +more rational than those of many credulous bigots, who suffer themselves +to be guided by masters little worthy of the confidence of men. + +You say then, Priests of the Lord! that the passions make unbelievers; +that they renounce Religion only through interest, or because it +contradicts their inordinate propensities; you assert, that they attack +your gods only because they fear their severity. But, are you yourselves, +in defending Religion and its chimeras, truly exempt from passions and +interests? Who reap advantages from this Religion, for which priests +display so much zeal? Priests. To whom does Religion procure power, +influence, riches, and honours? To Priests. Who wage war, in every +country, against reason, science, truth, and philosophy, and render them +odious to sovereigns and people? Priests. Who profit by the ignorance and +vain prejudices of men? Priests.--Priests! you are rewarded, honoured +and paid for deceiving mortals, and you cause those to be punished who +undeceive them. The follies of men procure you benefices, offerings, and +expiations; while those, who announce the most useful truths, are rewarded +only with chains, gibbets and funeral-piles. Let the world judge between +us. + + + + +188. + +Pride and vanity have been, and ever will be, inherent in the priesthood. +Is any thing more capable of rendering men haughty and vain, than the +pretence of exercising a power derived from heaven, of bearing a sacred +character, of being the messengers and ministers of the Most High? Are not +these dispositions perpetually nourished by the credulity of the people, +the deference and respect of sovereigns, the immunities, privileges, and +distinctions enjoyed by the clergy? In every country, the vulgar are much +more devoted to their spiritual guides, whom they regard as divine, than +to their temporal superiors, whom they consider as no more than ordinary +men. The parson of a village acts a much more conspicuous part, than the +lord of the manor or the justice of the peace. Among the Christians, a +priest thinks himself far above a king or an emperor. A Spanish grandee +having spoken rather haughtily to a monk, the latter arrogantly said, +"Learn to respect a man, who daily has your God in his hands, and your +Queen at his feet." Have priests then a right to accuse unbelievers of +pride? Are they themselves remarkable for uncommon modesty or profound +humility? Is it not evident, that the desire of domineering over men is +essential to their trade? If the ministers of the Lord were truly modest, +should we see them so greedy of respect, so impatient of contradiction, so +positive in their decisions, and so unmercifully revengeful to those +whose opinions offend them? Has not Science the modesty to acknowledge +how difficult it is to discover truth? What other passion but ungovernable +pride can make men so savage, revengeful, and void of indulgence and +gentleness? What can be more presumptuous, than to arm nations and deluge +the world in blood, in order to establish or defend futile conjectures? + +You say, that presumption alone makes Atheists. Inform them then what your +God is; teach them his essence; speak of him intelligibly; say something +about him, which is reasonable, and not contradictory or impossible. If +you are unable to satisfy them, if hitherto none of you have been able to +demonstrate the existence of a God in a clear and convincing manner; if +by your own confession, his essence is completely veiled from you, as from +the rest of mortals, forgive those, who cannot admit what they can neither +understand nor make consistent with itself; do not tax with presumption +and vanity those who are sincere enough to confess their ignorance; do +not accuse of folly those who find themselves incapable of believing +contradictions; and for once, blush at exciting the hatred and fury of +sovereigns and people against men, who think not like you concerning a +being, of whom you have no idea. Is any thing more rash and extravagant, +than to reason concerning an object, known to be inconceivable? You say, +that the corruption of the heart produces Atheism, that men shake off the +yoke of the Deity only because they fear his formidable judgments. +But, why do you paint your God in colours so shocking, that he becomes +insupportable? Why does so powerful a God permit men to be so corrupt? How +can we help endeavouring to shake off the yoke of a tyrant, who, able to +do as he pleases with men, consents to their perversion, who hardens, and +blinds them, and refuses them his grace, that he may have the satisfaction +to punish them eternally, for having been hardened, and blinded, and for +not having the grace which he refused? Theologians and priests must be +very confident of the grace of heaven and a happy futurity, to refrain +from detesting a master so capricious as the God they announce. A God, +who damns eternally, is the most odious of beings that the human mind can +invent. + + + + +189. + +No man upon earth is truly interested in the support of error, which is +forced sooner or later to yield to truth. The general good must at length +open the eyes of mortals: the passions themselves sometimes contribute +to break the chains of prejudices. Did not the passions of sovereigns, +centuries ago, annihilate in some countries of Europe the tyrannical +power, which a too haughty pontiff once exercised over all princes of his +sect? In consequence of the progress of political science, the clergy +were then stripped of immense riches, which credulity had accumulated +upon them. Ought not this memorable example to convince priests, that +prejudices triumph but for a time, and that truth alone can insure solid +happiness? + +By caressing sovereigns, by fabricating divine rights for them, by +deifying them, and by abandoning the people, bound hand and foot, to their +will, the ministers of the Most High must see, that they are labouring to +make them tyrants. Have they not reason to apprehend, that the gigantic +idols, which they raised to the clouds, will one day crush them by +their enormous weight? Do not a thousand examples remind them that these +tyrants, after preying upon the people, may prey upon them in their turn. + +We will respect priests, when they become sensible men. Let them, if they +please, use the authority of heaven to frighten those princes who are +continually desolating the earth; but let them no more adjudge to them the +horrid right of being unjust with impunity. Let them acknowledge, that no +man is interested in living under tyranny; and let them teach sovereigns, +that they themselves are not interested in exercising a despotism, which, +by rendering them odious, exposes them to danger, and detracts from +their power and greatness. Finally, let priests and kings become so +far enlightened as to acknowledge, that no power is secure which is not +founded upon truth, reason, and equity. + + + + +190. + +By waging war against Reason, which they ought to have protected and +developed, the ministers of the gods evidently act against their own +interest. What power, influence, and respect might they not have gained +among the wisest of men, what gratitude would they not have excited in the +people, if, instead of wasting their time about their vain disputes, they +had applied themselves to really useful science, and investigated the +true principles of philosophy, government, and morals! Who would dare to +reproach a body with its opulence or influence, if the members dedicating +themselves to the public good, employed their leisure in study, and +exercised their authority in enlightening the minds both of sovereigns and +subjects? + +Priests! Forsake your chimeras, your unintelligible dogmas, your +contemptible quarrels! Banish those phantoms which could be useful only in +the infancy of nations. Assume, at length, the language of reason. Instead +of exciting persecution; instead of entertaining the people with silly +disputes; instead of preaching useless and fanatical dogmas, preach human +and social morality; preach virtues really useful to the world; become the +apostles of reason, the defenders of liberty, and the reformers of abuses. + + + + +191. + +Philosophers have every where taken upon themselves a part, which seemed +destined to the ministers of Religion. The hatred of the latter for +philosophy was only a jealousy of trade. But, instead of endeavouring +to injure and decry each other, all men of good sense should unite their +efforts to combat error, seek truth, and especially to put to flight the +prejudices, that are equally injurious to sovereigns and subjects, and of +which the abettors themselves sooner or later become the victims. + +In the hands of an enlightened government, the priests would become the +most useful of the citizens. Already richly paid by the state, and free +from the care of providing for their own subsistence, how could they +be better employed than in qualifying themselves for the instruction +of others? Would not their minds be better satisfied with discovering +luminous truths, than in wandering through the thick darkness of error? +Would it be more difficult to discern the clear principles of Morality, +than the imaginary principles of a divine and theological Morality? Would +men of ordinary capacities find it as difficult to fix in their heads the +simple notions of their duties, as to load their memories with mysteries, +unintelligible words and obscure definitions, of which they can never +form a clear idea? What time and pains are lost in learning and teaching +things, which are not of the least real utility! What resources for the +encouragement of the sciences, the advancement of knowledge, and the +education of youth, well disposed sovereigns might find in the many +monasteries, which in several countries live upon the people without in +the slightest degree profiting them! But superstition, jealous of its +exclusive empire, seems resolved to form only useless beings. To what +advantage might we not turn a multitude of cenobites of both sexes, +who, in many countries, are amply endowed for doing nothing? Instead +of overwhelming them with fasting and austerities; instead of barren +contemplations, mechanical prayers, and trifling ceremonies; why should +we not excite in them a salutary emulation, which may incline them to seek +the means, not of being _dead_ to the world, but of being _useful_ to it? +Instead of filling the youthful minds of their pupils with fables, sterile +dogmas, and puerilities, why are not priests obliged, or invited to teach +them truths, and to render them useful citizens of their country? Under +the present system, men are only useful to the clergy who blind them, and +to the tyrants who fleece them. + + + + +192. + +The partisans of credulity often accuse unbelievers of insincerity, +because they sometimes waver in their principles, alter their minds in +sickness, and retract at death. When the body is disordered, the faculty +of reasoning is commonly disordered with it. At the approach of death, +man, weak and decayed, is sometimes himself sensible that Reason abandons +him, and that Prejudice returns. There are some diseases, which tend to +weaken the brain; to create despondency and pusillanimity; and there are +others, which destroy the body, but do not disturb the reason. At any +rate, an unbeliever who recants in sickness is not more extraordinary, +than a devotee who neglects in health the duties which his religion +explicitly enjoins. + +Ministers of Religion openly contradict in their daily conduct the +rigorous principles, they teach to others; in consequence of which, +unbelievers, in their turn, may justly accuse them of insincerity. Is it +easy to find many prelates humble, generous, void of ambition, enemies +of pomp and grandeur, and friends of poverty? In short, is the conduct of +Christian ministers conformable to the austere morality of Christ, their +God, and their model? + + + + +193. + +_Atheism_, it is said, _breaks all the ties of society. Without the belief +of a God, what will become of the sacredness of oaths? How shall we oblige +a man to speak the truth, who cannot seriously call the Deity to witness +what he says?_ But, does an oath strengthen our obligation to fulfil the +engagements contracted? Will he, who is not fearful of lying, be less +fearful of perjury? He, who is base enough to break his word, or unjust +enough to violate his engagements, in contempt of the esteem of men, will +not be more faithful therein for having called all the gods to witness his +oaths. Those, who disregard the judgments of men, will soon disregard the +judgments of God. Are not princes, of all men, the most ready to swear, +and the most ready to violate their oaths? + + + + +194. + +_The vulgar_, it is repeatedly said, _must have a Religion. If enlightened +persons have no need of the restraint of opinion, it is at least necessary +to rude men, whose reason is uncultivated by education_. But, is it indeed +a fact, that religion is a restraint upon the vulgar? Do we see, that +this religion preserves them from intemperance, drunkenness, brutality, +violence, fraud, and every kind of excess? Could a people who have no idea +of the Deity conduct themselves in a more detestable manner, than these +believing people, among whom we find dissipation and vices, the most +unworthy of reasonable beings? Upon going out of the churches, do not the +working classes, and the populace, plunge without fear into their ordinary +irregularities, under the idea, that the periodical homage, which they +render to their God, authorizes them to follow, without remorse, their +vicious habits and pernicious propensities? Finally, if the people are +so low-minded and unreasonable, is not their stupidity chargeable to +the negligence of their princes, who are wholly regardless of public +education, or who even oppose the instruction of their subjects? Is not +the want of reason in the people evidently the work of the priests, who, +instead of instructing men in a rational morality, entertain them with +fables, reveries, ceremonies, fallacies, and false virtues which they +think of the greatest importance? + +To the people, Religion is but a vain display of ceremonies, to which +they are attached by habit, which entertains their eyes, and produces +a transient emotion in their torpid understandings, without influencing +their conduct or reforming their morals. Even by the confession of the +ministers of the altars, nothing is more rare than that _internal_ and +_spiritual_ Religion, which alone is capable of regulating the life of +man and of triumphing over his evil propensities. In the most numerous +and devout nation, are there many persons, who are really capable of +understanding the principles of their religious system, and who find them +powerful enough to stifle their perverse inclinations? + +Many persons will say, that _any restraint whatever is better than none._ +They will maintain, that _if religion awes not the greater part, it serves +at least to restrain some individuals, who would otherwise without remorse +abandon themselves to crime_. Men ought undoubtedly to have a restraint, +but not an imaginary one. Religion only frightens those whose imbecility +of character has already prevented them from being formidable to their +fellow-citizens. An equitable government, severe laws, and sound morality +have an equal power over all; at least, every person must believe in them, +and perceive the danger of not conforming to them. + + + + +195. + +Perhaps it will be asked, _whether Atheism can be proper for the +multitude?_ I answer, that any system, which requires discussion, is +not made for the multitude. _What purpose then can it serve to preach +Atheism?_ It may at least serve to convince all those who reason, that +nothing is more extravagant than to fret one's self, and nothing more +unjust than to vex others, for mere groundless conjectures. As for the +vulgar who never reason, the arguments of an Atheist are no more fit for +them than the systems of a natural philosopher, the observations of +an astronomer, the experiments of a chemist, the calculations of a +geometrician, the researches of a physician, the plans of an architect, +or the pleadings of a lawyer, who all labour for the people without their +knowledge. + +Are the metaphysical reasonings and religious disputes, which have so +long engrossed the time and attention of so many profound thinkers, better +adapted to the generality of men than the reasoning of an Atheist? Nay, +as the principles of Atheism are founded upon plain common sense, are they +not more intelligible, than those of a theology, beset with difficulties, +which even the persons of the greatest genius cannot explain? In every +country, the people have a religion, the principles of which they +are totally ignorant, and which they follow from habit without any +examination: their priests alone are engaged in theology, which is too +dense for vulgar heads. If the people should chance to lose this unknown +theology, they mighty easily console themselves for the loss of a thing, +not only perfectly useless, but also productive of dangerous commotions. + +It would be madness to write for the vulgar, or to attempt to cure their +prejudices all at once. We write for those only, who read and reason; +the multitude read but little, and reason still less. Calm and rational +persons will require new ideas, and knowledge will be gradually diffused. + + + + +196. + +If theology is a branch of commerce profitable to theologians, it is +evidently not only superfluous, but injurious to the rest of society. +Self-interest will sooner or later open the eyes of men. Sovereigns +and subjects will one day adopt the profound indifference and contempt, +merited by a futile system, which serves only to make men miserable. +All persons will be sensible of the inutility of the many expensive +ceremonies, which contribute nothing to public felicity. Contemptible +quarrels will cease to disturb the tranquility of states, when we blush at +having considered them important. + +Instead of Parliament meddling with the senseless combats of your clergy; +instead of foolishly espousing their impertinent quarrels, and attempting +to make your subjects adopt uniform opinions--strive to make them happy +in this world. Respect their liberty and property, watch over their +education, encourage them in their labours, reward their talents and +virtues, repress licentiousness; and do not concern yourselves with their +manner of thinking. Theological fables are useful only to tyrants and the +ignorant. + + + + +197. + +Does it then require an extraordinary effort of genius to comprehend, +that what is above the capacity of man, is not made for him; that things +supernatural are not made for natural beings; that impenetrable mysteries +are not made for limited minds? If theologians are foolish enough to +dispute upon objects, which they acknowledge to be unintelligible even to +themselves, ought society to take any part in their silly quarrels? Must +the blood of nations flow to enhance the conjectures of a few infatuated +dreamers? If it is difficult to cure theologians of their madness and +the people of their prejudices, it is at least easy to prevent the +extravagancies of one party, and the silliness of the other from producing +pernicious effects. Let every one be permitted to think as he pleases; but +never let him be permitted to injure others for their manner of thinking. +Were the rulers of nations more just and rational, theological opinions +would not affect the public tranquillity, more than the disputes of +natural philosophers, physicians, grammarians, and critics. It is +tyranny which causes theological quarrels to be attended with serious +consequences. + +Those, who extol the importance and utility of Religion, ought to shew +us its happy effects, the advantages for instance, which the disputes +and abstract speculations of theology can be to porters, artisans, and +labourers, and to the multitude of unfortunate women and corrupt servants +with which great cities abound. All these beings are religious; they have +what is called _an implicit faith_. Their parsons believe for them; and +they stupidly adhere to the unknown belief of their guides. They go to +hear sermons, and would think it a great crime to transgress any of the +ordinances, to which, in childhood, they are taught to conform. But of +what service to morals is all this? None at all. They have not the least +idea of Morality, and are even guilty of all the roguery, fraud, rapine, +and excess, that is out of the reach of law. + +The populace have no idea of their Religion; what they call Religion +is nothing but a blind attachment to unknown opinions and mysterious +practices. In fact, to deprive people of Religion is to deprive them +of nothing. By overthrowing their prejudices, we should only lessen or +annihilate the dangerous confidence they put in interested guides, and +should teach them to mistrust those, who, under the pretext of Religion, +often lead them into fatal excesses. + + + + +198. + +While pretending to instruct and enlighten men, Religion in reality keeps +them in ignorance, and stifles the desire of knowing the most interesting +objects. The people have no other rule of conduct, than what their priests +are pleased to prescribe. Religion supplies the place of every thing else: +but being in itself essentially obscure, it is more proper to lead mortals +astray than to guide them in the path of science and happiness. Religion +renders enigmatical all Natural Philosophy, Morality, Legislation and +Politics. A man blinded by religious prejudices, fears truth, whenever +it clashes with his opinions: he cannot know his own nature he cannot +cultivate his reason, he cannot perform experiments. + +Everything concurs to render the people devout; but every thing tends to +prevent them from being humane, reasonable and virtuous. Religion seems to +have no other object, than to stupefy the mind. + +Priests have been ever at war with genius and talent, because +well-informed men perceive, that superstition shackles the human mind, and +would keep it in eternal infancy, occupied solely by fables and +frightened by phantoms. Incapable of improvement itself, Theology opposed +insurmountable barriers to the progress of true knowledge; its sole object +is to keep nations and their rulers in the most profound ignorance of +their duties, and of the real motives, that should incline them to do +good. It obscures Morality, renders its principles arbitrary, and subjects +it to the caprice of the gods or of their ministers. It converts the +art of governing men into a mysterious tyranny, which is the scourge +of nations. It changes princes into unjust, licentious despots, and the +people into ignorant slaves, who become corrupt in order to merit the +favour of their masters. + + + + +199. + +By tracing the history of the human mind, we shall be easily convinced, +that Theology has cautiously guarded against its progress. It began by +giving out fables as sacred truth: it produced poetry, which filled the +imagination of men with its puerile fictions: it entertained them with its +gods and their incredible deeds. In a word, Religion has always treated +men, like children, whom it lulled to sleep with tales, which its +ministers would have us still regard as incontestable truths. + +If the ministers of the gods have sometimes made useful discoveries, they +have always been careful to give them a dogmatical tone, and envelope them +in the shades of mystery. Pythagoras and Plato, in order to acquire some +trifling knowledge, were obliged to court the favour of priests, to be +initiated in their mysteries, and to undergo whatever trials they were +pleased to impose. At this price, they were permitted to imbibe those +exalted notions, still so bewitching to all those who admire only what +is perfectly unintelligible. It was from Egyptian, Indian, and Chaldean +priests, from the schools of these visionaries, professionally interested +in bewildering human reason, that philosophy was obliged to borrow its +first rudiments. Obscure and false in its principles, mixed with fictions +and fables, and made only to dazzle the imagination, the progress of this +philosophy was precarious, and its theories unintelligible; instead of +enlightening, it blighted the mind, and diverted it from objects truly +useful. + +The theological speculations and mystical reveries of the ancients are +still law in a great part of the philosophic world; and being adopted by +modern theology, it is heresy to abandon them. They tell us "of aerial +beings, of spirits, angels, demons, genii," and other phantoms, which are +the object of their meditations, and serve as the basis of _metaphysics_, +an abstract and futile science, which for thousands of years the greatest +geniuses have vainly studied. Hypothesis, imagined by a few visionaries +of Memphis and Babylon, constitute even now the foundations of a science, +whose obscurity makes it revered as marvellous and divine. + +The first legislators were priests; the first mythologists, poets, learned +men, and physicians were priests. In their hands science became sacred +and was withheld from the profane. They spoke only in allegories, emblems, +enigmas, and ambiguous oracles--means well calculated to excite curiosity, +and above all to inspire the astonished vulgar with a holy respect for +men, who when they were thought to be instructed by the gods, and capable +of reading in the heavens the fate of the earth, boldly proclaimed +themselves the oracles of the Deity. + + + + +200. + +The religions of ancient priests have only changed form. Although our +modern theologians regard their predecessors as impostors, yet they have +collected many scattered fragments of their religious systems. In modern +Religions we find, not only their metaphysical dogmas, which theology has +merely clothed in a new dress, but also some remarkable remains of their +superstitious practices, their magic, and their enchantments. Christians +are still commanded to respect the remaining monuments of the legislators, +priests, and prophets of the Hebrew Religion, which had borrowed its +strange practices from Egypt. Thus extravagancies, imagined by knaves or +idolatrous visionaries, are still sacred among Christians! + +If we examine history, we shall find a striking resemblance among all +Religions. In all parts of the earth, we see, that religious notions, +periodically depress and elevate the people. The attention of man is +every where engrossed, by rites often abominable, and by mysteries always +formidable, which become the sole objects of meditation. The different +superstitions borrow, from one another, their abstract reveries and +ceremonies. Religions are in general mere unintelligible rhapsodies, +combined by new teachers, who use the materials of their predecessors, +reserving the right of adding or retrenching whatever is not conformable +to the present age. The religion of Egypt was evidently the basis of the +religion of Moses, who banished the worship of idols: Moses was merely a +schismatic Egyptian. Christianism is only reformed Judaism. Mahometanism +is composed of Judaism, Christianity, and the ancient religion of Arabia, +etc. + + + + +201. + +Theology, from the remotest antiquity to the present time, has had the +exclusive privilege of directing philosophy. What assistance has been +derived from its labours? It changed philosophy into an unintelligible +jargon, calculated to render uncertain the clearest truths; it has +converted the art of reasoning into a jargon of words; it has carried the +human mind into the airy regions of metaphysics, and there employed it in +vainly fathoming an obscure abyss. Instead of physical and simple causes, +this transformed philosophy has substituted supernatural, or rather, +_occult_ causes; it has explained phenomena difficult to be conceived by +agents still more inconceivable. It has filled language with words, void +of sense, incapable of accounting for things, better calculated to obscure +than enlighten, and which seems invented expressly to discourage man, +to guard him against the powers of his mind, to make him mistrust the +principles of reason and evidence, and to raise an insurmountable barrier +between him and truth. + + + + +202. + +Were we to believe the partisans of Religion, nothing could be explained +without it; nature would be a perpetual enigma, and man would be incapable +of understanding himself. But, what does this Religion in reality explain? +The more we examine it, the more we are convinced that its theological +notions are fit only to confuse our ideas; they change every thing into +mystery: they explain difficult things by things that are impossible. Is +it a satisfactory explanation of phenomena, to attribute them to unknown +agents, to invisible powers, to immaterial causes? Does the human mind +receive much light by being referred to _the depths of the treasures of +divine wisdom_, to which, we are repeatedly told, it is vain to extend +our rash enquiries? Can the divine nature, of which we have no conception, +enable us to conceive the nature of man? + +Ask a Christian, what is the origin of the world? He will answer, that God +created it. What is God? He cannot tell. What is it to create? He knows +not. What is the cause of pestilence, famine, wars, droughts, inundations +and earthquakes? The anger of God. What remedies can be applied to these +calamities? Prayers, sacrifices, processions, offerings, and ceremonies +are, it is said, the true means of disarming celestial fury. But why is +heaven enraged? Because men are wicked. Why are men wicked? Because their +nature is corrupt. What is the cause of this corruption? It is, says the +theologian, because the first man, beguiled by the first woman, ate an +apple, which God had forbidden him to touch. Who beguiled this woman into +such folly? The devil. Who made the devil? God. But, why did God make this +devil, destined to pervert mankind? This is unknown; it is a mystery which +the Deity alone is acquainted with. + +It is now universally acknowledged, that the earth turns round the sun. +Centuries ago, this opinion was blasphemy, as being irreconcileable with +the sacred books which every Christian reveres as inspired by the Deity +himself. Notwithstanding divine revelation, astronomers now depend rather +upon evidence, than upon the testimony of their inspired books. + +What is the hidden principle of the motions of the human body? The soul. +What is a soul? A spirit. What is a spirit? A substance, which has neither +form, nor colour, nor extension, nor parts. How can we form any idea +of such a substance? How can it move a body? That is not known; it is a +mystery. Have beasts souls? But, do they not act, feel, and think, in a +manner very similar to man? Mere illusion! By what right do you deprive +beasts of a soul, which you attribute to man, though you know nothing at +all about it? Because the souls of beasts would embarrass our theologians, +who are satisfied with the power of terrifying and damning the immaterial +souls of men, and are not so much interested in damning those of beasts. +Such are the puerile solutions, which philosophy, always in the leading +strings of theology, was obliged to invent, in order to explain the +problems of the physical and moral world? + + + + +203. + +How many evasions have been used, both in ancient and modern times, in +order to avoid an engagement with the ministers of the gods, who have ever +been the tyrants of thought? How many hypotheses and shifts were such men +as Descartes, Mallebranche, and Leibnitz, forced to invent, in order to +reconcile their discoveries with the fables and mistakes which Religion +had consecrated! In what guarded phrases have the greatest philosophers +expressed themselves, even at the risk of being absurd, inconsistent, or +unintelligible, whenever their ideas did not accord with the principles of +theology! Priests have been always attentive to extinguish systems which +opposed their interest. Theology was ever the bed of Procrustes, to be +adapted to which, the limbs of travellers, if too long were cut off, and +if too short were lengthened. + +Can any sensible man, delighted with the sciences and attached to the +welfare of his fellow-creatures, reflect, without vexation and anguish, +how many profound, laborious, and subtle brains have been for ages +foolishly occupied in the study of absurdities? What a treasure of +knowledge might have been diffused by many celebrated thinkers, if instead +of engaging in the impertinent disputes of vain theology, they had devoted +their attention to intelligible objects really important to mankind? Half +the efforts which religious opinions have cost genius, and half the wealth +which frivolous forms of worship have cost nations would have sufficed +to instruct them perfectly in morality, politics, natural philosophy, +medicine, agriculture, etc. Superstition generally absorbs the attention, +admiration, and treasures of the people; their Religion costs them very +dear; but they have neither knowledge, virtue, nor happiness, for their +money. + + + + +204. + +Some ancient and modern philosophers have been bold enough to assume +experience and reason for their guides, and to shake off the chains of +superstition. Democritus, Epicurus, and other Greeks presumed to tear +away the veil of prejudice, and to deliver philosophy from theological +shackles. But their systems, too simple, too sensible, and too free from +the marvellous, for imaginations enamoured with chimeras, were obliged to +yield to the fabulous conjectures of such men as Plato and Socrates. Among +the moderns, Hobbes, Spinosa, Bayle, etc., have followed the steps of +Epicurus; but their doctrine has found very few followers, in a world, +still intoxicated with fables, to listen to reason. + +In every age, it has been dangerous to depart from prejudices. Discoveries +of every kind have been prohibited. All that enlightened men could do, was +to speak ambiguously, hence they often confounded falsehood with truth. +Several had a _double doctrine_, one public and the other secret; the +key of the latter being lost, their true sentiments, have often become +unintelligible and consequently useless. + +How could modern philosophers, who, under pain of cruel persecution, were +commanded to renounce reason, and to subject it to faith, that is, to the +authority of priests; how, I say, could men, thus bound, give free scope +to their genius, improve reason, and accelerate the progress of the human +mind? It was with fear and trembling that even the greatest men obtained +a glimpse of truth; rarely had they the courage to announce it; and those, +who did, were terribly punished. With Religion, it has ever been unlawful +to think, or to combat the prejudices of which man is every where the +victim and the dupe. + + + + +205. + +Every man, sufficiently intrepid to announce truths to the world, is sure +of incurring the hatred of the ministers of Religion, who loudly call to +their aid secular powers; and want the assistance of laws to support both +their arguments and their gods. Their clamours expose too evidently the +weakness of their cause. + + "None call for aid but those who feel distressed." + +In Religion, man is not permitted to err. In general, those who err are +pitied, and some kindness is shewn to persons who discover new truths; +but, when Religion is thought to be interested either in the errors or +the discoveries, a holy zeal is kindled, the populace become frantic, and +nations are in an uproar. + +Can any thing be more afflicting, than to see public and private felicity +depending upon a futile system, which is destitute if principles, founded +only on a distempered imagination, and incapable of presenting any thing +but words void of sense? In what consists the so much boasted utility of +a Religion, which nobody can comprehend, which continually torments those +who are weak enough to meddle with it, which is incapable of rendering men +better, and which often makes them consider it meritorious to be unjust +and wicked? Is there a folly more deplorable, and more justly to be +combated, than that, which far from doing any service to the human race, +only makes them blind, delirious, and miserable, by depriving them of +Truth, the sole cure for their wretchedness. + + + + +206. + +Religion has ever filled the mind of man with darkness, and kept him in +ignorance of his real duties and true interests. It is only by dispelling +the clouds and phantoms of Religion, that we shall discover Truth, Reason, +and Morality. Religion diverts us from the causes of evils, and from the +remedies which nature prescribes; far from curing, it only aggravates, +multiplies, and perpetuates them. Let us observe with the celebrated +Lord Bolingbroke, that "_theology is the box of Pandora; and if it is +impossible to shut it, it is at least useful to inform men, that this +fatal box is open_." + + +THE END. + + + + + + + + + + + + +End of Project Gutenberg's Good Sense, by Paul Henri Thiry, Baron D'Holbach + +*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK GOOD SENSE *** + +***** This file should be named 7319.txt or 7319.zip ***** +This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: + http://www.gutenberg.org/7/3/1/7319/ + +Produced by Freethought Archives + +Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions +will be renamed. + +Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no +one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation +(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without +permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, +set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to +copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to +protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project +Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you +charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you +do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the +rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose +such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and +research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do +practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is +subject to the trademark license, especially commercial +redistribution. + + + +*** START: FULL LICENSE *** + +THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE +PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK + +To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free +distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work +(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project +Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at +http://gutenberg.org/license). + + +Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works + +1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to +and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property +(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all +the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy +all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. +If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the +terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or +entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. + +1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be +used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who +agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few +things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See +paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement +and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. See paragraph 1.E below. + +1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" +or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the +collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an +individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are +located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from +copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative +works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg +are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project +Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by +freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of +this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with +the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by +keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project +Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. + +1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern +what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in +a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check +the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement +before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or +creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project +Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning +the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United +States. + +1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: + +1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate +access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently +whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the +phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project +Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, +copied or distributed: + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + +1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived +from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is +posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied +and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees +or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work +with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the +work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 +through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the +Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or +1.E.9. + +1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted +with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution +must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional +terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked +to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the +permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. + +1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this +work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. + +1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this +electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without +prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with +active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project +Gutenberg-tm License. + +1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, +compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any +word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or +distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than +"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version +posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), +you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a +copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon +request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other +form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. + +1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, +performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works +unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing +access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided +that + +- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from + the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method + you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is + owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he + has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the + Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments + must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you + prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax + returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and + sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the + address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to + the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." + +- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies + you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he + does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm + License. You must require such a user to return or + destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium + and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of + Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any + money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the + electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days + of receipt of the work. + +- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free + distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set +forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from +both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael +Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the +Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. + +1.F. + +1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable +effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread +public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm +collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain +"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual +property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a +computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by +your equipment. + +1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right +of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project +Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal +fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT +LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE +PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE +TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE +LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR +INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH +DAMAGE. + +1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a +defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can +receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a +written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you +received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with +your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with +the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a +refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity +providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to +receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy +is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further +opportunities to fix the problem. + +1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth +in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO +WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. + +1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied +warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. +If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the +law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be +interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by +the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any +provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. + +1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the +trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone +providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance +with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, +promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, +harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, +that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do +or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm +work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any +Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. + + +Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm + +Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of +electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers +including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists +because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from +people in all walks of life. + +Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the +assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's +goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will +remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure +and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. +To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation +and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 +and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. + + +Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive +Foundation + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit +501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the +state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal +Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification +number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at +http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent +permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. + +The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. +Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered +throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at +809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email +business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact +information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official +page at http://pglaf.org + +For additional contact information: + Dr. Gregory B. Newby + Chief Executive and Director + gbnewby@pglaf.org + + +Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation + +Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide +spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of +increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be +freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest +array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations +($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt +status with the IRS. + +The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating +charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United +States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a +considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up +with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations +where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To +SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any +particular state visit http://pglaf.org + +While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we +have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition +against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who +approach us with offers to donate. + +International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make +any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from +outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. + +Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation +methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other +ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. +To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate + + +Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. + +Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm +concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared +with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project +Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. + + +Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. +unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily +keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. + + +Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: + + http://www.gutenberg.org + +This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, +including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to +subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. diff --git a/7319.zip b/7319.zip Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..749ac75 --- /dev/null +++ b/7319.zip diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6312041 --- /dev/null +++ b/LICENSE.txt @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements, +metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be +in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES. + +Procedures for determining public domain status are described in +the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org. + +No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in +jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize +this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright +status under the laws that apply to them. diff --git a/README.md b/README.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..728cac6 --- /dev/null +++ b/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ +Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for +eBook #7319 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/7319) diff --git a/old/gsens10.txt b/old/gsens10.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..4a934a5 --- /dev/null +++ b/old/gsens10.txt @@ -0,0 +1,6533 @@ +The Project Gutenberg EBook of Good Sense, by Baron D'Holbach + +Copyright laws are changing all over the world. Be sure to check the +copyright laws for your country before downloading or redistributing +this or any other Project Gutenberg eBook. + +This header should be the first thing seen when viewing this Project +Gutenberg file. Please do not remove it. Do not change or edit the +header without written permission. + +Please read the "legal small print," and other information about the +eBook and Project Gutenberg at the bottom of this file. Included is +important information about your specific rights and restrictions in +how the file may be used. You can also find out about how to make a +donation to Project Gutenberg, and how to get involved. + + +**Welcome To The World of Free Plain Vanilla Electronic Texts** + +**eBooks Readable By Both Humans and By Computers, Since 1971** + +*****These eBooks Were Prepared By Thousands of Volunteers!***** + + +Title: Good Sense + +Author: Baron D'Holbach + +Release Date: January, 2005 [EBook #7319] +[Yes, we are more than one year ahead of schedule] +[This file was first posted on April 12, 2003] + +Edition: 10 + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: ASCII + +*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK GOOD SENSE *** + + + + +Good Sense by Paul Henri Thiry, Baron D'Holbach (08?-Dec-1723 to 21-Jan-1789) +Originally published in French in 1772. + + + + +Transcribed by the Freethought Archives <freethought@despammed.com> + + + + +Transcriber's note: this e-text is based on an undated English +translation of "Le Bon Sens" published c. 1900. The name of the +translator was not stated. + + + + + +GOOD SENSE +WITHOUT GOD: + +OR + +FREETHOUGHTS +OPPOSED TO +SUPERNATURAL IDEAS + + + +A TRANSLATION OF BARON D'HOLBACH'S +"LE BON SENS" + + + + +"_Atheism_ leaves men to Sense, to Philosophy, to Laws, to Reputation, +all which may be guides to moral Virtue, tho' Religion were not: but +Superstition dismounts all these, and erects an absolute Monarchy in +the Minds of Men. Therefore, Atheism did never perturb States; but +Superstition hath been the confusion of many. The causes of Superstition +are pleasing and sensual rights, and Ceremonies; Excess of Pharisaical +and outside holiness, Reverence to Traditions and the stratagems of +Prelates for their own Ambition and Lucre."--_Lord Bacon._ + + + + + +"FREETHINKER'S LIBRARY" SERIES + +LONDON: +W. STEWART & CO. + + + + + +PUBLISHER'S NOTE + + +The chief design in reprinting this translation, is to preserve +"_the strongest atheistical work_" for present and future generations +of English Freethinkers. + +The real author was, unquestionably, Paul Thyry; Baron D'Holbach, +and not John Meslier, to whom this work has been wrongly attributed, +under the title of "Le Bon Sens" (Common Sense). + +In 1770, Baron D'Holbach published his masterpiece, "Systeme de la Nature," +which for a long time passed as the posthumous work of M. de Mirabaud. +That text-book of "Atheistical Philosophy" caused a great sensation, +and two years later, 1772, the Baron published this excellent +abridgment of it, freed from arbitrary ideas; and by its clearness of +expression, facility, and precision of style, rendered it most suitable +for the average student. + +"Le Bon Sens" was privately printed in Amsterdam, and the author's name +was kept a profound secret; hence, Baron D'Holbach escaped persecution. + + + + +THE AUTHOR'S PREFACE + + +When we examine the opinions of men, we find that nothing is more +uncommon, than common sense; or, in other words, they lack judgment +to discover plain truths, or to reject absurdities, and palpable +contradictions. We have an example of this in Theology, a system +revered in all countries by a great number of men; an object regarded +by them as most important, and indispensable to happiness. An +examination of the principles upon which this pretended system +is founded, forces us to acknowledge, that these principles are +only suppositions, imagined by ignorance, propagated by enthusiasm +or knavery, adopted by timid credulity, preserved by custom which +never reasons, and revered solely because not understood. + +In a word, whoever uses common sense upon religious opinions, and +will bestow on this inquiry the attention that is commonly given to +most subjects, will easily perceive that Religion is a mere castle +in the air. Theology is ignorance of natural causes; a tissue of +fallacies and contradictions. In every country, it presents romances +void of probability, the hero of which is composed of impossible +qualities. His name, exciting fear in all minds, is only a vague +word, to which, men affix ideas or qualities, which are either +contradicted by facts, or inconsistent. + +Notions of this being, or rather, _the word_ by which he is designated, +would be a matter of indifference, if it did not cause innumerable +ravages in the world. But men, prepossessed with the opinion that +this phantom is a reality of the greatest interest, instead of +concluding wisely from its incomprehensibility, that they are not +bound to regard it, infer on the contrary, that they must contemplate +it, without ceasing, and never lose sight of it. Their invincible +ignorance, upon this subject, irritates their curiosity; instead of +putting them upon guard against their imagination, this ignorance +renders them decisive, dogmatic, imperious, and even exasperates +them against all, who oppose doubts to the reveries which they have +begotten. + +What perplexity arises, when it is required to solve an insolvable +problem; unceasing meditation upon an object, impossible to understand, +but in which however he thinks himself much concerned, cannot but +excite man, and produce a fever in his brain. Let interest, vanity, +and ambition, co-operate ever so little with this unfortunate turn +of mind, and society must necessarily be disturbed. This is the reason +that so many nations have often been the scene of extravagances of +senseless visionaries, who, believing their empty speculations to +be eternal truths, and publishing them as such, have kindled the zeal +of princes and their subjects, and made them take up arms for opinions, +represented to them as essential to the glory of the Deity. In all +parts of our globe, fanatics have cut each other's throats, publicly +burnt each other, committed without a scruple and even as a duty, the +greatest crimes, and shed torrents of blood. For what? To strengthen, +support, or propagate the impertinent conjectures of some enthusiasts, +or to give validity to the cheats of impostors, in the name of a being, +who exists only in their imagination, and who has made himself known +only by the ravages, disputes, and follies, he has caused. + +Savage and furious nations, perpetually at war, adore, under divers names, +some God, conformable to their ideas, that is to say, cruel, carnivorous, +selfish, blood-thirsty. We find, in all the religions, "a God of armies," +a "jealous God," an "avenging God," a "destroying God," a "God," who +is pleased with carnage, and whom his worshippers consider it a duty +to serve. Lambs, bulls, children, men, and women, are sacrificed to him. +Zealous servants of this barbarous God think themselves obliged even +to offer up themselves as a sacrifice to him. Madmen may everywhere +be seen, who, after meditating upon their terrible God, imagine that to +please him they must inflict on themselves, the most exquisite torments. +The gloomy ideas formed of the deity, far from consoling them, have +every where disquieted their minds, and prejudiced follies destructive +to happiness. + +How could the human mind progress, while tormented with frightful phantoms, +and guided by men, interested in perpetuating its ignorance and fears? +Man has been forced to vegetate in his primitive stupidity: he has +been taught stories about invisible powers upon whom his happiness was +supposed to depend. Occupied solely by his fears, and by unintelligible +reveries, he has always been at the mercy of priests, who have reserved +to themselves the right of thinking for him, and of directing his actions. + +Thus, man has remained a slave without courage, fearing to reason, +and unable to extricate himself from the labyrinth, in which he has +been wandering. He believes himself forced under the yoke of his gods, +known to him only by the fabulous accounts given by his ministers, who, +after binding each unhappy mortal in the chains of prejudice, remain +his masters, or else abandon him defenceless to the absolute power +of tyrants, no less terrible than the gods, of whom they are the +representatives. + +Oppressed by the double yoke of spiritual and temporal power, it +has been impossible for the people to be happy. Religion became sacred, +and men have had no other Morality, than what their legislators and +priests brought from the unknown regions of heaven. The human mind, +confused by theological opinions, ceased to know its own powers, +mistrusted experience, feared truth and disdained reason, in order +to follow authority. Man has been a mere machine in the hands of +tyrants and priests. Always treated as a slave, man has contracted +the vices of slavery. + +Such are the true causes of the corruption of morals. Ignorance and +servitude are calculated to make men wicked and unhappy. Knowledge, +Reason, and Liberty, can alone reform and make men happier. But +every thing conspires to blind them, and to confirm their errors. +Priests cheat them, tyrants corrupt and enslave them. Tyranny ever +was, and ever will be, the true cause of man's depravity, and also +of his calamities. Almost always fascinated by religious fiction, +poor mortals turn not their eyes to the natural and obvious causes +of their misery; but attribute their vices to the imperfection of +their natures, and their unhappiness to the anger of the gods. +They offer to heaven vows, sacrifices, and presents, to obtain the +end of sufferings, which in reality, are attributable only to the +negligence, ignorance, and perversity of their guides, to the folly +of their customs, and above all, to the general want of knowledge. +Let men's minds be filled with true ideas; let their reason be +cultivated; and there will be no need of opposing to the passions, +such a feeble barrier, as the fear of gods. Men will be good, when +they are well instructed; and when they are despised for evil, or +justly rewarded for good, which they do to their fellow citizens. + +In vain should we attempt to cure men of their vices, unless we +begin by curing them of their prejudices. It is only by showing +them the truth, that they will perceive their true interests, +and the real motives that ought to incline them to do good. +Instructors have long enough fixed men's eyes upon heaven; let +them now turn them upon earth. An incomprehensible theology, +ridiculous fables, impenetrable mysteries, puerile ceremonies, +are to be no longer endured. Let the human mind apply itself to +what is natural, to intelligible objects, truth, and useful knowledge. + +Does it not suffice to annihilate religious prejudice, to shew, +that what is inconceivable to man, cannot be good for him? +Does it require any thing, but plain common sense, to perceive, +that a being, incompatible with the most evident notions--that +a cause continually opposed to the effects which we attribute +to it--that a being, of whom we can say nothing, without falling +into contradiction--that a being, who, far from explaining the +enigmas of the universe, only makes them more inexplicable--that +a being, whom for so many ages men have vainly addressed to obtain +their happiness, and the end of sufferings--does it require, I say, +any thing but plain, common sense, to perceive--that the idea of +such a being is an idea without model, and that he himself is merely +a phantom of the imagination? Is any thing necessary but common sense +to perceive, at least, that it is folly and madness for men to hate +and damn one another about unintelligible opinions concerning a being +of this kind? In short, does not every thing prove, that Morality +and Virtue are totally incompatible with the notions of a God, +whom his ministers and interpreters have described, in every +country, as the most capricious, unjust, and cruel of tyrants, +whose pretended will, however, must serve as law and rule the +inhabitants of the earth? + +To discover the true principles of Morality, men have no need of +theology, of revelation, or of gods: They have need only of common +sense. They have only to commune with themselves, to reflect upon +their own nature, to consider the objects of society, and of the +individuals, who compose it; and they will easily perceive, that +virtue is advantageous, and vice disadvantageous to themselves. +Let us persuade men to be just, beneficent, moderate, sociable; +not because such conduct is demanded by the gods, but, because it +is pleasant to men. Let us advise them to abstain from vice and +crime; not because they will be punished in another world, but +because they will suffer for it in this.--_These are,_ says Montesquieu, +_means to prevent crimes--these are punishments; these reform manners-- +these are good examples._ + +The way of truth is straight; that of imposture is crooked and dark. +Truth, ever necessary to man, must necessarily be felt by all upright +minds; the lessons of reason are to be followed by all honest men. +Men are unhappy, only because they are ignorant; they are ignorant, +only because every thing conspires to prevent their being enlightened; +they are wicked only because their reason is not sufficiently developed. + +By what fatality then, have the first founders of all sects given to +their gods ferocious characters, at which nature revolts? Can we +imagine a conduct more abominable, than that which Moses tells us +his God showed towards the Egyptians, where that assassin proceeds +boldly to declare, in the name and by the order of _his God_, that Egypt +shall be afflicted with the greatest calamities, that can happen to +man? Of all the different ideas, which they give us of a supreme +being, of a God, creator and preserver of mankind, there are none +more horrible, than those of the impostors, who represented themselves +as inspired by a divine spirit, and "Thus saith the Lord." + +Why, O theologians! do you presume to inquire into the impenetrable +mysteries of a being, whom you consider inconceivable to the human +mind? You are the blasphemers, when you imagine that a being, +perfect according to you, could be guilty of such cruelty towards +creatures whom he has made out of nothing. Confess, your ignorance +of a creating God; and cease meddling with mysteries, which are +repugnant to _Common Sense_. + + + + + +TABLE OF CONTENTS + +GIVEN IN THE FRENCH EDITION + + +Section + +1. APOLOGUE + +2, 3. What is Theology? + +4. Man is not born with any ideas of Religion + +5. It is not necessary to believe in a God + +6. Religion is founded on credulity + +7. All religion is an absurdity + +8. The idea of God is impossible + +9. On the Origin of Superstition + +10. On the Origin of all Religion + +11. Religious fears expose men to become a prey to imposters + +12, 13. Religion seduces ignorance by the aid of the marvellous + +14. There would never have been any Religion, if there had not been + ages of Stupidity and Barbarism + +15. All Religion was produced by the desire of domination + +16. What serves as a basis to Religion is most uncertain + +17, 18. It is impossible to be convinced of the existence of a God + +19. The existence of God is not proved + +20. It explains nothing to say, that God is a spirit + +21. Spirituality is an absurdity + +22. Whatever exists is derived from Matter + +23. What is the metaphysical God of modern Theology? + +24. It would be less unreasonable to adore the Sun, than to adore + a spiritual Deity + +25. A spiritual Deity is incapable of volition and action + +26. What is God? + +27. Some remarkable Contradictions in Theology + +28. To adore God, is to adore a fiction + +29. Atheism is authorised by the infinity of God, and the impossibility + of knowing the Divine essence + +30. Believing in God is neither safer nor less criminal than not + believing in him + +31. Belief in God is a habit acquired in infancy + +32. Belief in God is a prejudice established by successive generations + +33. On the Origin of Prejudices + +34. On the effects of Prejudices + +35. The Religious principles of modern Theology could not be believed + if they were not instilled into the mind before the age of reason + +36. The wonders of nature do not prove the existence of God + +37, 38. Nature may be explained by natural causes + +39, 40. The world has never been created: Matter moves of itself + +41. Additional proofs that motion is essential to Matter, and that + consequently it is unnecessary to imagine a Spiritual Mover + +42. The existence of Man does not prove the existence of God + +43. Nevertheless, neither Man nor the Universe are the effects of chance + +44, 45. The order of the Universe does not prove the existence of a God + +46. A Spirit cannot be intelligent it is absurd to adore a divine + intelligence + +47, 48. All the qualities, which Theology gives to its God are contrary + to the Essence which is attributed to him + +49. It is absurd to say that the human race is the object and end + of the formation of the Universe + +50. God is not made for Man, nor Man for God + +51. It is not true that the object of the formation of the Universe + was to render Man happy + +52. What is called Providence is a word without meaning + +53. This pretended Providence is the enemy of Man + +54. The world is not governed by an intelligent being + +55. God cannot be considered immutable + +56. Good and evil are the necessary effects of natural causes. + What is a God that cannot change any thing? + +57. The consolations of Theology and the hope of paradise and of + a future life, are imaginary + +58. Another romantic reverie + +59. It is in vain that Theology attempts to clear its God from human + defects: either this God is not free, or else he is more wicked + than good + +60, 61. It is impossible to believe that there exists a God of + infinite goodness and power + +62. Theology makes its God a monster of absurdity, injustice, + malice, and atrocity + +63. All Religion inspires contemptible fears + +64. There is no difference between Religion, and the most somber + and servile Superstition + +65. To judge from the ideas which Theology gives of the Deity, the + love of God is impossible + +66. An eternally tormenting God is a most detestable being + +67. Theology is a tissue of palpable contradictions + +68. The pretended works of God do not prove Divine Perfections + +69. The perfection of God is not rendered more evident by the + pretended creation of angels + +70. Theology preaches the Omnipotence of its God, yet constantly + makes him appear impotent + +71. According to all religious systems, God would be the most + capricious and most foolish of beings + +72. It is absurd to say that Evil does not proceed from God + +73. The foreknowledge attributed to God would give men a right + to complain of his cruelty + +74. Absurdity of the theological stories concerning Original Sin, + and concerning Satan + +75. The Devil, like Religion, was invented to enrich the priests + +76. If God has been unable to render human nature incapable of sin, + he has no right to punish man + +77. It is absurd to say, that the conduct of God ought to be a mystery + for man + +78. Ought the unfortunate look for consolation, to the sole author + of their misery + +79. A God, who punishes the faults which he might have prevented, + is a mad tyrant, who joins injustice to folly + +80. What is called Free Will is an absurdity + +81. But we must not conclude that Society has no right to punish + +82, 83. Refutation of the arguments in favour of Free Will + +84. God himself, if there were a God, would not be free: hence the + inutility of all Religion + +85. According to the principles of Theology, man is not free a + single instant + +86. There is no evil, no disorder, and no sin, but must be attributed + to God: consequently God has no right either to punish or recompence + +87. The prayers offered to God sufficiently prove dissatisfaction of + the divine will + +88. It is the height of absurdity to imagine, that the injuries and + misfortunes, endured in this world, will be repaired in another world + +89. Theology justifies the evil and the wickedness, permitted by its God, + only by attributing to him the principle, that "Might makes Right," + which is the violation of all Right + +90. The absurd doctrine of Redemption, and the frequent exterminations + attributed to Jehovah, impress one with the idea of an unjust and + barbarous God + +91. Can a being, who has called us into existence merely to make us + miserable, be a generous, equitable, and tender father? + +92. Man's life, and all that occurs, deposes against the liberty of Man, + and against the justice and goodness of a pretended God + +93. It is not true, that we owe any gratitude to what is called + _Providence_ + +94. It is folly to suppose that Man is the king of nature, the favourite + of God, and unique object of his labours + +95. A comparison between Man and brutes + +96. There are no animals so detestable as Tyrants + +97. A refutation of the excellence of Man + +98. An oriental Tale + +99. It is madness to see nothing but the goodness of God, or to think + that this universe is only made for Man + +100. What is the Soul? + +101. The existence of a _Soul_ is an absurd supposition; and the existence + of an _immortal_ Soul still more absurd + +102. It is evident that Man dies _in toto_ + +103. Incontestible arguments against the Spirituality of the Soul + +104. On the absurdity of the supernatural causes, to which Theologians + are constantly having recourse + +105, 106. It is false that Materialism degrades + +107. The idea of a future life is only useful to those, who trade on + public credulity + +108. It is false that the idea of a future life is consoling + +109. All religious principles are derived from the imagination. + God is a chimera; and the qualities, attributed to him, + reciprocally destroy one another + +110. Religion is but a system imagined in order to reconcile + contradictions by the aid of mysteries + +111, 112, 113. Absurdity and inutility of all Mysteries, which were only + invented for the interests of Priests + +114. An universal God ought to have revealed an universal Religion + +115. What proves, that Religion is unnecessary, is, that it is + unintelligible + +116. All Religions are rendered ridiculous by the multitude of creeds, + all opposite to one another, and all equally foolish + +117. Opinion of a famous Theologian + +118. The God of the Deists is not less contradictory, nor less chimerical + than the God of the Christians + +119. It by no means proves the existence of God to say, that, in every + age, all nations have acknowledged some Deity or other + +120. All Gods are of a savage origin: all Religions are monuments of + the ignorance, superstition, and ferocity of former times: modern + Religions are but ancient follies, re-edited with additions and + corrections + +121. All religious usages bear marks of stupidity and barbarism + +122. The more a religious opinion is ancient and general, the more it + ought to be suspected + +123. Mere scepticism in religious matters, can only be the effect of + a very superficial examination + +124. Revelations examined + +125. Where is the proof that God ever shewed himself to Men, or ever + spoke to them? + +126. There is nothing that proves miracles to have been ever performed + +127. If God has spoken, is it not strange that he should have spoken + so differently to the different religious sects? + +128. Obscurity and suspicious origin of oracles + +129. Absurdity of all miracles + +130. Refutation of the reasoning of Pascal concerning the manner in which + we must judge of miracles + +131. Every new revelation is necessarily false + +132. The blood of martyrs testifies _against_ the truth of miracles, and + _against_ the divine origin attributed to Christianity + +133. The fanaticism of martyrs, and the interested zeal of missionaries, + by no means prove the truth of Religion + +134. Theology makes its God an enemy to Reason and Common Sense + +135. Faith is irreconcilable with Reason; and Reason is preferable + to Faith + +136. To what absurd and ridiculous sophisms every one is reduced, who + would substitute Faith for Reason! + +137. Ought a man to believe, on the assurance of another man, what is + of the greatest importance to himself + +138. Faith can take root only in feeble, ignorant, or slothful minds + +139. To teach, that any one Religion has greater pretensions to truth + than another, is an absurdity, and cause of tumult + +140. Religion is unnecessary to Morality + +141. Religion is the weakest barrier that can be opposed to the passions + +142. Honour is a more salutary and powerful bond than Religion + +143. Religion does not restrain the passions of kings + +144. Origin of "the divine right of kings," the most absurd, ridiculous, + and odious, of usurpations + +145. Religion is fatal to political ameliorations: it makes despots + licentious and wicked, and their subjects abject and miserable + +146. Christianity has propagated itself by preaching implicit obedience + to despotism + +147. One object of religious principles is to eternize the tyranny + of kings + +148. How fatal it is to persuade kings that they are responsible for + their actions to God alone + +149. A devout king is the scourge of his kingdom + +150. Tyranny sometimes finds the aegis of Religion a weak obstacle + to the despair of the people + +151. Religion favours the wickedness of princes by delivering them + from fear and remorse + +152. What is an enlightened Sovereign? + +153. Of the prevailing passions and crimes of the priesthood + +154. The quackery of priests + +155. Religion has corrupted Morality, and produced innumerable evils + +156. Every Religion is intolerant + +157. The evils of a state Religion + +158. Religion legitimates and authorizes crime + +159. Refutation of the argument, that the evils attributed to Religion + are but the bad effects of human passions + +160. Religion is incompatible with Morality + +161. The Morality of the Gospel is impracticable + +162. A society of Saints would be impossible + +163. Human nature is not depraved + +164. Concerning the effects of Jesus Christ's mission + +165. The dogma of the remission of sins was invented for the interest + of priests + +166. Who fear God? + +167. Hell is an absurd invention + +168. The bad foundation of religious morals + +169. Christian Charity, as preached and practised by Theologians!!! + +170. Confession, priestcraft's gold mine, and the destruction of the + true principles of Morality + +171. The supposition of the existence of a God is by no means necessary + to Morality + +172. Religion and its supernatural Morality are fatal to the + public welfare + +173. The union of Church and State is a calamity + +174. National Religions are ruinous + +175. Religion paralyses Morality + +176. Fatal consequences of Devotion + +177. The idea of a future life is not consoling to man + +178. An Atheist is fully as conscientious as a religious man, and has + better motives for doing good + +179. An Atheistical king would be far preferable to a religious king + +180. Philosophy produces Morality + +181. Religious opinions have little influence upon conduct + +182. Reason leads man to Atheism + +183. Fear alone makes Theists + +184. Can we, and ought we, to love God? + +185. God and Religion are proved to be absurdities by the different + ideas formed of them + +186. The existence of God, which is the basis of Religion, has not yet + been demonstrated + +187. Priests are more actuated by self-interest, than unbelievers + +188. Pride, presumption, and badness, are more often found in priests, + than in Atheists + +189. Prejudices last but for a time: no power is durable which is not + founded upon truth + +190. What an honourable power ministers of the Gods would obtain, + if they became the apostles of reason and the defenders of liberty! + +191. What a glorious and happy revolution it would be for the world, + if Philosophy were substituted for Religion! + +192. The recantation of an unbeliever at the point of death proves + nothing against the reasonableness of unbelief + +193. It is not true that Atheism breaks the bonds of society + +194. Refutation of the often repeated opinion, that Religion is necessary + for the vulgar + +195. Logical and argumentative systems are not adapted to the capacity + of the vulgar + +196. On the futility and danger of Theology + +197, 198. On the evils produced by implicit faith + +199. History teaches us, that all Religions were established by + impostors, in days of ignorance + +200. All Religions, ancient or modern, have borrowed from one + another ridiculous ceremonies + +201. Theology has always diverted philosophy from its right path + +202. Theology explains nothing + +203, 204. Theology has always fettered Morality, and retarded progress + +205. It cannot be too often repeated and proved, that Religion is an + extravagance and a calamity + +206. Religion prevents us from seeing the true causes of misfortunes + + + + + +GOOD SENSE WITHOUT GOD + + +APOLOGUE + + +1. There is a vast empire, governed by a monarch, whose strange +conduct is to confound the minds of his subjects. He wishes to be +known, loved, respected, obeyed; but never shows himself to his subjects, +and everything conspires to render uncertain the ideas formed of his +character. + +The people, subjected to his power, have, of the character and laws of +their invisible sovereign, such ideas only, as his ministers give them. +They, however, confess, that they have no idea of their master; that +his ways are impenetrable; his views and nature totally incomprehensible. +These ministers, likewise, disagree upon the commands which they pretend +have been issued by the sovereign, whose servants they call themselves. +They defame one another, and mutually treat each other as impostors and +false teachers. The decrees and ordinances, they take upon themselves +to promulgate, are obscure; they are enigmas, little calculated to be +understood, or even divined, by the subjects, for whose instruction +they were intended. The laws of the concealed monarch require +interpreters; but the interpreters are always disputing upon the +true manner of understanding them. Besides, they are not consistent +with themselves; all they relate of their concealed prince is only +a string of contradictions. They utter concerning him not a single +word that does not immediately confute itself. They call him supremely +good; yet many complain of his decrees. They suppose him infinitely +wise; and under his administration everything appears to contradict +reason. They extol his justice; and the best of his subjects are +generally the least favoured. They assert, he sees everything; +yet his presence avails nothing. He is, say they, the friend of +order; yet throughout his dominions, all is in confusion and disorder. +He makes all for himself; and the events seldom answer his designs. +He foresees everything; but cannot prevent anything. He impatiently +suffers offence, yet gives everyone the power of offending him. +Men admire the wisdom and perfection of his works; yet his works, +full of imperfection, are of short duration. He is continually doing +and undoing; repairing what he has made; but is never pleased with +his work. In all his undertakings, he proposes only his own glory; +yet is never glorified. His only end is the happiness of his subjects; +and his subjects, for the most part want necessaries. Those, whom he +seems to favour are generally least satisfied with their fate; almost +all appear in perpetual revolt against a master, whose greatness they +never cease to admire, whose wisdom to extol, whose goodness to adore, +whose justice to fear, and whose laws to reverence, though never obeyed! + +This EMPIRE is the WORLD; this MONARCH GOD; his MINISTERS are the PRIESTS; +his SUBJECTS MANKIND. + + +2. There is a science that has for its object only things +incomprehensible. Contrary to all other sciences, it treats only of what +cannot fall under our senses. Hobbes calls it the _kingdom of +darkness_. It is a country, where every thing is governed by laws, +contrary to those which mankind are permitted to know in the world they +inhabit. In this marvellous region, light is only darkness; evidence is +doubtful or false; impossibilities are credible: reason is a deceitful +guide; and good sense becomes madness. This _science_ is called +_theology_, and this theology is a continual insult to the reason of +man. + + +3. By the magical power of "ifs," "buts," "perhaps's," "what do we know," +etc., heaped together, a shapeless and unconnected system is formed, +perplexing mankind, by obliterating from their minds, the most clear +ideas and rendering uncertain truths most evident. By reason of this +systematic confusion, nature is an enigma; the visible world has +disappeared, to give place to regions invisible; reason is compelled +to yield to imagination, who leads to the country of her self-invented +chimeras. + + +4. The principles of every religion are founded upon the idea of a GOD. +Now, it is impossible to have true ideas of a being, who acts upon none +of our senses. All our ideas are representations of sensible objects. +What then can represent to us the idea of God, which is evidently an +idea without an object? Is not such an idea as impossible, as an +effect without a cause? Can an idea without an archetype be anything, +but a chimera? There are, however, divines, who assure us that the idea +of God is innate; or that we have this idea in our mother's womb. Every +principle is the result of reason; all reason is the effect of experience; +experience is acquired only by the exercise of our senses: therefore, +religious principles are not founded upon reason, and are not innate. + + +5. Every system of religion can be founded only upon the nature of God +and man; and upon the relations, which subsist between them. But to +judge of the reality of those relations, we must have some idea of the +divine nature. Now, the world exclaims, the divine nature is +incomprehensible to man; yet ceases not to assign attributes to this +incomprehensible God, and to assure us, that it is our indispensable +duty to find out that God, whom it is impossible to comprehend. + +The most important concern of man is what he can least comprehend. +If God is incomprehensible to man, it would seem reasonable never to +think of him; but religion maintains, man cannot with impunity cease +a moment to think (or rather dream) of his God. + + +6. We are told, that divine qualities are not of a nature to be +comprehended by finite minds. The natural consequence must be, that +divine qualities are not made to occupy finite minds. But religion +tells us, that the poor finite mind of man ought never to lose sight +of an inconceivable being, whose qualities he can never comprehend. +Thus, we see, religion is the art of turning the attention of mankind +upon subjects they can never comprehend. + + +7. Religion unites man with God, or forms a communication between them; +yet do they not say, God is infinite? If God be infinite, no finite being +can have communication or relation with him. Where there is no relation, +there can be no union, communication, or duties. If there be no duties +between man and his God, there is no religion for man. Thus, in saying +God is infinite, you annihilate religion for man, who is a finite being. +The idea of infinity is to us an idea without model, without archetype, +without object. + + +8. If God be an infinite being, there cannot be, either in the present +or future world, any relative proportion between man and his God. +Thus, the idea of God can never enter the human mind. In supposition +of a life, in which man would be much more enlightened, than in this, +the idea of the infinity of God would ever remain the same distance +from his finite mind. Thus the idea of God will be no more clear in +the future, than in the present life. Thus, intelligences, superior +to man, can have no more complete ideas of God, than man, who has not +the least conception of him in his present life. + + +9. How has it been possible to persuade reasonable beings, that +the thing, most impossible to comprehend, was most essential to them? +It is because they have been greatly terrified; because, when they fear, +they cease to reason; because, they have been taught to mistrust their +own understanding; because, when the brain is troubled, they believe +every thing, and examine nothing. + + +10. Ignorance and fear are the two hinges of all religion. The +uncertainty in which man finds himself in relation to his God, is +precisely the motive that attaches him to his religion. Man is +fearful in the dark--in moral, as well as physical darkness. His +fear becomes habitual, and habit makes it natural; he would think +that he wanted something, if he had nothing to fear. + + +11. He, who from infancy has habituated himself to tremble when +he hears pronounced certain words, requires those words and needs +to tremble. He is therefore more disposed to listen to one, who +entertains him in his fears, than to one, who dissuades him from them. +The superstitious man wishes to fear; his imagination demands it; +one might say, that he fears nothing so much, as to have nothing to fear. + +Men are imaginary invalids, whose weakness empirics are interested to +encourage, in order to have sale for their drugs. They listen rather +to the physician, who prescribes a variety of remedies, than to him, +who recommends good regimen, and leaves nature to herself. + + +12. If religion were more clear, it would have less charms for the +ignorant, who are pleased only with obscurity, terrors, fables, prodigies, +and things incredible. Romances, silly stories, and the tales of ghosts +and wizards, are more pleasing to vulgar minds than true histories. + + +13. In point of religion, men are only great children. The more a +religion is absurd and filled with wonders, the greater ascendancy +it acquires over them. The devout man thinks himself obliged to +place no bounds to his credulity; the more things are inconceivable, +they appear to him divine; the more they are incredible, the greater +merit, he imagines, there is in believing them. + + +14. The origin of religious opinions is generally dated from the time, +when savage nations were yet in infancy. It was to gross, ignorant, +and stupid people, that the founders of religion have in all ages +addressed themselves, when they wished to give them their Gods, their +mode of worship, their mythology, their marvellous and frightful fables. +These chimeras, adopted without examination by parents, are transmitted, +with more or less alteration, to their children, who seldom reason any +more than their parents. + + +15. The object of the first legislators was to govern the people; +and the easiest method to effect it was to terrify their minds, and +to prevent the exercise of reason. They led them through winding +bye-paths, lest they might perceive the designs of their guides; +they forced them to fix their eyes in the air, for fear they should +look at their feet; they amused them on the way with idle stories; +in a word, they treated them as nurses do children, who sing lullabies, +to put them to sleep, and scold, to make them quiet. + + +16. The existence of a God is the basis of all religion. Few appear +to doubt his existence; yet this fundamental article utterly embarrasses +every mind that reasons. The first question of every catechism has been, +and ever will be, the most difficult to resolve. (In the year 1701, +the holy fathers of the oratory of Vendome maintained in a thesis, +this proposition--that, according to St. Thomas, the existence of God +is not, and cannot be, a subject of faith.) + + +17. Can we imagine ourselves sincerely convinced of the existence +of a being, whose nature we know not; who is inaccessible to all +our senses; whose attributes, we are assured, are incomprehensible +to us? To persuade me that a being exists or can exist, I must be +first told what that being is. To induce me to believe the existence +or the possibility of such a being, it is necessary to tell me things +concerning him that are not contradictory, and do not destroy one another. +In short, to fully convince me of the existence of that being, it is +necessary to tell me things that I can understand. + + +18. A thing is impossible, when it includes two ideas that mutually +destroy one another, and which can neither be conceived nor united in +thought. Conviction can be founded only upon the constant testimony +of our senses, which alone give birth to our ideas, and enable us to +judge of their agreement or disagreement. That, which exists necessarily, +is that, whose non-existence implies a contradiction. These principles, +universally acknowledged, become erroneous, when applied to the existence +of a God. Whatever has been hitherto said upon the subject, is either +unintelligible, or perfect contradiction, and must therefore appear +absurd to every rational man. + + +19. All human knowledge is more or less clear. By what strange fatality +have we never been able to elucidate the science of God? The most +civilized nations, and among them the most profound thinkers, are +in this respect no more enlightened than the most savage tribes and +ignorant peasants; and, examining the subject closely, we shall find, +that, by the speculations and subtle refinements of men, the divine +science has been only more and more obscured. Every religion has +hitherto been founded only upon what is called, in logic, _begging +the question_; it takes things for granted, and then proves, by +suppositions, instead of principles. + + +20. Metaphysics teach us, that God is a _pure spirit_. But, is +modern theology superior to that of the savages? The savages +acknowledge a _great spirit_, for the master of the world. The +savages, like all ignorant people, attribute to _spirits_ all the +effects, of which their experience cannot discover the true causes. +Ask a savage, what works your watch? He will answer, _it is a spirit_. +Ask the divines, what moves the universe? They answer, _it is a spirit_. + + +21. The savage, when he speaks of a spirit, affixes, at least, some +idea to the word; he means thereby an agent, like the air, the breeze, +the breath, that invisibly produces discernible effects. By subtilizing +every thing, the modern theologian becomes as unintelligible to +himself as to others. Ask him, what he understands by a spirit? +He will answer you, that it is an unknown substance, perfectly simple, +that has no extension, that has nothing common with matter. Indeed, +is there any one, who can form the least idea of such a substance? +What then is a spirit, to speak in the language of modern theology, +but the absence of an idea? The idea of _spirituality_ is an idea +without model. + + +22. Is it not more natural and intelligible to draw universal existence +from the matter, whose existence is demonstrated by all the senses, +and whose effects we experience, which we see act, move, communicate +motion, and incessantly generate, than to attribute the formation of +things to an unknown power, to a spiritual being, who cannot derive +from his nature what he has not himself, and who, by his spiritual +essence, can create neither matter nor motion? Nothing is more evident, +than that the idea they endeavour to give us, of the action of mind +upon matter, represents no object. It is an idea without model. + + +23. The material _Jupiter_ of the ancients could move, compose, destroy, +and create beings, similar to himself; but the God of modern theology +is sterile. He can neither occupy any place in space, nor move matter, +nor form a visible world, nor create men or gods. The metaphysical God +is fit only to produce confusion, reveries, follies, and disputes. + + +24. Since a God was indispensably requisite to men, why did they +not worship the Sun, that visible God, adored by so many nations? +What being had greater claim to the homage of men, than the day-star, +who enlightens, warms, and vivifies all beings; whose presence enlivens +and regenerates nature, whose absence seems to cast her into gloom +and languor? If any being announced to mankind, power, activity, +beneficence, and duration, it was certainly the Sun, whom they ought +to have regarded as the parent of nature, as the divinity. At least, +they could not, without folly, dispute his existence, or refuse to +acknowledge his influence. + + +25. The theologian exclaims to us, that God wants neither hands nor +arms to act; that _he acts by his will_. But pray, who or what is that +God, who has a will, and what can be the subject of his divine will? + +Are the stories of witches, ghosts, wizards, hobgoblins, etc., more +absurd and difficult to believe than the magical or impossible action +of mind upon matter? When we admit such a God, fables and reveries +may claim belief. Theologians treat men as children, whose simplicity +makes them believe all the stories they hear. + + +26. To shake the existence of God, we need only to ask a theologian +to speak of him. As soon as he has said a word upon the subject, the +least reflection will convince us, that his observations are totally +incompatible with the essence he ascribes to his God. What then is God? +It is an abstract word, denoting the hidden power of nature; or it is +a mathematical point, that has neither length, breadth, nor thickness. +David Hume, speaking of theologians, has ingeniously observed, _that +they have discovered the solution of the famous problem of Archimedes-- +a point in the heavens, whence they move the world_. + + +27. Religion prostrates men before a being, who, without extension, +is infinite, and fills all with his immensity; a being, all-powerful, +who never executes his will; a being, sovereignly good, who creates +only disquietudes; a being, the friend of order, and in whose government +all is in confusion and disorder. What then, can we imagine, can be +the God of theology? + + +28. To avoid all embarrassment, we are told, "that it is not necessary +to know what God is; that we must adore him; that we are not permitted +to extend our views to his attributes." But, before we know that we +must adore a God, must we not know certainly, that he exists? But, +how can we assure ourselves, that he exists, if we never examine +whether the various qualities, attributed to him, do really exist +and agree in him? Indeed, to adore God, is to adore only the fictions +of one's own imagination, or rather, it is to adore nothing. + + +29. In view of confounding things the more, theologians have not +declared what their God is; they tell us only what he is not. By +means of negations and abstractions, they think they have composed +a real and perfect being. Mind is that, which is _not_ body. An +infinite being is a being, who is _not_ finite. A perfect being +is a being, who is _not_ imperfect. Indeed, is there any one, who +can form real ideas of such a mass of absence of ideas? That, which +excludes all idea, can it be any thing but nothing? + +To pretend, that the divine attributes are beyond the reach of human +conception, is to grant, that God is not made for man. To assure us, +that, in God, all is infinite, is to own that there can be nothing +common to him and his creatures. If there be nothing common to God +and his creatures, God is annihilated for man, or, at least, rendered +useless to him. "God," they say, "has made man intelligent, but he +has not made him omniscient;" hence it is inferred, that he has not +been able to give him faculties sufficiently enlarged to know his +divine essence. In this case, it is evident, that God has not been +able nor willing to be known by his creatures. By what right then +would God be angry with beings, who were naturally incapable of knowing +the divine essence? God would be evidently the most unjust and +capricious of tyrants, if he should punish an Atheist for not having +known, what, by his nature, it was impossible he should know. + + +30. To the generality of men, nothing renders an argument more +convincing than fear. It is therefore, that theologians assure us, +_we must take the safest part_; that nothing is so criminal as +incredulity; that God will punish without pity every one who has +the temerity to doubt his existence; that his severity is just, +since madness or perversity only can make us deny the existence of +an enraged monarch, who without mercy avenges himself on Atheists. +If we coolly examine these threatenings, we shall find, they always +suppose the thing in question. They must first prove the existence +of a God, before they assure us, it is safest to believe, and horrible +to doubt or deny his existence. They must then prove, that it is +possible and consistent, that a just God cruelly punishes men for +having been in a state of madness, that prevented their believing +the existence of a being, whom their perverted reason could not conceive. +In a word, they must prove, that an infinitely just God can infinitely +punish the invincible and natural ignorance of man with respect +to the divine nature. Do not theologians reason very strangely? +They invent phantoms, they compose them of contradictions; they +then assure us, it is safest not to doubt the existence of these +phantoms they themselves have invented. According to this mode of +reasoning, there is no absurdity, which it would not be more safe +to believe, than not to believe. + +All children are born Atheists; they have no idea of God. Are they +then criminal on account of their ignorance? At what age must they +begin to believe in God? It is, you say, at the age of reason. +But at what time should this age commence? Besides, if the profoundest +theologians lose themselves in the divine nature, which they do not +presume to comprehend, what ideas must man have of him? + + +31. Men believe in God only upon the word of those, who have no more +idea of him than themselves. Our nurses are our first theologians. +They talk to children of God as if he were a scarecrow; they teach +them from the earliest age to join their hands mechanically. Have +nurses then more true ideas of God than the children whom they teach +to pray? + + +32. Religion, like a family estate, passes, with its incumbrances, +from parents to children. Few men in the world would have a God, +had not pains been taken in infancy to give them one. Each would +receive from his parents and teachers the God whom they received +from theirs; but each, agreeably to his disposition, would arrange, +modify, and paint him in his own manner. + + +33. The brain of man, especially in infancy, is like soft wax, fit +to receive every impression that is made upon it. Education furnishes +him with almost all his ideas at a time, when he is incapable of +judging for himself. We believe we have received from nature, or +have brought with us at birth, the true or false ideas, which, in +a tender age, had been instilled into our minds; and this persuasion +is one of the greatest sources of errors. + + +34. Prejudice contributes to cement in us the opinions of those who +have been charged with our instruction. We believe them much more +experienced than ourselves; we suppose they are fully convinced of +the things which they teach us; we have the greatest confidence in them; +by the care they have taken of us in infancy, we judge them incapable +of wishing to deceive us. These are the motives that make us adopt +a thousand errors, without other foundation than the hazardous +authority of those by whom we have been brought up. The prohibition +likewise of reasoning upon what they teach us, by no means lessens +our confidence; but often contributes to increase our respect for +their opinions. + + +35. Divines act very wisely in teaching men their religious principles +before they are capable of distinguishing truth from falsehood, or +their left hand from their right. It would be as difficult to instill +into the mind of a man, forty years old, the extravagant notions that +are given us of the divinity, as to eradicate them from the mind of +him who had imbibed them from infancy. + + +36. It is observed, that the wonders of nature are sufficient to lead +us to the existence of a God, and fully to convince us of this important +truth. But how many are there in the world who have the time, capacity, +or disposition, necessary to contemplate Nature and meditate her progress? +Men, for the most part, pay no regard to it. The peasant is not struck +with the beauty of the sun, which he sees every day. The sailor is +not surprised at the regular motion of the ocean; he will never draw +from it theological conclusions. The phenomena of nature prove the +existence of a God only to some prejudiced men, who have been early +taught to behold the finger of God in every thing whose mechanism +could embarrass them. In the wonders of nature, the unprejudiced +philosopher sees nothing but the power of nature, the permanent and +various laws, the necessary effects of different combinations of matter +infinitely diversified. + + +37. Is there any thing more surprising than the logic of these divines, +who, instead of confessing their ignorance of natural causes, seek +beyond nature, in imaginary regions, a cause much more unknown than +that nature, of which they can form at least some idea? To say, that +God is the author of the phenomena of nature, is it not to attribute +them to an occult cause? What is God? What is a spirit? They are +causes of which we have no idea. O wise divines! Study nature and +her laws; and since you can there discover the action of natural causes, +go not to those that are supernatural, which, far from enlightening, +will only darken your ideas, and make it utterly impossible that +you should understand yourselves. + + +38. Nature, you say, is totally inexplicable without a God. That is +to say, to explain what you understand very little, you have need of +a cause which you understand not at all. You think to elucidate what +is obscure, by doubling the obscurity; to solve difficulties, by +multiplying them. O enthusiastic philosophers! To prove the existence +of a God, write complete treatises of botany; enter into a minute +detail of the parts of the human body; launch forth into the sky, +to contemplate the revolution of the stars; then return to the earth +to admire the course of waters; behold with transport the butterflies, +the insects, the polypi, and the organized atoms, in which you think +you discern the greatness of your God. All these things will not +prove the existence of God; they will prove only, that you have not +just ideas of the immense variety of matter, and of the effects, +producible by its infinitely diversified combinations, that constitute +the universe. They will prove only your ignorance of nature; that +you have no idea of her powers, when you judge her incapable of producing +a multitude of forms and beings, of which your eyes, even with the +assistance of microscopes, never discern but the smallest part. +In a word, they will prove, that, for want of knowing sensible agents, +or those possible to know, you find it shorter to have recourse to a +word, expressing an inconceivable agent. + + +39. We are gravely and repeatedly told, that, _there is no effect +without a cause_; that, _the world did not make itself_. But the +universe is a cause, it is not an effect; it is not a work; it has +not been made, because it is impossible that it should have been made. +The world has always been; its existence is necessary; it is its own cause. +Nature, whose essence is visibly to act and produce, requires not, to +discharge her functions, an invisible mover, much more unknown than +herself. Matter moves by its own energy, by a necessary consequence +of its heterogeneity. The diversity of motion, or modes of mutual +action, constitutes alone the diversity of matter. We distinguish +beings from one another only by the different impressions or motions +which they communicate to our organs. + + +40. You see, that all is action in nature, and yet pretend that nature, +by itself, is dead and without power. You imagine, that this all, +essentially acting, needs a mover! What then is this mover? It is +a spirit; a being absolutely incomprehensible and contradictory. +Acknowledge then, that matter acts of itself, and cease to reason +of your spiritual mover, who has nothing that is requisite to put +it in action. Return from your useless excursions; enter again into +a real world; keep to _second causes_, and leave to divines their +_first cause_, of which nature has no need, to produce all the effects +you observe in the world. + + +41. It can be only by the diversity of impressions and effects, which +bodies make upon us, that we feel them; that we have perceptions and +ideas of them; that we distinguish one from another; that we assign +them properties. Now, to see or feel an object, the object must act +upon our organs; this object cannot act upon us, without exciting +some motion in us; it cannot excite motion in us, if it be not in +motion itself. At the instant I see an object, my eyes are struck +by it; I can have no conception of light and vision, without motion, +communicated to my eye, from the luminous, extended, coloured body. +At the instant I smell something, my sense is irritated, or put in +motion, by the parts that exhale from the odoriferous body. At the +moment I hear a sound, the tympanum of my ear is struck by the air, +put in motion by a sonorous body, which would not act if it were not +in motion itself. Whence it evidently follows, that, without motion, +I can neither feel, see, distinguish, compare, judge, nor occupy my +thoughts upon any subject whatever. + +We are taught, that _the essence of a thing is that from which all +its properties flow_. Now, it is evident, that all the properties +of bodies, of which we have ideas, are owing to motion, which alone +informs us of their existence, and gives us the first conceptions +of them. I cannot be informed of my own existence but by the motions +I experience in myself. I am therefore forced to conclude, that +motion is as essential to matter as extension, and that matter cannot +be conceived without it. + +Should any person deny, that motion is essential and necessary to matter; +they cannot, at least, help acknowledging that bodies, which seem dead +and inert, produce motion of themselves, when placed in a fit situation +to act upon one another. For instance; phosphorus, when exposed to the +air, immediately takes fire. Meal and water, when mixed, ferment. +Thus dead matter begets motion of itself. Matter has then the power +of self-motion; and nature, to act, has no need of a mover, whose +pretended essence would hinder him from acting. + + +42. Whence comes man? What is his origin? Did the first man spring, +ready formed, from the dust of the earth? Man appears, like all other +beings, a production of nature. Whence came the first stones, the +first trees, the first lions, the first elephants, the first ants, +the first acorns? We are incessantly told to acknowledge and revere +the hand of God, of an infinitely wise, intelligent and powerful +maker, in so wonderful a work as the human machine. I readily confess, +that the human machine appears to me surprising. But as man exists +in nature, I am not authorized to say that his formation, is above +the power of nature. But I can much less conceive of this formation, +when to explain it, I am told, that a pure spirit, who has neither +eyes, feet, hands, head, lungs, mouth nor breath, made man by taking +a little clay, and breathing upon it. + +We laugh at the savage inhabitants of Paraguay, for calling themselves +the descendants of the moon. The divines of Europe call themselves +the descendants, or the creation, of a pure spirit. Is this pretension +any more rational? Man is intelligent; thence it is inferred, that +he can be the work only of an intelligent being, and not of a nature, +which is void of intelligence. Although nothing is more rare, than +to see man make use of this intelligence, of which he seems so proud, +I will grant that he is intelligent, that his wants develop this faculty, +that society especially contributes to cultivate it. But I see nothing +in the human machine, and in the intelligence with which it is endued, +that announces very precisely the infinite intelligence of the maker +to whom it is ascribed. I see that this admirable machine is liable to +be deranged; I see, that his wonderful intelligence is then disordered, +and sometimes totally disappears; I infer, that human intelligence +depends upon a certain disposition of the material organs of the body, +and that we cannot infer the intelligence of God, any more from the +intelligence of man, than from his materiality. All that we can +infer from it, is, that God is material. The intelligence of man +no more proves the intelligence of God, than the malice of man proves +the malice of that God, who is the pretended maker of man. In spite +of all the arguments of divines, God will always be a cause contradicted +by its effects, or of which it is impossible to judge by its works. +We shall always see evil, imperfection and folly result from such a +cause, that is said to be full of goodness, perfection and wisdom. + + +43. "What?" you will say, "is intelligent man, is the universe, +and all it contains, the effect of _chance_?" No; I repeat it, +_the universe is not an effect_; it is the cause of all effects; +every being it contains is the necessary effect of this cause, which +sometimes shews us its manner of acting, but generally conceals its +operations. Men use the word _chance_ to hide their ignorance of +true causes, which, though not understood, act not less according +to certain laws. There is no effect without a cause. Nature is +a word, used to denote the immense assemblage of beings, various +matter, infinite combinations, and diversified motions, that we +behold. All bodies, organized or unorganized, are necessary effects +of certain causes. Nothing in nature can happen by chance. Every +thing is subject to fixed laws. These laws are only the necessary +connection of certain effects with their causes. One atom of matter +cannot meet another _by chance_; this meeting is the effect of permanent +laws, which cause every being necessarily to act as it does, and +hinder it from acting otherwise, in given circumstances. To talk +of the _fortuitous concourse of atoms_, or to attribute some effects +to chance, is merely saying that we are ignorant of the laws, by +which bodies act, meet, combine, or separate. + +Those, who are unacquainted with nature, the properties of beings, +and the effects which must necessarily result from the concurrence +of certain causes, think, that every thing takes place by chance. +It is not chance, that has placed the sun in the centre of our +planetary system; it is by its own essence, that the substance, of +which it is composed, must occupy that place, and thence be diffused. + + +44. The worshippers of a God find, in the order of the universe, +an invincible proof of the existence of an intelligent and wise being, +who governs it. But this order is nothing but a series of movements +necessarily produced by causes or circumstances, which are sometimes +favourable, and sometimes hurtful to us: we approve of some, and +complain of others. + +Nature uniformly follows the same round; that is, the same causes +produce the same effects, as long as their action is not disturbed +by other causes, which force them to produce different effects. +When the operation of causes, whose effects we experience, is interrupted +by causes, which, though unknown, are not the less natural and necessary, +we are confounded; we cry out, _a miracle!_ and attribute it to a cause +much more unknown, than any of those acting before our eyes. + +The universe is always in order. It cannot be in disorder. It is +our machine, that suffers, when we complain of disorder. The bodies, +causes, and beings, which this world contains, necessarily act in +the manner in which we see them act, whether we approve or disapprove +of their effects. Earthquakes, volcanoes, inundations, pestilences, +and famines are effects as necessary, or as much in the order of nature, +as the fall of heavy bodies, the courses of rivers, the periodical +motions of the seas, the blowing of the winds, the fruitful rains, +and the favourable effects, for which men praise God, and thank him +for his goodness. + +To be astonished that a certain order reigns in the world, is to be +surprised that the same causes constantly produce the same effects. +To be shocked at disorder, is to forget, that when things change, or +are interrupted in their actions, the effects can no longer be the same. +To wonder at the order of nature, is to wonder that any thing can exist; +it is to be surprised at any one's own existence. What is order to +one being, is disorder to another. All wicked beings find that every +thing is in order, when they can with impunity put every thing in +disorder. They find, on the contrary, that every thing is in disorder, +when they are disturbed in the exercise of their wickedness. + + +45. Upon supposition that God is the author and mover of nature, +there could be no disorder with respect to him. Would not all the +causes, that he should have made, necessarily act according to the +properties, essences, and impulses given them? If God should change +the ordinary course of nature, he would not be immutable. If the +order of the universe, in which man thinks he sees the most convincing +proof of the existence, intelligence, power and goodness of God, +should happen to contradict itself, one might suspect his existence, +or, at least, accuse him of inconstancy, impotence, want of foresight +and wisdom in the arrangement of things; one would have a right to +accuse him of an oversight in the choice of the agents and instruments, +which he makes, prepares, and puts in action. In short, if the order +of nature proves the power and intelligence of the Deity, disorder +must prove his weakness, instability, and irrationality. + +You say, that God is omnipresent, that he fills the universe with +his immensity, that nothing is done without him, that matter could +not act without his agency. But in this case, you admit, that your +God is the author of disorder, that it is he who deranges nature, +that he is the father of confusion, that he is in man, and moves +him at the moment he sins. If God is every where, he is in me, +he acts with me, he is deceived with me, he offends God with me, +and combats with me the existence of God! O theologians! you +never understand yourselves, when you speak of God. + + +46. In order to have what we call intelligence, it is necessary +to have ideas, thoughts, and wishes; to have ideas, thoughts, and +wishes, it is necessary to have organs; to have organs, it is necessary +to have a body; to act upon bodies, it is necessary to have a body; +to experience disorder, it is necessary to be capable of suffering. +Whence it evidently follows, that a pure spirit can neither be intelligent, +nor affected by what passes in the universe. + +Divine intelligence, ideas, and views, have, you say, nothing common +with those of men. Very well. How then can men judge, right or wrong, +of these views; reason upon these ideas; or admire this intelligence? +This would be to judge, admire, and adore that, of which we can have +no ideas. To adore the profound views of divine wisdom, is it not +to adore that, of which we cannot possibly judge? To admire these +views, is it not to admire without knowing why? Admiration is always +the daughter of ignorance. Men admire and adore only what they do not +comprehend. + + +47. All those qualities, ascribed to God, are totally incompatible +with a being, who, by his very essence, is void of all analogy with +human beings. It is true, the divines imagine they extricate themselves +from this difficulty, by exaggerating the human qualities, attributed +to the Divinity; they enlarge them to infinity, where they cease to +understand themselves. What results from this combination of man with God? +A mere chimera, of which, if any thing be affirmed, the phantom, combined +with so much pains, instantly vanishes. + +Dante, in his poem upon _Paradise_, relates, that the Deity appeared +to him under the figure of three circles, forming an iris, whose +lively colours generated each other; but that, looking steadily upon +the dazzling light, he saw only his own figure. While adoring God, +it is himself, that man adores. + + +48. Ought not the least reflection suffice to prove, that God can +have none of the human qualities, all ties, virtues, or perfections? +Our virtues and perfections are consequences of the modifications +of our passions. But has God passions as we have? Again: our good +qualities consist in our dispositions towards the beings with whom +we live in society. God, according to you, is an insulated being. +God has no equals--no fellow-beings. God does not live in society. +He wants the assistance of no one. He enjoys an unchangeable felicity. +Admit then, according to your own principles, that God cannot have what +we call virtues, and that man cannot be virtuous with respect to him. + + +49. Man, wrapped up in his own merit, imagines the human race to +be the sole object of God in creating the universe. Upon what does +he found this flattering opinion? We are told: that man is the only +being endued with intelligence, which enables him to know the Deity, +and to render him homage. We are assured, that God made the world +only for his own glory, and that it was necessary that the human species +should come into this plan, that there might be some one to admire his +works, and glorify him for them. But, according to these suppositions, +has not God evidently missed his object? 1st. Man, according to +yourselves, will always labour under the completest impossibility +of knowing his God, and the most invincible ignorance of his divine +essence. 2ndly. A being, who has no equal, cannot be susceptible +of glory; for glory can result only from the comparison of one's own +excellence with that of others. 3rdly. If God be infinitely happy, +if he be self-sufficient, what need has he of the homage of his feeble +creatures? 4thly. God, notwithstanding all his endeavours, is not +glorified; but, on the contrary, all the religions in the world +represent him as perpetually offended; their sole object is to reconcile +sinful, ungrateful, rebellious man with his angry God. + + +50. If God be infinite, he has much less relation with man, than +man with ants. Would the ants reason pertinently concerning the +intentions, desires, and projects of the gardener? Could they +justly imagine, that a park was planted for them alone, by an +ostentatious monarch, and that the sole object of his goodness was +to furnish them with a superb residence? But, according to theology, +man is, with respect to God, far below what the vilest insect is to man. +Thus, by theology itself, which is wholly devoted to the attributes +and views of the Divinity, theology appears a complete folly. + + +51. We are told, that, in the formation of the universe, God's only +object was the happiness of man. But, in a world made purposely for +him, and governed by an omnipotent God, is man in reality very happy? +Are his enjoyments durable? Are not his pleasures mixed with pains? +Are many persons satisfied with their fate? Is not man continually +the victim of physical and moral evils? Is not the human machine, +which is represented as a master-piece of the Creator's skill, liable +to derangement in a thousand ways? Should we be surprised at the +workmanship of a mechanic, who should shew us a complex machine, +ready to stop every moment, and which, in a short time, would break +in pieces of itself? + + +52. The generous care, displayed by the Deity in providing for the +wants, and watching over the happiness of his beloved creatures, +is called _Providence_. But, when we open our eyes, we find that +God provides nothing. Providence sleeps over the greater part of +the inhabitants of this world. For a very small number of men who +are supposed to be happy, what an immense multitude groan under +oppression, and languish in misery! Are not nations forced to +deprive themselves of bread, to administer to the extravagances +of a few gloomy tyrants, who are no happier than their oppressed +slaves? + +At the same time that our divines emphatically expatiate upon the +goodness of Providence, while they exhort us to repose our confidence +in her, do we not hear them, at the sight of unforeseen catastrophes, +exclaim, that _Providence sports with the vain projects of man_, +that she frustrates their designs, that she laughs at their efforts, +that profound wisdom delights to bewilder the minds of mortals? +But, shall we put confidence in a malignant Providence, who laughs at, +and sports with mankind? How will one admire the unknown ways of +a hidden wisdom, whose manner of acting is inexplicable? Judge of +it by effects, you will say. We do; and find, that these effects +are sometimes useful, and sometimes hurtful. + +Men think they justify Providence, by saying, that, in this world, +there is much more good than evil to every individual of mankind. +Supposing the good, we enjoy from Providence, is to the evil, as +a _hundred to ten_; will it not still follow, that, for a hundred +degrees of goodness, Providence possesses ten of malignity; which +is incompatible with the supposed perfection of the divine nature. + +Almost all books are filled with the most flattering praises of +Providence, whose attentive care is highly extolled. It would +seem as if man, to live happily here below, needed not his own +exertions. Yet, without his own labour, man could subsist hardly +a day. To live, he is obliged to sweat, toil, hunt, fish, and +labour without intermission. Without these second causes, the +first cause, at least in most countries, would provide for none +of our wants. In all parts of the globe, we see savage and +civilized man in a perpetual struggle with Providence. He is +necessitated to ward off the strokes directed against him by +Providence, in hurricanes, tempests, frosts, hail-storms, +inundations, droughts, and the various accidents, which so often +render useless all his labours. In a word, we see man continually +occupied in guarding against the ill offices of that Providence, +which is supposed to be attentive to his happiness. + +A bigot admired divine Providence for wisely ordering rivers to +pass through those places, where men have built large cities. +Is not this man's reasoning as rational, as that of many learned +men, who incessantly talk of _final causes_, or who pretend that +they clearly perceive the beneficent views of God in the formation +of all things? + + +53. Do we see then, that Providence so very sensibly manifests +herself in the preservation of those admirable works, which we +attribute to her? If it is she, who governs the world, we find +her as active in destroying, as in forming; in exterminating, as +in producing. Does she not every moment destroy, by thousands, +the very men, to whose preservation and welfare we suppose her +continually attentive? Every moment she loses sight of her +beloved creature. Sometimes she shakes his dwelling, sometimes +she annihilates his harvests, sometimes she inundates his fields, +sometimes she desolates them by a burning drought. She arms all +nature against man. She arms man himself against his own species, +and commonly terminates his existence in anguish. Is this then +what is called preserving the universe? + +If we could view, without prejudice, the equivocal conduct of Providence +towards the human race and all sensible beings, we should find, that +far from resembling a tender and careful mother, she resembles rather +those unnatural mothers, who instantly forgetting the unfortunates +of their licentious love, abandon their infants, as soon as they +are born, and who, content with having borne them, expose them, +helpless, to the caprice of fortune. + +The Hottentots, in this respect are much wiser than other nations, +who treat them as barbarians, and refuse to worship God; because, +they say, _if he often does good, he often does evil_. Is not this +manner of reasoning more just and conformable to experience, than +that of many men, who are determined to see, in their God, nothing +but goodness, wisdom, and foresight, and who refuse to see that +the innumerable evils, of which this world is the theatre, must +come from the same hand, which they kiss with delight? + + +54. Common sense teaches, that we cannot, and ought not, to judge +of a cause, but by its effects. A cause can be reputed constantly +good, only when it constantly produces good. A cause, which produces +both good and evil, is sometimes good, and sometimes evil. But the +logic of theology destroys all this. According to that, the phenomena +of nature, or the effects we behold in this world, prove to us the +existence of a cause infinitely good; and this cause is God. Although +this world is full of evils; although disorder often reigns in it; +although men incessantly repine at their hard fate; we must be convinced, +that these effects are owing to a beneficent and immutable cause; +and many people believe it, or feign believe. + +Every thing that passes in the world, proves to us, in the clearest +manner, that it is not governed by an intelligent being. We can +judge of the intelligence of a being only by the conformity of the +means, which he employs to attain his proposed object. The object +of God, is the happiness of a man. Yet, a like necessity governs +the fate of all sensible beings, who are born only to suffer much, +enjoy little, and die. The cup of man is filled with joy and bitterness; +good is every where attended with evil; order gives place to disorder; +generation is followed by destruction. If you say, that the designs +of God are mysterious and that his ways are impenetrable; I answer, +that, in this case, it is impossible to judge whether God be intelligent. + + +55. You pretend, that God is immutable! What then produces a continual +instability in this world, which you make his empire? Is there a +state, subject to more frequent and cruel revolutions, than that +of this unknown monarch? How can we attribute to an immutable God, +sufficiently powerful to give solidity to his works, a government, +in which every thing is in continual vicissitude? If I imagine +I see a God of uniform character in all the effects favourable to my +species, what kind of a God can I see in their continual misfortunes? +You tell me, it is our sins, which compel him to punish. I answer, +that God, according to yourselves, is then not immutable, since the +sins of men force him to change his conduct towards them. Can a being, +who is sometimes provoked, and sometimes appeased, be constantly the same? + + +56. The universe can be only what it is; all sensible beings in it +enjoy and suffer; that is, are moved sometimes in an agreeable, and +sometimes in a disagreeable manner. These effects are necessary; +they result necessarily from causes, which act only according to +their properties. These effects necessarily please, or displease, +by a consequence of nature. This same nature compels me to avoid, +avert, and resist some things, and to seek, desire, and procure others. +In a world, where every thing is necessary, a God, who remedies nothing, +who leaves things to run in their necessary course,--is he any thing +but destiny, or necessity personified? It is a deaf and useless God, +who can effect no change in general laws, to which he is himself +subject. Of what importance is the infinite power of a being, who +will do but very little in my favour? Where is the infinite goodness +of a being, indifferent to happiness? Of what service is the favour +of a being, who, is able to do an infinite good, does not do even +a finite one? + + +57. When we ask, why so many miserable objects appear under the +government of a good God, we are told, by way of consolation, that +the present world is only a passage, designed to conduct man to a +happier one. The divines assure us, that the earth we inhabit, is +a state of trial. In short, they shut our mouths, by saying, that +God could communicate to his creatures neither impossibility nor +infinite happiness, which are reserved for himself alone. Can such +answers be satisfactory? 1st. The existence of another life is +guaranteed to us only by the imagination of man, who, by supposing it, +have only realized the desire they have of surviving themselves, +in order to enjoy hereafter a purer and more durable happiness. +2ndly. How can we conceive that a God, who knows every thing, and +must be fully acquainted with the dispositions of his creatures, +should want so many experiments, in order to be sure of their +dispositions? 3rdly. According to the calculations of their +chronologists, our earth has existed six or seven thousand years. +During that time, nations have experienced calamities. History +exhibits the human species at all times tormented and ravaged by +tyrants, conquerors, and heroes; by wars, inundations, famines, +plagues, etc. Are such long trials then likely to inspire us with +very great confidence in the secret views of the Deity? Do such +numerous and constant evils give a very exalted idea of the future +state, his goodness is preparing for us? 4thly. If God is so kindly +disposed, as he is asserted to be, without giving men infinite happiness, +could he not at least have communicated the degree of happiness, of +which finite beings are susceptible here below? To be happy, must +we have an _infinite_ or _divine_ happiness? 5thly. If God could +not make men happier than they are here below, what will become of +the hope of a _paradise_, where it is pretended, that the elect will +for ever enjoy ineffable bliss? If God neither could nor would avert +evil from the earth, the only residence we can know, what reason have +we to presume, that he can or will avert evil from another world, +of which we have no idea? Epicurus observed: "either God would +remove evil out of this world, and cannot; or he can, and will not; +or he has neither the power nor will; or, lastly, he has both the +power and will. If he has the will, and not the power, this shews +weakness, which is contrary to the nature of God. If he has the +power, and not the will, it is malignity; and this is no less contrary +to his nature. If he is neither able nor willing, he is both impotent +and malignant, and consequently cannot be God. If he be both willing +and able (which alone is consonant to the nature of God) whence comes +evil, or why does he not prevent it?" Reflecting minds are still +waiting for a reasonable solution of these difficulties; and our +divines tell us, that they will be removed only in a future life. + + +58. We are told of a pretended _scale of beings_. It is supposed, +that God has divided his creatures into different classes, in which +each enjoys the degree of happiness, of which it is susceptible. +According to this romantic arrangement, from the oyster to the celestial +angels, all beings enjoy a happiness, which is suitable to their nature. +Experience explicitly contradicts this sublime reverie. In this world, +all sensible beings suffer and live in the midst of dangers. Man cannot +walk without hurting, tormenting, or killing a multitude of sensible +beings, which are in his way; while he himself is exposed, at every +step, to a multitude of evils, foreseen or unforeseen, which may +lead him to destruction. During the whole course of his life, he +is exposed to pains; he is not sure, a moment, of his existence, +to which he is so strongly attached, and which he regards as the +greatest gift of the Divinity. + + +59. The world, it will be said, has all the perfection, of which +it is susceptible: since it is not God who made it, it must have +great qualities and great defects. But we answer, that, as the world +must necessarily have great defects, it would have been more conformable +to the nature of a good God, not to have created a world, which he could +not make completely happy. If God was supremely happy, before the +creation of the world, and could have continued to be supremely happy, +without creating the world, why did he not remain at rest? Why must +man suffer? Why must man exist? Of what importance is his existence +to God? Nothing, or something? If man's existence is not useful +or necessary to God, why did God make man? If man's existence is +necessary to God's glory, he had need of man; he was deficient in +something before man existed. We can pardon an unskilful workman +for making an imperfect work; because he must work, well or ill, +upon penalty of starving. This workman is excusable, but God is not. +According to you, he is self-sufficient; if so, why does he make men? +He has, you say, every thing requisite to make man happy. Why then +does he not do it? Confess, that your God has more malice than goodness, +unless you admit, that God, was necessitated to do what he has done, +without being able to do it otherwise. Yet, you assure us, that +God is free. You say also, that he is immutable, although it was +in _Time_ that he began and ceased to exercise his power, like the +inconstant beings of this world. O theologians! Vain are your +efforts to free your God from defects. This perfect God has always +some human imperfections. + + +60. "Is not God master of his favours? Can he not give them? +Can he not take them away? It does not belong to his creatures to +require reasons for his conduct. He can dispose of the works of his +own hands as he pleases. Absolute sovereign of mortals, he distributes +happiness or misery, according to his good pleasure." Such are +the solutions given by theologians to console us for the evils which +God inflicts upon us. We reply, that a God, who is infinitely good, +cannot be _master of his favours_, but would by his nature be obliged +to bestow them upon his creatures; that a being, truly beneficent, +cannot refrain from doing good; that a being, truly generous, does +not take back what he has given; and that every man, who does so, +dispenses with gratitude, and has no right to complain of finding +ungrateful men. + +How can the odd and capricious conduct, which theologians ascribe +to God, be reconciled with religion, which supposes a covenant, or +mutual engagements between God and men? If God owes nothing to his +creatures, they, on their part, can owe nothing to their God. All +religion is founded upon the happiness that men think they have a +right to expect from the Deity, who is supposed to say to them: +_Love me, adore me, obey me: and I will make you happy_. Men, on +their part, say to him: _Make us happy, be faithful to your promises, +and we will love you, we will adore you, and obey your laws_. +By neglecting the happiness of his creatures, distributing his +favours according to his caprice, and retracting his gifts, does +not God break the covenant, which serves as the basis of all religion? +Cicero has justly observed, that _if God is not agreeable to man, +he cannot be his God_. Goodness constitutes deity; this goodness +can be manifested to man only by the blessings he enjoys; as soon +as he is unhappy, this goodness disappears, and with it the divinity. +An infinite goodness can be neither limited, partial, nor exclusive. +If God be infinitely good, he owes happiness to all his creatures. +The unhappiness of a single being would suffice to annihilate unbounded +goodness. Under an infinitely good and powerful God, is it possible +to conceive that a single man should suffer? One animal, or mite, +that suffers, furnishes invincible arguments against divine providence +and its infinite goodness. + + +61. According to theology, the afflictions and evils of this life +are chastisements, which guilty men incur from the hand of God. +But why are men guilty? If God is omnipotent, does it cost him more +to say: "Let every thing in the world be in order; let all my subjects +be good, innocent, and fortunate," than to say: "Let every thing exist"? +Was it more difficult for this God to do his work well, than badly? +Religion tells us of a hell; that is, a frightful abode, where, +notwithstanding his goodness, God reserves infinite torments for +the majority of men. Thus after having rendered mortals very unhappy +in this world, religion tells them, that God can render them still +more unhappy in another! The theologian gets over this, by saying, +that the goodness of God will then give place to his justice. But +a goodness, which gives place to the most terrible cruelty, is not +an infinite goodness. Besides, can a God, who, after having been +infinitely good, becomes infinitely bad, be regarded as an immutable +being? Can we discern the shadow of clemency or goodness, in a God +filled with implacable fury? + + +62. Divine justice, as stated by our divines, is undoubtedly a quality +very proper to cherish in us the love of the Divinity. According to +the ideas of modern theology, it is evident, that God has created +the majority of men, with the sole view of putting them in a fair +way to incur eternal punishment. Would it not have been more conformable +to goodness, reason, and equity, to have created only stones or plants, +and not to have created sensible beings; than to have formed men, +whose conduct in this world might subject them to endless punishment +in the other? A God perfidious and malicious enough to create a +single man, and then to abandon him to the danger of being damned, +cannot be regarded as a perfect being; but as an unreasonable, unjust, +and ill-natured. Very far from composing a perfect God, theologians +have formed the most imperfect of beings. According to theological +notions, God would resemble a tyrant, who, having put out the eyes +of the greater part of his slaves, should shut them up in a dungeon, +where, for his amusement, he would, incognito, observe their conduct +through a trap-door, in order to punish with rigour all those, who, +while walking about, should hit against each other; but who would +magnificently reward the few whom he had not deprived of sight, in +avoiding to run against their comrades. Such are the ideas, which +the dogma of gratuitous predestination gives us of the divinity! + +Although men are continually repeating that their God is infinitely +good; yet it is evident, that in reality, they can believe nothing +of the kind. How can we love what we do not know? How can we love +a being, whose character is only fit to throw us into inquietude +and trouble? How can we love a being, of whom all that is said +tends to render him an object of utter detestation? + + +63. Many people make a subtle distinction between true religion and +superstition. They say, that the latter is only a base and inordinate +fear of the Deity; but that the truly religious man has confidence +in his God, and loves him sincerely; whereas, the superstitious man +sees in him only an enemy, has no confidence in him, and represents +him to himself as a distrustful, cruel tyrant, sparing of his benefits, +lavish of his chastisements. But, in reality, does not all religion +give us the same ideas of God? At the same time that we are told, +that God is infinitely good, are we not also told, that he is very +easily provoked, that he grants his favours to a few people only, +and that he furiously chastises those, to whom he has not been pleased +to grant favours? + + +64. If we take our ideas of God from the nature of things, where we +find a mixture of good and evil, this God, just like the good and evil +of which we experience, must naturally appear capricious, inconstant, +sometimes good, and sometimes malevolent; and therefore, instead of +exciting our love, must generate distrust, fear, and uncertainty. +There is then no real difference between natural religion, and the +most gloomy and servile superstition. If the theist sees God only +in a favourable light; the bigot views him in the most hideous light. +The folly of the one is cheerful, that of the other is melancholy; +but both are equally delirious. + + +65. If I draw my ideas of God from theology, he appears to inspire +aversion. Devotees, who tell us, that they sincerely love their God, +are either liars or fools, who see their God only in profile. It is +impossible to love a being, the very idea of whom strikes us with +terror, and whose judgments make us tremble. How can we, without +being alarmed, look upon a God, who is reputed to be barbarous enough +to damn us? Let not divines talk to us of a filial, or respectful fear, +mixed with love, which men ought to have for their God. A son can +by no means love his father, when he knows him to be cruel enough +to inflict upon him studied torments for the least faults he may commit. +No man upon earth can have the least spark of love for a God, who +reserves chastisements, infinite in duration and violence, for +ninety-nine hundredths of his children. + + +66. The inventors of the dogma of eternal hell-torments have made +of that God, whom they call so good, the most detestable of beings. +Cruelty in men is the last act of wickedness. Every sensible mind +must revolt at the bare recital of the torments, inflicted on the +greatest criminal; but cruelty is much more apt to excite indignation, +when void of motives. The most sanguinary tyrants, the Caligulas, +the Neros, the Domitians, had, at least, some motives for tormenting +their victims. These motives were, either their own safety, or the +fury of revenge, or the design of frightening by terrible examples, +or perhaps the vanity of making a display of their power, and the +desire of satisfying a barbarous curiosity. Can a God have any of +these motives? In tormenting the victims of his wrath, he would +punish beings, who could neither endanger his immoveable power, nor +disturb his unchangeable felicity. On the other hand, the punishments +of the other life would be useless to the living, who cannot be +witnesses of them. These punishments would be useless to the damned, +since in hell there is no longer room for conversion, and the time +of mercy is past. Whence it follows, that God, in the exercise of +his eternal vengeance, could have no other end than to amuse himself, +and insult the weakness of his creatures. I appeal to the whole human +race;--is there a man who feels cruel enough coolly to torment, I do +not say his fellow-creature, but any sensible being whatever, without +emolument, without profit, without curiosity, without having any thing +to fear? Confess then, O theologians, that, even according to your +own principles, your God is infinitely more malevolent than the worst +of men. + +Perhaps you will say, that infinite offences deserve infinite punishments. +I answer, that we cannot offend a God, whose happiness is infinite; +that the offences of finite beings cannot be infinite; that a God, +who is unwilling to be offended, cannot consent that the offences +of his creatures should be eternal; that a God, infinitely good, +can neither be infinitely cruel, nor grant his creatures an infinite +duration, solely for the pleasure of eternal torments. + +Nothing but the most savage barbarity, the most egregious roguery, +or the blindest ambition could have imagined the doctrine of eternal +punishments. If there is a God, whom we can offend or blaspheme, +there are not upon earth greater blasphemers than those, who dare +to say, that this same God is a tyrant, perverse enough to delight, +during eternity, in the useless torments of his feeble creatures. + + +67. To pretend, that God can be offended at the actions of men, +is to annihilate all the ideas, which divines endeavour to give us, +in other respects, of this being. To say, that man can trouble +the order of the universe; that he can kindle the thunder in the +hands of his God; that he can defeat his projects, is to say, +that man is stronger than his God, that he is the arbiter of his +will, that it depends upon him to change his goodness into cruelty. +Theology continually pulls down, with one hand, what it erects with +the other. If all religion is founded upon a God, who is provoked +and appeased, all religion is founded on a palpable contradiction. + +All religions agree in exalting the wisdom and infinite power of +the Deity. But no sooner do they display his conduct, than we see +nothing but imprudence, want of foresight, weakness and folly. +God, it is said, created the world for himself; and yet, hitherto, +he has never been able to make himself suitably honoured by it. +God created men in order to have, in his dominions, subjects to +render him their homage; and yet, we see men in continual revolt +against him. + + +68. They incessantly extol the divine perfections; and when we demand +proofs of them, they point to his works, in which, they assure us, +these perfections are written in indelible characters. All these +works are, however, imperfect and perishable. Man, who is ever +regarded as the most marvellous work, as the master-piece of the +Deity, is full of imperfections, which render him disagreeable to +the eyes of the almighty Being, who formed him. This surprising +work often becomes so revolting and odious to its author, that he +is obliged to throw it into the fire. But, if the fairest of God's +works is imperfect, how can we judge of the divine perfections? +Can a work, with which the author himself is so little pleased, +induce us to admire the ability of its Maker? Man, considered in a +physical sense, is subject to a thousand infirmities, to numberless +evils, and to death. Man, considered in a moral sense, is full of +faults; yet we are unceasingly told, that he is the most beautiful +work of the most perfect of beings. + + +69. In creating beings more perfect than men, it appears, that +heretofore God has not better succeeded, nor given stronger proofs +of his perfection. Do we not see, in many religions, that angels, +have even attempted to dethrone him? God proposed the happiness +of angels and men; yet, he has never been able to render happy +either angels or men;--the pride, malice, sins, and imperfections +of the creatures have always opposed the will of the perfect Creator. + + +70. All religion is obviously founded upon this principle, that +_God does what he can, and man what he will_. Every system of religion +presents to us an unequal combat between the Deity on one part, +and his creatures on the other, in which the former never comes off +to his honour. Notwithstanding his omnipotence, he cannot succeed +in rendering the works of his hands such as he would have them. +To complete the absurdity, there is a religion, which pretends, +that God himself has died to redeem mankind; and yet, men are not +farther from any thing, than they are from what God would have them. + + +71. Nothing is more extravagant, than the part, theology makes the +Divinity act in every country. Did he really exist, we should see +in him the most capricious, and senseless being. We should be compelled +to believe, that God made the world only to be the theatre of his +disgraceful wars with his creatures; that he created angels, men, +and demons, only to make adversaries, against whom he might exercise +his power. He renders men free to offend him, malicious enough to +defeat his projects, too obstinate to submit; and all this merely +for the pleasure of being angry, appeased, reconciled, and of repairing +the disorder they have made. Had the Deity at once formed his +creatures such as he would have them, what pains would he not have +spared himself, or, at least, from what embarrassments would he not +have relieved his theologians! + +Every religion represents God as busy only in doing himself evil. +He resembles those empirics, who inflict upon themselves wounds, +to have an opportunity of exhibiting to the public the efficacy +of their ointment. But we see not, that the Deity has hitherto +been able radically to cure himself of the evil, which he suffers +from man. + + +72. God is the author of all; and yet, we are assured that evil +does not come from God. Whence then does it come? From man. +But, who made man? God. Evil then comes from God. If he had +not made man as he is, moral evil or sin would not have existed +in the world. The perversity of man is therefore chargeable to God. +If man has power to do evil, or to offend God, we are forced to +infer, that God chooses to be offended; that God, who made man, +has resolved that man shall do evil; otherwise man would be an +effect contrary to the cause, from which he derives his being. + + +73. Man ascribes to God the faculty of foreseeing, or knowing +beforehand whatever will happen; but this prescience seldom turns +to his glory, nor protects him from the lawful reproaches of man. +If God foreknows the future, must he not have foreseen the fall +of his creatures? If he resolved in his decrees to permit this fall, +it is undoubtedly because it was his will that this fall should take +place, otherwise it could not have happened. If God's foreknowledge +of the sins of his creatures had been necessary or forced, one might +suppose, that he has been constrained by his justice to punish the +guilty; but, enjoying the faculty of foreseeing, and the power of +predetermining every thing, did it not depend upon God not to impose +upon himself cruel laws, or, at least, could he not dispense with +creating beings, whom he might be under the necessity of punishing, +and rendering unhappy by a subsequent decree? Of what consequence +is it, whether God has destined men to happiness or misery by an +anterior decree, an effect of his prescience, or by a posterior +decree, an effect of his justice? Does the arrangement of his +decrees alter the fate of the unhappy? Would they not have the +same right to complain of a God, who, being able to omit their +creation, has notwithstanding created them, although he plainly +foresaw that his justice would oblige him, sooner or later, to +punish them? + + +74. "Man," you say, "when he came from the hand of God, was pure, +innocent, and good; but his nature has been corrupted, as a punishment +for sin." If man, when just out of the hands of his God, could sin, +his nature was imperfect. Why did God suffer him to sin, and his +nature to be corrupted? Why did God permit him to be seduced, +well knowing that he was too feeble to resist temptation? Why did +God create _satan_, an evil spirit, a tempter? Why did not God, +who wishes so much good to the human race, annihilate once for all +so many evil genii, who are naturally enemies of our happiness; or +rather, why did God create evil spirits, whose victories and fatal +influence over mankind, he must have foreseen? In fine, by what +strange fatality in all religions of the world, has the evil principle +such a decided advantage over the good principle, or the divinity? + + +75. There is related an instance of simplicity, which does honour +to the heart of an Italian monk. One day, while preaching, this +pious man thought he must announce to his audience, that he had, +thank heaven, at last discovered, by dint of meditation, a sure +way of rendering all men happy. "The devil," said he, "tempts men +only to have in hell companions of his misery. Let us therefore +apply to the Pope, who has the keys of heaven and hell; let us prevail +upon him to pray to God, at the head of the whole church, to consent +to a reconciliation with the devil, to restore him to favour, to +reinstate him in his former rank, which cannot fail to put an end +to his malicious projects against mankind." Perhaps the honest +monk did not see, that the devil is at least as useful as God to +the ministers of religion. They have too much interest in their +dissensions, to be instrumental in an accommodation between two +enemies, upon whose combats their own existence and revenues depend. +Let men cease to be tempted and to sin, and the ministry of priests +will be useless. Manicheism is evidently the hinge of every religion; +but unhappily, the devil, invented to clear the deity from the +suspicion of malice, proves to us, every moment, the impotence +or unskilfulness of his celestial adversary. + + +76. The nature of man, it is said, was necessarily liable to corruption. +God could not communicate to him _impeccability_, which is an inalienable +attribute of his divine perfection. But if God could not make man +impeccable, why did he give himself the pains to make man, whose nature +must necessarily be corrupted, and who must consequently offend God? +On the other hand, if God himself could not make human nature impeccable, +by what right does he punish men for not being impeccable? It can +be only by the right of the strongest; but the right of the strongest +is called violence, and violence cannot be compatible with the justest +of beings. God would be supremely unjust, should he punish men for +not sharing with him his divine perfections, or for not being able +to be gods like him. + +Could not God, at least, have communicated to all men that kind of +perfection, of which their nature is susceptible? If some men are +good, or render themselves agreeable to their God, why has not that +God done the same favour, or given the same dispositions to all beings +of our species? Why does the number of the wicked so much exceed +the number of the good? Why, for one friend, has God ten thousand +enemies, in a world, which it depended entirely upon him to people +with honest men? If it be true, that, in heaven, God designs to +form a court of saints, of elect, or of men who shall have lived +upon earth conformably to his views, would he not have had a more +numerous, brilliant, and honourable assembly, had he composed it of +all men, to whom, in creating them, he could grant the degree of +goodness, necessary to attain eternal happiness? Finally, would +it not have been shorter not to have made man, than to have created +him a being full of faults, rebellious to his creator, perpetually +exposed to cause his own destruction by a fatal abuse of his liberty? + +Instead of creating men, a perfect God ought to have created only +angels very docile and submissive. Angels, it is said, are free; +some have sinned; but, at any rate, all have not abused their liberty +by revolting against their master. Could not God have created only +angels of the good kind? If God has created angels, who have not +sinned, could he not have created impeccable men, or men who should +never abuse their liberty? If the elect are incapable of sinning +in heaven, could not God have made impeccable men upon earth? + + +77. Divines never fail to persuade us, that the enormous distance +which separates God and man, necessarily renders the conduct of God +a mystery to us, and that we have no right to interrogate our master. +Is this answer satisfactory? Since my eternal happiness is at stake, +have I not a right to examine the conduct of God himself? It is +only in hope of happiness that men submit to the authority of a God. +A despot, to whom men submit only through fear, a master, whom they +cannot interrogate, a sovereign totally inaccessible, can never merit +the homage of intelligent beings. If the conduct of God is a mystery, +it is not made for us. Man can neither adore, admire, respect, nor +imitate conduct, in which every thing is inconceivable, or, of which +he can often form only revolting ideas; unless it is pretended, that +we ought to adore every thing of which we are forced to be ignorant, +and that every thing, which we do not know, becomes for that reason +an object of admiration. Divines! You never cease telling us, that +the designs of God are impenetrable; that _his ways are not our ways, +nor his thoughts our thoughts_; that it is absurd to complain of his +administration, of the motives and springs of which we are totally +ignorant; that it is presumption to tax his judgments with injustice, +because we cannot comprehend them. But when you speak in this strain, +do you not perceive, that you destroy with your own hands all your +profound systems, whose only end is to explain to us the ways of +the divinity, which, you say, are impenetrable? Have you penetrated +his judgments, his ways, his designs? You dare not assert it, and +though you reason about them without end, you do not comprehend +them any more than we do. If, by chance, you know the plan of God, +which you wish us to admire, while most people find it so little +worthy of a just, good, intelligent, and reasonable being, no +longer say, this plan is impenetrable. If you are as ignorant of +it as we are, have some indulgence for those who ingenuously confess, +they comprehend nothing in it, or that they see in it nothing divine. +Cease to persecute for opinions, of which you understand nothing +yourselves; cease to defame each other for dreams and conjectures, +which every thing seems to contradict. Talk to us of things intelligible +and really useful to men; and no longer talk to us of the impenetrable +ways of God, about which you only stammer and contradict yourselves. + +By continually speaking of the immense depths of divine wisdom, +forbidding us to sound them, saying it is insolence to cite God +before the tribunal of our feeble reason, making it a crime to judge +our master, divines teach us nothing but the embarrassment they are in, +when it is required to account for the conduct of a God, whose conduct +they think marvellous only because they are utterly incapable of +comprehending it themselves. + + +78. Physical evil is commonly regarded as a punishment for sin. +Diseases, famines, wars, earthquakes, are means which God uses to +chastise wicked men. Thus, they make no scruple of attributing +these evils to the severity of a just and good God. But, do not +these scourges fall indiscriminately upon the good and bad, upon +the impious and devout, upon the innocent and guilty? How, in this +proceeding, would they have us admire the justice and goodness of a +being, the idea of whom seems comforting to so many wretches, whose +brain must undoubtedly be disordered by their misfortunes, since +they forget, that their God is the arbiter, the sole disposer of +the events of this world. This being the case, ought they not to +impute their sufferings to him, into whose arms they fly for comfort? +Unfortunate father! Thou consolest thyself in the bosom of Providence, +for the loss of a dear child, or beloved wife, who made thy happiness. +Alas! Dost thou not see, that thy God has killed them? Thy God has +rendered thee miserable, and thou desirest thy God to comfort thee +for the dreadful afflictions he has sent thee! + +The chimerical or supernatural notions of theology have so succeeded +in destroying, in the minds of men, the most simple, dear, and natural +ideas, that the devout, unable to accuse God of malice, accustom +themselves to regard the several strokes of fate as indubitable +proofs of celestial goodness. When in affliction, they are ordered +to believe that God loves them, that God visits them, that God wishes +to try them. Thus religion has attained the art of converting evil +into good! A profane person said with reason--_If God Almighty thus +treats those whom he loves, I earnestly beseech him never to think of me_. + +Men must have received very gloomy and cruel ideas of their God, who +is called so good, to believe that the most dreadful calamities and +piercing afflictions are marks of his favour! Would an evil genius, +a demon, be more ingenious in tormenting his enemies, than the God +of goodness sometimes is, who so often exercises his severity upon +his dearest friends? + + +79. What shall we say of a father, who, we are assured, watches +without intermission over the preservation and happiness of his weak +and short-sighted children, and who yet leaves them at liberty to +wander at random among rocks, precipices, and waters; who rarely +hinders them from following their inordinate appetites; who permits +them to handle, without precaution, murderous arms, at the risk of +their life? What should we think of the same father, if, instead +of imputing to himself the evil that happens to his poor children, +he should punish them for their wanderings in the most cruel manner? +We should say, with reason, that this father is a madman, who unites +injustice to folly. A God, who punishes faults, which he could have +prevented, is a being deficient in wisdom, goodness, and equity. +A foreseeing God would prevent evil, and thereby avoid having to +punish it. A good God would not punish weaknesses, which he knew +to be inherent in human nature. A just God, if he made man, would +not punish him for not being made strong enough to resist his desires. +_To punish weakness is the most unjust tyranny._ Is it not calumniating +a just God, to say, that he punishes men for their faults, even in +the present life? How could he punish beings, whom it belonged to +him alone to reform, and who, while they have not _grace_, cannot act +otherwise than they do? + +According to the principles of theologians themselves, man, in his +present state of corruption, can do nothing but evil, since, without +divine grace, he is never able to do good. Now, if the nature of +man, left to itself, or destitute of divine aid, necessarily determines +him to evil, or renders him incapable of good, what becomes of the +free-will of man? According to such principles, man can neither merit +nor demerit. By rewarding man for the good he does, God would only +reward himself; by punishing man for the evil he does, God would +punish him for not giving him grace, without which he could not +possibly do better. + + +80. Theologians repeatedly tell us, that man is free, while all +their principles conspire to destroy his liberty. By endeavouring +to justify the Divinity, they in reality accuse him of the blackest +injustice. They suppose, that without grace, man is necessitated +to do evil. They affirm, that God will punish him, because God has +not given him grace to do good! + +Little reflection will suffice to convince us, that man is necessitated +in all his actions, that his free will is a chimera, even in the +system of theologians. Does it depend upon man to be born of such +or such parents? Does it depend upon man to imbibe or not to imbibe +the opinions of his parents or instructors? If I had been born of +idolatrous or Mahometan parents, would it have depended upon me to +become a Christian? Yet, divines gravely assure us, that a just God +will damn without pity all those, to whom he has not given grace to +know the Christian religion! + +Man's birth is wholly independent of his choice. He is not asked +whether he is willing, or not, to come into the world. Nature does +not consult him upon the country and parents she gives him. +His acquired ideas, his opinions, his notions true or false, are +necessary fruits of the education which he has received, and of +which he has not been the director. His passions and desires are +necessary consequences of the temperament given him by nature. +During his whole life, his volitions and actions are determined by +his connections, habits, occupations, pleasures, and conversations; +by the thoughts, that are involuntarily presented to his mind; in +a word, by a multitude of events and accidents, which it is out of +his power to foresee or prevent. Incapable of looking into futurity, +he knows not what he will do. From the instant of his birth to that +of his death, he is never free. You will say, that he wills, +deliberates, chooses, determines; and you will hence conclude, +that his actions are free. It is true, that man wills, but he +is not master of his will or his desires; he can desire and will +only what he judges advantageous to himself; he can neither love +pain, nor detest pleasure. It will be said, that he sometimes +prefers pain to pleasure; but then he prefers a momentary pain +with a view of procuring a greater and more durable pleasure. +In this case, the prospect of a greater good necessarily determines +him to forego a less considerable good. + +The lover does not give his mistress the features which captivate him; +he is not then master of loving, or not loving the object of his +tenderness; he is not master of his imagination or temperament. +Whence it evidently follows, that man is not master of his volitions +and desires. "But man," you will say, "can resist his desires; +therefore he is free." Man resists his desires, when the motives, +which divert him from an object, are stronger than those, which +incline him towards it; but then his resistance is necessary. A man, +whose fear of dishonour or punishment is greater than his love of money, +necessarily resists the desire of stealing. + +"Are we not free, when we deliberate?" But, are we masters of knowing +or not knowing, of being in doubt or certainty? Deliberation is +a necessary effect of our uncertainty respecting the consequences +of our actions. When we are sure, or think we are sure, of these +consequences, we necessarily decide, and we then act necessarily +according to our true or false judgment. Our judgments, true or false, +are not free; they are necessarily determined by the ideas, we have +received, or which our minds have formed. + +Man is not free in his choice; he is evidently necessitated to choose +what he judges most useful and agreeable. Neither is he free, when +he suspends his choice; he is forced to suspend it until he knows, +or thinks he knows, the qualities of the objects presented to him, +or, until he has weighed the consequences of his actions. "Man," +you will say, "often decides in favour of actions, which he knows +must be detrimental to himself; man sometimes kills himself; therefore +he is free." I deny it. Is man master of reasoning well or ill? +Do not his reason and wisdom depend upon the opinions he has formed, +or upon the conformation of his machine? As neither one nor the other +depends upon his will, they are no proof of liberty. "If I lay a wager, +that I shall do, or not do a thing, am I not free? Does it not depend +upon me to do it or not?" No, I answer; the desire of winning the +wager will necessarily determine you to do, or not to do the thing +in question. "But, supposing I consent to lose the wager?" Then +the desire of proving to me, that you are free, will have become +a stronger motive than the desire of winning the wager; and this +motive will have necessarily determined you to do, or not to do, +the thing in question. + +"But," you will say, "I feel free." This is an illusion, that may +be compared to that of the fly in the fable, who, lighting upon the +pole of a heavy carriage, applauded himself for directing its course. +Man, who thinks himself free, is a fly, who imagines he has power to +move the universe, while he is himself unknowingly carried along by it. + +The inward persuasion that we are free to do, or not to do a thing, +is but a mere illusion. If we trace the true principle of our actions, +we shall find, that they are always necessary consequences of our +volitions and desires, which are never in our power. You think yourself +free, because you do what you will; but are you free to will, or +not to will; to desire, or not to desire? Are not your volitions +and desires necessarily excited by objects or qualities totally +independent of you? + + +81. "If the actions of men are necessary, if men are not free, by +what right does society punish criminals? Is it not very unjust to +chastise beings, who could not act otherwise than they have done?" +If the wicked act necessarily according to the impulses of their +evil nature, society, in punishing them, acts necessarily by the +desire of self-preservation. Certain objects necessarily produce +in us the sensation of pain; our nature then forces us against them, +and avert them from us. A tiger, pressed by hunger, springs upon +the man, whom he wishes to devour; but this man is not master of +his fear, and necessarily seeks means to destroy the tiger. + + +82. "If every thing be necessary, the errors, opinions, and ideas of +men are fatal; and, if so, how or why should we attempt to reform them?" +The errors of men are necessary consequences of ignorance. Their +ignorance, prejudice, and credulity are necessary consequences of +their inexperience, negligence, and want of reflection, in the same +manner as delirium or lethargy are necessary effects of certain diseases. +Truth, experience, reflection, and reason, are remedies calculated to +cure ignorance, fanaticism and follies. But, you will ask, why does +not truth produce this effect upon many disordered minds? It is +because some diseases resist all remedies; because it is impossible +to cure obstinate patients, who refuse the remedies presented to them; +because the interest of some men, and the folly of others, necessarily +oppose the admission of truth. + +A cause produces its effect only when its action is not interrupted +by stronger causes, which then weakens or render useless, the action +of the former. It is impossible that the best arguments should be +adopted by men, who are interested in error, prejudiced in its favour, +and who decline all reflection; but truth must necessarily undeceive +honest minds, who seek her sincerely. Truth is a cause; it necessarily +produces its effects, when its impulse is not intercepted by causes, +which suspend its effects. + + +83. "To deprive man of his free will," it is said, "makes him a mere +machine, an automaton. Without liberty, he will no longer have either +merit or virtue." What is merit in man? It is a manner of acting, +which renders him estimable in the eyes of his fellow-beings. What is +virtue? It is a disposition, which inclines us to do good to others. +What can there be contemptible in machines, or automatons, capable +of producing effects so desirable? Marcus Aurelius was useful to +the vast Roman Empire. By what right would a machine despise a machine, +whose springs facilitate its action? Good men are springs, which second +society in its tendency to happiness; the wicked are ill-formed springs, +which disturb the order, progress, and harmony of society. If, for its +own utility, society cherishes and rewards the good, it also harasses +and destroys the wicked, as useless or hurtful. + + +84. The world is a necessary agent. All the beings, that compose it, +are united to each other, and cannot act otherwise than they do, so +long as they are moved by the same causes, and endued with the same +properties. When they lose properties, they will necessarily act in +a different way. God himself, admitting his existence, cannot be +considered a free agent. If there existed a God, his manner of acting +would necessarily be determined by the properties inherent in his nature; +nothing would be capable of arresting or altering his will. This being +granted, neither our actions, prayers, nor sacrifices could suspend, +or change his invariable conduct and immutable designs; whence we are +forced to infer, that all religion would be useless. + + +85. Were not divines in perpetual contradiction with themselves, they +would see, that, according to their hypothesis, man cannot be reputed +free an instant. Do they not suppose man continually dependent on his +God? Are we free, when we cannot exist and be preserved without God, +and when we cease to exist at the pleasure of his supreme will? If +God has made man out of nothing; if his preservation is a continued +creation; if God cannot, an instant, lose sight of his creature; if +whatever happens to him, is an effect of the divine will; if man can +do nothing of himself; if all the events, which he experiences, are +effects of the divine decrees; if he does no good without grace from +on high, how can they maintain, that a man enjoys a moment's liberty? +If God did not preserve him in the moment of sin, how could man sin? +If God then preserves him, God forces him to exist, that he may sin. + + +86. The Divinity is frequently compared to a king, whose revolted +subjects are the greater part of mankind; and it is said, he has a +right to reward the subjects who remain faithful to him, and to punish +the rebellious. This comparison is not just in any of its parts. +God presides over a machine, every spring of which he has created. +These springs act agreeable to the manner, in which God has formed +them; he ought to impute it to his own unskilfulness, if these springs +do not contribute to the harmony of the machine, into which it was +his will to insert them. God is a created king, who has created to +himself subjects of every description; who has formed them according +to his own pleasure whose will can never find resistance. If God +has rebellious subjects in his empire, it is because God has resolved +to have rebellious subjects. If the sins of men disturb the order +of the world, it is because it is the will of God that this order +should be disturbed. + +Nobody dares to call in question the divine justice; yet, under the +government of a just God, we see nothing but acts of injustice and +violence. Force decides the fate of nations, equity seems banished +from the earth; a few men sport, unpunished, with the peace, property, +liberty, and life of others. All is disorder in a world governed +by a God who is said to be infinitely displeased with disorder. + + +87. Although men are for ever admiring the wisdom, goodness, justice, +and beautiful order of Providence, they are, in reality, never satisfied +with it. Do not the prayers, continually addressed to heaven, shew, +that men are by no means satisfied with the divine dispensations? +To pray to God for a favour, shews diffidence of his watchful care; +to pray to him to avert or put an end to an evil, is to endeavour +to obstruct the course of his justice; to implore the assistance of +God in our calamities, is to address the author himself of these +calamities, to represent to him, that he ought, for our sake, to +rectify his plan, which does not accord with our interest. + +The Optimist, or he who maintains that _all is well_, and who incessantly +cries that we live in _the best world possible_, to be consistent, should +never pray; neither ought he to expect another world, where man will be +happier. Can there be a better world than _the best world possible_? +Some theologians have treated the Optimists as impious, for having +intimated that God could not produce a better world, than that in +which we live. According to these doctors, it is to limit the power +of God, and to offer him insult. But do not these divines see, that +it shews much less indignity to God, to assert that he has done his +best in producing this world, than to say, that, being able to produce +a better, he has had malice enough to produce a very bad one? If the +Optimist, by his system, detracts from the divine power, the theologian, +who treats him as a blasphemer, is himself a blasphemer, who offends +the goodness of God in espousing the cause of his omnipotence. + + +88. When we complain of the evils, of which our world is the theatre, +we are referred to the other world, where it is said, God will make +reparation for all the iniquity and misery, which, for a time, he +permits here below. But if God, suffering his eternal justice to +remain at rest for a long time, could consent to evil during the +whole continuance of our present world, what assurance have we, +that, during the continuance of another world, divine justice will +not, in like manner, sleep over the misery of its inhabitants? + +The divines console us for our sufferings by saying, that God is +patient, and that his justice, though often slow, is not the less sure. +But do they not see, that patience is incompatible with a just, +immutable, and omnipotent being? Can God then permit injustice, +even for an instant? To temporize with a known evil, announces +either weakness, uncertainty, or collusion. To tolerate evil, +when one has power to prevent it, is to consent to the commission +of evil. + + +89. Divines every where exclaim, that God is infinitely just; but +that _his justice is not the justice of man_. Of what kind or nature +then is this divine justice? What idea can I form of a justice, +which so often resembles injustice? Is it not to confound all ideas +of just and unjust, to say, that what is equitable in God is iniquitous +in his creatures? How can we receive for our model a being, whose +divine perfections are precisely the reverse of human? + +"God," it is said, "is sovereign arbiter of our destinies. His supreme +power, which nothing can limit, justly permits him to do with the works +of his own hands according to his good pleasure. A worm, like man, has +no right even to complain." This arrogant style is evidently borrowed +from the language, used by the ministers of tyrants, when they stop +the mouths of those who suffer from their violences. It cannot then +be the language of the ministers of a God, whose equity is highly +extolled; it is not made to be imposed upon a being, who reasons. +Ministers of a just God! I will inform you then, that the greatest +power cannot confer upon your God himself the right of being unjust +even to the vilest of his creatures. A despot is not a God. A God, +who arrogates to himself the right of doing evil, is a tyrant; a tyrant +is not a model for men; he must be an object execrable to their eyes. + +Is it not indeed strange, that in order to justify the Divinity, +they make him every moment the most unjust of beings! As soon as +we complain of his conduct, they think to silence us by alleging, +that _God is master_; which signifies, that God, being the strongest, +is not bound by ordinary rules. But the right of the strongest is +the violation of all rights. It seems right only to the eyes of +a savage conqueror, who in the heat of his fury imagines, that he +may do whatever he pleases with the unfortunate victims, whom he has +conquered. This barbarous right can appear legitimate only to slaves +blind enough to believe that everything is lawful to tyrants whom +they feel too weak to resist. + +In the greatest calamities, do not devout persons, through a ridiculous +simplicity, or rather a sensible contradiction in terms, exclaim, that +_the Almighty is master_. Thus, inconsistent reasoners, believe, that +the _Almighty_ (a Being, one of whose first attributes is goodness,) +sends you pestilence, war, and famine! You believe that the _Almighty_, +this good being, has the will and right to inflict the greatest evils, +you can bear! Cease, at least, to call your God _good_, when he does +you evil; say not, that he is just, say that he is the strongest, and +that it is impossible for you to ward off the blows of his caprice. + +_God_, say you, _chastises only for our good_. But what real good +can result to a people from being exterminated by the plague, ravaged +by wars, corrupted by the examples of perverse rulers, continually +crushed under the iron sceptre of a succession of merciless tyrants, +annihilated by the scourges of a bad government, whose destructive +effects are often felt for ages? If chastisements are good, then +they cannot have too much of a good thing! _The eyes of faith_ must +be strange eyes, if with them they see advantages in the most dreadful +calamities, in the vices and follies with which our species are afflicted. + + +90. What strange ideas of divine justice must Christians have, who +are taught to believe, that their God, in view of reconciling to +himself the human race, guilty, though unconscious, of the sin of +their fathers, has put to death his own son, who was innocent and +incapable of sinning? What should we say of a king, whose subjects +should revolt, and who, to appease himself, should find no other +expedient than to put to death the heir of his crown, who had not +participated in the general rebellion? "It is," the Christian will +say, "through goodness to his subjects, unable of themselves to +satisfy divine justice, that God has consented to the cruel death +of his son." But the goodness of a father to strangers does not +give him the right of being unjust and barbarous to his own son. +All the qualities, which theology ascribes to God, reciprocally +destroy one another. The exercise of one of his perfections is +always at the expense of the exercise of another. + +Has the Jew more rational ideas of divine justice than the Christian? +The pride of a king kindles the anger of heaven; _Jehovah_ causes +the pestilence to descend upon his innocent people; seventy thousand +subjects are exterminated to expiate the fault of a monarch, whom +the goodness of God resolved to spare. + + +91. Notwithstanding the various acts of injustice, with which all +religions delight to blacken the Divinity, men cannot consent to +accuse him of iniquity. They fear, that, like the tyrants of this +world, truth will offend him, and redouble upon them the weight of +his malice and tyranny. They hearken therefore to their priests, +who tell them, that their God is a tender father; that this God is +an equitable monarch whose object in this world is to assure himself +of the love, obedience and respect of his subjects; who gives them +liberty of acting only to afford them an opportunity of meriting +his favours, and of acquiring an eternal happiness, which he does +not owe them. By what signs can men discover the tenderness of +a father, who has given life to the greater part of his children +merely to drag out upon the earth a painful, restless, bitter +existence? Is there a more unfortunate present, than that pretended +liberty, which, we are told, men are very liable to abuse, and +thereby to incur eternal misery? + + +92. By calling mortals to life, what a cruel and dangerous part +has not the Deity forced them to act? Thrown into the world without +their consent, provided with a temperament of which they are not +masters, animated by passions and desires inherent in their nature, +exposed to snares which they have not power to escape, hurried away +by events which they could not foresee or prevent, unhappy mortals +are compelled to run a career, which may lead them to punishments +horrible in duration and violence. + +Travellers inform us, that, in Asia, a Sultan reigned, full of fantastical +ideas, and very absolute in his whims. By a strange madness, this +prince spent his time seated at a table, upon which were placed +three dice and a dice-box. One end of the table was covered with +pieces of silver, designed to excite the avarice of his courtiers +and people. He, knowing the foible of his subjects, addresses them +as follows: _Slaves, I wish your happiness. My goodness proposes +to enrich you, and make you all happy. Do you see these treasures? +Well, they are for you; strive to gain them; let each, in his turn, +take the box and dice; whoever has the fortune to throw sixes, shall +be master of the treasure. But, I forewarn you, that he who has not +the happiness to throw the number required, shall be precipitated +for ever into a dark dungeon, where my justice demands that he be +burned with a slow fire._ Upon this discourse of the monarch, the +company look at each other affrighted. No one wishes to expose +himself to so dangerous a chance. _What!_ says the enraged Sultan, +_does no one offer to play? I tell you then you must; My glory +requires that you should play. Play then; obey without replying._ +It is well to observe, that the dice of the despot are so prepared, +that out of a hundred thousand throws, there is but one, which can +gain the number required. Thus the generous monarch has the pleasure of +seeing his prison well filled, and his riches seldom ravished from him. +Mortals! this SULTAN is your GOD; his TREASURE IS HEAVEN; his DUNGEON +IS HELL, and it is you who hold the DICE! + + +93. Divines repeatedly assure us, that we owe Providence infinite +gratitude for the numberless blessings it bestows. They loudly extol +the happiness of existence. But, alas! how many mortals are truly +satisfied with their mode of existence? If life has sweets, with +how much bitterness is it not mixed? Does not a single chagrin often +suffice suddenly to poison the most peaceable and fortunate life? +Are there many, who, if it were in their power would begin again, +at the same price, the painful career, in which, without their consent, +destiny has placed them? + +They say, that existence is a great blessing. But is not this existence +continually troubled with fears, and maladies, often cruel and little +deserved? May not this existence, threatened on so many sides, be +torn from us any moment? Where is the man, who has not been deprived +of a dear wife, beloved child, or consoling friend, whose loss every +moment intrudes upon his thoughts? There are few, who have not been +forced to drink of the cup of misfortune; there are few, who have not +desired their end. Finally, it did not depend upon us to exist or not +to exist. Should the bird then be very grateful to the fowler for +taking him in his net and confining him in his cage for his diversion? + + +94. Notwithstanding the infirmities and misery which man is forced +to undergo, he has, nevertheless, the folly to think himself the +favourite of his God, the object of all his cares, the sole end +of all his works. He imagines, that the whole universe is made +for him; he arrogantly calls himself the _king of nature_, and +values himself far above other animals. Mortal! upon what canst +thou found thy haughty pretensions? It is, sayest thou, upon thy +soul, upon thy reason, upon the sublime faculties, which enable +thee to exercise an absolute empire over the beings, which surround +thee. But, weak sovereign of the world; art thou sure, one moment, +of the continuance of thy reign? Do not the smallest atoms of matter, +which thou despisest, suffice to tear thee from thy throne, and deprive +thee of life? Finally, does not the king of animals at last become +the food of worms? Thou speakest of thy soul! But dost thou know +what a soul is? Dost thou not see, that this soul is only the +assemblage of thy organs, from which results life? Wouldst thou +then refuse a soul to other animals, who live, think, judge, and +compare, like thee; who seek pleasure, and avoid pain, like thee; +and who often have organs, which serve them better than thine? +Thou boastest of thy intellectual faculties; but do these faculties, +of which thou art so proud, make thee happier than other animals? +Dost thou often make use of that reason, in which thou gloriest, +and to which religion commands thee not to listen? Are those brutes, +which thou disdainest, because they are less strong or less cunning +than thou art, subject to mental pains, to a thousand frivolous +passions, to a thousand imaginary wants, to which thou art a continual +prey? Are they, like thee, tormented by the past, alarmed at the future? +Confined solely to the present, does not what you call their _instinct_, +and what I call their _intelligence_, suffice to preserve and defend +them, and to supply them with all they want? Does not this instinct, +of which thou speakest with contempt, often serve them better than +thy wonderful faculties? Is not their peaceful ignorance more +advantageous to them, than those extravagant meditations and worthless +researches, which render thee unhappy, and for which thy zeal urges +thee even to massacre the beings of thy noble species? Finally, +have these beasts, like so many mortals, a troubled imagination, +which makes them fear, not only death, but likewise eternal torments? + +Augustus, hearing that Herod, king of Judea, had put his sons to +death, exclaimed: _It is much better to be Herod's hog, than his son_. +As much may be said of man. This dear child of Providence runs far +greater risks than all other animals; having suffered much in this +world, does he not imagine, that he is in danger of suffering eternally +in another? + + +95. Where is the precise line of distinction between man and the animals +whom he calls brutes? In what does he differ essentially from beasts? +It is, we are told, by his intelligence, by the faculties of his mind, +and by his reason, that man appears superior to all other animals, who, +in all their actions, move only by physical impulses, in which reason +has no share. But finally, brutes, having fewer wants than man, easily +do without his intellectual faculties, which would be perfectly useless +in their mode of existence. Their instinct is sufficient; while all +the faculties of man scarcely suffice to render his existence supportable, +and to satisfy the wants, which his imagination and his prejudices +multiply to his torment. + +Brutes are not influenced by the same objects, as man; they have +not the same wants, desires, nor fancies; and they very soon arrive +to maturity, while the mind of man seldom attains to the full enjoyment +and free exercise of its faculties and to such a use of them, as is +conducive to his happiness. + + +96. We are assured, that the human soul is a simple substance. It +should then be the same in every individual, each having the same +intellectual faculties; yet this is not the case. Men differ as +much in the qualities of the mind, as in the features of the face. +There are human beings as different from one another, as man is +from a horse or a dog. What conformity or resemblance do we find +between some men? What an infinite distance is there between the +genius of a Locke or a Newton, and that of a peasant, Hottentot, +or Laplander? + +Man differs from other animals only in his organization, which enables +him to produce effects, of which animals are not capable. The variety, +observable in the organs of individuals of the human species suffices to +explain the differences in what is called their intellectual faculties. +More or less delicacy in these organs, warmth in the blood, mobility +in the fluids, flexibility or stiffness in the fibres and nerves, +must necessarily produce the infinite diversity, which we observe +in the minds of men. It is by exercise, habit and education, that +the mind is unfolded and becomes superior to that of others. Man, +without culture and experience, is as void of reason and industry, +as the brute. A stupid man is one, whose organs move with difficulty, +whose brain does not easily vibrate, whose blood circulates slowly. +A man of genius is he, whose organs are flexible, whose sensations +are quick, whose brain vibrates with celerity. A learned man is he, +whose organs and brain have been long exercised upon objects to which +he is devoted. + +Without culture, experience, or reason, is not man more contemptible +and worthy of hatred, than the vilest insects or most ferocious beasts? +Is there in nature a more detestable being, than a Tiberius, a Nero, +or a Caligula? Have those destroyers of the human race, known by +the name of conquerors, more estimable souls than bears, lions, or +panthers? Are there animals in the world more detestable than tyrants? + + +97. The superiority which man so gratuitously arrogates to himself +over other animals, soon vanishes in the light of reason, when we +reflect on human extravagances. How many animals shew more mildness, +reflection, and reason, than the animal, who calls himself reasonable +above all others? Are there among men, so often enslaved and oppressed, +societies as well constituted as those of the ants, bees, or beavers? +Do we ever see ferocious beasts of the same species mangle and destroy +one another without profit? Do we ever see religious wars among them? +The cruelty of beasts towards other species arises from hunger, the +necessity of nourishment; the cruelty of man towards man arises only from +the vanity of his masters and the folly of his impertinent prejudices. +Speculative men, who endeavour to make us believe, that all in the +universe was made for man, are much embarrassed, when we ask, how +so many hurtful animals can contribute to the happiness of man? +What known advantage results to the friend of the gods, from being +bitten by a viper, stung by a gnat, devoured by vermin, torn in +pieces by a tiger, etc.? Would not all these animals reason as +justly as our theologians, should they pretend that man was made +for them? + + +98. AN EASTERN TALE. + +At some distance from Bagdad, a hermit, renowned for his sanctity, +passed his days in an agreeable solitude. The neighbouring inhabitants, +to obtain an interest in his prayers, daily flocked to his hermitage, +to carry him provisions and presents. The holy man, without ceasing, +gave thanks to God for the blessings, with which providence loaded him. +"O Allah!" said he, "how ineffable is thy love to thy servants. What +have I done to merit the favours, that I receive from thy bounty? +O Monarch of the skies! O Father of nature! what praises could worthily +celebrate thy munificence, and thy paternal care! O Allah! how great +is thy goodness to the children of men!" Penetrated with gratitude, +the hermit made a vow to undertake, for the seventh time, a pilgrimage +to Mecca. The war which then raged between the Persians and Turks, +could not induce him to defer his pious enterprise. Full of confidence +in God, he sets out under the inviolable safeguard of a religious habit. +He passes through the hostile troops without any obstacle; far from +being molested, he receives, at every step, marks of veneration from +the soldiers of the two parties. At length, borne down with fatigue, +he is obliged to seek refuge against the rays of a scorching sun; +he rests under the cool shade of a group of palm-trees. In this +solitary place, the man of God finds not only an enchanting retreat, +but a delicious repast. He has only to put forth his hand to gather +dates and other pleasant fruits; a brook affords him the means of +quenching his thirst. A green turf invites him to sleep; upon waking +he performs the sacred ablution, and exclaims in a transport of joy: +"O Allah! how great is thy goodness to the children of men!" After +this perfect refreshment, the saint, full of strength and gaiety, +pursues his way; it leads him across a smiling country, which presents +to his eyes flowery hillocks, enamelled meadows, and trees loaded +with fruit. Affected by this sight, he ceases not to adore the rich +and liberal hand of providence, which appears every where providing +for the happiness of the human race. Going a little farther, the +mountains are pretty difficult to pass; but having once arrived +at the summit, a hideous spectacle suddenly appears to his view. +His soul is filled with horror. He discovers a vast plain laid +waste with fire and sword; he beholds it covered with hundreds of +carcases, the deplorable remains of a bloody battle, lately fought +upon this field. Eagles, vultures, ravens and wolves were greedily +devouring the dead bodies with which the ground was covered. This +sight plunges our pilgrim into a gloomy meditation. Heaven, by +special favour, had enabled him to understand the language of beasts. +He heard a wolf, gorged with human flesh, cry out in the excess of +his joy: "O Allah! how great is thy goodness to the children of wolves. +Thy provident wisdom takes care to craze the minds of these detestable +men, who are so dangerous to our species. By an effect of thy Providence, +which watches over thy creatures, these destroyers cut one another's +throats, and furnish us with sumptuous meals. O Allah! how great +is thy goodness to the children of wolves!" + + +99. A heated imagination sees in the universe only the blessings +of heaven; a calmer mind finds in it both good and evil. "I exist," +say you; but is this existence always a good? "Behold," you say, +"that sun, which lights; this earth, which for you is covered with +crops and verdure; these flowers, which bloom to regale your senses; +these trees, which bend under the weight of delicious fruits; these +pure waters, which run only to quench your thirst; those seas, which +embrace the universe to facilitate your commerce; these animals, which +a foreseeing nature provides for your use." Yes; I see all these things, +and I enjoy them. But in many climates, this beautiful sun is almost +always hidden; in others, its excessive heat torments, creates storms, +produces frightful diseases, and parches the fields; the pastures +are without verdure, the trees without fruit, the crops are scorched, +the springs are dried up; I can only with difficulty subsist, and +now complain of the cruelties of nature, which to you always appears +so beneficent. If these seas bring me spices, and useless commodities, +do they not destroy numberless mortals, who are foolish enough to seek +them? The vanity of man persuades him, that he is the sole center +of the universe; he creates for himself a world and a God; he thinks +himself of sufficient consequence to derange nature at his pleasure. +But, concerning other animals, he reasons like an atheist. Does he +not imagine, that the individuals different from his own are automatons +unworthy of the blessings of universal providence, and that brutes +cannot be objects of his justice or goodness? Mortals regard the +happy or unhappy events, health or sickness, life or death, plenty +or want, as rewards or punishments for the right use or abuse of +the liberty, with which they erroneously imagine themselves endowed. +Do they reason in the same manner concerning the brutes? No. +Although they see them, under a just God, enjoy and suffer, equally +subject to health and sickness, live and die, like themselves, it +never occurs to them to ask by what crime, these beasts could have +incurred the displeasure of their Creator? Have not men, blinded +by their religious prejudices, in order to free themselves from +embarrassment, carried their folly so far as to pretend that beasts +have no feeling? + +Will men never renounce their foolish pretensions? Will they never +acknowledge that nature is not made for them? Will they never see +that nature has placed equality among all beings she has produced? +Will they never perceive that all organized beings are equally made +to be born and die, enjoy and suffer? Finally, far from having any +cause to be puffed up with their mental faculties, are they not forced +to grant, that these faculties often make them more unhappy than beasts, +in which we find neither opinions, prejudices, vanities, nor follies, +which every moment decide the welfare of man? + + +100. The superiority which men arrogate over other animals, is +chiefly founded upon their opinion, that they have the exclusive +possession of an immortal soul. But ask them what this soul is, +and they are puzzled. They will say, it is an unknown substance-- +a secret power distinct from their bodies--a spirit, of which they +have no idea. Ask them how this spirit, which they suppose to be +like their God wholly void of extension, could combine itself with +their material bodies, and they will tell you, they know nothing +about it; that it is to them a mystery; that this combination is +an effect of the omnipotence of God. These are the ideas that men +form of the hidden, or rather imaginary substance, which they consider +as the main spring of all their actions! + +If the soul is a substance essentially different from the body, +and can have no relation to it, their union would be, not a mystery, +but an impossibility. Besides, this soul being of a nature different +from the body, must necessarily act in a different manner; yet we see +that this pretended soul is sensible of the motions experienced by +the body, and that these two substances, essentially different, +always acts in concert. You will say that this harmony is also +a mystery. But I will tell you, that I see not my soul, that I know +and am sensible of my body only, that it is this body which feels, +thinks, judges, suffers, and enjoys; and that all these faculties +are necessary results of its own mechanism, or organization. + + +101. Although it is impossible for men to form the least idea of +the soul, or the pretended spirit, which animates them; yet they +persuade themselves that this unknown soul is exempt from death. +Every thing proves to them, that they feel, that they think, that +they acquire ideas, that they enjoy and suffer, only by means of +the senses, or material organs of the body. Admitting even the +existence of this soul, they cannot help acknowledging, that it +depends entirely upon the body, and undergoes, all its vicissitudes; +and yet it is imagined, that this soul has nothing, in its nature, +similar to the body; that it can act and feel without the assistance +of the body; in a word, that this soul, freed from the body, and +disengaged from its senses, can live, enjoy, suffer, experience +happiness, or feel excruciating torments. Upon such a tissue of +absurdities is built the marvellous opinion of the _immortality +of the soul_. If I ask, what are the motives for believing the soul +immortal, they immediately answer, that it is because man naturally +desires to be immortal: but, because you desire a thing ardently, +can you infer that your desire will be fulfilled? By what strange +logic can we dare affirm, that a thing cannot fail to happen, because +we ardently desire it? Are desires, begotten by the imagination, +the measure of reality? The impious, you say, deprived of the +flattering hope of another life, wish to be annihilated. Very well: +may they not then as justly conclude, from _their_ desire, that +they shall be annihilated, as you may conclude from _your_ desire, +that you shall exist for ever. + + +102. Man dies, and the human body after death is no longer anything +but a mass incapable of producing those motions, of which the sum +total constituted life. We see, that it has no longer circulation, +respiration, digestion, speech, or thought. It is pretended, that +the soul is then separated from the body; but to say, that this soul, +with which we are unacquainted, is the principle of life, is to say +nothing, unless that an unknown power is the hidden principle of +imperceptible movements. Nothing is more natural and simple, +than to believe, that the dead man no longer lives: nothing is more +extravagant, than to believe, that the dead man is still alive. +We laugh at the simplicity of some nations, whose custom is to bury +provision with the dead, under an idea that it will be useful and +necessary to them in the other life. Is it then more ridiculous +or absurd to suppose, that men will eat after death, than to imagine, +that they will think, that they will be actuated by agreeable or +disagreeable ideas, that they will enjoy or suffer, and that they +will experience repentance or delight, after the organs, adapted +to produce sensations or ideas, are once dissolved. To say that +the souls of men will be happy or unhappy after death, is in other +words to say, that men will see without eyes, hear without ears, +taste without palates, smell without noses, and touch without hands. +And persons, who consider themselves very reasonable, adopt these ideas! + + +103. The dogma of the immortality of the soul supposes the soul +to be a simple substance; in a word, a spirit. But I ask again, +what is a spirit? "It is," say you, "a substance void of extension, +incorruptible, having nothing common with matter." If so, how is +your soul born, and how does it grow, how does it strengthen or +weaken itself, how does it get disordered and grow old, in the same +progression as your body? + +To all these questions you answer, that these are mysteries. If so, +you cannot understand them. If you cannot understand them, why do +you decide about a thing, of which you are unable to form the least +idea? To believe or affirm any thing, it is necessary, at least, +to know in what it consists. To believe in the existence of your +immaterial soul, is to say, that you are persuaded of the existence +of a thing, of which it is impossible for you to form any true notion; +it is to believe in words without meaning. To affirm that the thing +is as you say, is the height of folly or vanity. + + +104. Are not theologians strange reasoners? Whenever they cannot +divine the _natural_ causes of things, they invent what they call +_supernatural_; such as spirits, occult causes, inexplicable agents, +or rather _words_, much more obscure than the _things_ they endeavour +to explain. Let us remain in nature, when we wish to account for the +phenomena of nature; let us be content to remain ignorant of causes +too delicate for our organs; and let us be persuaded, that, by going +beyond nature, we shall never solve the problems which nature presents. + +Even upon the hypothesis of theology, (that is, supposing an all-powerful +mover of matter,) by what right would theologians deny, that their +God has power to give this matter the faculty of thought? Was it +then more difficult for him to create combinations of matter, from +which thought might result, than spirits who could think? At least, +by supposing matter, which thinks, we should have some notions of the +subject of thought, or of what thinks in us; whereas, by attributing +thought to an immaterial being, it is impossible to form the least +idea of it. + + +105. It is objected against us, that materialism makes man a mere +machine, which is said to be very dishonourable. But, will it be +much more honourable for man, if we should say, that he acts by the +secret impulses of a spirit, or by a certain _I know not what_, that +animates him in a manner totally inexplicable. + +It is easy to perceive, that the supposed superiority of _spirit_ +over matter, or of the soul over the body, has no other foundation +than men's ignorance of this soul, while they are more familiarized +with _matter_, with which they imagine they are acquainted, and of +which they think they can discern the origin. But the most simple +movements of our bodies are to every man, who studies them, as +inexplicable as thought. + + +106. The high value, which so many people set upon spiritual +substance, has no other motive than their absolute inability to +define it intelligibly. The contempt shewn for _matter_ by our +metaphysicians, arises only from the circumstance, that familiarity +begets contempt. When they tell us, that _the soul is more excellent +and noble than the body_, they say what they know not. + + +107. The dogma of another life is incessantly extolled, as useful. +It is maintained, that even though it should be only a fiction, +it is advantageous, because it deceives men, and conducts them to +virtue. But is it true, that this dogma makes men wiser and more +virtuous? Are the nations, who believe this fiction, remarkable +for purity of morals? Has not the visible world ever the advantage +over the invisible? If those, who are trusted with the instruction +and government of men, had knowledge and virtue themselves, they +would govern them much better by realities, than by fictions. But +crafty, ambitious and corrupt legislators, have every where found +it better to amuse with fables, than to teach them truths, to unfold +their reason, to excite them to virtue by sensible and real motives, +in fine, to govern them in a rational manner. Priests undoubtedly +had reasons for making the soul immaterial; they wanted souls to +people the imaginary regions, which they have discovered in the other +life. Material souls would, like all bodies, have been subject to +dissolution. Now, if men should believe, that all must perish with +the body, the geographers of the other world would evidently lose +the right of guiding men's souls towards that unknown abode; they +would reap no profits from the hope with which they feed them, and +the terrors with which they oppress them. If futurity is of no real +utility to mankind, it is, at least, of the greatest utility to those, +who have assumed the office of conducting them thither. + + +108. "But," it will be said, "is not the dogma of the immortality of +the soul comforting to beings, who are often very unhappy here below? +Though it should be an error, is it not pleasing? Is it not a blessing +to man to believe, that he shall be able to enjoy hereafter a happiness, +which is denied him upon earth?" Thus, poor mortals! you make your +wishes the measure of truth; because you desire to live for ever, +and to be happier, you at once conclude, that you shall live for ever, +and that you shall be more fortunate in an unknown world, than in +this known world, where you often find nothing but affliction! +Consent therefore to leave, without regret, this world which gives +the greater part of you much more torment than pleasure. Submit to +the order of nature, which demands that you, as well as all other beings, +should not endure for ever. + +We are incessantly told, that religion has infinite consolations for +the unfortunate, that the idea of the soul's immortality, and of a +happier life, is very proper to elevate man, and to support him under +adversity, which awaits him upon earth. It is said, on the contrary, +that materialism is an afflicting system, calculated to degrade man; +then it puts him upon a level with the brutes, breaks his courage, +and shows him no other prospect than frightful annihilation, capable +of driving him to despair and suicide, whenever he is unhappy. The +great art of theologians is to blow hot and cold, to afflict and +console, to frighten and encourage. + +It appears by theological fictions, that the regions of the other +life are happy and unhappy. Nothing is more difficult than to become +worthy of the abode of felicity; nothing more easy than to obtain +a place in the abode of torment, which God is preparing for the +unfortunate victims of eternal fury. Have those then, who think +the other life so pleasant and flattering, forgotten, that according +to them, that life is to be attended with torments to the greater +part of mortals? Is not the idea of total annihilation infinitely +preferable to the idea of an eternal existence, attended with +anguish and _gnashing of teeth_? Is the fear of an end more +afflicting, than that of having had a beginning! The fear of +ceasing to exist is a real evil only to the imagination, which +alone begat the dogma of another life. + +Christian ministers say that the idea of a happier life is joyous. +Admitted. Every person would desire a more agreeable existence +than that he enjoys here. But, if paradise is inviting, you will +grant, that hell is frightful. Heaven is very difficult, and hell +very easy to be merited. Do you not say, that a _narrow_ way leads +to the happy regions, and a _broad_ way to the regions of misery? +Do you not often say, that _the number of the elect is very small, +and that of the reprobate very large_? Is not Grace, which your +God grants but to a very few, necessary to salvation? Now, I assure +you, that these ideas are by no means consoling; that I had rather +be annihilated, once for all, than to burn for ever; that the fate +of beasts is to me more desirable than that of the damned; that +the opinion which relieves me from afflicting fears in this world, +appears to me more joyous, than the uncertainty arising from the +opinion of a God, who, master of his grace, grants it to none but +his favourites, and permits all others to become worthy of eternal +torment. Nothing but enthusiasm or folly can induce a man to prefer +improbable conjectures, attended with uncertainty and insupportable +fears. + + +109. All religious principles are the work of pure imagination, in +which experience and reason have no share. It is extremely difficult +to combat them, because the imagination, once prepossessed by chimeras, +which astonish or disturb it, is incapable of reasoning. To combat +religion and its phantoms with the arms of reason, is like using +a sword to kill gnats; as soon as the blow is struck, the gnats and +chimeras come hovering round again, and resume in the mind the place, +from which they were thought to have been for ever banished. + +When we reject, as too weak, the proofs given of the existence of a God, +they instantly oppose to the arguments, which destroy that existence, +an _inward sense_, a deep persuasion, an invincible inclination, born +in every man, which holds up to his mind, in spite of himself, the +idea of an almighty being, whom he cannot entirely expel from his mind, +and whom he is compelled to acknowledge, in spite of the strongest +reasons that can be urged. But whoever will analyse this _inward sense_, +upon which such stress is laid, will perceive, that it is only the +effect of a rooted habit, which, shutting their eyes against the +most demonstrative proofs, subjects the greater part of men, and +often even the most enlightened, to the prejudices of childhood. +What avails this inward sense, or this deep persuasion, against +the evidence, which demonstrates, that _whatever implies a contradiction +cannot exist_? + +We are gravely assured, that the non-existence of God is not demonstrated. +Yet, by all that men have hitherto said of him, nothing is better +demonstrated, than that this God is a chimera, whose existence is +totally impossible; since nothing is more evident, than that a being +cannot possess qualities so unlike, so contradictory, so irreconcilable, +as those, which every religion upon earth attributes to the Divinity. +Is not the theologian's God, as well as that of the deist, a cause +incompatible with the effects attributed to it? Let them do what +they will, it is necessary either to invent another God, or to grant, +that he, who, for so many ages, has been held up to the terror of +mortals, is at the same time very good and very bad, very powerful +and very weak, unchangeable and fickle, perfectly intelligent and +perfectly void of reason, of order and permitting disorder, very +just and most unjust, very skilful and unskilful. In short, are +we not forced to confess, that it is impossible to reconcile the +discordant attributes, heaped upon a being, of whom we cannot speak +without the most palpable contradictions? Let any one attribute +a single quality to the Divinity, and it is universally contradicted +by the effects, ascribed to this cause. + + +110. Theology might justly be defined the _science of contradictions_. +Every religion is only a system, invented to reconcile irreconcilable +notions. By the aid of habit and terror, man becomes obstinate in the +greatest absurdities, even after they are exposed in the clearest manner. +All religions are easily combated, but with difficulty extirpated. +Reason avails nothing against custom, which becomes, says the proverb, +_a second nature_. Many persons, in other respects sensible, even +after having examined the rotten foundation of their belief, adhere +to it in contempt of the most striking arguments. Whenever we +complain of religion, its shocking absurdities, and impossibilities, +we are told that we are not made to understand the truths of religion; +that reason goes astray, and is capable of leading us to perdition; +and moreover, that _what is folly in the eyes of man, is wisdom in +the eyes of God_, to whom nothing is impossible. In short, to surmount, +by a single word, the most insurmountable difficulties, presented +on all sides by theology, they get rid of them by saying, these are +_mysteries_! + + +111. What is a mystery? By examining the thing closely, I soon +perceive, that a mystery is nothing but a contradiction, a palpable +absurdity, a manifest impossibility, over which theologians would +oblige men humbly to shut their eyes. In a word, a mystery is +whatever our spiritual guides cannot explain. + +It is profitable to the ministers of religion, that people understand +nothing of what they teach. It is impossible to examine what we do +not comprehend; when we do not see, we must suffer ourselves to be led. +If religion were clear, priests would find less business. + +Without mysteries there can be no religion; mystery is essential to it; +a religion void of mysteries, would be a contradiction in terms. +The God, who serves as the foundation of _natural religion_, or +_deism_, is himself the greatest of mysteries. + + +112. Every revealed religion is filled with mysterious dogmas, +unintelligible principles, incredible wonders, astonishing recitals, +which appear to have been invented solely to confound reason. +Every religion announces a hidden God, whose essence is a mystery; +consequently, the conduct, ascribed to him, is no less inconceivable +than his essence. The Deity has never spoken only in an enigmatical +and mysterious manner, in the various religions, which have been +founded in different regions of our globe; he has everywhere revealed +himself only to announce mysteries; that is, to inform mortals, that +he intended they should believe contradictions, impossibilities, and +things to which they were incapable of affixing any clear ideas. + +The more mysterious and incredible a religion is, the more power +it has to please the imagination of men. The darker a religion is, +the more it appears divine, that is, conformable to the nature of +a hidden being, of whom they have no ideas. Ignorance prefers the +unknown, the hidden, the fabulous, the marvellous, the incredible, +or even the terrible, to what is clear, simple, and true. Truth +does not operate upon the imagination in so lively a manner as fiction, +which, in other respects, everyone is able to arrange in his own way. +The vulgar like to listen to fables. Priests and legislators, by +inventing religions and forging mysteries have served the vulgar +people well. They have thereby gained enthusiasts, women and fools. +Beings of this stamp are easily satisfied with things, which they +are incapable of examining. The love of simplicity and truth is +to be found only among the few, whose imagination is regulated by +study and reflection. + +The inhabitants of a village are never better pleased with their parson, +than when he introduces Latin into his sermon. The ignorant always +imagine, that he, who speaks to them of things they do not understand, +is a learned man. Such is the true principle of the credulity of the +people, and of the authority of those, who pretend to guide nations. + + +113. To announce mysteries to men, is to give and withhold; it is +to talk in order not to be understood. He, who speaks only obscurely, +either seeks to amuse himself by the embarrassment, which he causes, +or finds his interest in not explaining himself too clearly. All +secrecy indicates distrust, impotence, and fear. Princes and their +ministers make a mystery of their projects, for fear their enemies +should discover and render them abortive. Can a good God amuse +himself by perplexing his creatures? What interest then could he +have in commanding his ministers to announce riddles and mysteries? + +It is said, that man, by the weakness of his nature, is totally +incapable of understanding the divine dispensations, which can be +to him only a series of mysteries; God cannot disclose to him secrets, +necessarily above his reach. If so, I answer again, that man is not +made to attend to the divine dispensations; that these dispensations +are to him by no means interesting; that he has no need of mysteries, +which he cannot understand; and consequently, that a mysterious +religion is no more fit for him, than an eloquent discourse is for +a flock of sheep. + + +114. The Deity has revealed himself with so little uniformity in +the different countries of our globe, that in point of religion, +men regard one another with hatred and contempt. The partisans +of the different sects think each other very ridiculous and foolish. +Mysteries, most revered in one religion, are objects of derision to +another. God, in revealing himself to mankind, ought at least, to +have spoken the same language to all, and saved their feeble minds +the perplexity of inquiring which religion really emanated from him, +or what form of worship is most acceptable in his sight. + +A universal God ought to have revealed a universal religion. By +what fatality then are there so many different religions upon earth? +Which is really right, among the great number of those, each of which +exclusively pretends to be the true one? There is great reason to +believe, that no religion enjoys this advantage. Division and disputes +upon opinions are indubitable signs of the uncertainty and obscurity +of the principles, upon which they build. + + +115. If religion were necessary at all, it ought to be intelligible +to all. If this religion were the most important concern of men, +the goodness of God would seem to demand, that it should be to them +of all things the most clear, evident, and demonstrative. Is it +not then astonishing, that this thing so essential to the happiness +of mortals, is precisely that, which they understand least, and +about which, for so many ages, their teachers have most disputed? +Priests have never agreed upon the manner of understanding the will +of a God, who has revealed himself. + +The world, may be compared to a public fair, in which are several +empirics, each of whom endeavours to attract the passengers by +decrying the remedies sold by his brothers. Each shop has its +customers, who are persuaded, that their quacks possess the only +true remedies; and notwithstanding a continual use of them, they +perceive not the inefficacy of these remedies, or that they are +as infirm as those, who run after the quacks of a different shop. + +Devotion is a disorder of the imagination contracted in infancy. +The devout man is a hypochondriac, who only augments his malady by +the application of remedies. The wise man abstains from them entirely; +he pays attention to his diet, and in other respects leaves nature +to her course. + + +116. To a man of sense, nothing appears more ridiculous, than the +opinions, which the partisans of the different religions with equal +folly entertain of each other. A Christian regards the _Koran_, +that is, the divine revelation announced by Mahomet, as nothing but +a tissue of impertinent reveries, and impostures insulting to the +divinity. The Mahometan, on the other hand, treats the Christian +as an _idolater_ and a _dog_. He sees nothing but absurdities in his +religion. He imagines he has a right to subdue the Christian, and +to force him, sword in hand, to receive the religion of his divine +prophet. Finally, he believes, that nothing is more impious and +unreasonable, than to worship a man, or to believe in the Trinity. +The _protestant_ Christian who without scruple worships a man, and +firmly believes the inconceivable mystery of the _trinity_, ridicules +the _catholic_ Christian for believing in the mystery of +_transubstantiation_; he considers him mad, impious, and idolatrous, +because he kneels to worship some bread, in which he thinks he sees God. +Christians of every sect regard, as silly stories, the incarnations +of _Vishnu_, the God of the Indies; they maintain, that the only true +_incarnation_ is that of _Jesus_, son of a carpenter. The deist, who +calls himself the follower of a religion, which he supposes to be +that of nature, content with admitting a God, of whom he has no idea, +makes a jest of all the mysteries, taught by the various religions +in the world. + + +117. Is there any thing more contradictory, impossible, or mysterious, +than the creation of matter by an immaterial being, who, though +immutable, operates continual changes in the world? Is any thing +more incompatible with every notion of common sense, than to believe, +that a supremely good, wise, equitable and powerful being presides +over nature, and by himself directs the movements of a world, full +of folly, misery, crimes and disorders, which by a single word, he +could have prevented or removed? In fine, whenever we admit a being +as contradictory as the God of theology, how can we reject the most +improbable fables, astonishing miracles, and profound mysteries. + + +118. The Deist exclaims: "Abstain from worshipping the cruel and +capricious God of theology; mine is a being infinitely wise and good; +he is the father of men, the mildest of sovereigns; it is he who +fills the universe with his benefits." But do you not see that +every thing in this world contradicts the good qualities, which +you ascribe to your God? In the numerous family of this tender +father, almost all are unhappy. Under the government of this just +sovereign, vice is triumphant, and virtue in distress. Among those +blessings you extol, and which only enthusiasm can see, I behold +a multitude of evils, against which you obstinately shut your eyes. +Forced to acknowledge, that your beneficent God, in contradiction +with himself, distributes good and evil with the same hand, for +his justification you must, like the priest, refer me to the regions +of another life. Invent, therefore, another God; for yours is no +less contradictory than that of theologians. + +A good God, who does evil, or consents to the commission of evil; +a God full of equity, and in whose empire innocence is often oppressed; +a perfect God, who produces none but imperfect and miserable works; +are not such a God and his conduct as great mysteries, as that of +the incarnation? + +You blush for your fellow-citizens, who allow themselves to be persuaded, +that the God of the universe could change himself into a man, and die +upon a cross in a corner of Asia. The mystery of the incarnation appears +to you very absurd. You think nothing more ridiculous, than a God, +who transforms himself into bread, and causes himself daily to be +eaten in a thousand different places. But are all these mysteries +more contradictory to reason than a God, the avenger and rewarder +of the actions of men? Is man, according to you, free, or not free? +In either case, your God, if he has the shadow of equity, can neither +punish nor reward him. If man is free, it is God, who has made him +free; therefore God is the primitive cause of all his actions; in +punishing him for his faults, he would punish him for having executed +what he had given him liberty to do. If man is not free to act +otherwise than he does, would not God be most unjust, in punishing +man for faults, which he could not help committing. + +The minor, or secondary, absurdities, with which all religions abound, +are to many people truly striking; but they have not the courage +to trace the source of these absurdities. They see not, that a +God full of contradictions, caprices and inconsistent qualities, +has only served to disorder men's imaginations, and to produce +an endless succession of chimeras. + + +119. The theologian would shut the mouths of those who deny the +existence of God, by saying, that all men, in all ages and countries, +have acknowledged some divinity or other; that every people have +believed in an invisible and powerful being, who has been the object +of their worship and veneration; in short, that there is no nation, +however savage, who are not persuaded of the existence of some +intelligence superior to human nature. But, can an error be changed +into truth by the belief of all men? The great philosopher Bayle +has justly observed, that "general tradition, or the unanimous consent +of mankind, is no criterion of truth." + +There was a time, when all men believed that the sun moved round +the earth, but this error was detected. There was a time, when +nobody believed the existence of the antipodes, and when every one +was persecuted, who had temerity enough to maintain it. At present, +every informed man firmly believes it. All nations, with the +exception of a few men who are less credulous than the rest, +still believe in ghosts and spirits. No sensible man now adopts +such nonsense. But the most sensible people consider it their +duty to believe in a universal spirit! + + +120. All the gods, adored by men, are of savage origin. They have +evidently been imagined by stupid people, or presented, by ambitious +and crafty legislators, to ignorant and uncivilized nations, who +had neither capacity nor courage to examine the objects, which +through terror they were made to worship. + +By closely examining God, we are forced to acknowledge, that he +evidently bears marks of a savage nature. To be savage is to +acknowledge no right but force; it is to be cruel beyond measure; +to follow only one's own caprice; to want foresight, prudence, +and reason. Ye nations, who call yourselves civilized! Do you +not discern, in this hideous character, the God, on whom you +lavish your incense? Are not the descriptions given you of the +divinity, visibly borrowed from the implacable, jealous, revengeful, +sanguinary, capricious inconsiderate humour of man, who has not +cultivated his reason? O men! You adore only a great savage, +whom you regard, however, as a model to imitate, as an amiable +master, as a sovereign full of perfection. + +Religious opinions are ancient monuments of ignorance, credulity, +cowardice, and barbarism of their ancestors. Every savage is a +child fond of the marvellous, who believes every thing, and examines +nothing. Ignorant of nature, he attributes to spirits, enchantments, +and to magic, whatever appears to him extraordinary. His priests +appear to him sorcerers, in whom he supposes a power purely divine, +before whom his confounded reason humbles itself, whose oracles are +to him infallible decrees which it would be dangerous to contradict. + +In religion, men have, for the most part, remained in their primitive +barbarity. Modern religions are only ancient follies revived, or +presented under some new form. If the savages of antiquity adored +mountains, rivers, serpents, trees, and idols of every kind; if the +EGYPTIANS paid homage to crocodiles, rats, and onions, do we not see +nations, who think themselves wiser than they, worship bread, into +which they imagine, that through the enchantments of their priests, +the divinity has descended. Is not the Bread-God the idol of many +Christian nations, who, in this respect, are as irrational, as the +most savage? + + +121. The ferocity, stupidity, and folly of uncivilized man have +ever disclosed themselves in religious practices, either cruel or +extravagant. A spirit of barbarity still survives, and penetrates +the religions even of the most polished nations. Do we not still +see human victims offered to the divinity? To appease the anger of +a God, who is always supposed as ferocious, jealous and vindictive, +as a savage, do not those, whose manner of thinking is supposed +to displease him, expire under studied torments, by the command +of sanguinary laws? Modern nations, at the instigation of their +priests, have perhaps improved upon the atrocious folly of barbarous +nations; at least, we find, that it has ever entered the heads of +savages to torment for opinions, to search the thoughts, to molest +men for the invisible movements of their brains? + +When we see learned nations, such as the English, French, German, +etc., continue, notwithstanding their knowledge, to kneel before +the barbarous God of the Jews; when we see these enlightened nations +divide into sects, defame, hate, and despise one another for their +equally ridiculous opinions concerning the conduct and intentions +of this unreasonable God; when we see men of ability foolishly +devote their time to meditate the will of this God, who is full +of caprice and folly, we are tempted to cry out: O men, you are +still savage!!! + + +122. Whoever has formed true ideas of the ignorance, credulity, +negligence, and stupidity of the vulgar, will suspect opinions +the more, as he finds them generally established. Men, for the +most part, examine nothing: they blindly submit to custom and +authority. Their religious opinions, above all others, are those +which they have the least courage and capacity to examine: as they +comprehend nothing about them, they are forced to be silent, or at +least are soon destitute of arguments. Ask any man, whether he +believes in a God? He will be much surprised that you can doubt it. +Ask him again, what he understands by the word _God_. You throw +him into the greatest embarrassment; you will perceive immediately, +that he is incapable of affixing any real idea to this word, he +incessantly repeats. He will tell you, that God is God. He knows +neither what he thinks of it, nor his motives for believing in it. + +All nations speak of a God; but do they agree upon this God? By +no means. But division upon an opinion proves not its evidence; +it is rather a sign of uncertainty and obscurity. Does the same +man always agree with himself in the notions he forms of his God? +No. His idea varies with the changes, which he experiences;-- +another sign of uncertainty. Men always agree in demonstrative +truths. In any situation, except that of insanity, every one +knows that two and two make four, that the sun shines, that the +whole is greater than its part; that benevolence is necessary +to merit the affection of men; that injustice and cruelty are +incompatible with goodness. Are they thus agreed when they +speak of God? Whatever they think, or say of him, is immediately +destroyed by the effects they attribute to him. + +Ask several painters to represent a chimera, and each will paint +it in a different manner. You will find no resemblance between +the features, each has given it a portrait, that has no original. +All theologians, in giving us a picture of God, give us one of +a great chimera, in whose features they never agree, whom each +arranges in his own way, and who exists only in their imaginations. +There are not two individuals, who have, or can have, the same +ideas of their God. + + +123. It might be said with more truth, that men are either skeptics +or atheists, than that they are convinced of the existence of God. +How can we be assured of the existence of a being, whom we could +never examine, and of whom it is impossible to conceive any permanent +idea? How can we convince ourselves of the existence of a being, +to whom we are every moment forced to attribute conduct, opposed +to the ideas, we had endeavoured to form of him? Is it then possible +to believe what we cannot conceive? Is not such a belief the opinions +of others without having any of our own? Priests govern by faith; +but do not priests themselves acknowledge that God is to them +incomprehensible? Confess then, that a full and entire conviction +of the existence of God is not so general, as is imagined. + +Scepticism arises from a want of motives sufficient to form a judgment. +Upon examining the proofs which seem to establish, and the arguments +which combat, the existence of God, some persons have doubted and +withheld their assent. But this uncertainty arises from not having +sufficiently examined. Is it possible to doubt any thing evident? +Sensible people ridicule an absolute scepticism, and think it even +impossible. A man, who doubted his own existence, or that of the sun, +would appear ridiculous. Is this more extravagant than to doubt the +non-existence of an evidently impossible being? Is it more absurd +to doubt one's own existence, than to hesitate upon the impossibility +of a being, whose qualities reciprocally destroy one another? Do we +find greater probability for believing the existence of a spiritual +being, than the existence of a stick without two ends? Is the notion +of an infinitely good and powerful being, who causes or permits an +infinity of evils, less absurd or impossible, than that of a square +triangle? Let us conclude then, that religious scepticism can result +only from a superficial examination of theological principles, which +are in perpetual contradiction with the most clear and demonstrative +principles. + +To doubt, is to deliberate. Scepticism is only a state of +indetermination, resulting from an insufficient examination +of things. Is it possible for any one to be sceptical in matters +of religion, who will deign to revert to its principles, and closely +examine the notion of God, who serves as its basis? Doubt generally +arises either from indolence, weakness, indifference, or incapacity. +With many people, to doubt is to fear the trouble of examining things, +which are thought uninteresting. But religion being presented to men +as their most important concern in this and the future world, skepticism +and doubt on this subject must occasion perpetual anxiety and must +really constitute a bed of thorns. Every man who has not courage +to contemplate, without prejudice, the God upon whom all religion +is founded, can never know for what religion to decide: he knows +not what he should believe or not believe, admit or reject, hope +or fear. + +Indifference upon religion must not be confounded with scepticism. +This indifference is founded upon the absolute assurance, or at any +rate upon the probable belief, that religion is not interesting. +A persuasion that a thing which is pretended to be important is not +so, or is only indifferent, supposes a sufficient examination of the +thing, without which it would be impossible to have this persuasion. +Those who call themselves sceptics in the fundamental points of religion, +are commonly either indolent or incapable of examining. + + +124. In every country, we are assured, that a God has revealed himself. +What has he taught men? Has he proved evidently that he exists? +Has he informed them where he resides? Has he taught them what he is, +or in what his essence consists? Has he clearly explained to them +his intentions and plan? Does what he says of this plan correspond +with the effects, which we see? No. He informs them solely, that +_he is what he is_; that he is a _hidden God_; that his ways are +unspeakable; that he is exasperated against all who have the temerity +to fathom his decrees, or to consult reason in judging him or his works. + +Does the revealed conduct of God answer the magnificent ideas which +theologians would give us of his wisdom, goodness, justice, and +omnipotence? By no means. In every revelation, this conduct +announces a partial and capricious being, the protector of favourite +people, and the enemy of all others. If he deigns to appear to some +men, he takes care to keep all others in an invincible ignorance of +his divine intentions. Every private revelation evidently announces +in God, injustice, partiality and malignity. + +Do the commands, revealed by any God, astonish us by their sublime +reason or wisdom? Do they evidently tend to promote the happiness +of the people, to whom the Divinity discloses them? Upon examining +the divine commands, one sees in every country, nothing but strange +ordinances, ridiculous precepts, impertinent ceremonies, puerile +customs, oblations, sacrifices, and expiations, useful indeed to the +ministers of God, but very burthensome to the rest of the citizens. +I see likewise, that these laws often tend to make men unsociable, +disdainful, intolerant, quarrelsome, unjust, and inhuman, to those +who have not received the same revelations, the same ordinances, or +the same favours from heaven. + + +125. Are the precepts of morality, announced by the Deity, really +divine, or superior to those which every reasonable man might imagine? +They are divine solely because it is impossible for the human mind +to discover their utility. They make virtue consist in a total +renunciation of nature, in a voluntary forgetfulness of reason, +a holy hatred of ourselves. Finally, these sublime precepts often +exhibit perfection in a conduct, cruel to ourselves, and perfectly +useless to others. + +Has a God appeared? Has he himself promulgated his laws? Has he +spoken to men with his own mouth? I am told, that God has not appeared +to a whole people; but that he has always manifested himself through +the medium of some favourite personages, who have been intrusted with +the care of announcing and explaining his intentions. The people have +never been permitted to enter the sanctuary; the ministers of the gods +have alone had the right to relate what passes there. + + +126. If in every system of divine revelation, I complain of not seeing +either the wisdom, goodness, or equity of God; if I suspect knavery, +ambition, or interest; it is replied, that God has confirmed by +miracles the mission of those, who speak in his name. But was it +not more simple for him to appear in person, to explain his nature +and will? Again, if I have the curiosity to examine these miracles, +I find, that they are improbable tales, related by suspected people, +who had the greatest interest in giving out that they were the messengers +of the Most High. + +What witnesses are appealed to in order to induce us to believe incredible +miracles? Weak people, who existed thousands of years ago, and who, +even though they could attest these miracles, may be suspected of being +duped by their own imagination, and imposed upon by the tricks of +dexterous impostors. But, you will say, these miracles are written +in books, which by tradition have been transmitted to us. By whom +were these books written? Who are the men who have transmitted them? +They are either the founders of religions themselves, or their adherents +and assigns. Thus, in religion, the evidence of interested parties +becomes irrefragable and incontestable. + + +127. God has spoken differently to every people. The Indian believes +not a word of what He has revealed to the Chinese; the Mahometan +considers as fables what He has said to the Christian; the Jew regards +both the Mahometan and Christian as sacrilegious corrupters of the +sacred law, which his God had given to his fathers. The Christian, +proud of his more modern revelation, indiscriminately damns the Indian, +Chinese, Mahometan, and even the Jew, from whom he receives his sacred +books. Who is wrong or right? Each exclaims, _I am in the right!_ +Each adduces the same proofs: each mentions his miracles, diviners, +prophets, and martyrs. The man of sense tells them, they are all +delirious; that God has not spoken, if it is true that he is a spirit, +and can have neither mouth nor tongue; that without borrowing the organ +of mortals, God could inspire his creatures with what he would have them +learn; and that, as they are all equally ignorant what to think of God, +it is evident that it has not been the will of God to inform them on +the subject. + +The followers of different forms of worship which are established, +accuse one another of superstition and impiety. Christians look with +abhorrence upon the Pagan, Chinese, and Mahometan superstition. +Roman Catholics treat, as impious, Protestant Christians; and the +latter incessantly declaim against the superstition of the Catholics. +They are all right. To be impious, is to have opinions offensive to +the God adored; to be superstitious, is to have of him false ideas. +In accusing one another of superstition, the different religionists +resemble humpbacks, who reproach one another with their deformity. + + +128. Are the oracles, which the Divinity has revealed by his different +messengers, remarkable for clearness? Alas! no two men interpret +them alike. Those who explain them to others are not agreed among +themselves. To elucidate them, they have recourse to interpretations, +to commentaries, to allegories, to explanations: they discover _mystical +sense_ very different from the _literal sense_. Men are every where +wanted to explain the commands of a God, who could not, or would not, +announce himself clearly to those, whom he wished to enlighten. + + +129. The founders of religion, have generally proved their missions +by miracles. But what is a miracle? It is an operation directly +opposite to the laws of nature. But who, according to you, made +those laws? God. Thus, your God, who, according to you, foresaw +every thing, counteracts the laws, which his wisdom prescribed to +nature! These laws were then defective, or at least in certain +circumstances they did not accord with the views of the same God, +since you inform us that he judged it necessary to suspend or +counteract them. + +It is said, that a few men, favoured by the Most High, have received +power to perform miracles. But to perform a miracle, it is necessary +to have ability to create new causes capable of producing effects +contrary to those of common causes. Is it easy to conceive, that +God can give men the inconceivable power of creating causes out of +nothing? Is it credible, that an immutable God can communicate to +men power to change or rectify his plan, a power, which by his essence +an immutable being cannot save himself? Miracles, far from doing +much honour to God, far from proving the divinity of a religion, +evidently annihilate the God idea. How can a theologian tell us, +that God, who must have embraced the whole of his plan, who could +have made none but perfect laws, and who cannot alter them, is forced +to employ miracles to accomplish his projects, or can grant his +creatures the power of working prodigies to execute his divine will? +An omnipotent being, whose will is always fulfilled, who holds in +his hand his creatures, has only to _will_, to make them believe whatever +he desires. + + +130. What shall we say of religions that prove their divinity by miracles? +How can we credit miracles recorded in the sacred books of the Christians, +where God boasts of hardening the hearts and blinding those whom he +wishes to destroy; where he permits malicious spirits and magicians to +work miracles as great as those of his servants; where it is predicted, +that _Antichrist_ shall have power to perform prodigies capable of shaking +the faith even of the elect? In this case, by what signs shall we know +whether God means to instruct or ensnare us? How shall we distinguish +whether the wonders, we behold, come from God or devil? To remove our +perplexity, Pascal gravely tells us, that _it is necessary to judge the +doctrine by the miracles, and the miracles by the doctrine; that the +doctrine proves the miracles, and the miracles the doctrine_. If there +exist a vicious and ridiculous circle, it is undoubtedly in this splendid +reasoning of one of the greatest defenders of Christianity. Where is the +religion, that does not boast of the most admirable doctrine, and which +does not produce numerous miracles for its support? + +Is a miracle capable of annihilating the evidence of a demonstrated truth? +Although a man should have the secret of healing all the sick, of making +all the lame to walk, of raising in all the dead of a city, of ascending +into the air, of stopping the course of the sun and moon, can he thereby +convince me, that two and two do not make four, that one makes three, +and that three make only one; that a God, whose immensity fills the +universe, could have been contained in the body of a Jew; that the +ETERNAL can die like a man; that a God, who is said to be immutable, +provident, and sensible, could have changed his mind upon his religion, +and reformed his own work by a new revelation? + + +131. According to the very principles either of natural or revealed +theology, every new revelation should be regarded as false; every +change in a religion emanated from the Deity should be reputed an +impiety and blasphemy. Does not all reform suppose, that, in his +first effort, God could not give his religion the solidity and +perfection required? To say, that God, in giving a first law, +conformed to the rude ideas of the people whom he wished to enlighten, +is to pretend that God was neither able nor willing to render the +people, whom he was enlightening, so reasonable as was necessary +in order to please him. + +Christianity is an impiety, if it is true that Judaism is a religion +which has really emanated from a holy, immutable, omnipotent, and +foreseeing God. The religion of Christ supposes either defects in +the law which God himself had given by Moses, or impotence or malice +in the same God, who was either unable or unwilling to render the +Jews such as they ought to have been in order to please him. Every +new religion, or reform of ancient religions, is evidently founded +upon the impotence, inconstancy, imprudence, or malice of the Divinity. + + +132. If history informs me, that the first apostles, the founders +or reformers of religions, wrought great miracles; history also +informs me, that these reformers and their adherents were commonly +buffeted, persecuted, and put to death, as disturbers of the peace +of nations. I am therefore tempted to believe, that they did not +perform the miracles ascribed to them; indeed, such miracles must +have gained them numerous partisans among the eye-witnesses, who +ought to have protected the operators from abuse. My incredulity +redoubles, when I am told, that the workers of miracles were cruelly +tormented, or ignominiously executed. How is it possible to believe, +that missionaries, protected by God, invested with his divine power, +and enjoying the gift of miracles, could not have wrought such +a simple miracle, as to escape the cruelty of their persecutors? + +Priests have the art of drawing from the persecutions themselves, +a convincing proof in favour of the religion of the persecuted. +But a religion, which boasts of having cost the lives of many +martyrs, and informs us, that its founders, in order to extend it, +have suffered punishments, cannot be the religion of a beneficent, +equitable and omnipotent God. A good God would not permit men, +intrusted with announcing his commands, to be ill-treated. An +all-powerful God, wishing to found a religion, would proceed in a +manner more simple and less fatal to the most faithful of his servants. +To say that God would have his religion sealed with blood, is to say +that he is weak, unjust, ungrateful, and sanguinary; and that he is +cruel enough to sacrifice his messengers to the views of his ambition. + + +133. To die for religion proves not that the religion is true, +or divine; it proves, at most, that it is supposed to be such. +An enthusiast proves nothing by his death, unless that religious +fanaticism is often stronger than the love of life. An impostor +may sometimes die with courage; he then makes, in the language +of the proverb, _a virtue of necessity_. + +People are often surprised and affected at sight of the generous +courage and disinterested zeal, which has prompted missionaries +to preach their doctrine, even at the risk of suffering the most +rigorous treatment. From this ardour for the salvation of men, +are drawn inferences favourable to the religion they have announced. +But in reality, this disinterestedness is only apparent. He, who +ventures nothing should gain nothing. A missionary seeks to make +his fortune by his doctrine. He knows that, if he is fortunate +enough to sell his commodity, he will become absolute master of +those who receive him for their guide; he is sure of becoming the +object of their attention, respect, and veneration. Such are the +true motives, which kindle the zeal and charity of so many preachers +and missionaries. + +To die for an opinion, proves the truth or goodness of that opinion +no more than to die in battle proves the justice of a cause, in +which thousands have the folly to devote their lives. The courage +of a martyr, elated with the idea of paradise, is not more supernatural, +than the courage of a soldier, intoxicated with the idea of glory, +or impelled by the fear of disgrace. What is the difference between +an Iroquois, who sings while he is burning by inches, and the martyr +ST. LAURENCE, who upon the gridiron insults his tyrant? + +The preachers of a new doctrine fail, because they are the weakest; +apostles generally practise a perilous trade. Their courageous +death proves neither the truth of their principles nor their own +sincerity, any more than the violent death of the ambitious man, +or of the robber, proves, that they were right in disturbing society, +or that they thought themselves authorised in so doing. The trade +of a missionary was always flattering to ambition, and formed a +convenient method of living at the expense of the vulgar. These +advantages have often been enough to efface every idea of danger. + + +134. You tell us, theologians! that _what is folly in the eyes of men, +is wisdom before God, who delights to confound the wisdom of the wise_. +But do you not say, that human wisdom is a gift of heaven? In saying +this wisdom displeases God, is but folly in his sight, and that he is +pleased to confound it, you declare that your God is the friend only +of ignorant people, and that he makes sensible people a fatal present +for which this perfidious tyrant promises to punish them cruelly at +some future day. Is it not strange, that one can be the friend of +your God, only by declaring one's self the enemy of reason and good sense? + + +135. According to the divines, _faith is an assent without evidence_. +Whence it follows, that religion requires us firmly to believe +inevident things, and propositions often improbable or contrary +to reason. But when we reject reason as a judge of faith, do +we not confess, that reason is incompatible with faith? As the +ministers of religion have resolved to banish reason, they must +have felt the impossibility of reconciling it with faith, which +is visibly only a blind submission to priests, whose authority +seems to many persons more weighty than evidence itself, and +preferable to the testimony of the senses. + +"Sacrifice your reason; renounce experience; mistrust the testimony +of your senses; submit without enquiry to what we announce to you +in the name of heaven." Such is the uniform language of priests +throughout the world; they agree upon no point, except upon the +necessity of never reasoning upon the principles which they present +to us as most important to our felicity! + +I will _not_ sacrifice my reason; because this reason alone enables +me to distinguish good from evil, truth from falsehood. If, as you +say, my reason comes from God, I shall never believe that a God, +whom you call good, has given me reason, as a snare, to lead me +to perdition. Priests! do you not see, that, by decrying reason, +you calumniate your God, from whom you declare it to be a gift. + +I will _not_ renounce experience; because it is a guide much +more sure than the imagination or authority of spiritual guides. +Experience teaches me, that enthusiasm and interest may blind and +lead them astray themselves; and that the authority of experience +ought to have much more influence upon my mind, than the suspicious +testimony of many men, who I know are either very liable to be +deceived themselves, or otherwise are very much interested in +deceiving others. + +I _will_ mistrust my senses; because I am sensible they sometimes +mislead me. But, on the other hand, I know that they will not always +deceive me. I well know, that the eye shews me the sun much smaller +than it really is; but experience, which is only the repeated +application of the senses, informs me, that objects always appear +to diminish, as their distance increases; thus I attain to a certainty, +that the sun is much larger than the earth; thus my senses suffice +to rectify the hasty judgments, which they themselves had caused. + +In warning us to mistrust the testimony of our senses, the priests +annihilate the proofs of all religion. If men may be dupes of +their imagination; if their senses are deceitful, how shall we +believe the miracles, which struck the treacherous senses of our +ancestors? If my senses are unfaithful guides, I ought not to +credit even the miracles wrought before my eyes. + + +136. You incessantly repeat that _the truths of religion are above +reason_. If so, do you not perceive, that these truths are not +adapted to reasonable beings? To pretend that reason can deceive +us, is to say, that truth can be false; that the useful can be hurtful. +Is reason any thing but a knowledge of the useful and true? Besides, +as our reason and senses are our only guides in this life, to say +they are unfaithful, is to say, that our errors are necessary, our +ignorance invincible, and that, without the extreme of injustice, +God cannot punish us for following the only guides it was his +supreme will to give. + +To say, we are obliged to believe things above our reason, is ridiculous. +To assure us, that upon some objects we are not allowed to consult +reason, is to say, that, in the most interesting matter, we must +consult only imagination, or act only at random. Our divines say, +we must sacrifice our reason to God. But what motives can we have +to sacrifice our reason to a being, who makes us only useless +presents, which he does not intend us to use? What confidence +can we put in a God, who, according to our divines themselves, +is malicious enough to harden the heart, to strike with blindness, +to lay snares for us, to _lead us into temptation?_ In fine, what +confidence can we put in the ministers of this God, who, to guide +us more conveniently, commands us to shut our eyes? + + +137. Men are persuaded, that religion is to them of all things the +most serious, while it is precisely what they least examine for +themselves. In pursuit of an office, a piece of land, a house, +a place of profit; in any transaction or contract whatever, +every one carefully examines all, takes the greatest precaution, +weighs every word of a writing, is guarded against every surprise. +Not so in religion; every one receives it at a venture, and believes +it upon the word of others, without ever taking the trouble to examine. + +Two causes concur to foster the negligence and carelessness of men, +with regard to their religious opinions. The first is the despair +of overcoming the obscurity, in which all religion is necessarily +enveloped. Their first principles are only adapted to disgust +lazy minds, who regard them as a chaos impossible to be understood. +The second cause is, that every one is averse to being too much +bound by severe precepts, which all admire in theory, but very +few care to practice with rigour. The religion of many people +is like old family ties, which they have never taken pains to +examine, but which they deposit in their archives to have recourse +to them occasionally. + + +138. The disciples of Pythagoras paid implicit faith to the doctrine +of their master; _he has said it_, was to them the solution of every +problem. The generality of men are not more rational. In matters +of religion, a curate, a priest, an ignorant monk becomes master +of the thoughts. Faith relieves the weakness of the human mind, +to which application is commonly painful; it is much more convenient +to depend upon others, than to examine for one's self. Inquiry, +being slow and difficult, equally, displeases the stupidity of +the ignorant, and the ardour of the enlightened. Such is undoubtedly +the reason why Faith has so many partisans. + +The more men are deficient in knowledge and reason, the more zealous +they are in religion. In theological quarrels, the populace, like +ferocious beasts, fall upon all those, against whom their priest +is desirous of exciting them. A profound ignorance, boundless +credulity, weak intellect, and warm imagination, are the materials, +of which are made bigots, zealots, fanatics, and saints. How +can the voice of reason be heard by them who make it a principle +never to examine for themselves, but to submit blindly to the +guidance of others? The saints and the populace are, in the +hands of their directors, automatons, moved at pleasure. + + +139. Religion is an affair of custom and fashion. _We must do as +others do._ But, among the numerous religions in the world, which +should men choose? This inquiry would be too painful and long. +They must therefore adhere to the religion of their fathers, to that +of their country, which, having force on its side, must be the best. + +If we judge of the intentions of Providence by the events and +revolutions of this world, we are compelled to believe, that +He is very indifferent about the various religions upon earth. +For thousands of years, paganism, polytheism, idolatry, were +the prevailing religions. We are now assured, that the most +flourishing nations had not the least idea of God; an idea, +regarded as so essential to the happiness of man. Christians +say, all mankind lived in the grossest ignorance of their duties +towards God, and had no notions of him, but what were insulting +to his Divine Majesty. Christianity, growing out of Judaism, +very humble in its obscure origin, became powerful and cruel +under the Christian emperors, who, prompted by holy zeal, +rapidly spread it in their empire by means of fire and sword, +and established it upon the ruins of paganism. Mahomet and his +successors, seconded by Providence or their victorious arms, +in a short time banished the Christian religion from a part of +Asia, Africa, and even Europe; and the _gospel_ was then forced +to yield to the _Koran_. + +In all the factions or sects, which, for many ages have distracted +Christianity, _the best argument has been always that of the +strongest party_; arms have decided which doctrine is most +conducive to the happiness of nations. May we not hence infer, +either that the Deity feels little interested in the religion +of men, or that he always declares in favour of the opinions, +which best suit the interest of earthly powers; in fine, that +he changes his plan to accommodate their fancy? + +Rulers infallibly decide the religion of the people. The true +religion is always the religion of the prince; the true God is +the God, whom the prince desires his people to adore; the will +of the priests, who govern the prince, always becomes the will +of God. A wit justly observed, that _the true religion is always +that, on whose side are the prince and the hangman._ Emperors +and hangmen long supported the gods of Rome against the God of +Christians; the latter, having gained to his interest the emperors, +their soldiers, and their hangmen, succeeded in destroying the +worship of the Roman gods. The God of Mahomet has dispossessed +the God of Christians of a great part of the dominions, which +he formerly occupied. + +In the eastern part of Asia, is a vast, flourishing, fertile, +populous country, governed by such wise laws, that the fiercest +conquerors have adopted them with respect. I mean China. +Excepting Christianity, which was banished as dangerous, the +people there follow such superstitions as they please, while +the _mandarins_, or magistrates, having long known the errors +of the popular religion, are vigilant to prevent the _bonzes_ +or priests from using it as an instrument of discord. Yet we +see not, that Providence refuses his blessing to a nation, +whose chiefs are so indifferent about the worship that is +rendered to him. On the contrary, the Chinese enjoy a happiness +and repose worthy to be envied, by the many nations whom religion +divides, and often devastates. + +We cannot reasonably propose to divest the people of their follies; +but we may perhaps cure the follies of those who govern the people, +and who will then prevent the follies of the people from becoming +dangerous. Superstition is to be feared only when princes and +soldiers rally round her standard; then she becomes cruel and +sanguinary. Every sovereign, who is the protector of one sect +or religious faction, is commonly the tyrant of others, and +becomes himself the most cruel disturber of the peace of his +dominions. + + +140. It is incessantly repeated, and many sensible persons are +induced to believe, that religion is a restraint necessary to men; +that without it, there would no longer exist the least check for +the vulgar; and that morality and religion are intimately connected +with it. "The fear of the Lord," cries the priest, "is the +beginning of wisdom. The terrors of another life are _salutary_, +and are proper to curb the passions of men." + +To perceive the inutility of religious notions, we have only to +open our eyes and contemplate the morals of those nations, who +are the most under the dominion of religion. We there find proud +tyrants, oppressive ministers, perfidious courtiers, shameless +extortioners, corrupt magistrates, knaves, adulterers, debauchees, +prostitutes, thieves, and rogues of every kind, who have never +doubted either the existence of an avenging and rewarding God, +the torments of hell, or the joys of paradise. Without the least +utility to the greater part of mankind, the ministers of religion +have studied to render death terrible to the eyes of their followers. +If devout Christians could but be consistent, they would pass their +whole life in tears, and die under the most dreadful apprehensions. +What can be more terrible than death, to the unfortunate who are told, +_that it is horrible to fall into the hands of the living God; that +we must work out our salvation with fear and trembling!_ Yet we are +assured, that the death of the Christian is attended with infinite +consolations, of which the unbeliever is deprived. The good Christian, +it is said, dies in the firm hope of an eternal happiness which +he has strived to merit. But is not this firm assurance itself +a presumption punishable in the eyes of a severe God? Ought not +the greatest saints to be ignorant whether they are _worthy of love +or hatred?_ Ye Priests! while consoling us with the hope of the +joys of paradise; have you then had the advantage to see your names +and ours inscribed _in the book of life?_ + + +141. To oppose the passions and present interests of men the +obscure notions of a metaphysical, inconceivable God,--the incredible +punishments of another life,--or the pleasures of the heaven, of +which nobody has the least idea,--is not this combating realities +with fictions? Men have never any but confused ideas of their God: +they see him only in clouds. They never think of him when they are +desirous to do evil: whenever ambition, fortune, or pleasure allures +them, God's threatenings and promises are forgotten. In the things +of this life, there is a degree of certainty, which the most lively +faith cannot give to the things of another life. + +Every religion was originally a curb invented by legislators, who +wished to establish their authority over the minds of rude nations. +Like nurses who frighten children to oblige them to be quiet, the +ambitious used the name of the gods to frighten savages; and had +recourse to terror in order to make them support quietly the yoke +they wished to impose. Are then the bugbears of infancy made for +riper age? At the age of maturity, no man longer believes them, +or if he does, they excite little emotion in him, and never alter +his conduct. + + +142. Almost every man fears what he sees much more than what he +does not see; he fears the judgments of men of which he feels the +effects, more than the judgments of God of whom he has only fluctuating +ideas. The desire of pleasing the world, the force of custom, the +fear of ridicule, and of censure, have more force than all religious +opinions. Does not the soldier, through fear of disgrace, daily +expose his life in battle, even at the risk of incurring eternal +damnation? + +The most religious persons have often more respect for a varlet, +than for God. A man who firmly believes, that God sees every thing, +and that he is omniscient and omnipresent, will be guilty, when alone, +of actions, which he would never do in presence of the meanest of +mortals. Those, who pretend to be the most fully convinced of the +existence of God, every moment act as if they believed the contrary. + + +143. "Let us, at least," it will be said, "cherish the idea of a God, +which alone may serve as a barrier to the passions of kings." But, +can we sincerely admire the wonderful effects, which the fear of this +God generally produces upon the minds of princes, who are called his +images? What idea shall we form of the original, if we judge of it +by the copies! + +Sovereigns, it is true, call themselves the representatives of God, +his vicegerents upon earth. But does the fear of a master, more +powerful than they are, incline them seriously to study the welfare +of the nations, whom Providence has intrusted to their care? Does +the pretended terror, which ought to be inspired into them by the +idea of an invisible judge, to whom alone they acknowledge themselves +accountable for their actions, render them more equitable, more +compassionate, more sparing of blood and treasure of their subjects, +more temperate in their pleasures, more attentive to their duties? +In fine, does this God, by whose authority kings reign, deter them +from inflicting a thousand evils upon the people to whom they ought +to act as guides, protectors, and fathers? Alas! If we survey the +whole earth, we shall see men almost every where governed by tyrants, +who use religion merely as an instrument to render more stupid the +slaves, whom they overwhelm under the weight of their vices, or whom +they sacrifice without mercy to their extravagancies. + +Far from being a check upon the passions of kings, Religion, by its +very principles, frees them from all restraint. It transforms them +into divinities, whose caprice the people are never permitted to +resist. While it gives up the reins to princes, and on their part +breaks the bonds of the social compact, it endeavours to chain the +minds and hands of their oppressed subjects. Is it then surprising, +that the gods of the earth imagine every thing lawful for them, and +regard their subjects only as instruments of their caprice or ambition? + +In every country, Religion has represented the Monarch of nature +as a cruel, fantastical, partial tyrant, whose caprice is law; the +Monarch God, is but too faithfully imitated by his representatives +upon earth. Religion seems every where invented solely to lull the +people in the lap of slavery, in order that their masters may easily +oppress them, or render them wretched with impunity. + + +144. To guard against the enterprises of a haughty pontiff who wished +to reign over kings, to shelter their persons from the attempts of +credulous nations excited by the priests, several European princes +have pretended to hold their crowns and rights from God alone, and +to be accountable only to him for their actions. After a long contest +between the civil and spiritual power, the former at length triumphed; +and the priests, forced to yield, acknowledged the divine right of +kings and preached them to the people, reserving the liberty of +changing their minds and of preaching revolt, whenever the divine +rights of kings clashed with the divine rights of the clergy. It +was always at the expense of nations, that peace was concluded +between kings and priests; but the latter, in spite of treaties, +always preserved their pretensions. + +Tyrants and wicked princes, whose consciences continually reproach +them with negligence or perversity, far from fearing their God, +had rather deal with this invisible judge who never opposes any +thing, or with his priests who are always condescending to the +rulers of the earth, than with their own subjects. The people, +reduced to despair, might probably _appeal_ from the divine right +of their chiefs. Men when oppressed to the last degree, sometimes +become turbulent; and the divine rights of the tyrant are then +forced to yield to the natural rights of the subjects. + +It is cheaper dealing with gods than men. Kings are accountable for +their actions to God alone; priests are accountable only to themselves. +There is much reason to believe, that both are more confident of the +indulgence of heaven, than of that of earth. It is much easier to +escape the vengeance of gods who may be cheaply appeased, than the +vengeance of men whose patience is exhausted. + +"If you remove the fear of an invisible power, what restraint will +you impose upon the passions of sovereigns?" Let them learn to reign; +let them learn to be just; to respect the rights if the people; +and to acknowledge the kindness of the nations, from whom they +hold their greatness and power. Let them learn to fear men, and +to submit to the laws of equity. Let nobody transgress these laws +with impunity; and let them be equally binding upon the powerful and +the weak, the great and the small, the sovereign and the subjects. + +The fear of gods, Religion, and the terrors of another life, are the +metaphysical and supernatural bulwarks, opposed to the impetuous +passions of princes! Are these bulwarks effectual? Let experience +resolve the question. To oppose Religion to the wickedness of tyrants, +is to wish, that vague, uncertain, unintelligible speculations may +be stronger than propensities which every thing conspires daily to +strengthen. + + +145. The immense service of religion to politics is incessantly +boasted; but, a little reflection will convince us, that religious +opinions equally blind both sovereigns and people, and never enlighten +them upon their true duties or interests. Religion but too often +forms licentious, immoral despots, obeyed by slaves, whom every +thing obliges to conform to their views. + +For want of having studied or known the true principles of administration, +the objects and rights of social life, the real interests of men and +their reciprocal duties, princes, in almost every country, have +become licentious, absolute, and perverse; and their subjects abject, +wicked, and unhappy. It was to avoid the trouble of studying these +important objects, that recourse was had to chimeras, which, far from +remedying any thing, have hitherto only multiplied the evils of mankind, +and diverted them from whatever is most essential to their happiness. + +Does not the unjust and cruel manner in which so many nations are +governed, manifestly furnish one of the strongest proofs, not only +of the small effect produced by the fear of another life, but also +of the non-existence of a Providence, busied with the fate of the +human race? If there existed a good God, should we not be forced +to admit, that in this life he strangely neglects the greater part +of mankind? It would seem, that this God has created nations only +to be the sport of the passions and follies of his representatives +upon earth. + + +146. By reading history with attention, we shall perceive that +Christianity, at first weak and servile, established itself among +the savage and free nations of Europe only intimating to their chiefs, +that its religious principles favoured despotism and rendered them +absolute. Consequently, we see barbarous princes suddenly converted; +that is, we see them adopt, without examination, a system so favourable +to their ambition, and use every art to induce their subjects to +embrace it. If the ministers of this religion have since often +derogated from their favourite principles, it is because the theory +influences the conduct of the ministers of the Lord, only when it +suits their temporal interests. + +Christianity boasts of procuring men a happiness unknown to preceding +ages. It is true, the Greeks knew not the _divine rights_ of tyrants +or of the usurpers of the rights of their country. Under paganism, +it never entered the head of any man to suppose, that it was against +the will of heaven for a nation to defend themselves against a ferocious +beast, who had the audacity to lay waste their possessions. The religion +of the Christians was the first that screened tyrants from danger, by +laying down as a principle that the people must renounce the legitimate +defence of themselves. Thus Christian nations are deprived of the +first law of nature, which orders man to resist evil, and to disarm +whoever is preparing to destroy him! If the ministers of the church +have often permitted the people to revolt for the interest of heaven, +they have never permitted them to revolt for their own deliverance +from real evils or known violences. + +From heaven came the chains, that were used for fettering the minds +of mortals. Why is the Mahometan every where a slave? Because his +prophet enslaved him in the name of the Deity, as Moses had before +subdued the Jews. In all parts of the earth, we see, that the first +legislators were the first sovereigns and the first priests of the +savages, to whom they gave laws. + +Religion seems invented solely to exalt princes above their nations, +and rivet the fetters of slavery. As soon as the people are too +unhappy here below, priests are ready to silence them by threatening +them with the anger of God. They are made to fix their eyes upon heaven, +lest they should perceive the true causes of their misfortunes, and +apply the remedies which nature presents. + + +147. By dint of repeating to men, that the earth is not their true +country; that the present life is only a passage; that they are not +made to be happy in this world; that their sovereigns hold their +authority from God alone, and are accountable only to him for the +abuse of it; that it is not lawful to resist them, etc., priests +have eternized the misgovernment of kings and the misery of the people; +the interests of nations have been basely sacrificed to their chiefs. +The more we consider the dogmas and principles of religion, the more +we shall be convinced, that their sole object is the advantage of +tyrants and priests, without regard to that of societies. + +To mask the impotence of its deaf gods, religion has persuaded mortals, +that iniquities always kindle the wrath of heaven. People impute +to themselves alone the disasters that daily befal them. If nations +sometimes feel the strokes of convulsed nature, their bad governments +are but too often the immediate and permanent causes, from whence +proceed the continual calamities which they are forced to endure. +Are not the ambition, negligence, vices, and oppressions of kings +and nobles, generally the causes of scarcity, beggary, wars, pestilences, +corrupt morals, and all the multiplied scourges which desolate the earth? + +In fixing men's eyes continually upon heaven; in persuading them, +that all their misfortunes are effects of divine anger; in providing +none but ineffectual and futile means to put an end to their sufferings, +we might justly conclude, that the only object of priests was to divert +nations from thinking about the true sources of their misery, and thus +to render it eternal. The ministers of religion conduct themselves +almost like those indigent mothers, who, for want of bread, sing their +starved children to sleep, or give them playthings to divert their +thoughts from afflicting hunger. + +Blinded by error from their very infancy, restrained by the invisible +bonds of opinion, overcome by panic terrors, their faculties blunted +by ignorance, how should the people know the true causes of their +wretchedness? They imagine that they can avert it by invoking the gods. +Alas! do they not see, that it is, in the name of these gods, that they +are ordered to present their throats to the sword of their merciless +tyrants, in whom they might find the obvious cause of the evils under +which they groan, and for whom they cease not to implore, in vain, +the assistance of heaven? + +Ye credulous people! In your misfortunes, redouble your prayers, +offerings, and sacrifices; throng to your temples; fast in sack-cloth +and ashes; bathe yourselves in your own tears; and above all, +completely ruin yourselves to enrich your gods! You will only +enrich their priests. The gods of heaven will be propitious, +only when the gods of the earth shall acknowledge themselves, +men, like you, and shall devote to your welfare the attention +you deserve. + + +148. Negligent, ambitious, and perverse Princes are the real causes +of public misfortunes. Useless, unjust Wars depopulate the earth. +Encroaching and despotic Governments absorb the benefits of nature. +The rapacity of Courts discourages agriculture, extinguishes industry, +produces want, pestilence and misery. Heaven is neither cruel nor +propitious to the prayers of the people; it is their proud chiefs, +who have almost always hearts of stone. + +It is destructive to the morals of princes, to persuade them that +they have God alone to fear, when they injure their subjects, or +neglect their happiness. Sovereigns! It is not the gods, but +your people, that you offend, when you do evil. It is your people +and yourselves that you injure, when you govern unjustly. + +In history, nothing is more common than to see Religious Tyrants; +nothing more rare than to find equitable, vigilant, enlightened princes. +A monarch may be pious, punctual in a servile discharge of the +duties of his religion, very submissive and liberal to his priests, +and yet at the same time be destitute of every virtue and talent +necessary for governing. To princes, Religion is only an instrument +destined to keep the people more completely under the yoke. By the +excellent principles of religious morality, a tyrant who, during +a long reign, has done nothing but oppress his subjects, wresting, +from them the fruits of their labour, sacrificing them without mercy +to his insatiable ambition,--a conqueror, who has usurped the provinces +of others, slaughtered whole nations, and who, during his whole life, +has been a scourge to mankind,--imagines his conscience may rest, +when, to expiate so many crimes, he has wept at the feet of a priest, +who generally has the base complaisance to console and encourage +a robber, whom the most hideous despair would too lightly punish +for the misery he has caused upon earth. + + +149. A sovereign, sincerely devout, is commonly dangerous to the state. +Credulity always supposes a contracted mind; devotion generally absorbs +the attention, which a prince should pay to the government of his people. +Obsequious to the suggestions of his priests, he becomes the sport of +their caprices, the favourer of their quarrels, and the instrument and +accomplice of their follies, which he imagines to be of the greatest +importance. Among the most fatal presents, which religion has made +the world, ought to be reckoned those devout and zealous monarchs, +who, under an idea of working for the welfare of their subjects, have +made it a sacred duty to torment, persecute, and destroy those, who +thought differently from themselves. A bigot, at the head of an empire, +is one of the greatest scourges. A single fanatical or knavish priest, +listened to by a credulous and powerful prince, suffices to put a state +in disorder. + +In almost all countries, priests and pious persons are intrusted with +forming the minds and hearts of young princes, destined to govern nations. +What qualifications have instructors of this stamp! By what interests +can they be animated? Full of prejudices themselves, they will teach +their pupil to regard superstition, as most important and sacred; its +chimerical duties, as most indispensable, intolerance and persecution, +as the true foundation of his future authority. They will endeavour +to make him a party leader, a turbulent fanatic, a tyrant; they will +early stifle his reason, and forewarn him against the use of it; they +will prevent truth from reaching his ears; they will exasperate him +against true talents, and prejudice him in favour of contemptible ones; +in short, they will make him a weak devotee, who will have no idea +either of justice or injustice, nor of true glory, nor of true greatness, +and who will be destitute of the knowledge and virtues necessary to the +government of a great nation. Such is the plan of the education of +a child, destined one day to create the happiness or misery of millions +of men! + + +150. Priests have ever shewn themselves the friends of despotism, and +the enemies of public liberty: their trade requires abject and submissive +slaves, who have never the audacity to reason. In an absolute government, +who ever gains an ascendancy over the mind of a weak and stupid prince, +becomes master of the state. Instead of conducting the people to +salvation, priests have always conducted them to servitude. + +In consideration of the supernatural titles, which religion has forged +for the worst of princes, the latter have commonly united with priests, +who, sure of governing by opinion the sovereign himself, have undertaken +to bind the hands of the people and to hold them under the yoke. But the +tyrant, covered with the shield of religion, in vain flatters himself +that he is secure from every stroke of fate; opinion is a weak rampart +against the despair of the people. Besides, the priest is a friend +of the tyrant only while he finds his account in tyranny; he preaches +sedition, and demolishes the idol he has made, when he finds it no +longer sufficiently conformable to the interest of God, whom he makes +to speak at his will, and who never speaks except according to his +interests. + +It will no doubt be said, that sovereigns, knowing all the advantages +which religion procures them, are truly interested in supporting it +with all their strength. If religious opinions are useful to tyrants, +it is very evident, that they are useful to those, who govern by the +laws of reason and equity. Is there then any advantage in exercising +tyranny? Are princes truly interested in being tyrants? Does not +tyranny deprive them of true power, of the love of the people, and +of all safety? Ought not every reasonable prince to perceive, that +the despot is a madman, and an enemy to himself? Should not every +enlightened prince beware of flatterers, whose object is to lull him +to sleep upon the brink of the precipice which they form beneath him? + + +151. If sacerdotal flatteries succeed in perverting princes and making +them tyrants; tyrants, on their part, necessarily corrupt both the great +and the humble. Under an unjust ruler, void of goodness and virtue, +who knows no law but his caprice, a nation must necessarily be depraved. +Will this ruler wish to have, about his person, honest, enlightened, +and virtuous men? No. He wants none but flatterers, approvers, +imitators, slaves, base and servile souls, who conform themselves +to his inclinations. His court will propagate the contagion of vice +among the lower ranks. All will gradually become corrupted in a state, +whose chief is corrupt. It was long since said, that "Princes seem +to command others to do whatever they do themselves." + +Religion, far from being a restraint upon sovereigns, enables them +to indulge without fear or remorse, in acts of licentiousness as +injurious to themselves, as to the nations whom they govern. It is +never with impunity, that men are deceived. Tell a sovereign, that +he is a god; he will very soon believe that he owes nothing to any one. +Provided he is feared, he will care very little about being loved: +he will observe neither rules, nor relations with his subjects, nor +duties towards them. Tell this prince, that he is _accountable for +his actions to God alone_, and he will soon act as if he were accountable +to no one. + + +152. An enlightened sovereign is he, who knows his true interests; +who knows, that they are connected with the interests of his nation; +that a prince cannot be great, powerful, beloved, or respected, while +he commands only unhappy slaves; that equity, beneficence, and vigilance +will give him more real authority over his people, than the fabulous +titles, said to be derived from heaven. He will see, that Religion +is useful only to priests, that it is useless to society and often +troubles it, and that it ought to be restrained in order to be prevented +from doing injury. Finally, he will perceive, that, to reign with glory, +he must have good laws and inculcate virtue, and not found his power +upon impostures and fallacies. + + +153. The ministers of religion have taken great care to make of their +God, a formidable, capricious, and fickle tyrant. Such a God was +necessary to their variable interests. A God, who should be just +and good, without mixture of caprice or perversity; a God, who had +constantly the qualities of an honest man, or of a kind sovereign, +would by no means suit his ministers. It is useful to priests, that +men should tremble before their God, in order that they may apply +to them to obtain relief from their fears. "No man is a hero before +his valet de chambre." It is not surprising, that a God, dressed up +by his priests so as to be terrible to others, should rarely impose +upon them, or should have but very little influence upon their conduct. +Hence, in every country, their conduct is very much the same. Under +pretext of the glory of their God, they every where prey upon ignorance, +degrade the mind, discourage industry, and sow discord. Ambition and +avarice have at all times been the ruling passions of the priesthood. +The priest every where rises superior to sovereigns and laws; we see +him every where occupied with the interests of his pride, of his cupidity, +and of his despotic, revengeful humour. In the room of useful and social +virtues, he everywhere substitutes expiations, sacrifices, ceremonies, +mysterious practices, in a word, inventions lucrative to himself and +ruinous to others. + +The mind is confounded and the reason is amazed upon viewing the +ridiculous customs and pitiful means, which the ministers of the +gods have invented in every country to purify souls, and render +heaven favourable. Here they cut off part of a child's prepuce, +to secure for him divine benevolence; there, they pour water upon +his head, to cleanse him of crimes, which he could not as yet have +committed. In one place, they command him to plunge into a river, +whose waters have the power of washing away all stains; in another, +he is forbidden to eat certain food, the use of which will not fail +to excite the celestial wrath; in other countries, they enjoin upon +sinful man to come periodically and confess his faults to a priest, +who is often a greater sinner than himself, etc., etc., etc. + + +154. What should we say of a set of empirics, who, resorting every +day to a public place, should extol the goodness of their remedies, +and vend them as infallible, while they themselves were full of the +infirmities, which they pretend to cure? Should we have much confidence +in the recipes of these quacks, though they stun us with crying, +"take our remedies, their effects are infallible; they cure every body; +except us." What should we afterwards think, should those quacks spend +their lives in complaining, that their remedies never produced the +desired effect upon the sick, who take them? In fine, what idea should +we form of the stupidity of the vulgar, who, notwithstanding these +confessions, should not cease to pay dearly for remedies, the inefficacy +of which every thing tends to prove? Priests resemble these alchymists, +who boldly tell us, they have the secret of making gold, while they +have scarcely clothes to cover their nakedness. + +The ministers of religion incessantly declaim against the corruption +of the age, and loudly complain of the little effect of their lessons, +while at the same time they assure us, that religion is the _universal +remedy_, the true _panacea_ against the wickedness of mankind. These +priests are very sick themselves, yet men continue to frequent their +shops, and to have faith in their divine antidotes, which, by their +own confession, never effect a cure! + + +155. Religion, especially with the moderns, has tried to identify +itself with Morality, the principles of which it has thereby totally +obscured. It has rendered men unsociable by duty, and forced them +to be inhuman to everyone who thought differently from themselves. +Theological disputes, equally unintelligible to each of the enraged +parties, have shaken empires, caused revolutions, been fatal to +sovereigns, and desolated all Europe. These contemptible quarrels +have not been extinguished even in rivers of blood. Since the extinction +of paganism, the people have made it a religious principle to become +outrageous, whenever any opinion is advanced which their priests +think contrary to _sound doctrine_. The sectaries of a religion, +which preaches, in appearance, nothing but charity, concord, +and peace, have proved themselves more ferocious than cannibals or +savages, whenever their divines excited them to destroy their brethren. +There is no crime, which men have not committed under the idea of +pleasing the Divinity, or appeasing his wrath. + +The idea of a terrible God, whom we paint to ourselves as a despot, +must necessarily render his subjects wicked. Fear makes only slaves, +and slaves are cowardly, base, cruel, and think every thing lawful, +in order to gain the favour or escape the chastisements of the master +whom they fear. Liberty of thinking alone can give men humanity +and greatness of soul. The notion of a tyrant-god tends only to +make them abject, morose, quarrelsome, intolerant slaves. + +Every religion, which supposes a God easily provoked, jealous, +revengeful, punctilious about his rights or the etiquette with +which he is treated;--a God little enough to be hurt by the opinions +which men can form of him;--a God unjust enough to require that we +have uniform notions of his conduct; a religion which supposes such +a God necessarily becomes restless, unsociable, and sanguinary; the +worshippers of such a God would never think, that they could, without +offence, forbear hating and even destroying every one, who is pointed +out to them, as an adversary of this God; they would think, that it +would be to betray the cause of their celestial Monarch, to live in +friendly intercourse with rebellious fellow-citizens. If we love +what God hates, do we not expose ourselves to his implacable hatred? + +Infamous persecutors, and devout men-haters! Will you never discern +the folly and injustice of your intolerant disposition? Do you not +see, that man is no more master of his religious opinions, his belief +or unbelief, than of the language, which he learns from infancy? +To punish a man for his errors, is it not to punish him for having +been educated differently from you? If I am an unbeliever, is it +possible for me to banish from my mind the reasons that have shaken +my faith? If your God gives men leave to be damned, what have you +to meddle with? Are you more prudent and wise, than this God, whose +rights you would avenge? + + +156. There is no devotee, who does not, according to his temperament, +hate, despise, or pity the adherents of a sect, different from his own. +The _established_ religion, which is never any other than that of the +sovereign and the armies, always makes its superiority felt in a very +cruel and injurious manner by the weaker sects. As yet there is no +true toleration upon earth; men every where adore a jealous God, of +whom each nation believes itself the friend, to the exclusion of all +others. + +Every sect boasts of adoring alone the true God, the universal God, +the Sovereign of all nature. But when we come to examine this Monarch +of the world, we find that every society, sect, party, or religious +cabal, makes of this powerful God only a pitiful sovereign, whose +care and goodness extend only to a small number of his subjects, +who pretend that they alone have the happiness to enjoy his favours, +and that he is not at all concerned about the others. + +The founders of religions, and the priests who support them, evidently +proposed to separate the nations, whom they taught, from the other +nations; they wished to separate their own flock by distinguishing +marks; they gave their followers gods, who were hostile to the other +gods; they taught them modes of worship, dogmas and ceremonies apart; +and above all, they persuaded them, that the religion of others was +impious and abominable. By this unworthy artifice, the ambitious +knaves established, their usurpation over the minds of their followers, +rendered them unsociable, and made them regard with an evil eye all +persons who had not the same mode of worship and the same ideas as +they had. Thus it is, that Religion has shut up the heart and for +ever banished from it the affection that man ought to have for his +fellow-creature. Sociability, indulgence, humanity, those first +virtues of all morality, are totally incompatible with religious +prejudices. + + +157. Every national religion is calculated to make man vain, unsociable, +and wicked; the first step towards humanity is to permit every one +peaceably to embrace the mode of worship and opinions, which he judges +to be right. But this conduct cannot be pleasing to the ministers +of religion, who wish to have the right of tyrannizing over men even +in their thoughts. + +Blind and bigoted princes! You hate and persecute heretics, and order +them to execution, because you are told, that these wretches displease God. +But do you not say, that your God is full of goodness? How then can you +expect to please him by acts of barbarity, which he must necessarily +disapprove? Besides, who has informed you, that their opinions +displease your God? Your priests? But, who assures you, that your +priests are not themselves deceived or wish to deceive you? The same +priests? Princes! It is then upon the hazardous word of your priests, +that you commit the most atrocious crimes, under the idea of pleasing +the Divinity! + + +158. Pascal says, "that man never does evil so fully and cheerfully, +as when he acts from a false principle of conscience." Nothing is +more dangerous than a religion, which lets loose the ferocity of the +multitude, and justifies their blackest crimes. They will set no +bounds to their wickedness, when they think it authorized by their God, +whose interests, they are told, can make every action legitimate. +Is religion in danger?--the most civilized people immediately becomes +true savages, and think nothing forbidden. The more cruel they are, +the more agreeable they suppose they are to their God, whose cause +they imagine cannot be supported with too much warmth. + +All religions have authorized innumerable crimes. The Jews, intoxicated +with the promises of their God, arrogated the rights of exterminating +whole nations. Relying on the oracles of their God, the Romans +conquered and ravaged the world. The Arabians, encouraged by their +divine prophet, carried fire and sword among the Christians and +the idolaters. The CHRISTIANS, under pretext of extending their +holy religion, have often deluged both hemispheres in blood. + +In all events favourable to their own interest, which they always +call _the cause of God_, priests show us the _finger of God_. +According to these principles, the devout have the happiness to +see the _finger of God_ in revolts, revolutions, massacres, regicides, +crimes, prostitutions, horrors; and, if these things contribute ever +so little to the triumph of religion, we are told, that "God uses +all sorts of means to attain his ends." Is any thing more capable +of effacing every idea of morality from the minds of men, than to +inform them, that their God, so powerful and perfect, is often forced +to make use of criminal actions in order to accomplish his designs? + + +159. No sooner do we complain of the extravagancies and evils, which +Religion has so often caused upon the earth, than we are reminded, +that these excesses are not owing to Religion; but "that they are +the sad effects of the passions of men." But I would ask, what has +let loose these passions? It is evidently Religion; it is zeal, +that renders men inhuman, and serves to conceal the greatest atrocities. +Do not these disorders then prove, that religion, far from restraining +the passions of men, only covers them with a veil, which sanctifies them, +and that nothing would be more useful, than to tear away this sacred +veil of which men often make such a terrible use? What horrors would +be banished from society, if the wicked were deprived of so plausible +a pretext for disturbing it! + +Instead of being angels of peace among men, priests have been demons +of discord. They have pretended to receive from heaven the right of +being quarrelsome, turbulent, and rebellious. Do not the ministers +of the Lord think themselves aggrieved, and pretend that the divine +Majesty is offended, whenever sovereigns have the temerity to prevent +them from doing evil? Priests are like the spiteful woman who cried +_fire! murder! assassination!_ while her husband held her hands to +prevent her from striking him. + + +160. Notwithstanding the bloody tragedies, which Religion often acts, +it is insisted, that, without Religion, there can be no Morality. +If we judge theological opinions by their effects, we may confidently +assert, that all Morality is perfectly incompatible with men's religious +opinions. + +"Imitate God," exclaim the pious. But, what would be our Morality, +should we imitate this God! and what God ought we to imitate? +The God of the Deist? But even this God cannot serve us as a very +constant model of goodness. If he is the author of all things, he is +the author both of good and evil. If he is the author of order, he +is also the author of disorder, which could not take place without his +permission. If he produces, he destroys; if he gives life, he takes +it away; if he grants abundance, riches, prosperity, and peace, he +permits or sends scarcity, poverty, calamities, and wars. How then +can we receive as a model of permanent beneficence, the God of Deism +or natural religion, whose favourable dispositions are every instant +contradicted by all the effects we behold? Morality must have a basis +less tottering than the example of a God, whose conduct varies, +and who cannot be called good, unless we obstinately shut our eyes +against the evil which he causes or permits in this world. + +Shall we imitate the _beneficent, mighty Jupiter_ of heathen antiquity? +To imitate such a god, is to admit as a model, a rebellious son, who +ravishes the throne from his father. It is to imitate a debauchee, +an adulterer, one guilty of incest and of base passions, at whose +conduct every reasonable mortal would blush. What would have been +the condition of men under paganism, had they imagined, like Plato, +that virtue consisted in imitating the gods! + +Must we imitate the God of the Jews! Shall we find in _Jehovah_ +a model for our conduct? This is a truly savage god, made for +a stupid, cruel, and immoral people; he is always furious, breathes +nothing but vengeance, commands carnage, theft, and unsociability. +The conduct of this god cannot serve as a model to that of an honest +man, and can be imitated only by a chief of robbers. + +Shall we then imitate the _Jesus_ of the Christians? Does this God, +who died to appease the implacable fury of his father, furnish us +an example which men ought to follow? Alas! we shall see in him only +a God, or rather a fanatic, a misanthrope, who, himself plunged in +wretchedness and preaching to wretches, will advise them to be poor, +to combat with and stifle nature, to hate pleasure, seek grief, +and detest themselves. He will tell them to leave father, mother, +relations, friends, etc., to follow him. "Fine morality!" you say. +It is, undoubtedly, admirable: it must be divine, for it is impracticable +to men. But is not such sublime morality calculated to render virtue +odious? According to the so much boasted morality of the _man_-God +of the Christians, a disciple of his in this world must be like +_Tantalus_, tormented with a burning thirst, which he is not allowed +to quench. Does not such morality give us a wonderful idea of the +author of nature? If, as we are assured, he has created all things +for his creatures, by what strange whim does he forbid them the use +of the goods he has created for them? Is pleasure then, which man +continually desires, only a snare, which God has maliciously laid +to surprise his weakness? + + +161. The followers of Christ would have us regard, as a miracle, +the establishment of their Religion, which is totally repugnant to +nature, opposite to all the propensities of the heart, and inimical +to sensual pleasures. But the austerity of a doctrine renders it +the more marvellous in the eyes of the vulgar. The same disposition, +which respects inconceivable mysteries as divine and supernatural, +admires, as divine and supernatural, a Morality, that is impracticable, +and beyond the powers of man. + +To admire a system of Morality, and to put it in practice, are two +very different things. All Christians admire and extol the Morality +of the gospel; which they do not practise. + +The whole world is more or less infected with a Religious morality, +founded upon the opinion, that to please the Divinity, it is absolutely +necessary to render ourselves unhappy upon earth. In all parts of +our globe, we see penitents, fakirs, and fanatics, who seem to have +profoundly studied the means of tormenting themselves, in honour of +a being whose goodness all agree in celebrating. Religion, by its +essence, is an enemy to the joy and happiness of men. "Blessed are +the poor, blessed are they, who weep; blessed are they, who suffer; +misery to those, who are in abundance and joy." Such are the rare +discoveries, announced by Christianity! + + +162. What is a Saint in every religion? A man, who prays, and fasts, +who torments himself, and shuns the world; who like an owl, delights +only in solitude, abstains from all pleasure, and seems frightened +of every object, which may divert him from his fanatical meditations. +Is this virtue? Is a being of this type, kind to himself, or useful +to others? Would not society be dissolved, and man return to a +savage state, if every one were fool enough to be a Saint? + +It is evident, that the literal and rigorous practice of the divine +Morality of the Christians would prove the infallible ruin of nations. +A Christian, aiming at perfection, ought to free his mind from whatever +can divert it from heaven, his true country. Upon earth, he sees +nothing but temptations, snares, and rocks of perdition. He must +fear science, as hurtful to faith; he must avoid industry, as a means +of obtaining riches, too fatal to salvation; he must renounce offices +and honours, as capable of exciting his pride, and calling off his +attention from the care of his soul. In a word, the sublime Morality +of Christ, were it practicable, would break all the bonds of society. + +A Saint in society is as useless, as a Saint in the desert; his +humour is morose, discontented, and often turbulent; his zeal +sometimes obliges him in conscience to trouble society by opinions +or dreams, which his vanity makes him consider as inspirations +from on high. The annals of every religion are full of restless +Saints, intractable Saints, and seditious Saints, who have become +famous by the ravages, with which, _for the greater glory of God_, +they have desolated the universe. If Saints, who live in retirement, +are useless, those who live in the world, are often very dangerous. + +The vanity of acting, the desire of appearing illustrious and peculiar +in conduct, commonly constitute the distinguishing character of Saints. +Pride persuades them, that they are extraordinary men far above human +nature, beings much more perfect than others, favourites whom God +regards with much more complaisance than the rest of mortals. +Humility, in a Saint, is commonly only a more refined pride than +that of the generality of men. Nothing but the most ridiculous +vanity can induce man to wage continual war against his own nature. + + +163. A morality, which contradicts the nature of man, is not made +for man. "But," say you, "the nature of man is depraved." In what +consists this pretended depravity? In having passions? But, are +not passions essential to man? Is he not obliged to seek, desire, +and love what is, or what he thinks is, conducive to his happiness? +Is he not forced to fear and avoid what he judges disagreeable or +fatal? Kindle his passions for useful objects; connect his welfare +with those objects; divert him, by sensible and known motives, from +what may injure either him or others, and you will make him a reasonable +and virtuous being. A man without passions would be equally indifferent +to vice and to virtue. + +Holy Doctors! you are always repeating to us that the nature of man +is perverted; you exclaim, "that _all flesh has corrupted its way_, +that all the propensities of nature have become inordinate." In +this case, you accuse your God; who was either unable, or unwilling, +that this nature should preserve its primitive perfection. If this +nature is corrupted, why has not God repaired it? The Christian +immediately assures me, "that human nature is repaired; that the +death of his God has restored its integrity." How then, I would ask, +do you pretend that human nature, notwithstanding the death of a God, +is still depraved? Is then the death of your God wholly fruitless? +What becomes of his omnipotence and of his victory over the Devil, +if it is true that the Devil still preserves the empire, which, +according to you, he has always exercised in the world? + +According to Christian theology, Death is the _wages of sin_. This +opinion is conformable to that of some negro and savage nations, who +imagine that the Death of a man is always the supernatural effect +of the anger of the Gods. Christians firmly believe, that Christ +has delivered them from sin; though they see, that, in their Religion, +as in others, man is subject to Death. To say that Jesus Christ has +delivered us from sin, is it not to say, that a judge has pardoned +a criminal, while we see that he leaves him for execution? + + +164. If shutting our eyes upon whatever passes in the world, we +would credit the partisans of the Christian Religion, we should believe, +that the coming of their divine Saviour produced the most wonderful +and complete reform in the morals of nations. + +If we examine the Morals of Christian nations, and listen to the +clamours of their priests, we shall be forced to conclude, that +Jesus Christ, their God, preached and died, in vain; his omnipotent +will still finds in men, a resistance, over which he cannot, or +will not triumph. The Morality of this divine Teacher, which his +disciples so much admire and so little practise, is followed, in +a whole century only by half a dozen obscure saints, and fanatics, +and unknown monks, who alone will have the glory of shining in the +celestial court, while all the rest of mortals, though redeemed by +the blood of this God, will be the prey of eternal flames. + + +165. When a man is strongly inclined to sin, he thinks very little +about his God. Nay more, whatever crimes he has committed, he always +flatters himself, that this God will soften, in his favour, the rigour +of his decrees. No mortal seriously believes, that his conduct can +damn him. Though he fears a terrible God, who often makes him tremble, +yet, whenever he is strongly tempted, he yields; and he afterwards +sees only the God of _mercies_, the idea of whom calms his apprehensions. +If a man commits evil, he hopes, he shall have time to reform, and +promises to repent at a future day. + +In religious pharmacy, there are infallible prescriptions to quiet +consciences: priests, in every country, possess sovereign secrets +to disarm the anger of heaven. Yet, if it be true that the Deity +is appeased by prayers, offerings, sacrifices, and penances, it can +no longer be said, that Religion is a check to the irregularities +of men; they will first sin, and then seek the means to appease God. +Every Religion, which expiates crime and promises a remission of them, +if it restrain some persons, encourages the majority to commit evil. +Notwithstanding his immutability, God, in every Religion, is a true +_Proteus_. His priests represent him at one time armed with severity, +at another full of clemency and mildness; sometimes cruel and unmerciful, +and sometimes easily melted by the sorrow and tears of sinners. +Consequently, men see the Divinity only on the side most conformable +to their present interests. A God always angry would discourage his +worshippers, or throw them into despair. Men must have a God, who +is both irritable, and placable. If his anger frightens some timorous +souls, his clemency encourages the resolutely wicked, who depend upon +recurring, sooner or later, to the means of accommodation. If the +judgments of God terrify some faint-hearted pious persons, who by +constitution and habit are not prone to evil, _the treasures of +divine mercy_ encourage the greatest criminals, who have reason +to hope they participate therein equally with the others. + + +166. Most men seldom think of God, or, at least, bestow on him serious +attention. The only ideas we can form of him are so devoid of object, +and are at the same time so afflicting, that the only imaginations +they can arrest are those of melancholy hypochondriacs, who do not +constitute the majority of the inhabitants of this world. The vulgar +have no conception of God; their weak brains are confused, whenever +they think of him. The man of business thinks only of his business; +the courtier of his intrigues; men of fashion, women, and young +people of their pleasures; dissipation soon effaces in them all +the fatiguing notions of Religion. The ambitious man, the miser +and the debauchee carefully avoid speculations too feeble to +counterbalance their various passions. + +Who is awed by the idea of a God? A few enfeebled men, morose and +disgusted with the world; a few, in whom the passions are already +deadened by age, by infirmity, or by the strokes of fortune. +Religion is a check, to those alone who by their state of mind +and body, or by fortuitous circumstances, have been already brought +to reason. The fear of God hinders from sin only those, who are +not much inclined to it, or else those who are no longer able to +commit it. To tell men, that the Deity punishes crimes in this +world, is to advance an assertion, which experience every moment +contradicts. The worst of men are commonly the arbiters of the world, +and are those whom fortune loads with her favours. To refer us to +another life, in order to convince us of the judgments of God, is +to refer us to conjectures, in order to destroy facts, which cannot +be doubted. + + +167. Nobody thinks of the life to come, when he is strongly smitten +with the objects he finds here below. In the eyes of a passionate lover, +the presence of his mistress extinguishes the flames of hell, and her +charms efface all the pleasures of paradise. Woman! you leave, say you, +your lover for your God. This is either because your lover is no longer +the same in your eyes, or because he leaves you. + +Nothing is more common, than to see ambitious, perverse, corrupt, and +immoral men, who have some ideas of Religion, and sometimes appear +even zealous for its interest. If they do not practise it at present, +they hope to in the future. They lay it up, as a remedy, which will +be necessary to salve the conscience for the evil they intend to commit. +Besides, the party of devotees and priests being very numerous, active, +and powerful, is it not astonishing, that rogues and knaves seek its +support to attain their ends? It will undoubtedly be said, that many +honest people are sincerely religious, and that without profit; but +is uprightness of heart always accompanied with knowledge? + +It is urged, that many learned men, many men of genius have been +strongly attached to Religion. This proves, that men of genius may +have prejudices, be pusillanimous, and have an imagination, which +misleads them and prevents them from examining subjects coolly. +Pascal proves nothing in favour of Religion, unless that a man of +genius may be foolish on some subjects, and is but a child, when +he is weak enough to listen to his prejudices. Pascal himself tells +us, that _the mind may be strong and contracted, enlarged and weak_. +He previously observes, that _a man may have a sound mind, and not +understand every subject equally well; for there are some, who, +having a sound judgment in a certain order of things, are bewildered +in others_. + + +168. What is virtue according to theology? _It is_, we are told, +_the conformity of the actions of man to the will of God_. But, +what is God? A being, of whom nobody has the least conception, +and whom every one consequently modifies in his own way. What is +the will of God? It is what men, who have seen God, or whom God +has inspired, have declared to be the will of God. Who are those, +who have seen God? They are either fanatics, or rogues, or ambitious +men, whom we cannot believe. + +To found Morality upon a God, whom every man paints to himself +differently, composes in his way, and arranges according to his +own temperament and interest, is evidently to found Morality upon +the caprice and imagination of men; it is to found it upon the +whims of a sect, a faction, a party, who believe they have the +advantage to adore a true God to the exclusion of all others. + +To establish Morality or the duties of man upon the divine will, +is to found it upon the will, the reveries and the interests of those, +who make God speak, without ever fearing that he will contradict them. +In every Religion, priests alone have a right to decide what is pleasing +or displeasing to their God, and we are certain they will always decide, +that it is what pleases or displeases themselves. The dogmas, the +ceremonies, the morals, and the virtues, prescribed by every Religion, +are visibly calculated only to extend the power or augment the +emoluments of the founders and ministers of these Religions. +The dogmas are obscure, inconceivable, frightful, and are therefore +well calculated to bewilder the imagination and to render the vulgar +more obsequious to the will of those who wish to domineer over them. +The ceremonies and practices procure the priests, riches or respect. +Religion consists in a submissive faith, which prohibits the exercise +of reason; in a devout humility, which insures priests the submission +of their slaves; in an ardent zeal, when Religion, that is, when the +interest of these priests, is in danger. The only object of all +religions is evidently the advantage of its ministers. + + +169. When we reproach theologians with the barrenness of their +divine virtues, they emphatically extol _charity_, that tender love +of one's neighbour, which Christianity makes an essential duty of +its disciples. But, alas! what becomes of this pretended charity, +when we examine the conduct of the ministers of the Lord? Ask them, +whether we must love or do good to our neighbour, if he be an impious +man, a heretic, or an infidel, that is, if he do not think like them? +Ask them, whether we must tolerate opinions contrary to those of the +religion, they profess? Ask them, whether the sovereign can show +indulgence to those who are in error? Their charity instantly +disappears, and the established clergy will tell you, that +_the prince bears the sword only to support the cause of the +Most High_: they will tell you that, through love for our neighbour, +we must prosecute, imprison, exile, and burn him. You will find +no toleration except among a few priests, persecuted themselves, +who will lay aside Christian charity the instant they have power +to persecute in their turn. + +The Christian religion, in its origin preached by beggars and +miserable men, under the name of _charity_, strongly recommends alms. +The religion of Mahomet also enjoins it as an indispensable duty. +Nothing undoubtedly is more conformable to humanity, than to succour +the unfortunate, to clothe the naked, to extend the hand of beneficence +to every one in distress. But would it not be more humane and +charitable to prevent the source of misery and poverty? If Religion, +instead of deifying princes, had taught them to respect the property +of their subjects, to be just, to exercise only their lawful rights, +we should not be shocked by the sight of such a multitude of beggars. +A rapacious, unjust, tyrannical government multiplies misery; heavy +taxes produce discouragement, sloth, and poverty, which in their +turn beget robberies, assassinations, and crimes of every description. +Had sovereigns more humanity, charity, and equity, their dominions +would not be peopled by so many wretches, whose misery it becomes +impossible to alleviate. + +Christian and Mahometan states are full of large hospitals, richly +endowed, in which we admire the pious charity of the kings and sultans, +who erected them. But would it not have been more humane to govern +the people justly, to render them happy, to excite and favour industry +and commerce, and to let men enjoy in safety the fruit of their labours, +than to crush them under a despotic yoke, to impoverish them by foolish +wars, to reduce them to beggary, in order that luxury may be satisfied, +and then to erect splendid buildings, which can contain but a very +small portion of those, who have been rendered miserable? Religion +has only deluded men; instead of preventing evils, it always applies +ineffectual remedies. + +The ministers of heaven have always known how to profit by the +calamities of others. Public misery is their element. They have +every where become administrators of the property of the poor, +distributors of alms, depositaries of charitable donations; and +thereby they have at all times extended and supported their power +over the unhappy, who generally compose the most numerous, restless, +and seditious part of society. Thus the greatest evils turn to the +profit of the ministers of the Lord. Christian priests tell us, +that the property they possess is the property of the poor, and +that it is therefore sacred. Consequently they have eagerly +accumulated lands, revenues, and treasures. Under colour of +charity, spiritual guides have become extremely opulent, and +in the face of impoverished nations enjoy wealth, which was +destined solely for the unfortunate; while the latter, far from +murmuring, applaud a pious generosity, which enriches the church, +but rarely contributes to the relief of the poor. + +According to the principles of Christianity, poverty itself is +a virtue; indeed, it is the virtue, which sovereigns and priests +oblige their slaves to observe most rigorously. With this idea, +many pious Christians have of their own accord renounced riches, +distributed their patrimony among the poor, and retired into deserts, +there to live in voluntary indigence. But this enthusiasm, this +supernatural taste for misery, has been soon forced to yield to +nature. The successors of these volunteers in poverty sold to the +devout people their prayers, and their intercessions with the Deity. +They became rich and powerful. Thus monks and hermits lived in +indolence, and under colour of charity, impudently devoured the +substance of the poor. + +The species of poverty, most esteemed by Religion, is _poverty of mind_. +The fundamental virtue of every Religion, most useful to its ministers, +is _faith_. It consists in unbounded credulity, which admits, without +enquiry, whatever the interpreters of the Deity are interested in +making men believe. By the aid of this wonderful virtue, priests +became the arbiters of right and wrong, of good and evil: they +could easily cause the commission of crimes to advance their interest. +Implicit faith has been the source of the greatest outrages that +have been committed. + + +170. He, who first taught nations, that, when we wrong Man, we must +ask pardon of God, appease _him_ by presents, and offer _him_ sacrifices, +evidently destroyed the true principles of Morality. According to +such ideas, many persons imagine that they may obtain of the king +of heaven, as of kings of the earth, permission to be unjust and +wicked, or may at least obtain pardon for the evil they may commit. + +Morality is founded upon the relations, wants, and constant interests +of mankind; the relations, which subsist between God and Men, are +either perfectly unknown, or imaginary. Religion, by associating +God with Man, has wisely weakened, or destroyed, the bonds, which +unite them. Mortals imagine, they may injure one another with +impunity, by making suitable satisfaction to the almighty being, +who is supposed to have the right of remitting all offences +committed against his creatures. + +Is any thing better calculated to encourage the wicked or harden +them in crimes, than to persuade them that there exists an invisible +being, who has a right to forgive acts of injustice, rapine, and +outrage committed against society? By these destructive ideas, +perverse men perpetrate the most horrid crimes, and believe they +make reparation by imploring divine mercy; their conscience is at rest, +when a priest assures them that heaven is disarmed by a repentance, +which, though sincere, is very useless to the world. + +In the mind of a devout man, God must be regarded more than his creatures; +it is better to obey him, than men. The interests of the celestial +monarch must prevail over those of weak mortals. But the interests +of heaven are obviously those of its ministers; whence it evidently +follows, that in every religion, priests, under pretext of the interests +of heaven or the glory of God, can dispense with the duties of human +Morality, when they clash with the duties, which God has a right to +impose. Besides, must not he, who has power to pardon crimes, have +a right to encourage the commission of crimes? + + +171. We are perpetually told, that, without a God there would be no +_moral obligation_; that the people and even the sovereigns require +a legislator powerful enough to constrain them. Moral constraint +supposes a law; but this law arises from the eternal and necessary +relations of things with one another; relations, which have nothing +common with the existence of a God. The rules of Man's conduct are +derived from his own nature which he is capable of knowing, and not +from the Divine nature of which he has no idea. These rules constrain +or oblige us; that is, we render ourselves estimable or contemptible, +amiable or detestable, worthy of reward or of punishment, happy or +unhappy, accordingly as we conform to, or deviate from these rules. +The law, which obliges man not to hurt himself, is founded upon the +nature of a sensible being, who, in whatever way he came into this +world, is forced by his actual essence to seek good and shun evil, +to love pleasure and fear pain. The law, which obliges man not to +injure, and even to do good to others, is founded upon the nature +of sensible beings, living in society, whose essence compels them +to despise those who are useless, and to detest those who oppose +their felicity. + +Whether there exists a God or not, whether this God has spoken or not, +the moral duties of men will be always the same, so long as they are +sensible beings. Have men then need of a God whom they know not, +of an invisible legislator, of a mysterious religion and of chimerical +fears, in order to learn that every excess evidently tends to destroy +them, that to preserve health they must be temperate; that to gain +the love of others it is necessary to do them good, that to do them +evil is a sure means to incur their vengeance and hatred? "Before +the law there was no sin." Nothing is more false than this maxim. +It suffices that man is what he is, or that he is a sensible being, +in order to distinguish what gives him pleasure or displeasure. +It suffices that one man knows that another man is a sensible +being like himself, to perceive what is useful or hurtful to him. +It suffices that man needs his fellow-creature, in order to know +that he must fear to excite sentiments unfavourable to himself. +Thus the feeling and thinking being has only to feel and think, +in order to discover what he must do for himself and others. +I feel, and another feels like me; this is the foundation of +all morals. + + +172. We can judge of the goodness of a system of Morals, only by +its conformity to the nature of man. By this comparison, we have +a right to reject it, if contrary to the welfare of our species. +Whoever has seriously meditated Religion; whoever has carefully +weighed its advantages and disadvantages, will be fully convinced, +that both are injurious to the interests of Man, or directly opposite +to his nature. + +"To arms! the cause of your God is at stake! Heaven is outraged! +The faith is in danger! Impiety! blasphemy! heresy!" The magical +power of these formidable words, the real value of which the people +never understand, have at all times enabled priests to excite revolts, +to dethrone kings, to kindle civil wars, and to lay waste. If we +examine the important objects, which have produced so many ravages +upon earth, it appears, that either the foolish reveries and whimsical +conjectures of some theologian who did not understand himself, or +else the pretensions of the clergy, have broken every social bond +and deluged mankind with blood and tears. + + +173. The sovereigns of this world, by associating the Divinity in +the government of their dominions, by proclaiming themselves his +vicegerents and representatives upon earth, and by acknowledging +they hold their power from him, have necessarily constituted his +ministers their own rivals or masters. Is it then astonishing, +that priests have often made kings feel the superiority of the +Celestial Monarch? Have they not more than once convinced temporal +princes, that even the greatest power is compelled to yield to the +spiritual power of opinion? Nothing is more difficult than to +serve two masters, especially when they are not agreed upon what +they require. + +The association of Religion with Politics necessarily introduced +double legislation. The law of God, interpreted by his priests, +was often repugnant to the law of the sovereign, or the interest +of the state. When princes have firmness and are confident of the +love of their subjects, the law of God is sometimes forced to yield +to the wise intentions of the temporal sovereign; but generally the +_sovereign_ authority is obliged to give way to the _divine_ authority, +that is, to the interests of the clergy. Nothing is more dangerous +to a prince, than to _encroach upon the authority of the Church_, +that is, to attempt to reform abuses consecrated by religion. +God is never more angry than when we touch the divine rights, +privileges, possessions, or immunities of his priests. + +The metaphysical speculations or religious opinions of men influence +their conduct, only when they judge them conformable to their interest. +Nothing proves this truth more clearly, than the conduct of many +princes with respect to the spiritual power, which they often resist. +Ought not a sovereign, persuaded of the importance and rights of +Religion, to believe himself in conscience bound to receive respectfully +the orders of its priests, and to regard them as the orders of the +Divinity? There was a time, when kings and people, more consistent +in their conduct, were convinced of the rights of spiritual power, +and becoming its slaves, yielded to it upon every occasion, and +were but docile instruments in its hands. That happy time is passed. +By a strange inconsistency the most devout monarchs are sometimes +seen to oppose the enterprises of those, whom they yet regard as +the ministers of God. A sovereign, deeply religious, ought to +remain prostrate at the feet of his ministers, and regard them +as true sovereigns. Is there upon earth a power which has a right +to put itself in competition with that of the Most High? + + +174. Have princes then, who imagine themselves interested in +cherishing the prejudices of their subjects, seriously reflected +upon the effects, which have been, and may be again produced by +certain privileged demagogues, who have a right to speak at pleasure, +and in the name of heaven to inflame the passions of millions of subjects? +What ravages would not these sacred haranguers cause, if they should +conspire, as they have so often done, to disturb the tranquillity of +a state! + +To most nations, nothing is more burthensome and ruinous than the +worship of their gods. Not only do the ministers of these gods +every where constitute the first order in the state, but they also +enjoy the largest portion of the goods of society, and have a right +to levy permanent taxes upon their fellow-citizens. What real +advantages then do these organs of the Most High procure the people, +for the immense profits extorted from their industry? In exchange +for their riches and benefits, what do they give them but mysteries, +hypotheses, ceremonies, subtle questions, and endless quarrels, +which states are again compelled to pay with blood? + + +175. Religion, though said to be the firmest prop of Morality, +evidently destroys its true springs, in order to substitute imaginary +ones, inconceivable chimeras, which, being obviously contrary to +reason, nobody firmly believes. All nations declare that they +firmly believe in a God, who rewards and punishes; all say they +are persuaded of the existence of hell and paradise; yet, do these +ideas render men better or counteract the most trifling interests? +Every one assures us, that he trembles at the judgments of God; +yet every one follows his passions, when he thinks himself sure +of escaping the judgments of Man. The fear of invisible powers +is seldom so strong as the fear of visible ones. Unknown or remote +punishments strike the multitude far less forcibly than the sight +of the gallows. Few courtiers fear the anger of their God so +much as the displeasure of their master. A pension, a title, or +a riband suffices to efface the remembrance both of the torments +of hell, and of the pleasures of the celestial court. The caresses +of a woman repeatedly prevail over the menaces of the Most High. +A jest, a stroke of ridicule, a witticism, make more impression +upon the man of the world, than all the grave notions of his Religion. + +Are we not assured that _a true repentance_ is enough to appease +the Deity? Yet we do not see that this _true repentance_ is very +sincere; at least, it is rare to see noted thieves, even at the +point of death, restore goods, which they have unjustly acquired. +Men are undoubtedly persuaded, that they shall fit themselves for +eternal fire, if they cannot insure themselves against it. But, +"Some useful compacts may be made with heaven." By giving the +church a part of his fortune, almost every devout rogue may die +in peace, without concerning himself in what he gained his riches. + + +176. By the confession of the warmest defenders of Religion and +of its utility, nothing is more rare than sincere conversions, and, +we might add, nothing more unprofitable to society. Men are not +disgusted with the world, until the world is disgusted with them. + +If the devout have the talent of pleasing God and his priests, +they have seldom that of being agreeable or useful to society. +To a devotee, Religion is a veil, which covers all passions; +pride, ill-humour, anger, revenge, impatience, and rancour. +Devotion arrogates a tyrannical superiority, which banishes +gentleness, indulgence, and gaiety; it authorizes people to +censure their neighbours, to reprove and revile the profane +for the greater glory of God. It is very common to be devout, +and at the same time destitute of every virtue and quality +necessary to social life. + + +177. It is asserted, that the dogma of another life is of the +utmost importance to peace and happiness; that without it, men +would be destitute of motives to do good. What need is there +of terrors and fables to make man sensible how he ought to +conduct himself? Does not every one see, that he has the +greatest interest, in meriting the approbation, esteem, and +benevolence of the beings who surround him, and in abstaining +from every thing, by which he may incur the censure, contempt, +and resentment of society? However short an entertainment, +a conversation, or visit, does not each desire to act his part +decently, and agreeably to himself and others? If life is but +a passage, let us strive to make it easy; which we cannot effect, +if we fail in regard for those who travel with us. Religion, +occupied with its gloomy reveries, considers man merely as +a pilgrim upon earth; and therefore supposes that, in order +to travel the more securely, he must forsake company, and deprive +himself of pleasure and amusements, which might console him for +the tediousness and fatigue of the journey. A stoical and morose +philosopher sometimes gives us advice as irrational as that of +Religion. But a more rational philosophy invites us to spread +flowers upon the way of life, to dispel melancholy and banish +terrors, to connect our interest with that of our fellow-travellers, +and by gaiety and lawful pleasures, to divert our attention from +difficulties and accidents, to which we are often exposed; it +teaches us, that, to travel agreeably, we should abstain from +what might be injurious to ourselves, and carefully shun what +might render us odious to our associates. + + +178. It is asked, _what motives an Atheist can have to do good?_ +The motive to please himself and his fellow-creatures; to live +happily and peaceably; to gain the affection and esteem of men. +"Can he, who fears not the gods, fear any thing?" He can fear men; +he can fear contempt, dishonour, the punishment of the laws; in short, +he can fear himself, and the remorse felt by all those who are +conscious of having incurred or merited the hatred of their +fellow-creatures. + +Conscience is the internal testimony, which we bear to ourselves, +of having acted so as to merit the esteem or blame of the beings, +with whom we live; and it is founded upon the clear knowledge we +have of men, and of the sentiments which our actions must produce +in them. The Conscience of the religious man consists in imagining +that he has pleased or displeased his God, of whom he has no idea, +and whose obscure and doubtful intentions are explained to him only +by men of doubtful veracity, who, like him, are utterly unacquainted +with the essence of the Deity, and are little agreed upon what can +please or displease him. In a word, the conscience of the credulous +is directed by men, who have themselves an erroneous conscience, or +whose interest stifles knowledge. + +"Can an Atheist have a Conscience? What are his motives to abstain +from hidden vices and secret crimes of which other men are ignorant, +and which are beyond the reach of laws?" He may be assured by constant +experience, that there is no vice, which, by the nature of things, +does not punish itself. Would he preserve this life? he will avoid +every excess, that may impair his health; he will not wish to lead +a languishing life, which would render him a burden to himself and +others. As for secret crimes, he will abstain from them, for fear +he shall be forced to blush at himself, from whom he cannot flee. +If he has any reason, he will know the value of the esteem which +an honest man ought to have for himself. He will see, that unforeseen +circumstances may unveil the conduct, which he feels interested +in concealing from others. The other world furnishes no motives +for doing good, to him, who finds none on earth. + + +179. "The speculative Atheist," says the Theist, "may be an honest man, +but his writings will make political Atheists. Princes and ministers, +no longer restrained by the fear of God, will abandon themselves, +without scruple, to the most horrid excesses." But, however great +the depravity of an Atheist upon the throne, can it be stronger +and more destructive, than that of the many conquerors, tyrants, +persecutors, ambitious men, and perverse courtiers, who, though +not Atheists, but often very religious and devout, have notwithstanding +made humanity groan under the weight of their crimes? Can an atheistical +prince do more harm to the world, than a Louis XI., a Philip II., +a Richelieu, who all united Religion with crime? Nothing is more rare, +than atheistical princes; nothing more common, than tyrants and ministers, +who are very wicked and very religious. + + +180. A man of reflection cannot be incapable of his duties, of +discovering the relations subsisting between men, of meditating +his own nature, of discerning his own wants, propensities, and +desires, and of perceiving what he owes to beings, who are necessary +to his happiness. These reflections naturally lead him to a knowledge +of the Morality most essential to social beings. Dangerous passions +seldom fall to the lot of a man who loves to commune with himself, +to study, and to investigate the principles of things. The strongest +passion of such a man will be to know truth, and his ambition to +teach it to others. Philosophy cultivates the mind. On the score +of morals and honesty, has not he who reflects and reasons, evidently +an advantage over him, who makes it a principle never to reason? + +If ignorance is useful to priests, and to the oppressors of mankind, +it is fatal to society. Man, void of knowledge, does not enjoy reason; +without reason and knowledge, he is a savage, liable to commit crimes. +Morality, or the science of duties, is acquired only by the study of Man, +and of what is relative to Man. He, who does not reflect, is unacquainted +with true Morality, and walks with precarious steps, in the path of virtue. +The less men reason, the more wicked they are. Savages, princes, nobles, +and the dregs of the people, are commonly the worst of men, because +they reason the least. The devout man seldom reflects, and rarely +reasons. He fears all enquiry, scrupulously follows authority, and +often, through an error of conscience, makes it a sacred duty to commit +evil. The Atheist reasons: he consults experience, which he prefers +to prejudice. If he reasons justly, his conscience is enlightened; +he finds more real motives to do good than the bigot whose only motives +are his fallacies, and who never listens to reason. Are not the motives +of the Atheist sufficiently powerful to counteract his passions? +Is he blind enough to be unmindful of his true interest, which ought +to restrain him? But he will be neither worse nor better, than the +numerous believers, who, notwithstanding Religion and its sublime +precepts, follow a conduct which Religion condemns. Is a credulous +assassin less to be feared, than an assassin who believes nothing? +Is a very devout tyrant less tyrannical than an undevout tyrant? + + +181. Nothing is more uncommon, than to see men consistent. Their +opinions never influence their conduct except when conformable to +their temperaments, passions, and interests. Daily experience shows, +that religious opinions produce much evil and little good. They are +hurtful, because they often favour the passions of tyrants, of +ambitious men, of fanatics, and of priests; they are of no effect, +because incapable of counter-balancing the present interests of +the greater part of mankind. Religious principles are of no avail, +when they act in opposition to ardent desires; though not unbelievers, +men then conduct themselves as if they believed nothing. + +We shall always be liable to err, when we judge of the opinions +of men by their conduct, or of their conduct by their opinions. +A religious man, notwithstanding the unsociable principles of a +sanguinary religion, will sometimes by a happy inconsistency, be +humane, tolerant, and moderate; the principles of his religion do +not then agree with the gentleness of his character. Libertines, +debauchees, hypocrites, adulterers, and rogues, often appear to +have the best ideas upon morals. Why do they not reduce them to +practice? Because their temperament, their interest, and their +habits do not accord with their sublime theories. The rigid +principles of Christian morality, which many people regard as +divine, have but little influence upon the conduct of those, +who preach them to others. Do they not daily tell us, _to do +what they preach, and not what they practise?_ + +The partisans of Religion often denote an infidel by the word +_libertine_. It is possible that many unbelievers may have loose +morals, which is owing to their temperament, and not to their opinions. +But how does their conduct affect their opinions? Cannot then an immoral +man be a good physician, architect, geometrician, logician, or +metaphysician? A man of irreproachable conduct may be extremely +deficient in knowledge and reason. In quest of truth, it little +concerns us from whom it comes. Let us not judge men by their opinions, +nor opinions by men; let us judge men by their conduct, and their +opinions by their conformity with experience and reason and by their +utility to mankind. + + +182. Every man, who reasons, soon becomes an unbeliever; for reason +shows, that theology is nothing but a tissue of chimeras; that religion +is contrary to every principle of good sense, that it tinctures all +human knowledge with falsity. The sensible man is an unbeliever, +because he sees, that, far from making men happier, religion is +the chief source of the greatest disorders, and the permanent +calamities, with which man is afflicted. The man, who seeks +his own welfare and tranquillity, examines and throws aside +religion, because he thinks it no less troublesome than useless, +to spend his life in trembling before phantoms, fit to impose +only upon silly women or children. + +If licentiousness, which reasons but little, sometimes leads to +irreligion, the man of pure morals may have very good motives for +examining his religion, and banishing it from his mind. Religious +terrors, too weak to impose upon the wicked in whom vice is deeply +rooted, afflict, torment and overwhelm restless imaginations. +Courageous and vigorous minds soon shake off the insupportable +yoke. But those, who are weak and timorous, languish under it +during life; and as they grow old their fears increase. + +Priests have represented God as so malicious, austere, and terrible +a being, that most men would cordially wish, that there was no God. +It is impossible to be happy, while always trembling. Ye devout! +you adore a terrible God! But you hate him; you would be glad, +if he did not exist. Can we refrain from desiring the absence or +destruction of a master, the idea of whom destroys our happiness? +The black colours, in which priests paint the Divinity, are truly +shocking, and force us to hate and reject him. + + +183. If fear created the gods, fear supports their empire over the +minds of mortals. So early are men accustomed to shudder at the mere +name of the Deity, that they regard him as a spectre, a hobgoblin, +a bugbear, which torments and deprives them of courage even to wish +relief from their fears. They apprehend, that the invisible spectre, +will strike them the moment they cease to be afraid. Bigots are too +much in fear of their God to love him sincerely. They serve him like +slaves, who, unable to escape his power, resolve to flatter their +master, and who, by dint of lying, at length persuade themselves, +that they in some measure love him. They make a virtue of necessity. +The love of devotees for their God, and of slaves for their despots, +is only a feigned homage. + + +184. Christian divines have represented their God so terrible and +so little worthy of love, that several of them have thought they +must dispense with loving him; a blasphemy, shocking to other +divines, who were less ingenuous. St. Thomas having maintained, +that we are obliged to love God as soon as we attain the use of +reason, the Jesuit Sirmond answered him, _that is very soon_. +The Jesuit Vasquez assures us, that _it is enough to love God +at the point of death_. Hurtado, more rigid, says, _we must love +God very year_. Henriquez is contented that we love him _every +five years_; Sotus, _every Sunday_. Upon what are these opinions +grounded? asks father Sirmond; who adds, that Suarez requires us +to _love God sometimes_. But when? He leaves that to us; he knows +nothing about it himself. _Now_, says he, _who will be able to +know that, of which such a learned divine is ignorant?_ The same +Jesuit Sirmond further observes, that _God_ "does not command us +to love him with an affectionate love, nor does he promise us +salvation upon condition that we give him our hearts; it is enough +to obey and love him with an effective love by executing his orders; +this is the only love we owe him; and he has not so much commanded +us to love him, as not to hate him." This doctrine appears heretical, +impious, and abominable to the Jansenists, who, by the revolting +severity they attribute to their God, make him far less amiable, +than the Jesuits, their adversaries. The latter, to gain adherents, +paint God in colours capable of encouraging the most perverse of +mortals. Thus nothing is more undecided with the Christians, +than the important question, whether they can, ought, or ought +not to love God. Some of their spiritual guides maintain, that +it is necessary to love him with all one's heart, notwithstanding +all his severity; others, like father Daniel, think that, _an act +of pure love to God is the most heroic act of Christian virtue, +and almost beyond the reach of human weakness_. The Jesuit Pintereau +goes farther; he says, _a deliverance from the grievous yoke of +loving God is a privilege of the new covenant_. + + +185. The character of the Man always decides that of his God; +every body makes one for himself and like himself. The man of +gaiety, involved in dissipation and pleasure, does not imagine, +that, God can be stern and cross; he wants a good-natured God, +with whom he can find reconciliation. The man of a rigid, morose, +bilious, sour disposition, must have a God like himself, a God +of terror; and he regards, as perverse, those, who admit a placable, +indulgent God. As men are constituted, organized, and modified +in a manner, which cannot be precisely the same, how can they +agree about a chimera, which exists only in their brains? + +The cruel and endless disputes between the ministers of the Lord, +are not such as to attract the confidence of those, who impartially +consider them. How can we avoid complete infidelity, upon viewing +principles, about which those who teach them to others are never agreed? +How can we help doubting the existence of a God, of whom it is evident +that even his ministers can only form very fluctuating ideas? How +can we in short avoid totally rejecting a God, who is nothing but +a shapeless heap of contradictions? How can we refer the matter +to the decision of priests, who are perpetually at war, treating +each other as impious and heretical, defaming and persecuting each +other without mercy, for differing in the manner of understanding +what they announce to the world? + + +186. The existence of a God is the basis of all Religion. +Nevertheless, this important truth has not as yet been demonstrated, +I do not say so as to convince unbelievers, but in a manner +satisfactory to theologians themselves. Profound thinkers have +at all times been occupied in inventing new proofs. What are +the fruits of their meditations and arguments? They have left +the subject in a worse condition; they have demonstrated nothing; +they have almost always excited the clamours of their brethren, +who have accused them of having poorly defended the best of causes. + + +187. The apologists of religion daily repeat, that the passions +alone make unbelievers. "Pride," say they, "and the desire of +signalizing themselves, make men Atheists. They endeavour to +efface from their minds the idea of God, only because they have +reason to fear his terrible judgments." Whatever may be the motives, +which incline men to Atheism, it is our business to examine, +whether their sentiments are founded in truth. No man acts +without motives. Let us first examine the arguments and afterwards +the motives. We shall see whether these motives are not legitimate, +and more rational than those of many credulous bigots, who suffer +themselves to be guided by masters little worthy of the confidence +of men. + +You say then, Priests of the Lord! that the passions make unbelievers; +that they renounce Religion only through interest, or because it +contradicts their inordinate propensities; you assert, that they +attack your gods only because they fear their severity. But, are +you yourselves, in defending Religion and its chimeras, truly exempt +from passions and interests? Who reap advantages from this Religion, +for which priests display so much zeal? Priests. To whom does +Religion procure power, influence, riches, and honours? To Priests. +Who wage war, in every country, against reason, science, truth, and +philosophy, and render them odious to sovereigns and people? Priests. +Who profit by the ignorance and vain prejudices of men? Priests.-- +Priests! you are rewarded, honoured and paid for deceiving mortals, +and you cause those to be punished who undeceive them. The follies +of men procure you benefices, offerings, and expiations; while those, +who announce the most useful truths, are rewarded only with chains, +gibbets and funeral-piles. Let the world judge between us. + + +188. Pride and vanity have been, and ever will be, inherent in the +priesthood. Is any thing more capable of rendering men haughty and +vain, than the pretence of exercising a power derived from heaven, +of bearing a sacred character, of being the messengers and ministers +of the Most High? Are not these dispositions perpetually nourished +by the credulity of the people, the deference and respect of sovereigns, +the immunities, privileges, and distinctions enjoyed by the clergy? +In every country, the vulgar are much more devoted to their spiritual +guides, whom they regard as divine, than to their temporal superiors, +whom they consider as no more than ordinary men. The parson of +a village acts a much more conspicuous part, than the lord of the +manor or the justice of the peace. Among the Christians, a priest +thinks himself far above a king or an emperor. A Spanish grandee +having spoken rather haughtily to a monk, the latter arrogantly +said, "Learn to respect a man, who daily has your God in his hands, +and your Queen at his feet." Have priests then a right to accuse +unbelievers of pride? Are they themselves remarkable for uncommon +modesty or profound humility? Is it not evident, that the desire +of domineering over men is essential to their trade? If the ministers +of the Lord were truly modest, should we see them so greedy of respect, +so impatient of contradiction, so positive in their decisions, and +so unmercifully revengeful to those whose opinions offend them? +Has not Science the modesty to acknowledge how difficult it is +to discover truth? What other passion but ungovernable pride can +make men so savage, revengeful, and void of indulgence and gentleness? +What can be more presumptuous, than to arm nations and deluge the +world in blood, in order to establish or defend futile conjectures? + +You say, that presumption alone makes Atheists. Inform them then +what your God is; teach them his essence; speak of him intelligibly; +say something about him, which is reasonable, and not contradictory +or impossible. If you are unable to satisfy them, if hitherto none +of you have been able to demonstrate the existence of a God in a +clear and convincing manner; if by your own confession, his essence +is completely veiled from you, as from the rest of mortals, forgive +those, who cannot admit what they can neither understand nor make +consistent with itself; do not tax with presumption and vanity +those who are sincere enough to confess their ignorance; do not +accuse of folly those who find themselves incapable of believing +contradictions; and for once, blush at exciting the hatred and +fury of sovereigns and people against men, who think not like +you concerning a being, of whom you have no idea. Is any thing +more rash and extravagant, than to reason concerning an object, +known to be inconceivable? You say, that the corruption of the +heart produces Atheism, that men shake off the yoke of the Deity +only because they fear his formidable judgments. But, why do you +paint your God in colours so shocking, that he becomes insupportable? +Why does so powerful a God permit men to be so corrupt? How can +we help endeavouring to shake off the yoke of a tyrant, who, able +to do as he pleases with men, consents to their perversion, who +hardens, and blinds them, and refuses them his grace, that he may +have the satisfaction to punish them eternally, for having been +hardened, and blinded, and for not having the grace which he refused? +Theologians and priests must be very confident of the grace of heaven +and a happy futurity, to refrain from detesting a master so capricious +as the God they announce. A God, who damns eternally, is the most +odious of beings that the human mind can invent. + + +189. No man upon earth is truly interested in the support of error, +which is forced sooner or later to yield to truth. The general good +must at length open the eyes of mortals: the passions themselves +sometimes contribute to break the chains of prejudices. Did not +the passions of sovereigns, centuries ago, annihilate in some +countries of Europe the tyrannical power, which a too haughty +pontiff once exercised over all princes of his sect? In consequence +of the progress of political science, the clergy were then stripped +of immense riches, which credulity had accumulated upon them. Ought +not this memorable example to convince priests, that prejudices +triumph but for a time, and that truth alone can insure solid +happiness? + +By caressing sovereigns, by fabricating divine rights for them, +by deifying them, and by abandoning the people, bound hand and foot, +to their will, the ministers of the Most High must see, that they +are labouring to make them tyrants. Have they not reason to apprehend, +that the gigantic idols, which they raised to the clouds, will one +day crush them by their enormous weight? Do not a thousand examples +remind them that these tyrants, after preying upon the people, may +prey upon them in their turn. + +We will respect priests, when they become sensible men. Let them, +if they please, use the authority of heaven to frighten those princes +who are continually desolating the earth; but let them no more adjudge +to them the horrid right of being unjust with impunity. Let them +acknowledge, that no man is interested in living under tyranny; +and let them teach sovereigns, that they themselves are not +interested in exercising a despotism, which, by rendering them +odious, exposes them to danger, and detracts from their power +and greatness. Finally, let priests and kings become so far +enlightened as to acknowledge, that no power is secure which is +not founded upon truth, reason, and equity. + + +190. By waging war against Reason, which they ought to have protected +and developed, the ministers of the gods evidently act against their +own interest. What power, influence, and respect might they not have +gained among the wisest of men, what gratitude would they not have +excited in the people, if, instead of wasting their time about their +vain disputes, they had applied themselves to really useful science, +and investigated the true principles of philosophy, government, and +morals! Who would dare to reproach a body with its opulence or +influence, if the members dedicating themselves to the public good, +employed their leisure in study, and exercised their authority in +enlightening the minds both of sovereigns and subjects? + +Priests! Forsake your chimeras, your unintelligible dogmas, your +contemptible quarrels! Banish those phantoms which could be useful +only in the infancy of nations. Assume, at length, the language +of reason. Instead of exciting persecution; instead of entertaining +the people with silly disputes; instead of preaching useless and +fanatical dogmas, preach human and social morality; preach virtues +really useful to the world; become the apostles of reason, the +defenders of liberty, and the reformers of abuses. + + +191. Philosophers have every where taken upon themselves a part, +which seemed destined to the ministers of Religion. The hatred of +the latter for philosophy was only a jealousy of trade. But, instead +of endeavouring to injure and decry each other, all men of good sense +should unite their efforts to combat error, seek truth, and especially +to put to flight the prejudices, that are equally injurious to +sovereigns and subjects, and of which the abettors themselves sooner +or later become the victims. + +In the hands of an enlightened government, the priests would become +the most useful of the citizens. Already richly paid by the state, +and free from the care of providing for their own subsistence, how +could they be better employed than in qualifying themselves for the +instruction of others? Would not their minds be better satisfied +with discovering luminous truths, than in wandering through the +thick darkness of error? Would it be more difficult to discern +the clear principles of Morality, than the imaginary principles +of a divine and theological Morality? Would men of ordinary +capacities find it as difficult to fix in their heads the simple +notions of their duties, as to load their memories with mysteries, +unintelligible words and obscure definitions, of which they can +never form a clear idea? What time and pains are lost in learning +and teaching things, which are not of the least real utility! +What resources for the encouragement of the sciences, the +advancement of knowledge, and the education of youth, well +disposed sovereigns might find in the many monasteries, which +in several countries live upon the people without in the slightest +degree profiting them! But superstition, jealous of its exclusive +empire, seems resolved to form only useless beings. To what advantage +might we not turn a multitude of cenobites of both sexes, who, +in many countries, are amply endowed for doing nothing? Instead +of overwhelming them with fasting and austerities; instead of +barren contemplations, mechanical prayers, and trifling ceremonies; +why should we not excite in them a salutary emulation, which may +incline them to seek the means, not of being _dead_ to the world, +but of being _useful_ to it? Instead of filling the youthful minds +of their pupils with fables, sterile dogmas, and puerilities, why +are not priests obliged, or invited to teach them truths, and to +render them useful citizens of their country? Under the present +system, men are only useful to the clergy who blind them, and to +the tyrants who fleece them. + + +192. The partisans of credulity often accuse unbelievers of insincerity, +because they sometimes waver in their principles, alter their minds +in sickness, and retract at death. When the body is disordered, +the faculty of reasoning is commonly disordered with it. At the +approach of death, man, weak and decayed, is sometimes himself +sensible that Reason abandons him, and that Prejudice returns. +There are some diseases, which tend to weaken the brain; to create +despondency and pusillanimity; and there are others, which destroy +the body, but do not disturb the reason. At any rate, an unbeliever +who recants in sickness is not more extraordinary, than a devotee +who neglects in health the duties which his religion explicitly enjoins. + +Ministers of Religion openly contradict in their daily conduct the +rigorous principles, they teach to others; in consequence of which, +unbelievers, in their turn, may justly accuse them of insincerity. +Is it easy to find many prelates humble, generous, void of ambition, +enemies of pomp and grandeur, and friends of poverty? In short, +is the conduct of Christian ministers conformable to the austere +morality of Christ, their God, and their model? + + +193. _Atheism_, it is said, _breaks all the ties of society. +Without the belief of a God, what will become of the sacredness +of oaths? How shall we oblige a man to speak the, truth, who +cannot seriously call the Deity to witness what he says?_ But, +does an oath strengthen our obligation to fulfil the engagements +contracted? Will he, who is not fearful of lying, be less fearful +of perjury? He, who is base enough to break his word, or unjust +enough to violate his engagements, in contempt of the esteem of men, +will not be more faithful therein for having called all the gods +to witness his oaths. Those, who disregard the judgments of men, +will soon disregard the judgments of God. Are not princes, of all +men, the most ready to swear, and the most ready to violate their oaths? + + +194. _The vulgar_, it is repeatedly said, _must have a Religion. +If enlightened persons have no need of the restraint of opinion, +it is at least necessary to rude men, whose reason is uncultivated +by education_. But, is it indeed a fact, that religion is a restraint +upon the vulgar? Do we see, that this religion preserves them from +intemperance, drunkenness, brutality, violence, fraud, and every +kind of excess? Could a people who have no idea of the Deity conduct +themselves in a more detestable manner, than these believing people, +among whom we find dissipation and vices, the most unworthy of +reasonable beings? Upon going out of the churches, do not the +working classes, and the populace, plunge without fear into their +ordinary irregularities, under the idea, that the periodical homage, +which they render to their God, authorizes them to follow, without +remorse, their vicious habits and pernicious propensities? Finally, +if the people are so low-minded and unreasonable, is not their +stupidity chargeable to the negligence of their princes, who are +wholly regardless of public education, or who even oppose the +instruction of their subjects? Is not the want of reason in +the people evidently the work of the priests, who, instead of +instructing men in a rational morality, entertain them with fables, +reveries, ceremonies, fallacies, and false virtues which they +think of the greatest importance? + +To the people, Religion is but a vain display of ceremonies, to +which they are attached by habit, which entertains their eyes, +and produces a transient emotion in their torpid understandings, +without influencing their conduct or reforming their morals. +Even by the confession of the ministers of the altars, nothing is +more rare than that _internal_ and _spiritual_ Religion, which +alone is capable of regulating the life of man and of triumphing +over his evil propensities. In the most numerous and devout nation, +are there many persons, who are really capable of understanding +the principles of their religious system, and who find them powerful +enough to stifle their perverse inclinations? + +Many persons will say, that _any restraint whatever is better than none._ +They will maintain, that _if religion awes not the greater part, +it serves at least to restrain some individuals, who would otherwise +without remorse abandon themselves to crime_. Men ought undoubtedly +to have a restraint, but not an imaginary one. Religion only +frightens those whose imbecility of character has already prevented +them from being formidable to their fellow-citizens. An equitable +government, severe laws, and sound morality have an equal power +over all; at least, every person must believe in them, and perceive +the danger of not conforming to them. + + +195. Perhaps it will be asked, _whether Atheism can be proper for +the multitude?_ I answer, that any system, which requires discussion, +is not made for the multitude. _What purpose then can it serve to +preach Atheism?_ It may at least serve to convince all those who +reason, that nothing is more extravagant than to fret one's self, +and nothing more unjust than to vex others, for mere groundless +conjectures. As for the vulgar who never reason, the arguments +of an Atheist are no more fit for them than the systems of a natural +philosopher, the observations of an astronomer, the experiments of +a chemist, the calculations of a geometrician, the researches of +a physician, the plans of an architect, or the pleadings of a lawyer, +who all labour for the people without their knowledge. + +Are the metaphysical reasonings and religious disputes, which have so +long engrossed the time and attention of so many profound thinkers, +better adapted to the generality of men than the reasoning of an Atheist? +Nay, as the principles of Atheism are founded upon plain common sense, +are they not more intelligible, than those of a theology, beset with +difficulties, which even the persons of the greatest genius cannot +explain? In every country, the people have a religion, the principles +of which they are totally ignorant, and which they follow from habit +without any examination: their priests alone are engaged in theology, +which is too dense for vulgar heads. If the people should chance +to lose this unknown theology, they mighty easily console themselves +for the loss of a thing, not only perfectly useless, but also +productive of dangerous commotions. + +It would be madness to write for the vulgar, or to attempt to cure +their prejudices all at once. We write for those only, who read and +reason; the multitude read but little, and reason still less. +Calm and rational persons will require new ideas, and knowledge +will be gradually diffused. + + +196. If theology is a branch of commerce profitable to theologians, +it is evidently not only superfluous, but injurious to the rest of +society. Self-interest will sooner or later open the eyes of men. +Sovereigns and subjects will one day adopt the profound indifference +and contempt, merited by a futile system, which serves only to make +men miserable. All persons will be sensible of the inutility of +the many expensive ceremonies, which contribute nothing to public +felicity. Contemptible quarrels will cease to disturb the tranquility +of states, when we blush at having considered them important. + +Instead of Parliament meddling with the senseless combats of your +clergy; instead of foolishly espousing their impertinent quarrels, +and attempting to make your subjects adopt uniform opinions--strive +to make them happy in this world. Respect their liberty and property, +watch over their education, encourage them in their labours, reward +their talents and virtues, repress licentiousness; and do not concern +yourselves with their manner of thinking. Theological fables are +useful only to tyrants and the ignorant. + + +197. Does it then require an extraordinary effort of genius to +comprehend, that what is above the capacity of man, is not made +for him; that things supernatural are not made for natural beings; +that impenetrable mysteries are not made for limited minds? +If theologians are foolish enough to dispute upon objects, +which they acknowledge to be unintelligible even to themselves, +ought society to take any part in their silly quarrels? Must +the blood of nations flow to enhance the conjectures of a few +infatuated dreamers? If it is difficult to cure theologians +of their madness and the people of their prejudices, it is at +least easy to prevent the extravagancies of one party, and the +silliness of the other from producing pernicious effects. Let +every one be permitted to think as he pleases; but never let +him be permitted to injure others for their manner of thinking. +Were the rulers of nations more just and rational, theological +opinions would not affect the public tranquillity, more than +the disputes of natural philosophers, physicians, grammarians, +and critics. It is tyranny which causes theological quarrels +to be attended with serious consequences. + +Those, who extol the importance and utility of Religion, ought +to shew us its happy effects, the advantages for instance, +which the disputes and abstract speculations of theology can +be to porters, artisans, and labourers, and to the multitude +of unfortunate women and corrupt servants with which great +cities abound. All these beings are religious; they have +what is called _an implicit faith_. Their parsons believe +for them; and they stupidly adhere to the unknown belief +of their guides. They go to hear sermons, and would think +it a great crime to transgress any of the ordinances, to which, +in childhood, they are taught to conform. But of what service +to morals is all this? None at all. They have not the least +idea of Morality, and are even guilty of all the roguery, fraud, +rapine, and excess, that is out of the reach of law. + +The populace have no idea of their Religion; what they call Religion +is nothing but a blind attachment to unknown opinions and mysterious +practices. In fact, to deprive people of Religion is to deprive +them of nothing. By overthrowing their prejudices, we should only +lessen or annihilate the dangerous confidence they put in interested +guides, and should teach them to mistrust those, who, under the +pretext of Religion, often lead them into fatal excesses. + + +198. While pretending to instruct and enlighten men, Religion in +reality keeps them in ignorance, and stifles the desire of knowing +the most interesting objects. The people have no other rule of +conduct, than what their priests are pleased to prescribe. Religion +supplies the place of every thing else: but being in itself essentially +obscure, it is more proper to lead mortals astray than to guide them +in the path of science and happiness. Religion renders enigmatical +all Natural Philosophy, Morality, Legislation and Politics. A man +blinded by religious prejudices, fears truth, whenever it clashes +with his opinions: he cannot know his own nature he cannot cultivate +his reason, he cannot perform experiments. + +Everything concurs to render the people devout; but every thing tends +to prevent them from being humane, reasonable and virtuous. Religion +seems to have no other object, than to stupefy the mind. + +Priests have been ever at war with genius and talent, because +well-informed men perceive, that superstition shackles the human mind, +and would keep it in eternal infancy, occupied solely by fables and +frightened by phantoms. Incapable of improvement itself, Theology +opposed insurmountable barriers to the progress of true knowledge; +its sole object is to keep nations and their rulers in the most +profound ignorance of their duties, and of the real motives, that +should incline them to do good. It obscures Morality, renders +its principles arbitrary, and subjects it to the caprice of the +gods or of their ministers. It converts the art of governing +men into a mysterious tyranny, which is the scourge of nations. +It changes princes into unjust, licentious despots, and the people +into ignorant slaves, who become corrupt in order to merit the +favour of their masters. + + +199. By tracing the history of the human mind, we shall be easily +convinced, that Theology has cautiously guarded against its progress. +It began by giving out fables as sacred truth: it produced poetry, +which filled the imagination of men with its puerile fictions: +it entertained them with its gods and their incredible deeds. +In a word, Religion has always treated men, like children, whom +it lulled to sleep with tales, which its ministers would have us +still regard as incontestable truths. + +If the ministers of the gods have sometimes made useful discoveries, +they have always been careful to give them a dogmatical tone, and +envelope them in the shades of mystery. Pythagoras and Plato, +in order to acquire some trifling knowledge, were obliged to court +the favour of priests, to be initiated in their mysteries, and to +undergo whatever trials they were pleased to impose. At this price, +they were permitted to imbibe those exalted notions, still so +bewitching to all those who admire only what is perfectly unintelligible. +It was from Egyptian, Indian, and Chaldean priests, from the schools +of these visionaries, professionally interested in bewildering human +reason, that philosophy was obliged to borrow its first rudiments. +Obscure and false in its principles, mixed with fictions and fables, +and made only to dazzle the imagination, the progress of this philosophy +was precarious, and its theories unintelligible; instead of enlightening, +it blighted the mind, and diverted it from objects truly useful. + +The theological speculations and mystical reveries of the ancients +are still law in a great part of the philosophic world; and being +adopted by modern theology, it is heresy to abandon them. They tell +us "of aerial beings, of spirits, angels, demons, genii," and other +phantoms, which are the object of their meditations, and serve as +the basis of _metaphysics_, an abstract and futile science, which +for thousands of years the greatest geniuses have vainly studied. +Hypothesis, imagined by a few visionaries of Memphis and Babylon, +constitute even now the foundations of a science, whose obscurity +makes it revered as marvellous and divine. + +The first legislators were priests; the first mythologists, poets, +learned men, and physicians were priests. In their hands science +became sacred and was withheld from the profane. They spoke only +in allegories, emblems, enigmas, and ambiguous oracles--means well +calculated to excite curiosity, and above all to inspire the astonished +vulgar with a holy respect for men, who when they were thought to be +instructed by the gods, and capable of reading in the heavens the +fate of the earth, boldly proclaimed themselves the oracles of +the Deity. + + +200. The religions of ancient priests have only changed form. +Although our modern theologians regard their predecessors as impostors, +yet they have collected many scattered fragments of their religious +systems. In modern Religions we find, not only their metaphysical +dogmas, which theology has merely clothed in a new dress, but also +some remarkable remains of their superstitious practices, their magic, +and their enchantments. Christians are still commanded to respect +the remaining monuments of the legislators, priests, and prophets +of the Hebrew Religion, which had borrowed its strange practices +from Egypt. Thus extravagancies, imagined by knaves or idolatrous +visionaries, are still sacred among Christians! + +If we examine history, we shall find a striking resemblance among +all Religions. In all parts of the earth, we see, that religious +notions, periodically depress and elevate the people. The attention +of man is every where engrossed, by rites often abominable, and by +mysteries always formidable, which become the sole objects of meditation. +The different superstitions borrow, from one another, their abstract +reveries and ceremonies. Religions are in general mere unintelligible +rhapsodies, combined by new teachers, who use the materials of their +predecessors, reserving the right of adding or retrenching whatever +is not conformable to the present age. The religion of Egypt was +evidently the basis of the religion of Moses, who banished the worship +of idols: Moses was merely a schismatic Egyptian. Christianism is +only reformed Judaism. Mahometanism is composed of Judaism, +Christianity, and the ancient religion of Arabia, etc. + + +201. Theology, from the remotest antiquity to the present time, +has had the exclusive privilege of directing philosophy. What +assistance has been derived from its labours? It changed philosophy +into an unintelligible jargon, calculated to render uncertain the +clearest truths; it has converted the art of reasoning into a jargon +of words; it has carried the human mind into the airy regions of +metaphysics, and there employed it in vainly fathoming an obscure +abyss. Instead of physical and simple causes, this transformed +philosophy has substituted supernatural, or rather, _occult_ causes; +it has explained phenomena difficult to be conceived by agents +still more inconceivable. It has filled language with words, +void of sense, incapable of accounting for things, better calculated +to obscure than enlighten, and which seems invented expressly to +discourage man, to guard him against the powers of his mind, to +make him mistrust the principles of reason and evidence, and to +raise an insurmountable barrier between him and truth. + + +202. Were we to believe the partisans of Religion, nothing could +be explained without it; nature would be a perpetual enigma, and +man would be incapable of understanding himself. But, what does +this Religion in reality explain? The more we examine it, the +more we are convinced that its theological notions are fit only +to confuse our ideas; they change every thing into mystery: they +explain difficult things by things that are impossible. Is it +a satisfactory explanation of phenomena, to attribute them to +unknown agents, to invisible powers, to immaterial causes? Does +the human mind receive much light by being referred to _the depths +of the treasures of divine wisdom_, to which, we are repeatedly +told, it is vain to extend our rash enquiries? Can the divine +nature, of which we have no conception, enable us to conceive +the nature of man? + +Ask a Christian, what is the origin of the world? He will answer, +that God created it. What is God? He cannot tell. What is it +to create? He knows not. What is the cause of pestilence, famine, +wars, droughts, inundations and earthquakes? The anger of God. +What remedies can be applied to these calamities? Prayers, sacrifices, +processions, offerings, and ceremonies are, it is said, the true +means of disarming celestial fury. But why is heaven enraged? +Because men are wicked. Why are men wicked? Because their nature +is corrupt. What is the cause of this corruption? It is, says +the theologian, because the first man, beguiled by the first woman, +ate an apple, which God had forbidden him to touch. Who beguiled +this woman into such folly? The devil. Who made the devil? +God. But, why did God make this devil, destined to pervert mankind? +This is unknown; it is a mystery which the Deity alone is acquainted with. + +It is now universally acknowledged, that the earth turns round the sun. +Centuries ago, this opinion was blasphemy, as being irreconcileable +with the sacred books which every Christian reveres as inspired by +the Deity himself. Notwithstanding divine revelation, astronomers +now depend rather upon evidence, than upon the testimony of their +inspired books. + +What is the hidden principle of the motions of the human body? +The soul. What is a soul? A spirit. What is a spirit? A substance, +which has neither form, nor colour, nor extension, nor parts. +How can we form any idea of such a substance? How can it move +a body? That is not known; it is a mystery. Have beasts souls? +But, do they not act, feel, and think, in a manner very similar +to man? Mere illusion! By what right do you deprive beasts of a soul, +which you attribute to man, though you know nothing at all about it? +Because the souls of beasts would embarrass our theologians, who are +satisfied with the power of terrifying and damning the immaterial souls +of men, and are not so much interested in damning those of beasts. +Such are the puerile solutions, which philosophy, always in the +leading strings of theology, was obliged to invent, in order to +explain the problems of the physical and moral world? + + +203. How many evasions have been used, both in ancient and modern +times, in order to avoid an engagement with the ministers of the gods, +who have ever been the tyrants of thought? How many hypotheses and +shifts were such men as Descartes, Mallebranche, and Leibnitz, forced +to invent, in order to reconcile their discoveries with the fables +and mistakes which Religion had consecrated! In what guarded phrases +have the greatest philosophers expressed themselves, even at the risk +of being absurd, inconsistent, or unintelligible, whenever their ideas +did not accord with the principles of theology! Priests have been +always attentive to extinguish systems which opposed their interest. +Theology was ever the bed of Procrustes, to be adapted to which, +the limbs of travellers, if too long were cut off, and if too short +were lengthened. + +Can any sensible man, delighted with the sciences and attached to +the welfare of his fellow-creatures, reflect, without vexation and +anguish, how many profound, laborious, and subtle brains have been +for ages foolishly occupied in the study of absurdities? What a +treasure of knowledge might have been diffused by many celebrated +thinkers, if instead of engaging in the impertinent disputes of +vain theology, they had devoted their attention to intelligible +objects really important to mankind? Half the efforts which +religious opinions have cost genius, and half the wealth which +frivolous forms of worship have cost nations would have sufficed +to instruct them perfectly in morality, politics, natural philosophy, +medicine, agriculture, etc. Superstition generally absorbs the +attention, admiration, and treasures of the people; their Religion +costs them very dear; but they have neither knowledge, virtue, +nor happiness, for their money. + + +204. Some ancient and modern philosophers have been bold enough +to assume experience and reason for their guides, and to shake off +the chains of superstition. Democritus, Epicurus, and other Greeks +presumed to tear away the veil of prejudice, and to deliver philosophy +from theological shackles. But their systems, too simple, too sensible, +and too free from the marvellous, for imaginations enamoured with +chimeras, were obliged to yield to the fabulous conjectures of such +men as Plato and Socrates. Among the moderns, Hobbes, Spinosa, +Bayle, etc., have followed the steps of Epicurus; but their doctrine +has found very few followers, in a world, still intoxicated with +fables, to listen to reason. + +In every age, it has been dangerous to depart from prejudices. +Discoveries of every kind have been prohibited. All that enlightened +men could do, was to speak ambiguously, hence they often confounded +falsehood with truth. Several had a _double doctrine_, one public +and the other secret; the key of the latter being lost, their true +sentiments, have often become unintelligible and consequently useless. + +How could modern philosophers, who, under pain of cruel persecution, +were commanded to renounce reason, and to subject it to faith, +that is, to the authority of priests; how, I say, could men, +thus bound, give free scope to their genius, improve reason, +and accelerate the progress of the human mind? It was with fear +and trembling that even the greatest men obtained a glimpse of truth; +rarely had they the courage to announce it; and those, who did, +were terribly punished. With Religion, it has ever been unlawful +to think, or to combat the prejudices of which man is every where +the victim and the dupe. + + +205. Every man, sufficiently intrepid to announce truths to the world, +is sure of incurring the hatred of the ministers of Religion, who +loudly call to their aid secular powers; and want the assistance +of laws to support both their arguments and their gods. Their +clamours expose too evidently the weakness of their cause. + + "None call for aid but those who feel distressed." + +In Religion, man is not permitted to err. In general, those who +err are pitied, and some kindness is shewn to persons who discover +new truths; but, when Religion is thought to be interested either +in the errors or the discoveries, a holy zeal is kindled, the +populace become frantic, and nations are in an uproar. + +Can any thing be more afflicting, than to see public and private +felicity depending upon a futile system, which is destitute if +principles, founded only on a distempered imagination, and incapable +of presenting any thing but words void of sense? In what consists +the so much boasted utility of a Religion, which nobody can comprehend, +which continually torments those who are weak enough to meddle with it, +which is incapable of rendering men better, and which often makes them +consider it meritorious to be unjust and wicked? Is there a folly +more deplorable, and more justly to be combated, than that, which +far from doing any service to the human race, only makes them blind, +delirious, and miserable, by depriving them of Truth, the sole cure +for their wretchedness. + + +206. Religion has ever filled the mind of man with darkness, +and kept him in ignorance of his real duties and true interests. +It is only by dispelling the clouds and phantoms of Religion, +that we shall discover Truth, Reason, and Morality. Religion +diverts us from the causes of evils, and from the remedies which +nature prescribes; far from curing, it only aggravates, multiplies, +and perpetuates them. Let us observe with the celebrated +Lord Bolingbroke, that "_theology is the box of Pandora; and +if it is impossible to shut it, it is at least useful to inform men, +that this fatal box is open_." + + +THE END. + + + + + +End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Good Sense, by Baron D'Holbach + +*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK GOOD SENSE *** + +This file should be named gsens10.txt or gsens10.zip +Corrected EDITIONS of our eBooks get a new NUMBER, gsens11.txt +VERSIONS based on separate sources get new LETTER, gsens11a.txt + +Project Gutenberg eBooks are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the US +unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we usually do not +keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. + +We are now trying to release all our eBooks one year in advance +of the official release dates, leaving time for better editing. +Please be encouraged to tell us about any error or corrections, +even years after the official publication date. + +Please note neither this listing nor its contents are final til +midnight of the last day of the month of any such announcement. +The official release date of all Project Gutenberg eBooks is at +Midnight, Central Time, of the last day of the stated month. A +preliminary version may often be posted for suggestion, comment +and editing by those who wish to do so. + +Most people start at our Web sites at: +http://gutenberg.net or +http://promo.net/pg + +These Web sites include award-winning information about Project +Gutenberg, including how to donate, how to help produce our new +eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter (free!). + + +Those of you who want to download any eBook before announcement +can get to them as follows, and just download by date. This is +also a good way to get them instantly upon announcement, as the +indexes our cataloguers produce obviously take a while after an +announcement goes out in the Project Gutenberg Newsletter. + +http://www.ibiblio.org/gutenberg/etext03 or +ftp://ftp.ibiblio.org/pub/docs/books/gutenberg/etext03 + +Or /etext02, 01, 00, 99, 98, 97, 96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 92, 91 or 90 + +Just search by the first five letters of the filename you want, +as it appears in our Newsletters. + + +Information about Project Gutenberg (one page) + +We produce about two million dollars for each hour we work. The +time it takes us, a rather conservative estimate, is fifty hours +to get any eBook selected, entered, proofread, edited, copyright +searched and analyzed, the copyright letters written, etc. Our +projected audience is one hundred million readers. If the value +per text is nominally estimated at one dollar then we produce $2 +million dollars per hour in 2002 as we release over 100 new text +files per month: 1240 more eBooks in 2001 for a total of 4000+ +We are already on our way to trying for 2000 more eBooks in 2002 +If they reach just 1-2% of the world's population then the total +will reach over half a trillion eBooks given away by year's end. + +The Goal of Project Gutenberg is to Give Away 1 Trillion eBooks! +This is ten thousand titles each to one hundred million readers, +which is only about 4% of the present number of computer users. + +Here is the briefest record of our progress (* means estimated): + +eBooks Year Month + + 1 1971 July + 10 1991 January + 100 1994 January + 1000 1997 August + 1500 1998 October + 2000 1999 December + 2500 2000 December + 3000 2001 November + 4000 2001 October/November + 6000 2002 December* + 9000 2003 November* +10000 2004 January* + + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation has been created +to secure a future for Project Gutenberg into the next millennium. + +We need your donations more than ever! + +As of February, 2002, contributions are being solicited from people +and organizations in: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Connecticut, +Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, +Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, +Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New +Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, +Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South +Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West +Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. + +We have filed in all 50 states now, but these are the only ones +that have responded. + +As the requirements for other states are met, additions to this list +will be made and fund raising will begin in the additional states. +Please feel free to ask to check the status of your state. + +In answer to various questions we have received on this: + +We are constantly working on finishing the paperwork to legally +request donations in all 50 states. If your state is not listed and +you would like to know if we have added it since the list you have, +just ask. + +While we cannot solicit donations from people in states where we are +not yet registered, we know of no prohibition against accepting +donations from donors in these states who approach us with an offer to +donate. + +International donations are accepted, but we don't know ANYTHING about +how to make them tax-deductible, or even if they CAN be made +deductible, and don't have the staff to handle it even if there are +ways. + +Donations by check or money order may be sent to: + +Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation +PMB 113 +1739 University Ave. +Oxford, MS 38655-4109 + +Contact us if you want to arrange for a wire transfer or payment +method other than by check or money order. + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation has been approved by +the US Internal Revenue Service as a 501(c)(3) organization with EIN +[Employee Identification Number] 64-622154. Donations are +tax-deductible to the maximum extent permitted by law. As fund-raising +requirements for other states are met, additions to this list will be +made and fund-raising will begin in the additional states. + +We need your donations more than ever! + +You can get up to date donation information online at: + +http://www.gutenberg.net/donation.html + + +*** + +If you can't reach Project Gutenberg, +you can always email directly to: + +Michael S. Hart <hart@pobox.com> + +Prof. Hart will answer or forward your message. + +We would prefer to send you information by email. + + +**The Legal Small Print** + + +(Three Pages) + +***START**THE SMALL PRINT!**FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN EBOOKS**START*** +Why is this "Small Print!" statement here? You know: lawyers. +They tell us you might sue us if there is something wrong with +your copy of this eBook, even if you got it for free from +someone other than us, and even if what's wrong is not our +fault. So, among other things, this "Small Print!" statement +disclaims most of our liability to you. It also tells you how +you may distribute copies of this eBook if you want to. + +*BEFORE!* YOU USE OR READ THIS EBOOK +By using or reading any part of this PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm +eBook, you indicate that you understand, agree to and accept +this "Small Print!" statement. If you do not, you can receive +a refund of the money (if any) you paid for this eBook by +sending a request within 30 days of receiving it to the person +you got it from. If you received this eBook on a physical +medium (such as a disk), you must return it with your request. + +ABOUT PROJECT GUTENBERG-TM EBOOKS +This PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm eBook, like most PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm eBooks, +is a "public domain" work distributed by Professor Michael S. Hart +through the Project Gutenberg Association (the "Project"). +Among other things, this means that no one owns a United States copyright +on or for this work, so the Project (and you!) can copy and +distribute it in the United States without permission and +without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth +below, apply if you wish to copy and distribute this eBook +under the "PROJECT GUTENBERG" trademark. + +Please do not use the "PROJECT GUTENBERG" trademark to market +any commercial products without permission. + +To create these eBooks, the Project expends considerable +efforts to identify, transcribe and proofread public domain +works. Despite these efforts, the Project's eBooks and any +medium they may be on may contain "Defects". Among other +things, Defects may take the form of incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other +intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged +disk or other eBook medium, a computer virus, or computer +codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment. + +LIMITED WARRANTY; DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES +But for the "Right of Replacement or Refund" described below, +[1] Michael Hart and the Foundation (and any other party you may +receive this eBook from as a PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm eBook) disclaims +all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including +legal fees, and [2] YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE OR +UNDER STRICT LIABILITY, OR FOR BREACH OF WARRANTY OR CONTRACT, +INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE +OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE +POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. + +If you discover a Defect in this eBook within 90 days of +receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) +you paid for it by sending an explanatory note within that +time to the person you received it from. If you received it +on a physical medium, you must return it with your note, and +such person may choose to alternatively give you a replacement +copy. If you received it electronically, such person may +choose to alternatively give you a second opportunity to +receive it electronically. + +THIS EBOOK IS OTHERWISE PROVIDED TO YOU "AS-IS". NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ARE MADE TO YOU AS +TO THE EBOOK OR ANY MEDIUM IT MAY BE ON, INCLUDING BUT NOT +LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A +PARTICULAR PURPOSE. + +Some states do not allow disclaimers of implied warranties or +the exclusion or limitation of consequential damages, so the +above disclaimers and exclusions may not apply to you, and you +may have other legal rights. + +INDEMNITY +You will indemnify and hold Michael Hart, the Foundation, +and its trustees and agents, and any volunteers associated +with the production and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm +texts harmless, from all liability, cost and expense, including +legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the +following that you do or cause: [1] distribution of this eBook, +[2] alteration, modification, or addition to the eBook, +or [3] any Defect. + +DISTRIBUTION UNDER "PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm" +You may distribute copies of this eBook electronically, or by +disk, book or any other medium if you either delete this +"Small Print!" and all other references to Project Gutenberg, +or: + +[1] Only give exact copies of it. Among other things, this + requires that you do not remove, alter or modify the + eBook or this "small print!" statement. You may however, + if you wish, distribute this eBook in machine readable + binary, compressed, mark-up, or proprietary form, + including any form resulting from conversion by word + processing or hypertext software, but only so long as + *EITHER*: + + [*] The eBook, when displayed, is clearly readable, and + does *not* contain characters other than those + intended by the author of the work, although tilde + (~), asterisk (*) and underline (_) characters may + be used to convey punctuation intended by the + author, and additional characters may be used to + indicate hypertext links; OR + + [*] The eBook may be readily converted by the reader at + no expense into plain ASCII, EBCDIC or equivalent + form by the program that displays the eBook (as is + the case, for instance, with most word processors); + OR + + [*] You provide, or agree to also provide on request at + no additional cost, fee or expense, a copy of the + eBook in its original plain ASCII form (or in EBCDIC + or other equivalent proprietary form). + +[2] Honor the eBook refund and replacement provisions of this + "Small Print!" statement. + +[3] Pay a trademark license fee to the Foundation of 20% of the + gross profits you derive calculated using the method you + already use to calculate your applicable taxes. If you + don't derive profits, no royalty is due. Royalties are + payable to "Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation" + the 60 days following each date you prepare (or were + legally required to prepare) your annual (or equivalent + periodic) tax return. Please contact us beforehand to + let us know your plans and to work out the details. + +WHAT IF YOU *WANT* TO SEND MONEY EVEN IF YOU DON'T HAVE TO? +Project Gutenberg is dedicated to increasing the number of +public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed +in machine readable form. + +The Project gratefully accepts contributions of money, time, +public domain materials, or royalty free copyright licenses. +Money should be paid to the: +"Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." + +If you are interested in contributing scanning equipment or +software or other items, please contact Michael Hart at: +hart@pobox.com + +[Portions of this eBook's header and trailer may be reprinted only +when distributed free of all fees. Copyright (C) 2001, 2002 by +Michael S. Hart. Project Gutenberg is a TradeMark and may not be +used in any sales of Project Gutenberg eBooks or other materials be +they hardware or software or any other related product without +express permission.] + +*END THE SMALL PRINT! FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN EBOOKS*Ver.02/11/02*END* + diff --git a/old/gsens10.zip b/old/gsens10.zip Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..c0fa119 --- /dev/null +++ b/old/gsens10.zip |