Pierre Bayle on atheism
From The Art and Popular Culture Encyclopedia
|
Related e |
|
Featured: |
Pierre Bayle on atheism in the Historical and Critical Dictionary, see Atheism in the Age of the Enlightenment.
Contents |
Full text of the Dictionnaire Historique et Critique
ATHEISM—ATHEISTS
Certain learned men contend for three degrees of Atheism. The first, is to maintain that there is no God. The second, to deny that the world is the work of God. The third, is to assert that God has created the world by the necessity of his own nature, and not by the inducement of free will.
Atheism less injurious than Idolatry
If the judgments of the Atheists in their denial of the existence of a Supreme Being be attended to, it will be manifest that they are exceedingly blind and ignorant of the nature of things ; but is there less extravagance in the notions of God which were entertained by the Pagans ? The Pagans thought that a great number of divinities existed with different interests, views, and passions; that the honours paid to Jupiter would do nothing to assuage the anger of Juno, and that men may be
- This is a smart exposition of the difficulties attendant on the subject, which in fact involves the great question of the origin of evil, and the doctrine of philosophical necessity, aground which cannot be taken from under the Calvinistic predestination, in itself so startling.—Ed.
- Bayle with his usual caution, ostensibly refers to Paganism only, but his reasoning applies to every species of superstition or doctrine which, whatever its profession, dishonours the Supreme Being, excites baleful passions, and does nothing to advance social well-being on this side the grave. The general application was felt in his own days, and hence no small degree of rancour and contumely from theologists of very opposite sentiments.—Ed.
lavoured by one god, and have another for an enemy. They attributed different sexes to the deity, and created the relationship of father and child, husband and wife, as among mortals. They believed, that if the driver of a chariot in a procession by chance took the reins with the one hand, instead of the other, the inadvertence would prevent the repentance and good intentions of an entire population from appeasing a portion of divine indignation, that would otherwise have been allayed. Such opinions, and a number of others* of a kindred description, which it would be tedious to
- Hume justly remarks, that however lofty the attributes which the multitude bestow upon the Divinity, their real idea of him, notwithstanding their pompous language is inconceivably mean and frivolous. The following passage pleasantly supports the illustration of Bayle's Charioteer :
" That original Intelligence, say the Magians, who is the first principle of all things, discovers himself immediately to the mind and understanding alone ; but has placed the sun as his image in the visible universe; and when that bright, luminary diffuses its beams over the earth and the firmament, it is a faint copy of the glory which resides in the higher heavens. If you would escape the displeasure of this divine Being, you must be careful never to set your bare foot upon the ground, nor spit into a fire, nor throw any water upon it, even though it were consuming a whole city.—Who can express the perfections of the Almighty ? say the Mahometans. Even the noblest works, if compared with him, are but dust and rubbish. How much more must human conception fall short of his infinite perfections ! His smile and favour render men for ever happy; and to obtain it for your children, the best method is to cut off from them, while infants, a little bit of skin, about half the breadth of a farthing. —Take two bits of cloth, say the Roman Catholics, about an inch, or an inch and a half square; join them by the corners with two strings or pieces of tape about sixteen inches long; throw this over your head, and make one of the pieces of cloth lie on your breast, and the other upon your back, keeping them next your skin (the scapulary). There is not a better secret for recommending yourself to that infinite Being, who exists from eternity to eternity "—Dissertation on the Natural History of Religion.—Ed.
particularize, evidently suppose the divine nature to be bounded, and subject to weaknesses, which would scarcely be pardoned in an honest man. They despoil God of his omnipotence, eternity, spirituality, and justice, and reduce him to a state of existence which is more contradictory to reason than his nonexistence altogether. From all which it follows, that the errors of the Pagan worship were more injurious and quite as opposed to ratio nality as Atheism itself.
It is sometimes asserted by those who contend for the worship of false gods as superior to the denial of the existence of any, that the miscreants who committed the greatest crimes among the Pagans, were in reality Atheists. But were it even true that a Tarquin, a Catiline, a Nero, and an Heliogabalus believed not in the gods ; can the same thing be affirmed of all the Romans who have been murderers, poisoners, spoilers, and perjured men 1 It cannot even be truly asserted of the monsters in question ; for according to Sueto nius, Nero himself dared not assist at the Eleusi sinian mysteries, knowing that it was customary foi an herald to cry aloud, that no impious or wicked man was allowed to approach them. According to the same authority, he also suffered from remorse of conscience, and was frightened with bad dreams and auguries, and pleased with good ones. He even thanked Heaven that having neglected other superstitions, he had always persevered in the worship of the small image of a child, to which he sacrificed three times a day. Similar proofs exist as to Tarquin, Catiline, Caligula, and Heliogabalus, who were therefore no Atheists. I wish not to displease the reverend fathers, the Minims, when I observe, that the journey of St. Francis de Paulo, from the lower end of Calabria, to the court of king Louis XL, produced in me no great
idea of the sanctity of that prince. Possessing all his life a duplicity of heart altogether opposed to the Christian doctrine, few persons might, with less apparent rashness, be accused of irreligion than he. Yet if we examine facts, nothing can be more false, than that this king whom historians describe as so barbarous and detestable, was not persuaded of the truths of religion. The proofs are innumerable, and one of them is very curious : for instance, he was overheard saying his prayers before the grand altar of our lady of Clery, in the following words :—" Ah ! my good lady, my little mistress, my greatest benefactress, in whom I have always found consolation, I pray of thee to supplicate God for me, and be my advocate with him, to pardon me the death of my brother, whom I caused to be poisoned by that wicked abbot of St Jean. I confess the truth to thee, as my. indulgent mistress.—Procure, then, my pardon, good lady, and I know that I will bestow on thee," fyc. fyc. During his last sickness, he not only sent for St Francis de Paulo, and for relics from Rome, to ward off the approach of death ; but caused himself to be surrounded with the latter, as a sort of fortification, thinking that death would not have the boldness to pass them, and assail him. It is impossible, therefore, to deny that this prince was persuaded of the truth of the doctrines of his church, and that he supplies in his person a conspicuous example of the perfect accordance of a soul altogether wicked, with even such a belief in the existence of God, as amounts to the most extravagant bigotry*.
- Bayle relates a number of instances of an entire reliance upon, and fervent devotion towards the Virgin on the part of many other persons engaged in criminal pursuits, all tending to prove his main position—the more injurious tendency of superstition or false religion, than of Atheism.—Ed,
It is not, in fact, to be pretended, that all who have lived wickedly either as Christians or Pagans, have not entertained sentiments of religion. Would it not be absurd to assert, that certain provinces and districts, which evinced so much enmity and rage towards the early Christians were destitute of religion, when it is evident, that it was exclusively on account of it that their indignation was excited. The zeal of the Christians against their gods, led them to attribute the internal calamities to the anger of the deities, who afflicted them by way of punishment; and so far from a deficiency of religious sentiment exciting them to persecution, their intolerance actually sprang from an excess of it*.
On the other hand, Atheism does not so necessarily imply a corruption of manners, as false religion ; and to imagine so, can only arise from neglecting to attend to the genuine principles of human actions. The usual mode of reasoning, is as follows :— " Man is by nature reasonable, he never loves without knowing why; he is naturally actuated by a regard to his own happiness, and a dislike to his own misery, and consequently he prefers the objects which operate accordingly. If he be convinced that a Providence governs the world, which nothing can escape, and which recompenses virtue with everlasting happiness, and punishes vice with eternal torment, he will not fail to embrace virtue, and fly from vice. But, if he be ignorant of, or deny such
- It is easy to perceive how Bayle might have strengthened his argument, by the massacre of St Bartholomew, and other instances, which, however instigated by the ambition and intrigue of leaders, were clearly the result of bigotry and superstition in the mass of the perpetrators. This indeed he has done, in the course of the inquiry, but not in such a wav as to render it necessary to lengthen an article which may be more briefly rendered conclusive.—Ed.
a Providence, he will regard the gratification of his own desires as his final object, and the rule of all his actions. He will follow the impulses of his selfishness, commit perjury for the least inducement, and should he find himself in a situation in which he can disregard human laws, as well as the voice of conscience, there are no crimes which may not be expected from him. Even the pious frauds of Paganism and superstition have prevented a quantity of crimes, which Atheists would have committed, who being by disbelief inaccessible to all such considerations, must necessarily be the most incorrigibly wicked beings in the universe," fyc. fyc. ' All which has just been quoted is fine, and sounds very well when things are regarded metaphysically, and in the abstract; but the misfortune is, that it is any thing but conformable to experience. No doubt, if a notion were to be formed of the manners of Christians, by the inhabitants of another world, who were simply told, that they were beings endowed with reason, anxious for felicity, and persuaded that there was a paradise for those who obeyed God, and a hell for those who disobeyed him, they would not fail to conclude that the Christians would strictly observe the precepts of the Gospel, and that they would all be distinguished by works of mercy, prayer arid forgiveness of injuries. But from what would they thus conclude ? From an abstract idea. If they came among us, and saw the real and proximate sources of action, they would quickly discover, that in this world the doings of men are regulated by other springs than the light of conscience. In short, let them be reasonable creatures as much as may be, it is not the less true, that they seldom or ever act in consequence of their principles. Man has great strength in affairs of speculation, and seldom draws false consequences : in matters of theory his error
usually consists more in the adoption of erroneous premises, than in false modes of inferring from them. In respect to morals, it is quite another affair: seldom giving into bad principles, and almost always retaining natural ideas of equity, mankind almost invariably act in obedience to their passions. Whence is it, that with so much diversity among men, on the manner of serving God, certain motives and passions act equally in all countries, and in all ages. That the Jew, the Mahometan, the Turk, the Moor, the Christian, the Infidel, the Indian, the Tartar, the Islander, and the inhabitant of Terra Firma, the nobleman and the plebeian—is a word, that all sorts of people who unite in nothing else, but in the general notion of man, are so alike in regard to the operation of the passions, that they are in that respect copies of each other throughout the world. How can this arise, (I except the influence of the Holy Ghost,) if the true spring of action in man be composed of any thing but temperament, natural inclination for pleasure, a taste contracted for certain objects, habits gained by early intercourse, or some disposition in the bottom of his nature, which will show itself wherever born or however abounding with education or acquirements.
Thi3, in fact, must be the case, since the ancient Pagans loaded as they were with an incredible multitude of superstitions, perpetually occupied in appeasing the anger of their idols ; frightened with innumerable prodigies ; and believing their gods the dispensers of adversity or prosperity, according to the lives which they led, were guilty of all sorts of crimes. If it were not so, I repeat, how is it that Christians who see so clearly by the light of a revelation, sustained by miracles, that vice ought to be renounced in order to be eternally happy, and to avoid being eternally miserable; ' who possess so many excellent preachers, who are paid for delivering the most pressing exhortations in the world;—who abound in learned and zealous directors of conscience, and in myriads of books of directions. How, I say, were it otherwise, would it be possible for Christians to live as they often do—the slaves of vice, and the constant victims of their passions 1 It has been asserted, that a moral Atheist would be a monster beyond the power of nature to create: I reply, that it is not more strange for an Atheist to live virtuously, than for a Christian to abandon himself to crime! If we believe the last kind of monster, why dispute the existence of the first ?
Not, however, to let the affair rest on simple conjecture, I affirm, that the few persons who are spoken of as professed Atheists among the ancients, were men of regular habits. Their lives, indeed, appeared so admirable in the eyes of Clement of Alexandria, that he denied their right to the appellation, and asserted that they were only called so, because, by their penetration and justness of deduction, they had detected the errors of Paganism. He deceived himself, and I wonder how a man with so much erudition did not perceive that the Pagans distinguished those who doubted the existence of the gods, from those who denied it; and those who attributed to them the government of the world, from those who allowed them a state of idle beatitude. They never confounded the opinions of those who denied there are gods at all, with those who entertained more modified opinions. They have always confined the name of Atheists to the former, and have always included among the number, Theodore, Diagoras, and those whom Clemens Alexandrinus would take take away. Cicero, Plutarch, and Diogenes Laertius are so express upon the point, that no chicanery can do away 'with their testimony. Socrates passed for a philosopher, who acknowledged the unity of God, yet he is not classed among the Atheists, with Diagoras and Theodore. Lactantius stoutly maintains that the unity of God was known to many Pagans, to Orpheus, to Virgil, to Thales, to Pythagoras, to Cleanthes, to Anaximenes, and to Cicero, and proves it by passages from their works; but those great men were never defamed as Atheists. It is, therefore, without reason that Clemens Alexandrinus doubts the Atheism of Diagoras, Theodore, Nicanor, Hippo, and others. Nevertheless, they were such honest men, that a father of the church would claim them, for the honour of virtue and true religion.
It appears from some passages in Pliny, that he believed not in God, but he was not a voluptuary, and no man was more attached, than he, to occupation, which became a worthy and illustrious Roman.
Epicurus, who denied a Providence, and the immortality of the soul, was one of the ancient philosophers who lived the most exemplary; and though the sect has been finally condemned, it is, nevertheless, certain that it has contained a great number of persons of honour and of probity, and that those who dishonoured it by their vices, did not become vicious by precept. They were debauchees by temperament and habit, and sought to veil their coarse passions beneath the mantle of this great philosopher. They became not libertines in consequence of embracing the doctrines of Epicurus; but embraced a corruption of his doctrines because they were libertines. Such is the testimony of Seneca, although the member of a sect altogether opposed to that of Epicurus, of whose frugality and moderation, even St Jerome speaks most advantageously, in opposing these qualities to the irregularities of the Christians, whom he thus sought to cover with confusion.
The Sadducees, among the Jews, openly denied the immortality of the soul; but with this offensive opinion, I cannot perceive that they led a more corrupt life than the other Jews. On the contrary, it appears probable that they were honester men than the Pharisees, who so piqued themselves on their attention to the law of Moses.
Balzac, in his " Christian Socrates," gives us the last words of a prince who lived and died an Atheist; and assures us that "he wanted not the moral virtues, that he attended to his oaths, drank no wine, and was extremely careful in respect to all which appeared to him unbecoming."
Vanini, who was burnt at Toulouse for Atheism, in 1619, was extremely correct in his manners, and whoever might have undertaken to prosecute him for any thing but his doctrines, would have run a great risk of being proved a calumniator.
In the reign of Charles IX, in the year 1573, they burnt, in Paris, a man who had dogmatized upon Atheism privately. He maintained that there was no other god in the world than the preservation of bodily purity; and it was said, that, in consequence, he had not parted with his virginity. He had as many shirts as there are days in the year, and sent them into Flanders to be washed in a fountain famous for the purity and clearness of its water, and forits admirable property of whitening linen. He had an aversion for every species of impurity, whether of actions or words; and although he maintained his heterodox opinions until death, he always pronounced them with a sweetness and gentleness of manner, and from a mouth made up for the delivery of the most refined phraseology.
I will not place the Chancellor L'Hopital in the number of Atheists, for I doubt not that he was a good Christian. I will only observe that he was very much suspected of having no religion; and although nothing could be more grave, austere, and composed .than his deportment, or more exemplary than his life, he was roundly accused of Atheism, by Peguillon, Bishop of Metz. His testimony is, no doubt, to be suspected, as the accuser was tutor to the Cardinal de Lorraine, but it is quite sufficient to set aside the bold assertion that Atheism is inseparable from moral depravity, to know that a chancellor of France was suspected of it, whose excellent conduct was known to all the world. It was something extraordinary, not to say scandalous, -that all men distinguished for strictness of morals in those days, were deemed bad Catholics, while a man, however dissolute, was deemed altogether orthodox, provided he kept clear of the new opinions. I am not certain that we may not apply to religion, that which Julius Caesar said to those who came to tell him that Mark Antony and Dolabella were plotting against him. " I have very little distrust," observed he, " in respect to men so sleek and well combed; I much more suspect those pale and lean persons," speaking of Brutus and Cassius. The enemies of religion, those minds who believe nothing, and who make to themselves a title to mental strength, by doubting every thing; who seek answers to arguments in proof of the existence of a God, and who refine upon the difficulties which are objected to a Providence, are not ordinarily self-indulgent and luxurious men. People who pass all their days amidst bottles and glasses, who like to resort to a ball every night, and court beauties brown and fair; who lay snares for the chastity of women; who seek only to kill time in debauchery, and to avoid disgust by a diversity of pursuits— these are not persons to trouble themselves with arguments on the existence of God, or the spirituality of the soul. They have no time to throw away on abstractions which afford few charms to persons immersed in sensuality. They confide in the truths of which they have been informed; they implicitly believe in their catechisms; they even persuade themselves that, in doubting nothing, they advance their own eternal welfare, and that faith is not less conducive to tranquillity of soul, than necessary to the salvation in the expectation of which they may rationally divert themselves. On the contrary, men who partake of the spirit of incredulity; who pique themselves on rationally doubting, care little for the tavern, treat coquetry with contempt, are melancholy, lean, and pale, and ponder even over their repasts. So much is this the case, that instead of saying with Cato, that of all who sought to extinguish liberty in Rome, Caesar alone was temperate; it must be admitted, that among all those who have disturbed the unity of the church, invented heresies, sought to overthrow religion, or denied the existence of God, few have been drunkards or debauchees. Cicero having observed that Cassar scratched his head with the tip of his finger only, and that he was well combed, and took great care in the arrangement of his hair, thought him incapable of plotting against the liberty of the republic. He was deceived in his conjecture; but it is not the less true, that a man plunged in sensuality is not likely to allow himself to be burnt, either for Heresy or Atheism. I do not assert that all those who are destitute of religion are moral and austere; I believe there may be, among them, every species of criminal; I simply maintain that many of that class exist who are no way distinguished for their vices, a fact which cannot be denied me, as I have experience on my side. Now if Atheists exist, who, morally speaking, are well-disposed, it follows that Atheism is not a necessary cause of immorality, but simply an incidental one in regard to those who would have been immoral from disposition or temperament, whether Atheists or not.
To conclude ! The fear and love of God are not the only spring of human actions : other principles actuate men—The love of praise, the fear of disgrace, the natural temper, punishments and rewards in the magistrates' hands, have a very great influ ence. He who doubts of it, must be ignorant of what passes in his own breast, and what the common course of the world may demonstrate to him every moment. It is not, however, probable that any man should be so stupid as to be ignorant of such a truth ; what, therefore, I have asserted concerning these other springs of human actions, may be placed in the number of truths which are beyond dispute.
The fear and love of God form not always the most powerful principle. The love of glory, the fear of infamy, death, or torments, the hopes of preferment, act with greater force upon some men, than the desire of pleasing God, and the fear of breaking his commandments. If any one doubt of it, he is ignorant of some of his own actions, and knows nothing of what is doing daily under the sun. The world abounds with people who choose rather to commit a sin, than displease a Prince who can either make or ruin their fortune. Men daily subscribe formularies of faith against their conscience, in order to save their estates, or to avoid imprisonment, exile, death, &c. An officer who has quitted all for his religion, finding himself under the alternative either of offending God if he revenge himself for having received a box on the ear, or of being accounted a coward if he do not, never rests till he has satisfaction for this affront, though at the peril of killing or being killed in a state that must be followed with eternal damnation.
It is not likely that any man should be so stupid as to be ignorant of such things. Therefore, let this moral aphorism be placed among indisputable truths,—' That the fear and love of God form not always the most active principle of human actions.' This being so, it ought not to be reckoned a scandalous paradox, but rather a very possible thing, that some men, without religion, should be more strongly excited to a. good moral life by their constitution, in conjunction with the love of praise and fear of disgrace, than some others by the instinct of conscience. The scandal ought to be much greater, that so many people are convinced of the truths of religion, and at the same time plunged in all manner of vice*.—Penseessur les Cometes. Appendix to Diet.
Bayle's Defence of himself for doing Justice to the moral Characters of Atheists and Epicureans.
In order to remove all suspicions of a vicious affectation, I have taken care to mention, as often as possible, the bad morals of Atheists. If I have not done it oftener, it was because I wanted materials. The public knows, that I called for information; nobody has been pleased to give me any, and I have not as yet been able to make any further discovery by my own inquiries. I do not pretend to deny, that there have been in all countries, and at all times, men, who, by their debaucheries, and long criminal habits, have stifled
- This article is a mere abstract, in his own language, of the parallel between Atheism and Idolatry, in our author's " Pensees sur les Cometes." It was unnecessary to dwell so much on the vices of Paganism, at this time of day ; as the value of the argument consists, at present, in its application to all impure and debasing systems of religion, and in abatement of the jargon on the tendency of the speculative opinions of men, which is often as false in fact, as erroneous in reasoning.—Ed.
the explicit belief of the existence of a God ; but history having not preserved their names, it is impossible to speak of them. It is probable, that among those banditti, and hired assassins, who commit so many crimes, there are some who have no religion; but the contrary is still more probable, since, among so many malefactors who pass through the hangman's hands, there are none found to be .Atheists. The ordinaries, who prepare them for death, find them always sufficiently disposed to desire the joys of heaven. As for those profane Epicureans, who, in the judgment of Father Garasse, and many other writers, are downright Atheists, I could not bring them into the list; the question not being concerning those we call practical Atheists, people that live without any fear of God, though they are persuaded of his existence; but concerning theoretical Atheists, such as Diagoras, Vanini, Spinosa, &c., whose Atheism is attested, either by historians, or by their own writings. The question only turns upon the morals of this class of Atheists, examples of whose bad lives, I have desired might be shown me.* If I had found any, I had made an exact mention of them. There is nothing easier to be found in history than some wretches, whose abominable actions make the readers tremble; but their very impieties, and blasphemies, are a proof that they believed a Deity. This is a natural consequence of the constant doctrine of Divines, that the devil, the most wicked of creatures, but incapable of Atheism, is the promoter of all the sins of
- There is a great difference, as Bayle observes elsewhere, between the fact of men being wicked because they are Atheists, or Atheists because they are wicked. The necessary immorality of the former speculative class is alone denied, and with respect to the latter, they are generally cured by the first fit of sickness, and, moreover, would have been immoral, whether believers or not.—Ed.
mankind; whence the greatest wickedness of man, must have the character of that of the devil; that is, be joined with the persuasion of the being of a God.
If what I have been saying, is capable of edifying people of a tender conscience, now it is proved that the assertion which frightened them agrees with the most orthodox principles, they will find no less a subject of edification in what I am going to propose—That the most wicked men not being Atheists, and that the greatest part of Atheists, whose names are come down to us, having been virtuous men in a worldly sense, is a proof of the infinite wisdom of God, and ought to make us admire his providence. It has set bounds to man's corruption, that there might be societies upon earth; and if it have favoured but a few with a sanctifying grace, it has dispersed a general repressing grace ; which, like a strong bank, restrains the floods of sin, as much as is necessary to prevent a universal inundation. It is commonly said, that the means God has made use of to arrive at this end, have been, to preserve in the souls of all men the ideas of virtue and vice, with a sense of a providence which superintends all, punishes vice, and rewards virtue. This notion will be found in the bodies of divinity, and in a great many other orthodox books. What is the natural consequence of this proposition? That if there be some persons whom God forsakes not so far as to suffer them to fall into Epicurus's system, or that of the Atheists, they are chiefly those brutish souls, whose cruelty, audaciousness, avarice, fury, and ambition, are capable of bringing a flourishing country to speedy ruin: that if he forsake some people, so far as to permit they should deny either his existence, or providence, they are chiefly persons, whose temper, education, lively ideas of virtue, love of fame, or sense of dis
honour, serve as a strong curb to keep them to their duty? These are two consequences that naturally flow from the above-mentioned theological principle. Now, as by informing my readers in some places of this dictionary, that the most profligate wretches have had some religion; and that those who have had none, have lived according to the rules of virtue, having said nothing but what agrees with these two consequences, there is no longer any ground for a just offence.
I also desire it may be observed, that in speaking of the good morals of some Atheists, I have not ascribed any true virtues to them. Their sobriety, chastity, probity, contempt of riches, zeal for the public good, good offices to their neighbour, neither proceeded from the love of God, nor tended to honour and glorify him. They themselves were the principle and end of all this : selflove was the only ground and cause of it. They were only shining sins, splendida peccata, as St Augustin says of all the good actions of the heathens*. I have, therefore, done no prejudice to the true religion by what I have said of some Atheists. It will still remain true, that good actions cannot be effected without it; and what is it to the true religion if the worshippers of the false gods are not better in their actions than those who have no religion ? What advantage would accrue to it, if the adorers of Jupiter and Saturn were not equally plunged in the gulf of perdition with the Atheists ?
If those who are scandalized pretend that we cannot praise the good morals of Epicurus, without
- The 13th article of a certain church says, that these works " discover not the grace of congruity ; yea rather as they are not done as God has willed and commanded them to be done, we doubt not but that thev have the nature of sin."
supposing it the same thing to a good life, to have no religion, or to profess any religion whatever, they are ignorant in the art of consequences, and perfect strangers to the question. I never compared Atheism except with Heathenism, and, therefore, the true religion is no way concerned in it ; the question being only about religions introduced and kept up by the devil, and to inquire whether those who have professed a worship so infamous in its origin and progress as this, have been more regular in the practice of morality than the Atheists. I suppose it is a point undoubted and fully determined, that in the true religion there is not only more virtue than elsewhere, but that there is no true virtue at all, nor any fruits of righteousness out of it. To what purpose then is this pretended fear that I injure true religion ? Is it concerned in the ill that may be said of the false one ? And is it not to be feared that the great zeal thus manifested, will scandalize men of sense, who will see that it is pretending to niceness in favour of a worship, detested by God, and set up by the devil, as is owned by all the doctors of divinity.
I could not have taken just exception to these complaints, if I had made a romance, in which the persons spoken of had been virtuous, and atheistical ; for, as I should have been master of their words and actions, I had been at liberty to describe them in a manner suited to the taste of the most scrupulous readers. But my Dictionary being an historical work, I ought not to represent people as they should have been, but as they actually were. I can neither suppress their faults nor their virtues. Seeing then that I advance nothing concerning the morals of some Atheists, but what the authors I cite relate of them, nobody has reason to be offended with me. To make my critics sensible of the truth of what I say, I need only ask them, whether they belive the suppression of true facts to be the duty of an historian ? I assure mysejf they will never subscribe to such a proposition. Not but I believe there are some ingenuous enough to confess, that a matter of fact ought to be suppressed by an historian, when it is likely to lessen the abhorrence of Atheism, or the veneration of religion in general. But I most humbly entreat them not to take it amiss that I continue to believe, that God has no need of the artifices of rhetoric ; and if this may be allowed in a poem, or a piece of eloquence, it does not follow, that I ought to admit it in an historical dictionary*.—App. to Diet.
Women seldom Atheists.
Atheism is not the vice of women; they make it a virtue not to enter into deep reasonings, so that they adhere to their catechism ; and are much more inclined to superstition than impiety. They are great followers of indulgences and sermons, and so much possessed with the croud of minor passions which fall to their lot, that they have seldom either the time or capacity to call in question the articles of their faith. They are more quick in discovering the secret of reconciling passions and religion together, than in the adoption of the expedient of believing in nothing.—Art. Barbara.
