Sivut kuvina
PDF
ePub

out doubt, founded upon the absurd | guided by experience, and the evidence ideas which they ascribe to their ad- of their senses, who see nothing in naversaries, whom they have unceasingly ture but that which they find really to accused of attributing every thing to have existence, or that which they are chance, to blind causes, to dead and capacitated to know; who do not perinert matter, incapable of acting by ceive, and cannot perceive, any thing itself. We have, I think, sufficiently but matter, essentially active and movejustified the partisans of nature, from able, diversely combined, enjoying from these ridiculous accusations; we have, itself various properties, and capable throughout the whole, proved, and we of producing all the beings which disrepeat it, that chance is a word devoid play themselves to our visual faculties: of sense, which, as well as the word if by atheists, be understood, natural God, announces nothing but an igno- philosophers, who are convinced that, rance of true causes. We have de- without recurring to a chimerical cause, monstrated that matter is not dead; they can explain every thing simply that nature, essentially active, and self- by the laws of motion, by the relations existent, had sufficient energy to pro- subsisting between beings, by their duce all the beings which it contains, affinities, their analogies, their attracand all the phenomena which we be- tion, and their repulsion; by their prohold. We have, throughout, proved, portions, their composition, and their that this cause was much more real, decomposition:* if by atheists be unand more easy to be conceived than derstood those persons who do not the fictitious, contradictory, inconceiv- know what a spirit is, and who do not able, and impossible cause, to which see the necessity of spiritualizing, or theology ascribes the honour of those of rendering incomprehensible those great effects which it admires. We corporeal, sensible, and natural causes, have made it evident, that the incom- which they see act uniformly ; who do prehensibility of natural effects was not find that to separate the motivenot a sufficient reason for assigning power from the universe, to give it to them a cause, still more incomprehen- a being placed out of the great whole, sible than all those of which we can to a being of an essence totally inconhave a knowledge. In fine, if the in-ceivable, and whose abode cannot be comprehensibility of God does not shown, is a means of becoming better authorize us to deny his existence, it is at least certain that the incompatibility of the attributes which they accord to him, authorizes us to deny that the being who unites them can be any thing more than a chimera, of which the existence is impossible.

acquainted with it: if, by atheists, be understood those men who ingenuously allow that their mind cannot conceive nor reconcile the negative attributes, and the theological abstractions, with the human and moral qualities,

This granted, we shall be able to fix * Dr. Cudworth, in his Systema Intellecthe sense that ought to be attached to tuale, chap.ii. reckons four species of atheists the name of atheist, which, notwith- among the ancients: Ist, The disciples of standing, the theologians, lavish in-tributed the formation of every thing to matAnaximander, called Hylopathians, who atdiscriminately upon all those who de- ter, destitute of feeling. 2d, The atomists, or viate in any thing from their revered the disciples of Democritus, who attributed opinion. If by atheist, be designated every thing to the concurrence of atoms. 3d, a man who denies the existence of a nature, but acting under certain laws. 4th, The stoical atheists, who admitted a blind power inherent in matter, and without The Hylozoists, or the disciples of Strato, which we cannot conceive nature, and who attributed life to matter. It is well to if it be to this power that the name of observe, that the most learned natural philosGod is given, there do not exist any ophers of antiquity have been atheists, either atheists, and the word under which openly or secretly; but their doctrine was always opposed by the superstition of the unthey are designated would only an- informed, and almost totally eclipsed by the nounce fools but, if by atheists, be fanatical and marvellous philosophy of Pyunderstood men without enthusiasm, thagoras, and above all by that of Plato. So true it is, that enthusiasm, and that which is vague and obscure, commonly prevail over that which is simple, natural, and intelligible. --See Le Clerc's Select Pieces, vol. ii.

fore an atheist, according to the notions of modern theology.-See the note to chap. iv. of this volume, page 237.

which are attributed to the Divinity; | against this God, by the atrocious character under which they depict him. In short, we shall be able to consider, as true atheists, those credulous people, who, upon hearsay, and from tradition, fall upon their knees before a being of whom they have no other ideas, than those which are furnished them by their spiritual guides, who themselves acknowledge that they comprehend nothing about the matter. An atheist is a man who does not believe the existence of a God; now, no one can be certain of the existence of a being whom he does not conceive, and who is said to unite incompatible qualities.

or those men, who pretend that from this incompatible alliance, there can only result an imaginary being, seeing that a pure spirit is destitute of the organs necessary to exercise the qualities and faculties of human nature: if by atheists be designated those men who reject a phantom, of whom the odious and discordant qualities are calculated only to disturb the human species, and plunge it into very prejudicial follies: if, I say, thinkers of this sort, are those who are called atheists, it is not possible to doubt of their existence; and there would be found a considerable number of them, if the lights of sound natural philosophy, and of just reason, were more generally diffused; from thence they would neither be considered as irrational, nor as furious beings, but as men devoid of prejudice, of whom the opinions, or, if they will, the ignorance, would be much more useful to the human species, than those sciences, and those vain hypotheses, which have so long been the true causes of all man's sorrows.

On the other hand, if by atheists, it is wished to designate those men who are themselves obliged to avow that they have no one idea of the chimera whom they adore, or which they announce to others; who cannot render themselves an account, either of the nature, or of the essence of their deified phantom; who can never agree amongst themselves, upon the proofs of the existence of their God, of his qualities, or of his mode of action; who, by dint of negations, have made him a pure nothing; who prostrate themselves, or cause others to fall prostrate, before the absurd fictions of their own delirium; if, I say, by atheists, be designated men of this kind, we shall be obliged to allow that the world is filled with atheists; and we shall even be obliged to place in this number the most active theologians who are unceasingly reasoning upon that which they do not understand; who are disputing upon a being of whom they cannot demonstrate the existence; who by their contradictions very efficaciously undermine his existence: who annihilate their perfect good being, by the numberless imperfections which they ascribe to him; who rebel No. X.-39

What has been said, proves that the theologians themselves, have not always known the sense which they would attach to the word atheist; they have vaguely calumniated and combated them as persons, whose sentiments and principles were opposed to their own. Indeed, we find that these sublime doctors, always infatuated with their own particular opinions, have frequently been lavish in their accusations of atheism, against all those whom they were disposed to injure and to blacken, and whose systems they sought to render odious: they were certain of alarming the uninformed and the silly, by vague imputation, or by a word to which ignorance attaches an idea of terrour, because they have no knowledge of its true sense. In consequence of this policy, we have frequently seen the partisans of the same religious sect, the adorers of the same God, reciprocally treat each other as atheist, in the heat of their theological quarrels: to be an atheist, in this sense, is not to have, in every point, exactly the same opinions as those with whom we dispute upon religion. In all times, the uninformed have considered those as atheists, who did not think of the Divinity, precisely in the same manner as the guides whom they were accustomed to follow. Socrates, the adorer of a unique God, was no more than an atheist in the eyes of the Athenian people.

Still more, as we have already observed, those persons have frequently been accused of atheism, who have taken the greatest pains to establish the existence of a God, but who have not produced satisfactory proofs of it.

hand, with the most vigour, have been taxed with atheism and irreligion; his most zealous partisans have been looked upon as deserters and traitors; the most religious theologians have not been able to guaranty themselves from this reproach; they have mutually lavished it on each other, and all have, without doubt, merited it, if by atheists be designated those men who have not any idea of their God which does not destroy itself, as soon as they are willing to submit it to the touchstone of reason.t

CHAPTER X.

When on a similar subject the proofs | were frail and perishable, it was easy for their enemies to make them pass for atheists, who have wickedly betrayed the cause of the Divinity by defending him too feebly. I shall here stop, to show what little foundation there is, for that which is said to be an evident truth, whilst it is so frequently attempted to be proved, and yet can never be verified, even to the satisfaction of those who boast so much of being intimately convinced of it; at least, it is certain, that in examining the principles of those who have essayed to prove the existence of God, they have been generally found weak or false, because they could not be either solid or true; the theologians Is Atheism compatible with Morality? themselves, have been obliged to discover, that their adversaries could draw AFTER having proved the existence from them inductions quite contrary to of atheists, let us return to the calumthose notions, which they have an in-nies which are lavished upon them, terest in maintaining; in consequence, by the deicolists. "An atheist," acthey have been frequently very highly cording to Abbadie, "cannot be virtuincensed, against those who believed ous; to him virtue is only a chimera, they had discovered the most forcible probity no more than a vain scruple, proofs of the existence of their God; honesty nothing but foolishness. He they did not perceive, that it was im- knows no other law than his interest; possible not to lay themselves open to where this sentiment prevails, conattack in establishing principles, or sys- science is only a prejudice, the law of tems, visibly founded upon an imagin- nature only an illusion, right no more ary and contradictory being, which each than errour; benevolence has no longer man sees variously.* any foundation; the bonds of society are loosened; fidelity is removed; the friend is ready to betray his friend; the citizen to deliver up his country; the son to assassinate his father in order to enjoy his inheritance, whenever he shall find an occasion, and that au

In a word, all those who have taken the cause of the theological God in

*What can we think of the sentiments of a man who expresses himself like Paschal, in the eighth article of his thoughts, wherein he discovers a most complete incertitude upon the existence of God? "I have examined," says he, "if this God, of whom all the world + Whence we may conclude that errour will speak, might not have left some marks of not stand the test of investigation-that it himself. I look every where, and every where will not pass the ordeal of comparison-that I see nothing but obscurity. Nature offers it is in its hues a perfect chameleon, that conme nothing, that may not be a matter of sequently it can never do more than lead to doubt and inquietude. If I saw nothing in the most absurd deductions. Indeed, the most nature which indicated a Divinity, I should ingenious systems, when they have their determine with myself to believe nothing foundations in hallucination, crumble like dust about it. If I every where saw the sign of a under the rude hand of the essayer: the most creator, I should repose myself in peace, in sublinated doctrines, when they lack the subthe belief of one. But seeing too much to stantive quality of rectitude, evaporate under deny, and too little to assure me of his exist- the scrutiny of the sturdy examiner who tries ence, I am in a situation that I lament, and in them in the crucible. It is not, therefore, by which I have a hundred times wished, that if levelling abusive language against those who a God does sustain nature, he would give un-investigate sophisticated theories, that they equivocal marks of it, and that if the signs which he has given be deceitful, that he would suppress them entirely that he said all or nothing, to the end that I might see which side I ought to follow." Here is the state of a good mind, wrestling with the prejudices that enslave it.

will either be purged of their absurdities, acquire solidity, or find an establishment to give them perpetuity. In short, moral obliquities can never be made rectilinear by the mere application of unintelligible terms, or by the inconsiderate jumble of discrepant properties, however gaudy the assemblage.

thority or silence, will shield him from the arm of the secular power, which alone is to be feared. The most inviolable rights, and the most sacred laws, must no longer be considered, but as dreams and visions."*

Such, perhaps, would be the conduct, not of a thinking, feeling, and reflecting being, susceptible of reason, but of a ferocious brute, of an irrational creature, who should not have any idea of the natural relations which subsist between beings necessary to their reciprocal happiness. Can it be supposed, that a man, capable of experience, furnished with the faintest glimmerings of good sense, would lend himself to the conduct which is here ascribed to the atheist, that is to say, to a man, who is sufficiently susceptible of reflection to undeceive himself by reasoning upon those prejudices, which every thing strives to show him as important and sacred? Can it, I say, be supposed, that there is, in any polished so ciety, a citizen sufficiently blind not to acknowledge his most natural duties, his dearest interests, the danger which he runs in disturbing his fellow-creatures, or in following no other rule than his momentary appetites? A being, who reasons the least in the world, is he not obliged to feel that society is advantageous to him, that he has need of assistance, that the esteem of his fellow-creatures is necessary to his happiness, that he has every thing to fear from the wrath of his associates, that the laws menace whoever dare infringe them? Every man, who has received a virtuous education, who has in his infancy experienced the tender cares of a father, who has in consequence tasted the sweetness of friendship, who has received kindness, who knows the value of benevolence and equity, who feels the pleasure which the affection of our fellow-creatures procures for us, and the inconveniences which result from their aversion and their contempt, is he not obliged to tremble at losing such manifest advantages, and at incurring by his conduct such visible dangers? Will not the hatred, the fear, the contempt of himself, disturb his repose, every time

* See Abbadie on the Truth of the Chris. tian Religion, vol. i. chap. xvii.

that, turning inwardly upon his own conduct, he shall contemplate himself with the same eyes as others? Is there, then, no remorse, but for those who believe in a God? The idea of being seen by a being of whom we have at best very vague notions, is it more forcible, than the idea of being seen by men, of being seen by ourselves, of being obliged to fear, of being in the cruel necessity of hating ourselves, and to blush in thinking of our conduct, and of the sentiments which it must infallibly inspire?

This granted, we shall reply, deliberately, to this Abbadie, that an atheist is a man who knows nature and its laws, who knows his own nature, and who knows what it imposes upon him. An atheist has experience, and this experience proves to him, every moment, that vice can injure him, that his most concealed faults, that his most secret dispositions may be detected and display him in open day; this experience proves to him that society is useful to his happiness; that his interest demands he should attach himself to the country which protects him, and which enables him to enjoy in security the benefits of nature; every thing shows him, that in order to be happy, he must make himself beloved; that his father is for him the most certain of friends; that ingratitude would remove from him his benefactor; that justice is necessary to the maintenance of every association; and that no man, whatever may be his power, can be content with himself, when he knows he is an object of public hatred.

He who has maturely reflected upon himself, upon his own nature, and upon that of his associates, upon his own wants, and upon the means of satisfying them, cannot be prevented from knowing his duties, from discovering that which he owes to himself, and that which he owes to others; then he has morality, he has real motives to conform himself to its dictates; he is obliged to feel that these duties are necessary; and if his reason be not disturbed by blind passions, or by vicious habits, he will feel that virtue is for all men the surest road to felicity. The atheists, or the fatalists, found all their systems upon necessity; thus, their moral speculations, founded upon

the necessity of things, are at least, much more permanent and more invariable than those which only rest upon a God who changes his aspect according to the dispositions and the passions of all those who contemplate him. The nature of things, and its immutable laws, are not subject to vary; the atheist is always obliged to call that which injures him, vice and folly; to call that which is advantageous to society, or which contributes to its permanent happiness, virtue.

We see, then, that the principles of the atheist are much less liable to be shaken than those of the enthusiast, who founds his morality upon an imaginary being, of whom the idea so frequently varies, even in his own brain. If the atheist deny the existence of a God, he cannot deny his own existence, nor that of beings similar to himself with whom he sees himself surrounded; he cannot doubt the relations which subsist between them and him, he cannot question the necessity of the duties which flow from these relations; he cannot, then, be dubious on the principles of morality, which is nothing more than the science of the relations subsisting between beings living together in society.

If, satisfied with a barren speculative knowledge of his duties, the atheist do not apply them to his conduct; if hurried away by his passions, or by criminal habits, if given up to shameful vices, if possessing a vicious temperament, he appear to forget his moral principles, it does not follow that he has no principles, or that his principles are false; it can only be concluded from such conduct, that, in the intoxication of his passions, in the confusion of his reason, he does not put in practice speculations extremely true; that he forgets principles ascertained, to follow those propensities which lead him astray.

Nothing is more common amongst men than a very marked discrepance between the mind and the heart; that is to say, between the temperament, the passions, the habits, the whims, the imagination, and the mind, or the judgment, assisted by reflection. Nothing is more rare, than to find these things in harmony; it is then that we see speculation influence practice. The

most certain virtues, are those which are founded upon the temperament of men. Indeed, do we not every day see mortals in contradiction with themselves? Does not their judgment unceasingly condemn the extravagances to which their passions deliver them up? In short, does not every thing prove to us, that men, with the best theory, have sometimes the worst practice; and with the most vicious theory, have frequently the most estimable conduct? In the blindest, the most atrocious superstitions, and those which are the most contrary to reason, we meet with virtuous men ; the mildness of their character, the sensibility of their heart, the excellence of their temperament, reconduct them to humanity, and to the laws of nature, in despite of their furious theories. Amongst the adorers of a cruel, vindictive, and jealous God, we find peaceable minds, who are enemies to persecution, to violence, and to cruelty; and amongst the disciples of a God filled with mercy and clemency, we see monsters of barbarity and inhumanity. Nevertheless, the one and the other acknowledge that their God ought to serve them for a model: wherefore do they not conform themselves to him? It is because the temperament of man is always more powerful than his God; it is because the most wicked Gods cannot always corrupt a virtuous mind, and that the most gentle Gods cannot always restrain hearts driven along by crime. The organization will always be more puissant than religion: present objects, momentary interests, rooted habits, public opinion, have much more power than imaginary beings, or than theories which themselves depend upon the organization of man.

The point in question, then, is to examine if the principles of the atheist are true, and not if his conduct is commendable. An atheist, who, having an excellent theory, founded upon nature, experience, and reason, delivers himself up to excesses, dangerous to himself, and injurious to society, is, without doubt, an inconsistent man. But he is not more to be feared than a religious and zealous man, who, believing in a good, equitable, and perfect God, does not scruple to commit the most frightful excesses in his name.

« EdellinenJatka »