Superstition In All Ages .doc

8/10/2019 Superstition In All Ages .doc

1/188

Project Gutenberg's

Superstition In All Ages (1732), by Jean Meslier

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and withalmost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away orre-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenerg !icense includedwith this eBook or online at www.gutenerg.org

Title" #uperstition $n %ll %ges &'()*+ ommon #ense

%uthor" ean eslier

ommentator" /oltaire

Translator" %nna 0noop

1elease 2ate" anuary *3, *445 67Book 8'(54(96!ast updated" uly *, *4''9

!anguage" 7nglish

::: #T%1T ;< T=$# P1;7T G>T7?B71G 7B;;0 #>P71#T$T$;? $? %!!%G7# &'()*+ :::

Produced y Gary 0lein

#>P71#T$T$;? $? %!! %G7#

By ean eslier

'()*

% 1;%? %T=;!$ P1$7#T, @=;, %#2;G%#, %?2


2/188

!7B!$#=72 %


3/188


4/188

ut $ detest their insatiale cupidity and the signal pleasure suchfellows take in railing at the ignorance of those whom they carefullykeep in this state of lindness. !et them content themselves withlaughing at their own ease, ut at least let them not multiply theirerrors y ausing the lind piety of those who, y their simplicity,

procured them such an easy life. You render unto me, my rethren, thejustice that is due me. The sympathy which $ manifested for yourtroules saves me from the least suspicion. =ow often have $ performedgratuitously the functions of my ministry. =ow often also has my hearteen grieved at not eing ale to assist you as often and as aundantlyas $ could have wishedJ =ave $ not always proved to you that $ took morepleasure in giving than in receivingK $ carefully avoided eDhorting youto igotry, and $ spoke to you as rarely as possile of our unfortunatedogmas. $t was necessary that $ should acEuit myself as a priest of myministry, ut how often have $ not suLered within myself when $ wasforced to preach to you those pious lies which $ despised in my heart.@hat a disdain $ had for my ministry, and particularly for thatsuperstitious ass, and those ridiculous administrations of sacraments,especially if $ was compelled to perform them with the solemnity whichawakened all your piety and all your good faith. @hat remorse $ had foreDciting your credulityJ % thousand times upon the point of urstingforth pulicly, $ was going to open your eyes, ut a fear superior to mystrength restrained me and forced me to silence until my death.F

The aot eslier had written two letters to the curates of hisneighorhood to inform them of his TestamentC he told them that he had

consigned to the chancery of #t. innehould a copy of his manuscript in)55 leaves in octavoC ut he feared it would e suppressed, according tothe ad custom estalished to prevent the poor from eing instructed andknowing the truth.

The curate eslier, the most singular phenomenon ever seen among allthemeteors fatal to the hristian religion, worked his whole life secretlyin order to attack the opinions he elieved false. To compose hismanuscript against God, against all religion, against the Bile and thehurch, he had no other assistance than the Bile itself, oreri

ontaigne, and a few fathers.

@hile the aot eslier naively acknowledged that he did not wish to eurned till after his death, Thomas @oolston, a doctor of amridge,pulished and sold pulicly at !ondon, in his own house, siDty thousandcopies of his F2iscoursesF against the miracles of esus hrist.

$t was a very astonishing thing that two priests should at the same timewrite against the hristian religion. The curate eslier has gonefurther yet than @oolstonC he dares to treat the transport of our#aviour y the devil upon the mountain, the wedding of ana, the readand the shes, as asurd fales, injurious to divinity, which wereignored during three hundred years y the whole 1oman 7mpire, and


5/188

nally passed from the lower class to the palace of the emperors, whenpolicy oliged them to adopt the follies of the people in order the moreeasily to sujugate them. The denunciations of the 7nglish priest do notapproach those of the hampagne priest. @oolston is sometimesindulgent,

eslier never. =e was a man profoundly emittered y the crimes hewitnessed, for which he holds the hristian religion responsile. Thereis no miracle which to him is not an oject of contempt and horrorC noprophecy that he does not compare to those of ?ostredamus. =e wrotethusagainst esus hrist when in the arms of death, at a time when the mostdissimulating dare not lie, and when the most intrepid tremle. #truckwith the diIculties which he found in #cripture, he inveighed againstit more itterly than the %costa and all the ews, more than the famousPorphyre, else, $amliEue, ulian, !ianius, and all the partisans ofhuman reason.

There were found among the ooks of the curate eslier a printedmanuscript of the Treatise of


6/188


7/188

ecome the theaters of eDtravagances caused y nonsensical visionists,who, pulishing their shallow speculations for the eternal truth, havekindled the enthusiasm of princes and of people, and have prepared themfor opinions which they represented as essential to the glory ofdivinity and to the happiness of empires. @e have seen, a thousand

times, in all parts of our gloe, infuriated fanatics slaughtering eachother, lighting the funeral piles, committing without scruple, as amatter of duty, the greatest crimes. @hyK To maintain or to propagatethe impertinent conjectures of enthusiasts, or to sanction the knaveriesof impostors on account of a eing who eDists only in their imagination,and who is known only y the ravages, the disputes, and the follieswhich he has caused upon the earth.

;riginally, savage nations, ferocious, perpetually at war, adored, undervarious names, some God conformed to their ideasC that is to say, cruel,carnivorous, selsh, greedy of lood. @e nd in all the religions ofthe earth a God of armies, a jealous God, an avenging God, aneDterminating God, a God who enjoys carnage and whose worshipersmake ita duty to serve him to his taste. !ams, ulls, children, men, heretics,indels, kings, whole nations, are sacriced to him. The ealousservants of this ararous God go so far as to elieve that they areoliged to oLer themselves as a sacrice to him. 7verywhere we seeealots who, after having sadly meditated upon their terrile God,imagine that, in order to please him, they must do themselves all theharm possile, and inMict upon themselves, in his honor, all imaginale

torments. $n a word, everywhere the aneful ideas of 2ivinity, far fromconsoling men for misfortunes incident to their eDistence, have lledthe heart with troule, and given irth to follies destructive to them.=ow could the human mind, lled with frightful phantoms and guided ymen interested in perpetuating its ignorance and its fear, makeprogressK an was compelled to vegetate in his primitive stupidityC hewas preserved only y invisile powers, upon whom his fate was supposedto depend. #olely occupied with his alarms and his unintelligilereveries, he was always at the mercy of his priests, who reserved forthemselves the right of thinking for him and of regulating his conduct.

Thus man was, and always remained, a child without eDperience, a slavewithout courage, a loggerhead who feared to reason, and who could neverescape from the layrinth into which his ancestors had misled himC hefelt compelled to groan under the yoke of his Gods, of whom he knewnothing eDcept the faulous accounts of their ministers. These, afterhaving fettered him y the ties of opinion, have remained his masters ordelivered him up defenseless to the asolute power of tyrants, no lessterrile than the Gods, of whom they were the representatives upon theearth. ;ppressed y the doule yoke of spiritual and temporal power, itwas impossile for the people to instruct themselves and to work fortheir own welfare. Thus, religion, politics, and morals ecamesanctuaries, into which the profane were not permitted to enter. en hadno other morality than that which their legislators and their priests


8/188

claimed as descended from unknown empyrean regions. The human mind,perpleDed y these theological opinions, misunderstood itself, doutedits own powers, mistrusted eDperience, feared truth, disdained itsreason, and left it to lindly follow authority. an was a pure machinein the hands of his tyrants and his priests, who alone had the right to

regulate his movements. %lways treated as a slave, he had at all timesand in all places the vices and dispositions of a slave.

These are the true sources of the corruption of haits, to whichreligion never opposes anything ut ideal and ineLectual ostaclesCignorance and servitude have a tendency to make men wicked andunhappy.#cience, reason, lierty, alone can reform them and render them morehappyC ut everything conspires to lind them and to conrm them intheir lindness. The priests deceive them, tyrants corrupt them in orderto sujugate them more easily. Tyranny has een, and will always e, thechief source of the depraved morals and haitual calamities of thepeople. These, almost always fascinated y their religious notions or ymetaphysical ctions, instead of looking upon the natural and visilecauses of their miseries, attriute their vices to the imperfections oftheir nature, and their misfortunes to the anger of their GodsC theyoLer to =eaven vows, sacrices, and presents, in order to put an endto their misfortunes, which are really due only to the negligence, theignorance, and to the perversity of their guides, to the folly of theirinstitutions, to their foolish customs, to their false opinions, totheir unreasonale laws, and especially to their want of enlightenment.

!et the mind e lled early with true ideasC let manHs reason ecultivatedC let justice govern himC and there will e no need ofopposing to his passions the powerless arrier of the fear of Gods. enwill e good when they are well taught, well governed, chastised orcensured for the evil, and justly rewarded for the good which they havedone to their fellow-citiens. $t is idle to pretend to cure mortals oftheir vices if we do not egin y curing them of their prejudices. $t isonly y showing them the truth that they can know their est interestsand the real motives which will lead them to happiness. !ong enough havethe instructors of the people Ded their eyes on heavenC let them atlast ring them ack to the earth. Tired of an incomprehensile

theology, of ridiculous fales, of impenetrale mysteries, of puerileceremonies, let the human mind occupy itself with natural things,intelligile ojects, sensile truths, and useful knowledge. !et thevain chimeras which eset the people e dissipated, and very soonrational opinions will ll the minds of those who were elieved fatedto e always in error. To annihilate religious prejudices, it would esuIcient to show that what is inconceivale to man can not e of anyuse to him. 2oes it need, then, anything ut simple common sense toperceive that a eing most clearly irreconcilale with the notions ofmankind, that a cause continually opposed to the eLects attriuted tohimC that a eing of whom not a word can e said without falling intocontradictionsC that a eing who, far from eDplaining the mysteries ofthe universe, only renders them more ineDplicaleC that a eing to whom


9/188

for so many centuries men addressed themselves so vainly to otain theirhappiness and deliverance from their suLeringsC does it need, $ say,more than simple common sense to understand that the idea of such aeing is an idea without model, and that he is himself evidently not areasonale eingK 2oes it reEuire more than common sense to feel that

there is at least delirium and freny in hating and tormenting eachother for unintelligile opinions of a eing of this kindK 7.

There is a vast empire governed y a monarch, whose conduct does utconfound the minds of his sujects. =e desires to e known, loved,respected, and oeyed, ut he never shows himselfC everything tends tomake uncertain the notions which we are ale to form aout him. The


10/188

people sujected to his power have only such ideas of the character andthe laws of their invisile sovereign as his ministers give themC thesesuit, however, ecause they themselves have no idea of their master, forhis ways are impenetrale, and his views and his Eualities are totallyincomprehensileC moreover, his ministers disagree among themselves in

regard to the orders which they pretend emanated from the sovereignwhose organs they claim to eC they announce them diversely in eachprovince of the empireC they discredit and treat each other as impostorsand liarsC the decrees and ordinances which they promulgate are oscureCthey are enigmas, made not to e understood or divined y the sujectsfor whose instruction they were intended. The laws of the invisilemonarch need interpreters, ut those who eDplain them are alwaysEuarreling among themselves aout the true way of understanding themCmore than this, they do not agree among themselvesC all which theyrelate of their hidden prince is ut a tissue of contradictions,scarcely a single word that is not contradicted at once. =e is calledsupremely good, nevertheless not a person ut complains of his decrees.=e is supposed to e innitely wise, and in his administrationeverything seems contrary to reason and good sense. They oast of his

justice, and the est of his sujects are generally the least favored.@e are assured that he sees everything, yet his presence remediesnothing. $t is said that he is the friend of order, and everything inhis universe is in a state of confusion and disorderC all is created yhim, yet events rarely happen according to his projects. =e foreseeseverything, ut his foresight prevents nothing. =e is impatient if anyoLend himC at the same time he puts every one in the way of oLending

him. =is knowledge is admired in the perfection of his works, ut hisworks are full of imperfections, and of little permanence. =e iscontinually occupied in creating and destroying, then repairing what hehas done, never appearing to e satised with his work. $n all hisenterprises he seeks ut his own glory, ut he does not succeed in einggloried. =e works ut for the good of his sujects, and most of themlack the necessities of life. Those whom he seems to favor, aregenerally those who are the least satised with their fateC we see themall continually revolting against a master whose greatness they admire,whose wisdom they eDtol, whose goodness they worship, and whose

justice

they fear, revering orders which they never follow. This empire is theworldC its monarch is GodC =is ministers are the priestsC their sujectsare men.

$$.--@=%T $# T=7;!;GYK

There is a science which has for its oject only incomprehensilethings. >nlike all others, it occupies itself ut with things unseen.=oes calls it Fthe kingdom of darkness.F $n this land all oey lawsopposed to those which men acknowledge in the world they inhait. $n


11/188

this marvelous region light is ut darkness, evidence ecomes doutfulor false, the impossile ecomes credile, reason is an unfaithfulguide, and common sense changed into delirium. This science is named

Theology, and this Theology is a continual insult to human reason.

$$$.

By freEuent repetition of if, ut, and perhaps, we succeed in forming animperfect and roken system which perpleDes menHs minds to the eDtentofmaking them forget the clearest notions, and to render uncertain themost palpale truths. By the aid of this systematic nonsense, all naturehas ecome an ineDplicale enigma for manC the visile world hasdisappeared to give place to invisile regionsC reason is oliged togive place to imagination, which can lead us only to the land ofchimeras which she herself has invented.

$/.--%? B;1? ?7$T=71 17!$G$;># ?;1 27$#T$%!.

%ll religious principles are founded upon the idea of a God, ut it is

impossile for men to have true ideas of a eing who does not act uponany one of their senses. %ll our ideas are ut pictures of ojects whichstrike us. @hat can the idea of God represent to us when it is evidentlyan idea without an ojectK $s not such an idea as impossile as aneLect without a causeK %n idea without a prototype, is it anything uta chimeraK #ome theologians, however, assure us that the idea of God isinnate, or that men have this idea from the time of their irth. 7veryprinciple is a judgmentC all judgment is the eLect of eDperienceCeDperience is not acEuired ut y the eDercise of the senses" from whichit follows that religious principles are drawn from nothing, and are notinnate.

/.--$T $# ?;T ?77##%1Y T; B7!$7/7 $? % G;2, %?2 T=7 ;#T17%#;?%B!7

T=$?G $# ?;T T; T=$?0 ;< =$.

?o religious system can e founded otherwise than upon the nature of Godand of men, and upon the relations they ear to each other. But, inorder to judge of the reality of these relations, we must have some ideaof the 2ivine nature. But everyody tells us that the essence of God isincomprehensile to manC at the same time they do not hesitate to assign


12/188

attriutes to this incomprehensile God, and assure us that man can notdispense with a knowledge of this God so impossile to conceive of. Themost important thing for men is that which is the most impossile forthem to comprehend. $f God is incomprehensile to man, it would seemrational never to think of =im at allC ut religion concludes that man

is criminal if he ceases for a moment to revere =im.

/$.--17!$G$;? $# ?272 >P;? 172>!$TY.

@e are told that 2ivine Eualities are not of a nature to e grasped ylimited minds. The natural conseEuence of this principle ought to ethat the 2ivine Eualities are not made to employ limited mindsC utreligion assures us that limited minds should never lose sight of thisinconceivale eing, whose Eualities can not e grasped y them" fromwhich we see that religion is the art of occupying limited minds withthat which is impossile for them to comprehend.

/$$.--7/71Y 17!$G$;? $# %? %B#>12$TY.

1eligion unites man with God or puts them in communicationC ut do you

say that God is inniteK $f God is innite, no nite eing can havecommunication or any relation with =im. @here there are no relations,there can e no union, no correspondence, no duties. $f there are noduties etween man and his God, there eDists no religion for man. Thusy saying that God is innite, you annihilate, from that moment, allreligion for man, who is a nite eing. The idea of innity is for usin idea without model, without prototype, without oject.

/$$$.--T=7 ?;T$;? ;< G;2 $# $P;##$B!7.

$f God is an innite eing, there can e neither in the actual world orin another any proportion etween man and his GodC thus the idea of Godwill never enter the human mind. $n the supposition of a life where menwill e more enlightened than in this one, the innity of God willalways place such a distance etween his idea and the limited mind ofman, that he will not e ale to conceive of God any more in a futurelife than in the present. =ence, it evidently follows that the idea ofGod will not e etter suited to man in the other life than in thepresent. God is not made for manC it follows also that intelligencessuperior to man--such as angels, archangels, seraphims, and saints--canhave no more complete notions of God than has man, who does not


13/188

understand anything aout =im here elow.

$.--;1$G$? ;< #>P71#T$T$;?.

=ow is it that we have succeeded in persuading reasonale eings thatthe thing most impossile to understand was the most essential for them.$t is ecause they were greatly frightenedC it is ecause when men arekept in fear they cease to reasonC it is ecause they have eeneDpressly enjoined to distrust their reason. @hen the rain is trouled,we elieve everything and eDamine nothing.

.--;1$G$? ;< %!! 17!$G$;?.

$gnorance and fear are the two pivots of all religion. The uncertaintyattending manHs relation to his God is precisely the motive whichattaches him to his religion. an is afraid when in darkness--physical ormoral. =is fear is haitual to him and ecomes a necessityC he wouldelieve that he lacked something if he had nothing to fear.

$.--$? T=7 ?%7 ;< 17!$G$;? =%1!%T%?# T%07 %2/%?T%G7 ;< T=7@7%0?7##;< 7?.

=e who from his childhood has had a hait of tremling every time heheard certain words, needs these words, and needs to tremle. $n thisway he is more disposed to listen to the one who encourages his fearsthan to the one who would dispel his fears. The superstitious man wantsto e afraidC his imagination demands it. $t seems that he fears nothing

more than having no oject to fear. en are imaginary patients, whominterested charlatans take care to encourage in their weakness, in orderto have a market for their remedies. Physicians who order a great numerof remedies are more listened to than those who recommend a goodregimen, and who leave nature to act.

$$.--17!$G$;? 7?T$7# $G?;1%?7 BY T=7 %$2 ;< T=7 %1/7!;>#.

$f religion was clear, it would have fewer attractions for the ignorant.They need oscurity, mysteries, fales, miracles, incredile things,


14/188

which keep their rains perpetually at work. 1omances, idle stories,tales of ghosts and witches, have more charms for the vulgar than truenarrations.

$$$.--;?T$?>%T$;?.

$n the matter of religion, men are ut overgrown children. The moreasurd a religion is, and the fuller of marvels, the more power iteDertsC the devotee thinks himself oliged to place no limits to hiscredulityC the more inconceivale things are, the more divine theyappear to himC the more incredile they are, the more merit he giveshimself for elieving them.

$/.--T=717 @;>!2 ?7/71 =%/7 B77? %?Y 17!$G$;? $< T=717 =%2?7/71 B77?%?Y 2%10 %?2 B%1B%1;># %G7#.

The origin of religious opinions dates, as a general thing, from thetime when savage nations were yet in a state of infancy. $t was tocoarse, ignorant, and stupid men that the founders of religion addressed

themselves in all ages, in order to present them with Gods, ceremonies,histories of faulous 2ivinities, marvelous and terrile fales. Thesechimeras, adopted without eDamination y the fathers, have eentransmitted with more or less changes to their polished children, whooften do not reason more than their fathers.

/.--%!! 17!$G$;? @%# B;1? ;< T=7 27#$17 T; 2;$?%T7.

The rst legislators of nations had for their oject to dominate, Theeasiest means of succeeding was to frighten the people and to preventthem from reasoningC they led them y tortuous paths in order that theyshould not perceive the designs of their guidesC they compelled them tolook into the air, for fear they should look to their feetC they amusedthem upon the road y storiesC in a word, they treated them in the wayof nurses, who employ songs and menaces to put the children to sleep, orto force them to e Euiet.


15/188

/$.--T=%T @=$= #71/7# %# % B%#$# ?71T%$?.

The eDistence of a God is the asis of all religion. %T$;?.

% thing is impossile when it is composed of two ideas so antagonistic,that we can not think of them at the same time. 7vidence can e reliedon only when conrmed y the constant testimony of our senses, whichalone give irth to ideas, and enale us to judge of their conformity orof their incompatiility. That which eDists necessarily, is that ofwhich the non-eDistence would imply contradiction. These principles,

universally recognied, are at fault when the Euestion of the eDistenceof God is consideredC what has een said of =im is either unintelligileor perfectly contradictoryC and for this reason must appear impossileto every man of common sense.

$.--T=7 7$#T7?7 ;< G;2 $# ?;T P1;/72.

%ll human intelligences are more or less enlightened and cultivated. Bywhat fatality is it that the science of God has never een eDplainedK

The most civilied nations and the most profound thinkers are of the


16/188

same opinion in regard to the matter as the most ararous nations andthe most ignorant and rustic people. %s we eDamine the suject moreclosely, we will nd that the science of divinity y means of reveriesand sutleties has ut oscured it more and more. Thus far, all religionhas een founded on what is called in logic, a Fegging of the

EuestionCF it supposes freely, and then proves, nally, y thesuppositions it has made.

.--T; #%Y T=%T G;2 $# % #P$1$T, $# T; #P7%0 @$T=;>T #%Y$?G%?YT=$?G %T%!!.

By metaphysics, God is made a pure spirit, ut has modern theologyadvanced one step further than the theology of the arariansK Theyrecognied a grand spirit as master of the world. The ararians, likeall ignorant men, attriute to spirits all the eLects of which theirineDperience prevents them from discovering the true causes. %sk aararian what causes your watch to move, he will answer, Fa spiritJF%sk our philosophers what moves the universe, they will tell you Fit isa spirit.F

$.--#P$1$T>%!$TY $# % =$71%&delusion, wild illusion+

The ararian, when he speaks of a spirit, attaches at least some senseto this wordC he understands y it an agent similar to the wind, to theagitated air, to the reath, which produces, invisily, eLects that weperceive. By sutiliing, the modern theologian ecomes as littleintelligile to himself as to others. %sk him what he means y a spiritK=e will answer, that it is an unknown sustance, which is perfectlysimple, which has nothing tangile, nothing in common with matter. $ngood faith, is there any mortal who can form the least idea of such a

sustanceK % spirit in the language of modern theology is then ut anasence of ideas. The idea of spirituality is another idea without amodel.

$$.--%!! @=$= 7$#T# #P1$?G#


17/188

than to attriute the formation of things to an unknown force, to aspiritual eing, who can not draw from his ground that which he has nothimself, and who, y the spiritual essence claimed for him, is incapaleof making anything, and of putting anything in motionK ?othing isplainer than that they would have us elieve that an intangile spirit

can act upon matter.

$$$.--@=%T $# T=7 7T%P=Y#$%! G;2 ;< ;271? T=7;!;GYK

The material upiter of the ancients could move, uild up, destroy, andpropagate eings similar to himselfC ut the God of modern theology is asterile eing. %ccording to his supposed nature he can neither occupyany place, nor move matter, nor produce a visile world, nor propagateeither men or Gods. The metaphysical God is a workman without handsCheis ale ut to produce clouds, suspicions, reveries, follies, andEuarrels.

$/.--$T @;>!2 B7 ;17 1%T$;?%! T; @;1#=$P T=7 #>? T=%? %#P$1$T>%! G;2.

#ince it was necessary for men to have a God, why did they not have thesun, the visile God, adored y so many nationsK @hat eing had moreright to the homage of mortals than the star of the day, which giveslight and heatC which invigorates all eingsC whose presence reanimatesand rejuvenates natureC whose asence seems to plunge her into sadnessand languorK $f some eing estowed upon men power, activity,enevolence, strength, it was no dout the sun, which should erecognied as the father of nature, as the soul of the world, as

2ivinity. %t least one could not without folly dispute his eDistence, orrefuse to recognie his inMuence and his enets.

/.--% #P$1$T>%! G;2 $# $?%P%B!7 ;< @$!!$?G %?2 ;< %T$?G.

The theologian tells us that God does not need hands or arms to act, andthat =e acts y =is will alone. But what is this God who has a willK %ndwhat can e the suject of this divine willK $s it more ridiculous ormore diIcult to elieve in fairies, in sylphs, in ghosts, in witches,in were-wolfs, than to elieve in the magical or impossile action of


18/188


19/188

$.--T=7 $?#T$


20/188

state of madness, which prevented them from elieving in the eDistenceof a eing whom their enlightened reason could not comprehend. $n aword, they must prove that a God that is said to e full of eEuity,could punish eyond measure the invincile and necessary ignorance ofman, caused y his relation to the divine essence. $s not the

theologiansH manner of reasoning very singularK They create phantoms,they ll them with contradictions, and nally assure us that thesafest way is not to dout the eDistence of those phantoms, which theyhave themselves invented. By following out this method, there is noasurdity which it would not e safer to elieve than not to elieve.

%ll children are atheists--they have no idea of GodC are they, then,criminal on account of this ignoranceK %t what age do they egin to eoliged to elieve in GodK $t is, you say, at the age of reason. %t whattime does this age eginK Besides, if the most profound theologians losethemselves in the divine essence, which they oast of not comprehending,what ideas can common people haveK--women, mechanics, and, in short,those who compose the mass of the human raceK

$.--T=7 B7!$7< $? G;2 $# ?;T=$?G B>T % 7=%?$%! =%B$T>27 ;2$7 @=$= =%# B77? =%?272


21/188

The rain of man is, especially in infancy, like a soft waD, ready toreceive all the impressions we wish to make on itC education furnishesnearly all his opinions, at a period when he is incapale of judging forhimself. @e elieve that the ideas, true or false, which at a tender agewere forced into our heads, were received from nature at our irthC and

this persuasion is one of the greatest sources of our errors.

$/.--=;@ T=7Y T%07 1;;T %?2 #P17%2.

Prejudice tends to conrm in us the opinions of those who are chargedwith our instruction. @e elieve them more skillful than we areC wesuppose them thoroughly convinced themselves of the things they teachus. @e have the greatest condence in them. %fter the care they havetaken of us when we were unale to assist ourselves, we judge themincapale of deceiving us. These are the motives which make us adopt athousand errors without other foundation than the dangerous word ofthose who have educated usC even the eing foridden to reason uponwhatthey tell us, does not diminish our condence, ut contriutes often toincrease our respect for their opinions.

/.--7? @;>!2 ?7/71 =%/7 B7!$7/72 $? T=7 P1$?$P!7# ;G=T %T %? %G7 @=7?

T=7Y @717 $?%P%B!7 ;17 2; ?;T P1;/7 T=7 7$#T7?7 ;17 7P!%$? T=7#7!/7# BY ?%T>1%!%>#7#.

$s there anything more surprising than the logic of so many profounddoctors, who, instead of acknowledging the little light they have uponnatural agencies, seek outside of nature--that is to say, in imaginaryregions--an agent less understood than this nature, of which they can atleast form some ideaK To say that God is the author of the phenomenathat we see, is it not attriuting them to an occult causeK @hat is GodK@hat is a spiritK They are causes of which we have no idea. #agesJ studynature and her lawsC and when you can from them unravel the action ofnatural causes, do not go in search of supernatural causes, which, very

far from enlightening your ideas, will ut entangle them more and moreand make it impossile for you to understand yourselves.

/$$$Q;?T$?>%T$;?

?ature, you say, is totally ineDplicale without a GodC that is to say,in order to eDplain what you understand so little, you need a causewhich you do not understand at all. You pretend to make clear that which

is oscure, y magnifying its oscurity. You think you have untied aknot y multiplying knots. 7nthusiastic philosophers, in order to proveto us the eDistence of a God, you copy complete treatises on otanyC youenter into minute details of the parts of the human odyC you ascendinto the air to contemplate the revolutions of the starsC you returnthen to earth to admire the course of the watersC you My into ecstasiesover utterMies, insects, polyps, organied atoms, in which you thinkto nd the greatness of your GodC all these things will not prove theeDistence of this GodC they will only prove that you have not the ideaswhich you should have of the immense variety of causes and eLects thatcan produce the innitely diversied cominations, of which theuniverse is the assemlage. This will prove that you ignore nature, thatyou have no idea of her resources when you judge her incapale of


23/188

producing a multitude of forms and eings, of which your eyes, even ythe aid of the microscope, see ut the least partC nally, this willprove, that not eing ale to know the sensile and comprehensileagents, you nd it easier to have recourse to a word, y which youdesignate an agent, of whom it will always e impossile for you to form

any true idea.

$.--T=7 @;1!2 =%# ?;T B77? 17%T72, %?2 %TT71 ;/7# BY$T#7!%T$;?

You see that everything in nature is in a state of activity, and youpretend that nature of itself is dead and without energyJ You elievethat all this, acting of itself, has need of a motorJ @ellJ who is thismotorK $t is a spirit, that is to say, an asolutely incomprehensileand contradictory eing. onclude then, $ say to you, that matter actsof itself, and cease to reason aout your spiritual motor, which has

nothing that is necessary to put it into motion. 1eturn from youruseless eDcursionsC come down from an imaginary into a real worldC takehold of second causesC leave to theologians their F%! ;T;1.

$t is ut y the diversity of impressions or of eLects which sustances


24/188

or odies make upon us, that we feel them, that we have perceptions andideas of them, that we distinguish them one from another, that we assignto them peculiarities. oreover, in order to perceive or to feel anoject, this oject must act upon our organsC this oject can not actupon us without eDciting some motion in usC it can not produce any

motion in us if it is not itself in motion. %s soon as $ see an oject,my eyes must e struck y itC $ can not conceive of light and of visionwithout a motion in the luminous, eDtended, and colored ody whichcommunicates itself to my eye, or which acts upon my retina. %s soon as$ smell a ody, my olfactory nerve must e irritated or put into motiony the parts eDhaled from an odorous ody. %s soon as $ hear a sound,the tympanum of my ear must e struck y the air put in motion y asonorous ody, which could not act if it was not moved of itself.


25/188

machine. $ would admit without Euestion that the human machine appearsto me surprisingC ut since man eDists in nature, $ do not elieve itright to say that his formation is eyond the forces of nature. $ willadd, that $ could conceive far less of the formation of the humanmachine, when to eDplain it to me they tell me that a pure spirit, who

has neither eyes, nor feet, nor hands, nor head, nor lungs, nor mouth,nor reath, has made man y taking a little dust and lowing upon it.

The savage inhaitants of Paraguay pretend to e descended from themoon, and appear to us as simpletonsC the theologians of 7urope pretendto e descended from a pure spirit. $s this pretension more sensileK

an is intelligent, hence it is concluded that he must e the work of anintelligent eing, and not of a nature devoid of intelligence. %lthoughnothing is more rare than to see man use this intelligence, of which heappears so proud, $ will admit that he is intelligent, that hisnecessities develop in him this faculty, that the society of other mencontriutes especially to cultivate it. But in the human machine and inthe intelligence with which it is endowed, $ see nothing that shows in aprecise manner the innite intelligence of the workman who has thehonor of making it. $ see that this admirale machine is suject toderangementC that at that time this wonderful intelligence isdisordered, and sometimes totally disappearsC from this $ conclude thathuman intelligence depends upon a certain disposition of the materialorgans of the ody, and that, ecause man is an intelligent eing, it isnot well to conclude that God must e an intelligent eing, any morethan ecause man is material, we are compelled to conclude that God is

material. The intelligence of man no more proves the intelligence of Godthan the malice of men proves the malice of this God, of whom theypretend that man is the work. $n whatever way theology is taken, Godwill always e a cause contradicted y its eLects, or of whom it isimpossile to judge y =is works. @e shall always see evil,imperfections, and follies resulting from a cause claimed to e full ofgoodness, of perfections, and of wisdom.

!$$$.--=;@7/71, ?7$T=71 %? ?;1 T=7 >?$/71#7 $# T=7 7


26/188

assemlage of eings, diverse sustances, innite cominations, and allthe various motions which we see. %ll odies, whether organied or notorganied, are the necessary results of certain causes, made to producenecessarily the eLects which we see. ?othing in nature can e made ychanceC all follow Ded lawsC these laws are ut the necessary union of

certain eLects with their causes. %n atom of matter does not meetanother atom y accident or y haardC this rencounter is due topermanent laws, which cause each eing to act y necessity as it does,and can not act otherwise under the same circumstances. To speak aoutthe accidental coming together of atoms, or to attriute any eLects tochance, is to say nothing, if not to ignore the laws y which odiesact, meet, comine, or separate.

7verything is made y chance for those who do not understand nature, theproperties of eings, and the eLects which must necessarily result fromthe concurrence of certain causes. $t is not chance that has placed thesun in the center of our planetary systemC it is y its very essence,the sustance of which it is composed, that it occupies this place, andfrom thence diLuses itself to invigorate the eings who live in theseplanets.

!$/.--?7$T=71 2;7# T=7 ;1271 ;< T=7 >?$/71#7 P1;/7 T=77$#T7?7 ;< %

G;2.

The worshipers of a God nd, especially in the order of the universe,an invincile proof of the eDistence of an intelligent and wise eingwho rules it. But this order is only a result of motions necessarilyrought on y causes or y circumstances which are sometimes favoraleand sometimes injurious to ourselvesC we approve the former and ndfault with the latter.

?ature follows constantly the same progressC that is to say, the samecauses produce the same eLects, as long as their action is not

interrupted y other causes which occasion the rst ones to producediLerent eLects. @hen the causes, whose eLects we feel, areinterrupted in their action y causes which, although unknown to us, areno less natural and necessary, we are stupeed, we cry out miracles"and we attriute them to a cause far less known than all those we seeoperating efore us. The universe is always in orderC there can e nodisorder for it. ;ur organiation alone is suLering if we complainaout disorder. Bodies, causes, eings, which this world emraces, actnecessarily in the manner in which we see them act, whether we approveor disapprove their action. 7arthEuakes, volcanoes, inundations,contagions, and famines are eLects as necessary in the order of natureas the fall of heavy odies, as the course of rivers, as the periodicalmovements of the seas, the lowing of the winds, the aundant rains, and


27/188

the favorale eLects for which we praise and thank Providence for itslessings.

To e astonished that a certain order reigns in the world, is to esurprised to see the same causes constantly producing the same eLects.

To e shocked at seeing disorder, is to forget that the causes eingchanged or distured in their action, the eLects can no longer e thesame. To e astonished to see order in nature, is to e astonished thatanything can eDistC it is to e surprised at oneHs own eDistence. @hatis order for one eing, is disorder for another. %ll wicked eings ndthat everything is in order when they can with impunity put everythinginto disorderC they nd, on the contrary, that everything is indisorder when they are prevented from eDercising their wickedness.

!/.--;?T$?>%T$;?.

#upposing God to e the author and the motor of nature, there could eno disorder relating to =imC all causes which =e would have made wouldnecessarily act according to their properties the essences and theimpulsions that =e had endowed them with. $f God should change theordinary course of things, =e would not e immutale. $f the order ofthe universe--in which we elieve we see the most convincing proof of =iseDistence, of =is intelligence, =is power, and =is goodness--should e

inconsistent, =is eDistence might e doutedC or =e might e accused atleast of inconstancy, of inaility, of want of foresight, and of wisdomin the rst arrangement of thingsC we would have a right to accuse =imof lundering in =is choice of agents and instruments.


28/188

must have a odyC to act upon odies, we must have a odyC toeDperiencetroule, we must e capale of suLeringC from which it evidentlyfollows that a pure spirit can not e intelligent, and can not eaLected y that which takes place in the universe.

2ivine intelligence, divine ideas, divine views, you say, have nothingin common with those of men. #o much the etterJ But in this case, howcan men judge of these views--whether good or evil--reason aout theseideas, or admire this intelligenceK $t would e to judge, to admire, toadore that of which we can form no idea. To adore the profound views ofdivine wisdom, is it not to worship that of which it is impossile forus to judgeK To admire these same views, is it not admiring withoutknowing wryK %dmiration is always the daughter of ignorance. en admireand worship only what they do not understand.

!/$$.--%!! T=7 R>%!$T$7# @=$= T=7;!;GY G$/7# T; $T# G;2 %17;?T1%1Y T;

T=7 /71Y 7##7?7 @=$= $T #>PP;#7# =$ T; =%/7.

%ll these Eualities which are given to God are not suited to a eingwho, y =is own essence, is devoid of all similarity to human eings. $tis true, they think to nd this similarity y eDaggerating the human

Eualities with which they have clothed 2ivinityC they thrust them uponthe innite, and from that moment cease to understand themselves. @hatis the result of this comination of man with God, or of thistheanthropyK $ts only result is a chimera, of which nothing can eaIrmed without causing the phantom to vanish which they had taken somuch troule to conjure up.

2ante, in his poem of Paradise, relates that the 2ivinity appeared tohim under the gure of three circles, which formed an iris, whoseright colors arose from each otherC ut having wished to retain itsrilliant light, the poet saw only his own face. $n worshiping God, man

adores himself.

!/$$$.--;?T$?>%T$;?.

The slightest reMection suIces to prove to us that God can not haveany of the human Eualities, virtues, or perfections. ;ur virtues and ourperfections are the results of our temperament modied. =as God atemperament like oursK ;ur good Eualities are our haits relative to theeings in whose society we live. God, according to you, is a solitaryeing. God has no one like =imC =e does not live in societyC =e has no


29/188

need of any oneC =e enjoys a happiness which nothing can alter. %dmit,then, upon your own principles, that God can not possess what we callvirtues, and that man can not e virtuous in regard to =im.

!$.--$T $# %B#>12 T; #%Y T=%T T=7 =>%? 1%7 $# T=7 ;B7T %?2T=7 7?2;< 17%T$;?.

an, charmed with his own merits, imagines that it is ut his own kindthat God proposed as the oject and the end in the formation of theuniverse. >pon what is this so Mattering opinion asedK $t is, we aretold, upon this" that man is the only eing endowed with an intelligencewhich enales him to know the 2ivine nature, and to render to it homageworthy of it. @e are assured that God created the world for =is ownglory, and that the human race was included in =is plan, in order that=e might have someody to admire and glorify =im in =is works. But ythese intentions has not God visily missed =is endK

'. %ccording to you, it would always e impossile for man to know hisGod, and he would e kept in the most invincile ignorance of the 2ivineessence.

*. % eing who has no eEuals, can not e susceptile of glory. Glory can

result ut from the comparison of his own eDcellence with that ofothers.

). $f God y =imself is innitely happy and is suIcient unto =imself,why does =e need the homage of =is feele creaturesK

S. $n spite of all =is works, God is not gloriedC on the contrary, allthe religions of the world show =im to us as perpetually oLendedC theirgreat oject is to reconcile sinful, ungrateful, and reellious man withhis wrathful God.

!.--G;2 $# ?;T %27


30/188

theology itself, theology, which does ut occupy itself with theattriutes and views of 2ivinity, is the most complete of follies.

!$.--$T $# ?;T T1>7 T=%T T=7 ;B7T ;< T=7 ?$/71#7 @%#

T; 17?271 7? =%PPY.

$t is pretended, that in forming the universe, God had no oject ut torender man happy. But, in a world created eDpressly for him and governedy an all-mighty God, is man after all very happyK %re his enjoymentsduraleK %re not his pleasures mingled with suLeringsK %re there manypeople who are contented with their fateK $s not mankind the continualvictim of physical and moral evilsK This human machine, which is shownto us as the masterpiece of the reatorHs industry, has it not athousand ways of deranging itselfK @ould we admire the skill of amechanic, who should show us a complicated machine, liale to e out oforder at any moment, and which would after a while destroy itselfK

!$$.--@=%T $# %!!72 P1;/$27?7 $# B>T % @;12 /;$2 ;< #7?#7.

@e call Providence the generous care which 2ivinity shows in providingfor our needs, and in watching over the happiness of its elovedcreatures. But, as soon as we look around, we nd that God provides fornothing. Providence neglects the greatest part of the inhaitants ofthis world. %gainst a very small numer of men, who are supposed to ehappy, what a multitude of miserale ones are groaning eneathoppression, and languishing in miseryJ @hole nations are compelled tostarve in order to indulge the eDtravagances of a few morose tyrants,who are no happier than the slaves whom they oppressJ %t the same timethat our philosophers energetically parade the ounties of Providence,and eDhort us to place condence in it, do we not see them cry out at

unforeseen catastrophes, y which Providence plays with the vainprojects of menC do we not see that it overthrows their designs, laughsat their eLorts, and that its profound wisdom pleases itself inmisleading mortalsK But how can we place condence in a maliciousProvidence which laughs at and sports with mankindK =ow can $ admiretheunknown course of a hidden wisdom whose manner of acting isineDplicaleto meK udge it y its eLectsJ you will sayC it is y these $ do judgeit, and $ nd that these eLects are sometimes useful and sometimesinjurious to me.

@e think to justify Providence y saying, that in this world there are


31/188

more lessings than evil for each individual man. !et us suppose thatthe lessings which this Providence makes us enjoy are as one hundred,and that the evils are as ten per cent.C would it not always result thatagainst these hundred degrees of goodness, Providence possesses a tenthdegree of malignityK--which is incompatile with the perfection we

suppose it to have.

%ll the ooks are lled with the most Mattering praises of Providence,whose attentive care is eDtolledC it would seem to us, as if in order tolive happy here elow, man would have no need of eDerting himself.=owever, without laor, man could scarcely live a day. $n order to live,$ see him oliged to sweat, work, hunt, sh, toil without relaDationCwithout these secondary causes, the 1B$?G T=7 @;1!2--;17 %? 7?7Y T=%? %


32/188

soon as they are ornC and who, pleased to have conceived them, eDposethem without mercy to the caprices of fate.

The =ottentots--wiser in this particular than other nations, who treatthem as ararians--refuse, it is said, to adore God, ecause if =e

sometimes does good, =e as often does harm. $s not this reasoning morejust and more conformed to eDperience than that of so many men whopersist in seeing in their God ut kindness, wisdom, and foresightC andwho refuse to see that the countless evils, of which the world is thetheater, must come from the same =and which they kiss with transportK

!$/.--?;J T=7 @;1!2 $# ?;T G;/71?72 BY %? $?T7!!$G7?T B7$?G.

The logic of common sense teaches us that we should judge a cause utyits eLects. % cause can not e reputed as constantly good, eDcept whenit constantly produces good, useful, and agreeale eLects. % causewhich produces good at one time, and evil at another, is a cause whichis sometimes good and sometimes ad. But the logic of Theology destroysall this. %ccording to it, the phenomena of nature, or the eLects whichwe see in this world, prove to us the eDistence of an innitely goodause, and this ause is God. %lthough this world is full of evils,although disorder reigns here very often, although men groan every

moment under the fate which oppresses them, we ought to e convincedthat these eLects are due to a enevolent and immutale auseC andmanypeople elieve it, or pretend to elieve itJ

7verything which takes place in the world proves to us in the clearestway that it is not governed y an intelligent eing. @e can judge of theintelligence of a eing ut y the means which he employs to accomplishhis proposed design. The aim of God, it is said, is the happiness of ourraceC however, the same necessity regulates the fate of all sentienteings--which are orn to suLer much, to enjoy little, and to die. anHs

cup is full of joy and of itternessC everywhere good is side y sidewith evilC order is replaced y disorderC generation is followed ydestruction. $f you tell me that the designs of God are mysteries, andthat =is views are impossile to understand, $ will answer, that in thiscase it is impossile for me to judge whether God is intelligent.

!/.--G;2 %? ?;T B7 %!!72 $>T%B!7.

You pretend that God is immutaleJ But what is it that occasions thecontinual instaility in this world, which you claim as =is empireK $s


33/188


34/188

to =is creatures either the indiLerence to the suLerings of others, orthe innite happiness which =e reserved for =imself alone. =ow can wee satised with these answersK

'. The eDistence of another life has no other guaranty than the

imagination of men, who, in supposing it, have ut manifested theirdesire to live again, in order to enter upon a purer and more duralestate of happiness than that which they enjoy at present.

*. =ow can we conceive of a God who, knowing all things, must know totheir depths the nature of =is creatures, and yet must have so manyproofs in order to assure =imself of their proclivitiesK

). %ccording to the calculations of our chronologists, the earth whichwe inhait has eDisted for siD or seven thousand yearsC during this timethe nations have, under diLerent forms, eDperienced many vicissitudesand calamitiesC history shows us that the human race in all ages haseen tormented and devastated y tyrants, conEuerors, heroesC y wars,inundations, famines, epidemics, etc. $s this long catalogue of proofsof such a nature as to inspire us with great condence in the hiddenviews of the 2ivinityK 2o such constant evils give us an eDalted idea ofthe future fate which =is kindness is preparing for usK

S. $f God is as well-disposed as they assure us =e is, could =e not atleast, without estowing an innite happiness upon men, communicate tothem that degree of happiness of which nite eings are susceptileK $n

order to e happy, do we need an $nnite or 2ivine happinessK

3. $f God has not een ale to render men happier than they are hereelow, what will ecome of the hope of a Paradise, where it is pretendedthat the elect or chosen few will rejoice forever in ineLalehappinessK $f God could not or would not remove evil from the earth &theonly sojourning place we know of+, what reason could we have to presumethat =e can or will remove it from another world, of which we knownothingK ore than two thousand years ago, according to !actance, thewise epicure said" F7ither God wants to prevent evil, and can not, or =ecan and will notC or =e neither can nor will, or =e will and can. $f =e

wants to, without the power, =e is impotentC if =e can, and will not, =eis guilty of malice which we can not attriute to =imC if =e neither cannor will, =e is oth impotent and wicked, and conseEuently can not eGodC if =e wishes to and can, whence then comes evil, or why does =e notprevent itKF


35/188

@e are told of a pretended scale for human eingsC it is supposed thatGod has divided =is creatures into diLerent classes, each one enjoyingthe degree of happiness of which he is susceptile. %ccording to thisromantic arrangement, all eings, from the oyster to the angel, enjoythe happiness which elongs to them. 7Dperience contradicts this sulime

revery. $n the world where we are, we see all sentient eings living andsuLering in the midst of dangers. an can not step without wounding,tormenting, crushing a multitude of sentient eings which he nds inhis path, while he himself, at every step, is eDposed to a throng ofevils seen or unseen, which may lead to his destruction. $s not the verythought of death suIcient to mar his greatest enjoymentK 2uring thewhole course of his life he is suject to suLeringsC there is not amoment when he feels sure of preserving his eDistence, to which he is sostrongly attached, and which he regards as the greatest gift of2ivinity.

!$.--$? /%$? 2;7# T=7;!;GY 771T $T#7!< T; %R>$T G;2 ;< %?H#27


36/188

defects of manC there is always visile in this God so perfect, Fa tipof the 6human9 ear.F

!.--@7 %? ?;T B7!$7/7 $? % 2$/$?7 P1;/$27?7, $? %? $?nder an innitely good and powerful God, is it possile to conceivethat a single man could suLerK %n animal, a mite, which suLers,furnishes invincile arguments against 2ivine Providence and itsinnite enefactions.


37/188

!$.--;?T$?>%T$;?.

%ccording to theologians, the aictions and evils of this life are

chastisements which culpale men receive from 2ivinity. But why are menculpaleK $f God is %lmighty, does it cost =im any more to say, F!eteverything remain in orderJF--Flet all my sujects e good, innocent,fortunateJF--than to say, F!et everything eDistKF @as it more diIcultfor this God to do =is work well than to do it so adlyK @as it anyfarther from the noneDistence of eings to their wise and happyeDistence, than from their non-eDistence to their insensate andmiserale eDistenceK 1eligion speaks to us of a hell--that is, of afearful place where, notwithstanding =is goodness, God reserves eternaltorments for the majority of men. Thus, after having rendered mortalsvery miserale in this world, religion teaches them that God can makethem much more wretched in another. They meet our ojections ysaying,that otherwise the goodness of God would take the place of =is justice.But goodness which takes the place of the most terrile cruelty, is notinnite kindness. Besides, a God who, after having een innitelygood, ecomes innitely wicked, can =e e regarded as an immutaleeingK % God lled with implacale fury, is =e a God in whom we cannd a shadow of charity or goodnessK

!$$.--T=7;!;GY %07# ;< $T# G;2 % ;?#T71 ;< ?;?#7?#7, ;#T$7, ;< %!$7, %?2 %T1;$TY--% B7$?G %B#;!>T7!Y =%T7!.

2ivine justice, such as our theologians paint it, is, without dout, aEuality intended to make us love 2ivinity. %ccording to the notions ofmodern theology, it appears evident that God has created the majority ofmen with the view only of punishing them eternally. @ould it not haveeen more in conformity with kindness, with reason, with eEuity, tocreate ut stones or plants, and not sentient eings, than to create men

whose conduct in this world would cause them eternal chastisements inanotherK % God so perdious and wicked as to create a single man andleave him eDposed to the perils of damnation, can not e regarded as aperfect eing, ut as a monster of nonsense, injustice, malice, andatrocity.


38/188

predestination gives of 2ivinityJ

%lthough men repeat to us that their God is innitely good, it isevident that in the ottom of their hearts they can elieve nothing ofit. =ow can we love anything we do not knowK =ow can we love a eing,

the idea of whom is ut liale to keep us in anDiety and trouleK =owcan we love a eing of whom all that is told conspires to render himsupremely hatefulK

!$$$.--%!! 17!$G$;? $?#P$17# B>T % ;@%12!Y %?2 $?;12$?%T7


39/188

!/.--%;12$?G T; T=7 $27%# @=$= T=7;!;GY G$/7# ;< 2$/$?$TY, T;!;/7G;2 $# $P;##$B!7.

$f $ take my ideas of God from theology, God shows =imself to me in such

a light as to repel love. The devotees who tell us that they love theirGod sincerely, are either liars or fools who see their God ut inproleC it is impossile to love a eing, the thought of whom tends toeDcite terror, and whose judgments make us tremle. =ow can we facewithout fear, a God whom we suppose suIciently ararous to wish todamn us foreverK !et them not speak to us of a lial or respectful fearmingled with love, which men should have for their God. % son can notlove his father when he knows he is cruel enough to inMict eDEuisitetorments upon himC in short, to punish him for the least faults. ?o manupon earth can have the least spark of love for a God who holds inreserve eternal, hard, and violent chastisements for ninety-ninehundredths of =is children.

!/$.--BY T=7 $?/7?T$;? ;< T=7 2;G% ;< T=7 7T71?%! T;17?T# ;7! TY1%?T @$T=;>T

%$.

The inventors of the dogma of eternal torments in hell, have made of theGod whom they call so good, the most detestale of eings. ruelty inman is the last term of corruption. There is no sensitive soul ut ismoved and revolts at the recital alone of the torments which thegreatest criminal enduresC ut cruelty merits the greater indignationwhen we consider it gratuitous or without motive. The most sanguinarytyrants, aligula, ?ero, 2omitian, had at least some motive intormenting their victims and insulting their suLeringsC these motiveswere, either their own safety, the fury of revenge, the design to

frighten y terrile eDamples, or perhaps the vanity to make parade oftheir power, and the desire to satisfy a ararous curiosity. an a Godhave any of these motivesK $n tormenting the victims of =is wrath, =ewould punish eings who could not really endanger =is immovale power,nor troule =is felicity, which nothing can change. ;n the other hand,the suLerings of the other life would e useless to the living, who cannot witness themC these torments would e useless to the damned,ecausein hell is no more conversion, and the hour of mercy is passedC fromwhich it follows, that God, in the eDercise of =is eternal vengeance,would have no other aim than to amuse =imself and insult the weaknessof=is creatures. $ appeal to the whole human raceJ $s there in nature a


40/188

man so cruel as to wish in cold lood to torment, $ do not say hisfellow-eings, ut any sentient eing whatever, without fee, withoutprot, without curiosity, without having anything to fearK onclude,then, ; theologiansJ that according to your own principles, your God isinnitely more wicked than the most wicked of men. You will tell me,

perhaps, that innite oLenses deserve innite chastisements, and $will tell you that we can not oLend a God whose happiness is innite.$ will tell you further, that oLenses of nite eings can not einniteC that a God who does not want to e oLended, can not consentto make =is creaturesH oLenses last for eternityC $ will tell you thata God innitely good, can not e innitely cruel, nor grant =iscreatures innite eDistence solely for the pleasure of tormenting themforever.

$t could have een ut the most cruel ararity, the most notoriousimposition, ut the lindest amition which could have created the dogmaof eternal damnation. $f there eDists a God who could e oLended orlasphemed, there would not e upon earth any greater lasphemers thanthose who dare to say that this God is perverse enough to take pleasurein dooming =is feele creatures to useless torments for all eternity.

!/$$.--T=7;!;GY $# B>T % #71$7# ;< P%!P%B!7 ;?T1%2$T$;?#.

To pretend that God can e oLended with the actions of men, is toannihilate all the ideas that are given to us of this eing. To say thatman can distur the order of the universe, that he can grasp thelightning from GodHs hand, that he can upset =is projects, is to claimthat man is stronger than his God, that he is the ariter of =is will,that it depends on him to change =is goodness into cruelty. Theologydoes nothing ut destroy with one hand that which it uilds with theother. $f all religion is founded upon a God who ecomes angry, and whois appeased, all religion is founded upon a palpale contradiction.

%ll religions agree in eDalting the wisdom and the innite power of the

2ivinityC ut as soon as they eDpose =is conduct, we discover utimprudence, want of foresight, weakness, and folly. God, it is said,created the world for =imselfC and so far =e has not succeeded in making=imself properly respectedJ God has created men in order to have in =isdominion sujects who would render =im homageC and we continually seemen revolt against =imJ

!/$$$.--T=7 P17T7?272 @;10# ;< G;2 2; ?;T P1;/7 %T %!! @=%T @7%!!2$/$?7 P71


41/188

@e are continually told of the 2ivine perfectionsC and as soon as we askthe proofs of them, we are shown the works in which we are assured thatthese perfections are written in ineLaceale characters. %ll theseworks, however, are imperfect and perishaleC man, who is regarded as

the masterpiece, as the most marvelous work of 2ivinity, is full ofimperfections which render him disagreeale in the eyes of the %lmightyworkman who has formed himC this surprising work ecomes often sorevolting and so odious to its %uthor, that =e feels =imself compelledto cast him into the re. But if the choicest work of 2ivinity isimperfect, y what are we to judge of the 2ivine perfectionsK an a workwith which the author himself is so little satised, cause us to admirehis skillK Physical man is suject to a thousand inrmities, tocountless evils, to deathC the moral man is full of defectsC and yetthey eDhaust themselves y telling us that he is the most eautiful workof the most perfect of eings.

!$.--T=7 P7117 #P$1$T#.

$t appears that God, in creating more perfect eings than men, did notsucceed any etter, or give stronger proofs of =is perfection. 2o we not

see in many religions that angels and pure spirits revolted againsttheir aster, and even attempted to eDpel =im from =is throneK Godintended the happiness of angels and of men, and =e has neversucceededin rendering happy either angels or menC pride, malice, sins, theimperfections of =is creatures, have always een opposed to the wishesof the perfect reator.

!.--T=7;!;GY P17%=7# T=7 ;?$P;T7?7 ;< $T# G;2, %?2;?T$?>%!!Y #=;@#=$ $P;T7?T.

%ll religion is visily founded upon the principle that FGod proposesand man disposes.F %ll the theologies of the world show us an uneEualcomat etween 2ivinity on the one side, and =is creatures on the other.God never relies on =is honorC in spite of =is almighty power, =e couldnot succeed in making the works of =is hands as =e would like them toe. To complete the asurdity, there is a religion which pretends thatGod =imself died to redeem the human raceC and, in spite of =is death,men are not in the least as this God would desire them to eJ


42/188

!$.--%;12$?G T; %!! T=7 17!$G$;># #Y#T7# ;< T=7 7%1T=, G;2@;>!2 B7

T=7 ;#T %P1$$;># %?2 T=7 ;#T $?#7?#%T7 ;< B7$?G#.

?othing could e more eDtravagant than the role which in every countrytheology makes 2ivinity play. $f the thing was real, we would e oligedto see in it the most capricious and the most insane of eingsC onewould e oliged to elieve that God made the world to e the theater ofdishonoring wars with =is creaturesC that =e created angels, men,demons, wicked spirits, ut as adversaries, against whom =e couldeDercise =is power. =e gives them lierty to oLend =im, makes themwicked enough to upset =is projects, ostinate enough to never give up"all for the pleasure of getting angry, and eing appeased, ofreconciling =imself, and of repairing the confusion they have made. =ad2ivinity formed at once =is creatures such as they ought to e in orderto please =im, what troule =e might have spared =imselfJ or, at least,how much emarrassment =e might have saved to =is theologiansJ%ccordingto all the religious systems of the earth, God seems to e occupied utin doing =imself injuryC =e does it as those charlatans do who woundthemselves, in order to have occasion to show the pulic the value oftheir ointments. @e do not see, however, that so far 2ivinity has eenale to radically cure itself of the evil which is caused y men.

!$$.--$T $# %B#>12 T; #%Y T=%T 7/$! 2;7# ?;T ;7 !2 G$/7 T; G>$!TY7? @=;=7 P>?$#=7#, T=7 1$G=T T; ;P!%$? ;< =$# 1>7!TY.


43/188

The faculty of foresight, or the aility to know in advance all which isto happen in the world, is attriuted to God. But this foresight canscarcely elong to =is glory, nor spare =im the reproaches which mencould legitimately heap upon =im. $f God had the foresight of thefuture, did =e not foresee the fall of =is creatures whom =e had

destined to happinessK $f =e resolved in =is decrees to allow this fall,there is no dout that =e desired it to take place" otherwise it wouldnot have happened. $f the 2ivine foresight of the sin of =is creatureshad een necessary or forced, it might e supposed that God wascompelled y =is justice to punish the guiltyC ut God, enjoying thefaculty of foresight and the power to predestinate everything, would itnot depend upon =imself not to impose upon men these cruel lawsK ;r, atleast, could =e not have dispensed with creating eings whom =e mightecompelled to punish and to render unhappy y a suseEuent decreeK@hatdoes it matter whether God destined men to happiness or to misery y aprevious decree, the eLect of =is foresight, or y a suseEuent decree,the eLect of =is justice. 2oes the arrangement of these decrees changethe fate of the miseraleK @ould they not have the right to complain ofa God who, having the power of leaving them in olivion, rought themforth, although =e foresaw very well that =is justice would force =imsooner or later to punish themK

!$/.--%B#>12$TY ;< T=7 T=7;!;G$%! P;? ;1$G$?%! #$? %?2>P;?#%T%?.

an, say you, issuing from the hands of God, was pure, innocent, andgoodC ut his nature ecame corrupted in conseEuence of sin. $f mancould sin, when just leaving the hands of God, his nature was then notperfectJ @hy did God permit him to sin, and his nature to ecomecorruptK @hy did God allow him to e seduced, knowing well that he woulde too weak to resist the tempterK @hy did God create a #atan, a

malicious spirit, a tempterK @hy did not God, who was so desirous ofdoing good to mankind, why did =e not annihilate, once for all, so manyevil genii whose nature rendered them enemies of our happinessK ;rrather, why did God create evil spirits, whose victories and terrileinMuences upon the human race =e must have foreseenK


44/188

@e are told a story of the simple-heartedness of an $talian monk, whichdoes him honor. This good man preaching one day felt oliged toannounceto his auditory that, thanks to =eaven, he had at last discovered a suremeans of rendering all men happy. FThe devil,F said he, Ftempts men ut

to have them as comrades of his misery in hell. !et us addressourselves, then, to the Pope, who possesses the keys of paradise and ofhellC let us ask him to eseech God, at the head of the whole hurch, toreconcile =imself with the devilC to take him ack into =is favorC tore-estalish him in =is rst rank. This can not fail to put an end tohis sinister projects against mankind.F The good monk did not see,perhaps, that the devil is at least fully as useful as God to theministers of religion. These reap too many enets from theirdiLerences to lend themselves willingly to a reconciliation etween thetwo enemies ties, upon whose contests their eDistence and their revenuesdepend. $f men would cease to e tempted and to sin, the ministry ofpriests would ecome useless to them. anicheism is evidently thesupport of all religionsC ut unfortunately the devil, eing invented toremove all suspicion of malice from 2ivinity, proves to us at everymoment the powerlessness or the awkwardness of his celestial %dversary.

!/$.--$< G;2 ;>!2 ?;T 17?271 =>%? ?%T>17 #$?!7##, =7 =%# ?;1$G=T T;

P>?$#= %?.

anHs nature, it is said, must necessarily ecome corrupt. God could notendow him with sinlessness, which is an inalienale portion of 2ivineperfection. But if God could not render him sinless, why did =e take thetroule of creating man, whose nature was to ecome corrupt, and which,conseEuently, had to oLend GodK ;n the other side, if God =imself wasnot ale to render human nature sinless, what right had =e to punish menfor not eing sinlessK $t is ut y the right of might. But the right ofthe strongest is violenceC and violence is not suited to the most ustof Beings. God would e supremely unjust if =e punished men for not

having a portion of the 2ivine perfections, or for not eing ale to eGods like =imself.

ould not God have at least endowed men with that sort of perfection ofwhich their nature is susceptileK $f some men are good or renderthemselves agreeale to their God, why did not this God estow the samefavor or give the same dispositions to all eings of our kindK @hy doesthe numer of wicked eDceed so greatly the numer of good peopleK @hy,for every friend, does God nd ten thousand enemies in a world whichdepended upon =im alone to people with honest menK $f it is true thatGod intends to form in heaven a court of saints, of chosen ones, or ofmen who have lived in this world according to =is views, would =e nothave had a court more numerous, more rilliant, and more honorale to


45/188

=im, if it were composed of all the men to whom, in creating them, =ecould have granted the degree of goodness necessary to otain eternalhappinessK 12 T; #%Y T=%T G;2H# ;?2>T >#T B7 % Y#T71YT; %?,%?2 T=%T =7 =%# ?; 1$G=T T; 7%$?7 %?2 >2G7 $T.

@e are told that the enormous distance which separates God from men,makes GodHs conduct necessarily a mystery for us, and that we have noright to interrogate our aster. $s this statement satisfactoryK But

according to you, when my eternal happiness is involved, have $ not theright to eDamine GodHs own conductK $t is ut with the hope of happinessthat men sumit to the empire of a God. % despot to whom men aresujected ut through fear, a master whom they can not interrogate, atotally inaccessile sovereign, can not merit the homage of intelligenteings. $f GodHs conduct is a mystery to me, it is not made for me. ancan not adore, admire, respect, or imitate a conduct of which everythingis impossile to conceive, or of which he can not form any ut revoltingideasC unless it is pretended that he should worship all the things ofwhich he is forced to e ignorant, and then all that he does notunderstand ecomes admirale.

PriestsJ you teach us that the designs of God are impenetraleC that =isways are not our waysC that =is thoughts are not our thoughtsC that itis folly to complain of =is administration, whose motives and secretways are entirely unknown to usC that there is temerity in accusing =imof unjust judgments, ecause they are incomprehensile to us. But do younot see that y speaking in this manner, you destroy with your own handsall your profound systems which have no design ut to eDplain the waysof 2ivinity that you call impenetraleK These judgments, these ways, andthese designs, have you penetrated themK You dare not say soC and,although you season incessantly, you do not understand them more thanwedo. $f y chance you know the plan of God, which you tell us to admire,


46/188

while there are many people who nd it so little worthy of a just,good, intelligent, and rational eingC do not say that this plan isimpenetrale. $f you are as ignorant as we, have some indulgence forthose who ingenuously confess that they comprehend nothing of it, orthat they see nothing in it 2ivine. ease to persecute for opinions

which you do not understand yourselvesC cease to slander each other fordreams and conjectures which are altogether contradictoryC speak to usof intelligile and truly useful thingsC and no longer tell us of theimpenetrale ways of a God, aout which you do nothing ut stammer andcontradict yourselves.

$n speaking to us incessantly of the immense depths of 2ivine wisdom, inforidding us to fathom these depths y telling us that it is insolenceto call God to the triunal of our humle reason, in making it a crimeto judge our aster, the theologians only confess the emarrassment inwhich they nd themselves as soon as they have to render account of theconduct of a God, which they tell us is marvelous, only ecause it istotally impossile for them to understand it themselves.

!/$$$.--$T $# %B#>12 T; %!! =$ % G;2 ;< >#T$7 %?2 G;;2?7##,@=;$?P;?

T=7

$??;7?T %?2 T=7 G>$!TYC $T $# $2!7 T; 27%?2 T=%T T=7>??%T7#=;>!2 ;?#;!7 T=7#7!/7# T=;1 ;< T=7.

Physical evil commonly passes as the punishment of sin. alamities,diseases, famines, wars, earthEuakes, are the means which God employstochastise perverse men. Therefore, they have no diIculty in attriutingthese evils to the severity of a just and good God. =owever, do we not

see these plagues fall indiscriminately upon the good and the wicked,upon the impious and the pious, upon the innocent and the guiltyK =owcan we e made to admire, in this proceeding, the justice and thegoodness of a eing, the idea of whom appears so consoling to theunfortunateK 2outless the rain of these unfortunate ones has eendistured y their misfortunes, since they forget that God is theariter of things, the sole dispenser of the events of this world. $nthis case ought they not to lame =im for the evils for which they wouldnd consolation in =is armsK >nfortunate fatherJ you console yourselfin the osom of Providence for the loss of a cherished child or of awife, who made your happinessJ %lasJ do you not see that your God haskilled themK Your God has rendered you miseraleC and you want =im toconsole you for the fearful lows =e has inMicted upon you.


47/188


48/188

aandoned to itself, of destitute of 2ivine help, inclines himnecessarily to evil, or renders him incapale of doing good, whatecomes of his free willK %ccording to such principles, man can meritneither reward nor punishmentC in rewarding man for the good he does,God would ut recompense =imselfC in punishing man for the evil he does,

God punishes him for not having een given the grace, without which itwas impossile for him to do etter.

!.--


49/188

in the hope of procuring a greater and more durale pleasure. $n thiscase, the idea of a greater good determines him to deprive himself ofone less desirale.

$t is not the lover who gives to his mistress the features y which he

is enchantedC he is not then the master to love or not to love theoject of his tendernessC he is not the master of the imagination or thetemperament which dominates himC from which it follows, evidently, thatman is not the master of the wishes and desires which rise in his soul,independently of him. But man, say you, can resist his desiresC then heis free. an resists his desires when the motives which turn him from anoject are stronger than those which draw him toward itC ut then, hisresistance is necessary. % man who fears dishonor and punishment morethan he loves money, resists necessarily the desire to take possessionof anotherHs money. %re we not free when we delierateK--ut has one thepower to know or not to know, to e uncertain or to e assuredK2elieration is the necessary eLect of the uncertainty in which we ndourselves with reference to the results of our actions. %s soon as weelieve ourselves certain of these results, we necessarily decideC andthen we act necessarily according as we shall have judged right orwrong. ;ur judgments, true or false, are not freeC they are necessarilydetermined y ideas which we have received, or which our mind hasformed. an is not free in his choiceC he is evidently compelled tochoose what he judges the most useful or the most agreeale for himself.@hen he suspends his choice, he is not more freeC he is forced tosuspend it till he knows or elieves he knows the Eualities of the

ojects presented to him, or until he has weighed the conseEuence of hisactions. an, you will say, decides every moment on actions which heknows will endanger himC man kills himself sometimes, then he is free. $deny itJ =as man the aility to reason correctly or incorrectlyK 2o nothis reason and his wisdom depend either upon opinions that he hasformed, or upon his mental constitutionK %s neither the one nor theother depends upon his will, they can not in any wise prove his lierty.

$f $ make the wager to do or not to do a thing, am $ not freeK 2oes itnot depend upon me to do or not to do itK ?oC $ will answer you, thedesire to win the wager will necessarily determine you to do or not to

do the thing in Euestion. FBut if $ consent to lose the wagerKF Then thedesire to prove to me that you are free will have ecome to you astronger motive than the desire to win the wagerC and this motive willnecessarily have determined you to do or not to do what was understoodetween us. But you will say, F$ feel myself free.F $t is an illusionwhich may e compared to that of the My in the fale, which, lightingon the shaft of a heavy wagon, applauded itself as driver of the vehiclewhich carried it. an who elieves himself free, is a My who elieveshimself the master-motor in the machine of the universe, while hehimself, without his own volition, is carried on y it. The feelingwhich makes us elieve that we are free to do or not to do a thing, isut a pure illusion. @hen we come to the veritale principle of ouractions, we will nd that they are nothing ut the necessary results of


50/188

our wills and of our desires, which are never within our power. Youelieve yourselves free ecause you do as you chooseC ut are you reallyfree to will or not to will, to desire or not to desireK Your wills andyour desires, are they not necessarily eDcited y ojects or yEualities which do not depend upon you at allK

!$.--@7 #=;>!2 ?;T ;?!>27 7?T# $?


51/188

necessarily its eLect when its impulse is not interrupted y causeswhich suspend its eLects.

!$$$.--;?T$?>%T$;?.

To take away from man his free will, is, we are told, to make of him apure machine, an automaton without liertyC there would eDist in himneither merit nor virtue @hat is merit in manK

$t is a certain manner of acting which renders him estimale in the eyesof his fellow eings. @hat is virtueK $t is the disposition that causesus to do good to others. @hat can there e contemptile in automaticmachines capale of producing such desirale eLectsK arcus %ureliuswas a very useful spring to the vast machine of the 1oman 7mpire. Bywhat right will a machine despise another machine, whose springs wouldfacilitate its own playK Good people are springs which assist society inits tendency to happinessC wicked men are adly-formed springs, whichdistur the order, the progress, and harmony of society. $f for its owninterests society loves and rewards the good, she hates, despises, andremoves the wicked, as useless or dangerous motors.

!$/.--G;2 =$#7!!2 ?;T B7 #7!7##?7## ;< %!! 17!$G$;?.

The world is a necessary agentC all the eings which compose it areunited to each other, and can not do otherwise than they do, so long asthey are moved y the same causes and possessed of the same Eualities.$f they lose these Eualities, they will act necessarily in a diLerentway. God =imself &admitting =is eDistence a moment+ can not e regardedas a free agentC if there eDisted a God, =is manner of acting would

necessarily e determined y the Eualities inherent in =is natureCnothing would e ale to alter or to oppose =is wishes. This considered,neither our actions nor our prayers nor our sacrices could suspend orchange =is invariale progress and =is immutale designs, from which weare compelled to conclude that all religion would e entirely useless.

!/.--7/7? %;12$?G T; T=7;!;G$%! P1$?$P!7#, %? $# ?;T


52/188

$f theologians were not constantly contradicting each other, they wouldknow, from their own hypotheses, that man can not e called free for aninstant. $s not man supposed to e in a continual dependence upon GodK$s one free, when one could not have eDisted or can not live withoutGod, and when one ceases to eDist at the pleasure of =is supreme willK

$f God created man of nothing, if the preservation of man is a continualcreation, if God can not lose sight of =is creature for an instant, ifall that happens to him is a result of the 2ivine will, if man isnothing of himself, if all the events which he eDperiences are theeLects of 2ivine decrees, if he can not do any good without assistancefrom aove, how can it e pretended that man enjoys lierty during onemoment of his lifeK $f God did not save him in the moment when he sins,how could man sinK $f God preserves him, God, therefore, forces him tolive in order to sin.

!/$.--%!! 7/$!, %!! 2$#;1271, %!! #$?, %? B7 %TT1$B>T72 B>T T;G;2C%?2 ;?#7R>7?T!Y, =7 =%# ?; 1$G=T T; P>?$#= ;1 17@%12.

2ivinity is continually compared to a king, the majority of whosesujects revolt against =im and it is pretended that =e has the right toreward =is faithful sujects, and to punish those who revolt against=im. This comparison is not just in any of its parts. God presides over

a machine, of which =e has made all the springsC these springs actaccording to the way in which God has formed themC it is the fault of=is inaptitude if these springs do not contriute to the harmony of themachine in which the workman desired to place them. God is a creating0ing, who created all kinds of sujects for =imselfC who formed themaccording to =is pleasure, and whose wishes can never nd anyresistance. $f God in =is empire has reellious sujects, it is God whoresolved to have reellious sujects. $f the sins of men distur theorder of the world, it is God who desired this order to e distured.?oody dares to dout 2ivine justiceC however, under the empire of a

just God, we nd nothing ut injustice and violence. Power decides the

fate of nations. 7Euity seems to e anished from the earthC a smallnumer of men enjoy with impunity the repose, the fortunes, the lierty,and the life of all the others. 7verything is in disorder in a worldgoverned y a God of whom it is said that disorder displeases =imeDceedingly.

!/$$.--7?H# P1%Y71# T; G;2 P1;/7 #>


53/188

%lthough men incessantly admire the wisdom the goodness, the justice,the eautiful order of Providence, they are, in fact, never contentedwith it. The prayers which they continually oLer to =eaven, prove to usthat they are not at all satised with GodHs administration. Praying toGod, asking a favor of =im, is to mistrust =is vigilant careC to pray

God to avert or to suppress an evil, is to endeavor to put ostacles inthe way of =is justiceC to implore the assistance of God in ourcalamities, means to appeal to the very author of these calamities inorder to represent to =im our welfareC that =e ought to rectify in ourfavor =is plan, which is not enecial to our interests. The optimist,or the one who thinks that everything is good in the world, and whorepeats to us incessantly that we live in the est world possile, if hewere consistent, ought never to prayC still less should he eDpectanother world where men will e happier. an there e a etter worldthan the est possile of all worldsK #ome of the theologians havetreated the optimists as impious for having claimed that God could nothave made a etter world than the one in which we liveC according tothese doctors it is limiting the 2ivine power and insulting it. But donot theologians see that it is less oLensive for God, to pretend that=e did =is est in creating the world, than to say that =e, having thepower to produce a etter one, had the malice to make a very ad oneK $fthe optimist, y his system, does wrong to the 2ivine power, thetheologian, who treats him as impious, is himself a reproate, whowounds the 2ivine goodness under preteDt of taking interest in God.

!/$$$.--T=7 17P%1%T$;? ;< T=7 $?$R>$T$7# %?2 T=7 $#71$7# ;< T=$#@;1!2 $? %?;T=71 @;1!2, $# %? $2!7 ;?7T>17 %?2 %? %B#>12#>PP;#$T$;?.

@hen we complain of the evils of which this world is the theater, we arereferred to another worldC we are told that there God will repair allthe iniEuities and the miseries which =e permits for a time here elow.=owever, if leaving =is eternal justice to sleep for a time, God couldconsent to evil during the period of the eDistence of our gloe, what

assurance have we that during the eDistence of another gloe, 2ivinejustice will not likewise sleep during the misfortunes of itsinhaitantsK They console us in our troules y saying, that God ispatient, and that =is justice, although often very slow, is not the lesscertain. But do you not see, that patience can not e suited to a eing

just, immutale, and omnipotentK an God tolerate injustice for aninstantK To temporie with an evil that one knows of, evinces eitheruncertainty, weakness, or collusionC to tolerate evil which one has thepower to prevent, is to consent that evil should e committed.


54/188

!$.--T=7;!;GY >#T$#T$7 P71$TT72 BY $T#G;2,;?!Y BY ;?72$?G T; T=$# G;2 T=7 1$G=T ;< T=7 #T1;?G7#T, T=%T$# T;#%Y, T=7 /$;!%T$;? ;< %!! 1$G=T#, ;1 $? ;%?2$?G P$227/;T$;?.

$ hear a multitude of theologians tell me on all sides, that God isinnitely just, ut that =is justi

Documents

Superstition In All Ages .doc