,,superstition ,,unveiled4  ,,by        
,,charles ,,southwell1 ,,author ,,of    
,,supernaturalism ,,exploded2           
,,impossibility ,,of ,,atheism          
,,demonstrated1 ,,etc4   ,abridged by   
the ,author from his ,,apology ,,for    
,,atheism4         ,not one of you      
reflects that you ought to      know    
your ,gods before you worship them4     
,,london3 ,,edward ,,truelove1 #bdj1    
,,strand1 ,,three ,,doors ,,from        
,,temple ,,bar1 ,,and ,,all             
,,booksellers  #ahed4                   
,,superstition ,,unveiled4   ,religion  
has an important bearing on all the     
relations and conditions of life4 ,the  
connexion between religious faith and   
political practice is1 in truth1 far    
closer than is generally thought4       
,public opinion has not yet ripened into
 a knowledge that religious error is the
 intangible but real substratum of all  
political injustice4 ,though the        
',schoolmaster' has done much1 there    
still remain among us1 many honest and  

energetic assertors of 'the rights of   
man1' who have to learn that a people in
 the fetters of superstition cannot1    
secure political freedom4 ,these        
reformers admit the vast influence of   
,mohammedanism on the politics of       
,constantinople1 and yet persist in     
acting as if ,christianity had little or
 nothing to do with the politics of     
,england4  ,at a recent meeting of the  
,anti-,state ,church ,association it was
 remarked that throw what we would into 
the political cauldron1 out it came in  
an ecclesiastical shape4 ,if the        
newspaper report may be relied on1 there
 was much laughing among the hearers of 
those words1 the deep meaning of which1 
it may safely be affirmed1 only a select
 few of them could fathom4  ,hostility  
to state churches by no means implies a 
knowledge of the close and important    
connection between ecclesiastical and   
political questions4 ,men may appreciate
 the justice of voluntaryism in         
religion1 and yet have rather cloudy    

conceptions with respect to the         
influence of opinions and things        
ecclesiastical on the condition of      
nations4 ,they may clearly see that he  
who needs the priest1 should disdain to 
saddle others with the cost of him1     
while blind to the fact that no people  
having faith in the supernatural ever   
failed to mix up such faith with        
political affairs4 ,even leading members
 of the ',fourth ,estate' are constantly
 declaring their disinclination for     
religious criticism1 and express        
particular anxiety to keep their        
journals free of everything 'strictly   
theological4' ,their notion is1 that    
newspaper writers should endeavour to   
keep clear of so 'awful' a topic4 ,and  
yet seldom does a day pass in which this
 self-imposed editorial rule is not     
violated--a fact significant1 as any    
fact can be of connection between       
religion and politics4  ,it is quite    
possible the editors of newspapers have 
weighty reasons for their repugnance to 

agitate the much vexed question of      
religion2 but it seems they cannot help 
doing so4 ,in a leading article of this 
days' ,post1 ,endnote #d3a we are       
told--,the stain and reproach of        
,romanism in ,ireland is1 that it is a  
political system1 and a wicked political
 system1 for it regards only the        
exercise of power1 and neglects utterly 
the duty of improvement4 ,in journals   
supported by ,romanists1 and of course  
devoted to the interests of their       
church1 the very same charge is made    
against ,english ,protestantism4 ,to    
denounce each other's 'holy apostolic   
religion' may be incompatible with the  
taste of 'gentlemen of the press1' but  
certainly they do it with a brisk and   
hearty vehemence that inclines one to   
think it a 'labour of love4' ,what men  
do con amore they usually do well1 and  
no one can deny the wonderful talent for
 denunciation exhibited by journalists  
when writing down each other's 'true    
,christianity4' ,the unsparing invective

 quoted above from the ,post is a good  
specimen4 ,if just1 ,irish ,romanism    
ought to be destroyed1 and newspaper    
writers cannot be better employed than  
in helping on the work of its           
destruction1 or the destruction of any  
other religion to which the same 'stain 
and reproach' may be fairly attached4   
,i have no spite or ill-will towards    
,roman ,catholics though opposed to     
their religion1 and a willing subscriber
 to the opinion of ,romanism in ,ireland
 expressed by the ,post4 ,the past and  
present condition of that country is a  
deep disgrace to its priests1 the bulk  
of whom1 ,protestant as well as         
,romanist1 can justly be charged with   
'regarding only the exercise of power1  
while neglecting utterly the duty of    
improvement4'  ,the intriguing and      
essentially political character of      
,romanism it would be idle to deny4 ,no 
one at all acquainted with its cunningly
 contrived 'system' will hesitate to    
characterise it as 'wickedly political1'

 productive of nothing but mischief--a  
system through whose accursed           
instrumentality millions are cheated of 
their sanity as well as substance1 and  
trained dog-like to lick the hand that  
smites them4 ,so perfect is their       
degradation that literally they 'take no
 thought for to-morrow1' it being their 
practice to wait 'till starvation stares
 them in the face1' #d3b and then make  
an effort against it4  ,the ,globe of   
,thursday1 ,october #cjth1 #ahde1       
contains an article on the damage       
sustained by the potatoe crop here and  
in ,ireland1 full of matter calculated  
to enlighten our first-rate reformers   
who seem profoundly ignorant that       
superstition is the bane of intellect1  
and most formidable of all the obstacles
 which stand between the people and     
their rights4 ,one paragraph is so      
peculiarly significant of the miserable 
condition to which ,romanism and        
,protestantism have reduced a peasantry 
said to be 'the finest in the world1'   

that ,i here subjoin it4  ,the best     
means to arrest the progress of the     
pestilence in the people's food have    
occupied the attention of scientific    
men4 ,the commission appointed by       
government1 consisting of three of the  
must celebrated practical chemists1 has 
published a preliminary report1 in which
 several suggestions1 rather than       
ascertained results1 are communicated1  
by which the sound portions of the root 
may1 it is hoped1 be preserved from the 
epidemic1 and possibly1 the tainted be  
rendered innoxious1 and even partially  
nutritious4 ,followed implicitly1 their 
directions might mitigate the calamity4 
,but the care1 the diligence1 the       
persevering industry which the various  
forms of process require1 in order to   
effecting the purpose which might result
 if they were promptly adopted and      
properly carried out1 are the very      
qualities in which the ,irish peasantry 
are most deficient4 ,in the present     
crisis1 the people are more disposed to 

regard the extensive destruction of     
their crops in the light of an          
extraordinary visitation of ,heaven1    
with which it is vain for human efforts 
to contend1 than to employ              
counteracting1 or remedial applications4
 ,sure the ,almighty sent the           
potatoe-plague and we must bear it as   
wall us we can1 is the remark of many2  
while1 in other places1 the copious     
sprinklings of holy water on the potatoe
 gardens1 and on the produce1 as it lies
 upon the surface1 are more depended on 
for disinfecting the potatoes than those
 suggestions of science which require   
the application of patient industry4    
,daniel ,o',connell boasted about ,irish
 morale and ,irish intellect--the       
handsome women1 and stalwart men of his 
'beloved country1' but no sensible      
persons paid the least attention to him4
 ,it is1 at all events1 too late in the 
day for we ',saxons' to be either       
cajoled or amused by such nonsense4 ,an 
overwhelming majority of the ,irish     

people have been proved indolent beyond 
all parallel1 and not much more         
provident than those unhappy savages who
 sell their beds in the morning1 not    
being able to foresee they shall again  
require them at night4 ,a want of       
forethought so remarkable and indolence 
so abominable1 are results of           
superstitious education4 ,does any one  
suppose the religion of the ,irish has  
little1 if anything1 to do with their   
political condition8 ,or can it be      
believed they will be fit for1 much less
 achieve1 political emancipation1 while 
priests and priests alone1 are their    
instructors8 ,we may rely upon it that  
intellectual freedom is the natural and 
necessary precursor of political        
freedom4 ,education1 said ,lord         
,brougham1 makes men easy to lead but   
difficult to drive2 easy to govern but  
impossible to enslave4 ,the ,irish      
peasantry clamoured for ',repeal1' never
 considering that did they get it1 no   
essential change would be made in their 

social1 moral1 or1 to say all in one    
word1 political condition4 ,they would  
still be the tool of unprincipled       
political mountebanks--themselves the   
tool of priests4  ,great was the outcry 
raised against the 'godless colleges'   
that ,sir ,robert ,peel had the         
courageous good sense to inflict on     
,ireland4 ,protestant1 as well as       
,romanist priests1 were terribly alarmed
 lest these colleges should spoil the   
craft by which they live4 ,sagacious    
enough to perceive that whatever        
influence they possess must vanish with 
the ignorance on which it rests1 they   
moved heaven and earth to disgust the   
,irish people with an educational       
measure of which superstition formed no 
part4 ,their fury1 like 'empty space1'  
is boundless4 ,they cannot endure the   
thought that our minister should so far 
play the game of 'infidelity' as to take
 from them the delightful task of       
teaching ,ireland's young idea 'how to  
shoot4' ,sir ,robert ,inglis christened 

this odious measure1 a 'gigantic scheme 
of godless education1' and a large      
majority of ,irish ,roman ,catholic     
,prelates have solemnly pronounced it   
'dangerous to faith and morals4'        
,neither ministerial allurements1 nor   
ministerial threats can subdue the      
cantankerous spirit of these bigots4    
,they are all but frantic and certainly 
not without reason1 for the ,irish      
,colleges' ,bill is the fine point of   
that wedge which1 driven home1 will     
shiver to pieces their 'wicked political
 system4' ,whatever improves ,irish     
intellect will play the mischief with   
its 'faith1' though not at all likely to
 deteriorate its 'morals4' ,let the     
people of ,ireland be well employed as a
 preliminary to being well educated1 and
 speedily they may deserve to be singled
 out as 'the most moral people on the   
face of the earth4'  ,an educated nation
 will never tamely submit to be         
priest-ridden1 and well do ,ireland's   
enslavers know it4 ,the most stupid of  

her priests1 equally with the shrewdest 
of her 'patriots1' are quite alive to   
the expediency of teaching as fact the  
fraudulent fables of the 'dark ages4'   
,to keep the people ignorant1 or what is
 worse1 to teach them only what is      
false1 is the great end of their        
training2 and if a ,british ministry    
propose anything better than the merest 
mockery of education1 they call it      
'dangerous to faith and morals4'        
,superstition is the curse of ,ireland4 
,to the rival churches of that country  
may be traced ,,all the oppressions     
suffered by its people who never can be 
materially improved till purged of their
 faith in priests4 ,when that salutary  
work shall be accomplished1 ,ireland    
will indeed be 'a nation' in the secure 
enjoyment of political liberty4 ,the    
priest-ridden may talk of freedom1 but  
can never secure it4  ,what then can be 
thought of the first-rate reformers1    
before alluded to1 who are going to     
emancipate every body without the least 

offence to any body's superstition8 ,it 
should be borne in memory that other    
people are superstitious as well as the 
,irish1 and that the churches of all    
countries are as much parts of 'a wicked
 political system' as are the churches  
of ,ireland4  ,the judges of our country
 frequently remind us that its laws have
 a religious sanction2 nay1 they assure 
us ,christianity is part and parcel of  
those laws4 ,do we not know that        
orthodox ,christianity means            
,christianity as by law established8    
,and can any one fail to perceive that  
such a religion must needs be political8
 ,the cunning few1 who esteem nothing   
apart from their own aggrandisement1 are
 quite aware that the civil and criminal
 law of ,england is intimately          
associated with ,christianity--they     
publicly proclaim their separation      
impossible1 except at the cost of       
destruction to both4 ,they are sagacious
 enough to perceive that a people       
totally untrammelled by the fears1 the  

prejudices1 and the wickedness of       
superstition would never consent to     
remain in bondage4  ,hence the pains    
taken by priests to perpetuate the      
dominion of that ignorance which        
proverbially is 'the mother of          
devotion4' ,what care they for universal
 emancipation8 ,free themselves1 their  
grand object is to rivet the chains of  
others4 ,so that those they defraud of  
their hard earned substance be kept     
down1 they are not over scrupulous with 
respect to means4 ,among the most potent
 of their helps in the 'good work' are  
churches1 various in name and character 
but in principle the very same4 ,all are
 pronounced true by priests who profit  
by them1 and false by priests who do    
not4 ,every thing connected with them   
bears the stamp of despotism4 ,whether  
we look at churches foreign or domestic1
 ,popish or ,protestant1 'that mark of  
the beast' appears in characters as     
legible as1 it is fabled1 the           
handwriting on the wall did to a tyrant 

of old4 ,in connection with each is a   
hierarchy of intellect stultifiers1 who 
explain doctrines without understanding 
them1 or intending they should be       
understood by others2 and true to their 
'sacred trust1' throw every available   
impediment in the way of improvement4   
,knowledge is their accuser4 ,to diffuse
 the 'truth' that 'will set men free' is
 no part of their 'wicked political     
system4' ,on the contrary1 they labour  
to excite a general disgust of truth1   
and in defence of bad governments preach
 fine sermons from some one of the many 
congenial texts to be gathered in their 
',holy ,scripture4' ,non-established    
priesthoods are but little more disposed
 to emancipate 'mind' and oil the wheels
 of political progression than those    
kept in state pay4 ,the air of          
conventicles is not of the freest or    
most bracing description4 ,the          
,methodist preacher1 who has the foolish
 effrontery to tell his congregation    
'the flush lusteth always contrary to   

the spirit1 and1 therefore1 every person
 born into the world deserveth ,god's   
wrath and damnation1' may be a liberal  
politician1 one well fitted to pilot his
 flock into the haven of true           
republicanism2 but ,i am extremely      
suspicious of such1 and would not on any
 account place my liberty in their      
keeping4  ,i possess little faith in    
political fanaticism1 especially when in
 alliance with the frightful doctrines  
enunciated from conventicle pulpits1 and
 have no hesitation in saying that      
,anti-,state ,church ,associations do   
not touch the root of political evils4  
,their usefulness is great1 because they
 give currency to a sound principle1 but
 that principle though important1 is not
 all-important--though powerful1 is not 
all-powerful4 ,if universally adopted1  
it is questionable that any useful      
change of a lasting character would be  
worked in the economy of politics4      
,wise men put no trust in doctrine which
 involves or assumes supernatural       

existence4 ,believing that              
supernaturalism reduced to 'system'     
cannot be other than 'wickedly          
political1' they see no hope for 'slave 
classes1' apart from a general diffusion
 of anti-superstitious ideas4 ,they     
cannot reconcile the wisdom of          
theologians with undoubted facts1 and   
though willing to admit that some 'modes
 of faith' are less absurd than others1 
are convinced they are all essentially  
alike1 because all fundamentally        
erroneous4  ,speculative thinkers of so 
radical a temper are not numerous4 ,if  
esteemed1 as happens to certain         
commodities1 in proportion to their     
scarcity they would enjoy a large share 
of public respect4 ,indeed1 they are so 
few and far between1 or at least so     
seldom make their presence visible1 that
 ,william ,gillespie is convinced they  
are an anomalous species of animal      
produced by our common parent 'in a     
moment of madness4' ,other grave        
,christian writers1 though horrified at 

,universal--nicknamed ,athe-ism--though 
persuaded its professors1 'of all       
earth's madmen1 most deserve a chain2'  
and1 though constantly abusing them1 are
 still unable to believe in the reality 
of such persons4 ,these1 among all the  
opponents of ,sense and ,wisdom may     
fairly claim to be considered most      
mysterious2 for1 while lavishing on     
deniers of their idols every kind of    
sharp invective and opprobrious epithet1
 they cannot assure themselves the      
'monsters' did1 or do1 actually exist4  
,with characteristic humour ,david ,hume
 observed1 ',there are not a greater    
number of philosophical reasonings      
displayed upon any subject than those   
which prove the existence of ,deity1 and
 refute the fallacies of ,atheists1 and 
yet the most religious philosophers     
still dispute whether any man can be so 
blinded as to be a speculative          
,atheist2' 'how 7continues he7 shall we 
reconcile these contradictions8 ,the    
,knight-errants who wandered about to   

clear the world of dragons and of       
giants1 never entertained the least     
doubt with regard to the existence of   
these monsters4' #h3a  ,the same ,hume  
who thus pleasantly rebuked 'most       
religious philosophers1' was himself a  
true ,universalist4 ,that he lacked     
faith in the supernatural must be       
apparent to every student of his        
writings1 which abound with reflections 
far from flattering to the self-love of 
superstitionists1 and little calculated 
to advance their cause4 ,hume astonished
 religious fanatics by declaring that   
while we argue from the course of nature
 and infer a particular intelligent     
cause1 which first bestowed1 and still  
preserves order in the universe1 we     
embrace a principle which is both       
uncertain and useless4 ,it is uncertain1
 because the subject lies entirely      
beyond the reach of human experience4   
,it is useless1 because our knowledge of
 this cause being derived entirely from 
the course of nature1 we can never1     

according to the rules of just          
reasoning1 return back from the cause   
with any new inference1 or making       
additions to the common and experienced 
course of nature1 establish any         
principles of conduct and behaviour4    
#i3a  ,nor did ,hume affect to consider 
popular ,christianity less repugnant to 
reason than any other theory or system  
of supernaturalism4 ,though confessedly 
fast in friendship1 generous in         
disposition1 and blameless in all the   
relations of life1 few sincere ,divines 
can forgive his hostility to their      
faith4 ,and1 without doubt1 it was      
hostility eminently calculated to       
exhaust their stock of patience1 because
 eminently calculated to damage their   
superstition1 which has nothing to fear 
from the assaults of ignorant and       
immoral opponents2 but when assailed by 
men of unblemished reputation1 who know 
well how to wield the weapons of wit1   
sarcasm1 and solid argumentation1 its   
priests are not without reason alarmed  

lest their house should be set out of   
order4  ,it would be difficult to name a
 philosopher at once so subtle1 so      
profound1 so bold1 and so good as ,hume4
 ,notwithstanding his heterodox         
reputation1 many learned and excellent  
,christians openly enjoyed his          
friendship4 ,a contemporary critic      
recently presented the public with 'a   
curious instance of contrast and of     
parallel1' between ,robertson and ,hume4
 ',flourishing 7says he7 in the same    
walk of literature1 living in the same  
society at the same time2 similar in    
their habits and generous dispositions2 
equally pure in their morals1 and       
blameless in all the relations of       
private life3 the one was a devout      
believer1 the other a most absolute     
,atheist1 and both from deep conviction1
 founded upon inquiries1 carefully and  
anxiously conducted4 ,the close and warm
 friendship which subsisted between     
these two men1 may1 after what we have  
said1 be a matter of surprise to some2  

but ,robertson's ,christianity was      
enlarged and tolerant1 and ,david       
,hume's principles were liberal and     
philosophical in a remarkable degree4'  
#i3b  ,this testimony needs no comment4 
,it clearly tells its own tale1 and     
ought to have the effect of throwing    
discredit upon the vulgar notion that   
disgust of superstition is incompatible 
with talents and virtues of the highest 
order2 for1 in the person of ,david     
,hume1 the world saw absolute           
,universalism co-existent with genius1  
learning1 and moral excellence1 rarely1 
if ever1 surpassed4  ,the unpopularity  
of that grand conception it would be    
vain to deny4 ,a vast majority of       
mankind associate with the idea of      
disbelief in their ,gods1 everything    
stupid1 monstrous1 absurd and atrocious4
 ,absolute ,universalism is thought by  
them the inseparable ally of most       
shocking wickedness1 involving          
'blasphemy against the ,holy ,ghost1'   
which we are assured shall not be       

forgiven unto men 'neither in this world
 nor in that which is to come4'         
,educated to consider it 'an inhuman1   
bloody1 ferocious system1 equally       
hostile to every restraint and to every 
virtuous affection1' the majority of all
 countries detest and shun its apostles4
 ,their horror of them may be likened to
 that it is presumed the horse feels    
towards the camel1 upon whom 7so        
travellers tell us7 he cannot look      
without shuddering4  ,to keep alive and 
make the most of this superstitious     
feeling has ever been the object of     
,christian priests1 who rarely hesitate 
to make charges of ,atheism1 not only   
against opponents1 but each other2 not  
only against disbelievers but believers4
 ,the ,jesuit ,lafiteau1 in a ,preface  
to his ',histoire des ,sauvages         
,americanes1' #aj3a endeavours to prove 
that only ,atheists will dare assert    
that ,god created the ,americans4 ,not a
 metaphysical writer of eminence has    
escaped the 'imputation' of ,atheism4   

,the great ,clarke and his antagonist   
the greater ,leibnitz were called       
,atheists4 ,even ,newton was put in the 
same category4 ,no sooner did           
sharp-sighted ,divines catch a glimpse  
of an ',essay on the ,human             
,understanding' than they loudly        
proclaimed the ,atheism of its author4  
,julian ,hibbert1 in his learned account
 ',of ,persons ,falsely ,entitled       
,atheists1' says1 'the existence of some
 sort of a ,deity has usually been      
considered undeniable1 so the imputation
 of ,atheism and the title of ,atheist  
have usually been considered as         
insulting4' ,this author1 after giving  
no fewer than thirty and two names of   
'individuals among the ,pagans who 7with
 more or less injustice7 have been      
accused of ,atheism1' says1 'the list   
shews1 ,i think1 that almost all the    
most celebrated ,grecian metaphysicians 
have been1 either in their own or in    
following ages1 considered1 with more or
 less reason1 to be ,atheistically      

inclined4 ,for though the word ,atheist 
was probably not often used till about a
 hundred years before ,christ1 yet the  
imputation of impiety was no doubt as   
easily and commonly bestowed1 before    
that period1 as it has been since4'     
#aa3a  ,voltaire relates1 in the        
eighteenth chapter of his ',philosophie 
de ,l',histoire1' #aa3b that a          
,frenchman named ,maigrot1 ,bishop of   
,conon1 who knew not a word of ,chinese1
 was deputed by the then ,pope to go and
 pass judgment on the opinions of       
certain ,chinese philosophers2 he       
treated ,confucius as ,atheist1 because 
that sage had said1 'the sky has given  
me virtue1 and man can do me no hurt4'  
,on grounds no more solid than this1    
charges of ,atheism are often erected by
 'surpliced sophists4' ,rather          
ridiculous have been the mistakes       
committed by some of them in their hurry
 to affix on objects of their hate the  
brand of ,impiety4 ,those persons1 no   
doubt1 supposed themselves privileged to

 write or talk any amount of nonsense   
and contradiction4 ,men who fancy       
themselves commissioned by ,deity to    
interpret his 'mysteries1' or announce  
his 'will1' are apt to make blunders    
without being sensible of it2 as did    
those worthy ,jesuits who declared1 in  
opposition to ,bayle1 that a society of 
,atheists was impossible1 and at the    
same time assured the world that the    
government of ,china was a society of   
,atheists4 ,so difficult it is for men  
inflamed by prejudices1 interests1 and  
animosities1 to keep clear of sophisms1 
which can impose on none but themselves4
  ,many ,universalists conceal their    
sentiments on account of the odium which
 would certainly be their reward did    
they avow them4 ,but the unpopularity of
 those sentiments cannot1 by persons of 
sense and candour1 be allowed1 in       
itself1 a sufficient reason for their   
rejection4 ,the fact of an opinion being
 unpopular is no proof it is false4 ,the
 argument from general consent is at    

best a suspicious one for the truth of  
any opinion or the validity of any      
practice4 ,history proves that the      
generality of men are the slaves of     
prejudice1 the sport of custom1 and foes
 most bigoted to such opinions          
concerning religion as have not been    
drawn in from their sucking-bottles1 or 
'hatched within the narrow fences of    
their own conceit4'  ,every day         
experience demonstrates the fallibility 
of majorities4 ,it palpably exhibits1   
too1 the danger as well as folly of     
presuming the unpopularity of certain   
speculative opinions an evidence of     
their untruth4 ,a public intellect1     
untainted by gross superstition1 can    
nowhere be appealed to4 ,even in this   
favoured country1 'the envy of          
surrounding nations and admiration of   
the world1' the multitude are anything  
but patterns of moral purity and        
intellectual excellence4 ,they who      
assure us vox populi 'is the voice of   
,god1' are fairly open to the charge of 

ascribing to ,him what orthodox pietists
 inform us exclusively belongs to the   
,father of ,evil4 ,if by 'voice of ,god'
 is meant something different from noisy
 ebullitions of anger1 intemperance1 and
 fanaticism1 they who would have us     
regulate our opinions in conformity     
therewith are respectfully requested to 
reconcile mob philosophy with the sober 
dictates of experience1 and mob law with
 the law of reason4  ,a writer in the   
,edinburgh ,review #ab3a assures us the 
majority of every nation consists of    
rude uneducated masses1 ignorant1       
intolerant1 suspicious1 unjust1 and     
uncandid1 without the sagacity which    
discovers what is right1 or the         
intelligence which comprehends it when  
pointed out1 or the morality which      
requires it to be done4 ,and yet        
religious philosophers are fond of      
quoting the all but universal horror of 
,universalism as a formidable argument  
against that much misunderstood creed6  
,the least reflection will suffice to   

satisfy any reasonable man that the     
speculative notions of rude1 uneducated 
masses1 so faithfully described by the  
,scotch ,reviewer1 are1 for the most    
part1 grossly absurd and consequently   
the reverse of true4 ,if the masses of  
all nations are ignorant1 intolerant1   
suspicious1 unjust1 and uncandid1       
without the sagacity which discovers    
what is right1 or the intelligence which
 comprehends it when pointed out1 or the
 morality which requires it to be done1 
who with the least shadow of claim to be
 accounted reasonable will assert that a
 speculative heresy is the worse for    
being unpopular1 or that an opinion is  
false1 and must be demoralising in its  
influence1 because the majority of      
mankind declare it so4  ,i would not    
have it inferred from the foregoing     
remarks that horror of ,universalism1   
and detestation of its apostles1 is     
confined to the low1 the vulgar1 the    
base1 or the illiterate4 ,any such      
inference would be wrong1 for it is     

certainly true that learned1 benevolent1
 and very able ,christian writers1 have 
signalised themselves in the work of    
obstructing the progress of             
,universalism by denouncing its         
principles1 and imputing all manner of  
wickedness to its defenders4 ,it must1  
indeed1 be admitted that their conduct  
in this particular amply justifies pious
 ,matthew ,henry's confession that 'of  
all the ,christian graces1 zeal is most 
apt to turn sour4'  ,one ,john ,ryland1 
,a4,m41 of ,northampton1 published a    
',preceptor1 or ,general ,repository of 
useful information1 very necessary for  
the various ages and departments of     
life1' in which 'pride and lust1 a      
corrupt pride of heart1 and a furious   
filthy lust of body1' are announced as  
the ,atheist's 'springs of action1'     
'desire to act the beast without        
control1 and live like a devil without a
 check of conscience1' his only 'reasons
 for opposing the existence of ,god1' in
 which he is told 'a world of creatures 

are up in arms against him to kill him  
as they would a venomous mad dog1' in   
which1 among other hard names1 he is    
called 'absurd fool1' 'beast1' 'dirty   
monster1' 'brute1' 'gloomy dark animal1'
 'enemy of mankind1' 'wolf to civil     
society1' 'butcher and murderer of the  
human race1' in which1 moreover1 he is  
cursed in the following hearty          
terms2--',let the glorious mass of fire 
burn him1 let the moon light him to the 
gallows1 let the stars in their courses 
fight against the ,atheist1 let the     
force of the comets dash him to pieces1 
let the roar of thunders strike him     
deaf1 let red lightnings blast his      
guilty soul1 let the sea lift up her    
mighty waves to bury him1 let the lion  
tear him to pieces1 let dogs devour him1
 let the air poison him1 let the next   
crumb of bread choke him1 nay1 let the  
dull ass spurn him to death4'  ,this is 
a notable specimen of zeal turned sour4 
,bishop ,hall was a ,divine of solid    
learning and unquestionable piety1 whose

 memory is reverenced by a large and    
most respectable part of the ,christian 
world4 ,he ranked amongst the best of   
his class1 and1 generally speaking1 was 
so little disposed to persecute his     
opponents because of their heterodox    
opinions1 that he wrote and published a 
,treatise on ,moderation1 in the course 
of which he eloquently condemns the     
practice of regulating1 or1 rather1     
attempting to regulate opinion by act of
 parliament2 yet1 incredible as it may  
appear1 in that very ,treatise he       
applauds ,calvin on account of his      
conduct towards ,servetus4 ,our         
authority for this statement is not     
',infidel' but ,christian--the authority
 of ,evans1 who1 after noticing the     
,treatise in question1 says1 'he        
7,bishop ,hall7 has discussed the       
subject with that ability which is      
peculiar to all his writings4 ,but this 
great and good man1 towards the close of
 the same ,treatise1 forgetting the     
principles which he had been            

inculcating1 devotes one solitary page  
to the cause of intolerance3 this page  
he concludes with these remarkable      
expressions3 ,master ,calvin did well   
approve himself to ,god's ,church in    
bringing ,servetus to the stake in      
,geneva4  ,remarkable1 indeed6 and what 
is the moral that they point8 ,to me    
they are indicative of the startling    
truth1 that neither eloquence nor       
learning1 nor faith in ,god and his     
,scripture1 nor all three combined1 are 
incompatible with the cruelest spirit of
 persecution4 ,the ,treatise on         
,moderation will stand an everlasting   
memorial against its author1 whose fine 
intellect1 spoiled by superstitious     
education1 urged him to approve a deed1 
the bare remembrance of which ought to  
excite in every breast1 feelings of     
horror and indignation4 ,that such a man
 should declare the aim of              
,universalists is 'to dethrone ,god and 
destroy man1' is not surprising4 ,from  
genuine bigots they have no right to    

expect mercy4 ,he who applauded the     
bringing of ,servetus to the stake must 
have deemed their utter extermination a 
religious duty4  ,that our street and   
field preaching ,christians1 with very  
few exceptions1 heartily sympathise with
 the fire and faggot sentiments of      
,bishop ,hall1 is well known1 but       
happily1 their absurd ravings are       
attended to by none save eminently pious
 people1 whose brains are unclogged by  
any conceivable quantity of useful      
knowledge4 ,in point of intellect they  
are utterly contemptible4 ,their        
ignorance1 however1 is fully matched by 
their impudence1 which never forsake1   
them4 ,they claim to be considered      
,god's right-hand men1 and of course    
duly qualified preachers of his 'word1' 
though unable to speak five minutes     
without taking the same number of       
liberties with the ,queen's ,english4   
,swift was provoked by the prototypes of
 these pestiferous people1 to declare   
that1 'formerly the apostles received   

the gift of speaking several languages1 
a knowledge so remote from our dealers  
in the art of enthusiasm1 that they     
neither understand propriety of speech  
nor phrases of their own1 much less the 
gift of tongues4'  ,the millions of     
,christian people who have been trained 
up in the way they should not go1 by    
this active class of fanatics1 are      
naturally either opposed to reason or   
impervious to it4 ,they are convinced   
not only that the wisdom of the world is
 foolishness with ,god1 but that wisdom 
with ,god is foolishness with the world2
 nor will any one affirm their          
'moderation' in respect to unbelievers  
one tittle more moderate than ,bishop   
,hall's2 or that they are one tittle    
less disposed than 'that good and great 
man1' to think those who bring heretics 
to the stake at ,geneva or elsewhere1   
'do well approve themselves to ,god's   
,church4' ,educated1 that is to say     
duped as they are1 they cannot but think
 disbelief highly criminal1 and when    

practicable1 or convenient1 deal with it
 as such4  ,it is1 nevertheless1 true1  
that ,universalists have been helped to 
some of their best arguments by         
adversaries4 ,bishop ,watson1 to wit1   
has suggested objections to belief in   
the ,christian's ,deity1 which they who 
hold no such belief consider            
unanswerable4 ,in his famous ',apology' 
he desired to know what ,paine thought  
'of an uncaused cause of everything1 and
 a ,being who has no relation to time1  
not being older to day than he was      
yesterday1 nor younger to day than he   
will be to-morrow--who has no relation  
to space1 not being a part here and a   
part there1 or a whole anywhere8 of an  
omniscient ,being who cannot know the   
future actions of man1 or if his        
omniscience enables him to know them1 of
 the contingency of human actions8 of   
the distinction between vice and virtue1
 crime and innocence1 sin and duty8 of  
the infinite goodness of a ,being who   
existed through eternity without any    

emanation of his goodness manifested in 
the creation of sensitive beings8 or1 if
 it be contended that there was an      
eternal creation1 of an effect coeval   
with its cause1 of matter not posterior 
to its maker8 of the existence of evil1 
moral and natural1 in the work of an    
,infinite ,being1 powerful1 wise1 and   
good8 finally1 of the gift of freedom of
 will1 when the abuse of freedom becomes
 the cause of general misery8' #ae3a    
,these questions imply much4 ,that they 
flowed from the pen of a ,bishop1 is one
 of many extraordinary facts which have 
grown out of theological controversy4   
,they are questions strongly suggestive 
of another4 ,is it possible to have     
experience of1 or even to imagine1 a    
,being with attributes so strange1      
anomalous1 and contradictory8 ,it is    
plain that ,bishop ,watson was convinced
 'no man by searching can find out      
,god4' ,the case is1 that he1 in the    
hope of converting ,deists1 ventured to 
insinuate arguments highly favourable to

 ,atheism1 whose professors consider an 
admission of utter ignorance of ,god1   
tantamount to a denial of ,his          
existence4 ,many ,christians1 with more 
candour1 perhaps1 than prudence1 have   
avowed the same opinion4 ,minutius      
,felix1 for example1 said to the        
,heathen1 ',not one of you reflects that
 you ought to know your ,gods before you
 worship them4' #ae3b ,as if he felt the
 absurdity of pretending to love and    
honour an unknown ',perhaps4' ,that he  
did himself what he ridiculed in them   
proves nothing but his own              
inconsistency4  ,the ,christian1 equally
 with the ,heathen1 is open to the      
reproach of worshipping ,,he ,,knows    
,,not ,,what4 ,yes1 to idol-hating      
'enlightened ,christians1' may be fairly
 applied the severe sarcasm ,minutius   
,felix so triumphantly levelled against 
idol-loving 'benighted ,heathens4' ,will
 any one say the ,christian absolutely  
knows more about ,jehovah than the      
,heathen did about ,jupiter8 ,i believe 

that few1 if any1 who have attentively  
considered ,bishop ,watson's queries1   
will say the 'dim ,unknown1' they so    
darkly shadow forth1 is conceivable by  
any effort either of sense or           
imagination4  ,under cover1 then1 of    
what reason can ,christians escape the  
imputation of pretending to adore what  
they have no conception of8 ,the very   
'book of books1' to which they so boldly
 appeal1 is conclusive against them4 ,in
 its pages they stand convicted of      
idolatry4 ,without doubt a ,god is      
revealed by ,revelation2 but not their  
,god1 not a supernatural ,being1        
infinite in power1 in wisdom1 and in    
goodness4 ,the ,bible ,deity is         
superhuman in nothing2 all that ,his    
adorers have ascribed to ,him being mere
 amplification of human powers1 human   
ideas1 and human passions4 ,the ,bible  
,deity 'has mercy on whom he will have  
mercy1 and whom he will he hardeneth2'  
is 'jealous1' especially of other ,gods2
 changeful1 vindictive1 partial1 cruel1 

unjust1 'angry with the wicked every    
day2' and altogether a ,being far from  
respectable1 or worthy to be considered 
infinite in wisdom1 power1 and goodness4
 ,is it credible that a ,being          
supernaturally wise and good1 proclaimed
 the murderous adulterer ,david1 a man  
after his own heart1 and commanded the  
wholesale butchery of ,canaanites8 ,or  
that a ,god of boundless power1 'whose  
tender mercies are over all his works1' 
decreed the extermination of entire     
nations for being what he made them8    
,jehovah did all three4 ,confessedly a  
,god of ,armies and ,lord of ,hosts2    
confessedly1 too1 a hardener of men's1  
hearts that he might destroy them1 he   
authorised acts at which human nature   
shudders1 and of which it is ashamed3   
yet to reverence ,him we are commanded  
by the self-styled 'stewards of his     
mysteries1' on peril of our 'immortal   
souls4' ,verily1 these pious            
anathematisers task our credulity a     
little too much4 ,in their zeal for the 

,god of ,israel1 they are apt to forget 
that only ,himself can compass          
impossibilities1 and altogether lose    
sight of the fact that where1 who1 or   
what ,jehovah is1 no man knoweth4       
,revelation 7so-called7 reveals nothing 
about 'the creator of heaven and earth1'
 on which a cultivated intellect can    
repose with satisfaction4 ,men naturally
 desire positive information concerning 
the superhuman ,deity1 belief in whom is
 the sine qua non of all superstition4  
,but the ,bible furnishes no such       
information concerning ,jehovah4 ,on the
 contrary1 ,he is there pronounced 'past
 finding out1' incomprehensible1 and the
 like4 ',canst thou by searching find   
out ,god8 ,canst thou find out the      
,almighty to perfection8' are questions 
put by an 'inspired writer1' who felt   
the cloudy and unsatisfactory nature of 
all human conceit concerning ,deity4    
,now1 a ,revelation from ,god might     
reasonably be expected to make the mode 
and nature of ,his existence manifest4  

,but the ,christian ,bible falls        
infinitely short in this particular4 ,it
 teaches there is a ,god2 but throws no 
light on the dark question ,what is     
,god8 ,numerous and various as are      
,scripture texts1 none can be cited in  
explanation of a ,deity no older to-day 
than he was yesterday1 nor younger      
to-day than he will be to-morrow2 of a  
,deity who has no relation to space1 not
 being a part here and a part there1 or 
a whole any where3 in short1 of that    
,deity written about by ,bishop ,watson1
 who1 like every other sincere          
,christian1 made the mistake of resting 
his religious faith on 'words without   
knowledge4'  ,it is to this description 
of faith ,universalists object4 ,they   
think it the root of superstition1 that 
greatest of all the plagues by which    
poor humanity is afflicted4 ,are they to
 blame for thus thinking8 ,the          
,christian has no mercy on the          
superstition of the ,heathen1 and should
 scorn to complain when the bitter      

chalice is returned to his own lips4    
,universalists believe the ,god of      
,bishop ,watson a supernatural chimera1 
and to its worshippers have a perfect   
right to say1 ,not one of you reflects  
that you ought to know your ,gods before
 you worship them4 ,these remarkable    
words1 originally addressed to the      
,heathen1 lose none of their force when 
directed against the ,christian4  ,no   
one can conceive a supernatural ,being1 
and what none can conceive none ought to
 worship1 or even assert the existence  
of4 ,who worships a something of which  
he knows nothing is an idolater4 ,to    
talk of1 or bow down to it1 is          
nonsensical2 to pretend affection for   
it1 is worse than nonsensical4 ,such    
conduct1 however pious1 involves the    
rankest hypocrisy2 the meanest and most 
odious species of idolatry2 for         
labouring to destroy which the          
,universalist is called 'murderer of the
 human soul1' 'blasphemer1' and other   
foolish names1 too numerous to mention4 

,it would be well for all parties1 if   
those who raise against us the cry of   
'blasphemy1' were made to perceive that 
'godless' unbelievers cannot be         
blasphemers2 for1 as contended by ,lord 
,brougham in his ,life of ,voltaire1    
blasphemy implies belief2 and1          
therefore1 ,universalists cannot        
logically or justly be said to blaspheme
 him4 ,the blasphemer1 properly so      
called1 is he who imagines ,deity1 an   
ascribes to the idol of his own brain   
all manner of folly1 contradiction1     
inconsistency1 and wickedness4          
,superstition is universally abhorred1  
but no one believes himself             
superstitious4 ,there never was a       
religionist who believed his own        
religion mere superstition4 ,all shrink 
indignantly from the charge of being    
superstitious2 while all raise temples  
to1 and bow down1 before 'thingless     
names4' ,the 'masses' of every nation   
erect chimera into substantial reality1 
and woe to these who follow not the     

insane example4 ,the consequences--the  
fatal consequences--are everywhere      
apparent4 ,in our own country we see    
social disunion on the grandest possible
 scale4 ,society is split up into an    
almost infinite variety of sects whose  
members imagine themselves patented to  
think truth and never to be wrong in the
 enunciation of it4  ,sanders' ,news    
,letter and ,daily ,advertiser of ,feb4 
#ah1 #ahde1 among other curiosities1    
contains an ',address of the ,dublin    
,protestant ,operative ,association1 and
 ,reformation ,society1' one sentence of
 which is--,we have raised our voices   
against the spirit of compromise1 which 
is the opprobrium of the age2 we have   
unfurled the banner of ,protestant      
truth1 and placed ourselves beneath it2 
we have insisted upon ,protestant       
ascendancy as just and equitable1       
because ,protestant principles are true 
and undeniable4  ,puseyite ,protestants 
tell a tale the very reverse of that so 
modestly told by their nominal brethren 

of the ,dublin ,operative ,association4 
,they1 as may be seen in ,palmer's      
,letter to ,golightly1 utterly reject   
and anathematise the principle of       
,protestantism1 as a heresy with all its
 forms1 sects1 or denominations4 ,nor is
 that all our ',romeward ,divines' do1  
for in addition to rejecting utterly and
 cursing bitterly1 as well the name as  
the principle of ,protestantism1 they   
eulogise the ,church of ,rome1 because  
forsooth she yields1 says ,newman in his
 letter to ,jelf1 free scope to feelings
 of awe1 mystery1 tenderness1 reverence1
 and devotedness2 while we have it on   
the authority of ,tract #ij1 that the   
,church of ,england is in bondage2      
working in chains1 and 7tell it not in  
,dublin7 teaching with the stammering   
lips of ambiguous formularies4 ,fierce  
and burning is the hatred of ,dublin    
,operative ,association ,christians to  
,popery1 but exactly that style of      
hatred to ,protestantism is avowed by   
,puseyites4 ,both sets of ,christians   

are quite sure they are right3 but      
7alas6 for infallibility7 a third set of
 ,christians insist that they are both  
wrong4 ,there are ,papists1 or ,roman   
,catholics1 who consider ,protestant    
principles the very reverse of true and 
undeniable1 and treat with derisive     
scorn the 'fictitious ,catholicism' of  
,puseyite ,divines4  ,count de          
,montalambert1 in his recently published
 ',letter to the ,rev4 ,mr4 ,neale on   
the ,architectural1 ,artistical1 and    
,archaeological ,movements of the       
,puseyites1' enters his 'protest'       
against the most unwarranted and        
unjustifiable assumption of the name of 
,catholic by people and things belonging
 to the actual ,church of ,england4 ',it
 is easy1' he observes1 'to take up a   
name1 but it is not so easy to get it   
recognised by the world and by competent
 authority4 ,any man for example1 may   
come out to ,madeira and call himself a 
,montmorency1 or a ,howard1 and even    
enjoy the honour and consideration      

belonging to such a name till the real  
,montmorencys or ,howards hear something
 about it1 and denounce him1 and then   
such a man would be justly scouted from 
society1 and fall down much lower than  
the lowness from which he attempted to  
rise4 ,the attempt to steal away from us
 and appropriate to the use of a        
fraction of the ,church of ,england that
 glorious title of ,catholic is proved  
to be an usurpation by every monument of
 the past and present--by the coronation
 oath of your sovereigns--by all the    
laws which have established your        
,church--even by the recent answer of   
your ,university of ,oxford to the lay  
address against ,dr4 ,pusey1 c41 where  
the ,church of ,england is justly styled
 the ,reformed ,protestant ,church4 ,the
 question then is1 have you1 the ,church
 of ,england1 got the picture for your  
frame8 have you got the truth1 the one  
truth2 the same truth as the men of the 
middle ages4 ,the ,camden ,society says 
yes2 but the whole ,christian world1    

both ,protestant and ,catholic1 says no2
 and the ,catholic world adds that there
 is no truth but in unity1 and this     
unity you most certainly have not4 ,one 
more2 every ,catholic will repeat to you
 the words of ,manzoni1 as quoted by ,m4
 ,faber3 ',the greatest deviations are  
none if the main point be recognised2   
the smallest are damnable heresies1 if  
it be denied4 ,that main point is the   
infallibility of the ,church1 or rather 
of the ,pope4'  ,no one desires to be   
eternally punished2 and1 therefore1 if  
any one embrace a false faith1 it is    
because he makes the mistake of         
supposing it the true one4 ,the three   
sets of ,christians1 just adverted to1  
may all be equally sincere1 but cannot  
all have the true faith4 ,protestant    
principles1 as taught by the ,dublin    
,operative ,association1 may be true4   
,anglo-,catholic principles1 as taught  
by the ,oxford ,tractmen1 may be true4  
,roman ,catholic principles1 as taught  
by the ,count de ,montalembert1 may be  

true2 but they cannot ,,all be true4 ,it
 is impossible to reconcile that        
orthodox ,papists' 'main point1' i4e4   
the infallibility of the 7,romish7      
,church1 or rather of the ,pope1 with   
the 'main point' of orthodox            
,protestants1 who denounce 'the great   
harlot of ,babylon1' that 'scarlet lady 
who sitteth upon the seven hills1' in   
the most unmeasured and virulent terms4 
,anti-,christ is the name they          
'blasphemously' apply to the actual 'old
 chimera of a ,pope4' ,puseyite ,divines
 treat his ,holiness with more          
tenderness1 but even they boggle at his 
infallibility1 and seem to occupy a     
position between the rival churches of  
,rome and ,england analogous to that of 
,captain ,macheath when singing between 
two favourite doxies--            ,how  
happy could ,i be with either1          
,were t'other dear charmer away2        
,but while you thus teaze me together1  
,the devil a word will ,i say4          
,infallibility of ,popes is the doctrine

 insisted upon by ,count ,de            
,montalembert as essential--as doctrine 
the smallest deviation from which is    
damnable heresy4 ,believe and admit     
,antichrist is not ,antichrist1 but     
,god's accredited viceregent upon earth1
 infinite is the mercy in store for you2
 but woe to those who either cannot or  
will not believe and admit anything of  
the kind4 ,on them every sincere ,roman 
,catholic is sure that ,god will empty  
the vials of his wrath4  ,priests       
ascribe to ,deity the low1 grovelling1  
vindictive1 feelings which agitate and  
disgrace themselves4 ,if ,roman         
,catholic principles are true and       
undeniable1 none but ,roman ,catholics  
will be saved from the wrath to come4   
,if ,anglo-,catholic principles are true
 and undeniable1 none but               
,anglo-,catholics will be saved from the
 wrath to come4 ,if orthodox ,protestant
 principles are true and undeniable1    
none but orthodox ,protestants will be  
saved from the wrath to come4  ,thus    

superstitionists                        
,grunt and groan1           ,cursing all
 systems but their own4  ,agreeing in   
little else save disagreement1 the 'main
 point' of this class of believers is a 
matter of little consequence to that    
class of believers1 and no matter at all
 to a third class of believers4 ,look at
 the thousand-and-one sects into which  
the ,christian world is divided4 ',some 
reject ,scripture2 others admit no other
 writings but ,scripture4 ,some say the 
,devils shall be saved1 others that they
 shall be damned2 others that there are 
no ,devils at all4 ,some hold that it is
 lawful to dissemble in religion1 others
 the contrary4 ,some say that           
,antichrist is come1 some say not2      
others that he is a particular man1     
others that he is not a man1 but the    
,devil2 and others that by ,antichrist  
is meant a succession of men4 ,some will
 have him to be ,nero1 some ,caligula1  
some ,mohammed1 some the ,pope1 some    
,luther1 some the ,turk1 some of the    

,tribe of ,dan2 and so each man         
according to his fancy will make an     
,antichrist4 ,some only will observe the
 ,lord's day1 some only the ,sabbath2   
some both1 and some neither4 ,some will 
have all things in common1 some not4    
,some will have ,christ's body only in  
,heaven1 some everywhere2 some in the   
bread1 others with the bread1 others    
about the bread1 others under the bread1
 and others that ,christ's body is the  
bread1 or the bread his body4 ,and      
others that his body is transformed into
 his divinity4 ,some will have the      
,eucharist administered in both kinds1  
some in one1 some not at all4 ,some will
 have ,christ descend to hell in respect
 of his soul1 some only in his power1   
some in his divinity1 some in his body1 
some not at all4 ,some by hell          
understand the place of the damned1 some
 limbus patrum1 others the wrath of     
,god1 others the grave4 ,some will make 
,christ two persons1 some give him but  
one nature and one will2 some affirming 

him to be only ,god1 some only man1 some
 made up of both1 some altogether deny  
him4 ,some will have his body come from 
,heaven1 some from the ,virgin1 some    
from the elements4 ,some will have our  
souls mortal1 some immortal2 some bring 
them into the body by ,infusion1 some by
 traduction4 ,some will have souls      
created before the world1 some after2   
some will have them created altogether1 
others severally2 some will have them   
corporeal1 some incorporeal2 some of the
 substance of ,god1 some of the         
substance of the body4 ,so infinitely   
are men's conceits distracted with a    
variety of opinions1 whereas there is   
but one ,truth1 which every man aims at1
 but few attain it2 every man thinks he 
hath it1 and yet few enjoy it4' #bj3a   
,chiefs of these sects are1 for the most
 part1 ridiculously intolerant2 so many 
small ,popes1 who fancy that whomsoever 
they bind on earth shall be bound in    
,heaven2 and whomsoever they loose on   
earth shall be loosed in ,heaven4 ,they 

remorselessly cobble the true faith1    
without which1 to their 'sole exclusive 
,heaven1' none can be admitted4         
,as if religion were intended1          
,for nothing else but to be mended4     
,and never seem so happy as when        
promising eternal misery to those who   
reject their chimeras4  ,but wisdom1 we 
read1 is justified by her children2 and 
to the wise of every nation the         
,universalist confidently appeals4 ,he  
rejects popular religion1 because such  
religion is based on principles of      
imaginative ignorance4 ,bailly defines  
it as 'the worship of the unknown1      
piety1 godliness1 humility1 before the  
unknown4' ,lavater as ',faith in the    
supernatural1 invisible1 unknown'4      
,vauvenargus as 'the duties of men      
towards the unknown4' ,dr4 ,johnson as  
',virtue founded upon reverence of the  
unknown1 and expectation of future      
rewards and punishments4' ,rivarol as   
'the science of serving the unknown4'   
,la ,bruyere as 'the respectful fear of 

the unknown4' ,du ,marsais1 as 'the     
worship of the unknown1 and the practice
 of all the virtues4' ,walker as        
',virtue founded upon reverence of the  
unknown1 and expectation of rewards or  
punishments2 a system of divine faith   
and worship as opposed to other         
systems4' ,de ,bonald as 'social        
intercourse between man and the         
unknown4' ,rees as 'the worship or      
homage that is due to the unknown as    
creator1 preserver1 and1 with           
,christians1 as redeemer of the world1' 
,lord ,brougham as 'the subject of the  
science called ,theology3' a science he 
defines as 'the knowledge and attributes
 of the unknown' which definitions agree
 in making the essential principle of   
religion a principle of ignorance4 ,that
 they are sufficiently correct          
definitions will not be disputed1 and   
upon them the ,universalist is satisfied
 to rest his case4 ,to him the worship  
or adoration of what is confessedly     
unknown is mere superstition2 and to him

 professors of theology are 'artists in 
words1' who pretend to teach what nobody
 has any conception of4 ,now1 such      
persons may be well-intentioned2 but    
their wisdom is by no means apparent4   
,they must be wonderfully deficient of  
the invaluable sense so falsely called  
'common4' ,idolizers of 'thingless      
names1' they set at naught the admirable
 dictum of ,locke that it is            
'unphilosophic to suppose names in books
 signify real entities in nature1 unless
 we can frame clear and distinct ideas  
of those entities4'  ,theists of every  
class would do well to calmly and fully 
consider this rule of philosophising1   
for it involves nothing less than the   
destruction of belief in the            
supernatural4 ,the ,jupiter of          
,mythologic ,history1 the ,allah of     
,alkoran1 and the ,jehovah of ',holy    
,scripture1' if entities at all1 are    
assuredly entities that baffle human    
conception4 ,to 'frame clear and        
distinct ideas of them' is impossible4  

,in respect to the attribute of unknown 
ability all ,gods are alike4  ,books    
have been written to exhibit the        
difficulties of 7what priests choose to 
call7 ,infidelity1 and without doubt    
unbelief has its difficulties4 ,but1    
according to a universally recognised   
rule of philosophising1 of two          
difficulties we are in all cases to     
choose the least4 ,from a rule so       
palpably just no one can reasonably     
depart1 and the ,universalist1 while    
freely admitting a great difficulty on  
his own side1 is satisfied there can be 
demonstrated an infinitely greater      
difficulty on the side of his opponents4
 ,the ,universalist labours to convince 
mankind they are not warranted by the   
general course of ,nature in assigning  
to it a ,cause2 inasmuch as it is more  
in accordance with experience to suppose
 ,nature the uncaused cause1 than to    
imagine1 as errorists do1 that there is 
an uncaused cause of ,nature4           
,theologians ask1 who created ,nature8  

without adducing satisfactory evidence  
that ,nature was created1 and without   
reflecting that if it is difficult to   
believe ,nature self-existent1 it is    
much more difficult to believe some     
self-existent ,super-nature1 capable of 
producing it4 ,in their anxiety to get  
rid of a natural difficulty1 they invent
 a supernatural one1 and accuse         
,universalists of 'wilful blindness1'   
and 'obstinate deafness1' for not       
choosing so unphilosophic a mode of     
explaining universal mystery4  ,the rule
 of philosophising just adverted        
to--that rule which forbids us1 in any  
case1 to chose the greater of two       
difficulties--is of immense importance1 
and should be carefully considered by   
every one anxious to arrive at correct  
conclusions with respect to theology4   
,for if believers in ,god do depart from
 that rule--if their belief necessarily 
involve its violation--to persist in    
such belief is to persist in what is    
clearly opposed to pure reason4 ,now1 it

 has been demonstrated1 so far as words 
can demonstrate any truth whatever1 that
 the difficulty of him who believes     
,nature never had an author1 is         
infinitely less than the difficulty of  
him who believes it had a cause itself  
uncaused4  ,in the ',elements of        
,materialism1' an unequal1 but still    
admirable work by ,dr4 ,knowlton1 a     
well-known ,american writer1 this       
question of comparative difficulty is   
well handled4  ',the sentiment1' says   
the ,doctor1 'that a being exists which 
never commenced existence1 or what is   
the same thing1 that a being exists     
which has existed from all eternity1    
appears to us to favour ,atheism1 for if
 one ,being exist which never commenced 
existence--why not another--why not the 
universe8 ,it weighs nothing1 says the  
,atheist1 in the eye of reason1 to say  
the universe appears to man as though it
 were organised by an ,almighty         
,designer1 for the maker of a thing must
 be superior to the thing made2 and if  

there be a maker of the universe there  
can be no doubt1 but that if such maker 
were minutely examined by man1 man would
 discover such indications of wisdom and
 design that it would be more difficult 
for him to admit that such maker was not
 caused or constructed by a pre-existing
 ,designer1 than to admit that the      
universe was not caused or constructed  
by a ,designer4 ,but no one will contend
 for an infinite series of ,makers2 and 
if1 continues the ,atheist1 what would1 
if viewed1 be indications of design1 are
 no proofs of a designer in the one     
case1 they are not in the other2 and as 
such indications are the only evidence  
we have of the existence of a ,designer 
of the universe1 we1 as rational beings1
 contend there is no ,god4 ,we do not   
suppose the existence of any being1 of  
which there is no evidence1 when such   
supposition1 it admitted1 so far from   
diminishing would only increase a       
difficulty1 which1 at best1 is          
sufficiently great4 ,surely1 if a       

superior being may have existed from all
 eternity1 an inferior may have existed 
from all eternity2 if a great ,god      
sufficiently mighty to make a world may 
have existed from all eternity1 of      
course without beginning and without    
cause1 such world may have existed from 
all eternity1 without beginning1 and    
without cause4' #bc3a  ,these are       
'strong reasons' for ,universalism4     
,they prove that ,theists set at nought 
the rule of philosophising which forbids
 us to choose the greater of two        
difficulties4 ,their system compels them
 to do so2 for having no other          
groundwork than the strange hypotheses  
that time was when there was no         
time--something existed when there was  
nothing1 which something created        
everything2 its advocates would be      
tongue-tied and lost if reduced to the  
hard necessity of appealing to facts1 or
 rigidly regarding rules of             
philosophising which have only their    
reasonableness to recommend them4 ,they 

profess ability to account for ,nature1 
and are of course exceeding eager to    
justify a profession so presumptuous4   
,this eagerness betrays them into       
courses1 of which no one bent on        
rejecting whatever is either opposed to1
 or unsanctioned by1 experience1 can    
possibly approve4 ,it is plain that of  
the ,god they tell us to believe        
'created the worlds1' no man has any    
experience4 ,this granted1 it follows   
that worship of such fancied ,being is  
mere superstition4 ,until it be shown by
 reference to the general course of     
things1 that things had an author1      
,himself uncreated or unauthorized1     
religious philosophers have no right to 
expect ,universalists to abandon their  
,universalism4 ,the duty of priests is  
to reconcile religion with reason1 if   
they can1 and admit their inability to  
do so1 if they cannot4  ,romanists will 
have nothing to do with reason whenever 
it appears at issue with their faith4   
,all sects1 as sects1 play fast and     

loose with reason4 ,many members of all 
sects are forward enough to boast about 
being able to give a reason for the     
faith that is in them2 but an           
overwhelming majority love to exalt     
faith above reason4 ,philosophy they    
call 'vain1' and some have been found so
 filled with contempt for it1 as to     
openly maintain that what is            
theologically true1 is philosophically  
false2 or1 in other terms1 that the     
truths of religion and the truths of    
philosophy have nothing in common4      
,according to them1 religious truths are
 independent of1 and superior to1 all   
other truths4 ,our faith1 say they1 if  
not agreeable to mere reason is         
infinitely superior to it4 ,priests are 
'at one' on the point4 ,dissenting and  
,protestant1 as well as ,romanising     
priests1 find it convenient to abuse    
reason and extol faith4 ,as priests1    
they can scarcely be expected to do     
otherwise2 for reason is a stern and    
upright judge whose decrees have        

hitherto been unfavourable to           
superstition4 ,its professors1 who      
appeal to that judge1 play a part most  
inconsistent and dangerous1 as is       
evident in the case of ,origen          
,bachelor1 who more zealous and candid  
than prudent1 declared the real and only
 question between ,atheism and ,theism a
 question of fact2 reducing it to these 
terms--',is there reason1 all things    
considered1 for believing that there is 
a ,god1 an intelligent cause of things1 
infinite and perfect in all his         
attributes and moral qualities8' #bd3a  
,now1 the reader has seen that the      
hypothesis of 'an intelligent cause of  
things' involves difficulties1 greater1 
infinitely greater than the one         
difficulty involved in the hypothesis   
that things always existed4 ,he has seen
 the folly of explaining natural1 by the
 invention of supernatural mystery1     
because it manifestly violates a rule of
 philosophising1 the justness of which  
it would be ridiculous to dispute4      

,having clearly perceived thus much1 he 
will perhaps think it rather 'too bad'  
as well as absurd1 to call              
,universalists 'madmen' for lacking     
faith in the monstrous dogma that       
,nature was caused by 'something        
amounting to nothing' itself uncaused4  
,there is something4 ,that truth admits 
not of being evidenced4 ,it is1         
nevertheless1 accepted4 ,it is accepted 
by men of all religious opinions1       
equally with men of no religious        
opinions4 ,if any truth be self-evident 
and eternal1 here is that truth4 ,to    
call it in question would be worse than 
idle4 ,we may doubt the reality of an   
external world1 we may be sceptical as  
to the reality of our own bodies1 but we
 cannot doubt that there is something4  
,the proposition falls not within the   
domain of scepticism4 ,it must be true4 
,to suppose it false is literally       
impossible4 ,its falsehood would involve
 contradiction1 and all contradiction   
involves ,impossibility4 ,but1 if proof 

of this were needed1 we have it in the  
fact that no man1 sage or simple1 ever  
pretended to deny there is something4   
,whatever men could doubt or deny they  
have doubted or denied1 but in no       
country of the world1 in no age1 has the
 dogma--there is something--been denied 
or even treated as doubtful4 ,here then 
,universalists1 ,theists1 and           
,polytheists agree4 ,they agree of      
necessity4 ,there is no escape from the 
conclusion that something is1 except we 
adopt the unintelligible dogma--there is
 nothing--which no human being can1 as  
nothing amounts to nothing1 and of what 
amounts to nothing no one can have an   
idea4 ,to define the word something by  
any other word would be labour in vain4 
,there is no other word in any language 
whoso meaning is better understood1 and 
they who do not understand what it      
means1 if such persons there be1 are not
 likely to understand the meaning of any
 word or words whatever4 ,ideas of      
nothing none have4 ,that there is       

something1 we repeat1 must be true1 all 
dogmas or propositions being necessarily
 true whose denial involves an          
impossibility4 ,what the nature of that 
something may be is a secondary         
question1 and however determined cannot 
affect the primary dogma--things are    
things whatever may be their individual 
or their aggregate nature4 ,nor is it of
 the least consequence what name or     
names we may see fit to give things1 so 
that each word has its fixed and true   
meaning4 ,whether1 for example1 we use  
for the sign of that something which is1
 the word ,universe1 or ,god1 or        
,substance1 or ,spirit1 or ,matter1 or  
the letter ,x1 is of no importance1 if  
we understand the word or letter used to
 be merely the sign of that something4  
,words are seldom useful except when    
they are the sign of true ideas2        
evidently therefore1 their legitimate   
function is to convey such ideas2 and   
words which convey no ideas at all1 or  
what is worse1 only those which are     

false1 should at once be expunged from  
the vocabularies of nations4 ,something 
is4 ,the ,universalist calls it matter4 
,other persons may choose to call it    
other names3 let them4 ,he chooses to   
call it this one--and no other4  ,there 
ever has been something4 ,here1 again1  
is a point of unity4 ,all are equally   
assured there ever has been something4  
,something is1 something must always    
have been1 cry the religious1 and the   
cry is echoed by the irreligious4 ,this 
last dogma1 like the first1 admits not  
of being evidenced4 ,as nothing is      
inconceivable1 we cannot even imagine a 
time when there was nothing4            
,universalists say1 something ever was1 
which something is matter4 ,theists say1
 something has been from all eternity1  
which something is not matter but ,god4 
,they boldly affirm that matter began to
 be4 ,they affirm its creation from     
nothing1 by a something1 which was      
before the universe4 ,indeed1 the notion
 of universal creation involves first1  

that of universal annihilation1 and     
secondly1 that of something prior to    
everything4 ,what creates everything    
must be before everything1 in the same  
way that he who manufactures a watch    
must exist before the watch4 ,as already
 remarked1 ,universalists agree with    
,theists1 that something ever has been1 
but the point of difference lies here4  
,the ,universalist says1 matter is the  
eternal something1 and asks proof of its
 beginning to be4 ,the ,theist insists  
that matter is not the eternal          
something1 but that ,god is2 and when   
pushed for an account of what he means  
by ,god1 he coolly answers1 a ,being1   
having nothing in common with anything1 
who nevertheless1 by his ,almighty will1
 created everything4 ,it may without    
injustice be affirmed1 that the         
sincerest and strongest believers in    
this mysterious ,deity are often        
tormented by doubts1 and1 if candid1    
must own they believe in the existence  
of many things with a feeling much      

closer allied to certainty than they do 
in the reality of their ',great ,first  
,cause1 least understood4' ,no man's    
faith in the inconceivable is ever half 
so strong as his belief in the visible  
and tangible4  ,but few among           
professional mystifiers will admit this1
 obviously true as it is4 ,some have    
done so4 ,baxter1 of pious memory1 to   
wit1 who said1 ,i am not so foolish as  
to pretend my certainty be greater than 
it is1 because it is dishonour to be    
less certain2 nor will ,i by shame be   
kept from confessing those infirmities  
which those have as much as ,i1 who     
hypocritically reproach with them4 ,,my 
,,certainty ,,that ,i ,,am ,a ,,man ,,is
 ,,before ,,my ,,certainty ,,that       
,,there ,,is ,a ,,god4  ,so candid was  
,richard ,baxter1 and so candid are not 
the most part of our priests1 who would 
fain have us think them altogether      
unsceptical4 ,nevertheless1 they write  
abundance of books to convince us ',god 
is1' though they never penned a line in 

order to convince us1 we actually are1  
and that to disbelieve we are is a      
'deadly sin4'  ,could ,god be known1    
could his existence be made 'palpable to
 feeling as to sight1' as unquestionably
 is the existence of matter1 there would
 be no need of ',demonstrations of the  
existence of ,god'1 no need of arguments
 a priori or a posteriori to establish  
that existence4 ,saint ,john was right2 
',no man hath seen ,god at any time'1 to
 which 'open confession' he might truly 
have added1 'none ever will1' for the   
unreal is alway unseeable4 ,yet have    
'mystery men' with shameless and most   
insolent pertinacity asserted the       
existence of ,god while denying the     
existence of matter4  ,the              
incomprehensible is not to be defined4  
,it is difficult to give intelligible   
account of an ,immense ,being           
confessedly mysterious and about whom   
his worshippers admit they only know1   
they know nothing1 except that          
',he is good1           ,and that       

themselves are blind4'  ,spinoza said1  
of things which have nothing in common1 
one cannot be the cause of the other2   
and to me it seems eminently            
unphilosophic to believe a ,being having
 nothing in common with anything1       
capable of creating or causing          
everything4 ',only matter can be touched
 or touch2' and as the ,christian's ,god
 is not material1 his adorers are fairly
 open to the charge of superstition4 ,an
 unknown ,deity1 without body1 parts or 
passions1 is of all idols the least     
tangible2 and they who pretend to know  
and reverence him1 are deceived or      
deceivers4  ,in this ,christian country1
 where men are expected to believe and  
called ',infidel' if they cannot believe
 in a 'crucified ,saviour1' it seems    
strange so much fuss should be made     
about his immateriality4 ,all but       
,unitarian ,christians hold as an       
essential article of faith1 that in him 
dwelt the fulness of the ,godhead       
bodily2 in other words1 that our        

,redeemer and our ,creator1 though two  
persons1 are but one ,god4 ,it is true  
that ,divines of our ',reformed         
,protestant ,church1' call everything   
but gentlemen those who lay claim to the
 equivocal privilege of feasting        
periodically upon the body and blood of 
,omnipotence4 ,the pains taken by       
,protestants to show from ,scripture1   
,reason and ,nature1 that ,priests      
cannot change lumps of dough into the   
body1 and bumpers of wine into the      
blood1 of their ,god1 are well known and
 appreciated4 ,but the ,roman ,catholics
 are neither to be argued nor laughed   
out of their 'awful doctrine' of the    
real presence1 to which they cling with 
desperate earnestness4  ,locke wrote    
rather disparagingly of 'many among us1'
 who will be found upon ,inquiry1 to    
fancy ,god in the shape of a man fitting
 in heaven1 and have other absurd and   
unfit conceptions of him4' ,as though it
 were possible to think of shapeless    
,being1 or as though it were criminal in

 the superstitious to believe ',god made
 man after his own image4'  ,that       
,christians as well as ,turks 'really   
have had whole sects earnestly          
contending that the ,deity was corporeal
 and of human shape'1 is a fact1 so     
firmly established as to defy           
contradiction4 ,and though every sincere
 subscriber to the ,thirty ,nine        
,articles must believe1 or at least must
 believe he believes in ,deity without  
body1 parts1 or passions1 it is well    
known that 'whole sects' of ,christians 
do even now 'fancy ,god in the shape of 
a man sitting in heaven1 and entertain  
other absurd and unfit conceptions of   
him4'  ,mr4 ,collibeer1 who is          
considered by ,christian writers 'a most
 ingenious gentleman'1 has told the     
world in his ,treatise entitled ',the   
,knowledge of ,god1' that ,deity must   
have some form1 and intimates it may    
probably be the spherical2 an intimation
 which has grievously offended many     
learned ,theists who considered going so

 far an abuse of reason1 and warn us    
that 'its extension beyond the assigned 
boundaries1 has proved an ample source  
of error4' ,but what the 'assigned      
boundaries' of reason are1 they don't   
state1 nor by whom 'assigned4' ,that if 
there is a ,god he must have some form  
is self-evident and why ,mr4 ,collibeer 
should be ostracized by his less        
daringly imaginative brethren1 for      
preferring a spherical to a square or   
otherwise shaped ,deity1 is to my       
understanding what ,god's grace is to   
their's4  ,but admitting the unfitness1 
and absurdity1 and 'blasphemy' of such  
conceptions1 it is by no means clear    
that any other conceptions of the       
'inconceiveable' would be an improvement
 upon them4 ,undoubtedly1 the           
matter-,god-system has its difficulties1
 but they are trifles in comparison with
 those by which the spirit-,god system  
is encompassed2 for1 one obvious        
consequence of faith in bodiless        
,divinity is an utter confusion of ideas

 in those who preach it1 as regards     
possibilities and impossibilities4  ,the
 universe is an uncaused existence1 or  
it was caused by something before it4   
,by universe we mean matter1 the sum    
total of things1 whence all proceeds1   
and whither all returns4 ,no truth is   
more obviously true than the truth that 
matter1 or something not matter1 exists 
of itself1 and consequently is not an   
effect1 but an uncaused cause of all    
effects4  ,from such conviction1        
repugnant though it be to vulgar ideas1 
there is no rational way of escape2 for 
however much we may desire1 however much
 we may struggle to believe there was a 
time when there was nothing1 we cannot  
so believe4 ,human nature is constituted
 intuitively or instinctively to feel   
the eternity of something4 ,to rid      
oneself of that feeling is impossible4  
,nature or something not ,nature must   
ever have been1 is a conclusion to which
 what poets call ,fate--                
,leads the willing and drags the        

unwilling4  ,but does this undeniable   
truth make against ,universalism8 ,far  
from it--so far1 indeed1 as to make for 
it4 ,the reason is no mystery4 ,of      
matter we have ideas clear1 precise1 and
 indispensable1 whereas of something not
 matter we cannot have any idea         
whatever1 good1 bad1 or indifferent4    
,the ,universe is extraordinary1 no     
doubt1 but so much of it as acts upon us
 is perfectly conceivable1 whereas1 any 
thing within1 without1 or apart from the
 ,universe1 is perfectly inconceivably4 
,the notion of necessarily existing     
matter seems fatal to belief in ,god2   
that is1 if by the word ,god be         
understood something not matter1 for    
'tis precisely because priests were     
unable to reconcile such belief with the
 idea of matter's self-existence or     
eternity1 that they took to imagining a 
',first cause4'  ,in the 'forlorn hope' 
of vanquishing the difficulty of        
necessarily existing ,matter1 they      
assent to a necessarily existing        

,spirit1 and when the nature of spirit  
is demanded from these assertors of its 
existence1 they are constrained to avow 
that it is material or nothing4  ,yes1  
they are constrained to make directly or
 indirectly one or other of these       
admissions2 for1 as between truth and   
falsehood1 there is no middle passage2  
so between something and nothing1 there 
is no intermediate existence4 ,hence the
 serious dilemma of ,spiritualists1 who 
gravely tell us their ,god is a spirit1 
and that a spirit is not any thing1     
which not any thing or nothing 7for the 
life of us we cannot distinguish between
 them7 'framed the worlds' nay1 created 
as well as framed them4  ,if it be      
granted1 for the mere purpose of        
explanation1 that spirit is an entity1  
we can frame 'clear distinct ideas      
of'--a real though not material         
existence1 surely no man will pretend to
 say an uncreated ,spirit1 is less      
inexplicable than uncreated ,matter4    
,all could not have been caused or      

created unless nothing can be a ,cause1 
the very notion of which involves the   
grossest of absurdities4  ,whatever is  
produced1 without any cause1 is produced
 by nothing2 or1 in other words1 has    
nothing for its cause4 ,but nothing     
never can be a cause no more than it can
 be something or equal to two right     
angles4 ,by the same intuition that we  
perceive nothing not to be equal to two 
right angles1 or not to be something1 we
 perceive that it can never be a cause1 
and consequently must perceive that     
every object has a real cause of its    
existence4 ,when we exclude all causes  
we really do exclude them1 and neither  
suppose nothing nor the object itself to
 be the causes of the existence1 and    
consequently can draw no argument from  
the absurdity of these suppositions     
except to prove the absurdity of that   
exclusion4 ,if everything must have a   
cause1 it follows that upon the         
exclusion of other causes1 we must      
accept of the object itself or nothing  

as causes4 ,but it is the very point in 
question whether everything must have a 
cause or not1 and therefore1 according  
to all just reasoning ought not to be   
taken for granted4 #bi3a  ,this         
reasoning amounts to logical            
demonstration 7if logical demonstration 
there can be7 of a most essential truth1
 which in all ages has been obstinately 
set at nought by dabblers in the        
supernatural4 ,it demonstrates that     
something never was1 never can be1      
caused by nothing1 which can no more be 
a cause1 properly so called1 than it can
 be something1 or equal to two right    
angles2 and therefore that everything   
could not have had a cause1 which1 the  
reader has seen1 is the very point      
assumed by ,theists--the very point on  
which as a pivot they so merrily and    
successfully turn their fine            
metaphysical theories and immaterial    
systems4  ,the universe1 quoth they1    
must have had a cause1 and that cause   
must have been ,first ,cause1 or cause  

number one1 because nothing can exist of
 itself4 ,oh1 most lame and impotent    
conclusion6 ,how1 in consistency1 can   
they declare nothing can exist without a
 cause in the teeth of their oft        
repeated dogma that ,god is uncaused4   
,if ,god never commenced to be1 ,he is  
an uncaused existence1 that is to say1  
exists without a cause4 #bi3b ,the      
difference on this point between        
,theists and ,universalists is very     
palpable4 ,the former say1 ,spirit can  
exist without a cause1 the latter say   
,matter can exist without a cause4      
,whole libraries of theologic dogma     
would be dearly purchased by ,hume's    
profound remark--if everything must have
 a cause1 it follows that upon the      
exclusion of other causes we must accept
 of the object itself or of nothing as  
causes4  ,saint ,augustine1 more candid 
than modern theologians1 said ',god is a
 being whom we speak of but whom we     
cannot describe and who is superior to  
all definitions4' ,universalists1 on the

 other hand1 as candidly deny there is  
any such being4 ,to them it seems that  
the name ,god stands for nothing1 is the
 archetype of nothing1 explains nothing1
 and contributes to nothing but the     
perpetuation of human imbecility1       
ignorance and error4 ,to them it        
represents neither shadow nor substance1
 neither phenomenon nor thing1 neither  
what is ideal nor what is real2 yet is  
it the name without senseless faith in  
which there could be no superstition4   
,if ,nature is all1 and all is ,nature1 
nothing but itself could ever have      
existed1 and of course nothing but      
itself can be supposed ever to have been
 capable of causing4 ,to cause is to    
act1 and though body without notion is  
conceivable1 action without body is not4
 ,neither can two ,infinites be supposed
 to tenant one ,universe4 ,only 'most   
religious philosophers' can pretend to  
acknowledge the being of an infinite    
,god co-existent with an infinite       
,universe4  ,universalists are          

frequently asked--,what moves matter8 to
 which question nothing is the true and 
sufficient answer4 ,matter moves matter4
 ,if asked how we know it does1 our     
answer is1 because we see it do so1     
which is more than mind imaginers can   
say of their 'prime mover4' ,they tell  
us mind moves matter2 but none save the 
third sighted among them ever saw mind1 
and if they never saw mind1 they never  
could have seen matter pushed about by  
it4 ,they babble about mind1 but nowhere
 does mind exist save in their mind2    
that is to say1 nowhere but nowhere4    
,ask these broad-day dreamers where mind
 is minus body8 and very cutely they    
answer1 body is the mind1 and mind is   
the body4  ,that this is neither joke   
nor slander1 we will show by reference  
to ,no4 #be of ',the ,shepherd1' a      
clever and well known periodical1 whose 
editor1 #cj3a in reply to a             
correspondent of the 'chaotic' tribe1   
said ',as to the question--where is     
magnetism without the magnet8 ,we       

answer1 magnetism is the magnet1 and the
 magnet is magnetism4' ,if so1 body is  
the mind and the mind is body2 and our  
,shepherd1 if asked1 ',where is mind    
without the body8' to be consistent1    
should answer1 body is the mind and the 
mind is the body4 ,both these answers   
are true1 or both are false2 and it must
 be allowed--            ,each lends to 
each a borrowed charm1           ,like  
pearls upon an ,ethiop's arm4  ,ask the 
',shepherd' where is mind without the   
body8 and1 if not at issue with himself1
 he must reply1 mind is the man and man 
is the mind4  ,if this be so1--if the   
mind is the man and the man is the mind1
 which none can deny who say magnetism  
is the magnet and the magnet            
magnetism--how1 in ,reason's name1 can  
they be different1 or how can the       
',shepherd' consistently pretend to     
distinguish between them2 yet he does   
so4 ,he writes about the spiritual part 
of man as though he really believed     
there is such a part4 ,not satisfied1 it

 would seem1 with body1 like            
,nonentitarians of vulgar mould1 he     
tenants it with ,soul or ,spirit1 or    
,mind1 which ,soul1 or ,spirit1 or      
,mind1 according to his own showing1 is 
nothing but body in action2 in other    
terms1 organised matter performing vital
 functions4 ,idle declamation against   
'facts mongers' well becomes such       
self-stultifying dealers in fiction4    
,abuse of 'experimentarians' is quite in
 keeping with the philosophy of those   
who maintain the reality of mind in face
 of their own strange statement1 that   
magnetism is the magnet and the magnet  
magnetism4  ,but we deny that magnetism 
is the magnet4 ,these words magnetism   
and magnet do not1 it is true1 stand for
 two things1 but one thing3 that one and
 only thing called matter4 ,the magnet  
is an existence1 i4e41 that which moves4
 ,magnetism is not an existence1 but    
phenomenon1 or1 if you please1          
phenomena4 ,it is the effect of which   
magnetic body is the immediate and      

obvious cause4  ,to evade the charge of 
,materialism1 said ,dr4 ,engledue1 we   
7,phrenologists7 content ourselves with 
stating that the immaterial makes use of
 the material to show forth its powers4 
,what is the result of this8 ,we have   
the man of theory and believer in       
supernaturalism quarrelling with the man
 of fact and supporter of ,materialism4 
,we have two parties2 the one asserting 
that man possesses a spirit superadded  
to1 but not inherent in1 the            
brain--added to it1 yet having no       
necessary connection with it--producing 
material changes1 yet                   
immaterial--destitute of any of the     
known properties of matter--in fact an  
immaterial something which in one word  
means nothing1 producing all the        
cerebral functions of man1 yet not      
localised-not susceptible of proof2 the 
other party contending that the belief  
in spiritualism fetters and ties down   
physiological investigation--that man's 
intellect is prostrated by the          

domination of metaphysical              
speculation--that we have no evidence of
 the existence of an essence1 and that  
organised mutter is all that is         
requisite to produce the multitudinous  
manifestations of human and brute       
cerebration4  ,we rank ourselves with   
the second party1 and conceive that we  
must cease speaking of 'the mind1' and  
discontinue enlisting in our            
investigations a spiritual essence1 the 
existence of which cannot be proved1 but
 which tends to mystify and perplex a   
question sufficiently clear if we       
confine ourselves to the consideration  
of organised matter--its forms--its     
changes--and its aberrations from normal
 structure4 #ca3a  ,the eccentric ,count
 de ,caylus1 when on his death-bed1 was 
visited by some near relation and a     
pious ,bishop1 who hoped that under such
 trying circumstance he would manifest  
some concern respecting those           
'spiritual' blessings which1 while in   
health1 he had uniformly treated with   

contempt4 ,after a long pause he broke  
silence by saying1 ',ah1 my friends1 ,i 
see you are anxious about my soul2'     
whereupon they pricked up their ears    
with delight2 before1 however1 any reply
 could be made the ,count added1 'but   
the fact is ,i have not got one1 and    
really my good friends you must allow me
 to know best4'  ,if people in general  
had one tenth the good sense of this    
impious ,count1 the fooleries of        
,spiritualism would at once give place  
to the philosophy of ,materialism1 and  
none would waste time in talking or     
writing about non-entities4 ,all would  
know that what theologians call         
sometimes spirit1 sometimes soul1 and   
sometimes mind1 is an imaginary         
existence4 ,all would know that the     
terms immaterial something do in very   
truth mean nothing4 ,count de ,caylus   
died as became a man convinced that soul
 is not an entity1 and that upon the    
dissolution of our 'earthly tabernacle'1
 the particles composing it cease to    

perform vital functions1 and return to  
the shoreless ocean of ,eternal ,being4 
,pietists may be shocked by such        
nonchalance in the face of their 'grim  
monster2' but philosophers will admire  
an indifference to inevitable           
consequences resulting from profoundest 
love of truth and contempt of           
superstition4 ,count de ,caylus was a   
,materialist1 and no ,materialist can   
consistently feel the least alarm at the
 approach of what superstitionists have 
every reason to consider the 'king of   
terrors4' ,believers in the reality of  
immaterial existence cannot be 'proper' 
,materialists4 ,obviously1 therefore1 no
 believers in the reality of ,god can be
 bona fide ,materialists2 for ',god' is 
a name signifying something or nothing2 
in other terms matter or that which is  
not matter4 ,if the latter1 to          
,materialists the name is               
meaningless--sound without sense4 ,if   
the former1 they at once pronounce it a 
name too many2 because it expresses     

nothing that their word ,,matter does   
not express better4  ,dr4 ,young held in
 horror the ,materialist's 'universe of 
dust4' ,but there is nothing either bad 
or contemptible in dust--man is         
dust--all will be dust4 ,a dusty        
universe1 however1 shocked the poetic   
,doctor1 whose writings analogise with--
            ,rich windows that exclude  
the light1           ,and passages that 
lead to nothing4  ,a universe of nothing
 was more to his taste than a universe  
of dust1 and he accordingly amused      
himself with the 'spiritual' work of    
imagining one1 and called its builder   
',god4'  ,the somewhat ungentle         
',shepherd' cordially sympathises with  
,dr4 ,young in his detestation of the   
,materialist's universe of dust1 and is 
sorely puzzled to know how mere dust    
contrives to move without the assistance
 of 'an immaterial power between the    
particles2' as if he supposed anything  
could be between everything--or nothing 
be able to move something4 ,verily this 

gentleman is as clever a hand at        
'darkening counsel by words without     
knowledge' as the cleverest of those he 
rates so soundly4  ,the names of ,newton
 and ,clarke are held in great esteem by
 all who are familiar with the history  
of mechanical and metaphysical          
philosophy4 ,as a man of science1 there 
is no individual1 ancient1 or modern1   
who would not suffer by comparison with 
,sir ,isaac ,newton2 while common       
consent has assigned to ,dr4 ,samuel    
,clarke the first place among religious 
metaphysicians4 ,it would be difficult1 
if not impossible1 to cite any other    
,theists of better approved reputation  
than these two1 and therefore we        
introduce them to the reader's notice in
 this place2 for as they ranked among   
the most philosophic of ,theists1 it    
might be expected that their conceptions
 of ,deity1 would be clear1             
satisfactory1 and definite4--,let us    
see1 then1 in their own writings1 what  
those conceptions were4  ,newton        

conceived ,god to be one and the same   
for ever1 and everywhere1 not only by   
his own virtue or energy1 but also in   
virtue of his substance4--,again1 ',all 
things are contained in him and move in 
him1 but without reciprocal action' 7sed
 sine muta passione7 ,god feels nothing 
from the movements of bodies2 nor do    
they experience any resistance from his 
universal presence4 #cc3a  ,pause1      
reader1 and demand of yourself whether  
such a conception of ,deity is either   
clear1 satisfactory1 or definite1--,god 
is one4 ,very good--but one what8 ,from 
the information1 ',he is the same for   
ever and everywhere1' we conclude that  
,newton thought him a ,being4 ,here1    
however1 matter stops the way2 for the  
idea of ,being is in all of us          
inseparably associated with the idea of 
substance4 ,when told that ,god is an   
',immense ,being1' without parts1 and   
consequently unsubstantial1 we try to   
think of such a ,being2 but in vain4    
,reason puts itself in a quandary1 the  

moment it labours to realise an idea of 
absolute nothingness2 yet marvellous to 
relate1 ,newton did distinctly declare  
his ,deity 'totally destitute of body1' 
and urged that fact as a reason why ,he 
cannot be either seen1 touched1 or      
understood1 and also as a reason why he 
ought not to be adored under any        
corporeal figure6  ,the proper function 
of ',supernaturality or ,wonder1'       
according to ,phrenologists1 is to      
create belief in the reality of         
supernatural beings1 and begets fondness
 for news1 particularly if extravagant4 
,most likely then1 such readers of this 
book as have that organ 'large' will be 
delighted with ,newton's rhodomontade   
about a ,god who resists nothing1 feels 
nothing1 and yet with condescension     
truly divine1 not only contains all     
things1 but permits them to move in ,his
 motionless and 'universal presence2'   
for 'news' more extravagant1 never fell 
from the lips of an idiot1 or adorned   
the pages of a prayer-book4  ,by the    

same great savan we are taught that ,god
 governs all1 not as the soul of the    
world1 but as the ,lord and sovereign of
 all things3 that it is in consequence  
of ,his sovereignty ,he is called the   
,lord ,god1 the ,universal              
,emperor--that the word ,god is         
relative1 and relates itself with       
slaves--and that the ,deity is the      
dominion or the sovereignty of ,god1 not
 over his own body1 as those think who  
look upon ,god as the soul of the world1
 but over slaves--from all which slavish
 reasoning1 a plain man who had not been
 informed it was concocted by ,europe's 
pet philosopher1 would infallibly       
conclude some unfortunate lunatic had   
given birth to it4 ,that there is no    
creature now tenanting ,bedlam who would
 or could scribble purer nonsense about 
,god than this of ,newton's1 we are well
 convinced--for how could the most      
frenzied of brains imagine anything more
 repugnant to every principle of good   
sense than a self-existent1 eternal1    

omnipotent1 omnipresent ,being1 creator 
of all the worlds1 who acts the part of 
'universal emperor1' and plays upon an  
infinitely larger scale1 the same sort  
of game as ,nicholas of ,russia1 or     
,mohammed of ,egypt1 plays upon a small 
scale4 ,there cannot be slavery where   
there is no tyranny1 and to say1 as     
,newton did1 that we stand in the name  
relation to a universal ,god1 as a slave
 does to his earthly master1 is         
practically to accuse such ,god1 at     
reason's bar of tyranny4 ,if the word   
,god is relative1 and relate itself with
 slaves1 it incontestably follows that  
all human beings are slaves1 and ,deity 
is by such reasoners degraded into the  
character of universal slave-driver4    
,really1 theologians and others who     
declaim so bitterly against             
'blasphemers1' and take such very       
stringent measures to punish 'infidels'1
 who speaks or write of their ,god1     
should seriously consider whether the   
worst1 that is1 the least superstitious 

of infidel writers1 ever penned a       
paragraph so disparaging to the         
character of that ,god they effect to   
adore1 as the last quoted paragraph of  
,newton's4  ,if even it could be        
demonstrated that there is a super-human
 ,being1 it cannot be proper to clothe  
,him in the noblest human               
attributes--still less can it be        
justifiable in pigmies1 such as we are1 
to invest ,him with odious attributes   
belonging only to despots ruling over   
slaves4 ,besides1 how can we imagine a  
,god1 who is 'totally destitute of body 
and of corporeal figure1' to have any   
kind of substance8 ,earthly emperors we 
know to be substantial and common-place 
sort of beings enough1 but is it not    
sheer abuse of reason to argue as though
 the character of ,god were at all      
analogous to theirs2 or rather1 is it   
not shocking abuse of our reasoning     
facilities to employ them at all about a
 ,being whose existence1 if we really   
have an existence1 is perfectly         

enigmatical1 and allowed to be so by    
those very men who pretend to explain   
its character and attributes8 ,we find  
no less a sage than ,newton explicitly  
declaring as incontestible truth1 that  
,god exists necessarily--that the same  
necessity obliges him to exist always   
and everywhere--that he is all eyes1 all
 ears1 all brains1 all arms1 all        
feeling1 all intelligence1 all          
action--that he exists in a mode by no  
means corporeal1 an yet this same sage1 
in the self-same paragraph1 acknowledges
 ,god is totally unknown to us4  ,now1  
we should like to be informed by what   
reasonable right ,newton could pen a    
long string of 'incontestible truths1'  
such as are here selected from his      
writings1 with respect to a ,being of   
whom1 by his own confession1 he had not 
a particle of knowledge4 ,surely it is  
not the part of a wise man to write     
about that which is 'totally unknown' to
 him1 and yet that is precisely what    
,newton did1 when he wrote concerning   

,god4  ,so much for the ,theism of      
,europe's chief religious philosopher4  
,turn we now to the ,theism of ,dr4     
,samuel ,clarke4  ,he wrote a book about
 the being and attributes of ,god1 in   
which he endeavoured to establish1      
first1 that 'something has existed from 
all eternity2' second1 that 'there has  
existed from eternity some one          
unchangeable and independent ,being2'   
third1 that 'such unchangeable and      
independent ,being1 which has existed   
from all eternity1 without any external 
cause of its existence1 must be         
necessarily existent2' fourth1 that     
'what is the substance or essence of    
that ,being1 which is necessarily       
existing1 or self-existent1 we have no  
idea--neither is it possible for us to  
comprehend it2' fifth1 that 'the        
self-existent ,being must of necessity  
be eternal as well as infinite and      
omnipresent2' sixth1 that ',he must be  
one1 and as he is the self-existent and 
original cause of all things1 must be   

intelligent2' seventh1 that ',god is not
 a necessary agent1 but a ,being endowed
 with liberty and choice2' eighth1 that 
',god is infinite in power1 infinite in 
wisdom1 and1 as ,he is supreme cause of 
all things1 must of necessity be a      
,being infinitely just1 truthful1 and   
good--thus comprising within himself all
 such moral perfections as becomes the  
supreme governor and judge of the       
world4'  ,these are the leading dogma   
contained in ,clarke's book--and as they
 are deemed invincible by a respectable1
 though not very numerous1 section of   
,theists1 we will briefly examine the   
more important important of them4  ,the 
dogma that something has existed from   
all eternity1 as already shown1 is      
perfectly intelligible1 and may defy    
contradiction--but the real difficulty  
is to satisfactorily determine what that
 something is4 ,matter exists1 and as no
 one can even imagine its non-existence 
or annihilation1 the ,materialist infers
 that must be the eternal something4    

,newton as well as ,clark thought the   
everlasting ,being destitute of body1   
and consequently without parts1 figure1 
motion1 divisibility1 or any other such 
properties as we find in matter--ergo1  
they did not believe matter to be the   
eternal something2 but if not matter1   
again we ask1 what can it be8 ,of       
bodilessness or incorporiety no one1    
even among those who say their ,god is  
incorporeal1 pretend to have an idea4   
,abady insisted that the question is not
 what incorporiety is1 but whether it   
be8 ,well1 we have no objection to      
parties taking that position1 because   
there is nothing more easy than to      
dislodge those who think fit to do      
so--for this reason3 the advocates of   
nothing1 or incorporiety1 can no more   
establish by arguments drawn from       
unquestioned facts1 that incorporiety is
 than they can clearly show what it is4 
,it has always struck the author as     
remarkable that men should so           
obstinately refuse to admit the         

possibility of matter's necessary       
existence1 while they readily embrace1  
not only as possibly1 but certainly1    
true1 the paradoxical proposition that a
 something1 having nothing in common    
with anything1 is necessarily existent4 
,matter is everywhere around and about  
us4 ,we ourselves are matter--all our   
ideas are derived from matter--and yet  
such is the singularly perverse         
character of human intellect that1 while
 resolutely denying the possibility of  
matter's eternity1 an immense number of 
our race embrace the incredible         
proposition that matter was created in  
time by a necessarily existing ,being1  
who is without body1 parts1 passions1 or
 positive nature6  ,the second dogma    
informs us that this always-existing    
,being is unchangeable and independent4 
,one unavoidable inference from which is
 that ,deity is itself immoveable1 as   
well as unconnected with the            
universe--for a moveable ,being must be 
a changeable ,being1 by the very fact of

 its motion2 while an independent ,being
 must be motiveless1 as it is evident   
all motives result from our relationship
 to things eternal2 but an independent  
,being can have no relations1 and       
consequently must act without motives4  
,now1 as no intelligent human action can
 be imagined without necessary          
precursors in the shape of motives1     
reasoning from analogy1 it seems        
impossible that the unchangeable and    
independent ,being1 ,clarke was so sure 
must ever have existed1 could have      
created the universe1 seeing he could   
have had no motive or inducement to     
create it4  ,the third dogma may be     
rated a truism--it being evidently true 
that a thing or ,being1 which has       
existed from eternity without any       
eternal cause of its existence1 must be 
self-existent3 but of course that dogma 
leaves the disputed question1 namely1   
whether matter1 or something not matter1
 is self-existent1 just where it found  
it4  ,the fourth dogma is not questioned

 by ,universalists1 as they are quite   
convinced that it is not possible for us
 to comprehend the substance or essence 
of an immaterial ,being4  ,the other    
dogmas we need not enlarge upon1 as they
 are little more than repetition or     
expansion of the preceding one4 ,indeed1
 much of the foregoing would be         
superfluous1 were it not that it serves 
to illustrate1 so completely and clearly
 theistical absurdities4 ,the only dogma
 worth overturning1 of the eight here   
noticed1 is the first1 for if that fall1
 the rest must fall with it4 ,if1 for   
example1 the reader is convinced that it
 is more probable matter is mutable as  
regards form but eternal as regards     
essence1 than that it was willed into   
existence by a ,being said to be eternal
 and immutable1 he at once becomes a    
,universalist--for if matter always was1
 no ,being could have been before it1   
nor can any exist after it4 ,it is      
because men in general are shocked at   
the idea of matter without beginning and

 without end1 that they do readily      
embrace the idea of a ,god1 forgetting  
that if the idea of eternal matter shock
 our sense of the probable1 the idea of 
an eternal ,being who existed before    
matter1 if well considered1 is          
sufficient to shock all sense of the    
possible4  ,the man who is contented    
with the universe1 who stops at that has
 at least the satisfaction of dealing   
with something tangible--but he who     
don't find the universe large enough for
 him to expatiate in1 and whirls his    
brains into a belief that there is a    
necessarily existing something beyond   
the limits of a world unlimited1 is in a
 mental condition no reasonable man need
 envy4  ,of the universe1 or at least so
 much of it as our senses have been     
operated upon by1 we have conceptions   
clear1 vivid1 and distinct2 but when    
,dr4 ,clarke tell us of an intelligent  
,being1 not part but creator of that    
universe1 we can form no clear1 vivid1  
distinct1 or1 in point of fact1 any     

conception of such ,being4 ,when he     
explains that it is infinite and        
omnipresent1 like poor ,paddy's famed   
ale1 the explanation 'thickens as it    
clears2' for being ourselves finite1 and
 necessarily present on one small spot  
of our very small planet1 the words     
infinite and omnipresent do not suggest 
to us either positive or practical      
ideas--of course1 therefore1 we have    
neither positive nor practical ideas of 
an infinite and omnipresent ,being4  ,we
 can as easily understand that the      
universe ever did exist1 as we now      
understand that it does exist--but we   
cannot conceive its absence for the     
millionth part of an instant--and really
 it puzzles one to conceive what those  
people can be dreaming of who talk as   
familiarly about the extinction of a    
universe as the chemist does of         
extinguishing the flame of his          
spirit-lamp4 ,the unsatisfactory        
character of all speculations having for
 their object 'nonentities with         

formidable names1' should long ere this 
have opened men's eyes to the folly of  
multiplying causes without              
necessity--another rule of              
philosophising1 for which we are        
indebted to ,newton1 but to which no    
superstitious philosophiser pays due    
attention4 ,newton himself in his       
theistical character1 wrote and talked  
as though most blissfully ignorant of   
that rule4  ,the passages given above   
from his ',principia' palpably violate  
it4 ,but ,theists1 however learned1 pay 
little regard to any rules of           
philosophising1 which put in peril their
 fundamental crotchet4  ,a distinguished
 modern ,fabulist #ch3a has introduced  
to us a philosophical mouse who praised 
beneficent ,deity because of his great  
regard for mice3 for one half of us1    
quoth he1 received the gift of wings1 so
 that if they who have none1 should by  
cats happen to be exterminated1 how     
easily could our ',heavenly ,father1'   
out of the bats re-establish our        

exterminated species4  ,voltaire had no 
objection to fable if it were symbolic  
of truth2 and here is fable1 which1     
according to its author1 is symbolic of 
the little regarded truth1 that our     
pride rests mainly on our ignorance1    
for1 as he sagely says1 'the good mouse 
knew not that there are also winged     
cats4' ,if she had her speculations     
concerning the beneficence of ,deity    
would have been less orthodox1 mayhap1  
but decidedly more rational4 ,the wisdom
 of this pious mouse is very similar to 
that of the ,theologian who knew not how
 sufficiently to admire ,god's goodness 
in causing large rivers almost always to
 flow in the neighbourhood of large     
towns4  ,to jump at conclusions on no   
other authority than their own ignorant 
assumption1 and to ,deify errors on no  
other authority than their own heated   
imagination1 has in all ages been the   
practice of ,theologians4 ,of that      
practice they are proud1 as was the     
mouse of our ,fabulist4 ,clothed in no  

other panoply than their own conceits   
they deem themselves invulnerable4      
,while uttering the wildest             
incoherencies their self-complacency    
remains undisturbed4 ,they remind one of
 that ambitious crow who1 thinking more 
highly of himself than was quite proper1
 strutted so proudly about with the     
,peacock's feathers in which he had     
bedecked himself4--,like him1 they plume
 themselves upon their own egregious    
folly1 and like him should get well     
plucked for their pains4  ,let any one  
patiently examine their much talked of  
argument from design1 and he will be    
satisfied that these are no idle        
charges4 ,that argument has for its     
ground-work beggarly assumption1 and for
 its main pillar1 reasoning no less     
beggarly4 ,nature must have had a cause1
 because it evidently is an effect4 ,the
 cause of ,nature must have been one    
,god1 because two ,gods1 or two million 
,gods1 could not have agreed to cause   
it4 ,that cause must be omnipotent1     

wise1 and good1 because all things are  
double one against another1 and ,he has 
left nothing imperfect4 ,men make       
watches1 build ships or houses1 out of  
pre-existing metals1 wood1 hemp1 bricks1
 mortar1 and other materials1 therefore 
,god made nature out of no material at  
all4 ,unassisted nature cannot produce  
the phenomena we behold1 therefore such 
phenomena clearly prove there is        
something unnatural4 ,not to believe in 
a ,god who designed ,nature1 is to close
 both ears and eyes against evidence1   
therefore ,universalists are wilfully   
deaf and obstinately blind4  ,these are 
samples of the flimsy stuff1 our        
teachers of what nobody knows1 would    
palm upon us as demonstration of the    
,being and ,attributes of ,god4  ,by    
artfully taking for granted what no     
,universalist can admit1 and assuming   
cases altogether dissimilar to be       
perfectly analogous1 our natural        
theologians find no difficulty in       
proving that ,god is1 was1 and ever will

 be2 that after contemplating ,his own  
perfections1 a period sufficiently long 
for 'eternity to begin and end in1' ,he 
said1 let there be matter1 and there was
 matter2 that with ,him all things are  
possible1 and ,he1 of course1 might     
easily have kept1 as well as made1 man  
upright and happy1 but could not        
consistently with his own wisdom1 or    
with due regard to his own              
glorification4 ,wise in their           
generation1 these 'blind leaders of the 
blind' ascribe to this ,deity of their  
own invention powers impossible1 acts   
inconceivable1 and qualities            
incompatible2 thus erecting doctrinal   
systems on no sounder basis than their  
own ignorance2 deifying their own       
monstrous errors1 and filling the earth 
with misery1 madness1 and crime4  ,the  
writer who declared theology ignorance  
of natural causes reduced to system1 did
 not strike wide of the true mark4 ,it  
is plain that the argument from design1 
so vastly favoured by theologians1      

amounts to neither more nor less than   
ignorance of natural causes reduced to  
system4 ,an argument to be sound must be
 soundly premised4 ,but here is an      
argument whose primary premise is a     
false premise--a mere begging of the    
very question in dispute4 ,did          
,universalists admit the universe was   
contrived1 designed1 or adapted1 they   
could not deny there must have been at  
least one ,being to contrive1 design1 or
 adapt2 but they see no analogy between 
a watch made with hands out of          
something1 and a universe made without  
hands out of nothing4 ,universalists are
 unable to perceive the least           
resemblance between the circumstance of 
one intelligent body re-forming or      
changing the condition of some other    
body1 intelligent or non-intelligent1   
and the circumstance of a bodiless      
,being creating all bodies2 of a        
partless ,being acting upon all parts2  
and of a passionless ,being generating  
and regulating all passions4            

,universalists consider the general     
course of nature1 though strangely      
unheeded1 does proclaim with 'most      
miraculous organ1' that dogmatisers     
about any such 'figment of imagination' 
would1 in a rational community1 be      
viewed with the same feelings of        
compassion1 which1 even in these        
irrational days1 are exhibited towards  
confirmed lunatics4  ,the author1 while 
passing an evening with some pleasant   
people in ,ashton-under-,lyne1 heard one
 of them relate that before the         
schoolmaster had made much progress in  
that devil-dusted neighbourhood1 a      
labouring man walking out one fine      
night1 saw on the ground a watch1 whose 
ticking was distinctly audible2 but     
never before having seen anything of the
 kind1 he thought it a living creature1 
and full of fear ran back among his     
neighbours1 exclaiming that he had seen 
a most marvellous thing1 for which he   
could conceive of no better name than   
,,clickmitoad4 ,after recovering from   

their surprise and terror1 this 'bold   
peasant' and his neighbours1 all armed  
with pokers and other formidable        
weapons1 crept up to the ill-starred    
ticker1 and smashed it to pieces4  ,the 
moral of this anecdote is no mystery4   
,our clickmitoadist had never seen      
watches1 knew nothing about watches1 and
 hearing as well as seeing one for the  
first time1 naturally judged it must be 
an animal4 ,readers who may feel        
inclined to laugh at his simplicity1    
should ask themselves whether1 if       
accustomed to see watches growing upon  
watch trees1 they would feel more       
astonished than they usually do when    
observing crystals in process of        
formation1 or cocoa-nuts growing upon   
cocoa-nut trees2 and if as inexperienced
 with respect to watches1 or works of   
art1 more or less analogous to watches1 
they would not under his circumstances  
have acted very much as he did4         
,supposing1 however1 that theologians   
were to succeed in establishing an      

analogy between 'the contrivances of    
human art and the various existences of 
the universe1' is it not evident that   
,spinoza's axiom--of things which having
 nothing in common one cannot be the    
cause of the others--is incompatible    
with belief in the ,deity of our        
,thirty-,nine ,articles1 or1 indeed1    
belief in any unnatural ,designer or    
,causer of ,material ,nature4 ,only     
existence can have anything in common   
with existence4  ,now1 an existence1    
properly so called1 must have at least  
two attributes1 and whatever exhibits   
two or more attributes is matter4 ,the  
two attributes necessary to existence   
are solidity and extension4 ,take from  
matter these attributes and matter      
itself vanishes4 ,that fact was         
specially testified to by ,priestley1   
who acknowledged the primary truths of  
,materialism though averse to the       
legitimate consequences flowing from    
their recognition4  ,according to this  
argument1 nothing exists which has not  

solidity and extension1 and nothing is  
extended and solid but matter1 which in 
one state forms a crystal1 in another a 
blade of grass1 in a third a butterfly1 
and in other states other forms4 ,the   
essence of grass1 or the essence of     
crystal1 in other words1 those native   
energies of their several forms         
constituting and keeping them what they 
are1 can no more be explained than can  
the essentiality of human nature4  ,but 
the ,universalist1 because he finds it  
impossible to explain the action of     
matter1 because unable to state why it  
exhibits such vast and various energies 
as it is seen to exhibit1 is none the   
less assured it naturally and therefore 
necessarily acts thus energetically4 ,no
 ,universalist pretends to understand   
how bread nourishes his frame1 but of   
the fact that bread does nourish it he  
is well assured4 ,he understands not how
 or why two beings should1 by           
conjunction1 give vitality to a third   
being more or less analogous to         

themselves1 but the fact stares him in  
the face4  ,our 'sophists in surplices1'
 who can no otherwise bolster up their  
supernatural system than by outraging   
all such rules of philosophising as     
forbid us to choose the greater of two  
difficulties1 or to multiply causes     
without necessity1 are precisely the men
 to explain everything4 ,but            
unfortunately their explanations do1 for
 the most part1 stand more in need of   
explanation than the thing explained4   
,thus1 they explain the origin of matter
 by reference to an occult1 immense1 and
 immensely mysterious phantasm without  
body1 parts or passions1 who sees though
 not to be seen1 hears though not to be 
heard1 feels though not to be felt1     
moves though not to be moved1 knows     
though not to be known1 and1 in short1  
does everything1 though not to be done  
by anything4 ,well might ,godwin say the
 rage of accounting for what is         
obviously unaccountable1 so common among
 philosophers of this stamp1 has brought

 philosophy itself into discredit4      
,there is an argument against the notion
 of a ,supernatural ,causer which the   
author does not remember to have met    
with1 but which he considers an argument
 of great force--it is this4 ,cause     
means change1 and as there manifestly   
could not be change before there was    
anything to change1 to conceive the     
universe caused is impossible4  ,that   
the sense here attached to the word     
cause is not a novel one every reader   
knows who has seen an elaborate and ably
 written article by ,mr4 ,g4,h4 ,lewes1 
on ',spinoza's ,life and ,works1' where 
effect is defined as cause realised2 the
 natura naturans conceived as natura    
naturata2 and cause or causation is     
define as simply change4 ,when1 says    
,mr4 ,lewes1 the change is completed1 we
 name the result effect4 ,it is only a  
matter of naming4  ,these definitions   
conceded accurate1 the conclusion that  
neither cause nor effect exist1 seems   
inevitable1 for change of being is not  

being itself any more than attraction is
 the thing attracted4 ,one might as     
philosophically erect attraction into   
reality and fall down and worship it as 
change which is in very truth a mere    
matter of naming4 ,not so the things    
changing or changed2 they are real1 the 
prolific parent of all appearance we    
behold1 of all sensation we experience1 
of all ideas we receive1 in short1 of   
all causes and of all effects1 which    
causes and effects1 as shown by ,mr4    
,lewis1 are merely notional1 for we call
 the antecedent cause1 and the sequent  
effect2 but these are merely relative   
conceptions2 the sequence itself is     
antecedent to some subsequent change1   
and the former antecedent was once only 
a sequent to its cause1 and so on4      
,ancient ,simonides1 when asked by      
,dionysius to explain the nature of     
,deity1 demanded a day to see about it1 
then an additional two days1 and then   
four days more1 thus wisely intimating  
to his silly pupil1 that the more men   

think about ,gods1 the less competent   
they are to give any rational account of
 them4  ,cicero was sensible and candid 
enough to acknowledge that he found it  
much easier to say what ,god was not1   
than what he was4 ,like ,simonides1 he  
was mere ,pagan1 and like him1 arguing  
from the known course of nature1 was    
unable1 with all his mastery of talk1 to
 convey positive ideas of ,deity4 ,but  
how should he convey to others what he  
did not1 could not1 himself possess8 ,to
 him no revolution had been vouchsafed1 
and though my ,lord ,brougham is quite  
sure1 without the proof of natural      
,theology1 revelation has no other basis
 than mere tradition2 we have even      
better authority than his ,lordship's   
for the staggering fact that natural    
,theology1 without the prop of          
revelation1 is a 'rhapsody of words1'   
mere jargon1 analogous to the tale told 
by an idiot1 so happily described by our
 great poet as 'full of sound and fury1 
signifying nothing4' ,we have a ,rev4   

,hugh ,m',neil 'convinced that1 from    
external creation1 no right conclusion  
can be drawn concerning the moral       
character of ,god1' and that 'creation  
is too deeply and disastrously blotted  
in consequence of man's sin1 to admit of
 any satisfactory result from an        
adequate contemplation of nature4' #db3a
 ,we have a ,gillespie setting aside the
 ,design ,argument1 on the ground that  
the reasonings by which it is supported 
are 'inapt' to show such attributes as  
infinity1 omnipresence1 free agency1    
omnipotency1 eternality1 or unity1'     
belong in any way to ,god4 ,on this     
latter attribute he specially enlarges1 
and after allowing the contrivances we  
observe in nature1 may establish a unity
 of counsel1 desires to be told how they
 can establish a unity of substance4    
#db3b ,we have ,dr4 ,chalmors and       
,bishop ,watson1 whose capacities were  
not the meanest1 contending that there  
is no natural proof of a ,god1 and that 
we must trust solely to revelation4     

#db3c ,we have the ,rev4 ,mr4 ,faber in 
his ',difficulties of ,infidelity'      
boldly affirming that no one ever did1  
or ever will 'prove without the aid of  
revelation1 that the universe was       
designed by a single designer4'         
,obviously1 then1 there is a division in
 the religious camp with respect to the 
sufficiency of natural ,theology1       
unhelped by revelation4 ,by three of the
 four ,christian authors just quoted1   
the design argument is treated with     
contempt4 ,faber says1 'evident design  
must needs imply a designer1' and that  
'evident design shines out in every part
 of the universe4' ,but he also tells us
 'we reason exclusively1 if with the    
,deist we thence infer the existence of 
one and only one ,supreme ,designer4'   
,by ,gillespie and ,m',neil1 the same   
truth is told in other words4 ,by       
,chalmers and ,watson we are assured    
that1 natural proof of a ,god there is  
none1 and our trust must be placed      
solely in revelation2 while ,brougham1  

another ,immense ,being worshipper1     
declares that revelation derives its    
chief support from natural ,theology1   
without which it has 'no other basis    
than vague tradition4'  ,now1           
,universalists agree with ,lord         
,brougham as to the traditionary basis  
of ,scripture2 and as they also agree   
with ,chalmers and ,watson with respect 
to there being no natural proof of a    
,god1 they stand acquitted to their own 
consciences of 'wilful deafness' and    
'obstinate blindness1' in rejecting as  
inadequate the evidence that ',god is1' 
drawn either from ,nature1 ,revelation1 
or both4  ,it was long a ,protestant    
custom to taunt ,roman ,catholics with  
being divided among themselves as       
regards topics vitally important1 and to
 draw from the fact of such division an 
argument for making ,scripture the only 
'rule of faith and manners4'            
,chillingworth said1 there are ,popes   
against ,popes1 councils against        
councils1 some fathers against others1  

the same fathers against themselves--a  
consent of fathers of one age against a 
consent of fathers of another age1 the  
church of one age against the church of 
another age4 ,traditive interpretations 
of ,scripture are pretended1 but there  
are few or none to be found4 ,no        
tradition but only of ,scripture can    
derive itself from the fountain1 but may
 be plainly proved1 either to have been 
brought in in such an age after ,christ1
 or that in such an age it was not in4  
,in a word1 there is no sufficient      
certainty but of ,scripture only for any
 considering man to build on4 #dc3a ,and
 after reading this should 'any         
considering man' be anxious to know     
something about the ,scripture on which 
alone he is to build1 he cannot do      
better than dip into ,dr4 ,watt's book  
on the right use of ,reason1 where we   
are told every learned 7,scripture7     
critic has his own hypothesis1 and if   
the common text be not favourable to his
 views a various lection shall be made  

authentic4 ,the text must be supposed to
 be defective or redundant1 and the     
sense of it shall be literal or         
metaphorical according as it best       
supports his own scheme4 ,whole chapters
 or books shall be added or left out of 
the sacred canon1 or be turned into     
parables by this influence4 ,luther knew
 not well how to reconcile the epistle  
of ,st4 ,james to the doctrine of       
justification by faith alone1 and so he 
could not allow it to be divine4 ,the   
,papists bring all their ,apocrypha into
 their ,bible1 and stamp divinity upon  
it1 for they can fancy purgatory is     
there1 and they find prayers for the    
dead4 ,but they leave out the second    
commandment because it forbids the      
worship of images4 ,others suppose the  
,mosaic history of the creation1 and the
 full of man1 to be oriental ornaments1 
or a mere allegory1 because the literal 
sense of those three chapters of        
,genesis do not agree with their        
theories4  ,these remarks are certainly 

not calculated to make 'considering men'
 put their trust in ,scripture4 ,coming 
from a ,protestant ,divine of such high 
talent and learning1 they may rather be 
expected to breed in 'considering men'  
very unorthodox opinions as well of the 
authenticity as the genuineness of both 
,testaments1 and a strong suspicion that
 ,chillingworth was joking when he      
talked about their sufficient certainty4
 ,the author has searched ,scripture in 
vain for 'sufficient certainty1' with   
respect to the long catalogue of        
religious beliefs which agitate and     
distract society4 ,laying claim to the  
character of a 'considering man1' he    
requires that ,scripture to be proved   
the word of a ,god before appealed to1  
as ,his ,revelation2 a feat no man has  
yet accomplished4 ,priests1 the         
cleverest1 most industrious1 and least  
scrupulous1 have tried their hands at   
the pious work1 but all have failed4    
,notwithstanding the mighty labours of  
our ,lardner's and ,tillemont's and     

,mosheim's1 no case is made out for the 
divinity of either the ,old or ,new     
,testament4 ',infidels' have shown the  
monstrous absurdity of supposing that   
any one book has an atom more divinity  
about it than any other book4 ,these    
'brutes' have completely succeeded in   
proving that ,christianity is a         
superstition no less absurd than        
,mohammedanism1 and to the full as      
mischievous4  ,christian practice is    
after all1 the best answer to ,christian
 theory4 ,men who think wisely1 do not1 
it is true1 always act wisely2 but      
generally speaking1 the moral1 like the 
physical tree1 is known by its fruit1   
and bitter1 most bitter1 is the fruit of
 that moral tree1 the followers of      
,jesus planted4 ,notwithstanding their  
talk about the pure and benign influence
 of their religion1 an opinion is fast  
gaining ground1 that ,bishop ,kidder was
 right1 when he said1 were a wise man to
 judge of religion by the lives of its  
professors1 perhaps1 ,christianity is   

the last he would choose4  ,he who      
agrees with ,milton that            ,to 
know what every day before us lies      
,is the prime wisdom1  will in all      
likelihood not object to cast his eyes  
around and about him1 where proofs of   
modern priestly selfishness are in      
wonderful abundance4 ,by way of example 
may be cited the cases of those right   
reverend ,fathers in ,god the ,bishops  
of ,london and ,chester1 prelates high  
in the church2 disposers of enormous    
wealth with influence almost            
incalculable2 the former more           
especially4 ,and how stand they affected
 towards the poor8 ,by reference to the 
,times newspaper of ,september #bgth1   
#ahde1 it will be seen that those very  
influential and wealthy ,bishops are    
supporters en chef of a ,reformed ,poor 
,law1' the virtual principle of which is
 'to reduce the condition of those whose
 necessities oblige them to apply for   
relief1 below that of the labourer of   
the lowest class4' ,a ,reformed ,poor   

,law1 having for its 'object1' yes      
reader1 its object1 the restoration of  
the pauper to a position below that of  
the independent labourer4' ,this is     
their 'standard' of reference1 by rigid 
attention to which they hope to fully   
carry out their 'vital principle1' and  
thus bring to a satisfactory conclusion 
the great work of placing 'the pauper in
 a worse condition than the 'independent
 labourer4' ,it appears1 from the same  
journal1 that in reply to complaints    
against their dietary1 the              
,commissioners appointed to work the    
,reformed ,poor ,law1 consider that     
twenty-one ounces of food daily 'is more
 than the hard working labourer with a  
family could accomplish for himself by  
his own exertions4' ,this1 observes a   
writer in the ,times1 being the         
,commissioners' reading of their own    
'standard1' it may be considered        
superfluous to refer to any other       
authority2 but1 as the ,royal           
,agricultural ,society of ,england have 

clubbed their general information on    
this subject in a compilation from a    
selection of essays submitted to them1  
we are bound to refer to such witnesses 
who give the most precise information on
 the actual condition of the independent
 labourer1 with minute instructions for 
his general guidance1 and the economical
 expenditure of his income4 ',he        
should1' they say1 'toil early and late'
 to make himself 'perfect' in his       
calling4 ',he should pinch and screw the
 family1 even in the commonest          
necessaries1' until he gets 'a week's   
wages to the fore4' ,he should drink in 
his work 'water mixed with some powdered
 ginger1' which warms the stomach1 and  
is 'extremely cheap4' ,he should        
remember that 'from three to four pounds
 of potatoes are equal in point of      
nourishment to a pound of the best      
wheaten bread1 besides having the great 
advantage of filling the stomach4 ,he is
 told that 'a lot of bones may always be
 got from the butchers for #b;d41 and   

they are never scraped so clean as not  
to have some scraps of meat adhering to 
them4' ,he is instructed to boil these  
two penny worth of bones1 for the first 
day's family dinner1 until the liquor   
'tastes something like broth4' ,for the 
second day1 the bones are to be again   
boiled in the same manner1 but for a    
longer time4 ,nor is this all1 they say 
'that the bones1 if again boiled for a  
still longer time1 will once more yield 
a nourishing broth1 which may be made   
into pea soup4'  ,this is the system and
 this is the schoolmastership expressly 
sanctioned by the ,bishops of ,london   
and ,chester4 ,in piety nevertheless    
those prelates are not found wanting4   
,they may starve the bodies but no one  
can charge them with neglecting the     
souls of our 'independent labourers4'   
,nothing can exceed their anxiety to    
feed and clothe the spiritually         
destitute4 ,they raise their mitred     
fronts1 even in palaces1 to proclaim and
 lament over the spiritual destitution  

which so extensively prevails--but they 
seldom condescend to notice physical    
destitution4 ,when the cry of famine    
rings throughout the land they coolly   
recommend rapid church extension1 thus  
literally offering stones to those who  
ask them for bread4 ,to got the         
substantial and give the spiritual is   
their practical ,christianity4 ,to      
spiritualise the poor into contentment  
with the 'nourishing broth' from thrice 
boiled bones1 and to die of hunger      
rather than demand relief1 are their    
darling objects4  ,did ,universalists   
thus act1 did they perpetrate1 connive  
at1 or tolerate such atrocities as were 
brought to light during the ,andover    
inquiry1 such cold blooded heartlessness
 would at once be laid to the account of
 their principles4 ,oh yes1 ,christians 
are forward to judge of every tree by   
its fruit1 except the tree called       
,christianity4  ,the vices of the       
universalist they ascribe to his creed4 
,the vices of the ,christian to anything

 but his creed4 ,let professors of      
,christianity be convicted of gross     
criminality1 and lo its apologists say  
such professors are not ,christian4 ,let
 fanatical ,christians commit excesses  
which admit not of open justification1  
and the apologist of ,christianity      
coolly assures us such conduct is mere  
rust on the body of his religion--moss  
which grows on the stock of his piety4  
,from age to age the wisest among men   
have abhorred and denounced             
superstition4 ,it is true that only a   
small section of them treated religion  
as if necessarily superstition1 or went 
quite as far as ,john ,adams1 who said1 
this would be the best of all possible  
worlds if there were no religion in it4 
,but an attentive reading of ancient and
 modern philosophical books has         
satisfied the author that through all   
recorded time1 religion has been        
tolerated rather than loved by great    
thinkers1 who had will1 but not power to
 wage successful war upon it4 ,gibbon   

speaks of ,pagan priests who1 'under    
sacerdotal robes1 concealed the heart of
 an ,atheist4' ,now1 these priests were 
also the philosophers of ,rome1 and it  
is not impossible that some modern      
philosophical priests1 like their ,pagan
 prototypes1 secretly despise the       
religion they openly profess4 ,avarice1 
and lust of power1 are potent           
underminers of human virtue4 ,the mighty
 genius of ,bacon was not proof against 
then1 and he who deserves to occupy a   
place among 'the wisest and greatest'   
has been 'damned to eternal fame' as the
 'meanest of mankind4'  ,nor are avarice
 and lust of power the only base        
passions under the influence of which   
men1 great in intellect1 have given the 
lie to their own convictions1 by calling
 that religion which they knew to be    
rank superstition4 ,fear of punishment  
for writing truth is the grand cause why
 their books contain so little of it4   
,if ,bacon had openly treated           
,christianity as mere superstition1 will

 any one say that his life would have   
been worth twenty-four hours' purchase8 
,there is an old story about a certain  
lady who said to her physician1         
',doctor1 what is your religion8' ,my   
religion1 madame1 replied the ,doctor1  
'is the religion of all sensible men4'  
',what kind of religion is that8' said  
the lady4 ',the religion1 madame1' quoth
 the ,doctor1 'that no sensible man will
 tell4'  ,this doctor may be given as a 
type of the class of shrewd people who  
despise superstition1 but will say      
nothing about it1 lest by so doing they 
give a shock to prejudice1 and thus put 
in peril certain professional or other  
emoluments4 ,too sensible to be pious1  
and too cautious to be honest1 they must
 be extremely well paid ere they will   
incur the risk attendant upon a         
confession of anti-superstitious faith4 
,animated by a vile spirit of           
accommodation1 their whole sum of       
practical wisdom can be told in four    
words--,,be ,,silent ,,and ,,safe4 ,they

 are amazed at the 'folly' of these who 
make sacrifices at the shrine of        
sincerity2 and while sagacious enough to
 perceive that superstition is a clumsy 
political contrivance1 are not wanting  
in the prudence which dictates at least 
a seeming conformity to prevailing      
prejudices4  ,none have done more to    
perpetrate error than these time-serving
 'men of the world1' for instead of     
boldly attacking it1 they preserve a    
prudent silence which bigots do not fail
 to interpret as consent4 ,mosheim says1
 #dg3a ',the simplicity and ignorance of
 the generality in those times 7fifth   
century7 furnished the most favourable  
occasion for the exercise of fraud2 and 
the impudence of impostors1 in          
contriving false miracles1 was artfully 
proportioned to the credulity of the    
vulgar1 while the sagacious and the     
wise1 who perceived these cheats1 were  
overawed into silence by the dangers    
that threatened their lives and         
fortunes1 if they should expose the     

artifice4 ,thus1' continues this author1
 'does it generally happen1 when danger 
attends the discovery and the profession
 of truth1 the prudent are silent1 the  
multitude believe1 and impostors        
triumph4'  ,beausobre1 too1 in his      
learned account of ,manicheism reads a  
severe lesson to those who1 under the   
influence of such passions as fear and  
avarice1 will do nothing to check the   
march of superstition1 or relieve their 
less 'sensible1' but more honest1       
fellow-creatures from the weight of its 
fetters4 ,after alluding to an epistle  
written by that 'demi-philosopher1'     
,synesius1 when offered by the          
,patriarch the ,bishopric of ,ptolemais1
 #dh3a ,beausobre says1 ',we see in the 
history that ,i have related a kind of  
hypocrisy1 which1 perhaps1 has been far 
too common in all times4 ,it is that of 
ecclesiastics1 who not only do not say  
what they think1 but the reverse of what
 they think4 ,philosophers in their     
closet1 when out of them they are       

content with fables1 though they know   
well they are fables4 ,they do more2    
they deliver to the executioner the     
excellent men who have said it4 ,how    
many ,atheists and profane persons have 
brought holy men to the stake under the 
pretext of heresy8 ,every day1          
hypocrites consecrate the host and cause
 it to be adored1 although firmly       
convinced as ,i am that it is nothing   
more than a piece of bread4'  ,whatever 
may be urged in defence of such         
execrable duplicity1 there can be no    
question as to its anti-progressive     
tendency4 ,the majority of men are      
fools1 and if such 'sensible'           
politicians as our ,doctor and the      
double doctrinising ecclesiastics1 for  
whose portraits we are indebted to      
,mosheim and ,beausobre1 shall have the 
teaching of them1 fools they are sure to
 remain4 ,men who dare not be 'mentally 
faithful' to themselves may obstruct1   
but cannot advance1 the interests of    
truth4 ,in legislation1 in law1 in all  

the relations of life1 we want honesty  
not piety4 ,there is plenty of piety1   
and to spare1 but of honesty--sterling1 
bold1 uncompromising honesty--even the  
best regulated societies can boast a    
very small stock4 ,the men best         
qualified to raise the veil under which 
truth lies concealed from vulgar gaze1  
are precisely the men who fear to do it4
 ,oh1 shame upon ye self-styled         
philosophers1 who in your closets laugh 
at 'our holy religion1' and in your     
churches do it reverence4 ,were your    
bosoms warmed by one spark of generous  
wisdom1 silence on the question of      
religion would be broken1 the multitude 
cease to believe1 and imposters to      
triumph4                ,london3        
,printed by ,edward ,truelove1 #bdj1    
,strand4      ,,endnotes   #d3a #beth   
,november1 #ahde4  #d3b ,vide ',times'  
,commissioner's ,letter on the          
,condition of ,ireland1 ,november #bh1  
#ahde4  #h3a ',essay on ,providence and 
a ,future ,state4'  #i3a ,essay of the  

,academical or ,sceptical ,philosophy4  
#i3b ,critical remarks on ,lord         
,brougham's ',lives of ,men of ,letters 
and ,science1 who flourished in the time
 of ,george ,,iii4'--,the ,times1       
,wednesday1 ,october #a1 #ahde4  #aj3a  
,history of ,american ,savages4  #aa3a  
,appendix the ,second to ',plutarchus   
and ,theophrastus on ,superstition4'    
#aa3b ,philosophy of ,history4  #ab3a   
,see a ,notice of ,lord ,brougham's     
,political ,philosophy1 in the number   
for ,april1 #ahde4  #ae3a ',apology for 
the ,bible1' page #acc4  #ae3b          
,unusquisque vestrum non cogitat prius  
se debere ,deos nosse quam colere4      
#bj3a ,see a curious ',essay on         
,nature1' ,printed for ,badcock and     
,co41 #b1 ,queen's ,head ,passage1      
,paternoster ,row4 #ahjg4  #bc3a        
,elements of ,materialism1 chapter #a4  
#bd3a ,discussion on the ,existence of  
,god1 between ,origen ,bachelor and     
,robert ,dale ,owen4  #bi3a ,hume's     
,treastise on ,human ,nature4  #bi3b    

,this sexing is a stock receipt for     
mystification4--,colonel ,thompson4     
#cj3a ,the ,rev4 ,j4,k4 ,smith4  #ca3a  
',an ,address on ,cerebral ,physiology  
and ,materialism1' delivered to the     
,phrenological ,association ,in ,london1
 ,june #bj1 #ahdb4  #cc3a ,principia    
,mathematica1 p4 #ebh1 ,lond4 edit41    
#agbj4  #ch3a ,lessing4  #db3a ,lecture 
by the ,rev4 ,hugh ,m',neil1 ,minister  
of ,st4 ,jude's ,church1 ,liverpool1    
delivered about seven years since1 in   
presence of some #djj of the ,irish     
,protestant ,clergy4  #db3b ,the        
necessary existence of ,deity1 by       
,william ,gillespie4  #db3c ,page #ajf  
of a ,discussion on the ,existence of   
,god1 between ,origen ,batchelor and    
,r4,d4 ,owen4  #dc3a ,quoted by ,dr4    
,samuel ,clarke1 in his introduction to 
the ,scripture ,doctrine of the         
,trinity4  #dg3a ,ecclesiastical        
,history1 vol4 ii1 page #aa4  #dh3a     
,manicheisme1 tome ii1 p4 #efh4