,,production ,,notes3 ,an ,apology for ,atheism by ,charles ,southwell 7#ahad-ahfj7 ,first published anonymously in #ahdf ,,an ,,apology ,,for ,,atheism3 ,,addressed ,,to ,,religious ,,investigators ,,of ,,every ,,denomination ,,by ,,one ,,of ,,its ,,apostles4 ,not one of you reflects1 that you ought know your ,gods before you worship them4 ,,london3 ,j4 ,,watson1 #e1 ,,paul',s ,,alley1 ,,paternoster ,,row4 ,,and ,,all ,,booksellers4 #ahdf ,,an ,,apology ,,for ,,atheism ,it would be absurd to doubt that religion has an important bearing on all the relations and conditions of life4 ,the connexion between religions faith and political practice is1 in truth1 far closer than is generally thought4 ,public opinion has not 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 and hold some away among us1 many honest and energetic assertors of 'the rights of man1' who have to learn that a people in the fetters of superstition1 can never achieve political freedom4 ,many of these reformers admit the vast1 the incalculable influence of ,mahommedanism 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 remarked1 that 'throw what we would into the political cauldron1 out it came in an ecclesiastical shape'4 ,if the newspaper report may be relied on1 there was much laughing among the hearers of those words1 the deep meaning of which 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 ',third ,estate' are constantly declaring their disinclination for religious controversy1 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 significant as fact can be1 of that connection between religion and politics the author thinks has been far too little regarded4 ,it is quite possible the editors of newspapers have weighty reasons for their repugnance to agitate the much vexed question of religion1 but it seems they cannot help doing so4 ,in a leading article of this day's ,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 ,the author of this ,apology has no spite or ill-will towards ,roman ,catholics1 though opposed to their religion1 and a willing subscriber to the opinion of ,romanism in ,ireland1 expressed by the ,post1 because convinced of its truth4 ,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 ,romanism1 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 like the dog 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' #e3a and then make an effort against it4 ,notwithstanding the purely ,christian education of which they are taught to boast1 nothing can exceed the superstitious recklessness displayed in their daily conduct4 ,the ,globe of ,thursday1 ,october #cjth1 #ahde1 contains an article on the damage sustained by the potato crops here and in ,ireland1 full of matter calculated to enlighten our first rate reformers1 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 rights3 one paragraph is so peculiarly significant of the miserable condition to which ,romanism and ,protestantism have reduced a peasantry1 said to be 'the finest in the world1' that we here subjoin it-- ',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 most 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 epidemy1 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 purposes 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 counteracting or remedial applications4 ,sure the ,almighty sent the potato-plague1 and we must bear it as well as we can6 is the remark of many2 while1 in other places1 the copious sprinklings of holy water on the potato gardens1 and on the produce1 as it lies upon the surface1 are more depended on for disinfecting the potatoes than the suggestions of science1 which require the application of patient industry4' ,daniel ,o',connell may continue to boast about ,irish morale and ,irish intellect--the handsome women1 and stalwart men of his 'beloved country2' but no sensible persons will pay 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 remarkable1 and indolence so abominable1 as characterize the peasantry of ,ireland1 are results of their religious education4 ,does any one suppose the religion of that peasantry has little1 if anything1 to do with their political condition2 or can it be believed they will be fit for1 much less achieve political emancipation1 while priests1 and priests alone1 are their instructors8 ,we may rely upon it1 that intellectual freedom is the natural and necessary precursor of political freedom4 ,education1 said ,lord ,brougham1 makes men easy to lead1 but difficult to drive2 easy to govern1 but impossible to enslave4 ,the ,irish peasantry clamour for ',repeal1' never considering that did they get it1 no essential change would be made in their social1 moral1 or to say all in one word1 political condition2 they would still be the tool of ,o',connell and other unprincipled political mountebanks--themselves the tool of priests4 ,great has been the outcry raised against the 'godless colleges1 that ,sir ,robert ,peel had the courageous good sense to inflict on ,ireland4 ,protestant as well as ,romanist priests are terribly alarmed lest those 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 religion formed no part4 ,their fury1 like 'empty space1' is boundless4 ,they cannot endure the thought that our ministers should so far play the game of 'infidelity' as to take from them the delightful task of teaching ,ireland's young ideas '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 morals1' ,neither ministerial allurements1 nor ministerial threats can subdue the cantankerous spirit of these bigots4 ,they are all but frantic1 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' ,the best guarantee for national morality is to be found in national intelligence2 nor need any one feel alarmed at the progress of principles and measures inimical to faith in either ,romanism or ,protestantism4 ,let the people of ,ireland be properly employed1 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 facts1 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' ,the sage who writes 'leaders' for the ,morning ,herald1 is of opinion that ,ireland would indeed be 'great1 glorious1 and free1' if its ,roman ,catholic people were to cease all efforts for ,repeal1 and turn good ,protestants4 ,but the ,herald does greatly err not knowing human nature and the source of ,irish evils4 ,it is not by substituting ,protestantism for ,romanism that those evils are to be cured4 ,were every ,romanist in ,ireland at once to turn 'good ,protestant1' their political emancipation would be far off as ever4 ,protestantism everywhere1 like ,romanism everywhere1 is 'a political system1 and a wicked political system1 for it regards only the exercise of power1 and neglects utterly the duty of improvement4' ,religion is the curse of ,ireland4 ,to the rival churches of that country may be traced nearly all the oppressions suffered by its people1 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 it2 for1 as truly said by one of our most admired poets-- ,tis man's base grovelling nature makes the priest1 ,who always rides a superstitious beast4 ,and he is a poor politician who expects to see political liberty achieved or enjoyed by nations made up of 'base1 grovelling' specimens of human nature4 ,what then can be thought of the first-rate reformers 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 own country frequently remind us that its laws have a religious sanction2 nay 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 make a market of delusion1 and 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 religion would never consent to remain in bondage4 ,hence the pains taken by piety-mongers 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 character1 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 mark 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 hand writing 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 devil4 ,so far as antagonism to progression goes1 there is no sensible difference between the hierarchies of ,rome or of ,england1 or of ,constantinople4 ,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' ,nor is it found that non-established priesthoods are much 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 ,no doubt the 'voluntary principle' is just--only brazen faced impostors will say it is right to tax a man for the support of those who promulgate doctrines abhorrent to his feelings and an insult to his judgment4 ,still1 the fact is incontestable1 that ,dissenting ,priests are1 for the most part1 opposed to the extension of political rights1 or1 what is equal1 that' knowledge which would infallibly secure them4 ,the ,methodist preacher1 who has the foolish effrontery to tell his congregation 'the flesh lusteth always contrary to the spirit2 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 republicanism3 but the author is extremely suspicious of such persons1 and would not on any account place his liberty in their keeping4 ,he has little faith in political fanaticism1 especially when in alliance with the frightful doctrines enunciated from conventicle pulpits1 and has no hesitation in saying that ,anti-,state ,church ,associations do not touch the root of all political evils4 ,their usefulness is great1 because they give currency to a sound principle1 but that principle1 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 ,priests of all religion are the same1 said ,dryden--the religions they teach are false1 and in their tendency anti-progressive1 say ,atheists1 who put no trust in doctrine which involves or assumes supernatural existence4 ,believing that supernaturalism reduced to 'system' cannot be other than 'wickedly political1' the ,atheist1 truly so called1 sees no hope for 'slave classes1' apart from a general diffusion of anti-religious ideas4 ,according to his theory1 religion is in part a cunningly and in part a stupidly devised fable4 ,he cannot reconcile the wisdom of theologians with undoubted facts1 and though willing to admit that some 'modes of faith' are less absurd than others1 is convinced they are all essentially alike1 because all fundamentally erroneous4 ,rousseau said 'philosophy can do nothing that religion cannot do better1 and religion can do many things which philosophy cannot do at all4' ,but ,atheists believe religion the most formidable evil with which progressors have to cope1 and see in philosophy that mighty agent in the work of improvement so beautifully described by ,curran as the irresistible genius of universal emancipation4 ,speculative thinkers of so decidedly irreligious 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 animal1 produced by our common parent 'in a moment of madness4' ,other grave ,christian writers1 though horrified at ,atheism--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 ,atheism and ,atheists1 may fairly claim to be considered most mysterious2 for1 while lavishing on deniers of their ,gods every kind of sharp invective and opprobrious epithet1 they cannot assure themselves the 'monsters' did1 or do actually exist4 ,with characteristic humour1 ,david ,hume observed ',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' #aj3a ,the same ,hume who thus pleasantly rebuked 'most religious philosophers1' was himself a true ,atheist4 ,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 religionists1 and little calculated to advance their cause4 ,many ,deists have been called ,atheists3 among others ,robert ,owen and ,richard ,carlile1 both of whom professed belief in something superior to nature1 something acting upon and regulating matter1 though not itself material4 #aa3a ,this something they named power4 ,but ,hume has shown we may search 'in vain for an idea of power or necessary connection in all the sources from which we would suppose it to be derived4 #aa3b ,owen1 ,carlile1 and other ,atheists1 falsely so called1 supposed power the only entity worthy of deification4 ,they dignified it with such appellations as 'internal or external cause of all existence1' and ascribed to it intelligence1 with such other honourable attributes as are usually ascribed to 'deified1 error4' ,but ,hume astonished religious philosophers by declaring that1 '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 #aa3c ,nor did ,hume affect to consider ,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 ,and without doubt it was hostility eminently calculated to exhaust their stock of patience1 because eminently calculated to damage their religion1 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' #ab3a ,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 all religion is incompatible with talents and virtues of the highest order2 for1 in the person of ,david ,hume1 the world saw absolute ,atheism co-existent with genius1 learning1 and moral excellence1 rarely1 if ever1 surpassed4 ,the unpopularity of that creed it would be vain to deny4 ,a vast majority of mankind associate with the idea of disbelief in their ,gods every thing stupid1 monstrous1 absurd1 and atrocious4 ,absolute ,atheism is thought by them the inseparable ally of most shocking wickedness1 involving as it manifestly does that 'blasphemy against the ,holy ,ghost' 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 strong religious 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 believers in ,god4 ,the ,jesuit ,lafiteau1 in a ,preface to his ',histoire des ,sauvages ,americanes1' #ac3a endeavours to prove that only ,atheists will dare assert that ,god created the ,americans4 ,scarcely 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 though1 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' #ac3b ,voltaire relates1 in the eighteenth chapter of his ',philosophie de ,l',histoire1' #ac3c 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 philosophers3 he treated ,confucius as ,atheist1 because that sage had said '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 ,these persons1 no doubt1 supposed they were 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 it1 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 ,china1 by ,voltaire and many others considered the most ancient on earth1 was a society of ,atheists4 ,so difficult it is for men inflamed by religious prejudices1 interests1 and animosities to keep clear of sophisms1 which can impose on none but themselves4 ,many ,atheists 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 candour be allowed1 in itself1 a sufficient reason for their rejection4 ,the fact of a creed being unpopular is no proof it is false4 ,the argument from general consent is at best a suspicious one1 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 bigotted to such opinions concerning religion as have not been drawn in from the sucking-bottles1 or 'hatched within the narrow fences of their own conceit4' ,no prudent searcher after truth will accept an opinion because it is the current one1 but rather view it with distrust for that very reason4 ,the genius of him who said1 in our journey to the other world the common road is the safest1 was cowardly as deceptive1 and therefore opposed to sound philosophy4 ,like horses yoked to a team1 'one's nose in t'others tail1' is a mode of journeying anywhere the opposite of dignified1 pleasant1 or improving4 ,they who are enamoured of 'the common road1' unless handsomely paid for journeying thereon1 must be slavish in feeling1 and willing submitters to every indignity sanctioned by custom1 that potent enemy of truth1 which from time immemorial has been 'the law of fools4' ,every day experience demonstrates the fallibility of majorities4 ,it palpably exhibits1 too1 the danger as well as the folly of presuming the unpopularity of certain speculative opinions an evidence of their falsity4 ,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 #ae3a 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 ,atheism as a formidable argument against that much misunderstood creed4 ,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 are for the most part grossly absurd and consequently the reverse of true4 ,if the masses of all nations are ignorant1 intolerant1 suspicions1 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 done2 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 ,atheism is false1 and must be demoralising in its influence because the majority of mankind declare it so4 ,the ,author of this ,apology does not desire it may be inferred from the foregoing remarks1 that horror of ,atheism1 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 ,atheism by denouncing its principles1 and imputing all manner of wickedness to its defenders4 ,it must indeed be admitted by the really enlightened of every name1 that their conduct in this particular amply justifies pious ,matthew ,henry's confessions1 that 'of all the christian graces1 zeal is most apt to turn sour4' ,one ,john ,ryland1 ,a4,m4 of ,northampton1 published a ',preceptor1 or ,general ,repository of useful information1 very necessary for the various ages and departments of life' 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 ,god2' 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 which among other hard names 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 which moreover he is cursed in the following hearty terms3 ',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' ,dr4 ,balguy in the course of a ,treatise which the 'liberal' author of a ,sketch of the ,denominations of the ,christian ,world1 'considered an excellent antidote against atheistical tenets1' expresses himself in the following manner3 ',of all the false opinions which ever infested the mind of man1 nothing can possibly equal that of atheism1 which is such a monstrous contradiction of all evidence1 to all the powers of the understanding and the dictates of common sense1 that it may well be questioned whether any man can really fall into it by a deliberate use of his judgment4 ,all nature so clearly points out1 and so clearly proclaims a ,creator of infinite power1 wisdom1 and goodness1 that whoever hears not its voice and sees not its proofs may well be thought wilfully deaf and obstinately blind4' ,these are notable specimens of zeal turned sour4 ,now1 when it is considered that such writings are carefully put into popular hands1 and writings of an irreligious character as carefully kept out of them1 astonishment at human intolerance must cease4 ,so far1 indeed1 from wondering that the 'giddy multitude' shrink aghast from ,atheists we shall conceive it little short of miraculous1 that they do not fall upon and tear them to pieces4 ,beattie1 another ,christian doctor1 towards the close of his celebrated ,essay on the ,immutability of ,truth1 denounces every sincere outspoken unbeliever as a 'murderer of human souls1' and it being obvious that the murderer of a single soul must to the 'enlightened' majority of our people appear an act infinitely more horrible than the butchery of many bodies1 it really does at first view seem 'passing strange' that body murderers are almost invariably hanged1 whilst they who murder 'souls1' if punished at all1 usually escape with some harmless abuse and a year or two's imprisonment4 ,even the 'tolerant' ,richard ,watson1 ,lord ,bishop of ,llandaff1 wrote with contemptuous bitterness of ',atheistical madmen1' and in his ,apology for the ,bible1 assured ,deistical ,thomas ,paine1 ,deism was so much better than ,atheism1 he 7,bishop ,watson7 meant 'not to say anything to its discredit4' ,the ,rev4 ,mr4 ,ward1 whose ',ideal of a ,christian ,church' spread such consternation in the anti-popish camp1 describes his own hatred of ,protestantism as 'fierce and burning4' ,nothing can go beyond that--it is the ne plus ultra of bigotry1 and just such hatred is displayed towards ,atheists by at least nine-tenths of their opponents4 ,strange to say1 in ,christians1 in the followers of him who is thought to have recommended1 by act and word1 unlimited charity1 who is thought to have commanded that we judge not1 that we be sat judged2 the ,atheist finds his most active foe1 his bitterest and least scrupulous maligner4 ,to exaggerate their bigotry would be difficult1 for whether sage or simple1 learned or unlearned1 priests or priest-led1 they regularly practise the denunciation of ,atheists in language foul as it is false4 ,they call them 'traitors to human kind1' yea 'murderers of the human soul1' and unless hypocrites1 or much better than their sentiments1 would rather see them swing upon the gibbet than murderers of the body1 especially if like ,john ,tawell1 'promoters of religion and ,christian ,missions4' ,robert ,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 and 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 or rather attempting to regulate opinion by act of parliament3 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 the ,author of this ,apology 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 ,atheists 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 the utter extermination of ,atheists a religious duty4 ,that our street and field preaching ,christians1 with very few exceptions1 heartily sympathise with the fire and faggot sentiments of ,robert ,hall1 is well known2 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 forsakes 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 'formerly1 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 ,hence1 arguing with them is sheer waste of brains and leisure--a casting of pearls before swine4 ,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 ,robert ,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 say1 duped as they are1 they cannot but think unbelief highly criminal1 and when practicable1 or convenient1 deal with it as such4 ,atheists would1 be 'astonished with a great astonishment' if they did not4 ,their crafty teachers adjure them to do so 'on peril of their souls2' and if1 as ,mr4 ,jay1 of ,bath1 said in one of his best sermons1 'the readiest way in the world to thin heaven1 and replenish the regions of hell1 is to call in the spirit of bigotry1' the ,author of this ,apology would not for all the treasures of ,india stand in the shoes of these men1 whose whole time and energies are employed in generating and perpetuating that detestable spirit4 ,but when your ,rylands1 and ,balguys and ,beatties1 and ,watsons and ,halls make a merit of abusing those who cannot believe as they believe1 what can be hoped or expected from the tribe of illiterate canters1 who 'go about ,mawworming8' ,it is nevertheless true1 that ,atheists 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 belief1 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 eternity1 without any emanation of his goodness manifested in the creation of sensitive beings8 or if it be contended that there was an eternal creation 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' #bj3a ,these questions imply what1 to the author of this ,apology1 appears an ample justification of ,atheism4 ,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 imagine a ,being with attributes so strange1 anomalous1 and contradictory8 ,to that question reason prompts an answer in the negative--,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' #bj3b ,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 ,to the ,author of this ,apology it seems certain1 a ,god whose being is not as our being1 whose thoughts are not as our thoughts1 and whose ways are not as our ways1 is neither more nor less than the merest figment of ill-regulated imagination4 ,he is sure a ,being1 above nature1 can only be conceived of by itself2 it being obviously true that the natural cannot attain to the supernatural4 ,the ,christian1 equally with the ,heathen1 is open to the reproach of worshipping he knows not what4 ,yes1 to idol-hating1 enlightened ,christians1 may fairly be applied the severe sarcasm ,minutius ,felix so triumphantly levelled at idol-loving 'benighted ,heathens4' ,will any one say the ,christian absolutely knows more about ,jehovah than the ,heathen did about ,jupiter8 ,the ,author believes 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 effort1 either of sense or imagination4 ,under cover1 then1 of what reason ,christians can escape the imputation of pretending to adore what they have no conception of1 the ,author of this ,apology is unable to divine4 ,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 ,god2 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's hearts that he might destroy them3 he authorised acts at which human nature shudders1 and of which it is ashamed3 yet to love1 respect1 yea1 reverence ,him1 we are commanded by the self-styled 'stewards of his mysteries1' on peril of our 'immortal souls4' ,verily1 these pious anathematisers ask 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 imagined creator of heaven and earth 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 religion4 ,but the ,bible furnishes no such information concerning ,jehovah4 ,on the contrary1 he is their pronounced 'past finding out1' incomprehensible1 and the like4 ',canst thou1 by searching1 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 about ,gods4 ,now1 a ,revelation from ,god1 at least so thinks the ,author of this ,apology1 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 questions1 who1 what1 or where 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 anywhere3 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 ,atheists object4 ,they think it the root of superstition1 that greatest of all plagues1 by which poor humanity is afflicted4 ,are they to blame for thus thinking8 ,the ,christian has no mercy on the superstition of the ,heathen2 and should scorn to complain when the bitter chalice is returned to his own lips4 ,atheists 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 conceive1 none ought to worship1 or even assert the existence of4 ,who worships a something of which he knows nothing1 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 which1 ,atheists are called 'murderers of the human soul1' 'blasphemers1' and other foolish names1 too numerous to mention4 ,it would be well for all parties1 if those who raise against ,atheists 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 belief1 and1 therefore1 ,atheists who do not believe in ,god1 cannot logically or justly be said to blaspheme him4 ,the blasphemer1 properly so called1 is he who imagines ,deity1 and ascribes to the idol of his own brain1 all manner of folly1 contradiction1 inconsistency1 and wickedness4 ,yes1 the blasphemer is he who invents a monster and calls it ,god2 while to reject belief therein1 is an act both reasonable and virtuous4 ,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 down before1 'thingless names4' ,the 'masses' of every nation erect 'thingless names' into substantial realities1 and woe to those1 who follow not the insane example4 ,the consequences--the fatal consequences--are everywhere apparent4 ,in our own country1 one consequence is social disunion on the grandest possible scale4 ,society is split up into an almost infinite variety of sects1 whose members imagine themselves patented to think truth1 and never to be wrong in the enunciation of it4 ,this if no idle or frivolous charge1 as the ,author of this ,apology can easily show4 ,before him is ,sanders' ,news ,letter and ,daily ,advertiser of ,feb4 #ah1 #ahde1 which1 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 it1 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 ,rome 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 bondage1 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 the reader has seen exactly that style of hatred to ,protestantism is avowed by ,mr4 ,ward4 ,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 ,papists or ,roman ,catholics 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 man1 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 present2 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 name itself is spurned at with indignation by the greater half1 at least1 of the inhabitants of the ,united ,kingdom4 ,the judgment of the whole indifferent world--the common sense of humanity--agrees with the judgment of the ,church of ,rome1 and with the sense of her #aej1jjj1jjj of children1 to dispossess you 7,puseyites7 of this name4 ,the ,church of ,england1 who has denied her mother1 is rightly without a sister4 ,she has chosen to break the bonds of unity and obedience2 let her therefore stand before the judgment-seat of ,god and of man4 ,again1 supposing the spirit of the ,camden ,society ultimately to prevail over its ,anglican adversaries2 supposing you do one day get every old thing back again2 copes1 letters1 roodlofts1 candlesticks1 and the abbey lands into the bargain1 what will it all be but an empty pageant1 like the ,tournament of ,eglington ,castle1 separated from the reality of ,catholic truth and unity1 by the abyss of three hundred years of schism8 ,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 ages8 ,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 ,once 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' ,our ,anti-,romish priests would have us think the more and more we have of-faith1 the more and more we have of happiness4 ,faith they exalt far1 very far1 above hope or even charity4 ',oh ,lord1 increase our faith1' is the text on which they love to enlarge4 ,faith is their panacea for all human ills3 but their faith is worse than useless if it be not true faith4 ,and how can we so test conflicting faiths as to distinguish the true from the false8 ,aye1 there's the rub6 ,undoubtedly faith is to religion what the root is to the tree2 and men in search of 'saving faith' are naturally anxious to find it4 ,no one desires to be eternally punished2 and therefore1 if any one embrace a false faith it is because he makes the mistake of supposing it the true one4 ,the three sets of ,christians just adverted to1 may all be equally sincere1 but cannot all have the true faith4 ,protestant principles 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 ,montalambert1 may be true2 but they cannot all be true4 ,it is impossible to reconcile that orthodox ,papists' 'main point'1 i4e4 the infallability 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 tenderness2 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 can ,i say4 ,the ,infallibility of ,popes is the doctrine insisted upon by ,count ,de ,montalambert as essential--as doctrine1 the smallest deviation from which is damnable heresy4 ,believe and admit ',antichrist' is not ,antichrist1 but ,god's accredited vicegerent 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 ,god will pour out the vials of his wrath1 as if the ',great ,perhaps1' ,who sees with equal eye1 as ,god of all1 ,a hero perish1 or a sparrow fall1 could be angry with creatures of his own creation for thinking what they cannot help thinking1 and being what they cannot help being4 ,every one has heard of the ,predestinarian1 who1 having talked much of his ,god1 was asked by a bystander to speak worse of the ,devil if he could2 but comparatively few persons feel the full force of that question1 or are prepared to admit ,god-worshippers in general1 picture their ,deities as if they were demons4 ',recognise1' exclaims the ,roman ,catholic ,priest1 'the main point of our holy apostolic religion1 or ,god will judge and eternally punish you4' ,the priests of nearly all religional denominations ascribe to ,deity the low grovelling vindictive 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-,catholic 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 do religionists ,grunt and groan1 ,and curse all systems but their own2 ,never scrupling to assure the advocates of those systems a hell is waiting to receive them4 ,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 ,dan1 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 divinity2 some in his body1 some not at all4 ,some by hell understand the place of the damned1 some limbus partum1 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 created4 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' #bg3a ,the 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 heaven1 and whomsoever they loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven4 ,they remorselessly cobble the true faith1 without which to their 'sole exclusive heaven1' none can be admitted2 ,as if religion were intended1 ,for nothing else but to be mended1 and rarely seem so happy as when promising eternal misery to those who reject their chimeras4 ,even ,dissenting ministers1 from whom better things might be expected1 have been heard to declare at public meetings1 called by themselves for the purpose of sympathising with1 and supporting one of themselves who was suffering for 'conscience sake1' that when they spoke of liberty to express opinions1 they meant such liberty for religionists1 not irreligionists4 ,when learned and 'liberal' ,dissenters gratuitously confess this species of faith1 none have a right to be surprised that the 'still small voice of truth' should be drowned amid the clamour of fanaticism1 or that ,atheists should be so recklessly villified4 ,but wisdom1 we read1 is justified of her children2 and to the wise of every nation the ,atheist confidently appeals4 ,he rejects religion1 because 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 unknown4' ,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 punishments3 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 and with ,christians as redeemer of the world4' ,lord ,brougham as 'the subject of the science called ,theology3' a science he defines as 'the knowledge and attributes of the unknown2' 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 ,atheist 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' ,idolisers of 'thingless names1' they set at naught the admirable dictum of ,locke1 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 unknowability all ,gods are alike4 ,they are all supernatural2 and the merely natural cannot attach rational ideas to names assumed to stand for something above nature4 ,it is easy to talk about seeing the ,creator in creation1 looking through nature up to nature's ,god1 and the like1 but very difficult to have any idea whatever of a ,god without body1 parts1 or passions2 that is to say1 the ,god set forth in one of the ,church of ,england's ,thirty-,nine ,articles4 ,no such ,god can be believed to exist by reasoners who rigidly abide by ,john ,locke's rule of philosophising1 and if it be urged that he1 the author of the rule1 was a ,theist and a ,christian--our answer is1 that in such case1 like many other philosophers1 he practically gave the lie to his own best precept4 ,books have been written to exhibit the difficulties of 7what priests choose to call7 ,infidelity2 and without doubt unbelief has its difficulties4 ,but 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 ,atheist1 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 ,atheist labours to convince mankind they are not warranted by the general course of ,nature in assigning to it a ,cause1 inasmuch as it is more in accordance with experience to suppose ,nature the uncaused cause1 than to imagine1 as religionists 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 ,atheists of 'wilful blindness1' and 'obstinate deafness1' for not choosing so unphilosophic a mode of explaining universal mystery4 ,call upon them to define their 'all-creative ,deity1' and they know not what to answer4 ,ask them who1 what1 or where ,he is1 and at once you have them on the hip2 at once you spy their utter ignorance1 and reduce them to a condition very similar to that of ,master ,abraham ,slender1 when with stammering lips he 'sings small like a woman4' ,to assume everything they are always ready2 but to prove anything concerning their ,immense ,supernatural1 they are never prepared4 ,regularly drilled to argue in a circle1 they foolishly imagine everybody else should do the same1 and marvel at the man who rigidly adheres to just rules of philosophising and considers experience of natural derivation a far safer guide than their crude1 undigested1 extravagant1 contradictory notions about the confessedly unknown4 ,the rule of philosophising just adverted to--that rule which forbids us1 in any case1 to choose 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 unequal but still admirable work by ,dr4 ,knowlton1 a well-known ,american writer1 this question of comparative difficulty is well handled1 and the ,author of this ,apology conceives most satisfactorily exhausted4 ',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 ,designer2 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 not2 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 if admitted1 so far from diminishing would only increase a difficulty1 which at best 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' #ca3a ,these are 'strong reasons' for ,atheism--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 so1 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 philosophising1 which have only their reasonableness to recommend them4 ,they profess ability to account for nature1 and are of course exceedingly 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 by 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 unauthorised1 religious philosophers have no right to expect ,atheists to abandon their ,atheism4 ,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 and superior to all other truths4 ,our faith1 say they1 if not agreeable to mere reason1 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 judge1 whose decrees have hitherto been unfavourable to religion4 ,its professors 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 fact1 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 #cb3a ,now1 the reader has seen that the hypothesis of 'an intelligent cause of things' involves difficulties1 greater1 infinitely greater than the one difficulty1 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 ,atheists '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 a contradiction1 and all contradiction involves impossibility4 ,but 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 something1 been denied or even treated as doubtful4 ,here then ,atheists1 ,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 nothing1 which no human being can1 as nothing amounts to nothing and of what amounts to nothing no one can have an idea4 ,to define the word something by any other word1 would be labour in vain4 ,there is no other word in any language whose meaning is better understood1 and they who do not under stand 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 true2 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 only useful1 when they are the signs 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 ,atheist calls it matter4 ,other persons may choose to call it other names2 let them4 ,he chooses to call it this one and no other4 ,there ever has been something4 ,here again1 is a point of unity4 ,all are equally assured there ever has been something4 ,something is1 something must always have been1 cry the religions1 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 ,atheists say1 something ever was1 which something is matter4 ,theists say1 something has been from all eternity1 which something is not matter1 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 second1 that of a 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 remarked4 ,atheists agree with ,theists1 that something ever has been2 but the point of difference lies here4 ,the ,atheist 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 is1 and when pushed for an account of what he means by ,god1 he coolly answers1 a ,being1 having nothing in common with anything1 who1 nevertheless1 by his ,almighty will created everything4 ,it may without injustice be affirmed1 that the sincerest and strongest believers in this mysterious ,deity1 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 can be so fully and perfectly satisfied there is a ,god in heaven as the ,author of this ,apology cannot but be of his own existence on earth4 ,no man's faith in the imaginary 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 certain1 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 they have no more1 and we ought to have no more1 doubt about ,god's existence than our own4 ,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 ,god1' no need of arguments a priori or a posteriori to establish that existence4 ,saint ,john was right2 ',no man hath seen ,god at any time1' to which 'open confession' he might truly have added1 'none ever will1' for the unreal is always unseeable4 ,yet have 'mystery men' with shameless and most insolent pertinacity asserted the existence of ,god while denying the existence of matter4 ,define your terms1 said ,locke4 ,atheists do so1 and where necessary insist upon others following the philosophic example4 ,on this account they are 'ugly customers' to ,priests1 who1 with exceptions1 much dislike being called upon to explain their idealess language4 ,ask one to define the word ,god and you stagger him4 ,if he do not fly into a passion deem yourself fortunate1 but as to an intelligible definition1 look for nothing of the sort4 ,he can't furnish such definition however disposed to do so4 ,the incomprehensible is not to be defined4 ,it is difficult to give an intelligible account of an ',immense ,being' confessedly mysterious1 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 the ,author of this ,apology1 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 ,knowledge of1 and reverence for an object1 imply1 the power of conceiving that object2 but who is able to conceive a ,god without body1 parts1 or passions8 ,in this ,christian country 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 bodily1 in other words1 that our ,redeemer and our ,creator2 though two persons are 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 blood 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 ,proselytes are apt to misunderstand1 and make sad mistakes about1 that doctrine4 ,two cases are cited by ,hume in his ',essay of the ,natural ,history of ,religion1' which he announces as 'pleasant stories1 though somewhat profane4' ,according to one1 a ,priest gave inadvertently1 instead of the sacrament1 a counter1 which had by accident fallen among the holy wafers4 ,the communicant waited patiently for some time1 expecting that it would dissolve on his tongue1 but finding that it still remained entire1 he took it off4 ,i hope1 said he1 to the ,priest1 you have not made a mistake2 ,i hope you have not given me ,god the ,father1 he is so hard and tough that there is no swallowing him4 ,the other story is thus related4 ,a famous ,general1 at that time in the ,muscovite ,service1 having come to ,paris for the recovery of his wounds1 brought along with him a young ,turk whom he had taken prisoner4 ,some of the doctors of the ,sorbonne 7who are altogether as positive as the dervises of ,constantinople7 thinking it a pity that the poor ,turk should be damned for want of instruction1 solicited ,mustapha very hard to turn ,christian1 and promised him for encouragement1 plenty of good wine in this world and paradise in the next4 ,these allurements were too powerful to be resisted2 and therefore having been well instructed and catechised1 he at last agreed to receive the sacraments of baptism and ,lord's ,supper4 ,nevertheless1 the ,priest to make everything sure and solid1 still continued his instructions1 and began the next day with the usual question1 ,how many ,god's are there8 ,none at all1 replied ,benedict1 for that was his new name4 ,how6 ,none at all8 ,cries the ,priest4 ,to be sure1 said the honest proselyte1 you have told me all along that there it but one ,god2 and yesterday ,i ate him4 ,this is sufficiently ridiculous2 and yet if we fairly consider the whole question of divinity there will be found no more absurdity in the notion of our ,benedict eating the ,creator1 than in ,jews crucifying ,him4 ,both notions involve materiality4 ,a ,god without body1 parts1 or passions1 could no more be nailed upon a cross than taken into the stomach4 ,and if it be urged there is something awful in the blasphemy of him who talks of swallowing his ,god1 the ,author of this ,apology can as conscientiously urge that there is something very disgusting in the idea of a murdered ,deity4 ,locke wrote rather disparagingly of 'many among us1' who 'will be found upon inquiry1 to fancy ,god in the shape of a man sitting 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' ,a ',philosophical ,unbeliever1' who made minced meat of ,dr4 ,priestley's reasonings on the existence of ,god1 well remarked that ',theists are always for turning their ,god into an overgrown ,man4 ,anthropomorphites has long been a term applied to them4 ,they give him hand and eyes1 nor can they conceive him otherwise than as a corporeal ,being4 ,we make a ,deity ourselves1 fall down and worship him4 ,it is the molten calf over again4 ,idolatry is still practised4 ,the only difference is that now we worship idols of our own imagination before of our hands4' #cg3a ,this is bold language1 but if the language of truth and soberness no one should take offence at it4 ,that ,christians as well as ,turks 'have had whole sects earnestly contending that the ,deity was corporeal and of human shapes1' is a fact1 testified to by ,locke1 and 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 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 gentleman1' 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 consider 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 ,god1 ,he must have some form is self-evident2 and why ,mr4 ,collibeer should be 'called over the coals' 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 'inconceivable' would be an improvement upon them4 ,the ,author's serious and deliberate opinion is1 that ascribing to ,deity a body analagous to our own1 is less ridiculous than affirming he has no body2 nor can he admire the wisdom of those ,christians who prefer a partless1 passionless ,god1 to the substantial piece of supernaturalism adored by their forefathers4 ,undoubtedly1 the matter-,god-system has its difficulties1 but they are trifles in comparison with those by which the spirit-,god-system is encompassed3 for1 one obvious consequence of faith in bodiless ,divinity is1 an utter confusion of ideas in those who have it1 as regards possibilities and impossibilities4 ,the ,author confidently submits that1 no man having 'firm faith' in a ,deity--without body parts and passions--can be half so wise as the famous cook of my ,lord ,hoppergollop1 who said1 ,what is impossible can't be1 ,and never never comes to pass4 ,he1 moreover1 confidently submits that1 granting the existence of so utterly incomprehensible a ,deity1 still such ,deity could not have caused nature1 or matter1 unless we deny the palpably true proposition of ,spinoza1 to wit--,of things which have nothing in common1 one cannot be the cause of the other4 ,in harmony with this proposition1 ,atheists cannot admit the supernatural caused the natural2 for1 between the natural and the supernatural it is impossible to imagine any thing in common4 ,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 ,nature1 or something not nature must ever have been1 is a conclusion to which1 what poets call ,fate-- ,leads the willing and drags the unwilling4 ,but does this undeniable truth make against ,atheism8 ,far from it--so far1 indeed1 as to make for it3 the reason is no mystery4 ,of matter we have ideas clear1 precise1 and indispensable1 whereas1 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 ,universe is perfectly inconceivable4 ,the notion of necessarily existing matter seems to the ,author of this ,apology 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 clearing the difficulty of necessarily existing matter1 they assent to a necessarily existing spirit2 and when the nature of spirit is demanded from these assertors of its existence 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 falsehood there is no middle passage1 so between something and nothing 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 and distinct ideas of'--a real though not material existence1 surely no man will pretend to say an uncreated reality called ,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' said ,hume1 '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 cause and consequently must perceive that every object has a real cause1 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 to prove the absurdity of that exclusion4 ,if everything must have a cause1 it follows that upon the exclusion of other causes 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 #dj3a ,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 be 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 cause which the reader has seen is the very point assumed by ,theists--the very point on which as a pivot they so merrily and successfully turn their fine metaphysical theories1 and immaterial systems4 ,the universe1 quoth they1 must have had a cause1 and that cause must have been a ,first ,cause1 or cause number one1 because nothing can exist of itself4 ,oh1 most lame and impotent conclusion6 ,how in consistency 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 be ,he is an uncaused existence1 that is to say1 exists without a cause4 ,the difference on this point between ,theists and ,atheists is very palpable4 ,the former say1 ,spirit can exist without a cause2 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' ,if the ,god of our ,deists and ,christians is not matter1 what is ,he8 ,upon them devolves the difficult duty of answering that question4 ,they are morally bound to answer it or make the humiliating confession that they 'ignorantly worship2' that with all their boasted certainty as to the existence of their 'deified error' they can furnish no satisfactory1 or even intelligible account of ,his #da3a nature1 if indeed a supernatural or rather ,unnatural ,being can properly be said to have a nature4 ,the author of ',good ,sense' has observed1 that names which may be made to mean anything in reality mean nothing4 ,is not ,god a name of this class8 ,our 'state puppet showmen1' as my ,lord ,brougham nicknamed ,priests1 who talk so much about ,gods1 forcibly remind one of that ingenious exhibitor of puppets1 who1 after saying to his juvenile patronisers--',look to the right1 and there you will see the lions a dewouring the dogs1' was asked--,which is the lion and which is the dogs8' to which query he replied1 ',vichever you please1 my little dears1 it makes no difference votsomnever4' ,for in exactly the same spirit do our ghostly exhibitors1 they who set up the state puppet show meet the inquiries of the grown children they make so handsomely 7again we are under an obligation to ,lord ,brougham7 'to pay for peeping4' ,children of this sort would fain know what is meant by the doctrines concerning the many 'true ,gods' they hear such precious rigmaroles about in ,church and ,conventicle1 as well as the many orthodox opinions of that ,god1 whose name is there so often 'taken in vain4' ,but ,priests like the showman in question1 answer1 in language less inelegant to be sure1 but substantially the same1 ',vichever you please1 my little dears1 it makes no difference votsomnever4' ,he who declared that the word ,god was invented by philosophers to screen their own ignorance1 taught a valuable truth1 though the ,author of this ,apology never fails mentally to ,substitute quacks for philosophers4 ,saint ,augustin more candid than modern theologians1 said1 ',god is a being whom we speak of but whom we cannot describe1 and who is superior to all definitions4' ,atheists 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 full faith in which there could be no religion4 ,if to the name ,god some rational signification cannot be attached away goes1 or at least away ought to go1 that belief in something supernatural which is 'the fundamental principle of all false metaphysics4' ',no such belief can for a moment be entertained by those who see in nature the cause of all effects1 and treat with the contempt it merits1 the preposterous notion that out of nothing at the bidding of something1 of which one can make anything1 started everything4 ,the famous ,mr4 ,law1 in his ',appeal to all that doubt or disbelieve the truths of the ,gospel1' gratuitously allows 'it is the same impossibility for a thing to be created out of nothing as by nothing1' for which sensible allowance 'insane philosophy' owes him much4 ,indeed the dogma1 if true1 proves all religion false1 for it strikes full at belief in a ,god1 a belief which1 it cannot be too often repeated1 is to religion what blood is to the brain and oxygen to the blood4 ,materialism is hated by priests1 because no consistent ,materialist can stop short of disbelief in ,god4 ,he believes in ,nature and ,nature alone4 ,by ,nature he understands unity4 ,the ,,one which2 includes all1 and is all4 ,that it pertains to the nature of substance to exist2 and that all substance is necessarily infinite1 we are told by ,spinoza1 who understood by substance that which exists in itself1 and is conceived through itself2 i4e4 the knowledge of which does not require the knowledge of anything antecedent to it4 ,this substance of ,spinoza is just the matter of ,materialists4 ,with him most likely1 with them certainly1 matter and substance are convertible terms4 ,they have no objection to the word substance so long as it is the sign of something substantial2 for substantiality implies materiality4 ,whether we say--,substance exists1 and is conceived through itself2 i4e4 the knowledge of which does not require the knowledge of anything antecedent to it1 or--,matter exists and is conceived through itself2 i4e4 'the knowledge of which does not require the knowledge of anything antecedent to itself'--our meaning is exactly the same4 ,to exclude matter from our conception 7if it were possible7 would be to think universal existence out of existence1 which is tantamount to thinking without anything to think about4 ,the ideas of those who try their brains at this odd sort of work1 have been well likened to an atmosphere of dust superintended by a whirlwind4 ,they who assume the existence of an unsubstantial i4e4 immaterial ,first ,cause1 outrage every admitted rule and every sound principle of philosophising4 ,only pious persons with ideas like unto an atmosphere of dust superintended by a whirl wind would write books in vindication of the monstrously absurd assumption that there exists an unsubstantial ,great ,first ,cause of all substantialities4 ,nothing can be wilder than the speculations of such 'hair brained' individuals1 excepting only the speculations of those sharp-sighted enough to see reason and wisdom in them4 ,a ,great ,cause1 or a ,small ,cause1 a ,first ,cause1 or a ,last ,cause1 involves the idea of real existence1 namely1 the existence of matter4 ,by cause of itself1 said ,spinoza1 ,i understand that which involves existence1 or that the nature of which can only be considered as existent4 ,and who does not so understand ,cause8 ,why ,gillespie and other eminently dogmatic ,christian writers whose ,great ,first ,cause cannot be considered an entity1 because they assert1 yes1 expressly assert its immateriality4 ,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 action 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 ,atheists are frequently asked--,what moves matter8 to which question1 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 second sighted among them ever saw mind2 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 is1 minus body8 and very acutely they answer1 body is the mind 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 #dd3a 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 true 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 and 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 them3 yet he does so4 ,he writes about the spiritual part of man as though he really believed there is such apart4 ,not satisfied1 it would seem1 with body1 like ,nonentitarians of vulgarest 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 action3 in other terms1 organised matter performing vital functions4 ,idle declamation against 'fact 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 ,those 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 existence2 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 ,cause implies action2 and till ,nonentitarians can explain how nothing may contrive to cause something1 they should assume the virtue of modesty1 even if they have it not4 ,to rail at 'fact mongers' is1 doubtless1 far easier than to overturn facts themselves4 ,the ',shepherd' calls ,atheists ',chaotics' and ,materialism 'the philosophy of lunacy1' which is a very free and very easy way of ',universalising4' ,but arguments grounded on observation and experience are not to be borne down by hard names4 ,man1 like the magnet1 is something--he acts4 ,dust and ashes he was2 dust and ashes he will be4--,he may be touched1 and tasted1 and seen1 and smelt4 ,in the immateriality of his composition no one believes2 and none but ,nonentitarians pretend to do so4 ,he thinks--thinking is the very condition of his existence4 ,to think is to live4 ,to the sum total of vital manifestations we apply the term mind4 ,to call mind matter1 or matter mind1 is ridiculous--genuine lunacy4 ,it would be as wise to call motion matter and wind up the spiritual work by making nothing of both4 ,the man who ran half round our planet in search of his soul did not succeed in finding it4 ,how should he when there is no such thing as soul4 ,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 connexion 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 matter 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 #df3a ,the eccentric ,count de ,caylus1 when on his death-bed1 was visited by some near relations and a pious ,bishop1 who hoped that under such trying circumstances 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 friends1 ,i see you are anxious about my soul2' whereupon they pricked up their ears with delight2 before1 however1 any reply could be made1 the ,count added1 'but the fact is ,i have not got one1 and really my good friends1 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 ,materialism2 and none would waste time in talking or writing about nonentities4 ,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 something1 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 tabernacle1' 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 monster1' 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 religionists 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 ,materialists1 for ',god' is a name signifying something or nothing2 in other terms1 matter1 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 however 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 ,we observe that motion is caused by body1 and apart from body no one can conceive the idea of motion4 ,local motion may1 but general motion cannot be accounted for4 ,the ,shepherd contends there is nothing more mysterious than motion4 ,there he is right2 and had he said nothing is less mysterious than motion he would have been equally so4 ,for telling these unpalatable truths the ,atheist is bitterly detested4 ',the ,shepherd' is a most unorthodox kind of ,pantheist2 yet even he does not scruple to swell the senseless cry against ',godless infidels1' whom he calls an almost infinite variety of bad names1 and among other shocking crimes accuses them of propounding a 'dead philosophy4' ,yet the difference between his ,pantheism and our ,atheism is only perceptible to the microscopic eye of super-sublimated spiritualism4 ,the subjoined is offered to the reader's notice as a sample of ,pantheism so closely resembling ,atheism1 that1 like the two ,sosias in the play1 to distinguish them is difficult3 ',what ,coleridge meant by the motto 7all ,theology depends on mastering the term nature7 concerns us not4 ,we appropriate the motto1 but we do not profess to appropriate it in the same sense as ,coleridge appropriated it4 ,every man must appropriate it for himself4 ,coleridge perceived what every thinking mind has perceived--the difficulty of believing in two self-determining powers1 viz41 ,god and ,nature1 as also the consequences of regarding them as identical4 ,if ,nature be one power and ,god another power1 and if ,god be not responsible for what ,nature does1 then ,nature is a self-subsisting ,god4 ,if ,god and ,nature be esteemed one universal existence1 this is ,pantheism1 which is denominated an accursed doctrine by the disciples of ,sectarianism1 and formed no part of the creed1 of the great dialectician of modern times4 ,the attempt to separate ,god from ,nature will mistify the clearest head3 not even ,coleridge could wade the depths of this vulgar ,theology4 ,is there any man who can rest satisfied in the faith of two independent powers who exist together in any other sense than the two polar energies of a magnet1 which are really one8 ,no3 and men are afraid to regard them as one4 ,on the one hand they are puzzled to understand an unintelligible absurdity1 and on the other1 they are afraid to admit a simple truism which leads to the abolition of all ceremonial forms1 and lip professions of religion1 and is execrated by priests and their accomplices on this very account4 ,we do not pretend to understand anything4 ,every subject whatsoever is too high1 too deep1 and too broad for us4 ,but coming into a world where men act upon certain modes of reasoning1 which are unsatisfactory to our minds1 we battle immediately with these men1 like an animalcule thrown into a glass of water amongst other animalcules of opposite principles1 and in doing so we act from the impulse within which is our sole authority--that impulse within is the preference we give to a mode of reasoning which begins by regarding the existing of every kind and1 degree as a 'perfect unity1' and making the unity1 responsible for every mode--the cause of every mode4' #di3a ,that is to say1 dealing with it as what it is1 the only existence2 the one1 or all and in all4 ,can ,atheists object to that8 ,no1 surely1 for they uniformly thus reason with respect to ,nature2 and unless traitors to their own principles1 cannot object to ,pantheistical philosophy as here laid down4 ,atheists say1 ,nature never had an ,author--so do ,pantheists of the ',shepherd' school4 ,atheists say ,nature is at once the womb and grave and cause and effect of all phenomena--so do they4 ,atheists say 'death is nothing1 and nothing death2' all matter breathing the breath of life--so do they4 ,indeed1 notwithstanding their talk about ,god and ,devil1 they think ,nature both1 which amounts to denying both4 ,can ,atheists do more8 or can ,pantheists do so much without themselves being ,atheists8 ,but the ,rev4 ,mr4 ,smith is no ,atheist2 at least he makes no profession of ,atheism4 ,au contraire1 he makes fine sport with those who do4 ,himself a ,pantheist of the all-,god school1 he took to calling ,atheists 'ugly names1' as if quite innocent that no 'thinking mind' can fail to perceive the downright lunacy1 or something worse1 of supposing a pin to choose on the score of piety1 between universal ,deity and no ,deity at all4 ,the ',shepherd' of a new philosophic flock should have known better than to attempt the reform of 'vulgar theology' by setting forth the mystical nonsense of 'vulgar' ,pantheism4 ,all falsehood is 'vulgar'2 but the most 'vulgar' of falsehood is that which assumes the convenient garb of transcendentalism1 with a view to throw dust in the eyes of 'vulgar' lookers-on4 ,if ,pantheists of this reverend gentleman's school are neither sophists nor simpletons1 ,materialism is neither true nor false4 ,they do not plainly write down philosophy of so strangely negative a kind2 that would be too ridiculous2 but every reader of the ',shepherd' knows that1 in their way1 they cleverly demonstrate all doctrine--their own of course excepted--true and false1 which1 no one need mount a pair of 'universal' spectacles to see1 comes to neither true nor false4 ,spiritualism receives at their hands no better treatment than ,materialism1 nor ,southcottianism than either4 ,southcottianism 7they say7 is true and false2 ,materialism is true and false2 ,spiritualism is true and false3 in brief1 all doctrine1 positive or negative1 faithful or unfaithful1 is true and false1 except the doctrine of ,pantheism alias ,universalism1 which is1 bye and bye1 to supersede every other4 ,according to this mystically wise1 but rather inconsistent school1 ,atheists are stupid as ,christians1 ,christians stupid as ,mohammedans1 and ,mohammedans stupid as nearly everybody else4 ,these men are peculiarly fitted to make in the world of intellect the best possible 'arrangements for general confusion4' ,atheists in all but good sense1 and seemingly without knowing it1 they contrive to mix up1 with skill worthy of better employment1 a very novel and amusing species of philosophical hodge-podge4 ,their ,reverend leader or ',shepherd' was wont to rail most furiously against dogmatists1 especially those of the ,atheistic sort2 but his own dogmatism is at least a match for theirs4 ,he did more than dogmatize when combatting ,materialism1 he from ignorance or design1 libelled it by putting1 according to a custom 'more honoured in the breach than the observance1' words into the mouths of ,materialists that no real ,materialist could utter4 ,take an example4 ,in the periodical just referred to and quoted from1 #ej3a are these words3--',the mode of 7matter's7 existence is the only subject in dispute4 ,the ,materialist says1 it is an infinite collection of dead unintelligent particles of sand2 the spiritualist1 that it is the visible and tangible development of an infinite1 eternal1 omnipresent1 thinking1 sentient mind4' ,now1 the truth is1 ,materialists contend that matter as a whole cannot in strictness be considered either dead or living1 intelligent or non-intelligent1 but simply matter2 which matter when in certain well-known states is called dead1 and when in other equally well-known states is called living4 ,if where motion is there is life1 then there is no dead matter2 for all matter1 or at least all matter of which we have experience1 moves4 ,to charge upon ,materialists the dogma of matter's deadness is a paltry trick which a writer like ,mr4 ,smith should disdain to practice4 ,nor does it become him to lecture ,atheists about their dogmatism1 while from his own published writings can be adduced such passages as the following3-- ',we know that the two principal attributes of matter are visibility and tangibility1 and these two properties are purely spiritual or immaterial4 ,thus resistance is nothing but that mysterious power we call repulsion--a power which fills the whole universe--which holds the sun1 moon1 and stars in its hand1 and yet is invisible4' ,this is what our ,rev4 ,pantheist calls one of ,spiritualism's 'splendid arguments1' and splendidly absurd it certainly is2 quite equal1 considered as a provocative of mirth1 to ,robert ,owen's sublimest effusions about that very mysterious and thoroughly incomprehensible power which 'directs the atom and controuls the aggregate of nature4' ,but the argument though 'splendid1' is false4 ,who is ignorant that resistance is not a power at all1 though we properly enough give the name resistance to one of matter's phenomena4 ,only half crazed ,spiritualists would confound phenomena with things by which they are exhibited4 ,matter under certain circumstances resists1 and under certain other circumstances attracts4 ,but neither repulsion nor attraction exists1 though we see every day of our lives that matter does repel and does attract4 ,its doing so proves it is able to do so1 and proves nothing more4 ,mr4 ,smith says1 'if we want repose for our minds upon this subject we may find it2 but it can only be found in the universal mind4' ,he does not however explain the co-existence of universal mind with universal matter4 ,he does not tell us how two universals could find room in one universe4 ',we are gravely assured 7by spiritualising ,pantheists among the rest7 that ,god is something out of time and space2 but since our knowledge is intuition comprehended under conception1 we cannot have any knowledge of that which is not received into the imaginary recipients of time and space1 and consequently ,god is not an entity4 ',but here comes the jugglery--reason forms the idea of the soul or a substance out of nature1 by connecting substance and accident into infinite and absolute substance4 ,what is that verbiage1 but that the reason gives the name of soul to something that does not exist at all8' ',reason forms the idea of ,god or of ,supreme ,intelligence out of ,nature1 by connecting action and reaction into infinite and absolute concurrence4 ,what is ,god out of ,nature8 ,where is out8 ,where is ,god8 ,what is ,god8--an absolute nothing4' ',for an imagination to exist there must be two properties or qualities coming in contact with each other to produce that imagination4 ,for these two properties or qualities to exist there must be matter for them to exist in2 and for matter to exist there must be space for it to exist in1 and so on4 ,matter might exist without two different properties to produce an imagination2 but neither two properties nor one property can exist without matter for it to exist in4 ,man may exist for a time as he does when he is dead without an imagination2 but the imagination cannot exist without the material man4 ,matter cannot become non-existent1 but the imagination can and does become so4 ,matter therefore is the reality and the imagination a nonentity1 an unsubstantial idea2 or an imagination only4' #eb3a ,the anonymous writer of the passages here given within inverted commas clearly draws the line of demarcation between the real and the unreal4 ,his remarks on imagination are specially important4 ,theologians do not seem to be aware that imagination is a modification of mind1 and mind itself a modification of sensibility--no sensations--no thought--no life4 ,though awkwardly expressed1 there is truth in the dogma of ,gassendi--ideas are only transformed sensations4 ,all attempts to conceive sensibility without organs of sense are vain4 ,as profitably might we labour to think of motion where nothing exists to be moved1 as sensibility where there is no organ of sense4 ,we often see organs void of sensibility1 but who ever saw1 or who can imagine sensibility independent of organs8 ,pantheists and other ,divinitarians write about mind as if it were an existence2 nay1 they claim1 for it the first place among existences1 according to 'mere matter' the second4 ,the ',shepherd' plainly tells us mind is a primary and matter a secondary existence4 ,having conjured up an ,universal ,mind ,god1 it was natural he should try to establish the supremacy of mind--but though a skilful logician he will be unable to do so4 ,experience is against him4 ,on experience of natural operations ,materialists base their conclusion that matter without mind is possible1 and mind without matter is impossible4 ,it has been proved that even the modification of mind called imagination is indebted for all its images1 yea1 for its very existence as imagination1 to the material world4 ,d',alembert states in the ,discourse prefixed to the ,french ,encyclopaedia that 'the objects about which our minds are occupied are either spiritual or material1 and the media employed for this purpose are our ideas either directly received or derived from reflection'--which reflection he tells us 'is of two kinds1 according as it is employed in reasoning on the objects of our direct ideas1 or in studying them as models for imitation4' ,and then he tells us 'the imagination is a creative faculty1 and the mind1 before it attempts to create1 begins by reasoning upon what it sees and knows4' ,he lauds the metaphysical division of things into ,material and ,spiritual1 appending however to such laudation these remarkable words--',with the ,material and ,spiritual classes of existence1 philosophy is equally conversant2 but as for imagination1 her imitations are imitations entirely confined to the material world4' ,des ,cartes1 in his second ',meditation1' says--,imaginari nihil aliud est quam rei corporeos figuram seu imaginem contemplari--which sentence indicates that he agreed with ,d',alembert as to the exclusive limitation of imagination to things material and sensible4 ,the same opinion seems to have been held by ,locke1 who in the concluding chapter of his ',essay on the ,human ,understanding1' states as something certain1 and therefore beyond dispute1 that 'the understanding can only compass1 first--the nature of things as they are in themselves1 their relations and manner of operation--or secondly1 that which man ought to do1 as a rational and voluntary agent1 for the attainment of any end1 especially happiness--or thirdly1 the ways and means by which the knowledge of both the one and the other of these is attained and communicated4' ,adam ,smith too1 in book #e1 c4 #a1 of his ',wealth of ,nations1' assures us the ancient ,greek philosophy was divided1 into three branches--,physics1 ,ethics1 and ,logic2 and after praising such general division of philosophy1 as being perfectly agreeable to the nature of things1 says that1 'as the human1 mind and the ,deity1 in whatever their essence may be supposed to consist1 are parts of the great system1 of the universe1 and parts too1 productive of the most important effects1 whatever was taught in the ancient schools of ,greece concerning their nature1 made a part of the system of ,physics4' ,dr4 ,campbell1 in his ',philosophy of ,rhetoric1' ventures to assign 'local habitation1' as well as 'name' to spirit itself4 ,nay1 he makes something of ,deity1 and the ,soul2 for spirit1 says he1 which here comprises only the ,supreme ,being and the human ,soul1 is surely as much included under the idea of natural object as body is1 and is knowable to the philosopher purely in the same way--by observation and experience4 ,it would be difficult to exaggerate the importance of these opinions--they are eminently worthy of attention4 ,if ,god is a spirit--and spirit 'is surely as much a natural object as body is'--the idea of something supernatural cannot for one instant be entertained4 ,if ,god is really no more than a 'part' of the great system of the universe1 to immaterialise ,him is absurd1 inconsistent1 and idolatrous4 ,let it be granted that ,god is 'part of nature1 and a part too1 productive of most important effects2' and what ,logician will be fool-hardy enough to declare ,him without body1 parts1 or passions8 ,nor are ,locke's dicta as to the compass of the understanding easier to be explained away than these of ,dr4 ,campbell and ,adam ,smith4 ,if we cannot know more than 'the nature of things as they are in themselves1' their relations1 manner of operation1 c4 only ignorant or cunning men will pretend acquaintance with the supernatural4 ,that nothing natural can possibly conceive what is above nature is indeed so palpably true as to deserve a place among philosophical axioms4 ,imagination itself1 however lofty1 wild1 or daring its flights1 cannot quit the universe--matter is its prison1 where1 like ,sterne's starling1 it is 'caged and can't get out4' ,fortunately1 however1 imagination1 though a prisoner1 has abundance of room to legitimately exercise itself in4 ,but1 is it not obvious that if1 as ,des ,cartes and ,d',alembert contended1 the 'imitations of imagination are imitations entirely confined to the material world1' all conceits about a ,supernatural somebody1 or ,supernatural somebodies1 are necessarily false1 because of purely natural origin1 and should be viewed as at best 'mere cobwebs of learning1 admirable indeed1 for the fineness of the thread and work1 but of no substance or profit4' #ed3a ,it is unfortunate for ,theologians that the fundamental principle of their 'science' either cannot be comprehended1 or1 if comprehended1 cannot be reconciled with any known principle of nature4 ',god is1' they pompously declare2 but what ,he is they are unable to tell us1 without contradicting themselves and each other4 ,some say ,god must be material2 some say1 nay1 ,he must be no such thing2 some will have ,him spiritual1 others immaterial1 others again neither spiritual nor material1 nor immaterial1 nor even conceivable4 ,some say1 if a ,spirit1 ,he can only be known by ,his place and figure2 some not4 ,some call ,him the author of ,sin1 some the permitter of sin1 while some are sure ,he could not consistently1 with his own perfections1 either authorize sin or grant to sinners a permit4 ,some say ,he made the ,devil1 others that the ,most ,low bedevil'd himself2 others that ,he created ,him angelic and upright1 but could not keep him so4 ,some say ,he hardens men's hearts1 others that they harden their own hearts2 others again1 that to harden men's hearts is the ,devil's peculiar and exclusive privilege4 ,some say ,he has prepared a ,hell for all wicked people1 others that ,hell will receive many good as well as tricked1 while others cannot believe either the just or the unjust1 the faithful or the unfaithful1 will be consigned to perdition and made to endure torments unutterable by a ,god 'whose tender mercies are over all his works4' ,some affirm ,his omnipotency1 some deny it2 some say ,he is no respecter of persons1 some the reverse4 ,some say ,he is ,immensity1 others that ,he fills ,immensity2 others that ,he don't fill anything1 though 'the ,heaven1 of ,heavens cannot contain ,him2' others again1 that ,he neither contains nor is contained1 but 'dwells on his own thoughts4' ,some say ,he created matter out of nothing2 some say it is quite a mistake--inasmuch as creation meant bringing order out of chaos4 ,some say ,he is not one person1 but three persons--the ,father1 the ,son1 and the ,holy ,ghost1 which together constitute ,godhead2 others that ,he is 'one and indivisible1' while others believe ,him 'our father which art in heaven1' but will have nothing to do with the ,son and the ,holy ,ghost1 ,unitarians1 for example1 one of whose popular preachers in the town of ,manchester1 was about twelve months ago charged with having in the course of a single sermon 'killed1 two ,gods1 one ,devil1 and slacked out ,hell ,fire4' ,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 ancient or1 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 impossible2 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 substance--,again1 ',all things are contained in him and move in him1 but without reciprocal action4' 7sed sine mutua passione7 ,god feels nothing from the movements of bodies2 nor do they experience any resistance from his universal presence4 #ef3a ,pause reader1 and demand of yourself whether such a conception of ,deity is either clear1 satisfactory1 or definite1--,god4 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 ,here 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 a belief in the reality of supernatural beings1 and begets fondness for news1 particularly if extravagant4 ,most likely then1 such readers of our ,apology 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 presence'2 for 'news' more extravagant1 never fell from the lips of an idiot1 or adorned the pages of a prayer-book4 ,by the same great savan1 we are taught that ,god governs all1 not as the soul of the world1 but as the ,lord and sovereign of all things2 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 large scale1 the same sort of game as ,nicholas of ,russia1 or ,mohammed of ,egypt plays upon a small scale4 ,there cannot be slavery where there is no tyranny1 and to say as ,newton did1 that we stand in the same relation to a universal ,god1 as a slave does to his earthly master1 is practically to accuse such ,god1 at reason's bar1 of tyranny4 ,if the word of ,god is relative1 and relates 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 ,really theologians and others who declaim so bitterly against 'blasphemers1' and take such very stringent measures to punish 'infidels1' who speak or write of their ,god1 should seriously consider whether the worst1 that is1 the least religious of infidel writers1 ever penned a paragraph so disparaging to the character of that ,god they affect 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 ,god who is 'totally destitute of body and of corporeal figure1' to have any kind of attributes8 ,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 a shocking abuse of our reasoning faculties to employ them at all about a ,being whose existence1 if it 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 incontestable 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 and 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 about ,god4 ,there is1 however1 one remark of his respecting the ,god he thought necessarily existed1 worthy of notice1 which is1 that 'human beings revere and adore ,gad on account of his 7supposed7 sovereignty1 and worship him like his slaves2' for to all but worshippers1 the practice as well as principle of worship does appear pre-eminently slavish4 ,indeed1 the ,author has always found himself unable to dissociate the idea of worshipping beings or things of which no one has the most remote conception1 from that of genuine hypocrisy4 ,christians despise the rude ,heathen for praying to a ,deity of wood or stone1 whom he soundly cudgels if his prayer is not granted2 and yet their own treatment of ,jehovah1 though rather more respectful1 is equally ridiculous4 ,when praying1 they lay aside truth1 sincerity1 and sanity4 ,their language is the language of fawning1 lying1 imbecile1 cowardly slaves4 ,intending to exalt1 they debase the imaginary object of their adoration4 ,they presume ,him to be unstable as themselves1 and no less greedy of adulation than ,themistocles the ,athenian1 who1 when presiding at certain games of his countrymen1 was asked which voice pleased him best8 ',that1' replied he1 'which sings my praises4' ,they love to enlarge on 'the moral efficacy of prayer1' and would have us think their 'omnipotent tyrant' best pleased with such of his 'own image' as best 'sing his praises4' ,of their 'living ,god' they make an amplified ,themistocles1 and thus reduce 7conscientiously1 no doubt17 the ,creator to a level with ,his creature4 ,the author is without ,god2 but did he believe there is one1 still would he scorn to affect for ,him a love and a reverence that nothing natural can feel for the supernatural2 still would he scorn to carry favour with ,deity by hypocritical and most fulsome adulation4 ,finely did ,eschylus say of ,aristides-- ,to be and not to seem is this man's maxim2 ,his mind reposes on its proper wisdom1 ,and wants no other praise4 ,tell us1 ye men of mystery1 shall a ,god need praises beneath the dignity of a man8 ,shall the ,creator of ,nature act less worthily than one of his creatures8 ,to do ,god homage1 we are quite aware1 is reckoned by ,christians among their highest duties4 ,but1 nevertheless1 it seems to us impossible that any one can love an existence or creature of which he never had any experience4 ,love is a feeling generated in the human breast1 by certain objects that strike the sense--and in no other conceivable way can love be generated6 ,but ,god1 according to ,newton1 is neither an object nor a subject1 and though1 all eyes1 all ears1 all brains1 all arms1 all feeling1 all intelligence1 and all action1 he is totally unknown to us4 ,if ,christians allow this to be a true description of the ,god they worship1 we wish to understand how they can love ,him so vehemently as they affect to do--or how they can pay any other than lip homage to so mysterious a ,deity8 ,it is usual for slaves to feign an affection for their masters that they do not1 cannot feel--but that believers in a ,god should imagine that he who 'searcheth all hearts1' can be ignorant of what is passing in theirs1 or make the tremendous mistake of supposing that their lip homage1 or interested expressions of love1 are not properly appreciated by the ,most ,high ,god1 and ',universal ,emperor1' is indeed very strange4 ,to overreach or deceive a ,god who created the heavens and the earth1 is altogether beyond the power of puny mortals4 ,let not therefore those who bend the knee1 while the heart is unbent1 and raise the voice of thankful devotion1 while all within is frost and barrenness1 fancy they have stolen a march upon their ,deity2 for surely if the lord liveth1 he judgeth rightly of these things4 ,but it were vain to expect that those who think ,god is related to his creatures as a despot is related to his slaves1 will hope to please that ,god by aught save paltry1 cringing1 and dishonestly despicable practices4 ,yet1 no other than a despotic ,god has the great ,newton taught us to adore--no other than mere slaves of such a ,god1 has he taught us to deem ourselves4 ,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 dogmas 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 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 exists2 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 ,clarke 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 ,being 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 ,being 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 external2 but an independent ,being can have no relations1 and consequently must act without motives4 ,now1 as no 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 external cause of its existence1 must be self-existent2 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 ,atheists1 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 repetitions or expansions of the preceding one4 ,indeed1 much of the foregoing would be superfluous1 were it not that it serves to illustrate1 so completely and clearly1 ,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 form1 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 an ,atheist--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 so 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 tells 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 a ,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 about 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 religious philosophiser pays due attention4 ,newton himself1 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 ,if they did1 ,atheism would need no apologist1 and ,theism have no defenders2 for ,theism1 in all its varieties1 presupposes a supernatural ,causer of what experience pronounces natural effects4 ,the ,author is aware that ',natural ,theologians' seek to justify their rebellion against the rules of philosophising1 to which the reader's attention has been specially directed1 by appealing to 7what they call7 evidences of design in the universal fabric4 ,but though they think so highly of the design argument1 it is not the less true that that argument rests on mere assumption of a disputed fact2 that even though it were proved the universe was designed1 still whether designed by one ,god1 two ,gods1 or two million of ,gods1 would be unshown2 and that ,paley1 'the most famous of natural ,theologians'--,paley1 who wrote as never man wrote before on the design question1 has been satisfactorily refuted in his own words4 #fc3a ,a distinguished modern ,fabulist #fc3b 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 we 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 assumptions1 and to ,deify errors on no other authority than their own heated imaginations1 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 conceits2 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 assumptions 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 ,god2 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 materials at all4 ,unassisted nature cannot produce the phenomena we behold1 therefore such phenomena clearly prove there is something supernatural4 ,not to believe in a ,god who designed ,nature1 is to close both ears and eyes against evidence1 therefore ,atheists are wilfully deaf and obstinately blind4 ,these are samples of the flimsy stuff1 our teachers of what nobody knows1 would palm upon us as argument for1 yea demonstration of1 the ,being and ,attributes of ,god4 ,design1 said ,shelley1 must be proved before a designer can be inferred--the matter in controversy1 is the existence of design in the universe1 and it is not permitted to assume the contested premises and thence infer the matter in dispute4 ,insidiously to employ the words contrivance1 design and adaptation1 before these circumstances are apparent in the universe1 thence justly inferring a contriver1 is a popular sophism against which it behoves us to be watchful4 ,to assert that motion is an attribute of mind1 that matter is inert1 that every combination is the result of intelligence1 is also an assumption of the matter in dispute4 ,why do we admit design in any machine of human contrivance8 simply because innumerable instances of machines having been constructed by human art are present to our mind--because we are acquainted with persons who could construct such machines2 but if having no previous knowledge of any artificial contrivance1 we had accidently found a watch upon the ground1 we should have been justified in concluding that it was a thing of nature1 that it was a combination of matter with whose cause we were unacquainted1 and that any attempt to account for the origin of its existence would be equally presumptuous and unsatisfactory4 #fd3a ,the acuteness and1 accuracy of this reasoning can only be disputed by persons wedded to system1 who either lack capacity to understand what is advanced in opposition to it1 or1 ,being convinced against their will1 ,are of the same opinion still4 ,experience1 the only safe guide on religious as well as other topics1 lends no sanction to belief in design apart from material agency4 ,by artfully taking for granted what no ,atheist can admit 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 invention1 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 ,atheists 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 nothing--,atheists 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 ,atheists consider the general course of nature1 though strangely unheeded1 does proclaim with 'most miraculous organ1' that dogmatisers about any such 'figment of imagination1' 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 ,author was recently passing an evening with some pleasant people in ,ashton-under-,lyne1 one of whom related that before the schoolmaster had 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 kind 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 or ether 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 ,admirably is it said in the unpublished work before referred to1 that the analogy which theologians attempt to establish between the contrivances of human art and the various existences of the universe is inadmissable4 ,we attribute these effects to human intelligence1 because we know beforehand that human intelligence is capable of producing them4 ,take away this knowledge1 and the grounds of our reasoning will be destroyed4 ,our entire ignorance therefore of the ,divine ,nature leaves this analogy defective in its most essential point of comparison4 ,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 ,now 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 attributes1 and matter itself vanishes4 ,this 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 then1 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 ,atheist1 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 ,atheist 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 should by conjunction 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 do for the most part stand more in need of explanation than the thing explained4 ,thus 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 and in short1 does everything1 though not to be done by anything4 ,well might ,godwin say the rage of accounting for what1 like immortal ,gibbs1 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 of this ,apology 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' #fh3a where effect is defined as cause realised1 the natura naturans conceived as natura naturata2 and cause or causation is defined as simply change4 ,when1 says ,mr4 ,lewis1 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 itself1 any more than attraction is the thing attracted4 ,one might as philosophically erect attraction into reality and fall down and worship it1 as change1 which is in very truth1 a mere matter of naming4 ,not so the things changing or changed3 they are real1 the prolific parent of all appearance we behold1 of all sensation we experience1 of all ideas we receive2 in short1 of all causes and of all effects1 which causes and effects1 as shown by2 ,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 ,now1 to reconcile with this theory of causation1 the notion of an ,eternal1 mighty1 causeless ,god1 may be possible1 but the ,author of this ,apology cannot persuade himself that it is4 ,his poor faculties are unequal to the mighty task of conceiving the amazing ,deity in question1 whom ,sir ,richard ,blackmore1 in his ,ode to ,jehovah1 describes as sitting on an 'eternal throne'-- ,above the regions of etherial space1 ,and far extended frontier of the skies2 ,beyond the outlines of wide nature's face1 ,where void1 not yet enclosed1 uncultivated lies2 ,completely filling every place ,and far outstretching all imaginary space4 ,still less has he the right to pretend acquaintance with a process of reasoning by which such ,eternal1 mighty1 causeless ,god can be believed in consistently with the conviction that cause is effect realised1 and means only ,,change4 ,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 ,gods2 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 revelation had been vouchsafed1 and though my ,lord ,brougham is quite sure1 without the proof of natural ,theology1 revelation has no other basis than mere tradition1 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' #fi3a ,we have a ,gillespie setting aside the ,design ,argument 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 #fi3b ,we have ,dr4 ,chalmers 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' #fi3c ,we have the ,rev4 ,mr4 ,faber in his ',difficulties of ,infidelity1' 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 all the contempt it merits4 ,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 ,atheists agree with ,lord ,brougham as to the traditionary basis of ,scripture2 and as they also agree with ,chalmers and ,watson with respect to their 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 is' 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 ,christ2 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 #gj3a ,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 fall of man1 to be oriental ornaments1 or a mere allegory1 because the literal sense of those three chapters of ,genesis1 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 of this ,apology 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 ,those 'brutes' have completely succeeded in proving that ,christianity is a superstition1 no less absurd than ,mohammedanism1 and to the full as mischievous4 ,to us1 we candidly avow that its doctrines1 precepts1 and injunctions appear so utterly opposed to good sense1 and good government1 that we are persuaded even if it were practicable to establish a commonwealth in harmony with them at sun-rise it would infallibly go to pieces before sunset4 ,the author has read that ,roman augurs rarely met to do the professional without laughing at each other1 and he is bothered to understand how ,christian priests contrive to keep their countenances1 amid the many strong temptations to mirth1 by which1 in their official capacity they are surrounded4 ,no doubt very many of them laugh immoderately in private1 by way of revenge for the gravity they are constrained to assume in public4 ,it is well known that hypocrites are most prone to an affectation of sanctity2 which marvellously steads them in this world1 happen what may in the world to come4 ,nine-tenths of those who make a parade of their piety1 are rotten at heart1 as that ,cardinal de ,crema1 ,legate of ,pope ,calixtus #bnd1 in the reign of ,henry #ast1 who declared at a ,london ,synod1 it was an intolerable enormity1 that a priest should dare to consecrate1 and touch the body of ,christ immediately after he had risen from the side of a strumpet1 7for that was the decent appellation he gave to the wives of the clergy71 but it happened1 that the very next night1 the officers of justice1 breaking into a disorderly house1 found the ,cardinal in bed with a courtezan2 an incident1 says ,hume1 #gb3a which threw such ridicule upon him1 that he immediately stole out of the kingdom2 the synod broke up1 and the canons against the marriage of its clergymen1 were worse executed than ever4 ,christian practice is after all1 the best answer to ,christian theory4 ,men who think wisely1 do not 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 ,kiddor 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' ,no unprejudiced thinker who is familiar with the history of religion will deny1 that of all priests in this priest-ridden world ,christian priests are the worst4 ,though less potent they are not much less proud or ambitious than when ,pope ,pascal ,,ii4 told ,king ,henry ,i4 that all ecclesiastics must enter into the church through ,christ and ,christ alone1 not through the civil magistrate or any profane laymen4 ,nor are they less jealous of such as would fain reduce the dimensions of their 'spiritual jurisdiction1' than when that haughty ,pope reminded his king that 'priests are called ,god in ,scripture as being the vicars of ,god2' while in consideration for the poor and the oppressed1 modern priests are disadvantageously distinguished1 from those 'vicars of ,god1' who trod upon the necks of emperors and kings1 made or unmade laws at pleasure1 and kept ,europe1 intellectual ,europe1 in unreasoning1 unresisting subjection4 ,the reader who agrees with ,milton that ,to know1 what every day before us lies1 ,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 say1 '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 the schoolmastership expressly sanctioned by the ,bishops of ,london and ,chester4 ,in piety nevertheless these 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 stone to those who ask them for bread4 ,to get 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 ,verily1 if these and men like these do not grind the faces of the poor1 the ,author of this ,apology is unable to conceive in what that peculiar process consists4 ,in ,scripture we are told1 the bread of the poor is his life1 and they who defraud him thereof are men of blood2 and by whom are the poor defrauded of their bread if not by those who1 like the ,bishops of ,london and ,chester1 legislate for poverty as if it were a crime1 and lend theft sanction to a system which1 while it necessitates the wholesale pinching and screwing even in the commonest necessaries of life 'of independent labourers1' does also necessitate the wholesale starvation of still more wretched paupers8 ,formerly our 'surplus populations' were 'killed off' by bullet and sabre1 now they are got rid of in ,poor ,law ,unions by a process less expensive perhaps1 but not less effectual4 ,did ,atheists 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 trees by their fruit1 except the tree called ,christianity4 ,their great 'prophet' argued that if the tree is good the fruit will be good2 but when their own religion is in question they give such argument the slip4 ,the vices of the ,atheist 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 ,christians4 ,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 ,it has been computed that the ,spaniards in ,america destroyed in about forty-five years ten millions of human creatures1 and this with a view of converting them to ,christianity4 ,bartholomew ,casa1 who made this computation1 affirms that they 7the ,spaniards7 hanged those unhappy people thirteen in a row1 in honour of the thirteen ,apostles1 and that they also gave their infants to be devoured by dogs4 #ge3a ,corsini1 another religious author1 tells us the ,spaniards destroyed more than fifteen millions of ,american aborigines1 and calculates that the blood of these devoted victims1 added to that of the slaves destroyed in the mines1 where they were compelled to labour1 would weigh as much as all the gold and silver that had been dug out of them4 ,if these or similar horrors were perpetrated by ,atheists1 who can doubt that ,roman ,catholics would at once ascribe them to the pestiferous influence of ,atheistical principles4 ,and the ,author of this ,apology is of opinion that they would be justified in so doing4 ,when whole nations of professed irreligionists shall be found conquering a country1 and hanging the aborigines of that country thirteen in a row1 in honour of some thirteen apostles of ,atheism1 their barbarity may fairly be ascribed to their creed4 ,habit does much1 and perhaps much of our virtue1 or its opposite is contingent on temperament2 but no people entertaining correct speculative opinions could possibly act1 or tolerate1 atrocities like these4 ,but strange to say1 neither ,roman ,catholic1 nor any other denomination of ,christians1 will submit to be tried to the same standard they deem so just when applied to ,atheists4 ,now sauce for the goose every body knows is equally sauce for the gander1 and it is difficult to discover the consistency or the honesty of men1 who trace to their creed the crimes or merest peccadilloes of ,atheists1 and will not trace to their creed the shocking barbarity of ,christians4 ,to understand such men is easy2 to admire them is impossible2 for their conduct in this particular palpably shocks every principle of truth and fairness4 ,why impute to ,atheism the vices or follies of its ,apostles1 while refusing to admit that the vices or follies of ,christians should be imputed to ,christianity4 ,of both folly and vice it is notorious professing ,christians have 'the lion's share4' ,yet the apologists of ,christianity1 who would fain have us believe the lives of ,atheists a consequence of ,atheism1 will by no means believe that the lives of ,christians are a consequence of ,christianity4 ,let no one suppose the ,author of this ,apology is prepared to allow that ,atheists are men of cruel dispositions or vicious4 ,he will not say with ,coleridge that only men of good hearts and strong heads can be ,atheists1 but he is quite ready to maintain that the generality of ,atheists are men of mild1 generous1 peaceable studious dispositions1 who desire the overthrow of superstition1 or true religion as its devotees call it1 because convinced a superstitious people never can be enlightened1 virtuous1 free1 or happy4 ,their love of whatever helps on civilisation and disgust of war are testified to even by opponents4 ,we may learn from the writings of ,lord ,bacon not only his opinion that ,atheism leaves men to sense1 to philosophy1 to natural piety1 to laws1 to reputation1 all which1 he justly observes1 may be guides to an outward moral virtue1 though religion were not2 but the fact that 'the times inclined to ,atheism 7as the times of ,augustus ,caesar7 were civil times4' ,nay1 he expressly declared ',atheism did never perturb states2 for it makes men wary of themselves as looking no further4' #gf3a ,can the same be said of religion8 ,will any one have the hardihood to say religion did never perturb states1 or that the times inclined to religion 7as the times of ,oliver ,cromwell7 were civil times1 or that it makes man wary of themselves as looking no further8 ,during times inclined to religion more than one hundred thousand witches were condemned to die by ,christian tribunals in accordance with the holy text1 thou shalt not suffer a witch to live4 ,during times inclined to religion it was usual to burn1 broil1 bake1 or otherwise murder heretics for the glory of ,god1 and at the same time to spare the vilest malefactors4 ,during times inclined to religion1 it has been computed that in ,spain alone no less than #cb1chb people were1 by the faithful1 burnt alive2 #ag1fij degraded and burnt in effigy2 and all the goods and chattels of the enormous number of #bia1dej consigned to the chancery of the ,inquisition4 #gg3a ,in short1 during those 'good old times1' men yielded themselves up to practices so strangely compounded of cruelty and absurdity1 that one finds it difficult to believe accounts of them1 however well authenticated4 ,speaking of the bigotted fury of certain ecclesiastics1 ,hippolyto ,joseph de ,costa1 in his ',narrative of the persecution' he suffered while lodged gratis by the ,portuguese ,inquisition for the pretended crime of ,free ,masonry1 says1 it would exceed the bounds of credulity1 had not facts in corroboration of it been so established by witnesses1 that nothing can shake them4 ,among ecclesiastics of this denomination we may mention that ,pontiff1 who1 from a vile principle of hate for his predecessor1 to whom he had been an enemy1 as soon as he ascended the ,papal chair directed the corpse to be taken out from the grave1 had the fingers and the head cut off and thrown into the sea1 ordered the remainder of the body to be burnt to ashes and excommunicated the soul4 ,could revenge be carried farther than in this instance8 ,the institution itself of the inquisition and the cruelty with which its members persecute those whom they suspect of tenets different from their own1 may well excite surprise4 ,in their eyes the tortures and the death of their fancied enemies are a mere amusement4 ,they burn some of their prisoners alive1 render their memories infamous1 and prosecute their children and all the connections of these unhappy sufferers2 they deprive orphans of the inheritance of their parents1 dishonour families in every possible shape1 and at length have recourse to the auto da fe1 #gg3b on which occasion1 while the miserable wretches are lingering in torments1 the members of the inquisition not only feast their eyes with this ,infernal spectacle1 but regale themselves with their friends at the expense of their unhappy victims4 ,such are the practises of the ,inquisition4 ,when those ,spanish ,christians who amused themselves by hanging poor wretches1 thirteen in a row1 in honour of the thirteen apostles1 were taunted with cruelty1 they boldly affirmed that as ,god had not redeemed with his blood the souls of the ,indians1 no difference should be made between them and the lowest of beasts4 ,in ,irvings history of ,new ,york is a letter written1 we are told1 by a ,spanish priest1 to his superior in ,spain1 which1 'among other curiosities1 contain this question--',can any one have the presumption to say these savage pagans have yielded anything more than an inconsiderable recompense to their benefactors1 in surrendering to them a little pitiful tract of this dirty sublunary planet in exchange for a glorious inheritance hereafter4' ,such is the conceit as well as cruelty of men who imagine themselves the vicegerents and avengers of ,deity4 ,in ,his name they burn1 and slay1 and rob without compunction or remorse2 nay1 when like ,sir ,giles ,overreach1 their ears are pierced by widows cries1 and undone orphans wash with tears their thresholds1 they only think what 'tis to make themselves acceptable in the sight of ,god4 ,believing pious ends justify any means1 they glory in conduct the most repugnant to every principle of decency1 equity1 and humanity4 ,in the cathedral of ,saragossa1 is a magnificent tomb1 raised1 in honor of a famous inquisitor2 around it are six pillars1 to each of which is chained a ,moor preparatory to his being burnt4 ,and if additional evidence were needed of human folly1 and stupid disposition1 like dray horses to go perpetually1 on 'one's nose in t'others tail1' we have it in the astounding fact1 that when the ,spanish ,cortes proposed the abolition of the ,inquisition1 the populace of ,spain considered such proposal1 'an infringement of their liberties4' #gh3a ,we have it on respectable authority1 that ,torquemada in the space of fourteen years that he wielded the chief inquisitorial powers1 robbed1 or otherwise persecuted eighty thousand persons1 of whom about six thousand were committed to the flames4 ,inquisitors made no secret of their hatred towards heretics2 to destroy them they considered a sacred duty4 ,far from ashamed of their cruelty towards heretics1 they gloried in it1 as undeniable evidence of their enthusiasm in the cause of ,christ4 ,simoncas1 one of their most esteemed writers1 said1 'the heretics deserve not merely one death1 but many deaths2 because a single death is the punishment of an ordinary heretic2 but these 7the heretics7 are deserving of punishment without mercy1 and particularly the teachers of the ,lutheran heresy1 who must by no means be spared4' ,pegma1 another of their writers1 insists1 that dogmatical heretics should be punished with death1 even though they gave the most unequivocal proof of their repentance4 ,that eminently pious monarch1 ,phillip the ,second of ,spain1 so loved to hear heretics groan1 that he rarely missed ,auto da ,fes2 at one of which several distinguished persons were to be burnt for heresy2 among the rest ,don ,john de ,cesa1 who while passing by him1 said1' ,sire1 how can you permit so many unfortunate persons to suffer8 ,how can you be witness of so horrid a sight without shuddering8' ,phillip coolly replied1 ',if my son1 sir1 were suspected of heresy1 ,i should myself hand him over to the ,inquisition4' ',my detestation1' continued he1 'of you and your companions is so great1 that ,i would act myself as your executioner1 if no other could be found4' ,phillip the ,fifth1 as may be seen in ,coxe's ,memoirs of the ,kings of ,spain1 'presented about the year #aagb1 three standards taken from 'infidels' to our lady of ,atocha2 and sent another to the ,pope1 as the grateful homage of the ,catholic ,king to the head of the ,church4 ,he also1 for the first time1 attended the celebration of an ,auto da ,fe1 at which in the commencement of his reign he had refused with horror to appear1 and witnessed the barbarous ceremony of committing twelve ,jews and ,mohammedans to the flames4' ,so great during times inclined to religion was inquisitorial power1 that monarchs and statesmen of liberal tendencies were constrained to quail before it4 ,it is related that a ,jewish girl1 entered into her seventeenth year1 extremely beautiful1 who in a public act of faith1 at ,madrid1 ,june #cjth1 #afhj1 together with twenty others of the same nation of both sexes1 being condemned to the stake1 turned herself to the ,queen of ,spain1 then present1 and prayed1 that out of her goodness and clemency she might be delivered from the dreadful punishment of the fire4 ',great ,queen1' said she1 'is not your presence able to bring me some comfort under my misery8 ,consider my youth1 and that ,i am condemned for a religion which ,i have sucked in with my mother's milk4' ,the ,queen turned away her eyes1 declaring1 she pitied the miserable creature1 but did not dare to intercede for her with a single word4 ,not only have ,roman ,catholic writers defended these inquisitorial abominations1 but1 with what every ,protestant must needs consider daring and blasphemous impiety1 laboured to prove that the first ,inquisitor was ,god himself4 ,luis de ,paramo1 for instance1 in his book ',de ,origine et ,progressu ,officii ,sanctoe ,inquisitionis1 ejusque dignitate et utilitate1' proves ,god to be the first ,inquisitor1 and that in the ,garden of ,eden was the first auto da fe4 ,nor do these most pious casuists discover anything in ,scripture which forbids the burning of heretics1 notwithstanding such texts as ',whosoever sheddeth man's blood by man shall his blood be shed1' which they contend inquisitors do never violate the true meaning or spirit of1 it being evident that to burn men is not to shed their blood--thus eluding the maxim ,ecclesia non novit sanguinem4 ,and if their right to burn heretics was questioned they triumphantly cited the text 7as given in the ',beehive' of the ,romish ,church7 ',whosoever doth not abide in me1 shall be cast out of the vineyard as a branch and there wither2 and men gather those branches and cast them into the fire and burn them4' ,on this text ,john ,andreas1 ,panormitamis1 ,hostraensii1 ,bernardus ,leizenburgen1 and others of the ,roman ,catholic casuists built up their proof that heretics1 like grape branches1 should be cast into the fire and burnt4 ,the execrable duplicity of these men is by ,protestant priests made the theme of unsparing invective1 as if the burning of heretics and its justification by ,scripture were crimes peculiar to ,roman ,catholics1 when in point of fact both have been shamelessly committed by ,christians rejoicing in the name of ,protestants4 ,john ,calvin burnt ,servetus1 and ,robert ,hall1 as we have seen1 applauded the act4 ,england1 to say nothing of other countries1 has had its auto da fe1 as well since as before the ,reformation4 ,heretics were first made bonfires of in ,england during the reign of ,henry the ,fourth1 who permitted the abomination in order to please certain bishops he was under obligation to for assisting him to depose ,richard the ,second and usurp his throne4 ,but that the practice of committing heretics to the flame prevailed in ,england long after ,popery ceased to be the dominant religion is notorious4 ,if heretics were thus sacrificed by ,henry the ,fourth to please ,popish ,bishops1 they were also sacrificed by ,elizabeth with a view to the satisfaction of ,protestant ,bishops4 ,cranmer literally compelled her brother1 the amiable ,edward1 to send a half crazed woman named ,joan ,boacher to the stake4 ,elizabeth herself caused two ,dutch ,anabaptists to be burnt in ,smithfield1 though it is but just to admit that1 unlike her sullen sister1 she preferred rather to hang than to burn heretics4 ,lord ,brougham has recently done mankind another valuable piece of service by painting the portrait of that ,protestant princess in colours at once so lively and faithful that none1 save the lovers of vulgar fanaticism and murderous hypocrisy1 will gaze on it without horror4 #ha3a ',mary1 honoured with the title of bloody1 appears to me a far more estimable character than her ripping-up sister ,elizabeth1 who1 when ,mary1 on her death-bed1 asked her for a real avowal of her religion1 prayed ,god that the earth might open and swallow her up if she was not a true ,roman ,catholic4' ,she made the same declaration to the ,duke of ,ferria1 the ,spanish ,ambassador1 who was so deceived that he wrote to ,philip1 stating no change in religious matters would take place on her accession1 and soon afterwards began ripping up the bellies of ,catholics4 ,that was quite the fashionable punishment in this and the succeeding reign4 ,i have the account1 with names1 dates1 and reference of no less than #aja more ,catholics who were burnt1 hung1 ripped up1 c41 by ,elizabeth1 and on to ,charles the ,second's end1 than there were ,protestants in ,mary's1 and all the reigns which preceded her1 letting lying ,fox count all he has got4 ,elizabeth1 too1 was by law a bastard1 and is to this day2 and so soon did her intentions appear of changing the religion1 that all the bishops but one refused to crown her2 and when this was done1 it was by the ,catholic ritual4 ,however the ,act-of-,parliament religion was set up again2 the prayer book of ,cranmer was set up again1 after sundry alterations3 it was altered too1 in ,edward's reign1 yet when first made1 it was duly declared to come from the ',holy ,ghost2' so it was after its second polishing under ,elizabeth4 ,to refuse the ,queen's supremacy was death2 it was death to continue in that religion1 which1 at her coronation she had sworn to firmly believe and defend4 ,it was high treason to admit or harbour1 or relieve a priest1 and hosts of these were ripped up1 for1 in the piety of their hearts1 risking all to afford the consolations of their religion to the ,catholics of ,england4 ,victim after victim came to the sacrifice1 mostly from the college of ,douay4 ,it is really horrible to read of these good and faithful champions of their religion being hung1 cut down instantaneously1 their bellies ripped up1 their hearts cut out1 their bodies chopped in pieces with every insult and indignity added to injury1 all through this reign1 and then to be talked to about 'bloody ,mary1' and the ',good ,queen-,bess4' ,verily1 countrymen1 you are vilely deceived4 ,taking into account the rippings1 and burnings1 and roastings1 and hanging2 the racks1 whips1 fines1 imprisonments1 and other horrors of the reign of this ',good ,bess1' there was a hundred times more human misery inflicted in her reign than in that of' ,bloody ,mary4' #hb3a ,the second ,catherine of ,russia1 though remarkable for rigid and scrupulous adherence to the ceremonial mummeries of her 'true church1' was at the same time as remarkable for liberality of sentiment4 ,it is said1 that upon a certain occasion1 being strongly advised by her ministers to deal out severe punishment on some heretics of ,atheistical tendencies1 who had given offence by rather freely expressing their opinions1 she laughingly said1 ',oh1 fie1 gentlemen fie1 if these heretics are to be eternally miserable in the other world1 we really ought to let them be comfortable in this4' ,few religious persons are liberal as this empress1 whose strong good sense seems to have been fully a match for her bad education3 that education was ,christian4 ,she was taught to loathe the opinions1 aye1 and the persons1 of heretics1 under which denomination may be included all dissenters from religious truth as it was in her1 or rather in the church of which she was chief member4 ,no other kind of teaching is accounted orthodox in our 'land of ,bibles' than that of state paid priests of law established religion4 ,look at the true ,church of ,england's ,thirty-,nine ,articles4 ,do they not abound in anathema1 and literally teem with the venom of intolerance8 ,do they not shock the better feelings even of those who believe them divine8 ,the truth is1 all priests teach religion which no wit can reconcile with reason1 and very many of them make their followers believe1 and perhaps believe themselves1 that to villify1 abuse1 and hunt down 'infidels1' are acts acceptable in the sight of ,god4 ,the idea of compensating poor unbelievers in this world by an extra quantum of comfort for the torments they are doomed to suffer in the next1 never enters their head4 ,indeed1 not a few of them gloat with satisfaction over the prospect of 'infidels' gnashing their teeth in that fiery gulph prepared for the devil and his angels4 ,by this odious class of fanatics neither the worm that dieth not1 nor the flame never to be extinguished1 is deemed sufficient punishment for the wretch whose thoughts concerning religion are not as their thoughts4 ,by them the imagined ',creator of the ,heavens and the earth' is dressed1 up in attributes the most frightful4 ,witness the character of ,him implied in the conceit of that popular preacher who declared 'there are children in hell not a span long'--a declaration which could only be made by one whose humanity was extinguished by divinity4 ,our pulpits can furnish many such preachers of 'a religion of charity1' while a whole army of ,christian warriors might be gathered from metropolitan pulpits alone1 who deeming it impious to say their ,god of mercy would permit the burning of infants not a span long1 do nevertheless1 firmly believe that 'children of a larger growth' may justly be tormented by the great king of kings2 and as ignorantia legis non excusat is a maxim of human law1 so1 according to them1 ignorance of divine law is no excuse whatever1 either for breaking or disregarding it4 ,the ,author of this ,apology was recently in ,scotland1 where a vast number of religious tracts were put into his hand1 one of which contains the following among other striking paragraphs3-- ',man could1 not create himself1 and far less can he save himself4 ,when ,god made him1 he brought him out of nothing2 when ,god4 saves him1 he brings him out of a state far lower and worse than nothing4 ,if in the one case1 then1 everything depended1 upon ,god's will and decree1 much more in the other4 ,there can be no injustice here4 ,had ,god pleased1 ,he might have saved the whole world4 ,but he did not2 and thousands are now in hell1 and shall be to all eternity4' ',hell is peopled already with millions of immortal souls doomed to fiery wrath2 while ,heaven is filled with ransomed sinners as vile1 yea perhaps viler than they4' #hc3a ,if the writer of this horrid nonsense do not blaspheme1 there surely can be no possibility of blaspheming4 ,if he do not impute to his ,god of mercy cruelty and injustice the most monstrous that can enter into human conception1 all language is void of meaning1 and men had far better cease 'civilising1' and betake themselves to woods and wilds and fastnesses1 to enjoy the state of mere brutishness so infinitely preferable to that reasonable state in which they are shaken and maddened by terrible dreams of a vengeful cruel ,god4 ,better be with the dead ,than on the tortures of the mind to lie ,in restless ecstacy4 ,better1 far better1 roam the desert or the forest like any other brutes1 than educate ourselves and others into the monstrous belief in a ,god who might have saved the world and would not2 who predestinates to endless and unutterable agonies2 who has with the one hand peopled ,hell with millions of immortal creatures1 while with the other has filled ,heaven with millions of ransomed sinners1 as vile1 yea perhaps viler than they4 ,in justice however to the large class of ,christians under the despotic and truly lamentable influence of this belief1 the ,author is bound to admit that they are far more consistent and logical in their notions of ,deity than perhaps any other section of ,theists1 for it cannot properly be denied that the doctrine of an ,omnipotent and ,prescient ,god destroys all distinction of virtue and vice1 justice and injustice1 right and wrong1 among men4 ,let the omnipotency and prescience of a ,first ,cause be granted1 the corollary of 'whatever is1 is right1' is one of the most obvious that can flow from any proposition3 the distance of any link in the eternal sequence cannot lessen the connection with a ,first ,cause1 admitting its ,omnipotency and ,prescience4 ,the author of these detestable paragraphs admits both4 ,he is a rigid ,predestinarian1 which no one can be who doubts the all powerfulness or foreknowledge of that ,god whom ,christians worship4 ,taking ,scripture as his guide1 the ,predestinarian must needs believe some are foredoomed to ,hell1 and some to ,hell1 irrespective of all merit2 it being manifestly absurd to suppose one man can deserve more or less than another1 in a world1 where all are compelled to believe1 feel1 and act1 as they do believe1 feel1 and act4 ,the disgrace attached to the memory of ,judas1 supposing him really to have betrayed his ,divine ,master1 has no foundation in human justice1 for 'surely as the ,lord liveth1' he was foredoomed1 and therefore compelled to betray him4 ,luther saw that truth1 and had the good sense to avow it4 ,no more rational or just are the denunciations of ,judas than those so unsparingly heaped upon the ,jews for crucifying the ,redeemer of the world1 when every body must1 or at least1 should know1 that admitting the world's redemption depended upon the ,crucifixion of ,christ1 if the ,jews had not crucified him the world could not have been redeemed4 ,so far then from blackguarding ,judas and the ,jews for doing1 what in the ,gospel they are represented to have done1 we should consider them rather as martyrs in the cause of ,divine ,providence than as villains worthy only of abhorrence and execration4 ,to the ,author of this ,apology it seems certain that if there is a ,god1 such as the ,christian delighteth to honour1 nothing happens1 nothing has happened1 nothing can happen contrary to ,his will4 ,and is it not absurd to say that what ,he pre-ordains mere mortals can hinder coming to pass8 ,even the ,devil1 believed in by ,christians1 is a creature--how then could he be anything else than the ,creator thought fit to make him8 ,grant he is the ,father of ,lies1 and then he will appear worthy of compassion1 if you reflect that he was made so by the ,father of ,truth4 ,in the ,tract to which such special reference has been made1 it is contended that ,adam was made not because he chose to be made1 but because ,god chose to make him1 and surely the same may be contended on the part of ,judas1 the ,jews1 and last1 though1 assuredly1 not least1 the ,devil himself4 ,he who is without ,god cannot run into absurdities and blasphemies like these1 whereas he who is with one cannot keep clear of them4 ,if consistent he must clothe ,him with ,calvinistic attributes4 ,to present ,him stripped of foreknowledge1 or omnipotency would outrage all just conception of that ',immense ,being' who brought his worshippers out of nothing4 ,and yet if we allow him these attributes there is no help for us1 headlong we go into the dark and fathomless doctrine of predestination1 than which no religious doctrine is so consistent or so revolting4 ,receive it1 and at once you find yourself bound heart and brain to belief in a supernatural ,,monster--'a vengeful1 pitiless1 and ,almighty ,fiend1 whose mercies are a nickname for the rage of hungry tigers4' ,the believers in this terrible offspring of heated imagination1 naturally aim at imitating1 and thus rendering themselves acceptable1 to ,him4 ,here is the source1 whence for ages have flowed the bitter waters of religious intolerance4 ,if ,calvin had not worshipped a cruel ,god1 he never could have hoped to please ,him by the murder of ,servetius4 ,if ,cranmer had wanted lively faith in a ,god who people's ,hell 'with millions of immortal souls1' he never would have brought ,joan ,bocher to the stake4 ,full of that ,christian zeal1 so 'apt to tarn sour1' these men lived like the hermit ,honorius1 'in hopes of gaining heaven by making earth a hell4' ,the savage bigotry of an ,elizabeth or a ,mary1 naturally resulted from the notion that monarchs unquestionably ruling by ,divine right1 were called upon by every earthly1 as well as heavenly consideration1 to prove their zeal in the cause of ,god1 by destroying ,his adversaries4 ,heretics have been consigned to dungeon and to name1 for ,his glory1 and ,his satisfaction4 ,all inquisitors from ,st4 ,dominic downward1 have indignantly repelled the charge that they have punished heretics just to glut their own appetite for cruelty4 ,worshippers of a ,god who saith1 'vengeance is mine1' they have felt themselves mere instruments in ,his hands2 of themselves1 and for themselves1 they did nothing2 all was for ,god4 ,to please ,him1 the ,jew and the ,heretic shrieked amid the flames4 ,they are not ashamed1 why should they8 to perform ,his behests4 ,when the late ,duke of ,york was about to leave ,lisbon1 its ,inquisitor-,general waited upon him1 with a humble request that he would delay his departure for a few days1 in order to make one at an ,auto da ,fe1 where it was kindly promised1 some ,jews should be burnt for his diversion3 so cruel and so blind are the superstitious4 ,queen ,mary has long been the mark at which our most eloquent ,protestant ,divines have aimed their shafts1 while of her no less 'bloody' sister's reputation1 they have been most watchful and tender4 ,with respect to her persecution of heretics1 they preserve a death-like silence4 ,fear of damaging ,protestantism deters them from exposing the enormous abomination of ,protestant monarchs4 ,against the bigotry of ,catholics they hurl the fiercest denunciations2 but if called upon to denounce as fiercely the bigotry of ,protestants1 they make us understand 'the case being altered1 that alters the case4' ,a ,popish ,inquisition they abhor1 but see no evil in ,inquisitions of their own4 ,smithfield ,auto da ,fe's1 according to these consistent ,christians1 were wrong during the reign of ,mary1 and right during the reign of her pious sister1 ',good ,queen ,bess4' ,such is the justice of superstition4 ,its votaries knowing themselves the favoured of heaven1 feel privileged to outrage and trample under foot the great principles of sense1 propriety1 and honour4 ,between ,catholics and ,protestants as regards these principles there is little to distinguish2 for in the race of abomination1 they have kept pretty nearly neck and neck4 ,the author of this ,apology has no sympathy with either1 but of the two much prefers ,popery4 ,there is about it a breadth of purpose1 a grandeur1 and a potency which excites some respect1 even in the breast of an enemy4 ,unreasonable it assuredly is1 but ,christians who object to it on that ground1 may be told--religion was never meant to be reasonable2 and that an appeal to rational principles will as little avail one religion as another1 as little avail ,protestant as ,roman ,catholic faith4 ,all religion is unreasonable1 and1 moreover1 to rationalize would be to destroy it4 ,hobbes could discover nothing in superstition essentially different from religion1 nor can we4 ,he deemed true religion as the religion which is fashionable1 and superstition as the religion which is not fashionable4 ,so do we1 so do all absolute ,atheists4 ,the notion that false religion implies the true1 just as base coin implies the pure1 will have weight with those1 and only those1 who cannot detect the sophistry of an argument a rubii toto caelo differentibus2 or in plain ,english1 from things entirely different presumed to be similar4 ,between coin and religion there is no precise analogy4 ,false coin implies true coin1 because none are sceptical as to the reality of true coin1 but false religion does not necessarily imply true religion1 because the reality of true religion is not only questionable1 but questioned4 ,it is not usual for money-dealers to be at issue as to the quality of their cash4 ,the genuine article will stand the test1 and always passes muster4 ,a practised ear can easily decide between the rival claims of two half-crowns1 one genuine1 the other spurious1 thrown upon a tradesman's counter4 ,but where are the scales in which we can weigh to a nicety true and false religions8 ,where is the ear so well practised and so delicately sensitive as to distinguish the true from the 'number without number' of false voices raised in their behalf8 ,where the eye so perfectly theologic1 so sharp1 piercing1 and free of that film called prejudice1 as to see which of our religions is the genuine article8 ,all are agreed as to the genuineness of current money4 ,all are at 'daggers drawn' as to the genuineness of any one religion4 ,that ,christianity is true no ,christian denies1 but which is the true ,christianity has not and we think cannot be determined4 ,the knot of old fashioned politicians who call themselves ,young ,england1 are enamoured of 'graceful superstition4' ,alarmed at the march of reason1 and admirers of 'blind faith in mystery1' they sigh for a renewal of those times when no one doubted the propriety of drowning witches1 or being touched for the king's evil4 ,cui bono is the question repeatedly put to the proselytising ,atheist by this modern antique class of persons1 who cannot see the utility of destroying the vital principle of all religions4 ,but if that principle is false1 no sane man can doubt the expediency of proving it so4 ,falsehood may be useful to individuals1 but cannot tend to the moral and political advancement of nations4 ,apologists of error find the presumed unfitness of their fellow creatures to appreciate truth a sufficient reason for not teaching it4 ,to raise up the populace to their own intellectual level they deem impracticable1 and therefore speak down to their lowest passions and prejudices3 like ,varro they contend there are some truths the vulgar had better think falsehoods1 and many falsehoods they had better think truths4 ,the consequences of such 'moral swindling' are everywhere visible3 on all sides superstition1 wild1 unreasoning1 senseless superstition rears its hateful front1 and vomits forth anathema on the friend of progress1 humanity1 and social justice4 ,look at ,ireland3 see to what a ,pandaemonium superstition has converted 'the first flower of the land and first gem of the sea4' ,in that unhappy country may be seen seven or eight millions of people cheated1 willingly defrauded of their substance1 by a handful of designing priests1 who1 dead to shame1 erect the most stupid credulity into exalted virtue --battle in support of ignorance because knowledge is incompatible with their 'blood-cemented pyramid of greatness1' and to aggrandise themselves1 perpetuate the vilest as well as most palpable delusions that ever assumed the mask of divine truth4 ,daniel ,o',connell may object to have them called 'surpliced ruffians1' not so the philosopher1 who sees in pious fraud on a gigantic scale1 the worst species of ruffianism that ever disgraced the earth4 ,these are no new tangled or undigested notions4 ,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 so 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 of this ,apology 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 them1 and he who deserves to occupy a place among 'the wisest and greatest' has been 'damned to eternal fame' as the1 '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 purchase4 ,he lived at a time when heresy1 to say nothing of ,atheism1 was rewarded with death4 ,bacon was not the man to be ambitious of such a reward4 ,few great geniuses are4 ,philosophers seldom covet martyrdom1 and hence it came to pass that few of them would run the terrible risk of provoking bigotted authority by the 'truth1 the whole truth1 and nothing but the truth' concerning religion4 ,in our own day the smell of a faggot would be too much for the nostrils of1 that still unamiable but somewhat improved animal1 called the public4 ,one delightful as well as natural consequence is1 that philosophical writers do ever and anon deal much more freely with religion than its professors are disposed1 though compelled1 to tolerate4 ,but1 even now1 with all our boasted liberty of conscience1 not one in one thousand of those who think truth about religion dare express it4 ,philosophy still exhibits1 in deference to popular prejudice and fanaticism1 what the great ,french maximist defined as 'the homage that vice pays to virtue4' ,such is the rule to which1 most fortunately for the pause of truth1 there are many1 and some splendid1 exceptions4 ,one of these is worth citing not only because of its intrinsic merit1 but because the thing to be cited includes an opinion of religion1 and a marked distinction between what is pious and what is honest1 that calls for especial notice4 ,the exception referred to is a paragraph from a paper on ,saint ,simonianism1 written by ,colonel ,thompson1 and originally published in the ,westminster ,review1 of ,april #a1 #ahcb1 containing these remarkable words3--',the world wants honest law-givers1 not pious ones4 ,if piety will make men honest1 let them favour us with the honesty and keep the piety for ,god and their own consciences4 ,there never was a man that brought piety upon the board when honesty would do1 without its being possible to trace a transfusion in the shape of money or money's worth1 from his neighbour's pocket into his4 ,the object of puzzling the question with religion is clear4 ,you cannot quarrel for sixpences with the man who is helping you the way to heaven4 ,the man who wants your sixpences1 therefore1 assumes a religious phraseology1 which is cant1 and cant is fraud1 and fraud is dishonesty1 and the dishonest should have a mark set on them4' ,there is an old story about a certain lady who said to her physician1 ',doctor1 what is your religion8' ',my religion1 madam1' replied the ,doctor1 'is the religion of all sensible men4' ',what kind of religion is that8' said the lady4 ',the religion1 madam1' quoth the ,doctor1 'that no sensible man will tell4' ,this doctor may be taken as a type of the class of shrewd people who despise religion1 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 irreligious faith4 ,like ,colonel ,thompson1 they know the world needs honest lawgivers not pious ones1 but unlike him1 they won't say so4 ,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 those who make sacrifices at the shrine of sincerity2 and while sagacious enough to perceive that religion is a clumsy political contrivance1 are not wanting in the prudence which dictates at least a warning conformity to prevailing prejudices4 ,none have done more to perpetuate 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 #ij3a ',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 imposters1 in contriving false miracles1 was artfully proportioned to the credulity of the vulgar2 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 the truth1 the prudent are silent1 the multitude believe1 and impostors triumph4' ,beausobre1 too1 in his learned1 account of ,manicheism reads a severe lesson to the 'sensible dummies1 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 #ia3a ,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 persecuting 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 advance the interests of truth4 ,colonel ,thompson is right4 ,in legislation1 in law1 in all the relations of life1 we want honesty1 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 them 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 ,but the desire to enlighten others is lost in regard for yourselves1 and what ,mrs4 ,grundy may say1 is sufficient to frighten ye from the enunciation truth4 ,is superstition no evil8 ,is there nothing hateful1 nothing against which unceasing war should be waged1 in the degradation of those unhappy persons who worship idols of their own imagination8 ,can error be fraught with good and truth with evil1 that we should shrink from doing justice to both8 ,everywhere are learnedly ignorant or basely cunning men1 who would scare us from dealing with religious error1 as all error deserves to be dealt with1 by high-sounding jargon about the danger of freeing vulgar minds from the wholesome restraints of certain antiquated beliefs4 ,themselves essentially vulgar by habit and in feeling1 their estimate of human tendencies is of the meanest1 the most grovelling description4 ,measuring the chaff of other men by their own bushel1 they arrive at the pious but false conclusion that without fear of ,god there can be no genuine love of man1 and that without faith in some one of our five hundred and odd true religions1 all the thoughts of our hearts would be evil continually4 ,they insist upon it that the 'absolute ,atheist1' if virtuous1 is so by accident not design2 that he can neither love truth1 justice1 nor his neighbour1 except by sheer luck1 and that1 if bad as his principles1 would cut the throat of every man1 woman1 and child who might have the misfortune to fall in his way4 ,they argue as if none can think good thoughts or purposely perform good acts unless so far eaten up by superstition as always to keep in view the probable rewards1 or equally probable vengeance of some supernatural ,being4 ,faith in human goodness1 irrespective of reward and punishment1 either here or hereafter1 sophists of this bigotted class have literally none4 ,influenced by fanaticism and stimulated by cupidity they let slip no opportunity of dealing out upon such as oppose their hideous doctrines the choicest sort of vituperative blackguardism4 ,the reader knows this is no idle or ill-considered charge4 ,he has seen at the commencement of this ,apology verbatim extracts1 affecting the moral character of ,atheists1 from books written by pious ,christians1 so utterly disgusting that only those in whom every sense of delicacy1 truth1 and justice has been obliterated1 by a worse than savage creed1 can peruse them without horror4 ,not inaptly1 we conceive1 has religion been likened to a madman's robe1 for the least puff of reason parts it and shows the wearer's nakedness4 ,this view of religion explains the otherwise inexplicable fact that eminent piety is usually associated with eminent imbecility4 ,such men as ,newton1 ,locke1 and ,bacon are not remembered and reverenced on account of their faith4 ,by all but peddling narrow-thoughted bigots they are held in honour for their science1 their matter-of-fact philosophy2 not their puerile conceits about 'airy nothings1' to which half crazed supernaturalists have assigned 'a local habitation and a name4' ,lord ,bacon laid down principles so remote from pious1 that no man can understand and philosophise in strict accordance with them1 if he fears to embrace ,atheism4 ,from his ,novum ,organum ,scientiarum may be extracted an antidote to the poison of superstition1 for it is there we are told that aiming at divine things through the human1 breeds only an odd mixture of imaginations4 ,there we are told that ,man1 the servant and interpreter of ,nature1 can only understand and act in proportion as he observes or contemplates the order of nature--more he cannot do4 ,there too is set down the wise lesson that truth is justly to be called the daughter1 not of ,authority1 but ,time4 ,bacon abhorred superstition4 ,he denounced it as the 'confusion of many states1' and for a 'religious philosopher' wrote most liberally of ,atheism4 ,no one who has read his ,essay on ,superstition can doubt that he thought it a far greater evil than ,atheism4 ,any man who should now write as favourably of ,godlessness would be suspected of a latitudinarianism quite inimical to the genius and spirit of 'true religion4' ,the orthodox much prefer false piety to no piety at all4 ,mere honesty does not satisfy them4 ,they insist on faith in their chimerical doctrines and systems1 as 'the basis of all excellence4' ,to please them we must sacrifice truth as it is in ,nature1 at the shrine of truth as it is in ,jesus1 and believe what derives no sanction from experience4 ,bacon taught us to 'interpret nature1' and that 'aiming at the divine through the human breeds only an odd mixture of imaginations2' but these hair-brained fanatics who would have us believe him one of them1 care little for natural knowledge1 and affect contempt for all that concerns most intimately our 'earthly tabernacles4' ,bacon taught us to consider as suspicious every relation1 which depends in any degree upon religion1 #ic3a but wiser than that 'wisest of mankind1' our real ,christians execrate such teaching1 and will have nothing good to do with those who walk in the light and honestly act in the spirit of it4 ,how dare they then pretend to sympathise with the opinions of ,bacon8 ,it is true he announced himself willing to swallow all the fables of the ,talmud or the ,koran1 rather than believe this ,almighty frame without a ,mind2 but who is now prepared to determine the precise sense in which our illustrious philosopher used the words 'without a mind4' ,we believe his own interpretation altogether unchristian4 ',to palter in a double sense' has ever been the practice of philosophers who1 like ,bacon1 knew more than they found it discreet to utter4 ,but with all their discretion1 ,locke1 ,milton1 and even ,newton did not succeed in establishing an orthodox reputation4 ,the passages from ,locke given in this ,apology do at least warrant our opinion that it may fairly be doubted whether he was either a ,christian or a ,theist4 ,had he been disposed to avow ,atheistical sentiments1 he could not have done so1 except at the imminent hazard of his life4 ,speculative philosophers do not usually covet the crown of martyrdom1 and are seldom unwilling to fling down a few religious sops to the ,cerberus of popular bigotry4 ,it was the boast of ,synesius1 ,bishop of ,ptolemais1 that when communing with himself1 he was always a philosopher1 but when dealing with the mass of mankind1 he was always a priest4 ,who knows how far ,john ,locke followed the safe example4 ,that he was a materialist his writings prove2 and every far sighted ,theist will admit that ,atheism is the natural termination of ,materialism4 ,john ,locke may have been a devout believer in 'thingless names1' to which no merely human creature can attach clear and distinct ideas3 he may have thought the ,bible had one of the said 'thingless names' for its author1 salvation for its end1 and truth without mixture of error for its matter2 though very probable he affected such belief1 to shield himself from persecution2 but it is quite certain1 and may be affirmed without injustice1 that he should to have professed ,atheism2 for his own rule of philosophising is inconsistent with belief in any thing supernatural4 ,while living he was often charged with ,atheism1 by opponents who understood the tendencies of his philosophy better than he appeared to do himself4 ,but the ,author of this ,apology has no such mean opinion of ,john ,locke1 as to suppose him ignorant that ,materialism1 as he taught it1 is totally irreconcileable with that ,god1 and that ,religion in which he professed to believe4 ,belief in inconceivable entities cannot be reconciled with disbelief of all entities1 save those of which we can frame clear and distinct ideas4 ,nor is it easy to persuade oneself that ,locke could so far have done violence to his own principles as to feel 'lively faith' in a 'science' with no other aim1 end1 or ground-work1 than 'the knowledge and attributes of the unknown4' ,by a late writer in the ,edinburgh ,review1 we are told that 'some of the opinions avowed by ,milton1' were so 'heterodox1' as to have 'excited considerable amazement4' ,we can scarcely conceive1 says this writer1 that any one could have read his ,paradise ,lost without suspecting him of heterodoxy2 nor do we think that any reader acquainted with the history of his life1 ought to be much startled by his opinions on marriage4 ,the opinions which he expressed regarding the nature of the ,deity1 the eternity of matter1 and the observation of the ,sabbath1 might1 we think1 have caused more just surprise4 #ie3a ,add to this good reader1 ,dr4 ,johnson's statement1 7',lives of the ,poets1' p4 #acd1 ,art4 ,milton17 that in the distribution of his 7,milton's7 hours there was no hour of prayer1 either solitary or with his household2 and then come1 if you can1 to the conclusion that he was a ,christian4 ,the piety of ,newton we are not prepared to dispute4 ,it is certain he manufactured for himself a ,god1 inasmuch as to space he ascribed the honor of being ,his sensorium4 ,it is equally clear that he believed ,christianity a divine system1 inasmuch as he wrote1 and rushed into print with1 a lot of exquisite nonsense about the exquisitely nonsensical ,apocalypse4 ,but we defy pietists to ferret out of his religious writings1 any argument in defence of religion1 not absolutely beneath contempt2 the best of them are execrably bad--mere ravings of a disordered and o'erwrought intellect4 ',the sublime ,newton1' said ,d',holbach1 'is but a child when he quits physical science1 to lose himself in the imaginary regions of theology4' ,he failed1 nevertheless1 to achieve the favour1 or escape the wrath1 of thorough-going theologians who were in ecstacies at his childishness1 but bitterly detested him1 as they detested every man who had the audacity to open up new1 and widen old fields1 of investigation2 to reject chimera and hold fast by fact in the pursuit of knowledge1 and to teach a series of scientific truths1 no ability can reconcile with the philosophy 787 of ,jesus and ,moses1 who1 according to wise ,dr4 ,epps1 never intended to teach man ,,natural ,,science1 which he defines to be ',god in ,creation2' but 'came to teach1 in referring to natural events1 ,,scientific ,,untruths4 #ie3b ,the ,author hopes that the opinions here advanced in reference to what may be named the ,argument from ',authority1' as contradistinguished from ',time1' will make obvious to ,christians themselves1 that it is an unsafe argument1 an argument which1 like the broken reed1 not only fails1 but cruelly wounds the hand that rests upon it4 ,much evidence has been1 and much more can be adduced to show that no prudent1 well-informed ,christian will say anything about the sanction lent to ,christianity1 or religion of any sort1 by the writings of ,newton1 ,milton1 ,bacon1 and ,locke4 ,by admirers of such sanction1 787 this1 our ,apology for ,atheism will1 no doubt1 be rejected with indignant contempt1 but we venture to predict for it better treatment at the hands of those who are convinced that untruth can no more be scientific1 than truth can be unscientific1 and that belief1 whether in the ,god of ,nature1 the ,god of ,scripture1 or the ,scripture itself1 opposed to ,philosophy1 must needs be opposed to ,reason and ,experience4 ,,endnotes #d3a #beth of ,november1 #ahde4 #e3a ,vide ',time's' ,commissioner's ,letter on the ,condition of ,ireland1' ,november #bh1 #ahdc4 #aj3a ,essay 'of the ,academical or ,sceptical ,philosophy4' #aa3a ,see the ,creeds of ,r4 ,owen and ,r4 ,carlile in ,no4 #ad of the ,promptor4 #aa3b ',essay of the ,idea of ,necessary ,connexion4' #aa3c ',essay of a ,providence and a ,future ,state4' #ab3a ,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 ,i1 #ahde4 #ac3a ,history of ,american ,savages4 #ac3b ,appendix the ,second to ',plutarchus and ,theophrastus on ,superstition4' #ac3c ,philosophy of ,history4 #ae3a ,see a ,notice of ,lord ,brougham's ,political ,philosophy1 in the number for ,april1 #ahde4 #bj3a ',apology for the ,bible1' page #acc4 #bj3b ,unusquisque vestrum non cogitate prius se debere ,deos nosse quam colere4 #bg3a ,see a curious ',essay on ,nature4' ,printed for ,badcock and ,co41 #b1 ,queen's ,head ,passage1 ,paternoster ,row4 #ahjg4 #ca3a ,elements of ,materialism1 chapter ,i4 #cb3a ,discussion on the ,existence of ,god1 between ,origen ,bachelor and ,robert ,dale ,owen4 #cg3a ,answer to ,dr4 ,priestly on the existence of ,god1 by a ,philosophical ,unbeliever4 #dj3a ,treatise on ,human ,nature4 #da3a ,this sexing is a stock receipt for mystification4--,colonel ,thompson4 #dd3a ,the ,rev4 ,j4,e4 ,smith4 #df3a ',an ,address on ,cerebral ,physiology and ,materialism1' delivered to the ,phrenological ,association in ,london1 ,june #bj1 #ahdb4 #di3a ,no #dj of ',the ,shepherd4' #ej3a ',the ,shepherd1' ,vol4 i41 page #dj4 #eb3a ,extracts from an able letter to the ,editor of ',the ,shepherd1' in ,no4 #bc of that periodical4 #ed3a ,novum ,organon4 #ef3a ,principia ,mathmatica1 p4 #ebh4 ,lond4 edit41 l#gbf4 #fc3a ,see a pamphlet1 price ,sixpence1 entitled ',paley refuted in his own words1' by ,g4,j4 ,holyoake4' #fc3b ,lessing4 #fd3a ,see ,extract from an unpublished work1 entitled the ',refutation of ,deism1' by the late ,p4,b4 ,shelley--given in the ,model ,republic of ,may #ast1 #ahac4 #fh3a ',westminster ,review' for ,may1 #ahdc4 #fi3a ,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 #fi3b ,the necessary existence of ,deity1 by ,william ,gillespie4 #fi3c ,page #aje of a ,discussion on the ,existence of ,god1 between ,origen ,batchelor and ,r4,d4 ,owen4 #gj3a ,quoted by ,dr4 ,samuel ,clarke1 in his introduction to the ,scripture doctrine of the ,trinity4 #gb3a ,history of ,england1 p4 #ea4 #ge3a ',dictionary of ,conversions1' page #d4 #gf3a ,essay on ,superstition4 #gg3a ,see article ',auto da ,fe1' vol4 i4 of ',recreative ,review1' published in #ahba4 #gg3b ,act of ,faith4 #gh3a ,st4 ,foix observes1 with respect to this tomb1 that if the ,jack ,ketch of any country should be rich enough to have a splendid tomb1 this might serve as an excellent model4 #ha3a ',lives of ,men of ,letters1' by ,henry ,lord ,brougham4 #hb3a ,vol iii41 page #eic1 #eid1 of ',a few hundred ,bible ,contradictions1 a ,hunt after the ,devil1 and other odd matters4' ,by ,john ,p4,y41 ,m4,d4 #hc3a ,no4 #h of ,j4 ,rutherford's ,series of ,tracts1 and entitled ',electing ,love4' #ij3a ,ecclesiastical ,history1 vol4 ii4 page #aa4 #ia3a ',manicheisme1' tome ii1 p4 #efh1 #efi4 #ic3a ,nov4 ,org41 lib2 ii4 aph4 #bi4 #ie3a ,see ',edinburgh ,review' containing a notice of ,milton's ',de ,doctrina ,christiana4' #ie3b ,page #ee of a ,pamphlet entitled1 ',the ,devil4'