A morality, which contradicts the nature of man, is not made for man.

"But," say you, "the nature of man is depraved." In what consists this

pretended depravity? In having passions? But, are not passions essential

to man? Is he not obliged to seek, desire, and love what is, or what he

thinks is, conducive to his happiness? Is he not forced to fear and avoid

what he judges disagreeable or fatal? Kindle his passions for useful

objects; connect his welfare with those objects; divert him, by sensible

and known motives, from what may injure either him or others, and you will

make him a reasonable and virtuous being. A man without passions would be

equally indifferent to vice and to virtue.

Holy Doctors! you are always repeating to us that the nature of man is

perverted; you exclaim, "that _all flesh has corrupted its way_, that

all the propensities of nature have become inordinate." In this case, you

accuse your God; who was either unable, or unwilling, that this nature

should preserve its primitive perfection. If this nature is corrupted, why

has not God repaired it? The Christian immediately assures me, "that human

nature is repaired; that the death of his God has restored its integrity."

How then, I would ask, do you pretend that human nature, notwithstanding

the death of a God, is still depraved? Is then the death of your God

wholly fruitless? What becomes of his omnipotence and of his victory over

the Devil, if it is true that the Devil still preserves the empire, which,

according to you, he has always exercised in the world?

According to Christian theology, Death is the _wages of sin_. This opinion

is conformable to that of some negro and savage nations, who imagine that

the Death of a man is always the supernatural effect of the anger of the

Gods. Christians firmly believe, that Christ has delivered them from sin;

though they see, that, in their Religion, as in others, man is subject to

Death. To say that Jesus Christ has delivered us from sin, is it not to

say, that a judge has pardoned a criminal, while we see that he leaves him

for execution?

164.

If shutting our eyes upon whatever passes in the world, we would credit

the partisans of the Christian Religion, we should believe, that the

coming of their divine Saviour produced the most wonderful and complete

reform in the morals of nations.

If we examine the Morals of Christian nations, and listen to the clamours

of their priests, we shall be forced to conclude, that Jesus Christ, their

God, preached and died, in vain; his omnipotent will still finds in men,

a resistance, over which he cannot, or will not triumph. The Morality

of this divine Teacher, which his disciples so much admire and so little

practise, is followed, in a whole century only by half a dozen obscure

saints, and fanatics, and unknown monks, who alone will have the glory

of shining in the celestial court, while all the rest of mortals, though

redeemed by the blood of this God, will be the prey of eternal flames.

165.

When a man is strongly inclined to sin, he thinks very little about

his God. Nay more, whatever crimes he has committed, he always flatters

himself, that this God will soften, in his favour, the rigour of his

decrees. No mortal seriously believes, that his conduct can damn him.

Though he fears a terrible God, who often makes him tremble, yet, whenever

he is strongly tempted, he yields; and he afterwards sees only the God

of _mercies_, the idea of whom calms his apprehensions. If a man commits

evil, he hopes, he shall have time to reform, and promises to repent at a

future day.

In religious pharmacy, there are infallible prescriptions to quiet

consciences: priests, in every country, possess sovereign secrets to

disarm the anger of heaven. Yet, if it be true that the Deity is appeased

by prayers, offerings, sacrifices, and penances, it can no longer be said,

that Religion is a check to the irregularities of men; they will first

sin, and then seek the means to appease God. Every Religion, which

expiates crime and promises a remission of them, if it restrain some

persons, encourages the majority to commit evil. Notwithstanding his

immutability, God, in every Religion, is a true _Proteus_. His priests

represent him at one time armed with severity, at another full of clemency

and mildness; sometimes cruel and unmerciful, and sometimes easily melted

by the sorrow and tears of sinners. Consequently, men see the Divinity

only on the side most conformable to their present interests. A God always

angry would discourage his worshippers, or throw them into despair.

Men must have a God, who is both irritable, and placable. If his anger

frightens some timorous souls, his clemency encourages the resolutely

wicked, who depend upon recurring, sooner or later, to the means of

accommodation. If the judgments of God terrify some faint-hearted pious

persons, who by constitution and habit are not prone to evil, _the

treasures of divine mercy_ encourage the greatest criminals, who have

reason to hope they participate therein equally with the others.

166.

Most men seldom think of God, or, at least, bestow on him serious

attention. The only ideas we can form of him are so devoid of object, and

are at the same time so afflicting, that the only imaginations they can

arrest are those of melancholy hypochondriacs, who do not constitute the

majority of the inhabitants of this world. The vulgar have no conception

of God; their weak brains are confused, whenever they think of him.

The man of business thinks only of his business; the courtier of his

intrigues; men of fashion, women, and young people of their pleasures;

dissipation soon effaces in them all the fatiguing notions of Religion.

The ambitious man, the miser and the debauchee carefully avoid

speculations too feeble to counterbalance their various passions.

Who is awed by the idea of a God? A few enfeebled men, morose and

disgusted with the world; a few, in whom the passions are already deadened

by age, by infirmity, or by the strokes of fortune. Religion is a check,

to those alone who by their state of mind and body, or by fortuitous

circumstances, have been already brought to reason. The fear of God

hinders from sin only those, who are not much inclined to it, or else

those who are no longer able to commit it. To tell men, that the

Deity punishes crimes in this world, is to advance an assertion, which

experience every moment contradicts. The worst of men are commonly the

arbiters of the world, and are those whom fortune loads with her favours.

To refer us to another life, in order to convince us of the judgments

of God, is to refer us to conjectures, in order to destroy facts, which

cannot be doubted.

167.

Nobody thinks of the life to come, when he is strongly smitten with

the objects he finds here below. In the eyes of a passionate lover, the

presence of his mistress extinguishes the flames of hell, and her charms

efface all the pleasures of paradise. Woman! you leave, say you, your

lover for your God. This is either because your lover is no longer the

same in your eyes, or because he leaves you.

Nothing is more common, than to see ambitious, perverse, corrupt, and

immoral men, who have some ideas of Religion, and sometimes appear even

zealous for its interest. If they do not practise it at present, they hope

to in the future. They lay it up, as a remedy, which will be necessary

to salve the conscience for the evil they intend to commit. Besides, the

party of devotees and priests being very numerous, active, and powerful,

is it not astonishing, that rogues and knaves seek its support to attain

their ends? It will undoubtedly be said, that many honest people are

sincerely religious, and that without profit; but is uprightness of heart

always accompanied with knowledge?

It is urged, that many learned men, many men of genius have been strongly

attached to Religion. This proves, that men of genius may have prejudices,

be pusillanimous, and have an imagination, which misleads them and

prevents them from examining subjects coolly. Pascal proves nothing in

favour of Religion, unless that a man of genius may be foolish on some

subjects, and is but a child, when he is weak enough to listen to his

prejudices. Pascal himself tells us, that _the mind may be strong and

contracted, enlarged and weak_. He previously observes, that _a man may

have a sound mind, and not understand every subject equally well; for

there are some, who, having a sound judgment in a certain order of things,

are bewildered in others_.

168.

What is virtue according to theology? _It is_, we are told, _the

conformity of the actions of man to the will of God_. But, what is God?

A being, of whom nobody has the least conception, and whom every one

consequently modifies in his own way. What is the will of God? It is what

men, who have seen God, or whom God has inspired, have declared to be the

will of God. Who are those, who have seen God? They are either fanatics,

or rogues, or ambitious men, whom we cannot believe.

To found Morality upon a God, whom every man paints to himself

differently, composes in his way, and arranges according to his own

temperament and interest, is evidently to found Morality upon the caprice

and imagination of men; it is to found it upon the whims of a sect, a

faction, a party, who believe they have the advantage to adore a true God

to the exclusion of all others.

To establish Morality or the duties of man upon the divine will, is to

found it upon the will, the reveries and the interests of those, who make

God speak, without ever fearing that he will contradict them. In every

Religion, priests alone have a right to decide what is pleasing or

displeasing to their God, and we are certain they will always decide, that

it is what pleases or displeases themselves. The dogmas, the ceremonies,

the morals, and the virtues, prescribed by every Religion, are visibly

calculated only to extend the power or augment the emoluments of the

founders and ministers of these Religions. The dogmas are obscure,

inconceivable, frightful, and are therefore well calculated to bewilder

the imagination and to render the vulgar more obsequious to the will of

those who wish to domineer over them. The ceremonies and practices procure

the priests, riches or respect. Religion consists in a submissive faith,

which prohibits the exercise of reason; in a devout humility, which

insures priests the submission of their slaves; in an ardent zeal, when

Religion, that is, when the interest of these priests, is in danger. The

only object of all religions is evidently the advantage of its ministers.

169.

When we reproach theologians with the barrenness of their divine virtues,

they emphatically extol _charity_, that tender love of one's neighbour,

which Christianity makes an essential duty of its disciples. But, alas!

what becomes of this pretended charity, when we examine the conduct of the

ministers of the Lord? Ask them, whether we must love or do good to our

neighbour, if he be an impious man, a heretic, or an infidel, that is,

if he do not think like them? Ask them, whether we must tolerate opinions

contrary to those of the religion, they profess? Ask them, whether the

sovereign can show indulgence to those who are in error? Their charity

instantly disappears, and the established clergy will tell you, that _the

prince bears the sword only to support the cause of the Most High_: they

will tell you that, through love for our neighbour, we must prosecute,

imprison, exile, and burn him. You will find no toleration except among a

few priests, persecuted themselves, who will lay aside Christian charity

the instant they have power to persecute in their turn.

The Christian religion, in its origin preached by beggars and miserable

men, under the name of _charity_, strongly recommends alms. The religion

of Mahomet also enjoins it as an indispensable duty. Nothing undoubtedly

is more conformable to humanity, than to succour the unfortunate, to

clothe the naked, to extend the hand of beneficence to every one in

distress. But would it not be more humane and charitable to prevent the

source of misery and poverty? If Religion, instead of deifying princes,

had taught them to respect the property of their subjects, to be just, to

exercise only their lawful rights, we should not be shocked by the sight

of such a multitude of beggars. A rapacious, unjust, tyrannical government

multiplies misery; heavy taxes produce discouragement, sloth, and poverty,

which in their turn beget robberies, assassinations, and crimes of every

description. Had sovereigns more humanity, charity, and equity, their

dominions would not be peopled by so many wretches, whose misery it

becomes impossible to alleviate.

Christian and Mahometan states are full of large hospitals, richly

endowed, in which we admire the pious charity of the kings and sultans,

who erected them. But would it not have been more humane to govern the

people justly, to render them happy, to excite and favour industry and

commerce, and to let men enjoy in safety the fruit of their labours, than

to crush them under a despotic yoke, to impoverish them by foolish wars,

to reduce them to beggary, in order that luxury may be satisfied, and then

to erect splendid buildings, which can contain but a very small portion

of those, who have been rendered miserable? Religion has only deluded men;

instead of preventing evils, it always applies ineffectual remedies.

The ministers of heaven have always known how to profit by the calamities

of others. Public misery is their element. They have every where become

administrators of the property of the poor, distributors of alms,

depositaries of charitable donations; and thereby they have at all times

extended and supported their power over the unhappy, who generally compose

the most numerous, restless, and seditious part of society. Thus the

greatest evils turn to the profit of the ministers of the Lord. Christian

priests tell us, that the property they possess is the property of the

poor, and that it is therefore sacred. Consequently they have eagerly

accumulated lands, revenues, and treasures. Under colour of charity,

spiritual guides have become extremely opulent, and in the face of

impoverished nations enjoy wealth, which was destined solely for the

unfortunate; while the latter, far from murmuring, applaud a pious

generosity, which enriches the church, but rarely contributes to the

relief of the poor.

According to the principles of Christianity, poverty itself is a virtue;

indeed, it is the virtue, which sovereigns and priests oblige their slaves

to observe most rigorously. With this idea, many pious Christians have of

their own accord renounced riches, distributed their patrimony among the

poor, and retired into deserts, there to live in voluntary indigence. But

this enthusiasm, this supernatural taste for misery, has been soon forced

to yield to nature. The successors of these volunteers in poverty sold to

the devout people their prayers, and their intercessions with the Deity.

They became rich and powerful. Thus monks and hermits lived in indolence,

and under colour of charity, impudently devoured the substance of the

poor.

The species of poverty, most esteemed by Religion, is _poverty of mind_.

The fundamental virtue of every Religion, most useful to its ministers,

is _faith_. It consists in unbounded credulity, which admits, without

enquiry, whatever the interpreters of the Deity are interested in making

men believe. By the aid of this wonderful virtue, priests became the

arbiters of right and wrong, of good and evil: they could easily cause the

commission of crimes to advance their interest. Implicit faith has been

the source of the greatest outrages that have been committed.

170.

He, who first taught nations, that, when we wrong Man, we must ask pardon

of God, appease _him_ by presents, and offer _him_ sacrifices, evidently

destroyed the true principles of Morality. According to such ideas, many

persons imagine that they may obtain of the king of heaven, as of kings

of the earth, permission to be unjust and wicked, or may at least obtain

pardon for the evil they may commit.

Morality is founded upon the relations, wants, and constant interests

of mankind; the relations, which subsist between God and Men, are either

perfectly unknown, or imaginary. Religion, by associating God with Man,

has wisely weakened, or destroyed, the bonds, which unite them. Mortals

imagine, they may injure one another with impunity, by making suitable

satisfaction to the almighty being, who is supposed to have the right of

remitting all offences committed against his creatures.

Is any thing better calculated to encourage the wicked or harden them in

crimes, than to persuade them that there exists an invisible being, who

has a right to forgive acts of injustice, rapine, and outrage committed

against society? By these destructive ideas, perverse men perpetrate the

most horrid crimes, and believe they make reparation by imploring divine

mercy; their conscience is at rest, when a priest assures them that heaven

is disarmed by a repentance, which, though sincere, is very useless to the

world.

In the mind of a devout man, God must be regarded more than his creatures;

it is better to obey him, than men. The interests of the celestial monarch

must prevail over those of weak mortals. But the interests of heaven are

obviously those of its ministers; whence it evidently follows, that in

every religion, priests, under pretext of the interests of heaven or the

glory of God, can dispense with the duties of human Morality, when they

clash with the duties, which God has a right to impose. Besides, must

not he, who has power to pardon crimes, have a right to encourage the

commission of crimes?

171.

We are perpetually told, that, without a God there would be no _moral

obligation_; that the people and even the sovereigns require a legislator

powerful enough to constrain them. Moral constraint supposes a law; but

this law arises from the eternal and necessary relations of things with

one another; relations, which have nothing common with the existence of a

God. The rules of Man's conduct are derived from his own nature which he

is capable of knowing, and not from the Divine nature of which he has no

idea. These rules constrain or oblige us; that is, we render ourselves

estimable or contemptible, amiable or detestable, worthy of reward or of

punishment, happy or unhappy, accordingly as we conform to, or deviate

from these rules. The law, which obliges man not to hurt himself, is

founded upon the nature of a sensible being, who, in whatever way he came

into this world, is forced by his actual essence to seek good and shun

evil, to love pleasure and fear pain. The law, which obliges man not

to injure, and even to do good to others, is founded upon the nature of

sensible beings, living in society, whose essence compels them to despise

those who are useless, and to detest those who oppose their felicity.

Whether there exists a God or not, whether this God has spoken or not, the

moral duties of men will be always the same, so long as they are sensible

beings. Have men then need of a God whom they know not, of an invisible

legislator, of a mysterious religion and of chimerical fears, in order to

learn that every excess evidently tends to destroy them, that to preserve

health they must be temperate; that to gain the love of others it is

necessary to do them good, that to do them evil is a sure means to incur

their vengeance and hatred? "Before the law there was no sin." Nothing is

more false than this maxim. It suffices that man is what he is, or that

he is a sensible being, in order to distinguish what gives him pleasure or

displeasure. It suffices that one man knows that another man is a sensible

being like himself, to perceive what is useful or hurtful to him. It

suffices that man needs his fellow-creature, in order to know that he must

fear to excite sentiments unfavourable to himself. Thus the feeling and

thinking being has only to feel and think, in order to discover what he

must do for himself and others. I feel, and another feels like me; this is

the foundation of all morals.

172.

We can judge of the goodness of a system of Morals, only by its conformity

to the nature of man. By this comparison, we have a right to reject it,

if contrary to the welfare of our species. Whoever has seriously meditated

Religion; whoever has carefully weighed its advantages and disadvantages,

will be fully convinced, that both are injurious to the interests of Man,

or directly opposite to his nature.

"To arms! the cause of your God is at stake! Heaven is outraged! The faith

is in danger! Impiety! blasphemy! heresy!" The magical power of these

formidable words, the real value of which the people never understand,

have at all times enabled priests to excite revolts, to dethrone kings, to

kindle civil wars, and to lay waste. If we examine the important objects,

which have produced so many ravages upon earth, it appears, that either

the foolish reveries and whimsical conjectures of some theologian who did

not understand himself, or else the pretensions of the clergy, have broken

every social bond and deluged mankind with blood and tears.

173.

The sovereigns of this world, by associating the Divinity in the

government of their dominions, by proclaiming themselves his vicegerents

and representatives upon earth, and by acknowledging they hold their power

from him, have necessarily constituted his ministers their own rivals or

masters. Is it then astonishing, that priests have often made kings feel

the superiority of the Celestial Monarch? Have they not more than once

convinced temporal princes, that even the greatest power is compelled to

yield to the spiritual power of opinion? Nothing is more difficult than

to serve two masters, especially when they are not agreed upon what they

require.

The association of Religion with Politics necessarily introduced double

legislation. The law of God, interpreted by his priests, was often

repugnant to the law of the sovereign, or the interest of the state. When

princes have firmness and are confident of the love of their subjects,

the law of God is sometimes forced to yield to the wise intentions of the

temporal sovereign; but generally the _sovereign_ authority is obliged

to give way to the _divine_ authority, that is, to the interests of the

clergy. Nothing is more dangerous to a prince, than to _encroach upon the

authority of the Church_, that is, to attempt to reform abuses consecrated

by religion. God is never more angry than when we touch the divine rights,

privileges, possessions, or immunities of his priests.

The metaphysical speculations or religious opinions of men influence their

conduct, only when they judge them conformable to their interest. Nothing

proves this truth more clearly, than the conduct of many princes with

respect to the spiritual power, which they often resist. Ought not a

sovereign, persuaded of the importance and rights of Religion, to believe

himself in conscience bound to receive respectfully the orders of its

priests, and to regard them as the orders of the Divinity? There was

a time, when kings and people, more consistent in their conduct, were

convinced of the rights of spiritual power, and becoming its slaves,

yielded to it upon every occasion, and were but docile instruments in

its hands. That happy time is passed. By a strange inconsistency the most

devout monarchs are sometimes seen to oppose the enterprises of those,

whom they yet regard as the ministers of God. A sovereign, deeply

religious, ought to remain prostrate at the feet of his ministers, and

regard them as true sovereigns. Is there upon earth a power which has a

right to put itself in competition with that of the Most High?

174.

Have princes then, who imagine themselves interested in cherishing the

prejudices of their subjects, seriously reflected upon the effects, which

have been, and may be again produced by certain privileged demagogues, who

have a right to speak at pleasure, and in the name of heaven to inflame

the passions of millions of subjects? What ravages would not these sacred

haranguers cause, if they should conspire, as they have so often done, to

disturb the tranquillity of a state!

Good Sense · 第 11 / 14 段