LETTER XI. Of Human or Natural Morality

By this time, Madam, you will have reflected on what I had the honor to

address to you, and perceived how impossible it is to found a certain

and invariable morality on a religion enthusiastic, ambiguous,

mysterious, and contradictory, and which never agreed with itself.

You know that the God who appears to have taken pleasure in rendering

himself unintelligible, that the God who is partial and changeable, that

the God whose precepts are at variance one with another, can never serve

as the base on which to rear a morality that shall become practicable

among the inhabitants of the earth. In short, how can we fonnd justice

and goodness on attributes that are unjust and evil; yet attributes of a

Being who tempts man, whom he created, for the purpose of punishing him

when tempted? How can we know when we do the will of a God who has said,

_Thou shalt not kill_, and who yet allows his people to exterminate

whole nations? What idea can we form of the morality of that God who

declares himself pleased with the sanguinary conduct of Moses, of the

rebel, the assassin, the adulterer, David? Is it possible to found

the holy duties of humanity on a God whose favorites have been inhuman

persecutors and cruel monsters? How can we deduce our duties from the

lessons of the priests of a God of peace, who, nevertheless, breathes

only sedition, vengeance, and carnage? How can we take as models for our

conduct _saints_, who were useless enthusiasts, or turbulent fanatics,

or seditious apostates; who, under the pretext of defending the cause of

God, have stirred up the greatest ravages on the earth? What wholesome

morality can we reap from the adoption of impracticable virtues, from

their being supernatural, which are visibly useless to ourselves, to

those among whom we live, and in their consequences often dangerous? How

can we take as guides in our conduct priests, whose lessons are a tissue

of unintelligible opinions, (_for all religion is but opinion_,) puerile

and frivolous practices, which these gentlemen prefer to real virtues?

In fine, how can we be taught _the truth_, conducted in an unerring

path, by men of a changeable morality, calculated upon and actuated

by their present interests, and who, although they pretend to preach

good-will to men, humanity, and peace, have, as their text-book, a

volume stained with the records of injustice, inhumanity, sedition, and

perfidy? J You know, Madam, that it is impossible to found morality on

notions that are so unfixed and so contrary to all our natural ideas of

virtue. By virtue, we ought to understand the habitual dispositions to

do whatever will procure us the happiness of ourselves and our species.

By virtue, religion understands only that which may contribute to render

us favorable to a hidden God, who attaches his favor to practices and

opinions that are too often hurtful to ourselves, and little beneficial

to others. The morality of the Christians is a mystic morality, which

resembles the dogmas of their religion; it is obscure, unintelligible,

uncertain, and subject to the interpretation of frail creatures. This

morality is never fixed, because it is subordinate to a religion which

varies incessantly its principles, and which is regulated according to

the pleasure of a despotic divinity, and, more especially, according

to the pleasure of priests, whose interests are changing daily, whose

caprices are as variable as the hours of their existence, and who are,

consequently, not always in agreement with one another.

The writings which are the sources whence the Christians have drawn

their morality, are not only an abyss of obscurity, but demand continual

explications from their masters, the priests, who, in explaining, make

them still more obscure, still more contradictory. If these oracles of

heaven prescribe to us in one place the virtues truly useful, in another

part they approve, or prescribe, actions entirely opposed to all the

ideas that we have of virtue. The same God who orders us to be good,

equitable, and beneficent, who forbids the revenging of injuries,

who declares himself to be the God of clemency and of goodness, shows

himself to be implacable in his rage; announces himself as bringing

_the swords and not peace_; tells us that he is come to set mankind at

variance; and, finally, in order to revenge his wrongs, orders rapine,

treason, usurpation, and carnage. In a word, it is impossible to find

in the Scriptures any certain principles or sure rules of morality.

You there see, in one part, a small number of precepts, useful and

intelligible, and in another part maxims the most extravagant, and the

most destructive to the good and happiness of all society.

It is in punctuality to fulfil the superstitious and frivolous duties,

that the morality of the Jews in the Old Testament writings is chiefly

conspicuous; legal observances, rites, ceremonies, are all that occupied

the people of Israel. In recompense for their scrupulous exactness to

fulfil these duties, they were permitted to commit the most frightful of

crimes. The virtues recommended by the Son of God, in the New Testament,

are not in reality the same as those which God the Father had made

observable in the former case. The New Testament contradicts the Old. It

announces that God is not pacified by sacrifices, nor by offerings,

nor by frivolous rites. It substitutes in place of these, supernatural

virtues, of which I believe I have sufficiently proved the inutility,

the impossibility, and the incompatibility with the well-being of man

living in society. The Son of God, by the writers of the New Testament,

is set at variance with himself; for he destroys in one place what he

establishes in another; and, moreover, the priests have appropriated to

themselves all the principles of his mission. They are in unison only

with God when the precepts of the Deity accord with their present

interest. Is it their interest to persecute? They find that God ordains

persecution. Are they themselves persecuted? They find that this pacific

God forbids persecution, and views with abhorrence the persecution of

his servants. Do they find that superstitious practices are lucrative to

themselves? Notwithstanding the aversion of Jesus Christ from offerings,

rites, and ceremonies, they impose them on the people, they surcharge

them with mysterious rites: they respect these more than those duties

Which are of essential benefit to society. If Jesus has not wished that

they should avenge themselves, they find that his Father has delighted

in vengeance. If Jesus has declared that his kingdom is not of this

world, and if he has shown, contempt of riches, they nevertheless find

in the Old Testament sufficient reasons for establishing a hierarchy

for the governing of the world in a spiritual sense, as kings do in a

political one,--for the disputing with kings about their power,--for

exercising in this world an authority the most unlimited, a license the

most terrific. In a word, if they have found in the Bible some precepts

of a moral tendency and practical utility, they have also found others

to justify crimes the most atrocious.

Thus, in the Christian religion, morality uniformly depends on the

fanaticism of priests, their passions, their interests: its principles

are never fixed; they vary according to circumstances: the God of whom

they are the organs, and the interpreters, has not said any thing but

what agrees best with their views, and what never contravenes their

interest Following their caprices, he changes his advice continually;

he approves, and disapproves, of the same actions: he loves, or detests,

the same conduct; he changes crime into virtue, and virtue into crime.

What is the result from all this? It is that the Christians have not

sure principles in morality: it varies with the policy of the priests,

who are in a situation to command the credulity of mankind, and who,

by force of menaces and terrors, oblige men to shut their eyes on their

contradictions, and minds the most honest to commit faults the greatest

which can be committed against religion. It is thus that under a God who

recommends the love of our neighbor, the Christians accustom themselves

from infancy to detest an heretical neighbor, and are almost always in a

disposition to overwhelm him by a crowd of arguments received from their

priests. It is thus that, under a God who ordains we should love our

enemies and forgive their offences, the Christians hate and destroy

the enemies of their priests, and take vengeance, without measure, for

injuries which they pretend to have received. It is thus, that under

a just God, a God who never ceases to boast of his goodness, the

Christians, at the signal of their spiritual guides, become unjust and

cruel, and make a merit of having stifled the cries of nature, the voice

of humanity, the counsels of wisdom, and of public interest.

In a word, all the ideas of justice and of injustice, of good and evil,

of happiness and of misfortune, are necessarily confounded in the head

of a Christian. His despotic priest commands him, in the name of God, to

put no reliance on his reason, and the man who is compelled to abandon

it for the guidance of a troubled imagination will be far more likely to

consult and admit the most stupid fanaticism as the inspiration of

the Most High. In his blindness, he casts at his feet duties the most

sacred, and he believes himself virtuous in outraging every virtue. Has

he remorse? his priest appeases it speedily, and points out some

easy practices by which he may soon recommend himself to God. Has he

committed injustice, violence, and rapine? he may repair all by giving

to the church the goods of which he has despoiled worthy citizens; or by

repaying by largesses, which will procure him the prayers of the priests

and the favor of heaven. For the priests never reproach men, who give

them of this world's goods, with the injustice, the cruelties, and the

crimes they have been guilty, to support the church and befriend her

ministers; the faults which have almost always been found the most

unpardonable, have always been those of most disservice to the clergy.

To question the faith and reject the authority of the priesthood, have

always been the most frightful crimes; they are truly the sin against

the Holy Ghost, which can never be forgiven either in this world or in

that which is to come. To despise these objects which the priests have

an interest in making to be respected, is sufficient to qualify one for

the appellation of a blasphemer and an impious man. These vague words,

void of sense, suffice to excite horror in the mind of the weak vulgar.

The terrible word sacrilege designates an attempt on the person, the

goods, and the rights of the clergy. The omission of some useless

practice is exaggerated and represented as a crime more detestable than

actions which injure society. In favor of fidelity to fulfil the duties

of religion, the priest easily pardons his slave submitting to vices,

criminal debaucheries, and excesses the most horrible. You perceive,

then, Madam, that the Christian morality has really in view but the

utility of the priests. Why, then, should you be surprised that they

endeavor to make themselves arbitrary and sovereign; that they deem

as faults, and as criminal, all the virtues which agree not with their

marvellous systems? The Christian morality appears only to have been

proposed to blind men, to disturb their reason, to render them abject

and timid, to plunge them into vassalage, to make them lose sight of the

earth which they inhabit, for visions of bliss in heaven. By the aid of

this morality, the priests have become the true masters here below; they

have imagined virtues and practices useful only to themselves; they have

proscribed and interdicted those which were truly useful to society;

they have made slaves of their disciples, who make virtue to consist in

blind submission to their caprices.

To lay the foundations of a good morality, it is absolutely necessary

to destroy the prejudices which the priests have inspired in us; it is

necessary to begin by rendering the mind of man energetic, and freeing

it from those vain terrors which have enthralled it; it is necessary to

renounce those supernatural notions which have, till now, hindered men

from consulting the volume of nature, which have subjected reason to the

yoke of authority; it is necessary to encourage man, to undeceive him as

to those prejudices which have enslaved him; to annihilate in his bosom

those false theories which corrupt his nature, and which are, in fact,

infidel guides, destructive of the real happiness of the species. It is

necessary to undeceive him as to the idea of his loathing himself, and

especially that other idea, that some of his fellow-creatures are not to

labor with their hands for their support, but in spiritual matters for

his happiness. In fine, it is necessary to influence him with self-love,

that he may merit the esteem of the world, the benevolence and

consideration of those with whom he is associated by the ties of nature

or public economy.

The morality of religion appears calculated to confound society and

replunge its members into the savage state. The Christian virtues tend

evidently to isolate man, to detach him from those to whom nature has

united him, and to unite him to the priests--to make him lose sight of

a happiness the most solid, to occupy himself only with dangerous

chimeras. We only live in society to procure the more easily those

kindnesses, succors, and pleasures, which we could not obtain living by

ourselves. If it had been destined that we should live miserably in

this world, that we should detest ourselves, fly the esteem of others,

voluntarily afflict ourselves, have no attachment for any one, society

would have been one heap of confusion, the human kind savages and

strangers to one another. However, if it is true that God is the author

of man, it is God who renders man sociable; it is God who wishes man to

live in society where he can obtain the greatest good. If God is good,

he cannot approve that men should leave society to become miserable; if

God is the author of reason, we can only wish that men who are possessed

of reason should employ this distinguishing gift to procure for

themselves all the happiness its exercise can bring them. If God has

revealed himself, it is not in some obscure way, but in in revelation

the most evident and clear of all those supposed revelations, which are

visibly contrary to all the notions we can form of the Divinity. We

are not, however, obliged to dive into the marvellous to establish the

duties man owes to man, since God has very plainly shown them in the

wants of one and the good offices of another person. But it is only by

consulting our reason that we can arrive at the means of contributing to

the felicity of our species. It is then evident that in regarding man as

the creature of God, God must have designed that man should consult his

reason, that it might procure him the most solid happiness, and those

principles of virtue which nature approves.

What, then, might not our opinions be were we to substitute the morality

of reason for the morality of religion? In place of a partial and

reserved morality for a small number of men, let us substitute a

universal morality, intelligible to all the inhabitants of the earth,

and of which all can find the principles in nature. Let us study

this nature, its wants, and its desires; let us examine the means of

satisfying it; let us consider what is the end of our existence in

society; we shall see that all those who are thus associated are

compelled by their natures to practise affection one to another,

benevolence, esteem, and relief, if desired; we shall see what is that

line of conduct which necessarily excites hatred, ill-will, and all

those misfortunes which experience makes familiar to mankind; our

reason will tell us what actions are the most calculated to excite real

happiness and good will the most solid and extensive; let us weigh these

with those that are founded on visionary theories; their difference will

at once be perceptible; the advantages which are permanent we will not

sacrifice for those that are momentary; we will employ all our faculties

to augment the happiness of our species; we will labor with perseverance

and courage to extirpate evil from the earth; we will assist as much as

we can those who are without friends; we will seek to alleviate their

distresses and their pains; we will merit their regard, and thus fulfil

the end of our being on earth.

In conducting ourselves in this manner, our reason prescribes a morality

agreeable to nature, reasonable to all, constant in its operation,

effective in its exercise in benefiting all, in contributing to the

happiness of society, collectively and individually, in distinction to

the mysticism preached up by priests. We shall find in our reason and in

our nature the surest guides, superior to the clergy, who only teach us

to benefit themselves. We shall thus enjoy a morality as durable as the

race of man. We shall have precepts founded on the necessity of things,

that will punish those transgressing them, and rewarding those who obey

them. Every man who shall prove himself to be just, useful, beneficent,

will be an object of love to his fellow-citizens; every man who shall

prove himself unjust, useless, and wicked will become an object of

hatred to himself as well as to others; he will be forced to tremble at

the violation of the laws; he will be compelled to do that which is good

to gain the good will of mankind and preserve the regard of those who

have the power of obliging him to be a useful member of the state.

Thus, Madam, if it should be demanded of you what you would substitute

for the benefit of society, in place of visionary reveries, I reply,

a sensible morality, a good education, profitable habits, self-evident

principles of duty, wise laws, which even the wicked cannot

misunderstand, but which may correct their evil purposes, and

recompenses that may tend to the promotion of virtue. The education of

the present day tends only to make youth the slaves of superstition;

the virtues which it inculcates on them are only those of fanaticism,

to render the mind subject to the priests for the remainder of life;

the motives to duty are only fictitious and imaginary; the rewards and

punishments which it exhibits in an obscure glimmering, produce no other

effect than to make useless enthusiasts and dangerous fanatics. The

principles on which enthusiasm establishes morality are changing and

ruinous; those on which the morality of reason is established are fixed,

and cannot be overturned. Seeing, then, that man, a reasonable being,

should be chiefly occupied about his preservation and happiness--that he

should love virtue--that he should be sensible of its advantages--that

he should fear the consequences of crime--is it to be wondered I should

insist so much on the practice of virtue as his chief good? Men ought to

hate crime because it leads to misery. Society, to exist, must receive

the united virtue of its members, obedience to good laws, the activity

and intelligence of citizens to defend its privileges and its rights.

Laws are good when they invite the members of society to labor for

reciprocal good offices. Laws are just when they recompense or punish in

proportion to the good or evil which is done to society. Laws supported

by a visible authority should be founded on present motives; and thus

they would have more force than those of religion, which are founded

on uncertain motives, imaginary and removed from this world, and which

experience proves cannot suffice to curb the passions of bad men, nor

show them their duty by the fear of punishments after death.

If in place of stifling human reason, as, is too much done, its

perfectibility were studied; if in place of deluging the world with

visionary notions, truth were inculcated; if in place of pleading a

supernatural morality, a morality agreeable to humanity and resulting

from experience were preached, we should no longer be the dupes of

imaginary theories, nor of terrifying fables as the bases of virtue.

Every one would then perceive that it is to the practice of virtue, to

the faithful observation of the duties of morality, that the happiness

of individuals and of society is to be traced. Is he a husband? He will

perceive that his essential happiness is to show kindness, attachment,

and tenderness to the companion of his life, destined by his own choice

to share his pleasures and endure his misfortunes. And, on the other

hand, she, by consulting her true interests, will perceive that they

consist in rendering homage to her husband, in interdicting every

thought that could alienate her affections, diminish her esteem and

confidence in him. Fathers and mothers will perceive that their children

are destined to be one day their consolation and support in old age, and

that by consequence they have the greatest interest in inspiring them in

early life with sentiments of which they may themselves reap the benefit

when age or misfortune may require the fruits of those advantages that

result from a good education. Their children, early taught to reflect on

these things, will find their interest to lie in meriting the kindness

of their parents, and in giving them proofs that the virtues they are

taught will be communicated to their posterity. The master will perceive

that, to be served with affection, he owes good will, kindness, and

indulgence to those at whose hands he would reap advantages, and by

whose labor he would increase his prosperity; and servants will discover

how much their happiness depends on fidelity, industry, and good temper

in their situations. Friends will find the advantages of a kindred heart

for friendship, and the reciprocity of good offices. The members of the

same family will perceive the necessity of preserving that union

which nature has established among them, to render mutual benefits in

prosperity or in adversity. Societies, if they reflect on the end of

their association, will perceive that to secure it they must observe

good faith and punctuality in their engagements. The citizen, when he

consults his reason, will perceive how much it is necessary, for the

good of the nation to which he belongs, that he should exert himself to

advance its prosperity, or, in its misfortunes, to retrieve its glory.

By consequence every one in his sphere, and using his faculties for

this great end, will find his own advantage in restraining the bad as

dangerous, and opposing enemies to the state as enemies to himself.

In a word, every man who will reflect for himself will be compelled to

acknowledge the necessity of virtue for the happiness of the world. It

is so obvious that justice is the basis of all society; that good will

and good offices necessarily procure for men affection and respect; that

every man who respects himself ought to seek the esteem of others; that

it is necessary to merit the good opinion of society; that he ought to

be jealous of his reputation; that a weak being, who is every instant

exposed to misfortunes, ought to know what are his duties, and how he

should practise them for the benefit of himself and the assembly of

which he is a member.

If we reflect for one moment on the effects of the passions, we shall

perceive the necessity of repressing them, if we would spare ourselves

vain regrets and useless sorrows, which certainly always afflict those

who obey not the laws. Thus, a single reflection will suffice to show

the impropriety of anger, the dreadful consequences of revenge, calumny,

and backbiting. Every one must perceive that in giving a free course to

unbridled desires, he becomes the enemy of society, and then it is the

part of the laws to restrain him who renounces his reason and despises

the motives that ought to guide him.

If it is objected that man is not a free agent, and therefore is unable

to restrain his passions, and that consequently the law ought not

to punish him, I reply that the community are impelled by the same

necessity to hate what is injurious, and for their own conservation and

happiness have the right to restrain an unhappily organized individual

who is impelled to injure himself and others. The inevitable faults of

men necessarily excite the hatred of those who suffer from them.

If the man who consults his reason has real and powerful motives for

doing good to others and abstaining from injuring them, he has present

motives equally urgent to restrain him from the commission of vice.

Experience may suffice to show him that if he becomes sooner or later

the victim of his excesses, he ceases to be the friend of virtue, and

exists only to serve vice, which will infallibly punish him. This being

allowed, prudence, or the desire of preserving one's self free from the

contamination of evil, ought to inculcate to every man his path of

duty; and, unless blinded by his passions, he must perceive how much

moderation in his pleasures, temperance, chastity, contribute to

happiness; that those who transgress in these respects are necessarily

the victims of ill health, and too often pass a life both infirm and

unfortunate, which terminates soon in death.

How is it possible, then, Madam, from visionary theories to arrive

at these conclusions, and establish from supernatural phantasms the

principles of private and public virtue? Shall we launch into unknown

regions to ascertain our duty and to keep our station in society? Is

it not sufficient if we wish to be happy that we should endeavor to

preserve ourselves in those maxims which reason approves, and on which

virtue is founded? Every man who would perish, who would render his

existence miserable, whoever would sacrifice permanent happiness for

present pleasure, is a fool, who reflects not on the interests that are

dearest to him.

If there are any principles so clear as the morality of humanity has

been and is still proved to be, they are such as men ought to observe.

They are not obscure notions, mysticism, contradictions, which have made

of a science the most obvious and best demonstrated, an unintelligible

science, mysterious and uncertain to those for whom it is designed.

In the hands of the priests, morality has become an enigma; they have

founded our duties on the attributes of a Deity whom the mind of man

cannot comprehend, in place of founding them on the character of man

himself. They have thrown in among them the foundations of an edifice

which is made for this earth. They have desired to regulate our

manners agreeably to equivocal oracles which every instant contradict

themselves, and which too often render their devotees useless to society

and to themselves. They have pretended to render their morality more

sacred by inviting us to look for recompenses and punishments removed

beyond this life, but which they announce in the name of the Divinity.

In fine, they have made man a being who may not even strive at

perfection, by a preordination of some to bliss, and consequent

damnation of others, whose insensibility is the result of this

selection.

Need we not, then, wonder that this supernatural morality should be so

contrary to the nature and the mind of man? It is in vain that it aims

at the annihilation of human nature, which is so much stronger, so

much more powerful, than imagination. In despite of all the subtile and

marvellous speculations of the priests, man continues always to love

himself, to desire his well being, and to flee misfortune and sorrow. He

has then always been actuated by the same passions. When these passions

have been moderate, and have tended to the public good, they are

legitimate, and we approve those actions which are their effects. When

these passions have been disordered, hurtful to society, or to the

individual, he condemns them; they punish him; he is dissatisfied with

his conduct which others cannot approve. Man always loves his pleasures,

because in their enjoyment he fulfils the end of his existence; if he

exceeds their just bounds he renders himself miserable.

The morality of the clergy, on the other hand, appears calculated to

keep nature always at variance with herself, for it is almost always

without effect even on the priesthood. Their chimeras serve but to

torture weak minds, and to set the passions at war with nature and their

dogmas. When this morality professes to restrain the wicked, to curb the

passions of men, it operates in opposition to the established laws

of natural religion; for by preserving all its rigor, it becomes

impracticable; and it meets with real devotees only in some few fanatics

who have renounced nature, and who would be singular, even if their

oddities were injurious to society. This morality, adopted for the most

part by devotees, without eradicating their habits or their natural

defects, keeps them always in a state of opposition even with

themselves. Their life is a round of faults and of scruples, of sins and

remorse, of crimes and expiations, of pleasures which they enjoy, but

for which they again reproach themselves for having tasted. In a word,

the morality of superstition necessarily carries with it into the heart

and the family of its devotees inward distress and affliction; it makes

of enthusiasts and fanatics scrupulous devotees; it makes a great many

insensible and miserable; it renders none perfect, few good; and

those only tolerable whom nature, education, and habit had moulded for

happiness.

It is our temperament which decides our condition; the acquisition

of moderate passions, of honest habits, sensible opinions, laudable

examples, and practical virtues, is a difficult task, but not impossible

when undertaken with reason for one's guide, It is difficult to be

virtuous and happy with a temperament so ardent as to sway the passions

to its will. One must in calmness consult reason as to nis duty. Nature,

in giving us lively passions and a susceptible imagination, has made

us capable of suffering the instant we transgress her bounds. She then

renders us necessary to ourselves, and we cannot proceed to consult

our real interest if we continue in indulgence that she forbids. The

passions which reason cannot restrain are not to be bridled by religion.

It is in vain that we hope to derive succors from religion if we despise

and refuse what nature offers us. Religion leaves men just such as

nature and habit have made them; and if it produce any changes on some

few, I believe I have proved that those changes are not always for the

better.

Congratulate yourself, then, Madam, on being born with good

dispositions, of having received such honest principles, which shall

carry you through life in the practice of virtue, and in the love of

a fine and exalted taste for the rational pleasures of our nature.

Continue to be the happiness of your family, which esteems and honors

you. Continue to diffuse around you the blessings you enjoy; continue to

perform only those actions which are esteemed by all the world, and all

men will respect you. Respect yourself, and others will respect you.

These are the legitimate sentiments of virtue and of happiness. Labor

for your own happiness, and you will promote that of your family,

who will love you in proportion to the good you do it. Allow me to

congratulate myself if, in all I have said, I have in any measure swept

from your mind those clouds of fanaticism which obscure the reason;

and to felicitate you on your having escaped from vague theories of

imagination. Abjure superstition, which is calculated only to make you

miserable; let the morality of humanity be your uniform religion; that

your happiness may be constant, let reason be your guide; that virtue

may be the idol of your soul, cultivate and love only what is virtuous

and good in the world; and if there be a God who is interested in

the happiness of his creatures, if there be a God full of justice

and goodness, he will not be angry with you for having consulted

your reason; if there be another life, your happiness in it cannot be

doubtful, if God rewards every one according to the good done here.

Letters To Eugenia; Or, A Preservative Against Religious Prejudices · 第 16 / 18 题