An Apology for Atheism

An Apology for Atheism, by
Charles Southwell

The Project Gutenberg EBook of An Apology for Atheism, by Charles
Southwell This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and
with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away
or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.net
Title: An Apology for Atheism Addressed to Religious Investigators of
Every Denomination by One of Its Apostles
Author: Charles Southwell
Release Date: August 11, 2005 [EBook #16512]
Language: English
Character set encoding: ASCII
*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK AN
APOLOGY FOR ATHEISM ***

Produced by Freethought Archives, www.freethought.vze.com

PRODUCTION NOTES:
An Apology for Atheism by Charles Southwell (1814-1860) First
published anonymously in 1846

Transcribed by the Freethought Archives, www.freethought.vze.com

AN APOLOGY FOR ATHEISM:
ADDRESSED TO RELIGIOUS INVESTIGATORS OF EVERY
DENOMINATION BY ONE OF ITS APOSTLES.

"Not one of you reflects, that you ought know your Gods before you
worship them."

LONDON: J. WATSON, 5, PAUL'S ALLEY, PATERNOSTER ROW.
AND ALL BOOKSELLERS.
1846

AN APOLOGY FOR ATHEISM
It would be absurd to doubt that religion has an important bearing on
all the relations and conditions of life. The connexion between religions
faith and political practice is, in truth, far closer than is generally
thought. Public opinion has not ripened into a knowledge that religious
error is the intangible but real substratum of all political injustice.
Though the 'schoolmaster' has done much, there still remain and hold
some away among us, many honest and energetic assertors of 'the rights
of man,' who have to learn that a people in the fetters of superstition,
can never achieve political freedom. Many of these reformers admit the
vast, the incalculable influence of Mahommedanism on the politics of
Constantinople, and yet persist in acting as if Christianity had little or
nothing to do with the politics of England.
At a recent meeting of the Anti-State Church Association it was
remarked, that 'throw what we would into the political cauldron, out it
came in an ecclesiastical shape'. If the newspaper report may be relied

on, there was much laughing among the hearers of those words, the
deep meaning of which it may safely be affirmed, only a select few of
them could fathom.
Hostility to state churches by no means implies a knowledge of the
close and important connection between ecclesiastical and political
questions. Men may appreciate the justice of voluntaryism in religion,
and yet have rather cloudy conceptions with respect to the influence of
opinions and things ecclesiastical on the condition of nations. They
may clearly see that he who needs the priest, should disdain to saddle
others with the cost of him, while blind to the fact that no people
having faith in the supernatural ever failed to mix up such faith with
political affairs. Even leading members of the 'Third Estate' are
constantly declaring their disinclination for religious controversy, and
express particular anxiety to keep their journals free of everything
'strictly theological.' Their notion is, that newspaper writers should
endeavour to keep clear of so 'awful' a topic. And yet seldom does a
day pass in which this self-imposed editorial rule is not violated--a fact
significant as fact can be, of that connection between religion and
politics the author thinks has been far too little regarded.
It is quite possible the editors of newspapers have weighty reasons for
their repugnance to agitate the much vexed question of religion, but it
seems they cannot help doing so. In a leading article of this day's Post,
[Endnote 4:1] we are told--'The stain and reproach of Romanism in
Ireland is, that it is a political system, and a wicked political system, for
it regards only the exercise of power, and neglects utterly the duty of
improvement.' In journals supported by Romanists, and of course
devoted to the interests of their church, the very same charge is made
against English Protestantism. To denounce each other's 'holy apostolic
religion' may be incompatible with the taste of 'gentlemen of the press,'
but certainly they do it with a brisk and hearty vehemence that inclines
one to think it a 'labour of love.' What men do con amore they usually
do well, and no one can deny the wonderful talent for denunciation
exhibited by journalists when writing down each other's 'true
Christianity.' The unsparing invective quoted above from the Post is a
good specimen. If just, Irish Romanism ought to be destroyed, and

newspaper writers cannot be better employed than in helping on the
work of its destruction, or the destruction of any other religion to which
the same 'stain and reproach' may be fairly attached.
The author of this Apology has no spite or ill-will towards Roman
Catholics, though opposed to