An Apology for Atheism | Page 6

in that which is to come.' Educated to consider it 'an inhuman,
bloody, ferocious system, equally hostile to every restraint and to every
virtuous affection,' the majority of all countries detest and shun its
apostles. Their horror of them may be likened to that it is presumed the
horse feels towards the camel, upon whom (so travellers tell us) he
cannot look without shuddering.
To keep alive and make the most of this strong religious feeling has
ever been the object of Christian priests, who rarely hesitate to make
charges of Atheism, not only against opponents, but each other; not
only against disbelievers but believers in God. The Jesuit Lafiteau, in a
Preface to his 'Histoire des Sauvages Americanes,' [13:1] endeavours to
prove that only Atheists will dare assert that God created the Americans.
Scarcely a metaphysical writer of eminence has escaped the
'imputation' of Atheism. The great Clarke and his antagonist the greater
Leibnitz were called Atheists. Even Newton was put in the same
category. No sooner did sharp-sighted divines catch a glimpse of an

'Essay on the Human Understanding' than they loudly proclaimed the
Atheism of its author. Julian Hibbert, in his learned account 'Of Persons
Falsely Entitled Atheists,' says, 'the existence of some sort of a Deity
has usually been considered undeniable, so the imputation of Atheism
and the title of Atheist have usually been considered as insulting.' This
author, after giving no fewer than thirty and two names of 'individuals
among the Pagans who (with more or less injustice) have been accused
of Atheism,' says, 'the list shews, I think, that almost all the most
celebrated Grecian metaphysicians have been, either in their own or in
following ages, considered, with more or less reason, to be
Atheistically inclined. For though, the word Atheist was probably not
often used till about a hundred years before Christ, yet the imputation
of impiety was no doubt as easily and commonly bestowed, before that
period, as it has been since.' [13:2]
Voltaire relates, in the eighteenth chapter of his 'Philosophie de
L'Histoire,' [13:3] that a Frenchman named Maigrot, Bishop of Conon,
who knew not a word of Chinese, was deputed by the then Pope to go
and pass judgment on the opinions of certain Chinese philosophers: he
treated Confucius as Atheist, because that sage had said 'the sky has
given me virtue, and man can do me no hurt.'
On grounds no more solid than this, charges of Atheism are often
erected by 'surpliced sophists.' Rather ridiculous have been the mistakes
committed by some of them in their hurry to affix on objects of their
hate the brand of impiety. These persons, no doubt, supposed they were
privileged to write or talk any amount of nonsense and contradiction.
Men who fancy themselves commissioned by Deity to interpret his
'mysteries,' or announce his 'will,' are apt to make blunders without
being sensible of it, as did those worthy Jesuits who declared, in
opposition to Bayle, that a society of Atheists was impossible, and at
the same time assured the world that the government of China, by
Voltaire and many others considered the most ancient on earth, was a
society of Atheists. So difficult it is for men inflamed by religious
prejudices, interests, and animosities to keep clear of sophisms, which
can impose on none but themselves.

Many Atheists conceal their sentiments on account of the odium which
would certainly be their reward did they avow them. But the
unpopularity of those sentiments cannot, by persons of sense and
candour be allowed, in itself, a sufficient reason for their rejection. The
fact of a creed being unpopular is no proof it is false. The argument
from general consent is at best a suspicious one, for the truth of any
opinion or the validity of any practice. History proves that the
generality of men are the slaves of prejudice, the sport of custom, and
foes most bigotted to such opinions concerning religion as have not
been drawn in from the sucking-bottles, or 'hatched within the narrow
fences of their own conceit.' No prudent searcher after truth will accept
an opinion because it is the current one, but rather view it with distrust
for that very reason. The genius of him who said, in our journey to the
other world the common road is the safest, was cowardly as deceptive,
and therefore opposed to sound philosophy. Like horses yoked to a
team, 'one's nose in t'others tail,' is a mode of journeying anywhere the
opposite of dignified, pleasant, or improving. They who are enamoured
of 'the common road,' unless handsomely paid for journeying thereon,
must be slavish in feeling, and willing submitters to every indignity
sanctioned by custom, that potent enemy of truth, which from time
immemorial has been 'the law of fools.'
Every day experience