Superstition Unveiled | Page 5

we have said, be a matter of surprise to some; but
Robertson's Christianity was enlarged and tolerant, and David Hume's
principles were liberal and philosophical in a remarkable degree.' [9:2]
This testimony needs no comment. It clearly tells its own tale, and
ought to have the effect of throwing discredit upon the vulgar notion
that disgust of superstition is incompatible with talents and virtues of
the highest order; for, in the person of David Hume, the world saw
absolute Universalism co-existent with genius, learning, and moral
excellence, rarely, if ever, surpassed.
The unpopularity of that grand conception it would be vain to deny. A
vast majority of mankind associate with the idea of disbelief in their
Gods, everything stupid, monstrous, absurd and atrocious. Absolute
Universalism is thought by them the inseparable ally of most shocking
wickedness, involving '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 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 superstitious 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. The Jesuit Lafiteau, in a Preface to
his 'Histoire des Sauvages Americanes,' [10:1] endeavours to prove that
only Atheists will dare assert that God created the Americans. Not 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.' [11:1]
Voltaire relates, in the eighteenth chapter of his 'Philosophie de
L'Histoire,' [11:2] 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. Those persons, no doubt, supposed
themselves 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 was a
society of Atheists. So difficult it is for men inflamed by prejudices,
interests, and animosities, to keep clear of sophisms, which can impose
on none but themselves.
Many Universalists 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 an opinion 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 bigoted to such opinions concerning religion as have