Of the importance of religious opinions

You may think, perhaps, after having read the preceding chapter, that I have taken little room to treat a question on which so much has been written; but if it be allowed that I have made some approaches to truth, I shall not need any excuse. The researches after truth resemble those circles which we trace sometimes one round another; the furthest from the centre has necessarily the greatest extent.

I will then endeavour, with the same brevity, to examine the objection which is to make the subject of this chapter.

Society, some say, is at present filled with persons, who, to borrow the expression of the times, are absolutely disengaged from every kind of prejudice, who believe not even the existence of a Supreme Being; and yet, their conduct appears as regular as that of the most religious men.

Before replying to this objection I ought to make an important observation. The detractors of a religious spirit habitually confound, in their discourse, devotion and piety; they attribute besides to devotion an exaggerated sense, which its natural definition will not bear; and derive from this misconception a great advantage. Piety, simple in its sentiments and deportment, commonly escapes the heedless glance of a man of the world; and the greater part of those who speak of it, would have some difficulty to delineate it well; devotion, on the contrary, such as we are accustomed to represent, seems to attach some value to appearances; it displays itself, it makes a parade of the austerity of its principles; and often soured by the sacrifices, of the constraint, which it has imposed on itself as a law, it contracts a rough and inflexible spirit, which banishes sentiment, amiable and indulgent: in short, devotion is sometimes mixed with hypocrisy, and then it is only a despicable assemblage of the most contemptible vices. It is easy to judge, from these two pictures, that judicious piety, rational and indulgent, forms the true characteristic of a religious spirit, considered in its purity. It is then with morality, inspired by a like spirit, that it is necessary to compare those men, who are guided only by the principles they frame to themselves; and I believe, that one of these two systems of morality is far superior to the other; but we run a risk of deceiving ourselves in our observations, when we do not extend them beyond the narrow circle, known amongst us by the name of society. Men, in the circumscribed relations which arise from the communications of idleness and dissipation, require of each other, only qualities applicable to these kind of relations; their code of laws is very short, integrity in the commerce of life, constancy in friendship, or, at least, politeness in our intercourse, a kind of elevation in their discourse and manner; in short, probity is the grand outline; and this is all that is required, in order to display ourselves to the best advantage in the midst of the active scenes which surround us, where we sometimes form a confederacy proper to serve as a support of the great virtues; but what they wish for before every thing is, a grant of indulgence in favour of vices, which do not disturb the order or the peace of their pleasures, and which only render unhappy parents, husbands, and creditors, vassals and the commonalty. Far distant, indeed, from a like tolerance, are those collective obligations which morality dictates, obligations, of which I made a concise sketch, when I compared them with those which are imposed by civil laws. It is then only, after having retraced ourselves the entire system of our duties, it is only after having compared them with the conventions softened by fashionable society, that we are in a state to judge, if the conduct of persons, disengaged from every religious tie, ought to be given as an example, and if their morality can suffice for all the circumstances of life.

But in admitting, for a moment, this supposition, we should not have a right to draw any deduction contrary to the truths, which I have endeavoured to establish; for all those who free themselves at a certain age, from the yoke of religion, have been at least prepared by it to respect virtue. Principles inculcated early in life, have a great influence on the human heart, a long time even after our understanding has rejected the reasoning which served as the basis of those principles: the soul, formed when the reason begins to dawn, to the love of order, and sustained in this disposition by the force of habit, never entirely loses this principle. So that, whatever be the opinions adopted when the judgment is formed, it is slowly, and by degrees, that these opinions act on the character and direct the conduct. Besides, while religion maintains amongst the greater number of men, a profound respect for morality, those who reject these sentiments know, nevertheless, that probity leads to esteem, and to the various advantages which depend on it. Of course, a virtuous atheist merely makes us recollect, that he lives where virtue is respected; and it is not the inefficacy, but, on the contrary, the indirect influence of religious opinions, which his conduct demonstrates to me. I think I see, in a beautiful piece of mechanism, a small part broken off from the chain, and which maintains its place, by the force still subsisting of general equilibrium.

What! would you have need of religion to be an honest man? Here is an interrogative, with which they hope to embarrass those who wish to preserve to morality its best support; and the dread that some have of not giving an honourable idea of their sentiments, induces them to reply with quickness, that certainly they should not need the check of religion, and that the dictates of their heart would always be sufficient to direct them. This answer is undoubtedly very respectable; but for my part, I avow, I should merely say, that virtue has so many charms, when it has been a long time practised, that a truly sensible man would continue to be just, even when every religious sentiment was annihilated; but that it is uncertain whether, with a political education, his principles might have been the same; and I should add further, that no one, perhaps, could be certain, that he would have sufficient strength to resist a revolution of ideas similar to those that we have just supposed, were he to fall at the same time into a state of misery and dejection, which would make him revolt at the enjoyments and the triumphs of others. It is always in a like situation, that it is necessary to place ourselves, to judge properly of certain questions; for all those who enjoy the favours of fortune, have, in consequence of this fortunate condition, fewer objects of envy, and are less subject to temptations; and in the midst of the different comforts, which peaceably surround them, it is not the principles of others of which they know the want.

As for philosophical writers, if it were amongst them, that we are to search for the principal defenders of the new opinions, and if, at the same time, their moral conduct was cited as an example, we should have to observe, that a retired life, love of study, and a constant habit of reflection, ought to spread a kind of calm over their sentiments; besides, delivered up to abstraction, or preoccupied by general ideas, they know not all the passions, and they are seldom personally engaged in those ardent pursuits which stimulate society. They cannot then determine, with certainty, what would have been the degree of their resisting force, if without any other defensive arms than their principles, and no guide but convenience, they had to combat against the allurements of fortune and ambition, which present themselves in every step of our worldly career. They have also, like all the inventors and the propagators of a new system, vanity, which engages them to multiply the number of their disciples: and how, in fact, could they be able to flatter themselves with any success, if, in attacking the most respectable opinions, they had not endeavoured to prove that their doctrines were not in opposition to morality. Besides, it is very necessary, after having silently sapped the foundation of our dwelling, that they support for some time the edifice, were it only while they have with us a common habitation; were it only during the interval when we should be able to judge in their presence, of the utility of their instructions: in short, very often, perhaps, the dupes of their own heart, they have been induced to believe that, because they were at the same time irreligious by system, and just by character and habit, religion and virtue have not a necessary union; and if it is true, that in the grand interests of life, the slightest doubt has some influence on our actions, would it be possible, that at the time when they would seek to shake religious opinions, even when they are ridiculed in conversation, that they would still endeavour to preserve a secret connexion with them, by the propriety of their conduct? It is thus that, in the disputes of princes, or in the quarrels of ministers, the members of the same family have sometimes the art of dividing themselves, in order, at all events, that one of their friends should be in each party.

These different reflections ought necessarily to be taken into consideration, before we give ourselves up to the inferences that they would wish to draw from the manners of irreligious men; but, to discredit their arguments, it is sufficient to observe, that we cannot make any application of them to the most numerous class of men: honest atheists have never existed among the commonalty, religion comprehends all their knowledge in morality; and if once they were to lose this guide, their conduct would be absolutely dependent on chance and circumstances.

It is still essential to observe, that, according to the motives to which we can attribute the relaxation of moral principles, there exists a great difference between the various characters which attend vicious actions: a depraved man, though religious, does wrong by accident, through weakness, and according to the successive transports of his passions; but the wicked atheist has not a fixed time; opportunities do not surprise him, he searches for them, or waits for them with impatience; he yields not through the contagion of imitation; but he takes pleasure in setting an example; he is not a corrupt fruit, he is himself the tree of evil.

Another objection is raised, but of a very different kind: they point out the contrast, frequently perceived, between the conduct and the religious sentiments of the greater part of men; an opposition from whence they would wish to conclude, that these sentiments are not a certain safeguard: and they add, to support their argument, that in examining the belief of all those, whose licentious life is terminated by an ignomious death, we perceive that the greater number is composed of people blindly subject to religious opinions.

Undoubtedly, these opinions form not, at all times, a complete resistance to the different starts of our passions; but it suffices, that they may be the most efficacious. There has been, and there ever will be, vicious men in the bosom of society, even where religion has the greatest influence; for it acts not on us like a mechanical force, by weights, levers, and springs, of which we can calculate exactly the power; it is not an arbitrary modification of our nature; but we are enlightened, guided, and animated, according to our dispositions and sensibility, and according to the degree of our own efforts in the numerous conflicts which we have to sustain; it would be then an evident piece of treachery, to attack religion, by drawing a picture of the vices and crimes, from which it has not been able to guard society, instead of fixing our attention on all the disorders which it checks or prevents.

They would be equally wrong, who represent the general languor of religion, as a proof that it has, in our time, very little influence on morality; it would be necessary rather to remark, how great must have been that power, which even in the decline of its force is still sufficient to concur to the maintenance of public order; we should be authorized to say, how valuable is the whole, when we receive so much advantage from a part?

In short, the consequence that they would wish to draw from the opinions, and from the faith of wretches sinking under the sword of justice, in an abuse of reasoning: men termed religious, forming the major part of the populace, we must among them necessarily meet the greater number of malefactors; in the same manner that we are sure to find, in this class, more men of a particular age, stature, or complexion; but, if they have a right to use such an argument to censure a religious education, they might, with the same reason, contest the salubrity of breast milk, alledging, that many sick and dying persons have received this nourishment. We should never confound a common circumstance with a general cause; these are two ideas absolutely distinct.

There are other objections which equally deserve to be discussed; but they will find a place, with more propriety, after the chapter where, I shall examine, under different heads, the influence of religious opinions on our happiness. You have seen, and you will perceive still more, in the progress of this work, that I do not endeavour to elude difficulties; for before I determined to defend, according to my abilities, a cause which I could wish to render dear to mankind, I carefully studied the means; and after having fortified myself against the systems opposite to my sentiments, I fear not to examine the motives which serve to support them.