Anthropomorphism and idolatry constituted of necessity the faith of the mind in its youth, the theology of infancy and poesy.Aharmless error, if they had not endeavored to make it a rule of conduct, and if they had been wise enough to respect the liberty of thought.But having made God in his own image, man wished to appropriate him still farther; not satisfied with disfiguring the Almighty, he treated him as his patrimony, his goods, his possessions.God, pictured in monstrous forms, became throughout the world the property of man and of the State.Such was the origin of the corruption of morals by religion, and the source of pious feuds and holy wars.Thank Heaven! we have learned to allow every one his own beliefs; we seek for moral laws outside the pale of religion.Instead of legislating as to the nature and attributes of God, the dogmas of theology, and the destiny of our souls, we wisely wait for science to tell us what to reject and what to accept.God, soul, religion,--eternal objects of our unwearied thought and our most fatal aberrations, terrible problems whose solution, for ever attempted, for ever remains unaccomplished,--concerning all these questions we may still be mistaken, but at least our error is harmless.With liberty in religion, and the separation of the spiritual from the temporal power, the influence of religious ideas upon the progress of society is purely negative; no law, no political or civil institution being founded on religion.Neglect of duties imposed by religion may increase the general corruption, but it is not the primary cause; it is only an auxiliary or result.It is universally admitted, and especially in the matter which now engages our attention, that the cause of the inequality of conditions among men--of pauperism, of universal misery, and of governmental embarrassments--can no longer be traced to religion: we must go farther back, and dig still deeper.
But what is there in man older and deeper than the religious sentiment?
There is man himself; that is, volition and conscience, free-will and law, eternally antagonistic.Man is at war with himself:
why?
"Man," say the theologians, "transgressed in the beginning; our race is guilty of an ancient offence.For this transgression humanity has fallen; error and ignorance have become its sustenance.Read history, you will find universal proof of this necessity for evil in the permanent misery of nations.Man suffers and always will suffer; his disease is hereditary and constitutional.Use palliatives, employ emollients; there is no remedy."Nor is this argument peculiar to the theologians; we find it expressed in equivalent language in the philosophical writings of the materialists, believers in infinite perfectibility.Destutt de Tracy teaches formally that poverty, crime, and war are the inevitable conditions of our social state; necessary evils, against which it would be folly to revolt.So, call it NECESSITY OF EVIL or ORIGINAL DEPRAVITY, it is at bottom the same philosophy.
"The first man transgressed." If the votaries of the Bible interpreted it faithfully, they would say: MAN ORIGINALLYTRANSGRESSED, that is, made a mistake; for TO TRANSGRESS, TOFAIL, TO MAKE A MISTAKE, all mean the same thing.
"The consequences of Adam's transgression are inherited by the race; the first is ignorance." Truly, the race, like the individual, is born ignorant; but, in regard to a multitude of questions, even in the moral and political spheres, this ignorance of the race has been dispelled: who says that it will not depart altogether? Mankind makes continual progress toward truth, and light ever triumphs over darkness.Our disease is not, then, absolutely incurable, and the theory of the theologians is worse than inadequate; it is ridiculous, since it is reducible to this tautology: "Man errs, because he errs."While the true statement is this: "Man errs, because he learns."Now, if man arrives at a knowledge of all that he needs to know, it is reasonable to believe that, ceasing to err, he will cease to suffer.
But if we question the doctors as to this law, said to be engraved upon the heart of man, we shall immediately see that they dispute about a matter of which they know nothing; that, concerning the most important questions, there are almost as many opinions as authors; that we find no two agreeing as to the best form of government, the principle of authority, and the nature of right; that all sail hap-hazard upon a shoreless and bottomless sea, abandoned to the guidance of their private opinions which they modestly take to be right reason.And, in view of this medley of contradictory opinions, we say: "The object of our investigations is the law, the determination of the social principle.Now, the politicians, that is, the social scientists, do not understand each other; then the error lies in themselves;and, as every error has a reality for its object, we must look in their books to find the truth which they have unconsciously deposited there."Now, of what do the lawyers and the publicists treat? Of jUSTICE, EQUITY, LIBERTY, NATURAL LAW, CIVIL LAWS, &c.But what is justice? What is its principle, its character, its formula? To this question our doctors evidently have no reply;for otherwise their science, starting with a principle clear and well defined, would quit the region of probabilities, and all disputes would end.
What is justice? The theologians answer: "All justice comes from God." That is true; but we know no more than before.
