Voltaire: A Sketch of his Life and Works - LightNovelsOnl.com
You're reading novel online at LightNovelsOnl.com. Please use the follow button to get notifications about your favorite novels and its latest chapters so you can come back anytime and won't miss anything.
"Well, my dear Pangloss," said Candide to him, "now you have been hanged, dissected, whipped, and tugging at the oar, do you continue to think that everything in this world happens for the best?" "I have always abided by my first opinion," replied Pangloss; "for, after all, I am a philosopher; it would not become me to retract. Leibnitz could not be wrong, and 'pre-established harmony' is, besides, the finest thing in the world, as well as a 'plenum' and the 'materia subtilis'."
When Cunegonde is at last found, she is no longer beautiful-but sunburnt, blear-eyed, haggard, withered, and scrofulous. Though ready to fulfil his promise, her brother, a baron whom Candide has rescued from slavery, declares that sister of his shall never marry a person of less rank than a baron. The book is a ma.s.s of seeming extravagance, with a deep vein of gold beneath. All flows so smoothly, the reader fancies such fantastic nonsense could not only be easily written, but easily improved. Yet when he notices how every sally and absurdity adds to the effect, how every lightest touch tells, he sees that only the most consummate wit and genius could thus deftly dissect a philosophy of the universe for the amus.e.m.e.nt of the mult.i.tude.
Voltaire tried to save England from the judicial murder of Admiral Byng, who was sacrificed to national pride and political faction in 1757, yet how lightly he touches the history in a sentence: "Dans ce pays ci il est bon de tuer de temps en temps un amiral pour encourager les autres."
The pride, pomp, and circ.u.mstance of glorious war had no charms for Voltaire. He shows it in its true colors as mult.i.tudinous murder and rapine. Religious intolerance and hypocrisy, court domination and intrigue, the evils attendant on idlers, soldiers and priests, are all sketched in lightest outline, and the reader of this fantastic story finds he has traversed the history of last century, seen it at its worst, and seen, too, the forces that tended to make it better, and is ready to exclaim: Would we had another Voltaire now!
The philosophy of _Candide_ is that of Secularism. The world as we find it abounds in misery and suffering. If any being is responsible for it, his benevolence can only be vindicated by limiting his power, or his power credited by limiting his goodness. Our part is simply to make the best of things and improve this world here and now. "Work, then, without disputing; it is the only way to render life supportable."
Carlyle did much to impair the influence of Voltaire in England. Yet what is Carlyle's essential doctrine but "Do the work nearest hand," and what is this but a translation of the conclusion of _Candide_: "Il faut cultiver notre jardin"?
Those who forget how far more true it is that man is an irrational animal than that he is a rational one, may wonder how Voltaire, having in _Candide_ sapped the foundations of belief in an all-good G.o.d by a portrayal of the evils afflicting mankind, could yet remain a Theist.
The truth seems to be that Voltaire had neither taste nor talents for metaphysics. In the _Ignorant Philosopher_ Voltaire seeks to answer Spinoza, without fully understanding his monistic position. He appears to have remained a dualist or modern Manichean-an opinion which James Mill considered was the only Theistic view consistent with the facts.
Writing to D'Alembert on the 15th of August, 1767, Voltaire says: "Give my compliments to the Devil, for it is he who governs the world." It is curious that on the day he was writing these lines, one Napoleon Bonaparte had just entered upon the world.
Voltaire appears to have been satisfied with the design argument as proving a deity, though he considered speculation as to the nature of deity useless. He showed the Positivist spirit in his rejection of metaphysical subtleties. "When," he writes, "we have well disputed over spirit and matter, we end ever by no advance. No philosopher has been able to raise by his own efforts the veil which nature has spread over the first principles of things." Again: "I do not know the _quo modo_, true. I prefer to stop short rather than to lose myself." Also: "Philosophy consists in stopping where physics fail us. I observe the effects of nature, but I confess I know no more than you do about first principles." But a deist he ever remained.
Baron de Gleichen, who visited him in 1757, relates that a young author, at his wits' end for the means of living, knocked one day at the poet's door, and to recommend himself said: "I am an apprentice atheist at your service." Voltaire replied: "I have the honor to be a master deist; but though our trades are opposed, I will give you some supper to-night and some work to-morrow. I wish to avail myself of your arms and not of your head."
He thought both atheism and fanaticism inimical to society; but, said he, "the atheist, in his error, preserves reason, which cuts his claws, while those of the fanatic are sharpened in the incessant madness which afflicts him."
Voltaire seems to have been at bottom agnostic holding on to the narrow ledge of theism and afraid to drop.
He says: "For myself, I am sure of nothing. I believe that there is an intelligence, a creative power, a G.o.d. I express an opinion to-day; I doubt of it to-morrow; the day after I repudiate it. All honest philosophers have confessed to me, when they were warmed with wine, that the great Being has not given to them one particle more evidence than to me." He believed in the immortality of the soul, yet expresses himself dubiously, saying to Madame du Deffand that he knew a man who believed that when a bee died it ceased to hum. That man was himself.
On the appearance, however, in 1770 of the Baron d'Holbach's _System of Nature_-in which he was very considerably helped by Diderot-Voltaire took alarm at its openly p.r.o.nounced atheism. "The book," he wrote,
"has made all the philosophers execrable in the eyes of the King and his court. Through this fatal work philosophy is lost for ever in the eyes of all magistrates and fathers of families." He accordingly took in hand to combat its atheism, which he does in the article _Dieu_ in the _Philosophical Dictionary_, and in his _History of Jenni_ (Johnny), a lad supposed to be led on a course of vice by atheism and reclaimed to virtue by the design argument. Voltaire's real att.i.tude seems fairly expressed in his celebrated mot: "S'il n'y avait pas un dieu, il fraudrait l'inventer"-"If there was not a G.o.d it would be necessary to invent one," which, Morin remarks, was exactly what had been done.
Morley says: "It was not the truth of the theistic belief in itself that Voltaire prized, but its supposed utility as an a.s.sistant to the police."
THE ENCYCLOPaeDIA
Voltaire was a great stimulator of the French _Encyclopaedia_, a work designed to convey to the many the information of the few. Here again the inspiration was English. It was the success of the _Cyclopcedia of Arts and Sciences_, edited by the Freethinker Ephraim Chambers, in 1728, which suggested the yet more famous work carried out by Diderot and D'Alembert, with the a.s.sistance of such men as Helvetius, Buffon, Turgot, and Condorcet. Voltaire took an ardent interest in the work, and contributed many important articles. The leading contributors were all Freethinkers, but they were under the necessity of advancing their ideas in a tentative way on account of the vigilant censors.h.i.+p. Voltaire not only wrote for the _Encyclopaedia_, but gave valuable hints and suggestions to Diderot and D'Alembert, as well as much sound advice. He cautioned them, for instance, against patriotic bias. "Why," he asks D'Alembert, "do you say that the sciences are more indebted to France than to any other nation? Is it to the French that we are indebted for the quadrant, the fire-engine, the theory of light, inoculation, the seed-sower? _Parbleu!_ you are jesting! We have invented only the wheelbarrow."
Voltaire wrote the section on History. The first page contained a Voltairean definition of sacred history which even an ignorant censor could hardly be expected to pa.s.s. "Sacred History is a series of operations, divine and miraculous, by which it pleased G.o.d formerly to conduct the Jewish nation, and to-day to exercise our faith." The iron hand beneath the velvet glove was too evident for this to pa.s.s the censors.h.i.+p. Vexatious delay and the enforced excision of important articles attended the progress of the work.
It was the attempted suppression of _l'Encyclopcedie_ which showed Voltaire that the time had come for battle.
In 1757 a new edict was issued, threatening with death any one who wrote, printed, or sold any work attacking religion or the royal authority. The same edict a.s.signed the penalty of the galleys to whoever published writings without legal permit. Within six months advocate Barbier recorded in his diary some terrible sentences. La Marteliere, verse-writer, for printing clandestinely Voltaire's _Pucelle_ and other "such" works, received nine years in the galleys; eight printers and binders employed in the same printing office, the pillory and three years' banishment. Up to the period of the Revolution nothing could be legally printed in France, and no book could be imported, without Government authorisation. Mr. Lecky says, in his _History of England in the Eighteenth Century_: "During the whole of the reign of Lewis XV.
there was scarcely a work of importance which was not burnt or suppressed, while the greater number of the writers who were at this time the special, almost the only, glory of France were imprisoned, banished, or fined." Voltaire determined to render the bigots odious and contemptible, and henceforth waged incessant war, continued to the day of his death. In satire on one of the bigots he issued his _Narrative of the Sickness, Confession, Death and Reappearance of the Jesuit Berthier_, as rich a burlesque as that which Swift had written predicting and describing the death of the astrologer Partridge, in accordance with the prediction. Every sentence is a hit. A priest of a rival order is hastily summoned to confess the dying Jesuit, who is condemned to penance in purgatory for 333,333 years, 3 months, 3 weeks, and 3 days, and then will only be let out if some brother Jesuit be found humble and good enough to be willing to apply all his merits to Father Berthier. Even putting his enemy in purgatory, he only condemned the Jesuit every morning to mix the chocolate of a Jansenist, read aloud at dinner a Provincial Letter, and employ the rest of the day in mending the chemises of the nuns of Port Royal.
From Ferney he poured forth a wasp-swarm of such writings under all sorts of pen-names, and dated from London, Amsterdam, Berne, or Geneva.
He had sufficient stimulus in the bigotry, intolerance, and atrocious iniquities perpetrated in the name of religion.
Voltaire, moreover, determined himself to uphold the work of the _Encyclopaedia_ in more popular form. He put forward first his _Questions upon the Encyclopaedia_, in which he deals with some important articles of that work, with others of his own. This was the foundation of the most important of all his works, the _Philosophical Dictionary_, which he is said to have projected in the days when he was with Frederick at Berlin. In this work he showed how a dictionary could be made the most amusing reading in the world. Under an alphabetical arrangement, he brought together a vast variety of sparkling essays on all sorts of subjects connected with literature, science, politics and religion. Some of his headings were mere stalking-horses, under cover of which he shot at the enemy. Some are concerned with matters now out of date; but, on the whole, the work presents a vivid picture of his versatile genius. An abridged edition, containing articles of abiding interest, would be a service to Free-thought at the present day.
Here is a slight specimen of his style taken from the article on Fanaticism: "Some one spreads a rumor in the world that there is a giant in existence 70 feet high. Very soon all the doctors discuss the questions what color his hair must be, what is the size of his thumb, what the dimensions of his nails; there is outcry, caballing, fighting; those who maintain that the giant's little finger is only an inch and a half in diameter, bring those to the stake who affirm that the little finger is a foot thick. 'But, gentlemen, does your giant exist?' says a bystander, modestly.
"'What a horrible doubt!' cry all the disputants; 'what blasphemy! what absurdity!' Then they all make a little truce to stone the bystander, and, after having a.s.sa.s.sinated him in due form, in a manner the most edifying, they fight among themselves, as before, on the subject of the little finger and the nails."
"L'Infame."
Voltaire had other provocations to his attack on the bigots, and as he greatly concerned himself with these, they must be briefly mentioned. In 1761 a tragedy of mingled judicial bigotry, ignorance, and cruelty was enacted in Languedoc. On October 13th of that year, Marc Antoine, the son of Jean Calas, a respectable Protestant merchant in Toulouse, a young man of dissolute habits, who had lived the life of a scapegrace, hanged himself in his father's shop while the family were upstairs. The priestly party got hold of the case and turned it into a religious crime. The Huguenot parents were charged with murdering their son to prevent his turning Catholic. Solemn services were held for the repose of the soul of Marc Antoine, and his body was borne to the grave with more than royal pomp, as that of a martyr to the holy cause of religion.
In the church of the White Penitents a hired skeleton was exhibited, holding in one hand a branch of palm, emblem of martyrdom, and in the other an inscription, in large letters, "abjuration of heresy." The populace, who were accustomed yearly to celebrate with rejoicing the Ma.s.sacre of St. Bartholomew's Day, 1572, were excited against the family. The father, who for sixty years had lived without reproach, was arrested, with his wife and children. The court before whom the case was brought, at first was disposed to put the whole family to the torture, never doubting that the murder would be confessed by one or other of them. But they ended by only condemning the father to be tortured, in order to extract a confession of guilt before being broken on the wheel, after which his body was to be burned and the ashes scattered to the winds. He was submitted first to the _question ordinaire_. In sight of the rack he was asked to reveal his crime. His answer was that no crime had been committed. He was stretched on the rack until every limb was dislocated and the body drawn out several inches beyond. He was then subjected to the _question extraordinaire_. This consisted in pouring water into his mouth from a horn, while his nose was pinched, till his body was swollen to twice its size, and the sufferer endured the anguish of a hundred drownings. He submitted without flinching to all the excruciating agony. Finally, he was placed upon a tumbril and carried through the howling mob to the place of execution. "I am innocent." he muttered from time to time. At the scaffold he was exhorted to confess by a priest: "What!" said he, "you, too, believe a father can kill his own son!" They bound him to a wooden cross, and the executioner, with an iron bar, broke each of his limbs in two places, striking eleven blows in all, and then left him for two hours to die. The executioner mercifully strangled him at last, before burning the body at the stake.
To the last he persisted in his innocence: he had no confession to make.
By his unutterable agony he saved the lives of his wife and family. Two daughters were thrown into a convent, and the property was confiscated.
The widow and son escaped, and were provided for by Voltaire.
He spared no time, trouble, or money to arrive at the truth, and that once reached, he was as a.s.siduous in his search for justice. He went to work with an energy and thoroughness all his own. He interested the Pompadour herself in the case. By his own efforts he forced justice to be heard. "The worst of the worthy sort of people," he said, "is that they are such cowards. A man groans over his wrong, shuts his lips, takes his supper, and forgets." Voltaire was not of that fibre. Wrong went as a knife to his heart. He suffered with the victim, and might have justly used the words of Sh.e.l.ley, who compared himself unto "a nerve, o'er which do creep the else unfelt oppressions of the world."
Voltaire had to fire others with his own fervor. He issued pamphlet after pamphlet in which the shameful story was told with pathetic simplicity. He employed the best lawyers he could find to vindicate the memory of the murdered man. For three years he left no stone unturned, until all that was possible was done to right the foul wrong of those in authority. During this time no smile escaped him of which he did not reproach himself as a crime. Carlyle speaks of this as "Voltaire's n.o.blest outburst, into mere transcendant blaze of pity, virtuous wrath, and determination to bring rescue and help against the whole world."
He had his pamphlets on the Calas case, seven in number, translated and published in England and Germany, where they produced a profound effect.
A subscription for the Calas family was headed by the young Queen of George III. When at length judgment was given, reversing the sentence, he wrote to Damilaville: "My dear brother, there is, then, justice upon the earth! There is, then, such a thing as humanity! Men are not all wicked rascals, as they say! It is the day of your triumph, my dear brother; you have served the family better than anyone."
It was while the Calas case was pending that Voltaire composed his n.o.ble _Treatise on Toleration_, a work which, besides its great effect in Europe, caused Catherine II. to promise, if not to grant, universal religious toleration throughout the vast empire she governed.
This Calas case was scarce ended when another, almost as bad an exhibition of intolerance, occurred. Sirven, a respectable Protestant land surveyor, had a Catholic housekeeper, who, with the a.s.sent of the Bishop of Castres, spirited away his daughter for the good of her soul, and placed her in a convent, with a view to her conversion. She returned to her parents in a state of insanity, her body covered with the marks of the whip. She never recovered from the cruelties she had endured at the convent. One day, when her father was absent on his professional duties, she threw herself into a well, at the bottom of which she was found drowned. It was obvious to the authorities that the parents had murdered their child because she wished to become a Roman Catholic. They most wisely did not appear, and were sentenced to be hanged when they could be caught. In their flight the married daughter gave premature birth to a child, and Madame Sirven died in despair.
It took Voltaire eight years to get this abominable sentence reversed, and to turn wrong into right. He was now between seventy and eighty years of age, yet he threw himself into the cause of the Sirvens with the zeal and energy which has vindicated Calas; appealing to Paris and Europe, issuing pamphlets, feeing lawyers, and raising a handsome subscription for the family.
Another case was that of the Chevalier de la Barre. In 1766 a crucifix was injured-perhaps wantonly, perhaps by accident. The Bishop of Amiens called for vengeance. Two young officers were accused; one escaped, and obtained by Voltaire's request a commission in the Prussian service. The other, La Barre, was tortured to confess, and then condemned to have his tongue cut out, his hand cut off, and to be burned alive. Voltaire, seventy years old, devoted himself with untiring energy to save him.
Failing in that, he wrote one of his little pamphlets, a simple, graphic _Narrative of the Death of Chevalier de la Barre_, which stirred every humane heart in France. For twelve years this infidel vindicated the memory of the murdered man and exposed his oppressors. One of the authorities concerned in this judicial atrocity threatened Voltaire with vengeance for holding them up to the execration of Europe. Voltaire replied by a Chinese anecdote. "I forbid you," said a tyrannical emperor to the historiographer, "to speak a word more of me." The mandarin began to write. "What are you doing now?" asked the emperor. "I am writing down the order that your majesty has just given me." Voltaire had sought to save Admiral Byng. He contended in a similar case at home. Count Lally had failed to save India from the English, had been taken prisoner, but allowed to go to Paris to clear his name from charges made against him. The French people, infuriate at the loss of their possession, demanded a victim, and Lally, after a process tainted with every kind of illegality, was condemned to death on the vague charge of abuse of authority. The murdered man's son, known in the Revolution as Lally Tollendal, was joined by Voltaire in the honorable work of procuring revision of the proceedings, and one of the last crowning triumphs of Voltaire's days was the news brought to him on his dying bed that his long effort had availed.
"Ecrasez L'infame."
These are samples of what was occuring when Voltaire was exhorting his friends to _crush the infamous_-a phrase which gave rise to much misunderstanding, and which priests have even alleged was applied to Jesus, their idol. A sufficient disproof, if any were needed, is that Voltaire treats "l'infame" as feminine. _Si vous pouvez ecraser l'infame, ecrasez-la, et aimez-moi." That oft-repeated phrase was directed at no person. Nor was it, as some Protestants have alleged, directed only at Roman Catholicism. As Voltaire saw and said, "fanatic Papists and fanatic Calvanism are tarred with one brush." "L'infame" was Christian superst.i.tion claiming supernatural authority and enforcing its claim, as it has ever sought to do, by pains and penalties. He meant by it the whole spirit of exclusiveness, intolerance, and bigotry, persecuting and privileged orthodoxy, which he saw-as the outcome of the divine faith. Practically, as D. F. Strauss justly remarked, "when Voltaire writes to D'Alembert that he wishes to see the 'Infame' reduced in France to the same condition in which she finds herself in England, and when Frederick writes to Voltaire that philosophers flourished amongst the Greeks and Romans, because their religion had no dogmas-'*mais les dogmes de notre infame gatent tout_'-it is clear we must understand by the 'Infame,' whose destruction was the watchword of the Voltairian circle, the Christian Church, without distinction of communions, Catholic or Protestant."
The Catholic Joseph de Maistre shrieks: "With a fury without example, this insolent blasphemer declared himself the personal enemy of the Savior of men, dared from the depths of his nothingness to give him a name of ridicule, and that adorable law which the Man-G.o.d brought to earth he called 'l'infame.'" This is a judgment worthy of a bigot, who dares not look into the reason why his creed is detested. Let us try and understand this insolent blasphemer to-day.
Voltaire looked deep into the heart of the atrocities that wrung his every nerve with anguish. They were not new: only the humanity and courage that a.s.sailed them were new. They were the natural outcome of what had been Christian teaching. It was not simply that, as a matter of fact, priests and theologians were the opponents of every kind of rational progress, but their intolerance was the logical result of their creed. These atrocities could not have been perpetrated had not priests and magistrates had behind them a credulous and fanatical populace, whose minds were suborned from childhood to believing that they had themselves the one and divine faith, and that all heretics were enemies of G.o.d. He saw that to destroy the intolerance he must sap the superst.i.tion from which it sprang. He saw that the core of the Christian superst.i.tion lay in Bibliolatry, and that while Christians believed they had an exclusive and infallibly divine revelation, they would deem all opposition to their own beliefs a sin, meriting punishment. Mr. Morley says, with truth: "If we find ourselves walking amid a generation of cruel, unjust, and darkened spirits, we may be a.s.sured that it is their beliefs on what they deem highest that have made them so. There is no counting with certainty on the justice of men who are capable of fas.h.i.+oning and wors.h.i.+pping an unjust divinity; nor on their humanity, so long as they incorporate inhuman motives in their most sacred dogma; nor on their reasonableness, while they rigorously decline to accept reason as a test of truth."
Voltaire warred on Christian superst.i.tion because he keenly felt its evils. He saw that intolerance naturally flowed from the exclusive and dogmatic claims which alone differentiated it from other faiths. Its inducements to right-doing he found to be essentially ign.o.ble, appealing either to brutal fear of punishment or base expectation of reward, and in each case alike mercenary. He saw that terrorism engendered brutality, that a savage will think nothing of slaughtering hundreds to appease his angry G.o.d. He saw that it had been a fine religion for priests and monks-those caterpillars of the commonwealth, living on the fat of the land while pretending to hold the keys of heaven, a race of parasites on the people, who toil not neither do they spin, and whose direct interest lay in fostering their dupes ignorance and credulity.
The Christian tree was judged, as its founder said it should be, by its fruits. Men do not gather grapes from thorns, or figs from thistles. He saw Christianity as Tacitus described it-"a maleficent superst.i.tion." It was a upas tree, to be cut down; and hence he reiterated his terrible _Delenda est Carthago,_ "Ecrasez l'Infame"-"Destroy the monster."
He wrote to D'Alembert from Ferney: "For forty years I have endured the outrages of bigots and scoundrels. I have found there is nothing to gain by moderation, and that it is a deception. I must wage war openly and die n.o.bly, 'on a crowd of bigots slaughtered at my feet.'" His war was relentless and unremitting. He a.s.sailed "l'Infame" with every weapon which learning, wit, industry, and indignation could supply.
Frederick wrote to him from the midst of his own wars: "Your zeal burns against the Jesuits and superst.i.tions. You do well to combat error, but do you credit that the world will change? The human mind is weak.
Three-fourths of mankind are formed to be the slaves of the absurdest fanaticism. The fear of the devil and h.e.l.l is fascinating to them, and they detest the sage who wishes to enlighten them. I look in vain among them for the image of G.o.d, of which the theologians a.s.sure us they carry the imprint." Madame du Deffand wrote in a similar strain. She a.s.sured him that every person of sense thought as he did; why then continue? No remonstrance moved him. He had enlisted for the war, and might have said with Luther: _Hier stehe ich; ich kann nicht anders_.
Much nonsense has been written about Voltaire's employment of ridicule against religious beliefs. I am reminded of Bishop South's remark to a dull brother bishop, who reproved him for sprinkling his sermon with witticisms. "Now, my lord, do you really mean to say that, if G.o.d had given you any wit, you would not have used it?" Voltaire ridiculed what he esteemed ridiculous. But there is nothing more galling to superst.i.tionists than to find that others find food for mirth in their absurdities.
"You mock at sacred things," said the Jesuits to Pascal when he exposed their casuistry. Doubtless the priests of Baal said the same when Elijah asked them whether their G.o.d was asleep, or peradventure on a journey.
The artifice of inculcating a solemn and reverential manner of treating absurdities is the perennial recipe for sanctifying and perpetuating superst.i.tion. "Priests of all persuasions," says Oliver Goldsmith, "are enemies to ridicule, because they know it to be a formidable antagonist to fanaticism, and they preach up gravity to conceal their own shallowness of imposture." Approach the mysteries of the faith with reverence and you concede half the battle. Christian missionaries do not thus treat the fetis.h.i.+sm and sorcery of heathen lands. To overcome it they must expose its absurdities. Ridicule has been a weapon in the hands of all the great liberators, Luther, Erasmus, Rabelais, Bruno, Swift, but none used it more effectively than Voltaire. Buckle well says; "He used ridicule, not as the test of truth, but as the scourge of folly." And he adds: "His irony, his wit, his pungent and telling sarcasms produce more effect than the gravest arguments could have done; and there can be no doubt he was fully justified in using those great resources with which nature had endowed him, since by their aid he advanced the interests of truth, and relieved men from some of their most inveterate prejudices." Victor Hugo puts the case in poetic fas.h.i.+on when he declares that Voltaire was irony incarnate for the salvation of mankind. "Ridicule is not argument"! Well, it is a pointed form of polemic, the _argumentum ad absurdum_. "Mustapha," said Voltaire, "does not believe, but he believes that he believes." To shame him out of hypocrisy, there is nothing better than laughter; and if a true believer, laughter will best free him from terror of his bogey devil and no less bogey G.o.d. Ridicule can hurt no reality. You cannot make fun of the multiplication table. The fun begins when the theologians a.s.sert that three times one are one. Shaftesbury, who maintained that ridicule was a test of truth, remarked with justice, "'tis the persecuting spirit that has raised the bantering one." Ridicule is the natural retort to those who seek not to convert but to convict and punish. Ridicule comes like a stream of sunlight to dissipate the fogs of preconceived prejudice. A laugh, if no argument, is a splendid preparative. Often, in Voltaire, ridicule takes an argumentative form. Thus, alluding to a Monsieur Esprit's book on the Falsity of Human Virtues, he says: "That great genius, Mons. Esprit, tells us that neither Cato, Aristotle, Marcus Aurelius, nor Epictetus were good men, and a good reason why, good men are only found among Christians. Again, among the Christians, Catholics alone are virtuous, and of the Catholics, the Jesuits, enemies of the Oratorians, must be excepted. Therefore, there is scarce any virtue on earth, except among the enemies of the Jesuits."
All his characteristic scorn and ridicule come out when dealing with the fetish book of his adversaries. The _Philosophical Dictionary_ is full of wit upon biblical subjects. I content myself with an excerpt from the less known _Sermon of Fifty_: "If Moses changed the waters into blood, the sages of Pharoah did the same. He made frogs come upon the land; this also they were able to do. But when lice were concerned, they were vanquished; in the matter of lice, the Jews knew more and could do more than the other nations."