A Memoir- the Testament

by Jean Meslier

  But it's not the same with for a God, who is supposed to be all-powerful; for if He truly were all-powerful, as the claim goes, He could easily do all sorts of good and prevent all manner of evil, and, unlike weak and mortal men, might never be found to have in this unpleasant need to do or allow any evil, to produce any good, or to avoid any greater evil, so that He could freely and easily do all manner of good, without having for all that to do or allow or suffer any evil. And likewise, He could very easily prevent all manner of vice and evil, without delay and without loss of any good; He would have to wish it, and everything would happen at the behest of His will. If, then, He doesn’t bring all due good to all His creatures, and if He doesn’t always prevent all the evil that might harm them, this must be either because He refuses, or because He can’t. If it’s because He refuses, then He isn’t infinitely good, as He is supposed to be, since He doesn’t desire all sorts of good, for a Being who would be infinitely good and infinitely wise, would never fail to gladly intervene, and He would necessarily love to always do what is good. And if it’s because He can’t, that He doesn’t always do what is good, and doesn’t always prevent what is evil, then He isn’t all-powerful, as is claimed, because nothing can be impossible for He who is supposed to be all-powerful.

  It would serve no purpose for them to say here that men often do not deserve for God to give them all the good He might and that He might wish to give them, and that, on the contrary, they often deserve punishment with the evils and afflictions He sends them, in order to make them wiser and more virtuous. It would serve no purpose, I repeat, to say this, since, according to very doctrine of our God-cultists and our Christ-cultists, men can have other virtues, or other merits than those which God bestows on them by His pure grace and mercy. Nor can they do anything good, or avoid any evil, or refrain from any vice, or any misdeed, except insofar as this same God gives them the grace and power to do so; so that all that is good in men is, according to their doctrine, the pure gift of God. Witness what is written in their Council of Trent, where it is explicitly stated that the goodness of God is so great towards humanity He even wants His pure gifts to make them more meritorious[855]. Tanta est erga homines Dei bonitas, ut eorum velit esse merita, quae sunt ipsius dona. And in one of their public prayers[856] they say: Deus de cujus munere venit ut tibi a fidelibus tuis digne et laudabiliter serviatur. And elsewhere: Deus a quo cuncta bona procedunt. And elsewhere: Deus a quo sancta desideria, recta consilia, et justa sunt opera. And many other similar places, which clearly imply that, not only do all manner of blessings, all manner of virtues, and all manner of merits come from God; but also, that all good thoughts, all good desires, all good affections, and all the good works people do come from His pure grace.

  From which it clearly follows, according to their principles, that if God always gave them grace and strength to avoid evil, they would never deserve any punishment, and that if He always gave them the virtues and all the merits that they needed, they would deserve all sorts of graces and blessings. And if, on the contrary, men happen not to universally do what they should, and they don’t also refrain from evil as they ought; and that, for this, they become more deserving of God’s punishments than His friendship and His grace, the fault certainly lies with God Himself, rather than men, since they can’t do the good that God wouldn’t do in them, and since they can’t avoid the evil which He doesn’t empower them to avoid; they might even criticize Him and tell Him, with the Prophet Isaiah, that He Himself was the cause of all their vices and all their wandering astray, and they could also tell Him, like this Prophet: “Why, Lord, have you turned us against your commandments; you have hardened our hearts, so that we have no fear of you[857]: Quare errare nos fecisti, Domine! de viis tuis: indurasti cor nostrum ne timeremus te. So, it is ridiculous for our God-cultists and our Christ-cultists to say, as they do, that God doesn’t bestow on men all the good He might, on the pretext that they don’t deserve it. And it’s equally ridiculous for them to say that He sends them evil and afflictions, on the pretext that they deserve His punishments; since they couldn’t have any other virtues or merits, but those that He would give them.

  From which I return to my argument and say that, if God does not always give men the gifts of His grace to help them practice virtue, to deserve His favor and His rewards, or to keep them and preserve them from wrongdoing, so as not to deserve His disfavor and His punishments; it’s either because He refuses, or because He can’t always bestow them on them. If it’s because He doesn’t always wish to grant them, then He certainly isn’t infinitely good, since He lacks kindness towards them; because a Being who is supposed to be infinitely good would always be happy to do what is good, and even so to the best of His ability. Thus, since men necessarily need the gift of His grace to live properly and to practice virtue, He wouldn’t allow them to lack any of His graces. And if it’s because He can’t always give it to them, then He certainly isn’t all-powerful, since He can’t always do good, or always prevent evil. And if He is not infinitely good or all-powerful, then He can’t truly be called God.

  By which it is easy to see that when our God-cultists say that men do not deserve for God to do them all the good He might do, and which they deserve, on the contrary, that He sends them evils and afflictions as punishment for their wickedness, this is also a vain pretext they use to try and cover the weakness and impotence of their God, and to keep the ignorant masses ignorant. But what would be peculiar in this conduct of a Being who is infinitely perfect, would be His skill in knowing so fortunately to take in this way the greatest goods from the greatest evils and the worst flaws, that He would leave in his creatures, as well as the greatest vices and the greatest wickedness, that He would leave in men. For it would already be a rather strange form of kindness and a rather shocking sort of wisdom for a God to want, by a principle of kindness and wisdom, to make people suffer so much pain and so many afflictions, and to allow so many and so severe evils among them, as well as so many great and abominable wicked deeds as there are in the world. Is it really credible or even thinkable that a divine goodness and wisdom would want to tend to the true and more solid good by ways that are so opposed to the good itself, and would it really establish the good through the destruction of the good itself? Is it credible, or even thinkable, that it would sanctify and perfect its creatures by means of flaws, defects, and even imperfections? That it would make them good by means of wickedness! That it would make them wiser by means of folly! That it would make them clear-sighted by means of blindness! That it would make them vicious to make them virtuous, that it would, finally, make them happy by making them truly unhappy! This is like saying that a skilled and clever artisan, who had made many excellent works, would let them be ruined or torn up, on the pretext of making them more beautiful and perfect, although this was never seen to make them any more beautiful or more perfect. It’s like saying that a good and wise prince would let his subjects and peoples be oppressed or plundered in every manner, on the pretext of making his Kingdom more prosperous, and his people richer and happier, while they were never seen to become happier or more prosperous. It’s like saying that a wise and prudent physician would either let his patients be poisoned or poison them himself, and let gangrene infect their wounds, on the pretext of healing them better and returning them to a better state of health; although nobody ever saw him healing anyone by this method. It’s like saying that a wise Philosopher had his Disciples indulge in folly and extravagance, on the pretext of making them wiser, although nobody ever saw them becoming wiser by this means. Finally, it’s like saying that a perfectly good father would let his children fall prey to all sorts of vices and wickedness, let them fight, hurt, and butcher each other, on the pretext of bringing more good into their lives and making them happier, although they were always seen to be miserable and unhappy.

  And just as it would be absolutely ridiculous to say that it would be for a greater good that a father would let things happen in this way, it would also
be ridiculous to say that it was for a greater good that a physician would let his patients be poisoned, or poison them himself, and let gangrene infect their wounds; as it would be ridiculous to say that it was for a greater good that a Prince would his peoples be oppressed and plundered; and finally, as it would be ridiculous to say it was to beautify and perfect excellent works of craft, that a skilled and clever artisan would have them be ruined and torn up; likewise, also, with all the more reason is it ridiculous for our God-cultists and our Christ-cultists to say, as they do, that it’s for a greater good that an infinitely good and infinitely wise God would permit and allow so many and so fearsome evils and so many and so abominable acts of wickedness, which obviously tend to the ruin and general destruction of everything good, rather than to the establishment of anything good.

  But again, how can they say that their God intentionally allows for a good and permits there to be so many and so immense evils and so many and so immense acts of wickedness, since they all agree with this maxim of their morality, that one should never do evil for the sake of a good: Non sunt facienda mala ut eveniant bona. If it is neither suitable nor appropriate to do any evil (i.e., any sin) for the sake of any good, then why do they think that their God would want to allow and permit the perpetration of so many crimes and sins, in order to bring about something good? Would it be that, as the Sovereign and Master and Lord of all things, He would simply be allowed to do as He likes? Or because, infinitely good and infinitely wise as He is, it would be more harmonious with His infinite goodness and His infinite wisdom to do evil or allow evil to get some good from it, than it would be harmonious for any creature to do or allow evil for the same reason, or for a similar motivation? It is, or it would be ridiculous to even hold this thought in your head. Thus, it’s clearly a ridiculous and absurd paradox to say that it’s for a good that an infinitely good and infinitely wise God would wish to permit and allow so much evil and so much wickedness in the world. It would also be an extraordinary paradox, if our fanatic Christ-cultists, especially the Priests, hadn’t imagined they might cover the weakness and impotence of their God and to simultaneously keep the masses in error, which benefits them and provides their subsistence.

  But, since nobody can deny that it is sometimes expedient to do some evil to bring about some good, it’s only a question of knowing on what occasions and in what circumstances this can be legitimately and prudently done. Now, I think that it can only be done legitimately and prudently in two types of circumstances, in addition, these must always coincide. The first is, when the good that’s supposed to come from the evil is more useful, more advantageous, more necessary than the resultant evil would be harmful and damaging; for it is undisputed that if the expected benefit of the evil weren’t far more significant than the result if the evil weren’t done, there would be neither prudence, nor wisdom in doing it, and it would even be folly to do so, if the claimed good weren’t expected to be as significant as the evil that would be done to obtain it.

  The second circumstance or condition required to legitimately and prudently commit evil to lead to some good, is when it is absolutely necessary to bring about this evil for the sake of the good that is promised as a result, for if we could get the good thing, or produce this promised good thing without having to bring about the evil, it is it’s clear, once more, that it would be a terrible blunder to then do or allow any evil to be brought about, on the pretext of bringing said good from it.

  But although humans might often find themselves in a situation, or even a condition of needing to do or to allow some evil to get some greater good from it, or to avoid something worse, and since, for this reason, they have an excuse to do something bad for the sake of some greater good, or to avoid some greater evil, it is, however, certain that God, who would be all-powerful, could never find Himself in any situation, or any condition in which He needs or is forced to do or allow any evil to get some good from it, because, given His supposed omnipotence, He can always, at all times and in all places, without any hardship or difficulty, produce all manner of good, without any need to produce or allow any evil for that purpose. This is why it’s beyond belief, or even thinkability that an infinitely good and infinitely wise being, who is all-powerful, would ever allow any harm to be done on the pretext of intending to get some good from it, because then it wouldn't doing evil or allowing evil to be done for the sake of a good, but it would rather be doing evil or letting evil be done for the evil’s own sake, which can’t be suitable in any way for an infinitely perfect being, as is clearly visible, for what little attention one pays it. That if, despite this, our pious Christ-cultists would maintain that their supposed divine goodness and wisdom permits and allows no evil, except for the sake of some good and even a greater good, (for this is how it must be understood) why, then, do they pray so much and so insistently to this supposed divine goodness and this supposed divine wisdom to preserve them from all evil and to deliver them from it as soon as it touches them and as they are afflicted by any of these ills? Why, in times of danger and peril, do they seek the help of their God? Why do they invoke Him so much in their afflictions? Why do they even become chagrined and exasperated when adversity reaches them, and not only in private adversity, but also in public calamity, such as war and famine? Why, on such occasions as these, do they make so many vows, processions, and prayers, both private and public, to be freed from them? Were they afraid that their God might bring forth too much good for them from these misfortunes? All one hears on such occasions is pious and sad invocations of God and the saints; people crying everywhere: Kyrie eleison and Christe eleison, miserere nobis, and ora pro nobis, in other words, lords have pity on us, and saints pray for us. They are heard saying things like exurge, quare obdormis Domine, exurge Domine, adjuva nos et libera nos propter nomen tuum. Which means: Arise, Lord, do not fall asleep, why are you asleep? Rise, come to our rescue, and deliver us, for the love of your holy name. It’s for the same reason also that they so devoutly invoke all their Mirmadolins Santons, one after the other, saying, saint so-and-so, pray for us, saint so-and-so, pray for us, etc. Why all these pious and devout invocations of their God and of His Saints? Why so many devout processions? Why all these vows, all these prayers, all these austere fasts and all these rigorous public and private acts of penance? Why all these cries, all these groans, all these cries, and all these sorry lamentations they make in their adversity and afflictions? If they’re truly goods and even greater goods, that their God wants to share with them by means of the evils and adversities He sends them, they would have no reason to fend them off with their prayers, to attract His good will to their cause, they would have no reason to fear the evils so much which must bring them more good than bad, and they would have no reason to be afflicted or become so sad when they come, since they claim that they’re greater goods that come to them or which must come to them by this means.

  A sick man, for example, who saw himself in danger of dying, or who was tortured by long and violent pains, wouldn’t be afraid of the prick of a bleeding session, if he knew that this pain is all it would take to be completely healed, he would even gladly rush to the doctor to beg for this satisfaction. Similarly, a poor beggar wouldn’t be bothered at all to be stripped of his wretched clothes, or even if he happened to have decent clothes, if he knew that he would immediately be dressed in more attractive and better clothes than the ones he lost; to the contrary, he would rejoice. Nor would he worry if he saw his horrible cabin set on fire if he knew that it was to put him immediately in possession of a fine house; to the contrary, he would be overjoyed to see this happening. This is precisely what all our Christ-cultists should do amid all the evils and all the afflictions that happen to them: for, since they are convinced that their God intends, by this means, to do more good than evil, they have no reason to fear, or complain when these things happen to them; on the contrary, they should have more reason to rejoice and even give praise and thinks to their God, as if they were receiving blessings fr
om His hands. And this is completely what their Christ wanted to convince his Apostles and Disciples of, when he told them, "Blessed are the poor, blessed are they who mourn, blessed are they who hunger and thirst and blessed are they who are persecuted for righteousness,” and when he told them they should rejoice and be glad when they received abuse and mistreatment for his sake. “You will be blessed,” he told them, “when, because of me, you will be insulted and all sorts of evil is falsely spoken against you; you should rejoice for this,” he said, “and be delighted, for a great reward awaits you in Heaven[858]: Gaudete et exultate quoniam merces vestra copiosa est in coelis. This is also why his first Disciples, trusting his words and already believing they were witnessing the alleged great and beautiful rewards which he’d promised them in Heaven, actually rejoiced in their sufferings and the disgrace they endured for the love of his name[859] ibant gaudentes a conspectu consilii quoniam digni habiti sunt pro nomine Jesu contumeliam pati. This is also why they exhorted their comrades to joyfully suffer all the troubles and afflictions of this life, informing them that, according to the word of their master, it was through many afflictions and mishaps that the Kingdom of Heaven could be entered, as it says in their books[860]: Quoniam per multas tribulationes oportet nos intrare in regnum Dei.