multiplied, by detaching them from their fellows, by reducing all their affections to a secret selfishness, as fatal to population as to virtue.  The indifference of the philosopher is like the peace in a despotic state; it is the repose of death; war itself is not more destructive.—­Thus fanaticism though its immediate results are more fatal than those of what is now called the philosophic mind, is much less fatal in its after effects.  Moreover, it is an easy matter to exhibit fine maxims in books; but the real question is—­Are they really in accordance with your teaching, are they the necessary consequences of it? and this has not been clearly proved so far.  It remains to be seen whether philosophy, safely enthroned, could control successfully man’s petty vanity, his self-interest, his ambition, all the lesser passions of mankind, and whether it would practise that sweet humanity which it boasts of, pen in hand.—­In theory, there is no good which philosophy can bring about which is not equally secured by religion, while religion secures much that philosophy cannot secure.—­In practice, it is another matter; but still we must put it to the proof.  No man follows his religion in all things, even if his religion is true; most people have hardly any religion, and they do not in the least follow what they have; that is still more true; but still there are some people who have a religion and follow it, at least to some extent; and beyond doubt religious motives do prevent them from wrong-doing, and win from them virtues, praiseworthy actions, which would not have existed but for these motives.—­A monk denies that money was entrusted to him; what of that?  It only proves that the man who entrusted the money to him was a fool.  If Pascal had done the same, that would have proved that Pascal was a hypocrite.  But a monk!  Are those who make a trade of religion religious people?  All the crimes committed by the clergy, as by other men, do not prove that religion is useless, but that very few people are religious.—­Most certainly our modern governments owe to Christianity their more stable authority, their less frequent revolutions; it has made those governments less bloodthirsty; this can be shown by comparing them with the governments of former times.  Apart from fanaticism, the best known religion has given greater gentleness to Christian conduct.  This change is not the result of learning; for wherever learning has been most illustrious humanity has been no more respected on that account; the cruelties of the Athenians, the Egyptians, the Roman emperors, the Chinese bear witness to this.  What works of mercy spring from the gospel!  How many acts of restitution, reparation, confession does the gospel lead to among Catholics!  Among ourselves, as the times of communion draw near, do they not lead us to reconciliation and to alms-giving?  Did not the Hebrew Jubilee make the grasping less greedy, did it not prevent much poverty?  The brotherhood of the Law made the nation one; no beggar was found