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.