<p>"I" <SPAN name="link2H_4_0008" id="link2H_4_0008"></SPAN></p>
<br/>
<h2> M. DE VOLTAIRE. </h2>
<p>François Marie Arouet, better known by the name of Voltaire, was born at
Chatenay, on the 20th of February, 1694. By assuming the name of Voltaire,
young Arouet followed the custom, at that time generally practiced by the
rich citizens and younger sons, who, leaving the family name to the heir,
assumed that of a fief, or perhaps of a country house. The father of M. de
Voltaire was treasurer to the Chamber of Accounts, and his mother,
Margaret d'Aumart, was of a noble family of Poitou. The fortune which the
father enjoyed, enabled him to bestow a first-class education upon the
young Arouet, who was sent to the Jesuits' College, where the sons of the
nobility received their education. While at school, Voltaire began to
write poetry, and gave signs of a remarkable genius. His tutors, Fathers
Poree and Jay, from the boldness and independence of his mind predicted
that he would become the apostle of Deism in France. This prediction he
fulfilled. "Voltaire was," says Lord Brougham, "through his whole life, a
sincere believer in the existence and attributes of the Deity. He was a
firm and decided, and an openly declared unbeliever in Christianity; but
he was, without any hesitation or any intermission, a Theist." His open
declaration of disbelief in the inspiration of the Bible, and his total
rejection of the dogmas of Christianity, laid him open to the malignant
attacks and misrepresentations of the priesthood and the bigots of Europe;
and so strong were they, that his life was continually in danger. Lord
Brougham, in his "Men of Letters of the Time of George III.." says:—"Voltaire's
name is so intimately connected in the minds of all men with Infidelity,
in the minds of most men with irreligion, and, in the minds of all who are
not well-informed, with these qualities alone, that whoever undertakes to
write his life and examine his claims to the vast reputation which all the
hostile feelings excited by him against himself have never been able to
destroy, or even materially to impair, has to labor under a great load of
prejudice, and can hardly expect, by any detail of particulars, to obtain
for his subject even common justice at the hands of the general reader."</p>
<p>Voltaire was born in a corrupt age, and in a capital where it was
fashionable to be immoral. When he left College, he was introduced by his
own godfather, the Abbe de Chateauneuf, to the notorious Ninon de
l'Enclos, who, at her death, left him by will two thousand livres to
purchase books. In estimating the character of Voltaire, a due
consideration must be had for the period in which he lived, and of the
nature of the society amidst which he was reared. He lived twenty, years
under the reign of Louis XIV., and during the whole of the reign of the
infamous Louis XV., when kings, courtiers, and priests set the example of
the grossest immorality. It was then, as Voltaire said, "that to make the
smallest fortune, it was better to say four words to the mistress of a
king, than to write a hundred volumes."</p>
<p>Voltaire's life, from his youth upwards, was a stormy one. After he left
College, his father, finding him persist in writing poetry, and living at
large, forbade him his house. He insisted upon his son binding himself to
an attorney. But his restless disposition quite unfitted him for regular
employment, and he soon quitted the profession. He early made the
acquaintance of the most celebrated men of his time, but his genius, his
wit, and his sarcasm, soon raised up numerous enemies. At the age of
twenty-two, he was accused of having written a satire upon Louis XIV., who
was just dead, and was thrown into the Bastile. But he was not cast down.
It was here that he sketched his poem of the "League," corrected his
tragedy of "Oedipus," and wrote some merry verses on the misfortune, of
being a prisoner. The Regent, Duke of Orleans, being informed of his
innocence, restored him to freedom, and granted him a recompense. "I thank
your royal highness," said Voltaire, "for having provided me with food;
but I hope you will not hereafter trouble yourself concerning my lodging."</p>
<p>Voltaire, with his activity of mind, and living to so great an age, must
necessarily produce many works. They are voluminous, consisting of
history, poetry, and philosophy. His dramatic pieces are numerous, many of
which are considered second only to Shakespeare's. "Oedipus," "Zadig,"
"Ingénu," "Zaire," "Henri-ade," "Irene," "Tancred," "Mahomet," "Merope,"
"Saul," "Alzire," "Le Fanatisme," "Mariamne," "Gaston de Foix," "Enfant
Prodigue," "Pucelle d'Orléans," an essay on "Fire," the "Elements,"
"History of Charles XII.," "Lectures on Man," "Letters on England,"
"Memoirs," "Voyage of Sacramentado," "Micromegas," "Maid of Orleans,"
"Brutus," "Adelaide," "Death of Cæsar," "Temple of Taste," "Essay on the
Manners and Spirit of Nations," "An Examination of the Holy Scriptures,"
and the "Philosophical Dictionary," are works that emanated from the
active brain of this wit, poet, satirist, and philosopher.</p>
<p>In 1722, while at Brussels, Voltaire met Jean Baptiste Rousseau, whose
misfortunes he deplored, and whose poetic talents he esteemed. Voltaire
read some of his poems to Rousseau, and he in return read to Voltaire his
"Ode addressed to Posterity," which Voltaire, it is asserted, told him
would never arrive at the place to which it was addressed. The two poets
parted irreconcileable foes.</p>
<p>In 1725, Voltaire was again shut up in the Bastile, through attempting to
revenge an insult inflicted upon him by a courtier. At the end of six
months he was released, but ordered to quit Paris. He sought refuge in
England, in 1726. He was the guest in that country of a Mr. Falconer, of
Wandsworth, whose hospitality he remembered with affection so long as life
lasted. Voltaire was known to most of the wits and Freethinkers of that
day in England. At this early age he was at war with Christianity. "His
visit to England," says Lamartine, "gave assurance and gravity to his
incredulity; for in France he had only known libertines—in England
he knew philosophers." He went to visit Congreve, who had the affectation
to tell him that he (Congreve) valued himself, not on his authorship, but
as a man of the world. To which Voltaire administered a just rebuke by
saying, "I should never have come so far to see a gentleman!"</p>
<p>Voltaire soon acquired an ample fortune, much of which was expended in
aiding men of letters, and in encouraging such youth as he thought
discovered the seeds of genius. The use he made of riches might prevail on
envy itself to pardon him their acquirement. His pen and his purse were
ever at the service of the oppressed. Calas, an infirm old man, living at
Toulouse, was accused of having hung his son, to prevent his becoming a
Catholic. The Catholic population became inflamed, and the young man was
declared to be a martyr. The father was condemned to the torture and the
wheel, and died protesting his innocence. The family of Calas was ruined
and disgraced. Voltaire, assuring himself of the innocence of the old man,
determined to obtain justice for the family. To this end he labored
incessantly for three years. In all this time, he said, a smile did not
escape him for which he did not reproach himself as for a crime. His
efforts were successful. Nor was this the only cause in which he was
engaged on the side of the weak and the wronged against the powerful and
the persecuting. His whole life, though maligned as an Infidel and
a-scoffer, was one long act of benevolence. On learning that a young niece
of Corneille languished in a condition unworthy of his name, Voltaire, in
the most delicate manner, invited her to his house, and she there received
an education suitable to the rank that her birth had marked lor her in
society. "It is the duty of a soldier," he said, "to succor the niece of
his general."</p>
<p>Voltaire lived for a time at the Court of Frederick the Great of Prussia,
and for many years carried on a correspondence with that monarch. He
quarrelled with the king, and left the court in a passion. An emissary was
despatched to him to request an apology, who said he was to carry back to
the king his answer <i>verbatim</i>. Voltaire told him that "the king
might go to the devil!" On being asked if that was the message he meant to
be delivered! "Yes," he answered, "and add to it that I told you that you
might go there with him." In his "Memoirs," he has drawn a most amusing
picture of his Prussian Majesty. He, also says, "Priests never entered the
palace; and, in a word, Frederick lived without religion, without a
council, and without a court."</p>
<p>Wearied with his rambling and unsettled mode of living, Voltaire bought an
estate at Ferney, in the Pays des Gex, where he spent the last twenty
years of his life. He rebuilt the house, laid out gardens, kept a good
table, and had crowds of visitors from all parts, of Europe. Removed from
whatever could excite momentary or personal passion, he yielded to his
zeal for the destruction of prejudice, which was the most powerful and
active of all the sensations he felt. This peaceful life, seldom disturbed
except by the threats of persecution rather than persecution itself, was
adorned by those acts of enlightened and bold benevolence, which, while
they relieve the sufferings of certain individuals, are of any service to
the whole human race. He was known to Europe as the "Sage of Ferney."
After an absence of more than twenty-seven years, he re-visited Paris in
the beginning of 1778. He had just finished his play of "Irene," and was
anxious to see it performed. His visit was an ovation. He had outlived all
his enemies. After having been the object of unrelenting persecution by
the priests and corrupt courtiers of France for a period of more than
fifty years, he yet lived to see the day when "all that was most eminent
in station or most distinguished in talents—all that most shone in
society, or most ruled in court, seemed to bend before him." At this
period he, for the first time, saw Benjamin Franklin. They embraced each
other in the midst of public acclamations, and it was said to be Solon who
embraced Sophocles.</p>
<p>Voltaire did not survive his triumph long. His unwearied activity induced
him, at his great age, to commence a "Dictionary" upon a novel plan, which
he prevailed upon the French Academy to take up. These labors brought on
spitting of blood, followed by sleeplessness, to obviate which he took
opium in considerable quantities. Condorcet says that the servant mistook
one of the doses, which threw him into a state of lethargy, from which he
never rallied. He lingered for some time, but at length expired on the
30th of May, 1778, in his eighty-fifth year.</p>
<p>It was the custom in those days, and prevails to a considerable extent
even in our own time, for the religious world to fabricate "horrible
death-beds" of all Freethinkers. Voltaire's last moments were distorted by
his enemies after the approved fashion; and notwithstanding the most
unqualified denial on the part of Dr. Burard and others, who were present
at his death, there are many who believe these falsehoods at this moment.
Voltaire died in peace, with the exception of the petty annoyances to
which he was subjected by the priests. The philosophers, too, who wished
that no public stigma should be cast upon him by the refusal of Christian
burial, persuaded him to undergo confession and absolution. This, to
oblige his friends, he submitted to; but when the cure one day drew him
from his lethargy by shouting into his ear, "Do you believe the divinity
of Jesus Christ?" Voltaire exclaimed, "In the name of God, Sir, speak to
me no more of that man, but let me die in peace!" This put to flight all
doubts of the pious, and the certificate of burial was refused. But the
prohibition of the Bishop of Troyes came too late. Voltaire was buried at
the monastery of Scellieres, in Champagne, of which his nephew was abbot.
Afterwards, during the first French Revolution, the body, at the request
of the citizens, was removed to Paris, and buried in the Pantheon.
Lamartine, in his "History of the Girondists," p. 149, speaking of the
ceremony, says:—</p>
<p>"On the 11th of July, the departmental and municipal authorities went in
state to the barrier of Charenton, to receive the mortal remains of
Voltaire, which were placed on the ancient site of the Bastile, like a
conqueror on his trophies; his coffin was exposed to public gaze, and a
pedestal was formed for it of stones torn from the foundations of this
ancient stronghold of tyranny; and thus Voltaire when dead triumphed over
those stones which had triumphed over and confined him when living. On one
of the blocks was the inscription, '<i>Receive on this spot, where
despotism once fettered thee, the Honors decreed to thee by thy country</i>'....
The coffin of Voltaire was deposited between those of Descartes and
Mirabeau—the spot predestined for this intermediary genius between
philosophy and policy, between the design and the execution."</p>
<p>The aim of Voltaire's life was the destruction of prejudice and the
establishment of Reason. "Deists," said W. J. Fox in 1819, "have done much
for toleration and religious liberty. It may be doubted if there be a
country in Europe, where that cause has not been advanced by the writings
of Voltaire." In the Preface and Conclusion to the "Examination of the
Scriptures," Voltaire says:—</p>
<p>"The ambition of domineering over the mind, is one of the strongest
passions. A theologian, a missionary, or a partisan of any description, is
always for conquering like a prince, and there are many more sects than
there are sovereigns in the world. To whose guidance shall I submit my
mind? Must I be a Christian, be-cause I happened to be born in London, or
in Madrid? Must I be a Mussulman, because I was born in Turkey? As it is
myself alone that I ought to consult, the choice of a religion is my
greatest interest. One man adores God by Mahomet, another by the Grand
Lama, and another by the Pope. Weak and foolish men! adore God by your own
reason.... I have learnt that a French Vicar, of the name of John Meslier,
who died a short time since, prayed on his death-bed that God would
forgive him for having taught Christianity. I have seen a Vicar in
Dorsetshire relinquish a living of £200 a year, and confess to his
parishioners that his conscience would not permit him to preach the
shocking absurdities of the Christians. But neither the will nor the
testament of John Meslier, nor the declaration of this worthy Vicar, are
what I consider decisive proofs. Uriel Acosta, a Jew, publicly renounced
the Old Testament in Amsterdam; however, I pay no more attention to the
Jew Acosta than to Parson Meslier. I will read the arguments on both sides
of the trial, with careful attention, not suffering the lawyers to tamper
with me; but will weigh, before God, the reasons of both parties, and
decide according to my conscience. I commence by being my-own
instructor.... I conclude, that every sensible man, every honest man,
ought to hold Christianity in abhorrence. 'The great name of Theist, which
we can never sufficiently revere,' is the only name we ought to adopt. The
only gospel we should read is the grand book of nature, written with God's
own hand, and stamped with his own seal. The only religion we ought to
profess is, 'to adore God, and act like honest men.' It would be as
impossible for this simple and eternal religion to produce evil, as it
would be impossible for Christian fanaticism not to produce it.... But
what shall we substitute in its place? say you. What? A ferocious animal
has sucked the blood of my relatives. I tell you to rid yourselves of this
beast, and you ask me what you shall put in its place! Is it you that put
this question to me? Then you are a hundred times more odious than the
Pagan Pontiffs, who permitted themselves to enjoy tranquillity among their
ceremonies and sacrifices, who did not attempt to enslave the mind by
dogmas, who never disputed the powers of the magistrates, and who
introduced no discord among mankind. You have the face to ask what you
must substitute in the place of your fables!"</p>
<p>As will be seen by his exclamation on his death-bed, Voltaire was no
believer in the <i>divinity</i> of Christ. He disbelieved the Bible <i>in
toto</i>. The accounts of the doings of the Jewish kings, as represented
in the Old Testament, he has unsparingly ridiculed in the drama of "Saul."
The quiet irony of the following will be easily appreciated:—</p>
<p>Divinity of Jesus.—The Socinians, who are regarded as blasphemers,
do not recognize the divinity of Jesus Christ. They dare to pretend, with
the philosophers of antiquity, with the Jews, the Mahometans, and most
other nations, that the idea of a god-man is monstrous; that the distance
from God to man is infinite; and that it is impossible for a perishable
body to be infinite, immense, or eternal. They have the confidence to
quote Eusebius, Bishop of Cæsarea, in their favor, who, in his
"Ecclesiastical History," book i., chap. 9, declares that it is absurd to
imagine the uncreated and unchangeable nature of Almighty God taking the
form of a man. They cite the fathers of the church, Justin and Tertullian,
who have said the same thing: Justin in his "Dialogue with Triphonius;"
and Tertullian, in his "Discourse against Praxeas." They quote St. Paul,
who never calls Jesus Christ, God, and who calls him man very often. They
carry their audacity so far as to affirm, that the Christians passed three
entire ages in forming by degrees the apotheosis of Jesus; and that they
only raised this astonishing edifice by the example of the Pagans, who had
deified mortals. At first, according to them, Jesus was only regarded as a
man inspired by God, and then as a creature more perfect than others. They
gave him some time after, a place above the angels, as St. Paul tells us.
Every day added to his greatness. He in time became an emanation,
proceeding from God. This was not enough; he was even born before time. At
last he was God consubstantial with God. Crellius, Voquelsius, Natalis,
Alexander, and Hornbeck, have supported all these blasphemies by
arguments, which astonish the wise and mislead the weak. Above all,
Faustus Socinus spread the seeds of this doctrine in Europe; and at the
end of the sixteenth century, a new species of Christianity was
established. There were already more than three hundred.—[Philosophical
Dictionary, vol. i. p. 405.]</p>
<p>Though a firm and consistent believer in the being of a God, Voltaire was
no bigot. The calm reasoning of the following passage does honor to its
author:—</p>
<p>Faith.—Divine faith, about which so much has been written, is
evidently nothing more than incredulity brought under subjection; for we
certainly have no other faculty than the understanding by which we can
believe; and the objects of faith are not those of the understanding. We
can believe only what appears to be true; and nothing can appear true but
in one of the three following ways—by intuition or feeling, as I
exist, I see the sun; or by an accumulation of probability amounting to
certainty, as there is a city called Constantinople; or by positive
demonstration, as triangles of the same base and height are equal. Faith,
therefore, being nothing at all of this description, can no more be a
belief, a persuasion, than it can be yellow or red. It can be nothing but
the annihilation of reason, a silence of adoration at the contemplation of
things absolutely incomprehensible. Thus, speaking philosophically, no
person believes the Trinity; no person believes that the same body can be
in a thousand places at once; and he who says, I believe these mysteries,
will see, beyond the possibility of a doubt, if he reflects for a moment
on what passes in his mind, that these words mean no more than, I respect
thee, mysteries; I submit myself to those who announce them. For they
agree with me, that my real reason, their own reason, believe them not;
but it is clear if my <i>reason</i> is not persuaded, I am not persuaded,
and my reason cannot possibly be two different beings. It is an absolute
contradiction that I should receive that as true which my understanding
rejects as false. Faith, therefore, is nothing but submissive or
deferential incredulity. But why should this submission be exercised when
my understanding invincibly recoils? The reason, we well know, is, that my
understanding has been persuaded that the mysteries of my faith are laid
down by God himself. All, then, that I can do, as a reasonable being, is
to be silent and adore. That is what divines call external faith; and this
faith neither is, nor can be, anything more than respect for things
incomprehensible, in consequence of the reliance I place on those who
teach them; If God himself were to say to me, "Thought is of an olive
colour;" "the square of a certain number is bitter;" I should certainly
understand nothing at all from these words. I could not adopt them either
as true or false. But I will repeat them, if he commands me to do it; and
I will make others repeat them at the risk of my life. This is faith; it
is nothing more than obedience. In order to obtain a foundation then for
this obedience, it is merely necessary to examine the books which require
it. Our understanding, therefore, should investigate the books of the Old
and New Testament, just as it would Plutarch or Livy; and if it finds in
them incontestable and decisive evidences—evidences obvious to all
minds, and such as would be admitted by men of all nations—that God
himself is their author, then it is our incumbent duty to subject our
understanding to the yoke of faith.—[Ibid, p. 474.]</p>
<p>Prayer.—We know of no religion without prayers; even the Jews had
them, although there was no public form of prayer among them before the
time when they sang their canticles in their synagogues, which did not
take place until a late period. The people of all nations, whether
actuated by desires or fears, have summoned the assistance of the
Divinity. Philosophers, however, more respectful to the Supreme Being, and
rising more above human weakness, have been habituated to substitute, for
prayer, resignation. This, in fact, is all that appears proper and
suitable between creature and Creator. But philosophy is not adapted to
the great mass of mankind; it soars too highly above the vulgar; it speaks
a language they are unable to comprehend. To propose philosophy to them,
would be just as weak as to propose the study of conic sections to
peasants or fish-women. Among philosophers themselves, I know of no one
besides Maximus Tyrius who has treated of this subject. The following is
the substance of his ideas upon it:—The designs of God exist from
all eternity. If the object prayed for be conformable to his immutable
will, it must be perfectly useless to request of him the very thing which
he has determined to do. If he is prayed to for the reverse of what he has
determined to do, he is prayed to be weak, fickle, and inconstant; such a
prayer implies that this is thought to be his character, and is nothing
better than ridicule or mockery of him. You either request of him what is
just and right, in which case he ought to do it, and it will be actually
done without any solicitation, which in fact, shows distrust of his
rectitude; or what you request is unjust, and then you insult him. You are
either worthy or unworthy of the favour you implore; if worthy, he knows
it better than you do yourself; if unworthy, you commit an additional
crime in requesting that which you do not merit. In a word, we offer up
prayers to God only because we have made him after our own image. We treat
him like a pacha, or a sultan, who is capable of being exasperated and
appeased. In short, all nations pray to God; the sage is resigned, and
obeys him. Let us pray with the people, and let us be resigned to him with
the sage. We have already spoken of the public prayer of many nations, and
of those of the Jews.—That people have had one from time immemorial,
which deserves all our attention, from its resemblance to the prayer
taught us by Jesus Christ himself. This Jewish prayer is called the
Kadish, and begins with these words:—"Oh! God! let thy name be
magnified and sanctified; make thy kingdom to prevail; let redemption
flourish, and the Messiah come quickly!" As this Radish is recited in
Chaldee, it has induced the belief, that it is as ancient as the
captivity, and that it was at that period that the Jews began to hope for
a Messiah, a Liberator, or Redeemer, whom they have since prayed for in
ihe seasons of their calamities.—[Ibid, vol. ii., p. 350.]</p>
<p>Voltaire's contempt for the Bible led him to use the language of "holy
writ" in the coarsest jokes; though, perhaps, with such material, the
jokes could not well be otherwise than <i>coarse</i>. The following letter
he addressed to M. Bâillon, Intendant of Lyons, on account of a poor Jew
taken up for uttering contraband goods. This kind of writing obtained for
Voltaire the title of "scoffer:"—</p>
<p>"Blessings on the Old Testament, which gives me this opportunity of
telling you, that amongst all those who adore the New, there is not one
more devoted to your service than myself, a certain descendant of Jacob, a
pedlar, as all these gentlemen are, whilst he is waiting for the Messiah,
waits also for your protection, which at present he has the most need of.
Some honest men of the first trade of St. Matthew, who gather together the
Jews and Christians at the gates of your city, have seized something in
the breeches pocket of an Israelitish page, belonging to the poor
circumcised, who has the honour to tender you this billet, with all proper
submission and humility. I beg leave to join my Amen to his at a venture.
I but just saw you at Paris as Moses saw the Deity, and should be very
happy in seeing you face to face. If the word face can any ways be applied
to me, preserve some remembrance of your old eternal humble servant, who
loves you with that chaste and tender affection, which the religious
Solomon had for his three hundred Shuhamites."</p>
<p>Voltaire's prodigious wit and sarcasm were so exuberant, that he expended
them upon all people and all subjects—even <i>himself</i>, when
occasion admitted of it, In one of his letters,-addressed to the Elector
Palatine, Sept. 9, 1761, he gives this excuse for not attending at the
court:—</p>
<p>"I should really make an excellent figure amidst the rejoicings of your
electoral highness. It was only, I think, in the Egypt of antiquity that
<i>skeletons</i> were admitted to a place in their festivals. To say the
truth, my lord, it is all over with me. I laugh indeed sometimes; but am
forced to acknowledge that pain is an evil. It is a comfort to me that
your highness is well; but I am fitter for an extreme unction than a
baptism. May the peace serve for an era to mark the prince's birth; and
may his august father preserve his regard for, and accept the profound
respects of his little Swiss, Voltaire."</p>
<p>In politics, Voltaire was not very far advanced. He seems to have had no
idea of a nation without a <i>king</i>. A monarch who should not commit
any very flagrant acts of tyranny, was as much as he appeared to desire.
He evidently did not foresee the great revolution that was so soon to
burst forth in France, but that he mainly contributed by his writings to
bring it about, there can be no doubt. His influence upon the men of his
time, both in France and Europe, is ably depicted by such writers as
Lamartine, Quinet, and Brougham. Voltaire's was the one great mind of his
day, whose thoughts engrossed the attention of all men. He was great by
his learning, his genius, and his benevolence—and this man was the
champion of Reason, the enemy of superstition, and an "Infidel." Quinet,
in his lectures on the Romish Church, says:—"I watch, for forty
years, the reign of one man who is in himself the spiritual director, not
of his country, but of his age. From the corner of his chamber, he governs
the kingdom of spirits; intellects are every day regulated by his; one
word written by his hand traverses Europe. Princes love, and kings fear
him; they think they are not sure of their kingdom if he be not with them.
Whole nations, on their side, adopt without discussion, and emulously
repeat, every syllable that falls from his pen. Who exercises this
incredible power, which had been nowhere seen since the middle ages? Is he
another Gregory II.? Is he a Pope? No—Voltaire."</p>
<p>We conclude our sketch with the eloquent words of Lamartine, who
describes, in a few sentences, the inestimable services rendered to
Freethought and intellectual progression by the Sage of Ferney:—</p>
<p>"If we judge of men by what they have <i>done</i>, then Voltaire is
incontestably the greatest writer of modern Europe. No one has caused,
through the powerful influence of his genius alone, and the perseverance
of his will, so great a commotion in the minds of men; his pen aroused a
world, and has shaken a far mightier empire than that of Charlemagne, the
European empire of a theocracy. His genius was not <i>force</i> but <i>light</i>.
Heaven had destined him not to destroy but to illuminate, and wherever he
trod, light followed him, for Reason (which is <i>light</i>) had destined
him to be first her poet, then her apostle, and lastly her idol."</p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />