Yan Li and Li Huiqin: Jean Meslier's Thought on Militant Atheism and Its Enlightenment — An Investigation Centered on "Testament"
Jean Meslier (1664–1729) was a pioneer of 18th-century French utopian socialism and a militant atheist who served as a rural parish priest in the village of Étrépigny in the Champagne province of France. Throughout his forty-year professional career, Meslier honestly performed his priestly duties even as they violated his inner convictions. While he fulfilled his clerical responsibilities on the surface, the seeds of hatred for the feudal nobility, hostility toward ecclesiastical theocracy, and sympathy for the laboring masses had long been sown in his heart. In his later years, Meslier made a quiet resolution to record what he had seen and thought over the years before his eyesight failed, leaving it as a final testament and a "witness to the truth" for future generations. With extraordinary perseverance, he eventually completed the manuscript of his Testament (L’Esprit de M. l'abbé Jean Meslier / Mémoire). However, out of consideration for the social situation at the time, Meslier did not publish it during his lifetime; it was not until 1864 that the full text of the Testament was officially published for the first time in the Netherlands. The Testament is rich in atheistic thought and played an important role in shaping public opinion by exposing and criticizing religious theology and the feudal autocratic system. Its appearance not only propelled the struggle of the bourgeoisie against theological authority and feudal despotism during the French Enlightenment but also had a profound influence on the struggle against religious superstition among people in other parts of the world.
Currently, scholars have conducted relevant research on Meslier's atheistic thought. Internationally, the Soviet scholar A. M. Deborin and the French scholar Dominique Badier have researched Meslier's political and philosophical thought, addressing religious issues and exploring the interconnectedness of his political and philosophical views in the process of interpreting his political stance. Domestically, scholars such as Wang Qiming, Ji Danqing, and Wang Qi have respectively researched Meslier's political thought, his ideas on common prosperity, and his materialistic worldview, all of which touch upon Meslier's atheistic thought and regard it as a conceptual weapon for his anti-religious and anti-theological stance. The scholar Xie Yingrui has conducted a relatively in-depth analysis of the philosophical foundations of Meslier's atheism. Through a review of the literature, it is found that research on Meslier by Chinese scholars generally started late, primarily because the translation and study of relevant works in China were weak prior to the Reform and Opening-up [1]. It was only after Reform and Opening-up, as Marxist historians began to unearth, organize, and translate Meslier’s relevant works, that the historical status he deserved in the Enlightenment was restored. Overall, domestic scholarly research on Meslier is characterized by its late start and relative insufficiency; research on his atheistic thought remains scattered, mentioned only within broader studies, and lacks systematic or specialized investigation. In light of this, this article attempts to explore the core essence of Meslier's atheistic thought based on an in-depth study of his Testament and an extensive reference to existing research results, with the aim of advancing and expanding relevant research and providing new perspectives and reflections for understanding the role of Meslier's atheistic thought in both historical and contemporary society.
I. Arguments on the Illusory and Hypocritical Nature of Religion
As a militant atheist, Meslier was deeply incensed by the absurdity and ignorance of religion. In his Testament, he devoted a great deal of space to exposing the falsity of so-called miracles, arguing for the illusory and hypocritical nature of religion from four aspects.
First, religion is an illusory thing fabricated by humans. Meslier believed that the religions of his time transformed man-made doctrines into sacred dogmas, an act that was essentially deceptive. The people who formulated these doctrines used the name and authority of God to make the masses accept religious dogmas that suited their own interests. However, because the fundamental principles of different religions contain essential contradictions and conflicts, they cannot be regarded as true simultaneously, nor can they be judged as originating from the same divine source. Therefore, Meslier pointed out: "Without a doubt, at least the majority of the world's religions, as I have said, are purely fabricated by men." Following this, Meslier further examined the motives behind the fabricators of religion, discovering that such people abused the name and prestige of God to implement their own laws and regulations while forcing the people to further revere, worship, and fear them, thereby ruling and deceiving the masses. Furthermore, he cited many historical examples—such as the Roman King Numa Pompilius, the Egyptian King Trismegistus, King Minos of Crete, and the founder of Islam, Muhammad—to expose their evil deeds of using religious ruses to fool the people and their followers, further proving that all existing and historical religions are essentially products of human fabrication.
Second, blind faith, which serves as the foundation of all religion, is the source of error, illusion, and deception. On the one hand, if religious doctrine and morality are built upon deception and error, leading people into a state of division and confusion between religious dogma and reality, then such a religion is false. In fact, all religions, including Christianity, have built their sacraments, doctrines, and moral systems on a foundation of misunderstanding, hallucination, and fraud. Christianity takes faith as its core—that is, the unconditional belief in the existence of spirits, divine laws, and revelations—and uses this to construct its moral and doctrinal system. All the veneration and authority of a religion stem from the believers' faith in the divine existence and its revelations; once this faith is lost, religious doctrine is treated with contempt. Therefore, the primary principle of every religion is to demand that believers remain steadfast in their faith. Religion emphasizes that faith must be firm and unshakable to prevent believers from changing their minds. In Meslier's view, however, this faith is blind. Because religions neither can nor will provide reliable evidence for their so-called sacred sacraments and revelations; they only demand that people accept them entirely without condition or doubt. If someone questions the reason why, it is seen as an insult to the divine, and excessive inquiry into the secrets of divine power invites punishment. Ultimately, religion equates firm faith with blind faith, discarding logical reasoning and supporting evidence. This blind faith, instilled in the name of God, is the very source of error, illusion, and deception.
Third, the illusory and hypocritical nature of religion arises from the falsity of visions and divine revelations. Christians had attempted to use divine revelation as the foundation of their faith and as a means to consolidate the truth and certainty of their religion. To this, Meslier critiqued that if there are still people today who claim to have seen God or received divine revelations, such people are undoubtedly mentally deranged and driven by hallucinations and fanaticism. To prove the correctness of his view, Meslier focused on the theme of manifestations and divine revelations, using the stories of the three patriarchs—Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—who were revered as holy for dreaming of God and receiving revelations. He reminded people that such religious matters, filled with confusion, self-deception, and fraud, need not be taken seriously. Even if the three patriarchs could appear in person to recount their visions and revelations, these accounts would still be superstitious and self-deceptive in essence. If the narrator makes others believe them, they are either trapped in their own hallucinations and simple-mindedness, or they harbor hidden interests as liars and cheats. In Meslier's view, the falsity of the stories regarding the three patriarchs is easily exposed; these visions and revelations benefited only specific individuals and nations, and their essence was a form of favoritism built upon injustice. From this perspective, they are only enshrined as sacred because they fit the interests of a specific group. The hollow details of these stories further expose their false core—for instance, the mark of circumcision used when God made a covenant with man, the cruel rituals of sacrificing innocent animals, and the grand promises made by God to the three patriarchs that never bore fruit and were never fulfilled. Thus, Meslier ultimately concluded that the illusory and hypocritical nature of religion is produced precisely by the falsity of its visions and divine revelations.
Fourth, the hypocrisy of religion is derived from the falsity of the so-called covenants and prophecies in the "Old Testament." Christians often cite prophecies to support their faith, viewing them as core evidence proving the truth of their religion. In their view, only God can precisely foresee things in the distant future, and prophecies are powerful evidence of the truth of divine revelations and omens. Regarding this, Meslier analyzed those prophets and "men of God" who claimed to speak based on the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, pointing out that they were not holy messengers at all but ordinary people easily deceived by hallucinations, whose words and deeds were often driven by intense emotions and impulses. Furthermore, some swindlers posing as prophets claimed to be executors of Holy Spirit revelations while actually being guided by the "demons" of hypocrisy and deception. In Meslier's view, many so-called prophets in history were either fanatics or individuals obsessed with hallucinations, or they were quacks who abused the name of God and used prophecies to seek personal gain. As some prophets have said, some false prophets utter prophecies in God's name even though God never communicated with them; their statements are nothing but fabricated hallucinations and calculated misdirection. Meslier cited numerous examples of prophets to prove that the so-called prophets were, in fact, just some fanatics and people trapped in hallucinations.
In addition, Meslier proposed a standard for judging the authenticity of a prophet. If a prophet claims to rely on God's revelation to prophesy but the prophecy fails to come true and is instead negated by reality, then they are by no means a true prophet. He cited the examples of prophets such as Moses, King David, Isaiah, and Ezekiel, finding that not one of their promises or prophecies to the believers was realized, and they were even clueless about the timing or method of fulfilling these promises. From this, he concluded that these covenants and prophecies were all false, and the people who fabricated them were either believers talking nonsense in a state of frenzy or swindlers attempting to use prophecies to gain admiration and thereby deceive and fool the masses.
II. Exposing the Relationship of Collusion Between Royal Power and Divine Power
In 18th-century France, the relationship between royal power and divine power was a major issue affecting social development. After witnessing the miserable state of the people suffering from exploitation and oppression, Meslier turned his focus to exposing and criticizing the relationship between royal and divine power. He pointed out that the root of all human disasters lies in "statecraft" (quan'shu [2]) and analyzed the operating principles of religion and government, elucidating the secrets of religious and political collusion, thereby exposing the relationship of collusion between royal power and divine power.
First, Meslier exposed statecraft as the root of all human disasters. He believed that all the profound disasters befalling the people—including being shackled by superstition and dominated by tyrannical laws in a world of power—stemmed from statecraft. Some people attempted to rule their equals in an unjust manner, while others craved secular or even religious fame. To achieve the goal of fooling the people more easily, these two groups of people not only skillfully employed violence but also used various plots and intrigues. It can be seen that these practitioners of statecraft exploited the people's lack of education, their weak character, and their kind nature to force them to revere and believe in them, thereby voluntarily or involuntarily accepting various laws imposed upon them. Using these means, one group forced others to respect them and treat them as deities; the other group became the most powerful and wealthiest people in the world. When these two groups obtained power, wealth, and influence through intrigue sufficient to make others submit in fear, they began to cruelly force these people to comply with their laws. Meslier pointed out that this is precisely the root and origin of everything that drives people to respect and worship objects as if they were deities.
Secondly, Meslier critiqued the operational principles of both religious theocracy and government rule. He argued that certain individuals utilize schemes and artifice to force others to regard them as deities or saints. Such people are found all across the globe, maniacally squeezing the people and plundering everything of value they possess. By the same token, this is the origin and inception of the privileges held by the Church and the clergy. Meslier reminds us that priests and bishops seize these privileges to dominate others. Under the guise of opening the gates of heaven and granting eternal happiness, and in the name of saving people from the torments of a fictional hell in the afterlife, they instill ideas that evoke both fear and hope but are, in fact, harmful. This causes people to endure hellish suffering in the only life they can actually rely upon, ultimately achieving the goal of total control. This practice severely interferes with people's opportunities to enjoy true happiness in their present, real lives. After analyzing the operational principles of religious theocracy, Meslier turns his analysis to the principles of government rule. He believes that tyrannical governments rely on the same methods and principles as religion to be established and maintained, as acts that violate religious principles or undermine the fundamental laws of the state are deemed extremely dangerous. Therefore, wise men choose to comply with the laws of the state, even if those laws are inherently unjust. Consequently, they not only submit to religion on the surface but continue to follow religious codes and strategies in practice, even if they have a profound understanding of religious hypocrisy and fallacy. This is because, compared to the difficulty of overcoming oneself and submitting to error, leading a peaceful life and preserving one's property is far easier than resisting fallacy and a king possessing absolute power. In kingdoms with large territories, rulers often cannot personally manage the lands that maintain their regime and rule; thus, they dispatch officials and governors, providing them with lavish remuneration so that they will protect the ruler's interests and ensure the stability of this despotic system. Meslier points out that even those clever enough to see the injustice and abuse of power by the government remain silent. Furthermore, there are secular and religious officials, as well as those seeking office, who value their own fame and wealth more than public affairs. Those who obtain state positions will not resist the hypocrisy and tyranny of the king. Likewise, those seeking holy orders and profitable positions within religion will not easily resist, as they all hope to continuously expand their own power under the king's protection.
Finally, Meslier elucidates the secret of the collusion between religion and politics. In his view, on one hand, religion and politics generally cannot coexist in harmony; the two are filled with contradictions and are mutually opposed. Given that religion inherently contains qualities of gentleness and piety, it ought to condemn cruel and unjust systems of tyranny. On the other hand, if political action were based on reason and wise judgment, it ought to condemn and restrain the abuse of power, fallacies, and deception of false religion. Theoretically, things should develop in this direction; however, reality proves otherwise. Therefore, although religion and politics appear diametrically opposed and contradictory in theory, in reality, once they form an alliance and establish friendly relations, they can coexist harmoniously. From 그 moment on, they are like two accomplices, protecting and supporting one another. Religion supports the worst governments, and governments likewise shield the most absurd and foolish religions. Priests use eternal torment as a means of intimidation, calling upon believers to obey magistrates, dukes, and kings just as they obey God. Meanwhile, kings respect the interests of priests, granting them generous stipends, guaranteeing their right to perform services, and using political means to force the people to accept everything the priests teach as truth. In reality, all of this is hidden under the guise of worshipping God and religious faith; deception, fallacy, and superstition saturate the human world, bringing profound disaster to the poor.
III. Exposing the Crimes of the French Feudal Aristocracy and Religious Officials in Exploiting the People
Having witnessed the despicable acts of exploitation and oppression committed by the ruling class and feudal lords against the peasantry, Meslier expressed immense sympathy for the peasants. He conducted an in-depth analysis of social relations in rural France, exposing the shameful acts of the feudal aristocracy and religious masters who lived without working. He launched a fierce critique of the feudal autocracy of the French authorities, manifesting a thorough revolutionary spirit.
First, Meslier conducted a critical reflection on the social relations in rural France. Based on direct observation of the reality of French peasants being oppressed and exploited, Meslier profoundly analyzed the rural social relations of the time. His critical logic centered on the peasants' conditions of existence, the aristocracy's means of exploitation, and the essence of that exploitation. First, the peasants were at the bottom of society, and their conditions of existence were extremely miserable. They exhausted themselves laboring for the feudal aristocracy yet could hardly solve the problem of basic food and clothing, falling into a state of extreme material deprivation. Meslier stated bluntly that the French peasants were the "true slaves" of the feudal nobility and were the most pitiable and unfortunate group of that time. Second, the aristocracy exploited the peasants through violent plunder and forceful suppression. The feudal lords who possessed vast tracts of fertile land were still not satisfied after enjoying every luxury. They used violence or guile to forcibly seize the property of peasants, compelling them to pay taxes and undertake extra corvée labor. Simultaneously, they implemented psychological oppression, demanding absolute obedience and subservience. Even the lowest-ranking petty noble forced the peasants to be cautious and trembling in his presence while continuously plundering their remaining assets. Meslier sternly condemned the exploiters, labeling the feudal aristocracy that oppressed the peasants as "devils" [3] and clearly pointing out that this group, through robbery and torture, created worldly disasters and was the chief culprit behind the peasants' misfortune. Meslier clearly revealed the social landscape of rural France at the time: the feudal aristocracy lived a life of leisure and unearned gain, while the peasants struggled at the very bottom of society under the dual suppression of material and spiritual forces. If the poor could not rid themselves of the harrassment of these "villains," there would never be a possibility of attaining happiness.
Secondly, Meslier exposed the shameful conduct of the clergy in living off the labor of others. In French society at that time, there existed a large number of groups that relied on the people for sustenance but provided no benefit to them, or even specialized in oppressing and exploiting them. Meslier collectively referred to those who lived by extortion, were idle, and made no contribution to society as "parasites." Among the many "parasite" groups, he particularly criticized the shameful ways the clergy—including priests, abbots, ministers, monks, and nuns—lived without working. The clergy donned sacred robes and superficially preached the vanity of the world while vowing to maintain poverty and seclusion; behind the scenes, however, they utilized religious privileges to occupy vast amounts of land and wealth. The Church amassed wealth through "mandatory offerings," the sale of "indulgences," and the management of estates. However, this wealth was not used for the relief of the poor; instead, it was squandered on constructing extravagant churches, purchasing expensive religious artifacts, and maintaining the daily luxurious lives of the clergy. This behavior of gaining without labor was, in essence, the squeezing and exploitation of the working people. Using false promises of "saving souls," the clerical class numbed the revolutionary consciousness of the common people, making them willing to offer up the fruits of their labor while the clergy sat back and enjoyed the results, becoming the "parasites" of the entire society. His exposure not only directly targeted the hypocrisy and greed of the clerical class but also touched upon how religious theocracy shackled human nature and destroyed social equity. Meslier lamented: "How absurd and unreasonable it is to provide for oneself by the labor of others!"
Finally, Meslier critiqued the feudal autocratic system of the French authorities. His logic in criticizing the French feudal autocracy was clear, with core arguments targeting the brutal essence of autocratic rule, specifically through the internal core of dictatorship and the fleecing of the masses, as well as the severe consequences they produced. First, there was the dictatorial core of the autocratic rule and the fleecing of the masses. The essence of autocracy lies in the supremacy of the monarch's will. Meslier pointed out sharply: "All rulers, all kings and dukes are tyrants." Within the French autocratic system, the monarch regarded his personal will as the sole basis for issuing decrees, even replacing rational arguments. The king was revered as a deity and became arrogant amidst the flattery of those around him; the king firmly believed he held absolute control over the lives and property of his subjects. Therefore, he showed no mercy for the people's lives and completely ignored their basic rights. This dictatorial essence was further externalized as dual pressure on the masses, typically manifested in exorbitant taxes and the plundering of war. Meslier was particularly concerned with the autocratic system's encroachment on the peasantry. To satisfy vanity, ambition, and greed, the King of France added new taxes under various false pretenses, completely disregarding the interests of the masses. If peasants were unable to pay, they were subjected to forced plunder by tax police; even if they pleaded their poverty, it was to no avail, and they were ultimately forced to surrender their remaining assets. More seriously, the king gradually evaded the institutional constraint that required the consent of the Estates-General [4] to levy taxes. Furthermore, the monarch's expansionist ambitions triggered large-scale wars, and the soldiers, food, and money required for these wars were all taken from the people. Louis XIV's initial instigation of war brought misfortune to the people, leading to ruined provinces, destroyed cities, and the displacement of the population. Second, the feudal autocracy of the French authorities brought severe consequences. The predatory policies of the autocratic system led to class antagonism and the intensification of social contradictions, directly resulting in a polarization where "officials grow richer while the masses grow poorer." The king and his ministers accumulated wealth by squeezing the lifeblood of the masses, forcing the people into abject poverty to ensure total submission. Because the common people lacked the courage to resist tyranny, they could only vent their anger and dissatisfaction through mutual quarreling, which further exacerbated internal social conflict and instability. Moreover, autocratic rule directly led to a fundamental divergence between the purpose of governance and reality. Meslier explicitly proposed that the people do not exist for the ruler; on the contrary, the ruler exists for the people. This people-oriented concept emphasized that the core responsibility of the ruler is to ensure the safety and happiness of the people. Even figures like Richelieu [5], the chief minister during the reign of Louis XIII who promoted autocratic rule, admitted that the goal of all the king's activities should be the happiness of the people. Yet the reality of French autocracy ran counter to this. It was precisely the monarch's indifference to the suffering of the masses, along with the fleecing of the people by a large number of "parasites" living without working, that ultimately incited a revolutionary resistance. The king himself bore an inescapable responsibility for the suffering of the people.
Meslier critiqued French feudal relations and the autocratic system on fundamental principles, exposing the oppression and tyranny of the feudal aristocracy and religious officials. He even cleverly used the Bible to attack feudalism. Meanwhile, contemporary opposition writers' views on the feudal corvée and tax systems that exploited the people remained only at the level of simple, superficial explanation. Meslier's ideal was not to simply reform the feudal autocratic system but to abolish it fundamentally. Uncompromising stance was Meslier's most prominent characteristic in his critique of the feudal autocratic system; subsequently, he put forward the important viewpoint of using revolutionary means to solve social problems and achieve the liberation of the people.
IV. A Profound Elucidation of the Problem of the Liberation of the People
In Meslier’s view, all religions were man-made illusions created at their founding. Through error, lies, and charlatanism, they compelled believers to accept them spiritually, which was a major cause of the countless abuses of power and acts of brutality in the world. Tyranny directly resulted in the people's hardships, while hypocritical religion actually colluded with tyranny to oppress and exploit the people, leaving them to live in misery. Meslier stood with the people, advocating for their use of violence to achieve their own liberation. He provided a profound elucidation of the problem of the liberation of the people, demonstrating a militant revolutionary spirit.
First, Meslier called upon the people to unite and carry out a revolution. Facing the fallacies and superstitions within religion, as well as the tyranny of all bureaucrats managing the people under the protection of the King’s power, Meslier called on the people to unite. To overthrow tyranny and escape oppression, they must—
Formulate a plan of struggle "based on mutual agreement." He pointed out that if the people had the courage to shake off their shared suffering, they must encourage one another to complete this noble and great undertaking. People could secretly exchange their thoughts and desires, skillfully revealing and spreading the vanity, absurdity, and superstitious practices of religion to inspire hatred for the tyranny of kings and religion. They must support each other in this necessary and just cause, which concerned the common interests of all the people. In Meslier’s view, the problem facing the people was that they opposed and weakened each other instead of uniting in struggle; such behavior would lead to self-destruction. Therefore, he exhorted the French people to cast aside all private feuds and resentments and direct their hatred and anger toward the proud nobility and clergy. They should strive to throw off the abominable oppression of tyranny and reject false, hollow religious superstitions and rituals. The French people could learn from the Dutch and the Swiss, both of whom had heroically broken free from the cruel rule of the nobility to gain freedom and independence.
Secondly, Meslier advocated for the people to achieve self-liberation through violent revolution. Compared to contemporary French political commentators, Meslier’s political radicalism was particularly striking. Fear of and distance from the masses characterized most 18th-century French political thinkers, a mindset completely alien to Meslier. He firmly believed: "The people are not only capable of accepting freedom, but will seize it for themselves through their own efforts." As an advocate against private property, Meslier defended the fundamental interests of the oppressed peasant masses more thoroughly than any other 18th-century French political writer. He called on the people to take revolutionary action to topple all tyrants and exploiters, and to eliminate the nobility, various officials, and the idle religious clergy who oppressed the people. He knew that without revolution, the working people could not be liberated. He maintained that there could be no compromise with the ruling class, as they were to be overthrown and eliminated. Meslier summoned the people to battle and revolution, even calling for the assassination of tyrants. He cried out: Where are those noble guardians of liberty who drove out kings and tyrants and gave the power to kill a tyrant to anyone who wished? Why do we not see them now, clearing all tyrants from the earth, suppressing the oppressors, and restoring freedom to the people? As a distinguished 18th-century political thinker, Meslier provided a penetrating analysis of the French political situation. He correctly identified the way out of the enslavement of the peasantry and the whole people, calling them to join the revolution and achieve liberation through violent means.
Thirdly, Meslier critiqued private property and advocated for the establishment of public ownership. Meslier believed the most pervasive scourge in social life was that all wealth and land were held in private hands. Under conditions of private ownership, everyone hopes to possess as much wealth as possible; thus, they resort to any means to seize it, inciting sinful tendencies among people. Private property opens the door to various crimes as people engage in brutal struggles to acquire more. In this struggle, it is often the most despicable and malicious who triumph, seizing for themselves the wealth essential to the people’s lives. This leads to inequality: some spend their days in idleness, indulging in a life of dissipation, while others labor day and night only to suffer bullying and abuse. However, the problem goes further. Inequality in wealth distribution leads to mutual jealousy, hatred, resentment, and resistance. Laborers deprived of basic means of subsistence sometimes must resort to theft, robbery, or even murder to survive. Their poverty also affects their children; due to economic hardship, they cannot afford the costs of raising, educating, and supporting them, forcing the children to remain in a state of ignorance and extreme poverty. In short, for Meslier, private property inevitably leads to inequality and is a primary cause of numerous evils and suffering. Meslier was deeply influenced by the theories of ancient and early Christian writers such as Plato, Seneca, and Lactantius, but his profound sensitivity to real life was the direct catalyst for this theory.
Finally, after critiquing the private property that caused social division, Meslier advocated for the construction of an ideal society centered on public ownership to replace the existing despotic system. Quoting the 17th-century French educator Fénelon, he noted that natural conditions are exceptionally favorable, providing everything needed for countless good and industrious people. Meslier argued that labor is the source of all wealth; any individual who participates in useful labor should have the right to utilize a portion of natural resources. In an ideal society, the principles of equal labor and equal enjoyment should reign supreme, based on the commonality of production and consumption. People should collectively own all wealth and land resources and utilize them jointly and equally according to the principle of equal rights. Based on this principle, Meslier outlined the framework of an ideal society. This society would consist of all residents of a city or rural district. They would collectively possess all wealth and land, using them together according to the principle of equal rights. All residents would love one another like brothers and sisters, living together in material equality. Everyone could participate in labor according to their profession and talents; work would be distributed based on the seasons and the needs and convenience of production. The ideal society described by Meslier was essentially a communal association, and to maintain peace and a spirit of mutual aid, these communes would need to form federations. Without mutual assistance, happiness and prosperity could not be sustained. For the communal organization to function orderly, a necessary hierarchy would be required, but these ranks should not violate the rules of fairness, and commune leaders should be the wisest and most experienced members. Simultaneously, collective ownership should replace private ownership. The communal associations advocated by Meslier represented a perfect system for the poor, both materially and spiritually. Only in this way could the poor escape the dual oppression of government and religion and achieve self-liberation.
V. Conclusion
Among 18th-century French thinkers, while many opposed the Christian Church and the religious worldview, only Meslier’s militant atheism became a direct weapon against exploitative society. He revealed the absurdity of the "theological conception of history" [6] and made a significant contribution to the transition of 18th-century French philosophy from deism to thorough atheism. Famous French Enlightenment thinkers such as Diderot and Holbach absorbed and drew upon the essence of Meslier’s atheistic thought, using materialism as a weapon to launch fierce critiques of religious theology and form their own atheistic views. Furthermore, Meslier’s critique of religion made an indelible contribution to awakening the people from the religious fog and inspiring them to liberate themselves. In discussing liberation, his vision of a communist society based on public ownership provided inspiration for the theoretical constructions of later utopian socialists. However, Meslier did not observe the bourgeoisie or the burgeoning capitalist relations of production of his time. Coupled with the limitations of his own social class, his atheistic thought carried certain constraints. Although he saw the absurdity and reactionary nature of religion, his understanding of its roots and essence was unclear, and thus he failed to find the true path toward the "withering away" of religion.
Despite its limitations, Meslier’s atheistic thought made a brilliant historical contribution, leaving a significant mark on the history of Western atheism and providing an important theoretical and historical reference for our current propaganda and education in atheism. First, it is crucial to emphasize and affirm human value. Meslier’s atheistic thought took the liberation of the people oppressed by religion and royal power as its logical starting point. In critiquing religious theology, he always kept the people in his heart, valued human worth, and committed himself to human liberation. This inspires us that when conducting atheistic propaganda, we must adhere to the "people-centered" [7] philosophy of development, innovate our methods, affirm human value, and liberate people from the shackles of theism and various superstitions to achieve "all-around human development" [8]. Second, we must take a clear-cut stand against all harmful social trends. In critiquing religious theology, Meslier pointed out that feudal nobles and religious leaders used the guise of religion to squeeze and exploit the people, leading to their misery. Currently, we must resolutely resist illegal religious and superstitious activities that confuse the public and damage the "social atmosphere" [9]. We should actively guide religion to adapt to socialist society, persist in the direction of the Sinicization of religion in our country, and strive to realize a modernization characterized by the coordination of material and "spiritual civilization" [10]. Third, we should emphasize the thoroughness of the critique of feudal theology. Meslier’s critique of religious theology and the associated feudal relations and despotic systems advocated for abolition rather than reform, demonstrating a thorough democratic and revolutionary spirit that had a profound impact on the people's struggle against religious superstition. Marx pointed out: "Theory is capable of gripping the masses as soon as it demonstrates ad hominem, and it demonstrates ad hominem as soon as it becomes radical. To be radical is to grasp the root of the matter." [11] Today, as we advance atheistic propaganda, we should unswervingly adhere to materialism as our scientific theoretical cornerstone, grasp the laws governing the development of theistic religion, and emphasize the thoroughness of theological critique. This will enhance the masses' theoretical consciousness regarding atheism, enabling them to uphold the scientific spirit when facing various theistic and superstitious ideas, maintain a clear head, and avoid being misled by false propaganda.
Source: Science and Atheism, Issue 1, 2026. Editor: Huihui.