ATHELNEY
42
ATHENAGORAS
The naturalistic pantheism of the Italian Giordano
Bruno (1548-1600) comes nejir to, if it is not actually
a profession of, atheism; while Tomaso Campanella
(1568-1639), on the contrary, in his nature-philosophy
finds in atheism the one impossibility of thought.
Spinoza (1632-77), while defending the doctrine that
God certainly exists, so identifier Him with finite
existence that it is difhcvJt to see how he can be
defended against the charge of atheism even of the
first type. In the eighteenth century, and especially
in France, the doctrines of materialism were spread
broadcast by the Encyclopedists. La Mettrie, Hol-
bach, Feuerbach, Fleurens are usually classed among
the foremost materialistic atheists of the period.
Voltaire, on the contrary, while undoubtedly helping
on the cause of practical atheism, distinctly held
its theoretic contrary. He, as well as Rousseau, was
a deist. Comte, it will be remembered, refused to
be called an atheist. In the last century Thomas
Huxley, Charles Darwin, and Herbert Spencer, with
others of the evolutionistic school of philosophy,
were, quite erroneously, charged with positive athe-
ism. It is a charge which can in no way be sub-
stantiated; and the invention and rapid coming into
general use of the term agnosticism, used first by
Huxley in 1859, shows the long-felt want of a word
more definitely defined than atheism to designate a
phase of thought either critically or sceptically con-
cerned with the process by which the common tenet
of theism is maintained. The fundamental formula
is not a denial of the existence of God, l^ut an asser-
tion that the Absolute is unknowable. In Germany,
the materialism of Karl Vogt, Jacob Moleschott,
Ludwig Buchner, culminating in the monism of
Ernst Hackel, goes far towards forming an atheistic
system of philosophy. But even the last named
admits that there may be a God, though so limited
and so foreign to the deity of theists that his admis-
sion can hardly remove the system from the first
category of theoretic atheism.
Among the unscientific and unphilosophical there have from time to time been found dogmatic atheists of the first tj-pe. Here again, however, many of those popularly styled atheists are more correctly described by some other title. There is a somewhat rare tract, "Atheism Refuted in a Dis- course to prove the Existence of God by T. P." — British Museum Catalogue, "Tom Paine", who was at one time popularly called an atheist. And perhaps, of the few who have upheld an indubitable form of positive theoretic atheism, none has been taken serioasly enough to have exerted any influence upon the trend of philosophic or scientific thought. Robert Ingersoll might be instanced, but though popular speakers and writers of this tj'pe may create a certain amount of unlearned disturbance, they are not treated seriously bj- thinking men, and it is ex- tremely doubtful whether they deser\-e a place in any historical or philosophical exposition of atheism.
Reimm.^n, Historia alheismi et atheorum . . . (Hildesheim. 1725): Tou.ss.\iNT in Diet, de theoloffie, s. v. (a good bibliog- raphy); Janet .and Seailles, History of the Problems of Philos- ophy (tr., London. 1902), II; Hettinger. Natural Religion (tr. New York, 1890); Flint. Anti-theistic Theories (New York, 1894); Lilly, The Great Enigma (New York, 1892); D.^uhelle, L'Atheisme devant la raison humaine (Paris, 1883); Ward, Naturalism and Agnosticism (New York. 1899); Ladd. Philos- ophy of Religion (New York, 1905), II; Boedder. Natural Theology (New York. 1891); Blackie. Natural History of Atheism (New York, 1S7S); The Catholic ilor/,;, XXVII, 471; Barry, The End of Attunsm in The Calholir WnrlJ, LX, 333; Shea, Steps to Atheism in The Am. Ccth. Quart. Rci.. 1879, 305; PoHLE. Lehrbuch d. Dogmatik (Paderlmrn. 1907). I; Baur in Kirchliches Handlexikon (Munich, 1907), s. v. See also bibliog- raphy under .\gnosticism. Materialism, Pantheism, and Theism. For the refutation of Atheism see the article God. Fr.^ncis Aveling.
Athelney, The Abbey of, in the County of Som- erset, England, was founded by King .\lfred, a., d. 888, as a religious house for monks of the Order of St. Benedict. Originally .\thclney was a small island
in the midst of d.angerous morasses in what is now
the parish of East Ling. It possessed scarcely more
than two acres of firm land; was covered with alders
and infested by wild animals, and was inaccessible
except by boat (^\■illiam of Malmesbury). Here .\1-
fred found a refuge from the Danes; here he built
the abbey dedicated to our Blessed Saviour, St.
Peter, St. Paul, and St. Egelwine. He peopled it
with foreign monks, drawn chiefly from France, with
John of Saxony (known as Scotus) as their abbot.
The original church was a small structure consisting
of four piers supporting the main fabric and sur-
rounded by four circular chancels. Little is known
of the history of the abbey from the eleventh cen-
turj- up to the time of its dissolution except that
the monks of Glastonbury attempted to annex it or
have it placed under the (ilastonbury jurisdiction. It
was not a rich community. .\n indulgence of thirty
days was given in 1321 for those who should assist
in the rebuilding of the church, and the monks
humbly petitioned Edward I to remit " corrod " for
which they were unable to find the means of pay-
ment. The last abbot w.as Robert Hamlyn. With
eight monks of his community, he surrendered 8 Feb-
ruaiy, 1.540, receiving a pension of £50 per annum
and retaining his prebend of Long Sutton. The rev-
enues (26 Hen. VII) were £209. Os. Jd.
DuGD.ALE, Monasticon Anglicanum; Asser, De Rebus Gestis Alffidi; Hearne, Script. Hist. Angl. XXVIII (1731), 587-90. Fr.ujcis Aveling.
Athenagoras, a Christian apologist of the sec- ond half of the second century of whom no more is known than that he was an Athenian philosopher and a convert to Christianity. Of his writings there have been preserved but two genuine pieces: — his "Apology" or "Embassy for the Christians" and a "Treatise on the Resurrection ". The only allusions to him in early Christian literature are the accredited quotations from his "Apology" in a fragment of Methodius of Olympus (d. 312) and the untrust- worthy biographical details in the fragments of the "Christian History" of Philip of Side (c. 425). It may be that his treatises, circulating anonymously, were for a time considered as the work of another apologist. His writings bear witness to his erudi- tion and culture, his power as a philosopher and rhetorician, his keen appreciation of the intellect u.al temper of his age, and his tact and delicacy in deal- ing with the powerful opponents of his religion. The "Apology", the date of which is fixed by in- ternal evidence as late in 176 or 177, was not. as the title "Embassy" (irpfff/Jc/a) has suggested, an oral defence of Christianity, but a carefully written plea for justice to the Christians made by a philosopher, on philosophical grounds, to the Emperors Marcus Aurelius and his son Commodus, conquerors, "but above all, philosophers ". He first complains of the illogical and unjust discrimination against the Christians and of the calumnies they suffer (i-iii), and then meets the charge of atheism (iv). He establishes the principle of monotheism, citing pagan poets and philosophers in support of tlie very doc- trines for which Christians are condemned (v-%n), and demonstrates the superiority of the Christian belief in God to that of pagans (vii-viii). This fiist strongly reasoned demonstration of the unity of God in Christian literature is supplemented by an able exposition of the Trinity (x). Assuming then the defensive, the apologist justifies the Chris- tian abstention from worship of the national deities (xiii-xiv) on grounds of its absurdity and inde- cency, quoting at length the pagan poets and phil- osophers in support of his contention (xv-xxx). Finally, he meets the charges of immorality by ex- posing the Christian ideal of purity, even in thought, and the inviolable sanctity of the marriage bond. The charge of cannibalism is refuted by showing the
