Here, we see that one of Mary Wollstonecraft's most significant drives for bother her creative works and those of her more persuasive arguments for women's rights. We can also see that one of her significant others, William Godwin, had perspective on her supposed form of faith. Check it out! 

Religion or, foundation and commitment to it, is a rule that is largely popular and has found its way into much of Marry Wollstonecraft’s works. A large portion of her childhood was guided by her ever long observance of God, and it was her true belief that a truly intellectual person with good morals follows this path. Her accreditation to many of her works lends itself to her religious foundation and its addition to her completed pieces, which were critical in aiding a more powerful voice to her as a female writer. However, with the comments from her husband William Godwin, it could be contended that his views regarding his wife’s faith were different and at some times challenging to her legacy as a feminist writer; this questioning of her religious values seems to aid in the ever-present binary rule of the submissive wife to the patriarchal husband. His perplexities on the matter testify his thoughts of even his wife not being a factual and valid writer and even to say that her admiration and relationship to God wasn’t authentic, thus perpetuating female subservience.

            We see the first instance of Godwin’s discredit to his wife’s beliefs when he states that her values were “almost entirely of her own creation. But she was not on that account less attached to it, or the less scrupulous in discharging what she considered as its duties” (as cited in Memoirs, 215). His undermining and disagreement of her faith was something that bothered her and even in her own marriage, she seemed to be combating ignorance of the classes  adding “How can you blame me for taking refuge in the idea of God, when I despair of finding sincerity here on earth?”(Wollstonecraft 101).  Godwin continues, and adds that it more for the comfort of discussion and lends no ties to actual verifiable belief when he adds that her faith “was founded rather in taste, that in the niceties of polemical discussion” (as cited in Memoirs, 215).

            His skepticisms add further evidence of male domination and he rectifies her “observing of God” to more of her way of being passionately imaginative, and not real.     

Bibliography

Johnson, Claudia L. The Cambridge Companion to Mary Wollstonecraft. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UP, 2002. Print.