principle foreign to the nature of the Will of God; and he
put aside as childish the belief that evil is created by the faculty of
human choice, setting itself against the benevolent Will of God; for
benevolence thus hampered would at once become a mere tame and
ineffective desire for the welfare of sentient things, and be wholly
deprived of all the attributes of omnipotence. Besides, he saw the
same qualities that produced suffering in humanity, such as the
instincts of cruelty, lust, self-preservation, manifesting themselves
with equal force among those sentient creatures which did not seem to
be capable of exercising any moral choice.

But in regarding nature, as revealed by the researches of scientists,
he saw that there was a slow development taking place, a development of
infinite patience and almost insupportable delay. Finer and finer
became the organisation of animal life; and in the development of human
life, too, he saw a slow progress, a daily deepening power of
organising natural resources to gratify increasingly complicated needs.
Not only was an energy at work, but a progressive energy, bringing into
existence things that were not, and revealing secrets unknown before.

He next attempted to define his moral belief; and here, too, he saw in
the world a progressive force at work. He saw society becoming more
and more refined, more desirous to amend faulty conditions, more
anxious to alleviate pain; and this not only with self-regarding
motives, but with a vital sympathy, which reached its height in the
deliberate purpose of many individuals that, even if condemned to
suffer themselves, they would yet spend thought and energy in
relieving, if possible, the ills of others.

He saw in the teaching of Christ what appeared to be the purest and
simplest attempt ever made to formulate unselfish affection. No
teacher of morals had ever reached the point of inculcating upon men
the belief that it was the highest joy to spend the energies of life in
contributing to the happiness of others. Though he saw in the system
of Christ, as popularised and interpreted, a whole host of insecure
assumptions, unverified assertions, and even degrading traditions, yet
he could not doubt of the Divine force of the central message. If he
was not in a position to affirm with certitude the truth of the
recorded events which attended the origin of the Christian revelation,
he could yet affirm with confidence that in the teaching