nd--to
come at once to the core of the question--the idea of the love of God,
in order to maintain itself in presence of evil and of the power of evil
on the earth, has need of resources which the Christian belief alone
possesses. The knowledge of the Heavenly Father is essentially connected
with the Gospel: this is the historical fact. This fact is accounted for
by the existence of an organic bond between all the great Christian
doctrines: this is my deliberate conviction. I frankly declare here my
own opinions: to do so is for me a matter almost of honor and good
faith; but I declare them, without desiring to lay any stress upon them
in these lectures. My present object is to consider the idea of God by
itself. I isolate it for my own purposes from Christian truth taken as a
whole, but without making the separation in my thoughts. The thesis
which I propose to maintain is common to all Christians, that is quite
clear; but further; in a perfectly general sense, and in a merely
abstract point of view, it is a proposition maintained equally by the
disciples of Mahomet; it is maintained by J.J. Rousseau and the
spiritualist philosophers who reproduce his thoughts. It is clear in
fact that just as Jesus Christ is the corner-stone of all Christian
doctrine, so God is the foundation common to all religions.

Before concluding this lecture I desire to answer a question which may
have suggested itself to some amongst you. What are we about when we
take up a Christian idea in order to defend it by reasoning? Are we
occupied about religion or philosophy? Are we treading upon the ground
of faith, or on the ground of reason? Are we in the domain of tradition,
or in that of free inquiry? I have no great love, Gentlemen, for hedges
and enclosures. I know very well, better, perhaps, than many amongst
you, because I have longer reflected on the subject, what are the
differences which separate studies specially religious, from
philosophical inquiries. But when the question relates to God, to the
universal cause, we find ourselves at the common root of religion and
philosophy, and distinctions, which exist elsewhere, disappear. Besides,
these distinctions are never so absolute as they are thought to be. You
will understand this if you pay attention to these two considerations:
there is no such thing as pure thought disengaged from every traditional
element: there is no such thing as tradition received in a manner purely
passive, and dis