are cases where some disorder in the part is necessary for producing the greatest order in the whole.  But it appears that M. Bayle asks a little too much:  he wishes for a detailed exposition of how evil is connected with the best possible scheme for the universe.  That would be a complete explanation of the phenomena:  but I do not undertake to give it; nor am I bound to do so, for there is no obligation to do that which is impossible for us in our existing state.  It is sufficient for me to point out that there is nothing to prevent the connexion of a certain individual evil with what is the best on the whole.  This incomplete explanation, leaving something to be discovered in the life to come, is sufficient for answering the objections, though not for a comprehension of the matter.

146.  ‘The heavens and all the rest of the universe’, adds M. Bayle, ’preach the glory, the power, the oneness of God.’  Thence the conclusion [215] should have been drawn that this is the case (as I have already observed above) because there is seen in these objects something entire and isolated, so to speak.  Every time we see such a work of God, we find it so perfect that we must wonder at the contrivance and the beauty thereof:  but when we do not see an entire work, when we only look upon scraps and fragments, it is no wonder if the good order is not evident there.  Our planetary system composes such an isolated work, which is complete also when it is taken by itself; each plant, each animal, each man furnishes one such work, to a certain point of perfection:  one recognizes therein the wonderful contrivance of the author.  But the human kind, so far as it is known to us, is only a fragment, only a small portion of the City of God or of the republic of Spirits, which has an extent too great for us, and whereof we know too little, to be able to observe the wonderful order therein.  ‘Man alone,’ says M. Bayle, ’that masterpiece of his Creator among things visible, man alone, I say, gives rise to great objections with regard to the oneness of God.’  Claudian made the same observation, unburdening his heart in these well-known lines: 

  Saepe mihi dubiam traxit sententia mentem, etc.

But the harmony existing in all the rest allows of a strong presumption that it would exist also in the government of men, and generally in that of Spirits, if the whole were known to us.  One must judge the works of God as wisely as Socrates judged those of Heraclitus in these words:  What I have understood thereof pleases me; I think that the rest would please me no less if I understood it.