A list in the underlined portion of the sentence automatically raises the
issue of parallelism. The rule is that a list of items must have all the items in the same form. Here, the list is introduced with the word "for." To maintain parallelism, this word can be used once at the beginning to apply to all of the items of the list, as in
for restoring ... reviving ... and advancing, or it can be repeated for each item, as in for restoring ... for reviving ... and for advancing. But it cannot be used on just two of the items, as in the original sentence, which reads, "for restoring ... reviving ... and for advancing." The right answer must correct this issue.
A scan of the beginnings of the choices reveals a
3-2 split, with (A), (B), and (C) retaining the word "for" at the beginning of the list, while (D) and (E) remove it. Which grouping is correct depends on the rest of the list, however, so don't dwell too much on these differences. Proceed to evaluate the choices more closely.
(A) can be eliminated, since it contains the error noted in the initial analysis.
(C) incorrectly combines the first two items into one compound item connected by
"and." There is nothing in the original sentence to suggest these items should be combined, so this slight change in meaning is not logically justified. Eliminate (C).
(D) creates an even worse parallelism problem. (D) ends up with "in the
restoration ... reviving ... and for advancing." The second and third items are in -ing form, while the first is not, and the third item is the only one introduced with "for."
(E) also creates a worse parallelism problem, with "
to restore ... revive ... and for advancing." Each of these three items is in a different form.
(B) fixes the problem directly, by simply removing the "for" before the third item. (B) reads "for restoring ... reviving ... and advancing." (B) is correct.