Darwin and Gray

[NotReady]

My following thoughts are based on this
article.

It's about the Harvard professor of botany in the 19th century, Asa Gray, sometimes referred to as Darwin's dove, who was one of Darwin's biggest promoters in America.

A couple of quotes:

[ QUOTE ]

As Darwin's strongest and most vocal scientific ally in the United States, Gray recognized the scientific importance of Darwin's efforts for the growing professionalism of biological researchers. But as an orthodox Christian, a Presbyterian firmly devoted to the faith expressed in the Nicene Creed, he saw in Darwin's theory both evidence for his philosophical commitment to natural theology and support for his opposition to the idealism advocated by Louis Agassiz and the nature philosophers in both Europe and America.

...

As all good historians of science and of Christian thought know, evangelical Christians in the nineteenth century were generally not biblical literalists, nor did they believe in a young earth. In other words, the religious opposition to Darwin did not arise from perceived problems between Darwin's theory and a literal reading of Genesis. Rather, following the publication of Origin of Species, it centered on what seemed to be the randomness of natural selection, the appearance of new organisms by chance, and therefore the exclusion of divine purpose or design in Nature.


[/ QUOTE ]
I've said many times on this forum that my primary objection to evolution is the concept of chance, or stated differently, that the universe or biological life is undesigned. I've also stated that I believe most of the controversy between science and religion centers around this difficulty. I think this article is some evidence that I was correct. It is almost mind boggling to think that Darwin's biggest fan in this country was an orthodox Chrisitian, a Calvinist no less. Let that sink in in the context of people like Dawkins and co.

I've been doing some other reading in this area (religion and science), especially some initial research into Augustine and Aquinas. I'm not ready (hey look a pun) to discuss it yet but some ideas I've had for a long time in vague form are beginning to take shape. Perhaps another post down the road on that score.

I would recommend this article for another reason. Gray and Darwin corresponded frequently. It's very interesting to see the conflict Darwin was undergoing over the question of God, design, etc. I think a fair reading will show that his growing agnosticism was not the direct product of his theory - his problem was a very common one for atheists - mostly the problem of pain, evil and suffering. In other words, from what I can tell, he didn't view his theory as proof or even evidence that God doesn't exist, but he needed the theory to explain nature if He doesn't.