78 EVOLUTION AND SOCIAL PROGRESS 



just referred to he clearly recognizes his error, 

 when he thus seeks to defend himself against the 

 charge that his doctrine is irreligious: 



I am aware that the conclusions arrived at in this work will 

 be denounced by some as highly irreligious ; but he who de 

 nounces them is bound to show why it is more irreligious to 

 explain the origin of man as a distinct species by the descent 

 from some lower form, through the laws of variation and 

 natural selection, than to explain the birth of the individual 

 through the laws of ordinary reproduction. The birth both of 

 the species and of the individual are equally parts of that grand 

 sequence of events, which our minds refuse to accept as the 

 result of blind chance. The understanding revolts at such a 

 conclusion, whether or not we are able to believe that every 

 slight variation of structure, the union of each pair in marriage, 

 the dissemination of each seed, and other such events have all 

 been ordained for some special purpose. 6 



What we are to think of the origin of man, 

 both from a Scriptural and scientific point of view 

 the two being in perfect accord we shall fully 

 make clear. For the rest, Darwin, with his com 

 plete lack of knowledge in religious matters, 

 which he quite frankly confesses, found a child 

 ish difficulty in accepting the idea of a Divine 

 Providence carried into all the details of a sup 

 posed evolutionary process, though he does not 

 here reject that possibility. A grasp of what 

 is implied in the almightiness and omnipresence 

 of God could readily have solved his difficulty, 

 but he admits that he gave no thought to these 



&quot;Charles Darwin, &quot;The Descent of Man,&quot; p. 613, Appleton, 

 1896. 



