XXIV 
THE INFLUENCE OF DARWIN UPON 
RELIGIOUS THOUGHT 
By P. N. Waceert, M.A., S.8.J.E. 
I. 
THE object of this paper is first to point out certain elements 
of the Darwinian influence upon Religious thought, and then to show 
reason for the conclusion that it has been, from a Christian point of 
view, satisfactory. I shall not proceed further to urge that the 
Christian apologetic in relation to biology has been successful. A 
variety of opinions may be held on this question, without disturbing 
the conclusion that the movements of readjustment have been bene- 
ficial to those who remain Christians, and this by making them more 
Christian and not only more liberal. The theologians may sometimes 
have retreated, but there has been an advance of theology. I know 
that this account incurs the charge of optimism. It is not the worst 
that could be made. The influence has been limited in personal 
range, unequal, even divergent, in operation, and accompanied by 
the appearance of waste and mischievous products. The estimate 
which follows requires for due balance a full development of many 
qualifying considerations. For this I lack space, but I must at least 
distinguish my view from the popular one that our difficulties about 
religion and natural science have come to an end. 
Concerning the older questions about origins—the origin of the 
world, of species, of man, of reason, conscience, religion—a large 
measure of understanding has been reached by some thoughtful men. 
But meanwhile new questions have arisen, questions about conduct, 
regarding both the reality of morals and the rule of right action for 
individuals and societies. And these problems, still far from solution, 
may also be traced to the influence of Darwin. For they arise from 
the renewed attention to heredity, brought about by the search for 
the causes of variation, without which the study of the selection of 
variations has no sufficient basis. 
Even the existing understanding about origins is very far from 
universal. On these points there were always thoughtful men who 
denied the necessity of conflict, and there are still thoughtful men 
who deny the possibility of a truce. 
