Darwinism Comes to America
When the first copies of Charles Darwin’s Origin of
Species reached American ports late in 1859, nearly all Americans,
including most naturalists, believed that the various species
of plants and animals owed their origin to divine intervention.
Darwin, in contrast, argued that species had originated without
supernatural assistance by means of natural selection and other
biological mechanisms. According to natural selection, evolution
occurred when organisms possessing certain advantageous characteristics
survived in the struggle for scarce resources and passed their
distinctive features on to their descendants. Eager for a scientific
(that is, natural) explanation of origins and impressed by the
cogency of Darwin’s argument, the majority of America’s
leading zoologists, botanists, geologists, and anthropologists
within fifteen years or so embraced some kind of evolution, though
few attached as much weight to natural selection as Darwin did.
Even Darwin’s closest ally in North America, the Harvard
botanist Asa Gray, who described himself as "one who is scientifically,
and in his own fashion, a Darwinian," disagreed with Darwin
on several key points. He not questioned the ability of natural
selection "to account for the formation of organs, the making
of eyes, &c.," but appealed to a "special origination"
in explaining the appearance of the first humans. He also urged
Darwin, without success, to attribute to divine providence the
inexplicable organic variations on which natural selection worked.
While naturalists debated the merits of evolution and the efficacy
of natural selection, religious leaders typically sat on the sidelines,
many of them doubting that the evolution would ever be accepted
as serious science. By the mid-1870s, however, American naturalists
were becoming evolutionists in such large numbers that theologians
could scarcely continue to ignore the issue. Some liberal Protestants,
such as James McCosh, the president of Princeton University, sought
ways to harmonize their doctrinal beliefs and their understanding
of the Bible with evolution, often viewing evolution as simply
God’s method of creation. Most theologians and clergy, however,
rejected evolution, especially of humans, or remained silent on
the subject. In 1874 Princeton Theological Seminary’s Charles
Hodge, arguably the most influential theologian in mid-century
America, published a thoughtful little book called What Is
Darwinism? The answer: "Darwinism is atheism," because
it denies divine design in nature. More frequently, theological
critics focused on the ways in which evolution undermined various
biblical doctrines and ethical teachings, especially by teaching
that humans had been made in the image of apes, not God. Particularly
offensive was Darwin’s assertion in The Descent of Man
(1871) that "Man is descended from a hairy quadruped, furnished
with a tail and pointed ears." Such a pedigree, complained
one outraged Christian, "tears the crown from our heads;
it treats us as bastards and not sons, and reveals the degrading
fact that man in his best estate—even Mr. Darwin—is
but a civilized, dressed up, educated monkey, who has lost his
tail."
Email
link | Printer-friendly | Feedback
| Contributed by: Dr. Ron Numbers
|
