Divine Guidance: 5 Ways Clergy Mentors Embrace Darwinian Evolution

Clergy as Mentors: How They Shaped Darwin's Thinking

Charles Darwin, the renowned naturalist and scientist, was greatly influenced by two clergymen who were also scientists. Despite their anti-evolutionary beliefs, these clergymen played a significant role in Darwin's development. The first mentor was the Rev. John Henslow, the Professor of Botany at Cambridge University. The second mentor was the Rev. Adam Sedgwick, the Professor of Geology at the same university. Both men had a profound impact on Darwin's thinking, even though they did not support his theory of evolution.

1. John Stevens Henslow (1796–1861)

Henslow was an academic with diverse interests. He had a deep passion for botany and geology and was ordained as an Anglican clergyman in 1824. As the founder of the Cambridge University Botanic Garden, Henslow collected a comprehensive dried plant collection of the entire British flora. His goal was to analyze the limits of variation within created species, adhering to the view that species do not evolve but can vary within certain boundaries.

Darwin credited his friendship with Henslow as the most influential factor in his career. Their relationship began in 1828 when Darwin attended one of Henslow's receptions as an undergraduate student. Darwin subsequently enrolled in Henslow's botany course three times and spent a significant amount of time on teaching walks organized by Henslow. Despite Henslow's deep religious convictions and orthodox views, he had a more nuanced perspective on geology and even proposed a non-miraculous cause for the biblical flood.

In 1831, it was Henslow who recommended Darwin for the position of gentleman naturalist on HMS Beagle's surveying expedition to South America. Prior to this, Henslow sent Darwin on a geological excursion to North Wales with Professor Adam Sedgwick. Henslow's influence on Darwin's thinking was instrumental, though unintentional, in providing the time frame necessary for evolution to occur.

2. Adam Sedgwick (1785–1873)

Sedgwick, like Henslow, was an ordained Anglican clergyman and a professor at Cambridge University, specializing in geology. While he was not an evangelical or a young-Earth creationist, Sedgwick firmly rejected evolution. He believed in a series of Divine creative acts throughout history but did not see the inconsistency of accepting a short age for humanity and a long age for the Earth's rocks.

Sedgwick vehemently opposed all theories of biological evolution. When Robert Chalmers published his theory of evolution anonymously in 1844, Sedgwick denounced it as false and dangerous. Similarly, when Darwin published "On the Origin of Species" in 1859, Sedgwick criticized him for abandoning true induction and embracing materialism.

Why This Matters:

The influence of clergymen such as Henslow and Sedgwick on Darwin's thinking is significant because it shows that even individuals who were deeply religious and anti-evolutionary unintentionally contributed to the development of Darwin's evolutionary philosophy. Their acceptance of long geological ages provided Darwin with the necessary time frame for evolution to occur. This highlights the importance of understanding how seemingly unrelated beliefs can impact one's overall worldview.

Think About It:

The relationship between religion and science is complex and often misunderstood. This case study demonstrates that individuals can hold religious beliefs while also engaging in scientific exploration. It challenges the assumption that religious individuals are inherently opposed to scientific advancements or theories like evolution. It encourages us to examine how our own beliefs may influence our understanding of scientific concepts and to approach conversations about science and faith with humility and open-mindedness.

In conclusion, clergymen like John Henslow and Adam Sedgwick played a significant role in shaping Charles Darwin's thinking, even though they did not support his theory of evolution. Their unintentional influence through their acceptance of long geological ages provided Darwin with the time frame necessary for his theory to develop. This case study reminds us of the complexity of the relationship between religion and science and encourages a nuanced and open-minded approach to these topics.