Charles Darwin professed his belief in God and renounced the theory of evolution on his deathbed.
Shortly after the death of the famous scientist Charles Darwin, the rumors began. Less than a week after his death, on April 19, 1882, a preacher in Wales “confirmed” to his parishioners that the father of evolution, a devoted man of science, had converted to Christianity on his deathbed. dead.
Similar stories have been shared since.
More than 30 years later, in 1915, across the Atlantic in Northfield, Massachusetts, a woman named Lady Elizabeth Hope told in a devotional service the story of her meeting with Darwin at the end of 1881. During their conversation, Darwin is said to have expressed his belief in God and renounced God. the theory of natural selection that made him a household name.
History is sometimes used as an argument against evolution, the very theory that Darwin made famous. If you believe Lady Hope’s story, even Darwin didn’t believe his own theory – so why should we?
This argument cannot, however, stand on a stable basis. There is no evidence that Darwin professed his belief in God in this conversation, nor that he renounced the theory of evolution. In order to better understand this statement, let’s start with a brief explanation from Darwin himself.
Charles Darwin
Darwin was born in 1809, at a time when the fields of biology and geology were new and mysterious. During his lifetime, Darwin’s theory of natural selection completely redefined the scientific landscape. But it took him a very long time to publish the work that made him famous.
Between 1831 and 1836, Darwin traveled the world aboard the HMS Beagle, where he visited the Galapagos Islands and began thinking about the ideas for which his name would become synonymous. Although he privately proposed his theories of natural selection soon after his return to England, he waited more than 20 years before publishing them. “On the Origin of Species”, now one of the most famous scientific works of all time, was published in 1859.
Initially, this project was not popular, especially among conservative and religious circles. Early critics quickly latched onto the implicit idea that humans were ape-derived, despite the fact that Darwin chose never to explicitly state this. One reviewer wrote:
Lady Constance Rawleigh, in Disraeli’s brilliant tale, leans towards the belief that man is descended from apes. This pleasant idea, mentioned in the “Remains,” is transformed into something like a creed by Mr. Darwin. Man, according to him, was born yesterday, he will perish tomorrow. Instead of being immortal, we are only temporary and, so to speak, incidental.
…
The work deserves our attention and it will succeed, we have no doubt. Scientific naturalists will take the author on his particular terrain; and we will imagine that there will be a fierce struggle for at least theoretical existence. Theologians will say – and they have the right to be heard – Why construct another elaborate theory to exclude Divinity from renewed acts of creation? Why not immediately admit that new species were introduced by the creative energy of the Omnipotent? Why not accept direct interference, rather than developments in the law and unnecessarily indirect or remote actions? Having introduced the author and his work, we must leave them to the mercy of the Divinity Hall, the College, the lecture hall and the museum.
Health problems at the time of the publication of “On the Origin of Species” prevented Darwin from actively participating in debates about the validity of his work. Due to his health problems, Darwin devoted much of his later years to research and to his family: his wife, Emma, and their seven children.
In the years before his death, Darwin wrote an autobiography. According to British Encyclopedia, the work — completed between 1876 and 1881 — was not intended for wider publication, but for his grandchildren. The scientist died less than a year after the work was completed.
“I cannot pretend to shed the slightest light on such abstruse problems. The mystery of the beginning of all things is insoluble for us; and for my part I must be content to remain agnostic,” Darwin wrote. It is this claim that proponents of Darwin’s supposed deathbed conversion must actually prove wrong.
The preacher from Wales was the first to attempt this feat, but others followed. In “Darwinian myths: legends and abuses of a theory“, author Edward Caudill shares correspondence from one of Darwin’s most ardent supporters, Thomas Huxley, and his son Francis Darwin, confirming for a Canadian newspaper that Darwin had not converted to Christianity.
By and large, historians agree: such claims were rare until Lady Hope’s story in 1915.
Lady Hope
Born Elizabeth Reid Cotton in 1842, the daughter of an evangelist, Lady Hope continued her father’s work throughout her life. She obtained her title after marrying Admiral Sir James Hope and continued to use it after his death. At the time of Darwin’s death, Hope was living relatively close to him and, according to “The Legend of Darwin” a book exploring the origins of Darwin’s supposed conversion written by prominent Darwin scholar James Moore, the two probably met about six months before Darwin’s death.
(Snopes was unable to access a complete copy of “The Darwin Legend.” Our sources for this claim come from “Darwinian Myths” and reviews of “The Legend of Darwin” available online.)
Perhaps these claims would carry more weight if Lady Hope had mentioned Darwin’s sudden turn to religion shortly after they met. However, she first recounted the supposed events in 1915 during a devotional service. It was quickly reprinted in the Watchman-Examiner, a Baptist newspaper. The following quote, which she attributed to Darwin, supposedly contains his renunciation:
I was a young man with ill-informed ideas. I threw out questions, suggestions, wondering about everything all the time; and to my great astonishment, the ideas took off like wildfire. People have made it a religion.
It’s a bit of a stretch to call it renunciation. The story spread quickly, and several members of Darwin’s family wrote to various people defending the theory to deny this claim. But, true or not, it has been reissued several times since.
Modern distancing
Lady Hope’s story has long been used by creationists who opposed Darwin’s theories as proof of their error. But over time, even creationist websites have come to recognize the inherent weakness of this argument. In fact, several of the sources we used in researching this article came from creationist websites sharing the story but warning readers against using it in an argument.
We can’t summarize the arguments against this story any better than the creationist site. AnswersInGenesis.org did:
Given the weight of the evidence, one must conclude that Lady Hope’s story is unbearable, even if she did indeed travel to Darwin. He never became a Christian and never renounced evolution. As much as we would like to believe that he died with a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ, it is far more likely that he did not. It is unfortunate that this story continues to be promoted by many sincere people who use it in an attempt to discredit evolution when many others great arguments existincluding the largest: the Bible.
