In the study of the conflict thesis of science and religion, two central questions persist: Why does belief in inevitable historical conflict between science and religion remain current, in spite of over a half century of historians' best efforts to refute it. Why did this belief and its central narrative, which existed well in advance of the year 1800, go viral, rising suddenly to international best-seller status in the last quarter of the nineteenth century? This paper suggests the answer to both these questions is closely linked. It examines the work of Victorian-era scientific naturalists, theologians, and scientists of religious faith. The first group is represented by well-known members of the X-Club in England, such as John Tyndall, T. H. Huxley, the philosopher Herbert Spencer, and their counterparts in the United States such as Simon Newcomb, John Draper, and Andrew Dickson White. Theologians include James B. Mozley, who debated Tyndall on the efficacy of prayer, Henry Drummond, and their conservative American counterparts at Princeton Seminary. The third group includes theologically engaged men of science such as William Whewell, John Herschel, Charles Lyell, James Clerk Maxwell, and American counterparts such as Asa Gray, George Frederick Wright, and William North Rice. Careful examination of the nuances of the concepts of laws of nature, divine action, and natural science as a means of knowing, particular to the late Victorian era and reappearing thereafter, offers significant promise for answering questions of the sudden widespread dissemination of the conflict thesis and its lasting influence today.
