HT: Edward Feser
I just watched Dr. Michael Behe's lecture at the Science and Faith Conference at Franciscan University of Steubenville.
Interestingly, in the second half of the lecture Behe tries to argue that Christianity and Darwinism are incompatible. I don't think he succeeds, as I think Dr. Daniel Kuebler, in his response, demonstrated. Merely because something is random doesn't mean that it is unintended by God. As Kuebler so excellently put it, our apparently random meetings of other people may have all sorts of transcendent purpose and meaning.
Behe tries using the example of the inventor of the kaleidoscope not knowing what the various future patterns it will display will be, and therefore could not have intended any of them. However, in the case of God, who knows the future, all random events are pre-known. Therefore, He could have intended many or even all of them.
So it seems to me that one can consistently be a Christian and a Darwinist.
I'm not a Darwinist, but that's because I don't think the empirical evidence supports it, not because I think there is a philosophical or theological conflict between the two. Let me add that much of the reason I don't think the empirical evidence supports Darwinism is due to the evidence and arguments of Michael Behe.