There is nothing "oddly pragmatic" about it. Darwin's discoveries proved that.
Darwin's discoveries didn't show anything about replication of memes, since he was only addressing things which could be inherited, and religion of course isn't genetic.
But even if we apply evolution more broadly to social memes and say that a meme is more apt to succeed if it can be indoctrinated when children are young, then it
is pragmatic to believe that what multiplies well, is by definition good or true.
Evolution is a mechanism to explain how things flourish, not a value judgment about those things.
Edited to add: And before we get into a semantic derail, I'm using
this definition of pragmatic: "relating to matters of fact or practical affairs often to the exclusion of intellectual or artistic matters: practical as opposed to idealistic <pragmatic men of power have had no time or inclination to deal with ... social morality --K. B. Clark>"
Of what value is a non-existent religion in doing God's work on earth?
Other religions who think they're right would say: Of what value is a religion which abandons God's work in order to be popular?
Do you think (to cite just one example), it's "popular" to require members to pay 10% of their annual increase to the Church?
Going back to Darwin again, evolution doesn't predict that every single thing about an organism, or meme, is devoted solely to reproductive success; the detriments just need to not outweigh the benefits. There's a benefit to a church in receiving income, although there's a detriment to requiring its members to pay 10%--although a greater sacrifice from members may also encourage more devotion, so it may not even be completely detrimental from members' point of view.
