I haven't read Charles Taylor's big new book, "A Secular Age," but I want to. There's an interesting discussion of it over at a blog devoted entirely to the book, "The Immanent Frame," Robert Bellah makes the following point:

Taylor argues that the Reformationwith its radical rejection of the monastic life and the demand of a kind of monastic discipline for everyoneis just the preliminary culmination of a thousand years of pressure of Christianity toward Reform. He then shows how, even when Protestantism itself comes in question, long-term pressure toward Reform continues, first in 18th-century Deism and its attendant strong emphasis on Benevolence, and then in the 19th-century emergence of unqualified (secular) humanism with its emphasis on progress.

According to Taylor, it is not “science” or “Darwinism” that accounts for these developments, but the continuation of a moral narrative that was already long present in Christianity. Even the emergence in the late 19th century of anti-humanism (Nietzsche) cannot be understood except in terms of the particular features of what was being rejected: namely, both Christian and secular social ameliorism. By seeing the emergence of the secular age in narrative form primarily, rather than as a theoretical discovery, I think he makes the whole thing far more intelligible and explains our present quandaries far better than any competing accounts.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.