Discussion of the book ''A Secular Age'' by Charles Taylor

[Druijf]

I have read the introduction of this book which makes me very excited, and heard a lot of people about it. Maybe this could lead to an interesting discussion on this forum, I was thinking of putting it in the form of a book debate.

What does it mean to say that we live in a secular age? Almost everyone would agree that we - in the West, at least - largely do. And clearly the place of religion in our societies has changed profoundly in the last few centuries. In what will be a defining book for our time, Charles Taylor takes up the question of what these changes mean - of what, precisely, happens when a society in which it is virtually impossible not to believe in God becomes one in which faith, even for the staunchest believer, is only one human possibility among others.Taylor, long one of our most insightful thinkers on such questions, offers a historical perspective. He examines the development in Western Christendom of those aspects of modernity which we call secular. What he describes is in fact not a single, continuous transformation, but a series of new departures, in which earlier forms of religious life have been dissolved or destabilized and new ones have been created. As we see here, today's secular world is characterized not by an absence of religion - although in some societies religious belief and practice have markedly declined - but rather by the continuing multiplication of new options, religious, spiritual, and anti-religious, which individuals and groups seize on in order to make sense of their lives and give shape to their spiritual aspirations.What this means for the world - including the new forms of collective religious life it encourages, with their tendency to a mass mobilization that breeds violence - is what Charles Taylor grapples with, in a book as timely as it is timeless.

[Druijf]

I will strive to make an introduction post this weekend wherein I will give a general outline of the book, some additional background information and links on the Radical Orthodoxy movement.

[theopoesis]

That sounds like a good start. Then we go chapter by chapter? I vote for not starting with Milbank's introduction, as it's largely a corrective to Smith before we even read Smith.

Thanks for doing the summary.

[Druijf]

I agree that dealing with Milbank's introduction is not necessary for now. I had a beautiful, but quite a rough night yesterday so I think I will postpone my opening post till tomorrow, if you don't mind.

Studying the book so far, I am especially interested in RO's claim that a change in Late Medieval ontology (notably Duns Scotus' view on the univocy of being) made the conception of the secular domain possible.

A chapter by chapter approach seems good to me.

[theopoesis]

Sure, take your time. I think the ontology claim is an interesting one as well. Ontology has been a critical issue in recent theology, and Duns Scotus' links with modernity are important in areas outside ontology as well. We'll have a good discussion I am sure.