This Earthly Frame: The Making of American Secularism by David Sehat

Abstract

Reviewed by: This Earthly Frame: The Making of American Secularism by David Sehat Mark Mattes This Earthly Frame: The Making of American Secularism. By David Sehat. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2022. x + 330 pp. Cultural and intellectual historian David Sehat argues that American secularism developed as a way to honor religious pluralism. Secularism is a product of inter-religious conflict in public life. Over decades such disputes helped to carve out a secular public square. While the Bill of Rights allowed no "establishment of religion" some states retained an established church in some cases for decades after the ratification of the Bill of Rights. Sehat distinguishes "negative secularism" in which the state holds no hostility toward a religion but the authority of the religion has no standing outside of its own community, from a "positive secularism" that actively establishes unbelief (4). For Sehat, negative secularism is no abandonment of belief but instead a commitment to the privatization of religious ideas (4). Conservative Roman Catholic thinkers see such a perspective as inherently Protestant, and not acceptable. Sehat responds that this criticism would fail to account for its support by many Jews and its opposition by many conservative Protestants (5). Sehat's work describes how the Supreme Court from the 1880s until today mostly undermined the hegemony of Evangelicalism's influence on public life, an influence due to the Second Great Awakening. Evangelicalism's influence was weakened due to Jehovah's Witnesses securing their right to proselytize and not salute the flag, the overturning of Prohibition, the debate over public subsidies for Catholic schools, the expulsion of religious devotions from public schools, and the legalization of abortion and same-sex marriage. Sehat presents a detailed history of each case and how the courts handled them. Even so, the story is mostly one of calling [End Page 122] out Evangelical privilege, overturning it, relegating Evangelical or other religious perspectives to a private realm, thereby creating a pluralistic society. That said, there is no doubt that those committed to creating a secular ethos saw their work in virtually eschatological terms in which the progressive, liberating forces of good triumph over the regressive, repressive forces of religion. For John Dewey, unless the world is governed by a non-religious secularism we have a "systematic stultification of the human mind" (117). Unfortunately, Sehat fails to take up the work of a thinker like Robert H. Nelson in Economics as Religion (2001) who documents that democratic capitalism is thoroughly saturated with postmillennial utopian mythology, indebted to, even an avatar of, a religious perspective. The case can be made that no public space exists that is devoid of myth. A blip in the secularist advance is the challenge by Catholic hospitals to the Affordable Care Act over a requirement that would force Catholic hospitals to perform abortions, a worrisome development for Sehat since it permits private religious sensibilities to gain currency in public life (260). Interestingly, up through the 1960s and 1970s, most court decisions favoring secularism were based on the "right to privacy," arguing for individual freedom in private lives without interference from the government. However, since the 1970s, a different, contradictory focus has advanced: the personal is the political, which believes that only by forcing the question of recognition will certain disenfranchised groups, such as gays and lesbians, gain acceptance (221). Surprisingly, religious conservatives increasingly claim disenfranchisement and entitlement. This reviewer questions whether Sehat's perspective undercuts the value of civil associations. Sehat criticizes groups like the American Bible Society as fronts of Protestant imperialism. The implication is that civil associations, especially ones with a religious flavor, threaten individual autonomy; only the state then can protect individuals from such coercive power. But is this true? For example, would congregations of any confession threaten individual autonomy? Sehat's valorization of "autonomy" ignores the idea that humans find meaning and friendship precisely in associations centered on common goals that promote give and take among their members. Overall, such associations enhance civil behavior. The [End Page 123] quest for autonomy or individual liberty assumes that such civic associations are robust and vital. Sehat's vision of America seems to be one where such civil associations potentially jeopardize individual...