Rejoinder

Abstract

And so we have four responses to my attempt to link the rich field of nineteenth-century prose with today’s abundant assertions about secularity, its current dimensions and historical roots. Two – those by W. Clark Gilpin and Colin Jager – come to a conclusion that is similar though hardly identical. In both cases my invitation to identify with theo-logical and literary accounts of secularization thriving in the 1860s is thoughtfully considered but politely declined. Current commentators on the secular, Gilpin and Jager say in different ways, should recognize an interpretive legacy that is diverse and needs to be applied differently in different contexts.