Revolutionary Deists begins with an introduction to deism in 18th
century America. Walters deftly explains the foundations of deism laid
by Bacon, Newton, and Locke, and dissects the factors for deism's
apparent sudden popularity at the time. Culling from a wealth of
first-hand and scholarly sources, Walters argues that the American
flavor of deism was a reaction against the Calvinist tradition, combined
with “the steady infiltration of French Enlightenment ideals” and the
newfound national independence (page 35). What’s more, Walters argues
that the Great Awakening itself may have nurtured the growth of American
deism. Walters also looks into possible reasons why the deists did not
always trumpet their views, and argues that American deism occupied a
precarious middle ground between the more radical French atheism and the
staid British sensibilities of the time.
Walters claims that the deists of colonial America essentially
agreed that “reality is rational, defined by immutable and absolute
natural laws, that these laws were set in motion by a supreme architect
whose nature is essentially reflected in creation; that humans are
likewise imbued with a spark of divine reason that permeates reality,
and hence are capable of understanding that reality” (page 46). Working
from this de facto agreed-upon definition of deism, Walters devotes the
next six chapters (the majority of the book) to six influential deists:
two that every schoolchild knows, two that every high school graduate
knows, and two that only history majors would know: Benjamin Franklin,
Thomas Jefferson, Ethan Allen, Thomas Paine, Elihu Palmer, and Philip
Freneau.
His selection of these six deists is apt. In discussing the more
well-known figures, Walters skips on the biographical sketches and
delves right in to an examination of their beliefs. He details how such
beliefs were acquired, modified, and explained during the figures’
lives. In exploring Franklin’s turn from his Christian upbringing, for
example, Walters quotes the influential American - whom he terms “the
ambivalent deist” - as having discerned: “the arguments of the Deists,
which were quoted to be refuted, appeared to me much stronger than the
refutation; in short, I soon became a thorough Deist” (page 52).
Walters spends more time familiarizing readers with the
less-familiar deists. Liberal quoting from their writings allows them to
speak for themselves while simultaneously making readers acquainted
with these relatively obscure figures. In the case of Elihu Palmer, for
instance, we learn that Palmer determined the doctrine of original sin
violated every “standard of distributive justice” and discover that
though Palmer admitted the scriptures had “some good moral maxims,” he
concluded that they were not unique to the Christian view. They had been
routinely defended by pagans antedating Jesus – and more
systematically... "Normative passages are thinly interspersed in the
scriptures and are inaccurate, incomplete, trifling and often without
utility” (page 191). And it is in exploring the life of Philip Freneau,
upon whom Walters bestows the moniker ‘Deism’s Poet,’ that we uncover
the crux of deists rationale for a creator: “God’s presence is obvious
in all creation, not because the divine is identical to creation, but
because he manifests himself in his works” (page 231).
In the concluding chapter, Walters delineates the reasons for
deism’s waning. He expounds on his earlier claim that deism’s “failure
to sustain itself as a widespread popular movement is that it succeeded
so well in ameliorating the dogmatic supernaturalism of orthodox
Christianity” (page 11). Oddly, Walters next makes the claim that
because the deists did not have the forethought to look at the
scriptures as allegorical, their arguments were cast aside as pedantic.
Church leaders were able to initiate a revival (the “Great Awakening”)
that, in part, relied upon the reinterpretation of specific holy texts –
such as the Genesis accounts – as figurative. Walters then counters his
own argument by excusing the deists, noting “that a literal reading of
the bible was the usual mode of interpretation” by their Christian
contemporaries. Their insistence on pointing out scriptural
contradictions and absurdities was understandable in their time, Walters
says, even though our modern minds may find such strategies irrelevant
(page 258). With all due deference to Walters and his impressive
historical research, a quick look at modern American religiosity exposes
a continued insistence by many denominations of biblical literalism and
inerrancy.
Still, Walters' unusual argument in the concluding pages does not
negate the superb insights Walters has brought to our nation’s history.
Indeed, his closing case will give readers much to ponder and debate,
even if they do not find themselves fully convinced by Walters’
conclusions.