what was the substitute?

Where an exclusive humanism was undoubtedly available was in Epicureanism.
And it is no surprise that Lucretius
was one of the inspirations for explorations
in the direction of naturalism,
e.g., with Hume.

But Epicureanism just as it was
couldn’t really do the trick.
 It could teach us to achieve ataraxia
by overcoming our illusions about the Gods.
But this wasn’t what was needed for a humanism
which could flourish in the modern context.
For this was becoming one
 in which the power to create moral order in one’s life
 had a rather different shape.
It had to include the active capacity to shape and fashion our world,
natural and social; and it had to be actuated by some drive to human beneficence.
To put this second requirement
in a way which refers back to the religious tradition,
modern humanism, in addition to being activist and interventionist,
had to produce some substituted for....

 agape' .

  - Charles Taylor   (canadian thinker)