Smitten With Socrates

Take one provocative topic, "Can Atheists Be Good Citizens?" Then add a brilliant and renowned theologian, Richard John Neuhaus, as the lecturer. Hold the lecture in one of New York City's premier private clubs, the University off Fifth Avenue. Offer an open bar, gourmet hors d'oeuvres, and soothing music by Sue Kyung at the grand piano during the pre-lecture reception. Charge a reasonable admission price of $20 or $30 at the door, and you're set for an evening of thought-provoking entertainment. Welcome to the delightful monthly series Socrates in the City, with the amiable and talented author Eric Metaxas as host.

While I was familiar with these lectures, I had never attended one, but the topic and the guest lecturer were just too enticing to ignore. It's also a pleasure to venture into these private clubs just to admire the beauty of older structures. Around 250 people filled the lecture room, and, while I was surprised at the large crowd, I learned that the Socrates meetings usually draw that number.

The wine and hors d'oeuvres are usually served at 6:15 p.m. and the lecture starts promptly at 7. The Reverend Neuhaus is an excellent speaker, who manages to convey knowledge to his listeners without coming off as a pedant.

We learned the difference between the original meaning of the word "atheism" and that of the modern denotation, which dates only from the 19th century. The Greek "a-theos" meant one who is "without god" and referred to the god of the city or the empire. Thus, Jews and the early Christians would be considered atheists because they believed that there is no god other than the God of Israel.

Modern atheists, on the other hand, believe that they are denying what Jews, Christians, and Muslims mean by God. That form of atheism, Father Neuhaus says, is a post-Enlightenment phenomenon that has developed a vocabulary that is prejudiced against believers.

Rev. Neuhaus cites the author James Turner ("Without God, Without Creed: The Origins of Unbelief in America") in making the startling statement, "it was religion, not science or social change, that gave birth to unbelief." For in making God more and more like man, the shapers of religion made it feasible to abandon God. He quoted H.L. Mencken's observation, "The chief contribution of Protestantism to human thought is its massive proof that God is a bore."

I have to admit I was not familiar with many of the names that Rev. Neuhaus mentioned but it made no difference to the enjoyment of the lecture. Rev. Neuhaus then alluded to the topic question by establishing what a good citizen is as determined by the Founding Fathers, who, he says, were moral realists, "which is to say they assumed the reality of a good not of their own contriving."

Quoting founder James Madison, "It is the duty of every man to render to the Creator such homage and such only as he believes to be acceptable to him."

Rev. Neuhaus reminded us that in the founding period, state constitutions could and did exclude atheists from public office. Respect for a higher judgment was essential to citizenship. Thus, Rev. Neuhaus concludes reluctantly that atheists cannot be good citizens. "The taking away of God dissolves all," he said. "Every text becomes pretext, every interpretation a strategy, and every oath a deceit."

That no state can now exclude atheists from holding public office - indeed, that the Constitution insists that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States" - no doubt reflects a national consensus that disagrees with Rev. Neuhaus's conclusion. But there's no doubt that the founders, particularly Washington, felt that national morality could not prevail "in exclusion," as Washington himself put it, "of religious principle."

Anyhow, I cannot do justice to Father Neuhaus's discourse in such a short column, but the audience was transfixed by the erudition of the guest speaker throughout the 45-minute lecture. Afterwards there was a buzz of energized participation as audience members lined up at a microphone to ask questions, which were as provocative as the topic.

Why, a woman asked, did Rev. Neuhaus, a noted Lutheran theologian, become a Catholic? He answered, "When I ran out of reasons why I wasn't."

Another questioner asked for Rev. Neuhaus's opinion about Catholic bishops now threatening to refuse to give communion to Catholic politicians whose votes defy church teaching. Rev. Neuhaus answered crisply, "They're finally doing their job, which is to defend and articulate the articles of faith without compromise." Pro-choice Catholic politicians give scandal, Rev. Neuhaus explained, which means they confuse the faithful about the truth of the faith, and they should not present themselves for the sacraments as Catholics in good standing.

Mencken might have been convinced by Protestantism that God is boring, but no one could argue that an evening spent listening to Richard John Neuhaus was anything but absorbing.