An interview with Richard John Neuhaus 

By Bernard Chapin
web posted April 28, 2003 

Richard John Neuhaus is the Editor in Chief of First Things, a
journal that, in its own words is "inter-religious and nonpartisan."
Claudia Winkler called it a "jewel of American journalism" and
from what I have read of it I could not agree more. Father
Neuhaus was once a Lutheran Minister but is now a Roman
Catholic priest. Father Neuhaus is a fine writer with an
abundance of wit and style: "One imagines Adam remarking to
Eve as they are leaving the garden, 'My dear, we are living in an
age of transition.' The modern assumption is that the transition is
to something better. The modern sensibility unbounded is that of
the neophiliac, the lover of the new." How often I wanted to
make the same argument about "the cult of the new" but lacked
the cogency of his words. Below, Father Neuhaus provides
precise and clear answers to the questions that I ask him but his
answers will resonate with you, as they have with me, long after
you're finished reading. In this interview we'll hear a bit from a
man who may well have been close to the precipice of heaven a
short time ago but luckily remains with us on this earth to analyze
the public square.

BC: Father, you are Editor in Chief of the journal, First Things,
which has as it's goal "to advance a religiously informed public
philosophy for the ordering of society." The obvious first
question is- has your public philosophy succeeded? Have you
come across public officials who told of First Things being an
intrinsic component of decisions that they have made?

RJN: No, the vision proposed by First Things will not have
succeeded definitively until the coming of the Kingdom of God,
and then it will not be needed. But yes, many people, including
government officials, tell us that the journal is indispensable in
their thinking and actions. Of course, maybe they are just being
polite, but I donšt think so. Arguments advanced in the journal
regularly show up in the pertinent public forums and debates.

BC: You are published by The Institute on Religion and Public
Life, which is "an interreligious, nonpartisan research and
education institute." Are there any religions or religious orders
and sects that you consider outside the pale? Have there been
any cases when you've had to exercise censorship on what or
who you've included?

RJN: Yes, radical Islam, commonly called Islamism, is beyond
the pale. As are a host of kooky views in this religion-obsessed
society. We have, as you mention in your first question, a public
philosophy, and we generally publish articles that advance the
arguments relevant to that philosophy. We don't call it
censorship. We call it editorial judgment.

BC: Father, you were once a Lutheran minister, how has your
life changed now that you have embraced Catholicism? Are you
still involved in Lutheranism in any meaningful way?

RJN: I am still involved with many Lutheran friends, and
editorially we attend to developments in Lutheranism, along with
all the other religious communities. Surely my life and way of
thinking have changed by becoming a Catholic. There is a richer
sacramental life, apostolic authority, Marian devotion, and much
else. In sum, I became a Catholic in order to be more fully the
Christian I was as a Lutheran, and that is what has happened.

BC: I've always said that if a religion is more permissive than its
followers then there is absolutely no need to have that religion.
Do you think this is a reason why the conservative, evangelical
branches of Christianity are experiencing rapid growth; whereas,
the more liberal ones are losing parishioners en masse? I am
thinking of the Methodist Church near where I live where one of
their Pastors began marrying gay couples and embraced the gay
community so much that, during the 2002 Gay Pride week, he
posted (or he permitted to be posted) on their message board a
quote from the "singer" Pink that was something like "guilt is
nothing but a thing, get your groove on girl."

RJN: I assume by "a religion" you mean a church or religious
authority. Yes, I agree with you. If a church offers no truth that is
not available in the general culture -- in, for instance, the
editorials of the New York Times or, for that matter, of National
Review -- there is not much reason to pay it attention. In general,
the more orthodox communions that make stricter demands
show more vigorous growth; in part, because that is what people
want, even when they do not live up to the faith that they profess.
They want their community to represent what ought to be,
knowing that all churches are composed of sinners. Forgiven
sinners, and sinners called to sainthood, but sinners nonetheless.

BC: How do you respond to Phil Donahue who made that
comment attempting to link the 9/11 murders with religion in
general by saying that the terrorists too "talked to God
everyday"? He clearly implied that excessive belief in God
promotes terrible acts. How big an obstacle are people like
Donahue to religion being a bigger part of the nation's public life?

RJN: Much smarter people than Mr. Donahue have said such
foolish things. "Religion" is a vacuous term until defined by
reference to the object of its belief and practice. Religion as a
human phenomenon is as riddled through with potential for both
good and evil as any other phenomenon. It is not going to go
away, however, and is today resurgent everywhere, except
possibly in Western Europe. Muslims of an Islamist stripe are to
be criticized for what they believe, not for believing excessively.
One can never believe the truth excessively. The great question
for the years ahead is whether, from within the heart of Islam,
can emerge a religiously legitimated understanding of pluralism
and democratic governance. As to Mr. Donahue being an
obstacle to what we are about at First Things, he is among the
least of my worries.

BC: The Weekly Standard had a magnificent essay last week,
"Onward, Christian Pacifists" that described how many churches
misjudged the situation with Hitler in the 30's and argued that it
was un-Christian to fight Nazi Germany. An allusion is made to
the situation today within the essay. How do you defend the right
of the state to protect it's people? Where do you stand on "just
war" theory? What about it's application to the situation in Iraq?

RJN: An answer to this one would require several essays, all of
which have appeared in First Things. Conscientious pacifism is to
be honored, although I think it is on crucial questions
wrongheaded. The Christian tradition teaches that war may
sometimes be a moral duty, and the reasons for going to war as
well as the conduct of war, must be kept within the boundaries
of moral reasoning. That is the purpose of what is called the just
war doctrine, which I strongly affirm. The first duty of the state is
to protect its people.

[The Father is correct as there are many essays to choose from
on this topic at his site. Here is a link to terror and just war
theory and another on jihad and just war.

BC: Concerning your journal, isn't that old quote by Martin
Luther, "Here I stand: I can do no other" a perfect description of
First Things and your mission in the post-modern era?

RJN: I don't know if it's a "perfect description" but it's a large
part of what we are about. I would hope that we are more irenic
and eager to engage alternative arguments than Luther typically
was.

BC: Your piece each month in First Things, "The Public Square,"
is the first thing I read. [Here's "The Public Square" from March]

It always examines a variety of topics that would be of interest to
anyone who was religious and also to a fair amount of the laity.
One of the topics last month was homosexuality among the
priesthood (you even make a distinction between homosexual
behavior and gay behavior). Do you think the priesthood can
recover from the negative stigma that the recent controversies
have given it?

RJN: Oh yes, it will recover and is recovering. A very small
number of miscreant priests have not dimmed Catholic devotion
to the priesthood. In fact, there are many signs of increased
support from the laity. It is confidence in bishops that has taken a
big hit. Deservedly so, in my judgment. There are proposals for
renewal on that score, too, and we will see what comes of them.

BC: Your new book, As I Lay Dying: Meditations Upon
Returning, has just been released. Many of our readers are
unaware of your near-death experience. Could you tell us if it
strengthened your belief in Christianity? In what way? What
advice do you have for people to allow them to appreciate every
day of their lives (without having to go through the life-
threatening ordeal that you experienced)?

RJN: Most of what I have to say on these matters is said in the
book. I hope the experience strengthened my faith in Christ, his
presence and power and promise of life everlasting. But I am
reluctant to speak about my own spiritual growth or lack thereof.
I'm not the best judge of that. You might ask my spiritual
director, but the confessional seal means he can't tell you.

BC: A recent essay from The Public Interest ("Our Secularist
Democratic Party," Fall 2002) suggested that more and more
belief is becoming a bigger and bigger variable in political
affiliation. It found that those who believe are more likely to be
Republicans and those who do not are more likely to be
Democrats. Do you regard this as being a promising portent for
those on the right? What can we do to take advantage of this
division among the parties?

RJN: I have written a good deal on this. No, not because my
first allegiance is to the Republican Party (far from it!), I do not
think it is a healthy thing for the parties to be so polarized along
religio-moral lines. The factor, more than any other, that has
produced this state of affairs is the Democrats' dogmatic,
fanatical, dont-give-an-inch position on abortion and related life
questions. I do not see that changing in the near future.

BC: Thank you very much for your time, Father Neuhaus.

RJN: Thanks for asking. 

Bernard Chapin is a school psychologist and adjunct faculty
member in Chicago. He can be reached at emeritus@flash.net.

Enter Stage Right -- http://www.enterstageright.com