Tis the Season All Year Round: “Collective Atheism” and the Collective Good

By Paul Louis Metzger and John W. Morehead*

“Tis the season to be jolly,” as the Christmas carol line goes, not hostile. Yet hostility over the public display of religious symbols and public speech regarding religion bound up with Christmas has often put a damper on the season festivities. This year during the holiday season, an irreligious invocation at a civic gathering in Florida has stoked the fires again. Can we make a Christmas and New Year’s resolution that religious and non-religious types can work together throughout the coming year to cultivate the collective good?

Over the last several months members of minority religions and the irreligious have increasingly expressed themselves and carved out their own niche in the public square. People of no faith have been a part of this effort. Preston Smith, an atheist activist, recently delivered the invocation at a Lake Worth, Florida City Commission meeting. His invocation and response to it became the focus of national discussion centering on the place of religious expression in the public square.

Before offering our response to the invocation, it is helpful to consider what was said. After an opening statement that affirmed the basis and perceived benefits of “collective atheism” over religious alternatives, Smith shifted to satire on religion:

May the efforts of this council blend the righteousness of Allah with the all-knowing wisdom of Satan. May Zeus, the great God of justice, grant us strength tonight. Jesus might forgive our shortcomings while Buddha enlightens us through His divine affection. We praise you, Krishna, for the sanguine sacrifice that freed us all. After all, if Almighty Thor is with us, who can ever be against us?

This invocation provides us with an opportunity for reflection. We provide the following response for Evangelicals, Atheists, and others to consider.

To our fellow Evangelicals we offer the following:

1. We encourage you not to respond confrontationally to this and similar events in the public square (surely, many more such events will be coming in the near future). It is clear that Smith satirized religion; he may have intended to offer an invocation that would provoke strong reactions from Christians and other religious people; however, Evangelicals are not well served when we react confrontationally. Instead, civility, respect and reason provide the contours for communicating that is more in keeping with a Christ-like response; such forms of communication will gain a better hearing than angry, reactionary rejoinders.
2. We also believe that Evangelicals should support the freedoms of irreligious and irreligious people to express themselves in the public square. America provides freedoms of expression that apply not only to Christians and others who are members of majority religions but also to members of minority religions and Atheists. Although this will at times involve expressions to which Evangelicals will object, Evangelicals should apply the Golden Rule to others in such situations, as we have argued in a previous essay.

To Atheists we would ask your consideration of these thoughts:

1. If you want to persuade religious people of differing traditions to consider the strength of your position, then move beyond satire. People hold their religious convictions closely, so much so that they form their identities as humans around their religious convictions. When others are seen as attacking religious identity (or non-religious identity for that matter) through mockery, it shuts down the listening process, raises defenses, and all opportunities for persuasion are lost. If Atheists only want to make public statements that stake out their territory over against other worldview expressions, then they may choose to discount such concerns. However, if they hope to persuade others, which appeared to be the ultimate aim of Mr. Preston’s remarks, then respectful strategies are in order (more on this point later).
2. We would also suggest that when you take advantage of the freedoms of expression given to you in the public square, engage in those activities that contribute to the common good. As we mentioned above, Atheists and others have the freedom to engage in all kinds of speech, including satirizing and mocking the religious beliefs of others; however, we believe that such actions detract from the common good and contribute negativity to an already tense public square.

Now to return to the point of persuasion, Mr. Smith aimed to convince others of the need to move beyond religious divisions. Instead, he only furthered them given the irreverent nature of his remarks. Smith stated that “collective atheism” entails “loving empathy.” “Loving empathy” did not stand out in his address:

Our collective atheism – which is to say, loving empathy, scientific evidence, and critical thinking – leads us to believe that we can create a better, more equal community without religious divisions. May we pray together?

Smith’s invocation mentioned Allah, Satan, Zeus, Jesus, Krishna and Thor, ending with “let us, above all, love one another, not to obtain mythical rewards for ourselves now, hereafter, or based on superstitious threats of eternal damnation, but rather, embrace secular-based principles of morality – and do good for goodness’ sake.” (Quotation taken from The Palm Beach Post article by Chris Persaud)

We would agree that “loving empathy, scientific evidence, and critical thinking” should go into the making of “a better, more equal community.” We are more than willing to hear cogent, non-mocking arguments for how “collective atheism” can move us beyond religion toward such ends. Let the best argument win! And regardless of what one makes of talk of eternal damnation, we could all see the value in the Christmas carol, “Santa Claus Is Coming to Town,” which many children take to heart: Santa Claus is making a list and checking it twice to see if we have been naughty or nice to one another (“…so be good for goodness sake!”).

Now whether or not one believes in Santa or religious figures and stories with Christmas holiday significance, religious convictions (whether held by Puritans or Deists among others) gave rise to liberty of religious expression and expression on religion in this country. While religious communities have not always practiced what this country has preached regarding the need to affirm religious liberty, Atheism has not always fared well either, including abroad in places like the former Soviet Union or Maoist China.

One of our Christmas and New Year wishes is that the religious collective and the Atheist collective can learn to work together in private and public to cultivate the collective or common good “for goodness sake.” What’s your wish?

______________

*

John W. Morehead (M.A., Salt Lake Theological Seminary) serves on the Board of Directors of the Foundation for Religious Diplomacy and is the Custodian of the Evangelical Chapter of the FRD. John is also Director of the Western Institute for Intercultural Studies. He is co-editor and contributing author for Encountering New Religious Movements: A Holistic Evangelical Approach, the editor of Beyond the Burning Times: A Pagan and Christian in Dialogue, and co-founder and editor of Sacred Tribes Journal. John also provides expertise to the Lausanne Committee for World Evangelization issue group on “The Church and the New Spiritualities.” He has been involved in numerous interreligious relationships and active conversations for many years in the contexts of Islam, Mormonism, and Paganism.