The bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, though primitive by today’s standards, were the only nuclear bombs ever dropped on men, women and children. Nevertheless, those fiery, mushroomlike columns of death have become an enduring nightmare in the collective consciousness of the human race. With a horrible vividness they showed on a small scale what could happen worldwide if mankind ever fought an all-out nuclear war.

It is hardly surprising, then, that many voices have been raised in a continuing​—but so far unavailing—​protest against the relentless growth of the world’s nuclear arsenals. Recently, though, these protesters have had new, unexpected allies​—prominent individuals and organizations of Christendom.

Why the Bishops Oppose It Now

“NEVER before has the human race been as close as it is now to total self-destruction.” With these words the sixth assembly of the World Council of Churches, meeting last summer in Vancouver, Canada, sounded the alarm against The Bomb. Urging nuclear disarmament, they proclaimed: “Nuclear deterrence is morally unacceptable because it relies on the credibility of the intention to use nuclear weapons.”

A few months earlier, in May 1983, the Roman Catholic bishops in the United States issued the final text of a long letter entitled “The Challenge of Peace: God’s Promise and Our Response.” In this, they urged a reduction in existing nuclear stockpiles as well as a halt to “the testing, production and deployment of new nuclear weapons systems.” They insisted: “There must be no misunderstanding of our profound skepticism about the moral acceptability of any use of nuclear weapons.”

These were two of the more outstanding recent declarations by religious leaders against nuclear weapons. Some have reacted with delight to the involvement of the bishops in the anti-Bomb cause. A Presbyterian minister, quoted in The New York Times, said of the letter by the U.S. bishops: “In it you hear a voice of moral conscience, not just speaking to Catholics but speaking to us as Americans and as decent human beings . . . God bless the Catholic bishops.”

Others are more critical. Philosopher Sidney Hook said: “The bishops’ position is uninformed, unrealistic and morally irresponsible.” And conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly was quoted as saying that the bishops’ statement is dangerous because it leads Catholics down the road of “pacifism . . . and disarmament and loving the Russians.”

Nevertheless, given the long history of clerical involvement in wars, and pro-Bomb statements by religious leaders in the years since the second world war, these recent anti-Bomb statements mark a startling turnaround. Why the change?

Forty Years Late

The U.S. bishops’ letter offers an explanation of sorts: “Today the destructive potential of the nuclear powers threatens the human person, the civilization we have slowly constructed, and even the created order itself.” Yet this has been true ever since those atomic bombs exploded over Hiroshima and Nagasaki almost 40 years ago. Why was there no hue and cry back then?

The World Council of Churches says: “We believe that any intention to use weapons of mass destruction is an utterly inhuman violation of the mind and spirit of Christ which should be in us.” Well, was that not also true when civilians were being massacred by the hundreds of thousands during the last world war? Yet few church leaders spoke up then.

Nuclear physicist Harold M. Agnew voiced his opinion bluntly: “I think they are hypocrites in that they seem to be accepting that conventional war is O.K. and nuclear war isn’t. For the first time in history, because of the power of nuclear weapons, those who make the decisions to get involved in war are equally at risk with the young people who traditionally are sent off to execute the elders’ decisions. So the churches and all the other decision-makers’ wine cellars, material wealth and other holdings are no longer immune in the event of a nuclear war. We’re all in it together.”