The Churches and the Thermonuclear Revolution

Abstract

During the summer of 1948, at the height of the Berlin Blockade, the First Assembly of the World Council of Churches was held in Amsterdam. The task, as Amsterdam understood it, was to discover new ways of responsible Christian citizenship in a world dominated by the nuclear shadow. No answer could be given to the question whether a nuclear war could still be just, but it was felt that ‘the churches must continue to hold within their full fellowship’ not only pure pacifist and just war arguments, but also embrace ‘those who hold that, even though entering a war may be a Christian’s duty in particular circumstances, modern warfare, with its mass destruction, can never be an act of justice’ (Potter, 1969, p. 113). This reiteration of the ‘nuclear pacifist’ suggestion first enunciated by the US Federal Council of Churches two years earlier would have a marked impact on church discussions in the decade to come. There were now three interpretations of responsible citizenship (withstanding unconditional loyalty to the state). First, a citizenship that believed war could never be just (pacifism). Second, a citizenship that thought war, even total war fought with nuclear weapons, was sometimes unavoidable (just war). And finally, a new citizenship that felt unable to condemn the possibility of all war fighting yet firmly believed the exercise of nuclear force could never be morally permissible (nuclear pacifism).