The Bishops Stand Firm

Roman Catholic leaders again criticize U.S. nuclear arms policy

The 365 Roman Catholic bishops of the U.S. will receive an anxiously awaited item in this week's post-Easter mail: the final revision of a proposed pastoral letter on nuclear arms. The controversial 140-page document accommodates some criticisms from conservatives in the U.S. and Catholics abroad, but it remains a sweeping critique of U.S. nuclear-deterrence strategy at the very time when President Reagan is caught up in a tense international struggle over the issue. Moreover, Joseph Cardinal Bernardin of Chicago, chairman of the drafting committee, informed fellow bishops in a confidential memo two weeks ago that he discussed the contents with Pope John Paul II in February, implying general papal support, although John Paul has issued no detailed policy on nuclear arms.

The letter, which will go before the bishops for approval at a meeting May 2 and 3 in Chicago, was revised after a headline-making public discussion of the issues by the church leaders last November. The bishops later submitted hundreds of proposed changes, and Bernardin and Minnesota's Archbishop John Roach, president of the U.S. Catholic hierarchy, conferred in January with West European bishops and top Vatican officials.

The thrust of the document remains its challenge to many central elements of the U.S. policy of relying on an arsenal of nuclear weapons to deter the Soviet Union from starting a war. The panel still accepts John Paul's view that deterrence is "morally acceptable" if it is part of a process leading to disarmament. But the committee clearly remains deeply distressed by the basic concept of deterrence: U.S. willingness to counterattack by launching nuclear missiles. Since such an assault would be bound to kill countless civilians near military targets, it might well conflict with the tenets of the venerable "just war" doctrine, which bars the indiscriminate or disproportionate killing of the innocent.

The revised letter drops one rationale previously offered for grudging acceptance of deterrence: that it was a "sinful situation" that should be tolerated because the dangers of unilateral disarmament were worse. The panel decided that such reasoning tried to justify an act because it was the "lesser of two evils," an approach that Catholic teaching rejects on such matters as abortion.

As before, the bishops' committee condemns the first use of nuclear weapons by any nation, although NATO relies on having that option to fend off superior fleets of Soviet tanks and conventional forces. The panel believes that any use of nuclear arms would quite likely bring on the holocaust. The bishops also continue to endorse a bilateral nuclear freeze, which is opposed by the White House. Responding to Administration arguments, the bishops make some minor concessions: giving more recognition to U.S. disarmament efforts and leveling more criticism at the Soviets for their belligerent stance.

Despite some reservations, the committee voted unanimously to send the document to the full hierarchy, which last November strongly supported the basic points of the evolving letter. Whatever the final version, the proposed text makes clear that only the universal principles of justice and the need to strive for peace are binding church teaching, while the bishops' applications of these tenets to nuclear strategy are matters on which Catholics may differ. This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.