In 1959 Karl Barth, an influential Protestant theologian, declared that the most vital issue facing Christianity is the inability of the church to take a definite stand against nuclear weapons.
Theologically, Barth was known for his refutation of liberalism. His biblical theology stood firmly anchored in traditional Protestant orthodoxy, which meant that he was by no means a secular humanist. Indeed, in his Church Dogmatics, Barth rarely made even passing reference to current political affairs. Why, then, did this conservative church man maintain that the most pressing issue for Christianity had to do with nuclear weapons?
To understand Barth’s position, we must remember his remarkable role in the formation of the confessing church in Nazi Germany. With the beginning of Nazi rule, Hitler effectively silenced Christians by signing a concordat with the Catholic Church and by organizing the larger Protestant churches under a National Socialist “Reich Bishop.” With the churches under firm control, professing Christians quickly rallied behind the cult of the Fuhrer, the Nazi ideology of the “Aryan race,” and the notion of the divine election of Germany for a pre-eminent role in human destiny. In contrast to this captivity of the churches, a remnant of faithful Christians gathered together to form the confessing church, adopting the “Barmen Declaration” which had been written by Barth.
The members of the confessing church saw clearly what was at stake. The struggle against the madness which had infested Germany did not merely involve a few political issues or a few questions of ecclesiastical structure; rather, the very essence of the faith was at stake. In its opening paragraphs, the Barmen Declaration proclaimed, “Jesus Christ, as he is attested for us in the Holy Scripture, is the one Word of God which we have to hear and which we have to trust and obey in life and in death.”
The Barmen Declaration was a statement of faith: Jesus Christ is Lord. But in that apparently simple statement of faith, and in the commitment of members of the confessing church to live by that faith, there were the most radical ramifications for all aspects of life in Nazi Germany. Hitler clearly recognized the threat which was posed to his regime, and as people in the confessing church sought to live by their faith, many were executed or imprisoned or--in Barth’s case--exiled.
This is why Barth maintains that the need for churches to oppose nuclear weapons is the most vital concern facing Christianity. Once again, we are not merely dealing with a political issue or a passing humanistic concern. Rather, the existence of nuclear weapons poses a challenge to the very center of the Christian faith, and, when interpreted biblically, if the essence of the faith is at stake, humanity itself is endangered.
The silence of the churches in the midst of this nuclear madness is astonishing--and frightening. In the October 12, 1959, issue of Christianity Today, Barth asks, “How do you explain the fact that the large Christian bodies cannot pronounce a definite yes or no on the matter of atomic war?” Almost two decades have passed since then, but the question remains highly appropriate. Indeed, with the passage of time and the stockpiling of increasingly awesome weaponry, the question becomes even more pressing.
Various churches have issued encyclicals, adopted position papers, and occasionally lobbied for cuts in military expenditures. But all of this talking from ecclesiastical bodies and authorities has only amounted to the silence of lifeless chatter. A definite yes or no has not been pronounced.
In the United States, I think this silence can only be explained by the fact that, like the church in Nazi Germany, the American church today is held captive. This captivity is manifested in several forms:
The first and most devastating aspect--that which determines all the rest--is that the faith of the church is held captive. The Bible has lost its power for the church because the church has fallen captive to the modern god of psychology and the American god of individualism; the Bible has been reduced to a book which offers freedom from despair only through personal salvation. In the concordats signed in Nazi Germany, Hitler insisted that the church restrict itself to concerns of personal salvation and not become involved in matters concerning the state. There is no need for such insistence today; most American churches have already restricted them selves voluntarily.
The captivity of the faith of the church means the captivity of the prophetic word which the church has to offer the world. For those churches which express any social concern whatsoever, the opinions offered are but powerless, political meanderings when compared to the truths which are thundered in the preaching of the prophets. Those churches (by no means a majority) which have reservations about militarism express those reservations in captivity to the American political system. Church lobbyists descend on Congress to play the game of deciding on increased or decreased military spending; the question of total renunciation of militarism is never considered. In this politicking, the churches also find themselves captive to military logic, which goes that the need for nuclear deterrence precludes unilateral disarmament. As a result, churches do not call for unilateral disarmament. Operating within this political system and the twisted logic it entails, there is no sign that the church actively opposes nuclear weapons, nor is there any sign of a prophetic word from the church. There is no sign that the church will block the path to nuclear madness with its faith and with its life.
This captivity of the church is also a captivity of the life of the professing Christian community and its members. Where there is no vision, the people perish. Because the people of the church have sacrificed the vision, the lifestyle of the people is in perfect accord with mainstream American life. So those who would be about the work of “new life” pay taxes for death machinery, work in war industry, and play America’s love affair with the bomb. If members of the church were to refuse to pay for death, were to refuse to work in death industry, were to place their bodies across the path toward war--in short, if members of the church community were to pronounce a clear “no” to nuclear weapons--the threat of nuclear annihilation could be eliminated.
That the church has no word to address to the world other than the word of politicians--and the hopes of lobbyists--that the church, like the politicians, can live comfortably with the bomb (just like the German church could once live with antisemitism, death camps, and world war)--these facts point beyond the political realities to spiritual death in the American church.
Rather than remembering the Lord’s Supper and that it symbolizes a resurrected redeemer of humanity, the church has practiced amnesia about its Lord. In its failure to give a loud, clear, active renunciation of nuclear weapons, the church has spoken a soft, confused, cowardly renunciation of Jesus Christ. Because the church is held captive, the axe which was once laid at the roots of our faithlessness is replaced by an axe laid on the neck of humanity.
Where is the call for the dual liberation of the church from captivity, and of humanity from the nuclear death threat? I think that this can only come from a new confessing church movement.
This confessing movement, if it is to arise, can take numerous forms. Perhaps there would be a formal and visible affiliation as with the confessing church in Germany, or the movement might grow as a network of intentional Christian communities breaking free from the captivity of the institutional churches. The form of the new confessing movement is less important than the need for that movement and the content of its proclamation and activity in the world.
As Barth saw clearly, the nuclear madness calls into question the faith of the church. The response of the captive American church has been spiritual death. The response of a new confessing movement must be a living faith that Jesus Christ is Lord, which has profound meaning for all aspects of society, not the least of which is nuclear folly. Because the liberated church confesses the resurrection of the dead, the redemption of all creation, and the reconciliation of humanity to God, the church will place itself in the path of the war machine. In obedience to the kingdom of God, the members of the body will disobey the laws, the politics, and the twisted logic of the nuclear kingdom. That body will be subversive of the law and order of mass murder.
Like any serious act of faith, the gathering of a new Confessing Movement is not a step to be taken lightly, for such a gathering involves nothing less than a conspiracy to follow Christ.
When this article appeared, Lee Griffith attended Bethany Seminary and was a member of Adviata House in Baltimore, Maryland.
Got something to say about what you're reading? We value your feedback!