Hiroshima

Some spiritual interpretations of atomic warfare are perfectly valid – others are positively radioactive

We can rightly regret the necessity of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But their primary purpose was never the killing of large numbers of civilians.

In Japan, even the dead get a say in how the nation’s war-machine should be run by the living.

Last month was the seventy-fifth anniversary of V-J Day—Victory over Japan, August 14, 1945—the official end of World War II. Yet most Britons prefer to celebrate V-E Day—Victory in Europe, May 8, 1945—the defeat of Nazi Germany. Why so?

Keir A. Lieber and Daryl G. Press argue in “The Myth of the Nuclear Revolution” that the Atomic Age isn’t too different from other ages. Geopolitical rivalries, arms races, military doctrines, stalemates, and much else are still the same.

The reclamation of a two-kingdom theology is a first step toward more careful and responsible thinking about issues such as Harry Truman’s decision to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Pope Francis visited Hiroshima and Nagasaki this weekend. In both locations, he lamented the horrors and immorality of nuclear weapons. He got the horror right, not much else.

But what struck me about reading The Most Controversial Decision is how we now superimpose our judgments on Truman’s decision post hoc, and we do this with great zeal, certainty, and righteous superiority.

The attack on Hiroshima was a moral horror but not a moral wrong. As such, it reveals important committments that ought to guide Christian moral reasoning.