INDIFFERENCE ABOUT THE H-BOMB

SIR,-It would be difficult to say which aspect of Fr. Donnelly's letter is the more liable to give scandal: his references to Canon Drinkwater; or his apparent acquiescence in the nuclear arms race which the late Pope repeatedly condemned as "this homicidal, this suicidal madness" (Easter, 1956) and "this terrifying and wilful race towards death" (Palm Sunday, 1957).
Those theologians who content themselves with devising hypothetical circumstances for the legitimate use of H-bombs might more profitably turn their attention to the realities of past fact and present intention.
Hqw were the acorn-bombs actually used in 1945? Not on the sort of military target imagined by Fr. Donnelly hut on the thickly-populated cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, plainly violating the principle-of which His Grace the Archbishop of Westminster reminded his congregation last Easter-that it can never be morally lawful to use indiscriminate nuclear weapons on centres of population w h ic h are predominantly civilian.
And there is not the slightest reason to suppose that, with far more destructive weapons at their disposal, a wartime government would be any more scrupulous in the future.
On the contrary, the Defence White Paper last February expressly declared the government's reliance on the threat of retaliation by a massive nuclear bombardment of the sources of power in Russia. The full implications of this official policy, which few moralists seem yet to have grasped, were made clear in an article in "The Times" of May 8, 1958:
"To the B-47 crews here in England 'The Weapon' is the megaton-range nuclear bomb, the fearful instrument ('One bomb Gone, One City Gone') that makes every mission a war-read) mission . a single crew flies a freight so awesome that one load in one bomber alone surpasses the explosive capability of all the bombs and all thc ammunition expended by all the planes flown by all the nations during all six 'cars of World War II."
Here, baffling human imagination. is the unprecedented challenge to the Christian conscience, which Fr. Donnolly appears to ignore completely May I commend to his attention the writings of sonic of his fellow-members of the Society of Jesus, e.g. the article "Nuclear Dilemma" by Archbishop Roberts in the May issue
of the " Month" (now reprinted in PAX Bulletin), Defense de Tuer arid other hooks by the late Pierre I.orson, and the comments of the Rev. John C. Ford in America: " If we do not intend to do it [terror-bombing] again, why are we stockpiling large quantities of high megaton H-bombs? The military targets for such bombs are few and far between . .. it is clear that the actual intent will he to win the war by wiping out everything in sight."
Why, in spite of the guidance of accepted moral teaching, are so few Catholic voices raised in protest against this commitment to mass-murder, which can never he lawful even in reprisal? Do those who remain silent suppose that the end justifies the means?
Even unbelievers detect the inconsistency with the Gospel commandment of love. Are ee. or are we not, Christians?
Charles S. Thompson (Editor. PAX Bulletin).
93 Stlalmstone Avenue, Merstham, Redhill. Surrey.
SIR,-What is a "Catholic Paci
fist"? Canon Drinkwater states that he is "one who disallows all military force for those who follow Christ" This is not correct and I wonder why he Continually and sometimes mischievously misrepresents the Catholic pacifist position which is certainly not that of the "absolute pacifist" if such there be The Catholic pacifist-and Canon Drink water should know this from his acquaintance with "PAX"-is concerned to discover and apply the Catholic principles governing a "just war" and to assert the rights and duties of conscience in this matter. Is this "holy eccentricity"?
Cecil Gill 115 Corporation Road, Cardiff.