For a few precarious days last month, the world seemingly hung on the nuclear-oriented edge of war. The human race underwent one of its biggest scares.
How did the Christian clergy face the crisis? What did church leaders have to say? What kind of help did they offer?
NEWS / A fortnightly report of developments in religion
CHRISTIANS RALLY TO INDIA’S SUPPORT
Protestants and Roman Catholics in India rallied behind their government this month against the Chinese Communist invasion, praying for the armed forces and offering funds, blood, and clothing.
The All India Council of Indian Christians said it would seek to recruit about 10,000 volunteers to join the Indian forces.
Church leaders, through circulars and sermons, appealed for financial contributions and prayers to aid Indian troops on the battle lines.
“Remember that death is better than slavery,” said Chaldean Bishop Marthoma Dharmo of Trichur in a speech calling for funds.
Valerian Cardinal Gracias, Archbishop of Bombay, brought a message from Pope John XXIII of sympathy and prayer for India.
The small Jewish community of Cochin and Ernakulam raised $5,000 for the defense fund, while also donating two gold coronets which had rested in the Cochin synagogue, oldest in India, for about 200 years.
Roman Catholic bishops issued a pastoral letter asking the church to accept all hardships and sacrifices for peace.
Dr. Eugene Carson Blake complained the church did and said very little.
Declared Blake, stated clerk of the United Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A., in a Reformation Festival of Faith at Binghamton, New York:
“We’ve been worried about the possibility of ending all cultures, the end of the world.… But has the church said anything?
“Not very much. Not very much.”
Blake’s observation notwithstanding, the Cuban crisis produced a variety of ecclesiastical commentaries. The Chinese-Indian border war, on the other hand, was largely ignored.
The most controversial statement came out of the Geneva headquarters of the World Council of Churches the day following President Kennedy’s announcement of an arms quarantine against Cuba:
“Taking their stand on statements made by the World Council of Churches assemblies, committees and officers of the WCC have on several occasions expressed their concern and regret when governments have taken unilateral military action against other governments. The officers of WCC consider it therefore their duty to express grave concern and regret concerning the action which the USA government has felt it necessary to take with regard to Cuba and fervently hope that every government concerned will exercise the greatest possible restraint in order to avoid a worsening of international tensions.”
The statement was signed by Dr. Franklin Clark Fry, president of the Lutheran Church in America and the Lutheran World Federation and chairman of the WCC’s policy-making Central Committee; Dr. Ernest A. Payne, vice-chairman; and Dr. W. A. Visser ’t Hooft, general secretary of the WCC. It was forwarded to the U. N. Security Council by Dr. O. Frederick Nolde, director of the WCC’s Commission of the Churches on International Affairs, who appended some remarks he had made in a sermon the previous Sunday.
“Only if Cuba becomes a military threat against other countries—aggressive in action rather than defensive—is military reprisal justified and it should be undertaken in accordance with the provisions of the United Nations Charter,” said Nolde.
The WCC statement was promptly repudiated by delegates to the 2,455,000 member American Lutheran Church convention which only four days before had voted to remain in the World Council. Dr. Fredrik A. Schiotz, ALC president, first urged that the convention take no action on the WCC statement. Later he said that it was “exceedingly unfortunate” that the statement did not cite the evidence of a Soviet buildup in Cuba on which the United States based its action.
The ALC action was one of the most stinging rebukes ever handed the World Council by a member church.
The National Council of Churches came out with a considerably longer and more general statement calling for “restraint, calmness, and control” and urging prayer for world leaders. The six-point message emphasized recourse to international organizations.
“We are hopeful that the Cuban people will be freed from foreign domination, and that we all may progress in political, economic and social well-being,” the statement said. It was signed by NCC President J. Irwin Miller.
In Washington, a group of prominent religious leaders met in a specially-called “emergency consultation” under the chairmanship of Dean John Bennett of Union Theological Seminary. They subsequently released a statement warning against “brandishing our might” but praising Kennedy’s use of the U. N. and the O. A. S. Methodist Bishop John Wesley Lord was host to the meeting.
Dr. Ben M. Herbster, president of the United Church of Christ, assured Kennedy that his denomination will continue to pray that this country will pass the crisis “without a conflict of arms.” He declared, however, that liberty and justice are more precious than peace.
In Philadelphia, leaders of the United Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A., including Blake, called on members to observe a day of prayer and repentance.
The American Council of Christian Churches, at its annual meeting in Chicago, approved a statement commending the blockade and remarking that it was “long overdue.”
In another statement, the ACCC urged the U. S. government to deny visas to Russian Orthodox churchmen planning to come to this country in 1963 to return visits made this year by delegations from the World and National Councils of Churches. The statement asserted that “the strategy of the Reds in the use of the churches has been imminently successful and they have obtained recognition and membership in numerous international church bodies and councils where their deceptions are being effectively promoted.”
In Moscow, six Protestant and Orthodox church leaders protested the arms quarantine but understandably ignored the Soviet military buildup in Cuba. They branded Kennedy’s decision “a violation of Christian teaching” and said it was “the greatest sin against mankind.”
At Columbia, South Carolina, the Presiding Bishop of the Protestant Episcopal Church was obliged to issue a clarification of his response to a reporter’s question about the proposed exchange of Cuban missile bases for those in Turkey. Presiding Bishop Arthur Lichtenberger had told a press conference that “this seems a reasonable solution.” He later observed that there seemed to be widespread misunderstanding of his statement and emphasized that “we do not know the actual facts” and “I rely fully on the judgment and actions of the President in these serious negotiations.”
Lichtenberger was in Columbia for a meeting of the Episcopal House of Bishops, as was Dr. Arthur Michael Ramsey, Archbishop of Canterbury, who said:
“My own view is that general disarmament is absolutely urgent, as shown by recent events. I don’t believe, however, in unilateral disarmament. I support the statement made by the Presiding Bishop, and I feel that both the scrapping of Soviet bases in Cuba and the scrapping of U. S. bases in Turkey would be a step forward to the relief of tensions.”
The House of Bishops issued a statement invoking “all people, especially leaders of nations, to exercise the strongest discipline of conscience to prevent total war.” But the statement added that “a strong military posture does serve as a deterrent to an aggressor nation intent upon military conflict.”
Delegates to the Evangelical United Brethren Church’s quadrennial General Conference in Grand Rapids, Michigan, pledged to join other Christians in confessing “our failures which have contributed” to the Cuban crisis and in interceding for divine guidance for peace. In a resolution, the delegates expressed satisfaction over Kennedy’s “courageous effort to safeguard the security and freedom of our hemisphere.”
Lichtenberger had also been quoted as saying that the United States should not invade Cuba to remove missile bases. A similar view was expressed by Methodist Bishops Lord, F. Gerald Ensley, and A. Raymond Grant. Although they spoke as individuals, Ensley is president and the others vice-presidents of the Methodist Board of Christian Social Concerns.
Dr. Oliver R. Harms, president of the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, called upon members to “express their loyalty to God and their nation through words of encouragement and prayer.”
