ABSTRACT
There is a responsibility laid upon theology to contribute to the debate about nuclear deterrence and it should be able to make a distinctive and useful input. But it is by no means obvious to everyone that such matters can or should be discussed in theological terms. Great issues, turning points of history, and encounters with radical evil, or authentic holiness, in history all call for religious symbols and theological language for their interpretation. Christian theology must be Church theology; but it also properly operates in the court, addressing the powerful and the decision-makers with challenge, support, solace and forgiveness; and it should see itself not as defending the interests of any religiously-defined fellowship or national group but as speaking on behalf of humanity, with a particular bias towards the weak and the poor. Gordon Dunstan, in an article on Theological Method in the Deterrence Debate' argues that there is little direct theological contribution possible.
