“I am willing to predict that because of space travel, by the end of the century our churches will be full again. NASA is redesigning man back in the direction of God.”

So said science-fiction writer Ray Bradbury in a CBS news interview with Mike Wallace. Does Bradbury have some special prophetic insight that’s worth paying attention to, or was his prediction attributable to mere euphoria brought on by the manned lunar landing?

President Nixon, aboard the U. S. S. Hornet to welcome the Apollo 11 astronauts back to earth, said: “This is the greatest week since the beginning of the world, the Creation. Nothing has changed the world more than this mission.”

Many immediately relegated Nixon’s assessment to the category of obvious overstatement. The neglect of spiritual dimensions was excusable, perhaps, considering the pressures, but to many, it was nonetheless lamentable.

The whole moon voyage, in fact, left something to be desired from the religious perspective. Carl McIntire’s Christian Beacon aptly pointed out that “God has been slighted.”

Fortunately, there were a few redeeming moments. Astronaut Edwin Aldrin, in a color telecast during the return voyage, said: “In reflecting on the events of the past week I am reminded of Psalm Eight in the Bible. ‘When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained; what is man, that thou art mindful of him?’ ”

Apollo 11 commander Neil Armstrong signed off by thanking those who had helped in the lunar mission, then added; “To all the other people listening and watching, God bless you and good night from Apollo 11.”

After the astronauts had been hauled aboard the Hornet, Nixon asked the ship’s chaplain, John Purtot, a Lutheran, to pray. The prayer: “Lord, God, our heavenly Father, our minds are staggered by the magnitude of this mission. As we try to analyze the scope of it, our hearts are overwhelmed. This magnificent event was made possible by the courage of these three brave men. A man on the moon was promised to us in this decade. We pour out our thanksgiving for their completion of this almost impossible journey and for their safe return to their families. May this success inspire us to move similarly to new avenues of needs. Link us in friendship with peoples throughout the world. Grant us peace. Amen.”

Collins, holding a microphone inside the astronauts’ quarantine vehicle, said a determined “Amen.”

While on the Hornet, Nixon got a telephone call from Pope Paul, who gave “thanks to God for the safe return of the explorers of the moon.” The pontiff said the Roman Catholic Church congratulated the “courageous pioneers, their families and all who collaborated in their success.”

Then after the astronauts were quarantined in Houston, a fifteen-minute Sunday service was held inside the Lunar Receiving Laboratory. Jesse Stewart, a cook and a deacon at the New Hope Baptist Church, read from the Twenty-third Psalm and delivered a short sermon.

From a biblical perspective, perhaps the most gratifying element was implicit. The plaque left behind on the moon notes that man first set foot there in July, 1969, A.D. Baptist pastor James Bulman of Oak Ridge, North Carolina in a July 27 sermon cited inclusion of the abbreviation of Anno Domini (in the year of our Lord) as partial fulfillment of the Philippians 2 passage that says Jesus will be acknowledged as Lord not only on earth but also “in heaven.”

Man—puffed up by conquest of a few feet of the moon’s surface. Man—apprehensive of a bomb that could destroy him. Man—perplexed by hunger, racism, and poverty. Man—excited and frightened by the possibilities of creating life artificially.

This is the atmosphere in which a group of concerned scientists “who have made a personal commitment of themselves and their lives to Jesus Christ as Lord and “Saviour” meets at Gordon College in Wenham, Massachusetts, this month for the annual convention of the American Scientific Affiliation. And never has it been more important to bring soul-searching, compassionate, scripturally based guidelines to bear on the world’s scientific revolution.

The paths of science and religion cross with growing regularity. The population explosion demands both scientific and moral answers. So does birth control. Space exploration. Hunger. Pollution. Organ transplanting. Genetic experimentation. Behavior manipulation. Poverty. And a thousand other problems.

Yet frequently science and religion have continued to go separate ways—too many Christian scholars inflexibly keeping sense data at arm’s length, too many scientists declaring, as at a recent conference (see page 40), that “as the knowledge gaps are being removed, religion is being displaced,” and neither side willing or able to reckon with the other’s findings.

This, in a society that puts great stress on the inter-disciplinary approach, that studies history in the light of sociology, anthropology through linguistics, medicine by means of engineering. For the scientist to make decisions without employing an ethical framework is to ignore today’s academic trends—as well as to invite such disasters as uncontrolled atomic use, amoral family planning, and devastating and militaristic competition in space.

But simple ethical concern is not enough. Too often scientists, including some who profess faith in Christ, disregard the Scriptures when discussing scientific morality, using instead an approach that can only be labeled ethical relativism. Why? Do they genuinely feel that the Scriptures do not apply? Or is their scriptural knowledge too superficial to be relevant? One often suspects the latter; there is need for more consultation with the biblical scholar.

At any rate, science, that constantly changing field, badly needs grounding in the changeless Word of God if it is not to wander fearfully in directions that could spell human deprivation. Scientists must begin in new, honest ways to pursue their work in the light of scriptural relevation from that One who controls both man’s destiny and nature’s laws.

May Wenham be a beginning.

The Kennedy Tragedy

Chappaquiddick is an awkward name next to Dallas and Los Angeles. Yet there it is, part of the tragedy of the Kennedys and the Presidency. Perhaps some meaning in the untimely death of Mary Jo Kopechne can be found in the realization that the American people, through this tragedy, have had a unique opportunity to observe a potential President under acute stress.

We would not be so presumptuous as to say that this is the end of Senator Edward Kennedy’s political career on the national level. There are many people around who said that Richard Nixon’s career was over after his decisive defeat in the California governor’s race in 1962 and his indiscreet remarks in the press conference that followed it. We do know that this accident marks a new phase in the ever turbulent American political scene. Kennedy may well have been contemplating removing himself from 1972 contention anyway, and his apparent decision to do so is wise. The way many politicians were using him often suggested they were concerned more for his vote-getting power and how it might benefit them personally than for what might be best for Kennedy himself or for the nation or even for the Democratic party.

Certainly many pressures have been removed from Kennedy, though many others have been added. It is difficult enough to be the youngest son in any famous family. Certainly none of us can quite know what it is like to be the sole surviving bearer of the Kennedy aura. Now Kennedy is, in some respects, on the level of the rest of us. Before, he was able to move about on the basis of his name; now he is considerably closer to having to prove himself like most other men. Conceivably he might be more effective as a senator now that he shows himself to be mortal like the rest of them. It is somewhat reassuring to note, however, that senators are not called upon to make the prompt decisions in time of crisis that presidents are.

We regret the secrecy surrounding the accident and can only surmise that some of the details, if revealed, might prove more embarrassing than silence. Few of us would claim always to have acted as we should when the unexpected occurred. Nevertheless, the failure of the senator’s lawyer friends to act more responsibly is mysterious. Certainly we have had a vivid reminder of the importance of appearances. If just one of the men’s wives had been at the cook-out, much of the speculation about unbecoming behavior would have been avoided.

As Christians we recognize that all men are fallen, but that the effects of the fall are expressed in various ways. We have now seen dramatically the kind of failure of one Presidential aspirant. Surely we must take this into consideration when evaluating his fitness for public office.

Last Call For Minneapolis

On September 8, the long-anticipated U. S. Congress on Evangelism opens in Minneapolis. This six-day event represents a great hope for the development of a national evangelistic strategy geared to the crucial problems of the day in which we live.

There are millions of American evangelicals, both inside and outside the mainline denominations, who would like to see the Church get moving again. There are a number of evangelical leaders who have a deep concern for more effective proclamation of the Gospel. This concern has been expressed most meaningfully in the last couple of years in the “Key Bridge” meetings aimed at fostering evangelical cooperation. Progress is slow, but the staggering potential is ever more obvious, encouraging further planning.

Now the U. S. Congress is making possible strategy talks on a much broader level. Churches still have time to arrange for their pastors and lay leaders to attend the Minneapolis meeting. Accommodations may still be found if inquirers act quickly. The rewards should be felt by local churches for a long time to come.

What this country needs most as we approach 1970 is a great demonstration of Christian faith. And American Christians need a great burden for their country. The U. S. Congress should help initiate both.

Presidential Popularity

The polls report that the public’s estimation of President Nixon’s performance in office dropped sharply between mid-June and mid-July. Probably it will come back up at least a little as the result of the landing on the moon and his successful trip around the world. So what? The President is well advised to pay less attention to the polls than did his predecessor. When they are going poorly is no time for alarm. Significant policies must be initiated not simply for short-term popularity but for long-term performance. The problems that President Nixon inherited are not the kind that can be solved quickly. Certainly beginnings should be made, but false starts, with promises of achievement that cannot be fulfilled, can be more harmful in the long run, despite the flurry of popularity. Polls are useful, as President Nixon has recognized, for finding what the people think on specific issues. As measures of popularity, however, they are best disregarded.

The Case Of Bishop Defregger

It is difficult to see what good purpose is served by the present harassment of the Most Rev. Matthias Defregger for his part in the killing of a number of Italian villagers during World War II. One can readily sympathize with the Italian villagers of Filetto di Camarda over their unforgettabl exploitation under the Nazis. But to indict a man twenty-five years after the event in question hardly seems a just procedure. Can we really expect that the Roman Catholic auxiliary bishop of Munich would get a fair trial?

The fifty-four-year-old prelate admits he passed on an order that resulted in seventeen deaths. At the time he was an intelligence captain in the Nazi forces. His commander gave the order, and Defregger contends that he tried to get it revoked. Ultimately a lieutenant carried it out. Defregger says that under the circumstances he does not feel himself morally or legally guilty.

Some are beginning to suggest that ulterior motives are involved, that the German military is really the target. Ecclesiastical tension might also be involved: feeling against the Roman Catholic Church as a whole on the part of those who dug up the data, or perhaps merely against Defregger’s wing of the church.

Certainly there should be no disqualification of Defregger as a churchman because of what has been uncovered. Either a man is forgiven or he is not. If Defregger has any conscience at all he has been paying for his deed for a quarter of a century.

Power That Never Fails

New York City, the corporate headquarters of the nation, is used to brazen crime, deteriorating educational systems, and filthy streets. But now, the utility futility.

An electric generator breakdown early this month knocked out more than one-fifth of Consolidated Edison’s power capacity and threatened to plunge the city into its worst power crisis since the disruptive blackout of 1965. In desperation, Con Ed appealed to Gotham residents to reduce their electric consumption. There virtually were no reserves. The prospect of a massive power failure during August, usually the hottest month of the year, made residents hot under the collar—to say the least.

All of which brings us to a happy observation: For the Christian, there is one source of power never rationed or in short supply. That’s the power of the Holy Spirit, promised by Jesus to his disciples shortly before the crucifixion (John 14:16–18), given on the day of Pentecost (Luke 24:39; Acts 2:1–4), and not to be diminished or revoked (Matt. 28:19, 20).

The Christian’s problem, unlike the electric crisis in New York, is that he is plunged into spiritual darkness because he pulls the plug—not because God’s resources are inadequate. A conscious seeking of the Holy Spirit will help prevent “power failure” this summer. Let each Spirit-filled Christian light his corner of the world by claiming the words of Paul: “… My speech and my message were not in plausible words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and power …” (1 Cor. 2:4).

Harnessing Hero Worship

At a time when some prominent American athletes are receiving a welter of attention and notoriety over questionable practices and associations, it is refreshing to note the rapid growth and influence of the Fellowship of Christian Athletes. Challenging high-school, college and professional athletes and their coaches to serve Christ and his Church, FCA has grown into national prominence. This summer alone, some 10,000 athletes and coaches are involved in sixteen conferences throughout the nation (see News, page 37).

Ever since FCA founder Don McClanen envisioned the banding together of Christian athletes in 1954, the FCA has capitalized on two facets of American culture: Ours is a sports-oriented society, and youth will have its heroes. There are enough sorry heroes around, McClanen reasoned; why not put forward athletic greats who give a clear testimony to Christ?

We commend the FCA for its vision in adding, for the first time this summer, a coaches’ clinic on sports techniques and strategies. While learning more about blocking, training, and jump shots, many mentors also were exposed—for the first time—to the claims of Christian discipleship.

Athletics is one of the last bastions of discipline on many campuses today. And organizations like the FCA and Campus Crusade for Christ’s Athletes in Action minister to persons who, in turn, have a unique opportunity to point sports admirers to the Master Coach of life.

The First Amendment And Christian Principle

In a landmark opinion a United States District Court in Michigan upheld Robert Kenneth Dewey in his legal bid to avoid working on Sundays. Reynolds Metals Company discharged Dewey, a die repairman, in 1966 when he refused to engage in compulsory Sunday work or to take the alternative course of obtaining a replacement. Dewey, who is an active member in the Reformed Church of America, maintains that both actions conflict with his religious beliefs. This strict position on Sunday observance is strongly held by his church. Reynolds, which has announced it will appeal, said it would not rehire Dewey because making allowances for employees with such convictions would place “undue hardship” upon the company.

Reynolds is in an admittedly difficult position. Making provisions for an employee’s religious scruples will not be easy. And determining sincerity will be even harder. Still, the provisions and determinations should be made. The court has suggested a shared overtime system in which Sunday observers would work extra hours on other days of the week. With some effort and desire practical solutions can be found.

While it is discouraging that those who stand for Sunday observance are in a defensive, minority position, it is heartening to see a man who is unwilling to compromise his Christian principles. Perhaps other Christians now stifling consciences for the sake of jobs will be challenged by his example. In the case of Dewey v. Reynolds, the court merits commendation for its application of the First Amendment in favor of a citizen with sincere Christian convictions. Dewey deserves applause for his courageous stand, and prayers for the difficult days ahead.

Rising Above Conformity

“Don’t let the world around you squeeze you into its own mold …” (Rom. 12:2, Phillips). Thus Paul challenged the Roman Christians to refuse to conform to the attitudes and behavior of those who do not know Christ. In a world where materialism is god, the Christian is to give priority to spiritual matters. In a world of selfishness, the Christian is to give himself to others for the sake of Christ. In a world of frustration and anxiety, the Christian is to demonstrate a sense of purpose for living and radiate a peace born of confidence in the love and power of God. In a world of moral indifference, the Christian is to display a purity of life that is honoring to God. In issuing this challenge to be different Paul tells why a Christian should be different, how he can be, and what the results of such a life will be (cf. Rom. 12:1, 2).

Why? The call to non-conformity is based on the “mercies of God.” Paul has reminded his readers that “God commendeth his love toward us in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us” (Rom. 5:8). After pointing to man’s guilt and man’s inability to remove that guilt, he proclaims that God has acted to deal with the problem apart from human effort or merit. Awareness of God’s mercy evokes a response of love and gratitude that motivates the Christian to a life pleasing to God.

How? The Christian cannot of his own inner resources live a “different” life. Only as he is changed from within by the power of God can he be “transformed.” This transformation comes when a man presents himself as a living sacrifice to God. The sacrificial language implies a total giving of oneself to the authority and control of God. Then God himself brings about an inward transformation. The Greek word rendered “transform” is the word from which we get the English word “metamorphosis.” Man can no more live a “different” life than a caterpillar can fly. But when through a metamorphosis that caterpillar becomes a butterfly, he is able to fly. Likewise the man who has been transformed into a new creature through the power of Christ is free to be what he could never be in his own strength.

What will be the results? The man who puts himself at God’s disposal will experience in his life the will of God for him. That which God wills for us in his wisdom and love is “good and acceptable and perfect.” Life at its best is life lived in the will of God, whatever it might be and wherever it might lead. This life comes to the man who will offer himself unreservedly to God and allow God to transform him from within.