Awake!, July 22, 1971

Download: PDF — Awake!, July 22, 1971

Awake! — July 22, 1971

Source: jw.org

Contents

France’s State TV Looks at the Catholic Church

French Shocked by Clergy Attitudes on Morals

TV Viewers Learn of Church’s Political Involvement

Divisions Widen Within Church

Reactions of French Catholics

Largest Vocabulary

Chemistry and the World Around Us

Building Time in Birdland

A Look Through Lenses

“The Fetus Is ‘Alive’”

Taking Up a Different Kind of Ministry

Inaudible Animal Communication

Disaster Hits Quebec Province

The Fine Art of Lacquer-Ware Making

Cleanliness Makes Sense

‘Musical’ Buses

‘Happy Those Hungering and Thirsting for Righteousness’

Watching the World

What Is the Meaning of Life?

“Then Is Finished the Mystery of God”

France’s State TV Looks at the Catholic Church

By “Awake!” correspondent in France

“SHOCKED!” “Grieved!” “Confused!” “Cut to the quick!” “I almost cried with shame!”

Rarely had the French television network, run by a state monopoly, raised such a general outcry and aroused such passion among Roman Catholics in France.

The above exclamations, gleaned from the French press, were brought forth by a series of television programs entitled “The Church, Tomorrow?” They were broadcast by the nationwide First Network as a part of its regular program called “Twentieth Century.”

This series, in four parts, ran monthly from December 1970 to March 1971. It was followed by a large audience of televiewers throughout France, and also by many French-speaking people in Belgium and Switzerland.

The opening program was shown on Tuesday evening, December 8, 1970. It dealt with the present condition and the prospects of the Catholic Church in several European countries. However, hardly had that first program begun when it produced an unexpected surprise.

The surprise came at the very beginning when it was announced that certain parts of the program would be shown with a small white rectangle in the corner of the screen. This sign is used by the French TV for sexy and extremely violent films meant for adults only.

For adults only? What could this mean? Many Catholics were startled to learn that a television show about their church would contain things that were unfit for young eyes and ears!

However, as the programs developed it became clear why. Information presented about the moral condition of some clergy indeed proved to be a shocker. Surprising too were the presentations concerning divisions within the Church and the political activity of clergymen.

First of all, what did the programs have to say about the attitudes of some priests on questions pertaining to sexual morality?

French Shocked by Clergy Attitudes on Morals

THE first television broadcast in the series showed why the French state television had recommended parts of it ‘for adults only.’ It was shocking even to many adult Catholics. Especially so was the part concerning morality, and it came when the camera moved to the Netherlands.

A preliminary scene showed a Dutch Catholic church decorated with plants, flowers, an aquarium and an aviary. A polite inquiry as to the reason for this rather unusual décor for a Catholic church brought forth from the local priest the reply that Mass “is a festival, not like Solesmes [the headquarters of the French Benedictine monks, experts in Gregorian chant], but like Woodstock [the scene of a huge hippie ‘pop’ festival in the United States]!”

But this was only the beginning. Further surprises awaited the French-speaking televiewers in France, Belgium and Switzerland. A few scenes later, turning to the subject of auricular confession of sins, the television commentator summed up the situation in the Netherlands as follows: “People hardly ever confess anymore, mainly because a wave of sexual emancipation has swept through Holland, so that people no longer really know what constitutes a sexual sin.”

A parish priest admitted that the Catholic Church shares the responsibility for this moral breakdown. He noted that it allowed Catholic psychiatrists and psychologists to lower the barriers against immorality.

The Biggest Shock

The biggest shock was to come next. The televiewers saw and heard proof that the Catholic Church tacitly condones not only sexual immorality, but even sexual perversion!

Viewers learned that in Amsterdam there is a “parish” made up entirely of Catholic homosexuals. The priest who “ministers” to them was asked: “Can homosexuals be Christians like anybody else?” He replied: “Yes, I am sure of it, and so are all the members of our group who have been working among homosexuals for ten years here in Holland.”

This priest revealed that at least two homosexual “marriages” have been solemnized in a Dutch Catholic church. Questioned on the propriety of such ceremonies, he added: “When two homosexuals request it, I am of the opinion that a priest can bless them.”

French-speaking Catholics watching could hardly believe their eyes and ears. But worse was yet to come. They were next offered the spectacle of a Catholic priest shamelessly admitting on television that he was himself a practicing homosexual! The interview ran as follows:

Commentator: “Since homosexuality is no longer considered to be a sin, Father ————, a priest in the student parish, has chosen to be frank. Father ————, you are a priest. You also belong to the C.O.C., a homosexual organization.”

Priest: “Yes.”

Commentator: “Are you a homosexual?”

Priest: “Yes.”

Commentator: “How long has it been publicly known that you are a homosexual?”

Priest: “Not for long. Six months.”

Commentator: “Has this situation brought forth any reaction on the part of your bishop? It must surely be the first time a priest has publicly admitted being a homosexual and an active member of a homosexual organization.”

Priest: “No, the bishop has not yet reacted.”

Commentator: “Do you consider yourself to be, in other people’s eyes, as good a priest as any?”

Priest: “Yes, of course! Why not?”

Bishop and Cardinal Comment

After this astonishing conversation, the TV reporter asked a Dutch bishop what he would do if a priest in his diocese openly admitted being a homosexual.

Many Catholics watching the program no doubt expected this prelate to reply unhesitatingly: ‘I would suspend him immediately!’ Instead, they saw and heard this bishop ‘beat around the bush’ and say: “It is very difficult for me to answer. If such a situation arose, I would have to see the priest and decide if his position shocked the faithful.” Asked if he personally was shocked by such a situation, he stammered: “It’s . . . it’s . . . it’s very new to me.”

The bishop directly concerned in this case had done nothing about the priest who is an avowed homosexual. This second bishop, who was interviewed, was either not shocked by the situation or not courageous enough to say so. What an example for sincere Catholics!

One hope remained for the hierarchy of the Catholic Church to come out openly for righteous Bible principles and against immorality being committed and tolerated by members of the clergy. That hope was French Cardinal Daniélou, who had been sitting in the studio throughout this program. The TV commentator put the following question to the cardinal: “Father, what is your reaction after seeing this report on Holland?”

What a golden opportunity to defend Christian principles! And therefore what a severe disappointment for sincere Catholics when they heard this high-ranking prelate philosophize and then compromise with Christian principles! The cardinal said: “I believe homosexuality is a problem the Church should carefully study because of its obviously dramatic character; on the other hand, it is quite clear that a homosexual has a perfect right to belong to the Church and to have faith.”

Although later conceding that homosexuality is not ‘normal,’ this French cardinal at no time condemned it, apparently forgetting that Catholic Bibles call it “filthy,” a “perversion,” “monstrous behaviour” and “depravity.”—Rom. 1:26-32, Douay; Jerusalem Bible.

After this program a sincere young Catholic woman in Lyons wrote the following in an open letter to Cardinal Daniélou: “In view of this display of abject theories on sexuality and particularly on homosexuality such as we heard yesterday on television, would it not have been fitting, Father, for you to have jumped up from your seat and cried out loud and clear your disapproval and your disgust? . . . I almost cried with shame!” This was published in the press, in Le Progrès de Lyon.

TV Viewers Learn of Church’s Political Involvement

THE programs on France’s state television about the Catholic Church revealed something else. They revealed a degree of political activity by clergymen of which many viewers were not aware.

For one thing, the televiewers heard the oath by which the Spanish bishops swear allegiance to the state before General Franco. Also featured was a series of interviews showing priests, monks and nuns more or less openly rebellious against the political regime in Spain. This has produced a grave embarrassment to the higher clergy who swear loyalty to the state.

One sequence, filmed near Barcelona, showed a meeting of rebel priests in a convent room placed at their disposal by the nuns. When the French TV interviewer asked one of the priests if political action was compatible with his priestly functions, he replied: “Yes, because the official church deals in politics all the time.” A long-haired ‘hippie’ type Jesuit priest stated that “in Spain, a priest reads the Gospel and Marx.” Asked whether the two were not contradictory, he answered, “No.”

Another interview took place inside a church in which the altar is curtained off when the church is used as a hall for clandestine political meetings. Here a priest stated bluntly that “it is necessary to open people’s eyes to the adulterous marriage between the church and state.” A worker-priest added: “The Church is united with international imperialism. This imperialism must be destroyed, whether it be religious or economic.”

But are these priests attaching more importance to political activity than to teaching people the Word of God? Television watchers saw the interviewer put this question to a Spanish Benedictine monk. Many were surprised to hear the monk answer: “Yes, this is true.”

Then French Cardinal Daniélou was asked to comment on this film report about the Catholic Church in Spain. Cardinal Daniélou stated: “I was struck by the genuineness of these priests. . . . I was also struck by the way they continually affirmed that their revolutionary struggle in no way affected their belief in God.” But many viewers were struck by something else. They thought it strange to hear a cardinal accept the idea of priests being political revolutionaries!

Turmoil Among French Clergy

Another one of the television programs reviewed the political activity of the French clergy. It showed a group of rebel priests, of whom there are said to be about a thousand in France.

A spokesman for these priests declared that they had committed themselves “to political action that mobilizes us to fight as citizens against all the oppressive forces in this country and elsewhere that engender and perpetuate flagrant inequalities and injustices. The Third World begins in the West, so we need to start here, together with all those who are already engaged in this liberation work.”

Television viewers must have wondered if they were listening to a priestly discourse or to a declaration on Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto! Their doubts seemed justified by the next sequence.

The next sequence showed leftist militant Catholics engaged in “class warfare” along with their local priest. The priest felt that mankind is divided, not into believers and atheists, but into those who are fighting to liberate mankind (including both believers and atheists), and those who refuse to take part in this combat. He confided that “personally I feel nearer to some of my Marxist and atheist friends than to those believers who stay outside of this fight.”

Political Differences in United States

One part of the television report had to do with Catholicism in the United States. It showed that there too political differences among the clergy were growing more pronounced.

Commenting on this part of the TV report, the French newspaper Le Monde spoke of the “super-Americanism of the [Catholic] Church, which has tied itself in with the Establishment in order to be accepted by a mainly Protestant community.”

However, a priest who was interviewed during this program admitted that many American Catholics “no longer feel the need to show themselves to be superpatriots.” And this proved to be especially true in another sequence which showed the conflicting Catholic attitudes on the Vietnam war.

Some American Catholics considered the war to be a crusade to save the Vietnam Catholics. But other American Catholics, including some priests, were willing to go to prison for violently demonstrating against the war.

Also revealing to many was the series of interviews with prominent Catholics who told of the important part the Catholic Church played in modern Vietnam. It was disclosed that one of the original reasons why the French colonized Indochina in the nineteenth century was to protect Catholic missionaries who were being persecuted there.

Television viewers were told that during the Indochina war between the French and the Vietminh (1947-1954), and in the present Vietnam war, the defense of Catholic interests was one of the major factors. The TV reporter interviewed a Catholic priest in a Vietnamese village who admitted proudly that he personally gave the villagers—men, women and children—military training.

With regard to the Catholic refugees who left North Vietnam after 1954, Le Monde spoke of them as being organized by “shock-troop-type priests, officer-priests who talk as much about machine guns as they do about the Gospel.”

The Church in Latin America

In the last program there was a report on the Catholic Church in Latin America. It showed that Catholicism was forced upon the Latin-American peoples by the conquistadors and the priests who accompanied them from Europe. This program also revealed that the Roman Catholic Church supported authoritarian governments that oppressed the people.

Part of this oppression could be noted in the fact that although present for nearly five centuries and long holding the monopoly in public education, the Church kept its people in ignorance. Even today in many Latin-American countries illiteracy is widespread.

Commenting on this particular program, the pro-Catholic Paris daily Le Figaro wrote: “It must be said to the credit of the producers of this program that they never allowed us to forget the main point, namely the deep poverty of the ‘marginal’ men—Bolivians, Colombians, Peruvians, Brazilians—who today are like displaced persons because they have never been considered worthy to be treated like human beings. That the [Catholic] Church and the government acted in complicity was long taken for granted. Now there is something new: today some priests and laymen are trying to break up the marriage between church and state.”

Confirming this, the TV camera showed a priest working among Bolivian Indians. He spoke of the “powerful [Catholic] Church that has flirted with the governments and enriched itself.” A priest in Colombia who works among the poor stated: “The church’s mission is to work with the poor. But in Colombia everything is different because here the church and the state are married, they have set up house together.” Both of these priests are in trouble with their bishops. But they are being joined by other priests who are becoming revolutionaries.

In its comment on this TV program, Le Monde wrote: “The fourth program gave a complex picture of Catholicism in Latin America, particularly in Colombia, Bolivia, Guatemala and Brazil. A painful litany of hunger, poverty, mortality, illiteracy, and a striking disparity in the attitudes of the members of the clergy.”

One can imagine that the growing differences in moral and political attitudes among Catholic clergymen would be reflected in other areas too. It was, and the TV programs showed some of this.

Divisions Widen Within Church

THE conflicting attitudes among clergymen of the Catholic Church on morals and politics spill over into other areas. French television viewers were also given insight into this condition.

One item noted was an interfaith Communion-Mass being held in a Protestant church in Amsterdam. A Catholic priest was giving the sermon. Such ‘ecumenical services’ are being held every Sunday in Holland. Yet, they are against the instructions of the local hierarchy and Rome.

Viewers were also introduced to the “Student Parish” of Amsterdam. This is ministered to by four Catholic priests, one of whom is married. Although married, he celebrates Mass every Sunday. The TV interviewer expressed surprise that no disciplinary measure had been taken against this priest by the local hierarchy or by Rome.

At this, one of the four priests replied: “Rome is afraid.” Questioned on this point, a bishop answered evasively: “It does not seem advisable to take disciplinary measures.” Yet, in the United States, a priest was recently excommunicated when it was discovered that he had been married for years and had a child!

A nun was asked if she thought priests should be left free either to marry or to practice celibacy. The nun gave this frank answer: “I wish they could do so. Sometimes the pope’s indignation makes me indignant. In Italy, in Spain and in South America there are thousands upon thousands of illegitimate children fathered by priests. The pope says nothing about this, and these priests are allowed to celebrate Mass and to hear confessions.”

One priest spoke of racial divisions among Catholics in the United States. He said the situation was well illustrated by the musical drama “West Side Story.” He remarked that the two gangs, one made up of European immigrant Americans and the other of Puerto Rican Americans, were both composed of Catholics wearing crosses around their necks. Yet this did not prevent them from hating and fighting each other. And a black Catholic priest in Baltimore noted the race distinction within the Catholic Church in America.

The divided aspect of Catholicism in France came to light during an interview with a conservative French Catholic. He belonged to an Old Guard Catholic organization that has resorted to violence against other Catholics whom it considers too ‘progressive.’ This conservative movement has even broken up Catholic church services because Mass was being said in French instead of Latin!

One of the programs ended with the testimony of three French bishops. One bishop admitted that the Catholic Church is divided. But by this time the viewers could see that for themselves. Also, this same bishop confessed that he sometimes has “problems” with his faith and that he envies “simple folk who live their faith” in Jesus Christ.

For Catholics, all of these disclosures did not paint a very reassuring picture of the future of Roman Catholicism. And many viewers were quick to express their bitter disappointment.

Reactions of French Catholics

THE reactions of French Catholics showed the anguish many of them experienced after viewing these television programs. Both the French press and individual citizens expressed dismay over some of the disclosures.

After the general outcry caused by the first program, the one showing the homosexual priest, a producer of the program, Pierre Dumayet, stated: “Our purpose was not to tell people there are homosexual priests, but to show to what limits the Church is willing to go in tolerating priests who publicly say they are homosexuals.” From the reaction of many Catholics, it was obvious that they thought the Church had exceeded the permissible limits.

Le Monde commented that this program showed “the extent to which the [Catholic] Church is not only ‘in the world’ but influenced by the world.” Many viewers regarded that worldly influence as having had a degrading effect on the Church. Thus, the most widely read French newspaper, France-Soir, commented: “It seems as though the world that has ‘lost’ its spirituality can no longer count on the traditional church to put an end to its confusion.”

A French Catholic in the Paris area said to one of Jehovah’s witnesses: “I consider that the leaders on both sides are too extremist. The reformers are demolishing the Catholic Church, not seeming to realize that they will be absorbed by the Marxists. As to the conservatives, they are living 150 years in the past, and this is just as dangerous. This program made a painful impression on me.”

Before the programs had been shown, a Catholic lady in a town on the French Riviera told one of Jehovah’s witnesses not to miss the TV report on the Catholic Church. She hoped it would convince the Witness she was wrong. The following week, after the first program, the lady told the Witness: “I was profoundly shocked and disappointed. I was horrified by the Church’s tendency to tolerate homosexuality. Above all, I was deeply disappointed by French Cardinal Daniélou, who tried to evade all the questions.” The lady ordered a Bible and is now studying with Jehovah’s witnesses.

The week before the first program was televised, a couple studying with two of Jehovah’s witnesses had discussed with them the second chapter of the Bible-study aid The Truth That Leads to Eternal Life. That chapter is entitled “Why It Is Wise to Examine Your Religion.” After the Witnesses had left, the husband, an army officer, referring to paragraph 3 of this chapter, which mentions some clergymen approving of homosexuality, said to his wife about Jehovah’s witnesses: “They really go a bit too far!”

But the day after the first TV program, the wife met one of the Witnesses in the street and said: “Madame, my husband and I were disgusted with what we saw on television. My husband told me: ‘You know, those people are right. They are telling the truth and do not exaggerate. We must go on studying with them.’”

There is no question about it. Sincere French Catholics were genuinely shocked by what they saw on their state television network. But what they need to appreciate is that these things are not really new, although the revelations about them may be. It should make them, and sincere persons everywhere, examine the foundations of their religion. And that is so no matter what religion a person belongs to, for while these television disclosures concerned the Catholic Church, some of the same things shown are going on in the rest of Christendom’s churches.

Have you examined your religion lately? Why not do so in the light of God’s Word of truth, the Holy Bible? Find out from the Creator himself what he accepts and rejects in the way of worship. See what his purposes are for this earth and man upon it. Learn what the very near future holds, not only for the churches, but also for you. Jehovah’s witnesses will be happy to assist you in this examination by discussing the Bible with you free of charge, in the privacy of your own home.

Largest Vocabulary

Over the centuries the English language has incorporated many words of other languages. Just a few of thousands of such examples are: piano from Italian, fiesta from Spanish, vodka from Russian, sauerkraut from German, tomahawk from American Indian, igloo from Eskimo, blue from French. Thus, today English has the largest and most varied vocabulary of all languages, about 600,000 words. Most persons use only a small fraction in everyday speech.

Chemistry and the World Around Us

AS A child, when you watched your mother mix and bake a cake, did you realize that she was a “chemist”? You ate the cake for its good taste. But did you know that your body was a highly complex chemical laboratory, digesting the cake and building it into body tissues for you?

Now that you are grown, you may not have made chemistry your career, but you know that nothing could live if it were not for chemical processes. Probably you appreciate also that many things we use today would be missing if some men had not taken up chemistry as a vocation.

Chemists, of course, do not make the laws by which chemicals react. They can only study, experiment and use tools such as microscopes to discover and understand these laws, and to know how to apply them to achieve certain results.

Some of the products of chemists’ research that have had deep influences on our world are explosives, fuels, plastics, paper, steel, glass, detergents, medicines and other things too numerous to mention. These things have influenced our work, our eating, our building, the clothing we wear, our modes of travel—just about everything in our way of life.

An Ancient Science

We do not know to what extent the ancient Egyptians, Babylonians, Assyrians and Hebrews understood chemistry. The Bible’s historical record does reveal, however, that even before these early civilizations, yes, before the global flood some 4,300 years ago, men had knowledge of metallurgy, which involves chemistry. (Gen. 4:22) And later on, Job, who lived before Israel became a nation, said: “Iron itself is taken from the very dust and from stone copper is being poured out.” (Job 28:2) Israel’s King Solomon had copper casting done. (1 Ki. 7:46, 47) Also, other industries requiring some knowledge of chemistry existed, such as wine making and the manufacture of dyes and inks. Drugs were used, and embalming was practiced.

The Atomic Theory

In modern history, however, extremely rapid progress has been made in chemistry because of the development of the atomic theory concerning the structure of matter (actually postulated by the ancient Greeks). In fact, chemists have had a large share in the development of the atomic theory.

This theory teaches that atoms are made up basically of three particles: protons, neutrons and electrons. Combinations of these particles in varying numbers make up the elements. An element is a substance that cannot be separated into simpler substances by ordinary chemical means. So, for ordinary chemistry, elements are the building blocks. The next unit in order is the molecule, which may consist of one or more atoms. Then come compounds, made up of the union of two or more elements.

There are ninety-two elements that are commonly found in the natural state. Hydrogen, a gas, is the lightest of these. Platinum is one of the heaviest. Some others have been made artificially, so that the total number of known elements today is more than one hundred. The most abundant element in earth’s crust and in its waters is oxygen, essential to both animal and plant life. Oxygen also constitutes about one fifth of the air by volume.

Most elements have an affinity or attraction for others. Very few are considered inert, or practically inactive. There is virtually an endless number of arrangements and combinations, making up every kind of material that exists. The most complex molecules are found in living things. Massive molecules of various proteins, consisting of many hundreds of atoms in a very complicated arrangement, have recently been given much attention by scientists. Massive as these are, for molecules, they can be “seen” only by means of an electron microscope.

Laws of Chemistry Work for Man’s Welfare

Even though chemical combinations beyond number have been discovered, it is found that there is great stability in the arrangement. Tables of atomic numbers and atomic weights compiled from observation of the elements are therefore very reliable and useful to the chemist. Some of the laws controlling chemical reactions are of the highest complexity, yet, when understood, they are seen to govern all matter with a most marvelous orderliness.

The elements sometimes bond together to produce compounds that have properties much different from the elements alone. An example of such a compound is table salt, composed of chlorine and sodium, both poisonous substances. Water, a liquid made up of gases, two atoms of hydrogen and one of oxygen, displays characteristics that in several ways affect our life and comfort. Water has the unusual characteristic of having its molecules more tightly packed in its liquid state than when frozen. Ice, therefore, floats. Otherwise, as it settled to the bottom of lakes they would become permanently frozen.

We can also be happy that water has a higher heat capacity than any other common liquid. This has much to do with the moderation of climate near large bodies of water. Also, no other liquid can equal water as a solvent.

Oxygen is a very active element, combining readily with many other elements. This makes it an ideal purifier of air and water, quickly oxidizing and rendering harmless certain poisonous substances.

Does Chemistry Have the Answer for Man’s Problems?

Because of the important part chemistry plays in man’s world, it is a most enjoyable study as well as a source of things convenient and useful to mankind. Chemists have learned much, but actually they have only “scratched the surface” of this enormous field of endeavor. Chemists still do not know exactly how a blade of grass grows, nor fully understand photosynthesis, by which plants manufacture food for all animal life. No chemist has yet reached the heights of accomplishment of one cell of the human body, which, it is said, can carry on from one to two thousand different chemical reactions simultaneously.

The things that chemistry has developed have had good potential, but lack of knowledge of their ultimate effect, and abuse in using them, have caused many problems. Plastics, detergents, drugs and advances in chemical means of destruction have helped to bring mankind to a time of crisis. Certainly science as represented in chemistry, just as in its many other branches, has demonstrated man’s inability to create a world of peace, health, life and security.

Building Time in Birdland

HOW would you feel if you had to build a new home every year soon after arriving from a trip that took you hundreds of miles? What would your attitude be if this new home could be of use to you for only six or seven months? That is exactly what birds of all kinds do every spring in the northern regions of our earth!

Enthusiastically they dart about collecting various materials to use in building cozy nests to house their future little ones. Moved by their God-given instinct and using only their bills as a fashioning tool, these birds embark on an amazing building program.

Those That Do Not Build Nests

Not all birds, of course, go into the nest-building business in the springtime. Some return to old nests, make any necessary repairs and then take up residence in them once again. Other birds do not bother to build a nest. Among these are certain sandpipers and killdeer. The females of these species are content simply to lay their eggs on the ground, where moss and leaves form a scanty nest. However, divine wisdom has compensated for the danger that this might present. The young of these birds are born covered with down and are able to run about. So when they break out of their shells, they dry their down in the warm sunlight and then scamper off to a place of safety.

The murre is another bird that does not trouble itself with nest-building activities. Mother murre has the unusual habit of laying her eggs on sloping ledges. You might think that this would be the last place on earth where a bird would lay her eggs, for there is the ever-present danger of their rolling off to a shattering end below. But the Creator of the murre has cared for this possibility. The murre’s eggs are shaped like a top and have a tough shell that does not break easily. Now, how does all this serve as a protection?

A bird fancier’s experiment while observing the murre answers this question. He let one of their eggs roll down the slope. He reported that the egg did not roll straight but swung around like a top and came to a standstill with its hard shell intact. Not one egg of this tapered shape rolled over the ledge. Only an intelligent Creator could have devised the shape of these eggs as a means of keeping them safe on those sloping ledges where they are laid!

Nighthawks and black skimmers also spare themselves the work of nest construction. The nighthawk merely lays her eggs, which have a protective color, on bare ground, on gravel, the top of a rock, or even the flat graveled roof of some city building. As for the black skimmer, she simply squats down in loose sand and turns around and around, making a slight hollow in which to lay her eggs. Quite a labor-saving method!

Home for Nest-building Birds

The sites where nest-building birds choose to set up house are as varied as the birds themselves. Even among the same species, nesting sites vary considerably.

The wren family provide a remarkable example of this. The male bird starts the building off by erecting a crude nest. Then he goes to another site and constructs another one. And how he gets carried away with this! He will build a crude nest in every suitable spot in his domain. Later, when his mate arrives, he takes her around on an inspection tour of these prospective nest homes so that she may select one that suits her fancy. Then she proceeds to throw out his sticks and build a nest according to her taste.

And just what are some of the places where Mr. and Mrs. Wren have set up house? Investigations have revealed that they use woodpecker holes, birdhouses, fish baskets, clothespin bags, old shoes, tin cans, hats, an old automobile radiator, yes, they have even settled into a leg of a pair of pants, a bathrobe pocket as well as a pair of swimming trunks! Evidently, for the wrens, housing is no problem!

It is interesting to note that the crude nests that Mrs. Wren rejects are not torn down. One authority suggests that these nests serve to discourage other prospective homeseekers from entering the wrens’ domain. Why? Because the wrens raise a large family, the food requirements for which are tremendous. So the immediate vicinity around the wrens’ nursery with its food supply must be kept free of any competition from other families with hungry mouths.

Now, consider another relative in this family, cousin cactus wren, a desert dweller. This fellow’s instinct moves him to locate his nest in a place that does not encourage traffic, yes, the thorniest section of the uninviting cholla cactus. There his globular nest is well guarded by thorns that are like so many swords poised to pierce and cling to any that carelessly brush against them. And another cousin, the rock wren, sets his nest in rocky crevices, often using small stones to form a pavement leading to his entrance. The marsh wren, still another relative, constructs his well-camouflaged home deep in the vegetation of the marshlands.

That ever-popular spring favorite, the robin, assembles his nest in a variety of places. He uses branches or crotches in trees; bushes, porch vines, rose arches, fence posts, stone walls, nooks on buildings, bridges, boats and wagons as well as nesting shelves set up by some kind human. The height of these locations has been observed to vary from a few feet to seventy feet from the ground.

Perhaps the strangest nesting site of all is that of the dipper, a tiny water bird that is a year-round resident of the far western mountains in North America. This creature often assembles his nest right in the spray of a cataract, or sometimes even behind the cataract where the only possible entrance is right through the falling water! Or he builds it in among tree roots or in a rock crevice near the cascading water. Just the right spot for a bird that delights in walking underwater!

Building Materials and Nest Shapes

Birds’ nests are fascinating things. Something about them seems to invite, yes, beckon you to come and take a closer look. Persons who have found an abandoned one cannot help but marvel at its architecture. Though woven with primitive materials and held together by mud, a nest is by no means a flimsy affair, for it will usually withstand rain and high winds, remaining firmly anchored to the spot where it is built. There it will keep its precious cargo of eggs safe in all kinds of weather. And to think that a little creature by instinct put it all together using just his bill as a building tool!

What are some of the materials that these winged creatures use to construct their amazing nurseries? Some of the items are twigs, grass, leaves, bark, feathers, human and horse hair and mud used as a binder, sometimes strengthened by bird saliva. The inside of the nest where the eggs lie is generally lined with soft materials such as moss, cobwebs, down from cottony plants, yarn and even lint from a clothes dryer!

The dipper’s nest, which is made up of grass, leaves and twigs, features green moss. This bird is most particular about the condition of the moss. It must be kept green to camouflage his nest, which is more or less spherical in shape, measuring six or seven inches in diameter. It is said that these birds will at times spatter waterdrops from their wet wings to keep the moss looking fresh and green if there is not enough moisture where their nest is located.

Ovenbirds build a very interesting nest. Its characteristics are responsible for the bird’s name. A roof of bark strips, leaves, grasses and other matter is built over it as an arch. The entrance is on the side rather than the top. This makes the entire structure look somewhat like an old-fashioned rounded oven.

A remarkable nest is that of the Baltimore oriole. Using only her bill for a needle, Mrs. Oriole will weave a pear-shaped pouch out of plant fibers, hair, moss, bits of soft string, yarn and so forth at the tip of a high-swinging branch. So durable is this nest that remnants of it often cling to the branch tips three or four years after it is abandoned. Truly, bird craftsmanship of high quality!

Chimney swifts construct saucer-shaped nests inside hollow trees or chimneys that resemble semicircular wall shelves. They form them by assembling tiny twigs and joining them together with their glue-like saliva that hardens when it is exposed to the air.

Speaking of adhesives, the robins use natural mud as a cement for their nests. If none is available, they have been known to make it by filling their bills with dust and then dipping them into a birdbath. Or they may wet their feathers and shake off the drops in a dusty place.

Indeed, building time in birdland is a delightsome time, refreshing the soul of those who would take time to look in on the activities. By being alert to note how and “where the birds themselves make nests” one may be moved to praise and thank the loving Creator, Jehovah God, for these winged gifts to mankind.—Ps. 104:1, 16, 17.

A Look Through Lenses

HOW often do we see someone having difficulty reading, perhaps holding a paper at arm’s length? Others may read only when the page is very close to their eyes. Why these differences in seeing? It has a lot to do with the working of the lens in the eye.

Lenses That Bend Light

Light that is reflected from objects all around us passes through the eye lens and forms images on the retina at the back of the eyeball. This activates the nerves leading to the brain, which develops the moving pictures so formed. But these images happen to be upside down or inverted! What a blessing for us that the Designer of the eye also instructed the brain on how to turn these images the right way up!

The inversion of images as they enter the eye occurs because our eye lens is convex, similar in size to an aspirin tablet. And this type of lens has the unusual feature of “twisting” light rays that pass through it to form an inverted image of the object originating the rays.

You can illustrate this with a magnifying glass. Rather like two saucers placed rim to rim, the magnifying glass is thicker in the middle than at the edges. At certain distances this lens can be used to give an enlarged view of something, because of the way it bends light rays passing through it. You may even be reading this page with the aid of such a lens. Magnification, however, will occur only when the object being viewed is held close to the lens, that is, closer than twice the focal length of the lens. Now increase the distance between your eye and the magnifying glass. Hold it out at arm’s length and peer through it at a picture on the wall. You will notice that everything appears upside down. Why? Because of the bending inward of the light rays as they pass through the glass. The image is inverted.

Those light rays that pass through the center of a convex lens do not bend or refract to any noticeable degree. But those striking the lens at a distance from the center are refracted to pass through a definite point called the focal point. The distance between this point and the center of the lens is called the focal length.

Have you ever used a magnifying glass to start a fire? The ancient Greeks and Romans are reported to have used glass containers full of water as “burning glasses.” The sun’s rays would pass through the water, converging to a focus on some combustible material and cause it to burn. To demonstrate this, you can focus the sun’s rays on a sheet of paper by adjusting the distance of the lens from the paper to form a small white spot. This will soon become so hot that the paper will burn, because that white spot is really an image of the sun, appearing at the focal point of the lens. It is obviously a wise rule never to peer at the sun through lenses, especially with telescopes and binoculars, for this could do irreparable damage to the eye.

The other type of lens, called concave, is shaped like two saucers placed base to base, being thicker at the edges than in the middle. This lens diverges or spreads light rays that pass through it. Concave lenses are most often used in combination with convex lenses, and their ability to spread light rays has been adapted as an aid to eyesight.

Glass Lenses Have Their Problems

As you may have noticed, lenses are not pieces of glass like windowpanes, but are usually made of special glass in shapes of carefully measured angles and arcs according to complex lens makers’ formulas. Generally, when used in optical instruments, they are much thinner than the hand reading-lenses.

Simple lenses present several problems, the commonest of which are spherical and chromatic aberrations. If you look closely at an image on a screen formed by a simple lens you will notice what is called spherical aberration. This is a distortion of the image, occurring because light rays from the object pass through the lens at slightly different angles and as a result do not focus sharply at the same spot. We do not have this problem with our eye, nor do we have the falling away of sharpness at the extremity of the lens, which also occurs in man-made lenses.

Neither do we suffer from chromatic aberration. “White light” when refracted sufficiently breaks up into the seven colors of the spectrum (red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo and violet), each of which is refracted at a slightly different angle, focusing one in front of another, violet first with red last. This gives that rainbow fringe to the image, called chromatic aberration.

Though it is impossible to correct all known aberrations in man-made lenses, they can be effectively masked by the combination of several precision lenses. These may be cemented together with Canada balsam, a resin from the North American balsam fir tree. Some lenses are coated to prevent “ghosting” or reflections from forming.

Complex systems are also employed in telescopes, binoculars and microscopes. These apply the principle of a convex objective lens for casting an image in the microscope or telescope tube, which is not shown on any screen but is made to fall within the focal length of an eyepiece. The image formed there is then viewed through the eyepiece, giving a magnified view of the object.

The inverted narrate of the image does not really matter in the microscope. (The slide being viewed can be turned upside down first.) But no ship’s captain would be happy with his binoculars or telescope if his next port of call appeared inverted. For this reason a correcting set of lenses or prisms is introduced between the objective lens and the eyepiece to rectify that problem.

Lens making by intelligent men involves a thorough knowledge of optics, refraction-of-light mathematical formulas and then patient skill, learned and accumulated over many years of training by another skilled in these arts. Since this is so, then, to use Isaac Newton’s words when discussing the origin of life, ‘by what sort of reasoning do some persons reach the incongruous conclusion’ that the complex wonders in the natural world have come into existence without an intelligent Creator?

The Superlative Eye Lens

When you look at the “black hole” in your eye, you are really looking through the lens into the dark interior of the eyeball. The tiny lens is held in place behind the colored iris by ciliary muscles and follows the same principles of refraction that man has applied in artificial lenses. The brain, by converting nerve impulses transmitted to it from the retina into full color, three-dimensional moving pictures, gives us an exciting upright view of something larger than the image on the retina but always in optical proportion to our bodies. This is true whether it is a pea or a plate, a vase of lilac blooms or magnificent, snow-clad mountains.

For us to be able to look at a map on our knee one moment and, the next, to view scenery and mountains miles away indicates that the eye lens has been perfectly designed. Instantly it can focus sharply, automatically correcting aberrations that would be found in man-made lenses. How confusing it would be to have a distorted image constantly changing with every movement of the head, with multicolored fringes around each image!

The refractive and focusing agencies of the eye, the lens itself and the cornea (that curved transparent covering of the eye), truly proclaim the intelligent handiwork of the Creator. Even Charles Darwin admitted the absurdity of his natural selection theory when he considered the eye: “To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.”—The Origin of Species, p. 190.

The Spectacle Lens

The eye lens is extremely flexible and can be bent, pulled out or elongated and squashed flatter. It is this ability in association with the refractive power of the cornea that permits quick, accurate focusing without distortion. However, the aging process can harden the lens or the attached ciliary muscles, making adjusting (called accommodation) and clear focusing more difficult. Some have a focusing weakness because of the unusual shape of the eyeball, it perhaps being longer or shorter than the average twenty-four millimeters (about one inch) in length.

Your eye lens is at rest when you view distant objects, but is squeezed thicker by the ciliary muscles to focus on things nearby. Because of this muscular activity we get “eyestrain” when doing work close to the eyes or reading or writing.

If the eyeball is too long, the image is focused short of the retina and appears blurred, causing nearsightedness. This can be corrected by using spectacles of the concave variety, which diverge the light entering the eye and help the eye’s convex lens to focus (form a focal point) on the retina properly.

On the other hand, farsightedness occurs because the eyeball is too small and the image is formed behind the retina. A convex spectacle lens introduced in front of the eye will converge the light rays entering and guide them onto the retina properly.

The formation of an image behind the retina also occurs when the eye’s lens loses its power of accommodation and reaches a point where it cannot assume the deeply curved shape necessary for focusing on nearby objects. Usually affecting those passing middle age, this condition is known as presbyopia, “old sight,” requiring convex segments in the spectacle to correct the weakness.

Great care should be taken with our eyes. Do not poke around in the eye if you get grit in it, or rub it with dirty fingers or cloths. Someone else may be able to lift the foreign body out carefully with a clean handkerchief—perhaps even a physician when necessary. And if you read at night, an evenly, well-lit room will be less of a strain on your eyes than reading under a patch of light.

The Lenses of Other Creatures

If you could look through the lenses of some insects, you would find them useful for quick darting flight or for judging speed. Their eyes are made of numerous lenses that produce individual images. The time lapse between the movement of an image from one segment of the eye to another is used as an indication of its speed.

Vertebrates have paired lenses for vision. Some, such as the horse, have panoramic vision, being able to see almost all around. Others, including man, owls and monkeys have eyes more forward in the head, giving vision in which each eye overlaps the other. Birds’ eyes have most remarkable lenses producing telescopic and microscopic effects. This enables them to have the most acute vision of all creatures. Eagles, vultures and others of their family are able to see tiny things at prodigious distances.

Many natural applications of the principles of refraction and optics have caused man to marvel at their use and to adapt them for his own convenience, intelligently doing so after learning from the handiwork of the Creator.

[Diagram on page 18]

(For fully formatted text, see publication)

The nearsighted eye: the eyeball is too long and the image is focused in front of the retina

Nearsightedness is corrected by use of concave lenses, which help the eye lens to focus properly on the retina

“The Fetus Is ‘Alive’”

● Dr. Michael J. Halberstam, a physician in Washington, D.C., wrote an article on abortion in the medical journal Ob.Gyn.News of May 15, 1970. Among the things he discussed, the following is especially worthy of consideration: “Medicine basically is the business of life. The physician is enjoined to protect and preserve life. I am talking now of biological life . . . the life that has to do with the welfare, say, of the mother, a family or of society as a whole.

“The physician is taught to make no distinction as to the stage or quality of the life he is to protect.” Then Dr. Halberstam mentioned that “the fetus [unborn child] receives its entire genetic potential of RNA and DNA at conception. . . .

“The fetus is also unique. Its exact combination of proteins has never existed before, will never exist again.

“There is no doubt that the fetus is ‘alive,’ though in a special way. As I do not believe in the immortal soul, I do not equate the life of the fetus with the life of the mother, but as a physician I know that it lives and as a human being I am in awe of it.” And Jehovah God’s law to Israel showed that he regarded the fetus or the developing child as alive and so it was respected as a life.—Ex. 21:22, 23.

Taking Up a Different Kind of Ministry

AROUND the earth thousands of interested persons are requesting that Jehovah’s witnesses study the Bible with them. It brings joy to the hearts of the Witnesses to hear such requests. Note this experience involving a clergyman, as related by a Witness in Kansas:

“A young fellow began attending the meetings at our Kingdom Hall. When his mother learned about this, she became angry and wanted her son to stop.

“So she asked a Methodist minister to come to her home to talk to him. The youth asked me to join their discussion. This minister, however, came to see me first. After explaining the situation, he said that he was willing to have the meeting but that he did not want to argue or debate. He remarked that he had great respect for Jehovah’s witnesses due to the fine conduct of two of them who worked at his place of employment.

“When the appointed evening came, we all met at the boy’s home. During our discussion the question of war and Christian neutrality came up. His mother claimed that if one lived in a country he should fight for it. Yet, the minister surprised her by saying that he had not been called for military service but that he did not know what he would do if he were called.

“We had other meetings after this, and at the last one I demonstrated our method of Bible study. Many members of the youth’s family sat in. As we neared the end of our discussion, it became quite evident that the majority of them had closed their minds to God’s truth. Then the clergyman leaned over and whispered to me, ‘I do not think anybody else here will go on studying the Bible with you, but I was wondering if you would study with just one person.’

“Would I? Of course! We met together on Monday evenings. Often the Bible study lasted three hours. It became evident that the Methodist minister deeply loved and believed God’s Word. Also he felt that a preacher should earn part, if not all, of his living, which is why he took on secular work. When he learned the importance of God’s name, Jehovah, he quickly began using it. It did not take him long to see that many of his church’s teachings did not agree with the Holy Bible.

“During all this time of studying the Bible with me, the minister continued his religious activities. He used what he was learning in his sermons. When we came to the matter of the need to separate oneself from false religion, we discussed the error of continuing in an organization that one knew was teaching falsehoods. (2 Cor. 6:14-18) He said that he hated to let the little church down and that he was helping some by his sermons. Also he talked vaguely about meeting with the church board to resign but the weather had been bad. Yes, this sincere Methodist minister was fighting a battle with his conscience.

“Finally, one Monday evening, he announced that he had resigned from his church. I was overjoyed! And this man who once had attended a religious college now was happy to join our Theocratic Ministry School. About a month later, he accompanied me in the door-to-door ministry.

“How thrilled I am to have seen this minister who was formerly a pillar of his church take up true religion. His deep love for God’s Word, and the good conduct of the Witnesses, helped him take this lifesaving step. Though his wife opposed him at first, she, too, began studying. They were both baptized in symbol of their dedication to God. What happened to the young man? He was also baptized and is finding joy in serving Jehovah God.”

Inaudible Animal Communication

◆ Did you know that certain animals communicate with one another with sounds that man cannot hear? The book The Mating Instinct by L. J. and M. J. Milne explains why this is so: “Man’s own hearing extends over a range of pitches from 16 to about 15,000 cycles per second—some ten octaves—a spread wherein his own and his mate’s voice may span four octaves if he is a basso profundo and she is high soprano. But sound continues well beyond 15,000 cycles. . . . Man is growing to realize that the usual stillness of the forest at night conceals—through his own limitations in hearing—a vast array of squeaky whispers that permit communication between smaller animals.”

Disaster Hits Quebec Province

By “Awake!” correspondent in Canada

ONE of the worst catastrophes ever to hit the Province of Quebec occurred on the evening of May 4, 1971, at about 11 p.m. Within a matter of minutes a huge crater one mile long, a quarter of a mile wide and about one hundred feet deep appeared in the new section of Saint-Jean Vianney, engulfing some forty homes and thirty-one persons. It was a nightmare that will not soon be forgotten by the people of this village of some 1,300 inhabitants, to the northeast of Quebec City.

A Bus Driver Helps Save Lives

Mr. Jules Girard of nearby Saint-Ambroise, who operates a bus service for the employees of the Alcan Company, was the first person to become aware of the disaster. He was driving about twenty men home from work when he noticed what he thought to be a small stream of water, some four to five feet wide, running across the road. Then, suddenly, the front wheels of his bus were suspended, overhanging the stream. He immediately tried to open the bus door, but without success. He shouted to all the men to leave the bus through the emergency door at the back. No sooner had he stepped out himself, being the last one to leave, than the bus suddenly disappeared. It dropped some 100 to 150 feet into a great chasm that had opened up.

The noise that could be heard sounded like a huge river. There was no time to lose. Many in the neighborhood were already asleep; others were watching ice hockey on TV, but none were aware that houses were completely disappearing into the huge crater, now getting bigger and bigger. Almost immediately there was a power failure, with downed hydro wires flashing in the darkness. Girard and his bus passengers ran shouting and knocking on doors, telling the people to evacuate quickly. Some seventy-five persons owe their lives to the quick thinking of this bus driver and his passengers.

During those few short minutes, houses were tumbling into the engulfing crater. Shouts and cries could be heard from those within them. Even a child’s voice was heard shouting “Telephone! Telephone!” as if asking for someone to phone for help. Some persons tried to flee in their cars, but they too were engulfed.

A State of Shock

People evacuated from the disaster area to the nearby Kenogami Memorial Center were in a state of shock and terror. One man had seen his wife and child engulfed in front of his eyes and could do nothing to help.

Another man relates what he saw before leaving his home: “The ground was shaking very hard and I barely had time to save my family. It was not a hole we saw, but a real crater one hundred feet deep. It was terrible to hear the cries and howling coming from the ravine below and it was impossible for us to do anything to save the people who were disappearing under this muddy soil . . .”

A woman said: “I have lost my house but I am safe and sound and that is what counts. I thought that earthquakes like this could happen only in other places. Now I know that catastrophes can happen wherever men are.”

On the eve of the disaster a man had purchased a piece of land in Saint-Jean Vianney; the following day it disappeared into the pit. Possessions offered no security when disaster struck.

Experts at Work

The Natural Resources Department (Ministère des Richesses Naturelles) of the Province of Quebec was immediately called to the scene to examine the situation and try to determine the cause of the disaster. According to reports, with which Mayor Lauréat Lavoie agrees, “there were three distinct tremors.” Geologist and engineer Mr. Marc Tanguay of the Ministère des Richesses Naturelles confirmed that a crater covering 500,000 square feet was formed.

There is controversy about the cause of the disaster. Earthquake tremors were recorded that day at Laval University in Quebec City, and this may have been responsible for the movement of the earth. Mayor Lavoie believes that a spring overflow of underground water streams could have eaten the earth away and finally resulted in its giving way completely.

The ground in the area of Saint-Jean Vianney is made up in part of a surface layer of sand on top of clay that is 135 feet deep in some places. The torrent of the Rivière aux Vases became so great that we could still see the discoloration from the muddy clay on the trunks of the trees along the river. In its overflow it swept away an almost new bridge into the Saguenay River.

…

Refine Search

Index Downloading...

Awake!, July 22, 1971