Awake!, July 8, 1976

Download: PDF — Awake!, July 8, 1976

Awake! — July 8, 1976

Source: jw.org

Contents

200 Years of Independence

Have the Freedoms Lasted?

Painful Problems of the Past

What Basis for a Better Future?

Something Better than Nationalism

The Bible Helps to Promote Family Unity

Writing Without Spelling

Planning for Your Funeral—Does It Make Sense?

A Night Aboard the “Ark”

Filled with Anxiety, but Blessed in Many Ways

Introducing the Beetle Sanitation Squad

Tracts That Leave Their Tracks

What About Celebrating Birthdays?

Watching the World

What Do You Know About Drugs?

Instinct Guides Birds—What Guides Man?

200 Years of Independence

ON July 4, 1776, the United States of America was “born.” That was the day when the thirteen colonies in North America declared their independence from Great Britain.

July 4, 1976, marks the 200th anniversary of that occasion. The event has been called the “Bicentennial,” from bi, meaning “two,” and centennial, meaning “hundredth anniversary.”

In two hundred years the United States has become the fourth-largest country in the world, both in population and in land area. Its population is now about 215 million.

But as nations go, the country is relatively young. The first permanent European settlement was established by the British at Jamestown, Virginia, in 1607. Most of those early settlers came in search of religious or political freedom, or to try to improve their economic condition.

Revolution Begins

By 1776 there were thirteen colonies, having a total population of about 2,600,000. But long before that year, antagonisms had been building between the colonists and the British government of King George III. Most of the colonists demanded more political and economic freedom. When it was not granted, they rebelled and formed their own Continental Congress.

The first successful aggressive military action by the American revolutionaries took place in May 1775. Ethan Allen and his “Green Mountain Boys” of Vermont attacked the British fortress of Ticonderoga, New York. Allen demanded and got the British to surrender “in the name of the great Jehovah and the Continental Congress.”

The next year, the Continental Congress met at Independence Hall in Philadelphia. There, on July 4, 1776, the Declaration of Independence was approved.

Desired Freedoms

The Declaration spelled out the freedoms desired. It embodied high and noble ideals, stating in part: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government.”

The Declaration also included protests against Britain’s ‘refusal to pass laws for the rights of the people, obstructing the administration of justice, depriving in many cases the benefits of trial by jury, plundering our seas, ravaging our coasts, burning our towns, destroying the lives of our people, and taking citizens captive and forcing them into the King’s service.’

Finally, after eight bitter years of war, a peace treaty was signed in 1783. All British forces were withdrawn. The United States was now its own master.

What has happened since then? What have two hundred years of proclaimed liberty brought to the nation? Is its future bright? What are the prospects for a “Tricentennial”?

Have the Freedoms Lasted?

WITH the Declaration of Independence in 1776, there began an unusual, large-scale experiment in human government—modern democracy. At that time most other nations were ruled by kings or other forms of authoritarian control.

But the United States felt that only a ‘government by the consent of the people’ could protect the freedoms desired. These included the freedoms of speech, religion, press and assembly.

Such freedoms were proclaimed as “unalienable rights.” And in 1787 they were incorporated into the official document that was to be the foundation of the United States—the Constitution.

What Does the Record Show?

The test of proclaimed ideals is how well they work in actual practice. It is not too difficult to write noble words on paper. But it is something else to uphold them.

The historical record in this regard is a contradictory one. In many cases the proclaimed freedoms have been preserved quite well. But in other cases the abuses and neglect of basic freedoms have been disastrous.

On the positive side, the basic ideas involved in the freedoms of speech, religion, press and assembly have been largely maintained. At times, though, this has meant a hard struggle through the courts to obtain the freedoms the Constitution provides.

A Struggle

In seeking to exercise religious freedom, minority beliefs have at times suffered. For example, in the late 1930’s and early 1940’s Jehovah’s Witnesses were persecuted in the United States. Not only mob action, but actions by certain biased officials denied them their Constitutional rights.

As a result, Jehovah’s Witnesses had to take many legal cases to the Supreme Court of the United States. Happily, one decision after another by this high court pushed back the forces of oppression. Freedom of religion was maintained.

That freedom has been of real benefit to the earth-wide preaching work of Jehovah’s Witnesses, since their world headquarters is located in the United States. And there is no doubt that the basic freedoms of religion, assembly, speech and press guaranteed by the Constitution have been important to all religions in the country.

This contrasts with the situation in many other lands. One needs only to think of how such preaching work was suppressed in Hitler’s Germany. It is also not possible to do such work openly today in Communist countries, as well as a number of other dictatorial lands where the free worship of God is banned.

Hence, there have been many intense struggles to keep the basic freedoms people want. In the United States, as of now, they do still exist.

Better than No Freedom

It is better to tolerate abuses of freedom than not to have any freedom at all. And an example of this is the Bicentennial celebration itself. While many groups have had dignified assemblies related to the country’s 200th anniversary, others have used it for selfish purposes.

U.S. News & World Report states: “If everybody isn’t careful, this year may be remembered as the 200th anniversary of the American huckster. Some of the hustle and bustle to cash in on the Bicentennial celebration is beginning to reach absurd proportions.”

The newsmagazine reports that you can buy Bicentennial “T-shirts, ice buckets, copies of John Hancock’s chair, chips from the timbers of the original Independence Hall, replicas of George Washington’s pistols, Bicentennial ball-point pens, a red, white and blue toilet seat, and a garbage bag with a Liberty Bell on it.”

The Wall Street Journal also commented: “Sad to say, the Bicentennial has attracted more than its share . . . of vulgar commercialism decked out in patriotic colors.”

It has also attracted tourists to historic sites. In some cases the tourists have not respected the rights of the people living there. For instance, in a Philadelphia neighborhood visitors have flocked down historic streets, peeked into the windows of homes of private citizens and littered sidewalks and streets.

One woman, in desperation, said that she finally found a way to keep the overly curious tourists away. She said that she took a page from the past and began to get rid of her garbage in the same way that some of her Colonial forebears did: She threw it out her second-story window! “If that doesn’t keep the tourists away, I don’t know what will,” she stated.

In a few places, some have insisted that workers must dress in certain colors, or conform to certain styles of grooming to observe the Bicentennial. But trying to force people to do this is a violation of the very freedoms the Bicentennial commemorates.

Of course, if an abuse becomes intolerable, there is recourse to the courts of the land. Those courts are obliged to protect Constitutional freedoms. But again, it is better to have abuses of freedom than to have no freedom at all.

Basic freedoms have been the privilege for many in the nation, true. But the noble ideals of freedom embodied in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution have sounded very hollow to others. Who? And in what way?

[Blurb on page 5]

Freedom worked well for some, but its abuses were disastrous for others.

Painful Problems of the Past

THERE have been serious problems in making effective the promised freedoms proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Some of these problems have proved very painful and, in the eyes of some historians, have brought a tragic stain on the history of the United States.

One observer claims that during the Bicentennial most Americans are being fed a sugar-coated version of their country’s history. He noted: “It’s just that there are other truths to be told as well.” An honest appraisal of two hundred years of history must include such truths.

One of them has to do with the freedoms proclaimed on July 4, 1776. The Declaration of Independence had said “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” The Constitution guaranteed the basic freedoms of speech, assembly, press and religion. Amendment IV also said: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.”

These are noble principles. And they have been preserved to a considerable extent for many people. But historians show this has not been so for all.

A Violent Past

For example, the settling of what was to become the United States by European settlers involved a violation of nearly all those fine principles. Those ideals were demanded by the European settlers, but they were denied to those who were on the land long before them.

The ‘right of the people to be secure in their persons and houses and free from search and seizure’ did not apply to the Indians who had been on the land centuries before the settlers. The fact of history is that the Indian populations were largely crushed. Their lands and homes were taken away. The decimated tribes were forced onto reservations. And Indians were not even given the right to vote in all states until 1948.

True, the Indians were regarded as ‘savages.’ They had indeed warred among themselves, with one tribe often conquering another. And they fiercely resisted the white man. But the question may be raised as to whether Americans would not have resisted with their might, just as savagely, if during the Civil War from 1861 to 1865 a foreign power had regarded such ‘intertribal warfare’ between North and South as ‘savage’ and had invaded the United States to ‘civilize’ the land.

Today, some Indian spokesmen are still very bitter. Vernon Bellecourt, a leader of the American Indian Movement, argues that ‘Americans should look at the 200 years of their Government as 200 years of deceit and shame.’ He declared that American Indians should not celebrate the Bicentennial because ‘we have nothing to celebrate . . . ever since white colonists began taking away the sovereign rights and lands of the native Americans.’

Some authorities feel that the violent American past has a bearing on the present. The Denver Post related: “The most serious point, it seems to be, is the question about the nature of American society. Certainly it has included since pioneer days a great deal of violence. The centuries-long ‘war’ against the American Indians was itself a dreadful conditioner. Europeans came as invaders and all too frequently fought their way into possession of other people’s land, destroying other people’s societies. These elements of violence continued.”

There is another chapter that has produced pain and stains during the American past. It has to do with the institution of slavery.

Why Slavery?

When the early settlers took over Indian lands, they found themselves in possession of vast areas with rich potential. In the southern colonies, the climate and soil were good for the growth of tobacco, rice, sugarcane and cotton.

But who would do all the work on these vast lands? The relatively small population of Europeans was not enough. And the type of work was not very desirable either. What was the answer? Black slaves, kidnapped from Africa.

Many have wondered how a nation founded on the principles that “all men are created equal” and that all had the “unalienable Rights” of “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,” and freedom from “unreasonable searches and seizures” could have condoned slavery. One of the grievances noted in the Declaration of Independence was the ‘taking of citizens captive and the forcing of them into the King’s service’ by the British. Yet, taking blacks captive and forcing them into slavery was condoned, and by the very individuals who wrote those noble words.

The problem demonstrates how deeply ingrained selfish desires are in all mankind. And one such desire is to make a lot of money, even at the expense of someone else. In the American past, it often proved to be more powerful than the noble principles, just as it so often proves to be today.

Of course, slavery did not begin in 1776. The first black slaves landed about 150 years earlier, in Jamestown. But by the eve of the Declaration of Independence in 1776, blacks numbered about 500,000 out of a population of 2,600,000. Well over 90 percent of the blacks lived in the South.

Thomas Jefferson, who drew up the rough draft of the Declaration of Independence, had spoken out against slavery when he was a young lawyer. But he had slaves himself. Regarding this, Ebony magazine says: “That he could do so while reaping the benefits of slavery was typical of the bright young revolutionaries of the times.” Sources state that Jefferson had over 200 slaves at Monticello, his estate of thousands of acres in Virginia.

Patrick Henry, though speaking of slavery as repugnant, nevertheless said: “I am the owner of slaves of my own purchase!” The answer as to why may be found in his next sentence: “I am drawn along by the general inconvenience of living here without them.”

Two years later, Patrick Henry delivered his famous speech wherein, regarding the coming break with Britain, he declared: “Give me liberty or give me death!” No doubt many black slaves felt similar sentiments.

Finally Abandoned

Ferment over slavery grew. Many people saw its basic injustice in a nation that claimed to champion freedom.

Many Americans, claiming to be followers of Jesus Christ, found it hard to harmonize the perpetual enslavement of fellow humans with Jesus’ famous “Golden Rule,” which said: “All things, therefore, that you want men to do to you, you also must likewise do to them.”—Matt. 7:12.

By the time of the Civil War, which began in 1861, the United States was made up of thirty-four states. Of these, fifteen were slave states. Eleven of them broke off to form the Southern Confederacy; four slave states joined the Northern side.

In 1863 President Abraham Lincoln issued his Emancipation Proclamation. This declared that slaves were considered free in the Confederate states. But slavery in all states was not entirely abolished legally until 1865 when Constitutional Amendment 13 was ratified.

Amendment 15, in 1870, gave blacks the right to vote. But such a right had little meaning for many. For example, some states required a poll tax. This was a tax that was required before a person could vote. Of course, poor blacks, as well as poor whites, often could not afford the tax. Only when Amendment 24 was adopted in 1964 was the poll tax prohibited for national elections. And in 1966 the Supreme Court outlawed such a tax for all elections.

Many states also had given the right to vote only to those persons who could pass a literacy test. Many blacks, and whites too, could not pass such a test. Not until 1970 did the government ban these tests as a requirement for voting.

The injustices committed during the more than 350 years of slavery form a deep stain on American history. To this day the country has not recovered from all the effects of this.

Differing Views of Some Women

A number of women claim that the freedoms proclaimed when the nation was born were, in some areas, long denied to them. These women point to the fact that for nearly a century and a half women did not have the right to vote.

They argue that if, as Lincoln declared, the nation was to have a “government of the people, by the people, for the people,” then that form of democratic rule should allow women to vote. Denying them that would deprive half the population, the “people,” of a right implied by the founding fathers. Eventually, the government agreed, and in 1920 it gave women the right to vote.

In addition, some women say that generally they do not get the same consideration and treatment from employers that men do, nor do they get the same pay for the same work even when they are the sole support for a family. One woman claimed that employment of women is often a case of “last hired, first fired.”

Of course, not all women in the United States agree with those sentiments. Most, however, do appreciate improvements in working conditions that have come as a result of laws designed to protect women from labor abuses and injustices.

Thus the course of freedom in the past two hundred years has been an uneven one. It has meant a high level of freedom for some, and this has been appreciated and cherished. For others there have undeniably been varying degrees of oppression. And while many of the previous injustices have been corrected since then, their bad fruitage still affects the nation.

[Picture on page 7]

The first Europeans peacefully exchanged goods for what they wanted. But soon their growing demands were backed by force

[Picture on page 8]

The fine principles of equality and freedom did not apply to the slaves

What Basis for a Better Future?

AFTER two hundred years of history, is the present state of development of the United States a good foundation for a better future? Certainly there is great economic strength in the nation, along with many other potential factors for good.

Many authorities who study trends in economics, education, social problems and politics, however, come to a sober conclusion. They feel that, while the country has much power and good, unless the negative trends are reversed, there could be deep trouble ahead soon.

They note that one casualty among many families is the “American Dream.” This was the belief that improvement would continue indefinitely, with better jobs, more money, a higher standard of living, security, peace of mind, and a good future for the young.

But that has not proved to be the case for many. The New York Times reports: “A fear appears to be growing among many Americans that the party may be over. The Great American Dream . . . seems somehow less attainable to many people.”

A Growing Problem

One major problem has to do with the way Americans have financed much of their prosperity in the past few decades. It has been done with borrowed money—debt, excessive debt. They have mortgaged the future to live well today. But too much debt leads to bankruptcy.

Because of enormous and mounting debt, the ability of a large number of people, many businesses, some city and state governments, and even the federal government, to pay their expenses is in serious danger. U.S. News and World Report says: “Debt is growing faster than the U.S. economy that must support it. The total of public and private liabilities now amounts to somewhat more than double the nation’s annual output of goods and services.” That total debt is now over three trillion (three million million) dollars!

The magazine observes that “corporate debt today is about 17 times the companies’ combined profits after taxes,” and climbing. The federal government’s debt is well over 600 billion dollars, and is also climbing. In the past seventeen years, only once has the government had a small surplus in its yearly budget. The deficit for fiscal 1975 was over 43 billion dollars. The expected deficit for fiscal 1976 is an estimated 75 billion dollars, an all-time record.

In 1939 the interest on the public debt was one billion dollars a year. But in fiscal 1977 it is expected to be about 45 billion dollars! That interest alone, for the one year, is greater than the total public debt accumulated in the entire history of the country up to World War II.

Senator Harry F. Byrd, Jr., says: “If this kind of deficit spending continues, I believe it is inevitable that the country is headed for disaster.”

But have not business prospects brightened in recent months? Yes, most economists feel that the bad recession of the recent past is over. Yet, much of the improvement is being financed by borrowed money. Pumping seventy-five billion borrowed dollars into an economy does improve conditions, temporarily. But the debt load becomes heavier and heavier. Some have expressed concern that it may be like the heroin addict who must have more and more of the drug until his system can no longer take it and then collapses.

Lower Living Standards

New York city already has found out what it means to keep spending more money than it makes. The city’s debt load has become so burdensome that it has great difficulty borrowing more money to pay current expenses, much less to pay back the loan.

So the city has cut back services, which means laying off workers too. But even with such drastic measures, the deficits persist. And it is getting more and more difficult for the city to keep raising the already heavy taxes.

Just as a city’s living standard can decline when too much money is spent and not enough made, so, too, many experts feel that this is what can happen to the country. Some feel that it has already begun. Professor George Sternlieb of Rutgers University stated: “What we are presiding over is none other than a decline in the American standard of living.”

Also hurting the people’s standard of living are taxes. They are the fastest rising major item in inflation. Already more than a third of a worker’s pay is taken by various taxes. With good reason did Treasury Secretary William E. Simon say: “The system of federal taxation which has evolved since the early days of the republic is in trouble today.” There is fear of a ‘tax revolt.’ Indeed, one of the reasons for the Revolutionary War was what the colonists considered unjust taxation.

Poverty amid Wealth

In spite of the prosperity that many enjoy, poverty persists. The New York Post stated: “Estimates of the number of Americans living below the poverty line range from 10 to 30 millions.” Many others live at or just above the poverty line.

Columnist Jack Anderson tells of a fellow reporter who disguised himself as a field hand and worked as a migratory farm worker. The living quarters provided him were “hardly fit for human habitation.” The overall conditions were, he said, “more reminiscent of the 19th-century slave quarters than any 20th-century habitation.”

Anderson concluded: “There is grim irony in the fact that those who work in the world’s most bounteous fields often live in stark poverty, earning barely enough to subsist. Some live in virtual bondage to the field boss, who collects more out of their wages than he pays them. For most, there seems to be no escape from the perpetual poverty of the fields.”

The number of elderly who live in poverty is an admitted national disgrace. And living conditions in many major cities are deteriorating. Renewal projects are not keeping up with decaying and abandoned buildings.

So after two hundred years, living conditions for many are very good, but for millions of others they are poor. All the years of prosperity, all the well-meaning efforts, have not changed that. It is not, the solid foundation that a better future requires.

Other Ills

Also, after two hundred years of one of the more advanced educational systems, millions are ‘functionally illiterate.’ The U.S. Office of Education calls “shocking” the inability of about one fifth of the adult population (23 million Americans) to cope with reading skills necessary for everyday chores like shopping, getting a driver’s license or reading an insurance policy. It reported that an additional 39 million Americans are “just getting by” with their educational skills.

The condition of many American schools does not give much confidence for any great improvement in overall educational levels. The nation’s press reports that violence is rampant in the nation’s schools, with assault, mugging, vandalism and gang warfare on the increase. One publication described it as “a virtual reign of schoolhouse terror.” In one large city, there were 474 assaults on teachers and staff members in five months.

That trend corresponds with the crime increase. There are now more than eleven million major crimes committed each year. And millions more go unreported.

Family life is deteriorating. Boston sociologists have found that ‘violence appears to be at least as common as love in the typical American family.’ Half the married couples interviewed admitted that there was physical violence in the family in the past year. And at least an estimated one million cases of child abuse are believed to occur each year.

Losing Confidence

The New York Times said: “Within the past few years, we as a people seem to have lost our way, to be floundering in uncertainty, to be unsure of ourselves in our relations to each other and to the world at large. The optimism and moral drive characteristic of America throughout the decades has been largely replaced by a deep-seated cynicism and disillusionment.”

Senator Frank Church also found that “a lack of faith, widespread cynicism, and profound pessimism are the most central and fundamental problems facing America today.” Church, who headed an investigation of abuses in federal agencies, said that “there has been a growing lawlessness at all levels of American society up to and including the federal government.” He noted that “the existence of a free government is imperiled if it fails to follow the law.”

The Future

Will the United States in its present form survive to celebrate its third hundred years, its “Tricentennial”?

Many feel that democracy is not the ‘wave of the future.’ They point out that there are fewer and fewer democratic governments in the world. Instead, totalitarian rule is increasing.

West Germany’s largest illustrated magazine, Stern, concluded that ‘the present American era of dominance has passed,’ but hoped that another kind of American era would take its place. The pro-American Economist of London speaks of a “recessional” for the American “empire.” It concluded that ‘world leadership is liable to pass into new hands quite early in the century 1976-2076.’

However, there is a more fundamental reason why we can expect to see a very major change take place long before the arrival of a “Tricentennial.” And it is not because the United States will be conquered by some other world power.

Something Better than Nationalism

THE people of every country want to feel that they and their descendants will have a better future. But how will it come? Through the efforts of individual nations?

There are today more nations in existence than ever before. Each one promises its people better times, and requires obedience to its policies. But has any one nation, or even group of nations, led the way to betterment of the entire human family ? Surely they have had the time. Yet our century has been filled with disastrous failures.

We cannot escape the fact that the dividing of the earth into so many different nations has not proved beneficial. A ‘divided house’ is not likely to solve the world’s complex problems.

For instance, Parade magazine says: “One-fourth of the world’s population is almost always hungry and one-tenth on the brink of death because of too little food.” Yet food experts say that it is not the earth that is at fault, since it can produce enough food. They say it is the divided political and economic systems that prevent cooperation and reasonable distribution.

Also, because of national pride—nationalism—the divided nations fear one another. So the nations of the world spend over 300 billion dollars a year now for armaments. Imagine what the human family could accomplish if that money were used for productive purposes!

Really, no nation or ideology can give people what they want and need most. And what most people want is true peace, permanent security, prosperity, health and happiness.

If all people could get along as a loving family, as loyal and trusted brothers, think of the desirable qualities among all national groups that could be enjoyed. Is it not interesting to sample the wide variety of foods that different peoples eat? Many of their styles of dress, and their music, are pleasing. If the present national divisions did not exist, there are many good features of all cultures that could add much to the enjoyment of life.

Does Not Make Sense

Pitting nations or races against one another does not make sense, since we all had common parents.

The late British historian Arnold Toynbee said of nationalism: “It is a state of mind in which we give our paramount political loyalty to one fraction of the human race . . . whatever consequences this may entail for the foreign majority of the human race.”

Because nationalism is so divisive and destructive, Toynbee said of it: “Nationalism is a mental disease.” And former United Nations Secretary-General U Thant observed: “So many of the problems that we face today are due to, or the result of, false attitudes—some of them have been adopted almost unconsciously. Among these is the concept of narrow nationalism—‘my country, right or wrong.’”

The Creator of mankind, Jehovah God, “is not partial,” says his Word. (Acts 10:34) And since “he made out of one man every nation of men,” it is apparent that to man’s Creator maintaining national divisions does not make sense either.—Acts 17:26.

But is there any realistic hope that someday all nations will overcome their national prejudices and unite in an international brotherhood to work for the good of all people?

Unity Under Way Now!

Yes, there is a realistic hope. In fact, God’s own Word guarantees that the present divided state of mankind will soon end. No more will there be hurtful national divisions.—Dan. 2:28, 44.

Bible prophecy shows that we now live “in the final part of the days” just before God intervenes in man’s affairs and brings the present divided system of man-rule to an end. But in this very same time, as Isaiah chapter 2 foretells, his true worship would be lifted up on high so that “all the nations must stream” to it.

With what result? God “will certainly render judgment among the nations and set matters straight respecting many peoples. And they will have to beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning shears. Nation will not lift up sword against nation, neither will they learn war anymore.”—Isa. 2:4.

Yes, Almighty God is right now gathering honest-hearted persons together into an international brotherhood and is teaching them how to live in a righteous new order that he will rule from heaven. And after destroying the present wicked system, God will usher the survivors he has ‘set straight’ into his new order of everlasting peace and prosperity.

Revelation chapter 7, verse 9, shows that these survivors are a “great crowd, which no man was able to number, out of all nations and tribes and peoples and tongues.” These are ones who submit to His rule. They appreciate that no matter what benefits any nation may provide, nothing can compare with the hope of life in God’s new order. Only God, not man, can lead willing people to that very desirable goal.

The Bible Helps to Promote Family Unity

TODAY many families face serious problems because of not applying the Bible’s counsel in their lives. However, once they start doing so, there are amazing changes for the better.

A man living in Spain relates: “My economic situation in the world was quite prosperous. I was the owner of a publicity agency that was doing very well. However, my marriage was shattered by adultery. Each of us lived a separate life to the point of having an assigned day for ‘marital unfaithfulness.’ The day it was my wife’s turn I stayed at home and looked after the two children and vice versa. Nevertheless, I realized that things could not go on like that. I wanted to put my life in order. I asked God to help me, and help came in a most unexpected way.

“I was in a painter’s attic studio with other friends when one of them, looking at his watch, said: ‘I’m going. I’ve got a Witness waiting for me at home.’ I asked him, ‘What’s that?’ His answer stirred my interest and so I went along to listen. I was put in contact with Jehovah’s Witnesses in my neighborhood, and my wife and I started to study. Little by little we made changes in ourselves, not only in a moral sense, but even to the point of my leaving the publicity firm to avoid undesirable contacts. Thanks to Jehovah, the family is now united.”

Writing Without Spelling

By “Awake!” correspondent in Taiwan

TEN-YEAR-OLD Lin Yung-hsiung sits at his desk in Taiwan. His small hand grasps firmly a slender bamboo-handled brush, almost straight up and down. He painstakingly draws black marks on his paper. Millions of other children in the cities, towns and villages of the Orient do the same thing each day. What are they doing? Are they painting pictures for an art class?

The answer is both Yes and No. The children are learning the art of writing without spelling. It is an art that reaches back, some 3,000 years or more, to the Shang dynasty of China.

But how can there be writing without spelling? Let us illustrate with the name of the young boy mentioned above. In Mandarin Chinese his family name is Lin. The character for this [Artwork—Chinese Characters] means “forest” or “thicket.” Can you see the two trees that convey the idea? His given name, Yung-hsiung, is made up of two characters [Artwork—Chinese Characters] that mean something like “permanent valor” or “everlasting manliness.”

But while the characters reveal the meaning, they do not spell out the pronunciation of the word. The reader must sound out the word according to the particular type of Chinese that he speaks. For instance, a Cantonese-speaking person whose name is written with the same characters set out in the previous paragraph would pronounce the name, not Lin Yung-hsiung, but Lam Wing-hung. Yet the meaning would be the same in both cases. All who read Chinese can communicate with one another in writing, though speakers of one dialect may not comprehend the spoken language of another.

Efforts to Promote Mandarin

Recently, efforts have been made to make Mandarina the national spoken language of all China. To facilitate this, experts formulated what are known as National Phonetic Symbols, a set of thirty-seven symbols that can spell out accurately the Mandarin pronunciation of the Chinese characters. These phonetic symbols are used to teach Mandarin pronunciation. They are also used alongside characters in publications for children and people with limited education. This enables them to read without knowing many thousands of complicated characters.

Since early in the twentieth century a second campaign has further affected written Chinese. How so? During the previous eighteen centuries Chinese writing appeared in the style known as wenyen. This is a very terse method of writing, with only one single-syllable character for each word. A person reading out loud such monosyllables would be little understood. To illustrate the problem: The character for “loyal” is pronounced chung1 in Mandarin.b Yet this very same spoken sound can also mean “center,” “clock,” “finish” or other things. English has similar examples of words that sound alike, yet have different meanings, as in “bare” and “bear,” “ware” and “wear.”

In conversation a Chinese person often overcomes this problem by adding an extra syllable to certain words in order to convey to his hearer the exact shade of meaning intended. For instance, when a Mandarin-speaking person is talking, instead of using one character for “loyal” (chung1), he says chung1-hsin1, adding an extra syllable (hsin1) so that his hearers would know that he meant “loyal” rather than “center,” “clock,” or something else. The paihua method adds the extra syllables in writing, making it similar to daily speech, which is what the term paihua means. This makes reading much more intelligible to the less educated person. These campaigns to employ phonetic symbols for teaching Mandarin pronunciation and the principles of paihua when writing Chinese have encouraged many persons to learn to read and converse in Mandarin.

Writing Without Spelling

Writing Chinese characters is quite an art. A schoolboy must first learn the correct order of the strokes. Balance and proportion are necessary too. As an aid, beginners use paper printed with small squares. Our young friend Yung-hsiung first practiced on squared paper with pen or pencil. Eventually he developed ability to write a character containing up to thirty-three strokes in a small square. Later on, Yung-hsiung mastered the art of writing the characters with a brush.

Writing without spelling presents problems. But the Chinese have devised ingenious ways to cope with these. Interesting is the way in which Yung-hsiung finds names in a telephone directory. Since Chinese has no alphabet, the names are listed according to the number of strokes used in writing the first character of the name, which, in Chinese, is the family name, or surname. His first step in finding the name is to write the character, counting the strokes as he does so. Yung-hsiung’s own family name, Lin, requires eight strokes; so he finds it in the eight-stroke section of the directory.

What about the relationship of Chinese to Japanese? Actually the two languages are not closely related. Japanese grammar and sentence construction are entirely different from Chinese. Yet the Japanese borrowed Chinese characters to write their language.

Borrowing Chinese characters for Japanese has produced one of the most complicated forms of writing in the world. Since all Chinese characters in Japanese have both Chinese and Japanese pronunciations, some may be read in up to nine or more different ways, depending on their context. And while Japanese students can get by with about 1,850 basic Chinese characters, they must also master two different phonetic methods of writing the forty-eight basic Japanese sounds. And that is not all. To complicate matters further, reading Japanese requires getting acquainted with tens of thousands of different combinations of two or more characters in order to know their correct pronunciation in various settings.

The Chinese system of writing without spelling is indeed a complicated art. But its value to the human family has been great, for Chinese writing makes it possible for some 800 million persons speaking different Chinese dialects to communicate clearly with one another.

[Footnotes]

Officially called Kuoya (National Language) but generally known among English-speaking people as Mandarin because it is based on the speech of Mandarins who came from northern China.

The figure “1” indicates the tone, of which Mandarin has four. For more details on the Chinese language and its writing, see the article “A Language That Is Radically Different,” in Awake! of May 22, 1975, pages 9-13.

[Picture on page 16]

The family name Lin

Planning for Your Funeral—Does It Make Sense?

“I NEVER thought about it,” is a common response to the question, “What kind of funeral for you when the time comes?” In this present system of things, we all must face death, but many consider the subject of their own funeral too morbid or distasteful even to think about. Consequently, any thinking about the funeral is suddenly thrust upon bereaved relatives at the time of death.

But is that when you want your grieving survivors to be considering funeral details? Do you want them forced into negotiating such matters when they are least in the mood and most vulnerable to costly suggestions?

A trusted and honorable funeral director can do much to relieve anxiety and keep costs within a family’s means. But another situation has also frequently faced survivors. Says a U.S. Federal Trade Commission investigator: “The buyer of funeral services is emotionally upset when he makes arrangements. And the [unscrupulous] funeral director often exploits that to sell his most expensive package.”

If you want to be sure that your already grieving family is not burdened with such an added load, you may want to consider planning your own funeral.

One person whose mother did so was at first stunned when she told him of her plans. But then, he says, “as time passed, my wife and I found ourselves increasingly struck by the sanity of the idea. What had seemed initially to be unthinkable became the intelligent, realistic thing to do.”

Former French president Charles de Gaulle is one who planned his own funeral. Says the Encyclopædia Britannica: “At his request he was buried with utmost simplicity in the small cemetery of Colombey-les-Deux-Églises in a plain wooden coffin made by the village carpenter.” In contrast, the government-planned state funeral of former U.S. president Dwight D. Eisenhower reportedly cost over $250,000.

Why So Costly?

Over the years, the American funeral industry has become what the Encyclopædia Britannica calls “highly commercialized.” It has done much to encourage some of the costly customs now fixed into the customary “complete” funeral. Such things as routine embalming, restoration of the body, open-casket services, grave liners or “vaults,” ornate sealed metal caskets, special clothing for the deceased and other services are often promoted as legally or morally necessary.

However, many of these traditions seem inspired more by economics and pride than by any real necessity. As a result, the average overall cost of an American funeral and burial has spiraled to about $2,000. Much of the inflation in cost lies in the extras that have come to be taken for granted as a customary part of “complete” funerals.

No doubt some of these acquired customs are comforting to people who feel that they have somehow satisfied their “obligation” to the deceased. Other individuals may derive satisfaction from seeing the body for the last time and ‘paying their respects.’ On the other hand, most of these traditions are not mandatory for those who cannot afford the high cost or would just personally prefer the dignity of simplicity.

Planning Cuts Expense

Usually a funeral planned by others is far more costly than one planned ahead by the person himself. “Everyone I talk to says, ‘When I die I want the simplest thing possible,’” notes one authority. “You never hear anyone say, ‘I want a $10,000 coffin and all the rest.’” You can verify this merely by asking your friends about their funeral wishes.

Of course, the elegance of one’s funeral is a personal family matter and should not be criticized if it does not violate Christian principles. But most persons who make their wishes known in advance apparently prefer not to be a financial burden to their families in death any more than they want to be in life. As one man put it: “I would rather have the money feeding my family than feeding the worms!”

Yet, more often than not, it does not work out that way. Why? Answers Los Angeles Times columnist Jim Fiebig: “I would guess that 90 percent of the funerals in this country are far more elaborate than the deceased would have wished. But because they failed to make their wishes known, the survivors—just to be on the safe side—figure they’d better go first class.”

On the other hand, preplanning removes a real burden from surviving loved ones. No amount of subtle persuasion to “go first class” need make them go beyond their means or your wishes. “The best sales resistance a survivor can have against high pressure,” says Fiebig, “is the knowledge he’s following your wishes.”

Even so, another situation could arise that you may also want to consider in advance. One person wrote to a newspaper advice columnist: “My husband told me that he wanted a simple funeral service and then cremation.” But her husband had only voiced his wishes. Complains his wife: “None of his family ever said yea or nay about their opinion of his wishes until I tried to make the arrangements—then I got static from all sides about what ‘we’ want.” She suggested that people should “put such wishes in writing. My husband didn’t. And it sure was rough on me.”

Even back in Biblical times burial arrangements were often made personally, well in advance of death. For example, dying Jacob said to his son Joseph: “In my burial place which I have excavated for myself in the land of Canaan is where you are to bury me.”—Gen. 50:5; see also Isaiah 22:16.

Making the Choices

Within certain limits, you or your family are legally free to decide for yourselves which funeral services you desire, if any. In America some states require by law that an itemized list of services and costs be made available. But the best time to make the choices is before necessity brings pressure. If you leave arrangements up to your family after death, the element of choice often becomes quite limited because they may feel bound by what is acceptable to the community and/or other relatives.

Even when making your own choices in advance, though, you may still want to consider the community. If you live in a small town, for example, would eliminating customary procedures possibly offend some persons or even cast a reflection on your Christian faith? Perhaps more would attend the Scriptural talk and more good could be accomplished if a more traditional funeral were held. But you must still balance finances, family wishes and personal desires against such considerations in making the final decision.

As you decide what services you wish, remember that there is no “best way” to handle a funeral. Many Europeans would be shocked by the lavishness of American funerals. For example, embalming is generally routine in U.S. funeral homes, yet it is seldom practiced in Europe. In fact, special permits are required in many countries to embalm a body.

The U.S. funeral industry argues that embalming is necessary for “sanitary” reasons to avoid the spread of disease. However, as in Europe, embalming is not really necessary if you choose not to display the body and have an early burial or cremation. But you must specifically request that it not be done. Federal law does not mandate embalming unless the body is to be transported by common carrier. Some states require embalming if death was from a communicable disease or if more than a certain period goes by between death and burial.

After embalming, a mortician may spend many hours restoring the appearance of a person who was ravaged by disease or accident. This is done so that survivors will have an “acceptable image” of the deceased to remember. Funeral directors say that this helps them to adjust to the reality of death and to avoid possible disquieting fantasies. But you may prefer to be remembered as you were when alive and happy, also sparing your family the expense of such costly procedures. Some cultures are even repelled by the idea of viewing the corpse at a funeral. And a noted psychiatrist said: “This business of putting perfume and shoes on a corpse! When you’re dead, you’re dead. Our funeral customs are an attempt to fool people into denying death.”

Caskets range from simple $75 pine boxes to elaborately fashioned sealed metal ones costing $8,000 or more, including innerspring mattresses and fine fabrics. The sealed caskets are supposed to keep moisture from the body, with the apparent implication that this will somehow retard decomposition. However, experts say that just the opposite occurs. And what good are fine fabrics or a mattress to the dead, since the Bible says that they “are conscious of nothing at all”?—Eccl. 9:5, 10; compare Psalm 146:3, 4.

Thus many customary funeral procedures that are normally taken for granted are certainly not mandatory. In view of this, some who feel that the emphasis should be put on spiritual matters and not on the corpse have chosen to have their body disposed of immediately by cremation or simple burial, followed by a memorial service for the benefit of friends and relatives. In England, West Germany and Denmark, for example, more than half choose cremation, while only about 8 percent do so in the U.S.A. The simple approach can also eliminate many of the costly services such as embalming, restoration work, funeral-home display of the body, hearse, and even the coffin and gravesite if cremation is chosen.

Whatever procedure you choose, reputable funeral homes should be pleased to assist you or your relatives to work out the details without undue pressure for extras. Nonprofit memorial societies also exist to help people to arrange for dignified and economical funerals.

Hence, giving thought now as to how you wish your remains to be cared for is not an exercise in morbidity. It is evidence of a mature and thoughtful approach to a trying situation, showing foresight and loving consideration for distressed survivors. It can do much to lighten their load until the time promised by God when “death will be no more.”—Rev. 21:4, 5.

A Night Aboard the “Ark”

By “Awake!” correspondent in Kenya

HOW would you like to spend a night in the Ark? It is a three-decked structure largely made of wood. No, this Ark was not built by Noah. But concepts of the one that he and his family constructed more than 4,300 years ago undoubtedly inspired the design of this modern Ark.

The present-day Ark rests on a 7,600-foot-high (2,316-meter-high) spur surrounded by a montane forest in Kenya’s Aberdare Range. From inside the Ark visitors can watch animals outside the structure. This is part of Kenya’s effort to enable people from all over the world to observe and study animals in their natural surroundings, in areas set aside to preserve many wild species threatened with extinction.

We plan to spend a night in the Ark, along with a number of other visitors. “But,” you ask, “how do you expect to see any animals in the darkness?” Well, viewing all through the night is made possible by powerful spotlights. These artificial “moons” are so designed that they do not startle or upset even the most timid animals.

The Journey

Our trip begins in Nairobi, near the edge of the great Rift Valley. After breakfast, we enjoy a leisurely three-hour drive through Kikuyuland. Our first stop is just outside the town of Nyeri, at the Aberdare Country Club. This will be our base. It is surrounded by woodland slopes rich with nandi flame, cape chestnut and jacaranda trees, under which crowned cranes and peacocks stroll.

Looking out over the plains to the north, we have a wonderful view of Mount Kenya on our right, its twin snowcapped peaks rising to somewhat over 17,000 feet (5,182 meters). To our left is the Aberdare Range, attaining a height of over 13,000 feet (3,962 meters). We will be heading in that direction after lunch.

To avoid disturbing the animals, private cars are not allowed to enter this side of the National Park. All visitors are transported to the Ark in two large buses. The eleven-mile (18-kilometer) trip takes us through Kikuyu settlements and farmlands adjoining the park.

Along the way, black-and-white Colobus monkeys frolic in the tall trees. There they are safe from hunters who once slaughtered them for their skins, used for ceremonial robes or decorative carpets. Cape buffaloes abound in the forest, and sometimes block the way, moving aside reluctantly to let us pass. Occasionally, a rhino is seen, but it never stays around very long. Not to be ignored are large herds of elephants. They have been known to make threatening charges at a bus, though never making contact. Now, that is quite an experience to relate to friends and relatives!

Our View from the Ark

Finally, we reach the Ark. Leaving the bus, all visitors cross a drawbridge leading onto the afterdeck. They then head for small cabins on one of the three decks. Our cabin has two bunks. Quickly, we open the window overlooking the sea of green grass. We wonder if any animals have arrived at the nearby salt lick.

Warthogs usually are present. They move around on their knees to crop the grass of the glade. Should anything frighten them, they scamper for cover in the surrounding bush, their tails as erect as a ship’s mast.

Each time we have visited the Ark, we have seen the bushbuck. This extremely elegant and dainty antelope never relaxes its vigilance. No wonder! It is the fearsome leopard’s favorite prey. The bushbuck has a collar-like lack of hair around the neck. According to the local Kikuyu tribe, this dates back to Noah’s day. Their tradition is that in order to get a stubborn bushbuck into his ark, Noah had to lead it with a rope that wore away all that hair!

Cape buffaloes stroll casually in front of the Ark. Soon they are wallowing in the mud around the water hole, not content until covered with slimy muck from horn to hoof. Only the elephants will make these stubborn creatures abandon the water hole. Those lumbering pachyderms want no other animals present when they come to drink and savor the salt put down by the Ark staff. With loud trumpetings and the flapping of their huge ears, they also are sure to chase off the small African hare and the mongoose.

The best view of any animals at the water hole is obtained from a ground-level observation chamber. It allows a person to be within arm’s length of elephants, buffaloes, rhinos or other large animals that come near. Elephants have been known to put their trunks through the slits in the chamber. Fortunately, no one has yet been dragged out through these openings.

What impresses us about all these large animals is the protection they give to their young. During a previous visit, a large herd of elephants came into view. They were shielding a very small calf, probably just two weeks old. This little one never left its safe place between the mother’s legs. We could see how nervous the whole herd was, especially when another herd arrived on the scene. Promptly, the new arrivals were made to realize that their presence was not appreciated. So, they kept their distance until the first herd went on its way.

Unusual Excitement Is Kindled

There are special moments ‘aboard the Ark’ too. At these times excitement rises to a peak. For instance, visitors are thrilled to see the rare and elusive bongo, for which the view from the Ark has become famous. This shy, beautiful animal is a large antelope. It keeps to the mountain forests and seldom is seen, except here at the Ark. The bongo has a chestnut-colored coat with twelve or thirteen thin vertical stripes on its sides. An ideal camouflage in its forest home! When the bongo emerges from the trees opposite the game-viewing lounge, a hush comes over the visitors. They almost hold their breath for fear of frightening it away. Soon, however, cameras click and whir, as eager photographers record the sighting of this graceful animal. The Ark’s log reveals that for many months there have been bongo sightings on at least one in every two days. When the bongo or the leopard puts in an appearance, a buzzer is sounded throughout the Ark to alert those who have gone to bed. Certainly, they would not want to miss the event.

Should there be a night when few animals come into the glade, observers can always be entertained by the nightly visits of a family of genets. These cats are fed raw eggs and slivers of meat, which regularly have been placed on the veranda almost since the Ark was opened at the end of 1970. Now the offspring of the original pair of genets are not afraid of man. They can be enticed to come right inside the Ark and be fed from the hand. These are the only animals welcome in the Ark, although vervet monkeys sometimes enter the cabins, if windows are left open.

Meals are abandoned suddenly if something exciting happens outside. Perhaps a leopard is hunting its prey in full view. Or two rival bull buffaloes may be fighting for supremacy over the herd. Hyenas sometimes attack unsuspecting buffalo calves or the piglet of the giant forest hog. The screams of the young, combined with the grunts of the parent animal trying to ward off the attackers, are enough to make any visitor rush away from the dinner table to get a glimpse.

Those determined not to miss anything may stay up all night watching game, and are fortified with hot drinks around a roaring log fire. However, shortly after dawn, when one may see Mount Kenya’s snowcapped peaks glistening in the early morning sunlight, all the Ark’s passengers disembark and follow the forest trail out of the Game Park. Back at base, they pick up the transport for home.

Fond Recollections

We will remember our night vigil in the Ark for a long time. Of course, such visits can have their lighter moments. These are not likely to be forgotten either. For instance, on seeing a group of giant forest hogs, one woman cried out in sheer delight. She was sure that she had just seen her first rhinoceros! Others have mistaken the mongoose for a Colobus monkey, and even a hyena for a leopard!

Doubtless, advance research is a good idea. Much can be gleaned from a good handbook on animals and birds common to the area that you plan to visit. And, who knows? In the future, you may be able to spend an intriguing night aboard the “Ark.”

Filled with Anxiety, but Blessed in Many Ways

UNEXPECTED sickness, accident or “natural” disaster. How quickly these things can change your whole life, even as the Bible says: “You do not know what your life will be tomorrow”! (Jas. 4:14) But if one of these drastic changes occurs, how will you respond? Let me share with you what occurred to our family.

My husband David was born in Saskatoon, Canada, back in 1919. As a young man he became a baptized witness of Jehovah and soon entered the full-time preaching work. David was privileged to attend the Watchtower Bible School of Gilead and became a missionary in Singapore. Later he came here to Australia, where we met.

After we married in 1950, my husband was a traveling minister, and we visited congregations of Jehovah’s Witnesses together. But in March 1954 our son Shannon was born. That meant change. David became an overseer in a local congregation. My son and I always benefited from his loving headship as a husband, father and overseer. When Shannon began attending school, David encouraged me to return to the full-time preaching work. Afterward, when he completed his schooling, Shannon joined me, bringing us all much happiness.

Back in Canada, David’s mother was by now over eighty and in failing health. So in May 1972 David traveled to Canada for a visit. There events took place that completely changed our lives. My husband was suddenly taken ill. Within forty-eight hours he was totally paralyzed. His life was saved by an emergency operation in which a tube was put in his trachea, or windpipe, so a respirator machine could help him breathe. What a shock it was for Shannon and me to receive a cable about David’s condition! Still, we gained strength from knowing that Jehovah God was mindful of our anxiety and would help us.

…

Refine Search

Index Downloading...

Awake!, July 8, 1976