Awake!, July 8, 1986

Awake! — July 8, 1986

Source: jw.org

Contents

Page Two

Why Marry?

Living Together or Marriage?

An Extramarital Affair—Why Not?

Why Did the Catholic Bishops Have to Meet?

Ban Smoking on Airplanes?

How Can I Recover From Drug Abuse?

Greece—Two Thousand Years Later

Poor Flyer, Good Climber—The Unique Hoatzin

Why Is Life So Unfair?

Blood’s Amazing Self-Sealing System

From Our Readers

Watching the World

The Trials of Job

It Helps Her Husband

Page Two

Unhappy marriages and an increasing number of divorces have caused some people to wonder if couples who live together without marriage have a better chance of success. But what do the facts show? How do the children fare in these so-called paperless marriages? The following articles provide good insight into these questions

Why Marry? 3

Living Together or Marriage? 4

An Extramarital Affair—Why Not? 7

Why Marry?

Living together without marriage has become fully acceptable in many places, but does it result in greater happiness than does marriage? “Awake!” correspondent in Sweden considers this matter in the following three articles.

JAN and Anna met at a club. They liked each other immediately. Anna had recently left her parents’ home to live by herself. Jan shared his accommodations with another young man. One night, shortly after they met, Jan accompanied Anna to her apartment. He ended up staying overnight. The next day he brought his guitar and toothbrush and stayed overnight again. Gradually he moved all his belongings to Anna’s apartment, and they began living together. Jan and Anna did not find it necessary to marry.

Like Jan and Anna, millions of couples of all ages live together without getting married. They reason: Why marry? We can live together better without a legally binding piece of paper—a marriage license.

In fact, in many places living together without marriage has become fully acceptable and normal. In Sweden, for instance, the number of marriages has decreased by almost 40 percent in the last two decades. Twenty years ago, approximately one child in eight in that country was born to an unmarried mother. Now the figure is between one in three and one in two. Notes researcher J. Trost of Uppsala University, Sweden: “As far as we know this is the highest rate of children born out of wedlock ever known of in an industrialized society.”

In Denmark, living together without marriage represents the standard household unit for young college-educated couples, according to the International Herald Tribune. Such unmarried couples account for more than one out of every three births there. “Hardly anyone we know is married,” said one 31-year-old Danish man. “Everyone has entered what we call a paperless marriage.”

Such paperless marriages are also on the rise in other countries. For example, according to recent figures released by the United States Census Bureau, some two million unwed couples in the United States are living together, more than three times the number in 1970.

Why do a man and a woman so often choose to live together without getting married? Is a paperless marriage as good as or even better than a legal marriage?

Living Together or Marriage?

“It’s just bureaucracy! A paper doesn’t mean anything. Love is what counts. Living together is a more romantic relationship. You need to be more careful and considerate toward each other when you’re not legally linked together.” That’s how Jan and Anna reasoned when they began living together.

SO EVIDENTLY some couples feel that by living together without legal bonds they will be afraid of losing each other. Thus they will be more careful with each other and their relationship. On the surface, that may seem like good reasoning. But are such relationships usually more stable than legal marriages?

Living Together—Are There Disadvantages?

In the book Unmarried Cohabitation, researcher J. Trost, after presenting data assembled from a study of the subject, revealed that “the dissolution frequency among the unmarried cohabitants is about twice as high as among the married couples.”

Jan and Anna lived together for three years before they got married. How stable was that first relationship? “We found that a casual relationship only held open the back door to other loose relationships. When you are just a cohabitant, you are more readily available to someone else.”

Lars and Anette also lived together for three years before getting married. Says Lars: “When problems arose, we were more inclined to run away from each other than to sit down and resolve matters, as we try to do now as married persons.” Anette adds: “I don’t know how many times I got mad at Lars and told him I would take my things and leave. I never do that now.”

“My things,” Anette said. That reflects how unwed partners may view their belongings—divided into “my” things and “your” things. Some carefully keep receipts and engrave or write their names on the things they buy—just in case. Does that sound like the basis for a stable, enduring relationship?

And what happens if the time comes when the couple decides to split up? Dividing up belongings can be a real problem, resulting in arguments and great injustices. For instance, if the woman has taken care of the children and the household, she may run the risk of being left destitute because her partner earned the money and bought most of the things. There may be little she can do legally because they are unwed. So what happens to her when they separate?

Some couples say that they live together for a time just to see if they are compatible for marriage. They feel that their future marriage will be more stable as a result. Is that the case? For example, has the divorce rate decreased in countries where this practice has been common?

Take Sweden as an example. Experts there estimate that 99 percent of a current group of newlyweds lived together before getting married. If unmarried cohabitation results in more secure marriages, then you would expect the divorce rate in that country to be dropping. Yet, statistics show that in the 25 years between 1958 and 1983, while the annual number of marriages decreased from 50,785 to 36,210, the number of divorces increased from 8,657 to 20,618. So do the facts indicate that living together tends to result in more stable marriages?

How Others Are Affected

Then there is the effect that a couple’s living together without marriage can have on others. There are still many who consider it wrong and even immoral to live together that way. Therefore, parents or grandparents may feel unhappy, embarrassed, and worried when their children or grandchildren just live together. Contact between the generations may be threatened.

Recalls Anna: “I think my parents felt quite ashamed of me when I began to live with Jan. Up till that time, I had always enjoyed a good relationship with them. But then they felt embarrassed whenever our relatives asked about me. And they felt very uncomfortable around Jan. Before long, they stopped visiting us altogether. I think they suffered a lot.”

And what about the children born from such a relationship? When parents make and break relationships, it can lead to cases where several children without a common set of parents are brought together in the same home. This may leave the children feeling confused and insecure. A survey conducted by a TV reporter among 15-year-old schoolchildren showed that about one out of three of these youngsters did not live with both of their biological parents. In Stockholm, the capital of Sweden, the figure was as high as 43 percent. The reporter commented: “We now have a completely different society. Many children of the 1980’s have two homes . . . They spend one weekend with mom and the next with dad.”

In a survey of 5,500 ten-year-old children in Sweden, assistant professor Claes Sundelin found that one boy out of ten had serious psychological problems. He concluded that children are “affected by the increase in separations” and that they “invest themselves emotionally in their nearest grown-ups, and a breakup causes great disappointment.” A 12-year-old girl, whose parents separated, expressed what many children in that situation feel when she said: “When I grow up, I want to live well. I’ll get married and never get divorced.”

In Sweden the term “separation” is used about unwed as well as married couples. Since unmarried cohabitation is a more unstable relationship than marriage, this would mean that children born to unwed parents run a greater risk of ending up in a one-parent home. In either case, children suffer from such separation, and often, like that 12-year-old girl, they say that when they grow up they want a strong, lasting relationship—in marriage.

There are other far-reaching effects when couples live together without marriage. As such relationships are not registered, authorities cannot take effective account of them and apply laws to them. Some couples decide not to marry in order to avoid unfavorable taxation and the loss of certain pensions and other social benefits. This has its effect on how the tax burden is apportioned among people in general. Laws involving inheritance, wills, partitioning of property, and custody of children cannot be fully applied either. As one Danish lawyer stated: “Apart from the moral question, from a strictly legal viewpoint, paperless marriages are undesirable. It takes a lot more paper, that is, more legal documents and procedures, to resolve property and custody matters than with properly registered marriages.”

Aside from the moral or social implications, there is another even more important consideration.

The Scriptural View

The Scriptural view of this matter may be of little or no importance to many of those who live together without marriage. But to those who want to apply God’s commandments, it is vital.

According to the Bible, legal marriage is the only form of cohabitation between a man and a woman that is authorized by man’s Creator. The Bible shows that Jehovah God brought the first human pair together in a marriage. Why? One purpose was companionship. As the historical account in Genesis says: “It is not good for the man to continue by himself. I am going to make a helper for him, as a complement of him.”(Ge 2:18) Another purpose was reproduction. “Be fruitful and become many and fill the earth,” the couple was told. (Ge 1:27, 28) That this was not to be a trial arrangement is evident from Genesis 2:24, which says: “A man will leave his father and his mother and he must stick to his wife and they must become one flesh.”

Although, today, every man and woman is imperfect and many marriages end in divorce, the legalized marriage still constitutes the most secure and firmly established form of cohabitation between a man and a woman in society today. No other form of cohabitation offers the same degree of protection and security to all parties, including the children, that legalized marriage does.

That is the conclusion that Jan and Anna came to. After having lived with Jan for several years, Anna began to study the Bible and attend the meetings of Jehovah’s Witnesses. She soon wanted to conform to the Bible’s requirements regarding marriage. So one day she asked Jan to marry her. He had noticed how happy and satisfied she was every time she came home from a meeting. He realized how much it would mean to her, so he married her.

‘That religion might also have a beneficial effect on me,’ Jan thought. He decided to investigate for himself. Soon he, too, concluded that the Scriptural view on marriage is the best one. Jan and Anna are now dedicated witnesses of Jehovah, both serving as full-time ministers. How does marriage compare with living together? They answer: “Before getting married, we just lived together. But after getting married, we began to build a much closer, more loving, and more responsible relationship, one that includes a third party—our Creator, Jehovah God. For more than a decade now, we have enjoyed a happy marriage, and we are still enjoying it!”

However, others may take yet another line. They feel that marriage may be a good arrangement, but that marital fidelity is not necessary. They claim that an extramarital affair may even have a positive and strengthening effect on a marriage. Is that really the case?

[Blurb on page 5]

“When problems arose, we were more inclined to run away from each other than to sit down and resolve matters, as we try to do now as married persons”

[Blurb on page 6]

The legalized marriage still constitutes the most secure and firmly established form of cohabitation between a man and a woman in society today

[Picture on page 5]

Children are affected emotionally when parents separate

An Extramarital Affair—Why Not?

“ONLY you and you alone.” These words of a popular song well express the feeling most men and women have for the person they marry. But how long does such fidelity last?

Extramarital affairs have become so common in modern society that not having one is considered almost abnormal. There are those who condone such infidelity, defend it, and even recommend it. Some claim that it makes for a better marriage. As psychologist Tony Lake and journalist Ann Hills write in their book Affairs: The Anatomy of Extra-Marital Relationships: “There can be no doubt that the lives of a very large proportion of married men and women are being enriched and made more meaningful by secret sexual relationships.”

Popular women’s magazines ask openly: “Will an affair preserve your marriage?” In answer, it is often argued that an affair can make you appreciate your marriage partner more, or make up for shortcomings in your sex life. It will make you more experienced, more able to cope with your mate and your children, and therefore happier, some claim. The impression is given that if you don’t have an affair, you’re missing out on something. But are you?

Does an Affair Make Marriage Better?

Could this popularizing of extramarital affairs have something to do with the increasing number of divorces in our time? In Sweden almost three out of every five marriages end in divorce. And the figures for other countries are not far behind.—See the accompanying box, “Marriage and Divorce Statistics for 1983.”

To what extent is adultery the reason for such divorces? Commenting on figures for the United Kingdom, Lake and Hills claim: “More than half the men who were divorced under the age of forty had adultery cited as the grounds in the petitions filed with the courts. It is reasonable to assume that adultery had taken place in many more of these marriages, and that it was not cited as the main reason for the petition. At the same time, it would be very surprising if there are not far more extra-marital affairs each year than there are divorces.”

A recent survey in China, conducted at the Shanghai Academy of Social Science, found that infidelity is a major reason for divorce in that country. Divorce as a result of infidelity “has tripled in the past two years,” says the Shanghai report.

Without doubt, extramarital affairs are one of the major causes of ruined marriages. Therefore, can having an affair ever be recommended as a remedy for a weak marriage? Could a drug that kills 30 to 40 percent or more of its consumers ever be recommended as medicine? Hardly!

Some argue that it is best to keep the affair secret from one’s marriage partner. But how? Explain Lake and Hills: “Affairs are usually surrounded by a protective web of lies and deceit. Whether an affair is a secret or not and whether it has ended or is still going on, the lies are usually designed to ‘protect’ the marriage, or to safeguard certain aspects of the marital relationship. Many of these lies are half-truths, because the whole truth would be too painful to face up to, or might too radically alter the relationship between husband and wife.”

When a man and a woman marry, they commit themselves to each other. To break a commitment is cheating, betrayal. Have lies, deceit, and half-truths ever brought lasting happiness to a marriage? So before considering having a secret affair, one would do well to ask oneself: Will all involved become happier? What about the feelings of guilt and the constant fear of finally being found out?

Still others argue that the foremost purpose of marriage is to bring children into the world, and the importance of sticking to one’s mate fades when the children grow up and leave home. They claim that there can be a sexual reawakening. So what’s wrong with having an affair then?

The Sexual “Reawakening”

There are psychologists and family counselors who recommend that middle-aged persons have an extramarital affair to reawaken dormant resources. Claim Lake and Hills: “An affair at this stage may well bring even more stability to a stable marriage, enabling one partner to feel alive in new ways without in the least threatening the other.”

Indeed, an affair may stimulate a person’s sexual appetite or satisfy his selfish fancy for a while. “It seemed such a glamorous idea, having a lover,” one middle-aged woman put it. But at what price?

Consider what happened to one middle-aged man after he had an affair with his secretary, who was 18 years his junior. His marriage of 30 years broke up, he began drinking heavily, and he was eventually fired from his job. He laments: “I did it simply because I was so proud of myself. Imagine me, at my age, conquering an attractive young woman. I believe this need to brag, to prove what a macho type you are, lies behind much of the stupidity men devote themselves to when they get a chance. This is unfortunate, because such pride rests on a false foundation.”

“A false foundation” indeed! The Bible long ago put it this way: “Pride is before a crash, and a haughty spirit before stumbling.”—Proverbs 16:18.

Is Sex Everything?

Some seek sex outside marriage because they think they are not getting enough within marriage. They are apt to think that happiness in life hinges on a very active sex life. To them a traditional lifelong relationship with one partner is outdated. As Rita Liljeström, an assistant professor of sociology in Sweden, said: “In Sweden there is a great deal of infidelity. Marital faithfulness has become surrounded by an air of ridicule. ‘We want to be modern.’”

Interestingly, the Bible has much to say on the subject of sex, presenting a balanced view of the matter. For example, consider what wise King Solomon wrote:

“Drink water out of your own cistern, and tricklings out of the midst of your own well. Should your springs be scattered out of doors, your streams of water in the public squares themselves? Let them prove to be for you alone, and not for strangers with you. Let your water source prove to be blessed, and rejoice with the wife of your youth, a lovable hind and a charming mountain goat. Let her own breasts intoxicate you at all times. With her love may you be in an ecstasy constantly. So why should you, my son, be in an ecstasy with a strange woman or embrace the bosom of a foreign woman?”—Proverbs 5:15-20.

So the Bible does not underestimate the “ecstasy” and satisfaction that sexual relations should bring to a man and a woman. But notice that this is to be within marriage, ‘with the mate of one’s youth.’

Of course, sexual desire may differ between man and wife. As in so many other areas of life, a happy relationship requires adaptability and willingness to share. So it is with sexual relations. Communication is a must. Each needs to know of the other’s abilities and desires. The apostle Paul recommends: “Let the husband render to his wife her due; but let the wife also do likewise to her husband.” And when doing so, they do well to follow this related principle: “Let each one keep seeking, not his own advantage, but that of the other person.”—1 Corinthians 7:3; 10:24.

Though sex has its place within marriage, that is not to suggest that it is everything or that the sexual appetite can go unrestrained. To illustrate: Alcohol, in moderation, can make “the heart of mortal man rejoice,” says the Bible. (Psalm 104:15) But that certainly does not mean that we should develop an inordinate craving for alcohol or that we need not control when, where, and how we drink it.—Proverbs 20:1; 23:29-35.

The Unselfish Norm

No, sex is neither the only nor the best basis for a happy marriage. The kind of love that provides the basis for lasting satisfaction is a mixture of friendship, tenderness, concern, understanding, fidelity, responsibility. Such is true marital love. It is what remains, what helps marriage mates to endure, when trials come, when physical or mental illness obstructs sexual relations, or when age takes strength and beauty away.

In the final analysis, the best advice is that found in the Book of Books, the Bible, when it says: “Be faithful to your own wife and give your love to her alone.” (Proverbs 5:15, Today’s English Version) The Christian apostle Paul added: “Let marriage be honorable among all, and the marriage bed be without defilement.” (Hebrews 13:4) In line with that, Jesus Christ reminded certain inquirers in his day: “Did you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and his mother and will stick to his wife, and the two will be one flesh’?”—Matthew 19:4, 5; Genesis 2:24.

A solid marriage built on such unselfish love and loyalty, coupled with unbreakable love for God and his Word, is the basis for lasting happiness—both for the partners, their children, and all others involved.

[Blurb on page 8]

Extramarital affairs have become so common in modern society that not having one is considered almost abnormal

[Box on page 10]

Marriage and Divorce Statistics for 1983:

Marriages Divorces Ratio

U.S.A.: 2,444,000 1,179,000 About 1 in 2

U.S.S.R.: 2,834,000 946,000 1 in 3

Australia: 113,905 41,412a More than 1 in 3

Cuba: 76,365 29,249 About 2 in 5

Netherlands: 78,415 32,596 About 2 in 5

United Kingdom: 387,000 145,802b About 2 in 5

Hungary: 75,978 29,000 About 2 in 5

Denmark: 27,096 14,763 More than 1 in 2

Sweden: 36,210 20,618 Almost 3 in 5

These figures are based on Demographic Yearbook 1983. The figures for Sweden and Denmark are taken from Yearbook of Nordic Statistics 1984.

[Footnotes]

Divorce figure for Australia is for 1981; figure for United Kingdom is for 1982.

[Picture on page 9]

A happy relationship between man and wife requires good communication and willingness to adapt

Why Did the Catholic Bishops Have to Meet?

By “Awake!” correspondent in Italy

“THE [Vatican II] Council—Cause of the Crisis in the Church?” With this question the Jesuit publication La Civiltá Cattolica (October 5, 1985) pointed to “a radical and global crisis” affecting the Catholic Church. It highlighted four main aspects: a crisis of faith, of morals, of religious observance, and of church personnel. It further stated: “A considerable number of priests have abandoned the priesthood, some because of a crisis of faith, and more for personal reasons.”

In view of this acknowledged crisis, the 1985 synod (assembly of bishops) held in Rome certainly should have great significance for the 627 million Catholics in the world. It is also intriguing for others who have closely observed the transformation of the Catholic Church over the last few decades. But what other reasons motivated this special synod? What issues were faced? And how will the synod affect Catholics in the long run?

“Catholic Synod: Facing the Undeclared Schism”

Under that title Catholic journalist and historian Anne Roche, writing in The Toronto Star of Canada, explained that 20 years after the close of the Second Vatican Council, “traditional Catholic doctrine and discipline are in ruins. We’ve all seen the amazing statistics: Fewer than 5 per cent of Catholics under 30 accept the church’s teaching on contraception; fewer than 10 per cent of the same group accept the Pope’s competence to teach infallibly in matters of faith and morals.”

This credibility gap has led to what Roche calls two Catholic churches, “the official church centered upon the papal magisterium [teaching authority] . . . and which now commands only a minority allegiance; and the unofficial church run by . . . the revolutionaries who have a stranglehold on every aspect of Catholic life in the increasingly autonomous national churches.” If this summation is correct, there is little wonder that the pope saw a need to call a special meeting for consultation with his bishops. But what events led up to the special synod?

A Cardinal’s Candid Opinion

The Second Vatican Council of 1962-65 raised great hopes within Catholic circles—but in different ways. Some hoped for and got a more liberal approach in certain matters. Others expected greater unity to be achieved. Many have been disappointed, including the Vatican’s most powerful prelate next to the pope, German cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (Vatican department that supervises the purity of Catholic doctrine).

In a recent interview the cardinal stated: “It is indisputable that the last twenty years have been decidedly unfavorable for the Catholic Church. The results that have followed the Council seem to be painfully opposite to everybody’s expectations, starting with those of Pope John XXIII and then of Paul VI.”

What had been expected? He continued: “What the Popes and the Council Fathers were expecting was a new Catholic unity. Instead, one has encountered a dissension which—in the words of Paul VI—seems to have passed over from self-criticism to self-destruction. One was expecting a new enthusiasm only to end up, too often, in boredom and discouragement. One was expecting a jump ahead, instead a progressive falling into decline had to be faced.”—Rapporto Sulla Fede, by Vittorio Messori, entitled in English The Ratzinger Report.

Therefore, on January 25, 1985, Pope John Paul II surprised the Catholic world by calling for a special synod to be held from November 24 to December 8 of the same year. He invited 165 bishops, 102 of whom were presidents of national bishops’ conferences around the world, as well as some nonvoting observers. The news media, like children expecting a fireworks fantasy, were also in attendance.

Issues That Divide

The synod was viewed by some as an arena for drawing up battle lines. As the French-Canadian writer Danièle Blain stated: “The behind-the-scenes struggle that has been going on for years between ‘progressives’ and ‘conservatives’ in the very heart of the Church has broken out into open war.” (L’Actualité, November 1985) On the one side were the so-called progressive bishops who wanted to hang on to the changes and gains achieved since Vatican II. On the other side were the conservative bishops who yearned for a restoration of some of the ideals that were followed prior to Vatican II.

In this face-off, the progressives feared the “umpire”—Pope John Paul II—more than anybody. Why so? Because on many occasions, he had made clear his preference for a return to conservatism in Catholic teaching and practice. Writer Marco Tosatti noted in the Turin daily Stampa Sera: “It could prove to be difficult for the synodal fathers . . . to uphold any thesis disagreeing with the ‘reading’ that John Paul II is building up day after day.”

Many Catholics had hoped that issues such as birth control, celibacy, and women’s ordination would have been discussed at length. In fact, they got scant consideration, if any at all. Some bishops brought up the widespread problem of divorced Catholics who are banned from partaking of the Eucharist. One New Jersey, U.S.A., priest told The Toronto Star that “if he barred divorced and remarried people from the sacraments, his church would be almost empty.” But the bishops offered no solution, and the problem didn’t even get mentioned in the synod’s final report.

The main issue seemed to be unity—to bridge the gap that has arisen between the papacy and some national conferences of bishops. As Danièle Blain wrote: “The search for lost unity is, more than ever, the order of the day.” (L’Actualité) Related to unity was also the issue of the theology of liberation, which claims that the church should be involved in the political and social struggles of the oppressed. It has divided the Catholic clergy in recent years, and it came under attack from Colombian bishop Darío Castrillón Hoyos.

As it turned out, the synod did not produce any violent confrontation, and, at least publicly, the pope avoided any appearance of putting pressure on the bishops. Peter Nichols, a correspondent for The Times of London, reported: “The Pope attended all the plenary sessions of the synod, but he remained silent to the last day. He made a point also of getting up and leaving the hall when a vote was taking place. The voting was secret, but he wanted to avoid any impression of seeking to influence opinions.”

Thus the news media were disappointed—the theological fireworks turned out to be a damp squib. Although there were obvious differences of opinion, acrimonious debate was avoided. Perhaps the synod was optimistically summed up by the headline in the Italian Catholic workers’ magazine Azione Sociale, which stated, “United but Different.” Possibly indicating that a dangerous confrontation had been defused, The New York Times commented: “The Synod’s final report was at least as notable for what it avoided as for what it confronted.”

How Does It Affect Catholics?

Apparently the synod’s report to the faithful was not an easy document to compose. A committee of five cardinals drew it up twice, only to have it rejected because of excessive pessimism. Finally they got approval for a third and more positive version. And what does it have to offer to Catholics in general?

One subject of vital interest is covered under the heading “The Word of God.” It states: “Hearing the word of God with reverence, the church has the mission of proclaiming it with faith ([compare] Dei Verbum, 1). Consequently, the preaching of the Gospel is among the principal duties of the church, and especially of the bishops, and today it takes on the greatest importance ([compare] Lumen Gentium, 25).” Yet, in the Synod Report, God’s Word the Bible, which is available to most people, is only quoted seven times. In contrast, church encyclicals and documents, which are only available to a privileged few, are referred to at least 44 times, as the above quotation illustrates! If the Bible is used so seldom, how can a document of this nature reach the hearts of sincere Catholics who really want to know what is their Christian duty?

The document also states: “Evangelization is the first duty not only of bishops but also of priests and deacons, indeed, of all Christians.” It further clarifies the subject: “Evangelization takes place through witnesses. The witness gives his testimony not only with words, but also with his life.”

We appeal to sincere Catholics to reason on this matter. Who today are really acting as witnesses for God and Christ? Who today are evangelizing in every walk of life, both by word and by conduct? Who today, regardless of sacrifice, even of life and liberty, are proclaiming the Gospel, or good news, of God’s Kingdom rule by Christ? Who are regularly visiting your home to bring you this message? Your priest? Or Jehovah’s Witnesses? (Compare Isaiah 43:10, 12 and Acts 1:8.)

While the Catholic Church is torn by dissension and rebellion motivated by theology, politics, and social issues, true Christianity must follow the Bible’s guidelines: “By this all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love among yourselves.” “Now I exhort you, brothers, through the name of our Lord Jesus Christ that you should all speak in agreement, and that there should not be divisions among you, but that you may be fitly united in the same mind and in the same line of thought.”—John 13:35; 1 Corinthians 1:10.

Evidently that unity does not exist in the divided ranks of the “progressive” and “conservative” bishops of the Catholic Church. The very need to convene a synod highlighted that division.

[Picture on page 12]

The synod in session in St. Peter’s Basilica, Rome

Ban Smoking on Airplanes?

Doctor and lawyer Lee S. Glass not long ago discussed this controversial topic in an article in Newsweek.

He reported: “When I spoke to a maintenance supervisor about smoking, I was told that it is quite costly for airlines. All those pounds of tobacco that change into ounces of ash don’t just disappear. After depositing a quantity of their carcinogens into each smoker’s lungs, they go out through the ventilation system, causing the mechanical equivalent of atherosclerosis in the process. That smoke gums up metal tubing just as it gums up the smokers’ arteries, and plenty has to be spent to restore the systems to good health.” Then why do airlines tolerate this needless expense, when banning smoking would save them much time and money? “The reason airlines tolerate the cost,” Glass declares, “is that the revenues generated by ticket sales to smokers exceed the amount that would be saved by banning smoking.”

Glass does not buy this argument. He reasons that in the long run, the small losses would be regained by the support given by nonsmokers and “every antismoking organization from Savannah to San Francisco.” Eventually, airlines “would have the smokers, who would not be smoking, because there would not be smoking seats available. They would have significantly decreased maintenance costs because their ventilators would be free from smoke residues. They would have taken a significant step toward improving national health and might have indirectly helped a few folks stop smoking.”

How Can I Recover From Drug Abuse?

Young People Ask . . .

How Can I Recover From Drug Abuse?

As more and more young people experiment with drugs, the question of how to recover from drug abuse takes on greater importance. This article deals with the emotional aspects of recovery. We publish it to help those who are struggling to break free from drugs. At the same time, it is our hope that being made aware of what is involved in recovery will help other youths to avoid getting involved with drugs in the first place.

“WHEN I first stopped using drugs, I had trouble identifying my feelings,” recalls Allen. “At times, I didn’t know if I was happy or sad. My frequent displays of violent anger were often triggered by insignificant events. I just didn’t know how to control my emotions.”

An unusual experience? Not really. It’s quite common for recovering drug abusers to have some trouble with their emotions when they first stop using drugs. The problem is, though, that often the tendency is to seek relief by going back to drugs. Hence, it’s important that they learn to maintain good emotional health.a But how?

Recovering Emotionally

Allen, who is starting his second year of drug-free life, says: “To really keep a handle on my emotions, while adding structure to my life, I try to follow one simple rule: Don’t get too hungry, angry, lonely, or tired. (As a memory aid, think of the word h-a-l-t.) I find that when I stick to this rule, I feel my best both physically and emotionally.” Yes, consider what drug rehabilitation experts say about avoiding these four things:

Hungry: Hunger, with its accompanying drop in the blood-sugar level, can cause irritability and depression, say the experts. Therefore it’s essential that at regular intervals the recovering drug abuser eat a well-balanced meal, including vegetables, fruit, and protein. And, of course, he’d do well to avoid junk foods—simple carbohydrates such as candy, cake, cookies, and soft drinks containing sugar. It is also recommended that he avoid alcohol in the light of its mood-changing properties.b

Angry: Uncontrolled anger poses a real danger to recovery. Anger causes you to do and say things you may later regret. This, in turn, causes feelings of guilt, depression, and low self-esteem, any of which could easily lead the recovering drug abuser back to drugs. The Bible tells us to “be wrathful, and yet do not sin.” (Ephesians 4:26) So although you may be justifiably angry at times, you’re still responsible to control such anger. So ask yourself: ‘Why am I angry? What can I constructively do about the situation?’ Try talking things over with a responsible adult before you say or do something you’ll later regret. Express how you feel in a calm, mature way. Talking out your feelings is one of the best ways of dealing with them.

Lonely: Loneliness can trigger such negative feelings as self-centeredness, envy, self-pity, depression. Once again the danger exists that such negative feelings may send the former abuser back to drugs, looking for relief. When you find yourself feeling lonely, try calling a close friend to talk about your feelings. (Proverbs 17:17) Or try talking to one of your parents. A good way to combat loneliness is to make yourself available to help others. Remember, “There is more happiness in giving than there is in receiving.”—Acts 20:35.

Tired: Reportedly, this more than any other factor can cause failure in one’s recovery. Being tired not only can make you irritable and depressed but can also cloud your thinking. Therefore, it is highly recommended that the recovering drug abuser have a structured sleep pattern, that he go to bed and get up at regular times so as to get a good night’s sleep.

In a practical way, how does all of this work? Explains Allen: “If I feel irritable or depressed during the course of the day, I just stop and think: ‘Am I too hungry, angry, lonely, or tired?’ Often just a simple adjustment in one of these areas puts me on the road to feeling better—without drugs!”

Needed—A More Meaningful Relationship

Often a drug abuser develops a close relationship with his drugs—he relies on drugs to feel secure, happy, or more comfortable in difficult situations.

Recalls Fred, who used drugs for a number of years: “Social events were a nightmare. I was shy and uncomfortable around people. I felt a wrenching feeling in the pit of my stomach, a feeling that I didn’t belong. The only solution I could see was to use drugs to loosen up. But it wasn’t long before the trouble started.” What kind of trouble? “I was arrested twice,” he continues, “once for disorderly conduct and once for driving while intoxicated. Both times I was high on something.”

If it’s not trouble with the law, the drug abuser may find himself in trouble with his teachers at school. Or his relationship with loved ones becomes strained. If things get bad enough, he may try to stop using drugs. But unless he replaces the lost relationship he had with drugs with something more meaningful, he may find himself returning to drugs. As Dr. Sidney Cohen wrote in The Journal of the American Medical Association: “Persons do not stop the use of mood-altering drugs until they discover something better.”

Finding “Something Better”

Both Allen and Fred found “something better” than drugs. They began to study the Bible with Jehovah’s Witnesses. Through a study of God’s Word the Bible, they learned about God’s endearing qualities and how to develop a father-child relationship with him.

Allen puts it this way: “Learning of God’s mercy has drawn me so close to him that I can approach life with confidence. I’m happier now than I’ve ever been.” Fred agrees, adding: “Although some days are better than others, I can truthfully say that I’ve found an inner peace that I never had with drugs.” This “peace of God” that ‘guards one’s heart and mental powers’ is promised to those who develop a close relationship with God.—Philippians 4:6, 7.

Such peaceful contentment is unmatched by any artificial means, and it can help you deal with problems you have little or no control over, such as sickness or perhaps the death of a loved one. (Ecclesiastes 9:11) You can likewise find strength to tackle day-to-day challenges—effectively dealing with others who mistreat you or trying to cope with days when everything seems to go wrong!

When problems crop up, learn to draw on your relationship with God through prayer. Share with him your deepest thoughts, feelings, and needs. Tell him your fears, your anxieties, your disappointments. Express your joys and thanks. Such deeply felt prayer, when uttered “in faith,” will help calm your heart. (James 1:6-8) Remember what the apostle said—such earnest petitions bring “the peace of God” that will ‘guard your heart’ and help you not to be “anxious over anything.”

The closer you draw to Jehovah, the more you will sense his interest in your life, just as an infant can sense the love of a caring parent. And each obstacle you overcome with God’s help will become a building block of faith, which will serve as a wall of protection, securing your emotional well-being.

Yes, to be successful in recovery, the former drug abuser needs to replace drugs with peaceful contentment such as that resulting from a close relationship with God. Such a relationship will enable him to enjoy life without turning back to drugs for a false sense of security. As Fred, who now has been off drugs for over three years, put it: “I’ve found an inner peace that I never had with drugs.”

[Footnotes]

For a discussion of why and how to say no to drugs and what is involved in the physical recovery from drug abuse, please see our issues of March 8, September 22, and October 8, 1985.

According to the booklet Narcotics Anonymous, “the substitution of alcohol has caused a great many addicts to form a new addiction pattern, which in its progression brings as many problems as before.”

[Blurb on page 15]

“I try to follow one simple rule: Don’t get too hungry, angry, lonely, or tired”

[Blurb on page 17]

“I’ve found an inner peace that I never had with drugs”

[Picture on page 16]

Recovering drug abusers should avoid alcohol in view of its mood-changing properties

Greece—Two Thousand Years Later

In the summer of 1985, large groups of Jehovah’s Witnesses from around the world converged on Greece to attend a series of international conventions and also to visit sites with particular significance in the history of Christianity. This article, written by a Witness who went to Japan as a missionary in 1966 and has lived there ever since, describes some of the experiences of these visitors.

GREECE—a land charged with history and with a strong attraction for Christians! As we arrived for our tour of this Bible land, questions bubbled up inside us. Would two thousand years melt away so that we could picture how things were in the first century? What would we learn about the apostle Paul, who organized the early Christian congregations in this land? Come and see what we saw in five cities here.

Philippi

We saw where Paul opened up Christian preaching in Europe and where he was persecuted for it. Among the ruins of a very large sixth-century church, we were amazed to find a baptismal pool much like the ones Jehovah’s Witnesses build today. We were surprised that these Greeks had followed the Bible way of baptism for so long. As there is no city of Philippi today, there is no congregation of our brothers by that name.—Acts 16:12-40.

Thessalonica

We shed tears for our brothers here. We saw modern-day faithful sisters witnessing on the streets and being surrounded by jeering youths. As we approached, passersby shouted angrily at us as well as at the local Witnesses. Sometimes a priest of the Greek Orthodox Church would come along like a self-appointed policeman to check on what was happening.

We recalled the opposition that Paul and Silas faced in Thessalonica in the first century. Jews, who should have known Jehovah, “getting jealous, took into their company certain wicked men of the marketplace idlers and formed a mob.” Their complaint? “These men that have overturned the inhabited earth are present here also.”—Acts 17:5, 6.

In the 20th century, the Greek Orthodox Church has the Bible and claims to know God. But the church leaders were especially angry with us. Their complaint? Well, although there are 42 congregations of Jehovah’s Witnesses in the city, the clergy have vehemently insisted that this is nothing more than a local group. And now this “local group” had organized an international convention in their city! They objected to Jehovah’s Witnesses from all over the world being “present here also.”

How proud we were to wear our Greek convention badges identifying us as Jehovah’s Witnesses and showing the local people that we in other countries are solidly supporting the Greek Witnesses. Our convention was a tremendous success.

Beroea

The Jewish synagogue here is much the same size as many Kingdom Halls. It was thrilling to see the Tetragrammaton above the platform and also to think that the apostle Paul visited a synagogue in Beroea. As our group was coming out of the synagogue, a Japanese Witness remarked: “It must have been just like this in the first century when the meetings finished.”

The Bible records that the Jews in Beroea were “noble-minded” because when they heard the preaching of Paul, they “received the word with the greatest eagerness of mind, carefully examining the Scriptures daily as to whether these things were so.” Today in this small town, there is a congregation of Christians who show the same ‘noble-mindedness.’—Acts 17:10-14.

Athens

This city was named after the goddess Athena and is dominated by the Parthenon, a temple dedicated to her almost 2,500 years ago. When Paul visited here, “his spirit within him came to be irritated at beholding that the city was full of idols.” (Acts 17:16) When the local guides talked endlessly about ancient mythical gods, we shared Paul’s irritation. If only these edifices could have been used for pure worship!

Looking down from the Acropolis, we saw the area of the old marketplace and Mars’ Hill. Some 1,900 years ago, Paul was down there in this city of pagan worshipers. Yet his love for Jehovah strengthened him to speak out boldly to those gathered in that marketplace. Now, there are 10,000 Witnesses in Athens boldly reasoning with the Athenians just as Paul did.—Acts 17:16-34.

Corinth

The ruins of Corinth are among the most interesting in Greece because they are comparatively well preserved and are easy to understand. We climbed the steps to what is thought to have been the judgment seat before which the apostle Paul appeared. (Acts 18:12) We ambled through the marketplace with its old shops, visited the theater, and saw water running in the old aqueducts. (1 Corinthians 10:25) Close by is the sea that brought foreign influences, both good and bad, to Corinth. Prominent are seven monolithic columns, all that is left of a temple to the god Apollo. But these columns have stood for 2,500 years, despite many earthquakes. How much this temple, and the many others in Greece, testify to the high regard the ancient Greeks had for their mythical gods! Now, two congregations of Jehovah’s Witnesses, imitating Paul, urge modern-day Corinthians to build even more durably in a spiritual way.—1 Corinthians 3:10-17.

Lasting Impressions

Beautiful Greece with her sunny, azure skies has much to attract tourists. Realizing this has renewed our respect for Paul, because he never made Greece his vacation ground. Single-mindedly, he worked hard. He visited all these five cities in one year (probably 50 C.E.). Considering that he was opposed violently by many Jews and that there were no Christian congregations in Greece before his visit, Paul’s assignment was difficult. (Acts 16:19–18:17) Yet, after a short time in a city, Paul had effectively helped so many to understand the truth that he could form a congregation and, trusting that Jehovah would take care of it, move on. Those of us who have gone out to pioneer new territories were moved to meditate on such effective preaching.

Like Paul, we will long remember the overwhelming love of our Greek brothers and sisters. Everywhere, they labored literally day and night for us, helping us to understand the sights we visited. Although we shed tears for them because of the opposition they face, we were deeply moved by their confidence in Jehovah and their determination to serve faithfully, come what may. It also made us happy to see how the Greek government and the police give our brothers all the protection they can.

Our group attended the convention in Athens. Many memories still bring a lump to our throat. Often when we had language difficulties someone would suddenly say: “Jehovah!” And we hugged one another, rejoicing in the one word we all understood, the name that identified us as spiritual brothers. On buses and at the convention grounds, groups of us from many countries sang Kingdom songs together. Particularly memorable was a scene of blacks, whites, and Orientals joining their voices and singing in perhaps 20 languages the words of the song: “Myriads on myriads of brothers/Stand at my side to be/Each one a faithful witness,/Keeping integrity.” We came away feeling as if our hearts would burst with gratitude to Jehovah for the love and unity we had.

Finally, may our group from Japan represent the thousands of Witnesses from America, Europe, Africa, Oceania, and Asia who converged on Greece in 1985 and say to our dear Greek brothers: “We always thank God when we make mention concerning all of you in our prayers, for we bear incessantly in mind your faithful work and your loving labor and your endurance.”—1 Thessalonians 1:2, 3.

[Picture on page 18]

Ruins at Philippi

[Pictures on page 19]

Synagogue in Beroea

Acropolis, Athens

[Picture on page 20]

Parthenon, Athens

Poor Flyer, Good Climber—The Unique Hoatzin

By “Awake!” correspondent in Suriname

‘THEY look like pheasants,’ suggested one scientist.

‘They strike me as fowls,’ claimed a colleague.

‘No, they are most nearly related to the cuckoos,’ challenged others, spurring the author of one reference book to write cautiously: “Placement in the zoological system debated.”

But just what are “they”? Well, they are neither pheasants, fowls, nor cuckoos. They are hoatzins. And so different are they from other birds that some ornithologists classify them in a family all to themselves.

If you’ve never heard of the hoatzin, though, this no doubt is due to the fact that they live only along the tropical rivers of South America. (The hoatzin fares poorly in captivity, according to one ornithologist I spoke to.) Nevertheless, some of its numerous nicknames may ring a bell. They range from colorful Cigana (Gypsy) to embarrassing Stinking Bird, and from eminent Governor van Batenburg’s Turkey to humbling Crazy Hannah. Completing the list of this bird’s aliases are Crest Fowl, Canje Pheasant, and the name the Amerindians gave it, Zezieras.

Early reports on this bird called it “the most peculiar of all birds inhabiting the South American forests.” Since about 650 different species of bird inhabit Suriname alone, perhaps this was somewhat of a hyperbole. Nevertheless, the passing of time and new findings have not altered man’s fascination for this remarkable creature. Why, during the last 25 years, scientists have often lowered their binoculars in old-fashioned puzzlement and exclaimed that hoatzin is “amazing,” “unique,” “completely different,” “strange,” “unusual,” and “most remarkable.” But just why does hoatzin merit these adjectives?

Crazy Hannah

To find out, I one day focused my binoculars on a small, jungle-thick island in the Courantyne River—the border river with Guyana and the only part of Suriname where the hoatzin can still be found. Since they are most active at dawn and dusk, our little party made sure that our small dugout canoe reached the island shortly after sunrise.

When we got to within 50 meters of the island, we knew we had found them.a Their loud call—like “chachalaca”—gave them away. When a group of about ten of them now appeared, we held our breath and tried not to move. The birds, however, scurried through the branches, doubling the volume of their strange call.

“You see, that’s why we call them Crazy Hannahs,” said David, our Amerindian friend. “A sane bird would keep quiet, hide, or take off. But these Hannahs make more noise and stay around! A bird like that must be crazy,” chuckled David.

Crazy or not, we were glad they gave us ample time to have a long, close-up look. The bird is about 60 centimeters long, roughly the size of a pheasant, with its big, round-tipped wings and long, broad tail accounting for most of its size. Its plumage is rich with autumn colors of chestnut brown, rusty red, and glossy olive-green streaked with black and buffy white. But higher up the colors change. A long, skinny neck supports a small head. Its crimson eyes are framed by a bare skin of cobalt blue.

What the head may lack in size is compensated for by its striking buff-colored crest. Crest Fowl indeed! With every slight move of its head or touch of a breeze, the crest plumes wave like a fan.

Food and Storage

As it turned out, the hoatzins were having breakfast when we interrupted them. They are vegetarians and feed on leaves, buds, pulpy seeds, and fruits. In fact, we spotted one high up enjoying the leaves of the corkwood tree. But their favorite food is the mokomoko, or arum—a native plant with giant, arrowhead-shaped leaves. The bird tears into the tough leaves with zest, gulping down big tatters to fill up its crop.

Crop? Yes, the crop is a pouch 50 times as big as the bird’s stomach. There the bird stores its food, where it soaks and undergoes preliminary digestion. This crop is so large that there is little room in the chest for strong muscles. The result? Hoatzin is a poor flyer.

Admittedly, when you hear the loud, whirring sound of this bird in flight, you imagine him to be the picture of grace. But not so. Oh, he tries hard enough—flailing his wings strenuously, going all out but hardly moving. Actually, he looks more like a helicopter taking off than a sleek airplane. During a short flight of about a hundred meters, he screeches protestingly with every tiring beat of his wings, eager to touch down as soon as possible. Unlike other birds that land daintily, a hoatzin’s landing is more like a crash. He heads straight for the trees or bushes, grasping awkwardly with his widespread feet at every random branch within reach. It is strictly a hit-or-miss affair. Sometimes he drops several feet before he finally grabs hold, uttering a squawk of relief.

Changing of the Guard

During the rainy season—breeding time in hoatzin country—I once had the opportunity to have a close look at one of their nests. There it was, hidden behind a curtain of mokomoko stalks, sitting some 3 meters above water level. It looked functional but not fancy: a simple platform, crudely constructed of twigs as thick as pencils. Measuring about 30 centimeters in diameter, it had no soft bedding. And it was such a loosely built affair that you could see the small eggs right through the bottom of the nest. Usually you’ll see two to five off-white eggs, freckled with brown and pinkish spots, in one of these nests. They take about 28 days to incubate. But the mother and father have found a way to fight the tedium. They take turns in brooding the eggs.

Early morning and late afternoon there is, according to writer Lear Grimmer, the “changing of the guard.” Says Grimmer: “The birds usually exchange brief but formal bows before they shift places.” And once in place, they are courageous defenders of their offspring. Mouse opossums, tree boas, birds of prey, and squirrel monkeys all have an appetite for the eggs—and the young ones themselves! But the intruders are greeted by the warning cries of the intrepid adult birds, poised for attack!

What a Baby!

If the adult hoatzin is unusual, baby hoatzin is even more singular. When hatched, out comes a naked chick armed with a strong beak and oversize feet. But puzzle for a moment at the well-developed claws, or “fingers,” at the bend of each wing, much like our thumb and forefinger. E. A. Brigham, who studied them a century ago, exclaimed: “From an egg laid by a bird with two feet and two wings comes an animal with four feet.”

Only a few hours old, the young ones look over the edge of the nest and crawl out. On all fours they scramble among the branches and vines, using their parrotlike jointed beak, big clawed feet, and powerful wing hooks. Good climbers, all right! But the “hands” also make effective “paddles.” Whenever danger lurks, the little one dives valiantly three or more meters into the river. The good climber is thus both a skillful diver and an excellent swimmer. The chick might paddle to the safety of tangled undergrowth. Then, to let the parents know where it is, it will give a distinctive “squeeownk,” convert its “paddles” into “hands” again, and claw its way up. The alarmed adult birds will now come to its aid, helping the terrified chick back to the nest.

Odor as a Lifesaver

“Fresh horse manure,” wrote one researcher.

“A cow shed,” added another.

“They have a . . . disagreeable musty smell,” acceded the experts. They had held their nose too close to the bird and aired their opinion in agreement: Stinking Bird! Just where did the smell come from?

“Its meat . . . smells awful,” wrote one.

“It is not the meat that is smelling but the contents of the crop,” differed another. What do the natives think?

“Nothing wrong with the meat. When I ate it, I asked for more!” laughed William, a seasoned hunter. “Just like turkey.”

“It is not the meat but the feathers that have the smell,” adds an older woman who has plucked some. But the majority turn up their nose and insist: “They stink!” And that deep conviction may well be the lifesaver for this otherwise vulnerable creature.

Hoatzin may have a foul odor and be a not-too-graceful flier, but, come to think of it, to survive in a world where many animals are heading for extinction is an accomplishment in itself. Perhaps Crazy Hannah is not so crazy after all.

[Footnotes]

1 meter = 3.28 feet.

Why Is Life So Unfair?

The Bible’s Viewpoint

Why Is Life So Unfair?

BARRELING down the road comes an unregistered car, driven by an unlicensed 17-year-old drunk. Without warning, the speeding vehicle plows into the rear of a slower-moving car, pushing it 230 feet (70 m) along the road, where it bursts into flames. In the back seat of the slower-moving car, a father and his sleeping 13-year-old daughter are incinerated almost immediately. The mother is dragged by her son from the front seat of the burning wreck, with the flesh of both her legs burned off to the bone. She dies a few hours later. Their 21-year-old son, who was driving, is the family’s sole survivor.

The punishment meted out to the culpable driver? Three hundred hours of community service, a fine of $3,000, and a good behavior bond for three years!

When hearing of the verdict, the son Douglas lamented: “It seems so wrong to me that the Government is prepared to go out and spend millions of dollars on a campaign to stop drunk-driving, yet when someone is killed they are not prepared to follow it up with the appropriate sentence.” This is but one of the many vehicle-related miscarriages of justice reported regularly in the Sydney Morning Herald newspaper under the sardonic heading: “Justice on the Roads.”

Perhaps you, too, have been a victim of unfairness—whether in law courts, or when looking for housing, or on the job.

Unfairness Is a World Problem

No matter where you look, social disparities are there. For instance, why do those living in some countries have so much food that waste and overeating are common, while in other lands millions are undernourished or even starve to death? In July 1983, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization painted a gloomy picture of the urgent need to supply millions with grain if actual starvation was to be averted. Starvation came, as events in Ethiopia during 1985 bore out.

…

Refine Search

Index Downloading...

Awake!, July 8, 1986