The Watchtower, April 1, 1975

Download: PDF — The Watchtower, April 1, 1975

The Watchtower — April 1, 1975

Source: jw.org

Contents

Will We Feed Our Neighbors—Or Let Them Starve?

Coping with Shyness

Insight on the News

The ‘Exceeding Sinfulness’ of Sin

Minister on the Move

The Voice of Conscience Within

Are You Guided by a Sensitive Christian Conscience?

A Highly Favored Family—Why?

Questions From Readers

Worried By the Cost of Living?

Will We Feed Our Neighbors—Or Let Them Starve?

Will We Feed Our Neighbors​—Or Let Them Starve?

THROUGH world news sources, the faces of hungry people confront us with growing frequency. Hunger, of course, is not new. But the scope of today’s problem is. As an article in the New York Times says:

“Famine here and there is recorded as far back as the Bible. What is new is the potential for food shortages not confined to particular places and times: a permanent crisis threatening hundreds of millions in large sectors of the globe.”

Estimates are that some 500 million persons​—most of them children—​now near starvation. Surely the Bible prophecy, “there will be food shortages . . . in one place after another,” is seeing fulfillment.​—Matt. 24:7.

Who among us can see pictures of hungry people without feeling a desire to aid them? But what can we do?

On a local scale, it is not difficult to help neighbors temporarily in need, as when some disaster hits. People often respond with acts of kindness and generosity. On a worldwide scale, however, the situation is quite different. Why?

For one thing, there is more to today’s situation than meets the eye. It would seem that the earth is just not producing enough food to go around. But this is not really the problem, yet. Grain crops now harvested would feed adequately every person living​—if they were distributed equally and if the grain were eaten directly as cereal or bread or similar products.

But that is not the case. Much of the world’s harvest is used by wealthier nations to feed animals and produce meat, milk and eggs. It can take up to seven pounds of grain to produce one pound of meat. That is one reason why so-called “advanced” nations with only one third of earth’s population consume more grain than the other, poorer, two thirds put together. So, too, with fuel and fertilizer, key production factors in modern agriculture.

But are not the “advanced” nations feeding much of the world? Yes, countries like the United States, Canada, Australia and Argentina export millions of tons of grain annually. The problem is that the poorer nations find it ever harder to pay. Spiraling inflation devastates their ability to buy food, fuel and fertilizer. And their populations keep growing. Each year there are over 80 million more mouths to feed​—most in already hungry lands.

WHAT IS THE ANSWER?

What is the solution? Contradictory claims are made. Leaders of “advanced” nations say that the poorer nations must make greater efforts to slow population growth. But in such lands many children die at an early age. So parents actually want large families, hoping that some children will survive to care for them in their old age. To the “advanced” nations the poorer nations say: ‘Why do you buy our raw materials at low prices and then sell us your products at high prices? Why don’t you live and eat more modestly so that your lands’ bounty can benefit more of mankind?’

Faced with this situation, what can an individual, yourself, for example, do to help? Obviously, just your eating less is not going to put food on people’s plates in another country. Can you confidently rely on national governments or other organizations to see that any efforts you make to contribute toward a greater food supply will bring relief for the world’s hungry?

Unfortunately, there is much to discourage people’s efforts. They see that, despite the vast amounts of financial aid given, conditions worsen. There are more hungry people now than ever before. Governments receiving aid may use it to buy costly military equipment rather than food. Corruption, black-market profiteering and waste cut deeply into food supplies sent, often reducing them to a mere trickle by the time they reach needy ones.

An article in BioScience magazine says:

“A wise and competent government saves out of the production of the good years in anticipation of bad years that are sure to come. This is not a new idea. The Bible tells us that Joseph taught this policy to Pharaoh in Egypt more than 2,000 years ago. Yet it is literally true that the vast majority of the governments of the world today have no such policy. They lack either the wisdom or the competence, or both.”

Evidence is that “advanced” nations often do not really want food to reach the point of abundance. Why not? Because then prices would drop and profits would be cut. Production is geared to keep prices high on the world market. Food is even used to gain political advantage.

On the one hand, then, we often hear world leaders claim that they view all men as brothers and they speak of the “brotherhood of man.” But when large areas of mankind come into need, time and again nationalistic and commercial interests are put first, ahead of the needs of fellow humans.

Long ago, the inspired apostle wrote: “I ask you, how can God’s love survive in a man who has enough of this world’s goods yet closes his heart to his brother when he sees him in need? . . . let us love in deed and in truth and not merely talk about it.” (1 John 3:17, 18, New American Bible) What is true of men is true of nations. Despite their religious claims, the nations of the world show that they lack love of God.

Clearly what is needed is an entirely new system for mankind, one that eliminates selfish nationalism and ruthless commercial competition, replacing these with systems that treat all persons as equals and that foster cooperation, unhypocritical generosity and love of neighbor. The book that foretold today’s food shortages, the Bible, also foretold the coming of that new system. It shows that God’s kingdom by his Son will soon take over full direction of earth’s affairs and rid the earth of all systems that now contribute to human suffering.​—Matt. 6:9, 10; Dan. 2:44.

Individually we cannot change the present conditions. But this does not excuse any indifference on our part toward the suffering of others. Are we making use of what opportunities we do have to give aid to others? Proverbs 22:9 assures us: “A blessing awaits the man who is kindly, since he shares his bread with the poor.”​—Jerusalem Bible.

Jehovah’s witnesses today endeavor to prove their love for God by helping their needy brothers in all lands, without concern for nationality, race, color or social standing. And, most importantly, they seek to aid all persons everywhere to gain the hope of the coming new order, free from hunger, that God’s Word promises.

Coping with Shyness

Coping with Shyness

Helpful facts that young people want to know

DO YOU find it hard to start conversations especially with strangers? Are you slow in making new acquaintances? Do you feel hesitant about joining in group activities? Then you evidently are faced with the problem of shyness.

Shyness can be appealing. At least it is in little children​—small tots of tender years who look at you with a wide-eyed gaze or hide their faces at even a small show of attention. Even with these, however, do we not enjoy seeing them overcome timidity and begin to take confidence in us, even display some childlike exuberance?

You are no longer a small child. And as we grow older, people rightly expect something more of us. As the apostle Paul put it: “When I was a babe, I used to speak as a babe, to think as a babe, to reason as a babe; but now that I have become a man, I have done away with the traits of a babe.” (1 Cor. 13:11) True, a certain degree of shyness can at times be appealing even in grown-ups. It is akin to modesty, a humble attitude toward yourself, and modesty always has appeal, no matter what one’s age.

But the restraining effect of shyness goes beyond that of modesty. And if it goes too far it can seriously hinder you from getting all you could out of life. It can be like a rope or chain that hobbles you, restricting your freedom of movement. It can slow down your progress to full manhood or womanhood, in effect making you lose precious time in your developing years. It can make even a simple thing, like eating a meal in front of others, become an unpleasant task.

But why are some persons shy or timid and others not? How can shyness be overcome or at least controlled so that it does not cut into your joy of living?

First, realize that being normal does not mean you have to be a talkative, supergregarious person. We can all be thankful that some people are naturally quieter than others and that some are not afraid of being alone for periods of time, doing serious studying, thinking or merely meditating. Such ones may not make as many contributions to a conversation as others do. But what they say may be of good quality and worth. (Compare Proverbs 17:27, 28.) There is a difference, though, in being naturally quiet or serene and being painfully shy, bashful or backward. What causes these latter traits?

CAUSES OF SHYNESS

It is due to an attitude of mind, one that may itself be of varied causes. Background may contribute. A person brought up in the city may feel more at ease around people than one brought up on a farm or in a sparsely populated area. Perhaps physical appearance is involved. When growing up we often pass through awkward stages of development. We may have complexion problems, or parts of us may seem out of proportion with the rest of our body or face. We may be teased about this, or about our shortness or tallness or chubbiness or skinniness. Or we may have a speech problem, lisping or stammering.

Even our parents may unintentionally play a part. Though loving us, they may expect more of us than they really should as to grades in school, athletic abilities, and so forth. Our failing to measure up to their high expectations may cause us to ‘go into a shell.’ If they frequently or severely criticize our slips in grammar or manners in front of others, this may affect us more than they may realize. Or if our questions are set aside as ‘foolish’ we may lose heart as to the value of communication.​—Col. 3:21.

COPING WITH THE PROBLEM

But worrying about the past cause will not change anything, will it? What counts is what you can do now to cope with the problem. Really, it is mainly a matter of taking a balanced view toward people and not being overly concerned about their opinion of you. True, some people are unkind and critical and look down on others. But not everyone is that way. Why let the unkind ones rob you of the enjoyment that fellowship with the others can bring? If we let a few bad experiences overly affect us we could become like those Israelites who lost their courage to the point where even ‘the sound of a leaf blowing about would chase them away.’ (Lev. 26:36) Happiness cannot come without overcoming some problems.

Maybe your face or figure is not just what you wish it were. But many persons with attractive faces and bodies are failures in life. (2 Sam. 14:25; 15:5, 6; 18:9, 14; Prov. 31:30) What really counts is what you are inside, in “the secret person of the heart.” This is what God is interested in, seeing not “what appears to the eyes; but . . . what the heart is.” (1 Pet. 3:4; 1 Sam. 16:7; Ps. 51:6) People who are worth having as friends will estimate you in the same way, according to the principles you live by, what you have in your heart and mind. Zacchaeus was very short, Paul evidently had poor eyesight, Elisha was bald, but all these earned the respect of God and righteous men by what they did and were inside.​—Luke 19:1-10; Gal. 4:15; 6:11; 2 Ki. 2:23, 24.

Moses had a speech problem that made him hesitant about speaking publicly. Yet, with time he evidently overcame this. (Ex. 4:10; compare Deuteronomy 31:30; 32:1, 2) Lisping and stuttering can be overcome or measurably improved if you will make the effort. Stuttering has no physical cause; it comes from a mental block that brings tension or confusion of thought. A helpful therapy is reading out loud at a slow pace. Then speak in the same way. Just as you are more likely to stumble when running than when walking, so with speaking. Keep speech in low gear until the stuttering finally fades away. Then you can gradually pick up speed. When speaking in public, remember that hardly anyone takes pleasure in your experiencing discomfort. They want you to succeed. After all, it is to their advantage that you do. So rather than look down on you, most people will be ‘rooting for you.’

Lisping may or may not have a physical cause. But remember that in childhood (or when learning a new language) the organs of speech​—tongue, lips, throat—​all have to learn how to pronounce each sound. They learn by exercise, making the same motions over and over again. To correct or lessen lisping, do pronunciation exercises, slowly putting speech organs (especially the tongue) through the motions necessary for the correct sound. In conversation, when words come up having difficult sounds, slow down. Determined and patient effort will bring improvement.

Learn not to take yourself too seriously, even to be able to laugh at yourself on occasion. One young man who had prominent ears would smilingly tell others that when he was born his parents were not sure whether he would walk or fly. Your own humor can relax you. Remember, too, that not all teasing is necessarily malicious; it may show affection. Thus the German proverb, “Was sich liebt, das neckt sich,” means, “The one loved is teased.”

MAKING A START

The big thing is to make a start. You can never learn to swim if you are not willing to get wet. And you cannot overcome shyness unless you are willing to make the effort to break free by initiating conversations, making new acquaintances, sharing with others in doing things. Realize that everyone at times will feel somewhat uncomfortable or uncertain with certain persons. But do not make a mountain out of a molehill. Starting a conversation can be as simple as saying, “I don’t believe I’ve met you; what is your name?” From there you can inquire as to where the person is from, what he or she is now doing, how things are going at work or school, perhaps ask about future plans. If you show interest in others, they will show interest in you. And especially if you express appreciation for the good you see in others you will find many friends.​—Luke 6:38.

That is the key to success in conquering the problem. Think of others, how to benefit them, and you will not be self-conscious. As Paul counseled Christians in Corinth, we often need to “widen out” in our affection and concern for others. (2 Cor. 6:11-13) Love should motivate us to do this, to make the effort rather than let fear of embarrassment control us. Think of the way that Jesus Christ was ridiculed and mocked without cause. Yet he showed real love and interest in persons of all kinds.​—1 Pet. 2:21-24.

The apostle Paul went to Corinth in “weakness and in fear and with much trembling,” evidently concerned as to being able to serve the Corinthians well and to overcome wrong attitudes among them. Though some opposers looked down on his appearance and speech, he did not let their twisted viewpoint hold him back from serving God’s interests and those of his fellowman. (1 Cor. 2:3; 2 Cor. 10:10) His young fellow worker Timothy may have been somewhat retiring by nature. (2 Tim. 1:6, 7) But this did not keep him from taking on difficult assignments.​—1 Tim. 1:3, 4; 4:12, 13.

Ingrained shyness can make us become “loners” with a hermit-like attitude. Proverbs 18:1 warns: “One isolating himself will seek his own selfish longing; against all practical wisdom he will break forth.” For good judgment in life we need to keep in touch with reality through association and conversation. Our minds and hearts need the stimulation and refreshing effect that such fellowship can bring. (Rom. 14:7) Otherwise our minds and hearts can become like rooms with closed windows and drawn curtains, getting stagnant, musty. True, reading can bring in some outside thought but it cannot completely replace fellowship with living persons.

Let love move you to make a start, today, to break free from shyness. And then day by day you will see your life grow richer, more interesting, more rewarding​—to yourself and to those in whom you show interest.

Insight on the News

Insight on the News

Religion in America

● The Gallup Poll organization has published a comprehensive survey entitled “Religion in America, 1975.” The survey indicates that the steady decline in church attendance seems to have leveled off during the past three years. Today about four out of every ten Americans attend church during an average week. But the survey also shows that the majority of Americans (56 percent) still feel that ‘religion is losing influence.’ The number believing that religion does not have the answer to today’s problems is rising sharply.

Hope is often expressed that a ‘religious awakening’ is taking place in America. Among those polled, some expressed serious doubts about this. One 54-year-old educator said: “The fervor of the sects, of the Jesus freaks, . . . and other groups is, in my opinion, simply the last throes of a mortally wounded Christian church.” A university professor commented: “America is awake to its materialistic problems, not to any spiritual demands​—it is her stomach that bothers her, not her soul.”

Interestingly, Bible reading increased slightly; 63 percent said that they had done some home Bible reading in the past year.

Origin of the Universe

● Astronomers’ theories on the origin of the universe vary. For a while the “steady state” theory was popular. It held that matter is in a constant process of being formed and destroyed, and that the universe is and always has been essentially as we now see it. That view was replaced in popularity by the “big bang” theory. According to it, the universe began with a giant fireball that exploded. The bits of matter flew out into space and eventually formed the stars and planets, and these are supposedly still flying away from the explosion’s center.

Recently, however, Los Angeles physicist Allen D. Allen, at the annual meeting of the American Physical Society, said that those believing this theory ‘would have to do so as an act of faith​—just as they would if it were a religious rather than a scientific theory.’ Why so? Not just because the theory seems inconsistent with certain astronomical observations. The main reason, he says, is ‘because no theoretical answer to the question could be demonstrable,’ that is, there is no way to demonstrate its validity. Obviously, stupendous power was involved in the origin of the universe, but as physicist Allen acknowledges: “Where the energy came from we don’t know.”

The Bible states in clear terms: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” (Gen. 1:1) Those putting faith in that statement have far greater basis for their belief than those who place their faith in the shifting theories of men.

Polygamy for Christians?

● Under the heading “Polygamy Is African Way of Life,” the Lagos, Nigeria, “Sunday Times” published an article by priest N. S. S. Iwe. Calling for a progressive church, he said that “the church must strive as a matter of policy and practice, never to infuse old wine into new bottles.” This reverses Jesus’ more logical statement about not putting ‘new wine into old bottles’ (ancient bottles were of skin and became dried and hardened with age, hence unable to expand with the new wine). (Matt. 9:17) Though not explaining this reversal, the priest did show he felt the church should adapt its teachings to local cultures. Regarding polygamy in Africa, he said: “Polygamy as a significant aspect of our culture cannot be condemned without hearing. The concept of . . . polygamy deserves a thorough study and examination by Christianity for it is one of the honest concepts and institutions of our culture.”

Nineteen hundred years ago, Christ Jesus said that God originally purposed for a man and his wife, just the two, to be “one flesh,” with no one else properly coming in between. (Matt. 19:4-6) Paul, an apostle of Christ, said that men serving in responsible positions in the Christian congregation should each be a “husband of one wife,” as examples for all the flock. (1 Tim. 3:1, 2, 12) Yet, not only Catholic, but also many Protestant churches allow polygamy in their African congregations. Evidently the Bible’s teaching is viewed as “old wine” unsuited for their “new bottles.”

The ‘Exceeding Sinfulness’ of Sin

The ‘Exceeding Sinfulness’ of Sin

HOW bad is sin? How far-reaching may the effects of even a “little” sin be? Jesus’ statement in counseling his disciples on faithfulness bears on the question. He said: “The person faithful in what is least is faithful also in much, and the person unrighteous in what is least is unrighteous also in much.” (Luke 16:10) Unfaithfulness to God is sin, and, according to the apostle John, “everyone who practices sin is also practicing lawlessness, and so sin is lawlessness.” (1 John 3:4) As with one person, also with a group or body of people, large or small, a slight deviation from right principles, if let run, can cause gross lawlessness and incalculable trouble.​—Rom. 7:13.

A forceful illustration of the terrible effects of what at first might have been considered a small thing is found in the development of the “man of lawlessness.” The Bible describes it through the writings of the apostle Paul at 2 Thessalonians chapter 2. About the coming of this “man” the apostles Paul and Peter both gave the congregations advance warning that “from among you yourselves [elders in the Christian congregation] men will rise and speak twisted things to draw away the disciples after themselves,” that they would “bring in destructive sects” and that many would “follow their acts of loose conduct.”​—Acts 20:30; 2 Pet. 2:1-3.

DESIRE FOR PROMINENCE THE BEGINNING OF APOSTASY

‘How,’ someone may say, ‘could such a situation originate in God’s own congregation?’ Well, it was not something that occurred overnight. It developed in a very insidious way. Jesus had set the proper example, and he had clearly warned his disciples against the spirit of the religious leaders of the Jews, saying:

“All the works they do they do to be viewed by men; . . . They like the most prominent place at evening meals the front seats in the synagogues, and the greetings in the marketplaces and to be called Rabbi [Teacher] by men. But you, do not you be called Rabbi, for one is your teacher, whereas all you are brothers. Moreover, do not call anyone your father on earth, for one is your Father, the heavenly One. Neither be called ‘leaders,’ for your Leader is one, the Christ. But the greatest one among you must be your minister. Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.”​—Matt. 23:5-12.

There are many other like admonitions in the Christian Scriptures. But some men in responsible positions in the early congregation evidently began taking little advantages. They felt somewhat important in the position they held. They felt that it entitled them to a little more than the “ordinary” member of the congregation deserved. They allowed themselves special privileges, and they expected things of a material nature from the brothers. In that way they could live a little easier, they could be looked up to as being “somebody.” That was all they wanted, at first. But gradually they and their successors in office became more demanding, more bold, more arbitrary in expressing authority. They deceived and misled the congregation in order to gratify their desires and ‘exploited them with counterfeit words.’ The apostle Paul describes some such men at 2 Corinthians 11:19, 20.​—2 Pet. 2:3.

Possibly at the beginning these men had no idea as to what their merely wanting a few favors would eventually lead to​—the terrible, hideous thing their catering to the “small” selfish desire would in time produce. They likely felt that their deviation, if any, was minor. But let us trace the history of this trend and see the outcome for which these very men became responsible.

From the Bible’s account of the preliminary manifestation of the apostasy of the “man of lawlessness” we can trace its development in historical records.

CLERGY-LAITY DISTINCTION

Jesus Christ had given no instructions for his disciples to be divided up into clergy and laity. They were all equals as members of a spiritual family, all spirit-begotten brothers of Jesus Christ, anointed to be a body of priests, with prospects of being heavenly kings and priests with Christ. The apostle Peter called them “a royal priesthood.” (1 Pet. 2:5, 9) Though some had responsibilities as “shepherds,” all were priests in a spiritual sense and all engaged in the work of offering spiritual sacrifices. (1 Pet. 5:1-4) There was no hint of a “clergy-laity” division. However, note what history says:

“The Jewish antithesis of clergy and laity was at first unknown among Christians; and it was ‘only as men fell back from the evangelical to the Jewish point of view’ that the idea of the general Christian priesthood of all believers gave place, more or less completely, to that of the special priesthood or clergy. . . . So Tertullian, even (De Baptismo, c. 17, before he became a Montanist): ‘The laity have also the right to administer the sacraments and to teach in the community. The Word of God and the sacraments were by the grace of God communicated to all, and may therefore be communicated by all Christians as instruments of the divine grace. But the question here relates not barely to what is permitted in general, but also to what is expedient under existing circumstances. We may here use the words of St. Paul, “All things are lawful for men, but all things are not expedient.” If we look at the order necessary to be maintained in the Church, the laity are therefore to exercise their priestly right of administering the sacraments only when the time and circumstances require it.’ From the time of Cyprian, . . . the father of the hierarchical system, the distinction of clergy and laity became prominent, and very soon was universally admitted. Indeed, from the third century onward, the term clerus (kleʹros, ordo) was almost exclusively applied to the ministry to distinguish it from the laity. As the Roman hierarchy was developed, the clergy came to be not merely a distinct order (which might consist with all the apostolical regulations and doctrines), but also to be recognised as the only priesthood, and the essential means of communication between man and God.”​—M’Clintock and Strong’s Cyclopædia, Volume II, page 386.

The above-mentioned Thascius Caecilius Cyprian was the bishop of the church in Carthage, Africa. He was born about 200 C.E. and died in 258 C.E. He was a clergyman, called here “the father of the hierarchical system,” one of the body of clergy that existed not much more than a century after the death of Christ’s apostles and their close associates. From that time on, throughout the “Dark Ages,” into the time of the Reformation and the beginning of the Protestant Churches, and down to the present, this clergy-laity distinction has existed in Christendom.

It is this so-called “Christian” clergy that demonstrated itself to be “the man of lawlessness . . . the son of destruction,” in connection with the apostasy or rebellion of 2 Thessalonians 2:3. It is evident that by the use of this expression the Holy Bible means a composite “man,” who exists over a long period of time and whose makeup and personnel change as time goes by.

DIRECT OPPOSITION TO GOD

This rebellion being (as discussed in our previous issue) against Jehovah God, it is no cause for surprise that this composite “man” should try to make a god of himself, as did the great rebel Satan the Devil, whom the Bible calls “the god of this system of things.” (2 Cor. 4:4) The apostle Paul said prophetically of the “man of lawlessness”: “He is set in opposition and lifts himself up over everyone who is called ‘god’ or an object of reverence, so that he sits down in the temple of The God, publicly showing himself to be a god.”​—2 Thess. 2:4.

The “man of lawlessness” is a composite body of men. We can, however, point to the claim made for one of these clergymen that reflects the general attitude of the body. Of the pope of the Roman Catholic Church, Ferraris’ ecclesiastical dictionarya says:

“The pope is of such dignity and highness that he is not simply a man but, as it were, God, and the Vicar of God. . . . Hence the pope is crowned with a triple crown, as king of heaven, of earth and of hell. . . . Nay, the pope’s excellence and power are not only above heavenly, terrestrial and infernal things, but he is also above angels, and is their superior . . . So that if it were possible that angels could err from the faith, or entertain sentiments contrary thereto, they could be judged and excommunicated by the pope. . . . He is of such great dignity and power that he occupies one and the same tribunal with Christ . . . So that whatsoever the pope does seems to proceed from the mouth of God. . . . The pope is, as it were, God on earth, the only prince of the faithful of Christ, the greatest king of all kings, possessing the plenitude of power; to whom the government of the earthly and heavenly kingdom is entrusted. . . . The pope is of so great authority and power that he can modify, declare or interpret the divine law. . . . The pope can sometimes counteract the divine law by limiting, explaining,” etc.

This power and might attributed to the pope has been upheld by the Catholic clergy, and, though many of the Protestant clergy may disagree, they too hold themselves up as “Reverend,” “Right Reverend” and “Father” and use other titles that put them high above the laity, to be looked up to, honored and materially supported, often in a very elaborate way​—in a manner similar to the spirit of the papal claim.​—Job 32:21, 22.

Not only in this self-exaltation, but also in making himself a “friend” of the world, the “man of lawlessness” has manifested himself to be in opposition to God. (Jas. 4:4) This collective “man” also opposes God when he tries to nullify the inspired Word of God, calling it “myth,” “outdated,” “unreliable,” “full of error” and even saying that “God is dead.”

THE ‘MARRIAGE’ OF CHURCH AND STATE

In many lands there has been and even now is a union of Church and State. In such ‘marriages’ the Church has endeavored to do the dictating. The clergy have controlled the thinking of the people to a great extent, and the political rulers, knowing this, have accorded the clergy authority, prestige, protection and immunities, financial support, and so forth. Concerning “Church and State,” The Encyclopedia Americana, Volume 6, pages 657, 658, says:

“Between these two institutions, in modern times, there has rarely, if ever, existed perfect harmony. This struggle, so long protracted, bids fair, unless some astonishing upheaval occurs, to last for all time. It has been a bitter one. It has involved large interests and brought to the forefront momentous discussions. It has fomented uprisings of all kinds and originated a literature of vituperation without parallel outside of political strife. It has been, not seldom, mere political contention. . . . Under Constantine the Church entered the arena of universal activity as a collaborator in the task of civilizing the peoples. Acknowledged as the spiritual ruler, it gradually acquired a local habitation and a name as a temporal potentate. It became a world power. This success was the beginning of all the many disasters of the Church. . . . From Constantine to Charlemagne the civil power, while giving legal recognition to the Church, interfered in its government. From Charlemagne to a period approaching that of the Reformation, Church and state were closely united and there was a generally acknowledged subordination of the civil to the spiritual authority.”

In this twentieth century, the situation has continued. Wars have been fought over religious issues, and the greatest, most gory, devastating World Wars have been fought, Christendom’s nations taking the lead with the most murderous weapons.

Think of the heartaches, the misery, the slaughter, the defamation of God’s name and of the name of Christianity, that have resulted from that beginning of desire for personal prominence and gain! Of those early elders appointed to shepherd the flock of God, many remained faithful. They followed the principle stated by Jesus, who said: “Whoever wants to be first among you must be the slave of all.” (Mark 10:44) But the selfish ones among them caused a religiously lawless rebellion that resulted in misery to millions. If they had followed the clear, simple command and example of Christ, such a terrible thing would not have taken place.

We as individuals can learn much from this. When God says a thing is wrong, it is really wrong. When we ignore his warning against any form of sin, we should never think we are doing ‘only a small thing.’ We are out of harmony with God’s universal arrangement and are indulging in the beginning of something that could be greatly harmful to many persons. The Bible rule is: “A little leaven ferments the whole lump.” (1 Cor. 5:6) Unless we quickly repent, turn away from such sin and do all we can to straighten up the matter, we can be responsible for unbelievably bad developments.

As an example, note what James the half brother of Jesus Christ wrote of a loose tongue: “The tongue is constituted a world of unrighteousness among our members, for it spots up all the body and sets the wheel of natural life aflame and it is set aflame by Gehenna.” (Jas. 3:6) Wrongly used, the tongue can upset our life and the lives of many others. James also showed that sin can have a very deceptive beginning. He said: “Each one is tried by being drawn out and enticed by his own desire. Then the desire, when it has become fertile, gives birth to sin; in turn, sin, when it has been accomplished, brings forth death.”​—Jas. 1:14, 15.

Everyone, it is true, sins at times. But, thanks to Jehovah God for providing help, through his undeserved kindness, so that we may avoid going on in a course of sin, with its awful effects. We can avoid the disastrous course of the “man of lawlessness.” This we can do through faith in the propitiatory sacrifice of his Son Jesus Christ. (Rom. 7:21-25; 8:1, 2) Only by recognizing sin’s ‘exceeding sinfulness,’ and, when committing a sin, going to Jehovah for forgiveness on the basis of Christ’s sacrifice, can we get Jehovah’s help to escape the full consequences of our errant action.

[Footnotes]

Prompta bibliotheca canonica, juridicao-moralis, theologica partim ascetica, polemica, rubricistica, historica, prepared at Bologna, Emilia-Romagna region, in Italy, in 1746 by Lucio Ferraris, Vol. VI, pp. 31-35; according to copy at Columbia University, New York city.

Minister on the Move

Minister on the Move

As told by Angelo Catanzaro

I HAVE been a minister on the move ever since 1947. In that year the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society assigned me to be a circuit overseer or traveling minister, to visit congregations of Jehovah’s Christian witnesses, to build them up and encourage them. But I am just one of about two thousand traveling overseers in various parts of the world. I would like to tell you about our work.

For one thing, we travel a great deal. My assignments have taken me into forty-two states of the United States, starting first in Georgia. Since we do so much traveling, you may wonder just where we stay.

HOME AMONG MANY FRIENDS

My wife and I stay in homes of our Christian brothers, who gladly share with us whatever facilities they have. In big cities we often have stayed with people who have just three rooms. And they frequently insist that we sleep in their bed while they sleep on the couch.

Once we stayed in the home of one of our Christian sisters whose husband was Jewish and not a Witness. He was impressed by the fact that we were so happy, and yet not paid a salary like the clergy of Christendom. In this town of Portsmouth, Ohio, there was a small Jewish group, and a rabbi would come to conduct services for them. But he insisted on a guaranteed payment of $75 for the one-hour service that he conducted. Additionally, he received the donations obtained that day at the services.

So, in view of all this, the Jewish man in whose home we stayed could hardly believe that, not only would we stay in private homes, but we also did our work without a salary. Each day he would ask me to relate experiences that we had in our house-to-house preaching work. And repeatedly he remarked that he knew that his rabbi was working for money, not for love of God and the congregation.

When it came time for me to give a public talk that week, this Jewish man asked: “Aren’t you going to invite me to hear your sermon?” He attended the talk and has been regular in attending meetings of Jehovah’s Christian witnesses since.

Sometimes we have been invited to stay in homes where the people were not Witnesses, although they showed interest in the Bible’s message. In Ardmore, Oklahoma, we spent a week with such a family. Both husband and wife were chain smokers who read much of the night. Cigarette smoke would waft its way around our bedroom door and awaken us at night. But before we left in the morning and after we returned from our preaching activity, they would ask us many Bible questions.

Well, six months later, at an assembly, this couple were among those getting baptized. No longer did they smoke, and they were feeling much better, as praisers of Jehovah. During our stay with them this man and his wife had been deeply impressed by our reliance upon Jehovah and by our referring them to the Bible for the answers to life’s problems.

SHARING THE GOOD NEWS

When visiting a congregation of Jehovah’s witnesses, my work involves a good deal more than giving Bible talks to the congregation. Much of my time is spent in working with my Christian brothers in the house-to-house preaching work. I am able to share my experience with others, and I too learn by observing the methods that they use in reaching honest-hearted people in the community with the Bible’s message. So we get mutual benefits by working with our Christian brothers.

I have shared in the preaching work with persons of all ages. Recently I went along with a ninety-three-year-old woman who is in the full-time preaching work. I also worked with a four-year-old. In the latter case, I told the householders that the youth with me was practicing to be a preacher, and ‘there is something he wants to tell you.’ He then handed them a handbill, inviting them to a public Bible discourse.

When we talk to the people about God’s kingdom and the coming righteous New Order of things, we often hear comments such as: “Why is it that our clergy have not told us these things?” I have met many persons who admit that their ministers, priests and rabbis have failed to give them a solid hope. Often they complain that all the clergy seem to be interested in are money and personal comforts. It impresses such householders that, without cost, we are bringing them God’s Word and a grand hope.

Since we travel so much, we preach to people of all kinds. Accordingly, we need to discern what is the best way of helping various people. Often we find it desirable to get householders to express themselves by our asking questions. But not all persons can readily be drawn into conversations in that way. For example, we have preached on Indian reservations out West, and though most Indians do not say much, they watch and observe. We have found that we are able to help the Indians most by befriending them and showing them that we are really interested in them. They soon learn that the Witnesses show no partiality with regard to race and nationality, but have proper respect for all.

On the other hand, there are persons who readily wish to express their viewpoints. If we were to ask them questions and not listen to their views, they would resent it. For example, I called at a home and a doctor came to the door and we discussed today’s decline in morality. When I asked him whether he thought there was a solution, he expressed his views, talking for quite some time without any outstanding remarks from me. When he concluded, I found areas of agreement. Toward the end of our discussion, he said that he especially appreciated that my companion and I had allowed him an opportunity to speak. He took four Bible study aids, and arrangements were made to call back on him.

In big cities, such as New York, we find that many people are fearful and seldom open their door for strangers. Nevertheless, we endeavor to express a few thoughts from the Bible, speaking to them, if possible, right through the peephole. They see us, but we do not see them​—except possibly an eyeball.

On one occasion, when I talked to a lady through the peephole, she said that she appreciated what I read to her from the Bible but that she was not going to open the door. Yet she wanted the Bible study aid that I offered her. So she instructed me to put it into the mailbox. We returned a little later and the book was gone and a contribution was found in its place.

FINANCES

People often ask me how the work of Jehovah’s witnesses is financed and how I myself manage. The work of Jehovah’s witnesses, like that of the early Christians, is financed by voluntary contributions. Most of Jehovah’s witnesses support themselves by secular work. As a full-time circuit overseer, I receive $7 a month (formerly $5) from the Watchtower Society for personal expenses, if this is requested, also a modest sum once a year for clothing. But we are cared for, since our Christian brothers are very hospitable and kind. Like the apostle Paul, we are content with food, shelter and clothing.​—1 Tim. 6:8.

Once in Indianapolis, Indiana, all of our clothes were stolen from our parked and locked car. But we were not left destitute. Our loving Christian brothers promptly saw to it that we were properly clothed.

At one time I appeared on a radio show in which the interrogator often tries to make people look somewhat foolish. After I remarked that I received $5 a month, he looked at my suit and said: “I could not afford a suit like that if I got $5 a month.”

“Well,” I explained, “the suit, the shoes, socks, shirt, tie​—all of these were given to me by dear Christian brothers and sisters who know what work we are doing. We don’t ask for this. But as the Bible says, ‘the workman is worthy of his wages.’” (1 Tim. 5:18) After my explaining that we do our work out of love for others, the Jewish interviewer remarked that clergymen, including Jewish rabbis, could not get along the way we do.

Often, when answering questions, I have opportunity to explain that our purpose as Jehovah’s witnesses is not to make money. We are all working to help people to know Jehovah and gain His approval.

JOY THAT MONEY CANNOT BUY

While we appreciate all that our Christian brothers have done and are doing for us, yet the most important reason why we are doing this preaching work is that Jehovah has commanded it. It is an expression of our love for him. And in compensation we receive something better than money​—the grand joy and satisfaction of knowing that we are doing what God wants us to do.

Sometimes I am asked what I have especially enjoyed in the circuit and district work. Well, I think that one of the most outstanding joys is seeing Jehovah’s blessing on the work we do. If we seek God’s guidance and blessing, instead of our fretting because something is not done in a way that appeals to us, God will bless our efforts with growth. (1 Cor. 3:6, 7) Seeing this growth brings us deep and satisfying joy.

Of course, the warmhearted hospitality we receive from our Christian brothers is a source of great joy too. In what other work could you travel virtually anywhere in the United States and receive the warmness, kindness and hospitality that we do? In almost any direction that we travel, in forty-two states, there is not a city where the Witnesses live that we would not be warmly welcomed to stop overnight and have a home in which to stay.

Then there is the joy of getting to know so many of our Christian brothers and sisters who have been loyal to Jehovah over the years. Many have stuck to Jehovah and his organization through thick and thin, and they are an inspiration to us. There is also the pleasure of seeing many thousands of newer ones, sheeplike persons, come into Jehovah’s organization in the areas where we serve, and our having some part in helping them to grow spiritually​—this in itself is a grand reward.

It is true that our life is one that does not permit us to settle down anywhere for very long, but my being a minister on the move has brought me unbounded joys that money cannot buy.

The Voice of Conscience Within

The Voice of Conscience Within

“Whenever people of the nations that do not have law do by nature the things of the law, . . . [they] demonstrate the matter of the law to be written in their hearts, while their conscience is bearing witness with them.”​—Rom. 2:14, 15.

1, 2. (a) What is the situation today as respects moral standards? (b) Why is moral guidance needed particularly since 1914?

TODAY what is “right” or “wrong” is in a state of constant change. In a speech on “Public Morality” Dr. Emanuel Demby stated: “An important reason why it is so difficult for us to pin down the exact moral nature of our times is that it is a period of great transition.” What were widely followed as the accepted standards just a few years ago have been altered or replaced. And with life becoming ever more complex, who is to say how valid the new standards are, or for how long they will last? What guidance does one have?

2 This situation faces particularly us living since 1914 C.E. Why especially since then? Dr. Archibald Chisholm observed: “So great has been the upheaval in thought and morals, that some suggest that we should regard ourselves as living in the year [61] A.B. (anno belli [the year of the war]), thus indicating their view that a new epoch began with the outbreak” of World War I. The very fact that there has been such upheaval in thought and morals since 1914 emphasizes our need for a guiding voice, for proper direction.

3. What questions arise as to relying on conscience?

3 Many persons who are aware of this need express the view that in the final analysis each person ought to rely on his conscience. They say: “Let your conscience be your guide.” By “conscience” they have in mind that each person seems to have a “voice” within him, an inner sense that tells him what is right or wrong. But is that true in all cases? Do you know what is the source of conscience and just how widespread it is? Also, just how reliable is this inner sense? Even if others can depend on their conscience, can you?

CONSCIENCE​—FROM WHERE?

4. According to some worldly authorities, what is the source of conscience?

4 Were you to look to intellectuals and philosophers for an explanation of the source of your conscience, you might be told that it is merely a social product of evolution. The opinion of evolutionist Charles Darwin was “that any animal whatever, endowed with well-marked social instincts, . . . would inevitably acquire a moral sense or conscience, as soon as its intellectual powers had become well, or nearly as well developed, as in man.” And Sigmund Freud felt that we could “reject the suggestion of an original​—as one might say, natural—​capacity for discriminating between good and evil.”

5. Does the Bible uphold these views of man’s conscience?

5 But do such views represent the true explanation? The most ancient and consistently reliable record of man’s history and dealings answers, No! In the first place, the Bible correctly states what has been borne out by honest scientific observation, that all living things reproduce ‘after their kind.’ Thus man is not merely a product of evolution, nor is his conscience. (Gen. 1:21-26) The Bible, furthermore, accurately identifies the source of that voice within you, your conscience. It shows why​—despite efforts of men such as Hitler, who boasted, “I am liberating man from the degrading chimera known as conscience”—​humans earth wide continue to have a conscience. And it can help us to use and benefit from conscience.

6, 7. (a) God’s Word indicates what about the origin of conscience ? (b) What was Adam’s conscience?

6 The Scriptures tell us that the Creator made man in His own image, with intelligence and a moral sense, just as God himself has these. (Gen. 1:27) And right from the start the first man possessed a God-given conscience; it was not something that simply developed as society grew. This can be seen in the account of Adam’s actions and attitude after he broke God’s command concerning the tree of the knowledge of good and bad. (Gen. 2:17) The record says that Adam and Eve then “went into hiding from the face of Jehovah God in between the trees.” And when Jehovah spoke, Adam did not quickly respond. Why not? Because he sensed his guilt; it was as if there were a voice within him that was condemning him, accusing him, testifying that he had sinned.​—Gen. 3:7-10.

7 So, the oldest historical record available indicates that man’s conscience was in evidence right from the start. Interestingly, in the first century C.E. the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, writing in Greek, pointed out that Adam’s reluctance to reply to God was evidence of his “evil conscience.” For the word “conscience” Josephus used the Greek term syneiʹdesis, which means literally “having knowledge of something with oneself” or “co-knowledge.” Adam’s conscience was from God; it was his inner moral sense, and it involved his intelligent mind. Since he was created in God’s image, when Adam acted contrary to God’s qualities or revealed will he felt an inner conflict. But how does this relate to our feelings and actions? Was conscience passed on to Adam’s descendants? Yes, both Biblical and non-Biblical evidence proves that it was, even down to each of us today.

8. What later Bible account reflects an inherited moral sense?

8 Note the historical account of what occurred with Joseph over two thousand years after Adam’s sin. Joseph was a slave in the household of the Egyptian court official Potiphar. Tempted perhaps by Joseph’s masculine beauty, Potiphar’s wife tried to seduce Joseph. Since he was but a slave, he easily could have felt obliged to obey her, possibly with the hope of bettering his position. Yet, Joseph flatly rejected her immoral advances, saying, “How could I commit this great badness and actually sin against God?” (Gen. 39:1-9) What moved Joseph to view adultery as a sin against God?

9. Why did Joseph reject adultery as a “sin against God”?

9 He did not respond that way because of a written law of God forbidding adultery, such as only later appeared in the Ten Commandments. (Ex. 20:14) And here was Joseph in Egypt, far from any family pressure or patriarchal rules. Clearly Joseph’s conscience was involved. Adultery violated his moral sense. He likely could “feel” that it was wrong to take what did not belong to him, another man’s wife. And this feeling could have been strengthened by his having reflected on the fact that a man and his wife are “one flesh,” a fact with which Adam was well acquainted. (Gen. 2:24; Matt. 19:4, 5) Also, he would have heard of the experiences of Abraham and Isaac, which did not show approval of adultery. (Gen. 20:1-18; 26:7-11) Hence, even without a law against adultery Joseph’s conscience could move him to reject it.

10. What evidence is there that other peoples, too, inherited the faculty of conscience?

10 But if Adam passed on to his descendants a measure of conscience, should not Potiphar’s wife, too, have sensed that adultery was wrong? Yes, though obviously she let passion control her. The Egyptians, along with people earth wide, realized that adultery was a grave moral offense. Their oldest religious texts associated the Last Judgment with the weighing of the “heart.” And over what was one judged? The ancient Egyptian “Book of the Dead” depicts the deceased as declaring his innocence, saying, ‘I have not robbed. I have not killed men. I have not lied. I have not defiled any man’s wife.’ So, it must be that conscience led them to sense the wrongness of adultery. Bringing conscience into the picture, historian Josephus later wrote of Joseph’s urging Potiphar’s wife to shun a lust that would bring remorse and suffering, but to be faithful to her husband and enjoy “a good conscience.”

11. How do both Biblical and non-Biblical sources illustrate a functioning conscience?

11 Additionally, we find both Biblical and non-Biblical descriptions that illustrate a functioning conscience. On one occasion King David of Israel had a census of the nation taken. The Bible describes David’s reaction when he realized that he had sinned. Showing the operation of conscience, the Bible says that “David’s heart began to beat him.” (2 Sam. 24:1-10) A similar effect of a smitten conscience is mentioned in an ancient cuneiform tablet that gives the prayer of a Babylonian who had sinned. He implored his god to listen “on account of his breast, which complains like a resounding flute.”

12. (a) So, what can correctly be concluded about the faculty of conscience, as pointed out by the apostle Paul? (b) Is conscience manifested by all people?

12 All of this shows that we have a conscience because of inheriting intelligence and a moral sense from Adam. Thus, even nations that knew nothing of the Mosaic law, given by God, forbade things such as stealing, lying, incest, murder and adultery. Yes, though they “do not have law,” they “do by nature the things of the law.” The apostle Paul highlighted the basis for their moral standards, saying, “their conscience [Greek, syneiʹdesis] is bearing witness with them and, between their own thoughts, they are being accused or even excused.” (Rom. 2:14, 15) So universal is the God-given faculty of conscience that one encyclopedia states: “No culture has yet been found in which conscience is not recognized as a fact.” And regarding individuals who seem to “have no conscience,” Dr. Geoffrey Stephenson wrote: “It was, and still is by some, regarded as a genuine form of insanity or psychosis.”​—Compare Titus 1:15.

CONSCIENCE​—ITS OPERATION AND TRAINING

13. Why is more needed than just knowing that we have a conscience?

13 Hence, can we simply “do by nature the things of the law”? No, more is needed. Just understanding the true source of conscience and how it is that we have that faculty does not assure us that we are fully benefiting from it. Recall that the ancient Egyptians had certain moral standards that manifested the effects of conscience. But was that sufficient in itself? Did that alone protect them from every improper thing? Their repulsive worship of animals, rendering “sacred service to the creation rather than the One who created,” proves that merely having a degree of conscience was not sufficient. (Rom. 1:20-25) Consequently, we need to know more than just that we have a conscience. We ought to know how it operates, how it can be trained and what God says about our using it in daily life.

14. What is one way in which your conscience operates?

14 The Biblical examples we have considered illustrate two essential ways in which your conscience can and should function. Likely the most commonly-thought-of operation of conscience is that of looking back and judging one’s past moral performance. We noted this function in the case of Adam’s sin and the experience of David after he had acted improperly. Their consciences smote them. Have you not felt your conscience operating in this way? This inner voice of conscience afflicting those who have done wrong can be so insistent that they take drastic action to clear their conscience or they may be pained by their conscience for years.

15. This can help you in what important way?

15 A far more important effect, though, of this operation of conscience is that it may move one to godly repentance. David wrote: “When I kept silent my bones wore out through my groaning all day long. My sin I finally confessed to you, and my error I did not cover. I said: ‘I shall make confession over my transgressions to Jehovah.’ And you yourself pardoned the error of my sins.” (Ps. 32:3, 5) Thus, your functioning conscience can bring you back to God, aiding you to recognize the need to have his forgiveness and to follow his ways in the future.​—Ps. 51:1-4, 9, 13-15.

16. How else can and should your conscience function?

16 The other function of conscience is its operation ahead of time in guiding and advising one who needs to make a moral choice or decision. Lecturer Eric D’Arcy observed: “In the pagan writers conscience did not appear on the scene until after the action was performed, and its role was purely judicial; but in [the Bible], conscience is credited with a legislative function.” It was this aspect of conscience that enabled Joseph to sense beforehand that he must not commit adultery. He followed his conscience in rejecting a course that was against his moral sense. Has your conscience functioned in this way? Is it aiding you as it should?

17, 18. (a) What danger exists if a person suppresses his conscience? (b) In what condition would this leave one?

17 Both of these functions of our conscience need attention and training if we are to be guided and benefited by it. That neither aspect can be ignored or suppressed is evident from what occurs when that has been done. Normally, as a result of inheriting it from Adam, a person’s conscience might prick him or signal him that it is wrong to lie or steal. This is similar to the signal you get when your hand comes near a flame; your built-in sense receptors alert you to the danger and you can pull your hand away. But what if you had already developed a heavy callous on that part of your hand, or maybe your hand was badly scarred from a previous burn? In that case your senses might be blocked; the callous or scar tissue would make the area insensitive, unresponsive. In like manner the conscience can become deadened if it is repeatedly ignored or suppressed. The apostle Paul wrote about men “whose consciences are as dead as seared flesh.” (1 Tim. 4:2, J. B. Phillips) Such men, without pangs of conscience, could lie, act hypocritically or intentionally mislead Christians, as Paul said.

18 Consequently, an ignored or suppressed conscience not only no longer pains a person after he has done wrong, but it fails to provide reliable guidance beforehand. Persons in that situation were described in Ephesians 4:19: “Their sense of right and wrong once dulled, they have abandoned themselves to sexuality and eagerly pursue a career of indecency of every kind.” (Jerusalem Bible) It is easy to understand why Hitler wanted to bring people into that condition. Their conscience would not restrain them at all, but they could do anything asked of them, no matter how debased. Surely we want to avoid becoming like that, but, rather, want to keep our conscience functioning and responsive.

19. How is the Bible an aid to one’s having a functioning conscience?

19 The Bible is an invaluable aid in this. Since it presents the greatest indications we have as to God’s qualities and ways, it can aid us to become attuned to his image. Thus the psalmist sang: “Teach me to do your will, for you are my God. Your spirit is good; may it lead me in the land of uprightness.” (Ps. 143:10) The more we learn of and appreciate his dealings and will, the more we will strengthen the influence of godly conscience in our lives. (Ps. 119:1-16) The inner voice becomes stronger and clearer, just as through cultivation and training the soloist gains more accurate voice and hearing and the watchmaker sharpens his sight.

…