THE tendency of the age is not flattering to those who are looking for the conversion of the world, or who claim that the world is growing better. A spirit of lawlessness largely prevails; and this seems to pervade all classes, not even excepting members of churches. So far from thinking that we hazard anything in this declaration, we sincerely believe that certain positions taken by most of the churches of the day lead to the very state of things which we deplore.
Observing men, spiritually-minded men, of all denominations, have expressed their convictions and their regret that there are many superficial conversions in this generation. The "revivals" do not lead to self-denial and cross-bearing; the converts mostly remain selfish and worldly, and follow the world in the paths of fashion and folly. Indeed, worldly fashions and methods are adopted by the churches to carry on their work. This is seen in their sociables, festivals, games of hazard, and almost every imaginable folly, to raise funds.
They who have come up in the present generation cannot realize it, as there is nothing within the range of their observation and experience with which to contrast it. But old revivalists of thirty or forty years ago lamented it, and almost every religious paper noted it. Professor Finney, than whom no one was better known as a revivalist, gave a reason for it, and we have ever thought that he was correct in his judgment. He said it was because of the growing practice of preaching the gospel without the law. Inasmuch as the Scriptures declare that "By the law is the knowledge of sin," Mr. Finney said that no thorough conviction of sin was produced by such preaching; that salvation was made easy to the sinner's conscience.
And what was true in his day is true to a still greater extent at present. If the error was negative—one of neglect—then, it is positive—one of intention—now. The law is not only neglected now; it is impugned; it is largely repudiated as Jewish, obsolete, superseded, abolished. There is a growing disrespect for the Old Testament. And this is true even among those whose church constitutions are utterly opposed to such antinomian delusions.
Some years ago we were holding meetings in a certain locality in one of "the States," and among other subjects presented the claims of the fourth commandment. A member of the only church there arose and said they were bound to receive this testimony, as it was the Bible, and they, in their church covenant, had agreed to take the Bible as the rule of their faith and life. Another member denied this, and said they had covenanted to take the New Testament only. A meeting was appointed to decide the matter, and the covenant being produced it was found to contain "the Bible." Upon this, a motion was made to strike "the Bible" out of the covenant, and insert "the New Testament" in its place, which was carried! The minority very properly left that church.
It is not at all an uncommon thing to hear the members of the most strictly orthodox churches ask, when a text is repeated to them, "But, is not that in the Old Testament?" The New Testament speakers and writers did not hold the Old Testament—always referred to as "the Scriptures"—in such light esteem. "Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." Have the words of the Holy Ghost become unreliable? That they are so considered is no wonder when the words which Jehovah himself spoke and wrote—his "ten words"—are treated with contempt, and "Reverends" and "Professors" and "Doctors of Divinity" labor to prove that the decalogue is not suited to the "genius" and "freedom" of the gospel dispensation. In all these things the authority of God over the minds of men is weakened. They who cast aside one part of the word of God will not retain deep respect for the other. Their religion, if they profess any, becomes formal; a system of will-worship, not so much designed to glorify God as to exalt self.
It should not be looked upon as a strange thing that unbelievers are bold in their denunciations of the Bible, when it is so constantly depreciated, and its plainest precepts evaded and made of no effect, in the churches. In obedience to the demands of free-thinkers—who are often such in name, and no-thinkers in fact—the Bible is turned out of the schools, and prayer is forbidden! It is claimed that to read the Bible or to pray in the schools is to trespass on the rights of those who do not believe in the Bible and in prayer. Of course they who do believe the Bible and in prayer have no rights to be considered! But allowing all that is possible in the name of charity toward unbelievers, we ask, What must be the influence of this rejection of the Bible over the minds of the rising generation? Are they not unconsciously led to scorn it as a book unworthy of an honorable position among books? Are they not prepared to give willing ears to remarks of teachers and professors, such as are frequently heard in normal schools and colleges, wherein science and philosophy are exalted above the Bible? Is it a matter of surprise that when they grow up they are found sitting in the seat of the scornful?
The remedy for this sad state of things is not to be found in legislative enactments or amendments to constitutions. It is to be found by an "amendment of life" among the ministers and members of the churches. Let the ministry exalt the word of God, and lead the members to humble obedience to its precepts, instead of presenting ingenious methods whereby its requirements may be evaded. Let them raise the commandments of God above human enactments, and preach the statutes of Jehovah as above "police regulations" and political ends. Let them teach self-denial and non-conformity to the world, and impress upon the members that it is a privilege to give the means which God places in their hands to carry on the work of God, and a sin and a shame for a church to resort to tricks and games to draw money for church purposes from the ungodly and the profligate.
Parents and guardians have not only an interest in, but a responsibility in regard to, these matters. Educational facilities are placed within reach of all; this is well. But the tendencies of the age are alarming. The wise parent will look to the moral and religious influence which surrounds the youth. Too often, alas, the influence is altogether immoral and irreligious. The danger and parental responsibility are both too great to be lightly considered. Let the Bible take a high place in all your calculations for the young. Teach them to say, "By the words of thy lips I have kept me from the paths of the destroyer." Ps. 17:4. The word of God, "the blessed Bible," is our only safeguard in these days of peril.
As an instance of people's readiness to accept anything but the Bible, we mention an article which we lately read, lauding the new-found "Teachings of the Apostles," because they gave color to the idea that sprinkling might be substituted for immersion, and that the first day of the week was the Lord's day, and not the seventh. We can infer freedom of action in these respects from Tertullian, and other writers of an early age. But all that has no effect upon our minds. When we accept something as authority beside the Bible, we shall take good care that it is in harmony with the Bible, and does not contradict it.
Prohibition.
By Editor
IT has been our belief for more than thirty years that prohibition is the only consistent position in which temperance reformers can stand. A reformation is necessarily progressive, because a complete reformation of any great abuse is never made at a single movement. We are gratified to see the progress which has been made on this subject by temperance workers.
More than thirty years ago we were invited to prepare an address for a county temperance society in Wisconsin. In that we argued in favor of prohibition; and as a result the address was adopted by a bare majority, the dissenters mostly withdrawing from the society and working thereafter only with the Sons of Temperance! No longer ago than 1877 we were invited to speak to a "Blue Ribbon Club" in a village in southern Michigan, and we there spoke in favor of prohibition. At the close of our remarks a prominent member of the club arose and promptly repudiated our position, stating that that was not the object of the organization, and that they had no sympathy with such remarks. In 1878 we were a little more fortunate. Being invited to speak before a temperance organization in Newark, Ohio, we presented the subject in the same light. They gave us a respectful hearing, and we were informed by a member, a few weeks afterward, that our remarks had been the subject of discussion at every meeting held since they were made, and most of the members were becoming convinced that we were right.
But quite different from this was our experience in 1879 in this city. A Mr. Haskell was holding a series of temperance meetings, and he invited us to speak a few moments at one of them, and we were so unsophisticated as to broach our old theme of prohibition, and advocate it. Mr. Haskell was not an animated or animating speaker, but on that occasion he spoke with unusual vigor in denouncing our position, and holding us up as an illustration of the fact that a man of good intentions may run into great errors! He did not, however, make any attempt to show the fallacy of our arguments, nor have we ever known any one to attempt that task.
It has been a favorite cry with many that "prohibition does not prohibit." That the expression is a contradiction in terms did not seem to strike their minds. What but prohibition could prohibit anything? Prohibition or prohibitory laws do not prohibit theft and murder, or rather, they do not prevent these crimes; evil-doers break the laws, and it has thus far been found impossible to strictly enforce them. What then? Shall we abolish our laws against theft and murder, and acknowledge that they have proved failures? Shall we "regulate" these crimes and put them under the restrictions of "high license"?
And what has seemed most strange of all is that the dealers in liquors have been the leaders in making this cry, very kindly advising the temperance people to desist from their efforts in favor of prohibitory laws, as they would surely prove ineffectual. Of course no one could doubt their sincerity in giving this advice, for who does not know that they earnestly desire that temperance workers should choose the most effective methods of accomplishing their object? What unselfish philanthropists liquor-sellers are!
But some recent occurrences have materially changed the tone of these kind advisers. The prohibitory law of Iowa is now in force, and we have noticed some most bitter outcries from those who have been wont to proclaim that "prohibition does not prohibit." They are complaining in the strongest terms of the vigorous manner in which the law is being enforced in Iowa. But why do they complain?473The law is in the interest of good morals; of public peace; it will lessen the amount of crime, and of taxes; it will protect the young from the snare of the gilded saloon; it will secure food and clothes to the wives and children of those who have squandered their wages for the means of their own degradation. Can they complain of this? No; this is all desirable. But above all this there is one harrowing thought which troubles them more than the approach of the cholera. What if, after all they have said, it should prove that prohibition does prohibit? The loss of such a precious theory is more than they can bear.
Prohibition is fast coming into favor, and is making rapid strides toward success in almost every direction. Whether it will be materially benefited by separate party action remains to be seen. We do not say it will not; we have as yet no evidence that it will. That the nominee of the Prohibition party will receive a large vote seems improbable. That, however, is no real argument against the step they have taken. If it shall be the means of arousing the public to the importance of the subject, then good will be accomplished. There are difficulties in the way of uniting all the true friends of temperance in a separate party movement. The party, when fully formed, must avow some policy of Government beyond the sole question of temperance. We have seen how difficult it was for the two recent conventions in Chicago to adopt "platforms" suited to the demands of the interests of the whole country. A third party would have to meet this question very soon, and it is no relief to promise "reform" without a distinct policy, as the veriest demagogue in the land can take up this cry as well as the best reformer.
In two States prohibition has been carried to success by the Republican party. In others it has received the strong support of the Democratic party. Whether the Prohibition party can secure these votes is a question. In Maine there is a probability of nearly all the votes going to the old parties, because both parties are fully committed to prohibition.
Success thus far has been achieved by submitting the question in the form of an amendment to be voted upon by all parties. Then every temperance man could vote without sacrificing his political preferences. There is no doubt that prohibition can command a larger vote in that manner than in any other. A third party is pretty sure to put some "plank" in its platform which must alienate some friends of the cause, as was the case in California in 1882. In that case the prohibition vote was scarcely large enough to be noticed. Had the question been submitted as a separate one, to be voted upon by all parties without regard to political questions, the vote would have been very much larger.
It will not do to say that this course has proved a failure in several States. It has proved successful in several States, and where it failed it was not so great a failure as a third-party vote would have been in the same States. To-day a third party cannot command so large a vote in those States as was given in favor of a Constitutional amendment when the vote was taken. It is for this reason we say we have no assurance that the present movement, or the third party, will greatly aid the cause of prohibition.
Intemperance is a monster curse in our land. But it must yet be borne in mind that it is but one of many evils, and the reform sought for, especially by political organization, is partial in its nature. True temperance is a Christian grace, provided it be coupled with the other graces. Separated from them, it is no part of Christianity. We joyfully unite with all workers in the cause of reform, but we can never lose sight of the truth that a thorough reform outside of Christianity is impossible. This is our "platform;" for this we labor; in this we trust. And this we recommend to all as the only source of perfect peace and happiness, for "the life that now is, and that which is to come."
Christ the End of the Law.
By Ellet Joseph Waggoner
(Continued.)
In our last article, two weeks ago, we showed how it is that "Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth." We wish to consider this matter a little further, for, as we then said, there is very much that might be said upon it. Indeed, the whole gospel is comprised in that one sentence; for the gospel is simply the good news of how men who have broken the law may be saved, through Christ, and enabled to keep it. In all our investigations let it be borne in mind that the righteousness of God is contained in his law (Isa. 51:4-7), and that Christ is the end of the law only for righteousness, which is equivalent to saying that he is the object of the law for obedience.
We now call the attention of the reader very briefly to the seventh chapter of Romans. We have space to notice only a portion of the chapter. In that the apostle brings to view, using himself as an illustration, the progress of a man from a state of worldly, carnal security, to that of acceptance with God. Let us follow him in his narrative.
First we notice his statement in verse 7 that the law is not sin. This he proves by showing that it is the law which points out and forbids sin. Then, of course, it must be perfect. We can detect base coin only by using genuine coin as a standard. The parallel to this verse is found in chap. 3:20, where he says: "By the law is the knowledge of sin." He continues, "For without the law sin was dead." Verse 8. This is the statement of verse 7 in another form. Before the law was brought to his knowledge, he did not know sin; it did not trouble him any. Although he did not know the law, he was a sinner, yet his sin, so far as his knowledge was concerned, was dead.
"For I was alive without the law once; but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died." Verse 9. Without the law ("the commandment") he was in a state of ease and carnal security, perfectly satisfied with himself. But when the law was applied, it made his sin assume hideous proportions. He saw himself just as he was. "And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death." Verse 10. How is this? The commandment (law) was ordained to life; that is, its object was to give life, which it will always do to those who obey it. "The man which doeth these things shall live by them." Rom. 10:5. This was the object of the law, but now that the law has been violated, it cannot fulfill the end for which it was designed; it can only condemn to death. Mark this well; around this fact the whole argument centers.
And how did the apostle regard that law which, by showing him to be such a sinner, had condemned him to death? Said he: "Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good." Verse 12. He acknowledged the perfectness of the law. And herein he showed his honesty of heart. He did not rail at the law, applying to it all manner of opprobrious epithets, and try to evade it or convince himself that it was abolished. No; he confessed himself a sinner, justly condemned by a perfect law. He recognized the fact that the law had done nothing to him; it had not created sin in him, but had simply brought to light that which previously existed. The effect of introducing the law is to make sin appear exceeding sinful. It is as a rod thrust to the bottom of a vessel of water, which roils the water by stirring up the sediment that lay in the bottom, yet it creates no impurity whatever. The dirt would be there if the rod were not introduced; therefore Paul did not complain, for he knew that the fault was in himself, and not in the law. So he exclaims: "For we know that the law is spiritual; but I am carnal, sold under sin."
In verse 9 Paul anticipates his argument, when he says, "And I died." This was the final result in his case. What does he mean by this? In the light of the preceding verse the answer is clear. When he was alive, it was when he was without the law—lawless; a servant of sin. Death is the direct opposite of life; therefore when the commandment came, and he died, it must mean that he yielded to the claims of the law, and ceased sinning. And this will be the result with every one who is as honest with himself as Paul was. This is conversion. But as before said, the apostle anticipates in order to place the effect side by side with the cause; he did not die without a struggle.
We have now the man before us as a convicted sinner, and here is his description: "For that which I do I allow not; for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I." Verse 15. This verse is introduced by "for," showing that it is a consequence of something that goes before. The preceding clause is, "But I am carnal, sold under sin." Now what is the condition of a man who is sold into slavery? He is unable to do anything for himself. He may be conscious of the degradation of his position, and long to be free; but he is placed where he cannot help himself; his hands or feet are bound with a chain. Every sinner is in bondage. (See 2 Pet. 2:19.) Before the law of God is held up before him, he is unconscious of his slavery; when he sees its claims, he arouses to a sense of his condition. But his struggle to break the galling chain is fruitless, because his long-continued bondage has weakened him. This struggle of the convicted sinner against sin is mentioned in several verses of this chapter.
"If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good. Now, then, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me." Verses 16, 17. Here we have the case of a man convicted of sin by the law, conscientiously trying to keep it, and yet continually violating it, even against his will. "It is not I that do it," he says; "I do not design to violate the law; but sin has bound me so long, and has such power over me, that I cannot get free." It is no longer from desire that he sins, but from the force of habit which he cannot break.
And so the fruitless struggle goes on, until the man in an agony of despair, exclaims: "O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?" Verse 24. We cannot imagine a more horrible condition than the one here brought to view. In ancient times a criminal was sometimes chained to the dead body of a man, and forced to drag the putrefying carcass wherever he went, until the effluvium caused him to die a miserable death. Think of the desperate attempts such a man would make to get free, and how frantic he would become as he realized the impotence of his arm as compared with the chain that bound him. How his whole soul would go out in that piteous cry, "Who shall deliver me from this body of death?" How many are there who have felt themselves in such a condition under the load of sin?
It is in this condition the apostle (the representative of a class) finds himself. He feels that sin is about to sink him into perdition, and, convinced of the hopelessness of his struggle, he cries out for deliverance. "Who shall deliver me from this body of death?" Immediately the question is answered, and he again exclaims, this time with transports of joy, "I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord." As soon as he realizes his own inability to meet the demands of the law, Christ is presented to his view, and he at once accepts deliverance from the only one who can give it. Christ strikes off the chain, and sets the prisoner free. Not only does he forgive past transgressions, but he helps us to break the chains of habit, and overcome the love of sin. And then the apostle continues: "There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus." The reason why there is not, is told in the474following verses, in which it is said that he who is in Christ keeps the law of God; he “walks not after the flesh, but after the Spirit;” in other words, “he is a new creature.”
This argument is not complete without verses 3 and 4 of the 8th chapter: “For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh; that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” What could not the law do? It could not justify any man, and give him life. Wherein lay its weakness? Not in itself, but in “the flesh.” It is the fault of man that the law condemns him, and not the fault of the law. The law cannot give life, because it has been violated. And in this extremity what did God do? He sent his own Son. What for? That the righteousness of the law (i.e., the law in its perfectness) might be accomplished by us. What we could not do while yet in bondage to sin, we may perform when we become free men in Christ.
Righteousness is required of us, and that means that there is something for us to do, for righteousness is simply right doing. But Christ says, “Without me ye can do nothing.” Our own righteousness, that is, the good that we attempt to do by our own unaided efforts, amounts to nothing. It is not righteousness at all, but unrighteousness. When, however, we join the strength of Christ to our weakness, we can truly say, “I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me.”
The Resurrection.
By Ellet Joseph Waggoner
WE have seen that the object of our Lord’s second coming is to take his people to himself. It has also been shown that Christ’s coming is not at the death of saints, but that the only coming spoken of is a literal, personal coming in power and glory. From John 14: 1-3 we drew the necessary conclusion that if his coming (yet in the future) is for the express purpose of taking his people to himself, then none of his people can be with him until he comes. This fact is plainly stated by Paul in the eleventh of Hebrews. After having given a list of the faithful ones “of whom the world was not worthy,”—those who “through faith subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness were made strong,” verses 33, 34,—as well as those who “had trial of cruel mockings and scourgings, yea, moreover, of bonds and imprisonments,” the apostle concludes thus: “And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise; God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.” Verses 39, 40. This is an explicit statement that even the martyrs of old must wait for their reward until we who are alive receive ours.
And this is exactly what our Saviour said. As he was one day eating in the house of a Pharisee, he took occasion to give some instruction concerning hospitality. Said he: “When thou makest a dinner or a supper, call not thy friends, nor thy brethren, neither thy kinsmen, nor thy rich neighbors; lest they also bid thee again, and a recompense be made thee. But when thou makest a feast, call the poor, the maimed, the lame, and the blind; and thou shalt be blest; for they cannot recompense thee; for thou shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of the just.” Luke 14: 12-14.
There is to be but one reward given. Of those who looked for a return for their charities in this life, who gave alms to be seen of men, the Lord said, “They have their reward.” Matt. 6: 1, 2. The applause of men, or an equivalent for the gift, is all they need expect; but those who live lives of unselfishness shall receive an everlasting recompense “at the resurrection of the just.” The words of Christ, “Behold, I come quickly, and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be” (Rev. 22: 12), show that the resurrection, when the reward is given, is at the coming of Christ. And so again we have found that the righteous receive no reward till Jesus comes.
This proposition, already proved, is sustained by many other plain declarations of Scripture. Let us once more refer to Paul’s words to the Thessalonians: “For the Lord himself shall descend from Heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God; and the dead in Christ shall rise first; then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air; and so shall we ever be with the Lord.” 1 Thess. 4: 16, 17.
Nothing can be plainer than this; the apostle has carefully guarded against any possibility of mistake. It is “the Lord himself” who comes. He comes, not secretly, but with “a shout,” and “with the trump of God,” whose reverberations shake the earth. That mighty blast awakes the millions of sleeping saints,—those who have died in faith, not having received the promise,—and they rise. This is the first thing accomplished. Then the living ones,—those who “remain until the coming of the Lord,”—are caught up “together with them” (those who have just been raised from the dead) in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air. This work of gathering the saints together is performed by the angels at the bidding of Christ. See Matt. 24: 30, 31.
“And so,” the apostle says, “shall we ever be with the Lord.” The word “so” means “in this manner,” by this means. How is it, then, that we go to be with the Lord? By the resurrection of the dead, and the translation of the living. There is no other way brought to view in the Bible, by which we can be with the Lord.
The doctrine of the resurrection of the dead is not a product of the New Testament alone. When Abraham was called upon to offer up Isaac, he obeyed, “accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead.” Heb. 11: 19. When Job was suffering not only physical torture, but the anguish of being deserted and despised by all his friends and acquaintances, his faith in the coming of the Lord and the resurrection of the dead still sustained him. From his lips came this sublime utterance: “For I know that my Redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth; and though after my skin worms destroy this body [margin, though this body be destroyed], yet in my flesh shall I see God.” Job 19: 25, 26.
Isaiah, in prophetic vision looking down the ages and beholding the troubles of the church, utters these consoling words: “Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust; for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead.” Isa. 26: 19. Hosea, favored with a similar view, speaks as in Christ’s stead, and says of the people of God: “I will ransom them from the power of the grave; I will redeem them from death; O death, I will be thy plagues; O grave, I will be thy destruction.” Hos. 13: 14.
We have space in this article for only one more quotation. The prophet David, putting himself in the place of the church, and considering the persecution which it must endure “from men of the world, which have their portion in this life,” anticipates the words of Paul in the eleventh of Hebrews, and says: “As for me, I will behold thy face in righteousness; I shall be satisfied when I awake with thy likeness.” Ps. 17: 15. When will the saints be in the likeness of Christ? The beloved disciple says: “We know that when he shall appear, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is.” John 3: 2. David, therefore, did not look for satisfaction until the Lord’s coming; but if he could have gone to Heaven at death, that certainly would have satisfied him.
The following comments on Ps. 17: 15, by Dr. Barnes, will be read with interest:—
“I shall be satisfied.” While they are satisfied with this world, I shall be satisfied only when I awake in the likeness of my God. Nothing can meet the wants of my nature; nothing can satisfy the aspirations of my soul, until that occurs. “When I awake.” This is language which would be employed only by one who believed in the resurrection of the dead, and who was accustomed to speak of death as a sleep—a calm repose in the hope of awakening to a new life. . . . The obvious interpretation of the passage, therefore, so far as its sense can be determined from the connection, is to refer it to the awaking in the morning of the resurrection; and there is nothing in the language itself, or in the known sentiments of the psalmist, to forbid this interpretation. . . . “With thy likeness.” Or, in thy likeness; that is, resembling thee. . . . I regard this passage, therefore, as one of the incidental proofs scattered through the Old Testament, which show that the sacred writers under that dispensation believed in the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead; that their language was often based on the knowledge and the belief of that doctrine, even when they did not expressly affirm it, and that in times of trouble, and under the consciousness of sin, they sought their highest consolation, as the people of God do now, from the hope and the expectation that the righteous dead will rise again, and that in a world free from trouble, from sin, and from death, they would live forever in the presence of God, and find their supreme happiness in being made wholly like him.
The Missionary.
By Stephen Nelson Haskell
South Lancaster Academy.
It is now over two years since this school at South Lancaster, Mass., was first started. The scarcity of laborers in the cause of God, and a feeling on the part of many that the influence of the common schools at the present day is not best calculated to improve the morals of those attending them, were among the considerations which led the friends of the enterprise to put forth efforts to establish this school. It began as an experiment, those in charge believing that if they would have a school which should prove a success, it must be by adopting those principles which are adapted to call out the judgment, and fit individuals for usefulness in society.
We have now passed through seven terms of the school, and we look back over its history with much satisfaction as to the results. During the two years which the school has been in progress there have been over thirty conversions among those connected with it. Many came to the school unconverted, some of whom had little or no faith in the Bible. Most of these individuals have not only given their hearts to God, but have connected themselves with his work. In these respects God has most signally blessed the school, and we feel to give him all the praise, and trust in his mercy and hope for his special blessing to accompany the efforts in the future.
Two other schools have been started by teachers who came here to acquaint themselves with our methods of teaching. One of these schools is in Jamaica, Vermont, and the other at Rome, New York. The results of both of these thus far are very encouraging.
Last winter, at a meeting of the leading brethren in the New England Conference, it was voted to raise the sum of $25,000, purchase land, and erect buildings suitable to carry out the design of those who led off in this enterprise. Accordingly stock to the amount of over $12,500 was subscribed at the meeting, twenty-six acres of land were immediately purchased, and in the spring they proceeded to erect two buildings capable of accommodating475one hundred and fifty students, at an expense of about $35,000 including the land. Other buildings have been arranged, where students who attend the school can learn some one of six useful trades. This does not include gardening and the culinary department, etc. It is now expected that these buildings will be completed so that their dedication will be held the first of October, at which time the fall term will commence, making a delay of a few weeks on account of the buildings not being completed.
The expenses at the South Lancaster Academy are light in comparison with other schools, the entire expense including board and tuition not exceeding $3.50 per week.
The True Educator, an eight-page sheet, is published monthly by the Academy, the typesetting, proof-reading, and press work all being done by those connected with the school. Those boarding at the Academy have advantages in the matter of tuition and learning trades not offered to others.
A specialty is made of teaching the Scriptures in such a manner that a general understanding of them may be acquired. There will be three departments in Bible study for advanced students—those desiring to fit themselves as teachers or for some other position of usefulness,—first Bible history, second theology, and third, the parables of our Saviour. Instruction will also be given in the best methods of missionary labor, especially that phase of it which relates to correspondence and how to arrest the attention of the careless to those subjects which pertain to their eternal interests. This course of instruction will be adapted to older persons, and those who cannot follow set rules in textbooks.
There will be lectures from time to time on the subject of hygiene, illustrating before the class the adulteration in foods and giving instruction upon proper ventilation and those subjects which can be made of practical use. This instruction will not take the place of studies commonly taught in such schools.
Certain hours each day will be devoted to physical employment. The conductors of the school have already found by experience that while the student engages in some employment that calls into exercise the muscles of the body, as well as the judgment, he will accomplish more with fewer hours of study than he would without that physical training. We think any who have a spirit and burden of labor can be benefited by the Biblical course and by the lectures on these practical subjects.
It is the design of those having charge of the school to make every arrangement in their power to carry out these principles which the most successful schools have found to be the true principles of education, and also to make the stay of those who come as pleasant as possible. South Lancaster is one of the oldest towns in Massachusetts. Its broad streets, with stately elms on each side, its neat residences and verdant hills, make it as attractive a place as is often found in any rural district in New England.
All connected with the school are expected to attend church on the Sabbath if able, and pay that outward respect to the worship of God which is thought to be consistent. Our only hope is in God. We acknowledge our dependence upon him, and seek his guidance in the enterprise.
We invite those who wish to learn more particulars of the school to send for catalogue, and correspond with those connected with the school. All correspondence addressed to South Lancaster Academy, South Lancaster, Mass., will receive prompt attention.