■,'K IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) i.O I.I ii4|||||M IIIII25 U& ^ 2.2 m m m lilM 1.8 125 1.4 1.6 ^ 6" — ► ^. *> Vi '*>^'l> v >#' on Photographic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 872-4503 CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHIVI/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 1980 Technica' and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has a. empted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographicaliy unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. L'lnstitut a microfilm^ le mellleur exemplaire qu'il lui a dt6 possible de se procurer. Lcs details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui pouvent exiger une modification dans la m^thode normale de fiimaqe sont indiqu^s ci-dessous. n Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur □ Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur □ Covers damaged/ Couverture enctommagde □ Pages damaged/ Pages endommag^es □ Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur^e et/ou pellicu!6e □ Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaur^es et/ou pellicul^es □ Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque n Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages d^coiordes, tachet^es ou piqudes I I Coloured maps/ Cartes g^ographiques en couleur □ Pages detached/ Pages ddtachees □ Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) ~7| Showthrough/ J-1 Transparence □ Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur □ Quality of print varies/ Quality in^gale de I'impression D Bound with other material/ Relid avec d'autres documents □ Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel supplementaire D D Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La reliure serree peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge intdrieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutdes lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 film^es. D D Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6t6 film6es d nouveau de facon d obtenir la meilleure image possible. D Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppl^mentaires: \y 10X '> This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiqud ci-dessous. 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X n _y 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X tails t du odifier une maqe a^ The copy filmed here has been reproduii:ed thanks to the generosity of: Library of the Public Archives of Canada The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grdce d la g6n6rosit6 de: La bibliothdque des Archives publiques du Canada Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus gi-and soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nettetd de l'exemplaire film6, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprim^e sont filmds en commenganx par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, sblon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont filmds en commenpant par la premidre page qui comporte une empreinte d: ipression ou d'illustration et en terminant par Id . ernidre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol — ^- (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Un des symboies suivants apparaitra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: Is symbole — »- signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbole V signifie "FIN". Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre filmds d des taux de reduction diff6rents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour etre reproduit en un seul clich6, il est film6 d partir de Tangle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammed suivants illustrent la mdthode. errata to I pelure, an d D 32X 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 A / Religious Instruction IN OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS I! KING A Number of Letters Published IN '11 IE TORONTO "MAIL" HY REV.. JOHN LAING, M.A., D. D., MlXISTKK OV TIIK rKKSHVTKRl AN Clll,-K(II, • DUX DAS, ONTARIO. _PUBLISHED BY THE j^EWS (:OMPANY. TORONTO ; .M.\rt. rKiNTiNc, C.I., Frimkks, Cokneu King and Pav Si 188a. >I-ETS. INTRODUCTION. Tliat religion and morals form an important part of education all will admit. Those also who know (Jod's Book are unanimous in affirming that even for literary purposes there is no book like the Bible. Its elevated, pure, unselfish tone; its rich, but chaste imagery ; its peerless parables and allegories; its sublime, grand poetry; its history, so ancient, life-like and instiuctive — all combine with the transcendent and eternal import- ance of its chief themes, and its power to aftect the life of man, to save and raise him morally and intellectually, to make the Bible the best of school-books. I"" the develop- ment of noble, pure, intelligent, robust manhood is the end of education, then the lUble is worth more than any other textbook in the wide world. But objections, both theoretical and practical, to the use of God's Book in the schools are strenuously put forth. The chief of these are stated, and to some extent met, in the following letters. The best answer, however, is a fact, " a sturdy chiel that winna ding"— a fact which must convince any man who has not resolved to remain blind, viz.: that the following resolution on the subject of religious education is canied out by the School Hoard of the*City of London, England : — " In the Schools provided by the " Board the Bible shall be read, and there shall be given such instruction therefrom in " the principles of morality and religion as are suited to the capacity of the children, " provided that no attempt be made in any such schools to attach children to any parti- " cular denomination." Mr. Mundella states that, during three years, he had only one complaint. It was from a father who wished to withdraw his child from ;eligious teaching, while the mother succeeded in preventing that from being done. In these schools, 300,000 pupils are thus instructed in Christian morals and religion, and Mr. Mundella adds that, practically, the whole school children of England, numbering 4,700,000 are receiving religious instruction. In this connection, the following extract from the speech of Mr. Forster, in the British House of Commons, is most significant:— " The firstand most important business " (of the schools) was to give a thorough good elementary education — reading, writing, " and ciphering — and he trusted that the day was far distant when there would not be •' alongside that a Sci.ptural education. (Cheers). The Act of 1870 had not resulted " in a purely secular system, but, as he believed, in a more thorough Scriptural and reli- " gious teaching than existed before." (Renewed cheers). Thus, the British Commons showed by applause their appreciation of religious and Scriptural teaching. What is done in London can certainly be done in Toronto ; what is possible in England is possible in Canada, and the best corroboration of this is another fact, viz. — that the Teachers' Association of Ontario endorse the proposal to have Biblical instruction given. These facts outweigh ten thousand hypothetical objections. I do not now propose to discuss the fundamental ideas of education ; nevertheless, simply to state the three distinct theories regarding where the promotion of education properly and primarily belongs, may help to make the position I take in these letters more intelligible : — \ (l) It is said that education is properly a function of the State, and this because the State should see that its subjects are intelligent, industrious, and law-abiding. Fduca- tion benefits the State, therefore it belongs to the State to educate. (2') It is said that education is the proper function of the Church. This is the Roman Catholic position, as will be shown below. "Teach all nations," and because Christ commissioned the Apostles to teach the Gospel, therefore Bishops should conduct the education of the young. (3) It is said that it is j.rimarily and properly the fiinction of parents to educate their children ; and that only when parents neglect to do this should .State or Church authoritatively interfere and compel parents to do their duty. The third is the position I approve. But as in modern society this duty cannot be discharged by every parent personally, parents may combine to have schools and employ teachers ; still the right to say what and how the children shall be taught remains with the parents, not with Church or State. Neither Government nor Bishop should be allowed to over-ride the parent. At the same time both Stite ,;nd Church may properly aid parents in dis- charging this function. In this way lational systems of education, which recognise the rights of parents and carry out thei; wishes an. legitimate, and Church and State can combine to secure the education of all the childrc" of the country. I need only add that clauses 9 and 10 of the Ontaiio School Law fully recognises this position in principle ; and that the principle of popular election is intended to keep the management of each school under the control of the parents of the children as far as is consistent with efficiency. Besides the six open letters to the Minister of Education which were published recently, the reader w^ill find other letters written duri.ig earlier discussions on the same general question. These are given under tr;e conviction that they throw light on the subject. I am satisfied that our Protestants are more generous than wise. They have no fear of the influence of Romanism, and are willing to leave Roman Catholics alone, under the idea that they are leaving us alone. One object that I have in view is to put this matter fairly before the public, and to ask our Protestants to consider whither things must dri if the present system is continued, and our Roman Catholic fellow-citizens are taught their religion in the State schools, while Protestants are denied the like privilege. Let me then direct attention to the position of the Roman Catholic community as to education. The following is taken from the paper read by Archbishop Lynch in Toronto in June last, to the Separate School Board : — " The teaching on the subject of education by the Catholic Church, especially of " Pope Pius IX., of blessed memory, and of his illustrious successor, Leo XIII., and of " all Catholic theologians is — that Catholic children, as far as it is [lossible, should be " educated in Catholic and unmixed schools. Kening; in his theology, recently publishefl " with the approbation of His Eminence Cardinal McCloskey, Archbishop of New York, " and of the Archbishops and Bishops of the United States and Canada, also teaches " that those Catholic parents who send their children to Common Schools where they " have schools of their own, are unworthy of the grace of the Sacraments, and that all " persons who advocate the contrary are also unworthy of the Sacraments, as opposing " in speech the teaching of the Church.'" I have been censured both by priest and newspaper correspondent for referring to the Syllabus as if it were irrelevant in the discussion of this question, but my readers will 6 see that the Archbishop also feels the importance in educational questions of that famous- manifesto. The 45th clause in it gives as "a principal error of our time, which is stigmatizeil " in the consistorial Allocutions, Encyclicals and other \postolical letters of our most " Holy Father Pope Pius IX. j the following : — 'The entire direction of Public Schools " in which the youth of Christian States (Protestant?) are educated, except (to a certain " extent) in the case of Episcopal seminaries, may and must appertain to the civil power, " and belong to it so far that no other authority whatsoever shall be recognized as hav- ^^ ing any riglit to interfere m the discipline of the schools, the arrangement of the " studies, the taking of degrees, or the choice and approval of teachers.' " This is the very position claimed for our Ontario school system which is thus condemned. Clause 47 stigmatizes as a principal error " the best theory of civil society requires that '* popular schools open to the children of all classes, and generally all public institutes, in- " structed for instruction in letters and philosophy, and for conducting the education of " the young should \i& freed from all ecclesiastical control, government and interference, " and should be fully subject to the civil and political power in conformity with the will " of rulers and the prevalent opinions of the age.' " Again we have the position of our Ontario school system condemned. Clause 48 stigmatizes as a principal error, " This system of instructing youth, which ^" consisls in separating it from the Catholic faith and from the I'OWEr of the Churchy "and in teaching exclusively, or at least primarily, the knowledge of natural things and '• the earthly ends of social life alone, may be approved by Catholics." ANOTHER I'RINCII'I.E OF OUR SCHOOL SYSTEM. It is now evident that this stigmatizing of these opinions is an unequivocal and strong condemnation of modern systems of education. We do not wonder then that the lay teachers of (Quebec felt it n^ jesoary to ask their Archbishop for protection against some of the clergy, who, they say, " wish, notwithstanding our protests, to apply to us *' the provisions of the 45, 47 and 48 of the Syllabus and consider us as infidels and " enemies." We are also prepared to learn that the Archbishop in his answer said : — " Hy its divine 'Constitution (the Church's) it is its right and duty to see that the faith "and morals of Christian youth (Protestant included) are protected in the schools, and " that these precious gifts are not exposed to the danger of being lost ; and as there can " never be any right against the right, the State cannot fetter the Church when faith "and morals are concerned. For this purpose, the church must hav. a right to enter ^^ the schools not only by tolerance, but in virtue of its divine mission.'^ What bolder, stronger, more defiant claim of right can the Church set forth as against a national system of education, free from clerical interference and control ? Thus clearly and unmistakably is set forth the claim of a Divine right and authority for Bishops to direct the education of the young in a Christian State, not excepting Protestant States arid the obligation to disregard any regulation of the state which contravenes this alleg'^d right. Surely we are inexcusable if we dislielieve this or allow it to be explained away. To lefuse to see is culpable blindness. When the " Marmion '' affair came upon us this claim was squarely put forth by Archbishop Lynch, and vindicated by others of' the clergy, admitted and acted upon by the Minister of Education, and approved by the Globe. Witness the following — the Arch- bishop, as reported by the (7/tf/v, siid on Sumlay, in the Cathedral : " .f* a Cal/iolic '• Bishop he was bound to see to the inoralily of the Catholic stitticnls, and as a Hrye '* number of such students were in attendance at Universities and High Schools they " (the bishops) must see to the literature placed in their hands. They condc-mned it " (the book) They remonstrated with the Education Department." Accordingly, Minister Crooks then and there acreed to suspend the use of " Marmion " in the High Schools. So, when a Roman Catholic Bishop, in the exercise of what he is pleased to regard as /us'Divinuiiiy "condemned" a book and "remonstrated;" at once, and without consultation with any Protestant, the Minister of Education, the heatl of our schooi system, obeyed — obeyed the prelate and interdicted the book. Mark well, not a siti^le yc'iionstranie cf any kind had reaihed the Minister thcfi, esicpt that of the Artlihishop, and he acknowledged the right of Episcopal interference r.nd control. This conduct of the Minister was thus approvingly spoken of by the Editor of the Globe, before the heat ;rt.' or any direct " or indirect (ein{:oral fowcr."' Thus avowing the purpose ol using any political advan- tnge she may have to gain her own ends, we can sec clearly what to expect. If the Roman Catholic Church in Ontario can in any w^y get the control of our State Schools she will get it and keep it, nor will she tolerate any teaching which will lend to maintain Protestant truth and Protestant liberty. Surely it l)ecomes us Protestants t OPEN LETTERS ON RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION (SEE SCHOOL LAW CLAUSE X.) To the Minister of Education for the Province oj Ontario: Ho\ORAi!i.E Sir,— I'ermit me in a letter addressed to you, as the responsible head of our educational systen., to direct the attention of the public to matters which are powerfully affecting the character of our people, for good or for evil, and of which the full Iruus will not be seen for a generation to come. With many friends who have witnessed your efforts in the past to make our educational system a success, I take this opportunity to express my sorrow that through severe affliction you are at present unable to discharge your duties, and also my hope that your health may yet be fully restored. While I cannot approve of all that has been enacted under your administration, or of the ever-recurring changes and modifications in the school law and regulations which so perplex those who are engaged in education, yet I believe them to 1)6 well intended— if not always wise— attempts to meet supposed defects in our provincial system. To some of these defects I may hereafter refer more in detail. I will here only state my conviction that we have had too much legislation and regulation, and that many trustees and teachers, who are not imbeciles, think that they might safely be left a wider margin (or the exercise of common sense, and not have their hands tied in every little matter by irritating, and oft-times ambiguously worded, regulations, which they find it necessary at times even to disregard, in the interests of education. The first thing of an unsatisfactory nature which I venture to bring under your notice is that of moral and Religious Instruction in our schools. Of the importance of such instruction I will not speak. Others have written largely ami well on the subject, and have shown that it is an indispensable element of a liberal Christian education. Besides, our law admits the desirableness of such instruction, and provides for it. It is only to be regretted that existing regulations make the provisions of the Act nugatory to a large extent, and when an attempt is made to impart such instruction in our public schools, ensure partial if not complete failure. The discussions on education of last year have shown that the opponents of the introduction of the Bible into our schools as a book of instruction rest their arguments. 10 among other things, although pcrhajis, cliiclly, on the fact that our pul)lic schools arc non-iiunoniinational and belong alike to citizens of every creed. Hence they assert it would be unju.st to teach in these schools, supported by public funds, anything upon which all citizen^ arc not agreed ; that all are agreed on a secular eilucation, but many do not agree to Christian morals and religion being taught ; and therefore >>nly secular instruction should be given, rarlicularly we have been told that in many parts of Ontario the Roman Catholic community support our public schools, and have, therefore, rights in our schools eeiually with Protestants; so that it is only right, to use the langu.ige of the late laniented Father Stafford, that " nothing anti Tapel ' should be taught in our schools. We are further told thr.t our schools are not Troteslant, although the Stparate Schools arc Roman Catholic, and that every Roman Catholic can claim the privileges of our Public and Ilij^h Schools. Now, honorable sir, I wish to look at this objection in its bearing on the relative position of the Protestant majority and the Roman Catholic minority in Ontario. The Venerable Archbishop Lynch lately expressed himself thus: — '*The Catholics of the Province of (Quebec, yielding to the scruples of their Protestant fellow-citizens, permitted them to have Separate Schools, with a Separate Hoard of Kducation, a Normal School, and in tine all the privileges which the C"ommon Schools of Ontario enjoy. » * * w'e hope that our Protestant fellow-citizens will yet feel proud to be as liberal to their Catholic fellow-subjects as the Catholics are to the Protestants of (Quebec. Minh advaiue has already been /iiai/e and "toe hope for more," The italics are mine. I have no doubt the Archbishop here states his convictions as to the state of things, and a hope, not, perhaps, without some good ground, of the extension of Roman Catholic Separate Schools. Let me then most respectfully call attention to a difference in the school law of the two Provinces which completely destroys any argument to be drawn from alleged injustice to Roman Catholics. In (Quebec, education is not a department of the Government as in Ontario, but is under the charge of a Superintendent and Council of Public Instruction. The Council consists of two sections or committees, known as the Roman Catholic Committee and the Protestant Committee. The former consists of all the bishops or administrators of Roman Catholic dioceses in the province, and an equal number of Roman Catholic gentlemen appointed by the Lieutenant-Governor in Council ; the latter of eight Protestant gentlemen appointed by the Governor-General. To these committees respectively is committed the management of the Roman Catholic and Protestant schools. This distinction between the two religions is carried out in every particular. In this way it comes that Protestant and Roman Catholic are ecjual in the eye of the law, and have equal privileges, with ilistinct school corporations, examining boards, books, &c., &c. Another notable thing is that while to the Roman Catholic Protestant Schools are common or public schools from the lowest to the highest grade, it depends upon which religion in any municipality has the majority, whether the ^^disseiitietif" (not separated) school is Roman Catholic or Protestant. If the majority is Roman Catholic, the Protestants, provided they have twenty children of school age, may have a dissentient school, and if the majority is Protestant the Roman Catholic School is dissentient in the same way. Further, no one, clergyman or Layman, professing the other creed can, without permission of the school authorities, in any way interfere with the parish school or the dissentient school, whether Roman Catholic or Protestant, And this is fair, equal-handed justice. But the case in Ontario is very different, (i) Here the Public II Schools are not I'roteslant, Inil llic Separate Schools are Romnn Catholic. (2) The I'uhlic Schools arc not administered and coii'viled exchixively t)y I'rotestants, as they wish and desire for tiieir interests; while the Separate Schools nre managed exclusively by Roman Catholics, and as the bishops direct. (3) Roman Catholics can obtain Separate .Schools in any part of Ontario ; hut Protestants can obtain them only when a Roman Catholic te.icher is employed. Also, in other respects the law bears n{.^ainst I'rotestant Separate Schools and favours Roman Catholic Separate Schools. (4) Kvery Roman Catholic has the right to support and so Air control the I'liblic School, while no I'fotestanl can interfere with a Roman Cathohc Separate School. (5) l-lvery priest and bishop is by law a visitor of the Public Schools, but no Protestant minister can visit a Roman Catholic Separate School. (6) As in (Quebec the clergy, both Roman Catholic and Protestant, decide what religious books arc to be used, so in Ontario the IJishop •appoints the books to be used which are then authorized, and thus the children are taught the tenets and religious practices of Rfimanisni ; but Protestant ministers Iiave no such rights, and the tenets and pr.actices rjf the reformed faith are not taught. Other points of advantage conceded by, or if you wish " wrung from ' the Legislature liy the bishops, might be specified, but the six mentioned may now suffice. Now, sir, is this equality? It our (Ontario school law were to recogni/e the fact, as Arch'-ishop Lynch puts it, that "tliere are two grand divisions of Christians in this country, the Catholic and Protestant," and were conformed to that acknowledged state of society, then we might hope to have rights and privileges equal to those conceded to the Roman Catholics. But our law professes not to know the creed of citizens in educational matters, and then makes an exception of nearly one-fourth of the population favouring their religious desires and claims. The law ignores Protestantism and individual Protestant churches, and refuses to allow them to have schools, at the same time that it acknowledges Roman Catholicism, and concedes everything it claims as a right. Father Stafford, with his clear insight, discerned tliis distinctly, and thus frankly stated it: — "The educational system of Ontario is not the work ol Catholics, consecjuently they are not to blame //' Proteslavts are tieprv'cd of Ihcir rii^lits to teach Protestantism in their schools.' In the same letter he strongly contends that it is the right of Roman Catholics to have everything oflfensive to them on religious grounds excluded from the Public Schools (including, of course, the Protestant Bible), because some Roman Catholic money goes to the support of the schools, because many Roman Catholic pupils attend these schools, and many Roman Catholics are employed as teachers in the schools. All this simply means that Roman Catholics have their own schools, subsidized from public funds, exclusively to themselves, and controlled by their clergy, and also enjoy equal rights with Protestants in all the Public Scliools. In light of the above facts, it is clear as noon-day that in Ontario it is the Protest- ants and not the Roman Catholics who are wrongeil. Protestants have no rights as Protestants or Christians. The public schools, so f.ir as the law goes, arc conducted on secular or agnostic principles ; and the Roman Catholics enjoy special privileges in their Separate Schools. It is impossible to abolish Separate Schools now ; I am far from thinking that such a measure would be beneficial. The other alternative is to separate Romanism and Protestantism for educational purposes, from the primary school to the university, and let each religion have full sway. This might afford relief from the pre- sent intolerable state of things. We cannot rest while we are denied privileges which 12 are conceded to Ivoman Catholics. We must have eciuality, if not by having all public schools unsectaiian and our system undenominational, then by having Protestant schools and Secularlist schools as there are Roman Catholic schools, in which the religious and non-religious among I rotestants may be trained as their parents desire. But care must be taken that each party support their own schools. I may address you again. Mean- while I have the honour to be Yours, etc., Dundas, Tuly 30. 18S3 TOHN LAING. NO. II. |1* '•'li To the Minister of Education for the Province of Ontario :— HONORAHi.E Sir, —In a former letter I tried to show that so far from being in an inferior position as to " rights and privileges," the Roman Catholic community of On- tario enjoy in their Separate School system privileges which are denied to Protestants. The former have full liberty to teach the religious tenets and practices of Romanism, and to use their religious books, while we Protestants may not teach in the Public Schools anything which is "anti-Papal'' or oftensive to Roman Catholics, and cannot use the Bible, except with the consent of trustees, and even then are prevented fiom teaching our religious doctrines or practices. Before leaving this subject I wish to remove still further, if possible, the false impression which is produced by the language of Arch- bishop Lynch when he says, " the Catholics of (Quebec, yielding to the scruples of their Protestant felloiv-ciil-e IS, permitted them to have .Separate Schools," etc. Now, sir, so far from Roman Catholics yielding anything to Protestant scruples, the establishment of Roman Catholic schools in Lower Canada is an illustration of Protestants' toleration, and their earnest desire to respect the religious convictions of those w ho differ from them in creed. What are the facts ? During the sixteenth century, and after it even, the motto '■'■ ciiJHs regio, ejus rcligio" was remorselessly carried out, as it is to-day on the Continent to some extent. No toleration was granted by Romanist or Protestant State to dissenters. Tearful and bloody has been the battle for equal rights, and still it has to be maintained in Karope and Mexico, and in nerrly all Roman Catholic countries. Protestant places of worship and schools, and the circulation of Protestant books, are discouraged in eve»y possible way, and put down wherever the Roman Catholic Church has the power to do so. When, however, " New ]'>ance" was conquered by Great Britain this was not done. The religion of the conquered was respected. " The treaty which ceded Canada to Great Britain secured for the Catholics of this country the free exercise and all prerogatives of their faith.'" — (Memorial of lay teachers to the bishops of Quebec, dated Feb. 26, 1881.) One of these " prerogatives" is that the Church shall control the education of the young— through its Hierarchy. In good faith, therefore, the conquering nation has put the education of their youth largely into the hands of the Roman Catholic bishops, and in its legislation has helped the Church of Rome equally with the other Churches to whicli the con(|uerors belong. Surely this is a very different thing from "the Roman Catholics yielding to Protestant scruples and permitting them to have Separate Schools." Ves, sir, it is the Protestants who have been generous both 13 in Ontario and Quebec. We do not expect the Church of Rome to yield to us one iota in religious questions ; we must ' wring from " her our rights. Her claim that the Church shall educate the young to the exclusion of the State is too clearly declared in the Syllabus, and has been too plainly confirmed by the evasive answer given by the Archbishop of (Quebec to the memorial, from which I have (juoted above, to allow any- one to be deceived who will take pains to enquire. Protestants desire even-handed justice— that, and no more ; and they arc willing to grant equal rights in every respect to our Roman Catholic fellow-citizens, the Archbishop's unfair implications nolwith- standing. But we are not willing to sit quietly with folded hands while our educational authorities grant to Roman Catholics and their clergy what they deny to Protestants and their clergy. Honorable sir, you have not forgotten how promptly you took action when the Archbishop demanded that "Marmion" should be prescribed as immoral and anti- I'apal, but it is now nine nionths since a deputation from the Methodist, Episcopalian, and Presbyterian Churches, consisting of both ministers and prominent laymen, wailed upon the Premier and earnestly laid before him the wishes of the vast majority of the IVotestants of the Province. We were indeed most courteously received, and the Premier "spoke us fair," and promised that the matter should receive his personal atten- tion and such consideration from the (government as its importance justified. 13ut, sir, we expected more than fair words. I am aware that a special circular was shortly after- wards issued with the view of putting the Government in possession of the facts as to the extent to which the Bible is used and the Ten Commandments taught in our I'ublic Schools. I have no doubt that information, when we get it, will be important and use- ful. But, sir, as I had to do with filling up the answers in the circular, I do not think 1 am presumptuous when I say that, like all statistics got up for a purpose, the answers when tabled will be found unreliable and unsatisfactory, that is to men who are practi- cally acquainted with the school-room, however much they may serve to blind the public by a show of diligence and the presenting of an array of tabled figures as to the use of the Bible. The main question as to making instruction in morals and religion a part of our children's education is not touched, even if it can be shown that a large majority of schools have the form of prayer and a few verses of Scripture read devotion- ally, and a hymn sung. We desiderate more than this, viz. : — instrurtioii, and that that instruction shall have as prominent a pl;<.ce assigned to it as arithmetic or grammar, or history or literature. The motto of the educational system of Lower Canada forms a striking contrast to that of the boasted system of Ontario. The former is, " Teach the children their moral dutids. No school without God. Religion is the best teacher uf our duties ; it exalts man and fortifies him." The laticr says (and oh, how un- worthy ! ) the schools are established for giving a secular education. They may go on without the mention of God's name. But if the trustees of any section have strong pre- judices in favor of Christianity, prayer may be offered, and if no objection is made by the ratepayers, then God's Word may be read, and the moral law may be taught, ami ministers may meet such children as they can coax to remain in school after hours and give them instruction in the highest of all knowledge — morality and religion. What mockery ! Now, sir, the Province was last autumn in a state of great excitement in view of the elections which were close at hand. The advocates of religious instruction were very anxious to keep education out of the political arena, if possible, and were ii ■ 14 !tt therefore willing to wait until the elections were over. Other very important matters have doubtless engaged the attention of the Government, and your own serious illness ought to be considered. Still I venture to lay that patience has bounds. Our courteous request .has not received the prompt attention accorded to the Archbishop's demand ; and now we are ready for a movement in favour of a change in our regulations, no matter how our advocacy of this question may effect political parties. We must have our just demands considered and granted, even if the Government be thereby embarrassed- Now, honorable sir, I will jiroceed to justify before a discerning public the demand we make in the nime of the Protestant Christians of Ontario, that our children shall be taught in our schools the morality of the Bible, the doctrines on which that morality rests, and the inspired history in which it has been illustrated. I merely noticft in pass- ing that modern civilization with its school for every child is begotten of Christianity. Common schools and general education are peculiar to Protestant communities, although where Protestant schools exist, Roman Catholics in self defence have to educate their youth. In all the schools of this Western world the Bible originally had a place as a school book, and religion was taught. Only gradually and stealthily has it been insidi- ously excluded in many places, by the secularist and agnoitic spirit of the age. Chris- tianity is part of the recognized law of the Province, " an integral part of the common law of the land " (Judge Harrison), and our children should therefore be taught i'.s principles and precepts. Experience has shown that the religion of Jesus Christ in- fluences all nations for good, by elevating morality and restraining vice, and hence the youth of the country should be made acquainted with its precepts, so that they may grow up under its benign influence. The duties of this 11*6 are best performed by those who arc carefully instructed in Scripture truth, and grow up in the fear of God and hope of heaven. The Bible has no e(|ual as a book for educating intellect, heart, and taste alike. These and other considerations of a general character might be enlarged upon, but I leave them now, and will in my next letter try to show that in this Ontario of ours the consistent carrying out of the law calls for a change in the present regulations, and that in giving our children instruction in Christian morals we are doing no wrong to those of a different creed or of no creed, while we are only seeking to discharge the sacred trust committed to us as parents, to fit our children *"or usefulness in time, and to prepare them for a happy eternity. \'ours, etc., " Dandas, Ont., Aug. I, iSSj. , , JOHN LAING. s!i th NO. III. To the Mi)iisler of Education for the Province of Ontario : — riONo:^.M;LK SiK, — I propose now to show that the demand made by the repre- sentatives of the several Protestant Churches in the name of the great majority of the people of Ontario ought to be granted, and that religious instruction should form part of the cour.se of instruction in our public institutions of learning. I shall not dwell on those grand principles and more general considerations whise force is admitted by all, even by the advocates of a purely secularist system, while they assert that it alone can be .successfully or justly put in practice. I shall look at our school law as it is, and 15 sliow thai not only in consistency with it n^ay religious instruction be given, but that the spirit of the law re(|aires that to be done. Before our present school system was introduced in 1S50 religious instruction was given in all the schools of the Province, both Protestant and Roman Catholic. The schools then existing were put by their supporters under the new system on the under- standing that the Bible and even the catechisms might s/i//he taught. The fact is that for many years religious instruction wai continued in the schools with general satisfac- tion. The Irish readers, which formed the series used under the new system, contained lessons in Scripture history and Christian morals. These books had in Ireland ol)tained the approval of the authorities, both Protestant and Roman Catholic, as imparting to some extent the religious and moral instruction which was desiderated, and were at once received here with satisfaction and thankfulness. Clause 10 of the School Act was con- sidered as guaranteeing the continuance of tlv; privilege which, up to that time, had beiin enjoyed, viz : — "l^upils shall be allowed to receive such religious instruction as their parents and guardians desire, according to any general regulations provided for the organization, government, and discipline of Public Schools." No one dreamed that the general regulations would be such as practically to make "religious instruction" a nullity, leaving at the utmost that coidd be hoped for the use of a form of prayer, the reading of a few verses by the teachers or by the scholars devotionally, and the partial learning of the commandments in some of the schools. Vet such has come to be the case, and now we are coolly told that our Public .Schools were established to give only secular instruction, not to teach Christianity or any otiier religion, but that clergymen are permitted ex gra/ia to give religious instruction out of school hours, and that they are to blame if they cannot capture the children for the purpose of having an additional lesson inflicted on them when le.ady to go home 1 The Roman Catholic Church was the first to complain of this want of religious in- struction. Its clergy saw the irreligious tendency, and denounced the schools as God- less. The superseding of the Irish series of books by those now in use, and the enforced enlargement of the programme of compulsory studies, at length made the Bible m longer a class-book, and all semblance of religious instruction disappeared from most of the Public Schools ; and all this be it noted in the face of a regulation which hypocriti- cally declares, "As Christianity is recognized by comnii^n consent throughout this Pro- vince as an essential element of education, it ought to pervade all the regulations for ele- mentary instruction." Honorable sir, this to me is not only inconsistency in the highest degree, but bitter mockery. And, sir, I challenge any friend of purely secular edu- cation to show when by common consent throughout this Province "it was resolved" that the Great God and His revealed will were to be regulated out of our schools in the face of an Act of Parliament which provides for religious instruction. I think, sir, that every reader will now admit that our demand for religious instruction is in strict harmony with the school law, nay, that without it law is made void. Again, honourable sir, we have been told that the trustees of any school section may require religious instruction to be given. If the law allows this, surely it cannot be contrary to the law if all the school sections of a townshiji, or of a county, or of the Province are reiiuired by com- petent authority to give such instruction. A board of trustees is civil authority as really as the department of the Government with which you are charged, and ic can no more be a violation of the law for the Government through you to make such a regulation as we desiderate and apply it, subject to the conscience clause (9th) of the Act, than for IG three men called trustees to enforce a similar regulation in one .'chool section. Be coH' sistent. Do not tell us that the law docs not allow the enforcement of religious instruc- tion in all school sections, but allows it in e\'ery section separately. Do not mock our common sense by telling us that three comparatively uneducated men may impose upon a remote country section what our most enlightened legislators, charged with conducting the education of our youth throughout the Province, cannot require without violating the law under which those trustees act. The inconsistency here is indeed glaring. But, honorable sir, I will go much further. I will proceeil to show that the r.overnment h now giving religious instruction through teachers whom it directly ajipoints, and is paying these teachers from public funds while giving religious instruction as part of their functions. In the fifteenth annual report of the Inspector of Prisons, I find on pages 96 and TtV/. most interesting information regarding the boys in the Reformatory at Penetangui- shene. I find there that there is a Protestant chaplain and a Roman Catholic chapli-.n in the employ of the Government ; also a Protestant schoolmaster and Roman Catholic teachers paid by the Government. The Protestant chaplain says : — " It is lamentable to observe the ignorance of the simplest principles of religion of many of the youths of this Province who become inmates of this institution. Boys who say they have attended Sunday School for months, lads who can read in the second and third books, are unable to give an answer to the (juestion, ' How many comm mdments are there?' or to repeal the Lord's prayer, and appear to have never known of a Creator, Redeemer, or Sanctifier. To be taught to pray regularly to a Divine Being, to he brought, as such boys are here, into frequent contact with religious subjects, must be attended with good results." Then we are told of regular religious services held and instruction given liy both Protestant and Roman Catholic functionaries, of twenty-six Protestant and twenty-one Roman Catholic boys being confirmed by the Bishops, of catechisms taught and .Sunday School instruction all under the authority of the Government, and, in some cases, by State-paid ofiicials. Now, sir, I may remark in passing tint I cannot adduce any be'ter evidence of the inadequate religious instruction received by a large portion of the youth in Ontario, both ill day school and .Sabbath .School, than tlia above quotation affords. But my object is to show that a ( lovernment who, by its officials and under its authority, thus teaches religion in gaols, prisons, reformatories, refuges, and asylums, is inconsistent when it ])retends that it cannot give public funds for teaching religion and Christianity in our Public .Schools. Far am I from blaming the Government for thus bringing religion to bear on the criminal and fallen ; nay, I heartily approve of it and rejoice in it. But, sir, you must admit that if the State may, and ought to, give religious instruction in order to reform fallen men, women, and children, it is much more proper and incumbent on them to give it in early life before they fall ; nay, in order to prevent their fall and to save them from that spiritual ignorance that leads to crime. If it is proper to teach the fear of God and Christian duty, in order to correct criminals, it is a much more a proper and emphatically a wiser thing to teach those lessons of heaveflly wisdom to prevent their becoming criminals. If the Government knows from experience that God's Word and Christian appliances are the most powerful agents we have for reclaiming the vicious, I use them for this purpose, much more should they insist upon their use in our public ■ iistitutions of learning for the prevention of vice and for the formation of a charade; possessed of that high religious and moral tone that will be proof against the temptations to which both children and n(Utlts are sure In be exposed, and for training our youth in the practice of virtue. Mow, honorable sir, can you consistently refuse ; nay, can you hesitate and delay to grant our recjuest to do what by your action in the case of criminals you declare to be proper and wi^e in the best interests both of the individuals and society at larg« ? You may have reasons — political reasons — a fear of losing the support of such citizens as are not Protestants, or ns are not Christians, but Atheists and Secularists. But, sir, Evan- gelical Christians cannot approve of such reasons. Surely the highest interests of our children and of society are paramount. Let political parties rise or (all, who cares ; but the Government that will not use what it admits to be the best ineans for raising up intelligent, virtuous, and law-abiding citizens has lost all regard for honesty and con- sistency. To deprive our children of religious instruction by impracticable regulations, is to rob them of their heritage, and to dwarf their moral and spiritual nature. I have more to say of inconsistency on the part of your Government greater than the above, meanwhile, I remain. Yours, etc., Dundas, August 7. 1883: JOHN LAING. ' IV. the :hes jin in bent d to the hper Ivent r'ovd lous, [iblic To the Minister of Education for tlie Pi oviiuc of Ontario : ■ ^, .'■ Honorable Sir, — Permit me to show still further how inconsistently the Govern- ment, of which you are a member, is acting while you refuse or at least delay to concede to Protestant parents the coveted privilege of religious instruction for their children. I have already shown that the school law explicitly, both in its provisions and regulations,, in its spirit and its administration up till i860, secures for us the privi'ege you are with- holding ; also that it is absurd to plead inability to do what you declare any Hoard of Trustees can do, and furtiier that the Government is now employing and paying public money to men who give religious instruction and conduct religious services in our public institutions, so that it is nonsense to say this cannot be done in our schools. There must be other reasons than those assigned for your delay in this matter. I shall now review somewhat particularly the doings of tlie Governmeni in its support of Roman Catholic Separate Schools, showing lliat public money is now, in accordance with the school law,, regularly paid to Romai> Catholic Trustees ; and that these schools in which religious instruction is given do receive public money, and if this is the case, it must be a glaring inconsistency to refuse the use of the Pible to us Protestants on the ground that public money .should not be paid to schools in which sectarian instruction is given — meaning thereby .Scriptural instruction. The Government should not leach Romanism if it cannot teach Protestantism and Scriptural religion. Before entering on the suliject, let me publicly thank the honourable gentleman who is now acting in your place for his kindness in giving me information on the subject. Being unwilling to write concerning any matter on which I am not at least fairly informed,. I endeavoured to ascertain: — (i) What books are authorized in the Roman Catholic 18 Separate Schools ; (2) What special regulations the schools are subject to ; (3) What special privileges they have as to tlie persons wlio may be employed as teachers, i was surprised to find it difficult, well nigh impossible, for nie to get, regarding these public institutions, which are supported by public funds, such information as I desideiated. I have, however, succeeded, after no little trouble, in obtain- ing 9 set of readers and the catechism which are used in the Roman Catholic Separate Schools. Extracts from these books I will give by-and bye, and thus will show what is taught to the Roman Catholic children under the sanction of the Department of Education, of which you are tlie responsible head ; and note it, taught by men and women who are paid from public funds, l^ut, sir, I was much astonished when informed by your Secretary that "There is no list of books specially authorized for Separate Schools, but the subject is under consideration."' An explanation so far of this surprising: statement I find on page 132 of your report for 1882. There the Separate School In- spector says : — "Puldic schools are strictly prohibited from using any but books duly authorized, while in .Separate Schools there is in reality no limitation, but they have whatever books they miy choose.'" He then suggests that " for such subjects as Algebra or geography the series used in the Public Schools might, with advantage, be adopted. For history and reading a different series would be required." Still, sir, I am perplexed. The Separate School regulations published in 1863 (page 48) make it the duty of Trustees to see that pupils are "supplied with aiilhori'Mi text-books.'' Also the late eminent educationist, Father Stafford, so deservedly esteemed for his zeal in the cause, when doing yeoman service in your defence in the " Marmion "" controversy, wrote on Octol)er li, 1882: "We cannot teach our religion during school hours, nor can we use any text hooks in our schools unless they are authorized by the Educational Department."" And mw I am told in August, 1SS3 : "There is no list of l)ooki specially authorized.'" There must be looseness, to say the least, somewhere ; but never mind, we can let tliis pass. Certairt books, very different from those authorized for the Public Schools, are used witli the sanction ot the Department ; and I am sure are used for teaching religion lietween the hours of 9 a m. and 4 p.m., Father Stafford's "cannot" te the cont.ary. I may, therefore, leave this point with the simple remark that it is a marvellous thing in my eyes how that after twenty years during which religious instruction, in the way which the Roman Catholic Hierarchy approves, has been given, the Government has not seen fit to lake cognizance of the books used in these schools, but has left the priesthood to do as they please, and now they coolly tell us " the subject is under consideration." Sir, has that pet phrase a meaning deejier than seems ? Does it mean the (government ntends to let things remain as they are ? I am tempted to think that our refjuest for religious instruction may, like the Roman Catholic school books, remain as it is for twenty years and more, for it is "under consideration." To proceed, I learn from your secretary that since 1S63, although "much advance." as His Grace Dr. Lynch says, has been made, there has been no change or addition in the regulations for Separate Schools. And so unimportant for conducting the schools do these regulations seem to be that they are "at present out of print." Thus, while during these twenty years the regulations for Public Schools and the text-books author- ized have been subjected to increasing and vexatious changes, even ad nauseam, and until very few know what is according to law to-day, or whether there was not a change made yesterday, the Roman Catholic Separate Schools have had all their own way with- 10 (3) ^^■h^^ teachers, regavdin;;; fornialiiin a obtain- Catholic will show irtment of men an danger of death by lay persons, the Christian's daily exercise of morning and night prayer, prayer to our guardian angel, the Pater Noster, Ave Maria, Credo, Confiteor, the An^elus, grace before meat, grace after meat, acts of contrition, faith, hope, and charity, prayer before mass, short prayers for confession and communion, and prayers before and after catechism. Here we have a very full presentation of the practice of the Roman Catholic religion. Then follows Dr. Butler's Short Catechism in twelve- lessons, Dr. Butler's Catechism in thirty lessons, with a supplement, next the Catholic Scriptural Catechism ; after that extracts from Dr. Challoner's Christian Instructor, concerning exorcisms, benedictions, Agnus Deis, and the use of holy water, the Christian virtues, the eight beatitudes, the fifteen mysteries of the rosary, the ten command- ments, scriptural references ; and lastly, the manner of serving .ind answering at mass — on the whole a complete exposition of the Roman Catholic doctrines and ritual. Having thus stated the contents of this authorized book, I shall stop to-day, and in my next will give some extracts which will speak for themselves, after which I will give you a few specimens of the reading contained in the reading books. But, sir, I wish you to understand that I am not now finding fault with the teaching of Romanism. The law has civen the Roman Catholics the privilege of teaching their religion. I only wish to show the unfairness of denying Protestants a like privilege. \'ours, etc., Dundas, August 8, 1883. JOHN LAING. V. To the Minister of Education for the Province of Oitlario. Honorable Sir, — Let me premise that in giving the following extracts I have no' purpose of criticising them; I only wish to show tliat presumably with the knowledge of the Department the text-books used in the Separate Schools, and in a sense author- ized, are sectarian — unmistakably Roman Catholic— and anti-Protestant. The legal right to teach the doctrines and practices of Romanism in the Roman Catholic schools I do not dispute, but I wish to show the inconsistency of authorizing this by-law and at the same time refusing to authorize the teaching of Protestantism. In the Catechism to which I have referred there is beyond doubt much excellent matter. It is a privilege which our Roman Catholic fellow-citizens should highly esteem, that the knowledge and fear of God and duty are taught to their children; gladly might Protestants welcome much of the instruction given. There are also things taught in these schools which Protestants cannot approve of. For example, " on page 43 we read : — Q. — Is there any other true Church besides the Holy Catholic Church? A. — No; as there is but one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all ; there is but one true Church, •) thai the latter never committed a mortal sin, and was so holy and good that he was niade a saint. The last lesson is a hymn to St. Joseph, " spouse of our Lady," which is in reality a prayer. The .Second T?ook is an admirable compilation of wholesome and useful instruction on the whole, hut we have mention on page 62 of .St. John of God, on page 96 of .St. Vincent of Paul, on page 118 o[ St. I'ciicitas and her sons, on page f'3 there is a hymn to the Virgin Mary, and on page 103 " The Ilail Mary," with a story, and ihe lesson ends with these words : — " She will obtain for you, also, the greatest of all graces, a happy death." The lessons also on England, Scotland, and Ireland refer to the religion of the nation in a way which particularly favours Romanism. Of the Metropolitan series in the First Reader on pages 51 and Si there are illustra- tions of a little girl kneeling before an image oJ the Virgin in prayer ; on page 63 a picture of the eye of (Jod ; on page 27 there is an interesting story of little Alice, wiih altar and crucifix l)y her dying bed ; of the vision of her guardian angel and " Our Holy Mother with the Divine Child in her arms," and of the pries, coming, when "little Alice received our blessed Lord into her heart, and was anointed." On p.ige 114 an illustra- tion of Saint Jo-iejih with child in arms, and a hymn or prayer to him. Thus at the earliest age in childhood arc Romanist ideas impressed upon the child's imagination. The Second Book is on the whole admirable ; it contains, however, many notices of the saints and their deeds ; references to the Virgin, and a telling dissertation on confessidn, which are emphatically Romanist; also the following anti- Protestant historical state- ment on page 202. The story of Katharine "is a very long and a very sad one, and you will read it in the history of England. Vou will read, too, how her wicked husband rebelled against the Pope, because he would not consent to his cruel treatment of his ([ueen, and how /'e Diade himself a Pope, and began what is called the Reformation.' The Third Book, still keeping up the Roman Catholic tone of teaching, has nothing in advance of the other two. But when we come to the Fourth Book, the religious character of the instruction is strongly developed, as well as its anti-Protest.ant aspect. The Hist lesson on page 15 is an exposition of Romish baptism, liaptism, it is said, " makes us children of God, and of His holy Church, and unless we receive it, we can- not enter the Kingdom of Heaven." The significance of all the baptismal rights is also set forth. On page 75 the significance of the cross is explained ; on page 109. confirma- tion and the chrism ; on page 131 is a thrilling death scene inculcating the presence of Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament, and its efficacy as^ the viaticum : on page 201 is .m exposition of the Eucharist as held by the Roman Catholic Church, and a vindication of it, ending with tiiese words, " A bad communion renders them the associates of devils, and marks them as candidates for evil, while a good communion elevates them to the companionship of angels, and seals them as the children of God." On page 204 the children are taught as an historical fact that " the house of Nazareth in which the blessed Virgin was born, in which our Lord passed his holy childhood and the .years of his manhood until the age of thirty ♦ * * was converted into a chapel where mass was celebrated every day during the first centuries of the Church. Towards the close of the ninth century, this house was Aj' a miracle carried through the air into Dalmatia. In the same miraculous manner it was finally translated to Loretto, where it now stands uniler file dome of a splendid cathedral which has been erected around it." Next lesson treats of extreme unction. On page 257 is an illustration of Mary in regal glory as the queen of heaven, and a hymn in her praise. Now, sir, I am ready to acknowledge tlie 28 excellence in many respects of these books. I am much pleased with the prominence given in them tu( it is no part of that object to secure for them religious instruction " (and this in the face of clause 9th of the Act !) 3. That there would be a danger of teachers being employed who would abuse their position by teaching heterodoxy or proselytizing. 4. That as a matter both oj principle and expediency the Slate should not under- take the work of religious instruction in any form. The work of imparting religious in- struction devolves on the parent and on the Church. 5. Thai there are many who claim to be religious without being Christian, and thai these should be deferred to by not givinp; children generally instruction in Christianity. 6. That there are hundreds of districts in Ontario in which any mandatory regula- tion requiring the use of the IJible would be resisted. 7. That the great majority of the supporters of Tublic Schools in this province are averse to a change in the direction of making instruction in Christian morals compulsory, and that no desire for such a change had ever found expression on the floor of the Legislature. At a later date the same journal tried to pooh pooh the movement in the Synods of Hamilton and London, and to extinguish it with one agnostic l)last. That movement has gone on notwithstanding. Then there were adiled as reasons : — 8. Thai making the use of the Bible as a class-book compulsory " is an infringe- ment upon the rights of minorities." Because, forsooth, "various classes of persons, such as Roman Catholics, agnostics, etc, would feel their consciences xvere violated" ! ! 9. That some "most devout believers" in the Bible object to having Bible teachings associated with "task-work and drudgery and often with tears and stripes." Out on the hypocritical veiling of the cloven foot, with the semblance of respect for the Book! 25 10. Thai many teachers maybe employed who "are deploralily ajjnostic" and *' regard a large portion of Bil)le liistory as a myth, its miracles as feats of legerdemain, and its doctrines as on a par with the ancient mythologies," and that Christians had hettei not leave their rhildren to form some of their eatlicNl and deepest impressions of the lUble under such instructors." Again, we say, away with the slimy mockery in the form of pious regard I 11. That there would he a danger of " making the sacred Book by such legislation, an apple of discord amongst the sects." Sucii are the reasons which have been paraded in the leading Reform journal, pre- sumably with the knowledge of the Department of Education, as justifying a refusal of the request to have the Hible in our schools. No, sir, I beg your pardon ; far be it from me to impute to you or to the department the inspiration of the last four hypocritical, snivelling, mock pious, but really agnostic, reasons. I thmk I can discern in them the spirit of a writer who cls'nvhere gave to the public the following : — " There should be no Christian teaching or observance (except moral) in educational institutions supported by the taxes of free-thinkers and Christians .ilike ; and we are therefore bound to work for the abrogation of all such unjust and discriminating laws." Also, I think I detect the hand of one who over his own name published the following resolution : — *' That the l?ible, being regarded as a book of sacred char.icter and of religious authority only by a part of the people, is to all intents and purposes a sectarian book; and we protest against ih^ permission of its use in the Public Schools on the pretence of its being a non- sectarian book, as a manifest evasion of the truth ai.d a wilful disregard of the equal religious rights of the people ;" also, " that the Public School system cannot be sustained in equal justice to all except by confining it to strictly secular instruction ; that all religious exercises should be prohibited in the Public Schools," etc. I repeat it most emphatically — far be it from me to impute to you or the Government of Ontario such sentiments. I am inclined to think that even the Glebe will go back upon itself, and rofitons nous!" Is this generous? Is it true? How was the Act of 1863 which thus favours Roman Catholics to the disadvantage of Protestants obtained ? Was it a Government measure ? No; but a piivate bill framed and promoted bya Roman Catholic, Mr. Scott, avowedly in the interests of Roman Catholics; opposed most determinedly by the majority from Upper Canada, but carried through political intrigue by the Catholic majority from Lower Canada. Is then this part of " the educational system not the work of Roman Catholics?" Oh, Father Stafford! But a minority from ^Jpper Canada favoured it. Yes, and what was the plea they put in ? What led even that minority to assent to the injustice ? " Separate Schools," said the chief superintendent, "have hitherto proved one of the safety valves for diverting and paralysing opposi- I ^ 34 tion to our Common School system. I'rott'slants can surely afford to be as libcriil as are Roman Calhol.csin Lower Canada." Protestants were told that by thus generously dealing with our Roman Catholic fellow-citizens the latter would be satisfied and would no longer interfere with us. That this Act would be a finality. But, lo! nineteen years thereafter Father Stafford tells us we were /oo/s to give them the advantage which they forced from us by Lower Canada Catholic votes \ fools, because we allow two-thirds of the Roman Catholic youth to share the blessings of our schools where they are either too weak to maintain Separate Schools without our money or in the majority, and can em- ploy a Roman Catholic teacher ; fools, because in what were once our schools ,ve employ two-thirds of the certificated Roman Catholic teachers. Oh, Father Stafford I And yet you expect us to live on terms of amity, while we are thus kept in an unfair position and taunted with it; while we are told that we " shall not teach " true history because it offends you, and that we must submit to the supervision of the acknowledged head of the Church that curses us. Mr. Editor, things cannot remain as they are if our schools are not Protestant. Protestants are tolerant, but if our tolerance and readiness, even to be generous to our Roman Catholic fellow-citizens, are to be used against us, and we are to be "deprived of our rights," as the reverend father says we have been, it is high time for Protestants to assert these rights. I have referred to only one class of facts which vindicate the rights of Protestants to our non-sectarian schools against the claims of the Hierarchy of Rome to interfere with their management. With your permission I may add something at another time. Yours, etc., Dundas, Ont. , Oct. 20. JOHN LAING. . ARE OUR NATIONAL SCHOOLS PROTESTANT? To the Editor of the Afail, Sir, — In a former communication I reviewed the history of our Public Schools, with the purpose of showing that our National Schools were originally denominational and Protestant, or Roman Catholic ; that they gradually became non-denominational, but never ceased lo be Protestant. On the contrary, that to the original Act of 1850 certain amendments were made giving Roman Catholics relief and advantages over Protestants in Separate Schools ; and that this concession to Roman Catholics was proposed by the Rev. Dr. Ryerson, and assented to by others, in the hope that Protestants would no longer be troubled by the interference of Roman Catholics with the National Schools. So that altl.ough the law has nowhere declared our schools to be Protestant, it has never denied that they are such, nor has it changed anything in the original Protestant features of our schools and the conducting of them. If the Protestant features have for nineteen years lain in abeyance, they have never been abolished. There are, however, other considerations to be urged. Our nation is a Christian nation, not a pagan or heathen nation. Christianity is admitted as at the foundation of our laws, as julge Moss decided in the famous case at Napanee when the use of public 35 liropcrly was refused for the purpose of propagating Atheism. Instruction in Christian morality is recognized as one end of our Public School education. Our schools, there- fore, are Christian schools in which the Holy .Scripture? n-iay be read, and religious worship may be celebrated ; but Atheism cannot be taught there. Now, Christians in Canada are either Roman Catholics or Protestants. Christian schools, therefore, must he either Protestant or Roman Catholic, and as they are not Roman Catholic they must be Protestant. Protestantism is not a sect nor a denomination of Christians, as Roman ( 'atholicism claims that it is. I do not care for the name, but I contend that the schools belong to Christianity, not of the Romish, but of the Protestant type. The difference between the schools of Quebec and Ontario will illustrate this. In the former Province the National Schools are Roman Catholic, and Protestants have dissentient schools ; in Ontario the Roman Catholics were granted the privilege of Separate Schools, because the National Schools were "offensive" to them on account of their Protestant type. In Quebec, also, certain saints' days and holidays are observed which are not observed in our Public .Schools of Ontario ; and the cure, priest, or officiating minister has the riijht of selecting books having reference to religion and morals. This may show the ciifference between the Roman Catholic and Protestant type of education. I .will not tUvell further on this, but will be satisfied by referring to one more class of facts. In 1880 the total Public School attendance in Ontario was 483,045 ; High School, 12,136; Separate Roman Catholic Schools, 25,311; total, 520,492. The Roman (-'atholics constitute about one-sixth of the entire population ; and it is entirely within the truth to say that Protestants of various denominations constitute at least three-fourths of the population. The number of Roman Catholic school children, therefore, may be about 90,000, of whom 25,311 are in Separate Schools, leaving 65,000 attending the Public and High Schools, whereas 420,000 Protestants or thereabouts are in attendance there — over five times as many. Are we then to be told that the school law is so unjust as to say that Protestants, who have more than five times the interest in these schools that Roman Catholics have, are not only not to control these schools, but must submit to the interference of the Romish Hierarchy when an Archbishop chooses to exercise his rights? If that is law we wish to know it, that Protestants may seek a remedy at once. If in 1850 and 1863 we were deceived by our Protestant leaders and politicians and "deprived of our rights," as Father Stafford asserts we were, we want to know it. If Father .Stafford is right, the Protestant community generally, and Dr. Ryerson in jiar- ticular, did not know what was then done ; we were misled as well as wronged by the Craholic majority in 1863, and now, if not too late, we nmst have a remedy. The other points in Father Stafford's letter have been so often discussed that I may pass all but one over with the single remark, that although Dr. Lynch " is recognized by Catholics as the head of the Catholic Church in this Province " (we say Roman Catholic Church), he ought not to be so recognized by our Government. Pie has civil rights a? a citizen, none as the head of the Church. The Roman Catholic Cluirch has men to represent it in the University Senate, and in the Council ; with them, and not with the Archbishop, the Government should deal on behalf of Roman Catholic citizens. The only other point to be mentioned is, in Father Stafford's language, " The Rev. Mr. Milligan says history is against us— says much against our Church. History may say what it likes in private households and in Protestant schools, but such histories will r.otbe used in schools common to Catholic and Protestant alike." This is plain speech :{ti and cnerRL-lir, loo. The object is evident. It is to prevent teachers from ••beini; clothed with authority to teach anti-Papal histories at the public expense." In other words, no history, however true, if it is anti-Papal, must be taught ; and to prevent thi being done the Roman Catholics have obtained, and mean to h«ld, the control of out schools. This is where Mr. Stafford and every lover of truth must take issue. We wish to know the truth and to teach it to our children, no matter what Church may suffer, Mr. Staflord wishes the truth suppressed for the good of the Church and the glory of God. A truce here is impossible. Protestants must have the truth, no matter whether it be the burning of Ser.vetus or of Huss or Hamilton ; the penal laws of Connecticut or of Ireland; the crimes ot a Henry VIII. or Philip of Spain ; the failings of Protestant clergy or of religious orders, as faithfully depicted by historians such as Froude. We can suffer no suppression of TRUTH on account of anyone. Protestants have to be humbled as they read of the cruelties and wrongs perpetrated by their forefathers, but tiiey do not wish their children and youth at college to grow up ignorant of that tearful past. We cannot consent to be silent concerning the glorious Reformation, the causes that led to it, and the atrocities to which the Papacy resorted to crush it with fire and sword ; by perjuries and covenant-breaking. We do not charge Father Stafford with these things. We hope that Roman Catholics r ' to-day are better than their forefathers, as we trust that we are better than ours. But we cannot allow Mr. Stafford to put untrue^ because defective or perverted, liistory into the hands of our children, and thus keep from their knowledge the real character of the Church and f the State in time past. If it is necessary in order to secure this end to have separate Protestant schools and colleges, we must have them, and let our mixed schools and colleges go. We cannot submit in our search for truth — scientific, historic, or revealed — to the Hierarchy of a Church which teaches that paltering with truth is a duty when the good of the Church requires it. Y^ours etc Dundas, Ont., Oct. 21, 1883. ' ' JOHN LAING. RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS. To the Editor of the Mail. Siu, — Shall the Protestant children of Ontario receive religious instruction in the National Schools ? This is a question of vital importance, and which at present is engaging the attention of our public men. I am free to admit that politicians of both parties answer yes or no, according as they think that they can carry a majority thereby at the coming elections. All Christian men, however, should seek to have the question practically answered in such way as shall be for the glory of God and the best interests ot the nation, irrespective of the ins and outs of political parties. Before our present system of education was introduced in 1850, religious instruction was given in all the schools of the Province, both Protestant and Roman Catholic. The Act of 1850 did not propose to do away with religious instruction. Had any such proposition been made then, the opposition which the Bill would have encountered would have prevented it becoming law. But all Christians were satisfied by clause 10, which seems words : " P» and guard iar regulotions to make it p is secured to "As Christ tssential eUi instruction. about ten ye Gradually tl agitation aga Roman Cath tinued. Th( history whicl studies crow( in which the time it thus < and in which given. The cases the rea uf the school schools, and are entitled t Are Pro should and c majority of o convinced thi nstruclion " itself in the c iss.atisfactio unanimous a change in th< tional zeal, a by law put i among yours But we religious exe children tauj and to know duty are fou ministers giv ourselves of for Ijread ani proved impr [his charge. 37 which seems at least to secure their right to have religious instruction given, in these words: " Pupils shall be allowed to receive suc/t religious instruction as their patents and guardians desire, according to any general regulations provided," etc. Now these regulations may be such as to serure the privilege, or to prevent the enjoyment of it, or to make it practically impossible for parents to avail themselves of the privilege which is secured to them by the law. Let us then look at the regulations, chap. 14, sec. i, "As Christianity is recognized by common consent throughout this Province ps an essential element of education, it ought to pervade all the regulations for elementary instruction." Good, all that can be desired. How then shall it be enforced ? For about ten years religious instruction continued to be given in the Common Schools. Gradually the catechisms and sectarian instructions cease'd. The Roman Catholic agitation against the teaching of the Protestant Bible began. In many places, to satisfy Roman Catholics, the reading of the Bible and other icligious exercises were discon- tinued. The substitution of the new readers in 1869 took away the epitome of Scripture history which up to that time formed part of elementary instruction, and additional studies crowded out the Bible. Further, Roman Catholics in 1863 got Separate Schools, in which their children receive such religious instruction as they desire. In course of time it thus came about that in our Public Schools, sujiported chiefly l)y Protestants, and in which almost exclusively their children arc taught, no religious instruction is given. The only semblance of religion is the reading of prayers, and also in many cases the reading by the teacher of a few verses of Scripture at the opening and closing of the school. Practically this is the whole amount of religious instruction given in our schools, and we are told that this is all we can properly ask. Is it, then, all that we are entitled to by law ? Are Protestant parents satisfied with this ? Do they think that this is all that should and can be given in carrying out the lOth section of the school law ? If the majority of our Christian parents say so, I am satisfied, and at once submit. But I am convinced that they are not satisfied, and that generally they " desire " more " religious instruction " to be given in our schools. The present agitation so signally showing itself in the deputation that waited upon the ( Jovernment on the 24th inst., proves ihi^i dissatisfaction. And whereas it has even been said that the sects could not agree, the intoiiimous assent given by Anglicans, Methodists, ^nd Presbyterians to the proposed change in the regulations, shows that Christian feeling has now risen above denomina- tional zeal, and makes it possible to unite in an effort to have the rights secured to us by law put in force. No longer can the taunt be hurled at us, " Vou cannot agree among yourselves." We are agreed, and could agree in even more than we have asked. But we are told that of 5,137 Public Schools reported in 1S80, in 4,489 there are religious exercises. Yes; but that is not what we " parents desire." We wish our children taught to read the Word of God for themselves, to be familiar with the text» and to know and understand the facts and precepts on which Christian principles and duty are founded. Then we are told that provision is made in the regulations for ministers giving weekly religious instruction in the schools, and that we should avail ourselves of this permission. Mr. Editor, this regulation is cruel mockery. " We ask for bread and the State gives us a stone." It has been tried in a few places, Init has- proved impracticable. No minister can give weekly instruction to all the children of his charge. No means arc available for paying a substitute ; children will not stay 88 alter school hours to receive religious instruction ; even if they did, one hour a week u utterly inadcnuatc considering the importance of the subject ; and as the attendance must be voluntary, so no compulsion can be used to secure the learning of prescribed lessons. "Instruction" to which we have a legal right is thus not within our reach. It is evident that Protestant pupils are not allowed to receive such religious instruction as their parents and guardians "desire," and they are thus deprived of "a just and proper right " secured to them by the school law. And why should this be ? Mr. Mowat tells us that of the two millions which con- stitute the |)opulati(m of Ontario, only one in seventy is not returned as Christian, and of the Christians four-fifths, I suppose, are Protestants. Hut we are told, lest we shouKl by having our children taught Christian and IJiblical history and morality ojfi-nd one man in seventy, therefore the other sixty-nine ought to allow their children to be deprived of their legal rights. And lest we may olk-nd one in five Christians, a Roman Catholic, therefore the other four should not insist upon their rights. Is this common sense? Are we to love our neighbor better than ourselves? The law expressly say that no child shall be required " to read or study in any religious book, or to join in any religious c-.crcisc." Is not that enough? liy all means let the seventieth man who is not a Christian withdraw his child ; let the Roman Catholic one-(ifth either send their children to .Separate Schools, where more than a third of them are now enjoying an education such as the Romish Hierarchy approves", or withdraw them from our Public Schools when religious instruction is being given. Christian Protestants claim nothini; but their r(:{/i/s, their Irqal rights, when they contend for the privilege of their children receiving religious instruction during school hours. Much has been sai'°"^ ^^"^'^ ^° educate the public generally Bible to th' 'H Trf' ""'' "''^^ °^^^-"^'°"^ l^-P"'^" ---1 in g1 nTth^ Bible to thousands of children who have no other way o. learning concerning^God' and Tu Ar , Vours. etc., The Manse, Dundas, Nov. 30, 18S2. jqIIN LAING. ♦ ■,!.'-'■ ;t/n;;i 1; .u.;a 4U^M • ■^ri' themldveT "re' t? ' •'' •'"' "" '^"""^"^ °' ''^'^ '"°^^"^^"^ ^^ ^^ ^g-^d among ^er^e And / r"^'' ''''''""^' °" ^'''^'^ ' ^^'"'^ ^" the deputation would ngree .-And surely what is proposed can be eflbcted by united action. THE BIBLE IN THE SCHOOLS. I. We do not ask that the Bible be made a text-book in the sense that everv iToZ 'thii: ""'^"' '"''"'' ''' ''-'' ''-'- ^°'^^"^ -" '- -- lu^'rihin ;i pare'; o^I^ts." "' "' ^'" ''' "" °' ^'^ ''"^ '^ "^^'^ ^^'"^"'^^--•' - -^ ^^Id whose theyte ^toV" "' ^'" ''^ "^^'^" ^'^" '^^ r''^'-" '-'-^ '" ^^y -"- 'hat ^..C«LJI' ''° "' "' '"■ "' ''"'" " ''' ^'^'"°' '''""• ^"'y f- ^ ^l^-'ge in the trustf. ar^tt^rs"' '°'' '^"^"'"^ " '' '°"^ ^'^^'^ ""^^ "^ ^^ P'^- ^ ^^ne by So far for misconceptions which are being ever repeated, either designedly or from •gnorance. by some men who seem to be unwilling to have our children read the Word of God during school hours. IVe do ask-i. That not only shall the t.acher read a portion of Scripture, as is now done in the majority of our Public Schools as part of a religious exercise i:^ con' nection w. h prayers ; but also that the