IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 1.25 
 
 !:ia ilM 
 ■• iu III 21 
 
 M II 1.6 
 
 ■+> 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporation 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, NY. I45B0 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 
 # 
 
 <V 
 
 ^^ 
 
 \ 
 
 \ 
 
 .4\^ 
 
 4ft 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 6^ 
 
 <> 
 
 %^ 
 
 '^^ 
 
4^ W 
 
 t*^/ 
 
 C/j 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 Collection de 
 microfiches. 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 
 
 :\ 
 
Tachnical and Bibliographic Notas/Notes tachniquas at bibliographiquas 
 
 The Instituta has attamptad to obtain tha bast 
 original copy availabia for filming. Faaturas of this 
 copy which may ba bibliographically uniqua, 
 which may altar any of tha imagas in tha 
 reproduction, or which may significantly change 
 tha usual method of filming, are chaclted below. 
 
 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 Coloured covers/ 
 Couverture de couleur 
 
 I I Covers damaged/ 
 
 Couverture endommagia 
 
 Covers restored and/or laminated/ 
 Couverture restaur6e et/ou pellicul6e 
 
 I I Cover title missing/ 
 
 Le titre de couverture manque 
 
 Coloured maps/ 
 
 Cartes gdographiques en cotileur 
 
 Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ 
 Entre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) 
 
 I I Coloured plates and/or Illustrations/ 
 
 Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 Reli6 avec d'autres documents 
 
 Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 La reliure serr6e 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/ 
 11 se peut que certaines pages blanches ajout^es 
 lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, 
 mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont 
 pas 6t6 filmdas. 
 
 Additional comments:/ 
 Commentaires supplimentaires: 
 
 L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire 
 qu'il lui a iti possible de se procurer. Les details 
 de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-Atre uniques du 
 point de vue biblicgraphique. qui peuvent modifier 
 une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une 
 modification dans la m^thoda normale de filmaga 
 sont indiquis ci-dessous. 
 
 I I Coloured pages/ 
 
 n 
 
 Pages de couleur 
 
 Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommagdes 
 
 □ Pages restored and/or laminated/ 
 Pages rastaurdes et/ou palliculdes 
 
 Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 Pages d6color6es, tachetdes ou piqu< 
 
 piquies 
 
 Pages d6tach6es 
 
 Showthrough/ 
 Transparence 
 
 Quality of prir 
 
 Quality in6gale de ('impression 
 
 Includes supplementary materii 
 Comprend du matdrie! supplementaire 
 
 I I Pages detached/ 
 
 ["71 Showthrough/ 
 
 I I Quality of print varies/ 
 
 I I Includes supplementary material/ 
 
 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 filmdes d nouveau de fagon d 
 obtenir la meilleure image possible. 
 
 1 
 t 
 
 C 
 
 b 
 
 tl 
 s 
 
 
 
 fi 
 
 s 
 o 
 
 T 
 
 s 
 T 
 
 IV 
 
 d 
 
 ei 
 b 
 ri 
 r( 
 rr 
 
 This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ 
 
 Ce docurbiont est film6 au taux de rMuction indiqud ci-dessous. 
 
 10X 
 
 
 
 
 14X 
 
 
 
 
 18X 
 
 
 
 
 22X 
 
 
 
 
 26X 
 
 
 
 
 30X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 J 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 12X 
 
 16X 
 
 20X 
 
 24X 
 
 28X 
 
 32X 
 
Th« copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks 
 to the generosity of: 
 
 Library of the Pubiic 
 Archives of Canada 
 
 The images appearing here are the best quaiity 
 possible considering the condition and legibility 
 of the original copy and in keeping with the 
 filming contract specifications. 
 
 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. 
 
 The last recorded frame on each microfiche 
 shall contain the symbol — ^ (meaning "CON- 
 TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), 
 whichever applies. 
 
 L'exemplaire film* fut reproduit qtifm h la 
 (lAnArositA de: 
 
 La bibliothAque des Archives 
 publiques du Canada 
 
 Las images suivantes ont 4t4 repr 'Suites avec le 
 plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et 
 de la nenet« de l'exemplaire film«, et en 
 conformity avec les conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en 
 papier est imprim6e sont filmAs en commen^ant 
 par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la 
 dernlAre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second 
 plat, salon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires 
 originaux sont filmts en commenpant par la 
 premiere page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par 
 la dernlAre page qui comporte une telle 
 empreinte. 
 
 Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la 
 derniire image de cheque microfiche, seion le 
 cas: le symbols — ► signifie "A SUIVRE ", le 
 symbols 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 /ollowing diagrams illustrate the 
 method: 
 
 Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre 
 filmis A des taux de reduction diff^rents. 
 Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atre 
 reproduit en un seul clich6, il est film6 A partir 
 de I'angle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, 
 et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre 
 d'images nicessaire. Les diagrammes suivants 
 illustrent la mithode. 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
1 
 
 i 
 
 I:©: 
 
 
 m 
 
 ^SlUi 
 
 ^1 
 
 I 
 
 C"">Jl 
 
 (V- 
 
 
 r. . ■ ; 
 
iEHP^iii>^^^^v'^]iiiiig 
 
 /^ 
 
 M 
 
 ^^)j 
 
 s-.'^ 
 
 
 ' 
 
 
 !6. 
 
 w 
 
 m 
 1 
 
 Bibles and Religions 
 
 our versus IN 
 
 Till- Pl'BLlC SCHOOLS, 
 
 BY 
 
 ALLEN PRINGLE 
 
 " 'Tis •fliu'alion forms llio ooriinif)!! miiid : 
 .Just aa Ihe Iwig ii L»i.ut. I ho tivc'.-t iiu;liried. 
 
 Coronto : 
 
 PRINTED BY .!. SPENCER ELLFS, 
 
 And nistrilnuod xuidcr the iVii8i.iicoa of 
 THE CANADIAN SIX'ITLAU UNION. 
 
 1891. 
 
 
 m. 
 
 'ffmw^ 
 
 m 
 
 
 m 
 
 ._5?5^ 
 
 « 
 
 
 <ifi 
 
PREFATORY NOTE. 
 
 In addressing educatioiialista jind others on the burning 
 and voxed question of tho Bible in or out of the Public 
 schools, a word of explanation may be due both reader and 
 writer. 
 
 I have written wliat follows at the request of a fn'-nd of 
 Secular Education, who generously pays for the printing and 
 distribution of the pampiilet among those enga;,'ed in 
 educational work and others who, we think, might possioly 
 profit by its perusal. 
 
 ALLEN PIIINGLE. 
 
 JSelby, Out., September, 1891. 
 
BIBLES AND RELIGIONS 
 
 OUT VERSUS IN 
 
 THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 I 
 
 Seoitlar or Sectarian, vvliicli ? This is tl>e ({ueation to 
 be settled. Sluill tlu' public schools, supported by public 
 money, bo really public and secular or private and 8ec- 
 tarian ? I say "private," because no school can be public 
 in the proper sense, where religious tenets are taught or 
 religious exercises performed which some of its sup- 
 porters conscientiously reject as erroneous and injurious 
 to the child. 1 say " sectarian," because any formula of 
 Bible doctrine, no matter how general or fundamental, 
 which could possibly be agreed upon by the different 
 sects of (jhristiardty (were such an agreement possible) 
 would be sectarian to those outside Christianity, and 
 these constitute ibn'O-fourths or more of mankind. 
 
 A universiil religion would bf non-sectarian ; all others 
 are sectarian. . " . 
 
 ►Shall the public schools, then, be secular or sectarian ? 
 Shall they or shall they not teach religion of any kind ? 
 Shall they use any of the different Bii)les of the world, 
 ^•aid to contain Divine Revelations, or shall they use 
 none of them ? 
 
 Reason has but one answer to these (juestions ; right 
 has but one. They lioth answer one way, while senti- 
 ment and superstition answer another. (No oflencehere 
 to the sincere believer of any religion, whatever it may 
 
be. A great writer has snid that " the religion of one 
 age is the superstition of the next," and in these ehange- 
 ful tiiiH s it hardly takes an " age " to accomplish such 
 a mental transformation.) Those under the dominion 
 of the latter- -that in, sentiment and superstition -are 
 probahly still in a majority througliout the world as well 
 as in this province of (Ontario; and ?n an overwhelming 
 majority in the near (yet so far) province of Quebec, 
 where the Church not only dominates the schools, 
 blighting education, but dominates the State, vitiating 
 legislation in the body politic. But ought unreasoning 
 majorities to settle questions of this kind ? They pro- 
 bablj' will continue to do so till they get more light, or 
 the onward march of intelligence forces them into the 
 channel of progress, which it is sure to do ere long. The 
 next generation will have more .sense and less sentiment. 
 I do not mean the higher sentiments, which cannot be 
 too strong under the guidance of reason, but the lower 
 sentiments and passions ut pre.^iMit largely under the 
 control of neither reason nor ri<:ht. 
 
 The masses of humanity are, unfortunately, still 
 governed by feeling more than reason, by the promptings 
 of passion and prejudice rather than the instincts of 
 justice and right — by the influence of early education 
 and pieconceived opinions rather than the potency of 
 present facts and experience. ' ' 
 
 That the question before us is a very important one, 
 involving i.ssues and influences of great moment, no 
 thinking man will deny. As already intimated, it can 
 have but one fair answer on any principle of ;^stice and 
 equal rights. Not only so, but the true answer carries 
 with it the only solution of the many evils which beset 
 
t 
 
 sectarian schonis, »in<l the only solution of tbut para- 
 mount ovi! an<l inculms on cjluoation in Ontario and 
 Quebec, " 8«^|)Hrnte schools," 
 
 Wliut is the answer, aiul what is the sohition ? It is 
 sin»ply thin, — That no citizen (>ui(ht, to he conipellefl, 
 either directly or indirectly, to pay tor tenehin^his own 
 or his neighhonrV children a religion he does not believe 
 — that public schools supported by the State ought to 
 be public, and open to all without offence to any. In a 
 word, they ought to be secular, free from Bibles of all 
 kinds and religions of all kinds, which always and 
 everywhere, with few exceptions in which Christianity 
 cannot be included, have been a constant source of 
 dissension, strife and dispute. 
 
 This is an age of change, and the change is, on the 
 
 whole, in the direction of true proj^ress. Reaction fliere 
 
 is here and there, and reactior)ists then- are everywhere, 
 
 l»ut the p'lralysis of inipotencv is coming over them. 
 
 Old systen)H and ideas which have had tlu'ir day and 
 
 have served their purpose as necessary factors in the 
 
 evolution of things are rapidly passing away, and being 
 
 replaced by better systenus and more enlij^htened idea«. 
 
 The most popular and venerable of them are at length 
 
 being callt-d upon to show their right to a longer lease 
 
 of life. The religious creeds and theological cults — no 
 
 matter how lioary and formidable with age and prestige 
 
 — are not in the least exempt from this ordeal. Nor is 
 
 it easy to see on any reasonalde grounds why they 
 
 should be, for their past and present inflnenci- on man- 
 kind for good or ill has been prodigious. A devotee of 
 
 one of them has wisely said to " prove all things and 
 
 hold fast to that which is good," and we take him at bis 
 

 f:% 
 
 ■3* 
 
 wonl. This is what the hiHtorical rtisearnh of tho day 
 and Rcience in the hands of impartial inveati^ator», are 
 doing, and St. Paul is discredited by the modern (jl«»ntilea 
 by a method of his own suggestion. One of fiis loudest 
 followers of to-day (Moody) is more discrwt (no doiiht 
 because of the age he lives in), for he warns us that if 
 we "begin to reason we are lost." All the same the 
 world begins to rt5ason. Mere authority is waning. 
 Dogma is on the down grade even in that infallible, 
 arbitrary and " 07ily trite church," Rome. And the 
 doctrine of ex-caihedra in open questions, in Protestant- 
 ism as well as Romanism, is going to the wall where it 
 ought to go. From the briUum fulinen of the Vatican 
 at Rome down to the " believe or be danihed " scarecrow 
 of the backwoods Methodist exhorter, all fails to frighten 
 the "hard-heads" of these days, who may be found 
 within the fold of almost every religion as well as out- 
 side them. Men are everywhere beginning to think and 
 act for themselves, not only in secular matters but in 
 all other matters. Educated and intelligent people of 
 to-day, have their own opinions and beliefs on speculative 
 religious questions, instead of accepting thtin "ready 
 made " as formerly, on the authority of churches, priests, 
 or even divine revelations. Each has his own religion 
 or no religion, which is his right and which no man has 
 the right to question, so long as he does not allow his 
 religion tb interfere with the equal rights of others, — 
 which no government or other authority has the right 
 to tax, or suppress, or support (except to protect) so long 
 as he fulfils his secular duties as a citizen ; and these of 
 course include his moral and social duties. The citizen 
 can have no religious duties to the State. These apper- 
 
tain solely hikI excluaively to hiiiiMolf. As the State 
 cannot ho «luinne«l here or hereuft<;r for the citizen, so 
 the citizen naght not to he damned here or hereafter for 
 the State. Nor ouejht any citizen to be saved or damned 
 spiritually or secularly for any other citizen. Vicarious 
 philosophy of this sort, which is altogether outside the 
 true iuHtincts of benevolence, has no resting place in 
 Secularism. " Kuch tub should stand on its own bottom." 
 
 It, therefore, follows that oithor every religion ought 
 to be tauj^ht in the public schools or no religion ought 
 to be taught there. 
 
 But as the teaching of everybody's religion to every- 
 body is quite out of t^he question as impracticable, the 
 iwbxiy's reliijion must stand logically and equitably as 
 the only alternative. 
 
 Because a certain tax-payer's creed (or want of creed) 
 happen.^ for the time being to be unpopular, and he 
 himself in the minority, is no good reason why his 
 rights should be ignored and the majority lord it over 
 him. I agree with the great John Stuart Mill when he 
 says in his famous essay on " Liberty," " If all mankind, 
 minus one, were of one opinion, mankind would be no 
 more justified in silencing that one person than he, if he 
 had the power, would be in silencing mankind." 
 
 This is the true principle of right and reason, no 
 matter what popes or prelates, priests or bishops, synods 
 or assemblies, may say to the contrary. This is the 
 only doctrine of equal rights worth a straw, no matter 
 what the religious aectarist may say, whether he be 
 Christian or non-Christian, Jew or Gentile, Turk or 
 Brahmin. 
 
 The trouble with us here in this Christian conntry is 
 
I 
 
 si 
 
 that the popnhir relij^ionist or OiriHtiau ]«'giHlator rcfuHofl 
 to admit that he is a Hoctari.st, or tliat there is any othur 
 great roligion in the worlil l)Ut IiIh own — much Iomh any 
 other trtN! religion. N(>ne hut his own is worthy to he 
 taken into account in the afrairs of the State. Much 
 le»8 should Secularism he recognised, or even the ohvious 
 rights of its votaries. With few exceptions, wlterever 
 and whenever he has the powt^r in Ijjs liands with which 
 to back up this notion, he religiously and conscientiously 
 U'jes it. But outside of every religion right is right ; 
 and 'might alone must always morally fail to make 
 right. 
 
 There is alre^vdy a largo and rapidly growing class of 
 the population in Canada, and in every enliglitened 
 country, who do not, and cannot, accept any of the 
 current cree<ls. Hut, while rejecting religious do^nia, 
 they believe in morality, and pmclise it — at any rate as 
 well as their uiore pretentious religious neighbors. 
 They pay their taxes, ol)ey the laws, anrl are what may 
 fairly be called good citizens of the State. The State is, 
 therefore, morally bound to protect them in their rights. 
 The State, therefore, has no right to tax them on 
 account of any other man's religion or the religious 
 teaching of any other man's children. We may concede 
 that the State has the right to tax the citizen for the 
 secular education of those of its citizens unable to pay 
 for themselves, but it has no right whatever to tax him 
 for religious teaching of any kind. The State ought to 
 hav3 nothing at all to do with any of the religions, 
 popular or unpopular, further than to tolerate all of 
 them (even the noisy Salvationists except when they 
 disturb the peace) and protect every citizen in his 
 
religioUN <>r iiun-ri'li;;iuu^ lights , hiuI those righU 
 inchxle the privilcj^e tv teach hi8 religion, whutfver it 
 may ho, tu his children at home, and have it taught 
 thum in Win Sunday school and his ch\irch, hut not tn 
 thf. jmUir nehocU at oihtr jtfopU's eximiiHe. The State 
 should also vouchsafe to every religion and every sect 
 the privilege of eatahlishing schools, Sunday >)r Monday, 
 for tlninselvcH, where they could liave their religion 
 taught to their heart's content, witho"^ let vt' hindrance, 
 hut strictly and exclusively at their invn tu'itensc. This 
 is the only kind of justice that will stand a test, the 
 only species of common sense wor»,.iy the n>».Mie. 
 
 \7c ire told by the opponent-t of secu' r schools that 
 they are "godless," and such teaching therefore, neces- 
 sarily vicious — or at leust very defect! vj — tending to 
 vice and crime. Rev. John Langtry. at a recent meetiri^^ 
 of Synod in Toronto, in a motion which lio suhmitted to 
 the meeting looking to the estahlishing of Protestant 
 separate schools in Ontario, apparently in older to he 
 up with the Roman Catholics in this matter; and 
 looking to the legal and compulsory introduction of 
 Christianity into " every puMic school in the land," 
 broadly asserted, "that the daily record of breaches of 
 trust, fraud, peculation, forgery, and other crimes which 
 godless educatipn would increase . , bear alarming 
 testimony to the evil constMjuences which mere secular 
 education is producing.'" 
 
 This rev. gentleman seemed to forget, or conveniently 
 ignored the fact, that education is not now Secidar but 
 Christian and religioiiH to all intents and purposes ; 
 and, therefore, if it fails to turn out good citizens he and 
 his religion are to blame — not Secularism, which has 
 
8 
 
 never yet had a fair chance to show what it can do. 
 Education be</ins at the mother's breast ; and as the 
 facts are to-day the child gets its religious education at 
 home, at the church, at the Sunday school (which every 
 church lias running) and at the Separate and so-called 
 Public schools. If Mr. Langtry's catalogue of vice and 
 crime above enumerated is due to education at all it 
 must surely be due to Christian education, for Christ- 
 ianity is still the prevailing religion in Church and 
 State in this country. It may not be out of place h^re to 
 note the fact that the whole tribe of ojfficial and contract- 
 ing "boodlers" — high and low — whosepeculations, frauds, 
 rascalities, and official corruption (" smelling to heaven") 
 are now being exposed to the light of the day at the 
 Capital of this humiliated Dominion, are men who were 
 mostly educated in those godly — very godly — and 
 religious schools which are so exemplary, and trained 
 and nurtured by that "only true religion " which is the 
 boast of the " Holy Mother Church," and which runs 
 the politics and legislation as well as the religion of 
 Quebec. 
 
 Mr. Langtry seems also to forget that the population 
 of the prisons is distinctly religious not secular ; and that 
 almost every absconding defaulter or lecherous licentiate 
 in " high life " as well as low life in these days is a pillar 
 in some church, or, perhaps, a Sunday school teacher, or 
 some pious and exalted exemplar of that sort ! 
 
 Assuming for a moment that their religion is good 
 and true, and is the regenerating and reforming power 
 among men which they claim it to be, the question is a 
 pertinent one: " What are these thousands of well-paid 
 priests and parsons about, with their thousands of 
 
9 
 
 churches and cathedniuS, and Sunday scliools, and 
 separate schools, and parochial schooly, and numerous 
 other pious agencies and influenct-s, that they must, 
 forsooth, come forward and beg the State to do what 
 they themselves ought to do ; and depend on the public 
 schools to do what they themselves ought to do, and 
 what they are well paid for doing ? " How is it that 
 they come forward thus, and voluntarily "confess 
 judgment," and acknowledge (for that is Just what it 
 amounts to) that they and their multiform forces nre 
 failing in regenerating society — that they cannot with 
 all their complicated religious machinery turn out good 
 citizens? Will Mr. Langtry or somebody else answer? 
 Why should these reverend wnd right reverend parsons 
 and priests come begging the special aid of the State to 
 help them in their own special work, and tlius tyrannize 
 over the citizen ? If this is not an abject and humil- 
 iating confession of weakness on their part, and 
 impotency on the part of their boasted religion, I know 
 not what is! There must be "something rotten in the 
 State of Denmark " else the clergy " move in a myster- 
 ious way," their little wonders to perform. The truth 
 of the matter is, however, perfectly palpnble. That the 
 decomposition (or, shall we magnaTiimously say, puriji- 
 cation) of one of the most stupendous systems of truth 
 and error, good and evil, which humanity ever produced, 
 has commenced, and is, indeed, well advanced, is per- 
 fectly obvious to him wlio can read the signs of the 
 times. 
 
 Religion of that kind however has about had its day ; 
 and it has had its opportunity in the work of education. 
 Christianity has had a long trial and test in training the 
 
10 
 
 young and forming human character, and it has failed 
 — miserably failed. Let Secularism now have a trial ; 
 let Science now try lier hand. 
 
 Wherever the home and school have heen secularized 
 the results have been .'^alutary and satisfactory. Socular 
 schools would be no blind experiment with u<. In 
 several countries, puhJic education has been secularized 
 and no kinci of religious instruction is allowed in the 
 public schools. This is true of France, of some of the 
 States of Germany, and some parts of Switzerland and 
 Holland. While the re.sults are favorable, and more 
 than could be reasonably expected under the circum- 
 stances, the te.st of secular teaching and training so far 
 has not been a fair one, because there is the counter- 
 vailing influence of the error and superstition which are 
 imbibed by the child at houie and at the ch\irch — from 
 parent and priest. 
 
 How the proper teaching of reading, writing, arith- 
 metic, granimar, gec^graphy, etc., and the co- incident 
 inculcation, by precept and example, of kindness, hone"sty, 
 truthfulness, industry and all the moral virtues, can 
 possibly lead to vice and crime, Rev. John Langtry 
 failed to explain. 
 
 That a purely secular system of education and 
 training can turn out a better citizen for this world 
 (however it might be about the hypothetical next) than 
 is now being turned out by the homo, the Sunday school, 
 the Separate school, and the q^ia,si-r^A\^louH public 
 school, only remains to be tried here to be demonstrated. 
 
 The only reason Mr. Langtry gives that secular 
 schools are vicious is that they are " godless." I think 
 it was Lord Bacon who said " it were better to have no 
 
11 
 
 
 God at ftll Ihtin a l>ad one," or words to that effect. 
 Men have created many gods in their own imaginations. 
 The world's Pantheon has heen full of tliem, but like 
 other human institution,' the gods are coming to an end. 
 They are even now mostly dead and buried, past nny 
 resurrection. The remainder will follow in due course, 
 except the universal god of Nature which has never 
 been deified or placed in any of the Pantheons. 
 
 Alexander Pope comes nearest to the scientific con- 
 ception of God. — 
 
 " All are but parts of one 8tuj)eiid<>iis whole, 
 Whose body Nature is stud (iod the Soul." 
 
 Secular education is no more godless fronir the scien- 
 tific standpoint than Cliristian education is godless from 
 Mr. Langtry's standpoint. The diti'erence is in the gods, 
 or in the interpretation of them. Science and Secularism 
 fully recognise a Power in the Universe itlie Noumenon 
 behind phenomena) of the nature and essence of wh.ich 
 they claim to know nothing. Mr. Langtry and many 
 other excellent people call this power " God," and pro- 
 ceed to define it, but in reality they know not one whit 
 more about it than we do, albeit they profess to know 
 a great deal more. 
 
 We have, however, one common ground with tliem 
 here. We all believe in and recognise the existence of 
 this mysterious Power, bnt we part com})any as soon as 
 our fellow-travellers begin to define what this Power is, 
 anthropomorphize it, and profess an intimate ac<[uaint- 
 ance with it. The Christian, with no greatei facilities 
 for information on the subject than ourselves, confidently 
 proceeds with his definitions and deductions, which he 
 

 12 
 
 forthwith essayR to force on ever3})ody else nole/ns 
 volenti. We decline either to define the Unknowable or 
 to accept his definitions of the Unknowable. True, he 
 is at liberty, and it is his right, to define for himself, 
 and worship in his own way, but he has no right to 
 either crowd his notions on others, or have others taxed 
 to support and extend them. He need not hold up a 
 book to us in one hand (unless he take a sword in the 
 other) as his authority, calling it " divine revelation," for 
 that is assuming just what is to be proved, and the proof 
 is lacking — to the bulk of the world at any rate if not 
 to him. The Mahomedan could follow his example, and 
 did follow it when he had the power, with the Koran 
 in one hand and the sword in the other. The exponents 
 of the other great religions might with equal right and 
 reason do the same. That style of argument is, how- 
 ever, going out of fashion in these days. According to 
 present appearances, from this on, the religion that 
 cannot stand on its merits, and hold its own in a peace- 
 able way by reason and moral suasion, must go to the 
 wall, as the gods appear to be indifferent and careless as 
 to what happens to any of their religions. 
 
 Sf^cularism, therefore, is no more "godless" in the 
 highest and noblest sense than Christianity is — not so 
 much so according to Bacon just quoted, — and if there 
 is any advantage, educational or otherwise, in a high 
 and noble, but modest, conception of the " Soul of the 
 Universe," the great Unknown, Secularism has it. 
 
 The assumption that secular education is essentially 
 vicious is predicated on that other assumption that 
 religion and morality are inseparable if not identical. 
 Now, did we believe that morality were dependent upon 
 
Ki 
 
 religion, and relij^ious teaching^ indispensable to moral 
 teaching, we would be as strongly opposed to secular 
 schools as those who do believe that fallacy. It iscpiite 
 natural that every religion should claim morality as an 
 essential and integral part of itself. But the truth is 
 morality is no essential part of any religion or any 
 creed, that is, it belongs to none of them by right or 
 priority. Even Christianity, while inculcating some high 
 moral principles, can lay no original claim to those 
 principles. Nor can any one religion on the face of the 
 earth, either of the past or the present. Morality is a 
 development of humanity and is, therefore, the common 
 property of humanity. The gods have no claim to it 
 either theoretically or practically — especially practically, 
 as they would appear, from the accounts before us, to 
 be rather an immoral lot. 
 
 The " Golden Rule," to do unto others as you would 
 they should do unto you, is the best moral precept to be 
 found in the New Testament, but that e.Kcellent precept 
 does not belong to the New Testament ; or to the Old 
 Testament — to the Christians or to the Jew-!. Conrn -ius 
 of China, Aristotle and Isocrates of Greece, and others, 
 taught the golden rule several centuries before the 
 Christian era. Every mo.-al precept of Christianity 
 antedates the New Testament. I have not the space 
 here to enter fully into this point, but every impartial 
 scholar knows the statement to be true. Buckle, the 
 great historian, in his " History of Civilisation," says, — 
 " To assert that Christianity communicated to men 
 moral truths previously unknown, argues on the part of 
 the assertor gross ignorance or wilful fraud." — Vol. 1, p. 
 129. Johti Stuart Mill says, — " It can do truth no service 
 
14 
 
 to Mink tlio fact known to all who havr* the most 
 ordinary ac(juaintance with literary history, thatalarije 
 portion of the nohlcst and most valuahlu moral teaching; 
 lias been the work, not only of men who did not know, 
 hut of men who knew and rejected, the Christian faith." 
 
 This ^reat truth, now so fully recognised by the secular 
 find scientific learning of the age, occHsionally forces 
 itself upon the religionist. Hi>tory, obseivation and 
 the facts before him sonietimes convince even the edu- 
 cnterl Christian of an unpleasant truth, against his will 
 as it were. The Bishop of Hereford, in liis " Bampton 
 Lectures," frankly declares that, "The principles of 
 morality ure founded in our nature, independently of an ^ 
 religious belief, and are, in fact, obligatory even upon 
 the Atheist." 
 
 Modern science ascribes to the moral sentiments of 
 man a strictly nafund origin and development. Moral- 
 ity, therefore, being a natural element and a human 
 product, IS es.sentially secuLir, and hence a necessary 
 part of secular education. While moral teaching and 
 training are so highly essential, no religious teaching of 
 any kind is nece.ssary to a sound and complete education. 
 As the youthful, plastic mind will accept and assimilate 
 any religion or creed which it happens to be taught, no 
 matter how erroneous or absurd, it stands to reason that 
 the time for religious doctorine (if there is any proper 
 time for it) is when the mind is formed and the judgment 
 mature, so that the subject may select a religion for 
 himself among the many rival and conflicting systems 
 before him, or select none at all as his judgment may 
 direct. Indeed, I regard it as morally wrong to cram a 
 religion of any kind into a child. (The reader will 
 
15 
 
 please boar in niinf) that I am usinfj the word relij^ion 
 here as stundinfr for a creed, or body <»f speculative 
 doctrines or dogmas, and (juite apart from ethics.) 
 People are learning, as we have just seen, to distin^^uiMh 
 the>')retically as well as practieally between morality 
 and religion, which are in reality as di He rent as day and 
 night — one being truth and light and the other for the 
 most part error and darkness. They see in every-day 
 life the not uncommon spectacle of a very pious and 
 religious person being at thesauic time grossly immoral ; 
 while they also see what seems a wonderful phenomenon 
 to some, — viz., a moral, exemplary citiz<.'n without any 
 religion at all. We also find l)y turning to the Bible 
 that one of the principal characters there — "a man 
 after God's own heart" — a very religious man — was a 
 verv immoral man accordins: to the record. Morality, 
 from the secular standpoint, is degraded by its associ- 
 ation with suMi religion. Its touch with creeds, till the 
 creeds are purged, is pollu(,ing. Let the religionist 
 practise the moral virtues by all means if he can do so 
 consistently with his religion, but in the abstract the 
 two must be divorced. When the truth is fully realised 
 that the supernatural religions do not necessarily include 
 ethics they (the religions) will the more spee<lily make 
 their exit. When it is understoo'l thai faitk is one thing 
 and ivorks another, the Christian regaiding faith as the 
 greaterof the two, the world will, it is hoped, decide to let 
 fhe faiths go instead of the works. The Christian Church 
 hasnever taken very kindly to works (Mther indoctrine or 
 practice. We know bow it is witli Rome ; and Luther, one 
 of the foundprs of Protestantism, it is said, clipped the 
 Epistle of St. James out of his J3ible because James put 
 
 ! :' 
 
I I 
 
 Hi! 
 
 16 
 
 too much Rtross on works to suit Luther. At any rate 
 ho has left his opinion of James on record as follows: — 
 "The Epistle of Jame^*, I account the writing of no 
 apostle ; it -is an epistle of straw." 
 
 A quarter of a century ago (and still for aught I know) 
 you could hear from the pulpit of Methodist " reviva- 
 lists " at their " protracted meetings " the following 
 choice teaching, — " Come forward to the anxious seat 
 and seek 'religion and he converted and saved. Your 
 morality vnll damn yo^i. You must believe on the 
 Lord Jesus Christ in order to be saved, etc., etc." But 
 this iaa religious philosophy which is becoming obsolete, 
 and is now mostly relegated to the country villages and 
 backwoods. The polished and politic parson of the 
 fashionab^» city church preaching to a cultured congre- 
 gation has, as a rule, but little to say about those old- 
 fashioned biblical doctrines so odoriftrousof brimstone ; 
 and still less has he to say out of the pulpit about 
 them. 
 
 As one of the many indications f>f the present whole- 
 some trend of thouoht and sentiment nwny from faiths 
 and creeds and towarls works and moral principle, I 
 shall (juote here from a recent editorial in the leading 
 popular tribune in the Dominion. The writer, at this 
 possible turning-point in our political afltairs, in advo- 
 cating a radical and general purification of our corrupt 
 politics, utters the following, — 
 
 " A great historian, who was also a great economist, 
 has remarked that while the crowd is apt to worship the 
 man who has had the hardihood to set himself above 
 moral sentiment, sound observation teaches that moral 
 sentiment is the quintessence of practical wisdom, 
 
17 
 
 S 
 
 and that as morality in the only way to indlvulaa 
 p4rf§cii(yit and kappinens so it in the only way to puhlic 
 prosperity and the preieTvation of the State." 
 
 1 have italicised the last sentiment as being no less 
 significant than true as a sign of the times. Thoni is 
 nothing here about religion ; but morality is recommended 
 as the " only way to individual perfection " as well as 
 the only safeguard of the State. 
 
 The very fact that every religion — great or small — 
 has its own peculiar code of ethics (and some of them 
 are very peculiar), and that Christian ethics, since the 
 beginning, have been " on the wing," as it were, and 
 changing front from time to time, shows that the 
 highest morality — the genuine article — is the creation 
 and result, not of any religion or creed, but of the 
 secular and social progress of mankind. Were a true 
 religion the parent of true moral principles the principles 
 would not be liable to change, or be susceptible of repair, 
 any more than a Divine Revelation would come to need 
 
 " revision ! " 
 
 Rev. John Langtry, in speaking to his motion, referred 
 to in the foregoing, is reported to have said that " Agnos- 
 tics thought there was nothing in man worth developing 
 but intellect, and these people were desirous of enforcing 
 their views into the public school system." Rev. Prof. 
 Clark, who seconded Mr. Langtry s motion, ventured the 
 assertion that *' secular education cultivated a certain 
 brutality and coarseness of manner and destroyed senti- 
 ment." 
 
 What the clergy hope ultimately to gain by thus 
 persistently misrepresenting and distorting the views 
 and positions of people at least as exemplary and useful 
 
 i"' 
 
 I 
 
 ; J: 
 
18 
 
 iu tlie comiimnity as thomselves is difficult to iinderHtau*!. 
 Tlujy iiiu}' ;^ain a tmn.sitory advantage by imposing upon 
 the ignorance of sonu;, and pandering to the prejudices of 
 others, hut eventually such a course must recoil upon 
 themselves. Nothing C'>uld be further from the truth than 
 the above utterances from these two prominent and rev- 
 erend Cyhristians. Spenc^er, Mill, Tyndall, Huxlry, Hrad- 
 laugh, Holyoake, and Watts, may be called leading and 
 eminent representatives of Agnosticism and Secularism ; 
 and 1 submit that these reverend giiiitlemen cannot (piote 
 a single line from the writingsof any of them to give even 
 a semblance of truth or ju.stiticatiun to their assertions. 
 
 Those great leaders in the world of thought and senti- 
 ment teach just the opposite. In fact, Secularism is the 
 only philosophy which inculcates the normal and proper 
 cultivation and development of the whole nature of child 
 and adult — all that is good in both; and we hold that 
 the natural and legitimate function of every human 
 faculty is good per se. Christianity cannot consistently 
 do this, for she teaches that man is by nature " utterly 
 depraved," having a heart "deceitful above all thiiigs 
 and desperately wicked." and hence that much of tiiat 
 nature must be suppressed, and the " flesh " of that 
 wicked heart " crucitied," 
 
 Secularism says, most emphatically, not so ! Man 
 (much less woman) is not by nature utterly depraved or 
 essentialy bad. On the contrary, every human faculty 
 is naturally good. The ultimate normal function of 
 every faculty is good. The normal function of every 
 passion even, and every propensity, is good. Vice is 
 only a perversion of these faculties, resulting from 
 misdirection, — from false teaching, training, and un- 
 
H) 
 
 favorable surroundingji. Criruu in only tho abuse of 
 J assions and propensities whicli are in themselves legiti- 
 mate. This is th(5 teaching of modern mental science, 
 whatever the Hihie or the churches may teach to the 
 rontrary on the hubject. Secularisn», in accordanc*^ 
 with Huch science, teaches how to une all the faculties 
 find powers, and how not to pen^n't or afnise any of 
 thorn 
 
 The moral and social eh nients of hunwinity arc no 
 loss important and sacred to the Secularist than the 
 intellectual. Even the " tleshly " elements, instead of 
 being essentially base, and " carnal " and " depraved," 
 are normally good, and necessary to the existence, liappi-, 
 ness, and continuance of the race. Secular education 
 therefore, aims at guiding and directing the passions and 
 propensities instead of trying to suppress them and 
 " crucify " them. It places reason and the moral sense 
 at the helm of human conduct. 
 
 Injustice to the lay element of the Anglican Synod, 
 to which the Rev. Mr. Langtry's motion was presented, 
 it must be said that through their opposition it failed to 
 carry, even after the author had eliminated tlu; obnox- 
 ious portion (|UOted above, which, it seems, the Rev A. 
 H. Baldwin requested lo be removed fr.)m the r solution 
 because, as he frankly put it, it was " wholly untrue ! " 
 The defeat of the semi-expurgated motion by the lay 
 delegates, while the clergy stood for it 40 to 16, is but 
 another proof that the pew is ahead of the pulpit in the 
 onward march of progress. 
 
 That obnoxious secular education, which, it is said, 
 would be " godless " and, therefore, vicious, would be at 
 any rate intellectual, and moral, and social, — even 
 
 U 
 
90 
 
 tiMthubic and neritimonUI, uiulDr the guidance of ruason 
 un<l Hii enlighten«;d moral Hense. 
 
 To the sincere heli(!ver in the New Testament it may 
 seem very presumptuous and even aatoundinj^ that wc 
 .should want or expect anything hij^lier and better in 
 moral teachinf^ than his religion iifi'ordH, but that in 
 what we earnestly dosiro and urgently <lemand. 
 
 Judge VVeHtbrook of the United States, in writing on 
 this <jueMtion, says, — " Wo want something for our State 
 Schools that is more practical, and better adapted to 
 this commercial age. Wc want a higher inoralUy than 
 is taught in the New Testament. We want higher and 
 more noble conceptions than are given in the parable of 
 the * Unjust Judge,' and more just and equitable princi- 
 ples than are taught in the parable of the ' Unjust 
 Steward,' or the ' Laborers in the Vineyard,' or the 'Ten 
 Talents.' We want a morality tliat relates to thi» life 
 rather than to the next. We do not want the possession 
 of property held up as a crime, and poverty represented 
 as a virtue entitling one to a seat in the future kingdom. 
 We want good homes to live in now, rather than ' Man- 
 sions in the Skies.' We do not want a morality that 
 appeals to selfishness only, that discriminates in favor 
 of celibacy, and that only toIera*"es marriage as a remedy 
 for lust, as taught in the seventh chapter of 1 Corin- 
 thians. I repeat that we want a higher 'morality than 
 the morality of the New Testament."* 
 
 And I shall add that we, too, not only want a higher 
 morality than that, but the world imperatively needs it, 
 
 •'•Shall the Bible lie Read in Our Public Schoold I" J. B. Lippincott 
 Compaay, Philadelphia. 
 
21 
 
 Lippincott 
 
 a.«» amply atteHted hy Rov. Mr T^nngtry's forcj^oinp 
 catalogue of vice and criino. 
 
 Aivl whil« even tins N«'W Ttstninerit is tluiM fumla- 
 HH'ntall}' (lefVctivo in secular ftliics, and ln'nce iiuule- 
 (juato Hsanvdncational miidr nKJially and socially, tlic Old 
 Testament is still wor.-fo ; for it not «)nly Ix^aiH the al»ove 
 deft.'cts, but mueh of it, both in precept and (example, is 
 positively pernicious an<l polluting to the youthful mind. 
 Indeed, it seems to have the same lamentable effect on 
 the adult I Ilover, ju(l^?in<^ from the scandalous iu)n\oral- 
 ities amon^ its devotees, hi^h and low. Because the 
 Protestant sects of Christianity proclnim nn " open Bible " 
 lor the ]H»op'e they deny the pernicious inlluencc? on the 
 younj.j of their open l>ible ; but becaiwe the Church of 
 Home di.scourujies an open Bibb; for th»! {)«M)j)le, seeking 
 to limit it to the priesthood, that church admits its 
 polluting tH'ects upon the youn^y, which w<' are here 
 (Inpreeating and deploring, an<l which is one of the chief 
 reasotiM why we think it ought not to be read in the 
 public scliouls. A rei^ent issue of a Ivoinan Catholic paper 
 (The New Yo'rk Freeman* s Jo wrvnl tnid ('nfhoLic licijlh- 
 lar, — June 20th, ISOI) has the followin^^ warnirjg: — 
 
 " Examine the Bibles promiscuously distributed in 
 school rooms, and it will be fountl that certain portions 
 are soiled syith nuich use, and sometimes absolutely worn 
 away V)y lecherous-minded youths; particular passagesare 
 marked to aid in more convenient reference for others : 
 a special delight is taken by many lads to call the atten- 
 tion of the female element in mixed schools to certain 
 verse?, expressions, etc., whose reading and study produce 
 the utmost disorder in both sexes," 
 
 Tnis is a very significan passage, coming from a Chris- 
 
Mi 
 
 1 1 i 
 
 00 
 
 tian journal, and tnny wfll bo ponflered hy e"ery rduca- 
 tionalisfc and other reader. ()l)«orve the way the dis- 
 tasteful fact is ])iit, for the daniiiging admission is evi- 
 dently mude for th»' purpose for havinjr a shot nt the 
 Pujtestants with their " opc^n Bihlo." "Certain portions " 
 and " c( I'tain verses" of the sacred (?) record are sought 
 out- by " lecherous-minded youths," and passed round to 
 the " female element," the rt ading and studying of w^hich 
 " produce the utmost disorder in both sexes." The 
 proper desijTnation of those " certain " passages would 
 more propeily l)e, sliocking and polluting immoralities 
 and obscenities. 
 
 Every adult, not a barbarian, who has read the Old 
 Testament through, knows that much of it is utterly 
 unfit to be read in schools or anvwdiere (dse amnnir decent 
 or ciN-ilized ])eople. In tht.- interests of private putity 
 and ])ublie morality tlie book ought to be either expur- 
 gated or prom)>tIy suppressed, so far as the Public schools 
 and juvenile reiding aie concerned. 
 
 Apart from the moral and social aspect of the question 
 there are other strong reasons why the Bibles one and 
 all, and the religions one and all, ought to be rigorously 
 excluded from the public schools. One of the cliief of 
 these is that the public schools, once thoroughly secular- 
 ized, the main pretext for State-aided Separate schools 
 would be removed. This is the only satisfactory solu- 
 tution of the Separate scho>l question. L"t the Schools 
 be secularised, let the British North America Act be 
 revised and amended, and let Ontario, Manitoba, and 
 every other province control their educational matters as 
 they have a right to do. Quebec has or had no right to tie 
 up Ontario and keep her forever bound, All Constitu- 
 
2S 
 
 I-- 
 
 tions and institution=i are more or les.^ tUt'cctivt? nnd 
 nui.st be amended from time to time, as progress may re- 
 (|uii'e. 'Ihese tilings were not made for all time, or if 
 they were so intended we have the right toiinmake them. 
 A [)ast age had no right to legislate for us atid Kind us. 
 They had a right to act for themselves according to the 
 circumstances and we have the same right. We are, 
 therefore, not eternally V)ound by what ('artier did, or by 
 what John A. Macdonald did, or any other man or men. 
 We afe not bound by the British North America Act 
 only till such time as we can get it revised : and the 
 sooner the better. 
 
 Another cogent reason for excluding the Bible from 
 the schools is, that Mo<lern Science has declared asjainst 
 it. Her leading authorities tell us that the teachings of 
 the Bible and the facts of science in regard to the crea- 
 tion of*" the world, the Noachian deluge, and other 
 matters, are in direct conflict, beyond the possibility of 
 adjustment. Why, then, should the child be taught 
 scientific error, even in the name of rt-iigion ? The 
 thing is morally wrong, as well as against the material 
 interests of the iihiid ; and no theological subtlfty or 
 sacred sophistry can make it otherwise. 
 
 A few years ago Prof. Huxley was a member of the 
 London (England) School Board, when, in discussing 
 this question, he addressed the Board as Follows. In 
 speaking of the first chapter of Genesis he said :- " The 
 reading of this chapter would convey — whatever the 
 chapter was intended to convey— that the world was 
 made in six natural days. I dont ^ay whether this is 
 the right interpretation or not ; but 1 appeal to the com- 
 mon sense of the Poard whether that is not the interpre- 
 tation which every child capable of understanding the 
 
 !■•■ 
 
 I': 
 
 ■■ii\- 
 

 IJ 
 
 24 
 
 English languafye would naturally derive I'roni tlu; state- 
 ment contained in the book of Genesis ? And, that being 
 the case, it is perfectly certain that this statement is 
 erroneous, and no more capable of being disputed than 
 whether the earth stands still or not. I submit that it 
 is an absolute crime that this Board should sanction the 
 instilling into the minds of children statements which 
 are not true, and which the instruction they receive a 
 
 few years later will infallibly upset What I ask, 
 
 and what I have a right to ask, and what you as honest 
 men must grant, is this, that these tender children shall 
 not be taught tltat which you do not yourselves believe." 
 
 Were the Bible quite free from thii moral and social 
 objections against it, its demonstrated errors in science, 
 history, and ethnology would be more than sufficient to 
 condrmn it as a school book ; and Prof. Huxley deserves 
 the thanks of every true friend of education for the fear- 
 less stand ho has taken against the Bible in the schools. 
 
 With our Public schools secu'arised, and some other 
 important changes made .in the S3 stem, education might 
 become the power for good in the laud, and the engine 
 of enlightenment and progress, which it ought to be, but 
 which it is not at present. 
 
 Let public education, therefore, be completely secular- 
 ised ; let the system be turned roimd, placing the i(M'ful 
 first and the ornaTnenfal last; let physical education take 
 first place ; let ohjeciive teaching, off the bench and on 
 foot, largely take the place of subjective teaching on the 
 bench and in confinenient ; let moral training be conduc- 
 ted on natural instead of theological lines ; let a sound 
 mind be built up in a sound body by building up the 
 body first, and the upward development of humanity 
 ' will be thereby greatly accelerated. 
 
; state- 
 t being 
 lumt is 
 ;i] than 
 that it 
 ion the 
 
 which 
 ceive a 
 j I ask, 
 
 honest 
 m shall 
 elieve." 
 I social 
 ijcience, 
 iient to 
 ('Serves 
 le fear- 
 
 5C}lOol.S. 
 
 e other 
 
 \ niijxht 
 
 eiiprine 
 
 be, but 
 
 
 secular- 
 i useful 
 ion take 
 and on 
 ^ on the 
 conduc- 
 . sound 
 up the 
 imanity