IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 1.0 Ifi^ 11^ 
 
 I.I 
 
 1.25 
 
 132 
 
 ■U ■-,. 11111^= 
 
 2.0 
 
 1.8 
 
 U III 1.6 
 
 V] 
 
 <^ 
 
 /}. 
 
 ""l 
 
 ^m 
 
 
 v 
 
 >«« 
 
CIHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 Collection de 
 microfiches. 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions institut canadien de microreproductions historiques 
 
 1980 
 
Technical Notes / Notes techniques 
 
 The Institute has attempted to obtain the best 
 original copy available for filming. Physical 
 features of this copy which may alter any of the 
 images in the reproduction are checked below. 
 
 D 
 
 Coloured covers/ 
 Couvertures de couleur 
 
 L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire 
 qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Certains 
 ddfauts susceptibles de nuire d la quality de la 
 reproduction sont not6s ci-dessous. 
 
 D 
 
 Coloured pages/ 
 Pages de couleur 
 
 T 
 
 P 
 o 
 
 fi 
 
 T 
 c 
 o 
 a 
 
 □ 
 □ 
 
 Coloured maps/ 
 
 Cartes gdographiques en couleur 
 
 Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 Pages ddcolordes, tachet^es ou piqudes 
 
 Tight binding (may cause shadows or 
 distortion along interior margin)/ 
 Reliure serrd (peut causer de I'ombre ou 
 de la distortion le long de la marge 
 int^rieure) 
 
 □ 
 
 >^ 
 
 D 
 
 Coloured plates/ 
 Planches en couleur 
 
 Show through/ 
 Transparence 
 
 Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommag^es 
 
 T 
 fi 
 ir 
 
 ^ 
 ir 
 u 
 b 
 f< 
 
 E 
 
 Additional comments/ 
 Commentaires suppl^mentaires 
 
 Original copy restored and laminated. 
 
 Bibliographic Notes / Notes bibliographiques 
 
 □ 
 
 Only edition available/ 
 Seule Edition disponible 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 Relid avec d'autres documents 
 
 Cover title missing/ 
 
 Le titre de couve.ture manque 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 D 
 
 Pagination incorrect/ 
 Erreurs de pagination 
 
 Pages missing/ 
 
 Oes pages manquent 
 
 Maps missinc/ 
 
 Oes cartes gdographiques manquent 
 
 □ 
 
 Plaies missing/ 
 
 Des planches manquent 
 
 D 
 
 Additional comments/ 
 Commentaires suppl6mentaires 
 
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. 
 
 Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le 
 plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et 
 de la nettetd de I'exemplaire film6, et en 
 conformity avec les conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 The last recorded frame on each microfiche ahail 
 contain t'le symbol —»- (meaning CONTINUED"), 
 or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever 
 applies. 
 
 Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la der- 
 nidre image de cheque microfiche, selon ie cas: 
 le symbole — ► signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbole 
 V signifie "FIN". 
 
 The original copy was borrowed from, and 
 filmed with, the kind consent of the following 
 institution: 
 
 Library of the Public 
 
 Archives of Canada 
 
 Maps or plates 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: 
 
 L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grSce d la 
 g6n6rosit6 de I'^tablissement prdteur 
 suivant : 
 
 La bibliothdque des Archives 
 
 publiques du Canada 
 
 Les cartes ou les planches trop grandes pour dtre 
 reproduites en un seul clich6 sont film^es d 
 partir de Tangle sup^rieure gauche, de gauche d 
 droite et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre 
 d'images ndcessaire. Le dia^iramme suivant 
 illustre la mdthode : 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 1 2 3 
 
 # 5 6 
 
I 
 
 THE SCRIPTURE READINGS 
 
 A STATEMENT OF THE FACTS CONNEGTED 
 
 THEREWITH. 
 
 IVIIsrepresentations Corrected— Not a Roman Catholic 
 Scheme, but suggested and Carried Out 
 
 by Protestants. 
 
 LETTERS FROM REV. PRINCIPAL CAVEH AMD DR. DLWART. 
 
 ' Herewith will be found letters on tbe siibjcct of the Scripture Readings from two of 
 the most prominent clergymen in Canada, The letter of Dr. Dewravt, edifrr of , the Chria- 
 Han Guardian, deals with the Ol'ijjill of the Volumi^ of SClectlOBS. It brings out 
 
 very clearly the facts that the sujf jfcstioii came first iVoai ?iyiB<>d.s, i'*reshy- 
 terics, €«iif(t»rcnces, and Teachers' Associations, and that a larg« joint com- 
 mittee consiaintg of clergyman ami hiymen from aJl dt-noniinsjiioas and 
 
 political parties apprOYCfl the Srloctions, after they had been lirst apiiroyCMl by 
 a representative SUh-COniinittee. l^i'. Dewart deals, in his characteristically inci- 
 sive style, with the objections made Hgaiiist the principle of using selectionL. instead of the 
 "whole Bible." > . , 
 
 liev. Principal Caven, speaking also as a nonpartisan, sayS that the attack npon 
 
 the Siinlster of Kducatiou ia respect of these Readings is ** sHch as 110 exijfeii- 
 eies of party waifare can jnstify." He also proves that tlie origin ol the 
 
 Iteaders was IVotCStanft and non sectarian, and that the Mluist'T, in issuin'g 
 
 the book, « waH hat givin;[|[ eflbct (o the strongly cxpres.sed wishes of ihe 
 
 Churches and tlie teacher.*^." Dr. Caven then defends tlie selections th«?m*ielves. 
 The letters were puUished lu the Globe^ November 27th, 1886. 
 
From Rev. Principal Cavon. 
 
 Sir,— The Jllliiister of Education is attacked from various quarters in re 
 
 gftrd to tho book of " Sci'iptlire ICeadinus*" for the use in tho Public Schools. Tllis 
 
 attack seems to me <iinte groundless, and such as no exi<$encies oi 
 
 pariy Waiiare can Justify. I am certainly not anxious to intcrveuH in the I)oUtical 
 conflict, but I think it my iUltj tO make a brief statement regarding theae 
 Readings. 
 
 Tlie Efiucation; Department, in authorizing selections of Soriphire, actcd 
 
 in confornjiiy with representations made to tlie lleparhnent by the 
 Churches of Onturio and by tho Provincial Teachers' Association. A large 
 depDtHtion of the €Iiuj'ch ol liUg^laiid and of the Jiletliodist and rresi»yterlan 
 Cliarches suhuiitted to tlie Attoruey-Cieneral a resolution cf which th< 
 
 following is part ; — 
 
 " That this conference pledges itself to press upon the Attoi^ney-General tho making 
 of the reading of tho Holy Scriptures by the children and teacher ... an obliga- 
 tory exercise at the opening of the Public Schools of Ontario, the passage of Holy Scrip- 
 ture to be reai each day to be prescribed by the De[)artment in conformity with the 
 recouiniendations of the Committee of this Conference, or some other represoncutivo of tho 
 various Churches of Ontario, etc." 
 
 The Teachers resolved :— 
 
 " That the reading of selected portions of Scripture as a part of tho regular daily exer- 
 cises of the school, would be a material aid to teachers in the discharge of their duties in 
 resju'ct to moral trainitig,'' and " that the Educational l)a|)artment do make- a suitable se- 
 lection of Scripture reaiinga for the schools under its charge." 
 
 A selection of readings was accordingly made, and before receiving 
 
 authorization was SUl^mitted to a large joint COIUUlittee of tllC €hurches, each 
 member of the conun ttee had a COpy SCUt to him for examination iu advance. 
 
 When the contmiitec met, its (irst action was to approve of the princi- 
 ple of a book of Scripture readings ; afterwards free and j;enera.| expressions of 
 
 opinion regarding cho proposed selection took place, and a SUb-ConimltteC, represent 
 ing the several Churches, was appointed to examine the selections carefully in detail 
 The writer of this letter, while not a member of the sub committee, was ])resent at 
 the meeting of the general committee and kuOWS Whjlt WJlS done. Th<? ^tlinlstcr 
 
 in Issuintf ihis maligned book was but giving ellVct to the strongly expressed 
 
 wishes of tho Chui'uhes ai.d the teachers. 1 am not heie asguing for the use of Sfiections 
 in preference to the use of the entire Bible, but stating the cir. umstances under which this 
 
 selection received approval ; aud it wiU tlius be seen liow littlc $*rounfl I here 
 is for accusing the Depjirtmont of proceeding in opposiilon to, or in 
 ignorance of, the opinion of tlie t'hurches. 
 
 The regulaiions approved iu 1884 do not rt quire " the reading of the Holy Scrip- 
 ture!^" by the children and teachers, which I think the committee of the Churches desired, 
 and which seems to tue decidedlv preferable to reading by the teachers alono ; and to this 
 extent etiect has not been given to the views of the Church Committee ; but in regard 
 
jartors in re 
 hools. This 
 jeiicles o2 
 
 the [)olitical 
 arding theae 
 
 ure, acted 
 
 ent V.y thf.! 
 
 >II. A large 
 sbyterian 
 
 I whicli thf 
 
 the making' 
 an obliga- 
 Holy Scrip- 
 ty with the 
 iitive of the 
 
 r daily exer- 
 tir duties iii 
 suitable se- 
 
 © receiving 
 dies, each 
 in advance. 
 
 ift priiici- 
 essioHs of 
 
 , represent 
 ly in detail 
 8 present at 
 
 Ulriiister 
 
 y expressed 
 f selections 
 r which this 
 
 111(1 iliere 
 to, or in 
 
 Holy Scrip- 
 hes desired, 
 and to this 
 
 n re«fard 
 
 to the principle of selectioiH, au<i; tlie main features of tli's selection, 
 tlie Minister ol' Kihinillon is sustained l>y tliw representatives of* tlie 
 i'on$;regatioiial, Aletiiotlist, Ejiiscopal, and rresby»erij»n 4'linrclies. 
 
 It is scarcely nece^^aary, th-^roforo, to say that tlie Scripture Reailin;;S WOrc not 
 
 selected by Arclil)i>liop Lyncli, n«>r under Ills direction. The draft seems 
 
 to have been sent to him in comiuoti with all the gentlemen composing thi.s large com- 
 roittee above referred to, and the Archbishop suggested the harmless, if unnecessary^ 
 change of " which" into *' who" in the' Lord's prayer; further than this tllC lianil of 
 the Archbishop wa-* not apjdled. 
 
 Have those who assert that selections acceptable to tlie Church of 
 R<une have been made ever examined the book ? Have they any conception 
 of the consequences of what they are saying 1 Are they prepared to admio that selections 
 embracing a considerable part of bjth Testaments, and regarded, presumably, by the able 
 men who gave the final revision as exhibiting fairly the teachings of the Bible, are an ia- 
 adequate basi'' for Protjstantism 1 If the Archbishop of Toronto entirely approves of the 
 selections I am delighted to hear it ; for in thl'IH J cau find CVCry doCtrine of Uiy 
 
 faith distinctly exhibited. 
 
 It was further a'.leged, if my memory serves me, that selections wore made which 
 should not give offence to Agnostics; but it will hardly be expected that 1 
 
 should refute this absurd proposition. 
 
 An able journal in this city, which cannot be suspected of undua partiality towards 
 the Minister, was pleased to say, " The Minister of Education is to be congratulated upon 
 having adppted for use in the Common Schools a series of readings from the Old and 
 New Testaments, together with a brief form of prayer. . , The work has been prepared 
 with the greatest care, and'cannot fail to commend itself to parents.' * 
 
 My oV»jt;ct in writing this letter, as already said, is not to defend selections of Scrip- 
 ture fo' use in schools, nor to endorse in every particular the compilation in question, bub 
 to express my slnci^re condemnation of all attempts to discredit Mr, 
 Ross by misrepresenting facts which are weJl known to many ministers 
 and laymen in all the Churches. I would equally bear testimony on behalf of the 
 opponents of the Ontario Government should their action have been in question, No 
 Governm nt can complain of fair and honest criticism, however searching ; but when 
 public men strive to do right, and to follow the best sentiment of the community 
 in its most authentic expression (a^ Mr. Ross has done In tlie matter of this 
 book), they are entitled, I think, to expect that those who have 
 prompted their action, and as it were pushed (hem forward, shall not 
 without emphatic protest allow that action to become the ground of 
 party attack. 
 
 WM, CAVEN. 
 
 Toronto, 26bh Nov. 
 
 * The Mail, 
 
From Dr. Dewart. 
 
 rtin.— As niiiTiy Incorrect aiul iiiisloadiiiv; stnti'iiiniits h^ve been pub- 
 
 Il>^lieil and oircillaled resiM't'tiH}^ the " Scripture K.'admijH " issued by the 
 EdutHitiiiu l)t!|)arLm«:'iit ot Oiitariu, a brief iiresentation of the niuiu liiuta in the history 
 of the matter, and of the reHsons whicli justify such selections, will be only Jill act of 
 
 ju)!»tiec fro i|i« representatives ot tliel*rote.staut4/hareh<'s, who approv- 
 ed of llus way ol providiiiji; Scriptnnil readiu<j;s in the INiblie Schools. 
 It h^rs heea alleju^ed iu vinious fomiHthat these ** Scripture R(;adiuy;s *" were 
 
 tlie scheme or W(»rk of Archbishop LyilcJl, and timl their use is e<iuivalent to a 
 rejection oi" th^ Bible, which, it is said, has been (iishonored and dethroned by this voiunie, 
 
 A>s one ofihe Protestaiiit .tliiiisters who approved of tlie publication ol 
 such a.v/i>l)*inie, and who took part in the preparati<ui and revision ol 
 these '' l>!$cripture Keadiu«$s,'^ 1 fet^l bound, on behalt of myself and the 
 other ministers concerned, to repudiate the unfair mid incorrect con 
 
 StrUCtion that has been put upon the adoption of this method of sujjplying tlie domand 
 of the .Ch'UrobeB for more religious instruction in the schoolu. Much of wliat has been 
 
 wf itteur fi<i;^in8t ahe "vSoripture Iteadinga " I cannot but rcj^ard as an attempt 
 
 to arouse unwarranted prejudice, and to mislead the public mind as to the aim,, 
 chfti'acteii, and teudency of the volume under discussion. 
 
 4 simple statement of the facts ol the case, the circumstance that led Uj 
 
 tUe ^ctipp. taUeu, and the names and character of tlie gentlemen who approved of this 
 
 course anti helped to carry it out, ought to convince ali candid Protestants 
 that there Is no ground whatever lor the charge that the Bible has been 
 
 di^ltmor.ed: to gratify Archbisho[) Lynch and the Roman Catholics. 
 
 (The Angliciiu and Presbyterian Synods, and some of the Ulethodist 
 
 Conferences, l>assed resolutions recommending more general and regular reading of the 
 Scriptures in the Public Schools ; and these bodies appointed deputatiouS to preSS 
 
 this reqtuest upon the attention of the Ontario ^jiovernuvent. The main 
 
 point urged by them was that, instead of the reading of the Scriptures in the schools being 
 optional, it phould lie made obligatory. These deputations met as a united committee and 
 agreed upon, the resolution which they should present to the Government. Then, aS & 
 
 united body, they held a conference with the Attorney General, The 
 
 joii^t resolution agreed upon closed with these words : — 
 
 And that this Conference press upon the Government the necessity for a return to the 
 Scriptural and nioral instruction contained in the firat series of National Readers, issued by the 
 Education Department for use in the Public Schools of Ontario, or of some similar religioua ia- 
 etructioii. 
 
 The Teachers' Provincial Association 
 
 somftime after this recommended " the reading of selected portions of Scripture ae a 
 part of the daily school exercise," aifd to carry out this idea the Association further re- 
 commended that the Education Department do make *^ a suitable se- 
 lection of Scripture readings for the schools under its charge/' 
 
i(l Ijy the 
 ha history 
 
 Ml iWi of 
 
 approv- 
 "I'liools, 
 s "• >vcre 
 
 valent to a 
 Is volume, 
 
 aliou ol 
 vision o( 
 
 and tlie 
 rect con 
 
 he dotuand 
 it has been 
 
 attempt 
 
 to the aim,, 
 
 that lef] to 
 ved of this 
 
 otcstunts 
 hiis been 
 
 [ethodi^jt 
 
 idiug of the 
 
 s to press 
 
 The main 
 ihools being 
 iimittee and 
 
 lien, as a 
 Ural. The 
 
 sturn to the 
 sBued by the 
 religioua in- 
 
 ripture as a 
 further re- 
 
 itable se- 
 
 M 
 
 In response to t^esc appeals the Minister of Education niTnnged to 
 
 have prepared 11 hook of Scrlptnre lessons to be read in all the Public .Schook 
 11 iviriir first siibinittjul n copy of the propo>sed sy.steru (<( lessona to each, he CuLcd tO* 
 i^etfiier the members of the dei>utatioQs fiom the Churuhea, and 
 
 Submitted the Troposai to Ihem. 
 
 After fnll eonslderati4m of the ^\ho!e question, Una conference of ministeu 
 lipproved of the ])lan of a volntne of ScHpture selections iis the best method praciicivble, 
 and iippoiuted a SUb-rommltfee of their members to aid in prf-paring and Tevia- 
 
 hv^ the proposed book of h'88(tii}». This siib-c<»mniittee carefnll^ pcrfornuMl 
 
 this duty. The book ilFeif is the best evidence of the manner in which the work waa 
 done. It has been justly claimed by the subcommittee " that the volume of, .selections 
 was intended to be thoionghly representative of every portion of the Scripiurea, whether 
 of a moral or doctrinal charncter." The selections have met with general approval, ?ven 
 
 Tha Mail congratulated the Minister of Education on haivlnii; adopted 
 this series of readings for use in the Commou Schools, and warmly commended the 
 w^rk. That was before the idea of representing it as a dishonour to the Bible and a blow 
 to Protestantism was thought out. 
 
 I want specially to call attention to the ftlCt that not only the sub commit- 
 tee of revision, whose names have been often mentiouetl, approved of preparing the8« 
 Scripture selections, but 
 
 THE LARGE JOTNT OOMMnTEE OF PBOTKaXANT M1NISTF3S AND LAYMEN, 
 
 representing not only the three Churches already named, but also Baptist and 
 Congregational ministers, approved ol this course, which the public are 
 
 now asked by certain parties to believe is the adoption of a Roman Catholic policy that 
 rejects and dishonours the Bible. 
 
 Here ai'e the names of the members Ofthe joint committee of repreaentativeH 
 to whom the proof-sheets of the readings were sent, and who, at their meeting ap- 
 proved of the preparation and publication of a booli of Scripture 
 Readings:— - 
 
 The Methodist Church.— Rev. Dr. Rose, Rev. Dr. Sutherland, Rev. Dr. Dewart, 
 Rev. S. J. Hunker, Rev. W. S. Blackstoclr, Rev. E. Roberts, Rev. J. M. Simpson, Mr. 
 John Macdonald, Mr. R. Walker, Mr. W.\rring Kennedy, and Mr. Justice Rose. 
 
 Church of England* — Very Rev. Archdeacon Boddy, M.A.; Rev. Provost Body, 
 M.A.; Rev. John Langtrr, M.A.; Rev. J. P. Lewis, Rev. I. Middleton, B.A.; Rev. J, 
 W. Beck, Rev. A. Sanson, Hon. G. W. Allan, Mr. N. W. Hoyles, B.A.; Mr. C. R. W- 
 Biggar, M.A.; Mr. G. B. Kiikpatrick, Mr. A. McLean Howard, and J. A. Worrel, B.C.L. 
 
 * 
 
 The Presbyterian Cl':*rch,-— Rev. Dr. Laing, Rev. Dr. Gregg, Rev. Principal 
 Grant, Rev. Principal Cp' en, Rev. H. M. Parsons, Rev. S. Lyle, Rev. W. T. McMuUen, 
 Charles Davidson, Mr. J. L. Blaikie, Mr. James McLellan, Q.C., Mr. H. Cassds, Dr. 
 Macdonald. 
 
 The Congregational Church.— iJsv. H. P. Powis, liev. John Burton, B.D. 
 
6 
 The IBjiptist €hiirch.— Rev. Dr. Castlei 
 
 All theae gentlemen wenj not present at the moeting of the confcrotiC'3 tliat approved <^i 
 the propoKoii book, but nearly all the ministers named were ther»\ and I believe thb 
 proof-sheets were sent to every membar of the different deputations. 
 80 that none of them were loft in ignorance of what was proposed, or without an oppor- 
 tunity of objecting. 
 
 And yet, in the face of these factH respecting the origin, the approval, 
 aF5d olitji t'is of tlie hook, tlie Proteslants of Ontario are sisliod to l)e- 
 liove that lliese Scripture readiiiji^M were an antj B'^rotestaut movement, 
 
 designed to dishonour the Bible and banish it from the Public Schools, This could only be 
 
 true on the Hupposition that thi^ conference of IVotesiant Mfnister^ 
 
 was knowingly taithlOSS md dtslojal to the Uibie, or too stupid to under- 
 stand the purport and otfect of the course of action of which they approved. It will bo 
 impossible to persuade the people of Ontario that they were either the ouo or the other. The 
 Protestant Ministers who ap^ .'0 7ei of the proposed reaJin^a are certa.inly as 
 loyal to the Bible, and as jealous of its honour as the most blatant of their 
 partisan assailants. For myself and the Christian gentlemen with whom 
 I waa associated, I fling b ick the clap-trap appeals and partisan raisreprosentations, 
 as moan and slanderous aspersions on the character of men who were honestly 
 
 and intelligently endeavouring to promote a fuller knowledge of tiie life-giving 
 
 truths of the Bible among the youth of the country. 
 
 I confess I have been surprised at the weakness and unfairness of the appeal made 
 against the Bible Belectious, and the desperate efforts to make the teachers believe that 
 they were slighted and ill-used in the matter. If the Scriptures are to bo read 
 in the Schools at all, some selections must bo made. Only a brief portion 
 
 of Scripture can bo read at any one time. It will not be denied that some portions 
 
 of Scripture are better adapted to instruct and edify children and 
 
 youtll than others. Sonaebody must make the selection. Oan it be denied that se- 
 lections chosen in the way these selections were made are more likely to ba choseu judici 
 ously than if the selection is left to the hurried impulse of the moment] 
 
 I am glad to learn from a recent statement of the Minister of Education that since 
 
 the issue of the Readings, the Scriptures are much more extensively 
 read in the Schools than formarly. This must be gratifying to eveiy 
 
 Protestant who is not warped by some perverting influence^ The objeot SOUght 
 
 by the Churches is evidently being accomplished. A great step for 
 ward has been achieved. 
 
 There has been a disingenuous play on the phrase " The Bible in the School," aa if it 
 meant only the Old and New Testament bound in one volume and kept within the walls 
 of the school-house. By " The Bible in the School," I understiind the truths of the 
 Bible read and tawght In the school as part of the daily exercises. 
 
 It would intrude too much upon your space for me to reply to the cavilling objections 
 that have been urged in the columns of the Mail against these Scripture Readings. The 
 mere statement of most of theso cavillings reveals their essential weakness and unfairr.ess. 
 
 But I may be permitted to ask :— Is the morc extensive reading of the en- 
 lightening trntlis of Iloij Scriptscre in our i^ntario Schools something 
 
 / 
 

 approved f*i 
 )eUevo thb 
 
 iitations, 
 L an uppor- 
 
 <m1 to be- 
 ovemciit, 
 
 Diilcl ouly be 
 
 nhiister^ 
 
 to under- 
 It will bo 
 other. The 
 
 thinly as 
 at of their 
 
 with whom 
 osentations, 
 oro honestly 
 
 ife-giviug 
 
 ppeal made 
 believe tliat 
 
 bo read 
 
 rief portion 
 
 portions 
 
 (Ire 11 ami 
 
 lied that se- 
 .080U judici 
 
 'hat since 
 :tensively 
 to eveiy 
 3t sought 
 step for 
 
 ool," as if it 
 in the walls 
 
 hs of the 
 
 fliut «<4hoiil<l rotixe the oppo^itiou ot rrotestaiits as if it were a calamity 
 
 iO be d<'pIored ? Is tho form in which the Scriptiift's are bound mnro sacrel an<i 
 important than tlio spiritual truths which enlighten- the raind and purify tho heart 1 
 
 Hoes the ihiirchof KiiKland dishonour tlie Rible when she ioHertn in her 
 
 Prayer- 1 look select lesson h to be read iti tlie pullio soi vices 1 lloe.S til<5 ltil)lc Socit^tV 
 'lislloUOUr tlie Bible when it publiBhes parlHof tho Scriptures in Be;)arate voluroen for 
 
 r asouB of f oonoiuy and convenience ? Were the different bookg of Scripture 
 
 dishonoured, or robbed of their authority and spiritual power, in tho time before thoy 
 wiro all bound together in our modern form, in one volume f Does th^i SBlection of 
 certain Scriptural ]es?ons by the International Suaday-School Com- 
 mittee, »ind thtir publication on Heparate flyleaves, dishonour the .I»ii>le 1 Aro tho 
 Bible truths given in these " Scripture Readings " any less the Word of 
 
 God. "quick and powerful" because they aro published in this form 1 
 
 I am Hitisfied to leave every honest man to answer these questions for himself. 
 
 In view of the facta and arguments which I have hastily named, and othun" which it 
 
 w(uld occupy too much space to state hern, I do not hesitate i;o say th'\t, if the otiiej* 
 
 <^rounds on which it is alle<;ed that ProteHtanisui if^ in danger in this 
 i*rovincc are as weak, as ilinisy, and as fatile as what has beea urged 
 cihout Ihc ** Scrip! ure Keadin«;s^Mn the Public Scho(>3s, tlu^y are not 
 Hkeiy to secure tlie coniidencc of candid! and intelll$<;cnt people. 
 
 E. H. DEWART. 
 
 Toronto, Nov. 25, 1886, 
 
 g objections 
 
 iings. The 
 
 unfairtess. 
 
 f the en- 
 i>ntetiiin$(