PRAYER BOOK.

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 18921, 9 February 1927, Page 9

PRAYER BOOK.

DRAFT OF REVISED VERSION. MEETING MODERN CONDITIONS. AIJCHBPiJH.JI' OF CANTKKHriIY'S :-;."[':l':ch. ■:m ctr,:.r. t.itu ».iio,nation c.-<i vnMnr ;a'. s : h'-1'.,:; .;ir> ;;.s cakj.b i.ONDO.V I'-bruaiy 7. T,;c a.o;'. import:;].. even; In :!.,■ i "liurcli of ii: living :m:i:ory ■.o-eiirr-: :-,-d;:y, alien the Cnnvccatioi:- vi:l, : :. ( ;;rjt■■rbury and Yuri; me; a! «Ii u : - ■., ;l,us,-, Westminster, to receive from the archbishops a draft eopy of (he revised Prayer nook,

consisting of nearly -Id ' pago. The Archbishop of i anterijuiy, in presenting the rovi-ion, aid that a" new background had Ijccii given men's minds as the. rc-'ilt of war experience:!. It had become inevitable thai there must he some modification in the direction of enrichment, or elasticity, or some facility for less rigid thought, if they were to gel in touch with a great number of present-day familiar thoughts. Though the new bwik was termed provisional, and was subject to amendment, it was in a larger sense final. He was aware that brethren overseas were watching the deliberations keenly. Perhaps none would regard the nor.' book as an ideal alternative, but he believed that it would meet the requirements of many who felt that their requirements had not been met hitherto. He believed that it would draw closer some who were now disunited, though some would be disappointed. Summarising the proposals, the Archbishop of Canterbury said that the new book was permissive, and would in no sense be forced upon those unwilling to receive it. It was composite, containing the old Prayer Book. The majority of the changes dealt with uncontroversial things, permitting the shortening of the Litany to make use of the Athnnasian Creed, and voluntarily enriching the office for the burial of the dead, and omitting some of the references to the Old Testament patriarchs from the orders for baptism and matrimony. Turning to matters which could not be called uncontroversiah ho said: "On Holy Communion wo adopted your own suggested rubric. In regard to clergy vesture, we are giving sanction to the optional use of an alternative order for Communion. This will no doubt be challenged in some quarters, but we are sanguine that we have found a satisfactory solution of the problem. Regarding the anxious question of reservation of the consecrated elements for the Communion of the Sick, thero is no question that a demand has grown up, which calls for consideration. Accordingly, rubrics provide for the reservation of the elements to be used for the Communion of the Bick and no other purpose. The conditions under which we authorise the reservation aro set forth with unmistakablo clcnrness in the proposed rubric. "Other alterations include tho deletion of the word 'obey' in the bride's responses. Both the bride's and bridegroom's responses will be identical. "Tho now prayers, proposed to meet modern requirements, aro for the peace of the world, for the League of Nations, for election times, for seafarers, and for industrial peace, "Tho Burial Service contains a permissive prayer less stern and gloomy than the resisting committal prayer and referring directly to tho dead person. Sermission is also given, under cortain conditions, to use an extempore prayer. It is an experiment some will deem rash. Its possible danger is undisputable, but we believe that on the whole, it will bo a great gain. "Having summarised what seemed to me the more important proposals, I say emphatically that, in my deliberate judgment, nothing we have suggested makes any change in the doctrinal position of the Church of England. The distinctive basis remains sure, and is enriched by the development of thought, the acquisition of fresh knowledge, and the upgrowth of new theories for the exposition of a Truth manifold, yet one and indestructible. I remind you our proposals are only permisfive. Those who find in the old Prayer Book all they desire, can rest content in those pastures still." Concluding, the Archbishop of Canterbury pointed out that to-day was the twenty-fifth anniversary of his Archbishopric. The Archbishop of York said: "The bishops recommend the issue of a composite book, in which the existing book of Common Prayer and the permitted additions, alterations, and alternatives be placed side by side. Only in one small respect has the position of tho Prayer Book been modified, namelp, the new rubrics. These are neither numerous nor of great importance. Wo have sought, however imperfectly, to make tho Prayer Book as inclusive as the Church. Our desiro has been to obtain, not a compromise for tho sake of peace, but rather comprehension for the «ake of truthfulness and richness of the one fellowship of Faith and Life." The Bishop of Birmingham has issued a statement declaring: "I cordiallv support the majority of the proposals, which are desirablo, as two and a half centuries have passed since the revision of the Prayer Book. I cannot agree with all unfortunately. Such a variety in worship is now permitted that a visitor to a strango church might not be able to follow the service. Extempore praver may lead to invocation of tho saints. Tho new consecration praver brings the Communion service nearer the Roman Mass and, although it is difficult to derive the doctrine of Transubstantiation therefrom, the dexterity of thiologkal casuists may misinterpret the innocent formula?." ~ .... , ~ He suggests the possibility of the consecrated elements being placed on a "tabernacle," before which the simple people are taught to pray, and states: "Thus the whole cult of Transubstantiation can be started with the apparent consent of the Church. I urge the Church to adopt the non-contentious croposals and to postpone the-new consecration prayer and reservation ot the Sacrament for a generation, when the demand for them may have disappeared."

DEEP INTEREST AROUSED. PRESS NOT ENTHUSIASTIC. (ACBTBAUAS AK> V.Z. CIBLI ASSOCUTIOjr.) (Received February Bth, 7.35 p.m.) LONDON, February 8. The deep interest in the revision of the Prayer Book, is shown in the prominence with which it is displayed in

both the evening and morning newspapers. The "Daily Telegraph," besides an editorial, devotes sixteen columns to it, netting out lengthy passages in parallel colun-ns. Tho book will bo available to tl-.e pubiic --his morning, m pay.i?r covers at 2s 6d.

"'he next stttge is t.i.*t the alterations will ho submitted to the (."ciivocation njfain on February 22ud, which will return them to the Bishops for final revision on March 2nd, and they will finally bo presented to the Convocation on Marcli 29th, to tho Church Assembly on July 4th. Tho alterations will be submitted to Parliament in autumn.

The "Morning Post" says editorially: "We have reluctantly to confess that the Archbishops of Canterbury and York avoid the main issue, which is: Why alter the Book of Common Prayer at aIH Tho inspired wisdom of the original framers insisted upon a uniform use. The proposals for revision are particularly unfortunate at a time when the need of the laity is for definite and authoritative guidance. The revised Prayer Book must lead to endless confusion, which is not mended by the suggestion that a parochial Church Council should decide which usage is to be adopted. We cannot believe that either Church or Parliament will accept the revision." The "Daily Telegraph" says: "It must bo borne in mind that the now book is not offered as likely for a moment to satisfy complctoly any single section of churchmen. It is submitted as the onlv kind of alternative bock for which the rulers of the Church at the present juncture can anticipate general acceptance. It has, at least, the merit that it is not a book of any party in the Church. Probably it is not the ideal of any single person, and should it receive legal sanction, it will yet be no more than a permissible alternative to the book of 1662. It will be on probation long after it has received the imprimatur of Church and State.