THE PRAYER BOOK

Evening Star, Issue 19892, 14 June 1928, Page 9

THE PRAYER BOOK

MEASURE BEFORE COMMONS INTRODUCED BY SOUCiTCMcNERAf ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST. (British Official Wireless.) Preis Association—By Telegraph—Copyright. RUGBY, June 13. (Received June 14, at 11.30 ».m.) The galleries of the House of Commons were crowded to-day, when Sir ,Boyd Merriman (Solicitor-General) introduced the revised Prayer Book measure The Archbishops of Canterbury and York and several bishops were in tho peers’ gallery. Sir Boyd Merriman emphasised that the two vital matters in rq*ard to the revised Prayer Book were discipline in the church and the underlying doctrines of the new book. He declared that it was possible to yive undue weight to certain extravagances within the Church of England in proportion to hto general body of loyal servants faithfully doing their duty. The Prayer Book was not designrd to legalise these illegalities. fn regard to church discipline, Sir Boyd Merriman asked what chance would there be, if the measure were rejected, of retaining the loyal clergy, who had already been adopting the ceremonies which were pongitted in tho book and which wore so permitted with the knowledge that bohind them was the'overwhelming majority of the bishops and of the clergy; and if the measure were rejected bow could the bishops possibly demand that those who were exceeding tho proposed limits should come within those limits. Ha submitted that on the ground of the restoration of discipline th«:e was an overwhelming case for the passing of this measure. Ho further contended that the book maintained #io Protestant character of tho Chureh of England, and that the additions or amendments which had been instituted made that position abundantly char. In defending the reservation of the Sacrament Sir Boyd Meiriman reminded tho House of those padres to whom the Army owed so much during the war—those padres who had never practised reservation before. The reserved Sacrament had been consecrated in a battery or a. battalion headquarters and carried by the padres under their gas helmets into the front-line trenches or the gun pits, and there administered to men who were in greater peril than those who wero iu hospital. “ Are these men lightly going to give up a practice which lias such sacred associations for them and of which they have realised the spiritual benefit?” he concluded.

Sir Samuel Huberts (Conservative), who opposed the motion, arjjued that tho new Prayer Poole would put back any chance of reunion with ♦he great Nonconformist churches of the country. Ho declared that tho belief ia the real presence, which was indicated in the hook, was not according to the Protestant religion. Commander Kenworthy (Labour) said that £he Church of England was a Catholic as well as a Protestant church, and it had to he a comprehensive church and to open its iyms and receive all those brethren and piiests who had accepted this compromise tor the sake of peace and ior the sake of the ultimate peace whic would enable the church to get on with its work, social as well as religious. The compromise was justified. SPEAKERS’ REMARKS AMPli* " El El). LONDON, Jun« 15. (Received June M, at 1.5 a.m.) There was an electric atmosphere in the House of Commons during the Prayer Book debate. Many Commoner s were compelled to seek scats in tho side galleries. Members have been bombarded with letters, post cards, and petitions to the last moment, a large proportion being framed on models supplied by societies. Sir Boyd Mcrrimau introduced the measure in an hour’s speech. He said that he did nob regret the previous rejection, which had been recognised by Parliament as an explosion of indignation by laity against tho more lawless extravagances ot certain elcig.N, and the failure in certain quarters to restrain those extravagances.

Sir Boyd Mcrriman said that side by side with the doctors of the Church of England whereby the rite of communion was a commemoration of the sacrifice on the Cross, was another which those of the Church of England might hold as members ol the Holy Catholic Church, which was not tlip Roman Catholic Church at all. There was a perfectly legitimate desire to use all that was pcrmissablo in the traditional liturgy of the church. Sir Samuel Roberts, in opposing the measure, said that the hook set up two standards of doctrine. Everyone in the church would have to be labelled a* one who believed in the new some® or the old. The new book type of man would shine in the light of episcopal blessings, but the others would not. Tiip new Prayer Book was going to be U great deterrent to young evangelical*, joining the church. . Commander Ivenwortliy said if one thought only of the outward forms, and was prepared to damn man because he preferred a clergyman to wear a chasuble, the changes iu the Prayer Book were great, hut if one kept one’s eyes upon the goal of all religion the changes were small. There was no reason for rejecting the book. Mr J. H. Hayes tilth.) said that the decision of the House of Commons in December found a warm endorsement in all sections of the community. He could find nothing but whole-hearted opposition to the measure. There was a feeling of amazement when it was discovered how much the representatives of the Church of England were prepared to surrender at Maliues. Mr Rosslyn Mitchell (Lab.) said this measure was admittedly . before ' the ' House because of lawlessness and chaoe in the Church of England. As the Book gave no fresh powers, how could it he argued that the bishops would in future curb lawlessness. The bishops continued to appoint to livings me# whose services could bo forecasted. The only reason people acquiesced in the Church of England was because its doctrine and outlook remained fundamentally Protestant. The new Book was an outward sign of an inward movement to overthrow Protestantism in England. Cardinal Manning said once; “ Protestantism conquered in, England is conquered in the whole world.”— Australian Press-United Service —*