NEW PRAYER BOOK.

Gisborne Times, Volume LXVI, Issue 10459, 14 December 1927, Page 5

NEW PRAYER BOOK.

DIVISION IN LORDS EXPECTED . TO-.MGHT.

REJECTION YVILL MEAN CRISIS BETWEEN STATE AND CHURCH.

. .LONDON, Dec. 12, -s. The debate on the revised Prater Book, opens in the House of Lords to-morrow, and’a division must be taken onWednesday . ■ evening.- The peers must either approve or reject it. • They l , have no. power to amend tho book. If the Lords reject it there will bo. no debate m the House of Commons. A

The Daily Express says many peers and' commoners are Of the opinion that this is the-most important Parliamentary struggle concerning the doctrinal principles of the Church since the Reformation. Churchmen and non-conlormists belonging to all three parties arid even Cabinet itself is divided on the • subject. If -the, book is rejected a crisis between the church'.and., the'State is inevitable, but fa voidable majorities are: anticipated in both Houses. ,

The Daily Herald says there has been a busy >whipping, up of. peers for the division. There will probably be the. largest, attendance since the .days, when the ’’backwoodsmen” mustered to fight Lloyd George’s people’s Budget,—A.N.Z.C. A.

ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY OPENS DEBATE. NO DEPARTURE FROM PRINCIPLES OF REFORMED CHURCH. ."LONDON, Dec. 12. As a. result of the widespread interest in tho Prayer Book debate, there was a long queue of the public in the outer lobby of the House of Lords, clergymen and women predominating.. The public galleries were crowded, including the portions reserved for peeresses and commoners. Tlie Archbishop of Canterbury, risino- from a full bench of bishops, moved” that;the Prayer Book measure be presented for Royal. Assent. He expressed the opinion that the new book would promote tli'e good order of the church and the welfare of the English people. He did not agree with the view that Parliament’s only duty was to accept the church’s decision m tlie matter. Evbry menibei had an absolute right to vote freely on the question Those submitting the revised book had boon charged with dreadful things, such as being false to their ordination vows, being renegades, and trying to bring back to English homes the antagonism from which the Reformation, set England free. , , . . The •Archbishop oi Canterbury said it was startling to learn that large sums had been 'subscribed in order to spread this sort ol charge, lam absolutely unconscious of any departure front the principles of the Reformed’Church in England to which 1 declared allegiance 53 years ago. t have striven to maintain that ever since. If I. thought the present proposals were calculated to controvert and/impair these principles I should not bo standing here, but T believe nothing; of the kind.

THE FE QUESTION'S. < Tlie House, he said, was entitled to demand an answer to throe questions : “(1) Are there, adequate reasons for desiring the revised Prayer l!00 (V) What are the outstanding differences between the present and the proposed rules of worship t” •■(:)) What stood results are to he expected as a result of the change.-” •V o-reat majority oi the t-huich Assembly, he said, supported the new h °TlVe Bishop of Wells: Eighty per cent, of the members of the diocesan conferences. The Archbishop of Canterbury proceeded: “I hope I have shown conclusively that this is not a plan or phantasv of the bishops. It is the hock of the church drawn up by tho laitv and clergy, and finally approved bv the bishops. 1 maintain that every available means of securing the corporate voice of representatives oi the church has been taken. The new hook, lie added, recognised the mere devotional spirit noticeable in. all ■ churches in the country. Changes' in the order of services m the churches of Scotland were greater than in most churches in England. Pravors for tlie Empire, industrial neace, and the League oi Nations, were an enlargement and enrichment of the present Prayer Book.

HOLY COMMUNION. The- Archbishop of Canterbury, continuing, said lie hoped the House would not exaggerate what the new Holy Communion offered, it was rearranged rather than re-written, i he were a parish priest he would certainly use both. He he keyed that both were perfectly • sound in the faith of the English,, and retormeu in character. Many regarded the restricted use,and. reservation ot consecrated elements for the sick as the crux* of the problem. He -confessed that when he first sat on the committee cn the subject he hoped that it would not. be necessary to sanction Che reservation at all owing to the danger of superstition, but sheer weight of evidence convinced; him o the. need cf something of the kmd, 11 it were regulated to prevent .abuse. They had taken pains by every bit ol language possible to guard against Archbishop continued that he believed it was right to allow; restricted use. In his. deliberate judgment nothing now suggested' in any way changed the doctrinal position' of the church which wanted a book_bclon„ino- not to 1662 ; hut to 1927. Ihe now book would -liberate the church from ;petty strifes, and conduce to fli-lft progress, doing better , noik a Home and-* overseas.-The bishops wore determined, to enforce obedience to it He hoped that their lordships would bid, the church go forward, newlv equipped, disregarding tH clamor of sections on eithei side. . a.n.z.c.a, - ■' .

OPPOSITION TO' ALTERATION (Received Baron Hanworth said he hoped the. House would' ripeqiiiyocally reject.- the motion. He, said the opponents of the. measure; d'esu'ed thy rubric .0 include a permanent safegurd, .binding the Episcopal Bend, l for generations to come. They partiCiilafly ob-jected-to the alternative Communion ferviee; in'which they contended it was Vital to have unify. Discipline could not he enforced when there was an alternative. ..... . . ; Earl Bqaueha,mp said •> it .wqs - the extremists on. both sides who opposed the measure. -They, ought Mo give way ,oil .personal .points, for, the-good of, the which aflplislied nothing, hilt enficbed everything. ; ' The Marquis of Lincolnshire, opposing the motion, declared that the Church was at war witly itself. They saw the. use of vestments', confession, mass., and the reservation of the eminent (which could not be. dissociated from adoration), being practised in the Church of England. t think we;, have a right to dernand . declared’ the Marquis* of Lincolnshire, “that .in matters ecclesiastical,,as,,well as temporal, every Englishman should he made to. obey , the law. We who are,conscientiously opposed' to the measure are standing, shoulder to shoulder. Ivy ,the ,oltL-fniHi and the English traditions for which.

our forefathers fought and _ John Hampden died.” CATHOLIC PETALS’ NEUTRAL . POSITION The Earl of Dembigh said none of the Roman Catholic peers intended to take part. either, in; the debate, or in the division. He could not imagine a more incongruous body than the modern Parliament, comprising varying religions, agnostics and free thinkers, being a&ked practically to lay down the doctrines and rubrics of the Church of England. , R’aron Pliillimore supported the measure, as leading to order through liberty'Without change of doctrine, it. was only at the most, a change in. emphasis. Tlie debate, was adjourned,—A. and N.Z.C.A. . • BISHOP BARNES’ GLOOMY IT) RECAST CHAOS IF NEW BOOK IS APPROVED BISHOPS DO NOT KNOW WHERE, THEY STAND , (Received Dec. 13. 9.30 p.m.) LONDON, Dec. 13. “The' passage ok the. Prayer Book by. Parliament will give implicit approval, to the erroneous doctrines perpetuating discord, and will prevent the church from profiting Ify the next religious revival”, said Bishop/ Barnes at the Birmingham Diocesan Conference., “The Archbishop of York says chaos will.'ensue if the book’ is rejected,, I feel chaos is far more likely in the event of its approval Bticanse of contentions rubrics looser ly .cliafted . Bishop,si are given dangerous unprecedented powers to make subordinate rubrics possessing the force of law ; consequently Bishops do not know where they stand. ‘ Nptnially I' shall try to, continue loy.hi to my duties, but the uncertainty will render it impossible to restore • discipline. If the measure is rejected, the reservation of the Holy Comm.nnion changes could easily be . carried out, enabling the church within thirty, years, to re-state its theology in* harriiony with modern knowledge, -A. and N.Z.O.A. . / \