NEW PRAYER BOOK

Hawera Star, Volume XLVII, 15 June 1928, Page 5

NEW PRAYER BOOK

DECIDING ITS FATE. DEBATE IN’ THE COMMONS. FADING GRAVE ISSUES. . i..it'd Press Association —By Electric Tel-g.u; Copyright.} J (Australian Press Association.) LONDON, June 13. Til© debate on the Prayer Look measure was- continued m the House ot Commons. to-day. 'l'll© House was well filled and the galleries were- uncanttortaibdy crowded. Sijpieeoh.es were marked by high seriousness ami careful preparation. Many observers express the opinion that so lar there dis no sign oh the second version of the’revised Prayer Look being regarded in a more, davoucable light than the first. Loth sides are holding their leading speakers in reserve for Thursdaywhen a division w-iill be taken. It is generally agreed that the fate ot the book really rests on the hundred olid members who abstained from voting in December. Major J. D. Birchall, continuing the debate, claimed that th© measure was supported by the majority of laymen of the Church of England (cries of “No!”). They believed that unless changes were made they would not have peace and happiness. If only the Ahglo-Qatholics would'drop the use ol th© word “nuaiss” it would be a gesture and go a long way towards preventing misunderstanding. Many people .were oiplposjlng th© measure through groundless fears. . Lady Iveagh asked members to- get back to realities. The young people ot the country were looking to religion for guidance. As the result of this controversy the young would turn away disappointed and say religion was only a • wrangle over formalities. What mattered, she said, was the spreading of the Kingdom of God upon, the earth. iSlr A. B. Boyd-Clanpenter said if the measure were passed it would cut oft from the church many earnest men, and there would be a fan greater demand for dis-establishment. He asked if the promoters of the book could not withdraw from the position they had. taken oyer the sacrament in attempting to define the indefinable. Sir W. Greaves-Lord said he belong-, cd to neither af the extreme schools of “the Church of England. The Prayer Book had served the purposes of centuries so completely that anyone who laid hands on that .book was undertaking a task fraught with the. greatest danger. It was clear a revision had done nothing to meet the objections voiced in December. The Duchess of Atbolil wished to approach the question from a differentangle. Believing Scotland could give definite guidance in the matter, she asked the Scottish members to recall their own national church and her great freedom, and to think twice before they made it .impossible for the national Chruroh of England to obtain the liberty the Church of Scotland enjoyed. GAINS OF DEFORMATION. There was no attempt- to go back upon the .priceless gains of the 'Reformation, which were the open Bible, the English Prayer Look and audible service, she said. Aloreover that dootiin© was safeguarded by the prayer after the administration of the Clements. Dispassionate examination -showed that the Church did ii.ot accept th© doctrine of carnal presence. With these safeguards what did vestment or whether the elements were reserved in the form of simple bread and water. matter ? Mr H. Snell intruded into the debate only to .state the attitude of the unchurched multitude who did not belong to church pr chapel, wlho were neither mystics nor rationalists, but who had deep reverence for their spiritual heritage. The people looked to the House of Commons to preserve the religious liberties their fathers had won. It the Clhurahi of England were a free body it Would have the right to have religion as it pleased ; but it was not a free body, and the Prayer Book was in the nature of U State document. He resented the language with which Tnenibers of the church had thought right to address the House of Commons. Because of the rejection in December they called them “mob atheists, Communists, Unitarians and Agnostics.” Such language had not been heard since the days of Wolsey. The time might come when it would be necessary to tell such people that the State was going to- be masters of the country. Air C. G. Ammon asked the House to pass the measure. There must be a place for revision of a book which had been in existence four hundred years, he said. Parliamentary sketch writers Agree tliia-t the first day of the debate did not reach tlhe heights of the memorable debate of December. LONDON, June 13. Air. E. Rosslyn Mitchell said that this measure was admittedly before- the House because of the lawlessness and chaos in the Church of England. As the b-ook gave no fresh powers, how could it he argued that the bishops would in future curb lawlessness. The bishops continued 1 to encourage the practices which they deplored, and. continued to appoint to livings men whose services could be forecasted. The only reason people acquiesced in the Church of England was because- the doctrine and- outlook remainded fundamentally Protest an t. The new book was an outward- sign of an inward movement- to overthrow Protestantism in England, and Cardinal Alanning said, once: “Protestantism conquered in England is conquered- in the whole world.”