THE PRAYER BOOK

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLVIII, Issue 165, 12 June 1928, Page 7

THE PRAYER BOOK

INTEREST IN PARLIAMENT. GRAVE DECISION TO BE AIADE. FORCES BEING AIARSHALLED. (United Press Association —By Electric Te 1 egra ph—Copy right). (Australian Press Association). LONDON, June 11. Interest in the Prayer Book measure overshadows everything else in Parliament during the coming week. The House of Commons at 11 o clock on Thursday night, following on a two days’ debate, will take a decision deciding the Church of England issue, which the Bishop of AVinchester describes as “the gravest in three centuries.” , Sir William Jovnson-llicks_ and Sir Thomas Inskip are marshalling their forces and speakers, against the measure. The speakers includo Air Lloyd George. Forty members are ready to speak in favour of the measure, including Air Baldwin, Sir Robert Horne anu the Duchess of Athol!. Canon Donaldson, of AVestminster, struck a new note during the weekend, appealing to the Labour Party to support the bill, on the ground that it cannot consistently demand freedom for Trades Unions if it denies freedom to the Church.

Canon Donaldson expresses the opinion that rejection of the measure will result in an ecclesiastical controversy occupying so much attention that social reform will be retarded for a generation. Prayers for the rejection of the measure were offered in many nonconformist churches on Sunday. Tho Primitive Methodist Conference passed a resolution appealing to Parliament to reject the measure. Lobbyists agree that the decision either way will be marrow.

ALTER NATIVE AIEASUR E

HOAIE SECRETARY’S EX PLAN A-

TION

(British Official AYireless). RUGBY. June 9

A new and important development in the Prayer Book controversy was announced last night by Sir William Joynson-Hieks—the preparation of an alternative measure for consideration if the measure passed by the Church Assembly’ and embodying the Bishops’ revised proposals should be rejected by Parliament next week. The Home Stcretary. who is president of the National Church League, and is one of the leaders of the opposition to the Bishops’ proposals, stated that a committee of competent men, who were already engaged in the task, would produce a book to cover noncontentious enrichments and variations which were found in the “Deposited Book” and which there was reason to believe were generally acceptable. It was only contentious matter relating to Holy Communion upon which difference existed. It should only be necessary, therefore, to take out- of the Prayer Book the contentious parts to enable a common -agreement to be reached. Such a new Prayer Book aneasure would of course have to be sponsored, through the Church Asembly. Sir AA illiana Joynson-Hicks believed that if th© Archbishops and Bishops should agree upon a scheme of this kind, the matter would go through by general consent, and thus an end be put to the controversy.'