THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19234, 25 January 1926, Page 7

THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.

Sir,—ln the Herald of January 21 is a letter from Mr. N. E. Burton which. I think, needs answering. Ho states, " Most of the English bishops permit reservation for the communion of tho sick and this practice has the consent of the Church Assembly. It will probably bo provided for in tho New Prayer Book," etc. Now what some bishops may permit does not mean that they do so rightly for it is diametrically opposed tho Article surix., which even' bishop" is bound to §ee is obeyed. ?>o bishop cari do anything, nor can ho allow scything to bo done, that is not provided for in that Prayer Book, far less can ha condone nny such practice. I have with me a late authority (Albert Mitchell) on the subject and he writes as follows: "Of late years it has been asserted that the practice of reservation is allowable under the existing Prayer Book. This point was the subject of an exhaustive hearing before the two Arcl)bishops of Canterbury and York (Drs. Temple and Maclagan) in the year 1899 and reference may bo had to the long and full speech of Sir Lewis Dibdin, which covers tho whole of the post Reformation history. As a result, the two archolshops gave their opinion on May 1, 1900. Tho former said " The Church of England dots not at present allow reservation in any form." Tho latter: " That tho practice of reservation has no sanction from the Church of England at the present time. That it was deliberately abandoned at the time of the Reformation." The Archbishop of Canterbury said more to the effect that the minister " Has no right to interpolate into the Prayer Book what the service negatively, and the .Article explicitly, condemns." It must be kept in mind that any such change as Mr. Burton thinks may be effected by the Church Assembly has no authority until it has passed through the Houses of Parliament, then and only then, has it " I'Wmj authority." Just a few lines on "A.E.C s letter on spiritual healing, I would remark that to eliminate the miraculous from the New Testament would completely destroy its whole value. Tide, l. Cot "rv 12 so. The Apostles Creed is based on'the miraculous. Tho miracn cms is tho Christian's sheet anchor, and U a man does not believe m . denies the Christian fai th and can have no hope in the and faith is not a natural proda.t, a gift from God (Ep^n., A