THE PRAYER BOOK CRISIS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXV, Issue 19859, 1 February 1928, Page 8

THE PRAYER BOOK CRISIS.

REJECTION BY COMMONS. REMARKABLE SCENES. EMOTION AND ELOQUENCE. ADHERENTS WON AND LOST. The rejection of the new Church of England Prayer Book by the House of Commons on December 15 was attended, as indicated by the cablegrams published at the time, by remarkable scenes of tense emotion and extraordinary excitement. The House of Commons, says a London paper, assembled in an atmosphere more sensational than it has known since the Great War. A vital question was debated, for once purely on conscience. All political ties were snapped, colleague opposed colleague, and party boundaries were rooted up. Religion found partisans in political foes. It was still moro remarkable that free sentiment swept through the assembly. Oratory was not set to its usual forlorn test of embellishing inevitable decisions. Rhetoric made and unmade adherents to the cause. The public galleries and side galleries were packed. A bent and white-haired figure, the Archbishop of Canterbury, sat by himself over the clock in the peers' gallery, eagerly sensing the clash of sentiment beneath him. Woman Sobs in the Galleiy. Avi unusual depth of omotiovi stirred the House throughout the debate, Serious and sombre faces were like a mantle of contemplation around each speaker. A woman was heard to sob in the public gallery, where many persons, without disguise, wiped moist eyes. Mr. Bridgeman, First Lord of the Admiralty—" the man in the pew "he described himself in this debate—led the supporters of the measure. The Prime Minister, at his right, was another supporter. A formidable trio of opponents sat near—Sir William Joynson-Hicks, tho Homei Secretary, who was the chief spokesman, with Sir Thoma3 Inskip and Sir Douglas Hogg, the two law officers of the Crown, ready to run errands i.a order to bring ammunition for his speech and to prompt their more militant colleague with further ideas. Mr. Bridgeman announced himself as one whoai long thought had converted from, opposition to support. He fell out, pointedly, with the Home Secretary, saying almost at the outset that the ArchBishop of Canterbury's opinion mast carry greater weight than—he turned to look lor Sir Wiliiam, and, facing him completed his sentence dramatically with the word i' his." Sir William looked embarrassed. Home Secretary's Speech. A hush fell as the Home Secretary rose. The debate in a momsnfc became a duel between him and the silent witness in the gallery. Sir William agreed that he had the Archbishop of Canterbury against him, but he said he found conscientious support in the Bishop of Worcester and Lord Parmoor. "Reservation of the Sacrament should not be permitted by the Church," he thundered. "It is being done every day. How can the bishops possibly deal with an offence at which they have connived for so many years?" " Why," demanded Sir William, " appoint men guilty of practices, not merely illegal, but contrary to the Church's doctrines ? The Bishop of London has filled his diocese with such clergymen. How ca.a the bishops turn round in a fortnight and sajr to them: 'You must give up the practices which wc have tolerated so long?" The Archb?shop of Canterbury declared hi 1903 that tolerance had passed its limits, and that the sands had run cut. Ths sands are still running out to-day, and nothing has been done." Canon Bullock Webster, Sir William continued after his sensational protest at St. Paul's Cathedral, wcDt to his church and conducted an illegal service. He quoted a list of the services conducted recently in that church—Mass. Mass for* 1 the Departed, Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Marv and Adoration of the Blessed Virgin. "The patron of that, church," he j said, "is the Lord Archbishop of Canter-1 bury. The man who appoints to this living is the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury." Labour Member's Stirring Speech. For a moment the debate did not grip members, bat they came crowding in again as Mr. Rosslyn Mitchell (Labour member for Paisley)* displayed, as he has displayed before, his immense emotional powers The Daily Express says: "He is one of tho smallest figures in the House, but he towers in the imagination as his Scottish fervour transfigures him. A moro stirring and impassioned outburst has rarely been heard in the four walls of Westminster. His neat figure seemed to vibrate wi ; ;h his own eloquence. The House hung on his voice as he raised it in denunciation or dropped it to trembling appeal. He seemed to recreate the presence of a John Knox. Mr. Mitchell's words hissed as he described with Presbyterian horror the observance of Mass—a belief that human materials of bread and wine could recreate in themselves the biood and flesh of the Saviour. "That is transsubstantiation," he cried; "that is the deciding line between the Church of Rome and the Church of England. If the Church of England thinks that"—there waa a loathing accent on "that"—let her have it, and God be with her. But if she does not want it she cannot pass this book. "The Church of England cannot permanently endure if half Reformist and half Roman. If the Church so chooses, I, for one, convinced in my Protestantism, thanking God from my heart, can do nothing but vote against this bill." _ He paused and dropped his voice to a whisper. "I do not want to do it," he added in a low, but intense tone, "but I can do no other. So help pie God." A new personality was next revealed to the House. Lady Iveagh made her maiden ispeech. Such a speech is an ordeal at any time. To deliver it in support of the measure and in face of the tide 1 i,tien running at the full against it wasS doubly courageous. Her first words j stayed the beginning of a movement of members from the House. *' Christian unity of spirit is of more importance than some of the theological divergencies so ably put before the House," she said. "I ask the House to do nothing to hamper the bishops in their task of making the Church a real living entity oi what I believe to be a deeply religious nation." Mr. Slid win's Powerful Plea. Mr. Baldwin's speech was a powerful plea for union. "There has always existed a double stream of opinion in the Church on the nature of the sacrament," he observed. "Both schools have produced saints and scholars. It will be a tragic day for this country if the Church of England is ever so narrowed that these two Btreams cannot flow side by side." "The Church of England has come to us with every testimony open to her and ■with her leaders pledged to remedy disorders whii:h have been the despair of Christians of all denominations," said the Prime Mirister. "Is the House of Com-1 mons going to say, 'We will not trust you ? We told you to set your house in order, and we don't believe you.' " This passage, in the most extraordinarily open of all debates won the deep applause of profound conviction. "The glory of our Church is its comprehensiveness." Mr. Baldwin concluded -with solemn emphasis. "Which vote in my opinion will do most to help the religious life of the nation ? I have decided clearly and without hesitation in my conscience that the answer is to vote for the measure. bill was rejected by 247 votes to