PRAYER BOOK REVISION.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19529, 11 July 1925, Page 5

PRAYER BOOK REVISION.

movement now universal. THE POSITION IN ENGLAND PARLIAMENT TO DECIDE. Tho probabilities of an early revision of the Prayer Book wore discussed at Auckland recently bv the Very Rev, Dr E. A. Burroughs. Doan of Bristol, who has completed a short tour of New Zealand aftei attending the Australian Congress of the Anglican Church. As one of the younger dignitaries of tho parent church, his sympathies are patently with those who are socking to bring the outward forms of church doctrine into keeping with a changing world, and he evinces a keen interest in the rapidly-maturing movement in England for Prayer Book revision. Dean Burroughs was anxious to dispose of the suspicion that seemingly had a hold in tho minds of a section of the clergy and laity that the demand for a revision of certain sendees amounts to a sort of conspiracy to rob the Church of the Prayer Book. It is nothing of the sort, he said. The practical intention is a provide a service which will make worship more of a reality for tho twentieth century. “That was, and still is,” he said, “the original idea of the Prayer Book revision, and the wl\ole of this battle of different coloured books has grown later.” The actual position in the Home Church regarding revision was outlined by him in brief form. Tho House of Clergy and tho House of Laity had expended an enormous amount of time and energy in going into details, and the revised draft of the original Prayer Book revision measure was now ready to go before the House of Bishops. The latter had the responsibility of presenting the final edition of the measure to the whole of the Church Assembly, which could cither accept it or reject it, but could not amend it.

ALTERNATIVE COMMUNION OFFICE. If tho final version is accepted, it will go before Parliament, and what will happen there will largely depend on the degree of ■ unanimity with which the assembly accepts what tho bishops propose, if tho assembly rejects the measure, the whole thing will fail to the ground, while acceptance by a narrow majority will certainly moan rejection by tho House of Commons, especially if tho moro controversial innovations proposed are included. “My own opinion,” said Doan Burroughs, “is that tho bishops will seo tho wisdom of cutting tho measure in two and jeserv-ng tho proposed alternative communion office until a later date. In this way the less controversial portions of the now alternative book would come into currency pretty quickly, and if they commended themselves generally it would ease tho passage of tho rest of the measure later. No one, said the dean, could cla’m that there was any pressing demand for a revised communion office from any side except that of tho Anglo-Cat holies, while a good many who might bo called moderate Catholics, who would like a certain amount of revision in this service, would, ho believed, in face ox tho far moro ambitious demands made by the extremor section, agree now that it would lie well to content thornselves with what they had, rather than perpetuate a controversy and perhaps even cause a schism.

DANGER OF ADVERSE NOTE. “It cannot bo too often repeated,” ho added, “that what is called tho revision of tho Prayer Book ought rather to bo the piovision of a permissive alternative to the Uook of Common Prayor.’ Tho latter will remain in fore© and will ho tho standard by which any now book must be interpreted. The now book need not be used in any parish, and cannot bo used against tho wishes of any parochial church council, unless, after appeal to the bishop, he decides against it. So really tho present proposals are far less sweeping and much more tentative than perhaps they sound. Doan Burroughs attributed dire results to an adverse vote in tho House of Commons. “The danger,” ho said, “of failing to carry tho measure in any form, after all those years of labour upon it, is that it would discredit the Church of England m the eyes of the whole world. It is universally agreed that some chances in our present service—for instance," the matter of the baptism of infants and holy nrntnmqnv—are imperative if the Prayer Book is to meet the needs of to-day, and it would bo a disgrace to have to confess that after 20 years wo could not agree upon any changes at nil. Of that disaster, however, I think there is no likelihood at all.