THE BISHOPS

Pahiatua Herald, Volume XXXVI, Issue 10954, 1 October 1928, Page 5

THE BISHOPS

NEW PRAYER BOOK THREE-DAY' CONFERENCE. United Press Assn—By Electric Telegraph—Oo p.vr i gli t. LONDON. September 29. At the conclusion of a three-day conference <Y all bishops r.t Lambeth Palace, the Archbishops of York and Canterbury' issued a statement regarding the new Prayer Book, ‘setting forth the principles the Bishops were generally prepared to follow in administrative action necessitated by the acknowledged inadequacy of the existing law and the varieties of usage which already prevail. They wish it clearly to be understood that their conclusions at present are only informal and provisional, and intended for their own guidance in consulting the clergy and laity. Formal action, whether diocesan or general, must be postponed until the Bishops obtain the results ot these consultations, and until the question of fqll official sanction has been considered. During the present emergency, and until further order, the Bishops cannot regard, as inconsistent with loyalty to the Church’s principles the use of such additions and deviations contained in the 1928 Book as fall within the limit of their proposal, but they must regard .as inconsistent with such loyalty any other deviations and additions to the 1662 Book. Accordingly the Bishops, exercising legal and administrative discretion, will endeavour to secure that practices inconsistent with both the 1662 and 1928 Bock shall cease. Further, the Bishops regard it as the governing principle that no departure from the 1662 Book shall be permitted at public services unless th© Parochial Council agree with the iiTcumbent. WAYS TO RESTORE PEACE. The Bishops recommended : “(1) That permission to use ‘the Consecration’ canon contained ill the 1928 Book should only' be> granted provisionally and in exceptional circumstances, subject to such condition* as the Bishop determines. They regard variations and additions of the 'Holy' Communion of the 1662 Book except what the Bishop sanctions, in accordance with -alternative order of the l 1928 Book, as irreguj it.nr.ies which must cease. (2) Rubrics for tbe Reservation will further be considered by the Committee of Bishops. Meanwhile, the Bishops recommend that, while existing permissions for Reservation ior the sick, as contemplated in the alternative order, should continue, "Further permissions should be provisional only.” The statement concludes: “In view of the whole situation the Bishops frankly recognising that they are not without a share of tile blame for the difficulties in recent years, appeal to churchmen, clerical and lay, for loyal co-operation in this fresh endeavour to restore peace, so that the whole body may devote itself more wholeheartedly to it s tasks.” An authority' on church law, writ--1 in tlie Daily Herald, declares that the Archbishops’ decision means the defiance of Parliament’s recusal to legalise the 1928 Book, which was made usable as long as certain Romish practices were stopped. The Daily Telegraph’s ecelesiastiQ'i rtirrespendent, pointing out the virtual authorisation of the 1928 Book asks: “Are the Bishops above the law?” The Archbishop of Canto burv's secretary announces that the Bishop's next conference is expected in December or January.