REVISED PRAYER BOOK.

Wairarapa Daily Times, 17 December 1927, Page 5

REVISED PRAYER BOOK.

REJECTED BY COMMONS. EXTRAORDINARY SCENES. Press Association-Elect-ic Telegryiti-Copyr'gh'i. LONDON, Thursday. The House of Commons was unusually crowded when the debate on the revised Prayer Book opiened. After a keen discussion the motion for the adoption of the revised Prayer Book was rejected. When the tellers appeared at the clerk’s table, and it was seen that the measure had been rejected, there was a wild outburst of cheering from opponents of the Bill. Some Liberals stood up, shouting and waving OrderPapers, and a Labour member waved a handkerchief. The din was so great that the figures could not be announced for some minutes, when, it was found that there was a majority of 12 in favour of rejection, the voting being: Ayes, 205; noes, 217. Following on the rejection of the measure, extraordinary scenes were witnessed in the lobbies and corridors, members rushing excitedly hither and thither congratulating or condoling one another. The Archbishop of Canterbury, spent with the long period of waiting and watching the progress of the debates, extending over eight hours, was seen in tears going out on the arm of the Archbishop of York. INEFFECTIVELY PUT. LONDON, Friday. It is generally agreed that the case for the Prayer Book was ineffectively put. Mr Bridgeman’s opening speech was dull. He is described as having been like a sleepy country squiro reading a speech prepared for him by a curate. Nor were later advocates much better. It was the opponents of the measure rather than supporters who were stirred to eloquence. Mr Rosslyn Mitchell (Labour, Paisley), speaking with the conviction of an old .Scottish Covenanter, moved the House, as it had very rarely been moved, when he declared: “The Church of England cannot permanently endure if she is half Reformist and half Roman,” and wound up passionately: “I do not want to vote against this Bill, but I can do no other. .So help mo God.”

The words perhaps ready coldly, but coming at the end of a perfervid speech they moved many to tears. Then towards the end of the debate Sir Thomas Inskip reduced the issue, to a narrow limit. “Do members of the House of Commons think this book goes too far towards Romo in its restricted use of the reserved Sacrament?” lie asked, calling on members to defend the ramparts of the national faith. The cheer which followed presaged the measure’s doom. What the result will be no one can at present tell. It is said in the lobbies that if a new Prayer Book were submitted, containing 99 per cent, of the alternative book, it would pass without dissent. The only need is to omit the reservation of the Sacrament, around which has centred all opposition. EFFECT OF THE VOTE, LONDON, Friday. .When the excitement in the House of Commons had subsided the sole topic was the effect of the vote and what would happen next. Supporters and opponents remained long after the House had risen discussing the consequences. Sir Thomas Inskip, K.C., expressed the opinion that the next step would be that the Church Assembly would take the book back and pass the whole of it except the Communion service. “Although there is a good deal of the other par ( t. I dislike, I will personally do all I can to put it through.” Commander Kenworthy, who was teller for the measure, said: “I am not really surprised. The case presented for the book was appalling. There was no one concerned in the presentation who could grip the audience. At -I o’clock in the aiternoon we reckoned on a clear majority of 75. The next step will be disestablishment. It is the finish of the Church as a State Church. ” NEW BOOKS SCRAPPED. (Received Saturday, 11.20 a.m.) LONDON, Friday. The rejection of the prayer-book means the scrapping of 100,000 new books already sold. GRAVITY OF SITUATION. (Received Saturday, 11.20 a.m.) LONDON, Friday. The Archbishop of Canterbury says that everyone will recognise the gravity of the situation in regard to the life, work and worship of the Church of England. - The Archbishops of Canterbury and York will next week consult other bishops, and thereafter issuing a statement to guide the clergy and laity in a time of confusion and anxiety. The Archbishops ask for patience and charity to be exercised and that precipitate words and acts be avoided pending that statement.