NEW PRAYER BOOK

Waiapu Church Gazette, Volume 25, Issue 11, 1 November 1935, Page 8

NEW PRAYER BOOK

At the Synod Session, Mr. A. Andrews moved that it be a recommendation to Synod to authorise the 1928 Prayer Book for use throughout the Church of England m New Zealand. The motion was seconded by Mr. C. Downard. The mover argued that the Prayer Book revision was m keeping with the progress of thought m education, science, etc. He said that the new Prayer Book had the approval of the highest Church dignitaries m England, and had been passed by both Convocations of Canterbury and York, and by the House of Lords, only to be rejected by the House of Commons. After further amendments the Prayer Book was again rejected by the Commons. The speaker had a profound respect for the Mother of Parliaments, but

considered that its conglomerate religious nature rendered it unfit to determine what . our liturgy should be. The new book contained all the Book of Common Prayer, and m addition many other services of very great beauty and value. There was a grow^ ing desire for the universal use of the Revised Prayer Book, and the permissive use m this diocese was much appreciated. Mr. Andrews hoped that Synod would find nothing repugnant to their faith m the book and would support his resolution, as he felt sure that it would be of great help to Church people. SORRY TO OPPPOSE MOTION Mr. A. B. Harper asked if the mover wanted the whole of the Revised Prayer Book put into use. The mover replied that his motion meant the book as it stands. Mr. Harper said that he was sorry to have 'to oppose the motion, as he felt that there were m it departures from the standard doctrines of our Church. He admitted that a layman was at a disadvantage m discussing this highly controversial subject. To authorise the use of the alternative Communion service would be to override the judgment of many of those competent to decide its orthodoxy or otherwise. He appealed for a use of the prayers of the new book, but urged that the Communion service of the old book should be retained. The laity would be led, but not driven, to a use of it, therefore let the permissive use be continued. Archdeacon Butterfield denied that the Revised Book contained any change of doctrine m the Communion service. The Book of Common Prayer was really more High Church than the new. The new book followed the Eastern rather than the Roman view. He traced the distinction at some length. Mr. W- J. Pallott opposed the resolution on the ground that the R.P.B. supported the reservation of the Sacrament. BITTER CONTROVERSY FORGOTTEN Mr. H. Holderness suggested that the mover and seconder had forgotten the bitter controversy aroused m the Church and Parliament by the introduction of this book. He held that this book was repugnant to their faith and beliefs. They had only agreed to