PRAYER BOOK REVISION,

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 864, 9 July 1910, Page 11

PRAYER BOOK REVISION,

AN INTERESTING DISCUSSION. .' At tho recent meeting of the London Diocesan Conference, an interesting discussion took place on "Elasticity in Public Worship."

The Rev. W. S. Swayne 'moved:— "That this conference, recognising that objections havo 'been raised to any alteration of tho text of tho Book of Common Prayer, is of opinion that tho cause of a reasonablo revision would bo best served, if permissible additions and . deviations, including a rearrange-' ment of tho Lectionary and' Psalter, wero 'to bo scheduled in the form of an appendix." Mr. Swayne stated that the policy of doing nothing was tho most dangerous one that could be pursued. Matters had changed very much in the last live or six years, and especially since the Royal Commission on Ecclesiastical Discipline had issued its report. If the Church refused to take action in order to bring its laws' and formularies into harmony with the changed needs and conditions of our day, it was to he feared that somo other authority might step in and do.it over their heads. They had precedents for their guidance in what had been done by' the American and Scottish Episcopal Churches. Such enrichments and deviations as wero decided upon would at first be bound ■ up with the Prayer Book' as an appendix, and in course of time ,would ultimately bo incorporated', if found suitable. The llev. J. E. Watts-Ditchfield, in seconding tho resolution, said he believed a living Church ought to bo ablo to adapt itself, from timo to time, to the requirements of its people. Tho Bishop should bo enabled to speak'with increased authority, and if coupled with this there were established somo species of ecclesiastical courts which would command tho respect of all classes of Churchmen, it would be well, not. only for the Church, but for tho nation. They did not want any. revision that would narrow down tho comprehensiveness of the Church of England. Ho believed that this question was going- to be settled, not by extremists on either side, but by the great central body of Church feeling.

Tlie Rev. Dr.' H. Barnes (Cambridge; regarded the proposal contained in, tho resolution as 0110 that jobbed the question of more than half its terrors. No sudden calamity could come upon them if they followed along the lines suggested.

The Rev. Dr. A. W. Robinson said he believed there was amongst them a great deal of real unity with regard to this difficult question.' Tho proposal

submitted in tho resolution was intended to make for peaco and. progress.

Mr. Bernard Gibson pointed out .that there was no need to - obtain Parliamentary sanction for a revision of the lectionary. If they only set about doing this it would bo a great step forward.

Prebendary -Wcbb-Pcploe said at present all of them were law breakers, either by omission or commission, and one thing which especially pained him was that ho so seldom heard tho long exhortation to Holy Communion read in any, church.

Mr. Howard Candler urged tlio necessity for revision of tho lectionary and tho Psalter, and the. retention of tho Athanasian Creed in the Prayer Book as a valuable document, while getting rid of it in public worship. Canon Newbolt said ho entirely disagreed with everything said by the last speaker concerning the Athanasian Creed. He could not help feeling that they were at present in one of. those periods of experiment when all sort® of now problems liad to bo faced, and to underta.ko tlio alteration'of tlio Prayer Book at such a. time seemed to him a step fraught with extremo, danger. Som& new forms of service wcro much wanted indeed—as, for. instance, services for the consecration of churches or of burial .grounds—and such might very well fee placed in an appendix to tho Prayer Book; but if they were to •have such an appendix, it must be with the proviso that the Prayer Book itself should not be kept locked up as in a muscuni, but used exactly as'it stood, and those who wanted additions and enrichments "might take them from tho appendix and use-them by way of additional services. He moved that the .word '.'deviations" be omitted.from the motion. , ,

On .a. division. Canon Newbolt's amendment was defeated, the numbers being 106 for and 142 against. The resolution was then put and carried by. 155 against 78.