NEW PRAYER BOOK

Hokitika Guardian, 8 July 1927, Page 1

NEW PRAYER BOOK

(Australian & X.Z. Cable Association.) LONDON. July 7. Speaking at the Assembly on tlie new Player Book, the Bishop of Norwich said be regretted that the discussion seemed to have become one of a vote of confidence in the Bishops. This was bringing a matter of Heaven down to earth. It bad cost him much to differ from the Bishops, but the whole Book was unwise- at this time The revision rested upon Episcopal inconsistencies. There was no sign that the- Bishops would not cliango their minds again.

Sir T. Tusk ip.. K.C.. M.P. closed tbe debate for the opposition. Ho said that it. would he inadvisable, as some suggested, to brush the whole question of revision aside in a spirit of breezy optimism, as giving a. fresh start to the Church. Ho referred to the changes of opinion which have taken place among the Bishops. He declared that the Bishop of Durham had gone as near as a Bishop could to condemning to the Protestant underworld those opposing the revision proposals. The Bishop of Durham immediately sprang to his feet. He said—“l carefull)' refrained in that observation from giving any names.”

Sir T. Inskip: “As a lawyer, I prefer particularities when dealing with the Church.” After a painful pause, Sir T. Inski]) added—“lt would be unworthy of a loyal son of the Church to adopt the attitude of saying ‘As t.he Bishops have taken tlie wrong road, let them tread it to the end.’ ” Ho ihad been grateful, be said, for tlie fellowship of some of the AngloCatholics but in the Church on earth there was a. limit to the practices permitted within its hounds.

The Ardhbishop of York in dosing the debate for the niiprovnlists, said there was' no change of doctrine. There was a cihange of emphasis in the new Book. This change in nowise violated the fundamental basis of the Book of Common Prayer. The changes made were natural and inevitable. They were a sign of progress of mind and of thought. lie humbly suggested to (lie laity that some very special attention should be given to the judgment of the Bishops, whose Consecration commissioned them, as the guardians of the Church's doctrine and faith, lie concluded amid a storm ol applause. Thereupon tile Archbishop of Canterbury put the motion saying that never before lmd they divided on such

a momentous issue. Tile voting resulted: - ■ HOUSE OF BU : HOI'S. For the Hook 7! Agai’nst lIOFSE OF CLERGY. bW , Against HOUSE OF LAITY. For ••• 2W Against The Archbishop of Canterburv said that i bis was no revision tor nny proclamat ion of victory or of defeat. •• We have joined in a great enterprise in trying to arrive at a sat istaetory solution of a. solemn question." The new Prayer Book next goes to the House of Commons to he considered by a Joint Ecclesiastical Committee rif both Houses, and then will go before both Houses as a Bill.