THE PRAYER BOOK.

Hokitika Guardian, 16 June 1928, Page 2

THE PRAYER BOOK.

Australian Press Assn.—United Service

LONDON, June 14.

Hon W. Churchill said a great re-' ligious community was asked by recognised means to corporate in an expression for wider interpretation of t'lieir freedom ,in spiritual matters. The onus of proof law with those who invited the House to refuse. The primary presumption must obviously ibe against a denial of liberties which were lawfully demanded as a member of Parliament. He felt bound to accept the corporate expression of which the church, as representing the main mind of the church and especially of those responsible for carrying on its future life. Personally he could not sec overwhelming objections against the grant of wider- religious liberty. Parliament liad to use constitutional rights with tolerance and moderation. ’Hie rejection of the measure would inaugurate a period of chaos which would only be corrected by disestablishment. Cries of “No,”. inducing Mr Churchill to shrug his shoulders and remark, “Of course nobody will agr'ee with anybody.” (Ixrud laughter). I personally did not wish the mitred front of one of the great remaining Protestant churches of Europe to be irretrievably broken .into discordant fragments. Mr Barr retold the story of Crnnnier’s marvtrdom and concluded: “I see the burning hand of Cranmer in the Lambert flame becoming a compelling irresistible gesture to this house.” Mr Lansbury did not find justification for the assumption that there was anything in the Book which would lead the church to Romish practices. \ BLOW TO THE BISHOPS. LONDON, June 14. After the division in the Commons, the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishops walked out quietly, with a dejected air.

It obviously was a. severe blow to the Primate. ‘On hearing the result, he bowed his bead as though stricken with •grief. Immediately after the division, the Archbishops of Canterbury and York issued <a statement as "follows: “Some who have eagerly supported the Prayer Book measure as a right step on the roadway to orderliness and harmony aiid to a new freedom for active service at home and overseas, may be led by their disappointment and irritation to advocate rash and irregular action. We plead for quietness and patience and for abstention from angry or unkindly words. The responsibility laid on the Bishops by tlie vo‘e of the House of Commons is the gravest. They are alive to this. They will with the least delay; give the required counsel and direction. This “must take a little time. Meanwhile, prayers will not be lacking that they may be guided to interpret aright God’s will and purpose for the Church.”

The “Morning Post” says: Whatever is the outcome of the Prayer Book issue, the Archbishop of Canterbury's resignation will most likely lie tendered at an early date.

OBEDIENCE TO BISHOPS URGED Mr George Thorne (Liberal) said that the Nonconformists paid a price for their nonconformity. Let those contrary to the feelings of the Church pay the same price. (Applause). Those who could not obey tlie Church should have a church of their own.

THE “TIMES” COMMENT. LONDON, Juno 14

Commenting on the Prayer Book division, the Times says: The attack on the Prayer Book measure has changed less since December than its defence. The attack was again directed against two main points. Neither of these points is really relevant to tlic| dispute,, but each is calculated toil spread an atmosphere of doubt and suspicion. These points were:—First, the question of pro-Reformnticn supwst • tions, with hints of extravagant ritual being now isolated practised. Secondly there was the supposed unpopularity of the measure in the constituencies. The former was really the strongest argument in favour of the measure, liecause the illegalities cannot l>e restrained if tlie 'Church is to be denied the right to define what is illegality in the light of modern thought. The second point (that of the supposed unpopularity of the Bill among the electors) is only a matter of opinion, for nothing is easier than to organise a campaign of propaganda by means of co rrespon dence.

LONDON, June 14. Commenting on the Prayer Book deli ate, the Daily Telegraph says: The issue was again narrowed down to the question : “Does the revised Book jeopardise tbe Protestant character or the Church?” The debate made i’t clear that the House of Commons still takes Queen Victoria’s view that the Anglo-Cntholies are not an allowable party. We have no doubt the House of Commons reflects the feelings of the generality of English people. Whatever the sympathy that the Anglo-Catliolics find among the Bishops, the House of Commons still regards them with grave distrust. The House of Commons has throughout demonstrated a conviction that the Anglican Church’s claim to the allegiance of the nation consists in her unmistakeable Protestantism. (Received this day at a a.m.) LONDON, June 15. Ail analysis of the voting on the Prayer Book was— Conservatives: For 191: Against 163 Labour: ... For 28: Against 75 Liberals: ... For 2: Against 28 Independents: For 1: Against 3 The Conservatives vote increased by 24 compared with December; Labour vote against increased by 21.