THE PRAYER BOOK.

Hokitika Guardian, 18 June 1928, Page 2

THE PRAYER BOOK.

Australian Press Assn.—United Service LONDON, June IG. Tlie newspapers all devote tlieir first leading articles to the problem that is facing the Church of England through the second rejection by the House of Commons of the Prayer Book. • The Daily Telegraph recommends deference to Parliament, and says: “Probably an influential liody of opinion will harden in favour of the Church asserting its spiritual authority, and giving full Synodical sanction for the rejected Prayer Book. If the Bishops pursue that plan they will win tlie support of a large proportion of the clergy, who will rally to tlieir side. Many of the clergy are now disaffected.”

THE MAIN PROBLEM. LONDON, June 16. The “Morning Post” says:—“Tlie Church’s work must continue, and the measure of its worth will be its success in preventing the most perilous results of the sincere antagonisms that exist. If the primate, to the universal regret, must shortly leave his task of guiding the Church to a successor, that successor must be determined to hold in cohesion the Church as by law established.” AA T HAT STEP NEXT. LONDON, June 16. Everywhere the talk -among the ecclesiastics and laymen as to the Prayer Book question has turned to the next step when the Bishops meet to consider the situation in a few days. Three main lines are opened. The first is to shelve all idea of the new Book and to carry on as at present. The second, idea is to give facilities for a new-contentious Book, based on the suggestions of the Bishop of Norwich, who is at present drafting one. Tlie third idea is to defy Parliament and to authorise the rejected Book, which will probably lead to the dis-es-tahlishment of the Church.

Though the latter suggestion has been advanced, a number of the Bishops are nowise likely to adopt it. It is generally believed that the Bishops will decide on the second course of a new Book, which has also been advocated hv Sir AA T illinm Joynson Hicks. If the Bishops make some noil-con-troversial changes of which Mr Baldwin, Prime Minister, spoke earnestly in the debate, it would be welcomed by all, and could be passed by the Church Assembly, and by Parliament, as far as can be seen, without opposition

END ■ OF ESTABLISHMENT. LONDON. June 16.

The “Daily Neuis” says:—“There will be no definite next step. Romish practices exist in the Church. In this regard there is an increasing defiance of the Bishops, who hitherto have only protested most mildly. The process, however, will probably continue. The Bishops are unlikely to act drastically till they are forced to do so by public opinion. AYlien this point is reached, it will marfirtdie beginning of the end of the establishment. MR GARVIN’S COMMENT. (United Service.) (Received this day at 8.50 a.m LONDON, June 17. Mr Garvin in tlie “Observer” states: “ There is no chance for the defeated book in the next Parliament. The Established Church has been exhibited a second time in the Commons as a Church in chains. AA’hatever else happens it must be ruled and ordered like all other Communion by our members. Either it must stand humiliated, discredited and weakened in its whole repute and endeavour, or it must at any cost assert and achieve that equal light to spiritual self Government which believedly was finally conceded when it adopted the present representative constitution. The Church must free itself from the terms of connection with the State, such as are injurious to both. It must he emancipated from the intolerable political tutelage of those not belonging to its fold. It is necessary for the whole moral life of the Church to secure the political, religious equality, enjoyed by every other sect, or a confession of dis-ostnb-lishment will only come if Parliament imposes. AVe cannot imagine any party taking the initiative. If either Labour or Liberalism puts the issue in the progrmme at next general election the whole existing political situation will ho transformed with incalculable results. The cry “Religion in Danger” and “Church in Danger” would be raised and the election would be the bitterest and most- violent for many years. AA r o dp not fear the present troubles will have a tragic issue. It is more ilkely the Church will remain established and become spiritually free. The whole of the Conservatives are against disendowment and neither Labourites or Liberals are likely to favour dis-estalilisbment with or without disondowment.”