A CHURCH IN CHAINS

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 383, 18 June 1928, Page 9

A CHURCH IN CHAINS

Rejection of Prayer Book ‘ INTOLERABLE TUTELAGE ” Mr. Garvin Examines Future (United P.A.—By Telegraph — Copyright) (Australian P.A.—United Service) Reed. 9.5 a.m. LONDON, Sunday. riERE is no chance for the deposited Prayer Book in the next Parliament,” writes Mr. J. L. Garvin in “The Observer.” “The established church has been exhibited for a second time in the House of Commons as a church in chains.

“Whatever else happens, it must be ruled and ordered, like all other communions, by our members. Either it must stand humiliated, discredited, and weakened in its whole repute and endeavour, or at any cost it must assert and achieve that equal right of spiritual self-government which it was believed was finally conceded when it adopted the present representative constitution. “The Church must free itself from the terms of its connection with the State, such as are injurious to both. It must be emancipated from the intolerable political tutelage of those not belonging to its fold. “It is necessary for the whole moral life of the Church that she secure the political and religious equality enjoyed by every other sect. “The confession of disestablishment will only come if Parliament imposes it. We cannot imagine any party taking the initiative. If either Labour or Liberalism puts the issue in the programme of the next general election, the whole existing political situation

will be transformed with incalculable results. The cry ‘Religion in danger, church in danger/ would be raised. The election would be the bitterest and most violent in many years. “We do not fear that the present troubles will have a tragic issue. It is more likely that the Church will remain established and become spiritually free. The whole of the Conservatives are against disendowment, and neither the Labourites nor the Liberals are likely to favour disestablishment with or without disendowment.” WHAT THE PAPERS SAY The newspapers to-day all devote their first leaders to the problem facing the Church of England through the second rejection of the Prayer Book. The “Daily Telegraph” recommends the defiance of Parliament, and says probably an influential body of opinion will harden in favour of the Church asserting her spiritual authority ,and giving full synodical sanction for the use of the rejected book. If the bishops pursue that plan, they will, says the paper, win the support of a large proportion of the clergy, who will rally to their side many who are now disaffected. The “Morning Post” says the work of the Church must continue, as the measure of its worth will be its success in preventing the most perilous results of the sincere antagonisms to the proposed book. To the universal regret the Primate must shortly leave the task of guiding the Church to his successor, who must be determined to hold in cohesion the Church as by law established. The “Daily Chronicle” says:—“The rejection of the new Prayer Book emphasises our view of the December decision, and brings disestablishment several strides nearer. A point comes at which a religious body must be free or die.” The “Daily Express” says the decision of the House of Commons is a landmark for all time in Church and national history. It makes imminent the question of whether the Church loses or gains by association with, and subjection to, the secular arm. Let the Church break away from State governance and concentrate on the spiritual objects of its mission. It will forfeit nothing that really matters by repudiating doles and the guidance of Parliament. “LANDMARK FOR ALL TIME” The “Daily News” says there will be

AND WHAT NOW?

no definite next step. The Romish practices exist, and there is increasing defiance of the bishops, who, hitherto, have only protested most mildly. The process will probably continue. The bishops are unlikely to act drastically until they are forced to do so by public opinion. When this point is reached it will mark the beginning of the end of the Establishment. LABOUR JOURNAL’S VIEW The “Daily Herald,” the Labour paper, says:—“We do not decry nor begrudge the intense interest shown by the House of Commons in the Prayer Book. We only wish it would evidence similar concern in the human and economic problems of the country. One million unemployed men and their dependants are living in a continuous hell. Millions of their fellow-country-men are not receiving enough wages to buy the necessaries of civilised life. Do members of the House of Commons, in tense excitement, discuss the means of lifting the people from the abyss of poverty? No, because the House of Commons is not representative of the nation. It will be, when the nation chooses to make it so.”

BISHOPS MEET EARLY NON-CONTENTIOUS BOOK (Australian P.A.—United Service) LONDON, Saturday. The bishops will meet in London on June 27, to consider the situation created by the rejection of the revised Prayer Book by the House of Commons. The Primate, Dr. Randall T. Davidson, had an audience for half an hour with King George at Buckingham Palace to-day. Everywhere the talk among ecclesiastics and laymen turned to the next step. When the bishops meet to consider the situation three main lines are open. First they may shelve all idea of a new book, and decide to carry on as at present. Secondly, they may give facilities for a new non-contentious book, based on the suggestions of the Bishop of Norwich, Dr. Bertram Pollock, who is at present drafting such a book. Thirdly, they may defy Parliament and authorise the use of the rejected book, which will probably lead to disestablishment.

Although the latter suggestion has been advanced, a number of the bishops are not at all likely to adopt it. It is generally believed the bishops will decide on the second course, which has also been advocated by the Home Secretary, Sir William Joynson-Hicks. If the bishops make the non-controver sial changes of which the Prime Minister, Mr. Baldwin, spoke earnestly, it would be welcomed by all, and could be passed by the Church Assembly and Parliament, as far as can be seen, without opposition. “FLOUT PARLIAMENT” The Rev. G. Bullock-Webster, who was the central figure in the protest made against the Bishop of Birmingham, Dr. E. W. Barnes, when the latter preached in St. Paul’s Cathedral last year, lias been urging the bishops to flout Parliament. To-day he posted the following announcement, in his own handwriting, on the door of his church, St. Michael’s, Paternoster Row, in the city: “The vote in the House of Commons now offers the Archbishop of Canterbury the occasion for the crowning act of his illustrious episcopate, namely, to take action, in unison with the bishops of the two provinces, to promulgate the revised Prayer Book, and thus to assert the spiritual authority of the Church, and to determine her own doctrine) and worship, unfettered by State control.” SYMPATHY WITH PRIMATE The Archbishop of Canterbury, for whom there is universay sympathy, was early at work at Lambeth Palace. His manner to those people who brought condolences was cheerful, and showed no signs of the great blow he has received. During a day of quiet devotion he attended a service in his chapel. Some 30 of the bishops were present. Prayers for guidance in the crisis were offered. Letters, telegrams and messages poured in all day long. It was rumoured that his prophesied resignation might be accelerated by the rejection of the book, but it is semi-officially stated that this is unlikely, unless the Archbishop’s health should be affected by the ruin of his hopes.