CHURCH CRISIS.

Waikato Argus, Volume VI, Issue 434, 13 May 1899, Page 3

CHURCH CRISIS.

BILL REJECTED. [UNITED press ASSOCIATION.J (BY ELKCTRIC TELKORAPH. COPYRIOHT). London, May 10. In connection with the proceedings against the Revs. Westall and Ram, who are cited before the Archbishops for using incense and lights during service, the Archbishops linubbed John Kensit, the well-known anti-ritualist, by refusing to entertain his protest against the proceedings of the Court. May 11. The House of Commons rejected the Church Discipline Bill, intended to cheek the spread of ritualism, by 310 votes to 156. The Govern* ment's ameudment, foreshadowing legislation in the event of the Bishops failing to secure obedience, was adopted. Bir Richard Webster characterised the Bill as unjust and unworkable, and prejudicial to peace and uniformity. Sir W. Haroourt said the attitude of the House had strikingly changed within a few months. Both the Bill and the amendment asserted that the Crown and Parliament were supreme, but the Archbishops at Lambeth were seeking to evade the jurisdiction of the Privy Council, Unless something were done now it would be impossible to maintain the Establishment. Mr Balfour said the Church, established or unostablished, would retain the great majority only if it remained a church purified by the Reformation. Most of the Irish members and 25 liberals voted with the majority on the Bill. 6ir H. Campbell-Bannerman, Mr Morley, Mr Asquith, Mr Bryce and 14 followers of the Liberal leaders abstained from voting. Lord Cecil considered the amendment neither dignified nor courageous. The Bill would have necessitated the prosecution of 7000 clergy, and caused a disruption in the Church. Parliament, in keeping the gates of God's vineyard, ought to reject and prevent an inrush of bitterness and bigotry. ________