Dr. Pollock on Prayer Book Revision
Prayer Book Revision. By Bertram Pollock, K.C.V.O., D.D., Lord Bishop of Norwich. (S.P.C.K. 4d.)
Tim sermon which the Bishop of Norwich preached in Norwich Cathedral on Sunday, February 13th, has just been published and is a model of a grave, intensely sincere and scholarly protest. The Bishop discusses the doctrinal change which he considers is embodied in the revision of the Holy. Communion ervice, and he states his opinion that though the change may be veiled, excused or denied, it is such a real change that it create sectarianism within the Church—one sect following present doctrine and one the doctrine of the alternative Although we have taken the view that the revision 0 to be accepted by all and that it provides a substantial for the maintenance of the unity of the Church, we never wish that the:desired end should be reached j any of way than by reasoned and temperate discussim
re argument should be heard ; nothing should be sup- . The Bishop of Norwich by right of learning and innate devotion to the traditional English spirit_ of the rch has an indisputable title to be heard with great respect. thing but profoundly conscientious disagreement with the hbishop and the vast majority of his brother Bishops could e induced him to circulate this solemn warning, and it t be added that there is not a word in it that could justify er retorts or the language of acrimonious controversy.
he Bishop says that only a few years ago he was supported -a great majority" of Bishops. Now he is almost alone. can hardly believe that the deep views of the Church of and as a whole have changed as much as the personnel le Episcopate. He, says firmly and plainly that what for " a prudent compromise " in the Communion ice is not really a compromise if it establishes " a formal 'on," as he believes it will. He detects the work of the esiastical parliamentarian rather than that of the Christian fish statesman. He has behind him the overwhelming port of the Norwich Diocesan Conference.
e Bishop of Norwich's point is that since the virtue or ity of the Communion Service resides in the whole service, symbols of the bread and wine cannot be supposed to vey that virtue to those who have taken no part in the -ice. If they are supposed to do so they at once have bated to them such a mysterious transmutation as is vowed in the present Book of Common Prayer. In fine, is a change of doctrine. He looks back wistfully to the dive practice of carrying the consecrated elements t to the sick who had been following the Service at home were waiting to receive. Evidently he would revive that
m if he thought it possible, but he does not think it 'bk. This, however, suggests the reflection that the ence between the primitive custom and what is now sed is not very great. May it not be presumed that even y the sick would, as far as their condition permitted, llow the Service " ? Does not their expressed wish to ve imply that amount of spiritual preparation ?
ally, the Bishop expresses the hope that a large part of revision will become law without carrying on its back the .ersial revision of the Communion Service. He thinks Parliament, in spite of obvious technical difficulties, draw this distinction, and he promises to develop the ion.
Previous page
