Although it is true that in 1906 the Royal Commission specified 10 particularly flagrant sorts of practices which they recommended should be checked, and checked then and there, without waiting for any of the reforms which they recommended, I hope hon. However, it is only fair to remind the House that the Royal Commission in 1906 said, what is true now as it was true then, that it was possible to give undue weight and undue prominence to those extravagancies, in proportion to the general body of loyal clergy faithfully doing their duty within the Church of England. It must be admitted-I admit it freely-that there do exist lawless extravagancies within the Church of England. I want to deal, first, with the question of discipline, because I realise that the two things that matter, so far as the country generally is concerned, are the breakdown of discipline and the question of the underlying doctrine of the New Book.
I believe that when our immediate differences recede into their proper perspective, and when the Church is able to resume her work harmoniously and, as I hope, with an enriched liturgy, the widespread revival of interest in her affairs must be wholly to the good.
So far as I am concerned, I shall have failed wholly in my purpose if-although I intend to speak perfectly plainly about opposing arguments which seem to me to be fallacious and wrong, and I expect people on the other side to exercise exactly the same liberty-there is left at the end of it any personal bitterness. It is inevitable in a matter of this sort that there should be plain speaking, and it is inevitable that, for the moment, our differences should seem to be accentuated. I need only say in regard to the first reason, the interest which this matter has evoked, that nobody can fail to recognise, and to recognise with thankfulness, that our discussions in this House reflect the earnest desire of the people of this country to get at the truth in this matter and to decide the matter rightly. I am going to take the last two questions, discipline and doctrine, in detail later. That, in accordance with the Church of England Assembly (Powers) Act, 1919, this House do direct that the Prayer Book Measure, 1928, be presented to His Majesty for Royal Assent.Īlthough I should have been glad if in this sacred matter the Church of England, in spite of differences stoutly fought and maintained in the Church Assembly, had been able to present this Measure for the acceptation of Parliament, unanimously, at the same time I am bound to admit that I do not regret this controversy, and I do not regret the rejection of the corresponding Measure in December, for three reasons: First, for the widespread and earnest interest which our discussions have evoked in the affairs of the Church secondly, for the fact that the rejection in December last has been recognised and, indeed, has been described by one of the Bishops as an explosion of indignation on the part of the laity against the more lawless extravagancies of certain clergy, and the more notorious failures in certain quarters to restrain those extravagancies and, thirdly, because, speaking as one who desires as ardently as any Member in this House to maintain the Protestant character of the Church of England, I am convinced that the Deposited Prayer Book does maintain that provision and that the Amendments made since December last make that more abundantly clear.