Evening star., 1928-06-16
AMERICAN PRAYER BOOK CHANGE
TO OCCUPY EPISCOPALIANS HERE
English Dispute Over Reservation of
Sacrament Already Eliminated From
US. Revision, Begun in 1913.

Interest has been awakened In Epis-
copal Church circles over the vote In
the British Parliament last Thursday
on the revision Of the Church of Eng
land prayer book.
At the Forty-ninth Triennial Gen
eral Convention of the Episcopal
| Church. which will assemble here Oc-
tober 10 next, final action will be
taken on the revision of the American
Book of Common Prayer. which was
adapted from the English book when
the American church was organized
following the Revolution. AS framed
in 1890, the American book remained
substantially unchanged until 1892,
when the first revision was made and
then, at the general convention OF 1913,
joint commission was appointed. un-
der which in the intervening Is years
succeeding conventions have acted on
the general revision, which is expected
TO be finally completed at the Wash
ington gathering.
In the English revision the greatest
controversy has been Waged over the
subject Of reservation. Reservation"
refers to the practice of retaining for
emergency use the ConseCrated bread
and wine Of the communion service.
provision for which Is made in the
English book In the American book
it is provided that IL any of the sacred
elements remain following a COM
munlon service they "Shall not be car
red out Of the church. but the min
lister and other communicates shall
Immediately after the blessing rev.
erently eat and drink the same" In
asmuch as a proposal TO amend this
rule has been defeated in the progress
of the American revision. this problem
Is not likely to arise at the Washing
ton convention.
Cites Differences.
Having in mind the worldwide re-
vision Of the English prayer book and
action in Parliament concerning 1t,
Right Rev. Charles Lewis Slattery,
man of the Joint commission of the
Episcopal Church, which has the
American revision in charge. in a
statement issued IN Boston discussed
The difference between the English and
American revisions. Bishop Slattery
said:
The chief difference between the
English and American revision of the
prayer book is that the English church
Is providing for the reservation of the
consecrated bread and wine of the holy
communion. and the American church,
In its book. makes no such provision.
At the convention Of 1925 the House of
Bishops adopted a measure allowing for
reservations under certain conditions.
but it was defeated in the House Of
Clerical and Lay Deputies. This de-
feat came from the same groups which
today in England are rcopening rubrics
on reservation--namely. the extreme
low churchmen, who refuse to allow any
recognition Of reservation whatever.
and by the extreme high churchmen.
who wish no limiting of their use of
reservation.
Stili Linked With State.
Another difference is that the Eng
lish church. being still linked with the
state, Is only slowly reaching self-gov-
ernment The bishops, the convoca-
tions, the church assembly. the House
OF Lords and the House Of Commons
must all pass upon the prayer book. Az
certain stages discussion ceases and the
voting body must accept all or reject
all. The House OF Commons for ex-
ample, in its first vote, would doubtless
have accepted everything except res
ervation.' hut in order to show disap-
proval OF that detail, they were forced
to reject the whole book.
Our procedure In America is quite
different. The recommendations of the
Prayer Book Commission must be passed
by two successive conventions before
they can be adopted. and In the final
eote the clergy and the laity of the
House OF Deputies vote separately, so
that, even II all the bishops and all the
clerical deputies voted for a measure,
one less than majority OF the laymen
would defeat 1t. The resolutions are
broken up into small sections, and no
part of our governing body Is presented
with a whole service, much less the
whole book, and invited to take II or
leave it.
This gives the church confidence and
sense OF fairness: therefore. when
our American book Is isalled we may