The Henson Journals
Sat 3 August 1918
Volume 23, Pages 112 to 114
[112]
Saturday, August 3rd, 1918.
1461st day
On several occasions since I came to the diocese I have been asked by the clergy whether I would sanction the preaching of the Nonconformist ministers in the parish churches. From many parts of the country I receive information that such preaching has taken place with happy results in drawing Christians together, and creating a temper of mutual goodwill. This "interchange of pulpits" would appear to be the natural consequence of the remarkable demonstrations of the Fraternity which have been observed in the vast armies of Englishmen overseas. The blessed contagion of religious fellowship is flowing back from the Front to the parishes at home. Old, obstinate barriers of sect and prejudice are too weak to resist the pressure of the new emotion, born of common experiences in camp, trench, hospital, and stricken field. I must needs welcome, and rejoice in new departure so congruous with the spirit of our Religion, and so rich in spiritual promise.
Inevitably I ask myself what is my personal duty, as charged with chief authority in the diocese, and fairly called upon for counsel by the clergy with respect to a situation which is as novel as it is religiously encouraging. It will, I think, be unfortunate if the Episcopate remains silent, & suffers "interchange of pulpits" to establish itself by unrecognised individual action. There will be danger [113] that a salutary change for which the general conscience and reason of Christians are plainly pressing, should in some places provoke friction & controversy, and everywhere should be belittled as no more than a fresh evidence of the disciplinary chaos into which the Church of England has fallen.
It must be allowed that the Law is singularly unhelpful when direction as to our attitude towards Non–Anglicans is required. For not only is it largely obsolete: but it is almost wholly irrelevant. It does not contemplate the situation in which we stand, for it belongs to an age in which ecclesiastical unity was so closely associated in men's minds with political stability, that every form of religious dissent was legally prohibited, and men had often to choose between their conscience and their interest. Let any candid & loyal clergyman be at the pains of reading through the Canons of 1604 (which form the bulk of our canonical code), and let him consider how he could reasonably and usefully make them his rule of action. He will certainly rise from his study with a feeling of dismay, so remote are they from the circumstances of his life, so harsh their tone, so frankly impracticable are many of their practical requirements,
We must, therefore, in this matter of the interchange of pulpits consider the question on its merits, & seek a solution of the practical problem, less from the letter of the Law, than from [114] a just estimate of what is expedient in the interest of Religion. These are no ordinary times.
Norcock & his fiancée were so terrified by the masterful manner and language of Mr Collett–Mason, the Churchwarden of Almeley, that they decided not to go there, albeit the parish would have suited them well enough! This is annoying from more points of view than one. In the course of the morning, the said tyrannical warden came to see me, & bleated as harmlessly as a sucking dove! He disclaimed "Anglo–Romanism", which he seems to have professed, to Norcock. After lunch we went for a drive, and paid two calls. At Mordiford we found the Rector, Mr Binstead, at home. He said that he had been hearing much of Welldon's clash with the Bishop of Manchester. On the whole, he thought as I do, that it was not seemly or fair for the outgoing Dean thus gratuitously to attack the sitting Diocesan. But, indeed, Welldon did but provide one more illustration of his main and incapacitating defect viz. his inability to resist the call of the nearest gallery. The Bishop of M. is undoubtedly unpopular; & there is a secure response of applause for anyone who will oppose or insult him. It is probably unnecessary to seek further for the explanation of Welldon's quite superfluous outburst on the subject of dividing the Manchester diocese. The same explanation will serve for his signature of the fatuous petition which the Bishop of Chelmsford presented at the last Convocation.