The Henson Journals

[84]

Thursday, July 31st, 1919.

[symbol]

Misfortunes never come unaccompanied. Yesterday, the unexpected gardening–bill; today, the expected claim for compensation from old Croft, who was knocked down last March. Bateman considerately brought a whole sheaf of bills – gas, water, light, coals! Then James brought Mr Horth, the Vicar of Lingen, to be instituted. I had arranged to do this tonight in Lingen itself, but this disgusting ailment hindered. James undertook to arrange with old Croft so that (this was my charge) no sense of grievance survived in his mind.

Then I prepared myself for an interview with Rushton, the Vicar of All Saints, who is said to have reserved the Sacrament, & celebrated with lawless pomp the illegal Festival of Corpus Christi. I want to explore the situation by discovering (1) what he actually has done; (2) what further he has it in mind to do. He has ignored the Bishop as well as broken the law. On what view of his position is he proceeding? Then there is a subsidiary point. How is the Sacrament reserved? In both kinds? In a special receptacle? If so, has he applied for a faculty? What, on a total review of his procedure, is his expectation of my attitude? What does he judge I ought to do? And, what does his vow of canonical obedience pledge him to do? Then there is the rather difficult question of Scott's situation. Can I be expected to sanction his continuance at All Saints?

[85] [symbol]

Did he read the 39 Articles publicly on Sunday as required by the law?, & is the fact duly certified by the churchwardens? Are the Churchwardens cognizant of the reservation? and do they approve of it?

Is the reserved Sacrament made the object of devotion?

Is the service known as "Benediction" used?, or about to be used?

I can hardly hope for any good result from this interview, but it seems an indispensable first step on my part. The naked alternative, prosecution or acquiescence will have to be fact at last.

My interview went on for more than an hour. Finally, I asked Rushton whether he wd promise that his innovations shd proceed no further, until, if he meditated some advance, he had first come & talked it over with me. He was fairly candid, though as wrong–headed as his party always are, and asked whether hymns sung before the reserved Sacrament wd be regarded as "a devotional service". He did undertake to let things remain where they are, and promised not to introduce "Benediction" or street processions of the Host without discussing their introduction with me. I said a good many important things to him, & I think, he was not wholly unimpressed, but his whole conception of Anglicanism is preposterously incongruous with the history & law of the Established Church.

[86] [symbol]

The game of law & order is clearly "up" in the Church of England when a Bishop is reduced to such a conversation as I held with Rushton this morning. In effect it comes to an appeal to the law–breaker not to go too fast in his law–breaking! Avoid shocking the public, and then go as you please! Yet what else is there to do? "Benediction" appears to be the prosecution–point at present; & Rushton is good enough to tell me that he has no immediate intention of introducing "benediction"! The points to be noted are:

1. I have received no complaint from any parishioner.
2. "Reservation" is ostensibly made for the communicating of the sick.
3. The disciplinary system of the Church may be said to be suspended until some reconstruction of the Establishment has been effected.
4. The state of public opinion renders it highly undesirable to have a ritual prosecution.
5. "Anarchy all round" is a policy which implies an acquiescence in particular breaches of law on whatever side. Hitherto law has been rigid on one side, lax only on the other. In the diocese of Hereford there will at least be no favouritism. The Bishop will take no umbrage whatever is done!!

---