The Henson Journals

[87]

Friday, August 1st, 1919.

[symbol]

Rushton said that, while his main object in "reserving" the Sacrament was the communicating of the sick, he was also influenced by the fact, as he was informed, certain of his parishioners were accustomed to resort to the Roman church at Belmont. He would give them what they wanted nearer home. He seemed to have no consciousness that the distinctive doctrines & practice of the Church of England have any claim on his regard. He thought the principal danger was that people should think of the C. of E. as distinguished from the Catholic Church. I suggested that the distinction was unreal & misleading, for the English Church was for an English Churchman nothing other than the Catholic Church as we understood & accept it. He seems to take for granted that there can be no real difference of doctrine or practice between the English & Roman churches for are they not both Catholick? Rather he would regard the evident & general misunderstanding of this identity by both English & Roman Churchmen a weighty reason for making the identification quite unmistakable! And the tortoise on which this universe of fantastic absurdity rests is the hard worked "Ornaments Rubrick"!! How can this Bedlamite nonsense be effectively dealt with? Rushton looks normal, and is said to be good!

[88] [symbol]

There remains nothing for the Bishop but to perform his mechanical functions, and his spiritual ministries with assiduity: to teach as opportunity offers, & thus to form opinion: to exercise such influence as he can in Convocation: and to live in his diocese as a Christian citizen. He can neither exercise discipline nor enforce law: for there no longer exists either discipline to be exercised or law to be enforced. There is no advantage in pretending to control, to regulate, to lead when it is certain that however dutiful their language, and reverential their demeanour, the clergy who profess to accept control, regulation, & leading have made up their minds apart from the Bishop what they intend to and teach, and intend to carry out their intention whether the Bishop approve or no. They will kiss his ring, & ask his blessing, but they will neither heed his counsel, nor consult his wishes. The relation between an English Bishop & his clergy may become a very hypocritical thing. Where there is agreement & goodwill between bishop & clergy all things go well enough, but such agreement is nowhere complete, & everywhere precarious. Every exercise of patronage endangers it, and may even destroy it altogether!

[89] [symbol]

Plutarch begins his account of Alexander with some explanation of his method. He is not, he says, writing 'histories' but 'lives', and his object is, less to give a record of events, than a picture of character, and "a slight thing like a phrase or a jest often makes a greater revelation of character (ηθουσ) than battles where thousands fall, or the greatest armaments, or sieges of cities"

"Accordingly just as painters get the likenesses in their portraits from the face & expression of the eyes, wherein the character shows itself, but makes very little account of the other parts of the body, so I must be permitted to devote myself to the signs of the soul (ψυχησ) in men, & by means of these to portray the life of each, leaving to others the description of their great contests"

The truth of this is indisputable, & the recognition of it makes all the difference between a good biographer and a bad. Perhaps, also, Plutarch's words may serve as a commentary on the words of Christ, which are rather dismaying. "By thy words thou shalt be justified, & by thy words thou shalt be condemned". If the test of words be their power of disclosing character, they will serve as the basis of a just judgement on men when applied by Him Who is All knowing & All just.

[90] [symbol]

The 'Cambridge Platonists' were exposed to unworthy suspicions by their contempories: Fowler's "Free Discourse" published anonymously in 1670 says:–

"They are characterised as people whose only religion it is to temporise, & transform themselves into any shape for their secular interests: & that judge no doctrine so saving as that which obligeth to so complying and condescending a humour, as to become all things to all men, that so by any means they may gain something: as I heard one once jeer at a most worthy person, as he thought, no doubt, very wittily". [v. Tulloch. Ii. 37]

The name 'Latitudinarian' was bestowed on them with no friendly purpose. Burnet explains the name thus:–

"They continued to keep a good correspondence with those who had differed from them in opinion, and allowed a great freedom both in philosophy and in divinity: from whence they were called men of latitude. And upon this, men of narrower thoughts & fiercer tempers fastened upon them the name of Latitudinarians".

The title of Fowler's 'Discourse' agrees with this, 'Principles & Practices of certain moderate Divines of the Church of England, abusively called Latitudinarians & in a Free Discourse between Two Intimate Friends".

---