The Henson Journals

Wed 13 August 1919

Volume 25, Pages 116 to 118

[116]

Wednesday, August 13th, 1919.

[symbol]

Dear Mr Williams,

Your letter of the 7th inst. has been forwarded to me. I gather from what you say that Mr Lucas is a "guilty divorcé", that is, he was divorced by his wife for "adultery & cruelty", as the law permits.

In that case, you are legally entitled to refuse to officiate at his re–marriage, though, if he can find another clergyman willing to officiate, you must allow him the use of your church, and in any case cannot refuse to publish the Banns.

I think a clergyman should certainly exercise his legal option, & refuse to marry a guilty divorced person: and that, as respects publication of banns, & use of the church, he should obey the law.

In the case of an "innocent party", I cannot think he should refuse to marry, for not only would his doing so imply a breach of the law, but also would obliterate the distinction between guilt and innocence, which would be offensive to equity.

And, since he cannot himself investigate the question of guilt or innocence, he is bound on that issue to accept the verdict of the Court.

[117] [symbol]

I am, my dear Sir, Yours v. faithfully

H. H. Hereford

The Rev. G. M. Williams

Chelmarsh Vicarage, Bridgnorth

The Bishop of Newcastle writes to ask me to be one of two speakers on the Enabling Bill at "a large public meeting on the evening of Nov 4th". I declined the invitation because "I did not think it advisable for Bishops to contend with presbyters on public platforms. The position was unnatural at best, & might easily become also unseemly". After discussing the situation with respect to the Enabling Bill, & stating the amendments which in my view should be aimed at in the House of Commons, I proceeded: –

"The effect of these amendments wd be to preserve the general plan of the Establishment, substituting for the purely clerical Convocations, a mixed assembly of clergy & laity, & for the old system of letters of business substituting a large grant of powers, reserving only certain cardinal points. If there were substantial agreement among Church folk, & a spirit of goodwill, the new Constitution might work. As, however, neither condition can be counted upon, I hold it fairly certain that our present difficulties will continue, & that the pace of our progress towards disruption will be accelerated".

[118] [symbol]

Then I went on to sound him on the declaration which the Bishop of Manchester & I are devising:–

"I want you to be ready to cooperate in a positive policy with respect to the constantly debated subject of our relations with Non–episcopalians. If the Bishops who mainly agree on this matter, would put forward a declaration stating for the information of their own clergy what they are prepared to sanction within their dioceses, it wd have a very wholesome effect: & wd command the eager welcome of all that body of younger men – chaplains, students' union members etc. – who have been led by their experiences during the War to desire closer relations with Non–episcopalians. And such action on the part of the Bishops wd help to bring to secession point our Romanizers, who must go if the Church of England is to hold together".

I declined Lady Renshaw's invitation to go to Garvochs, and remained all the morning in the house writing letters. The local episcopalian ministers came to lunch, & afterwards I walked for 1 1/2 hours with the spaniel. After tea I wrote to the President of Magdalen about the Anson memoir, and also to my brother Arthur, urging him to visit us while we yet occupy the Palace.