The Henson Journals

[179]

Tuesday, March 7th, 1922.

An ancient clergyman, C. Crowden D.D., who was ordained as long ago as 1860, writes to point out an error in "Anglicanism", which he has been reading "with the greatest interest & almost unqualified acceptance".

"On p. 191, you attribute to St Augustine "the significant words, "In necessariis unitas &c". In the late Dean Stanley's "Addresses and Sermons at St Andrew's, page 83, you will find this note. "It fell to my lot two years ago to track out the story of another famous axiom, which was really due to Rupertus Meldenius, an obscure German divine of the 17th century, "In necessariis unitas, (not non necessariis) in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas". The Dean asked me to try to find the passage in St Augustine, but I of course failed. He got his information, I think, from Lord Acton."

He adds that he met me "upon the invitation oof Sir Peile Thompson at the Park Gates Hotel about 2 years ago".

Ella and I voted for Sam Adams as a member of the County Council, and then bought two of Henty's books for the Thurlow twins whose birthday is on Thursday.

The Bishop of Norwich writes to say that in his belief the "Parochial Church Councils (Further Powers) Measure" will not pass the Ecclesiastical Committee. "It is all plain sailing now for the E.C., so I understand, is doing our work for us, and, therefore, the proposed Measure will be drowned in its first ditch." I wonder whether he is right. Unless he knows more than I do, his assumption is excessive.

Clayton and I left the castle at 5 p.m., and motored to Stockton, where we went to S. Peter's Vicarage. Here I had 3 interviews. 1. with the Vicar, Kirkham. 2. with a deputation from the Oxbridge district. 3. with Macready, the Curate. The upshot was that the said Macready is to take charge of the Oxbridge district with a stipend of £250, per annum. Then I confirmed 198 candidates in S. Peter's Church. There was much coughing which disturbed me. After service we returned to Auckland, arriving about 9.30 p.m.

Mr Dismorr wrote asking me to advise him how best to use his money for the resistance of Romanism in the Church of England. I replied as follows: –

[180]

March 7th, 1922.

Dear Mr Dismorr

In answer to your inquiry I must say frankly that I don't think private associations to oppose "Romanism in England" do any good, and I suspect that they often do much harm. I have never seen any of their publications without being offended by the tone, and often by the ignorance which distinguish them. That they could have the smallest effect for good on any candid & inquiring mind I cannot believe.

The 'Protestant" section of the Church of England is deplorably ill–educated, and unsympathetic with knowledge. If we could make sure that young men preparing for the Anglican Ministry were trained at the Universities, and not in partisan Theological Colleges, much good would be done. This matter is best handled in the diocese: & most dioceses have Funds for assisting to train candidates for the Ministry. If I were a lay member of the Church of England, possessed of means which I desired to use for God's work in that Church, & therefore wishing to preserve the Church from error, I should devote myself to advancing the cause of sound training for the clergy: and I should certainly regard training at the Universities as the soundest kind of training, especially now that the Theological Professors are devoting special attention to this part of their duty. But I should have nothing whatever to do with partisan societies, or partisan colleges. They have been the bane of the Church, and, perhaps, a principal cause of that Romanizing of the Church of England which you and I deplore.

I return the enclosed, which I have read with interest.

With kind regards,

I am,

Yours sincerely,

Herbert Dunelm:

J. Stewart Dismorr Esq

---