The Henson Journals

[132]

Wednesday, May 31st, 1922.

Hugh Cecil has written an article for the Bristol Diocesan Magazine under the heading "The Little Bishop", in which he develops a case for very small bishoprics. He would have an episcopate of 150 to 200 members grouped under 6 Abps. Every 'little bishop' would have 2 suffragans for all the Archdeacons would be in episcopal orders. Incidentally, one effect of his scheme would be the transformation of the Lower Houses of the Convocations into predominantly episcopal assemblies, & largely to increase the number of the already too numerous National Assembly. But the whole scheme is ludicrously crude. The obvious objections are 1: its cost. 2: the bishop would have insufficient work. 3: the parish clergy wd degenerate into assistant curates. 4: the composition of the Convocations & the National Assembly wd be deranged. 5: the relation of the Church of England to the other branches of the Anglican Communion would be altered. A more important, though less apparent, objection is the theory of episcopacy which is implied. For, while emphasizing pastoral obligation so strongly, it yet lowers the status of presbyters, & raises the question why episcopacy is required if the oversight of presbyters is not the bishop's proper task. I wasted a great part of the morning in writing some observations on Lord Hugh's Article. I took occasion to quote some words which Bishop Boyd Carpenter addressed to me some years ago:–" In my opinion one of the worst dangers of the Church of England is the growth of a fanatical and illiterate episcopate"

[133] [symbol]

May 31st, 1922.

My dear Sir William Joynson–Hicks,

I have to thank you for sending me the memorial recently presented to the Abp. of C.: and I have read it with the attention which its importance merits. It is in my judgment unfortunate that it shd. bring together into a single complaint both the difficult doctrinal situation created by modern science & criticism (which has created a problem for all considering & educated Christian men, & does not constitute a question peculiar to the C. of E.), and those disorders within our Church which are its distinctive shame, & a principal cause of its moral weakness.

The former cannot, I think, be dealt with by authoritative action: the problem must find a solution from honest intellectual effort in a free atmosphere. The latter seems to call for some revision of our legal & judicial system. The Bishops have authority, but neither power nor money to enforce the law: nor in the present temper of the nation is the enforcement of law an easy process. Most of all is it difficult, all but impracticable, in the ecclesiastical sphere, where the popular interest is small, & the plea of conscience insistent. Moreover no Church can enforce a system in the teeth of its own best members, & the situation now is nothing less than this, that the sympathies of the ablest & most influential clergy & laity are [134] vaguely but persistently adverse to any policy of law enforcement in the C. of E. I note that your memorial carries the signatures of no more than 43 lay members of the National Assembly, & of hardly any of the leading clergy. The whole position is extraordinarily perplexing.

Believe me

Sincerely yrs.

Herbert Dunelm:

I thought it worth while to write the above in reply to Joynson Hicks's letter asking me to "assist" to "carry out the objects" of the memorialists. It seems to me well to let slip no opportunity of bringing home to the Evangelicals their intellectual squalor, and their actual insignificance. They are really not worth fussing over: yet they are as conceited as a blend of primitive Pharisees and popular Preacher could be!

I received a number of Questionnaires issued in connextion with a "Conference on Christian Politics, Economics and Citizenship" which is being arranged by a committee over which the Bishop of Manchester presides. The assumption appears to be that by syndicated effort on all these vast & difficult subjects, it is possible to attain to the truth. But "the kingdom of God cometh not with observation", and the utmost that can be gained by such procedure is a kind of "working platform" for "Christian Socialists".

---