The Henson Journals

[15]

Monday, April 9th, 1923.

On reflexion I think my abstention from playing the fool last night was prudent, and probably right. In view of the attitude which I have taken up towards "Sunday games in the Parks" &c, it would be intolerable that I should privately ignore the Sunday claim: and one has never a right to assume immunity from public knowledge. Besides, it is less discreditable to be absurd in protesting than unduly facile in conceding. And one never knows what impression is being made on others.

Beyond a short walk with Ella, I did not go outside the house before lunch, for though the sun shone intermittently, there was a high wind which was bitterly cold.

I wrote to Mrs Gow showing cause why I was not really well qualified for writing a Memoir of her husband, by way of introduction to a volume of selected sermons &c, & suggesting that either she herself, or her eldest son should undertake the pious task. My performance in the case of Sir William Anson does not encourage another essay in Giography.

The Archbishop of Canterbury writes in a friendly but cautious manner to acknowledge the proof of the Edinburgh Article. He secures for himself a free hand, either to support the course I shall recommend, or (which is more probable) civilly to throw me over!

[16]

April 9th, 1923.

Dear Mr Scott,

Of course if you cannot see your way to conform to the regulations under which Diocesan Readers hold office in my diocese, I have no choice but to accept your resignation, but I do so with real regret.

You are, I think, mistaken in thinking that the cause of Christian Unity suffers from the maintenance of necessary discipline. On the contrary, I hold that nothing throws back that cause so effectively as its association with procedures which, however well–intentioned, are essentially disorderly.

Thanking you for your labours in the past, and wishing you all happiness in the future.

I am,

Yours v. sincerely,

Herbert Dunelm:

F. Scott Esq.

Woodleigh

42 Bracken Road

Darlington

[17] [symbol]

April 9th, 1923.

My dear Lord Archbishop,

First let me congratulate you most sincerely on your Birthday. It is no mean felicity to have reached an age so relatively advanced without apparently any loss of power, and with an ever–accumulating tradition of public confidence & private affection. Be sure that no one more ardently desires your continued strength & happiness than I.

I think in the matter of policy much will turn on the view one takes of the actual situation. To my thinking there is a competition of tendencies within the Church of England, & the vital interests of English Religion are concerned in it. Much will turn on our handling of the present issue. If the main question is again obscured & cast into the background while attention is fastened on specific details of Revision, so that the discord of first principles is perpetuated, I cannot doubt that the Church of England will move, and quickly, towards an impasse which could only be ended by Disestablishment & Disruption. If, on the other hand, we fasten on the really essential matter viz. the restoration of authority & insist on bringing

English Churchmen to the issue of obedience, I think there is what laymen call "a sporting [18] [symbol] chance" that we may yet succeed in evicting the really incongruous element, & giving the Church another lease of life. I am not sanguine of success, but I can see no better way. To go on as we are means disaster not merely for the Church, but (a far graver matter) to the national Christianity. As I read the Report of 1906 – which I must needs think was really your Grace's Report – this is the policy which is there suggested. That policy must be in such wise carried into effect as to make clear to the English people what its ultimate end really is.

My wife and I hope to return to Auckland tomorrow. There is no sign of social disturbance here except an armed guard on the house, and even this Lord Londonderry assures me is probably superfluous.

I am,

my dear Lord Archbishop,

ever dutifully & sincerely,

Herbert Dunelm:

The Most Rev. & Right Hon:

The Lord Archbishop of Canterbury

[19]

Lancelot Lewis Sockwood is rather an unusual name. It belongs to the young footman who has been looking after me. He hails from Norfolk, is 20 years of age, and for a brief period was in the Army, having understated his age. He has never been abroad, but would like to do so, especially he would like to see Spain, and to visit his brother's grave in Germany: but 'foreign countries seem so disturbed'. This youth interested me, & so did the old Irish mason, who is said to oscillate between the most admirable & intelligent industry and the wildest drunkenness! Such is the paradox of humanity.

The Bishop of Down (Grierson) dined here. He says that his diocese contains no less than 250,000 churchmen, as against 350,000 Presbyterians: that he has more spiritual subjects than most of the other bishops put together. The 3 Protestant churches – Episcopal, Presbyterian & Methodist – were agreed in demanding religious instruction in the schools. He described the sorry state of the Irish Clergy in the Free State, where in many cases their congregations, never numerous, had now disappeared almost completely. I wondered how, in these circumstances, the poor men found any adequate occupation, and how they could persuade men to accept appointment. I gathered that the majority of the incumbents were survivors from an earlier and less disastrous period, and that they would probably have no successors. The situation is quite evidently both humiliating and precarious.

---