The Henson Journals

[6]

Friday, October 5th, 1923.

[symbol]

"Not many years ago a remarkable picture was on exhibition in an art gallery of Tokyo. It was not exactly a masterpiece, but its subject was exceedingly suggestive. In the centre stood a child, and grouped around it were four men, each beckoning to it to follow. On the face of the child was an expression of bewilderment. The child was meant to represent Japan, and the four men represented a Shinto priest, Confucius, Gautama Buddha, and Jesus".

"Creative Forces in Japan" by Galen M. Fisher p. 107

I spent the morning mostly in reading Hooker on the Sacrament with a view to addressing the Diocesan Conference on the subject. The Cruickshanks and Lillingston came to lunch and, afterwards, Cruickshank & I walked in the Park for an hour in spite of the rain.

Sir W. Joynson Hicks wrote rather urgently asking me to be one of the speakers at a public demonstration in the Queen's Hall early next year 'in defence of Reformation Principles'. But I declined the invitation, not being minded publicly to associate myself with the ranting zealots who bring contempt on the Protestant name. I stated my objection more civilly!

[7]

"The greatest difference between us and them (i.e. papists) is the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ, whose name in the service of our communion we celebrate with due honour, which they in the error of their mass profane. As therefore on our part to hear mass were an open departure from that sincere profession wherein we stand, so if they on the other side receive our communion, they give us the strongest pledge of fidelity that man can demand".

Hooker Ecc: Pol: Bk. V cl. 1xviii.s.8 (ii.476)

Things are rarely what they look like in this strange world. Shebbeare writes to say that he cannot make both ends meet in Stanhope in spite of the apparently ample endowment of the Rectory. The house is palatial: the rates, taxes and other outgoings are on a corresponding scale. There is in the minds of the parishioners an ineradicable belief that the Rector of Stanhope must be wealthy. It is very repugnant to every historical instinct, nay to every sentiment of piety, that the house in which Butler lived, and the very walk in which the great Author of the Analogy thought out his argument should be alienated, yet what is to be done, if the Rector cannot afford to occupy the official residence? Ought we frankly to reserve for the rich these more famous benefices? Shall we much longer possess any clergymen who could, in any intelligible sense be described as rich?

---