The Henson Journals

[190]

Friday, January 30th, 1925.

[symbol]

As I walked to Lambeth I noticed that workmen were busily engaged in pulling down Devonshire House. Sic transit Gloria mundi. I stopped at the hairdresser's, & had my hair cut &c. Then I went on to Lambeth, & found the Bishops discussing Storr's proposal, (which the Guardian supported with suspicious ardour) that a Committee of experts should be appointed to examine into the historical, philosophical, and theological background to the practice of reservation. I made rather a fierce speech against allowing it to be supposed that reservation for the purpose of worship was in the view of the bishops, an open question. I reminded the Archbishop that he had signed the Royal Commission's Report of 1906, in which such reservation was sharply condemned as wholly inconsistent with the doctrine of the Church of England. This brought his Grace onto his feet, with the declaration that he still held that opinion, but did not think that a Committee of experts would imply any change of mind. Later, the Archbishop passed me the following note:–

"I have been asking some African students to make a statement to me as to the grounds, ethical, physiological, & other, on which we ought to insist on monogamy. But I don't [191] [symbol] for that reason doubt my own position as a convinced monogamist.

Similarly in some degree, I have no sort of doubt as to my position as an Anglican on the questions which divide us from Rome, but I don't, for that reason, undervalue a statement, historical, theological, and philosophical as to the basis whereon the supporters of each side rest.

If the Church of England were to adopt some of the things we denounced in the R. Commission, I should be bound to resign my position – But I am ready to consider with interest any statement of the basis on wh. those who advocate such doctrines and usages rest".

Frere urged, and Headlam supported Storr's proposal, but I do not think it commended itself to the Bishops, and the Archbishop of York in closing the discussion abandoned it. I reckon that 15 bishops including the Archbishop of C. would refuse to authorize Tabernacle Worship, & that 15 including the Abp. of York would concede it. Seven bishops are doubtful – Carlisle, Oxford, Ripon, Newcastle, Exeter, Rochester, and Gloucester. Of course this is a very rough estimate, but I think not far from the mark.

[192] [symbol]

I came away from Lambeth after lunch, and went to the Ecclesiastical Commission, where I failed to see Downing but saw his deputy. He made notes of my business, and undertook to write to me. Then I called on Sir Henry Craik, and found him fairly well. He walked with me to the Club, where I found Gee, who told me on the authority of old Greenwell, that the local papists did privily excavate for S. Cuthbert's bones at the foot of the great Tower, but being alarmed by the slamming of a door, fled from the Cathedral before they had finished their work. I went to Hugh Rees and urged him to send me any books on "Spiritual Healing" or kindred matters. I had some talk with Jenkins, the Lambeth Librarian. He said that he had on several occasions listened to Hickson, & had reached the conclusion that he had "a measure of honesty". However, he agreed with me that we ought to "keep religion out of healing. I dined at the Athenaeum, and then walked back to Park Lane. The weather was almost uncomfortably warm.

The Archbishop warned the bishops against hearing the confessions, formally or informally, of their clergy, as it was but too easy to compromise their judicial position. He said that he had himself known instances in which this had happened.

---