The Henson Journals

[49]

Monday, August 29th, 1927. Sandbeck Park, Rotherham.

I spent the whole morning until lunch–time in reading Lawrence's fantastically realistic book, "The Seven Pillars". His description of individuals (i.e. Mark Sykes) are life–like: and he narrates with dramatic power. He dwells much on the perverted morals of the Desert, and seems to explain, if not even extenuate, the prevailing poederasty. In one repulsive chapter he describes the horrible misfortunes which befel him when he resisted the immoral advances of a Turkish Bey. He describes the Turks as utterly depraved, the men being habitually used by their officers as the victims of their lust. More than half the prisoners taken were afflicted with venereal disease unnaturally imparted. The wide extension of syphilis in the east must go far to explain the decadence of Eastern peoples. Child marriage in India is according to Katherine Mayo a potent cause of disease; & all the conditions of Eastern life favour its spread. I find it difficult to decide whether, as his admirers affirm, Col. Lawrence has a resolute & almost insurmountable dislike of publicity and decorations, or whether, as his critics suggest, his repudiations do but disclose an eager appetite for the lime–light.

[50]

Fawkes writes enthusiastically about the Modern Churchmen's Conference, at Birmingham:–

"The public meeting in the Midland Institute was a great success: 1200 people: and many could not get in. Inge was brilliant and effective. I confess that his religion seems to me one of hatred and scorn, not of charity! But he "went for" Catholicism tooth and nail: and I think his criticism was timely & true. The enthusiasm with which Barnes was received shews the respect in which he is held. It is, I hear, great and general: the opposition being sectional & confined to a small group of clergymen whose churches are (for the most part) empty. His utterances have been most impressive; he seems to me to have the lay mind, & to be straight and fearless. The papers have been well attended; and some very good. The event was Bethune Baker's strong pronouncement against Revision as involving change of doctrine & leading to strife. It was the [51] the paper of a theologian, but you will say that I am prejudiced. As far as I can gather, the feeling of the younger men is decidedly against revision, that of some of the elder men half–heartedly for. Major e.g. thinks it the lesser of 2 evils. I have met no one who thinks that conformity to the new rubricks can be enforced: some welcome what they think the 'concessions to Modernism in the proposed Book. I reflect on what the Bishop of Norwich wrote about a parson who said "I will have my way, even if the churches are empty". He had his way; said the Bishop, "and the Church is empty".

The demands of the 'Modern Churchmen' are so alien to the general belief of the Church that their satisfaction is almost impossible. They must either acquiesce in the not unsubstantial concessions which the Revised Book contains, or have no Revision at all.

[52]

The reasons why changes in the familiar system are resented may not be exactly religious. Canon Shearne relates that a Cornish Squire, when the 1st Lesson for the 21st Sunday after Trinity, Daniel III, was read, ejaculated the word 'Woodcocks', and, being asked the cause of this remarkable interruption, answered that 'When the Nebuchadnezzar lesson came round, you might look out for Woodocks'. The Church's Calendar connected itself with his shooting arrangements, and its alteration might well have been disconcerting to a keen sportsman.

Lord Hardinge of Penhurst arrived. I had a long & interesting talk with him. He said that the book "Mother India" was not in the least exaggerated. The dominant note of Indian life was sexuality. He had been admitted to the great temple at Benares, & it was simply indescribable – a delirium of phallacism. The present policy of democratising India could not possibly succeed. He spoke of the 2nd vol. of 'Sydney Lee's Life of Edward VII' which is about to appear. It had been submitted to him in proof, & he had not thought it necessary to advise more than the change of a single word.

[53]

But while his letters to the King were freely quoted: the King's letters to him had never been seen by Sydney Lee: & this was certainly unfortunate, as the last had necessarily affected he first. The broad effect of the book was to confirm the belief that Edward VII played a considerable rôle in foreign politics. He told me that the King had wished him to be Ambassador at Washington, & that 'C.B.' had actually offered him the Embassy. When he declined the offer, he had to make his peace with Edward VII, who received him kindly enough, & asked him to suggest an alternative to himself. He had recommended Bryce, who was finally sent to Washington. "You had, perhaps, better not say that the suggestion of his name came from you" – said the sapient Monarch, as he parted with Hardinge at Sandringham. Contrasting the sacrileges, he said that Edward VII expressed himself freely but wrote in an almost undecipherable hand, while George V. could not express himself at all, being indeed little better than a child in mind, but wrote a very legible hand! Of the P. of W. he said that he held him to be 'the most ill–conditioned man imaginable'!! His behaviour in Canada had been extraordinarily indiscreet and tactless.

[54]

He said that he had known personally five generations of Hohenzollerns. and thought meanly of the family. The ablest of them was the unfortunate Emperor, Frederick. In his judgement Emil Ludwig's description of Wilhelm II was thoroughly sound. He did not think that there was any prospect of a Hohenzollern Restoration.

I asked him what was his judgement on General Dyer. He replied that Dyer was an Indian born Englishman who had been educated in India: that he shared the anti–Hindhu prejudice common to man thus born & bred: that he had let himself go in a massacre when, probably, firing over the heads of the people would have sufficed. Nevertheless he thought that the consequences of the Massacre had probably been salutary, as the Hindhus had become extremely insolent. I asked him whether he thought that Lord Reading's authority had suffered from the fact that he was a Jew: & he replied in the negative. But the fact, (on which Lrd Reading himself said emphasis) that he was not a gentleman had probably been injurious. He thought that Lrd Irwin wd probably be one of the most successful Viceroys because he was both an aristocrat and an earnest Christian.