The Henson Journals
Wed 10 July 1929
Volume 48, Pages 193 to 194
[193]
Wednesday, July 10th, 1929.
[symbol]
YORK CONVOCATION
We packed our bags, and carried them into York with us on the supposition that we should get through our business in time for us to get away tonight. We did get away, but our business was not finished.
There was a choral Celebration in the Minster at 10 a.m. The Archbishop was the celebrant, and I read the Gospel. After service in the Minster we processed to S. William's College, and, after the Lower House had chosen its Prolocutor, the Archbishop addressed the Convocation. Then the Bishops retired to their chamber. We excluded the Press in order to discuss with more freedom a foolish motion which "Little Arty" [The Bp. of Ripon, Burroughs] had sent in. It is evident that the episcopal policy of governing the Church of England "by consent" will be strongly opposed by the extreme Protestants, and the extreme Anglo–Catholics. I suspect that the Low Church Bishops in both Provinces are acting on a concerted plan.
With great folly, as I judge, the Primates submitted their proposals to the Lower Houses, and invited their observations!
[194]
[symbol]
An opportunity was given to the malcontents to make a demonstration, and they took full advantage of it. The Lower House had not concluded their discussion by 5.30 p.m. when the debate was adjourned. The Bishops took a provisional vote, & carried the resolutions by 9 votes to 1 not–voting. The Bishop of Bradford conceived himself to be pledged to refuse permission to reserve the Sacrament whatever the circumstances of the parish might be, that is, he refused to exercise the discretion required by the Rubrick!
My speech in moving the resolutions was crude, inadequate, and unconvincing! I was tired, and "put off" by the long delay before the subject came on. But I did make clear both the revolutionary character of our proposals, and the slender likelihood of their working successfully. "The Establishment must be either mended or ended", I said. We cannot go to Parliament again for that would imply our deliberate acceptance of the situation disclosed by the action of the House of Commons. If our essay in 'Government by consent' shall fail, how can Disestablishment be averted?