[22 Paradise Rd., Northampton, Mass.]
I was glad to get your letter No. 22, announcing the receipt of my letters up to and including 22. ISeaverns, Helen;d8 was incidentally glad to be in a position to tell Mrs. Seaverns thatPerkins, Dr John Carroll (EH's uncle)his Pastor Emeritus position endangered;d5 you knew nothing of the rumour of Dr. Perkins’s loss, and it is to be presumed that if it was true you would have heard of it. Yet she was sure she had it on the most responsible authority; butEliot, Theresa Garrett (TSE's sister-in-law)inflator of rumours;b2 no doubt anyone hearing on Theresa’s authority that I had become a professor at Cambridge would think that that was the most responsible authority too. As for Crookes’s Collosol Halibut (which I pronounce Hollibut, but nobody else seems to; just as I prefer the Down East rawsberry to rasberry raspberry [sic]) Oil Capsules, my dear, I go in for them every winter! – except as at such times as the present, when I am taking other temporary medicines. This week, I have to finish the cough medicine, a dose at night time; and then begin on the pills to bring up the blood pressure. Oh yes, I have seen my doctor since I wrote last, and he tells me that the blood pressure is very low. It is rather a relief to know that, because it serves to account for my disinclination to get up in the morning, which I had been putting down to laziness (DrJohnson, Dr SamuelTSE's fellow lie-abed;a3. Johnson had the same trouble, but it could hardly have been due to low blood pressure in his case), and to not feeling so bouncing with energy as I should like to. I have obeyed the injunction not to go out at night, this week; andMoot, The;b2 I am not going to the Moot meeting. ButEmpson, Williamlunch on return from China;a5 one can’t get out of everything: andLawrence, David Herbert ('D. H.')David;b1 on Saturday I have (1) Bill Empson to lunch, just returned from two years in Yunnan, via Cambridge Mass.1 (2) toBrowne, Elliott Martinwar work with Pilgrim Players;d3 go to Martin’s production of ‘David’ by D. H. Lawrence, I believe at the Drama League headquarters in Fitzroy Square. AndNew English Weekly;b4 I have done another page for the New English Weekly.
InChristianityorthodoxy;c4authority;a8 a general way, I do not mean by ‘Church doctrines’ the views of this or that theologian or bishop, or of one or another party, but the doctrines which appear always to have been held by the Church since the beginning, or which have received the sanction of authoritative Church Councils in the past. There is an important distinction too between permanent doctrine of belief or behaviour, and rules of government. In the Roman Church, for instance, the rule of a celibate clergy is just a rule and no more: some of the Eastern Churches which are in communion with Rome are allowed to continue their ancient custom of permitting the clergy to marry – just as they are also permitted to wear beards. But as for doctrine, it is not for any Archbishop or assembly of bishops, to alter that; and all that one can ask of a theologian is to tell one what the law of the Church is – sometimes to interpret it: it is a matter of his knowledge and orthodoxy, his knowledge of church history, and not of what he individually thinks to be right. ThereChristianityorthodoxy;c4Transubstantiation;a9 are many points on which difference of opinion is permissible: points on which neither Scripture, nor the judgement of the Church throughout history, gives a definite ruling: such as the way in which the Body and Blood of Christ become present in the Eucharist. ButMussolini, Benitohis authoritarianism distinguished from Church authority;a6, in submitting to authority, or accepting a doctrine because it is the doctrine of the church, one is not deferring to another human being, or any body of people in existence at any one time. It is not a question of ‘il duce ha sempre ragione’,2 or anything like that. It is the assumption, if you like, that there is a collective wisdom, not the wisdom of any one or more great men, manifested in the life of the Church throughout the centuries, the main features of which one can discern, and distinguish from local conditions and passing opinions. ThisChristianityChristendom;b2the Church Visible and Invisible;a4 assumption itself rests on the belief that the Church is not an organisation founded by men, but a mystical body created by God – the Church which is the mystical body of Christ being the continuation and renovation of the Church of the Hebrew people; and that at no time has God left it without the guidance of the Holy Ghost – however frequently individual men, even in the highest ecclesiastical position, have erred and betrayed it. When we use the term ‘the Church’, of course, we often mean only its human aspect, and often mean merely the ecclesiastical organisation and not even the body of the actual faithful; these variations of meaning have to be made clear by the context of discussion. But in its largest sense, the Church is not limited to the living, but is a communion of the living and the Dead, and indeed in a sense of the unborn. And I know that this notion of the ‘authority’ of the Church, even when one has grasped it, apparently, with one’s mind, is very difficult (until one is used to it) to keep clear from the ordinary meaning of ‘authority’ such as that of a Dictator or a Legislator.
ThereChristianityAnglo-Catholicism;a8apostolic succession;a7 is of course also the question of the relation of the ‘separated brethren’ (those who, without accepting the fulness [sic] of meaning of ‘the Church’, yet believe the doctrine of the Trinity and the Creeds) with the Church of the Apostolic Succession of Bishops: and that of the position of the Anglican Church in relation to Rome. ThisChristianityAnglo-Catholicism;a8over Roman Catholicism;a8 comes down to personal terms in the question: why am I personally a member of the Church of England instead of the Church of Rome? I am one of those who are always just on the edge of conversion to Rome, and yet stay where we are. It is awfully difficult to explain this; difficult even to set it down in terms which would satisfy my own mind. I don’t for a moment expect to make it at all intelligible in one letter; and the danger is always of creating further misunderstandings by one’s explanation, which one will then have to try to dispose of by further explanations which will give rise to further misunderstandings etc. SoChristianityRoman Catholicism;d1TSE's counter-factual denomination;a1 at the moment, to begin with, let me say that if I had lived in America, and come to anything like my present position, I believe that it would have been the Church of Rome that I should have accepted and not the Episcopal Church. And I do not mean that the Episcopal Church in communion with Canterbury might as well not exist in America: if I had been born into it I believe I should have stuck to it anywhere; but that the Church of Rome, in a country like America, has as good a right, and therefore a better right, to be the main Church, than any other. IChristianityAnglo-Catholicism;a8and the Reformation;a9 regret the separation of the English Church by Henry VIII; but, as for England, I do not think that that situation can be amended, or that one can get out of all responsibility for one’s ancestors and towards the living community, by going individually to Rome. The BodyChristianityChristendom;b2prospect of total reunion within;a7 of the Church in England, though separated, still have a living spiritual existence: the important thing is not the secession of people one by one, but the eventual re-incorporation of the whole Church; for I cannot be content with any future which does not envisage the ultimate reunion of all Christendom and in re-union in communion with Rome. But meanwhile the English Church exists, and I believe it has, so to speak, interim validity; and that there is a meaning to loyalty to the community of Christians in what is the Church of England, which is something entirely different from loyalty in the sense of ‘team spirit’ or loyalty to a school, college or temporal government.
It is awfully difficult to put this in a way which will not seem as if one remained in the Church of England solely on grounds of expediency, and as if one were not either committing the limited dishonesty of belonging to one body when one believed in another, or the complete dishonesty of not believing in anything.
And all this may seem at first very dry, as well as very remote from the questions to which you want answers: but it all has a bearing, and has to be dealt with somehow!
My dear, you are always with me, but speech would be so much better.
1.TSE to Hayward, 16 Feb. 1940: ‘Bill Empson lunched with me on Saturday. Quiet voyage [from the USA], but says that if Winston’s famous convoy was looking after his ship, it tactfully kept below the horizon, as he saw nothing of it. He is dirtier and more distrait than ever. It was most refreshing to see him.’ (Letters 9, 429–30)
2.‘The Leader [Duce] is always right’: a much-repeated official Italian slogan praising Mussolini.
4.E. MartinBrowne, Elliott Martin Browne (1900–80), English director and producer, was to direct the first production of Murder in the Cathedral: see Biographical Register.
4.WilliamEmpson, William Empson (1906–84), poet and critic: see Biographical Register.
3.DrPerkins, Dr John Carroll (EH's uncle) John Carroll Perkins (1862–1950), Minister of King’s Chapel, Boston: see Biographical Register.
3.HelenSeaverns, Helen Seaverns, widow of the American-born businessman and Liberal MP, Joel Herbert Seaverns: see Biographical Register.