educational work, which, with the arrival of further settlers with young families, will become an increasingly important sphere.

It is improbable that the number of ex-service men requiring the benefits which Enham provides will diminish for some years. Several thousand men are still in hospital, and there are many more in Government convalescent and training centres. A proportion of these men must be suitable for Enham, and in the Enham scheme lies their only hope for the future.

It may be questioned whether the capital expenditure on the estate is justified, whether this problem of war disablement, which will pass with this generation, justifies measures of a permanent character for which money has now to be found. The national utility of Enham will not, however, pass with the years. Enham will be needed by disabled ex-service men for many years to come; and then it can be used to make good a part of the industrial wastage. Nearly 250,000 men are injured annually in the mines and factories of Great Britain. A number of these are rendered unemployable. No attempt is made at, present to re-educate them industrially, or to afford them any but a slight measure of medical and pecuniary aid. These industrial' derelicts' are, practically, abandoned; but in due course Enham will be able to salvage and refit them for service either in the great sea of national industry or in the quiet harbour of Enham itself.

The harvest of war is not all sorrow, and the product of war is not all bitterness. We have to curb the causes and agencies of destruction. That is our first duty. To conserve and develop all the creative and constructive elements which emerged from the four years of the world's great tragedy-that is another duty, no less solemn, no less imperative. For this reason it is surely incumbent upon us to press for the development of the Enham scheme, and by so doing bring to the unfortunate of this and future generations a new hope and a more humane prospect.

HENRY BENTINCK.

REUNION

THE 'conversations' at Malines give much food for thought. Few English Churchmen outside the inner coteries of the AngloCatholic movement' knew that matters had gone so far, and the announcement that the Primate of all England was prepared to associate himself with the ecclesiastical advances of Lord Halifax came with the shock of unwelcome surprise to most English folk. When, in 1894, Archbishop Benson dissociated himself with some sharpness from any responsibility for his Lordship's diplomacy, the way for a restoration of fellowship between the Churches was comparatively unobstructed. But since the issue of the Bull Apostolicæ Curæ' in 1895, declaring the absolute nullity of English Orders, the renewal of relations with Rome seemed to be wholly blocked. It was hard to imagine how any approach was possible from the side of the Anglican Communion until that harsh verdict had been withdrawn, or at least mitigated. Why did not the present Primate follow his predecessor's example, and, with even more evident reason, meet the well-intentioned but unauthorised efforts of Lord Halifax with a stern rebuke ?

It is not clear what precise measure of official authorisation was possessed by the delegates from the two Churches who met in the Cardinal's palace at Malines. The English Primate and the Roman Pontiff appear to disagree on the point, for-if The Times correspondent in Rome has been correctly informed-the Pope did not concede the 'official cognisance' which the Archbishop considered himself fairly entitled to assume, and which formed the necessary condition of his own course. That an unfortunate misunderstanding has occurred is sufficiently evident, but that a situation should have come into existence in which such a misunderstanding is possible will appear to the majority of English Christians extremely perplexing, and even startling. Even the ample assurances of the Archbishop's letter, and the well-founded confidence which is generally felt in His Grace's judgment, have not been able to remove the unpleasant impression which has been created. The profound respect for the Primate, built on his eminent services to the Church through many years, has restrained the public expression of an anxiety which none the

less is widely felt, and which will not easily or quickly be removed. A sudden and unexpected light has been cast on the meaning and tendency of the attempt to restore the visible unity' of the Christian society, which, since the issue of the Appeal to all Christian People by the last Lambeth Conference, has filled so large a place in the mind of English-speaking Christians. Many who accepted without much reflection the ardent summons to 'bury hatchets' and make peace between the Churches have been compelled to ask themselves what they really mean by reunion, and what they really want.

The Archbishop refers to the Lambeth Appeal as in some sense requiring his recent action, but an examination of that document does not appear to justify the reference. The language is indeed regrettably ambiguous, and lends itself but too easily to discordant interpretations, but, so far as the Roman Catholic Church is concerned, its meaning seems plain enough. The Appeal to all Christian People is set out in nine sections, of which the first five describe, with perilous because misleading eloquence, the reasons why the Bishops have felt themselves bound to seek ' reunion,' and what they consider the Christian Church would be if it accorded with the Divine intention. Then, in Section VI., they set down shortly and clearly what they conceive to be the necessary basis of negotiations between the separated Churches. This crucial section runs thus:

VI. We believe that the visible unity of the Church will be found to involve the whole-hearted acceptance of—

The Holy Scriptures, as the record of God's revelation of Himself to man, and as being the rule and ultimate standard of faith, and the Creed commonly called Nicene, as the sufficient statement of the Christian faith, and either it or the Apostles' Creed as the baptismal confession of belief;

The Divinely instituted Sacraments of Baptism and the Holy Communion, as expressing for all the corporate life of the whole fellowship in and with Christ;

A ministry acknowledged by every part of the Church as possessing not only the inward call of the Spirit, but also the commission of Christ and the authority of the whole body.

The remaining sections are concerned with the single point of organisation. They suggest a method by which the diverse polities of the separated Churches might be everywhere brought into an uniform type, the episcopal, without doing violence to any conscience or wounding any self-respect. It is sufficiently obvious, as well from the order of the sections of the Appeal as from the necessary sequence of the argument, that the practical proposals contained in the eighth section presuppose acceptance of the basis set out in the sixth. On that basis the Bishops profess themselves ready to enter into such arrangements as they indicate

in Section VIII. The particular method proposed is plainly directed primarily to the case of the non-episcopal Churches, since in their case only does the difficult and embarrassing question of a 'valid' ministry properly arise. Efforts have indeed been made by some Anglo-Catholics' to read into the Appeal an intention which was certainly absent from the minds of most of the Bishops at Lambeth. Thus, to give but a single example, the Rev. Wilfred L. Knox writes in his curious and illuminating book The Catholic Movement in the Church of England:

An obstacle which seemed at one time to be very serious may now be regarded as set aside, namely, the condemnation by Leo XIII. of the Orders of the Church of England. For although Anglicans are firmly convinced that they receive at ordination the power which our Lord gave to His Apostles to teach and to administer the Sacraments in His name, yet the recent Lambeth Conference of 1920 formally declared the willingness of Anglicans to accept, if such acceptance were a condition of reunion, any such confirmation of their Orders as would satisfy the consciences of those with whom reunion was sought. It is not clear whether the decision of Leo XIII. would be regarded as still in force, if there were no other obstacle to reunion on the Roman side; but if it were insisted on, it seems that the Lambeth Conference would be prepared to recommend, if necessary, the acceptance of ordination by the clergy of the English Church in such a form as to set aside all doubts which Rome might feel. Such an acceptance would not imply an admission of the invalidity of the past ministrations of English priests, but a willingness to remove all obstacles to unity with another Christian body" (v., p. 248).

It is not perhaps without significance that the English delegates at Malines, until they were recalled to actuality by the Archbishop, embarked at once on the discussion of 'certain large administrative problems which might arise, if and when a measure of agreement had been reached on the great doctrinal and historical questions sundering the two Churches.' When, however, it is remembered that it is the common assumption of the 'AngloCatholics' that doctrinal agreement (save for the measures of the Pope's supremacy) is already in existence, this inversion of the natural order of discussion ceases to be surprising. Neither the Archbishop nor the Cardinal was thus to be hoodwinked :

I found myself in concurrence with His Eminence the Cardinal [writes the Archbishop] as well as with the members of the original group in pressing the point that prior to any discussion upon the possible administrative questions which might arise attention should be concentrated upon the great doctrinal and historical issues at stake between the Churches.

Had the order of the Appeal been followed in the first instance, and the Roman delegates confronted with the basis for negotiation proposed in its sixth section, it would have been immediately apparent that 'conversations' were altogether out of place. The Archbishop reminds his readers that we have

before us what was said on the subject' (of the relation of the Church of England to the Church of Rome) 'by the Committee of the same Lambeth Conference' (as issued the Appeal). But a reference to that Committee's report will not strengthen the case for such essays at negotiation as have been made at Malines. There it is laid down that the initiative must come from the Church of Rome, since the barriers to fellowship are of her creation. Emphasis is placed on what are described as 'movements going on in the Church of Rome which may be fruitful in the future,' but that is all. 'It is obvious,' says the report,' that no forward step can be taken yet; but the facts thus referred to may help to create in the future a very different position.' There is nothing here to justify Lord Halifax's self-commissioned embassy to Cardinal Mercier, nor the more or less authorised conferences which have grown from it. The Archbishop has expressed his belief that 'further conversations must follow from the careful talks already held,' but that belief will hardly survive the disclosure of the true mind of the Vatican. In any case, His Grace claims 'in this direction, as in others, to give effect to the formal recommendation of the Lambeth Conference,' and he proceeds to quote some words from the tenth resolution of the Conference. But it is difficult to see how that resolution can be made to cover such proceedings as His Grace has described. It runs thus:

The Conference recommends to the authorities of the Churches of the Anglican Communion that they should, in such ways and at such times as they think best, formally invite the authorities of other Churches within their areas to confer with them concerning the possibility of taking definite steps to co-operate in a common endeavour, on the lines set forth in the above Appeal, to restore the unity of the Church of Christ.

The words italicised are those which the Archbishop has not thought it necessary to quote. Yet they are quite fatal to His Grace's application of the Lambeth resolution to the proceedings at Malines.

As a method of improving relations between the Churches such private approaches to Rome even with some kind of official cognisance' can hardly be fruitful of any useful result. In truth they do justice to neither Church, and may easily injure both, for while Roman Catholics on the Continent may well be confirmed in an unfortunate misunderstanding of the religious situation in England, members of the Church of England may be encouraged to pursue a false ideal of ecclesiastical unity. In fact, proceedings of this kind can never lead to any good. There will, of course, always be a friendly reception of such overtures for reunion as Dr. Pusey made to the French Bishops in 1868, and Lord Halifax in 1894; and always the welcome will exhaust itself in personal compliments. For, however conciliatory