The idea persists that the Lambeth Conference is a sort of Legislative Body or Court of Appeal which propagates laws for the Anglican Communion throughout the world and settles differences. But this position it has always declined (Emphasis added), believing that under special circumstances, i.e. the different governments under which the churches live, and the various races of which they are composed (like the various nations which make up the Empire which, as we know, is held together far more by a common tradition of loyalty than by actual organization) it will better fulfill its purpose by remaining a conference pure and simple and recording its findings in a series of Resolutions and Recommendations to be freely received by those who value them, than by claiming the position of an authoritative Synod. (Emphasis added)
It is true that there is a Consultative Committee attached to the Conference which sits from time to time and which Bishops may consult as its name implies, and most useful it is. But this does not alter the nature of the Conference as I have described it. Further, it does seem as though the thorny problem of Reunion in South India has been submitted to the Conference for settlement. But it is still true that all the Bishops can do is to state the principles which in their judgment are true and binding, and leave those who are concerned to apply them. Our responsibility is of course immense, but it is a responsibility of discerning truth not dictating a policy (Emphasis added). Again being a world conference, it does not discuss local problems, as e.g. the Rejection of the Prayer Book by the House of Commons. It can no more do that than the British Parliament can busy itself with the internal affairs of the Dominion of Canada.
This will be the third Conference that I shall have attended. The first was in 1908, the second (delayed by the Great War) in 1920, and the third this year, 1930. I see in my "Notes" of nearly ten years ago, I referred to the last Conference as by general consent epoch-making, especially as to the Reunion question. So what then will this be? The general impression, well-founded as I think, is that that problem, like other, has moved on to phases of appalling complexity and difficulty. In realms of thought, as of life, it is becoming an increasingly difficult world. But also I note then, what is more cheering, our conviction of the Holy Spirit's presence.
The Rt Rev. Francis Every, Bishop of Argentina and Eastern South America, 1930.
