Editing Randall Davidson (section)

==Archbishop of Canterbury==
When Temple was appointed in 1896 there had been three candidates under consideration for the Archbishopric;{{refn|group=n|name=london}} in 1902 Davidson was the only one.<ref name=to/> It was a generally popular choice, except among the more militant Anglo-Catholics.<ref name=to/> He was enthroned at Canterbury on 12 February 1903.<ref>Bell (Volume I), p. 393</ref> From the outset, Davidson, unlike Temple, was happy to turn to colleagues for advice. In a 1997 study, [[Edward Carpenter]] describes the most prominent of them: [[John Wordsworth]], [[Bishop of Salisbury]], "a man of great if somewhat restricted ecclesiastical learning"; [[Francis Paget]], [[Bishop of Oxford]], "a scholar and theologian"; [[Edward Talbot (bishop)|Edward Talbot]], [[Bishop of Rochester]], "a practical Diocesan"; Cosmo Lang, [[Bishop of Stepney]] and later [[Archbishop of York]], "a fellow Scotsman who made Lambeth his London home and became almost indispensable" and [[Lord Stamfordham]], who had been Queen Victoria's private secretary.<ref>Carpenter, p. 411</ref>

Davidson's constant concern was for what he called "the great central party in the English Church".<ref>Hastings, p. 83</ref> He was a prime mover in efforts to update the ''[[Book of Common Prayer]]'' to make it comprehensible to 20th century congregations, and he aimed to accommodate all the clergy of the Church of England within Anglican doctrine, bringing the few high-church extremists back into obedience to church rules.<ref name=to/> With his cautious support, Balfour set up a [[Royal Commission]] to enquire into and propose remedies for the prevalent disorders in the church. It concluded that the church needed more control over its own affairs, but that the laws governing its practices must be enforced.<ref name=to>"Death of Lord Davidson – Archbishop for 25 Years – A Wise Leader", ''The Times'', 26 May 1930, pp. 15–16</ref><ref>Bell (Volume I), p. 471</ref> Davidson was neither a diehard conservative nor an adventurous reformer, but steered a middle course. On the government's wish to reform the marriage laws to allow a widower to marry his late wife's sister he opposed reform (unsuccessfully);{{refn|This possibility had been a matter of controversy for decades. Marriage with a deceased wife's sister had been added to the church's list of prohibited marriages in 1835. Gladstone had been among the prominent Liberals allied with the Marriage Law Reform Association seeking the overturning of the ban. In 1882 [[W.&nbsp;S. Gilbert]] made fun of the recurrent controversy in ''[[Iolanthe]]'': "that annual blister, marriage with deceased wife's sister". The ban was overturned by Parliament [[Deceased Wife's Sister's Marriage Act 1907|in 1907]].<ref>Bradley, pp. 406–408</ref>|group=n}} on the interpretation of the [[Athanasian Creed]] he took a liberal line.{{refn|The question was how literally Christians should take the clauses of the creed that threatened damnation to those who do not keep the faith "whole and undefiled".<ref>Bell (Volume I), p. 434</ref>|group=n}}
[[File:Archbishop-Randall-Davidson-1900s.png|thumb|left|alt=bald, clean-shaven white man in ecclesiastical robes, carrying as staff surmounted by a cross|Davidson, c. 1908]]

In August 1904 Davidson, accompanied by his wife, sailed to the United States to attend the triennial convention of the American [[Episcopal Church (United States)|Episcopal Church]]; he was the first Archbishop of Canterbury to visit the US.<ref name=to/> He met many church leaders in the US and Canada, and established closer links between the Anglican churches of England and North America.<ref>"The Archbishop of Canterbury", ''The Times'', 22 October 1904, p. 9</ref> This accomplishment abroad was followed by a setback at home: Davidson's unsuccessful attempt to bring political leaders to agree about national education policy. The [[Liberal Party (UK)|Liberals]] had opposed the passage of the 1902 Education Act, and once in office in 1906 they reopened the issue. Their attempts at further reform were opposed by the [[Conservative Party (UK)|Conservatives]], and from 1906 to 1908 Davidson strove to bring the two sides to compromise. His failure to secure agreement and achieve a cohesive primary education system was one of the major regrets of his life.<ref>Bell (Volume I), p. 539</ref> In 1907 Davidson disappointed some Liberals by not explicitly backing state old-age pensions, but he declined to do so merely in the abstract, insisting on detailed proposals before expressing support.<ref>Bell (Volume I), p. 545</ref> He was much more forthcoming on atrocities by the [[Atrocities in the Congo Free State|Belgians in the Congo]] and the [[Macedonian Struggle#Crimes|Bulgarians in Macedonia]], which he condemned vehemently.<ref>Bell (Volume I), pp. 547–548</ref>

===Lambeth Conference, 1908===
In July and August 1908 Davidson presided over the fifth [[Lambeth Conference]] of bishops from the world-wide Anglican communion;<ref>Bell (Volume I), p. 559</ref> 241 bishops were present.<ref name=eb/> The chief subjects of discussion were: the relations of faith and modern thought; the supply and training of the clergy; education; foreign missions; revision and "enrichment" of the Prayer-book; the relation of the church to "ministries of healing" such as [[Christian Science]]; the questions of marriage and divorce; organisation of the Anglican Church; and reunion with other churches.<ref name=eb>{{cite EB1911|wstitle=Lambeth Conferences|last=|first=|page=}}</ref> Public interest focused on the bishops' desire for Christian unity. The resolutions showed a will for reunion, but a caution in taking any step towards the nonconformists that might destroy the possibility of ultimate reunion with the Roman Catholic or [[Eastern Orthodox Church|Orthodox]] churches.<ref name=to/>

===Domestic affairs, 1909–1911===
In 1909 [[David Lloyd George]] as [[Chancellor of the Exchequer]] found [[People's Budget|his radical budget]] blocked by the Conservative majority in the House of Lords; a few bishops voted for or against the government's bill, but Davidson, like most of the 26 [[Lords Spiritual]], abstained.{{refn|The votes or abstentions of the Lords Spiritual had no practical effect on the outcome: the Lords rejected the government's bill by 350 votes to 75.<ref>Bell (Volume I), p. 597</ref>|group=n}} Partisans, both conservative and radical, criticised Davidson for his abstention, but he felt that being identified with one side or the other in party politics would bring the church into disrepute.<ref>Bell (Volume I), p. 600</ref>

[[File:Parliament-Act-1911-Division-in-House-of-Lords (retouched).png|thumb|upright=2|alt=Scene inside parliamentary debating chamber with peers and bishops walking into the voting lobbies. Two bishops are joining the peers opposing the current legislation; the others are voting with the government|1911 vote on the [[Parliament Act 1911|Parliament Bill]] in the [[House of Lords]]: all but two of the bishops follow Davidson into the pro-government voting lobby (top l.){{refn|The two bishops (rear centre-right) walking towards the opposition lobby are [[Watkin Williams (bishop)|Watkin Williams]], [[Bishop of Bangor]], and [[Huyshe Yeatman-Biggs]], [[Bishop of Worcester]].<ref>"The Passing of the Veto Bill without a Creation of New Peers: The Separation of the Contents and the Not-Contents",  ''[[The Illustrated London News]]'', 19 August 1911, pp. 292–93</ref>|group=n}}]]

The Prime Minister, [[H. H. Asquith]], secured the King's reluctant agreement to create as many new peerages for government supporters as was necessary to secure a majority in the Lords. At the end of April 1911 Davidson convened a private meeting at Lambeth Palace to try to resolve the constitutional impasse; the other three attending were Balfour, [[Francis Knollys, 1st Viscount Knollys|Lord Knollys]] and [[Reginald Brett, 2nd Viscount Esher|Lord Esher]] – respectively, [[Leader of the Opposition (United Kingdom)|Leader of the Opposition]], the King's private secretary, and an influential politician and courtier. Balfour said that if invited by the King, he would consider forming a minority Conservative government, so that the question of creating new Liberal peers would not arise; he subsequently decided that he would not be justified in doing so.<ref name=r123>Rose, p. 123</ref> A week after this meeting Edward VII died, and was succeeded by [[George V]].<ref name=r123/>

The Lords continued to resist the will of the Commons, even after [[December 1910 United Kingdom general election|a general election]] fought on the issue. Asquith proposed the [[Parliament Act 1911|1911 Parliament Bill]], to enshrine the supremacy of the Commons in British law, and King George followed his father in agreeing to create hundreds of Liberal peers, should it become necessary to ensure the bill was passed. Davidson, having unsuccessfully striven to bring the party leaders to compromise, voted for the bill. The votes of the Lords Spiritual were crucial in its passage through the Lords, where the majority was only 17.<ref name=t11>"House of Lords", ''The Times'', 11 August 1911, p. 5</ref> The two archbishops and eleven bishops voted with the government; two bishops voted against.<ref name=t11/> There were strident protests that the bishops were harming the church by taking sides, but Davidson had come to regard this as a matter on which the church must take a stand. He believed that were the bill not passed, the creation of what he called "a swamping majority" of peers would make Parliament and Britain a worldwide laughing-stock, and would have grave constitutional implications for church and state.<ref name=l1911/>{{refn|Among Davidson's concerns was the question of legislation affecting the church, particularly with regard to [[Welsh disestablishment]], which Liberals generally supported.<ref name=l1911>Davidson, Randall. Letter to ''The Times'', 24 August 1911, p. 4; and Quinault, p. 41</ref>|group=n}} His speech in the Lords was credited with tipping the balance.<ref>Bell (Volume I), pp. 629–631</ref>

On 22 June 1911, Davidson presided at the [[coronation of George V and Mary|coronation of the new sovereign]]. The service largely followed the form he had arranged for the 1902 service, except for a revised coronation oath, less offensive to the King's Roman Catholic subjects,{{refn|The existing text, dating from the 17th century, referred to some teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, particularly [[transubstantiation]], as "superstitious and idolatrous". Davidson successfully proposed omitting this section of the oath.<ref>Bell (Volume I), pp. 613 and 617</ref>|group=n}} and Davidson's crowning of both King George and [[Mary of Teck|Queen Mary]]. In contrast, in the 1902 coronation, [[Queen Alexandra]] had been crowned by the Archbishop of York.<ref name=to/><ref>Bell (Volume I), p. 637</ref> When the King left Britain for the [[Visit of King George V to India|Delhi Durbar]] later in the year, Davidson was one of the four [[Counsellors of State]] appointed to transact royal business in the monarch's absence.{{refn|The others were [[Prince Arthur of Connaught]], the [[Lord Chancellor]] ([[Lord Loreburn]]) and the [[Lord President of the Council]] ([[John Morley|Lord Morley]]). They held office from November 1911 to the end of January 1912, when the King returned from India.<ref>Bell (Volume I), pp. 637–638</ref>|group=n}}

===Kikuyu controversy 1913–1914===
{{main|Kikuyu controversy}}
Skirmishing between Anglican factions continued with the [[Kikuyu controversy]] in 1913–14.<ref>Bell (Volume I), p. 690</ref> [[William George Peel]], who was the [[Bishop of Mombasa]] and [[John Jamieson Willis]], the [[Bishop of Uganda]], attended an interdenominational missionary conference at the Church of Scotland's parish in [[Kikuyu, Kenya|Kikuyu]], [[British East Africa]], during which they took part in an [[ecumenical]] communion service together with their nonconformist colleagues.<ref>Bell (Volume I), p. 691</ref> For this, and their agreement to cooperate with other churches in their missionary work, they were denounced by [[Frank Weston (bishop of Zanzibar)|Frank Weston]], the [[Anglican Bishop of Zanzibar|Bishop of Zanzibar]]. Weston, described by Mews as a "champion of Anglo-Catholic hardliners", sought their trial for heresy. He was backed by the Bishop of Oxford, [[Charles Gore]], the most vociferous of the Anglo-Catholic bishops.{{refn|[[Hensley Henson]], [[Dean of Durham|Dean]], and later [[Bishop of Durham|Bishop]], of Durham, privately described Weston and Gore as "fanatical in temper, bigoted in their beliefs, and reckless in their methods".<ref>Henson, p. 159</ref>|group=n}}  Davidson's private view was that the attending bishops had been "rash" but the denunciations by Weston and Gore "preposterous" and "absurdly vituperative".<ref>Barber, p. 433</ref> The issue was debated in the press for several weeks but Davidson's inclusive and pragmatic views prevailed, and the controversy dwindled away.<ref name=odnb/><ref name=dnb/>

===First World War, 1914–1918===
[[File:Service-of-intercession-1917-Westminster-Abbey.png|thumb|upright=1.4|alt=People praying in church|Davidson (kneeling, l.) and [[George V]] (kneeling, r.) at a service to pray for peace, [[Westminster Abbey]], 1917]]

The outbreak of the [[First World War]] was a severe shock to Davidson, who had held that war between Britain and Germany was inconceivable.<ref>Bell (Volume II), p. 731</ref> But he was clear that it was a [[just war]] in which it was Britain's duty to fight because of "the paramount obligation of fidelity to plighted word and the duty of defending weaker nations against violence".<ref name=dnb/> He was reconciled to allowing clergy to serve as non-combatants, but not as combatants.<ref>Bell (Volume II), p. 739</ref><ref>Hughes, p. 91</ref>

When a group of theologians in Germany published a manifesto seeking to justify the actions of the German government, Davidson was ready to respond. At the government's request he took the lead in collaborating with a large number of other religious leaders, including some with whom he had differed in the past, to write a rebuttal of the Germans' contentions<ref name=odnb/> but unlike some of his colleagues in the church, Davidson, in Bell's words, "felt the horror of war too keenly to indulge in anti-German rhetoric".<ref name=dnb/> As ''The Times'' put it, "He was never betrayed into the wild denunciations and hysterical approval of war to which some ecclesiastics gave utterance".<ref name=to/> He donated to a fund to help Germans and [[Austro-Hungarians]] in Britain, where they were classed as [[enemy alien]]s.<ref>Van Emden, p. 53</ref>

Throughout the war Davidson criticised the use of what he considered immoral methods of warfare by the British side.{{refn|He wrote, "the principles of morality forbid a policy of reprisal which has, as a deliberate object, the killing or wounding of non-combatants&nbsp;... the adoption of such a mode of retaliation, even for barbarous outrages, would permanently lower the standard of honourable conduct between nation and nation".<ref name=c148>Carpenter, p. 418</ref> He said in the House of Lords that Christianity required Britain to fight in a way that "in the coming years, whatever record leaps to light, we shall never be ashamed".<ref name=c148/>|group=n}} Most of his objections were made privately to political leaders, but some were public, and he was bitterly attacked for them. Mews records "hate mail flood[ing] into Lambeth Palace".<ref name=odnb/> Davidson protested against the [[Propaganda in World War I|false information]] put out to hide British military reverses,{{refn|With regard to Davidson's protests about the government's deceit of the public over British losses, [[Winston Churchill]], the [[First Lord of the Admiralty]], told Asquith, "I arranged some time ago not to publish any more [[Navy List]]s during the war. I don't know who studies them except the German Admiralty and the Archbishop of Canterbury".<ref>Gilbert (1972), p. 496</ref>|group=n}} the use of [[Chemical weapons in World War I|poison gas]], the [[Strategic bombing during World War I|punitive bombing]] of [[Freiburg]] in April 1917 and the targeting of [[non-combatant]]s.<ref name=odnb/><ref name=dnb/> In 1916 he crossed to France for an eight-day visit to combatant troops at the [[Western Front (World War I)|Western front]].<ref name=to/>

While the war was going on, civil strife in Ireland was another matter of concern to Davidson. He spoke against the death sentence passed on [[Sir Roger Casement]] for his part in the [[Easter Rising]], and post-war condemned the violence of the [[Black and Tans]].<ref name=marshall>Marshall, p. 269</ref>

In the last year of the war Davidson had to deal with further agitation from the high-church faction. Gore took exception to the liberal theology of [[Hensley Henson]] and attempted to thwart the Prime Minister's nomination of Henson for a bishopric.<ref>Bell (Volume II), pp. 859–862</ref>{{refn|The Prime Minister was Lloyd George, who had succeeded Asquith in 1916.<ref>Morgan, Kenneth O. [https://www.oxforddnb.com/view/10.1093/ref:odnb/9780198614128.001.0001/odnb-9780198614128-e-34570 "George, David Lloyd, first Earl Lloyd-George of Dwyfor (1863–1945), prime minister"], ''Oxford Dictionary of National Biography'', Oxford University Press, 2018.   {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200104021953/https://www.oxforddnb.com/view/10.1093/ref:odnb/9780198614128.001.0001/odnb-9780198614128-e-34570 |date=4 January 2020 }}. Retrieved 3 January 2020 {{ODNBsub}}</ref>|group=n}} Opinion among the laity and most of the clergy was against Gore. Davidson, who hated unnecessary conflict, was distressed by the controversy, and even considered resigning.<ref name=henson>Grimley, Matthew. [https://www.oxforddnb.com/view/10.1093/ref:odnb/9780198614128.001.0001/odnb-9780198614128-e-3382 "Henson, Herbert Hensley (1863–1947), bishop of Durham"]  ''Oxford Dictionary of National Biography'', Oxford University Press, 2011. {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191212111619/https://www.oxforddnb.com/view/10.1093/ref:odnb/9780198614128.001.0001/odnb-9780198614128-e-3382 |date=12 December 2019 }}. Retrieved 12 December 2019 {{ODNBsub}}</ref> But, despite Henson's fear that the Archbishop might weaken,<ref>Peart-Binns, p. 91</ref> Davidson stood by him, and the two agreed that Henson would issue a statement of faith to silence the critics.<ref name=henson/> Davidson then stated publicly that no fair-minded man could read Henson's sermons without feeling that they had in him a brilliant and powerful teacher of the Christian faith.<ref>"Bishopric of Hereford: The Primate's Attitude", ''The Manchester Guardian'', 18 January  1918, p. 5</ref> Gore and his followers were obliged to call off their protests.<ref name=henson/><ref>Bell (Volume II), p. 879</ref>

Throughout the war, Davidson distanced himself from pacifism. For him, Christian idealism must be accompanied by political realism. He maintained that alongside prayer and witness, Christians had a "duty to think", and that peace would come "when we have given our mind – yes, mind as well as heart – to these new and brave resolves".<ref>Chapman, p. 27</ref> With this conviction in mind, he was a strong supporter of the [[League of Nations]] when it was set up after the war.<ref name=marshall/>

===Enabling Act, 1919 and Welsh disestablishment, 1922===
{{see also|Church of England Assembly (Powers) Act 1919|Welsh Church Act 1914}}

Up to this point the Church of England had little power to make its own rules. As the established church it was subject to parliamentary control, and had no independent authority to initiate legislation.<ref>Bell (Volume II), pp. 956–957</ref> [[Church of England Assembly (Powers) Act 1919|The Enabling Act]], strongly backed by Davidson, gave the church the right to submit [[primary legislation]] for passage by Parliament.<ref>Bell (Volume II), p. 968</ref> The historian [[Jeremy Morris]] calls it "probably the most significant single piece of legislation passed by Parliament for the Church of England in the twentieth century",<ref name=morris/> and summarises its effects:

{{blockquote|It led to the full integration of lay representatives with the two houses of clergy and bishops into a new [[Church Assembly]]. It provided some legislative autonomy for the Church, thus drawing the sting of anti-establishmentarian criticism, and instituted at local level the [[Parochial Church Council]]s which constitute the bedrock of the Church of England's representative system today.<ref name=morris>Morris, p. 246</ref>|}}

Davidson failed to achieve his aims over [[Welsh disestablishment]]. Unlike England, Wales had long been mainly nonconformist; the Anglican church there was widely seen as that of the ruling elite, and its legal status as the official church of the principality was strongly resented. The historian [[Callum G. Brown]] quotes the view that "church disestablishment was to Wales what home rule was to the Irish".<ref>Brown, p. 82</ref> There had been pressure since the 1880s for disestablishment, and bills to bring it about had been unsuccessfully put to Parliament in 1894, 1895, 1911 and 1912. Davidson was against disestablishment, but Parliament finally voted for it in 1914 and after considerable delay it came into effect in 1922.<ref>Brown, pp. 82–83</ref>

===Lambeth Conference, 1920===
[[File:Lambeth-Conference-1920.png|thumb|left|upright=1.5|alt=Long procession of mostly white clergymen in episcopal costume|Procession of bishops at the 1920 Lambeth Conference]]
At Davidson's instigation the sixth Lambeth Conference was held as soon as practicable after the end of the war. It met at Lambeth Palace in July and August 1920; 252 bishops attended. The bishops reaffirmed the [[Lambeth Quadrilateral]] – the four fundamentals of the Anglican Communion's doctrine. From this starting-point they developed the major initiative of the conference, the "Appeal to all Christian People", which set out the basis on which Anglican churches would seek to move towards union with churches of other traditions.<ref name=t1920/>

Other resolutions of the conference welcomed the League of Nations "as an expression of Christianity in politics", affirmed the eligibility of women for the [[diaconate]], and declared marriage an indissoluble and life-long union, with no acceptable ground for divorce except adultery. The bishops denounced [[birth control]], [[Spiritualism (movement)|spiritualism]], and attempts to [[Mediumship|communicate with the dead]]. Christian Science and [[theosophy]] were stated to involve grave error, but were given credit for showing a reaction against [[Economic materialism|materialism]].<ref name=t1920>"The Lambeth Resolutions", ''The Times'', 14 August 1920, p. 11</ref><ref>Bell (Volume II), pp. 1007–1015</ref>

===General Strike, 1926===
{{see also|1926 United Kingdom general strike}}
In May 1926 a general strike was called by the [[Trades Union Congress]] (TUC) in an attempt to force the government to do something to prevent wage cuts and ameliorate worsening conditions for British coal miners. Some 2.5&nbsp;million workers struck from 3 to 12 May, paralysing transport and industry.<ref>Butt, p. 391</ref> Davidson sought to play a conciliatory role; the historian G. I. T. Machin calls his intervention "probably the most celebrated actions of his twenty-five years as Archbishop of Canterbury". Davidson first spoke about the strike on 5 May, addressing the Lords. He expressed disapproval of the strike but called on the Government to act to end the industrial bitterness. Two days later he convened an interdenominational group of church leaders and they drew up an appeal for a negotiated settlement.<ref>Bell (Volume II). pp. 1306–1307</ref> They called for the resumption of talks in a spirit of cooperation, with three tenets: the TUC should call off the general strike, the government should agree to subsidise the coal industry for a short time, and the mine owners should withdraw the disputed wage terms.<ref>Machin, p. 38</ref> Davidson wished to make the appeal known to the whole country by making a radio broadcast, but [[John Reith, 1st Baron Reith|John Reith]], the general manager of the [[BBC]], refused to allow it, fearing reprisals from the government.<ref>Machin, p. 39</ref>

The initiative was only partly successful – though the strike was called off, the miners' grievances were not remedied – but the joint action by Davidson and the other religious leaders was a further step in the direction of unity. One of the nonconformist clerics told Davidson, "For the first time in my life it has been possible to feel that the Christian forces in this country were united and courageous, and for that we have to thank your leadership. A new sense of unity has been given to us."<ref>The Rev Herbert Gray, ''quoted'' in Machin, p. 39</ref>

===Revision of the ''Book of Common Prayer''===
{{see also|Book of Common Prayer (1928, England)}}
[[File:Book of Common Prayer (1662).jpg|thumb|upright=0.6|alt=title page of Prayer Book in 17th-century typeface and design|The [[Book of Common Prayer (1662)|1662 ''Book of Common Prayer'']], which Davidson sought to update]]

The historian Matthew Grimley describes the prayer-book controversy of 1927–28 as "the last great parliamentary battle over Church and state".<ref>Grimley, p. 143</ref> Davidson&nbsp;– like his [[Tudor period|Tudor]] predecessor [[Thomas Cranmer]], according to ''The Times''&nbsp;– had "immense and perhaps excessive faith in a new Prayer-book as a means of composing differences and restoring discipline within the Church".<ref name=to/> He also considered that a modern Prayer-book would enrich Anglican services and make them relevant to 20th-century needs unforeseen when Cranmer and his colleagues wrote the original version in the 16th century.<ref name=to/>{{refn|The original 1549 version edited by Cranmer had been lightly revised several times in the 16th and 17th centuries; the one in use in Davidson's time, largely based on the original Tudor text, dated from 1662.<ref>Jacobs and Magee, pp. 83, 85 and 159–160</ref>|group=n}} Work had been going on under his supervision since 1906, and in 1927 a version was finally ready. The Church Assembly approved it, and it was put to Parliament for authorisation. The House of Lords agreed it by an unexpectedly large majority of 241 votes. The measure then went before the House of Commons, where it was introduced by [[William Bridgeman, 1st Viscount Bridgeman|William Bridgeman]], who made a listless speech that did not impress MPs.<ref name=b1345>Bell (Volume II), p. 1345</ref> Opposing, [[William Joynson-Hicks]] spoke vehemently, maintaining that the new Prayer-book opened the door to [[Papist|Romish]] practices.<ref>Bell (Volume II), pp. 1345–1346</ref><ref>"House of Commons", ''The Times'', 16 December 1927, p. 7</ref> Davidson privately wrote of Bridgeman's speech, "He absolutely muffed it. It was a poor speech with no knowledge and no fire";<ref>''Private Papers of Randall Davidson, Archbishop of Canterbury 1903–28, vol. xvi, Diaries and Memoranda, 1927–1930'', Memorandum of 15 January 1928, pp. 11–12, ''quoted'' in Martell, p. 218</ref> Bell calls Joynson-Hicks's speech "flashy" but "abundantly successful".<ref name=b1345/> The Commons rejected the bill by 238 votes to 205.<ref>Bell (Volume II), p. 1346</ref> The MP [[Austen Chamberlain]] described Davidson as "a tragically pathetic figure as he left&nbsp;... after the result".<ref>Grimley, p. 140</ref> ''The Times'' said:

{{blockquote|Few people, whether they desired a revised Prayer-book or not, failed to sympathize with the Archbishop in his personal disappointment, or to regret that the 25 years of his Primacy should not have ended with what must have seemed its crowning achievement.<ref name=to/>|}}

A second attempt the following year was voted down in the Commons on 14 June 1928. After that defeat Davidson told the [[Church Assembly]]:

{{blockquote|It is a fundamental principle that the Church&nbsp;– that is, the Bishops together with the Clergy and the Laity&nbsp;– must in the last resort, when its mind has been fully ascertained, retain its inalienable right, in loyalty to our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, to formulate its Faith in Him and to arrange the expression of that Holy Faith in its forms of worship.<ref name=t406>Barber, p. 406</ref>|}}

This statement had the unanimous approval of the bishops.<ref name=t406/> Some of Davidson's colleagues felt that Parliament's rejection of the Prayer-book would have grave consequences. [[William Temple (bishop)|William Temple]], his successor-but-one at Canterbury, wrote that "some sort of disestablishment is (I suppose) the necessary result";<ref name=ah/> Henson, previously a strong supporter of establishment, now began to campaign against it.<ref>Grimley, p. 153</ref> The historian [[Adrian Hastings]] writes that "by adroitness of manoeuvre and delay" Davidson led his fellow bishops away from such a drastic outcome.<ref name=ah>Hastings, Adrian. [https://www.oxforddnb.com/view/10.1093/ref:odnb/9780198614128.001.0001/odnb-9780198614128-e-36454 "Temple, William (1881–1944), archbishop of Canterbury"]. Retrieved 15 December 2019 {{ODNBsub}}</ref>

===Retirement===
[[File:Canterbury Cathedral cloister.JPG|thumb|upright=1.25|alt=exterior of Gothic cathedral with lawn bounded by single-storey cloister|Cloister of [[Canterbury Cathedral]]]]

In June 1928 Davidson announced his retirement, to take effect on 12 November.<ref name=resig/> He had served as Archbishop of Canterbury for longer than anyone since the [[English Reformation|Reformation]].<ref name=odnb/> He was the first holder of the post to retire,<ref name=c278>Collinson, p. 278</ref>{{refn|Several earlier Archbishops were deposed or deprived of their sees – [[Byrhthelm (bishop of Wells)|Byrhthelm]],<ref>Rumble, p. 102</ref> [[Robert of Jumièges]],<ref>Rumble, p. 107</ref> [[Stigand]],<ref>Cowdrey, H. E. J. [https://www.oxforddnb.com/view/10.1093/ref:odnb/9780198614128.001.0001/odnb-9780198614128-e-26523 "Stigand (d. 1072), archbishop of Canterbury"], ''Oxford Dictionary of National Biography'', Oxford University Press, 2104. {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191213123158/https://www.oxforddnb.com/view/10.1093/ref:odnb/9780198614128.001.0001/odnb-9780198614128-e-26523 |date=13 December 2019 }}. Retrieved 14 December 2019 {{ODNBsub}}</ref> [[Roger Walden]],<ref>Davies, R. G.  [https://www.oxforddnb.com/view/10.1093/ref:odnb/9780198614128.001.0001/odnb-9780198614128-e-28445 "Walden, Roger (d. 1406), administrator, archbishop of Canterbury, and bishop of London"], ''Oxford Dictionary of National Biography'', Oxford University Press, 2104. Retrieved 14 December 2019 {{ODNBsub}}</ref> [[Thomas Cranmer]]<ref>Carpenter, p. 145</ref> and [[William Sancroft]]<ref>Carpenter, pp. 220–221</ref> – but Davidson was the first to retire voluntarily in old age.<ref name=c278/>|group=n}} and to deal with this unprecedented event the King appointed a four-man commission to accept Davidson's formal resignation.{{refn|The commissioners were the Archbishop of York ([[Cosmo Lang]]) and the Bishops of London, Durham and Winchester (respectively, [[Arthur Winnington-Ingram]], [[Hensley Henson]] and [[Theodore Woods]].<ref name=resig>"The Primate", ''The Times'', 26 July 1928, p. 14</ref>|group=n}} On his retirement he was created '''Baron Davidson of Lambeth''', and was introduced in the House of Lords on 14 November by [[Lord Harris]] and Lord Stamfordham.<ref>"The Primate", ''The Times'', 13 November 1928, p. 16</ref> After leaving Lambeth Palace, Davidson moved to a house in [[Cheyne Walk]], [[Chelsea, London|Chelsea]].<ref>Bell (Volume II), p. 1365</ref> He died there on 25 May 1930, aged 82.<ref>Bell (Volume II), p. 1380</ref> The [[William Foxley Norris|Dean of Westminster]] offered interment in Westminster Abbey, but Davidson had made it known that he hoped to be buried at Canterbury, and his wishes were followed. He was buried on 30 May in the [[cloister]] of Canterbury Cathedral, opposite the [[Chapter House]].<ref>Bell (Volume II), p. 1381</ref> His widow died in June 1936, and was buried with him.<ref>"Death of Lady Davidson of Lambeth", ''The Times'', 27 June 1936, p. 14</ref>