Tag Archives: Church of England

February 8 2018 – “Church of England dealing with thousands of sex abuse allegations” – The Times – Kaya Burgess

Leave a reply

Church of England dealing with thousands of sex abuse allegations

Kaya Burgess, Religious Affairs Correspondent

The Times

About a fifth of the 3,300 allegations being dealt with in 2016 were made against clergy and other church officials
About a fifth of the 3,300 allegations being dealt with in 2016 were made against clergy and other church officialsGETTY IMAGES
The Church of England is dealing with more than 3,000 reports of sexual abuse within its parishes.

The most recent figures for 2016 show that dioceses were dealing with 3,300 “concerns or allegations”, the vast majority related to “children, young people and vulnerable adults within church communities”.

About a fifth of the reports were made against clergy and other church officials, with the rest relating to other members of the congregation who perform unofficial roles or volunteer within the church. The 3,300 figure related to both open cases and those newly reported that year. It is not known how many involved active claims against the church for compensation.

The figures were revealed by the Bishop of Bath and Wells, the Right Rev Peter Hancock, who is the church’s lead bishop on safeguarding issues. He issued the figures in response to a written question from Kat Alldread, a lay member of the church’s General Synod, which starts its three-day meeting today.

The bishop said that in 2016 alone 338 risk assessments were carried out by the church’s dioceses, of which 19 per cent were carried out on priests. In the same year, 867 “safeguarding agreements” were in place, made when someone is believed to pose a risk to young or vulnerable people and must agree to be monitored or to restrict their interaction with possible victims of abuse.

Of these 867 agreements, 682 related to known sex offenders.

Bishop Hancock was also asked whether it was right for the church to refer to those who made abuse allegations as “victims” or “survivors” instead of “complainants”.

He replied that church guidance stated that the terms were used without making any judgment about the veracity of the allegations and explains: “This guidance will use the terms ‘victims/survivor’ and ‘respondent’ without presupposing the accuracy of the complaint. These should be regarded as neutral terms that do not imply the innocence or guilt of either party.”

The church commissioned Lord Carlile of Berriew to conduct an independent investigation into the church’s handling of abuse allegations made against George Bell, the revered former bishop who was posthumously accused of abusing a child. The report criticised the church for “rushing to judgment” in declaring that he was likely to have committed the abuse and paying out compensation of almost £17,000 to his alleged victim, who is now in her 70s.

Bishop Hancock revealed that the review cost the church £38,000 in addition to any costs incurred by dioceses that were asked to provide information.

He also said that bishops would look at ways to “strengthen independent oversight” of the church’s safeguarding practices.

The bishop said that there were no plans to change church laws that state that general complaints against clergy must be made within a year of the alleged incident for them to be dealt with under Clergy Discipline Measure but he said that this one-year limit had been removed in cases of alleged sexual misconduct towards children or vulnerable adults.

23 comments
MJJ

A good job Carey is no longer in charge. His compulsion to reward abusers might get near bankrupting the Church. Sickening to remember how the then leader of the Church of England took the part of a despicable sex abuser, provided funds for his escape from justice and, cherry on the top, withheld evidence from the police. Now he has the nerve to whinge because people express their disapproval (for my part, utter contempt) of his conduct and his lucrative little part time bishopric is snatched from him.

.

I must say that I will need convincing that other clerics, those self styled “men of god” are so very different. Their aim is to protect their church, and if it costs the happiness, or even the sanity, of their many victims, then too bad!

John D Finlay 

IMO religion of any kind is about power, pure and simple. Invented/developed so that some should have power over others and generally enforced by a set of rules constructed to purport to tell the majority how they should live their lives. Of course those who do not follow the rules are severely punished.

Peter O’Toole 

The article relates to the C of E, yet the headline photo is of a Roman Catholic priest’s collar.

Both branches of British Christianity have a lot to answer for, but try to get the details right .

MJJ 

I’m sure most of us don’t consider CofE clerics so very different from their Catholic counterparts, and who really cares about the different styles of their collars. Badges of honour for hypocrites some would say

Pumpiepants 

682 agreements relate to known sex offenders. Not sure why the church engages these people in the first place. Surely, a policy of zero tolerance, zero engagement is better than exposing young people to the prospect of sexual abusers. The scars of sexual abuse can last a very long time.

Leanora Munn 

““This guidance will use the terms ‘victims/survivor’ and ‘respondent’ without presupposing the accuracy of the complaint. These should be regarded as neutral terms that do not imply the innocence or guilt of either party.” ”

Victims/survivors are not neutral terms. If you want an even field it’s victim/survivor and perpetrator, or complainant and respondent.

Doc Torrants 

On a serious note…I have experienced at first hand the inadequate safeguarding procedures of a local church where the leadership was intent on promoting a convicted paedophile to positions of responsibility within the church (initially without the knowledge of parents or  some members of the church leadership team)  and didn’t even think to have an agreement which said they shouldn’t attend family services.  A spectacular failure of the Daily Mail Test (apologies for using bad words) .   After having had my concerns repeatedly ignored by the leadership, the incoming safeguarding officer took them seriously and some of these issues have been addressed.   As a practising christian I believe in forgiveness and redemption.  As a parent and health professional I also believe in appropriate safeguarding procedures and these should be of  paramount importance.

Let’s ask ourselves a simple question…in the history of the church, both anglican and catholic, how many serious problems reported on the front page of the national press have arisen from being too strict with respect to safeguarding and erring on the side of caution?  Anyone?  No?  And another question…how likely is it that a convicted paedophile would knowingly be employed in a school, as opposed to a church?  We need to get real with a bit of muscular christianity.

And finally on a frivolous note: as a child of the Blackadder era I am amazed that the Bishop of Bath and Wells would be in charge of safeguarding.  We all know his proclivities 😉

James 

To be fair and very few commenting on here are, can anybody point to institutions such as political parties, every religious group, police, armed forces, public sector, private sector sports clubs, education, all races  that hasn’t been guilty of covering up.

I bet we are all in one of those groups where those in charge have been at best slow to contact the police or in the case some downright frown on anybody reporting somebody from their group to one who isn’t .

Part of the problem is that far too many jump up and condemn very quickly when its not one of their “gang”.

Andy Webb 

@James

That is blatant whataboutery James.

Yes, these things happen in all walks of life, but this article is about the church of England and sex abuse……..again!

Bishop Jonathan Blake 

Unaccountable clergy wielding autocratic authority, and disturbed individuals allured into membership and given access to vulnerable children creates a hotbed of perverse abusive relationships that sane members of the community would do well to avoid.

OutsidetheM25 

Who would dare let their children anywhere near the Church of England? It’s a giant institution run by, and for the benefit of, perverts. Best avoid.

Andrew Middlemiss 

“Of these 867 agreements, 682 related to known sex offenders.”

Meanwhile, on Planet Earth, known sex offenders are not allowed to work in schools.

You truly can’t make this story up; yet again the Church is showing itself to be an anachronism, unworthy of respect.

Malcolm Gray 

@Andrew Middlemiss I am not clear that these 682 relate to people who work for the church – I think they probably include people who attend services – an agreement that said X may not attend services that children attend would seem to agree with your comment?

Richard Moss 

“This guidance will use the terms ‘victims/survivor’ and ‘respondent’ without presupposing the accuracy of the complaint. These should be regarded as neutral terms that do not imply the innocence or guilt of either party.”

That is a distortion of the English language. The Church seems to want to be seen to be sympathetic to victims of abuse while making a passing nod to the principle of innocent until proven guilty. You can’t have a victim without a crime or attack  and a survivor must by definition have suffered an injury, attack or accident and survived it. Rigor and religion don’t seem to go well together.

BlueInTheFace 

“[Bishop Hancock] replied that church guidance stated that the terms [“victims” or “survivors” instead of “complainants”] were used without making any judgment about the veracity of the allegations and explains: “This guidance will use the terms ‘victims/survivor’ and ‘respondent’ without presupposing the accuracy of the complaint. These should be regarded as neutral terms that do not imply the innocence or guilt of either party.” ”

Another Bishop who seems to be able to talk out the wrong end of his alimentary canal while keeping a straight face.

February 9 2018 – “Bishop Bell is still being defamed by the Church of England” – The Times – John Charmley

Leave a reply

JOHN CHARMLEY

 the times

Bishop Bell is still being defamed by Church of England

john charmley

The coincidence of a second sexual assault allegation against Bishop George Bell coming to light a month after the initial one was discredited and a week before the synod of the Church of England was due to hear a motion on the issue was remarkable. Quite why the church had to issue a press release is unclear. Lord Carlile of Berriew, who investigated the first allegation, has been told nothing about the second.

When did the church first hear of this allegation against the former Bishop of Chichester, who died 60 years ago, and why release it in a manner that suggests an attempt to divert attention from criticism of the church’s initial investigation?

The work of the Carlile report and the George Bell Group has shown that the original investigation by the church was inadequate. There was no attempt to talk to surviving witnesses, or to look at his papers, nor was there any evidence of a pattern of offending behaviour.

The obvious thing for the Archbishop of Canterbury to do would have been to accept this as, at the least, a sign that it was unsafe to condemn Bishop Bell. That would not mean that the complainant, “Carol”, was wrong, but would have aligned with the conclusion that there was no evidence of guilt.

Instead the archbishop managed to make two mutually exclusive claims: first that a cloud hung over Bell’s reputation, but that he remained an “Anglican hero”. These two things cannot both be true. Bell’s reputation as an Anglican hero rests on his record of integrity in opposing the persecution of Jews in the 1930s and the bombing of Germany in 1944, and on his work as a great ecumenist. If he was abusing a child or children during this time, his integrity disintegrates. The archbishop tells us his own integrity is at stake here, although it is unclear how.

The Archbishop Cranmer blogger has suggested that this second allegation may come from a source who failed to contact Lord Carlile. The church could confirm or deny that but prefers to say nothing.

The archbishop clearly wishes to escape the charge that, in the case of Peter Ball, the former Bishop of Gloucester, it failed to investigate child abuse allegations, but it cannot do that by mounting an inadequate allegation against a long-dead bishop. If it thought that it could signal virtue by throwing Bell under the bus, it failed.

Doubling down here does not raise questions about the archbishop’s integrity, but rather about the quality of the advice he receives and his own judgment.

Professor John Charmley is pro vice-chancellor of St Mary’s University, Twickenham

February 7 2018 – “Archbishop of Canterbury says George Bell’s accuser is as important as late Bishop’s reputation” – Christian Today

Leave a reply

https://www.christiantoday.com/article/archbishop-of-canterbury-says-george-bells-accuser-is-as-important-as-late-bishops-reputation/125411.htm

Archbishop of Canterbury says George Bell’s accuser is as important as late bishop’s reputation

James Macintyre

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, has said the woman who alleged that Bishop George Bell abused her should be ‘treated equally importantly’ as the reputation of the late bishop, and that she is ‘not an inconvenience to be overlooked’.

In an interview with the Church Times ahead of a gathering of General Synod, which is like a church parliament, Archbishop Welby defended the decision, made by the Church of England with Welby’s involvement, to publicise the £16,800 payment it made to the woman, known as ‘Carol’.

Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby
Reuters Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby has defended the Church of England’s handling of allegations against the late Bishop George Bell.

That decision and the ‘rush’ that led up to it was heavily criticised in a review published in December by Lord Carlile into the handling of the allegations made against Bishop Bell, regarded as a 20<sup>th Century giant of Anglicanism who died in 1958.

Since then, Archbishop Welby has come under growing criticism from historians and academics for insisting that a ‘significant cloud’ remains over Bell’s name.

Speaking to the Church Times, Welby acknowledged that the Carlile report ‘points out some of the quite severe weaknesses in the initial investigation of George Bell’ and he said that he ‘accepted its recommendations — all except half of one recommendation’ [the naming of those accused of abuse].

But he added: ‘Let’s just have a hypothetical situation in which Chichester diocese had not declared its payment [to Carol] two years ago. With the Independent Inquiry [into Child Sexual Abuse]…that confidentiality undertaking would certainly have become public. Now, the first question, when I give evidence, would then be asked: ‘What else are you hiding? What do you really know about George Bell that you are not telling us, because you’re so anxious to keep it secret?’ It’s a lose-lose…

Welby continued: ‘We have to treat both Bishop Bell, his reputation — we have to hold that as something really precious and valuable. But the person who has brought the complaint is not an inconvenience to be overlooked: they are a human being of immense value and dignity, to be treated equally importantly. And it is very difficult to square that circle.’

Last week, the Church of England’s national safeguarding team announced that it had received ‘fresh information concerning Bishop George Bell’ and said that Sussex police had been informed, without providing any details of the ‘new’ information about the late Bishop of Chichester. It was subsequently reported that a new complainant had come forward.

The following day, the Bell Society convened a conference at Church House in Westminster, with the keynote speaker  as Dr Jules Gomes, the controversial pastor of an independent Anglican church on the Isle of Man.

Bishop George Bell
Courtesy of Jimmy JamesBishop George Bell

This led the Bishop of Gloucester, Rachel Treweek, to attack the meeting as ‘outrageous’ when speaking to Christian Today.

The General Synod will discuss safeguarding policy at its meeting in Church House on Saturday morning.

Reflecting on the past five years in office, Archbishop Welby said that safeguarding was the hardest thing that he had to deal with. ‘It’s the hardest because you’re dealing with the Church’s sin. You’re dealing with profound human weakness. You’re dealing with the consequences in damaged people, in people who’ve been terribly, terribly hurt. And it’s heart-breaking. . .

‘I think we’ve sought to address it, both in mechanistic ways but also spiritually, in prayer, in attitude and culture. We’ve sought to address it in every way we can.’

Archbishop Welby has taken a leading role in defending the Church of England’s approach to Bishop Bell, having been involved in his name becoming public in relation to allegations. The Carlile report reveals an email from the Bishop of Durham on April 29, 2014 to the so-called ‘Core Group’ in the Church of England, which reads: ‘Dear All, At the meeting of Archbishops & Diocesans Archbishop Justin decided that he should inform those gathered of the possibility of the name of the person concerned becoming public in due course.’

The full interview with Archbishop Welby will appear in the next issue of the Church Times.

February 6 2018 – “Welby under pressure as General Synod members asked to back motion of ‘regret’ over Bishop George Bell case” – Christian Today – Harry Farley

Leave a reply

https://www.christiantoday.com/article/welby-under-pressure-as-general-synod-members-asked-to-back-motion-of-regret-over-bishop-george-bell-case/125358.htm

Welby under pressure as General Synod members asked to back motion of ‘regret’ over Bishop George Bell case

Harry Farley 

The Archbishop of Canterbury will be under renewed pressure at the Church of England’s ruling General Synod this week to renounce his claim that a ‘significant cloud’ remains over George Bell, a highly-respected bishop accused of sex abuse.

Members of synod, which acts as the church’s parliament, are today being asked to back a motion expressing ‘regret’ over Justin Welby’s handling of the case and calling for Bishop Bell’s ‘reputation as one of the great bishops of the Church of England is restored untarnished’.

Bishop George Bell
Courtesy of Jimmy James Bishop George Bell is accused of historical child sex abuse but his supporters insist the allegations are uncorroborated and without evidence.

The motion, seen by Christian Today, will be published as synod opens on Thursday after being approved by the church’s lawyers. It will not be debated at this week’s sessions but could be discussed at the next synod in July, if it receives enough support.

It comes after Welby said he could not retract his assessment that a ‘significant cloud’ hung over Bell’s reputation and the Church announced ‘fresh information’ had emerged about the case. Christian Today understands this involves a new complaint against Bishop Bell.

David Lamming, a lay member of synod and proposer of the motion, told Christian Today: ‘Regardless of this new information, the conclusions made in the damning Review by Lord Carlile QC into how the Church handled the case are important. General Synod must be given the opportunity to debate them.’

He added: ‘I initially considered putting the motion on ice while the investigation into these latest allegations unfolded but on second thoughts I think it important that synod has the opportunity to hold the Church to account for its processes and a debate on this motion would do just that. It will not be debated this week in any event, but if sufficient synod members sign it, that will be a clear indication that it should be on the agenda at York in July.’

The controversy over the George Bell case is likely to dominate this week’s synod with several questions tabled to the Archbishop of Canterbury on the issue.

Synod
The General Synod will meet this week in Westminster.

It comes after an independent review into how the Church dealt with the allegation made by ‘Carol’ found officials ‘rushed to judgment’ and smeared Bell in its desperation to avoid being seen as soft on clerical sex abuse. The inquiry by Lord Carlile QC found ‘serious errors were made’ as a result of an ‘oversteer’ that presumed his guilt without fully looking at the evidence.

Despite the highly critical report Welby refused to apologise to Bell’s relatives and supporters and instead issued a statement that appeared to leave open the possibility of his guilt.

Two groups of Bell’s supporters, alongside a number of historians and academics, have criticised Welby’s statement after Carlile’s review judged there would not have been sufficient evidence for a guilty verdict in a criminal court.

A question from Mr Lamming is thought to have prompted the Church’s admission of ‘fresh information’ after he tabled a question asking if there is ‘considered to be any evidence or other information that would support or corroborate the claim by “Carol” that she was sexually abused as a child by Bishop Bell?’

 

February 2 2018 – “Bishop blasts disgraced priest allowed to defend George Bell at Church of England’s headquarters” – Christian Today

1 Reply

https://www.christiantoday.com/article/exclusive.bishop.blasts.disgraced.priest.allowed.to.defend.george.bell.at.church.of.englands.headquarters/125197.htm

EXCLUSIVE: Bishop blasts disgraced priest allowed to defend George Bell at Church of England’s headquarters

Harry Farley 

It is ‘outrageous’ that a disgraced priest banned from ministry has been allowed to speak at the Church of England’s headquarters, a bishop said today.

Rachel Treweek
Rachel Treweek was the first female bishop to sit in the House of Lords.

Jules Gomes, formerly a priest at St Mary’s on the Harbour on the Isle of Man, addressed a group of supporters for the former Bishop of Chichester, George Bell, who is accused of historical sex abuse, in Church House, Westminster, this morning.

But today the Bishop of Gloucester, Rachel Treweek, blasted his presence at the event, which is titled ‘Rebuilding bridges’.

‘He has been invited to speak under that wonderful title whereas all his writings about me and other bishops who are women are being destructive and destroying bridges not building them,’ she told Christian Today.

‘I think it is outrageous that he has been allowed to speak at Church House under that title when his writings demonstrate that he is not up for living in reconciliation or relationship.’

Church House is the building used as the Church of England’s main London base. The National Church Institutions (NCIs) which govern the Church’s daily running, do not own the building nor control its bookings and the CofE appeared to distance itself from the event.

A Church of England spokesperson previously told Christian Today: ‘We are aware of an event due to take place at Church House Conference Centre Limited, in Westminster, on Feb 1 at which we understand Jules Gomes, a former Church of England parish priest prohibited from ministry for 10 years by a Bishop’s Disciplinary Tribunal, has been invited to speak.

‘The National Church Institutions are tenants at Church House. Church House Conference Centre Limited, who manage bookings from clients and operate the conference spaces, is an independent conference centre located at Church House.’

Jules Gomes
Jules Gomes.comJules Gomes was barred for 10 years from ministry for conduct unbecoming a priest.

Gomes was banned from ministry for 10 years after a disciplinary tribunal found against him following complaints about his behaviour. Deeply opposed to female clergy, refers to female bishops as ‘bishopesses’ described Sarah Mullally, the new Bishop of London, as ‘safe space Sarah, the box-ticking Bishopette of Londonistan’ who ‘doesn’t have the foggiest idea about the biblical gospel’.

Elsewhere in a blog badged as ‘satirical’ he described a ‘gaggle of anorexic and bulimic teenage girls’ accompanying ‘Rachel Treweek, Bishopess of Gloucester’.

Treweek told Christian Today: ‘I have known him in the past so it is deeply disappointing that he feels able to write things about me and others without ever trying to communicate in a relational way.

‘If rebuilding bridges is about relationship then it is a very funny and strange way to demonstrate that if you feel able to simply write abusive things on blogs.’

February 1 2018 – “Church accused of launching new shameful attack on memory of Bishop George Bell

Leave a reply

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/01/31/church-accused-launching-new-shameful-attack-memory-bishop-george/

Church accused of launching new ‘shameful’ attack on memory of Bishop George Bell

Bishop George Bell
Bishop George Bell

The Church of England has been accused of launching a ‘shameful and foolish’ new attack on one of its most revered bishops, by making public an uncorroborated child sex abuse allegation almost 70 years old.

The Church announced on Wednesday it had referred to the police a second claim of sexual assault made against Bishop George Bell, who died in 1958.

It made the allegation public amid growing pressure on Archbishop Justin Welby to apologise for the Church’s handling of a previous claim against Bishop Bell, which shredded his reputation.

The General Synod is to discuss the Church’s treatment of Bishop Bell with some suggestion that Archbishop Welby should have resigned over his refusal to say sorry.

In a statement, the Church said: “The Church of England’s National Safeguarding Team has received fresh information concerning Bishop George Bell.  Sussex Police have been informed and we will work collaboratively with them.”

Bishop Peter Hancock, the Church of England’s lead Safeguarding bishop, said: “Due to the confidential nature of this new information I regret I cannot disclose any further detail until the investigations have been concluded.

Archbishop Justin Welby
Archbishop Justin Welby CREDIT: MOHAMED NURELDIN ABDALLAH/ REUTERS

The Church refused to give further details such as the date of any alleged wrongdoing nor even whether the complainant is a man or a woman or even still alive. That raises the prospect Bishop Bell is being investigated 60 years after his death on claims made by someone from beyond the grave.

An independent report by Lord Carlile QC into the previous claim – made by a woman known only as Carol – had found the Church had “severely and unnecessarily damaged” Bishop Bell’s reputation. A psychiatric report suggested her claim could have been the result of false memory.

Lord Carlile said he was astonished that the Church had gone public with the new claim against Bishop Bell. Among his recommendations was that people accused of abuse should remain anonymous until the allegations are proven.

Lord Carlile said last night: “I am not privy to the information that is referred to in the church’s press release. But I think it was unwise, unnecessary and foolish to issue a press release in relation to something that remains to be investigated and which was not part of the material placed before me over the period of more than a year in which I carried out my review.

“During that period the review was well known and it was open to anybody to place information before me.”

Chichester Cathedral
Chichester Cathedral CREDIT: CHRISTOPHER PLEDGER

Professor Andrew Chandler, his biographer and spokesman for the George Bell Group, said: “This is shameful. The issuing of this press release shows the only way the Church can justify itself is at George Bell’s expense.”

A source close to the case said it was “outrageous” that the Church had made the announcement on the eve of a debate held at Church House which is expected to lead to calls for Justin Welby to quit over his handling of the matter. General Synod will also hear calls for Archbishop Welby to apologise when it meets next week.

The new complaint is understood to be at least 70 years old and is uncorroborated.

The source added: “This is outrageous behaviour on the part of the Church.”

The Telegraph understands the Church has known about the case for at least a fortnight before making it public 24 hours before the Church House debate.

One source suggested the Church might be keen to pay damages to the complainant because it will help to justify its contentious decision to pay damages to “Carol” in 2015.

Bishop Bell, who was Bishop of Chichester, was one of the Church’s outstanding clerics of the 20th century, recognised for helping to save the lives of Jews fleeing Nazi Germany.

Carol had first gone to the Church with her complaint in 1995 and made her allegations a second time direct to Archbishop Welby in 2013. The psychiatric report suggested it was highly unusual for her to have waited almost 50 years before making her initial complaint. The fresh allegation will raise similar concerns.

 

January 26 2018 – “Church loses legacy over paedophile bishop ‘myth'” – Daily Telegraph + Letters: “Welby must change his stance on Bishop Bell”

Leave a reply

IMG_0719

https://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-daily-telegraph/20180126/281736974881073

January 25 2018 – Lords criticise Church’s handling of George Bell case, as Bishop of Peterborough calls for ‘a major review of anonymity'” – Daily Telegraph – Olivia Rudgard

Leave a reply

Lords criticise Church’s handling of George Bell case as Bishop of Peterborough calls for ‘a major review of anonymity’

In a debate in the House of Lords on Monday peers called on the Government to "uphold the cardinal principle that an individual is innocent until proved guilty".  
Peers called on the Government to “uphold the cardinal principle that an individual is innocent until proved guilty”.   CREDIT: PA ARCHIVE 

Peers including the Bishop of Peterborough have called on the Government to protect the identity of people accused of a crime after their death.

One member of the House of Lords said Anglicans were “deeply ashamed” of the Church of England’s handling of the case of Bishop George Bell, who was accused of abusing a child several decades after his death in 1958.

A report published at the end of last year by Lord Carlile found that the highly-respected bishop’s reputation had been unnecessarily damagedby the Church when it publicly named him in an apology to the alleged victim in 2015.

In a debate in the House of Lords on Monday peers called on the Government to “uphold the cardinal principle that an individual is innocent until proved guilty”.

In cases until there is overwhelming evidence to suggest guilt, it seems reasonable for people’s reputations not to be damaged in this public wayRt Revd Donald Allister

Official historian of the Conservative Party Lord Lexden asked home office minister Baroness Williams whether the Government would “review the law governing the naming of deceased individuals against whom criminal allegations have been made”.

He called on the Government to review the law in order to to ensure the anonymity of dead suspects accused by “one uncorroborated alleged witness”.

Fellow peer Lord Cormack added that the case was “deeply shocking” and said “the reputation of a great man has been traduced, and many of us who are Anglicans are deeply ashamed ​of the way that the Anglican Church has behaved”.

The Bishop of Peterborough, the Rt Revd Donald Allister echoed the calls and added: “In all cases where the complainant has a right to be anonymous, there seems to be a case for the respondent also to be anonymous, and in cases until there is overwhelming evidence to suggest guilt, it seems reasonable for people’s reputations not to be damaged in this public way.”

However Baroness Williams said the Government “do not have plans to review the law”.

“Any decision to name an individual where that is considered to be in the public interest will necessarily be specific to the circumstances of an individual case,” she said.

January 23 2018 – “Bishop George Bell not to be cleared of ‘abuse'” – BBC

Leave a reply

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-42779684

Bishop George Bell not to be cleared over ‘abuse’

  • 22 January 2018
Bishop George BellImage copyright GETTY IMAGES
Image caption George Bell was Bishop of Chichester from 1929 until his death in 1958

The Archbishop of Canterbury has rejected calls for him to clear the name of the late Bishop George Bell, who was accused of abusing a young girl.

A review found failings in the way the Church investigated allegations against the Bishop of Chichester in the 1950s.

Supporters of Bishop Bell have called on the Most Rev Justin Welby to pronounce the bishop as innocent.

But Mr Welby said he could not rescind a statement in which he said a cloud hung over Bishop Bell’s name.

Bishop Bell’s supporters have sent three open letters to the archbishop in recent days.

They were written by a group of historians, an international group of church leaders, and a selection of former choristers at Chichester cathedral.

Justin Welby, Archbishop of Canterbury
Image caption The archbishop said the letter from the historians did not take into account the “realities” of past abuse in the church

But the archbishop said: “Our history over the last 70 years has revealed that the church covered up, ignored or denied the reality of abuse on major occasions.

“As a result, the church is rightly facing intense and concentrated scrutiny (focused in part on the Diocese of Chichester) through the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA).

“The Diocese of Chichester was given legal advice to make a settlement based on the civil standard of proof, the balance of probability.

“It was not alleged that Bishop Bell was found to have abused on the criminal standard of proof, beyond reasonable doubt.

“The two standards should not be confused.”

The independent reviewer, Lord Carlile QC, said the Church of England’s investigation into allegations against the bishop by a woman known as “Carol” were deficient.

The church apologised and compensated Carol after she claimed she had been assaulted by Bell as a young girl.

Lord Carlile said the church had “rushed to judgment”.

But Mr Welby provoked anger among the late bishop’s supporters when he said: “No human being is entirely good or bad. Bishop Bell was in many ways a hero. He is also accused of great wickedness.”

Related Topics

More on this story

  • Church apology over Bishop George Bell abuse inquiry
    15 December 2017
  • Petition seeks ‘justice’ for ‘abuse’ Bishop George Bell
    19 October 2016
  • Sussex Police apology over Bishop George Bell affair
    5 August 2016
  • George Bell: The battle for a bishop’s reputation
    5 May 2016
  • Bishop George Bell: Archbishop defends abuse claim payout
    25 March 2016
  • Carey’s support for abuse accused Bishop George Bell ‘distressing’
    7 March 2016

Around the BBC

  • Great Lives: George Bell

Related Internet links

  • Church of England
  • Diocese of Chichester
  • George Bell Group