Thinking Anglicans

Opinion – 18 January 2025

Anon ViaMedia.News Recognising Grooming: Revisiting the David Tudor Case

Stephen Parsons Surviving Church Grooming Adults. Is it Possible?

Gavin Drake Church Abuse Safeguarding: Second Church Estates Commissioner holds Church of England feet to the fire
[This refers to oral questions in the House of Commons to the Second Church Estates Commissioner; the Hansard record is here, and there is a video of the session on YouTube.]

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

47 Comments
Oldest
Newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Interested Observer
Interested Observer
1 month ago

Hmm. It’s hardly “holding their feet to the fire”, more gently shining a torch from the other side of the room in the hope that they notice. “Holding their feet to the fire” would be a no-knock search warrant of Lambeth Palace to look for documentation of conspiracy to conceal crime, or an interview under caution for the archbishops of York and Canterbury to discuss conspiracy to pervert the course of justice.

The CofE is being given licence to conceal crime without consequences. Nothing in the second commissioner’s answers alters that.

Surrealist
Surrealist
Reply to  Interested Observer
1 month ago

Where’s the prima facie evidence that either of those actions would be proportionate and legal? Without it they would look very much like State persecution of the Church, wouldn’t they?

Pat ONeill
Pat ONeill
Reply to  Surrealist
1 month ago

The CofE was established by the State. How could the State persecute its own creation?

Janet Fife
Janet Fife
Reply to  Pat ONeill
1 month ago

Parents sometimes persecute their own children.

Pax
Pax
Reply to  Pat ONeill
1 month ago

Quite easily – by the State ceasing to be Christian, and turning on the Church. And BTW the State did not, does not and cannot ‘create’ the Church of God!!

Janet Fife
Janet Fife
Reply to  Pax
1 month ago

But the state did create the Church of England, which is the part of the Church of God under discussion here.

Pax
Pax
Reply to  Janet Fife
1 month ago

God creates the church by calling people to faith in Jesus Christ and pouring the Holy Spirit upon them. That’s how the church is created – divinely. A secular Act of Supremacy may have configured the Church In England in a novel and questionable earthly way in the C16. But it didn’t create the Church of England de novo – or do you think there was no church in England before Henry VIII? The point Pat O Neill sought to make was that if the State created the CofE then the idea of State persecution of the CofE becomes illogical.… Read more »

Janet Fife
Janet Fife
Reply to  Pax
1 month ago

I distinguish between the Church in England and the Church of England. The first is a mystical body, having existed since some time during the Roman occupation. The second is a denomination which came into existence under Henry VIII and is integral to the English establishment. The tension between the Church as a body of true believers, both living and departed; and the Church as collections, in various forms, of true and false worshippers, has always existed. I’m sure Venn would like to produce a diagram. But the sheep can’t be separated from the goats, nor the wheat from the… Read more »

Simon Kershaw
Reply to  Janet Fife
1 month ago

Canon law makes no distinction between the two! Ecclesia Anglicana persists across the Reformation. What changed was that the monarch became Supreme Head and subsequently Supreme Governor of the Church, replacing the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome.

Froghole
Froghole
Reply to  Simon Kershaw
1 month ago

Thank you. Would it be possible to advance the argument – albeit tentatively – that both kernel and husk remained essentially the same between 1534 (where the king simply substituted himself for the pope) and 1547 (if not a little earlier), but that the husk was retained whilst the kernel was partly/largely discarded under Protector Somerset, and that it was really that Edwardian settlement of the Church (of the RC husk without the RC kernel) which was revived after 1558? In other words, and regardless of the preservation of most pre-1534 externalities, the essence and substance of the Church changed… Read more »

Simon Kershaw
Reply to  Froghole
1 month ago

Thanks Froghole. I would want to take into consideration the idea that in most places in England the same people continued to worship in the same buildings, in many cases with the same clergy across the Reformation. Certainly there were doctrinal changes, especially with the Edwardine prayer books, largely restored under Elizabeth I. But I suggest that no one at the time thought this as a different body, but rather a reform of an existing body. Did Mary I think she was getting rid of the Church that her father and brother had reformed, or did she rather consider that… Read more »

Allan Sheath
Allan Sheath
Reply to  Simon Kershaw
1 month ago

“Ecclesia Anglicana persists across the Reformation.” Not least because people wished to have assurance about the final destiny of their pre-Reformation forebears.

Surrealist
Surrealist
Reply to  Janet Fife
1 month ago

I think that’s one take on what happened in 1534 (or 1559?) rather than an unquestionable statement of fact.
There’s obviously change happening in the church in both these years, but undeniable continuity too. So the language of the state ‘creating’ the CofE at either juncture is questionable.

John Davies
John Davies
Reply to  Janet Fife
1 month ago

Well said, Janet. That’s a beautifully worded reply.

John Davies
John Davies
Reply to  Pat ONeill
1 month ago

Ask messrs Laud and Cranmer……

DAVID HAWKINS
DAVID HAWKINS
Reply to  Interested Observer
1 month ago

I hear your white hot anger and I totally share it. “Holding their feet to the fire” is necessary but it is not by itself going to address the causes of abuse. There is too little love in the Church of England. Too little kindness and very little empathy. The growing realisation that far too many priests simply don’t care for their flock has been personally devastating. What can we make of clergy who simply don’t practice what they preach ? How did we end up with two Archbishops with so little empathy ? We certainly need firefighting and consequences… Read more »

Richie
Reply to  Interested Observer
1 month ago

Interested Observer. Let’s hope that this happens as both Cantuar and York on the allegations published and the timelines could fit the bill for a myriad of charges to. Be bought forward subject to the prosecutions section of the Home Office to consider enough evidence exists for formal charges to be laid after interview in my reading of the documentary evidence and timelines. In police slang “a hamburger with the lot “ The Australian experience has been that charges against the Catholic AB of Adelaide of conspiracy to conceal crime resulted in guilty verdicts but were appealed. Likewise similar charges… Read more »

Janet Fife
Janet Fife
Reply to  Interested Observer
1 month ago

I’m not sure how you define ‘the state’, but the government has no power to issue search warrants or conduct interviews under caution. The first is the province of the judiciary, and the second of the police. Both are, in theory at least, independent of the government.

The government’s means of holding the C of E’s feet to the fire is by appointing a Second Church Estates Commissioner and an Ecclesiastical Committee who are not blindly loyal to the C of E, and will demand answers to uncomfortable questions.

Richie
Reply to  Janet Fife
1 month ago

Respectfully, Janet Fife I interpreted Interested Observers comment as to the state actually meaning the Police service and public prosecutions. The complexity in the UK is both the establishment of the CofE and Bishops sitting in your undemocratic House of Lords. From my reading of both the Makin report on Smyth as well as the documents in public surrounding AB York and Tudor it seems that misprision of a felony or conceal crime charges could be made out. Again this is only a non expert opinion. Certainly with Mr Welby a possible avenue to prosecution may be available, with York… Read more »

Last edited 1 month ago by Richie
Janet Fife
Janet Fife
Reply to  Richie
1 month ago

Thank you. We agree on the need for a Royal Commission, and more resignations at the top level.

T Pott
T Pott
Reply to  Interested Observer
1 month ago

Whether the police or other state organs have the legal right to search Lambeth Palace I don’t know, but the palace does have a rather large library and I doubt they keep documentation of conspiracy to commit crimes in an easily retrievable set of files.

As for interviewing the archbishops, wouldn’t a select commitee be able to interview them? Poitically it would be difficult for them to refuse.

TimP
TimP
Reply to  Interested Observer
1 month ago

I think I need to question “interview under caution … to discuss conspiracy to pervert the course of justice” and “The CofE is being given licence to conceal crime without consequences.” This is a serious accusation. One that I hear a lot – – but I don’t think anyone has any real evidence to point to it. Can you shed light on why you think that? To the best of my knowledge, the Makin report (for example) does not make this. It accuses +Justin of failing to do all he could do. But the implication of what you are saying… Read more »

Richie
Reply to  TimP
1 month ago

Tim P, respectfully and also noting that at times your posts do show a certain hesitancy or defensiveness. In regard to Makin and Mr Welby my reading ( note I am not a lawyer ) is that when first presented with the Smyth reports in 2013 ( not withstanding Welby possible prior knowledge ) at no stage did he follow up what was happening or refer the case to either the Police or internal investigations. With Smyth in Cape Town he also did not contact the SA Bishops. Yes he delegated but did not follow up. Therefore it could be… Read more »

Simon Bravery
Simon Bravery
Reply to  Richie
1 month ago

Smyth was reported to the Police five times. It is perfectly understandable that ++ Justin did not report him as he was told (rightly) that he had already been reported.

Keith Makin’s conclusion that there was no formal report to the Police is odd. There is nothing in ++ Justin’s s acts or omissions as outlined by the Makin Report that amounts to a criminal offence. With the exception of FGM there is no legal obligation to report an offence.

Richie
Reply to  Simon Bravery
1 month ago

Thanks Simon for your clarifications. I may be under the misapprehension that misprision of a felony , or conceal knowledge of a crime is not in the UK criminal statutes. I believe it should be . Note that its use in NSW Criminal Code which has antecedents in the UK criminal codes makes me think (perhaps erroneously) that the English criminal code has misprision of a felony within its sections. If this is the case then Mr Welby once he had knowledge of the crimes of Smyth Assault causing bodily harm, possibly grevious bodily harm then as he had knowledge… Read more »

TimP
TimP
Reply to  Richie
1 month ago

Thank you for your reply. I think at the heart of it – is what does “conceal” mean. In the old-days [i.e. back when church abuse scandals first rocked national media] I remember the problem identified was “you need to tell the police]. But both of these cases are where the police were told and then nothing happened – – now what? The use of ‘concealed’ in language when the police have been told feels unhelpful to me. For example the new “duty to disclose stuff to the police” type law – would not have changed ANYTHING in either case.… Read more »

Richie
Reply to  TimP
1 month ago

Tim P, thanks for taking the time to respond with care and honesty to my posts on the nexus between criminal law and canon law. With the Welby situation I think that we will see more posts and media from victim survivors of Smyth shine more light onto the timeframe as well as clarifications from Makin. I still think that from my reading Welby had prior knowledge pre 2013 and even though he delegated he did not proactively follow up. Even if criminal charges are a bridge too far Welby as AB Cantuar had the ability to do far more… Read more »

Fr Dean
Fr Dean
1 month ago

David Tudor would not have had employment rights unless he was employed directly by the school he was the chaplain of. His parochial duties would always have been as an office holder. Whatever his status he was throughout subject to ecclesiastical discipline. The Archbishop of York has not given a satisfactory explanation of why he twice renewed his appointment as area dean and why he made a known paedophile an honorary canon of his cathedral. Today’s news indicates that far from being at a loss as to what to do with Tudor he held him up as an exemplar of… Read more »

Fr Dexter Bracey
Fr Dexter Bracey
Reply to  Fr Dean
1 month ago

Ah, yes, Sir Gavin Williamson MP, that well-known upholder of standards of conduct…

Fr Dean
Fr Dean
Reply to  Fr Dexter Bracey
1 month ago

Members of Parliament are not always the most self aware people, and need the thickest of skin.

Wilfred
Wilfred
Reply to  Fr Dean
1 month ago

According to the principles of church law and justice, there was little the bishop could have done to remove him, even if he had wanted to. In this instance, there was no such thing as employer as master (the bishop) and employee as servant (the priest). The bishop had no powers to instigate disciplinary action or to dismiss, for the simple reason that there was no contract of employment, hence no breach of contract. Employment law was not operable – only ecclesiastical law, so the relationship could only be severed once the threshold for a CDM tribunal had (finally) been… Read more »

Fr Dexter Bracey
Fr Dexter Bracey
Reply to  Wilfred
1 month ago

I am mystified as to why no action could have been taken against Tudor. If I have understood correctly, he admitted in 1988 to having had sex with a 16 year old girl. That would not be illegal (assuming that she consented) but it would have been conduct unbecoming of a clerk in holy orders.Why was that not used as the basis of disciplinary action much earlier? I wonder what clergy in same-sex civil partnerships who have to give assurances of celibacy make of a heterosexual priest who appears to have been given a free pass (and a canonry) here.

Wilfred
Wilfred
Reply to  Fr Dexter Bracey
1 month ago

The reference to the granting of employment rights in 2009 in the ViaMedia piece is irrelevant, because Tudor was a freehold officeholder, not a common tenure officeholder. Even if he had been subject to common tenure regulations, his right to make a claim for unfair dismissal to an employment tribunal would have been limited to capability procedures, not conduct. So the legal advice Cottrell received can’t have been related to the common tenure provisions. I imagine it was because of the high bar needed to meet the threshold for bringing a case to a CDM tribunal for ‘conduct unbecoming’. If… Read more »

Fr Dean
Fr Dean
Reply to  Wilfred
1 month ago

Wilfred, honorary canonries and the post of area dean is entirely in the Ordinary’s gift. Those positions could have been removed or not offered or renewed in an instant and without any legal recourse by Tudor. His position as a parish priest was certainly more problematic but bishops have ways of making life very uncomfortable for recalcitrant clergy if they want to – the Archbishop evidently chose not to. Tudor’s victims have every right to feel aggrieved.

A not so humble parishioner
A not so humble parishioner
1 month ago

Every single revelation about the David Tudor case just makes it worse. Obviously the latest claims about ++York praising a man he knew was a risk and had had inappropriate relations with young girls let alone was the abuser we know now is utterly shocking and really highlights the fact that the Archbishop’s version of events is shaky at best.

Once we get a new person on the throne of St Augustine Cottrell needs to stand down.

Nigel Goodwin
Nigel Goodwin
1 month ago

Stephen Parsons makes a lot of sense. I would consider myself reasonably robust, but early days at my Cambridge college were quite daunting, academically and socially. Taken to a ‘little talk’ by Jonathan Fletcher, what was on offer was attractive, and becoming a member of the college christian union meant a whole new group of friends.

Nothing in itself wrong with any of that, my christian union group were reasonably sensible – but I can, looking back, see possible danger signs.

I think adults become mature by the age of 25? Some of us never mature, thank goodness.

Last edited 1 month ago by Nigel Goodwin
Rerum novarum
Rerum novarum
Reply to  Nigel Goodwin
1 month ago

Yes, Stephen’s ideas are really interesting. Churches should consider how young adults doing internships are managed. A one year placement might provide a useful period of discernment and service ahead of entering or re-entering the regular workplace. Longer than that and secular employment chances will become more limited, pushing the intern in the direction of permanent paid ministry. But until an intern has been accepted for training by a denomination, they are largely dependent on their local line-manager for career development, leaving them in a vulnerable position. The effect of music also needs more thought. Not so much in terms… Read more »

Susanna (no ‘h’)
Susanna (no ‘h’)
Reply to  Rerum novarum
1 month ago

These three articles coupled with the BBC report John Davies pointed out in the post below where Stephen Cottrell was quoted as describing Tudor as a ‘Rolls Royce priest’ just show up the complete muddle that is COf E safeguarding, and why all the cover ups make things worse. Anon and Stephen Parsons talk about grooming – Anon about its effect divisive effect on her then local congregation and the unfortunate victims still being dismissed as ‘no better than they ought to have been’ even many years later. Following on from Stephen Parson’s article, did David Tudor manage to groom… Read more »

Nigel Goodwin
Nigel Goodwin
Reply to  Rerum novarum
1 month ago

Yes, music can play a role, in all genres, and righteous anger is sadly missing from many. Plenty of Bach’s organ works also display a feeling of anger.

When discussing abuse, it is easy to talk about child abuse or vulnerable adults. But it is surely a Christian perspective to see everybody as vulnerable, particularly in certain catalytic environments.

Kate Keates
Kate Keates
Reply to  Nigel Goodwin
1 month ago

Catalytic or cataclysmic?

Nigel Goodwin
Nigel Goodwin
Reply to  Kate Keates
1 month ago

I meant it in the chemistry sense of catalysts, but cataclysmic works too.

Surrealist
Surrealist
Reply to  Nigel Goodwin
1 month ago

Thanks, yes. Imbalances of power (physical, financial, rhetorical, institutional, erotic, reputational, etc. etc. etc.) are everywhere, and surely operate in every single relationship and interaction. There’s always the risk (or probability) that they will lead to leverage, micro-exploitation, or abuse of one kind and degree or another. All of us are vulnerable, or potentially abusive, at some level, in some manner. All of us are human, make mistakes and pursue (sometimes unwittingly) agendas which are imperfect. Which leads me to the genuine question, for which I don’t have an answer – how many of these power dynamics need defining, legislating… Read more »

Nigel Goodwin
Nigel Goodwin
Reply to  Surrealist
1 month ago

You make a lot of sense. It is handling these imbalances of power (or playing in not 100% safe environments) which allow us to grow. it is clear that babies need a bit of uncleanliness in order to attain resistance.

Safe environments? It was different when I grew up. Did boy scouts 1st class award when 13, which involved a 20 mile hike with tent on back, and during the walk asking a random farm for permission to camp in their field. I can;t imagine that would happen nowadays.

John Davies
John Davies
Reply to  Surrealist
1 month ago

Steven’s point about all of us being vulnerable adults at some point in our lives is a good one; I copied his article to my church’s safeguarding officer for their interest. There’s been other correspondence on Via Media about it – if followed to its natural conclusion you could well end up with having to have a DSB certificate to go to the local shop. (Slight exaggeration perhaps!) but that is the general way we seem to be going. Interestingly someone in our service yesterday, leading the prayers mentioned a Christian parliamentary watchdog group, claiming God’s blessing on it for… Read more »

Michael M
Michael M
Reply to  Surrealist
1 month ago

This is because a more underhand, less creative way of living got inculcated into mainly religious authority figures fuelled especially with the denying of the Holy Spirit in religion from about 40 years ago in “favour” of its social status.

Rerum novarum
Rerum novarum
Reply to  Surrealist
30 days ago

A less prescriptive approach would be to help adults safeguard themselves by encouraging critical evaluation of what they hear and see. That would work out differently in different contexts. For people doing internships it might simply involve a guide to the various career pathways that can open up, how they might be explored, and the likely timelines and skillsets involved. Many secular employers produce resources like that for junior staff. To reduce the possibility of someone being unhelpfully influenced by a charismatic speaker in a catalytic environment, it might be useful to periodically issue disclaimers. It could be pointed out… Read more »

John Davies
John Davies
Reply to  Rerum novarum
1 month ago

There’s a lovely, pertinent comment in the book ‘Rhythms of Grace’ by Tony Horsfall. “Some charismatic churches measure the spirituality of the worship by the decibel levels of the band”…..

47
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x