This report, previously scheduled for publication on 13 November, has been published this afternoon.
Press Release: Independent review into Church’s handling of Smyth case published (copied in full below the fold)
Independent Learning Lessons Review John Smyth QC (253 pages)
Appendices (245 pages)
Personal Statement by the Archbishop of Canterbury
The full review can be read here. Links to further information may be found below.
Keith Makin, who led the independent review, said:
“The abuse at the hands of John Smyth was prolific and abhorrent. Words cannot adequately describe the horror of what transpired.
“Many of the victims who took the brave decision to speak to us about what they experienced have carried this abuse silently for more than 40 years.
“Despite the efforts of some individuals to bring the abuse to the attention of authorities, the responses by the Church of England and others were wholly ineffective and amounted to a coverup.
“The Church and its associated organisations must learn from this review and implement robust safeguarding procedures across their organisations that are governed independently.
“This has been a long process but a necessary one to uncover the extent of John Smyth’s despicable behaviour and how the Church reacted to it.
“I would like to sincerely thank the victims for their courage, grace and dignity and I would like to remind everyone reporting on this review about their right to anonymity and privacy.”
The Church of England’s Lead Safeguarding Bishop, Joanne Grenfell, and the National Director of Safeguarding, Alexander Kubeyinje, said:
“We are deeply sorry for the horrific abuse inflicted by the late John Smyth and its lifelong effects, already spanning more than 40 years.
“The review concludes that Smyth is arguably the most prolific serial abuser to be associated with the Church of England. We know that no words can undo the damage done to people’s lives both by him and by the failure of individuals in the Church and other institutions to respond well. We are also aware that the time the review has taken, which the reviewer addresses, as well as the details now in the public domain have been retraumatising for survivors.
“We highlight the comment in the review from a deceased cleric (David Fletcher) who was aware in the 1980s, along with others, of the extent of the abuse: ‘I thought it would do the work of God immense damage if this were public’.
“We are appalled that any clergy person could believe that covering up abuse was justified in the name of the Gospel, which is about proclaiming Good News to the poor and healing the broken hearted. It was wrong for a seemingly privileged group from an elite background to decide that the needs of victims should be set aside, and that Smyth’s abuse should not therefore be brought to light.
“Every member of the Church is responsible for a culture in which victims are heard, responded to well, and put first: there is never a place for covering up abuse.
“We are aware of criticisms in the report of individuals and organisations and names of clergy were passed to the National Safeguarding Team, NST, from the reviewer (see below Terms of Reference).
“Of those who were interviewed 25 were questioned about their knowledge of Smyth and had their safeguarding risk assessed. The reviewer also had a duty to pass on information to statutory authorities including police if appropriate. Permissions to officiate were removed for some clergy while their actions were considered. Some seriously criticised in the report are deceased, others are not.
“The NST will now consider if there is any new evidence in the report that needs to be considered to assess if there is any ongoing safeguarding risk and if there is evidence to support any disciplinary process.
“The report also highlights Smyth’s abuse in Zimbabwe, where a boy died and many more were abused. It is clear that Smyth went abroad in the early 1980s following the discovery of his abuse here and in full knowledge of the church officers named in the report. The reviewer urges the Church to consider commissioning a report into Smyth’s actions both in Zimbabwe and South Africa.
“We will now seek to progress this in appropriate ways (noting the recommendation for international information sharing) and liaise with counterparts there who would need to lead on any subsequent investigation, which we would fully support.
“We also note the criticism of the Church’s response in 2013 and 2017. We apologise unreservedly that the needs of the victims were not at the forefront in terms of thinking and planning and the response was not trauma informed. We will continue to learn lessons about responding well which is reflected in our revised guidance and survivor engagement framework.
“We welcome all the recommendations and will consider them now in detail, noting work already underway. We wholeheartedly endorse the reviewer’s emphasis that safeguarding must be everyone’s responsibility in the Church, working closely with safeguarding professionals.”
“Paragraph 16.14. Our opinion therefore is that Justin Welby held a personal and moral responsibility to pursue this further, whatever the policies at play at the time required”. Absolutely damning, personally damning. That is not a statement on the CofE response, but a criticism of his complete failure in 2013 to ensure John Smyth was stopped. Resign
Yes, the Archbishop should resign. An apology is not enough.
We are reminded today also of the resignation tendered by Sir John Nott (a here today and, if I might say so, gone tomorrow politician) and that of Lord Carrington over the inattention to the Falklands. The Archbishop claims he can do no more than apologise.He has presided over this cover up- he, and others, must, for God’s sake, go. How can he expect to stay on, and why? Compensation/ reparations/ redress, including for Zimbabweans, NOW- no ifs, no buts
Fat chance of that happening. I hope I could be proved wrong.
This is now a test of Welby’s leadership and integrity. A good leader who had integrity would tender their resignation, and be making significant reparations for Smyth’s many victims. A weak man grasping for the last dregs of power, not resigning and dissembling blame would be a bad leader, with all his tired old apologies reissued on speed-dial confirming that. Which one is Justin? If he’s not resigned by Monday we will know what kind of person has been at the helm of the CofE since 2013. I think we already know the answer to this. The church and nation… Read more »
And those who encouraged him into taking on the role must surely be feeling utterly embarrassed.
Martin, The real problem here is that Justin is merely the figurehead, the core of a rotten apple, utterly painful though it is to me to write that. If he ‘is guilty’, and I personally happen to think he is, not that that matters in the least, I can think of only one single current Bishop who ‘is innocent’ and one retired Bishop who ‘is also innocent’ despite/because of the fact that the latter Bishop would be the very first to cite his own failings. I used to hold out the naive assumption that when we could get rid of… Read more »
60+ years ago, as a theological college student, I was persuaded by another student to help staff summer camps on Exmoor for teenage boys from a Dr Barnados Home, who were attempting the Duke of Edinburgh awards. I was called the Adjutant. The CO was a free church chaplain from Dr Barnados Homes. I sought no permission, was accountable only to the CO and reported to no one afterwards. Safeguarding hadn’t been invented. I suggest that my position was similar to that of Justin Welby at the so-called ‘Bash Camps’, which were entirely – and fiercely – independent of the Church of England,… Read more »
John, you don’t have to read much of the Makin Report to understand why. Smyth was a Lay Reader, Iwerne was almost entirely Anglican, and a whole host of Anglican clergy actively covered up the abuse.
When you read the Makin review you will see that it concerns multiple abuse by John Smyth & CofE gross mishandling of his case, and only covers the Iwerne Camps as regards his activities & connections there.
As a former Iwerne camper who met Smyth (some 10 years before the events described), I am reading the in-depth Makin Review through a forensic lens not unlike that of the reviewers. This bears the hallmark of the ‘Church of England’ throughout. I will have more to say.
Which I will await with considerable interest. I had personal contact with Smyth in a civil action in the Winchester County Court when he was a junior barrister; QC and Recorder came later, both at an unusually young age. This would have been in the late 1960s or possibly very early 1970s. I have been present at hundreds of court hearings over the years and have no reason to remember the many counsel or solicitors ‘on the other side’, but I still have a vivid recollection of Smyth, both his personal features and as decidedly cool and aloof, also a… Read more »
There seems to be a narrative developing around the Makin report which is now going to be hard to shift. I was a leader of a Christian Union in a private school from 1982, but for some reason Makin has omitted to include my evidence in his enquiry report. I think inadequate attention (although mentioned) has been paid about the relationship between Iwerne and the Church of England. Iwerne heartily disliked the Church of England and notice, all clergy mentioned in the report were out of this Conservative Evangelical stable – a rather small stable, and one which doesn’t follow… Read more »
“Iwerne heartily disliked the Church of England…Iwerne was always independent of the Church of England…”
This seems like a very significant comment.
But I’m not clear what difference it makes to the guilt of the C of E, even accepting the reality of an anti C of E faction within the C of E.
It does seem to be where Safeguarding and PLF meet.
Would parents or schools have approved their boys’ attendance at the holiday camps if they were not endorsed by the Church of England? I suggest they would not have done so.
The duty to report abuse frankly , is everyone’s business and each individual person needs to be clear that if they fail to act when they know something they are also guilty of covering up and allowing that abuse to happen. Nothing should prevent us from understanding our responsibility . Certainly I and most right thinking individuals with clear healthy moral boundaries on this , do not expect the suffering traumatised victims to be ignored and Christmas cards exchanged with perpetrators . It’s seriously morally misguided of the church . We depend on the church to shine a light in… Read more »
At several points, a good summary of the review would be “Justin Welby is a liar”. An example is at Section 15.1.1 subsection (r) on page 197 (internal pagination). “Justin Welby was interviewed on Channel 4 on 12th August [2019]. He claims, amongst other things, that Iwerne is “not Anglican”. This has been taken to mean, by some victims and other commentators, that it is not associated with the Church of England.” That’s clearly not true, for the reasons set out in 15.1.95 on page 221: Smyth was a church officer by the definitions of the time, as were others at… Read more »
Iwerne was under the direct authority of Scripture Union – an inter-denominational organisation quite separate from the Church of England, and any clergy working in or alongside Iwerne (for example School Chaplains) are under the supervision and authority (safeguarding) of those organisations (for example the school in the latter case), and so the Archbishop is correct to say that Iwerne is ‘not Anglican’ – it’s interdenominational. Peter Baron
Surely the Archbishop must resign; his position is untenable.
In my view, each of the Bishops named in the Report as failing to act, misleading others, or mishandling the case should resign – most notably Bishops Conway and Bailey Wells in addition to the Archbishop. Will they? Of course not. Moral responsibility is not one that is Episcopal in today’s Church of England, despite the Bishops’ propensity to assume the moral high ground in their dealings with and critiques of others.
It was perfectly clear in 2013 from the safeguarding training I had even before that, that any disclosures had to reported and dealt with accordingly. The possibility of being groomed was also at the fore then, not only of potential victims but of those receiving information and not acting upon it. Archbishop Welby and the other bishops mentioned failed those children both here and in Zimbabwe and they should do the honourable thing and resign. It is a simple matter of marrying up their safeguarding training record and their inaction at specific points. I would have thought that the Police… Read more »
I couldn’t agree more, Father.
Quite right.
Welby has lied, covered up, hung out colleagues to dry – Lowson, Perham, Sentamu etc – and also tried to destroy Bishop Bell and several others, in order to burnish his own reputation. Welby’s legacy will have been to institutionalise bullying, entitlement and dishonesty in the leadership of the CofE. It is certainly hard to think of a more corrupt and dishonest holder of the role of Archbishop of Canterbury. The new interns at LamPal working social media on buffing up Welby’s reputation will be reading this, and trying to figure out how to improve Welby’s standing. Him resigning would… Read more »
There were good reasons to hang Sentamu out to dry.
Explain!
Makin calls in several places for mandatory reporting. As IICSA does, as Jay does. But the Jay Response Group set up to consider Jay’s recommendations does NOT have it on its agenda for reasons that to me, at least, are not at all clear. What is our problem as a Church with adopting this policy?
Openness, honesty and a general wish to preserve a reputation?
Unfortunately the Channel 4 interview with XX Welby on the news programme tonight did not ask him that question . According to him, senior colleagues as late as this morning were telling him not to resign. Having spent a considerable part of my working life in non-church safeguarding XX Welby presented as troubled man, but also as one on a completely different wavelength from most of the rest of the safeguarding world. The XX claimed that similar types of abuse could not happen now because of reforms to the system he has introduced – (pity about Mike Pilavachi then)- and… Read more »
Alexis Jay in The Guardian this morning on mandatory reporting.
Bishops and senior ecclesiocrats have no accountability to anyone or anybody. They rule and reign as quasi-regal barons, and don’t have to give any account for any of their actions or routine inaction. Accountability and transparency would subject them to independent professional regulatory bodies and proper public scrutiny. Were that to happen, the utter Kafkaesque amateurishness of their work on safeguarding would be on full public display. So they’d rather not be subject to anyone, and take the hit reputationally and financially as more and more people head for the exit door. Frankly, they don’t know what they are doing… Read more »
Martin I agree so much. I left CofE nearly five years ago. Archbishop Welby is the main reason. I’ve begun to read the report a few pages at a time, it’s so stomach churning.
I’ve been reflecting how near impossible it is to persuade someone to quit when it’s clear to everyone but themselves, that it’s time to go. In recent times, Pope Benedict XVI seems to be an isolated example.
Others, like Biden, leave it too too late.
‘Swifter than an arrow from the Tartar’s bow’ straight to the Truth as always.
A superb comment describing the safeguarding situation as honestly and transparently as ever could be wished for. Thank you, Martin, we can only expect the arrow from your bow to hit its mark as any Tartar’s arrow would.
Let’s hope it is now acknowledged.
I agree completely – except with the statement that victims and survivors are offered a review. Many of us don’t even get that. To be honest, I think we may be the lucky ones, since the reviews often just provide further re-abuse.
A repeat of what I’ve said on a related post – The accounts from the victims that Makin’s review reports on are harrowing: – on what happened to them; the life altering effects of the abuse; on respect for those victims who have shared what happened; on respect for those victims who don’t want to share. They are accounts that all clergy, church officers & synod members need to read with a sense of shame for how our CofE allowed this to happen, and a ruthless determination to address the many mistakes of the past. And the review has some… Read more »
This is so serious and I think Justin Welby has now lost all moral authority as Archbishop. He should certainly not now drift on in office until January, he needs now to seriously consider his position as Archbishop, I would certainly agree that his position is now both untenable and unsustainable. I think he should resign with immediate effect, let the Bishop of Dover be acting Bishop for the Diocese of Canterbury in the interim and a Bishop of a Senior Diocese the Province of Canterbury be commissioned by Royal mandate as Acting Archbishop until a New Archbishop is appointed… Read more »
Please note the next TA article which contains the full text of a response to Makin by victims and survivors.
Nothing much has changed as far as I see it, and a Welby resignation won’t magically put everything right in the light of this long detained review. Despite a far greater awareness of good safeguarding practices, still endemic in the Church of England is abusive, bullying and controlling behaviour. The recent cases of Hindley and Pilavachi demonstrate very clearly that, to this day, the institutional response is far from adequate – lots of hand wringing, hiding behind legal advice, high levels of secrecy, poor decision making, with no-one ever really being held to account in any meaningful way. This all… Read more »
His resignation is not a “ silver bullet” for all our many continuing failures.
But oh for someone to take the honourable path of accepting responsibility … for once.
We cannot clean the wound until this happens.
Of all the (many to be fair) Diocesan expressions of regret that I have seen, Diocese of Oxford wins the prize for the most uncaring unfeeling statement. https://www.oxford.anglican.org/news/statement-in-response-to-the-john-smyth-review.php Although it is absolutely no surprise given Steven’s widely known track record, I would literally have preferred that Oxford say nothing rather than that. Steven’s statement refers to ‘non-recent abuse’. To educate entire AC & all Bishops of C of E on trauma-informed behaviour: Each one of you jointly & severally has ‘re-abused’ Smyth victims, and all the other victims of historic Church-related historic abuse each and every day of 2024, and… Read more »
On second thoughts I would prefer to commend good practice, and B&W is perhaps the best I’m aware of:
https://www.bathandwells.org.uk/news/bishop-michael-and-our-safeguarding-manager-share-their-response-to-makin-report.php
However I would certainly welcome feedback from TA readers about other good/even better ones?
I am reminded of what +Justin allegedly said of John Sentamu according to the Guardian:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/22/the-guardian-view-of-abuse-in-the-church-a-truly-dreadful-story
I am finding it hard to recognise what he reportedly said about +John with what he is now saying when he is the focus himself.
Recognise s/b *reconcile
It’s easy to reconcile when you realise that Archbishop Welby is a hypocrite and “economical with that truth” around his own knowledge of abuse.
He was right about John Sentamu, and he should hold himself to the same standard. He has however, consulted with some “senior colleagues” and absolved himself of all crimes it seems.
Not sure what else Welby could have said to Cathy Newman of Channel 4 News (on message as always), as he needs to speak with His Majesty The King first. Let’s hope a meeting is planned and common sense prevails. As Martin Sewell notes, his resignation is not a silver bullet, but until it happens (as happen it must in my view) there can be no progress on starting to ‘clean the wound.’ All those others criticised need to reflect on their position, including a current member of the Crown Nominations Commission.
He could have said nothing. Instead he said that he had consulted with senior colleagues and he will not be resigning.
He has also denied knowing anything about the abuse prior to 2013 despite the Makin report making it clear he was aware much, much earlier.
He is a hypocrite and a liar and totally unfit to be in his position. He deserves no apologies for how he has handled this, it is simply not good enough.
You say the report makes it clear that he was aware of abuse before 2013 – this wasn’t clear to me. Can you provide a reference? Do you mean the vague warning that he got in Paris in – – at the time he was a relative-nobody in the church (10+ years before ordination – not on any council/synod or similar) and it seems to me from 11.3.84 he was only given a vague “not a nice man” warning, not “here are some specific allegations”. I have not read all of it in detail so I am asking because I… Read more »
I know emotions are intense and high about all that is going on, but… I want to ask you to back ++Justin. Yes – he has made mistakes which he has confessed to . Could this not be an Augustinian movement of how you rise up rather than how you have failed? Resignations achieve nothing much. This is a shameful episode for the church. So what does the future look like? What does reparation look like? And then, who delivers it?
You are correct he shouldn’t resign, he should be sacked.
Yes, but is there a mechanism for the sacking of an archbishop?
There is no mechanism for sacking a diocesan bishop, but there is a recent precedent at Winchester, where the diocesan bishop was persuaded that he needed to resign.
Just by contrast, in the past four years, two major generals in the British army have been court-martialled and sacked. One for over-claiming boarding school allowance and one for drunkenly groping a woman at a party.
Query whether that is the case. A disciplinary tribunal operating under the Clergy Discipline Measure 2003 may remove from office anyone holding any form of preferment, and in Section 43 ‘preferment’ includes any archbishopric or bishopric. However, any such penalty applying to an archbishop or bishop has to be confirmed by the sovereign through an order in council (Section 24 (2)). An archbishop can also be suspended under Section 37. See 6.48 in Hill. It would appear that the 2003 Measure may have resulted in the lapse or abolition of most of the metropolitical rights of deprivation. Section 26 vests… Read more »
The King can almost certainly sack any bishop, or even an archbishop, but it would only happen in exceptional circumstances and if dismissal was incontrovertibly necessary.
One has to point out that our King has just knighted Justin for services to the Crown, and fell for Peter Ball hook, line & sinker. To be fair he wasn’t the only one: George Carey did so at least as much. Nevertheless it does seem to be clutching at straws to hope the King can usefully intervene when what is really needed is root & branch reform of the governance & power structures of the entire Church of England, much more than one token resignation. It could be argued that such reform is more likely to be achieved if… Read more »
Henry II had one.
Apart from personal views on whether or not +Justin should resign, what effect is his decision to stay going to have on a deeply wounded man as he limps towards retirement?
I don’t believe that the facts support any basis upon which Welby’s continuing in his position could do anything but exacerbate the harm he has inflicted already. I think Interested Observer has the right of it.
Any one resisting a Welby resignation is simultaneously kind to JW – and inadvertently utterly cruel to not only these victims but many many others. Remember this is only one of many conspiracies of cover-up on JW’s watch – and there is more of which I know but has yet to come out. Remember Gilo who has brought a simple but damning complaint against the Secretary General William Nye; nearly two years later it is still “in the weeds” Soul Survivor – conduct not so shockingly physically brutal but as long term damaging to faith and wellbeing to many victims,… Read more »
As a simple, onlooking ‘joe in the pew’ I’m in sympathy with Martin Sewell’s comments. Somebody has to be held accountable for all of this. Not just the abuse, but the culture which seems to see protection of the organisation, and those responsible for the problems as the ultimate aim of the game. As a civil servant we were held accountable to our minister for any mistakes which were made in the decisions and running of our department – the ultimate sin was to have ’embarrassed the minister’. And, if the embarrassment was big enough, or a minister had sufficiently… Read more »
Martin, wise words indeed. Thank you.
Surely there must be more than just a handful of us within the C of E who notice a pattern, to name just a tiny few: EJ Nash, Brandon Jackson, Peter Ball, John Smyth, Chris Brain, Iain Broomfield, Nicky Gumbel, Jonathan Fletcher, John Sentamu, William Taylor, Mike Pilavachi etc etc. All charismatic individuals who can ‘gather a crowd’ (in the short term?). When people come to believe that they personally are on a ‘mission from God’ (pls excuse Blues Brothers quote), then, another quote: Houston, we have a problem. The C of E hierarchy for much of the last 40… Read more »
Is one link between all of those names that they are all out of the English public school boarding system (or perhaps a clone of one in Sentamu’s case), and Justin Welby as well?
John Smyth is the exception and was not a product of the English public school. He attended a boarding school in Canada (where he was born), and always retained links with Canada. Of those named, he is surely the only one born into a family of the Plymouth Brethren. Academically and professionally he scaled the heights after the family’s move to England.
Thanks Rowland. I was wondering about the effect of an emotionally distorted childhood, and damaged relationships with father figures and women, due to a boarding school education. Perhaps a Plymouth brethren childhood might provide a similar effect.
I understand from past reading (not first-hand knowledge) that the family was expelled from the Plymouth Brethren. I imagine that would have been traumatic.
Rowland,
As Keith makes abundantly clear throughout his Review, a key motivator that drove JS upwards & onwards through the Iwerne movement, & beyond, (and ironically might even have attracted Bash?) was the very fact that JS himself had NOT attended ‘one of the 30 elite public schools’: Iwerne’s words not mine
I wasn’t making a general point. It was a specific response to Simon Dawson and the additional possible significance of the Plymouth Brethren.
He attended St Lawrence Ramsgate, which is HMC, albeit a minor public school. This may help explain the chip on his shoulder and the desire to ingratiate/worm his way into Winchester College which is, of course, one of the seven great Clarendon schools. Perhaps he wanted to become a sort of Wykehamist by proxy. The report also records him administering a brutal punishment for a trivial matter as a senior boy at St Lawrence. Also his obtaining silk at a comparatively early age might have had far more to do with the influence of Mrs Whitehouse on Mrs Thatcher and,… Read more »
I can see your point, about popularity cults, Simon. Agreed on that, but….. is it fair to include Nicky Gumbel and John Sentamu in the same list as really prominent abusers?
As far as I know, Nicky Gumbel is a decent, honest man, regardless of his theological stances. John Sentamu’s error was one of judgement in a specific instance; not quite the same league as Ball or Smyth.
And, to be fair, the problem of superstar hotshot clergy and their excesses is not unique to the CofE, nor just to this generation.
Sentamu: To which instance do you refer?
Martin, Thank you for this contribution. Regretfully I do agree with you about the need for JW’s resignation. I was at Ridley Hall, Cambridge, and a member of a revival prayer group with John and Margaret Sentamu, in 1976-1977. I also met my wife, Christine, for the first time in John and Margaret’s flat. I have special and happy memories from knowing John and Margaret. But as Kate Keates, – above, – points out, John was disciplined for a lesser offence, and JW is alleged to have said:’ It is not an acceptable human response, let alone a leadership response,… Read more »
I need more time than I have at present to read the Review and absorb its detail fully before commenting on the content. However, drawing on what Welby has said in response to it, both in his statement and in the Channel 4 interview with Cathy Newman, I am left with two immediate questions. Why was it that Welby moved quickly and decisively to (effectively) remove Michael Perham from office as Bishop of Gloucester over (what later proved to be) an unfounded allegation at, more or less, the same time as the Smyth allegations landed on his desk? Why was… Read more »
Safeguarding rules and regulations are for the little people as far as the bishops are concerned. We do endless training and submit all our paperwork to serve coffee at a warm space event. Bishops and church bureaucrats rely on a recollections may vary approach.
How totally true!
Surely your examples can be read the other way? He (maybe) thought that there was a problem with Gloucester and Lincoln – and they are actively paid members of the CofE whereas Smyth was not employed by the CofE. So where he felt he could take action regarding what may be current abuse he did something straight away. The error may have been doing too much too soon. On the other hand – he didn’t do something for Smyth and the error is not doing something. I would think there is a consistency of acting where people are currently employed… Read more »
Nye needs to resign. We also need the resignations of the present and previous Lead Safeguarding Bishop. Let’s be honest, this threesome have done nothing other than act as apologists for the systemic failures in safeguarding, and they have lied, lied and lied again. They have also opposed independent regulation and oversight 100%. Their positions are untenable. I am glad they have said nothing on this. But I never want to hear a pipsqueak from them again. They are utterly depraved. Cottrell’s position is hardly any better. A date for his retirement, tabled now, would help. That’s the minimum needed.… Read more »
Well – – let us hope this opens the floodgates for others (who I feel are more deserving of ‘hounding’) to tender their resignations.
I am so saddened for the individuals who were groomed and abused in this case, and the psychological violation of their faith and their lives, and the damage and impact such vile perversion then must have had on their ability to love their families, grow whole in their lives, and flourish with joy. I feel sad for Justin as well, in a different way, because we should always pray – for forgiveness, for repentance, for healing and comfort (in the full sense). However, I don’t think it should be remotely relevant for Justin to say that he has decided not… Read more »
Hi Susanah, I agree with much of all you say. I think a difficulty in asking others widely to say whether +Justin should resign is practical… (unless it’s synod) but otherwise I think the larger problem is whether he will be “judged” on this alone. There’s plenty of people with their knives ready for him on other issues… and I think “ready to assassinate”. I’m not shouting in this for him to stay… or go…. Maybe it would be good for him and the church to go but I’m unconvinced a head over the wall necessarily is the best way… Read more »
Difficult to know what to think – I’m not a fan of Mr Welby, and there does seem to be some strange inconsistencies in his decisions, as pointed out by others on here, but how can you / do you actually sack an archbishop? The only precedent I can think of involved Laud, Cranmer and others under the Elizabethan monarchs – and their method, albeit effective, wouldn’t be acceptable these days……
Here is a transcript of Cathy Newman’s interview with the Archbishop, as shown on Channel 4 News on Thursday evening.
https://www.thinkinganglicans.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Justin-cathy-newman-7-nov-2024.pdf
And here is a transcript of a BBC Radio 4 News broadcast containing an interview with Bishop Julie Conalty
https://www.thinkinganglicans.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/8th-Nov-2024-Radio-4-News-Bishop-Julie-Conalty.pdf
Thank you for this. She is simmering and forthright.
Interviewer: ‘Should Justin Welby resign?’
Julie: ‘The Archbishop has apologized. And I think that’s absolutely genuine. I think the question for me is whether words are enough.’
Quite hard for a suffragan bishop to suggest an archbishop should resign. She came as close to that as she could. There are few ‘good’ bishops in all this. The retired Bishop of Bath and Wells is clearly one, the Bishop of Birkenhead is another.
And I suggest the Bishop of Newcastle when she withdrew Archbishop Sentamu’s PTO. I understand she has now described the ABC’s position as untenable. Still to see source document.
The trouble with Welby resigning is that this would further expose the many fractures within CofE, and (to be brutal) the gene pool for his replacement is not inspiring.
Indeed. The Tablet’s piece on the runners and riders to succeed Welby is very funny but not encouraging.
The spread of opinion from different people on this is fascinating . I am very much in line with Martin Sewell’s comments above . It is really upsetting to think that there are more skeletons waiting in cupboards in the wings. Maybe points to consider are 1) The views of the survivors who have been disgracefully treated by the COf E in addition to their treatment by Smyth. They would like to see some accountability on the part of the COf E 2)Archbishop Welby’s ongoing obstruction of proposals from the ever mounting list of lessons learnt reviews 3) The ‘penalty’… Read more »
But the thing is “involved in the cover-up” – – I don’t think Justin was – – he was told that the police had been informed in 2013.
Or at least that’s how I read the report.
I don’t see anything to suggest he covered things up – his error (as I understand it) was taking it at face-value and not checking up / chasing to make sure that progress was made.
Which is an error – – but a different scale of error – – the sort I would have thought is easier for someone to learn from.
It would also ‘buy in’ to the whole sin/suffering/scapegoat/punishment axis that underlines the whole disgraceful Smyth episode, and the theological system on which it is based. It also lets others off the hook and most important of all does nothing for the survivors who the Archbishop should now meet with in a facilitated meeting as a matter of urgency. Contrition and reconciliation is the business we’re supposed to be in. Let’s have some !
I think that makes a lot of sense – – that he should meet with the survivors.
Maybe make the entire of November/December – any survivor related to this can come in and speak to him, and whatever he was going to do will have to be delayed.
That would show a change in priorities.
I think that’s a very credible suggestion that might just facilitate the beginnings of a dialogue – because that’s what it would have to be. Whether or not JW is willing or able to take that step is another matter. He looks like (and must be) a man under considerable stress and I wonder to what extent his own theological emphases might be under threat. I would have thought that a meeting with the survivors is vital, and only he can do that
.
I want accountability but I am much less sure whether the resignation of the ABC would achieve this rather the plunging the CofE into leaderless chaos and the stalling of some of its most important programs, at a vital time in a church already under immense pressure. In this respect I might observe that the renewed conservative lobbying for his resignation (is not new) has more than one motivation at a time they have their own challenges to face in this Review.. I think consider one of the most important parts of the Makin Review to be the psychological assessment in… Read more »
Exactly. And to add, the ‘work’ needed to go on, secret or not. This was omertà writ large with the Mafia bosses escaping justice largely through death. However, I hold a different view on whether or not there should be resignations. Edward Stourton pressed the Bishop of Stepney on accountability this morning on BBC Sunday programme. Accountability matters.
If ‘Exactly’ Anthony, I am not sure why you hold a different view on resignations?
Because I hold the same view on accountability and culture etc. The only difference is our respective views on consequences. As the Bishop of Birkenhead perceptibly noted, words are often not enough.
From a close reading of the comments the individuals calling for resignation are largely survivors and survivor advocates. In Australia we have had a concerted effort to see those who covered up abuse removed from office. In this situation given the findings of the review the moral and ethical road is for JW to resign. Without independent oversight like in Australia the leadership of the Church will constantly fall into the elitist pattern of denial obscuring and protection. Like Martin says in his comments above The Post Office at Prayer. In Australia the majority of Bishops caught in cover up… Read more »
But – – and I will keep saying this until something is pointed out – – I can’t see evidence that JW did “cover up” anything.
Only that he was told it was being handled and then he never followed it up.
That is a “failing to look under the cover” not “putting a cover on top”.
Thank you, David. You’ve encapsulated just about everything that put me off the organised charismatic movement – particularly the ‘Restoration’ branch, in your comments. “ elitist society embedded in hierarchical presumptions of power, entitlement, deference, valorised military methods – and a God found in the likeness of that mix. It was wholly male led and male centred – as that corner of the evangelical world still largely is.” If my memory is correct, one leader of that movement was a retired army officer, and a staunch Plymouth Brethren man, wasn’t he? The military images of conquest and invasion of ‘enemy territory’ ran right… Read more »
A question I would want to ask from a theological standpoint whether the Doctrine of Penal Substitutionary Atonement, quite a hallmark of classic Conservative Evangelicals had an influence in providing some theological Justification to John Smyth to carry out his abuse considering the way he perverted Scripture to justify his Abuse? I shall be interested to know what readers and commentators think about this? Jonathan
David’s point about the psychological assessment in the appendix is a very good one. But I wonder what you think accountability looks like? I was also not advocating that only the archbishop should resign- all the points about him being seen as the scapegoat are very true. We need the sort of removal described by Richie as the response in Australia
In the Australian Anglican situation the huge issue was Anglo Catholic clericalism. I think Makin discusses this as as deferring to superiors which was also commented on by both ISCA and our Royal Commision. The culture of sado masochistic bullying within elite schools being normalized in the 70s and 80s is still around but in other forms . This seems to be evident not only in Con Evo places but Anglo Catholic as well. Smyth certainly used the suffering of Christ as part of his defenses \ grooming. The extent of the abuse both in UK ZA and SA plus… Read more »
It certainly bears the same hallmarks of sin/scapegoat/punishment and I suppose the perpetrators could read restoration into it. Don’t forget also that much of the abuse took place with a background of public school education and that corporal punishment was often used as a corrective up until 1998 in private and public schools, sometimes by senior prefects as well as by staff so was part of the culture
The fact that it was often unjustly administered was just seen as a ‘grin and bear it’ scenario. Not difficult to equate which the kind of theology you talk about.
Jonathan, yours is the over-riding question; to my mind even more crucial than +Justin’s future. What the Makin report calls ‘the conducive culture’ was conservative Evangelicalism allied to a public school system which embraced muscular Christianity (forming men fit to serve Empire). Look behind muscular Christianity, male headship and the urge to see sinners harshly punished and you’ll find the atonement theory of penal substitution; the acid test of orthodoxy for conservative Evangelicals. Penal substitution, supported by a strained reading of a few NT verses and promoted by lines in a popular hymn “till on that cross as Jesus died,… Read more »
I feel you are mis-understanding penal substitution (or my understanding of the cross at least). The very fact that Christ died for our sins – – means that we don’t have to (die or suffer). So penal substitution would look at the Catholic confessional asking for 10 hail Marys or self-flagellation and say “that’s obviously wrong”. Maybe you could twist penal-substitution to say that self-flagellation (or by another) is ok.. but you could twist any theology that has somewhere in it a “God who dies and suffers = good” and hence say “so it’s good for you to suffer like… Read more »
“look at the Catholic confessional asking for 10 hail Marys or self-flagellation” and say “that’s obviously wrong”.
It certainly is a wrong representation of Catholic understanding of the confessional. Your ’10 Hail Marys’ or whatever are a response to forgiveness not a price to be paid in order to be forgiven. You’ve already been absolved before the penance is imposed.
I agree – – my point isn’t that Catholic understanding leads to abuse – it’s that it could just as easily be twisted… If someone thinks you have to do these things because of sin / as a response to forgiveness – then you could lead that into saying you have to suffer as a response to forgiveness. I’m sure you would say that’s not a correct Catholic response [although obviously at one point in history some did think it was re: self-flagg] The point is – I don’t think Evangelical theology is (significantly if at all) any easier to… Read more »
So true.
Debating the issue of penal substitutionary atonement with an evangelical ordained friend, he said that it would have a great deal of meaning to people living under Roman law. Probably true – but what about those of us who aren’t? Is there no better, but equally valid way of representing the atonement for a modern world? I’ve noticed that people from this particular church culture are very often open supporters of capital punishment too. Not an easy one to justify nowadays – we know that the ‘system’ has killed innocent people in the past, or effectively stolen their lives more… Read more »
I see no reason why the theory of penal substitution, on its own, should lead to abuse. But, as you say, its adherents often seem to have an urge to see punishment handed out. But maybe it’s somewhere deep in Anglican DNA: the BCP repeatedly upholds the duty of magistrates to punish, while strangely mute on Christ’s compassion for sinners.
I wonder how often you use the BCP, Father. At every mass I celebrate I repeat the ‘Comfortable Words’ – “Come unto me all that travail are heavy laden and I will refresh you” etc.
8am every Sunday for 25 years, Fr. Love the language; the theology not so much.
There are several competing theories of the atonement. Penal substitution is particularly favoured by conservative evangelicals, but other models include Satisfaction, Christus Victor, and Moral Exemplar. The Satisfaction theory seems to me to be excessively legalistic and mechanistic (God is just and justice demands a payment for humanity’s disobedience of God’s will — there is no let-out from this justice). In Penal Substitution, Christ’s death is seen as a substitute for the penalty that should be imposed on sinful human beings, again an excessively legalistic and mechanistic view to me. In the Christus Victor model, Jesus triumphs over evil —… Read more »
Whilst atonement, as suggested by Jonathan Jamal, maybe part of what was going on, I would suggest that there were other Christian teachings in the mix which were not linked to atonement and punishment. Such teachings are found outside this conservative evangelical grouping but can be equally damaging. There is a tradition in Christianity which supports the virtue of voluntarily embracing suffering, along the lines of “take up your cross and follow me”, or “this is the cross you have to bear”. It is the task of the Christian disciple to embrace suffering, and to prove his or her love… Read more »
Clearly Winchester was still into corporal punishment as late as 1980s, and that would have made it easier for Smyth to suggest a beating to his victims. However, it must be said that many other private schools had given it up well before then. My own otherwise very spartan establishment seldom used it, & abolished it entirely in late 1960s under a new headmaster – an ex Royal Marine Commando so no shrinking violet!
Four years back I took the funeral of a ninety-five-year old, whose daughter asked me to pray for her two children who were desperate to have children of their own. Within the year both children were expecting, but then one gave birth very prematurely, and it not only looked as if the baby girl wouldn’t survive, but that the mother wouldn’t survive too. It was a tragic situation where I felt utterly out of my depth, and I emailed Archbishop Justin and asked for his prayers. I fully realised that the Archbishop’s timetable was impossibly packed to respond to every… Read more »
I’m sure like all of us there is much good amongst the occasional bad; this however is seriously bad and potentially devastating for the church you and I were ordained into in the same year. This not a “clarion call” but rather an objective response to a situation which can now only start to be redressed by the ABC’s resignation.
Transcript of the BBC Radio 4 Sunday programme segment including an interview with Bishop Joanne Grenfell
https://www.thinkinganglicans.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/10-Nov-2024-Radio-4-Sunday.pdf
Transcript from BBC Radio 4 Today programme Monday 11 November https://www.thinkinganglicans.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/R4-Today-11-Nov-2024.pdf
Latest on the BBC News website
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5yx90q0v31o
I may be missing the point but a few years ago a diocesan bishop was somewhat brutally suspended ,presumably by Archbishop Welby, and left in mental and spiritual agony apparently about a historic incident which was thought not to have been dealt with sufficiently well. At the time it was stated that Bp X had done nothing shameful himself. Small comfort that after about 18 months of hanging in shamed limbo, without any authentic pastoral care, it was deemed that the bishop should after all be restored to his diocese. He returned but shortly afterwards proffered his resignation. I wonder… Read more »
If you’re referring to the previous Bishop of Lincoln I recollect that he was very publicly described by AbC as a ‘danger’. And you are quite right to hint that this action virtually ‘called time’ on his active ministry as well as causing no small amount of damage in the Diocese.
I wonder how Bishopn Lowson is feeling right now.
Clearly those responsible for not effectively dealing with abuse are unfit for office, but it is vital to consider the origin, the doctrinal cause, being an unhealthy obsession with sin and redemption through self serving, arrogant and inadequate leadership.
When sin and guilt get the better of love you’re in trouble.
Think about John Smyth’s twisted actions… Philippians 4:8
Were they gentle? Were they kind? Were they noble? Were they pure? Were they lovely? Were they admirable? Were they excellent? Were they praiseworthy?
The key thing about Jesus pouring out his life on the Cross was to teach us devotion, sacrifice, givenness, compassion as the nature of love and the nature of God.
To inspire us to open our hearts to the Love of God ourselves.
Can anyone please enlighten me and tell me when as the normal Joe public did we know about John Smyth and the abuse to his victims did we know about his abuse in the 80s ,
23rd February 1989 – John Thorn, former headmaster of Winchester College at the time Smyth as abusing his pupils, writes about the abuse Smyth had carried out (without naming him), in his book ‘The Road to Winchester’. However, that will not have been very widely read. 19th October 1993 – The Coltart Report is published (in Zimbabwe, I believe) detailing Smyth’s history of abuse in the UK and abuse of nearly 100 boys and young men in Zimbabwe. But again, this info would not have circulated widely in the UK. 12th September 2003 – The Coltart Report was sent to… Read more »
Thank you for the detailed report
So why in 2013 or 2017 when many knew and the bishop had also admitted he knew why has the Bishop of Canterbury only stepped down yesterday and not in 2013 or 2017
Just out of curiosity, is that the same David Macinnis who was presenter of Birmingham Cathedral in the late 1970’s?
God’s immaculate timing- the Church of England has designated THIS coming Sunday, 17 November 2024 as ‘Safeguarding Sunday’;-) ‘Let’s talk’ !
https://www.churchofengland.org/safeguarding/safeguarding-news-releases/safeguarding-sunday-2024
What is the message; the medium; how might clergy lead; what might laity be saying. Ears to hear?
Well if he’d hung on till Sunday to make the resignation then…..
… then it would have been bad in a different way.
On a serious point – Maybe this Sunday can be used for good to call for other changes that are required.
Phew: I exalt the granular detail! Has anyone really addressed the willingness of ‘power’ to prioritise institutional self preservation over the predicament of victims? Was the “Post Office Scandal’ , ironically broadcast, last “Christmastime”, a template, with echoes in this story. How did Paula Vennells suit her conscience (and faith) to facts she knew? Perhaps the timeline/facts/overlaps of responsbility don’t fit there either, but when Paula was considered for her faith role, who knew anything of the PO scandal, and could have asked “Whoa, careful, here, do we fully understand what’s happening?” Is this unfair? What’s not unfair is that… Read more »
I’m not a member of the church and came across this story by accident. What is the connection between the public schools and the church?
The Iwerne camps were set up specifically to invite boys only from the top 30 private schools in this country and with a focus on conservative evangelical Christianity, with the aim of getting them and that wing of the church into positions of power and influence in the Anglican Church. Such boys would for the most part come from well off backgrounds and have influential parents. Some went on to become bishops or lead big evangelical churches. Welby is of course an Archbishop.
Watching the interview on the 7th November it seems to me he is like a wriggling fish presenting his case in the best light for him with distortion of the the facts of his failures
…and he seemed to me to tell few lies.