Surviving Church Conflict

Product Information

These recurring chapters are indication that literally nothing has got through to them. If you didn’t know that already, simply read the plethora of ignored messages from Survivors across social media, often screaming with pain. I have more than once complained that it is difficult to penetrate the complexity of safeguarding organisations at the national level of the CofE. Most people become bewildered at the plethora of organisations with the word safeguarding attached to them. Janet Fife wrote a very helpful glossary on this blog in an attempt to demystify the way things work in the CofE. http://survivingchurch.org/2020/12/15/alphabet-soup-a-glossary-of-safeguarding/One of the issues that helps to muddle the situation still further is the fact that when survivors are included in a national body working for safeguarding, we cannot know for reasons of confidentiality who these survivors are. Are we to take on trust that the survivor members of the group are true representatives of this group and that they are in constant touch with others in a similar situation? There is no way that we can know whether the survivor representatives on the new Redress Scheme Project Board or the National Safeguarding Survivors Group (NSSG) are reaching out to others to gauge their opinions and ideas. If there is in fact a lively interchange and proper communication between these ‘official’ survivors and others who remain suspicious of these groups, I am ready to be corrected. All I can say that the survivors I know do not feel safe at present to engage with any of the national Church structures. For a variety of reasons, they stand apart from them. Readers of this blog will recognise the signs and symptoms of narcissism. Individuals with severe narcissistic personalities in leadership have had plenty of exposure on this and the other side of the Pond. I need not name examples, except to note that despite continuing uncovering of significant moral and other failures, they still believe wholeheartedly in their own narrative and are not dissuaded in carrying on their crusades to regaining power whatsoever. IICSA cannot fail to have noticed that they too were ignored by the Church of England. I hope that they make their views known to policymakers. For these reasons we have engaged in creative projects designed and delivered by those with lived experience of abuse, those who minister to them, and others in our communities who support this vital work.”

In 2015, following the completion of the review of past safeguarding cases over the last fifty years (the Courage, Cost & Hope Report), The Methodist Church offered a full unreserved apology to survivors and victims of abuse for the failure of current and past processes in fully protecting children, young people and adults from abuse. The rest of us not possessed by this destructive condition, would be humiliated by barely 10% of their exposed failures, and would resign or otherwise withdraw from the limelight with immediate and prolonged effect. I have asked for a major review into every person who has a disability and a mental health condition if they are subject to Diocese Safeguarding agreements, assessments, and, monitoring. All who have engaged with the Jay Review report a uniformly good impression of the competence, professionalism and kindness toward them in addition to a grasp of the issues partly born out of Professor Jay’s experience at IICSA.

Our blogs

Such expertise does exist, but rarely resides in a single individual. Teamwork will be needed. Someone who knows the detailed inside workings of the CC, having worked there, would top my list. But in this case the brief is different: it’s not how to scam the system to max out the benefit for dodgy trustees, but how to enforce the system, using the system as it stands, in the likely most effective way, to protect smaller people with generally less money. On Friday I discovered that Jasvinder Sanghera and Steve Reeves have been obliged to decline engagement with the ISB Review which is being conducted by barrister Sarah Wilkinson. The key issue is depressingly familiar. JC: Absolutely, my view is that we do not have confidence in an appointment that has been made without due process, without any consultation with survivors or existing members of the Board, and where somebody has had that conflict of interest, it is a red line. Part of the great bitterness of the dispute can therefore be attributed to ‘buyers’ remorse’ on the part of academics who, on reflection, did not undertake sufficient due diligence, and noted that it was their own mistake. That was due diligence which might once have been undertake by the patronage secretary and who would have advised the governing body. That said, it may be wondered what due diligence either party could have performed in 2014 which would have been adequate. However, as I have noted before, the main problem is the extreme paucity of eligible ordained candidates. If a large college has to resort to appointing people who have, or have had, connections with a seminary some miles from the University, then it is clear that the field is excessively narrow. This itself creates antipathy within the governing body: that they are forced to choose between candidates about which it is hard to undertake sufficient due diligence; it simply adds a further layer of resentment. But in the Church of England’s safeguarding structure we now have a Lead bishop perceived as silent to the harm and re-abuse being done to survivors on an almost daily basis; a bishop who seems to have decided the best course of action with this critical portion of a portfolio is to stay hidden beneath the mantle of the structure and hope the three years passes her by with little to no impact. There’s a rather more sinister possibility: perhaps the bishop has been instructed to follow this course.

I once had a rather naughty antique dealer friend (think Lovejoy), who used to defend his wheeler-dealing trading by saying: “ Truth is a precious commodity – we must use it sparingly”. When I read and listen to many of the Replies to our Questions at Synod, I often wonder why those answering us have so much to say yet are so evasive and sparing with the truth. At a time when trust and confidence in the leadership has never been lower, truth and delivery on promises looks so problematic. As this is a purely private investigation by a body outside of the public sector, the M.P. is unlikely to be able to have any significant agency or influence over the case’.I hope Martyn gets somewhere but from my experience unless there is a provable mishandling of charity funds or beneficiaries that are in immediate danger the CC is too stretched to properly respond. In February, General Synod members were denied the opportunity to debate the ISB (News, 2 February; 6 February). Patently, such a debate must take place at York in July, when those responsible for the current débâcle can be held to account.” Titus charitable trust was formed many years ago. Basically it was designed to assist leaving Iwerne’s baggage in the past as an insurance against John Smyth’s misdemeanours catching up with them in the future, and their having to pay for his crimes. Although apostasy has frequently attracted to itself various negative connotations, it is still possible to see that moving from one political, spiritual or religious identity to another has a potentially positive side. If religious or political faith is understood to be a stance which involves individual decision, we should be ready to applaud anyone who moves into a place of conviction which may differ radically from the assumptions of the past. Parents obviously would prefer their children to grow up expressing the values and beliefs of the family unit but, in a setting where self-determination and free choice are taught, the right of an emerging adult to exchange one set of values and beliefs for another should be celebrated. The book edited by Martyn Percy and Charles Foster, Faiths lost and found, Understanding Apostasy invites us to think seriously and engage with this positive side of the word used within the context of religious belief. Apostasy, in the world of religious belief, can be seen as potentially marking a valuable expression of human creativity involving both change and growth. We recognise the continuing need to reflect, learn and develop understanding in all corners of the Church about safeguarding and what is needed to protect, respond and support those who may be vulnerable.