THERE are inquiries to answer concerning the safeguarding processes and decisions that meant that David Tudor was in a position to remain in ministry until 2019 — however the Archbishop of York’s resignation wouldn’t be the answer, bishops have said.
On Monday morning, the Bishop of Newcastle, Dr Helen-Ann Hartley, had called on Archbishop Cottrell to step down over the case of Mr Tudor, a priest who had faced multiple police investigations for indecent assault of ladies below the age of 16 (see story).
On Monday afternoon, nonetheless, the Bishop of Birkenhead, the Rt Revd Julie Conalty, said that, although she agreed with Dr Hartley that questions needed to be asked concerning the case, she didn’t think that Archbishop Cottrell should resign.
“We can keep having resignations, but that isn’t going to resolve our problems,” Bishop Conalty, who’s the deputy lead bishop for safeguarding within the C of E, told the BBC Radio 4’s The World at One.
She said that, while she had questions on some points of the case, and thought that church safeguarding processes needed to vary, it looked as if it would her that Archbishop Cottrell “didn’t have the facility to remove this cleric from office right up until the purpose at which he was in a position to suspend him”.
“There are inquiries to answer, I’m absolutely clear about that, and, in that, I agree with Bishop Helen-Ann. I’m less clear as as to whether those issues are a resigning matter within the context of this case,” she said.
Bishop Conalty said that, on the premise of data within the BBC investigation into the case, she couldn’t see grounds for Archbishop Cottrell’s resignation.
On the identical programme, the Bishop of Winchester, the Rt Revd Philip Mounstephen, emphasised that bishops “don’t have the facility to rent and fire”, and that it seemed that the Archbishop of York had had his “hands tied” within the case of Mr Tudor.
Bishop Mounstephen praised the BBC’s investigation, but said that questions of resignation mustn’t happen amid a “trial by media”, but that established processes needs to be followed, and enhancements delivered to bear on the entire system.
The lead bishop for safeguarding, the Bishop of Stepney, Dr Joanne Grenfell, also focused on the necessity for reform, including the way in which by which the clergy are employed and disciplined.
“Alongside higher safeguarding structures, that are already being revised, we want problems with clergy conduct more broadly to be tackled. This must include higher use of effective disciplinary and capability processes, and the correct use of risk assessment, so that individuals will not be allowed to proceed in ministry when unacceptable risk is present,” she said.
Current rules prevent the pursuit of a disciplinary case on the premise of accusations which have already been investigated. There isn’t any provision for removing a cleric from office based on a risk assessment.
Dr Grenfell said that she would also prefer to see clergy terms of service, and the establishment of an “office for skilled conduct in ministry”. Currently, the status of clergy as office-holders makes it harder for them to be faraway from post.
Some of those issues got here into the highlight in the summertime when the previous Bishop of Blackburn, the Rt Revd Julian Henderson, defended a payout for a canon at Blackburn Cathedral because the “only option” for his removal (News, 16 August and 23 August).
An independent review of the way in which by which accusations against Mr Tudor were handled has been commissioned: a choice welcomed by the present Bishop of Chelmsford, Dr Guli Francis-Dehqani. “I understand the will to reply quickly and decisively,” she said in a press release on Monday. “At the identical time, and much more importantly, we must respond well.
“I do know that in situations like this, turning to process may be perceived as a straightforward way out, but it surely is poor process, or an absence of process, that has led to lots of the Church’s failings prior to now, and we must not repeat those mistakes now.
“We must allow those professionals whose particular responsibility it’s the time and space to review this case properly and fully, in order that we may be guided by their conclusions,” she said.
Dr Francis-Dehqani joined the Bishop of Southwark, the Rt Revd Christopher Chessun, in offering to fulfill survivors within the case. The abuse mostly took place while Mr Tudor was ministering within the diocese of Southwark within the Seventies and ’80s.
“The behaviours admitted by David Tudor indicate a serious and damaging breach of his pastoral and skilled obligations as a priest, and I would love to apologise unreservedly for the pain and trauma that his actions have caused,” Bishop Chessun said.
“I’m deeply grateful for many who have had the courage to share their experiences and have interaction with this long and difficult process.”
The BBC investigation found that, in 1988, Mr Tudor twice stood trial, in each cases accused of indecent assault against girls under the age of 16. In the primary trial, he was acquitted, but had admitted to having sex with one girl when she was 16.
In the opposite case, he was convicted of indecent assault against three girls, and served a six-month sentence, however the conviction was subsequently quashed on the premise that the judge had misdirected the jury.
One of the ladies in the primary trial, whom the BBC refers to as Debbie, told the programme that she was abused by Mr Tudor between the ages of 13 and 15.
She said: “He abused his position of trust, and it’s had an enormous effect on my life. Having that vast secret pulled me away from my parents. I’ve lived with shame for 40 years.”
The BBC investigation also found that, in 2012, Mr Tudor paid £10,000 to a girl, often called Jessica, who says that she was sexually abused from the age of 11.
The payment was to settle a civil claim brought against Mr Tudor after the police had decided to not pursue charges.
“Nobody would make a payment in the event that they haven’t got something to cover,” Jessica told the BBC. She called on Archbishop Cottrell to resign: “It looks like he spat in my face; I feel he should leave the Church as well.”
A spokesperson for Archbishop Cottrell told the BBC that he had been guided by legal advice that no further motion could possibly be taken, and that Mr Tudor “admitted no liability” in making the payment.
In 2015, Mr Tudor was appointed an honorary canon of Chelmsford Cathedral — a move that, a spokesperson for Archbishop Cottrell said, had been the results of a policy change to grant all area deans the title.
Dr Hartley, nonetheless, told the BBC that this might not be justified. By making someone an honorary canon, “you’re absolutely uplifting someone’s ministry,” she said.
The granting of an honorary canonry to Mr Tudor was something that Bishop Conalty couldn’t understand, she said. She also queried why Mr Tudor couldn’t have been faraway from the position of area dean.
“The abuse is completely appalling, and it seems clear to me that he should never have been allowed to return to ordained ministry after the five-year suspension,” Bishop Conalty said on Monday.
In a press release, Archbishop Cottrell said that “the method at the moment didn’t prevent him from returning to ministry within the diocese of Southwark in 1994. Changes to the way in which safeguarding is now managed and scrutinised would mean the choice taken in 1988 wouldn’t happen now.”
The BBC reported that Mr Tudor’s return to ministry was assisted by the then Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey. Leaked documents obtained by the BBC purportedly show that, in 1996, Lord Carey asked for Mr Tudor’s name to be faraway from a central record of clergy who had been subject to disciplinary proceedings.
According to the BBC, Lord Carey said that he had no memory of Mr Tudor, and a spokesperson for the C of E said that the agreement that Mr Tudor could return was made “with some trepidation”.
A spokesperson for the diocese of Southwark told the BBC that the choice to impose a five-year slightly than a lifetime ban on Mr Tudor “seems absolutely inexcusable in today’s context, and wouldn’t have been made today”.
DR HARTLEY received support from the campaign group ACT on IICSA, which incorporates the previous chair of the Independent Inquiry into Childhood Sexual Abuse, Professor Alexis Jay.
In an open letter to Dr Hartley, the group thanked the Bishop for “standing alongside the youngsters, lots of whom at the moment are adults, who’ve suffered lifelong trauma consequently of sexual abuse inside the Church of England”.
The letter, which was signed by Professor Jay, together with the chief executives of greater than half a dozen survivor organisations, commended Professor Jay’s report on the longer term of safeguarding within the Church of England, and called for its recommendations to be adopted in full.
The report, the letter said, had been “rejected by Synod last 12 months”. In a debate in February, the General Synod had voted to launch a consultation on the report, which had been published two days before the Synod was on account of scrutinise it (News, 1 March).
The decision to go for a consultation was criticised on the time by Dr Hartley, who told the Church Times that the C of E needed to adopt Professor Jay’s proposals at once (News, 1 March).
At the subsequent meeting of the Synod, in July, nonetheless, Dr Hartley made a speech endorsing the approach taken by the Response Group which had been given the duty, after the February vote, of preparing detailed options for the longer term of church safeguarding (News, 12 July).
On Monday, it was confirmed that Synod members can be given a selection between two models of independent safeguarding.
