Since the SCIE report on Lambeth Palace Safeguarding was published on 28 February, there has been a series of news and comment articles about it. Our reporting of it has been a bit disjointed so for clarification here is a complete record.
Our original 28 February report is here: Lambeth Palace safeguarding audit published. We then published links to six other items in the Comments rather than by amending the original post. We also mentioned two of these in our Opinion roundup on 4 March. Here are all the links:
28 February Anglican Futures: Unbelievable!
28 February Premier Christian News: Welby’s attempts to create safe CofE culture ‘undermined’ through lack of consistency says audit
28 February Church Times: Abuse survivors unhappy with their treatment by Lambeth Palace, audit finds
2 March Jasvinda Sangera Independent Safeguarding Board: Response to SCIE Report on safeguarding practices into Lambeth Palace
3 March Stephen Parsons Surviving Church: Trying to be heard. How Lambeth Palace has let down the Abused in their search for Justice.
4 March The Times (£): Archbishops’ aide criticised for handling of Church of England sex abuse allegations
Now the Church Times has published two further articles (read the earlier one first, to make sense of them):
9 March Church Times: Abuse survivors criticise Bishop Urquhart’s appointment as Bishop to the Archbishops
10 March Church Times: Safeguarding not a responsibility of the Bishop to the Archbishops, Lambeth said
Here is the Lambeth Palace statement: Clarification from Lambeth Palace of current safeguarding arrangements following publication of SCIE report.