Curiouser and Curiouser! I can’t help feeling that there must be quite a lot that we are not being told about this case. Firstly, Dean Peers, who had appeared to be heavily involved as Sub-Dean in the long running controversy over the former Dean of Christ Church, Oxford (Martyn Percy) was completely exonerated by a CDM tribunal in the diocese, which praised him as an “impressive and truthful witness” while not troubling to damn with even the faintest of praise anyone else involved in the case, especially the complainant, and including two witnesses who are frequent posters on TA. Both… Read more »
Thank you for lifting the lid. I read the original report and thought it was yet another unholy mess. I’m not sure partisan comments are helpful in such a situation. But I am struck by how this story adds to the perception that natural justice and the CofE are not obvious bedfellows.
Malcolm- thank you for this; and Moderators- thank you for publishing. I submitted a comment to TA at the time of the publication of the CDM report, making reference, as you do, to witnesses who are frequent posters to TA. I took the view that ‘legal advice’ may well have suggested caution regarding a publisher’s responsibilities and liabilities, and concluding that perhaps silence was appropriate. I confess to a niggling discomfort.
Perhaps the silence also has something to do with the sort of effect described by Archdeacon Jones (who has also worked as a solicitor) on another blog post dated 30 January 2023 (which, of course, may have nothing whatsoever to do with the Peers case): “The Western Mail reports that ‘we are not able to name the cleric concerned, nor to report details of the [disciplinary] proceedings, nor the allegations he faces, nor the post to which he has been appointed’. Why ever not? ‘The reason … is the threat of contempt proceedings, from a senior Church lawyer’, Mr Justin Gau, barrister, chancellor… Read more »
Froghole – I think you are confusing your Philip Joneses. The author of the ‘blog is a Welsh Roman Catholic layperson (and former Anglican layperson) and is not the former solicitor and former Archdeacon of Hastings with the same name.
Many thanks for that correction, and apologies to you and both gentlemen! I have evidently been labouring under this misapprehension (one of many) for a very long time.
Thank you, Froghole, for these comments. I certainly agree with you that, if ecclesiastical law is to be practised in the heavy-handed and probably ultra vires way it has been in this case, it is well past its sell by date and should be done away with forthwith. But what would it take to bring that about? I can foresee a mountain of work for lawyers, ecclesiastical and otherwise, and a probable ‘Gradgrind vs Gradgrind’ denouement, with nobody benefitting but the lawyers. I was unaware of the demise of the Archbishop Cranmer blog. If that has been brought down by… Read more »
I had not been wanting to make any comments about the Peers case itself, about which I know nothing. I can only wish him and Llandaff cathedral – where I have attended services several times in recent years – well. My clumsy comment was merely to note Mr Jones’s other observations (his is an excellent blog) from 30 January 2023 on an apparent attempt to extend the application of English ecclesiastical law to Wales, using the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction Measure 1963 and the Clergy Discipline Measure 2003, and to assert that both Measures permit a threat of contempt proceedings. If the… Read more »
Without quoting chapter and verse, any intention by an Ecclesiastical Court to commit for contempt must be made on application to the High Court. So in practice, and in fact, it is the secular court which adjudicates such matters.
Thank you again, Froghole, for this further information. The breadth and depth of your knowledge, and your ability quickly to extract relevant sections from ancient pieces of legislation, never fail to astonish me. Not being a lawyer, and therefore having no self-interest in the matter, I certainly hope that you are right that simple legislation of the type to which you refer would be enough to put an end to ecclesiastical law. I feel certain however that there would be many whose self-interest would force them to put all sorts of obstacles in the way. The senior lawyer in this… Read more »
Many thanks, as ever, but those two statutes are relatively well known to students of disestablishment, and I used them when drafting my own disestablishment bill 8 years’ ago. The main difficulties with disestablishment in 1868-69, 1894, 1909, 1912 and 1913-14 were not about disestablishment per se but the total or partial disendowment which went with it (see here, for example: https://archive.org/details/disestablishment0000bell). A quick glance at the Irish Church Act 1869 will reveal that it was overwhelmingly concerned with the appointment of commissioners who would deal with the disendowed assets, and then how the property should be dealt with: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1869/42/contents/enacted.… Read more »
Surely Philip Jones is correct in asserting that the CDM 2003 confers no jurisdiction whatsoever over lay people, and that is equally true of the Clergy Conduct Measure 2024 (I am not sure whether this has yet been laid before Parliament) which is to replace the CDM..
Thanks for this, and to TA for linking to the additional article. I have to confess I was astonished by the judgement – I make no comment on the aspects relating to former Dean Peers – my astonishment was grounded in the Tribunal’s treatment of the Complainant. So I am pleased to see a thorough examination of it. I also think it extremely poor form for the private individual to have been left to make the complaint. As to the new appointment. I think it’s a very canny move on the part of the Bishop to appoint someone with this… Read more »
The impression being given by all the announcements is that this appointment has been made by the Bishop alone. I’m not a member of the CinW so I have no idea if “due process” was followed or not. However a Consultation was carried out before the appointment of the previous Dean, which might be of interest: https://tinyurl.com/2f3xzb39
The idea that a lay person (or indeed a cleric) is so tightly bound by confidentiality that they may not access their support network has uncomfortable echoes of the tragic case of Ruth Perry and her treatment by Ofsted. It must not be part of our system of resolving complaints, and it must not be thought to be part of that system.
Quite so! But I am not sure that the senior lawyer who has been issuing threats of injunctions sees it that way. He just wants the ‘little people’ to be required to accept what their superiors tell them and not allowed to see critical comments on blogs, or even in national newspapers.
The tribunal Chair, Lyndsey de Mestre KC, in a ruling on the confidentiality issue dated 8 April 2024 (effectively indicated as to follow by para 59 of the substantive decision of 21 March 2024, which recorded the fact that I was ‘disputing the basis for challenging [my] entitlement to hold the papers‘) and following the submission of a requested statement in which, over four pages, I gave reasons for saying that Karen Gadd was entitled to provide me with a copy of the trial bundle, is now (following a direction by the Chair on 9 April) publicly available on the… Read more »
Thank you, David, for this detailed post and for having the bravery and expertise to challenge successfully the original ruling. Nevertheless, the original thread remains closed to comments, presumably because of similar threats to refer to the High Court. Are these threats not also as empty as alleged by Gavin Drake in the link you provide?
“to deal with a breach of confidentiality required under the CDM process.”
Arguably, this reads as if it is the breach of confidentiality which is required under the CDM process. What they should have written is, ‘to deal with a breach of the confidentiality which is required…’.
Janet, I don’t think this is muddled thinking, just loose use of language. The meaning is clear. What is reprehensible is that the reference should have been to the “alleged breach of confidentiality.” The tribunal’s decision (of 21 March 2024) does not indicate the position of Adam Hobson—the DO’s delegate in “conduct[ing] the case for the complainant” (see CDM 2003, section 18(1))—when the issue of the alleged breach was raised, and whether the tribunal’s attention was drawn to the ‘ambiguous’ position, as now acknowledged in the Chair’s ‘Paragraph 309’ ruling, and as clearly set out in both Philip Jones’s and… Read more »
I agree with you as to the legal point – but maintain that the meaning of the sentence is not clear. Loose use of language in a legal context isn’t helpful, as you well know.
Might I suggest that given the circumstances a speedy appointment was essential. Well done to the Bishop. Why, why does someone think full consultation is required in every case, particularly given very recent full consultation! (Rhetorical Question!)
It’s due to an assumption that the same rules for appointment of a Dean in the Church of England apply equally in the Anglican churches of Wales, Scotland and Ireland – which they don’t. In the C of E there is a mandatory consultation and ultimately a Crown appointment announced through 10 Downing Street.
As Rowland has pointed out, my suggestion that the appointment may have been carried out without due process was based on my ignorance that the process in the CiW was different from that in England. Ignorance is no excuse, so I apologise to any I have offended. Nevertheless, I could point out that the ‘very recent full consultation’ appears to have been carried out under the auspices of the previous bishop, June Osborne, who may have had different requirements for the dean. As someone has pointed out, things have not been happy or stable at Llandaff for some considerable time!… Read more »
Interested Observer
21 days ago
One cannot help thinking that short of the holding of an entirely good faith “Truth and Reconcilliation” council supported and endorsed by all participants — which is hardly likely — l’affaire Percy is likely to have direct and indirect fallout for years to come.
Sam Jones
21 days ago
I am sorry to read of Richard Peers departure. I always enjoyed reading his blog, and hope his ministry will continue elsewhere in some form.
David James
21 days ago
I sometimes wonder if this should be renamed “Speculative Anglicans”. Not a word of support for the new Dean, or the community at Llandaff Cathedral who will soon be on their 3rd Dean in as many years. (4th if Jan Van der Lely’s term is taken into account). The new person needs support and prayers and a swift appointment maybe exactly the right approach.
Ouch! Sorry if I touched on a nerve. There would be no need for speculation if the authorities were open and transparent when making announcements and appointments, which has not apparently been the case here.
Yes, some things may need to remain confidential and that can be stated. But for Dean Peers to ‘retire’ aged only 58 from a post he has held only since Nov 22 is extraordinary. I have nothing against the newly appointed dean but the speed of his appointment does not seem to have allowed for due process.
You haven’t touched any particular nerve, I’m just reflecting on the various responses which have continued in the same vein. I’m old enough and ugly enough to understand that sometimes ‘all is not as it appears’ and could write a book about my own experiences of two Archdeacons. I just feel we can do better than this and I’m concerned at how low the bar is. .
Patrick Coleman
21 days ago
I think it would be wise (and kind) to hold back comments and views on the various procedures that lie behind these stories, not least because there are real people involved: the outgoing Dean, the Dean-to-be, their families – and not least the people who form the community of Llandaff Cathedral. For clarity, the Constitution of the Church in Wales provides for a Bishop to appoint the Dean of the diocesan cathedral of sole right (if you want to check, the whole thing is available online via the Church in Wales website). I think the last time this occurred without… Read more »
Thank you, that’s most helpful. That’s exactly why I questioned rather than passed judgement on process in relation to the appointment of the new Dean. Not being a member of the CiW I was unaware of that provision. I’m greatly obliged for the information. Like you, I think this seems a very canny choice of candidate.
Thank you Patrick for your input on due process in the CiW and for your personal insights on the people involved. Your suggestion of splitting the thread into two, one covering the CDM debate, and the other the Llandaff appointments has much merit but the problem, as I see it, is that the earlier thread, reporting the CDM findings, is still closed to comment, as presumably would be any new thread covering the CDM. Nevertheless, the paper from Philip Jones updating the first thread seems to have comprehensively ‘blown the doors off’ that particular obfuscation strategy, however much this might… Read more »
If comments and views had been discouraged or disallowed here, there would have been no opportunity for you to clarify the legitimacy of the appointment procedure – and widespread suspicion would have continued. Better to let in the light and air.
I think you’re setting up a straw man for me here. There is I hope no wording in my post to suggest either discouraging or disallowing comments and views – indeed I go so far as to suggest they are necessary and should be homed elsewhere. My aim – which, from what you have shared here and written elsewhere, I would have expected you of all people to appreciate – is to try and ask for people to attend to the effect of their comments and speculations on the real people involved, and to exercise appropriate restraint. This reminds me… Read more »
My apologies if I misunderstood you. I did indeed think that by saying ‘I think it would be wise (and kind) to hold back comments and views on the various procedures that lie behind these stories’, you were discouraging comments. I agree that we ought always to be mindful of the real people behind the stories, which is why I try to avoid personal comments and insults as distinct from discussion of issues at stake. On the other hand, I recognise that those in public life, like clergy, are bound to attract a certain amount of public comment. Especially those… Read more »
Coincidentally, ‘Let there be light’ is the title of Matt Redman’s video about Soul Survivor which is now live on his UTube Channel . Anyone with ongoing concerns about the
Cof E’s attitude to safeguarding should watch it
Martin Reynolds
17 days ago
Wishing the best to the new Dean of Llandaff whose appointment comes – one must assume – after careful discussion behind the scenes by all involved. Reading closely the complaint – and judgment I have to agree with the bishop who ruled that there was no case to answer. One wonders why the complainant pressed on despite such discouragement and with no support, the offence as presented seemed so paltry even had it been believed. The former Dean of Llandaff was desperately unfortunate to find the almost unbelievably venomous atmosphere of his time at Oxford follow him to Wales. Anyone… Read more »
As someone closely involved with the Jeffrey John train crash back in 2017, could I simply thank you for this very well-put and incisive comment. When I left Llandaff on Easter Day 2017, with just three months to find a home, I was deeply grateful for the massive support people like you and Thinking Anglicans gave me, and my hope and prayer is that others, with many waters swirling around them, will be similarly heartened. I spent Holy Week 2018 in St Albans Cathedral. Church attendance is seldom high on Good Friday, yet St Albans was literally packed with… Read more »
Curiouser and Curiouser! I can’t help feeling that there must be quite a lot that we are not being told about this case. Firstly, Dean Peers, who had appeared to be heavily involved as Sub-Dean in the long running controversy over the former Dean of Christ Church, Oxford (Martyn Percy) was completely exonerated by a CDM tribunal in the diocese, which praised him as an “impressive and truthful witness” while not troubling to damn with even the faintest of praise anyone else involved in the case, especially the complainant, and including two witnesses who are frequent posters on TA. Both… Read more »
Thank you for lifting the lid. I read the original report and thought it was yet another unholy mess. I’m not sure partisan comments are helpful in such a situation. But I am struck by how this story adds to the perception that natural justice and the CofE are not obvious bedfellows.
Malcolm- thank you for this; and Moderators- thank you for publishing. I submitted a comment to TA at the time of the publication of the CDM report, making reference, as you do, to witnesses who are frequent posters to TA. I took the view that ‘legal advice’ may well have suggested caution regarding a publisher’s responsibilities and liabilities, and concluding that perhaps silence was appropriate. I confess to a niggling discomfort.
Perhaps the silence also has something to do with the sort of effect described by Archdeacon Jones (who has also worked as a solicitor) on another blog post dated 30 January 2023 (which, of course, may have nothing whatsoever to do with the Peers case): “The Western Mail reports that ‘we are not able to name the cleric concerned, nor to report details of the [disciplinary] proceedings, nor the allegations he faces, nor the post to which he has been appointed’. Why ever not? ‘The reason … is the threat of contempt proceedings, from a senior Church lawyer’, Mr Justin Gau, barrister, chancellor… Read more »
Froghole – I think you are confusing your Philip Joneses. The author of the ‘blog is a Welsh Roman Catholic layperson (and former Anglican layperson) and is not the former solicitor and former Archdeacon of Hastings with the same name.
Many thanks for that correction, and apologies to you and both gentlemen! I have evidently been labouring under this misapprehension (one of many) for a very long time.
Thank you, Froghole, for these comments. I certainly agree with you that, if ecclesiastical law is to be practised in the heavy-handed and probably ultra vires way it has been in this case, it is well past its sell by date and should be done away with forthwith. But what would it take to bring that about? I can foresee a mountain of work for lawyers, ecclesiastical and otherwise, and a probable ‘Gradgrind vs Gradgrind’ denouement, with nobody benefitting but the lawyers. I was unaware of the demise of the Archbishop Cranmer blog. If that has been brought down by… Read more »
I had not been wanting to make any comments about the Peers case itself, about which I know nothing. I can only wish him and Llandaff cathedral – where I have attended services several times in recent years – well. My clumsy comment was merely to note Mr Jones’s other observations (his is an excellent blog) from 30 January 2023 on an apparent attempt to extend the application of English ecclesiastical law to Wales, using the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction Measure 1963 and the Clergy Discipline Measure 2003, and to assert that both Measures permit a threat of contempt proceedings. If the… Read more »
Without quoting chapter and verse, any intention by an Ecclesiastical Court to commit for contempt must be made on application to the High Court. So in practice, and in fact, it is the secular court which adjudicates such matters.
Thank you again, Froghole, for this further information. The breadth and depth of your knowledge, and your ability quickly to extract relevant sections from ancient pieces of legislation, never fail to astonish me. Not being a lawyer, and therefore having no self-interest in the matter, I certainly hope that you are right that simple legislation of the type to which you refer would be enough to put an end to ecclesiastical law. I feel certain however that there would be many whose self-interest would force them to put all sorts of obstacles in the way. The senior lawyer in this… Read more »
Many thanks, as ever, but those two statutes are relatively well known to students of disestablishment, and I used them when drafting my own disestablishment bill 8 years’ ago. The main difficulties with disestablishment in 1868-69, 1894, 1909, 1912 and 1913-14 were not about disestablishment per se but the total or partial disendowment which went with it (see here, for example: https://archive.org/details/disestablishment0000bell). A quick glance at the Irish Church Act 1869 will reveal that it was overwhelmingly concerned with the appointment of commissioners who would deal with the disendowed assets, and then how the property should be dealt with: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1869/42/contents/enacted.… Read more »
Surely Philip Jones is correct in asserting that the CDM 2003 confers no jurisdiction whatsoever over lay people, and that is equally true of the Clergy Conduct Measure 2024 (I am not sure whether this has yet been laid before Parliament) which is to replace the CDM..
Thanks for this, and to TA for linking to the additional article. I have to confess I was astonished by the judgement – I make no comment on the aspects relating to former Dean Peers – my astonishment was grounded in the Tribunal’s treatment of the Complainant. So I am pleased to see a thorough examination of it. I also think it extremely poor form for the private individual to have been left to make the complaint. As to the new appointment. I think it’s a very canny move on the part of the Bishop to appoint someone with this… Read more »
The impression being given by all the announcements is that this appointment has been made by the Bishop alone. I’m not a member of the CinW so I have no idea if “due process” was followed or not. However a Consultation was carried out before the appointment of the previous Dean, which might be of interest: https://tinyurl.com/2f3xzb39
The link in that page to the actual profile document is broken, but the pdf can still be found here https://jobs.churchtimes.co.uk/JobFiles/10329/LlandaffCathedral_DeanProfile_6-20220706140603160.pdf
Strange – the link still works for me! One of those computer glitches, no doubt.
The idea that a lay person (or indeed a cleric) is so tightly bound by confidentiality that they may not access their support network has uncomfortable echoes of the tragic case of Ruth Perry and her treatment by Ofsted. It must not be part of our system of resolving complaints, and it must not be thought to be part of that system.
Quite so! But I am not sure that the senior lawyer who has been issuing threats of injunctions sees it that way. He just wants the ‘little people’ to be required to accept what their superiors tell them and not allowed to see critical comments on blogs, or even in national newspapers.
The tribunal Chair, Lyndsey de Mestre KC, in a ruling on the confidentiality issue dated 8 April 2024 (effectively indicated as to follow by para 59 of the substantive decision of 21 March 2024, which recorded the fact that I was ‘disputing the basis for challenging [my] entitlement to hold the papers‘) and following the submission of a requested statement in which, over four pages, I gave reasons for saying that Karen Gadd was entitled to provide me with a copy of the trial bundle, is now (following a direction by the Chair on 9 April) publicly available on the… Read more »
The position should not be ambiguous – the rules on the new CCM must be crystal clear.
Thank you, David, for this detailed post and for having the bravery and expertise to challenge successfully the original ruling. Nevertheless, the original thread remains closed to comments, presumably because of similar threats to refer to the High Court. Are these threats not also as empty as alleged by Gavin Drake in the link you provide?
“to deal with a breach of confidentiality required under the CDM process.”
Arguably, this reads as if it is the breach of confidentiality which is required under the CDM process. What they should have written is, ‘to deal with a breach of the confidentiality which is required…’.
It just shows how muddled their thinking is.
Janet, I don’t think this is muddled thinking, just loose use of language. The meaning is clear. What is reprehensible is that the reference should have been to the “alleged breach of confidentiality.” The tribunal’s decision (of 21 March 2024) does not indicate the position of Adam Hobson—the DO’s delegate in “conduct[ing] the case for the complainant” (see CDM 2003, section 18(1))—when the issue of the alleged breach was raised, and whether the tribunal’s attention was drawn to the ‘ambiguous’ position, as now acknowledged in the Chair’s ‘Paragraph 309’ ruling, and as clearly set out in both Philip Jones’s and… Read more »
I agree with you as to the legal point – but maintain that the meaning of the sentence is not clear. Loose use of language in a legal context isn’t helpful, as you well know.
Might I suggest that given the circumstances a speedy appointment was essential. Well done to the Bishop. Why, why does someone think full consultation is required in every case, particularly given very recent full consultation! (Rhetorical Question!)
It’s due to an assumption that the same rules for appointment of a Dean in the Church of England apply equally in the Anglican churches of Wales, Scotland and Ireland – which they don’t. In the C of E there is a mandatory consultation and ultimately a Crown appointment announced through 10 Downing Street.
As Rowland has pointed out, my suggestion that the appointment may have been carried out without due process was based on my ignorance that the process in the CiW was different from that in England. Ignorance is no excuse, so I apologise to any I have offended. Nevertheless, I could point out that the ‘very recent full consultation’ appears to have been carried out under the auspices of the previous bishop, June Osborne, who may have had different requirements for the dean. As someone has pointed out, things have not been happy or stable at Llandaff for some considerable time!… Read more »
One cannot help thinking that short of the holding of an entirely good faith “Truth and Reconcilliation” council supported and endorsed by all participants — which is hardly likely — l’affaire Percy is likely to have direct and indirect fallout for years to come.
I am sorry to read of Richard Peers departure. I always enjoyed reading his blog, and hope his ministry will continue elsewhere in some form.
I sometimes wonder if this should be renamed “Speculative Anglicans”. Not a word of support for the new Dean, or the community at Llandaff Cathedral who will soon be on their 3rd Dean in as many years. (4th if Jan Van der Lely’s term is taken into account). The new person needs support and prayers and a swift appointment maybe exactly the right approach.
Ouch! Sorry if I touched on a nerve. There would be no need for speculation if the authorities were open and transparent when making announcements and appointments, which has not apparently been the case here.
Yes, some things may need to remain confidential and that can be stated. But for Dean Peers to ‘retire’ aged only 58 from a post he has held only since Nov 22 is extraordinary. I have nothing against the newly appointed dean but the speed of his appointment does not seem to have allowed for due process.
You haven’t touched any particular nerve, I’m just reflecting on the various responses which have continued in the same vein. I’m old enough and ugly enough to understand that sometimes ‘all is not as it appears’ and could write a book about my own experiences of two Archdeacons. I just feel we can do better than this and I’m concerned at how low the bar is. .
I think it would be wise (and kind) to hold back comments and views on the various procedures that lie behind these stories, not least because there are real people involved: the outgoing Dean, the Dean-to-be, their families – and not least the people who form the community of Llandaff Cathedral. For clarity, the Constitution of the Church in Wales provides for a Bishop to appoint the Dean of the diocesan cathedral of sole right (if you want to check, the whole thing is available online via the Church in Wales website). I think the last time this occurred without… Read more »
Thank you, that’s most helpful. That’s exactly why I questioned rather than passed judgement on process in relation to the appointment of the new Dean. Not being a member of the CiW I was unaware of that provision. I’m greatly obliged for the information. Like you, I think this seems a very canny choice of candidate.
Thank you Patrick for your input on due process in the CiW and for your personal insights on the people involved. Your suggestion of splitting the thread into two, one covering the CDM debate, and the other the Llandaff appointments has much merit but the problem, as I see it, is that the earlier thread, reporting the CDM findings, is still closed to comment, as presumably would be any new thread covering the CDM. Nevertheless, the paper from Philip Jones updating the first thread seems to have comprehensively ‘blown the doors off’ that particular obfuscation strategy, however much this might… Read more »
If comments and views had been discouraged or disallowed here, there would have been no opportunity for you to clarify the legitimacy of the appointment procedure – and widespread suspicion would have continued. Better to let in the light and air.
I think you’re setting up a straw man for me here. There is I hope no wording in my post to suggest either discouraging or disallowing comments and views – indeed I go so far as to suggest they are necessary and should be homed elsewhere. My aim – which, from what you have shared here and written elsewhere, I would have expected you of all people to appreciate – is to try and ask for people to attend to the effect of their comments and speculations on the real people involved, and to exercise appropriate restraint. This reminds me… Read more »
My apologies if I misunderstood you. I did indeed think that by saying ‘I think it would be wise (and kind) to hold back comments and views on the various procedures that lie behind these stories’, you were discouraging comments. I agree that we ought always to be mindful of the real people behind the stories, which is why I try to avoid personal comments and insults as distinct from discussion of issues at stake. On the other hand, I recognise that those in public life, like clergy, are bound to attract a certain amount of public comment. Especially those… Read more »
Coincidentally, ‘Let there be light’ is the title of Matt Redman’s video about Soul Survivor which is now live on his UTube Channel . Anyone with ongoing concerns about the
Cof E’s attitude to safeguarding should watch it
Wishing the best to the new Dean of Llandaff whose appointment comes – one must assume – after careful discussion behind the scenes by all involved. Reading closely the complaint – and judgment I have to agree with the bishop who ruled that there was no case to answer. One wonders why the complainant pressed on despite such discouragement and with no support, the offence as presented seemed so paltry even had it been believed. The former Dean of Llandaff was desperately unfortunate to find the almost unbelievably venomous atmosphere of his time at Oxford follow him to Wales. Anyone… Read more »
As someone closely involved with the Jeffrey John train crash back in 2017, could I simply thank you for this very well-put and incisive comment. When I left Llandaff on Easter Day 2017, with just three months to find a home, I was deeply grateful for the massive support people like you and Thinking Anglicans gave me, and my hope and prayer is that others, with many waters swirling around them, will be similarly heartened. I spent Holy Week 2018 in St Albans Cathedral. Church attendance is seldom high on Good Friday, yet St Albans was literally packed with… Read more »