William Temple was instrumental in bringing in the welfare state as part of the 1944 social reforms and ‘War on Want’ with the aim of establishing ‘the kingdom of God’ in post war Britain. It’s hard to over estimate his impact but essentially the state took over much of the social role of the C of E, which lost much of its identity as a result and will not get it back. Perhaps the C of E would do better to focus on evangelism rather than on trying to regain its diminished social status? The kingdom of God is near… Read more »
It seems to me that what the book proposes is not regaining social status – indeed it suggests giving up power and status – but making the CofE relevant in today’s world. I think it is right to suggest that the UK is at an inflection point and the CofE has to rethink completely its role. In 1942, Temple published Christianity and Social Order which influenced the creation of the welfare state. It made a great impression on me as a young man twenty years later. I recently re-read it and I found much of its analysis still relevant. I… Read more »
Making the C of E relevant certainly involves evangelism, how can that not be the case? But if it’s lost its historic role then what is it? What are the alternative futures of the C of E? I have yet to hear a liberal vision, other than freedom of choice which is the route the nominated ABC appears to be pursuing. The problem is how are these freedoms are to be guaranteed when they directly contradict and undermine each other. Freedom of choice over abortion being one example among many.
That’s a good question. But you cannot bypass the cross to get there otherwise it becomes just a political project. And I do question the personal ethics of the nominated ABC. Will she be the most divisive ever?
The Church was OK with killing witches and heretics, albeit divided over the killing of the innocent citizens of Dresden or Hiroshima. The Church has changed its views about marriage (it wasn’t very loving to bastards or divorcees in the past) and will almost certainly continue to change them. Ethical dilemmas are like that.
Abortion is not an easy subject. However, the fact is that the antis concentrate all their fire on the pregnant women involved, along with those who sympathise in any way with their plight (particularly if they too are female). Perhaps they might spare a little of that righteous wrath for the men involved in getting the women pregnant, simply because they were unable to keep their trousers zipped up, and too arrogant to use condoms.
I think that opprobrium is very freely directed at men who cause unwanted pregnancies even by consensual sex. But abortion is another matter. It is a decision by a woman to the effect ‘not me, not this time’, a decision over which no man has any authority, nor indeed any other woman. It is not a decision taken in the heat of passion but later, and after cold calculation of circumstances. A husband’s or lover’s sexual acts do become vulgar or irresponsible because his partner later decides that she doesn’t want this time to become – or again to become… Read more »
All down to ‘cold calculation’ by the woman. Wow! No chance of woman being deserted by the bloke & her family immediately she told them (“stupid girl got herself up the duff”, etc), or of pregnancy due to rape (including marital rape). No, it’s all the woman’s fault. Of course it is!
My two cents is very simple – you can never be pro-abortion, everybody is anti-abortion, but the question of a lesser of two problems (I deliberately do not use the word evils) is worthy of theological and moral debate.
Are not all moral debates about the comparative morality of different decisions or actions? They can never be considered in isolation.
Often people ascribe immorality to a particular action, but do not consider the consequences of no action.
‘Just war’ is a typical case. Nobody is pro-war.
Rowland Wateridge
20 days ago
Andrew Brown’s forensic dissection of the Smyth case must now be supplemented by new events: claims by Zimbabwean victims based on alleged failures on the part of theChurch of England:
I was once told on the subject of asking awkward questions at diocesan synod meetings, that it was the question itself that was important thing, not the invariably bland and equivocal answer. Andrew Brown’s piece seems to be driven by some envy of Cathy Newman’s apparently more successful journalistic career. As a journalist her job is to ask awkward questions of those who appear to be behaving badly. A free press is a pillar of our democracy, as Donald Trump is all too well aware. I thank God that there are those who are willing to ask those questions.
Is there some vindictiveness i n Cathy Newman’s reporting? Choosing the day that the announcement of the new ABC was made to air an earlier, recorded piece about Smyth’s Zimbabwean crimes?
Possibly Ch 4 aired the earlier piece because Bp Mullally had refused them an interview that day. If she had agreed to be interviewed they might have run that instead – though I’m sure she would (rightly) have been asked some tough questions.
Ms Newman had hoped to air an interview with the nominee for archbishop and so the C4 had presumably reserved space for it. When the interview did not happen she had to fill that space with something held in reserve. Perhaps.
I didn’t detect any envy, but perhaps the first paragraph might have been better omitted.
The rest is a serious forensic analysis of this complex case and needs to be read as such. The significance and chronology of the Coltart Report – written in the previous century! – seems to have escaped (or not been understood) by many people.
I’m not going to say any more in view of the newly-intimated claims from Zimbabwe (linked above) which will run their course.
The problem is , as with the Father Griffin affair but on a much bigger scale, that to a lot of reasonable people a ‘nothing burger’ is exactly what those at the top of the CoE seem to have handed out to victims and survivors and then they expect everyone wronged to forget about it and go away and play nicely somewhere else. In the Smythe case it has gone on for so long the lines of accountability ( such as there ever may have been) are tenuous and blurred . But because so many people still feel terribly hurt… Read more »
Cathy Newman’s long coverage of the John Smyth affair culminated in the interview she had with Justin Welby in which he said he wouldn’t resign – shortly before he resigned. Her brilliant journalism is typical of Channel 4 News. Hopefully she’ll continue to expose more about sordid abuse. She is a credit to British journalism.
Andrew Brown writes from a particular political slant to particular audiences with a known political attitude. His style is more typical of a conservative position. Cathy Newman on the other hand is a TV investigative journalist attached to a publicly funded media organization that inherently has less bias. Mr Brown tends to write opinion based on his own political viewpoint while Ms Newman is far more typical of the best investigative journalism without fear favour or bias. IMHO. Also Mr Brown often disparages survivors and sources in his often emotive polemics. But it is great that TA chooses to shine… Read more »
Andrew Brown has a long and distinguished career as a reporter of religious matters for national broadsheets, especially left-leaning broadsheets. Cathy Newman has an admirable career as a television journalist. I see no reason to disparage one in relation to the other. We should look at the evidence
Mr Brown tends to look at the evidence of Makin and Tudor with a defensive tone that muddies the evidence defends the indefensible disparages survivors and sources and is most definitively polemic and emotive. Ms Newman on the other hand sticks to the best traditions of investigative journalism .
I don’t know about his other writings, but I cannot see much to dispute in this article. Sometimes words are written about Welby and others wrt. Smyth which are completely unfounded, and indeed the general population may be led by headlines to the view that Welby himself committed the crimes.
Welby’s mistakes occurred long after the crimes, particularly his lack of communication with victims.
Defend the indefensible? What exactly do you mean? Who exactly is muddying the waters?
Perhaps if you understand that in a series of posts Mr Brown has tried to defend AB York many POI persons of interests mentioned in the Makin report and now descends to taking on Channel 4 Cathy Newman.in some Quixotic crusade to leap to the defense of people who have failed in safeguarding in positions of leadership. This that sadly means that his often good work over the years seems to become tarnished.
Nigel, also I greatly appreciate your posts and support for safeguarding across TA comments. The issue with Welby seems to be ,starkly ,that he failed to act . My comment on Andrew Browns blog pieces is that having read both Makin and Andrew Graystones book Bleeding for Jesus , and also the David Tudor reports that link to AB York Andrew Browns blog seems to be trying to run a defence for many failed leaders and Clergy caught up in these failures . It misses the bigger picture and the blog posts can create real lasting hurt to victims of… Read more »
Allan Sheath
20 days ago
Chris Baker’s blog speaks of a Church that ‘has lost sight of Memory and Tradition’ in ‘a relentless quest for cultural relevance’; a Church that ‘has lost its prophetic tradition and roots, with institutional self-preservation prevailing over prophetic risk-taking’. The blog then notes how minorities (Jews, Muslims) express their faith through shared practices, even when belief is uncertain. But isn’t this what our Catholic tradition used to be rather good at, and which restless hearts might again be ready to connect with? Recently I was at a church on Ash Wednesday where the visiting priest preached on ‘Beware of practicing… Read more »
Unless people are compelled to join a community, then as Margaret Thatcher is famously misquoted as saying ‘there is no such thing as society’ only a collection of free individuals. The church is one body with many parts freely joined together by the Spirit through individual faith. The Catholic Church compels people to attend Mass for example, Muslims – the 5 pillars of faith, Jews – observance of Jewish law. For the C of E there is no such compulsion, only individual faith.
Catholic Christianity has learnt from Judaism the centrality of participating in those rituals that bind us together: firm believers with those searching for truth. To Anglo-Catholics – and to many who see themselves as ‘just C of E’ – God does not save individuals who then get together to ‘be’ the Church; it is by being grafted into the Church through baptism that we become Christians.
I’ve recently been re-reading the OT prophets and am presently going through Ezekiel. They certainly went in for risk taking – Ezekiel and Jeremiah don’t mince their words about Israel’s spiritual degradation, with some very colourful, indeed brutally rude comments. Jesus did the same; he was no respecter of self-exalted persons either.
I can’t help wondering what might happen if our modern clerics did the same. Not that it did Isaiah and his like that much good.
The major act of prophetic witness – speaking truth to power – by the C of E (and not only its clerics) that still resonates after 40 years is surely Faith in the City. Since when there has been environmental advocacy, advocacy on behalf of refugees, setting up food banks while calling out the causes of food poverty, etc. Then there are those who speak prophetically to the Church – typically when she has become at ease in Zion. But I’m not sure that is where we are today!
……I was also hoping that +Guli Francis-Dehqani would be the next ABC on the grounds that she’d be more prophetic than the others. But looking back +Sarah seems the obvious choice for our times: calm, self-aware, prayerful, pastoral and reflective.
John, I think the problem is that the prophetic gift and the pastoral gift, while equally important, are rarely (I don’t say ‘never’) found in the same person, since they seem to require different temperaments. At least, that’s been my gut feeling for a long time now.
Sam Jones
19 days ago
Can someone explain how can a C of E church be legally liable for actions of a former vicar from 40 years ago? And was Mark Ruston’s role in Iwerne linked to being vicar of that church?
Mark Ruston was vicar of the Round church, which I attended in the mid 1970’s. He seemed to me to be sensible and mature. Many many evangelicals in Cambrdge attended. A small proportion may have attended Iwerne camps, but I, for example, had never heard of Iwerne until 5 or so years ago. Jonathan Fletcher and others were curates there who definitely had Iwerne links, but I don’t recall them ever mentioning it. I do not recall reading anywhere that Mark Ruston attended Iwerne camps or had any direct connection. Obviously he was aware of them. I worry about blame… Read more »
You don’t remember them even being mentioned as ‘Bash’ camps? I remember a discussion about them with either Jonathan Fletcher or Hugh Palmer about the camps in, I think, 1974 (at a pre-term CU get together) – A slightly nudgy reference to Bash camps – in retrospect one may draw one’s own conclusions.
No, never. I was never in the Jonathan Fletcher crowd, not good enough at tennis. I remember our college CU was invited to tea once in his rooms, but nothing more. I have a feeling some leaders in our college CU were a bit wary – even the one who was from Harrow (I doubt very much he ever attended an Iwerne camp, he was more an admirer of David Shepherd, a very different kettle of fish). My feeling was that Jonathan Fetcher was on a pedestal, whereas Mark Ruston was more down to earth. From his accent, Mark Ruston… Read more »
The public school accent only seems to have evolved quite recently. Recordings of Gladstone show a distinct Scouse twang despite his years at Eton and Christ Church.
Though I see from wikipedia that David Sheppard was an Iwerne attendee (in my last year in college I occupied a room that Sheppard had as a student) and he was (as far as I could tell) regarded as a bit sniffily within the college – and address he gave to a saturday CICCU was definitely beyond the pale for the inner circle!
Not sure I got those inferiority vibes but I was on the fringe of the Round Church.
After glancing at Makin again – my impression is that Mark Rushton wrote his report off his own bat, mainly because he was hearing things from victims. Nobody asked him to investigate. He passed the report to 7 recipients. Mark Ruston in no way holds back on his description of the abuse or the criminality of the abuse. I think Mark Ruston should at least be commended for taking the initiative to investigate. Why Mark Ruston, or any of the 7 recipients, did not report it to the police is a mystery to me. Makin details all the communications which… Read more »
A vicarious liability can be handed down through the various iterations of PCCs, Churchwardens and Incumbents, Hence insurance claims for historic abuse are made against the current office holders, not those in situ at the time of the offence (who are often dead).
I dealt with child abuse claims for a couple of decades or more on behalf of a large public authority. Initially it was thought that an employer could not be vicariously liable for the criminal and unauthorised act of an employee. That has been overcome but would have applied when John Smyth was ‘active’. Moreover the Limtation Act, if applied, would eliminate all historical claims (as most were). I remember clearly the ‘gymnastics’ of the 1980s seeking to overturn a limitation defence, but ultimately the Courts themselves came to the rescue by applying the existing judicial discretion to extend limitation… Read more »
Was there a problem that Smyth was not an employee of Iwerne or CoE?
To whom would Ruston et. al. have reported the matter? The police, the media? Public school headmasters?
I would hope that, had I been in their position, I would have reported to all three, but that is with considerable hindsight. Legal documents would have landed at my front door very rapidly.
At the time of these events, John Smyth was a barrister at the top of his profession, accordingly self-employed, the youngest QC and (more worryingly) a Recorder, i.e., a part-time judge sitting in the Crown Court. I don’t think his judicial appointment was an employment, and, for what my opinion is worth, I don’t think any vicarious liability exists for his criminal acts; liability was his alone. Now the question of his relationship with the C of E is less clear. Ostensibly he was a Lay Reader in the Diocese of Winchester, denied ordination on his application to Chelmsford. However,… Read more »
Rowland, ‘the question of his relationship with the CofE is less clear’. Indeed, it’s tricky. You will already know this….In his book, Bleeding for Jesus, by Andrew Graystone, he mentions specific links with Christ Church, Winchester, pages 26,84,190. Also, I have read in other reports, I think (perhaps) the full Report on Winchester College, that minutes of Christ Church showed he was on its electoral roll. Sorry, I can’t find the full report on Winchester College ….. but I have read it and was impressed by Jan Pickles and her findings. If you can find links to the full Report… Read more »
Pilgrim, I know about Christ Church, Winchester, in fact very well! I knew the Vicar at that time, the organist was a long-standing personal friend and, largely through him, I knew several members of the congregation including a GP who had occasionally treated me I have, of course, read the Winchester College report (unfortunately my link to it currently appears to be ‘down’). I knew (I think) three College masters from that time, people of the highest probity including one who had played cricket for England. That same master became a friend also and we often ‘worked’ together, he as… Read more »
Rowland, thank you, really appreciated, I realised your interest and local knowledge.
In the full report… Winchester College…. Page 14 it states…. John Smyth was also a lay reader at Christ Church in Winchester between 1974-1978 following his training in 1972. (Note, reference no. 22 which states…Annual returns to the Diocese made by lay readers (1974-1980) Parish of Christ Church minutes and electoral rolls).
My apologies, it doesn’t state he was actually on the electoral roll. I found re-reading the report (over 180 pages) today truly harrowing, the witness statements frightful.
Another master at Winchester who was also a cricketer was Rev John ‘Budge’ Firth (1900-1957), though I don’t think he played for England. He married into the Woods family, and was brother-in-law of Robin Woods, Bishop of Worcester, and Frank Woods, Archbishop of Melbourne. He preached at the consecration of Frank Woods as Bishop of Middleton, when one of the presenting bishops was Edward Woods, Bishop of Lichfield and Frank’s father. Firth’s final job was Master of the Temple. He died on a visit back to Winchester.
Thank you. It’s no secret that my lay reader ‘colleague’, usually for Evensong in remote country churches, was “Podge” Brodhurst. By then he had retired as a housemaster at Winchester. College – there are eleven separate houses (I fear that many commenting here have no real understanding of the set-up). He would have been an active staff member at the time under discussion here. Obviously I have no idea whether he knew about Smyth. I found him, and considered him to be, one of Nature’s true gentlemen, always kind, a devout Christian and a gifted preacher, yet humble and totally… Read more »
I think the problem at the time was that none of “police, the media, public school headmasters” would have been particularly interested, for different reasons in this case. From the perspective of the police, there would be a presumption of consent, doubly so if the survivors were not willing to give evidence. The survivors were by today’s lights vulnerable and coerced, but by the standards of the time (ie, before R v Brown, aka “Spanner”) they were adults with capacity. The police would have been rapidly of the view that there may not have been a crime. For newspapers, Smythe… Read more »
The action is being handled by Leigh Day solicitors. I’d suggest that a survey of Leigh Day’s track record suggests: – their instincts are admirable, being always on the side of the underdog, always looking for some person or group who is oppressed or has suffered an injustice, preferably at the hands of an arm of the establishment, never afraid to take on a cause neglected by supposedly wiser heads. – their sense that it feels like an injustice has been done sometimes slants their objective assessment of what the evidence says, and their aim to expose injustice can lead… Read more »
Martin Hughes
19 days ago
There is discussion in the context of the Crime and Policing Bill 2025 about duty to report safeguarding matters but I’m sure no such obligation existed in the 80s
Quite. When I watch Judge Judy, and someone tried to sue somebody else for reporting child abuse concerns, Judge Judy always throws it out, and says that people have an obligation to report suspicions to child protection officers. I assume it is the same in the UK nowadays. But in the 1970’s/1980’s, when the slipper and cane were common practice in some schools, little concern may have been raised initially – however, Ruston make it clear that in the Smyth case it was criminal. It was a different world, thank God.
No, in the UK there is no legal obligation to report abuse, let alone suspicion of abuse. Many of us are trying to get that changed, it’s called mandatory reporting.
Nigel , Janet is spot on and the world is probably not as different as we might like to think. Mandatory reporting was one of the recommendations of Professor Jay’s IICSA report which has been quietly ignored, first by the Conservative government and up till now by Labour . There has been a lot of discussion of Smyth ( sorry I misspelled him in my last post as my phone thinks he needs an e ) on both TA and Surviving Church , with Rowland Wateridge knowing more about the subject than most. There is also Andrew Greystone’s book ‘Bleeding… Read more »
You misinterpret me. I never said mark ruston was not to blame – quite the opposite. I was simply saying he is not there to defend himself and he was clearly converned enough to investigate and write the report.
He should have sent it to the police. We dont know why he didnt but it is too easy to speculate. I dont do speculation.
OK, thanks. Maybe I was too emphatic. There is no legal obligation, but there is a moral obligation, and best practices in many organisations make it part of the code of conduct, to at least report to a suitable safeguarding officer. Going to the monthly exec meeting of our athletics club this evening. There are two on-going safeguarding concerns which our safeguarding officer has reported on. I was one of the observers on one of the incidents. In both cases, concerned adults brought it to the attention of the safeguarding officer. Both were bullying/intimidation issues. In each case, there was… Read more »
Your athletics club appears to be setting a good example. Fortunately many other organisations, especially those involved with education and children, also set a good example. But they are not required to by law, as the various grooming scandals show; and in the C of E bullying and intimidation are not regarded as safeguarding issues. In fact bullying in various forms almost seems to be the default mode of the C of E.
It might not be mandatory in the Church but I believe it is effectively mandatory in schools – as is following up on any report of abuse, however improbable. A young girl of my acquaintance, having made a jocular remark that her dad would give her a “jolly good thrashing” if she failed to do her homework, was rightly reproved when the Head rang her (working) mother the next morning and insisted she came to school for an interview at 0800.
You make an important point – the school environment where Smyth was able to wreak his havoc was one where rich parents routinely sent boys to be expensively and extensively thrashed by both teachers and other boys. Smyth’s ghastly antics were just a more extreme example of what generations of the English upper classes had queued up to pay for. My husband went to a Rhodesian (now Zimbabwean) boarding school with exactly the same style, and where compulsory nude swimming was the norm. When he and some other prefects took courage in hand and reported to the Head that the… Read more »
Luckily other public schools were more enlightened. I am 6 years younger than your husband – when I went to public school, fagging had been abolished, right of prefects to beat had been abolished, and it was extraordinarily rare for any boy to be beaten at all – rustication or expulsion were more common. The only incident I recall was when a 17 yr old boy lingered in a girl’s study after 10 pm. He could not be expelled, as he was due to play Elgar cello concerto at the upcoming school concert, and also had Oxbridge entrance exams. He… Read more »
Autobiog of then Winchester headmaster John Thorn is revealing. First of all it is clear that he felt out of his depth when faced with the strong evangelical movement at his school, ignoring worries of parents & staff. More important still, he did not name Smyth & grossly under-played his violent criminal behaviour by merely writing that he had been “with their consent [as minors!!!] punishing them physically when they confessed to him they had sinned”. I may say that my very spartan school changed headmaster in 1969, a year later than Thorn went to Winchester, & our new broom… Read more »
Martin Hughes
19 days ago
It seems to me that there is much tradition remembered and followed in today’s Church
Kyle Johansen
18 days ago
The William Temple Foundation blog includes the line ‘This has allowed Christian message and identity to be increasingly co-opted by the Far-Right with disastrous consequences.’
What are these disastrous consequences?
God 'elp us all
18 days ago
‘One thing worse than being talked about … not being talked about-‘ attributed to that observer Osacr Wilde. The reticence of the Archibishop of Canterbury Designate (ABCD?) to accede to an invitation from an interviewer -C4’s Cathy Newman- showing interest in her appointment, left the door open to this item of historical and continuing interest. A grip needs to be got, and shown to be grasped. Regarding sexual abuse, own up; fess up; pay up, with generosity. Get LLF ‘over the line’- how long O Lord? The fifth ‘richest’ nation, with increasing child poverty- time for a renewed war on… Read more »
ABC(Desig) ducking interview with Cathy Newman is very much in line with CofE ‘tradition’ of avoiding any form of confrontation & never calling a spade a spade.
By the way UK fell from 5th to 6th place for GDP some time ago.
I simply do not agree with you and others here on. I think it would have been a crazy time for agree to such a press interview – and over issues have been exhaustively examined already. So the idea some kind of fundamental avoidance is going on makes no sense either. So I am more with Andrew Brown. With our new Archbishop I think we are in good and capable hands. I pray for her with gratitude.
You say the issues have been exhaustively examined. However, there is a legitimate public interest in the new ++
Canterbury’s record in and approach to safeguarding.
Cathy Newman played a major part in bringing Smythe’s evil deeds to light. If Sarah Mullally has a good story to tell an interview with Ms Newman is her chance to tell it.
William Temple was instrumental in bringing in the welfare state as part of the 1944 social reforms and ‘War on Want’ with the aim of establishing ‘the kingdom of God’ in post war Britain. It’s hard to over estimate his impact but essentially the state took over much of the social role of the C of E, which lost much of its identity as a result and will not get it back. Perhaps the C of E would do better to focus on evangelism rather than on trying to regain its diminished social status? The kingdom of God is near… Read more »
It seems to me that what the book proposes is not regaining social status – indeed it suggests giving up power and status – but making the CofE relevant in today’s world. I think it is right to suggest that the UK is at an inflection point and the CofE has to rethink completely its role. In 1942, Temple published Christianity and Social Order which influenced the creation of the welfare state. It made a great impression on me as a young man twenty years later. I recently re-read it and I found much of its analysis still relevant. I… Read more »
Making the C of E relevant certainly involves evangelism, how can that not be the case? But if it’s lost its historic role then what is it? What are the alternative futures of the C of E? I have yet to hear a liberal vision, other than freedom of choice which is the route the nominated ABC appears to be pursuing. The problem is how are these freedoms are to be guaranteed when they directly contradict and undermine each other. Freedom of choice over abortion being one example among many.
Your first question might well be posed differently. Making the CofE relevant includes social action/ethics (etc),;How can that not be so??
That’s a good question. But you cannot bypass the cross to get there otherwise it becomes just a political project. And I do question the personal ethics of the nominated ABC. Will she be the most divisive ever?
The Church was OK with killing witches and heretics, albeit divided over the killing of the innocent citizens of Dresden or Hiroshima. The Church has changed its views about marriage (it wasn’t very loving to bastards or divorcees in the past) and will almost certainly continue to change them. Ethical dilemmas are like that.
Abortion is not an easy subject. However, the fact is that the antis concentrate all their fire on the pregnant women involved, along with those who sympathise in any way with their plight (particularly if they too are female). Perhaps they might spare a little of that righteous wrath for the men involved in getting the women pregnant, simply because they were unable to keep their trousers zipped up, and too arrogant to use condoms.
I think that opprobrium is very freely directed at men who cause unwanted pregnancies even by consensual sex. But abortion is another matter. It is a decision by a woman to the effect ‘not me, not this time’, a decision over which no man has any authority, nor indeed any other woman. It is not a decision taken in the heat of passion but later, and after cold calculation of circumstances. A husband’s or lover’s sexual acts do become vulgar or irresponsible because his partner later decides that she doesn’t want this time to become – or again to become… Read more »
All down to ‘cold calculation’ by the woman. Wow! No chance of woman being deserted by the bloke & her family immediately she told them (“stupid girl got herself up the duff”, etc), or of pregnancy due to rape (including marital rape). No, it’s all the woman’s fault. Of course it is!
My two cents is very simple – you can never be pro-abortion, everybody is anti-abortion, but the question of a lesser of two problems (I deliberately do not use the word evils) is worthy of theological and moral debate.
Are not all moral debates about the comparative morality of different decisions or actions? They can never be considered in isolation.
Often people ascribe immorality to a particular action, but do not consider the consequences of no action.
‘Just war’ is a typical case. Nobody is pro-war.
Andrew Brown’s forensic dissection of the Smyth case must now be supplemented by new events: claims by Zimbabwean victims based on alleged failures on the part of the Church of England:
https://lawandreligionuk.com/2025/10/07/legal-claim-from-zimbabwean-victims-of-john-smyth/
Further developments arising from the Zimbabwe claims:
https://lawandreligionuk.com/2025/10/13/zimbabwean-victims-of-legal-claim-further-comments/
I was once told on the subject of asking awkward questions at diocesan synod meetings, that it was the question itself that was important thing, not the invariably bland and equivocal answer. Andrew Brown’s piece seems to be driven by some envy of Cathy Newman’s apparently more successful journalistic career. As a journalist her job is to ask awkward questions of those who appear to be behaving badly. A free press is a pillar of our democracy, as Donald Trump is all too well aware. I thank God that there are those who are willing to ask those questions.
Is there some vindictiveness i n Cathy Newman’s reporting? Choosing the day that the announcement of the new ABC was made to air an earlier, recorded piece about Smyth’s Zimbabwean crimes?
Possibly Ch 4 aired the earlier piece because Bp Mullally had refused them an interview that day. If she had agreed to be interviewed they might have run that instead – though I’m sure she would (rightly) have been asked some tough questions.
Ms Newman had hoped to air an interview with the nominee for archbishop and so the C4 had presumably reserved space for it. When the interview did not happen she had to fill that space with something held in reserve. Perhaps.
I didn’t detect any envy, but perhaps the first paragraph might have been better omitted.
The rest is a serious forensic analysis of this complex case and needs to be read as such. The significance and chronology of the Coltart Report – written in the previous century! – seems to have escaped (or not been understood) by many people.
I’m not going to say any more in view of the newly-intimated claims from Zimbabwe (linked above) which will run their course.
The problem is , as with the Father Griffin affair but on a much bigger scale, that to a lot of reasonable people a ‘nothing burger’ is exactly what those at the top of the CoE seem to have handed out to victims and survivors and then they expect everyone wronged to forget about it and go away and play nicely somewhere else. In the Smythe case it has gone on for so long the lines of accountability ( such as there ever may have been) are tenuous and blurred . But because so many people still feel terribly hurt… Read more »
Thanks Susanna.
Cathy Newman’s long coverage of the John Smyth affair culminated in the interview she had with Justin Welby in which he said he wouldn’t resign – shortly before he resigned. Her brilliant journalism is typical of Channel 4 News. Hopefully she’ll continue to expose more about sordid abuse. She is a credit to British journalism.
I’m not sure why you should think Ms Newman’s career has been more successful than Andrew Brown’s.
Andrew Brown writes from a particular political slant to particular audiences with a known political attitude. His style is more typical of a conservative position. Cathy Newman on the other hand is a TV investigative journalist attached to a publicly funded media organization that inherently has less bias. Mr Brown tends to write opinion based on his own political viewpoint while Ms Newman is far more typical of the best investigative journalism without fear favour or bias. IMHO. Also Mr Brown often disparages survivors and sources in his often emotive polemics. But it is great that TA chooses to shine… Read more »
Andrew Brown has a long and distinguished career as a reporter of religious matters for national broadsheets, especially left-leaning broadsheets. Cathy Newman has an admirable career as a television journalist. I see no reason to disparage one in relation to the other. We should look at the evidence
Mr Brown tends to look at the evidence of Makin and Tudor with a defensive tone that muddies the evidence defends the indefensible disparages survivors and sources and is most definitively polemic and emotive. Ms Newman on the other hand sticks to the best traditions of investigative journalism .
I agree. Ms Newman’s reporting shouldn’t be disparaged as a Nothingburger.
I don’t know about his other writings, but I cannot see much to dispute in this article. Sometimes words are written about Welby and others wrt. Smyth which are completely unfounded, and indeed the general population may be led by headlines to the view that Welby himself committed the crimes.
Welby’s mistakes occurred long after the crimes, particularly his lack of communication with victims.
Defend the indefensible? What exactly do you mean? Who exactly is muddying the waters?
Perhaps if you understand that in a series of posts Mr Brown has tried to defend AB York many POI persons of interests mentioned in the Makin report and now descends to taking on Channel 4 Cathy Newman.in some Quixotic crusade to leap to the defense of people who have failed in safeguarding in positions of leadership. This that sadly means that his often good work over the years seems to become tarnished.
Nigel, also I greatly appreciate your posts and support for safeguarding across TA comments. The issue with Welby seems to be ,starkly ,that he failed to act . My comment on Andrew Browns blog pieces is that having read both Makin and Andrew Graystones book Bleeding for Jesus , and also the David Tudor reports that link to AB York Andrew Browns blog seems to be trying to run a defence for many failed leaders and Clergy caught up in these failures . It misses the bigger picture and the blog posts can create real lasting hurt to victims of… Read more »
Chris Baker’s blog speaks of a Church that ‘has lost sight of Memory and Tradition’ in ‘a relentless quest for cultural relevance’; a Church that ‘has lost its prophetic tradition and roots, with institutional self-preservation prevailing over prophetic risk-taking’. The blog then notes how minorities (Jews, Muslims) express their faith through shared practices, even when belief is uncertain. But isn’t this what our Catholic tradition used to be rather good at, and which restless hearts might again be ready to connect with? Recently I was at a church on Ash Wednesday where the visiting priest preached on ‘Beware of practicing… Read more »
Unless people are compelled to join a community, then as Margaret Thatcher is famously misquoted as saying ‘there is no such thing as society’ only a collection of free individuals. The church is one body with many parts freely joined together by the Spirit through individual faith. The Catholic Church compels people to attend Mass for example, Muslims – the 5 pillars of faith, Jews – observance of Jewish law. For the C of E there is no such compulsion, only individual faith.
Catholic Christianity has learnt from Judaism the centrality of participating in those rituals that bind us together: firm believers with those searching for truth. To Anglo-Catholics – and to many who see themselves as ‘just C of E’ – God does not save individuals who then get together to ‘be’ the Church; it is by being grafted into the Church through baptism that we become Christians.
That is one view. There are other views.
I agree. Your post would be better directed at Adrian Clarke who claims to speak for the entire C of E.
I’ve recently been re-reading the OT prophets and am presently going through Ezekiel. They certainly went in for risk taking – Ezekiel and Jeremiah don’t mince their words about Israel’s spiritual degradation, with some very colourful, indeed brutally rude comments. Jesus did the same; he was no respecter of self-exalted persons either.
I can’t help wondering what might happen if our modern clerics did the same. Not that it did Isaiah and his like that much good.
The major act of prophetic witness – speaking truth to power – by the C of E (and not only its clerics) that still resonates after 40 years is surely Faith in the City. Since when there has been environmental advocacy, advocacy on behalf of refugees, setting up food banks while calling out the causes of food poverty, etc. Then there are those who speak prophetically to the Church – typically when she has become at ease in Zion. But I’m not sure that is where we are today!
……I was also hoping that +Guli Francis-Dehqani would be the next ABC on the grounds that she’d be more prophetic than the others. But looking back +Sarah seems the obvious choice for our times: calm, self-aware, prayerful, pastoral and reflective.
John, I think the problem is that the prophetic gift and the pastoral gift, while equally important, are rarely (I don’t say ‘never’) found in the same person, since they seem to require different temperaments. At least, that’s been my gut feeling for a long time now.
Can someone explain how can a C of E church be legally liable for actions of a former vicar from 40 years ago? And was Mark Ruston’s role in Iwerne linked to being vicar of that church?
Mark Ruston was vicar of the Round church, which I attended in the mid 1970’s. He seemed to me to be sensible and mature. Many many evangelicals in Cambrdge attended. A small proportion may have attended Iwerne camps, but I, for example, had never heard of Iwerne until 5 or so years ago. Jonathan Fletcher and others were curates there who definitely had Iwerne links, but I don’t recall them ever mentioning it. I do not recall reading anywhere that Mark Ruston attended Iwerne camps or had any direct connection. Obviously he was aware of them. I worry about blame… Read more »
You don’t remember them even being mentioned as ‘Bash’ camps? I remember a discussion about them with either Jonathan Fletcher or Hugh Palmer about the camps in, I think, 1974 (at a pre-term CU get together) – A slightly nudgy reference to Bash camps – in retrospect one may draw one’s own conclusions.
No, never. I was never in the Jonathan Fletcher crowd, not good enough at tennis. I remember our college CU was invited to tea once in his rooms, but nothing more. I have a feeling some leaders in our college CU were a bit wary – even the one who was from Harrow (I doubt very much he ever attended an Iwerne camp, he was more an admirer of David Shepherd, a very different kettle of fish). My feeling was that Jonathan Fetcher was on a pedestal, whereas Mark Ruston was more down to earth. From his accent, Mark Ruston… Read more »
A telling comment about Mark Ruston’s accent!
The public school accent only seems to have evolved quite recently. Recordings of Gladstone show a distinct Scouse twang despite his years at Eton and Christ Church.
Though I see from wikipedia that David Sheppard was an Iwerne attendee (in my last year in college I occupied a room that Sheppard had as a student) and he was (as far as I could tell) regarded as a bit sniffily within the college – and address he gave to a saturday CICCU was definitely beyond the pale for the inner circle!
Not sure I got those inferiority vibes but I was on the fringe of the Round Church.
It appears Mark Ruston atended Jesus College Cambridge.
Justin Welby lodges with Mark Ruston when he was a student at Cambridg
After glancing at Makin again – my impression is that Mark Rushton wrote his report off his own bat, mainly because he was hearing things from victims. Nobody asked him to investigate. He passed the report to 7 recipients. Mark Ruston in no way holds back on his description of the abuse or the criminality of the abuse. I think Mark Ruston should at least be commended for taking the initiative to investigate. Why Mark Ruston, or any of the 7 recipients, did not report it to the police is a mystery to me. Makin details all the communications which… Read more »
My understanding is that Mr Ruston was told that the victims did not want Smyth reported to the police.
A vicarious liability can be handed down through the various iterations of PCCs, Churchwardens and Incumbents, Hence insurance claims for historic abuse are made against the current office holders, not those in situ at the time of the offence (who are often dead).
I dealt with child abuse claims for a couple of decades or more on behalf of a large public authority. Initially it was thought that an employer could not be vicariously liable for the criminal and unauthorised act of an employee. That has been overcome but would have applied when John Smyth was ‘active’. Moreover the Limtation Act, if applied, would eliminate all historical claims (as most were). I remember clearly the ‘gymnastics’ of the 1980s seeking to overturn a limitation defence, but ultimately the Courts themselves came to the rescue by applying the existing judicial discretion to extend limitation… Read more »
Was there a problem that Smyth was not an employee of Iwerne or CoE?
To whom would Ruston et. al. have reported the matter? The police, the media? Public school headmasters?
I would hope that, had I been in their position, I would have reported to all three, but that is with considerable hindsight. Legal documents would have landed at my front door very rapidly.
At the time of these events, John Smyth was a barrister at the top of his profession, accordingly self-employed, the youngest QC and (more worryingly) a Recorder, i.e., a part-time judge sitting in the Crown Court. I don’t think his judicial appointment was an employment, and, for what my opinion is worth, I don’t think any vicarious liability exists for his criminal acts; liability was his alone. Now the question of his relationship with the C of E is less clear. Ostensibly he was a Lay Reader in the Diocese of Winchester, denied ordination on his application to Chelmsford. However,… Read more »
Rowland, ‘the question of his relationship with the CofE is less clear’. Indeed, it’s tricky. You will already know this….In his book, Bleeding for Jesus, by Andrew Graystone, he mentions specific links with Christ Church, Winchester, pages 26,84,190. Also, I have read in other reports, I think (perhaps) the full Report on Winchester College, that minutes of Christ Church showed he was on its electoral roll. Sorry, I can’t find the full report on Winchester College ….. but I have read it and was impressed by Jan Pickles and her findings. If you can find links to the full Report… Read more »
Pilgrim, I know about Christ Church, Winchester, in fact very well! I knew the Vicar at that time, the organist was a long-standing personal friend and, largely through him, I knew several members of the congregation including a GP who had occasionally treated me I have, of course, read the Winchester College report (unfortunately my link to it currently appears to be ‘down’). I knew (I think) three College masters from that time, people of the highest probity including one who had played cricket for England. That same master became a friend also and we often ‘worked’ together, he as… Read more »
Rowland, thank you, really appreciated, I realised your interest and local knowledge.
In the full report… Winchester College…. Page 14 it states…. John Smyth was also a lay reader at Christ Church in Winchester between 1974-1978 following his training in 1972. (Note, reference no. 22 which states…Annual returns to the Diocese made by lay readers (1974-1980) Parish of Christ Church minutes and electoral rolls).
My apologies, it doesn’t state he was actually on the electoral roll. I found re-reading the report (over 180 pages) today truly harrowing, the witness statements frightful.
Another master at Winchester who was also a cricketer was Rev John ‘Budge’ Firth (1900-1957), though I don’t think he played for England. He married into the Woods family, and was brother-in-law of Robin Woods, Bishop of Worcester, and Frank Woods, Archbishop of Melbourne. He preached at the consecration of Frank Woods as Bishop of Middleton, when one of the presenting bishops was Edward Woods, Bishop of Lichfield and Frank’s father. Firth’s final job was Master of the Temple. He died on a visit back to Winchester.
Thank you. It’s no secret that my lay reader ‘colleague’, usually for Evensong in remote country churches, was “Podge” Brodhurst. By then he had retired as a housemaster at Winchester. College – there are eleven separate houses (I fear that many commenting here have no real understanding of the set-up). He would have been an active staff member at the time under discussion here. Obviously I have no idea whether he knew about Smyth. I found him, and considered him to be, one of Nature’s true gentlemen, always kind, a devout Christian and a gifted preacher, yet humble and totally… Read more »
I have found Podge (Arthur) Brodhurst on Wikipedia. From the dates I deduce that he was in the Royal Artillery when my father was.
I think the problem at the time was that none of “police, the media, public school headmasters” would have been particularly interested, for different reasons in this case. From the perspective of the police, there would be a presumption of consent, doubly so if the survivors were not willing to give evidence. The survivors were by today’s lights vulnerable and coerced, but by the standards of the time (ie, before R v Brown, aka “Spanner”) they were adults with capacity. The police would have been rapidly of the view that there may not have been a crime. For newspapers, Smythe… Read more »
Thank you.
The action is being handled by Leigh Day solicitors. I’d suggest that a survey of Leigh Day’s track record suggests: – their instincts are admirable, being always on the side of the underdog, always looking for some person or group who is oppressed or has suffered an injustice, preferably at the hands of an arm of the establishment, never afraid to take on a cause neglected by supposedly wiser heads. – their sense that it feels like an injustice has been done sometimes slants their objective assessment of what the evidence says, and their aim to expose injustice can lead… Read more »
There is discussion in the context of the Crime and Policing Bill 2025 about duty to report safeguarding matters but I’m sure no such obligation existed in the 80s
Quite. When I watch Judge Judy, and someone tried to sue somebody else for reporting child abuse concerns, Judge Judy always throws it out, and says that people have an obligation to report suspicions to child protection officers. I assume it is the same in the UK nowadays. But in the 1970’s/1980’s, when the slipper and cane were common practice in some schools, little concern may have been raised initially – however, Ruston make it clear that in the Smyth case it was criminal. It was a different world, thank God.
No, in the UK there is no legal obligation to report abuse, let alone suspicion of abuse. Many of us are trying to get that changed, it’s called mandatory reporting.
Nigel , Janet is spot on and the world is probably not as different as we might like to think. Mandatory reporting was one of the recommendations of Professor Jay’s IICSA report which has been quietly ignored, first by the Conservative government and up till now by Labour . There has been a lot of discussion of Smyth ( sorry I misspelled him in my last post as my phone thinks he needs an e ) on both TA and Surviving Church , with Rowland Wateridge knowing more about the subject than most. There is also Andrew Greystone’s book ‘Bleeding… Read more »
You misinterpret me. I never said mark ruston was not to blame – quite the opposite. I was simply saying he is not there to defend himself and he was clearly converned enough to investigate and write the report.
He should have sent it to the police. We dont know why he didnt but it is too easy to speculate. I dont do speculation.
Some pushback is coming from those defending the seal of the confessional.
Ruston himself was explicit in saying his investigations were outside the scope of the confessional
OK, thanks. Maybe I was too emphatic. There is no legal obligation, but there is a moral obligation, and best practices in many organisations make it part of the code of conduct, to at least report to a suitable safeguarding officer. Going to the monthly exec meeting of our athletics club this evening. There are two on-going safeguarding concerns which our safeguarding officer has reported on. I was one of the observers on one of the incidents. In both cases, concerned adults brought it to the attention of the safeguarding officer. Both were bullying/intimidation issues. In each case, there was… Read more »
Your athletics club appears to be setting a good example. Fortunately many other organisations, especially those involved with education and children, also set a good example. But they are not required to by law, as the various grooming scandals show; and in the C of E bullying and intimidation are not regarded as safeguarding issues. In fact bullying in various forms almost seems to be the default mode of the C of E.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06793/
It might not be mandatory in the Church but I believe it is effectively mandatory in schools – as is following up on any report of abuse, however improbable. A young girl of my acquaintance, having made a jocular remark that her dad would give her a “jolly good thrashing” if she failed to do her homework, was rightly reproved when the Head rang her (working) mother the next morning and insisted she came to school for an interview at 0800.
You make an important point – the school environment where Smyth was able to wreak his havoc was one where rich parents routinely sent boys to be expensively and extensively thrashed by both teachers and other boys. Smyth’s ghastly antics were just a more extreme example of what generations of the English upper classes had queued up to pay for. My husband went to a Rhodesian (now Zimbabwean) boarding school with exactly the same style, and where compulsory nude swimming was the norm. When he and some other prefects took courage in hand and reported to the Head that the… Read more »
Luckily other public schools were more enlightened. I am 6 years younger than your husband – when I went to public school, fagging had been abolished, right of prefects to beat had been abolished, and it was extraordinarily rare for any boy to be beaten at all – rustication or expulsion were more common. The only incident I recall was when a 17 yr old boy lingered in a girl’s study after 10 pm. He could not be expelled, as he was due to play Elgar cello concerto at the upcoming school concert, and also had Oxbridge entrance exams. He… Read more »
Autobiog of then Winchester headmaster John Thorn is revealing. First of all it is clear that he felt out of his depth when faced with the strong evangelical movement at his school, ignoring worries of parents & staff. More important still, he did not name Smyth & grossly under-played his violent criminal behaviour by merely writing that he had been “with their consent [as minors!!!] punishing them physically when they confessed to him they had sinned”. I may say that my very spartan school changed headmaster in 1969, a year later than Thorn went to Winchester, & our new broom… Read more »
It seems to me that there is much tradition remembered and followed in today’s Church
The William Temple Foundation blog includes the line ‘This has allowed Christian message and identity to be increasingly co-opted by the Far-Right with disastrous consequences.’
What are these disastrous consequences?
‘One thing worse than being talked about … not being talked about-‘ attributed to that observer Osacr Wilde. The reticence of the Archibishop of Canterbury Designate (ABCD?) to accede to an invitation from an interviewer -C4’s Cathy Newman- showing interest in her appointment, left the door open to this item of historical and continuing interest. A grip needs to be got, and shown to be grasped. Regarding sexual abuse, own up; fess up; pay up, with generosity. Get LLF ‘over the line’- how long O Lord? The fifth ‘richest’ nation, with increasing child poverty- time for a renewed war on… Read more »
ABC(Desig) ducking interview with Cathy Newman is very much in line with CofE ‘tradition’ of avoiding any form of confrontation & never calling a spade a spade.
By the way UK fell from 5th to 6th place for GDP some time ago.
I simply do not agree with you and others here on. I think it would have been a crazy time for agree to such a press interview – and over issues have been exhaustively examined already. So the idea some kind of fundamental avoidance is going on makes no sense either. So I am more with Andrew Brown. With our new Archbishop I think we are in good and capable hands. I pray for her with gratitude.
You say the issues have been exhaustively examined. However, there is a legitimate public interest in the new ++
Canterbury’s record in and approach to safeguarding.
Cathy Newman played a major part in bringing Smythe’s evil deeds to light. If Sarah Mullally has a good story to tell an interview with Ms Newman is her chance to tell it.