Church of England Bishops Turn on Each Other over Lord Carey Abuse Scandal

By Harry Farley
The Telegraph
July 29, 2018

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/07/29/church-england-bishops-turn-lord-carey-abuse-scandal/

Lord Carey was allowed to return to preaching after the Bishop of Oxford reinstated his 'permission to officiate' CREDIT: ANDREW CROWLEY FOR THE TELEGRAPH

Church of England bishops are turning on each other after the lead figure on safeguarding was locked out of discussions about a former archbishop accused of covering up child sexual abuse.

Lord Carey stepped down as an honourary assistant bishop in Oxford last year at the request of the current archbishop, Justin Welby, after a damning report last year accused the Church of colluding with disgraced paedophile bishop Peter Ball in the 1990s.

But just months after being asked to step down, Lord Carey was allowed to return to preaching after the Bishop of Oxford, Steven Croft, reinstated his "permission to officiate" (PTO) earlier this year.

The Bishop of Bath and Wells, Peter Hancock, who leads the Church's response to safeguarding, revealed on Sunday he was not consulted about the decision to reinstate Lord Carey.

Despite Bishop Hancock being sidelined, The Telegraph understands that other senior figures in the Church, including at Lambeth Palace, were involved and approved allowing Lord Carey to return to ministry.

Bishop Hancock described the step as regrettable, adding it had caused survivors of abuse further distress.

"I regret it (the decision to grant the PTO) not because I want to intervene in matters that relate to another diocese, but just because what I hear from those I speak to, which are the victims, the survivors, those who are particularly troubled by the church's actions, that see this, perceive this and believe this to be something which has caused them more distress and it's for that reason particularly," he told BBC Radio 4's Sunday programme.

"PTO" - permission to officiate - is a legal requirement for anyone preaching or taking services in the Church of England.

The Bishop of Willesden, Pete Broadbent, appeared to join the veiled criticism of Bishop Croft's decision in a comment on the Thinking Anglicans blog site. While insisting he was not commenting on the specific case, he said "it’s clear that there is no right to a PTO", adding "there are bishops who have been denied PTO" and "when renewing PTO previous history (including safeguarding history) should be reviewed."

It comes after Bishop Croft doubled down on his decision to return Lord Carey's permission to preach, saying there "were no legal grounds" to deny his request for PTO in February.

“Lord Carey’s PTO remains in place at this time, providing him with a safe space to exercise his ministry. However, as part of the Church of England’s ongoing response to IICSA, there will now be a process of review and support offered to Lord Carey by the Diocese of Oxford together with the National Safeguarding Team.”

However, a senior canon lawyer told The Telegraph a bishop didn't need any legal grounds to reject a PTO and suggested Bishop Croft was trying to excuse a bad decision.

He pointed to the Church of England's latest advice which states the permission is "held entirely at the bishop's discretion and may be withdrawn by the bishop at any time, and without any right of appeal."

Peter Ball was given a police caution and resigned as a bishop in 1993 CREDIT: DAVID JONES /PA

Lord Carey was heavily criticised in hearings for the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse last week into how the Church of England responded to allegations of child sexual abuse levied against Peter Ball.

Ball was given a police caution and resigned as a bishop in 1993 after being accused of sexual abuse.

But he was allowed to continue ministering did not face a criminal trial for more than 20 years, by which time one of his victims had taken their own life.

Lord Carey was archbishop at the time and has been heavily criticised for his "uncritical support" of Ball, even after he had accepted a caution, thereby admitting his guilt.

The former archbishop admitted a series of letters sent to him alleging improper conduct against Ball should have been passed to the police.

"Looking back now, what is described in these letters is appalling behaviour by a bishop. It’s very clear now that we should have handed those letters over,” he told the inquiry last week.