One page summary

The Anglican Church: Case Studies into the Diocese of Chichester and the response to allegations against Peter Ball

This report looks at the sexual abuse and exploitation of children in the Anglican Church, focusing on the Diocese of Chichester and the case of Peter Ball.

The Chair and Panel concluded that both investigations revealed a number of serious failings in response to allegations of child sexual abuse. The Church of England should have been, and should continue to be, a place which cares for and supports victims of child sexual abuse.

Instead, the report found that disclosures of abuse were handled inadequately, with responses failing to display an appropriate level of urgency or appreciation of the seriousness of allegations made. It states that there were occasions when the Church put its own reputation above the needs of victims and survivors.

Of the 42 dioceses in England and Wales, Chichester received the most reports of child sexual abuse, with 18 convictions over 50 years. Many of these convictions were not secured until years after the offences had taken place. The report concludes there were perpetrators about whom there were allegations, or even known convictions, who were provided with unrestricted access to children and young people and continued to offend.

The report found that clericalism and tribalism in the Diocese contributed to an approach to ministry which led to an abuse of power. In the public hearings, this was acted out by several senior clergy squabbling about responsibility for failing to deal with past sexual abuse. The damaging consequence of this overriding allegiance to one’s own ‘tribe’ was that child protection was compromised.

The report notes that Peter Ball’s charm, charisma and reputation enabled him to avoid a criminal conviction until 2015; the Church responded to his 1992 arrest by minimising his offending, without any kind of assessment of his risk to children.

The report considers how Peter Ball abused his position as Bishop of Gloucester to deliberately manipulate vulnerable teenagers and young men for his own sexual gratification, which included naked praying, masturbation and flagellation.

The Chair and Panel describe the response of former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey, the only person able to take steps to limit Peter Ball’s ministry, as weak. The report states that when there was a choice to be made, Carey frequently seemed to do the wrong thing. His ‘compassion’ whilst often accorded to Ball, did not extend to his victims, displayed by his overt support for Ball’s innocence, despite having no justification for his position. At Christmas, he sent a letter to parishioners which read: “We hope and pray that the investigation will clear his name.”

The report contains five recommendations including that the government should amend Section 21 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 to include clergy within the definition of a position of trust. This would criminalise sexual activity between clergy and a person aged 16–18, over whom they exercise pastoral authority, involving the abuse of a position of trust.